I will have to confess my ignorance when it comes to Judith Butler. Although I have heard her name circulating around in the department, this semester will be my first time reading her. I know it's awful. So, for me, reading articles and critiques about her and watching a documentary focused on her has really peaked my interest. However, does knowing her make her theories more authentic? Is it important to know who Butler is as a person in order to understand her work? I would have to say no to both of these questions mostly because I just don't think it should always matter but also because often times I know nothing of the author before I read something and it makes no less of an impact. But for me personally, knowing a little something about the author does help me take more interest in the writing, or vice versa when the writing is so interesting that it makes me want to know more about the author. Which I think is why this alleged "superstardom" has arisen around her. I think these questions of authenticity and "knowing" Judith Butler speaks more to people's inquiry about WHO has the "authority" to speak on certain subjects, hence the call to her identity as "troublemaker." All in all, I felt that in the case of this documentary our level of knowing was very limited and controlled by Butler. She seemed guarded and aware of the effects her words and actions would have on both her work and public personae. Like Butler said herself she is not her theories, she is not the embodiment of her theories. So this would just be a reflection of that, I felt the message was that the details of her life shouldn't matter; her work should be taken for what it is.
I agree with a lot of what you said here--and I'm coming from a similar place; I've never read Butler before either. But, to be fair, I'm a psych major, so until I picked up the GLBT minor last fall it wasn't really within my realm of expertise.
Anyway, I really like what you said about authority. I, too, don't think it's necessary at all to understand who a person is in order to understand their theory better. But your bringing up the notion of authority got me to understanding my own position better.
I have to wonder if the other main reason people want to know who Butler is as a person (the first reason being that Butler's explicitly made her personal life untouchable--and by deeming it as such we, as humans, automatically have a desire to want it) is because her theory/ies shook so many foundations of understanding for so many people, they must assume she's had some groundbreaking life experiences to lead her to posit such revolutionary...stuff. Or, put another way, surely such amazing work can't come from an ordinary person, right?! It's got to come from someone much unlike us! And if it were to come from an ordinary person like me it would automatically be less credible, because I don't have enough "experience!"
It's the same thing that happens with others who we've ascribed celebrity status and assumed to be out of the range of our understanding--we find out they're just normal people, and it bums us out. So, in my eyes, the seemingly unquenchable desire to know who she is as a person directly relates to the assumption that she's anything but "like us," and therefore the possible fear that if that ordinary person did something amazing with their life, my life is going to be meaningless if I don't.
Whew. Hopefully that made some kind of sense! But your post really got me thinking.