Teaching about the Grenfell Tower fire requires navigating a complex and unsettled temporal landscape. Unlike many historical events taught in schools, Grenfell is not a closed chapter; its inquiries, legal processes, and political ramifications remain ongoing. This unfinished status creates distinctive pedagogical challenges, as well as important opportunities for justice-centred learning.
A central difficulty lies in the fact that key outcomes are still unknown. Because official inquiries and legal proceedings have not reached their full conclusions, some feel uncertain about presenting information that may evolve. This produces a pedagogy of “what ifs,” where the contours of the event are still shifting. Others express frustration that, seven years on, answers remain elusive and the prolonged absence of accountability undermines trust. The open-ended nature of the process can generate hesitancy, but it can also highlight the realities of delayed justice and the social implications of waiting.
Temporality also shapes how Grenfell is positioned within education. It occupies an ambiguous space between “recent history” and “distant past.” Its recency allows for direct engagement with memory, community experience, and lived testimony—an immediacy that contrasts sharply with events such as the Great Fire of London or early twentieth-century conflicts. Yet this same closeness heightens emotional sensitivity and demands careful, informed teaching. For some, the event still feels too raw; for others, the passage of time creates a sense of urgency to ensure its lessons are not lost.
Concerns about fading memory are becoming increasingly visible. Grenfell is described as “still recent but long enough to be forgotten,” raising fears that public remembrance may drift into routine or that its core message may dull over time. Perspectives on memorialisation are also shifting. Some feel that earlier reticence—such as avoiding images out of respect for trauma—may now hinder public understanding, particularly as younger cohorts lack direct memory of the event. As time passes, certain forms of representation may become more necessary to preserve what happened with honesty and clarity.
Time is not experienced uniformly. For those directly affected, Grenfell is not contained within a single night but stretches across the “before,” the “event,” and the unfolding “after.” It remains a continuous presence shaping daily life, emotions, and future anxieties. Others, especially those geographically distant or too young to remember, may perceive the event as belonging firmly to the past. These layered temporalities—personal, generational, communal—mean that different groups encounter Grenfell with different levels of immediacy and emotional resonance.
Finally, there is a persistent tension between rawness and readiness. Some express apprehension about discussing Grenfell openly for fear of causing harm or “getting it wrong.” At the same time, others emphasise that waiting for a perfect moment may mean the topic is never addressed. The unfinished nature of Grenfell does not preclude teaching; rather, it calls for pedagogies capable of holding uncertainty, acknowledging ongoing injustice, and supporting learners to think critically about events that are not yet resolved.
