Discussion Starter: The Beauty of Action

1. Arendt sees labor, historically central to the private world, has now moved so that much of society has become centered on it, at the expense of the public sphere. What does she mean? Why is this a bad thing?

Hannah Arendt, in "The Human Condition", describes how, historically, life or viva activa consisted of labor, work, and action. Labor and work are necessary for the maintenance of life while action allowed one to utilize one's freedom to invent, create, and think. Since labor and work were concepts of necessity and responsibility, they were found in a private realm--a household. This private realm was a biological requirement based on basic life necessities: food, clothing, shelter, and procreation. "...these natural functions, the labor of man to provide nourishment and the labor of the woman in giving birth, were subject to the same urgency of life" (30). Thus, the private realm was characterized as one of duty and immediacy; one where, if rules were broken, life itself would be risked. On the other hand, action was dependent on man's natural state of being a social animal. Speech and persuasion were methods that promoted growth and progress--the basis of politics. However, according to Arendt, freedom under regulation is not freedom at all. Thus, man had to separate his private realm with a public realm, an incubator for politics and communication.

Arendt's main concern was with modernity--a concept rooted in the existence of another realm that governs both the public and private realm. This social realm essentially manifests man-made, artificial necessities at the macroscopic level of the public realm. According to Arendt's definition of freedom, in this situation freedom is essentially abolished. Without freedom there is no action and without action there is no innovation, no thought, and no progress. Arendt fears the cyclical nature of the private realm--of just surviving. Thus labor is now expanded to encompass not only household responsibilities but responsibilities of the entire city-state. Rather than a coexistence of labor, work, and action, labor ultimately conquers any form of action--halting the growth of a society.

Arendt would describe an artist's work when the artist is solely producing art, music, literature, etc. for the purpose of surviving. Selling one's work to use the money to support one's household is a form of labor based on necessity. However, creating a masterpiece that has a purpose outside of necessity, in the historical sense, is action. Arendt, quite beautifully, writes, "...finding the right words at the right moment, quite apart from the information or communication they may convey, is action" (26). A purpose for spurring communication between individuals or influencing a culture or to induce an emotion, all exist in the public realm. Although I may challenge the strictness of Arendt's philosophical dichotomy, for I believe there can exist dual-motives, I understand the value of utilizing one's freedom.