Han Qijun, Curtis Daniel R
Foreign Studies, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
History, Erasmus University Rotterdam Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Med Humanit. 2020 May 28;47(2):248-56. doi: 10.1136/medhum-2020-011871.
One key factor that appears to be crucial in the rejection of quarantines, isolation and other social controls during epidemic outbreaks is trust-or rather distrust. Much like news reporting and social media, popular culture such as fictional novels, television shows and films can influence people's trust, especially given that the information provided about an epidemic disease is sometimes seen as grounded in 'scientific fact' by societies. As well as providing information on the 'correct science' behind disease transmission, spread and illness in films and literature, popular culture can also inform societies about how to feel and how to react during epidemics-that is to say create some expectations about the kinds of societal responses that could potentially occur. In this article we closely analyse three films that centre around epidemic diseases- (Steven Soderbergh, 2011), (Fernando Meirelles, 2008) and (John Curran, 2006)-in order to highlight three categories of distrust that have recently been identified and conceptualised in broader discussions regarding trust and health: institutional, social and interpersonal. These films raise two key issues about trust and social responses during epidemics. First, while certain aspects of trust are badly diminished during epidemic disease outbreaks, epidemics can also interact with pre-existing structural inequalities within society-based on race, gender or wealth-to create mixed outcomes of discord, prejudice and fear that coexist with new forms of cohesion. Second, the breakdown in trust seen at certain levels during epidemics, such as at the institutional level between communities and authorities or elites, might be mediated or negotiated, perhaps even compensated for, by heightened solidity of trust at the social level, within or between communities.
在疫情爆发期间，人们拒绝接受隔离、检疫及其他社会管控措施，其中一个关键因素似乎至关重要，即信任——或者更确切地说是不信任。与新闻报道和社交媒体很相似，诸如虚构小说、电视剧和电影等流行文化能够影响人们的信任，特别是考虑到社会有时会认为有关流行病的信息是以“科学事实”为依据的。除了在电影和文学作品中提供有关疾病传播、扩散和发病背后的“正确科学”信息外，流行文化还能让社会了解在疫情期间的感受和应对方式——也就是说，对可能出现的社会反应类型产生一些预期。在本文中，我们仔细分析了三部以流行病为主题的电影——《传染病》（史蒂文·索德伯格，2011年）、《盲流感》（费尔南多·梅里尔斯，2008年）和《惊变28天》（约翰·卡兰，2006年）——以突出最近在关于信任与健康的更广泛讨论中确定并概念化的三类不信任：机构性不信任、社会性不信任和人际性不信任。这些电影提出了关于疫情期间信任与社会反应的两个关键问题。第一，虽然在疫情爆发期间，信任的某些方面会严重受损，但疫情也可能与社会中基于种族、性别或财富的现有结构性不平等相互作用，从而产生不和谐、偏见和恐惧等混合结果，并与新形式的凝聚力共存。第二，在疫情期间某些层面出现的信任破裂，比如社区与当局或精英之间在机构层面的信任破裂，可能会通过社区内部或社区之间社会层面信任的增强来得到调节或协商，甚至可能得到弥补。
