Identity and Selfhood in Constance: Clones, Memory, and the Making of a Self

The Core Thematic Claim

In Constance, Matthew FitzSimmons argues that identity is not fixed by a continuous chain of memory or a single consciousness. Instead, selfhood emerges through the choices we make, the relationships we nurture, and the stories we choose to accept—even when those stories are fractured, duplicated, or inherited from a dead original. The novel challenges both the fear that a clone is merely a “copy” and the counterclaim that clones are exactly the same person. Through Constance “Con” D’Arcy’s journey from bewildered copy to self-accepting individual, the book proposes that identity is a practice, not an essence.

Tracing Identity Across the Plot

Awakening to a Fractured Self (Chapters 4–7)

Con wakes from a routine refresh to discover she is a clone. Her original is dead, and eighteen months of memory are missing. She stares at her reflection: no tattoos, no scars, no piercings—a body that feels like a stranger’s. In the mirror she sees “not the real Con,” and the narrator notes she feels like an imposter. When she visits former friend Kala Solomon, Kala says bluntly, “You’re not even a person.” That verdict stings because Con fears it might be true. She has no memory of moving to Richmond or of recent gigs; she has only the original’s past up to the point of her last backup. The gap makes her feel incomplete, a “lie” rather than a person.

This crisis forces Con to ask: if she shares all of the original’s memories up to December 2037, but none of the subsequent experiences, is she the same self? The novel does not allow a simple yes. Con’s early struggle is to accept that she does not need to recover the missing years to be a valid person. She gradually stops seeing herself as a defective copy and starts building her own here-and-now relationships.

Confronting Multiple Copies (Chapters 28, 30)

The identity question multiplies when Con meets another clone of herself in Chapter 28. This second Con has been made by Abigail Stickling and acts with cold, calculating violence. She kills a woman without remorse and blames the murder on the CEO of Palingenesis. When Con asks, “What happened to you?” the other Con deflects. This encounter shows that even with identical starting memories, clones can diverge radically based on environment and choices. The other Con is not a different person because of the cloning process itself, but because of what she has been forced to become.

In Chapter 30, Con learns that Abigail and her clone (nicknamed Cabigail) have already solved the mind-body problem. They have transferred Abigail’s consciousness into the body of the original Con—a profound violation. The two Abigails argue that identity is purely a matter of consciousness: if a mind continues in a new body, the person has not died. Their logic justifies murder: if the victim can be re-cloned, killing is merely “putting a copy to sleep.” Con rejects this. She recognizes that the body, the history, and the relationships matter. Identity cannot be reduced to a data file. The Abigails’ desire for immortality devalues the distinctiveness of each life.

Forging a Unified Identity (Chapters 33–35)

At the climax, Con gains control of the hidden compound and faces a choice. She lets Cabigail die (by withholding antidote) and disconnects the clone of Abigail. She also rejects the opportunity to clone herself again. When she inherits Stickling’s fortune, she uses part of it to clear Levi Greer’s name—a choice that the original Con had also made, but Con now makes it her own.

In the final chapter (35), Con runs a music shop, records guitar with worsening hand tremors, and refuses to cooperate with Vernon Gaddis when he wants information about the mountain compound. She declines to seek further cloning technology. Instead, she performs one song at a party, accepting her limited, un-replicated life. The novel’s last image is of Con choosing not to be immortal: she presses the self-destruct button on the lab, steps outside, and stands her ground as it explodes. She is not running; she is living fully in the present.

Character and Symbol Connections

The tattoo sleeve is especially telling. When Con wakes in her clone body, it is gone. That physical erasure deepens her sense of inauthenticity. Yet by the end, she has started to create new marks on her life through relationships—with Stephie, Dahlia, and even the teenagers who visit the shop. The sleeve was the original’s story; Con must write her own.

Complexity and Contradiction

The novel does not resolve the identity debate neatly. On one hand, clones are legally declared persons by the Supreme Court at the end, which suggests that shared DNA or consciousness transfer does not erase individuality. On the other hand, Con’s own feelings remain complicated: she still refers to “her” (the original) as someone else. In Chapter 23, Dahlia asks, “Why can’t you be both? Her but not her. Her but also you?” Con finds this comforting, but she also admits that the relationship with Dahlia will never be the same as the original’s, and that makes her jealous.

The Abigails’ argument—that killing is not murder if the victim has a clone—is chilling but logically consistent with their worldview. Con’s refusal to accept that logic is the book’s moral center. Yet the novel also shows that the original Con’s choices (like moving to Richmond, dating someone, helping Dahlia) shaped the person Con is becoming. So identity is partly inherited and partly made.

Study Questions and Answers

1. How does Con’s missing memory affect her sense of self in the early chapters?
   The eighteen-month gap makes her feel like an imposter. She cannot access experiences the original had, so she doubts whether she is the “real” Con. This leads to her feeling like a “lie” (Chapter 6) and being told by Kala that she is “not even a person” (Chapter 7). The crisis forces Con to either accept a fractured identity or build a new one from scratch.

2. What does the encounter with the other clone in Chapter 28 reveal about identity?
   That clone shares Con’s memories but behaves ruthlessly—killing without remorse and manipulating events. This proves that identical memories do not guarantee identical moral character. Context and training shape personality; identity is not a static file. Con realizes she could have become that person under different circumstances, which unsettles her.

3. How does the symbol of the purple artificial Christmas tree relate to Con’s status as a clone?
   The tree is artificial but still capable of bringing a small joy. Con rescues it from a dumpster. Similarly, she is an artificial person (a clone), but she can still form genuine relationships, make meaning, and deserve respect. The tree’s falseness does not negate its value.

4. Why does Con refuse to clone herself again at the end of the novel?
   She has seen how the quest for immortality corrupts—the Abigails killed and stole bodies to extend their lives. Con chooses to accept her death as part of being human. She tells Vernon no when he presses her about the compound’s secrets. By not replicating herself, she affirms that her one life is enough.

5. How does Dahlia’s perspective in Chapter 23 offer an alternative to the binary of “same person vs. different person”?
   Dahlia, a child, instinctively says Con can be “her but not her.” She accepts the complexity without needing the contradiction to be resolved. Her viewpoint suggests that identity can be a both/and—Con carries forward the original’s history but also creates her own present. The novel endorses this inclusive understanding over rigid legal or philosophical definitions.