A Person Is More Than the Label on Their File

A file can tell us something important about a person. It can also become the point where our curiosity stops.

Once a label seems to explain someone, we may no longer ask how they describe their own experience. The category supplies the answer before a conversation begins.

A creative project in Germany offers a different starting point: let people help make the story through which others encounter them.

In a report dated 20 October 2026, the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning describes illustrator Patricia Thoma’s work creating comics with incarcerated people over more than two years in over 20 prisons. A public reading and discussion is planned for 4 November at Hamburg Central Library, in collaboration with library and prison-library partners.

That event is still ahead. Its effects cannot yet be reported. Nor does the announcement establish that the project has reduced reoffending or changed participants’ lives in a measurable way.

What it does describe is a space for people’s own illustrated accounts. That is a worthwhile development without requiring a larger claim.

Listening does not settle every question

There is an important distinction here. Taking an interest in someone’s account does not mean accepting every claim, dismissing harm, or abandoning accountability.

We can listen carefully and still recognise that other people have been affected. We can consider context without pretending it removes responsibility.

The editorial reflection is about resisting a shortcut: the assumption that one category contains everything worth knowing about a person.

That shortcut can appear in ordinary life too. Someone becomes “the difficult colleague,” “the quiet student,” or “the person who always gets it wrong.” After a while, every new action gets read through the old description.

The settings are not equivalent to prison, and their consequences differ. The useful connection is narrower: labels can guide attention so completely that we stop noticing anything else.

Ask for a moment, not a life story

An invitation to speak should leave the other person some control over what they share.

You do not need to ask for a painful history or a personal confession. A smaller question can be enough: what happened at that point? What did you understand the task to mean? What would you want someone to notice about that day?

Let the person decline. Do not treat privacy as proof that they have nothing useful to say.

In a workplace, for example, a missed deadline might lead to a hypothetical conversation about an unclear handover. The colleague’s account may reveal something the manager did not know. It may also leave a performance concern unresolved.

Both can be true. Listening improves the information available for a decision; it does not predetermine the decision.

Borrow the form, not someone else’s experience

The comics story suggests a simple exercise for reflection. This is an Evolv proposal, not an activity claimed to come from the project.

Draw three boxes on a page. Stick figures are enough. Choose an ordinary, low-stakes misunderstanding from your own life.

In the first box, show what you expected. In the second, show what happened. In the third, show the question you wish you had asked.

Then look for the gap between your assumption and the information you actually had.

Keep the page private unless you choose otherwise. Do not draw another person’s sensitive experience for an audience or turn a colleague into a recognisable character without their agreement.

The purpose is not artistic quality. It is to slow down one interpretation long enough to examine it.

Leave room for an unfinished answer

A good conversation does not always end with agreement. Sometimes it ends with a clearer disagreement, an unanswered question or a boundary that still needs to stand.

That is not necessarily a failure.

We can say, “I understand more about how you saw it,” without saying, “Everything that happened was acceptable.” We can correct an assumption while still asking someone to meet a responsibility.

This matters because a demand for a perfectly uplifting ending can distort a human story. People do not owe an audience a neat transformation.

Curiosity with responsibility

The forthcoming Hamburg event offers an opportunity for an audience to encounter creative work made with people whose lives are often described from outside.

Our practical task is smaller and closer to home. Notice one label you use about another person. Ask what it helps you understand, and what it may prevent you from seeing.

If a conversation is appropriate, choose a respectful question. If it is not, begin by examining your own assumption.

You may still reach a difficult conclusion. You can reach it with more care about what you know, what you do not know and whose voice has been missing.

What might you notice if the label stopped being the end of the conversation?

## Sources
Primary source 1

Editorial note: Prepared with AI assistance from the linked primary sources. No interviews or field reporting. Workplace examples and practical exercises are hypothetical editorial proposals. Reported activities are distinguished from outcomes.