Report on the event – The Return of the Scapegoat: COVID Syndemic in the unconscious life of groups

Sabrina Braganti, Gina Cadeddu, Chiara Cedri, Bruno Chipi, Vanna Decandia, Alfonso D’Auria, Giovanni Losito, Earl Hopper

6 March 2021
9:00-13:00 (CET)

Online, Platform Zoom

Language: English and Italian, with real time translation

Participants: 500 registered, 367-370 during the Lecture and Question Time, 266-268 in the Large Group

Abstract of the lecture: In this lecture Dr Earl Hopper will consider some of the psychological, relational, and social consequences of the Covid syndemic from a group analytic point of view.  Dr Hopper will argue that because of socially traumatogenic processes and the fear of annihilation, the syndemic involves unconscious aspects of Incohesion: Aggregation/Massification as the fourth basic assumption.  Although they are often neglected, fundamentalism and scapegoating are especially important.

Earl Hopper, PhD, is a psychoanalyst, group analyst, certified group therapist, and organisational consultant in private practice in London. A Distinguished Fellow of the American Group Psychotherapy Association, an Honorary Member of the Group Analytic Society International, and an Honorary Member of the Institute of Group Analysis, he is a supervisor and training analyst for many psychotherapy associations in England. He is a former President of the International Association for Group Psychotherapy and Group Processes (IAGP), and a former Chairman of the Association of Independent Psychoanalysts of the British Psychoanalytical Society.  The author and editor of many books and articles in psychoanalysis, group analysis, and sociology, he is the editor of the New International Library of Group Analysis for Routledge.

Introduction, Bruno Chipi (President of IL CERCHIO, Italian Association of Group Analysis).

Good morning everyone, as you can see from the text on the screen, I am Bruno Chipi. I welcome you on behalf of all the members of Il Cerchio of which I am currently the President. Il Cerchio is an Italian association of professionals, psychotherapists, psychoanalysts, group analysts, doctors and psychologists who believe that group analysis is more than a method, more than a theory, it is a way of reading the world, indeed, I would say it is a way of being in the world, sharing it co-responsibly.

Il Cerchio was born at the beginning of the 2000s from the merging of two associations that had very old roots, dating back to the beginning of the 1980s and the end of the 1970s, and composed of professionals dedicated to the study, research, and the use of the small group in clinical practice and training. Since the beginning of the 1990s, the members of Il Cerchio have also applied themselves to observing, studying, and experiencing the large group. Il Cerchio is one of the founding members of the Confederation of Italian Organisations for Analytical Research on Groups, Coirag, of which it is currently a member, along with eight other members.

Before getting into more detail, I would like to thank the Group Analytic Society International, GASI and its President, David Glyn, for the sponsorship from COIRAG and its President, Ms Silvana Koen. I would also like to thank the Department of Philosophy, Social Sciences, Humanities and Education of the University of Perugia, led by Professor Claudia Mazzeschi, from the Order of Psychologists of Perugia and its President, Mr David Lazzari, and from the Director General of the Foundation La Città Del Sole, Mr Marco Casodi. We are pleased to see such a large audience. Of course, it would be interesting, even more pleasant to be gathered in person, but I think that will happen soon.

I would like to thank of course our most important guest, Earl Hopper, for the introduction of whom I hand over to Mr Alfonso D’Auria, who will also be the Chair for all the activities of the morning. Have a good morning and enjoy the meeting.

Presentation, Alfonso D’Auria (Chair)

Thank you, Bruno. Welcome everyone. In order to stick to the agenda and facilitate the simultaneous translation, I prepared a brief speech and I will read it to introduce Mr Hopper and today’s activities. So, welcome everybody.

It is an honor for the Italian Association of Group Analysis Il Cerchio to have Professor Earl Hopper as the guest of this event. I believe that if you are here, you already know the great value of his scientific contributions in the field of Psychotherapy and specifically in Group Analysis. Among his many contributions, we recall the formulation of the Fourth Basic Assumption of Inchoesion: Aggregation / Massification in the unconscious life of groups, and the study and research on the Social Unconscious and on Large Groups.

We all know how tragic the pandemic and the lockdown have been, both for the many lives lost and the serious psychological and relational consequences. Yet, in the midst of this tragedy, thanks to technology, new opportunities of “contact”, of “connection” opened up, precisely at the moment when contact was feared and no longer possible.

After an initial phase of bewilderment, the group analysts who had active groups had to resort and adapt to online technology to continue working. Just like therapy groups, experiential support groups for colleagues were launched, both nationally and internationally. In this regard, I remember the Sunday Large Groups of GASI, every week throughout the lockdown, and the Large Groups organised internally among the members of Il Cerchio.

It was at that time that GASI discussed the possibility of not cancelling the Symposium that should have been held in Barcelona in early September 2020, and to organise it online. An arduous and courageous undertaking, which provided an opportunity to maintain the hope of moving forward and experimenting new ways of meeting up. Previously, such new ways were not considered and evaluated, specifically I am referring to the reduction of the costs related to the registration, travels and overnight stay for colleagues from distant countries and with greater economic difficulties.

And it is in this huge, painful, and revolutionary process of change that we decided to use this “middle ground”, the virtual “field”, to organise an international event with our national association Il Cerchio. If the event had not been digital, our association would not have been able to cover its huge costs, and the event certainly would not have been free and would not have had so many participants, I am referring in particular to the numerous international colleagues.

That is why, in addition to Professor Hopper’s valuable lecture, today’s event is an “extraordinary” event for the Italian group-analytic community since, thanks to the simultaneous translation (Italian / English), and thanks to the support of GASI, it was possible to extend the invitation to the international colleagues who are present here today.

In this respect, I would like to provide some figures to help you understand the composition of our group: we had around 490 people registered, including 400 Italians and around 90 international colleagues from 20 different countries.

When we decided to host the event, we thought that Professor Hopper was the most authoritative Group Analyst who could act as a “bridge”, to allow the meeting between these two scientific communities, unfortunately still largely distant, if not for Italian colleagues who speak English and who in the years before COVID-19 “actively” participated, in person, with passion and with great financial efforts, in the international events organised by GASI.

For these reasons, I hope that technology works well today and that we can manage to communicate and discuss in the best possible way.

To make this happen, technology is not enough but the contribution of everyone present at today’s event is needed. For this reason, I ask you to pay attention and to follow these simple but fundamental instructions.

First of all, always keep the microphone off, except when you decide to speak. To help the interpreter, Claudia Marchetti, we ask you to speak slowly. Remember to turn off the microphone after speaking. During Hopper’s one-hour lecture (that will be recorded), it will not be possible to intervene, and the chat will be disabled. During the half-hour question time, you can switch on the microphone and ask a question out loud. It is important not to overlap in asking questions verbally. During the question time the chat will be open in case you want to write your question instead of saying it. At the end of the question time, there will be a half-hour break. The meeting will remain open and there is no need to log out. Just turn off microphone and video. At 11:30 am the Large Group will begin (which will not be recorded), during which Hopper will be present, but as a simple participant, so he will not be there to continue answering questions. During the Large Group the chat will be disabled.

The Large Group will be convened by Gina Cadeddu and Giovanni Losito. There will be also three observers: Vanna Decandia, Chiara Cedri and Sabrina Braganti. While I will only look after technical aspect, monitoring that the microphones of those who are not speaking are turned off.

Let me remind you again to speak one at a time and slowly, in order to facilitate communication and interpretation. Thank you all for your cooperation. I now hand over to Prof. Hopper.

Lectio Magistralis, Earl Hopper

Two versions of the video are available:

1) The first is in the original language, with English subtitles to the Italian interventions, which you can find at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE_vvYRqv3k

2) The second is in Italian, with audio from the interpreter translating the speeches in English, which you can find at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-OA2qRdKMQ

Large Group

Conveners: Gina Cadeddu, Giovanni Losito

Observers: Chiara Cedri, Vanna Decandia, Sabrina Braganti

Participants: 266-268

Observer Chiara: The group consists of a reduced number of participants compared to what we had previously anticipated from the number of people who had signed up. The workings of the large group will be started by the convener Gina Cadeddu, who will introduce herself and will then hand over to the other convener, Giovanni Losito, for his introduction.

Gina Cadeddu: Good morning everyone, I am Gina Cadeddu, I am a psychologist, Cerchio and Coirag group analyst and GASI member. Let’s start this large group; I now hand over to the other convener and I will take care to inform you when the time is up.

Giovanni Losito: My name is Giovanni Losito, I am a member of Cerchio and Coirag, the latter is a federation of Group Analysis Societies. I am also a member of GASI London.

More than a minute of silence

Woman 1: (English) I would just like to say that many people have their cameras off. One thing is the presentation (Hopper’s seminar during the first part of the morning) in the larger group, but there are many people that we cannot see, and I do not feel good about this.

Man 1: (Italian) I completely agree with this. Thank you. It would be nice to see everyone.

Woman 2: (Italian) I want to take part, but I am ill and that is why I keep my camera off. Tell me whether this is okay.

Observer Vanna: I have the feeling that the group starts by expressing discomfort, what lies behind these cameras being off? The voice that emerges from one of the dark rectangles tells us about an illness, that perhaps because of shame is kept hidden, is it still possible to take part even if suffering?

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: Is the group searching for a scapegoat, perhaps one who has returned?

Observer Chiara: Nobody directly replies to this question.

Woman 3: (Italian) an association with what Woman 1 has said: the danger of what we do not see during this historical moment, with this virus that is invisible.

Observer Sabrina: A difficulty to tolerate the inability to see all the attendees emerges from these first exchanges. This aspect (being able to see all the attendees) characterises the setting of an in-person group, thus allowing each participant to choose where to seat, either at the centre being the spotlight or at the boundaries to ‘check’ on the individuals as well as on the group. In this online situation, not only people are on different ‘pages’, and one has to ‘look for them’ one by one if they want to see them, but some people decide to attend with their cameras off, leaving only their names or initials, on the screen. The group already seems to come together, we realise it, but with the fear of being ‘infected’ by something that is somehow invisible.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer:  Is there a fear here?

Brief silence

Woman 4: (Italian) I would like to share my experience of a patient, a strong Trump supporter and no-vax, that I have been seeing for some years and sometimes I would like to kick her out of the room. She asked me if I was vaccinated and if she were to find out that I am, she would no longer come to therapy. An image that touches me strongly this morning.

Observer Chiara: Without even a moment of pause from the previous intervention, an italian woman steps in with an evidently highly irritated tone.

Woman 5: (Italian) (her tone seems angry, or resentful) this image is a form of reverse marginalisation. I had Covid and I could have died. (She is interrupted by someone who cannot hear her, although many say that she can be heard perfectly). We need to fight this form of marginalisation, both towards those who have suffered from Covid and those who work with patients that display forms of fundamentalism, starting in small groups as well as with Covid survivors. If Prof. Hopper has talked about this referring to the historical contexts of native Americans and Nazis, then maybe, we should be afraid to develop social antibodies from those who have been infected. Thank you.

Man 2: (Italian) I feel as if you are all friends with whom I can talk whenever I want, I can see your faces. I do not know if it is an escape to be attached to Earl’s brilliant conference, but this is my feeling.

Silence

Observer Chiara: A moment of silence came about; I can feel the difficulty and the struggle of not being able to see everyone. I miss being able to look at facial expressions, body movements… what makes my observation more emotionally intense lies in the contents and in the variation of tones and vocal expressions. It looks like this IT tool awakens anguishes of fragmentation, not being able to make use of the group’s gestalt. The sharing resumes…

Woman 6: (Italian) We are developing the ability to feel close even if we are apart…Afterall this is what we have been experiencing for a year now.

Observer Chiara: I have the feeling that part of the group is searching for a sense of closeness and a highly empathic sharing experience, which would keep quiet these more discriminatory and aggressive experiences, which, I imagine to be repeatedly blocked.

Observer Vanna: It appears to me that the sense of discomfort is alternatively replaced by one of hope, the need to express anger and look for solutions (I have had this feeling throughout the whole group).

Regarding the platform: on one hand it reminds us that we are physically apart, on the other hand it allows the group to happen. I wonder, if this was in person, where I would have sat, I would have not seen some people, I would have not heard the words of others, but surely, I would have experienced other feelings related to the more physical aspects, in this case I can look at facial expressions and by changing the settings on the platform, I can see as many people as possible or focus on who is speaking, I am myself in one of the rectangles and at the same time out of it.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer:  The group seems to be searching for closeness without massification, which would involve finding a scapegoat.  In other words, these sophisticated and well-meaning people want to be close to one another, but they would not like to scapegoat any one or sub-group in order to find this closeness.

Gina Cadeddu: Maybe we are experimenting and looking for a way to feel close, even if this technological method makes it hard to see each other, perhaps we are finding a distance that will allow us to talk.

Woman 7: (Italian) I feel close to the colleague who had Covid. It must have been a very frightening experience, maybe with a greater fear coming from those who have never been infected by the disease.

Man 3: (Italian) in the previous interventions I have heard anger even in the voices and maybe being pro or no-vax can be a way to virtually delete people.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: The group is searching for a way to protect itself against the virus and the returned scapegoat.

Woman 8: (Italian) the famous categories that Professor Hopper was talking about.

Woman 9: (Italian) some people do not have the option to choose whether to do it or not.

Observer Chiara: Following this intervention, I am struck by the voice in English that starts talking. She has an intense and involved tone which I miss on to listen to the translator.

Woman 10: (English) I felt very confused when I received the vaccine. I work in a hospital, and it is mandatory. I also feel very close to Woman 5, I feel her anger. Here in my country, 60/70 % of the population has been vaccinated and it is becoming complicated in groups, there are lists and communication is very difficult. The problem of the scapegoat arises towards people who do not want to be vaccinated. We have more and more categories and they are really difficult to deal with. Here very religious people are against the vaccine. In my analytic group, the majority are women who do not yet have children and they fear the vaccine could damage their ability to procreate. People also talk about privacy and how governments are manipulating these areas.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: The problem is that the virus and the returned scapegoat involve the possibility of social violence.

Woman 11: (Italian) I work in mental health and some nurses refused to have the vaccine, because it is allowed, there is no obligation to accept it. There is a lot of anger towards these co-workers which work (in healthcare) but are not vaccinated.

Man 4: (Italian) Someone I am really close to works for the Government in the social work department and in their work group half of the people accepted the vaccine. Two co-workers, not vaccinated, took some days off from work because they thought that those who have been vaccinated can pass the virus to others. We are in a scientific community where we can talk and exchange ideas but there are social situations where divisions, conflicts and very unpleasant fights occur.

Brief silence

Woman 12: (Italian) I feel the exertion of trying to relate aspects of common sense and logical and rational thinking to more emotional ways of thinking. A weariness that has been with me for the past 13 months. I feel guilty when I follow the more emotional way of thinking, such as last week when I did not go to a funeral, because, in my social network, there has been a funeral every fortnight. I could not do it; these were too many funerals for my mind to handle.

Man 5: (English) I have received the first dose of the vaccine and I do not want the second one. The first dose made me sick, but I feel that I do not have the strength to say ‘no’ to the scientific and social pressure that tells us to undergo this cure. I do not want the second dose because I had a very negative reaction to the first one and I have some doubts on the fact that we are all becoming ‘doctors’.

Observer Chiara: For a moment I can see his face, he is very resolute in his statement. I imagine that through this resolution he wants to show an experience of rejection or nonetheless conflict.

Observer Vanna: this intervention really strikes me, I feel like it expresses pain, fear, a sense of helplessness, anger, interior conflict, all at the same time; feelings that have gone through us, during this time, later emerging in the background.

Woman 13: (Italian) the vaccine is not a medicine, it does not act on the disease, it is a protection, which is something very different.

Woman 14: (Italian) How do we fight the virus? There is also a social responsibility.

Woman 10: (English) In my country, the fact that I do not trust the leadership, my beliefs, and my inability to believe in the Prime Minister, they have an impact on my ability to be vaccinated. I believe that part of my refusal and that of the ones who do not want to be vaccinated, is a protest towards the leadership, and this is about a lack of trust: can I be positively nurtured by the Prime Minister? I believe that this the origin of the doubts around the vaccine.

Woman 15: (English) In my country we are always (very divided) between South and North, East, and West. Even though we are a very poor country, we have five different vaccines so one can choose. People who are reluctant to accept the vaccine, maybe do so because they have too much choice. There is a high number of people who have already received the second dose of the vaccine, we might be the first in Europe and this is very interesting. The country has so many vaccines that can afford to donate vaccines to surrounding countries who have asked for additional vaccines and have not obtained them. It is an absolute paradox. In Greece, where it’s not possible to choose which type of vaccine to receive, one can only tell whether they want to be vaccinated or not, and now the situation is the following: because there is not a lot of trust in the government, people are starting to think that there is some manipulation over who receives which type of vaccine.

Observer Sabrina: Is it possible that these emerging paranoid anguishes are a symptom of mistrust towards the excessively silent lead (of this group) and hence towards feeling protected within this group? Maybe the comparison with what is happening in other countries is a comparison with other groups we belong to?

Observer Chiara: I am unable to understand who this voice, that keeps on speaking in English, belongs to. I feel the weariness of trying to put together the contents, the faces, and the homogeneity of the English voices, that are translated alongside my thoughts. Hence why the reference to the limitations of this tool (referring to the online platform) and to the specificity of the phenomenon of the large group suddenly come to my mind. Then, as in a continuous reflection, I think that, if this event was in person, it would have not been possible to hear these voices. Even less to know about these experiences, which are so distant but at the same time so close to us. It resonates with me how power and leadership are so strongly affected from an emotional viewpoint, based on trust and choice, in contexts which are so different and contradictory in some ways. There are those who feel threatened from the excessive variety of available vaccines, others from only having one choice, some from having to choose for or against, as if it was a freedom that no longer appears like such. Regarding the mistrust and fear generated by the leaders of countries and nations, I wonder whether in the group dismay is generated by the generally silent presence of the conveners. Conveners, who a bit like ‘leaders’, have the power to decide the fate of the group, even if it is only by deciding the starting and ending times.

Observer Vanna: I listen with great interest and curiosity to the various experiences around the vaccine in the many countries represented here, in the end I focus on two categories that have emerged: for or against the vaccines, two categories that appear to be related to the idea of choice, which appears unrealistic , either because such choice is not allowed or because paradoxically it is made impossible by the presence of too many options, or even because it is affected by superstition or by the lack of trust in those in power.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: I wonder if in what seems to me to be their excessive silence the convenors are unconsciously producing failed dependency, thereby enacting the theory that I tried to explain in my lecture.

Woman 16: (Italian) I am a teacher and, as teachers, we see our classroom-groups and the families, who are behind our pupils, through a new light. In the last 15 years, as school staff, we have experienced an ever-growing shared responsibility with families. Now Covid has separated pupils from their teachers, both physically and emotionally. As soon as we are back in the classroom, we suddenly must go back to quarantining, because a pupil tests positive and people start pointing fingers, thus creating further divide: the pupil’s family should have kept them at home or we, as teachers, are not careful enough. Divides within the group emerge and they make me think. Almost all teachers are fueled by a strong civic sense, with a desire to be back in the classroom.

Earl Hopper: (English) I am struck by how difficult it is to talk about the underlying aggregation and the fears of Covid. It is extremely difficult to remember that most of our societies were in a very different state five years ago, when were worried about migrations and the increase in various types of fascist ideologies.  This was happening before Covid, and these issues have not disappeared. This is the context of our responses to Covid, beyond dealing with the realities of the virus.  This is the context of experiencing the virus as the returned scapegoat.

Woman 17: (English) At the Institute where I am training, I struggled with being able to listen to and engage all the sub-groups equally. The sub-group concerning the vaccination has been silenced and we have been pushed on the zoom platform. The most painful thing for me has been that these discussions about the vaccine are not allowed. Here nobody forbids listening to my voice and to different voices. Thank you, it is a great thing to speak in front of 260 people.

Woman 3: (Italian) ‘it is not allowed’

Woman 18: (English) the group is not a dominant narrative, it is perceived as a scapegoat, as made of extremists, mad people. Differences are not allowed, there is a predominant narrative that is held. All of those who are different are marginalized and perceived as people that have something wrong within themselves. Earl was saying this thing about the _“East”_, there are other people who are not from the _ “East”_, some of my friends have a similar view to mine and they are not heard. I am not heard by the students in my course, by the tutors and by my group analyst.

Observer Vanna: Sometimes I struggle to understand who says what (because the translator gives voice in Italian to multiple people), I perceive these interventions (woman 17, woman 18) as one, where I feel the satisfaction of being able to express the views of the minority and to condemn not being heard, by anyone, not even by the ones that are supposed to.

Observer Chiara: First the overlap of voices, then a very brief pause to understand who and how can start talking again.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: I am pleased that we have been brought back to the Large Group.  Again, I find myself wondering where are the convenors.

Man 6: (italian) I am a supervisor in various therapeutic communities for minors. The most frequent word among the caregivers’ group is no longer ‘resilience’ but ‘tolerance’ and ‘weakness’. Various patients have lost people due to Covid and I have recently lost a loved one, not because of Covid, however. This experience has been characterised by the impossibility of engaging with the end of life, of being able to say goodbye to, because the protocols did not allow it. Through this, I re-discovered the idea of ‘tolerance and weakness’. Covid has taken a lot away from us, but it has also given us an enormous opportunity. Antisocial, adolescent offenders in therapeutic communities have re-discovered a setting characterised by very firm rules that makes them feel better. Perhaps a way of thinking directed towards knowledge, Bion’s idea of knowledge, is activated starting from these proto-sensory aspects; therefore, re-discovering weakness and tolerance, has been very useful for me, from both a personal and a professional viewpoint. If we are all here together it means that there must be something, at the level of the social unconscious, which has pushed us to gather to reflect and understand what kind of lesson we want to derive from this experience.

Man 7: (English) I come from Germany and in my family, there are some encapsulated areas regarding the past, which I cannot talk about with them. Even with my friends, I sometimes feel like we cannot get to an agreement over the reality we are all living through. It is as if there is an elephant in the room, something that is there but we cannot talk about. Is it healthy to have these encapsulated ideas or should we talk about everything? Sometimes it really feels impossible to talk about certain things.

Observer Sabrina: From the interventions in English, a difficulty to talk to course colleagues (colleagues from this group), friends (man 2 that at the beginning says that he perceives all attendees as friends), family (the ‘parental couple’ at the lead) comes across. We wonder whether we should be allowed to talk about anything…here in the group?

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: What scapegoats are relevant here?

Woman 19 (English): I am *** and I come from Slovenia. I am very happy to be here, and towards the end of the Lectio Magistralis it felt like a volcanic eruption, I don’t know if it is Mount Etna but, because of the sun shining in my eyes, I had the warm feeling of lava, which in reality is a threat and, I wondered what do we do in front of an immediate threat? To what extent can we tolerate aggression and threat? How many threats can be positively perceived? Who and what are we sacrificing? Freedom? What lies between massification and aggregation? I feel that between these two concepts there is space for ambivalence, madness and all these shadows that are part of our lives…How much chaos and uncertainty can we tolerate? Leaderships are becoming more and more autocratic, therefore this space for reflection is taken away, leading to more aggression, rejection, paranoia, and unconscious thoughts that are expressed in places like this and I am really happy to be taking part.

Observer Vanna: I am fascinated by the reference to a volcano (an italian volcano), which emits heat and is at the same time threatening. Perhaps we should leave space for ambivalence, to understand how much chaos and uncertainty we can tolerate, if this ambivalence was removed, we might incur in an emergency with paranoid traits.

Observer Chiara: I write down a reflection, which I am no sure is right but that arises from the impromptu listening. I have the feeling that many attendees, who give voice to their thoughts, do so with deference. As if they were guests to an elite group. It mostly comes across in the English voices, but I am not fully sure that this is how things are going. Maybe it is because they require additional focus on my part, but I have the feeling that they ask for permission when introducing themselves and their stories.

Earl Hopper (English): Thank you Woman 19. I have to remind myself that this is a large group rather than a plenary meeting. Man 7 and Woman 19 you showed that you understand exactly what I am talking about. I feel understood. This movement between aggregation and massification removes every form of authentic listening, debate, and dialogue. The massification process depends on a certain type of fundamentalism as a protection against an enormous amount of fear. Encapsulation are necessary in order for life to go on. However, in extreme forms such encapsulations are “anti-life”. This must be considered on both the part of individual persons and on the part of social systems.

Woman 20: (English) I would like to share two experiences, During the Lectio Magistralis, I hysterically laughed when you talked about rivalry between siblings that smell, they are dirty. I am pregnant and there will soon be a little brother for my son, and I was thinking about the diapers that I will have to change, I will get my hands dirty and maybe I will try to laugh about it to send something away, either it be fear or confusion. You might be able to help me with this.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: “Sibling rivalry” among nationalities and among ethnic groups?

Woman 21: (Italian) I think I belong to one of the last generations that were vaccinated for smallpox. The vaccination process will give way to rather strong reactions, but nobody would question whether to accept the vaccine or not, they would just do it. I believe that in the times we are living through, this situation really affects social dynamics, particularly the aspect around trust, lack of trust who can notably fuel fear. I find uninfluential the opinions of scientists, which are often contrasting.

Gina Cadeddu: I wonder if, in parallel to this debate, there are also thoughts about what is happening here in our group… how such a large group, with a delivery system that does not allow us to see each other in person, is giving rise to difficulties around trust, but mostly the boundaries that each one of us has to find around their narcissistic thoughts, in order to allow what we are trying to achieve here, as we are trying to talk, to create a dialogue. Maybe the group wonders if we could tell something more about the pain, which however stays encapsulated.

Man 8: (Italian) I would like to share the strong anger I feel towards our society, about how everything is handled during these times…I made an association about incoherence. I cannot understand how, in 2021, we have not managed to structurally handle our protection as human beings from a virus, which is not even one of the most lethal ones. We must get vaccinated, but they give us the option whether to do it or not, they made us hyper-responsible and they give us obligations. We must adjust gyms and restaurants but then they shut them down. Now they are asking us to close schools once again and not even a single euro has been invested in the attempt to implement the infrastructures. I find it mad; I cannot accept it…I do not feel protected by my own kind…

Woman 8: (Italian) This reminds me of a scene from the movie ‘1984’ by George Orwell, where incoherence is the tool to control people. There is a scene where one of the two protagonists is tortured to push them to accept incoherence…Someone was saying that we have an alternative to the vaccine…the alternatives have been given by many months of staying at home. Doctors have put a protocol in place for almost a year now and they had no deaths…the contradiction is because as a whole we do not make the decision to act…but we keep pushing on the fear of for /against vaccine and all the contradictions listed up until now.

Observer Chiara: The image of this woman resonates with me, I hear the perplexity filled with sadness, sometimes despair, that fills me in during moments of my daily life because, just as she says while referring to the movie scene, two plus three is five and two plus three is no longer five. I also feel that the image portrayed by the large group can illustrate many of the interior movements that are happening, from the need to understand the fear of being puppets in the hands of those in power, up until the rehabilitation of a contract that can stop the strong sense of dismay and helplessness. A bit like a riot against the leadership that in the group remains silent and almost hidden but it is yet present and has power. The partial silence in the lead, who is refrained in its male voice, resonates with me.

Woman 22: (Italian) I had Covid, with deadly symptoms but with the strength and self-awareness that I could overcome it…last night for the first time I was hugged by a family member because we were both vaccinated…

Woman 23: (Italian) It appears to me that this pandemic has forced us to face limitations…we are on Zoom, and this leads to some limitations but also to opportunities. I listen to the interventions, and I feel emotions of every sort, very strong emotions. I had not seen some people in a while, others I did not know before, yet I feel close to you because of this tool that prevents us from physically hugging each other but gives us the opportunity to still feel close.

Man 9: (English) During the last half an hour I have been feeling frustrated by the length of the

interventions. I do not understand why the organisers are not stepping in.

Observer Chiara: I perceive this last intervention as filled with anger and, despite my expectations, maybe my need for a moment of silence, pause, processing, listening to reactions, the group keeps on going with fast-paced interventions. It is as if there was a strong need to speak as well as a strong need to calm down the most untuned emotions, thus denying silence so that space is left for action, obviously through words, rather than for listening.

Woman 24: (Italian) I would like to highlight the possibility that this experience of being in a large group is actually an experience where the dynamic of the scapegoat is kept inactive, through our effort…We are trying to control this automatism to avoid the possibility that very different positions are marginalised or criminalised. I had the vaccine, but I hate to hear when those who do not want to receive it are considered as criminals. There is space for all points of view, and I thank all of us for the possibility of keeping those open.

Man 10: (Italian)…maybe we are undergoing a torture to try and accept all these positions. Maybe we really want to explode. I was struck by the pregnant person, and I thought that she has a scapegoat in her womb ready to explode. With regards to younger siblings.

Man 11: (Italian) I would like to tell Man 9 that Italians tend to be wordy, to use long sentences but this is our blueprint and perhaps we should learn to accept that we speak differently.

Observer Sabrina: I am intrigued by this intervention to defend the italian blueprint. Up until this point, the interventions both in italian and English were equal in length.

Man 12: (Italian) In this situation, psychologists are a privileged social category because they have some reference category, for the experience, the thoughts, a mental organization that is more accustomed to engaging with these situations. In the past ten years, the issue of trauma has been a major deal. In this sense we are privileged. In comparison with the great dismay that most of the population is experiencing. The psychologist’s role is a social one, it is important to be involved, to give our opinion to offer society the categories, the bearings, the viewpoints that were previously mentioned. It is particularly important to aid society in thinking sensibly, appropriately, which involves controlling emotional sides through more rational ones. There is a human, emotional basis to science and there may be sensible scientists that have different ideas. We have all been surprised to see that humanity managed okay in the face of a surprise, a pandemic, a trauma so sudden, so strong, and profound, although discomforts and pains so strong have started to pile up and manifest themselves…resilience, rather unexpected resources. From evening to morning, a dull government, such as the one we had, managed to keep at home entire regions, to shut down businesses, and everyone agreed, understood, was okay with it. What a shame! We have so many resources, such incredible opportunities that we could use to change this society and make it more sensible, to imagine, to plan, to act, to be involved. The psychologist’s role continues to be a fundamental one.

Observer Sabrina: This attendee has just spoken in Italian through a long intervention (thus supporting the defence of the Italian blueprint), that appears to summarise all that is happening in the group: mental health professionals that share their human fears, discomforts, and pains, giving meaning to the dismay caused by the incoherence and accepting very contrasting views. Nevertheless, a voice within the group asks for the conveners to watch for the length of the interventions: can we observe in this a desire for massification, as mentioned by Hopper? The emergence of feelings of rivalry, envy, and a desire to eliminate every difference? Or are the interventions really too long?

Woman 9: (English) I am with Man 9, with the frustration brought by the long interventions because I am getting really irritated. This is not a large group; it feels more like a discussion group, and I wanted to share this feeling.

Observer Vanna: Interventions of protest arise regarding the long interventions, hoping for the organisers to step in; I am surprised by the defence to the wordiness, which characterises being Italian (so far, I did not feel as if the italian interventions were longer than the others), paradoxically this is followed by a long intervention by an Italian. There is mention to the scapegoat in the womb, ready to the explode, focusing, to walk away from this danger, on the role of the Psi’s category, whose task is to act in aid of society.

Observer Chiara: After this intervention filled with anger, another one follows which rapidly drops what has been said, so that even in me a discomfort arises, caused by this constant reference to emotions and experiences within the group. I feel a strong desire for an intervention by the conveners which would bring back the opportunity to talk and think about these ideas, that are marginalised as soon as they are voiced. This feeling prevents me from listening and perhaps from taking notes on the two following events.

Silent reflections by Hopper as a Participant Observer: The phenomenology of the fear of annihilation following failed dependency? Fission and fragmentation in oscillation with fusion and confusion?

Man 13: (Italian) A year ago, in the space of 24 hours, I had to decide to close my office and start to talk to my patients remotely. Not everyone was on board but, as I talked to them, I asked why they would give up on having a dialogue with their fears and then about 90% of them agreed to work remotely. For many, this has brought advantages, it has been an opportunity in some ways.

Woman 25 (Italian): We had a small group experience with serious psychotic patients. We were forced to leave to quarantine, and the small group tried to deal with the team’s distance using zoom to be able to follow up on the patients in all their daily activities. Five individuals with rather significant issues, that found themselves dealing with a completely new approach, showing the ability to bring up incredible resources in taking care of the house, of their medication, they make me feel very hopeful. Situations like the one we are going through allow us to benefit from internal resources we were not aware of.

Observer Chiara: The speed of the interventions is so overwhelming that currently I struggle to provide a narrative and emotional report. While I write down these suggestions, I hear a Spanish accent that accompanies the fluctuation of my thoughts. The narration appears to be the one of transient communication, between internal resources and external opportunities. Italian and English voices overlap, so I join back in.

Woman 26 (English): The Italians can speak in Italian because a nice translation is available, but it is quite different to stay focused on the translation, so can someone speak in English? It would be very helpful.

Woman 27 (English): I can understand the difficulty of the translation, but I think that everyone should speak in their own language. For me, this is an Italian group, so I was ready to hear a lot of Italian.

Man 14 (Italian): Slovenia, Greece, Germany…Serbia …Italy. I wish for this experience to be repeated and not abandoned. Being together from different parts of the world, I get emotional when I hear Woman 19 describing the image of Mount Etna that, in my land, gives a show. A land of contradictions where a minority, such as the Mafia, often makes the rules, where however we can still get emotional as we look at Mount Etna that makes itself seen and heard. On one side there is fear, on the other there is the astonishment in front of a natural phenomenon. I hope that this tool will become useful in the future.

Woman 28 (Italian): In this group I felt many contradictions, a volcano of emotions. I feel the effort of trying to stay between professional and personal. A patient spent the weekend at a friend’s house who she had not seen in a year and, as a therapist, I saw how the patient was feeling better because of this. Part of me was angry because I belong to a vulnerable category, and I have been home for a year now. I felt a lot of anger during Man 2’s first intervention and I thought: who is more at East? Me as I have been home for a year or Man 2 who does not want to take the second dose of the vaccine and feels socially pressured to do so?

Observer Vanna: I sense confusion within the group. After the growing protest around the length of the interventions and the doubt on whether something might get lost in translation, enthusiasm for the variety of voices that come from different countries appears. The image of the volcano, Mount Etna, is once again recalled, which during this time provides the excitement of a stunning sight but also causes lots of fear.

Observer Earl: Is the encapsulation beginning to dissolve or rupture?

Man 15 (Italian): What is cohesion for me? From Earl’s image, it reminds me that I can experience cohesion when I can alternatively be a parent, a firstborn, and a second-born son, I can make a mess, I can obey, I can rule in an authoritative or authoritarian way. Stop.

Woman 29 (Italian): This is the second time I attend, and I feel like I could be the small one, the last one, the dirty one, the one who is frowned upon. I felt close to all the emotions that I experienced and maybe this has something to do with feeling as a whole. My first reaction to the pandemic was waiting for people to get close and help each other, then I read “Blindness” by Saramago, and I then realised that we turn into enemies, there is aggression…Us from the South feel below those from the North and community and tradition are important. Helping each other is extremely important. Maybe today the scapegoat is identified in the establishment. Sometimes the scapegoat is identified in the one that has power over a situation and perhaps, in the basic tenet of dependency, whose fault is it? The leaders’? Another point is that we place ourselves as a professional category that can provide solutions, by thinking similarly to the way we did in this experience of Large Group. Why do we not suggest this to our politicians or to those we think are not protecting us enough?

Man 16 (English): I wonder, when the borders that have protected us and continue to do so, will open up again and we will be able to meet up again, to see people we do not want to see and see people we want to. How would things be then?

Woman 1 (English): I believe that there are people who do not share hugs, who do not open up to others, there are many people like that. I would like to talk about generosity. Here I see that this is done voluntarily, for free, it is a big act of generosity just like mother earth that gives us a lot. Then we feel spoiled, and we no longer appreciate things. I would like to tell something to the person that talked about hugs. I feel like this group has tried to create a professional identity that protects all members through a seminar, that protects us from the fear of invasion that is happening worldwide. It appears to me as the fortifying of a group.

Gina Cadeddu: perhaps there is this fear of invasion but it comes to my mind, after all that has been said, something that Professor Hopper said regarding the fear of annihilation…Everything we have tried to suggest as potential solutions, maybe to try to get in touch with this fear within us and to calm down, thinking that there will be resources that will appear suddenly in times of great difficulty…Losing certainties, and feeling that we move towards unknown directions, it makes us realise that finding the idea of “the hug”, not in person, is something that is on our mind. It is a strong representation that originates from our imagination, because at this very moment we can only imagine this hug and the profound effects that it may have on our professional community.

Man 17 (Italian): Right now, more than Covid, I fear fascism…

Man 7 (English): I do not want to hug these people; I do not want to hug everyone. Furthermore, I think that the English do not like hugging. I do not particularly like hugging, but I am very interested in the middle ground between mashed and boiled potatoes and in what might lie between these two.

Woman 17 (English): Throughout this year many of my boundaries opened. I enjoyed all the voices, for and against various topics. I would like to thank everyone, the Italian colleagues that have created this space for all of us, I appreciate all of this, and I find very concrete all that professor Hopper has explained theoretically, with his theory of the fourth basic tenet.

Earl Hopper (English): Thank you everyone. I would like to say two things: rather than focusing on aggregation and massification as polarities, we might move to a different reference point, i.e. the work group. We need to move away from the basic assumption and shift to another way of thinking, towards the functioning of the work group. Authentic cohesion is a function of the work group. That is what I hope we can achieve. Speaking of hope, I want to take a risk: since we found out that at least one woman is pregnant, the tone of the conversation within the group has changed, at least in my opinion. I think this is due to the rivalry with personal creativity and perhaps envy of it. I think this has changed the mood of the group, and we have not been able to deal with this envy. The pregnancy might be both a consequence of the lecture and a displacement from it.  It is intended as a gift to us, but it is also a kind of competition with our event.  As the Greeks might say, beware of strangers bearing gifts.

Gina Cadeddu: Time is up, the group comes to an end.

Observer Chiara: The convener speaks up to remind us that the group is coming to an end, and it seems that she is not respecting Prof. Hopper’s need to stay with us for a little longer. It is a rather difficult limbo to understand that time is up, but the narration is still on. Earl asks to hand over to a group’s attendee, very well-known professionally, that he recalls having seen among the attendees.

Among the overlapping voices, Alfonso D’Auria takes over and highlights that the concluding remarks are happening in the last 15 minutes, to then hand over to Bruno Chipi. Unexpectedly for me, as I was looking for a boundary in a container that is already overflowing with contents and emotions, Chipi welcomes Earl’s request to look for this potentially famous colleague. What seemed as a suggestion to say goodbye, for a moment becomes a search for an unknown person. Unknown person that is lost among those who logged off once they recognised the authority in the concluding remarks.

Observer Vanna: The group comes to an end, which seems indefinite, between the rejection of the idea of the hug (the English dislike it), the desired middle ground between mashed and boiled potatoes (referring to Hopper’s lesson and the categories of aggregation and massification), acknowledgements for such an enriching experience and the feeling of not having dealt with the change in the group’s mood and with envy after having learnt about the pregnancy. It seems like the responsibility of bringing the group to an end wants to be left to Hopper, as if denying the convener’s closing remarks, as if it is perhaps difficult to accept that something remains pending or to accept that the group, after all, has managed to go on by itself, just like the silent convener was expecting.

Sabrina Braganti, Gina Cadeddu, Chiara Cedri, Bruno Chipi, Vanna Decandia, Alfonso D’Auria, Giovanni Losito, Earl Hopper