Being “Human” During a Pandemic

Well, it’s Groundhog day… again, says Phil Connors, Bill Murray’s character in the classic 1993 film Groundhog Day. To those of you unfamiliar with the film’s plot, Phil relives February 2nd (Groundhog Day) over and over, each day starting the same way irrespective of the incidents of the previous instances of the same day.

Almost 30 years later, Indians seem to have a similar experience. After all the struggles, lockdowns, curfews, deaths, and tragedies in 2020, 2021 seems to be an action replay. It is as if someone pressed a reset button after everything we went through exactly a year ago (if you are getting a sense of déjà vu when receiving WhatsApp forwards, chances are the same messages were circulated last year too). If anything, the situation is even more dire now. With more cases (and deaths) every day, a shortage of oxygen, vaccines, and medicines, it is a terrifying time to be living in. Now, there are several issues that make me (and several others) angry – the black marketers exploiting those in need by charging exorbitant prices, the careless folks flouting safety norms and posing a threat to the larger society… However, this article is not about any of those topics. Understandably, even if these things make my blood boil, there is little I can do to change them. So instead, this article is about something individuals like you and I can do to have an impact.

A comic in The Hindu illustrating the oxygen crisis in India

But first, let me go back a few days and tell you what triggered me to write this article. As many of you would know already, the ceremony for the 93rd Academy Awards was held on April 25th this year. Being a movie buff, I too eagerly followed the event online, having a mini celebration whenever a favourite of mine won. This effect lasted five days, after which I read this article in the newspaper. For the first time, I felt somewhat guilty for devoting attention to an awards ceremony that I have otherwise routinely watched or followed year after year in the recent past. While I strongly recommend you to check out the link later, here is an extract for now:

The film we’re speeding through is more reality TV, without the glamour of fake tears dripping off fake eyelashes. The unlikely cast won’t grace a red carpet, or even be allowed near it. A man in a sweat-stained shirt who keeps nodding off. A woman with cracked soles and nervous eyes. A girl who sleeps with her shoes on.
The exhausted hero is the autorickshaw driver who ferries passengers free in any emergency to the nearest hospital. He’s stayed awake and on the road for a week or longer, and has saved a dozen lives at least, not that he counted.
The female lead is the domestic help who walks five miles daily to plead to work all day in an apartment that keeps accusing her of carrying the virus in from her slum. She still lands up because keeping her family alive has more to do with putting food on the table than any microscopic threat.
The supporting actor is a nurse who does back-to-back shifts and sleeps in her uniform and shoes in case she gets called back to an emergency.

 Jane De Suza, “This film we live in”, The Hindu dated April 30, 2021

Over the past 15 months or so, we have seen the best and worst of human behaviour. The majority of us have commended the efforts of some, and criticised (often too quickly) the actions of many others. But the question I ask is this: how many of you have turned the lens on yourself? How many of your actions during the crisis were commendable? How many actions were potentially harmful to others, irrespective of whether you realised it at the time?

Another comic in The Hindu

Here is a biting article elaborating how some Indians breached safety protocols when things were improving, possibly leading to what we are experiencing now; we only have ourselves to blame, as the figure above illustrates. I think it’s fair to say that we have become selfish in one way or the other as the pandemic progressed. We have put our safety first, considered our needs ahead of our neighbour’s, wondered if our birthday celebrations would be virtual again, hoped if we would get additional allowance from our employer, and so on. How many times have we agreed to help a neighbour who has symptoms, or checked to see if our driver’s or maid’s children are coping well with online classes, or given them extra salary?

I say “our” and “we” because I am no higher-order being who is always on the “right path”; I am also human and equally guilty of having such thoughts and doing (or not doing) such actions. Case in point: there was a 20-minute debate at home to decide whether or not to lend our Oximeter to a neighbour who had a 100-degree fever (we did give it, and later religiously doused the Oximeter in sanitiser once we got it back). It seems logical to justify these actions in retrospect by saying that everyone puts safety first and that each of us is able to run his or her life in a way that’s as close to “normal” as possible.  As humans, we also need breaks; we need to forcibly throw ourselves into a different world to attain temporary bliss, which is why we spend hours mindlessly sitting in front of the TV watching IPL or binge-watch Netflix or do crossword puzzles.

In trying times like this, where each of us have our own difficulties to deal with, I propose that we put in some extra effort and take a moment to think about all those we know who have been selfless and caring. I am sure a few minutes of introspection would make you remember people and incidents in your life during the pandemic where someone has done some sacrifice to help you out, or when you have done the same to a friend or family member: a colleague who worked a few extra hours to cover for you when you needed sick leave, your driver who went to the market and got your groceries for you, or the time you paid for your maid’s vaccine or arranged for an ICU bed for a friend (I am reminded of the Hamam advertisement that was made last year, where a girl offers the soap to the delivery man so that he can keep himself safe too; call it brilliant marketing if you will, but it does strike a chord). Do what you can to help those who have not been able to take breaks: frontline workers, delivery men, doctors…

Graffiti artwork in Delhi

It is very easy to fall victim to the “drop in the bucket” effect, where you feel your efforts, however generous, will hardly matter given the massive size of the problem you are trying to solve. But I believe we can all start small. Criticising the mistakes or the stupidity of the masses is unlikely to impact anyone’s life or behaviour, but recognising the efforts and sacrifices of others to make your life a little easier goes a long way in making both your lives happy, as does making tiny contributions to improve the lives of others. You don’t have to donate a million bucks tomorrow or start a large-scale food donation camp, but the first step can be a change in mindset to do one such good deed every week (or every day, if that’s possible).

One of the many NGOs doing exceptional work on ground

It is a dangerous time to step outside, and our go-to instinct is to be intimidated by the risk involved in helping others. But this is why having the change in mindset is the first step; those who want to help will find a way. It is also reasonable to wonder if someone would help if you were in a jam. At this stage, the best we can do is to help others in any way possible, however big or small, and trust that a fellow human will offer a helping hand when we are the ones who need it. 

When emojis become emotions…

Have you noticed how some people seem to be very different over text and in person? You see them always online on Messenger and actively engaging in discussions, and yet, when you actually meet them, they struggle to start a conversation. On the other hand, there can be a person who sticks to laconic one-word replies over text but talks a lot in person (which may or may not be a good thing!).

Why is this the case? Maybe someone is not spontaneous enough to quickly start a topic in person, but when it is through a written form, they can afford to think and get their words right. I’ve also noticed that there are some conversations that people prefer to have over text, like an impending fight or a quick recollection of memories after spending time together (“Did you have fun?”, “Send me the pictures, please!” and so on). I, for one, always prefer to text a person if it is the first time I am talking to them. 

Not only do these chat platforms act as a medium to communicate with your friends and relatives who live far away, but they have become the primary source of communication for most things. As an obvious consequence, we become addicted.

If my father sees me glued to my phone, he says, “When I was your age, we never had phones, you know. We spent the entire day without internet,” to which I retort, “Can you do the same now?” I immediately get a ‘don’t argue with me, son,’ look. Despite the point he was trying to make, it is true that WhatsApp (and suchlike) has become a necessary evil that we cannot stay away from. 

I’m still amazed at how my mother manages to carry out so many things at home every day, and still finds time to relax. I think a major factor is that she (vehemently) refuses to have neither a WhatsApp account nor a Facebook account (and yet, as far as staying in touch with friends goes, she can call a friend after four months and talk as if they had been exchanging news every other day!). That’s where she gets all the “extra” time from. 

Think of how much time you spend on social media every day. How many messages do you think you send and receive on a daily basis? In fact, for WhatsApp, you can actually see the number of exchanges for each chat. I admit I was shocked at those figures! (See footnotes)

When you talk to someone in person, you can often gauge their moods by paying attention to their voice modulation, volume and facial expressions. In text, these three factors don’t work, but there are other indicators. If you have been texting long enough, you’ll know that these seem to be the three ways of saying the same thing, but they are all different:

  1. K
  2. Ok/Okay
  3. Okay 🙂 

The first indicates either an addiction to common text abbreviations, or dislike towards what the other person is saying (“I didn’t like that movie you suggested”, “K”) – and the receiver is supposed to take the hint. The second is the normal way of saying it. The third additionally indicates that the sender is in a good mood. Any other emoji can be interpreted appropriately. It is that easy to fake emotions over a chat. A message sent with an emoji indicates a mood different than one indicated by the same message sans emojis. 

So many things can be “categorised” in this manner. Here’s another example: in any chat group, there will be the following types of people (and you can come up with other such categories using your imagination). I’ve acted as each of them in different groups myself. 

  1. The enthusiast: that person who is constantly active on the group, posting, replying, sharing… he’s most often the key reason why a group is active (or muted). 
  2. The spammer: the guy who only keeps forwarding chain messages, publicising other events, clubs etc.  
  3. The lurker: he/she just reads the messages and has an idea of what’s going on, but never replies to any nor says something on his/her own.
  4. The human Dirac delta function: This is the person who remains a lurker for months together, who suddenly posts a flurry of messages and becomes the most active member for a couple of days, before becoming dormant again. You’re not always happy when this person resurfaces. 

Isn’t it weird how ego issues come up when texting? The most common one is, “Why am I always the one starting the conversation? Do you not want to talk to me?” This then quickly leads you to keep checking your phone every now and then for an expected response. “Have they read my message yet?” “He is online, but why is he not responding?” Before you know it, you are getting negatively affected by all these thoughts that you build up on your own. Moreover, WhatsApp had made it easier for those who don’t want to be nagged by giving an option to remove your last seen and the blue tick, which makes another set of people a lot more anxious than they should be. If it wasn’t for this, the word “seenzoning” would have never come into existence.  

When you are with someone in person, then there are new issues, starting with the so-called “awkward silence.” I’m curious: since when did silence become awkward? Why do people have an urge to keep some conversation going? That is the reason this quote below is something I follow, and I have felt this “comfort” only with very few people. 


That’s when you know you’ve found somebody really special: you can just shut the f*** up for a minute and comfortably share silence.

Mia Wallace (“Pulp Fiction”, 1994)

“Sharing silence” does NOT mean that you will resort to your social media accounts when you don’t find a topic to talk about with the other person. It is when you are satisfied just with the other’s company. I find it irritating when someone is talking to me and simultaneously looking at their WhatsApp to talk to someone else (“I’m still listening to what you say”, is not an excuse that I buy). 

I know it is easier said than done to control our time on social media and online communication platforms. The least we can do is to put the phone aside and learn to appreciate a person’s presence when they are with us.


Footnotes:

[1] Here’s what you do on WhatsApp:
1) Menu -> Settings -> Data and Storage Usage -> Storage Usage
Then choose whichever chat you want and see the total number of messages, images, and other statistics. (I bet there are at least 2-3 chats where the numbers will astound you). 

[2] As an interesting coding activity, try to do this (some might consider this going overboard, but nevertheless):
1) Export a WhatsApp chat as a text file (Go to the chat -> Menu -> More -> Export 
2) Write a program to read the file (line by line) and count the number of messages that each of you sent (either a two-person chat or a group chat). You can then plot a histogram between message frequency and people in the latter case. 
3) Copy each person’s chat into separate text files. Now you can do some crazy stuff like counting the number of emojis and whatnot that only one person sent.  
P.S.: This certainly helped me revive my coding practice, and of course, gave me a lot of fun. If you are a coding whiz, then this is a trivial exercise.

[3] To work on your number-crunching skills, here’s a case study I came across, that you can try working out on your own. (Link)