1050116

research-article2021
CSI0010.1177/00113921211050116Current SociologyKubacka et al.

Article CS

Current Sociology

Pandemic rage: Everyday

1­–18
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
frustrations in times of the sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00113921211050116
https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921211050116
COVID-19 crisis journals.sagepub.com/home/csi

Małgorzata Kubacka , Piotr Luczys ,

Ariel Modrzyk and Agnieszka Stamm
Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland

Abstract
In this study, the authors use data from qualitative research to examine the phenomenon
of pandemic rage in everyday life. They define pandemic rage as an emotional reaction
to feelings of anger, frustration and helplessness resulting from the conviction that
fundamental rules have been violated during a pandemic, which is perceived (by the
person experiencing pandemic rage) as provocation, impertinence, insolence, and
crossing boundaries. The article takes a closer look at the relations between space,
normative order, behaviours and pandemic rage. It first introduces the linkages between
the occurrence of pandemic rage and the experience of spatial compression in the
private and public spheres, situations of feeling ‘condensed’ and ‘condemned’ in the
presence of others, and proxemic disturbances. Then the article discusses endogenous
and exogenous catalysts of pandemic rage. The last section provides a summary with
interpretations and conclusions.

Keywords
COVID-19, everyday life, pandemic rage, Poland

Introduction
Since March 2020, when COVID-19 surfaced in Europe, researchers from different sci-
entific fields and disciplines have faced new challenges. ‘The black swan’ (Nassim,
2010), or as Krastev (2020) describes it, ‘grey swan’ event of this period, which is the
prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, not only has entailed far-reaching consequences, but
also has revealed or exacerbated problems that already had been present in particular

Corresponding author:
Małgorzata Kubacka, Faculty of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Szamarzewskiego 89 street, Poznań,
60-568, Poland.
Email: malgorzata.kubacka@amu.edu.pl
2 Current Sociology 00(0)

communities. The pandemic illustrates the duality of social dynamics associated with the
occurrence of unpredictable events. First, an unpredictable event occurs (the COVID-19
pandemic), which then leads to many other unpredictable consequences (e.g. changes in
the reality of everyday life). Thus, unexpected pandemic changes occur at many levels of
human existence (Forshaw et al., 2020; Makridis and Rothwell, 2020; Thomson, 2020).
However, the most basic level is everyday life, which requires constantly reproducing
practices and satisfying individual and collective needs (Schutz, 1999). The main objec-
tive of our research for the project ‘Everyday Life of Poles in Times of and After SARS-
CoV-2 Pandemic: Transformations of Practices and Social Expectations’ was to trace the
changes in everyday life that appeared in Polish society as a result of the COVID-19
pandemic.
In this article we focus on two selected areas of everyday life where far-reaching
transformations have taken place. First, there is the everyday spatial order. Our analysis
has focused on the experience of social compression, mainly among the representatives
of the metropolitan middle class in Poland. It is worth mentioning that the changes in
everyday life in this particular context may exemplify phenomena of change of a univer-
sal nature, experienced in other countries and by representatives of other social classes.
This is insofar justified as we recognise that the strictures of the pandemic took a similar
course around the world, becoming the most important shared global experience of the
21st century. Secondly, there is the emotional dimension. In times of crisis, empathy,
solidarity and altruism are enhanced, enabling us to understand others and go into other
people’s head (Weber, 1978: 4–22). Nevertheless, crises are regarded in this case as
times of increased frustration, conflicts and struggle for scarce resources.
Moreover, both spatial and emotional dimensions are intertwined. Changes in the
spatial order cause specific emotional reactions, which in turn make it even more
dynamic. The category that links these two dimensions is pandemic rage. Times in which
we experience unforeseen consequences provide an ample opportunity for ad hoc expla-
nations based on impressions, feelings and interpretations of facts, rather than the facts
themselves. An in-depth analysis of phenomena carried out after the fact often under-
mines these first explanations: in retrospect, their casualness, inaccuracy or, in some
cases, even ideological nature becomes apparent. Assuming such an approach, we admit
that the category of pandemic rage may also require critical verification in the future.
Nevertheless, we believe that it is a promising concept that can serve us to better under-
stand the consequences that the pandemic has brought about in the realm of everyday
life.

Research methodology
Our project was inspired by a decades-old tradition of research on contemporary Polish
society’s everyday life (Sztompka and Bogunia-Borowska, 2008). We identified three
key research questions: (1) What kinds of changes to Poles’ everyday lives occurred dur-
ing the COVID-19 pandemic? (2) How did Poles try to adapt to the changes in their
everyday lives from the pandemic? (3) How does the experience of the pandemic change
social expectations towards public institutions (public policies)?
Kubacka et al. 3

The project comprised four phases.1 The study’s final, qualitative phase developed the
findings from the previous stages and focused primarily on the following themes: spatial
boundaries; disruption of the temporal order; and returning to traditional forms of coex-
istence and claims of a political nature. The qualitative study was conducted from
December 2020 to April 2021.2 This article is based on 30 semi-structured individual
in-depth interviews (IDIs) conducted remotely. The semi-structured interview was cho-
sen to broaden explanations of the results of the previous quantitative stage of our
research. Due to time and funding limitations, we decided to interview 30 participants.
Questions around temporal and spatial boundaries, gender roles, cultural customs and
politics were broached, but participants were free to explore related areas (Kaufmann,
2010; Kvale, 2007). Each interview lasted about 1.5 hours and was conducted either via
phone or online (Deakin and Wakefield, 2014). The sampling for the individual in-depth
interviews was purposive (Babbie, 2009: 193). Research participants were chosen from
among those who participated in quantitative stages of the research project based on
predefined criteria: gender; age; breadwinner status; and whether the participant lives
alone or with family. Before analysing the data, we posed the following research ques-
tions: What are the relations between space and pandemic rage? How is pandemic rage
related to the normative order? Which behaviours are part of pandemic rage? All these
factors (space, norms and behaviours) turned out to be important components of pan-
demic rage and are described in detail in the following sections. We categorised data
related to pandemic experiences into several broader codes using qualitative thematic
analysis (Clarke and Braun, 2014: 1947–1952). All the authors conducted the thematic
analysis, following several iterations.

Conceptual background
During the analysis, we drew attention to the fact that pandemic rage is a multifaceted
phenomenon relating to various reflections present in social sciences: those concerning
the relationships between space and social behaviour; social norms and social produc-
tion; and management of emotions. The emotional dimension of experiencing the
COVID-19 crisis turned out to be particularly interesting. In respondents’ narratives,
frequent declarations of experiencing difficulties due to the emergence of violent emo-
tions are notable, and these results confirmed wider trends. Researchers noticed that
globally, the COVID-19 pandemic elicited increasingly negative emotions while decreas-
ing positive ones (Wang et al., 2020). During the pandemic, public feelings changed
sharply, from fear to anger and rage (Lwin et al., 2020). In the research, fear and anger
experienced during this health crisis were found to be catalysts for hatred and even rac-
ism (Huang, 2021).
Emotional experiences influence social relationships, both close (e.g. among family
members) and more distant (e.g. in the public sphere). In the research data, moments of
stress, tension and indignation among participants were notable, contributing to conflicts
with those around them and corresponding with results from other studies conducted
during the pandemic. Researchers found that circumstances accompanying the pandemic
are likely to increase existing conflicts, including interpersonal conflicts occurring in
4 Current Sociology 00(0)

romantic relationships (Luetke et al., 2020) and work–family/life-related conflicts, par-

ticularly among parents with young children (Schieman et al., 2021). In a study con-
ducted in the UK, most participants reported having had arguments or becoming angry
as a result of COVID-19, and about one-fifth said they had been confronted by or referred
to authorities (Smith et al., 2021).
It should be noted that underlying the aforementioned emotions and conflicts was the
necessity of constant readiness to respond to everyday changes and uncertainties, which
are the main causes of disruptions to familiar routines. In this realm during the pandemic,
maintaining balance in different life domains has become exceedingly complex. A loss
of balance is mediated by the further blurring of existing boundaries between work and
non-work facets of life, mainly due to telecommuting necessitated by the lockdown
(Bick et al., 2020). Research has also indicated that working from home is particularly
challenging for mothers with children, whose work time is reduced significantly more
than that of fathers (Collins et al., 2021), as they take on more responsibilities in per-
forming emotional labour and/or managing household chores (Hjálmsdóttir and
Bjarnadóttir, 2021).
Based on these findings, we posit the existence of an emotional phenomenon specific
to the epidemiological crisis – a phenomenon that we named ‘pandemic rage’. It is anal-
ogous to already-existing terms referring to the emotion of anger present in various situ-
ations of everyday life, such as ‘road rage’, ‘computer rage’ or ‘work rage’ (Berry, 1999;
Garase, 2006; Sokoloff, 2017). Pandemic rage can be characterised by the following
features: It is an emotional reaction to feelings of anger, frustration and helplessness
resulting from the belief that particularly important rules have been violated, which is
perceived (by the person experiencing pandemic rage) as provocation, impertinence,
insolence and/or crossing boundaries. It results from the tensions caused by functioning
in a pandemic, with an awareness of its possible consequences, accompanying restric-
tions, prohibitions and orders, as well as a general atmosphere comprising fear, anxiety
and uncertainty resulting from, among other things, emotionally charged media mes-
sages. It occurs at various intensity levels and may be directed outward (towards the
milieu, manifesting itself in an outburst of aggression, malice or violence) or inward
(comprising a form of self-aggression).
Data supporting this point in previous research on the pandemic not only are limited,
but also indirect. This article aims to describe situations related to the appearance of
pandemic rage as reported by research participants. Due to the wide range of spheres of
social life involved in the processes of initiating, containing and releasing pandemic
rage, we used categories of roles, behaviours, norms and theoretically related concepts.
Taking the assumption of the existence of a social construction of reality’s objective
character as a starting point, it is impossible to talk about pandemic rage in isolation
from any of these categories. The first section below introduces the linkages between the
occurrence of pandemic rage and the experience of spatial compression in the private
and public spheres, situations of feeling ‘condensed’ and ‘condemned’ in the presence of
others, and proxemic disturbances. In the next section, we present endogenous and exog-
enous catalysts of pandemic rage. The article’s final section provides a summary with
interpretations and conclusions.
Kubacka et al. 5

The experience of spatial compression

As the analysis of the material acquired in the course of the research demonstrates, the
pandemic directly connects with the spatial environment. Sharing a confined space in
one flat or house has been found to be particularly challenging and might increase ten-
sion between family inhabitants.3 As one of the research participants stated:

People live in tiny flats with whole families here. And at some stage, caging up people who are
already frustrated, their level of emotionality is far higher than the middle class, which is so
polite, well-organised and has it all sorted out, so the quarrels, brawls, which have been going
on all along and have accumulated to the fullest, can be heard behind the walls. And I’m not
surprised when you live on 40 square meters with five people, and you have to sit there around
the clock, you can go doolally. (R892)

Contrary to the perception of escalating anger only in the lower classes as presented
above, middle-class households experience frustration and argue in their homes as well.
The association between place and pandemic frustration is much closer and universal,
and does not only concern the lower social strata (Lwin et al., 2020). Regardless of the
social position of those affected by pandemic rage, what is crucial is the perpetrator’s
denial of the rules of self-presentation and Goffman’s (1982: 85–92) profanation of the
interaction ritual, albeit devoid of a humorous tone and celebration. This specific way of
expressing disrespect is also essentially dependent on the situational-spatial setting.
Although pandemic rage is different in public and private places, experiencing it in
each sphere is mutually dependent. While we (sometimes) can stop aggressive behaviour
when the initiating circumstances appear in one of these spheres, we (often) lack the
strength and patience to stop the outburst when it moves into another one. As extant
research indicates, the pandemic period is also a period of adjustment on making public
displays (or non-displays) of emotion, contradicting the basics of social life (Durnová
and Mohammadi, 2021).
Some of the respondents actually tried to put up a wall between the public and the
domestic, preventing external frustrations from penetrating their immediate environ-
ments. They tried to mark both spheres with symbolic boundaries (e.g. by dressing up
more formally while working from home). Sometimes, they also kept their publicly
induced frustrations to themselves to protect their significant others from witnessing
their occasional outbursts. However, the respondents did not mention that an analogous
relation exists in the other direction, i.e. that they tried to prevent the pandemic rage initi-
ated in the private space from manifesting in public spaces (e.g. in a shop, on public
transport, in a stairwell or at work). Thus, the tension ginned up at home often pours out
much more freely than the frustration formed in the public sphere. However, the latter
often is expressed more openly, as we usually try to arrange a situation in which we can
safely relieve our tension (e.g. by sharing feelings and communicating). In a situation of
externally motivated pandemic rage, we also seek circumstances that we seemingly can
control and are not stressful for us. Therefore, it is easier for us to vent negative emo-
tions, but the consequences of such actions are borne not only by random people we
meet, but also by significant others.
6 Current Sociology 00(0)

However, it should be noted that the pandemic significantly has changed the unique
ways of understanding the separation of public and private spheres (Schieman et al.,
2021), an excellent example of which entails interactions and communication. Meetings
with friends or others in education and work contexts suddenly has become technology-
mediated, devoid of physical contact at a specific time and in a specific place (e.g. homes,
offices, schools or university buildings). During the lockdown, most everyday activities
took place online, as we began participating in public events while literally sitting at
home. This phenomenon never has existed on such a large scale in history, and it entailed
changes in norms or rules regarding the public and private spheres. The pandemic has
contributed enormously to blurring the private and the public even further. In a new pan-
demic reality, the norms and rules that previously served as tools to preserve the bounda-
ries between the two domains stopped being applicable. Moreover, modifications of
norms in one sphere inherently implied a transformation of norms in the other. Increased
tolerance to various disturbances during public meetings held online via digital screens
(e.g. the presence of children, noises and voices from off-screen, distracting events and
situations in the background and interruptions in network access, among other phenom-
ena preventing situational focus) goes hand-in-hand with tightened rules concerning
safe, accepted co-presence in the same space (wearing masks, maintaining social dis-
tance, new greeting gestures, striving for a disinfected environment, etc.). As a conse-
quence, households have become spatially closed (with tightened rules concerning the
acceptance of co-presence in the same space) and virtually open (meetings held at homes
via digital screens) systems in which attempts to compensate for physical mobility limi-
tations are made through successive calls, chats, screenings and/or online journeys to
different places. However, the more the public sphere becomes present in the domestic
sphere, the more the former empties out interactively, becoming more and more tempo-
rary and identified with a threat. The latter, in turn, becomes saturated with situations
involving our intimacy and privacy, which we do not always want to present in public
(e.g. the presence of children, noises and voices from off-screen). Thus, creating any
impressions about ourselves is constantly in danger of being judged as false by others.
The private leaks out and blends with the public, and vice versa, making the mechanism
of growing frustration a closed circuit:

.  .  . even working together in two different industries, in one room, where various teleconferences
and talks take place, it sometimes caused some, maybe not so much conflict situations, but it
simply disturbed us mutually. (R314)

The pandemic has caused interruptions in the ability to manage the backstage of life
effectively (Goffman, 1959: 111–131), i.e. people found it extremely challenging to keep
their backstage where they believed it should be. The unwanted presence of fellow home
dwellers in the middle of professional online meetings, messy homes, quarrelling chil-
dren and objects clanging in the background are some prime examples of everyday strug-
gles to maintain longed-for order. Our respondents perceived such moments as being out
of control. Private and professional spheres interfered with each other severely and, as a
result, research participants were unable to present an image of themselves consistent
with the role they assume in public spheres (Goffman, 1959: 23–30):
Kubacka et al. 7

Closing the door helps, but there were times when my children came in, screaming. . . . This
undoubtedly increased the feeling of frustration, trying to balance work and life. Because if I’m
at a seminar, and I have to say something, and at that moment I hear a brawl coming from
behind the door and my son bursts in, I don’t manage to mute it and turn off the camera and he’s
shouting, and there are so many people who can see it, well, OK, they’re tolerant, they know
I’m in a difficult situation. But, I feel bad about it. (R126)

The pandemic has altered these closer, intimate and more distant public spaces and rela-
tionships related to them. A wave of adjustments has swept through homes and flats. The
necessity to find a place for activities that had been carried out outside the household
emerged, causing the need to redefine the number of places in which everyone wants to
do the same thing (simultaneously) or something completely different (preferably in
peace and separation from others, in a separate area):

Because of it [pandemic], the part [of the flat belonging to] the younger son had to be taken,
who, in turn, was moved to the living room. This causes a lot of frustration as he is heard by
others because he can’t be locked behind the door and the other son can hear him talking when
he is in the online classroom. It doesn’t seem like much, but when I come home from work in
the afternoon, it’s such a blast. I can already hear them quarrelling. (R675)

Therefore, pandemic rage can be triggered by the feeling of the ‘condensed’ presence of
(the) other people. In forced confinement together, differences become more apparent.
The extra time to examine close relationships could result in both strengthened and
weakened bonds, leading to a desire for separation. The intensification of these contacts
makes it impossible to remain silent about specific issues, often with no time to ‘cool
down’, re-energise or simply think things through carefully before bringing up the
issue. The absence of these elements definitely raises the temperature of disputes. On
the other hand, outside the home, ubiquitous sanitary regime/hygiene care, covering the
mouth and the expectation of obedient compliance with doctors’ and other experts’ rec-
ommendations increase our vigilance for deviations from these new norms. The con-
densed presence of others in the home and increasingly restrictive norms in public
spaces cause growing tensions that are transferred back and forth between the home and
non-home spheres.
In both the public and private spheres, the spatial compression phenomenon could be
observed, accompanied by ways in which it could be expanded. Each time, excessive
proximity or intensification of contact led to an increase in pandemic rage. This increase
was graded according to how radical the violation of the new pandemic coexistence rules
was. Merely being impolite/rude or a momentary rejection of good manners and civility
led to Goffman’s (1971: 49–58) territorial offences, identified by invasion, intrusion or
even appropriation of part of another person’s private space. In the pandemic reality,
borders of one individual’s private space strongly overlap with the borders of inhabited
or occasionally visited places, reducing a significant part of the nearest social space to
the level of physical space.
Spatial compression is accompanied by a disarrangement of proxemics. The pandemic
has necessitated increasing physical distance. Respondents were irritated particularly by
the disruption of personal distance. Coming too close was a cause of significant concern,
8 Current Sociology 00(0)

which might lead to an atmosphere of vulnerability and distrust. This case is a perfect
example of how the official requirement of physical distancing turned into social distanc-
ing that evokes negative feelings of exclusion and separation (Wasserman et al., 2020):

It bothers me a lot when someone comes too close to me in a shop. (R126)

Agitation was caused e.g. by touching objects, even those that were not the respondents’
personal belongings. This irritation may be of particular importance with regard to touch-
ing unpacked food in shops (e.g. fruit, vegetables, bread) using bare hands. Touching
some items at shops to examine them has become defined as an unnecessary danger to
other people’s health and safety. Thus, the violation caused initial fear of catching
COVID-19 and led to sudden outbursts of rage directed towards anyone who dared to
(hypothetically) spread germs from their hands to the not-yet-bought food. Others have
been defined as the main threat, so we not only have been cut off from others, but also
turned into mindless zombies:

My husband and I have found that we used to be more tolerant of other people’s behaviour,
specifically this lack of personal culture. (R126)

The need for distance not only concerned the public sphere, but also was important in the
context of maintaining emotional balance in the private sphere. According to the research,
a wave of anger often was aroused from being ‘condemned’ to certain people, the satura-
tion of mutual presence resulting from a lack of possibility of leaving the house to fulfil
assumed duties or shared routines. The disruption of the rhythm of daily life and the
impossibility of pursuing goals were causes of high levels of stress (e.g. from the pres-
ence of underage children or a partner who carries on loud conversations at home as part
of his work duties). It also was the cause of feelings of helplessness and frustration and,
not infrequently, the trigger for anger:

Yes, I felt condemned to my family, whom I adore, but their constant presence can be a minor
burden, mainly because my husband’s work requires him to travel for business for half of the
year. Then we got used to it, and it was OK. We are now constantly together, which can lead to
disagreements and tensions. (R126)

Anger and frustration also were caused by a sense of ‘populating the self’ through tech-
nology, i.e. entering into numerous and varied relationships simultaneously, primarily
facilitated by remote communication – a phenomenon described by Kenneth Gergen
(1991: 68–80) as a state of multiphrenia:

There have been times when I turn off notifications. For example, if I am at work and I need to
focus on something, .  .  . and here my phone is vibrating all the time .  .  . it is simply impossible
to work. (R050)

Spatial compression increased with the length of time spent in a given space and the
amount of interaction, eliciting a need for a cyclical change in environment, if only for a
Kubacka et al. 9

moment. However, the need to ‘break out’ often was hampered by lockdown-related
restrictions, recommendations and personal convictions as to the validity of keeping
one’s distance (always and everywhere, only in certain circumstances, only towards cer-
tain people, etc.). The frustration resulting from inevitable (in this case) contradictions
between varying sanitary advice (e.g. try to avoid other people/isolate yourself vs try to
use outdoor spaces/go for walks) only increased feelings of powerlessness. The experi-
ence of compression became so self-perpetuating that one might try to deal with it on an
ongoing basis, which could not always be effective due to the pandemic. The compres-
sion of negative emotions in a limited space also contributed to the accumulation of
behavioural and health problems, among which, according to research, we can distin-
guish: ‘increased risk for anxiety and depressive disorders, as well as other forms of
psychopathology; impaired social connections; increased substance use; compromised
immune system functioning; disturbed sleep; increased maladaptive eating; increased
aggressive behaviour; impaired learning; worse job performance; and impaired eco-
nomic decision-making’ (Wang et al., 2020: 3). Similarly, increasing stress (caused by
both spatial separation and compression) led to similar effects, related not only to behav-
ioural change, reduced well-being and immunity, but also to habituation to social isola-
tion. The difference was that in the case of separation from others it was a consequence
of its duration, and in the case of compression it was a missed but sought-after remedy
(Mari et al., 2020; Shah et al., 2021). This completes the circuit of frustrating events and
situations leading to pandemic rage. The multifaceted desire to maintain distance (from
infected people, including strangers who might be ill, or from being too close or too far
away) clearly indicates that space is not just the setting for the ‘happening’ of pandemic
rage, but also a significant determinant of its nature, course and duration.

Pandemic rage triggers

Pandemic rage can refer to various actors in social life, including specific individuals
(e.g. neighbours, partners, children), representatives of social and professional groups
(seniors, teenagers, couriers, doctors), the state (government), as well as oneself or cat-
egories of a more abstract nature, e.g. the system. Our research indicates that it is impos-
sible to mention a single origin that is specific to pandemic rage. On the one hand, the
causes of pandemic rage can be viewed as universal factors that triggered irritation.
What makes them unique to the phenomenon was the situational context resulting from
the epidemiological crisis. It was this context that made them more disruptive (Dragan
et al., 2021: 2–3, 6–8).
On the other hand, one can try to distinguish between the various substrates of rising
anger: its endogenous and exogenous catalysts. Endogenous causes include phenomena
related to the emotional and psychological state in which the individual finds themselves
in relation to the pandemic and all its consequences (Chiru and Răban-Motounu, 2020:
185–187). According to the information obtained during the project’s second phase,
respondents experienced uncertainty about the future and tension resulting from a stress-
ful and new situation in which previously known behavioural patterns proved unreliable
(Drozdowski et al., 2020a, 2020b). Research participants reported fatigue due to the
prolonged feeling of stress and the lack of opportunities to rest, change surroundings and
10 Current Sociology 00(0)

get away from thoughts about the pandemic. Another emotion experienced during the
epidemiological crisis was fear for our own safety and that of our loved ones. The pro-
longed uncertainty and the necessity to mobilise resources already weakened by the cri-
sis, combined with no possibility of rest, may have resulted in the conviction that the
effort had reached a critical point, eliciting the feeling that ‘it can’t go on any longer’
(Popiel et al., 2020).
In turn, exogenous causes are associated with the environment’s impact on the indi-
vidual: people’s behaviour and imposed compression of time, space, tasks and
information.
However, endogenous and exogenous catalysts of pandemic rage have most fre-
quently coexisted and similarly in the case of the private and public spheres described
above and are in closed-loop relations. Their combinations provide a trigger at a particu-
lar time and place, leading to outbursts of anger, anxiety, distress, restlessness or other
negative emotions. As one of the research participants put it:

I want to jump out of the window because I am fed up. I cannot sit still all the time. (R483)

Based on our research, one of the main triggers of pandemic rage was others’ attitudes
towards the epidemiological situation. Anger was caused both by behaviours associated
with ostentatious disregard for the rules under sanitary regimes, as well as by the
extremely restrictive application of these rules. However, it should be noted that pan-
demic rage more often refers to people who do not follow the rules for functioning in
public spaces during an epidemiological crisis. Respondents were irritated by the lack of
safety measures, i.e. special care for hygiene during a pandemic, manifested, for exam-
ple, by insufficient frequent washing of hands or failure to maintain an appropriate phys-
ical distance. This particular behaviour was viewed as dangerous and irresponsible:

Aggression, for example, especially of seniors in shops. . . . there are seniors who basically go
for walks to the shops and only check whether the shopper is under 60 or not. . . . Such
generational gendarmes .  .  . . I encountered something like that, in a queue when a lady told me
that it was not 1.5 metres [between her and me]. .  .  . She started shouting wildly; no one knows
what she meant. (R781)

Interestingly, one person’s nervous agitation often becomes a catalyst for anger in others,
eliciting a chain reaction, i.e. one person’s pandemic rage can trigger pandemic rage in
others. The crisis has caused nearly unbearable tension that cannot be suppressed any
longer by many study participants, who pointed out that the people around them were
more easily triggered now, aggressive and stressed. They themselves were less resistant
than usual to others’ negative emotions. In this case, it seems that pandemic rage is no
less contagious than COVID-19:

This gentleman . . . started shouting at an old lady he was serving. The lady started crying. It
was incredible. I thought I was dreaming. And I don’t think I would have been so worried about
it before [the pandemic]. (R126)
Kubacka et al. 11

The above examples reveal that the trouble spot may be more generally attitudes towards
norms. Behaviour associated with disregard for the rules of conduct during a pandemic
is particularly striking because it can be perceived as a manifestation of a lack of solidar-
ity, abandoning the community and refusing to act for the good and safety of others. This
might cause concern, perceived as the breaking of a social contract based on a shared
adherence to norms. During the crisis, social disobedience has been viewed as particu-
larly negative, especially because it is accompanied by a condition in which individuals’
and institutions’ strength is strained. In addition, good health and human life are highly
regarded values, so the risk associated with the possibility of contracting a new, danger-
ous virus evokes intense emotions and leads to an uncensored reaction, rather than a
well-thought-out response. The fast pace of the emergence of new norms and the high
level of emotional involvement among individuals cause a breakdown in neutrality in the
public space, a phenomenon Goffman termed ‘civil inattention’ (Goffman, 1966: 83–88).
Under these circumstances, we are more inclined towards observing others closely and
overtly. Moreover, we feel like we have a right to admonish them in situations that once
were ignored before a pandemic:

If he [my husband] goes to the shop and someone touches all the apples in front of him, he is
able to tell off this person. He would have ignored it completely before [the pandemic]. (R126)

It should be noted that attitudes towards norms may result from attitudes towards the
pandemic and a belief (or lack thereof) in COVID-19 dangers or existence. People who
deny that the pandemic exists or who disregard it are unwilling to abide by newly created
norms, so they view any attempts to enforce conformist behaviour as a sign of oppres-
sion or restriction of their freedom (Oleksy et al., 2021).
Pandemic rage also is triggered by a sense of contrast. A comparative perspective and
a sense of injustice emerge, caused by both deficits (inability to partake in one’s favourite
activities, such as travel, etc.) and excesses (more information, extra contact with cohab-
itants, new obligations resulting from working remotely, etc.). As we established in this
study, the return to a more traditional order – e.g. traditional gender roles, a patriarchal
family model, conservative morality (Krajewski et al., 2021) – took place during the
pandemic. We observed that it was mainly women who were affected by the excessive
burden of responsibilities resulting from the social expectation that they should put
increased effort into reproducing everyday life in this crisis situation. For some women,
this elicited frustration and anger stemming from overload and unfulfilled aspirations
from sacrificing career for family (Wenham, 2020: 32–36). A contrast also has become
apparent in research participants’ daily functioning and has been associated with enforced
changes in the pace of life. Irritation was caused by the acceleration of time, which mani-
fested itself in nervousness directed at people whose slower pace of life was perceived as
demonstrative:4

That’s why during that first lockdown, when I saw those bored students who don’t know what
to do with themselves, whether they’ll clean the wardrobe or do something, it made my heart
jump because I don’t know where to put my hands into. There are simply four times more
12 Current Sociology 00(0)

duties than normal; you have to take care of everything and also calm down everyone around,
and [then] someone is bored and resents the world for having too much time. (R187)

Discussion
The pandemic has complicated areas of everyday life that had not been controversial or
tense previously (e.g. physical and social distancing). In many respects, we have observed
a major ethnomethodological experiment that did not occur in a planned way, as in
Garfinkel’s study (1991), but took place spontaneously. The tactics and strategies fol-
lowed by our respondents are similar to what the US sociologist’s experiment has
revealed. Tactics and strategies comprised maintaining a sense of being in the shared
reality of everyday life, which was done under conditions that can be described as a crisis
of everyday life that included the undermining of the obviousness of everyday life and of
established routines. Everyday life became disrupted, and boundaries, e.g. between work
and home life/family, were undermined. We indicated above that the boundaries between
public and private spheres were experienced similarly. Daily life also has become desyn-
chronised, in that different actors’ activities were not coordinated in time. As a conse-
quence, there was the experience of waiting (for documents to be signed, for an
opportunity to speak to a colleague, etc.), which was another factor that gave rise to
frustration. Established relationships between work and leisure time, or between being
with others and alone were also undermined. Consequently, the description of one’s own
experience of this state of affairs was accomplished through notions of excesses and defi-
cits. All these factors allowed us to conclude that pandemic rage is a consequence of
experiencing disruptions in everyday life and the accompanying need to restore order.
The situation of the pandemic and the necessity to undertake remedial practices in a
coordinated manner with other social actors meant that this was not always possible,
reinforcing the feeling of powerlessness and lack of control over one’s own life. Under
the conditions of a disrupted everyday life, pandemic rage was both a reaction to such an
experience and an attempt to work through the situation emotionally. It is also a way to
inform the social environment about the challenges, create an impetus to action and,
consequently, cope with pandemic rage.
An important issue is that the rules regarding how to behave during the pandemic
were new and, therefore, only just being negotiated and assimilated. Behavioural norms
emerging during the pandemic were introduced in two ways, imposed in top-down (e.g.
in the form of recommendations or specific legislation) and bottom-up manners as a
result of interactions at the micro-interaction level. This process, contrary to the classic
situation of the gradual and long-lasting process of norm establishment and embedment
(Sztompka, 2002: 316–331), occurs at a very fast pace.5 The social elaboration of the
shape of rules during the pandemic resulted from the described events and conflicts
between various actors in social life. The new norms and lack of time to make them more
common socially were essential in fuelling pandemic rage.
Moreover, it can be considered that the rapid introduction of less socially ingrained
norms and the accompanying conflicts are a universal feature of social crises, such as
wars, natural disasters, economic crashes and disease pandemics. These society-level
crises are also reflected in the everyday lives of ordinary people who are not at the centre
of political and media life. In this context, the COVID-19 pandemic is an interesting
Kubacka et al. 13

example, as it fundamentally has changed the basis of the global community’s everyday
existence. Therefore, we suppose that situations we define as pandemic rage may be
universal and go beyond the Polish context.
The pandemic rage phenomenon is also a litmus test for conditions of the middle
class in large Polish cities. In our study, research participants were representatives of the
broadly defined metropolitan middle class, with relatively high cultural capital (Bourdieu,
1984). However, they were differentiated in terms of economic capital (although it is
worth noting that there were no underprivileged participants in our study). The sub-
capital of economic capital can be viewed as infrastructural capital, i.e. housing and
close space to realise one’s life values. The average level of the capital mentioned above
(e.g. tiny flats) among our respondents remains directly correlated with the need to man-
age the shared space to guarantee comfortable cohabitation. The middle-class represent-
atives who participated in our research adapted by sharing this small capital through the
use of services and spaces of the world outside the home (work, entertainment, catering,
etc.). For such people, the ‘flexibility of the threshold’ is essential, allowing them to
avoid or be together only temporarily. As long as there was no global crisis, such as the
pandemic, a shortage of space could be compensated for successfully through ‘threshold
flexibility’. If we consider these small spaces in the context of the stressful environment
of a pandemic, the high volume of work conditions (particularly in project form, with the
pressure of deadlines and the requirement to synchronise activities) for the emergence of
pandemic rage becomes complete. This results in conflicts in one’s own small flat with
colleagues in online spaces and with other anonymous members of society in shops,
offices, hospitals and other public spaces. Therefore, the pandemic can be viewed as a
marker of weaknesses in Poland’s middle class, primarily due to low infrastructural capi-
tal that cannot guarantee maintenance of one’s own everyday life during social perturba-
tions. Furthermore, the weakness of this capital seems to infringe on remaining capital as
well, leading to the erosion of even those who so far appeared to be the most transparent
and solidly established in the case of the middle class (e.g. social capital, expressed in
imprisonment with relatives and ‘significant others’, exposed to the simultaneous test of
forced isolation and restriction of social life).
The pandemic has demonstrated that in densely populated areas, we long for the right
to be free from others in a particular space, i.e. we need more freedom of space. For our
own psychological well-being and for maintaining social ties, we need lots of space and
distance, which is an exclusive option in cities. Moreover, there are two crucial factors
of spatial well-being: (a) the possibility of remaining in non-places temporarily and (b)
remaining temporarily in groups organised around a specific sphere of life.
Non-places – such as train stations, airports and waiting rooms – symbolise the mod-
ern human condition, in which individuals are single, do not form bonds and are lonely
(Augé, 1995). The pandemic has demonstrated that the individual’s experience is a nec-
essary counterbalance to the cultivation of bonds in social places (such as one’s own
home, work, pub, etc.), in which relationships with others are established and main-
tained. The pandemic led to a situation in which individuals had to stay together for an
extended period of time, unable to benefit from temporarily being ‘together, but apart’ in
non-places. Based on this perspective, non-places fulfil an important social function by
allowing temporary respite from strong and binding social ties, and by enabling the shar-
ing of confined domestic spaces.
14 Current Sociology 00(0)

On the other hand, the functioning of places such as kindergartens, schools, universi-
ties and workplaces allows for temporary changes in social composition, in which people
gather to perform specific activities and rituals. The pandemic created circumstances in
which all these spaces were compressed within the household. As a result, there were
numerous tensions between family members participating online on different social net-
works. The respondents’ statements indicate how important it is to perform activities
outside the home and the prominent role of ‘non-places’. In this way, we are not ‘con-
demned’ to the constant presence of loved ones. Based on our research, it appears that
certain stretches of time not being together might strengthen social bonds. It can be
concluded that the pandemic has taught us that to be together, some time is needed to
function in a diverse spatial environment.

Funding
The research was funded from the competition entitled “Research on COVID- 19” from the funds
of Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (grant number 28/2020).

ORCID iDs
Małgorzata Kubacka https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5301-878X
Piotr Luczys https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7062-7461

Notes
1. Two research stages were based on quantitative techniques (CAWI, n = 2500, n =
1300; March and April 2020); one used mixed methods (Kvale, 2007: 46–47), includ-
ing visual materials (Sztompka, 2005: 58–62, 70–74) (April and May 2020); and one
was based entirely on qualitative methodology. Reports on the first three stages of the
research are available in open access under the following links: http://socjologia.amu.edu.
pl/images/pliki/r%C3%B3%C5%BCne_prezentacje_etc/%C5%BBycie_codzienne_w_
czasach_pandemii_-_Wydzia%C5%82_Socjologii_UAM_-_WWW.pdf (accessed 5
May 2021);https://issuu.com/wydzialsocjologiiuam/docs/z_ycie_codzienne_w_czasach_
pandemii_8a63943c6eb314 (accessed 5 May 2021); https://issuu.com/wydzialsocjologiiuam/
docs/_raport_ycie_codzienne_3 (accessed 8 May 2021).
2. A research team established at the Department of Theory and Research of Social Practices
at the Faculty of Sociology of Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. The team com-
prises Rafał Drozdowski, Maciej Frąckowiak, Marek Krajewski, Małgorzata Kubacka, Piotr
Luczys, Ariel Modrzyk, Łukasz Rogowski, Przemysław Rura and Agnieszka Stamm.
3. It is important in this context to pay attention to the data on Poland’s housing situation.
According to 2020 data from the Ministry of Development, ‘The usable floor area of a flat per
person is in Poland 28.2 m2, and in the EU 41.9 m2. The average number of rooms per person
in Poland is 1.1 (ranking last in the EU), while the EU average is 1.7 rooms’ (Ministerstwo
Rozwoju, 2020).
4. A sense of contrast, of injustice, was present not only on the level of interpersonal relations,
but also along the line between citizen and authority. The catalyst for the rage was the feel-
ing that the authorities had passed the breaking point due to severe restrictions, regulations
and too many times being caught telling untruths. However, this aspect of pandemic rage has
already been described in the literature and is not the focus of our analysis (Huang, 2021:
101–102).
Kubacka et al. 15

5. In addition, it should be noted that obtaining reliable, complete information is problematic;

therefore, it is necessary to rely on the assumptions that Marek Ziółkowski (2000: 54–63)
called ‘partial objective interest’, i.e. a favourable state recognised using the maximum
knowledge available in a given place and time.

References
Augé M (1995) Non-Places: An Introduction to Supermodernity. London and New York: Verso
Books.
Babbie E (2009) The Practice of Social Research. Wadsworth, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Berry B (1999) Social Rage: Emotion and Cultural Conflict. New York: Garland Publishing.
Bick A, Blandin A and Mertens K (2020) Work from home before and after the Covid-19 outbreak.
SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3650114. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.
Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Chiru AI and Răban-Motounu N (2020) Anxiety and aggression during social distancing imposed
by the COVID-19 pandemic. Current Trends in Natural Sciences 9(18): 176–188.
Clarke V and Braun V (2014) Thematic analysis. In: Teo T (ed.) Encyclopedia of Critical
Psychology. New York: Springer, pp. 1947–1952.
Collins C, Landivar LC, Ruppanner L and Scarborough WJ (2021) COVID-19 and the gender gap
in work hours. Gender, Work & Organization 28: 101–112.
Deakin H and Wakefield K (2014) Skype interviewing: Reflections of two PhD researchers.
Qualitative Research 14(5): 603–616.
Dragan M, Grajewski P and Shevlin M (2021) Adjustment disorder, traumatic stress, depression
and anxiety in Poland during an early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal
of Psychotraumatology 12(1): 1–9.
Drozdowski R, Frąckowiak M, Krajewski M et al. (2020a) Życie codzienne w czasach pandemii.
Raport z pierwszego etapu badań [Everyday life in times of a pandemic. Report from the first
stage of research]. Report, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland, April.
Drozdowski R, Frąckowiak M, Krajewski M et al. (2020b) Życie codzienne w czasach pandemii.
Raport z drugiego etapu badań [Everyday life in times of a pandemic. Report from the second
stage of research]. Report, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland, July.
Durnová A and Mohammadi E (2021) Intimacy, home, and emotions in the era of the pandemic.
Sociology Compass 15(4): 1–10.
Forshaw MJ, Blinkhorn V and Galvin L (2020) Feelings towards physical and behavioural adapta-
tions during the Covid-19 pandemic. Health Psychology Update. Epub ahead of print 24 July
2020. Available at: http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/13382/
Garase ML (2006) Road Rage. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC.
Garfinkel H (1991) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.
Gergen KJ (1991) The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Identity in Contemporary Life. New York:
Basic Books.
Goffman E (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Vintage Anchor
Publishing.
Goffman E (1966) Behavior in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings.
New York: The Free Press.
Goffman E (1971) Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books.
Goffman E (1982) Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon
Books.
16 Current Sociology 00(0)

Hjálmsdóttir A and Bjarnadóttir SV (2021) ‘I have turned into a foreman here at home’: Families
and work–life balance in times of COVID-19 in a gender equality paradise. Gender, Work &
Organization 28: 268–283.
Huang PH. (2021) Pandemic emotions: The good, the bad, and the unconscious – implications for
public health, financial economics, law, and leadership. Northwestern Journal of Law and
Social Policy 16(2): 82–129.
Kaufmann JC (2010) Comprehensive Interview. Warszawa: Oficyna Naukowa.
Krajewski M, Frąckowiak M, Kubacka M and Rogowski Ł (2021) The bright side of the crisis:
The positive aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic according to the Poles. European Societies
23: 5777–5790.
Krastev I (2020) Is it Tomorrow Yet? London: Penguin Books.
Kvale S (2007) Doing Interviews. Los Angeles: Sage.
Luetke M, Hensel D, Herbenick D and Rosenberg M (2020) Romantic relationship conflict due
to the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in intimate and sexual behaviors in a nationally
representative sample of American adults. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 46: 747–762.
Lwin MO, Lu J, Sheldenkar A et al. (2020) Global sentiments surrounding the COVID-19 pan-
demic on Twitter: Analysis of Twitter trends. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance 6(2).
Makridis C and Rothwell JT (2020) The real cost of political polarization: Evidence from the
COVID-19 pandemic. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3638373
Mari E, Fraschetti A, Lausi G et al. (2020) Forced cohabitation during coronavirus lockdown in
Italy: A study on coping, stress and emotions among different family patterns. Journal of
Clinical Medicine 9(12): Article 3906.
Ministerstwo Rozwoju (2020) Raport Stan mieszkalnictwa w Polsce [Report on the Condition of
Housing in Poland], March.
Nassim NT (2010) The Black Swan: The Impact of Highly Improbable, 2nd edn. London: Penguin
Books.
Oleksy T, Wnuk A, Maison D and Łyś A (2021) Content matters: Different predictors and social
consequences of general and government-related conspiracy theories on COVID. Personality
and Individual Differences 168(3). DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110289
Popiel A, Zawadzki B, Bielecki M et al. (2020) COVID-STRES Raport nr 15 z badania
przeprowadzonego na Wydziale Psychologii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego we współpracy
z Uniwersytetem SWPS podczas epidemii COVID-19 w 2020 r [Report No. 15 from a study
conducted at the Faculty of Psychology of the University of Warsaw in cooperation with
the University of Social Sciences and Humanities during the COVID-19 epidemic in 2020],
March.
Schieman S, Badawy PJ, Milkie MA and Bierman A (2021) Work–life conflict during the COVID-
19 pandemic. Socius 7: 1–19.
Schutz A (1999) On Phenomenology and Social Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shah SMA, Mohammad D, Qureshi MFH et al. (2021) Prevalence, psychological responses and
associated correlates of depression, anxiety and stress in a global population, during the coro-
navirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Community Mental Health Journal 57: 101–110.
Smith LE, Duffy B, Moxham-Hall V et al. (2021) Anger and confrontation during the COVID-
19 pandemic: A national cross-sectional survey in the UK. Journal of the Royal Society of
Medicine 114: 77–90.
Sokoloff WW (2017) Confrontational Citizenship: Reflections on Hatred, Rage, Revolution, and
Revolt. New York: SUNY Press.
Sztompka P (2002) Socjologia. Analiza społeczeństwa [Sociology. Analysis of society]. Kraków:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe Znak.
Kubacka et al. 17

Sztompka P (2005) Socjologia wizualna. Fotografia jako metoda badawcza [Visual sociology.
Photography as a research method]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Sztompka P and Bogunia-Borowska M (2008) Socjologia codzienności [Sociology of everyday
life]. Kraków: Znak.
Thomson B (2020) The COVID-19 pandemic: A global natural experiment. Circulation 142(1):
14–16.
Wang K, Goldenberg A, Dorison C et al. (2020) A global test of brief reappraisal interventions on
emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Report, April.
Wasserman D, Van Der Gaag R and Wise J (2020) The term ‘physical distancing’ is recommended
rather than ‘social distancing’ during the COVID-19 pandemic for reducing feelings of rejec-
tion among people with mental health problems. European Psychiatry 63(1): 1–2.
Weber M (1978) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Wenham C (2020) The gendered impact of the COVID-19 crisis and post-crisis period. Policy
Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs Directorate-General for Internal
Policies Report, EU, September.
Ziółkowski M (2000) Przemiany interesów i wartości społeczeństwa polskiego [Changes in the
interests and values of Polish society]. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Fundacji Humaniora.

Author biographies
Małgorzata Kubacka is a PhD student at the Faculty of Sociology, Adam Mickiewicz University in
Poznań. Her research interests include qualitative research methods in the areas of housing studies,
sociology of emotions, boredom studies and user experience. Her doctoral thesis examines emo-
tional and strategic dimensions of boredom management. She is a member of the research team
developing ‘The Archive of Research on Everyday Life’.
Piotr Luczys, MA in sociology, is a network research specialist at Public Profits Sp. z o. o. (since
2017) and a business analyst at the University Development Centre TEB Akademia (since 2021).
Former PhD student at the Faculty of Sociology (Adam Mickiewicz University, 2009–2015) and
completed postgraduate studies in IT Project Management (WSB University in Poznań, 2019–
2020). He held an AMU Foundation scholarship for PhD students (2012) and has been member of
the board of the Poznań Department of the Polish Sociological Association since 2010. His
research fields include sociology of knowledge; methodology and history of social sciences; digi-
tal humanities; data science and project management.
Ariel Modrzyk is a sociologist and was awarded his PhD at the Faculty of Sociology of the Adam
Mickiewicz University. He has published several papers in Polish journals. His scientific interests
focus on the sociology of daily life, sociology of economy and sociology of the body. He also has
authored two monographs: Pomiędzy normatywizmem a realizmem. Od teorii uznania Axela
Honnetha do radykalnie refleksyjnej krytyki społecznej (Ha!art 2013) [Between Normativism and
Realism. From Axel Honneth’s Theory of Recognition to Radical Reflexive Social Critique] and
Społeczeństwo Marnotrawców? Funkcje i status normy niemarnowania żywności (Nomos 2019)
[Wasteful Society? Functions and Status of the Norm of Not Wasting Food].
Agnieszka Stamm, MA in sociology, is a PhD student at the Faculty of Sociology at the Adam
Mickiewicz University in Poznań. Her master’s thesis is titled ‘Right face! A sociological portrait
of Poznań students with conservative-liberal views’. Her research interests include sociology of
politics, contemporary Polish society and social psychology. She is a regular participant at confer-
ences and research projects.
18 Current Sociology 00(0)

Résumé
Pour cette étude, nous avons utilisé des données de recherche qualitative pour examiner
le phénomène de la rage pandémique dans la vie quotidienne. La rage pandémique est
définie comme une réaction émotionnelle aux sentiments de colère, de frustration et
d’impuissance résultant de la conviction que des règles fondamentales ont été violées en
temps de pandémie, ce qui est perçu (par la personne qui éprouve la rage pandémique)
comme de la provocation, de l’impertinence, de l’insolence et un dépassement des
limites. Nous examinons de plus près les rapports entre l’espace, l’ordre normatif, les
comportements et la rage pandémique. Dans la première partie, nous montrons les liens
entre l’apparition de la rage pandémique et l’expérience de la compression spatiale dans
les sphères privée et publique, situations où l’on se sent « condensé » et « condamné »
en présence d’autres personnes, et les perturbations proxémiques. Dans la deuxième
partie, nous présentons les catalyseurs endogènes et exogènes de la rage pandémique. La
dernière partie est constituée d’un résumé avec des interprétations et des conclusions.

Mots-clés
COVID-19, Pologne, rage pandémique, vie quotidienne

Resumen
En este estudio se usan datos de investigación cualitativa para examinar el fenómeno
de la rabia pandémica en la vida cotidiana. Se define la rabia pandémica como una
reacción emocional a los sentimientos de ira, frustración e impotencia que resultan de
la convicción de que se han violado reglas fundamentales durante una pandemia, lo cual
es percibido (por la persona que experimenta la rabia pandémica) como provocación,
impertinencia, insolencia y un traspaso de los límites. Se analizan las relaciones entre
el espacio, el orden normativo, los comportamientos y la rabia pandémica. La primera
parte presenta los vínculos entre la aparición de la rabia pandémica y la experiencia de
compresión espacial en las esferas pública y privada, situaciones de sentirse ‘condensado’
y ‘condenado’ en presencia de otros, y perturbaciones proxémicas. En la segunda parte,
se presentan los catalizadores endógenos y exógenos de la rabia pandémica. La última
parte proporciona un resumen con interpretaciones y conclusiones.

Palabras clave
COVID-19, Polonia, rabia pandémica, vida cotidiana