From the premise that normality is a social construct, it follows that insanity is too. These moments of insanity we refer to manifest themselves individually: the feeling that you are insane or do not fit in in a given context or situation. However, since it could befall anyone, it could simultaneously be considered a collective experience.

The boundary between insanity and normality is fickle, defined by temporary conditions that depend upon the context in which it surfaces. Manifestations of insanity and how these are understood are highly subjective: what is considered deviant behaviour in or by one person might not be perceived so in or by another. Behavioural expressions which are understood as deviant under certain time-space restrictions will be considered “normal” when occurring in a different setting. Thus, since the parameters of what is perceived as normality are unstable, they can be moved through and by insanity.

If subjective experiences of everyday insanity lay bare the otherwise opaque structures of normality – for it is this “normality” against which possible deviations are measured and vice versa –, this implies that we are (subconsciously) governed by structures which contain a priori definitions of what it means to be “normal”. Since we are generally not aware of the existence of these structures (or do not recognise normality as such), they can only be altered when they are rendered visible and understood for what they are. Experiences of everyday insanity could thus become a means to subvert and alter these structures in a given context.