Some of you will probably know I'm currently grieving. It's a month since my fantastic sister died. I've been thinking a lot about loss, progress and reckoning and coming to terms, both personally and as a society. And I've been wondering: how will we remember the pandemic dead?

The UK is filled with memorials to the dead of wars, of disasters, of lifeboat crews and atrocities. We are a landscape haunted by attempts to remember the brave and the innocent. Villages, towns, businesses, communities: all grouped together to pay for plaques, statues, gardens
I have a terror that in our desire to get 'back to normal' we will forget those lost and things lost during the current pandemic. There's not an enemy they were overcome by; not a single flashpoint of tragedy. Those lost to the pandemic are an uncomfortable reminder of failure
Rebecca Solnit talks about hope only coming from knowing history. People may be optimistic about the future post-covid-19, but that's just desire and dream. For us to build a hopeful future we need to acknowledge and feel what has been lost; to repair and grow, not just erase
The thing is, I don't know if our communities know how to remember what is lost, not in ways that are meaningful to all of that community. Religion is a great enabler of remembrance, but that's not something everyone has. I'm wondering how we fully inhabit our collective sorrow
I feel like the seeds of something better are there in the soil of that sorrow; but that our every instinct will be to turn away from them, to salt the ground so that uncomfortable weeds of what has been lost cannot grow up through the shining 'building back better'
You might argue that we shouldn't politicise sorrow and loss, that blame is not appropriate at a time where unprecedented circumstances led to decisions that are obviously wrong in retrospect. I think this is a trap to avoid the possibility of sorrow turning to hope of better
I feel like there should be a cadre of people helping communities to find a better world in midst of sorrow. Grief doulas if you like. People who for next couple of years come forward to work with expression of collective grief. Not to put it to bed, but to help it become fertile
Imagine every place in the UK set itself the task of finding someway of understanding and living within what has been lost, then creating a new something: a new vision, a new togetherness, a place or a thing that allows the anger, loss, isolation to find a place in the new world
Without a way of carrying the reality of those people lost and those things lost into the new landscape, our collective response will exclude, will devalue. The rush for a national narrative will just be rhetoric and avoidance and the change we need will not happen
WIthout a shared common space in which grief and loss and sorrow can exist, both for lives lost and ways of life lost, we'll just end up with a world that tries to be the same as it was before, and with nowhere but dreams and disaffection for those who have lived through but lost
I don't really know who these grief workers should be; but they need a space to exist and to draw people together. To know what a better world will be takes going to where and when the last one was at its worst. I fear instead we will create a taboo against pandemic loss
We need something that bridges individual and collective loss. We don't have it now. Covid-19 isn't to blame for the pandemic. How our world was organised and how we responded is. We need to remember how loss of people and things happened to avoid it happening again
But my sense is that we don't need a national 'story' of loss. What we need to do is take the licence and space to make our own smaller collective remembrances, to seize back the story in whatever shape that takes. And we don't know how to do that yet: to transmute loss to hope
I do know that the people who lost least and have the greatest resources will define the 'national story'. I also know that this is wrong. The pandemic year isn't just the story of those who made it out relatively unscathed. And loss isn't just a problem to be managed
We don't really know how to build a culture of remembrance and of living through sorrow for thousands of individuals who died because they were in wrong place at the wrong time. We don't know how to make that individual plural. If the risk is hollow theatre, the answer is meaning
I dunno, I picture a vast quilt of different responses, different reckonings, different communities and different conclusions. And to get that quilt started we need to begin the process of sowing and stitching and gather yarn. It;s not too early. It's exactly the right time
And what do we need to overcome? Those who feel the fear they will be tainted by touching the loss of others; people who fear what that loss may tell us about the world that was and the world to come. They'll want to avoid the inconvenience of the need to remember
Many people have lost their lives, and many more have lost the lives they thought they would have. And that isn't inconvenient to 'bouncing back'. It's what bouncing back is bouncing back from. It's not an alternate discussion about the future. It's what the discussion should be
I'm just a sad person missing their dead sister. I've not got any answers tonight. My story is important and so is everyone else's. But forgetting will be a violence against those already hurt.
Thanks for listening. I'm off to make the dinner. Hope you're all as OK as it's possible to be right now.

More from Life

TW: suicidal ideation.

At the darkest days of the abuse I was being subjected to I decided to attend a conference for women in Los Angeles. I convinced my mother in law to pay for it because I couldn’t afford it. @ChristineCaine was preaching. I was desperate...
1/


I wanted to die, I didn’t see a way out and I had tried everything. I imagined many ways to die daily. The most recurring one was throwing my car down a bridge I had to drive over every day. I never did it because my kids were in the car and I was afraid one of them would...

2/

survive or I’d kill someone on the way down.

Christine spoke about honoring your pastors even when they weren’t great, she spoke of us expecting too much of pastors and how wrong that was. She said God would use our testimony if we submitted to our pastors.

3/

She said “honor your pastors, God will honor you.” She said more about having disagreed with her pastors but she submitted and God honored her and now she’s blessed. How if they are faithfully serving God, we need to support them and not forfeit what God has for us.

4/

I felt my heart drop into my stomach. I got up and went to the bathroom because I couldn’t breath and I felt like I was going to faint if I didn’t scream. I now know I was having a panic attack. I sat on the toilet w/my head between my legs, breathed and wept..
5/

You May Also Like

1/12

RT-PCR corona (test) scam

Symptomatic people are tested for one and only one respiratory virus. This means that other acute respiratory infections are reclassified as


2/12

It is tested exquisitely with a hypersensitive non-specific RT-PCR test / Ct >35 (>30 is nonsense, >35 is madness), without considering Ct and clinical context. This means that more acute respiratory infections are reclassified as


3/12

The Drosten RT-PCR test is fabricated in a way that each country and laboratory perform it differently at too high Ct and that the high rate of false positives increases massively due to cross-reaction with other (corona) viruses in the "flu


4/12

Even asymptomatic, previously called healthy, people are tested (en masse) in this way, although there is no epidemiologically relevant asymptomatic transmission. This means that even healthy people are declared as COVID


5/12

Deaths within 28 days after a positive RT-PCR test from whatever cause are designated as deaths WITH COVID. This means that other causes of death are reclassified as
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".