In section 19 of The Human Condition, Hannah Arendt discusses the concept of reification (taking an abstract idea and making something corporeal from it) and its relationship with work.  This relationship also helps humans define their identity.  This essay will first discuss work and reification and will then look at how this helps define a person’s identity.

“Fabrication, the work of homo faber, consists in reification” Arendt says (p. 139).  All work involves taking materials and an idea and combining them to make something new.  A model or blueprint is needed, of course, to make the final object turn out as close to the original idea as possible.  Often, the model is simply a mental picture of the goal rather than a hardcopy blueprint (which, Arendt would probably argue, is a reified object itself) (p. 140).  As the model is being transferred to the corporeal world, however, it is also being defined and modified.  Often, the finished product isn’t exactly the original idea due to material shortage, the creator’s lack of skill, or lack of time.

After the product is finished, the model doesn’t just disappear; indeed, Arendt says that “it survives intact, present, as it were, to lend itself to an infinite continuation of fabrication” (p. 141).  This ability to use the same idea to create many of the same product is what lead to the assembly line, which revolutionized work as we know it.

 This process of reification, Arendt says, is determined by means and end.  Every product is an end in itself and a means to another product.  Labor has but one end: the exhaustion of labor power.  A product produced by work, on the other hand, does not end until “an entirely new thing with enough durability to remain in the world as an independent entity has been added to the human artifice” (p. 143).  Basically, Arendt believes that work does not come to an end until something new and unique has been created.  Simply duplicating an item is not an end, only a means to something else.  This repetition, therefore, is not true work but  something closer to labor.  This duplication process isn’t the same type of labor as finding food (which Arendt calls “compulsory repetition”) but rather is a process done for reasons outside of itself, such as earning money.

How does this process help to identify a person?  There are many different ways that creating something leads to creating our identity as a human being.  The place something is created, the mood it was created in, the way it was created, and, of course, the creation itself all play a part in showing the world who we are.  It is the world’s view of us that makes up our identity; we are what society decides we are, not what we decide we want to be.

The place something is created in can say a lot about who and what we are.  Creating a painting in a studio, for example, identifies one as an artist.  Working on an assembly line makes one a factory worker.  Our job, which is often defined by where we work, goes a long way in creating our identity.  Society often uses where a person works as an indication of their financial status, education level, and their motivation to do well.  If an older person is working at a fast food place, for example, we immediately think that they are either lower class, have no college education, or lack motivation to do well.  Likewise, anyone under thirty that has made partner in a law firm must have money, a law degree, and the desire to climb the corporate ladder.  It doesn’t really matter how the McDonald’s cook or the lawyer view themselves, society has already identified them.  Because we’ve been raised to judge someone by their job, the place work is done contributes all this to a person’s identity whether they want it to or not.

The mood someone is in when they are creating something also plays a part in  creating our identity.  It’s usually easy to tell when someone enjoys the work they are doing.  We often hear people say things like “It lacks passion” or “his heart wasn’t in it.”  This lets society identify its happy workers.  We can tell if an artist or writer enjoys their career because their work reflects their enjoyment.  A painter who paints simply because he believes it will make him rich or because it is expected of him often turns out mediocre paintings, even if he has the talent for greatness.  Even factory workers, whose mood isn’t directly reflected in their products, can alert others to their unhappiness by their actions, body language, and lack of energy.  Since one of our society’s goals seems to be making people happy (which, of course, is the goal of the vita activa), being happy or unhappy makes a person more readily identifiable.

The way something was created also adds to our identity.  As Arendt says, all work includes an “element of violation and violence” (p. 139).  While this is true, we don’t always see the destruction wrought by work, so we don’t include this negative activity in our evaluation of a person’s work.  However, if the destruction is very obvious, it often creates a negative identity for a person or group of people.  Destroying the rain forest or hunting whales, for example, will cause society to view the destroyer in a very negative way.  This is what so often leads to corporations using illegal, non-public means of reification.  For a person to establish and keep an identity that makes them welcome among society, they must only use means of reification that are socially accepted.

The creation itself also plays a large part in creating a person’s identity.  Since the original idea for something had to originate within the person, their creation gives us a glimpse into their mind and tells us something about them.  The creation reflects a facet of the creator.  A writer who writes dark horror stories, for example, is categorized as someone who is morbid, strange, and a little scary.  An architect who builds a plain house with no frills is seen as unimaginative.  An inventor who creates something that revolutionizes our way of life is a genius.  This is perhaps the most important piece of our identity; while the location, mood, and process all say something about our identity, nothing says more than what we create because that creation is a part of us, not anyone else, and could have only came from us as an individual. 

In conclusion, the process of reification contributes greatly to a person’s identity.  Everything involved in this process, from location and mood to method and final product, reflects on the creator and on society’s view of the creator.  By carefully choosing among the many options of reifying an idea, a person can mold their identity into something they and society can be proud of.