“Que será, será / Whatever will be, will be / The future's not ours to see / Que será, será / What will be, will be”
—“Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)”, Jay Livingston & Ray Evans (1955)
Identity is the fundamental fact of existence. I am me. 1=1. So, why need we say, “it is what it is”?
History
First, the phrase has a very long lineage. This category of tautological identity statement has been used for thousands of years. in the Christian Bible, when Pontius Pilate is asked, by the Jews, to take down the sign reading, “I.N.R.I.”¹, he replies, “Quod scripsi scripsi”: “What I have written, I have written”. This, like “I.I.W.I.I.”, is a present perspective on the situation established in the past.
Shakespeare used a future-facing tautological identity statement in ‘Macbeth’. When he is told that he is Thane of Cawdor, and talks rapt to himself aside, MacBeth says, “Come what come may, time and the hour run through the roughest day”. This is functionally the same phrase as the popular song, “Que sera, sera”: whatever will be, will be. These are the supposed words of a child addressing her mother, with the mother giving this response.
There are many other examples of this type of phrase in great literary works throughout history. If it was good enough for the Bible and Shakespeare, it ought to be good enough for me!
Practicality
So, why did these great writers value this odd tautology? This is our second point: that it is immensely practical. The phrase is that of a pragmatic mind who aims to persuade. After all, “It is what it is” is not a tautology in practical terms. Folks bicker over the exact status of the past, the present, and the future, and this is debilitating to decision-making.
We see this in the examples we selected of famous tautological identity statements. MacBeth is steeling his own resolve to act. The mother is teaching her child to act in the present with-out obsessing over the future. Pontius Pilate is pre-empting the Jews from casuistic pilpul² over his decision.
This plays out again in the most-common modern usage of “It is what it is”: the office. Bureaucratic organisations, such as corporations, are vulnerable to paralysis by competing factions. This comes to a haed in meetings³, which often function as choke-points in project time-lines, and are especially vulnerable to these tactics. A strong leader who is capable of over-ruling factional bickəring by announcing that decisions are wot they are will have greater success than a weaker leader who allows bickering to continue.
“It is what it is” also helps leaders to side-step another peril of office politics: the blame-game. Because in a corporation (or other such bureaucratic organisation) employees' only concern is with avoiding blame so as to maintain their sinecures, they will often bicker desperately over who bears responsibility for failures, in a way which harms the organisation's ability to over-come the consequences of those failures. Again, being able to say “It is what it is” and negate the threat of repercussions for failure is a powerful tool for leaders.
In short, as we found with the binary / categorical exception to our maxim that reality is scalar, this rule gets its force from the forcing effect of decisions. Decisions reduce the conceptual space available, collapsing binaries and now reifying tautologies. It may seem strange, but if you are inclined to bicker what can I say but: it is what it is.
sum θoətiz abaʊt “it bii wot it biiʸ”
“kei seraə, seraə / wotevə wil bii, wil bii / ðə fyʊʊcə bii not wiis tə sii / kei seraə, seraə / wot wil bii, wil bii”
—“kei seraə, seraə (wotevə wil bii, wil bii)”, jei liviŋstən & reiʸ evənz (1955)
aidentitii bii ðə fundamentəl fakt ov egzistəns. mii bii miiʸ. 1=1. soʊ, kwes wai niid wii seiʸ, “it bii wot it biiʸ”?
histərii
umθ, ðə freiz hav a verii loŋg liniiyij. ðis kategəriiʸ ov tʊətəlojikəl aidentitii steitmənt av bii yʊʊzəð foə θaʊniz ov yiəriz. in ðə kristiiən baibəl, wen ponʃəs pailət bii askəð, bai ðə jʊʊwiz, tə teik daʊn ðə sain riidiŋᵍ, “y.n.r.y.”¹, hii riplai, “kwod skripsii skripsii”: “wot miiʸ av rait, miiʸ av rait”. ðis, laik “i.b.w.i.b.”, biiʸ a prezənt puəspektiv on ðə sicʊʊweiʃən establiʃəð in ðə past.
ʃeikspiə did yʊʊz a fyʊʊcə-feisiŋ tʊətəlojikəl aidentitii steitmənt in ‘makbeθ’. wen hii bii teləð ðat hii bii θein ov kʊədʊə, and toək rapt tə hii-self asaid, macbeθ sei, “kum wot cum mei, taim and ðiiʸ aʊə run θrʊʊ ðə rufist dei”. ðis bii funkʃənəlii ðə seim freiz az ðə popyələ soŋ, “kei seraə, seraə”: wotevə wil bii, wil bii. ðiiz bii ðə supoʊzəð wuədiz ov a caild adresiŋ ʃiis muðə, wið ðə muðə giviŋ ðis rispons.
ðeə bii meniiʸ uðəʳ egzampəliz ov ðis taip ov freiz in greit litərerii wuəkiz θrʊʊwaʊt histərii. if it did bii gʊd enuf foə ðə baibəl and ʃeikspiə, it oət tə bii gʊd enuf foə mii!
praktikalitii
soʊ, wai did ðiiz greit raitəriz valyʊʊ ðis od tʊətoləjii? ðis bii wiis tʊʊθ point: ðat it biiʸ imenslii praktikəl. ðə freiz bii ðat ov a pragmatik maind hʊʊʷ eim tə pəsweid. aftəʳ oəl, “it bii wot it bii” bii not a tʊətoləjiiʸ in praktikəl tuəmiz. foʊkiz bikəʳ oʊvə ðiiʸ egzakt steitəs ov ðə past, ðə prezənt, and ðə fyʊʊcəʳ, and ðis bii dibiliteitiŋ tə disiʒən-meikiŋ.
wii sii ðis in ðiiʸ egzampəliz wii did selekt ov feiməs tʊətəlojikəl aidentitii steitməntiz. macbeθ bii stiiliŋᵍ hiis oʊn rizolv tʊʊʷ akt. ðə muðə bii tiiciŋ ʃiis caild tə akt in ðə prezənt wið-aʊt əbsesiŋᵍ oʊvə ðə fyʊʊcə. ponʃəs pailət bii priiʸ-emptiŋ ðə jʊʊwiz from kaʒyʊʊwistik pilpʊl² oʊvə hiis disiʒən.
ðis pleiʸ aʊt agen in ðə moʊst-komən modən yʊʊsij ov “it bii wot it bii”: ðiiʸ ofis. byʊərəkratik ʊəgənaizeiʃəniz, suc az kʊəpəreiʃəniz, bii vulnrəbəl tə paralisis bai kəmpiitiŋ fakʃəniz. ðis kum tʊʊʷ a hed in miitiŋgiz³, wic oftən funkʃən az coʊk-pointiz in projekt taim-lainiz, and bii espeʃəlii vulnrəbəl tə ðiiz taktikiz. a stroŋᵍ liidə hʊʊ bii keipəbəl ov oʊvə-rʊʊliŋ fakʃənəl bikəriŋ baiʸ anaʊnsiŋ ðat disiʒəniz bii wot dii bii wil hav greitə sukses ðan a wiikə liidə hʊʊʷ alaʊ bikeriŋ tə kəntinyʊʊ.
“it bii wot it bii” oəlsoʊ help liidəriz tə said-step anuðə peril ov ofis politiks: ðə bleim-geim. bikuz in a kʊəpəreiʃən (oəʳ uðə suc byʊərəkratik ʊəgənaizeiʃən) emploiyiiyiz-iis oʊnlii kənsuən bii wið avoidiŋ bleim soʊ az tə meintein diis sinikyʊəriz, dii wil oftən bikə despərətliiʸ oʊvə hʊʊ beə responsibilitii foə feilyəriz, in a wei wic haəm ðiiʸ ʊəgənaizeiʃən-iis abilitii tə oʊvə-kum ðə konsikwənsiz ov ðoʊz feilyəriz. agen, biiyiŋᵍ eibəl tə sei “it bii wot it bii” and negeit ðə θret ov riipəkuʃəniz foə feilyə bii a paʊwəfəl tʊʊl foə liidəriz.
in ʃʊət, az wii did faind wið ðə bainərii / katəgorikəl eksepʃən tə wiis maksim ðat riiyalitii bii skeilə, ðis rʊʊl get itiis fʊəs from ðə fʊəsiŋᵍ efekt ov disiʒəniz. disiʒəniz ridyʊʊs ðə kənsepʃʊʊwəl speis aveilabəl, kəlapsiŋ bainəriiyiz and naʊ reiyifaiyiŋ tʊətoləjiiyiz. it mei siim streinj, but if ðii biiʸ inklainəð tə bikə kwes mii kan sei wot but: it bii wot it bii.