Introduction<\/h1>\n

Natalie Loveless<\/p>\n

T<\/span>his issue of Imaginations<\/em> was originally scheduled to launch September 2020, in conjunction with the first Canadian exhibition of <Immune Nations><\/em> at the McMaster Museum of Art in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. As I finalize these introductory words in April 2020, the exhibition we had planned to accompany this volume is likely postponed in light of the physical distancing measures required by COVID-19: a virus\u2014a pandemic\u2014for which there is not yet a vaccine.^{1<\/sup><\/a> Universities, schools, parks, community centres, places of worship, museums, and all businesses deemed \u201cnon-essential\u201d are closed or have been put online. Predictions for when restrictions will ease and public spaces re-open range from two to six to 18 months.<\/p>\n}

We, in Canada, are mostly staying put in our homes, reconfiguring the patterns of life that we were living only six weeks ago into new shapes that feel sustainable for the long haul\u2014or at least the medium haul, depending on which predictive models are being consulted. For those of us with children at home, this involves \u201ccrisis schooling\u201d\u2014navigating online teaching modules, hastily but earnestly put together by our children\u2019s elementary, middle, and high school teachers\u2014while juggling entirely reconfigured professional obligations (for those of us lucky enough to still have jobs).<\/p>\n

The backdrop to all of this is The News. Anxiety over viral contamination dominates the airwaves. Death rates rise exponentially. We watch local numbers and worry about our loved ones; we follow statistics that present a differential threat to the entire population. The stressors we do know are numerous and the stress of the unknown\u2014the uncharted that awaits us individually and on a global scale\u2014is often greater still.<\/p>\n

Exacerbating all of this are the many different stories being circulated via Facebook and Twitter that are often at cross purposes when it comes to correct action at this time. Charismatic misinformation campaigns abound and range from COVID-19 being a hoax (\u201cGoop-Approved Shrink Says There\u2019s No Such Thing as Coronavirus\u201d) to a biological weapon (\u201cThe Wuhan Disease Lab Is the Focus of Suspicion and Conspiracy Theories about COVID-19\u2019s Origins\u201d). There are even claims that US-based software developer and philanthropist Bill Gates is only funding COVID-19 vaccine research in order to microchip and track the entire population (\u201cHere\u2019s what Bill Gates has to say about those COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories he\u2019s pegged to\u201d). While conspiracy theorists the world over cry wolf, the majority of us are simply waiting for a vaccine, the only real way out of this pandemic. A vaccine for COVID-19 is our top medical priority, period.<\/p>\n

\u201cOne challenging aspect of the collaboration is the fact that we do not share a common vocabulary much less epistemology. So terms like \u2018art\u2019 and \u2018policy\u2019 and even \u2018vaccination\u2019 carry different meanings for the different participants. [Given this,] one of the most exciting possibilities is the potential that the collaboration forces new perspectives on what were thought to be settled issues or forces a consideration of phenomena that might otherwise go unnoticed. In this case, the very premise that \u2018art\u2019 might influence policy makers is, as far as I can tell, something that has not been seriously considered before. This is exciting.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Throughout <Immune Nations><\/em> we worked to develop a heightened awareness of the ways that art is too-often used as a tool merely to instrumentalize or illustrate social problems rather than to also help solve them. We were also vigilant about the ways that science is too-often used as decontextualized data or fodder for artistic expression that fails to retain any scientific use-value, and the ways that policy processes can be overly simplified or vilified into meaningless caricatures. On interdisciplinary projects such as ours, which bring art and science and policy experts together, such misunderstandings are common and underscore the need for more robust interdisciplinary literacies and languages that push us all out of our comfort zones and encourage greater capacities to speak across and with difference.<\/p>\n

Another insight that emerged from the project was that sophisticated interdisciplinary collaboration takes time<\/em>. It takes time to cultivate robust relationships, especially when we are all coming at a problem equipped with different disciplinary understandings. With <Immune Nations><\/em> we had, effectively, two full years as a team\u2014between the first and third working sessions\u2014to learn each-others\u2019 approaches, priorities, perspectives, values, and needs. Everyone agreed that this was just not enough. Interdisciplinary and collaborative research is difficult and time-consuming. It demands that we all take risks, stepping into arenas where we are less knowledgeable. This process can be anxiety-provoking, leaving researchers feeling vulnerable to being exposed as incompetent when the skills of our discipline prove insufficient in another. It can also be frustrating, when what is plain in one disciplinary idiom is incomprehensible or, worse, anathema to the other.<\/p>\n

True inter- and transdisciplinary research requires a mode of temporal and material attunement that the contemporary academy\u2014indeed, the contemporary world\u2014is often hostile to. It requires slowing down, taking risks, asking our questions differently, and trusting each other. It requires being attentive to each others\u2019 differences as carefully as to our similarities. And letting those differences teach us.<\/p>\n