Rey Mysterio, Hijo del Perro Aguayo and commodification as a matter of interpretation

Complex nature of commodification--How do we know if something has been commodified?

Although defining commodification is a sizable task, it is not the end. After defining commodification (let us suppose we define it as "converting something into more of a commodity--more of something to be used for gain rather than valued for its intrinsic worth"), it is still not clear whether it has occurred (or is occurring). For example, appearing recently in the news is the death of Mexican professional wrestler Hijo del Perro Aguayo. He died after suffering a kick to the neck from the wrestler called Rey Mysterio. Was Aguayo's life commodified? It would be easy in a moment of tragedy to cry out that it was. People made money of off these wrestling matches. In fact, lucha libre (as wrestling is called in Mexico) is known for its flair--including flashy advertising and creative and at times extravagant costumes.

Was Hijo del Perro Aguayo's life commodified?

At the end of the day, wasn't Aguayo just treated like an object used to make more money? Don't dangerous sports allow people to be injured just because of how profitable they are? Before concluding definitively that this is the case, consider the other side. Aguayo himself entered the profession (one his father had made a successful career out of) and also profited from such a career. Even if we conclude that he commodified his own life, do not we all do the same in many cases when we make money? Very few of us are artisans, expressing our inner self through our trade.

Do most people commodify themselves at work?

Most of us probably feel like we give up some part of ourselves when we go to work everyday. In fact, Marx first defined commodification in this way--labor under a capitalist system that alienates the individual (and the things that make them unique and human) from their labor. So perhaps a few artists and artisans may say that their labor is not commodified, but many of us feel like "replaceable cogs in a machine". We are just objects that are part of a system in order for someone to get gain (even if we also profit from our work financially).

EDIT: Given the definition of commodification as “An increase in the way some thing (be it a person, culture, material object or so forth) is esteemed, valued or represented vis-à-vis commodities, which are defined broadly as anything used, seen, or represented as an object for exploitation or gain (of any kind) rather than as a subject of intrinsic worth”, it seems almost impossible to not commodify ourselves through paid employment. This is because payment suggests that our labor can be represented, used or exploited as an object for gain of some kind (financial gain in this case). 

How to tell if commodification has happened

So how can we tell when commodification has happened? Is describing the extent to which something is commodified the best we can do? In the case of the latter, I think of prostitution. In academia, there are those who say that those who turn to prostitution usually do not have better options and they sell off their bodies as one of the only alternatives they have for making money. Their humanity and their intimate relationships become dehumanized and commodified. Others have argued that most sex workers want to be there and choose to be there. According to this group, many sex workers are a lot like everyone else who chooses their desired profession and does what they have to do to make a living. Perhaps this group may argue that it does not alienate the workers from their humanity as much as those in the first group would say it does. I would definitely side with the former rather than the latter group, but that makes the point--the same phenomenon can be seen and described as commodified to a different extent from one person to the next.

 COMMODIFICATION IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

Commodification, then, is "in the eye of the beholder", as is the extent to which something has been commodified. Let us return to the recent new stories about Rey Mysterio and Hijo del Perro Aguayo. Whether or not competing in a dangerous sport commodifies the life of the individuals who compete--people are making money off of the unfortunate and untimely death of this athlete. Should his death be a way for the media to increase consumerism and make more money? Is not human life (and death) something that should not be used like a commodity--as an object employed to get gain?

COMMODFIED TO WHAT EXTENT? Two hypothetical examples of different levels of commodification

To answer that question, let us consider two hypothetical examples. Imagine first a news outlet that makes enough profit to stay in business and for its owners and employees to make a decent living, but its primary mission is to get honest and timely news out to people. Perhaps the owners built up the business thinking of the value of providing honest news to people everywhere. (After all, many entrepreneurs go into business to do something they feel is worthwhile, rather than commodifying themselves working for someone else). Such a company may air the Rey Mysterio story to raise awareness about the dangers of many contact professional sports to prevent further disasters. However, a second example would be a news company that airs the most sensational news it can drum up in order to make the most money. Which of these two is the best example of commodification? This speaks to the idea of intention. It would be easy to say the second, except that the motive may not always be completely transparent. In other words, the second news company may be motivated by exploitation for financial gain but someone reading the story may think that the story was motivated by the desire to raise awareness. This may be especially true if the news company does an especially good job at putting off the image that this is their true motivation!

 Commodification is always a judgement call of some kind.

Therefore descriptions of commodification involve judgments on the part of the person using the term. This judgment may hinge around the intention of the person, people, process or institution that does the commodifying, but ultimately, commodification is in the eye of the beholder--or at least the person using the term!