To challenge the treatment of culture and self as reified entities, Hermans
(2001) proposes a model of both culture and self as a multiplicity of dial
ogical positions. We question whether this model fully responds to his chal
lenge. First, the notion of positioning itself appears to reify culture by
treating flowing patterns as fixed locations. Second, the notion of dialogu
e appears to neglect the possibility of automatic influence from implicit c
ultural patterns. This implies a core, universal self whose functioning is
insensitive to cultural variation. We suggest an alternative approach to th
e problem of reification: to conceive of culture not as group, but as patte
rns. Corresponding to this shift, we propose a distinction between the nego
tiation of cultural identity and the cultural grounding of self. As a model
of identity negotiation, Hermans' dialogical self makes important contribu
tions: it emphasizes the multiplicity of identity highlights the agency of
the self as a constructor of identity and suggests the importance of psycho
logy-and the study of self, in particular-for the study of culture.