What does redundant really mean?

SunakIt looks like masses of people will become redundant as a result of the Covid-19 lockdown.

And our economic systems and government policies have made paid employment the sole means to reliably feed, clothe and house your family.  It is also how we recognise the individual worth of citizens who make a valuable contribution to society. The oft used phrase “hard working” only refers to people in paid jobs. And the pandemic has highlighted that,  even in employment,  pay doesn’t reflect the relative value to society of any particular job (or even its utility at all!).

But what does it mean to be “redundant” . I looked it up and here’s the modern, most common definition.

not or no longer needed or useful; superfluous

So, people will now have to prove their eligibility for Universal Credit in the hopes that will pay them enough to eat and pay the rent (although probably not any mortgage). But just as bad, the label defines them as “not or no longer needed or useful” – up and until they secure another job – however poorly paid or ill-matched to their skills or interests that is.

Could we look at this differently? Is anyone ever actually “redundant” in that sense. Dr Katherine Trebeck has argued that our economic system lacks the resilience it needs because it has no inbuilt redundancy or slack. As profit and shareholder dividends became the goal, we developed Just-in-Time manufacturing followed by Just-in-Time employment to cut any slack out of the system and thereby maximise efficiency and profit for the benefit of wealthy shareholders.

In contrast, nature is one system that thrives on abundance making it very resilient. Why does the term abundant feel like a much more positive term than redundant? Again, I looked it up. The dictionary definition has a more positive feel:

existing or available in large quantities; plentiful

Abundance certainly would have felt a preferable state in relation to numerous critical items, people and services during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic here. Presumably, those staff, equipment and services were deemed “not or no longer needed or useful” at various points in the last few years.

Whilst the modern definitions and common usage of “redundant” and “abundant” express something so different, they actually share the same Latin root and clearly were synonomous in earlier times. The Latin root is “surging up” – again an entirely different feel.

Working with my artist colleagues is teaching me ways to explore knowing differently so I stopped thinking at this point and simply drew what came to mind in relation to the those two words – ‘redundant’ and ‘abundant’ – and their common Latin root to see what might emerge.

This is what emerged on the paper as I drew… so, could we choose a world where no-one was ever labelled as redundant, paid employment or no? Given a sustainable basis, everyone has the ability to contribute uniquely to the common good. Surgepic

 

 

 

 

Posted in Psychology, socially engaged art | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Covid who came for G&T

G&T with CovidOK, so the unexpected ring at the door WAS a surprise but I (being both ‘home’ and ‘alert’) saw it as an opportunity to face the enemy and try to understand her perspective on causing a devestating pandemic.

She did suggest that I sit 2 metres away and keep the hand sanitiser handy.

The G&T and crisps disappeared pretty rapidly (do tigers and Covids have something in common maybe?) but we conversed for a while once I’d got over the initial shock and had a stiff gin inside me.

I suppose, not surprisingly, she said she sees herself “leading” rather than following “the science” – laughing disparagingly at my New Scientist lying on the table and saying she’s thoroughly enjoying leading those guys a merry and unco-ordinated dance (her words not mine).

I asked her motivation and, I guess fair enough, she pointed out that she simply exists to reproduce and have her species thrive even if that’s at others’ expense. “How am I any different from any other biological species? We are all concerned with number 1, no?

I slowly nudged the conversation round to the dreadful death and destruction she is causing. I’m afraid she laughed huskily (not a pleasant sound at all) before hitting back hard. “What do you mean ‘dreadful death and destruction’ – compared to you humans? At least I know the death and destruction I am causing. You guys are only just waking up to how your desire for endless growth by consuming everything in your path is killing the world and how your economy allows the poor to die”.

“…..And, more to the point, I’m simply programmed to do what I do. But you humans can make choices about what kind of values, lifestyles, politics and culture you want to replicate and what gets killed or destroyed en route. “

Hey, maybe I’ve even done you humans some good – cleaner air, time to stop and think, finally recognising who your critical workers actually are and I’ve even got your Tory government acting like big state socialists.. Who’d have thought?. Ever read Solzhenitsyn? “the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being”?”.

And with that, she polished off the second bowl of crisps and said she was heading back to England where life now looked a hell of a lot easier than here in Wales.


Making an imaginary Covid-19 was inspired by a combination of Grayson Perry’s Art Club on Channel 4 where the topic on Monday 11th May was fantasy and the children’s book by Judith Kerr “The Tiger who came to Tea”. I was curious about what we might talk about.

Posted in Psychology, socially engaged art, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

What effect is Covid-19 having on our thinking?

Stuck at home in isolation, I’ve been wondering (as have many others) what impact Covid-19 is having on our thinking about the world we’d like to inhabit beyond the pandemic.

In this weird, lonely and suspended state, we long for a return to “normality”. At the same time, there’s a growing sense that we don’t want (or possibly can’t even have) a return to “normality” as we have known it. We are suspended in time right now between two worlds and that creates opportunity for reflection and change. As the quote says “never let a good crisis go to waste“.

I’ve been analysing hundreds of online comments discussing the economic ramifications of Covid-19 to try to gain a sense of the language and the mood at least in some circles.  Admittedly these are circles where people were uncomfortable already with the way our Western neo-liberal society was headed and the values and politics driving it. So, this is not necessarily representative of the wider population.

My symbolic burning of a sacred cow

However, whatever one’s views, there are certainly much garlanded sacred cows which, whilst not being slaughtered outright, are certainly having their value and importance questioned.

To name a few: economic growth (built on consumption and debt), GDP, the market, and paid jobs for all.

The following are some patterns I am seeing emerging (conceivably because I want to!)….

An acknowledgement that we got ourselves in this mess. It was inevitable given the way we had structured our society and its priorities for the past 50 years.

An aversion to “going back to “normal” because “normal” is what got us in this mess.

An ideal that, post Covid-19, we need to evolve a new economic model with many of the following characteristics:-

  •  it protects our planet and recognises that we humans are part of it not magically separate from it,
  •  it doesn’t rely on growth based on endlessly buying and consuming material stuff,
  •  it isn’t fuelled by debt,
  •  it redistributes wealth more equitably,
  • it recognises and pays well those people whose work and skills are most critical for the common good – e.g. nurses, carers, cleaners, drivers, shop assistants, etc
  • it prioritises public spending on that which benefits the common good – the environment, NHS, Social care, education, infrastructure, housing, community and creative and cultural activity,
  • it reduces people’s dependence on a wage in order to live,
  • it acknowledges death as part of the natural cycle of life.

These are reflections from my particular Covid island. For a much more thorough analysis of our economic choices going forward, I recommend this article.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Psychology, socially engaged art | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Our shadow selves…

“Imagination …. reason in her most exalted mood” (William Wordsworth)

Posted in Psychology, socially engaged art | Leave a comment

Technology trials & tribulations

The Prospectory agenda  (assuming we were ever formal enough to have such a thing) suffered a significant set back when Peter was diagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease in December 2017.

Having said that, our combined interests in technology and psychology are getting well exercised as we learn how to adapt to living with Peter’s progressive loss of muscle power.

Some things we are learning for the first time; others we are re-encountering from  experiences over the years in technology research. Here are some examples:-

Single function wins every time

I confess to a long term dislike of multi-function devices. They lack affordance ( an object’s visible or tangible properties that signal clearly the actions users can take with it), e.g. door handles, push buttons, hooks, sliders or well designed screen icons). In contrast, multi-function devices require a user model – “what will it do?” and “how do I make it to do that?”. You can find yourself in the ‘wrong’ mode just when you need to act and sometimes the different modes interact in unfortunate ways.

So, here’s an example. Peter can no longer turn the lock and open our front door. Generously funded by the ever wonderful NHS, we were assessed for appropriate technology support which was installed some months ago by the private technology company who design and manufacture it.  Unfortunately, it’s a multi-function system designed (at least in principle) to control a whole range of household functions mainly via an app on a dedicated ipad. – TV, lights and phones as well as the front door .

Radio key fob for opening door

The best thing is that the “system” includes an independent single function radio fob. You can hang it round your neck and press its one button (from anywhere in the house) to open the front door. It’s perfect for our needs except you can’t distinguish between friends and axe murderers (not that we have a lot of these in rural Wales) before opening the door to let them in.

But the all singing, all-dancing ‘system’ includes an intercom with the doorbell so, in principle, you can talk to the caller to establish their identity before opening the door to let them in. But, unfortunately you can’t do that from the radio fob. And the doorbell, rather than sounding a loud bell in the house, causes the ‘phone (well at least one dedicated handset) to ring. If  we don’t happen to be in the same room as the handset,  we don’t hear it or, if we are otherwise occupied and think it’s a phone call (which it kind of is albeit with a different ring tone) we might leave it to go to Voicemail to pick up later – all while some poor friend, delivery person or even would-be axe murderer is stuck waiting on the

IMG_20190405_165156

i.e. Please use the other doorbell, not this one!

doorstep. If you hear the ‘phone, what you are meant to do is pick it up and you can then speak to the intercom. You can’t actually open the door though. That requires the ipad or the key fob. So, embarrassingly,  we have had to sellotape a sign on the intercom bell pointing to the old (less conspicuous) doorbell which we need people to press if they are guaranteed to get a response.

The function which seems to really excite the suppliers is the TV automatically muting when you answer the ‘phone! However, unfortunately if you are using the ‘phone when the doorbell goes, it interrupts the call completely not offering the chance to ignore it or explain to your ‘phone caller what is happening.

So, we’ve switched off as much of the system as we can and are just happily using the simple radio key fob.  Ironically though, the lock on the door having been changed, Peter now finds he can now open the door by hand!

Physics 101 for MND sufferers – Friction vs slipperiness

If you have very poor grip or muscle function, then suddenly textural properties of everyday objects gain huge significance but they have to be the right way around. Friction when you need slipperiness means things get stuck and slipperiness when you need friction means things get dropped or can’t be picked up at all.  So,  we have switched to fleece jackets and coats with slippy nylon linings and silky night shirts because otherwise, you’ll never get them on or off or (in the case of night shirts) be able to turn over in bed. But the opposite (friction) is what you need when you can’t squeeze your fingers together to create friction and you need to pick something up or open a jar. And friction is also useful (we discover) for working one’s socks on by pushing the foot against the carpet or to work one’s trousers on by lying on the bed and wriggling!

This kind of easily obtainable grippy material is invaluable.

sticky

Useful grippy/sticky stuff

Physics 101 for MND sufferers (cont) : Skeletons are invaluable

There’s nothing like losing muscle function to discover the value of your skeleton! The trick is to find ways of using your skeletal structure instead of using muscle. A skeleton is arguably like a  table – it’s a strong and stable structure which, physics will tell you, involves no energy to support a weight. So, Peter can carry surprisingly heavy things as long as his arms are straight and we’ve found a way of attaching them to him which don’t require grip! If the arms are bent at all, it won’t work because then muscles are involved. As Peter happily explains to people, a dead horse can carry the same weight of rider as a living one – it just won’t take him anywhere!

Posted in Psychology, Technology | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Enjoying irrationality

What I like doing best is Nothing.”

How do you do Nothing?,” asked Pooh after he had wondered for a long time.

Well, it’s when people call out at you just as you’re going off to do it, ‘What are you going to do, Christopher Robin?and you say, ‘Oh, Nothing,’ and then you go and do it.

It means just going along, listening to all the things you can’t hear, and not bothering.”

Oh!” said Pooh.”

A.A. Milne Winnie-the-Pooh

———————————————–

Activities with my artist colleagues, the Larks & Ravens, sometimes feel like this. When the Larks & Ravens are struggling to understand something or don’t know what to do next, we make an effort to stop talking or thinking and start doing instead – sometimes drawing, sometimes making or manipulating physical materials and seeing where that takes us. This is so different to my previous experience of beating a troublesome topic to death through endless discussion. Doing is nearly always rewarding but, as with Christopher Robin, the tricky bit is when someone asks you “what you are doing?” and you simply have no rational answer. Is it our fear of looking or acting crazy – i.e. not in a way which makes logical sense to those around?

Last Friday we were ‘playing’ with materials by a bus stop in a community (where we are working) because we had got stuck as to what made sense to do next to trigger conversations. All we had to hand was a very large red hot air balloon cover and a council wheelie bin so we started seeing what we could do with them. A lady waiting for the bus asked “what are you doing?”. “We don’t know” we replied. Another man, who’d watched us for a while, came over asking “can I help at all? … just explain to me what you are you trying to do!”. We “explained” that we had absolutely no idea but would he like to red bus stophelp?!  Having such conversations in public is certainly awkward but also interesting. It makes you question why we think our normal life makes rational sense when ‘playing’ with a red tent and a wheelie bin by a bus stop doesn’t. What’s the critical difference?  Is it just that we have a set of culturally acceptable narratives of what counts as rational activity?

(I have put ‘playing’ in inverted commas here because we certainly weren’t playing in the dictionary definition sense of “engaging in activity for enjoyment and recreation rather than a serious or practical purpose” (OED). Our actions were both serious and practical (as well as playful) but I can’t find another word which works in this context).

Some argue that an important role of art in our modern society is as a resistance to the logic of making sense … or, should I say, believing that what we do in our everyday lives makes sense … because does it? really?

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A small rant about project ‘outcomes’

I’ve just completed a project proposal which required a section entitled ‘Outcomes’ ( “The way a thing turns out” according to the OED). Grant Applications often require this too along with a description of  “Outputs” (“The amount of something produced by a person, machine, or industry” according to the OED).

The most rewarding aspect of work I do in collaboration with my artist colleagues is that we don’t know what might happen until we do something! No-one does. We can certainly tell you our motivations and roughly what we plan to do first but even what we do after that will change depending on “the way things actually turn out“!.  To me, that’s the power (and joy) of art.

Of course, there are cases where you know exactly what you want the outputs and outcome of a project to be (although, in my experience, it still rarely works quite as you planned). But, even in such cases, the fact that you declared your outcomes in advance can shut down alternatives or surprises emerging en route and may mean you miss out on a better or more interesting result.

Thinking back to my more traditional working days as an experimental psychologist – I didn’t have to declare what the desired outcome of any planned experiment would be but rather the outcome (a.k.a. a null hypothesis) which my carefully designed experiment would set out to disprove. Designed well, the actual ‘outcome’ could still surprise (and often did) challenging one’s developing theory and forcing you to think again.

Declaring desired outcomes in advance and then setting out carefully to realise them as stated feels at best narrow minded and, at worst, self confirming. You are likely to select the data which fits and consult the experts who agree with you. Disruptions and misfits (data or people) are not welcome.

I guess the question may be – do you want to have your pre-conceptions challenged and be open to surprising or uncomfortable outcomes? If you don’t, my advice would be to stay clear of involving artists and live an altogether duller life!

(For some reason, I’m reminded of 3M’s accidental invention of Post-it Notes as a result of a failed experiment with a glue which didn’t stick properly.)

Posted in Psychology, socially engaged art, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment