Recently, we have been introduced with Doel, a little village that has to make way for the expanding harbor of Antwerp. Elderly Emilienne tries to sustain her life in Doel, which is a striking and admirable challenge captured in a series of everyday scenes that form an intriguing film. Somewhat unsatisfactory, the story ends in a rather hopeless fashion as Emilienne passed away recently (Pieters, 2019). Now that Doel is no longer Emilienne’s home what purpose could it serve?
In this blog, we won’t come up with a new goal. We are rather unfamiliar with Doel and its history, therefore we find ourselves not in a position to do so. Instead, we focus on exploring potential reasons why people, like Emilienne, find Doel so meaningful.
As researchers, we recognized elements and concepts of theories related to, for example, trust, discourse, and power relations in this movie. Starting with trust, fundamental in the acceptance or rejection of a message (Bostrom, Böhm, & O’Connor, 2018).
There are various forms of trust, such as institutional trust and interpersonal trust. In the context of Doel, the residents of the village seemed to have a relatively high degree of interpersonal trust compared to institutional trust. Accordingly, residents were more prone to accept messages received from other residents while rejecting those coming from institutions like the local government. In the documentary, this is demonstrated when Emilienne receives a letter from the municipality and agitatedly rejects to open it. All this happens through the process of discourse, another topic we would like to discuss.
Discourse affects one’s convictions, behavioral tendencies, and actual behavior itself (Cheek, 2004). Trust or distrust can be reflected in the way a message is perceived. (Lewicki, 2006).
Over time, the institutional distrust of Emilienne and the other residents of Doel might have increased. The plans for expanding the harbor have existed since the 1960s and introduced a lot of uncertainty about Doel’s future. This may have made Emilienne, the priest, and other
resisting residents adhere to their existing beliefs, and therefore, were not inclined to change their behavior, which in this case would mean leaving Doel. Besides trust, power relations may play a big role as considered in the next graph.
resisting residents adhere to their existing beliefs, and therefore, were not inclined to change their behavior, which in this case would mean leaving Doel. Besides trust, power relations may play a big role as considered in the next graph.
Arguably, the municipality of Doel has more power than the residents, resulting in the departure of most of Doel’s residents. Still, one might argue that residents, like Emilienne, can offer much resistance to pressing requests of the government. To reiterate, Emilienne rejected a letter - and seemed to have the power to do so, yet she was not forcefully taken out
of Doel. This may signify the power she and other individual citizens have as opposed to the formal authorities that theoretically have the final word, under the condition that they are acting within legal boundaries. Alternatively, Emilienne did not recognize authoritative power which may have driven out other residents in Doel.
of Doel. This may signify the power she and other individual citizens have as opposed to the formal authorities that theoretically have the final word, under the condition that they are acting within legal boundaries. Alternatively, Emilienne did not recognize authoritative power which may have driven out other residents in Doel.
We ponder how, and to what degree, discourse, trust, and power dynamics have contributed to the purpose of Doel’s remaining residents, possibly reflecting Doel’s goal. How would youthink a similar situation would be different regarding interpersonal trust and dominant discourse when relating it to a different position in time and space, considering different cultures and periods in time?
Sanne de Bruin, Dagmar Haas, Joris Hijmans, Thomas Ritt
References:
Bostrom, A., Böhm, G., & O’Connor, R. E. (2018). Communicating risks: Principles and challenges. In Psychological Perspectives on risk and risk analysis (pp. 251-277). Springer, Cham.
Bostrom, A., Böhm, G., & O’Connor, R. E. (2018). Communicating risks: Principles and challenges. In Psychological Perspectives on risk and risk analysis (pp. 251-277). Springer, Cham.
Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C., & Gillespie, N. (2006). Models of interpersonal trust development: Theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306294405
Pieters, K. (2019). Engel van Doel’ op 87-jarige leeftijd overleden. HLN. Retrieved April 24, 2020 from https://www.hln.be/in-de-buurt/beveren/-engel-van-doel-op-87-jarige-leeftijd-overleden~ae7fcf46/
Comments
Post a Comment