Perturbante e performante. Il lockdown indomestico

Journal title SALUTE E SOCIETÀ
Author/s Antonio Maturo, Veronica Moretti, Marta Gibin
Publishing Year 2021 Issue 2021/suppl. 2
Language Italian Pages 14 P. 21-34 File size 482 KB
DOI 10.3280/SES2021-002-S1002
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Italy, the first European country that started the lockdown due to Covid-19, today is - still - in the midst of a mass biographical (or else, societal) disruption. Our everyday life has been completely overturned. During the first phase of the pandemic (March/April 2020) we conducted 20 episodic narrative interviews with childless, highly educated adults (11 females and 9 males, 29 to 36 years old) living in Northern Italy, the epicentre of the epidemic, to explore how residents reconstructed their everyday life. Interviewees report mixed feelings about staying locked in their homes: cozyness but also restriction; easiness to call friends but forced physical isolation; doing work in places usually devoted to relax. Moreover, being forced to stay at home appears as a cognitive ambiguous situation in which people define themselves as persons ‘in-waiting’ in a ‘hold-on’ time. With COVID-19, something (very) familiar like everyday life became suddenly hostile and incomprehensible. We underwent a social disruption requiring new cognitive categories, new social practices and new habits. Our experience of the domestic sphere turned ambivalent.

Keywords: covid-19; uncanny; everyday life; domestic-life; sociographical disruption; decoincide.

  1. Atzori F. (aa 2018/2019). Self-tracking, empowerment e autocura tra i malati di diabete nella società digitale. Prospettive e limiti. Tesi di dottorato “Sociologia e Ricerca sociale”, Dipartimento di Sociologia e Diritto dell’Economia, Università di Bologna.
  2. Bateson G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company.
  3. Berger P.L., Luckmann T. (1997). La realtà come costruzione sociale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  4. Brewer J. (2003). Content analysis. In: Miller R.L., Brewer J.D., a cura di, The A–Z of Social Research. London: Sage.
  5. Bury M. (1982). Chronic illness as biographical disruption. Sociology of Health &Illness, 4(2): 167-182.
  6. Cardano M. (2011). La ricerca qualitativa. Bologna: Il Mulino. Charmaz K. (2003). Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In: Denzin N.K., Lincoln Y.S., a cura di, Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  7. Chicchi F., Simone A. (2017). La società della prestazione. Roma: Ediesse.
  8. De Certeau M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  9. Derrida J. (1994). Gli spettri di Marx. Stato del debito, lavoro del lutto e nuova Internazionale. Milano: Cortina Raffaello.
  10. Felski R. (2000). Doing Time: Feminist Theory and Postmodern Culture. New York: NYU Press.
  11. Freud S. (1919). Il perturbante. Saggi sull’arte, la letteratura e il linguaggio. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, Torino, 1991.
  12. Garfinkel H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
  13. Giddens A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  14. Goffman E. (1969). La vita quotidiana come rappresentazione. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  15. Habermas J. (1986). Teoria dell’agire comunicativo. Bologna: il Mulino.
  16. Husserl E. (1961). La crisi delle scienze europee e la fenomenologia trascendentale. Milano: il Saggiatore.
  17. Jullien F. (2017). Il gioco dell’esistenza. De-coincidenza e libertà. Milano: Feltrinelli.
  18. Luhmann N. (1990). Sistemi sociali. Bologna: il Mulino.
  19. Masschelein A. (2011). The Unconcept: The Freudian Uncanny in Late-Twentieth-Century Theory. Albany: Suny Press.
  20. Maturo A., Moretti V. (2020). COVID-19, The triple bias, and the “Unheimlich. In: ESA, a cura di, The challenges of covid-19.
  21. Moretti V., Maturo A. (2021), Unhome’ Sweet Home: The Construction of New Normalities in Italy During COVID-19. In: Lupton D., Willis K., a cura di, The COVID-19 Crisis. Social Perspectives, New York: Routledge.
  22. Mueller R.A. (2019). Episodic Narrative Interview: Capturing Stories of Experience with a Methods Fusion. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18: 1-11. DOI: 10.1177/160940691986604
  23. Neresini F. (2020). Scienziati, laboratori e comunicazione pubblica della scienza. In: Magaudda P., Neresini F., a cura di, Gli studi sociali sulla scienza e la tecnologia. Bologna: il Mulino.
  24. Scambler G. (2020). Covid-19 as a “breaching experiment”: exposing the fractured society. Health Sociology Review, 29(2): 140-148. DOI: 10.1080/14461242.2020.178401
  25. Schütz A. (1979). Saggi sociologici. Torino: Utet.
  26. Veltri G. (2020). Digital social research. Cambridge: Polity.

Antonio Maturo, Veronica Moretti, Marta Gibin, Perturbante e performante. Il lockdown indomestico in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" suppl. 2/2021, pp 21-34, DOI: 10.3280/SES2021-002-S1002