Click here to download

Perturbante e performante. Il lockdown indomestico
Journal Title: SALUTE E SOCIETÀ 
Author/s: Antonio Maturo, Veronica Moretti, Marta Gibin 
Year:  2021 Issue: suppl. 2 Language: Italian 
Pages:  14 Pg. 21-34 FullText PDF:  482 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SES2021-002-S1002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

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, in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" suppl. 2/2021, pp. 21-34, DOI:10.3280/SES2021-002-S1002


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content