PGC 2020 Keynote Molly Andrews_ Global Crisis and the Failure of the Narrative Imagination Part 2
[00:30:57]
That which is not real, namely that we somehow compare this with what has happened in the past and somehow assume that this is the same. Namely that we somehow argue we’re going to have a vaccine, while no one knows whether we’re actually going to have a vaccine. And this, that which is not yet real, namely that we’re going to teach, if we talk about our very private lives, that we’re probably going to be teaching online in the fall.
[00:31:20]
But then somehow, at one point, we somehow expect that everything will go back to normal. So I’m wondering essentially, how do we discern this kind of conundrum of the real, the not real in this overarching narrative that we all seem to have ready at hand?
[00:31:42]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think that one of the things which is really interesting is that probably the single worst response that we could have happened at a policy level was the very one that was adopted by the two countries where I have passports.
That’s to say, the United States in the UK, which was to say, let’s pretend it’s not happening. Okay, we’re just going to go on with life and Boris Johnson was really focused on another reality that was to save the Brexit, which was happened on January the 31st when we left the EU and other matters and Donald Trump we already saw on those slides there.
[00:32:32]
Now what previous pandemics have showed is that the real way through it is through it. Okay, that the very worst thing you can do is hide information from people. Yes, people will become scared, but actually, there’s a good reason why they might become scared, but you need to actually send out as much information as possible.
[00:32:54]
And I would actually say that’s one of the reasons why Hong Kong, for instance, has one of the most incredible responses to this. Hong Kong has actually had four deaths. Four, okay? Despite having extraordinary traffic, direct traffic between them and Wuhan. And it was not the government of Carrie Lam who actually provided information.
[00:33:21]
On the contrary, she was very much involved in disinformation. It was in fact the citizens rights movements on the ground, the pro-democracy movement who utilized already existing networks of information to galvanize literally from the very first day, a very sophisticated information machine and an online website, but with many arms.
[00:33:51]
And I think that there’s a reason why they’ve only had four deaths. Okay. Because so I think despite that many of us are narrative people and we tend to explore subjective realities and the fluidity of stories, etc., I think this is a case where establishing what the facts are is really important.
[00:34:14]
You can write your story. That’s great, and you come to some– but actually the nuts-and-bolts information, even accepting that there are many uncertainties, as you rightly indicated, taking the information that we do have and making that public is what’s really important.
[00:34:38]
MARTIN DEGE:
I’m going to continue with a question that Corinne posted that connects to what we just said. She asked, have you come across any narrative imaginings of a COVID or post-COVID future that are in a positive direction, persuasive to you?
[00:35:00]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yeah, perhaps not as completely knitted together story. But in fact, recently, I gave a paper on political activism in COVID, 19 times.
And this was we had some really interesting discussion there where people were, at the moment, I am not living in Britain, I’m living in Finland, and people in Britain, for instance, were telling me, despite the really horrific response of the British government that in fact, the organizing on the ground at local level which you could say was perhaps just social activism, but in fact, it was imbued with a political consciousness and that the level and degree of organizing many people. have said, and we’re saying in that talk earlier in the week that they would be really surprised if all of a sudden, those bonds were broken.
[00:36:00]
I think that we’ve seen a lot of repurposing, if you will, of political movements a huge surge in trade unionism in the United States because of the horrific way that workers have been treated.
But also, these questions, there are not very many people now who question whether or not it’s good for everyone that there is access to public health, that people should be allowed to take vacation days when they are sick, that prisoners that there are many people serving time inside who should not be, all that kind of stuff. So I think that there are seeds, let me put it that way.
[00:36:45]
MARTIN DEGE:
I’m going to maybe press the issue a little bit further with what Brian just posted. He says, I’m wondering, and maybe I’m wondering the same.
I’m wondering if Molly can comment a little more on what’s real in this context, because I think that’s maybe one of the important arguments to make here. What is the real what we talk about? Narrative imagination and the facts.
[00:37:08]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I tried to, there are so many aspects of the real. Okay. And I tried and those slides were hard to put because at one level, I just wanted to put out there, no, this isn’t a hoax. No, it’s not like the flu.
No, it’s not. It doesn’t. It’s not going to be a miracle and go away. There are these things. There are these cases, etc. But I think equally important is the other is the next two slides that I had after that.
[00:37:44]
One was these let’s say spontaneous local political social organization that is happening, but also the very, very worrying cut back on human rights that we see around the world.
Actually, some people in the United States are saying what’s going to happen with the November election? How is that? Are we going to have an election? We know Orban has now canceled their elections. What? Indefinitely. These are also real things.
The real is not just related to the virus. The real is also very much about how it is dealt with and how that moment is used and I think that’s extremely important.
[00:38:38]
MARTIN DEGE:
I’m trying to work with the questions tool here Just want to remind everyone that you can upload questions by others if you want me to prioritize them and then I’m happy to do so.
One of the questions that has been upvoted very much to the top is to say, first of all, thank you for a powerful talk. And then Carmen is asking, I would like to hear your thoughts about how narrative relates to uncertainty. It doesn’t seem to me that Trump is mainly unable to let in knowledge, but to show a tolerance for ambiguity.
[00:39:18]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I don’t think, I’m not sure how ambiguous it is. I think that there’s a kind of different story going on there, if you will, if you want to use a narrative term. I think that it’s not coincidence that he is targeting states which have democratic governors and he is encouraging them to open up, right? And I don’t think that’s ambivalent. I think that’s really strategic.
[00:39:56]
And I think that narrative can contribute some, but not everything in this moment. Okay. And I think that one of our challenges is really at the very end where I was trying to say, what is the future, both that we hope will happen, but also that we’re really frightened will happen? And how do we actually try to minimize one and build the other?
[00:40:18]
And this is not just a narrative question. There’s a really small window of opportunity where profound global changes are going to happen. And to see it’s not going to happen. It’s already happening.
And I think that we need to actually not just what cultivate our own gardens right now. To be honest, I think that’s not something we should be doing. I think we need to be highly alert of what is already happening and the dangers that we’re facing as well as the possibilities.
And so I think it’s not really just a question of narrative. I think it’s a question of coming up how you actually politically resist things, even while we cannot physically be together and congregate.
[00:41:19]
MARTIN DEGE:
I want to continue with a question Mark posted here, which connects exactly to what you just. He says he is sympathetic with Solnit’s and also your vision, your hope for the future. But he also says that he is fearful.
What sometimes happens in the face of intense anxiety and uncertainty and vulnerability is an effort to regain, to reassert strength and power, possibly leading us further in the direction of a violent authoritarian future.
[00:41:53]
So his question is, and that’s also mine, and maybe it’s a question for many, many, many of us, and maybe that’s also a question where narrative imagination comes in big time. What gives you, what gives us, what can give us hope, what gives you hope in this scenario?
[00:42:13]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think in some ways I alluded to it already. I do think that we have seen some favorable changes for sure. We have seen many people report just at the most, a new every day is how much bird song there is. Okay, a new every day is that, for those of us who live under flight paths, we don’t actually hear the planes every day.
[00:42:44]
I had my first experience of even going on public transportation the other day, my first in months. And I thought, “Okay, I’m actually going to wait a few more months.” It was not fun. These days, these last few months, every single place we go we walk or we cycle, right? I mean, it’s just what you do.
[00:43:00]
And so these are things of necessity, but they’re also quite favorable in some ways. I do think that it’s not just the worry of violent authoritarianism. I also think there is I’m going to sound pretty cynical here, but I think I already mentioned. There’s an inclination amongst some to actually experience this as a just as a personal challenge, okay?
[00:43:36]
And the whole thing, I actually was part of a Zoom meeting where the actor Dominic West was describing his idyllic life. I think it’s in the Berkshires or something.
And he said it was– he described it as absolute utopia, okay, and how beautiful it is, and his wife is a gardener, and his kids are all in the gardening project now, and they love… That’s great, okay, it’s fine for some, good, not everybody has that, and I think that one of the problems is to forget that we are really not all in this together.
[00:44:13]
Some people are suffering terribly, and there is this. Window of opportunity where governments are taking the limited powers that their citizens were already allocated. So I think that to call this moment one of utopia is also really, really problematic.
And if the only thing we’re doing is tending to our own limited experiences within our homes, within our gardens, even on our streets. That’s a problem.
[00:44:41]
And so to go back to what Mark was saying, I think we need to actually make sure that even while we cannot be physically together, that we use the tools which are available to us to make sure that that the changes are as positive as they can be and to minimize the negative. Yeah.
[00:45:06]
MARTIN DEGE:
Thank you. I want to connect this to another question Shelot. I’m sorry if I mispronounce your name, posted here. Yes, stay positive and find ways in which we continue despite what is happening and use a merit, narrative imagination to hopefully create a positive future together. Yet at the same time, and you alluded to that in your talk as well, we’re also reinventing our past.
[00:45:38]
Maybe we quickly, more quickly than we can realize. We see, for example, if we turn on movies right now and we see people in Manhattan walking down the street and it’s packed, and we think, like, “How can they do that for a moment?” Until we realize, yes, actually, of course, that was before corona, and we could behave like that.
[00:45:57]
How in France people say hello to each other in a very different way than they used to, and they might not, Brian alluded to this yesterday in his talk, and they might not return to the original way. It becomes a new normal so quickly to us and this new normal then, of course, is in many ways, also, the basis of the imagination for our future.
[00:46:22]
I think I would want to ask how can we avoid this or how can we make sure that this new normal does not necessarily become a normal that quickly, but that we continue to question the kinds of changes that we go through in order to keep an open mind and be able to imagine. A not the continuation of what we had in the past, but a new future after this.
[00:46:50]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yeah. I think that this is a challenge for all of us. Actually, it’s as individuals, as members of families, and members of households, as colleagues. I think it is a– it will be an ongoing challenge in front of us.
But the other thing I want to say is because the term narrative imagination and the word imagination more generally has often been used to indicate the more positive things that we muster in our minds, but in fact, I would like to also say that equally important are feared nightmares.
[00:47:34]
And I think going forward, to me, we have to both, we have to balance both what we hope to be. What parts even of our new existence that we want to bring forward with us. But equally, we have to remember how it was that we have arrived at the moment where we are now.
[00:47:57]
And this is a much more of a nightmarish vision. And some people for me, for instance, just speaking on a personal level, I live my life very much across several continents. And that is how I physically hold my family close to me physically, right? Will I still be doing that? How often when, what kinds of trips will those be.
[00:48:26]
I’m not just talking about saying I want to see other countries, I’m saying I want to see my father so these are questions which we need to think about as we go forward. And what we were doing before is not going to be something that we can keep doing in the same way.
[00:48:49]
MARTIN DEGE:
Thank you. Gordana is asking as so-called past normality has become so desirable, this would mean that the post-Corona future would be just repetition or even strengthening of all those processes which substantially contributed to our current crisis.
In many ways, exactly what you just said, living across various continents. And many of us academics do the same thing. We fly because it’s our job, but we also fly because our families are spread out. And in many ways, we’re not, maybe not personally responsible for carrying the Corona virus from one continent to the other, but it’s our lifestyle that contributes to that.
[00:49:40]
Is there a way, I mean, how do we imagine continuing our lives once we have maybe this particular coronavirus under control, but potentially face the next one coming up? Do we have to reinvent all this? Do we have to reinvent family life? Is Zoom, is this two-dimensional way of interacting with people, the new future? Where do we go?
[00:50:04]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
The challenge is huge. And I was reading something recently and I think it’s right. That says, look, this coronavirus is just dress rehearsal for what’s going to happen with climate change. And once we actually get the vaccine, if we get the vaccine, we will have at least some kind of a remission. But that will not happen actually with climate change.
[00:50:34]
And for whatever dramatic changes we are being, we are experiencing now, we actually think we will go back to this other thing, but that will not always be the case. And maybe this is the moment that many people are right starting to think more seriously about that.
[00:50:53]
And actually, as the quote I used from Rebecca Solnit earlier, where she said the impossible is already happening, we’ve been told that we can’t do without all of these different things, and yet we see that we can.
Now I don’t want to make it sound all too positive. I’m one that, as nice as it is, seeing you across here. The fact is I’m sitting by myself in a room, and probably you are the same and many of us here are doing the same.
I actually– I hate online teaching. I find it really difficult. I want to see the buddies and the whole thing is just, and the idea that many people are going for months without ever touching another human being.
[00:51:42]
MARTIN DEGE:
I want to switch maybe to another aspect of your talk. You talked a lot about Trump, about politics, political narratives, facts versus fiction that Trump delivers.
[00:49:11]
And Casey is asking here, first of all, she says, thank you for a wonderful talk. But aren’t you being too generous with Trump?
[00:52:25]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
That’s great. I’ve never been accused of that.
[00:52:29]
MARTIN DEGE:
It isn’t so magical. Imaging things are magically connected and your wishes are coming true in the parentheses, but rather a calculating upspeak, designed to talk to the markets up. He is speaking quite rationally, so the argument goes, to a particular audience. Don’t we need to analyze Trump’s actions as rational rather than magical? It’s a good one.
[00:52:58]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yeah. Okay. I would go along with that. Sure. I just like this idea of magical thinking as well, but I think that I know I would go along with that as well. I think that, Piaget always had, from what point of view is the wrong answer, right? That’s what sort of motivated his research.
And I think that’s our question here with Trump from what point of view does his response make sense. And there is a very strong inner logic in that.
[00:53:34]
And even when he’s inconsistent, there’s a strong inner logic there. So I really do agree with that. And actually, that one quote, which I read where he says, “Oh, gosh, those of you who’ve lost family members. Nothing’s going to…” that actual quote. If I only put part of it, but it’s quite extended.
[00:53:53]
And it’s so chilling because he literally is putting– he’s balancing one. “Yeah, it’s such a shame and it’s so bad as a… but by the way, the upside is,” and it’s just can you actually put those two things together, literally, right together. It’s was just chilling watching him. Anyway, so yeah, I agree with that, Casey. I definitely do.
[00:54:22]
MARTIN DEGE:
It would be an interesting question to analyze that further to what extent what he does is actually rational and to what extent he’s just, on the stage and doing things on the spot. Dan McAdams is probably still sleeping. If he was in the audience, we could bring him in and ask him since he put some research into that.
[00:54:43]
We have another question that goes into the same direction maybe. It says, to what extent these policies you are talking about in the UK and in the USA came out of willful negligence, lack of political care of the masses, or simple, pure ignorance of the potential lethal power of COVID-19.
[00:55:08]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think that– Oh wait, could you just repeat the very first part of that question? Because my mind was already going someplace with this. So just the very first part.
[00:55:19]
MARTIN DEGE:
Just to what extent these policies you’re talking about come out of willful negligence, lack of political care of the masses, or simply pure ignorance of the potential lethal power.
[00:55:33]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think one of the most interesting things that’s happened again just to use the United States, but there are other examples, but that one I really have been spending quite a lot of time with. You actually see that the virus is just showing up the already existing very deep cracks in the system.
[00:55:55]
And the fact that it is so disproportionately affecting different sectors of the population that isn’t to do with the virus. That’s actually to do with fundamental inequality that is right throughout the United States. That’s what that’s about. So I don’t think– I think that it is showing us stuff that we haven’t wanted to be looking at for a long time.
[00:56:21]
Now, the same is true, my guess is that it’s the same is true in many other countries as well. I also think that in the country where I’m living right now, Finland, it also shows that the basic the fundamental values are of social welfare. Okay. And the way that it is approached is just fundamentally different. And it’s the same virus, but it is dealt with in a very different way. So I think that yeah, I think that it is exposing already existing conditions.
[00:56:57]
MARTIN DEGE:
We have another question in the audience here that again connects to that and also connects a little bit to our previous keynote speaker, Luca Tateo, who emphasized the fact that we’re using war rhetoric when we talk about the virus. So the question here reads, “Thank you for an inspiring talk, Molly. Is it possible there is a narrative of exaggeration out of panic and lack of time of reflection about the current situation?”
[00:57:32]
In other words, are we, that’s how I read it, are we exaggerating what is happening right now? Should we calm it down further and have a more nuanced way of looking at the current crisis?
[00:57:46]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
First to go to the first part of your comment, which is about the war language. This is actually an extremely interesting thing itself. The idea and if we can connect that, I think two questions of the other. Who is the other? What is the other? What’s the enemy? Okay. And this war language seems particularly inappropriate when what is needed is a highly developed collaboration.
[00:58:16]
I saw a Facebook post, which said something like opening up some states. But not others is like saying that you’re going to have a section of the swimming pool where people can pay. I think that the idea that we actually have to work together towards something that we have to develop a collaborative vision is really, really important.
[00:58:44]
The exaggeration of our panic is an interesting one at the lack of time for reflection about the current situation. I don’t know. I think there is a lot of reflection going on. One of the things I would say that’s very– I myself, but I think many others as well have spent a lot of time, not only reading, there’s been some really outstanding coverage in the media as well as alarmist stuff, but some of the deep coverage has just been exceptional and some, the Atlantic, for instance, is just putting out one fabulous piece after another. But in addition to that, people are also returning to classics, and there’s a lot of, for instance, poetry circulars which are going on a lot now.
[00:59:43]
And I think that there is a sort of movement towards a taking this moment and reflecting. We’ve been, even you read in the Daily newspaper about Seneca, right? And the old philosophers and about the importance of contemplation and interweaving it with action in our lives. So I’m not so sure about that. I think that there already is that. And I think that even in some of the hottest spots, places like New York City, where one of my brothers lives. Actually, the stories that I have heard from the groundswell up as it were New York City where people are literally starving.
[01:00:32]
There’s not enough food, right? And yet, the conversation that my brother has been telling me between himself and other workers who are going about doing food distribution there is incredible. It’s also very moving. So I think that even in situations which could be panic-stricken, we’ve seen both the best and the worst in people.
[01:00:57]
MARTIN DEGE:
Thank you. We have here both a comment and a question from Michelle Ferrari. I’m wondering, Michelle, do you want to come on and ask the question yourself? Then I could just bring you on here. If you give me a sign in the chat, then I will do that. And while you think about it, I’ll pick another question. Quickly from all in, otherwise I’ll read it out.
[01:01:21]
Lee June says, I appreciate Molly. We’re not using the record. Oh, we’re not recording using the recorded video, which is better experience to me. Okay. Maybe that’s I maybe missed the question that I want to read. Sorry. Barbara says, thanks Molly for an interesting discussion on rethinking the past in the present or in the future, different few points on timing for learning lessons. Is leaving it till it’s over or is it too late? If you scroll down, maybe you can look at the question yourself.
[01:01:56]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yeah. Okay. Oh, I see. There’s so much here. I really I hope you’ll get to see these later as well. I think that’s a really important point. Okay, because that quote, which I closed with Rebecca Solnit where she says when the storm has cleared.
[01:02:14]
But I would say we can’t actually wait for the storm to clear. Okay, this storm is going to be around for a long time. And as we said this, even when this one goes away, there’s going to be another. So I like the metaphor. But actually, it’s rather limited.
This moment of opportunity that we have in which to act is limited. So, I think that is a really important question. But I think the moment is now. And that’s what one of the things I’ve been trying to emphasize there as well.
And again, to say to people to look at that human rights tracker as well. If you wonder the kinds of actions that are going on every single day now in terms of the retraction of human rights around the world. It’s really sobering.
[01:03:03]
MARTIN DEGE:
I haven’t heard from Michelle so far, so I’m going to read it out, the comment and also the question. It reads, in the USA, it seems as if social media leads to a rapturing of the national imaging of the story about what is real, not real, and impossible. The battle for President Trump seems to be to convince enough voters of his imagined fantasy long enough to be re-elected.
[01:03:36]
So the question is, oh and there it jumps. The question is what can be done to help generate a united and proactive story to help galvanize people as in Hong Kong? Or does the Hong Kong example show the end to build islands of truth? And shore up those.
[01:03:58]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think the thing that we have to learn from Hong Kong, although I was told by my daughter that actually even that my information about Hong Kong, even though I had gotten it a few days ago is already out of date and that in fact these very activists who I’ve been citing recently are being arrested.
[01:04:23]
So quite horrific stories, but let’s just when I was putting this together that had not happened. And so I think the case of Hong Kong, what is most important about them is this information campaign and that and I’ve seen this also in other countries where people where the point is that you can’t actually always look to the government.
In fact, sometimes not at all look to the government. In the United Kingdom, I think the British people have been so much better than our leadership. We have proven ourselves to be so much more worthy than the Prime Minister himself to see him clapping at eight p. m. on Thursday nights for the NHS.
[01:05:13]
He of all people. It’s pretty outrageous. And yet, you see these examples when they are calling for volunteers and they want 250,000 and they get 750,000. I think that there are many hopeful things that happen, which are, which show that organized people can be much better than their governments.
[01:05:34]
That’s certainly the case in Hong Kong. You’ve also seen that across the United States, where you have these for instance, with food shortages, you actually see it’s people on the ground people communities who are organizing To get the food out of the warehouses onto the trucks distributed. That’s not the president. He’s not going to do that. And so, I think that there’s different levels of that question.
[01:06:02]
MARTIN DEGE:
Helen is confronting us maybe with a little bit of pessimism and I want to hear your thoughts about that. She says, I do agree that there have been some positive changes and some shifts in narrative which open possibilities, but I’m very worried that there are powerful other narratives which either diminish the credibility of real facts or provide convincing narratives that make Trump’s perspective acceptable, like freedom, the economy comes first because our future depends on this, most people who died were already vulnerable, these are, she says, the narratives which persuade people to open up again.
[01:06:43]
I’d like to hear your comments about that.
[01:06:45]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
No, I agree. I think that is a fear. I think that is correct. What I also think, though, is that if we resist this temptation, as nice as it is to, let’s say, “attend to our own gardens,” if we actually collectively and in our homes, collectively alone try to inform ourselves and do information campaigns, that’s where the hope does lie.
[01:07:18]
But I absolutely agree. I don’t think– that’s why I was saying the narrative imagination, it doesn’t have to be, it’s not necessarily a positive thing. It can be a complete nightmare. And I think that the president’s view of the future is for me exactly that, is a nightmare. So yeah, I think that’s correct.
[01:07:46]
MARTIN DEGE:
Michael adds here, he says, thanks Molly. Could you comment on what you, we as psychologists can contribute in all of this? And is there a way to reimagine the discipline of psychology? I think this is a beautiful question because it’s also at the core of this conference, right?
[01:08:06]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yes. It’s very nice to think of Michael out there.
[01:08:09]
Hi, Michael. What do I think? Yeah, I think that we as psychologists actually need to move away from this whole question of individual psychological health and that we need to realize how important community health is. And I think that there’s been some really interesting things, which I think have happened over the last few months.
[01:08:36]
I don’t know of any research on this, but I have heard anecdotally that it’s that many people who suffer from manic depression have actually found this moment to be in some ways easier to deal with than other people, because for the first time, other people are beginning to experience that kind of alienation and rupture that, in fact, has been more part of their lives.
[01:09:06]
I think that’s really– I’ve heard that from several people also telling me about their own experiences. I think we have a lot to learn from that. And again, because we tend as parts of society to other people who experience who have mental health problems, and we don’t actually take that as a community problem and now I think that we have to realize that there really is a community problem as well and Michael knows me well enough to know that I’m always interested in this question of Political narratives and political psychology.
And I think that the response really is not just in the individual mind and heart and home. I think that if we are to come out of this, we will come out together and we need to make that so.
[01:10:02]
MARTIN DEGE:
Kuril has two questions here and I think the first one connects beautifully to what we just said. We read here, you said during your presentation that governments failed in delivering an appropriate narrative in times of crisis knowing that the pandemic we’re experiencing today have been seen before. In your opinion, what could be considered a successful narrative?
[01:10:31]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I’m not quite sure I understand that. [crosstalk]
[01:10:35]
MARTIN DEGE:
I think I read the question. The way in which I read the question, if I’m wrong, then please, correct me with another question that you can post.
But the way in which I read the question here is to say, if we haven’t found a narrative that steers us through this crisis, what would be a positive narrative that we could have in order to maybe stay on top of what is happening or maybe to open the gates for narrative imagination for a positive future?
[01:11:07]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Okay, I’m going to I’m going to resist your interpretation there for a second because I’ve just re-read this question and it says, “knowing that the pandemic we’re experiencing today has never been seen before, but I think that’s the very thing that is the thing we need to question. Okay?
[01:11:21]
That is what Trump is telling us. It came out of the blue. Nobody’s ever experienced anything like this… And I’m saying, I think there’s a lot of evidence that just isn’t true.
Maybe some of us. I’ve never experienced something like this, but there are many people, perhaps some of the people you’ve been watching this right now, but there are many people living in other parts of the world who have experienced pandemics.
[01:11:45]
And in fact, as I said they actually that’s one of the things I also said about Hong Kong is that they actually knew how to respond better because they’ve been through this before. And, there are… So I think that the idea for me that we have never experienced this before, some of us have never experienced this before, and when we tell ourselves, there’s so many interesting parallels, not to overdo them, for instance, with the Spanish flu of 1918, the idea that it was even called the Spanish flu, by the way, it didn’t start, it wasn’t Spanish, it started in the United States.
Why is it called the Spanish flu? That might be because the United States didn’t want to talk about it, even while we were busy exporting it at the end of World War I, all over the place, okay? And it’s really, I think the problematic construction there is that this is unique in history.
[01:12:46]
I think what perhaps is unique is this, okay, that when this has happened before and it has gone throughout the world, we have not been able to communicate with each other simultaneously about it. That is actually interesting. And that also might connect to what Michael was asking earlier about the role for psychologists, because we do have the opportunity, you and me and Michael, sitting as we are in different countries at this exact moment, all together.
We have the moment to reflect on this, not only professionally, but also just as engaged citizens.
[01:13:23]
And that’s something different, but I don’t think that this really is as important unique a moment as we are always being told by the government that it is.
It certainly didn’t come out of the blue. I tried to keep that slide as short as I could, but the more I read, the more my blood just boiled. It certainly did not come out of the blue. We had every warning we needed. We just didn’t heed them.
[01:13:53]
MARTIN DEGE:
We had an intense discussion, even though it’s just the two of us, but people are sending in their questions. And of course, there are many out there and I’ll try to represent all of you as good as possible. Unfortunately, we’re slowly running out of our time here.
[01:14:10]
Still, we have Slack going on and you can go and register if you haven’t done so and maybe one of the people in the background can do me the favor and post the link in the chat so that everyone can get registered. And Molly, if you are not registered yet, I will tell you after the talk how you can get there if you want to.
[01:14:28]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Yeah.
[01:14:28]
MARTIN DEGE:
I want to ask one final question though before we close. And it’s a short one by Annetta and I think it’s still an important one about the category of normality.
Normality as something that we maybe don’t talk about if we believe that we’re in it, but which we instantly seem to either miss or imagine the moment we realize that it’s maybe not there.
[01:14:53]
That we have this category of this past normality that we were in with us and now we are in a state where nothing is normal and maybe carry a hope of everything turning back to normal or a new normal or at the same time people might threaten us with the idea of “This is the new normal. This is the new conference style forever.”
[01:15:14]
I don’t know. So my question would be for you, how do we deal with this category of the normality? Do we have to reinvent that category?
[01:15:24]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
I think, again, I keep going back to Michael’s question about psychologists, I think there’s a lot of it’s not just psychologists, but a lot of psychologists have actually been talking about everyday lives for a long time.
[01:15:36]
And I think that there is a lot to be said about. Every day lives do change. And there are certain aspects which remain constant, but they change.
And they change for better and for worse. So we might grieve when we lose parts of them, or we might celebrate and there’s sometimes these changes are marked by ritual and a big moment, but most often they are marked by smaller changes.
[01:16:04]
So I think that, again, there’s a sort of myth that, you know, that there has been a constant normal and that all of a sudden that changes, but clearly, there are some aspects like not going to work or being outside, which have changed. And I think that it’s a mixed bag.
[01:16:30]
There are many people who do actually say I’m spending more time with my kids. Fathers are spending more time with their children at home.
At the same time, there’s more domestic violence and deaths in the home. It’s a complicated picture. And I think that is really why it is a moment for the Stoics.
[01:16:56]
We do need to sit back and actually take the temperature of where we currently are. What aspects of this new normal? Do we celebrate? What would we like to take forward? How do we combine critically with the Stoics? The idea of compliance, combining contemplation with action.
So how does this get woven and interwoven again into our lives going forward? And I hope that this crisis that we don’t come out of this crisis evading that possibility for rethinking what kind of future we want as individuals, but also as communities.
[01:17:42]
MARTIN DEGE:
And this is maybe also where we as psychologists and social researchers find our task to strengthen that hope.
[01:17:51]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Absolutely.
[01:17:53]
MARTIN DEGE:
Molly, thank you so much for a wonderful presentation and a wonderful discussion. As I said before, we’ll continue on Slack throughout the conference and I hope to see you in other talks as well. Thank you so much.
[01:18:04]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Thank you. So do we just leave now? Is that what happens?
[01:18:08]
MARTIN DEGE:
We’re leaving now unfortunately, this is unfortunately what happens. We’re not going out for dinner this time, but next time we will.
[01:18:16]
MOLLY ANDREWS:
Okay. That’s great. And do we get, thank you so much, everyone. Bye.
[01:18:20]
MARTIN DEGE:
Bye-bye.
Copyright Disclaimer
Under Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
