The various version of the rhetoric-persuasion, inauthentic-authentic, secondary-primary, sentimental-naive, low-high, split-integral, persona-self etc., polarity - which are not by any means equivalent, but are echoes and analogies of each other - are all subject to a series of dialectical twists which pretty much destroys the sense of the polarity - and would do so but that that it keeps returning in fresh forms. One twist is that there is nothing more inauthentic than the desire to be authentic, so that it turns out that the desire to be inauthentic is the only authentic desire, and all the more so if that very desire for inauthenticity is itself inauthentic. It's clear enough where this leads, but the logic is not easily escaped, even if we wanted to, which is doubtful. Another is that the entire polarity with all its ramifications, its entire caste system, actually exists within the first member of each series, the putatively secondary one. This means that not only is it possible to deconstruct the polarity by claiming that its entire existence is as an appearance within its so-called secondary member - which therefore must be as little secondary as it is primary - but also that the edifying spiritual profit to be derived from keeping faith with the primary moment can be reproduced, as culture, by a less ascetic and demanding faith, indeed an entirely richer one, given to some encapsulated naive moments within the sentimental, cf. the profundity of film buffs or of foodies. There is no successful persona that is not an ironic or downright unserious disavowal of a deep self, just as there no good insider that doesn't instantly identify, by way of a positive overflow of fellow-feeling, with the most outside of outsiders.