Impulses of Repair

Human beings go throughout life dealing with their own human nature and impulses. Spelman states that we exhibit at least three forms of impulses: to create, to destroy, and to repair. These three impulses clearly and specifically display human nature and how we are as homo reparans. When attempting repair, our impulse for repair can be almost “disturbing.” While repair is necessary for connecting the past with the present, it is also important to understand why we have this disturbing impulse to do this. Humans feel the need to attempt to become perfect in the eyes of others. This impulse for perfection contradicts why we feel we need repair and it displays how necessary repair is.
Repair and creation are very different in their own basic forms. As Spelman stated in the beginning of the last chapter of the book:

Repair is about trying to preserve some kind of continuity with the past, with objects or relationships that already exist and have fallen prey to damage or decay. Creation is the process by which those things come into existence to begin with.

Repair contradicts creation because repair is attempting to fix or mend something where as creation is the new existence of something else. This is important to understand because humans sometimes feel the need to take the easy way out and start over and begin again. Recreating a new model, whether it be a project, person, relationship, or idea is easier and provides less learning experience compared to repair. Repair is needed to understand what went wrong in the past so that the present model can become better for the future. Destruction is almost the same process. Instead of repairing, one may completely destroy the work they put in to create a new model. In a way, destruction and creation are very similar.
An example from my experience with contrasting repair to creation or destruction is when my best friend of 10 years and I had a very serious altercation. This altercation became so bad that our friendship ended and there hasn’t been a word spoken either way since it happened. Instead of my friend or myself attempting to repair our relationship, we destroyed it and created new ones with other people. All of our past experiences with each other almost become vacant, emotionless memories that just make us feel worse. This example is the best way for me to explain why repair is more important and tougher to complete rather than creation or destruction.
Repair, as an overall process, is one of the most important things in our lives that we sometimes take for granted. Repair is something that is always there and always will be. It is important knowing that the past cannot be full and emotionally remembered if we destroy our present model of whatever it is that we have destroyed. Spelman explains our “disturbing” impulse to repair that compares to our impulse to create and destroy. Even though all are similar, repair is necessary for one’s past, present, and future.

Human Nature through Reparation and Apology

Elizabeth Spelman provides a descriptive glimpse of basic human nature in Chapter 5. The beginning of the chapter describes the differences and aspects of whether a harmed person or group may prefer reparations over an apology. If a person or group has to experience extreme wrongdoing, the party that caused the wrongdoing is obligated to execute some sort of repair to acknowledge what they did was wrong and inhumane. The repair process that was explained in previous chapters provides a basis for an acceptable apology. In order for the past to be linked to the present, an apology must stimulate the repair process and begin to move towards the future.
However, a harmed person or group may feel that a reparation provides more of an “emotional coolness” compared to the thoughts and feelings that are reactivated when an apology is given. When an apology is given, the harmed party may feel overwhelmed and have flashbacks that may damage the repair process more than help it. A reparation however, may establish more of a less emotional statement that most likely will have a dollar figure attached to it. Human nature is a key factor in dictating whether a person or group may want an apology or a reparation. As Spelman stated in the opening pages of the chapter:

But by examining the difference between apology and reparations as modes of repair, we shall here explore the possibility that the emotional coolness of reparations is precisely why victims of injustice might not welcome apology, why groups who have endured systematic injustice might reek reparations unaccompanied by expressions of sorrow, regret and other likely ingredients of the emotional tableaux associated with apology.

A past experience I can connect with these types of repair is when I was in 7th grade and my father got sick due to chemicals he was exposed to at his job. My father was bed ridden for 2 weeks while recovering from his injuries and put my family through a very tough hardship. After my father’s full recovery, he was granted a reparation from the company which took the place of an apology. This was easier for my family to cope with since our past and present emotions were not reawakened by the company’s half-heartened apology.
My personal experience makes it easier to explain apologizing and forgiving. Spelman explained that an apology is a combination of the payer and the payee. Both parties have to be present and willing to execute an apology and overall forgiveness for wrongdoing. With the reparation my father received, there was no apology and we do not forgive the company for their lack of protection of their employees. A reparation makes this possible and makes it easier for both parties to have closure and have that emotional connection repaired. However, who’s responsibility is it to decide what specific reparation is needed to resolve the situation? If there is one, who decides upon the dollar amount? In chapter 4, restorative justice provides an insight to how a person or party can determine such questions and who’s responsibility it is to determine them. Spelman creates specific examples and analogies that connect chapter 4 to chapter 5 and how these examples compare to everyday life.
Either a reparation or an apology is needed depending on the situation and the affected person or group. A reparation usually comes with a dollar amount that, alluding to human nature, is more welcomed than an apology. It also does not reactivate the harsh feelings and memories that an apology comes with. The affected person or party already understands the acknowledgement through the reparation and does not need to forgive. No apology means no forgiveness which is a moving part of a specific repair process. My past experience connects with this this mindset and provides a real first-person account of how reparation may be needed sometimes more than an apology. As soon as the affected party is taken care off, the repair process is completed and connection is established between the past and present just as Spelman previously explained.

Value of Reparation

The beginning chapters in Elizabeth Spelman’s “Repair” provide a thorough and descriptive process of what it means to repair an object, relationship, person, or feeling. Spelman uses many metaphors, themes, opinions, and comparisons that elaborate on the idea of repair. Repairing something begins with acknowledging what is wrong and figuring out why it needs to be repaired. The most detailed and understandable example that Spelman uses to describe repair is through the character Willie, the multi-tooled repair man. Willie uses many different parts and odds-and-ends to perform his job as a Saab automobile repair man. By establishing his process of reparation, he can understand that his goal is to repair a car back to its practical working condition. There is nothing special about his process: if something on the automobile is broken, he will use any sort of tool, part or material in order to make the car “road-ready” once again for the customer.
If Willie were to be locked into a fixed process of reparation, he would not be able to perform his job. If he had to repair using authentic parts, an authentic process, or an authentic design, customers would find a restorer in order to complete this specific process of restoration. As Spelman clearly stated:

“Willie’s knowledge of materials helps him understand why machines have deteriorated or broken down, and it leads him to see the act of repair as remedying an engineered flaw rather than replacing a part.”

However, when it comes to a human being, how does a person repair oneself for the future and not just for the present? Even though in both instances there is a “repair”, it is much easier to tell if the repair is successful in an automobile engine than in a person. Just like an automobile engine is an object, and is therefore easier to view a repair objectively, a person is a subject and therefore falls prey to more of a subjective analysis as to how effective the repair happened to be. People are complex, therefore the complexity of the repair matches its counterpart. A how-to guide for a person is virtually impossible because of the limitless differences from one person or from one situation to the next. This adds an additional complexity in the repair process. However, acknowledging that a repair needs to be made, assessed, and analyzed determines how far the repair needs to go and what specifically needs to be done. There are very subtle nuances in a repair process that can make a big difference in the outcome and lasting success of any repair, be it object or person.
In repairing something important, such as a relationship, a person needs to decide whether or not the relationship is worth repairing. For example, a decision to begin a reparation of a close relationship, such as a person’s father or relative, needs to be first priority over someone such as a casual friend or partner. Understanding that a close relationship needs to be repaired in order to connect the past with the present and to keeping moving towards the future is extremely important. As Spelman stated:

 “Insofar as an ethics of care is about understanding people as in relationships with other, about seeing conflicts as threatening of relationships, surely a large part is about repairing those relationships or judging that it is not possible or desirable under the circumstances to do so.”

Spelman provides a glimpse of what it means to repair oneself through many different processes. Even though we may not realize it, every one of us attempts repairs in our everyday lives. It boldly shows how human nature compares to things such as a repairman and a car engine. Understanding the context of certain situations and the relationships we have with others assists us in being our own repairmen. The more experience we garner in life, the stronger our repair skills become.