Genering Disability--"Interpreting Women"

In Brenda Jo Brueggemann's "Interpreting Women," she discusses how the construction of moral character or ethos influences the "rhetorical triangle" between the speaker, hearing-impaired "listener," and signer. However, what is particularly relevant here is Brueggemann's discussion of ethics and authority--for Brueggemann the ethics of the interpreter, in my research, the ethics of the parent or advocate "speaking" on behalf of the autistic.

Brueggemann notes: "First, there is the way that an ethics of care and ethics of justice occur in often-entangled operations with each other" (Brueggemann 68). Brueggemann describes a challenges faced by interpreters in regard to the "dimensions of, and boundaries around, their service to and representation of their d/Deaf clients" and how those concerns govern "their collective and individual views of care and justice" and how that "impacts their way of doing their job" (Brueggemann 68).

A second issue she addresses in regard to the "interpretive authority dynamics" is how "complex representation issues are encountered repeatedly by sign language interpreters," particularly when the deaf person is a "power-under situation"--as in a medical scene. Such instances are "microcosms of the way power plays out at large in our culture" (Brueggemann 69). Brueggemann argues, "The complex of representational issues that sign language interpreters encounter in their authoritative 'speaking' space need to be even more carefully coded, catalogued, and categorized so that interpreters in training and practice might have better frames within which to understand their own authority" (69).

Another issue: The "representational dilemmas that sign language interpreters often encounter, that are also often complementary and competing at the same time, are their ethical conflicts about their own positions as mere instruments or powerful advocates" (Brueggemann 70). Brueggemann discusses the ethical concerns in regard to sign language but I think her concerns likewise apply to issues related to representation and autism (parental advocacy, ABA, assisted communication): "Is an interpreter merely a kind of communicative conduit? Are they a unique form of access technology? And (or?) are they real people and an active, engaged part of the dia-no, make that tria-logue?" (Brueggemann 70).

A final point that is important for autism and representation: Interpreters "are deeply involved in the politics of translation. In exploring the always shifting standpoint of an interpretative triangle, they must turn to issues of translation, transliteration, and communicative and crosscultural (mis)understandings in general. Sign language interpreters by and large have a discomforting awareness that too much depends on upon them, that hearing people often only have conversations with them (not with the deaf person they are interpreting for), that their authority is simply too great, that the balance of communication is off-kilter to begin with and the triangle askew, near to collapsing" (Brueggemann 71).

Finally, Brueggemann concludes with a statement about "willing speech" that seems particularly relevant for autism issues, especially considering how difficult speech--communication--can be for the autistic: "What strikes me here then, and finally, is how the power of willing speech --of speech that is one's will, of speech that is easy and willing , of the ability to will speech to occur--is no authority to be ignored. [...] The authority of [...interpreters] represents perhaps one of the keenest examples we could imagine of rhetoric's long-standing educational, political, and personal power--the endowment of willing speech" (Brueggemann 71).

Deaf Studies Research

Gendering Disability has actually been much more useful than I first thought it would be in my research. I'm going to start reading some texts on the ethics of interpretation and sign language for my discussion on "who can speak for whom?" in my dissertation. I'm still gathering research and reading everything I can get my hands on, but for homework, after I'm finished with Smith and Hutison's book, I've ILL'ed Melanie Metzger's Sign Language Interpreting: Deconstructing the Myth of Neutrality, Judith Roof and Robyn Wiegman's Who Can Speak?: Authority and Identity, and Fiona Robinson's Globalizing Care: Ethics, Feminist Theory, and International Relations. I will pick up Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's article "The Politics of Translation" in Destabilizing Theory: Contemporary Feminist Debates and Linda Alcoff's "The Problem of Speaking for Others" in Feminist Nightmares: Women at Odds: Feminism and the Problem of Sisterhood on Thursday from the TWU library.

I'm thinking that the issues addressed in regard to sign language interpretation will prove useful for my research in two regards: One, I'm going to argue that "personhood" is linked closely with communication--i.e., the ability to speak and listen--determines our (in the collective sense) constructions of who is "a person" or "human" and who isn't. (My research into the Terri Schiavo case might prove very useful here.) This will also play into definitions of autism. And, deaf studies has a wealth of resources that will help me flesh out this discussion. I could transition from this discussion on "personhood" and communication to "who can speak for whom" and the ethics of representation (in regard to activism and advocacy--especially by parents in online communities.)

Back to reading...

Gendering Disability--"Why the Intersexed Shouldn't Be Fixed"

Colligan, Sumi. "Why the Intersexed Shouldn't Be Fixed: Insights from Queer Theory and Disability Studies." 45-

Colligan's article examines the ways in which queer theory and disability theory intersect in regard to intersexuality and disability as "cultural spectacle,"

"I contend that such an analysis should be broadened to include the role that the development of statistics played in turning disability into deviance, a process that included upholding a statistical norm against which all else was rendered abnormal" (Colligan 48).

"Moreover, the analysis should consider the manner in which the growth of the rehabilitation industry was catalyzed by a drive to remove the 'lack' and restore the disabled body to its 'assumed, prior normal state'" (Colligan 48).

The disabled are "extended the benevolent hand of charity because, particularly in the United States, their images help reaffirm the virtue and moral fitness of its nondisabled citizens" (Colligan 49). I've been thinking about this statement a bit and [just to rant] can see how enormously obvious this is. If Americans, for instance, were really concerned about the wellbeing of the disabled, why not insure that those on SSI are provided with more than the sheer, bare minimum to survive on? Why not uphold laws that prevent the discrimination of the disabled? If we really cared about the disabled as we claim to, why not have initiatives, for instance, that employ every mentally disabled American with some kind of employment? Maybe not the most productive or cost-beneficial, but it would meet the objectives of taking care of the mentally disabled. Oh well... rant over.

Why? Because "their images help reaffirm the virtue and moral fitness of its nondisabled citizens" (Colligan 49).

These statements justify autism representations because they affirm the "normalcy" of the non-autistic.

Gendering Disability--"Critical Race Theory, Feminism, and Disability"

I've been reading Gendering Disability over the past two days, not necessarily because it discusses mental disabilities, but because it's a title that I keep seeing over and over again in disability readings. So, here's some relevant points that I've identified in my brief reading:

Asch, Adrienne. "Critical Race Theory, Feminism, and Disability: Reflections on Social Justice and Personal Identity." 9-44

Asch applies Critical Race Theory (CRT) Disability Theory in her article. Asch's article is relevant for my dissertation because it addresses issues related to "Human Variations" (determining who is or who isn't disabled), how those "variations" influence the "worth" or profitability of the disabled individual, and how the disabled constitute "communities" and how community membership acts as a means of agency leading to social, legal change.

Asch cites Richard Delgado: "Because racism is an ingrained feature of our landscape, it looks ordinary and natural to persons in the culture... [W]hite elites will tolerate or encourage racial advances for blacks only when they also promote white self-interest" (qtd in Asch 9).

In regard to discussions of the representation of autistics as children, never adults: "Many commentators note that people with disabilities are expected to play no adult social role whatsoever; to be perceived as always, in ever social interaction, a recipient of help and never a provider of assistance; and to be more disliked by nondisabled others if they are clearly competent than if they are perceived as incompetent at a task" (Asch 11).

An interesting point made by Asch as to why minority theory doesn't necessarily "work" in regard to disability theory: "First, impairments are multiple and various; the same impairment may affect several individuals differently, depending upon other factors in their lives. The same impairment may affect the same individual differently at different times in life. [This is particularly true of autistic individuals.]

"Second, making notions of impairment equivalent to forms of human variation would reduce the need to decide who is 'in' and who is 'out' of the group of people counted as people with disabilities, which has become on of the major methods of denying people protection under the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ["Human variation" model discussed in a moment]

"Third, people with various conditions have a range of needs that influence their ability to take advantage of legal entitlements to education, employment, or public services. Without income to meet certain impairment-related expenses such as medications , transportation, personal assistance services, particular diet supplements, or items of clothing, for example, individuals may not flourish. Without the assistance of job coaches or other support staff, persons with emotional or cognitive impairments may not receive the individual assistance that permits them to manage the demands of typical schools or jobs. Without equipment or work schedules adjusted for rest or medical appointments, people with limited energy or with chronic pain may be unable to perform work for which they are otherwise well suited" (Asch 13).

Scotch and Schriner explain the "Human Variation" model that Asch believes ought to be applied to issues of disability: "In this...human variation model of disability, the problems faced by people with disability might be seen as the consequence of the failure of social institutions (and their physical and cultural manifestations) that can be attributed to the institutions' not having been constructed to deal with a narrower range of variation than is in fact present in any given population" (qtd in Asch 14). According to Asch, this model "has many advantages for people with a range of impairments [...] because it removes some of the pejorative specialness and exceptionality--some of the 'us and them' quality--from disability and reminds everyone that human beings come in a variety of physical, mental, and emotional make-ups that change over time" (Asch 14).

In regard to the ethics and financial interests involved in autism issues: "society will balk at making modifications tat include everyone unless dominant members of that society can be perceived to benefit as a by-product of these changes" (Asch 14).

Also in regard to the financial "worth" of the disabled according to the nondisabled and making disability issues relevant for the nondisabled: "Until it is legitimate, respectable, and acceptable to be a person with a disability in the world, until the nondisabled majority recognizes how ubiquitous impairment is and how likely it is that everyone will experience it themselves or in someone they love, and until the nondisabled majority perceives the millions of people with impairments are fully human and can contribute in meaningful ways to the economy and the family, that world will fight against every legal or moral claim made upon it to change institutions, cultural practices, and institutional and physical structures to become readily inclusive" (Asch 15).

"Instead of discussing which kinds of people have impairments or disabilities and which people do not, instead of saying that some members of society are disabled and others are not, we should consider which people cannot perform which activities in given environments and question how to modify the environments so that they are not disabling. Arguably, any person now living could, without any change in his or her physical, cognitive, sensory, and emotional make-up, be considered impaired [...] Instead of discussing impaired individuals, attention should go to determining which environments--which social, physical, bureaucratic, and communication structures--could incorporate the widest array of individuals in all their diversity of capacities and then determine which environments were impairing and how they could be modified" (Asch 17).

"impairments impinge upon people differently from one another depending upon a host of psychological and social factors that all are external to the biomedical condition" (Asch 19).

Important for discussions of who's "autistic enough": "The medical model of disability would [...contend] that people with substantial departures from a notion of 'species-typical' cognitive, orthopedic, hearing, and visual norms may be the only ones with genuine impairments" (Asch 19).

"If people labeled as mentally ill are filing complaints of discrimination in employment, it may derive from the existential anxiety occasioned by contact with someone whose behavior may be feared unpredictable, out of their or our control, or whose modes of social interaction startle those with the power to make employment decisions" (Asch 21).

In regard to her discussion on community, Asch notes, "Even for those who acquire their conditions at birth or in childhood and young adulthood, most characteristics are not genetically transmitted, and thus only a small fraction of the millions of people with disabilities grow up in a natural community of others with their same characteristics" (Asch 23).

"Lack of natural community, the variability among impairments, and the domination of medical services and philanthropic disability service organizations by nondisabled professionals have all mitigated against developing a strong, coherent, politically powerful community of people with disabilities" (Asch 23). I see online autism communities as part of creating this community to enable social change--creates agency.

Online communities are important, according to Asch, because they challenge the medical model of disability that so often presents disabled children and adults as unwanted, unhappy burdens. Communities create counter-discourses to that "[c]ontrast the views of disability as burdensome and disappointing to families expressed by many philosophers and physicians" (Asch 27). Counter-discourses are necessary considering that "most families who raise children with disabilities fare as well as others in overall life satisfaction and enjoyment of their children" (Asch 27).

Smith, Bonnie G. and Beth Hutchison, eds. Gendering Disability. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP, 2004.

Claiming Disability, Chpt 3

Chapter 3, "Divided Society"

"society works to divide up the human community and oppress some of its members" (34).

"Disabled people have existed predominantly as marginal figures, their contributions and perspectives are not generally noted" (36).

Linton discusses the role of voice (vox) in the rhetorics of disability and her statement is particularly relevant to discussions of online autism communities: "The most fundamental problem, though, is that disabled people's voices are almost completely absent from this picture, and so the understanding of disabled people's place in these situations is filtered through the experience of people who have never been in that place" (37).

Distinct categories that disabled people have occupied in Western history (Linton is referencing and elaborating on categories first described by Hanks and Hanks):

1. Pariah--"disabled people are denied most if not all claims to succor and to rights by the dominant nondisabled majority and are deemed a threat to the group itself" (38). "despised by society." "Denying or withholding resources or protection is one set of responses to disabled people deemed pariahs" (39). Nazi Germany.

Also, published reports of institutions and schools abusing autistic children and adults fits within this discussion. Numerous examples are seen in the media and noted on Autismvox.com in regard to "electroshock therapy," neglect, and physical and emotional abuse. "A most profound example of withholding care and 'succor" can be seen in the United States, in the history of many of our institutions and asylums" (40).

"Disabled people around the world who are deemed pariahs by their own families and communities have lived through the terrible pain of being denied succor by the very persons to whom it would be most natural to turn. Practices ranging from withholding attention, food, love, and education to denying them life itself have been documented" (45).

2. Economic and Social Liability--"disabled people's being seen as impairing the economic well-being, as well as the vitality and viability, of a society" (45). The disabled are thought to drain economic resources and "deflect attention from other needs" (45). Rhetoric involves the "lifeboat image" of a "society abandoning the 'weaker' members to aid the survival of the group.

Couple this "lifeboat image" with technology and "There are at least two compteting ideas at work here. One is the belief that in the modern, industrialized world scientific and technological competence, along with advanced humanitarian and moral development, would lead the way toward the highest level of care and of concern ever evidenced. However, those modernist ideals mean the society would not tolerate being bogged down by those who can't keep up, who are thought to drain resources, or who remind us in any way of the limitations of our scientific capabilities" (46).

Economic concerns are particularly relevant to discussions on autism, especially considering the enormous costs that ABA, medication, chelation (if a parent chooses to go in that direction), tutoring, etc can cost parents.

Local responsibility of raising disabled child and, possibly, caring for disabled adult.

Important to note the distinction of those "in need" who are worthy of help and those who are not (47). Another important note: "dependency was deemed antithetical to citizenship" (qtd in Linton 48). Interesting for discussion on those with mental disabilities--what constitutes active citizenship (especially considering the focus on citizenship in the early American institutions as discussed in Trent), who gets to have citizenship, does one have to contribute economically to have citizenship, and how might all of this impact those who are mentally disabled? (Perhaps something to discuss in the corporitization/ethics of autism?)

Also, important to note: "America's glorification of independence has not served disabled people well" (48).

Interesting point to note for "supranatural section": "In the nineteenth century, there was a shift from the belief that disability was caused by supernatural agency to a biological explanation that held that treatment, or some form of rehabilitation, was the logical response to disability" (48). Discussion also found in Longmore... Thoughts to consider: how does our ideological shift during the 18th and 19th centuries influence autism treatments in the 21st century? Seems to be 2 rhetorics/discourses going on: Media--autism as a reflection of some demon, spirit, supernatural being, angel existing in the body of the individual. And, Media--autism as a biological defect or some active poison wrecking havoc on the autistic's body. Point to note is that there is some "other" at fault for the disabilities of the individual.

"Although medicine didn't overtly claim expertise in reducing the economic liability posed by disabled people, it did corner the market on attempts to contain the perceived negative social impact of disability" (49).

"The institutions that emerged in the twentieth century became teaching hospitals and research centers" (49).

"In the current climate in the United States of managed health care, there is a deep fear among disabled people that our lives will be weighed on an economic scale" (50).

Michael Berube writes: "I do not want to see a world in which human life is judged by the kind of cost-benefit analysis that weeds out those least likely to attain self-sufficiency and to provide adequate 'returns' on social investments" (qtd in Linton 51).

3. Tolerant Utilization--disabled people "are allowed to participate to the extent that they have the ability to fulfill certain roles and duties designated by the nondisabled majority as necessary" (51). "[T]hese situations are ripe for exploitation" (51)--freakshows and carnival acts.

4. Limited Participation--"disabled people's roles and status are largely derived from their ability to be productive in terms of the standards set by the dominant majority"(53). "[I]t is up to the individual to demonstrate worth and competence" and this model promotes "a false sense of acceptance because the norms and standards of the able-bodied majority are imposed and held up as the ideal to which all should aspire" (53). "Limited participation indicates the society's willingness to accept a disabled person among its ranks in any domain in which she or he can 'keep up' with the nondisabled" (53).

5. Laissez-Faire--"a steadfast relation to the protective group, despite handicap," (qtd in Linton 53) and the "obligation of the extended family to shelter and provide for its unfortunates continues, whether they are able to give their labor or not" (qtd in Linton 53). For Linton, this term means that society accepts the "idea of noninterference" as applied to social structures. "The society makes no effort to reconstruct its goals or acceptable means of achieving them to reflect a broader range of citizens, the society has accepted a laissez-faire approach to disability" (54). "Disabled people then are left in the uneviable position of having to keep up with norms and standards but with no opportuntity to shape them" (54).

6. Participation and Accomodation--"concerted efforts to accomodate all members of the group and to adapt the procedures and standards typically imposed to reflect a range of abilities, interests, and needs. This does not mean lowering standards in an absolute sense; it means that greater flexibility is evident and a broader range of objectives are set. These actions are based on moral, practical, religious, and/or rights-based approaches to full participation of all members of society" (54).

Claiming Disability--Chpts 1 & 2

I finished reading Simi Linton's book last night and found it enormously informative and insightful. I wish I had found this book at the beginning of last semester.

Points for discussion:

Disability studies enables scholars to understand "disability as a social, political, and cultural phenomenon" (2).

Differences b/t "disability" and "impairment"--disability is a social construction

"the field of disability studies is even more mariginal in the academic culture than disabled people are in the civic culture. The enormous energy society expends keeping people with disabilities sequestered and in subordinate positions is matched by the academy's effort to justify that isolation and oppression" (3).

The disabled "are all bound together, not by [the] list of our collective symptoms but by the social and political circumstances that have forged us as a group" (4). For my research, I see this statement as important because it is not the symptoms of autism but the circumstances that constitute "autism" as a definition. Definitions of autism are not medically based but socially and politically...

"vantage point of the atypical"... "atypical experience as deficit and loss" (5)

Disability studies grounded in humanities and social/political contexts, not psychology, because psychology endorses notion of "normalcy," which "centers and priviledges certain types of behavior, functioning, and appearance" (6), psychology's emphasis on empiricism, and psychology's emphasis on the individual rather than the environment (6).

"Disability studies, in contrast, focuses on the external variables: the social, political, and intellectual contingencies that shape meaning and behavior" (6).

"The scholarship and curriculum practices housed in academic institutions play a significant role in the perpetuation of a divided and unequal society" (7).

Discussion on the different labels and meanings behind them in Chapter 2.

"the medicalization of disability cast human variation as deviance from the norm, as pathological condition, as deficit, and, significantly, as an individual burden and personal tragedy. Society, in agreeing to assign medical meaning to disability, collude to keep the issue within the purview of the medical establishment, to keep it a personal matter and 'treat' the condition and the person with the condition rather than 'treating' the social processes and policies that constrict disabled people's lives" (11). This seems to relate well to criticisms of Autism Speaks by the neurodiversity movement. The problem with Autism Speaks for some is that the organization treats autistic individuals as "abnormal" through their emphasis on bio-medical interventions rather than addressing the social practices that disable, e.g., lack of group homes to insure a higher quality of life for disabled individuals.

"When medical definitions of disability are dominant, it is logical to separate people according to biomedical condition through the use of diagnostic categories and to forefront medical perspectives on human variation. When disability is redefined as a social/ political category, people with a variety of conditions are identified as people with disabilities or disabled people, a group bound by common social and political experience" (12).

Interesting point for discussion in regard to high/low functioning of autism--big deal in autism circles-- "The question of who 'qualifies' as disabled is as answerable or as confounding as questions about any identity status. [...] The degree and significance of an individual's impairment is often less of an issue than the degree to which someone identifies as disabled" (12). I would say that Linton's claims here do not necessary apply to autism discussions. Issue of ethos in regard to who can identify themselves as high/low functioning, who is even considered autistic.

Disability is determined by disclosure.

"Nice words" such as "physically challenged," "able disabled," "handicapable," and "special people/children" "may be considered well-meaning attempts to inflate the value of people with disabilities, they convey the boosterism and do-gooder mentality endemic to the paternalistic agencies that control many disabled people's lives" (14).

"Overcoming a disability" is really about overcoming the "social stigma of having a disability" (17). "the individual's responsibility for her or his own success is paramount." The disabled are required to "manage an inaccessible environment rather than demand that the community change to include them" (19).

"Shame and fear are personal burdens, but if these tales are told, we can demonstrate how the personal is indeed the political" (22).

Normal/Abnormal rhetoric is often used to describe "absolute categories" that maintains their "certainty by association with empiricism, and they suffer from empiricism's reductive and simplifying tendencies" (24).

"Language that conveys passivity and victimization reinforces certain stereotypes when applied to disabled people. Some of the stereotypes that are particularly entrenched are that people with disabilities are more dependent, childlike, passive, and miserable and are less competant then people who do not have disabilities" (25).

"disabled people are rarely depicted on television, in film, or in fiction as being in control of their own lives--in charge or actively seeking out and obtaining what they want and need. More often, disabled people are depicted as pained by their fate or, if happy, it is through personal triumph over their adversity. The adversity is not depicted as lack of opportunity, discrimination, institutionalization, and ostracism; it is the personal burden of their own body or means of functioning" (25).

"Victim" rhetoric casts the disability as the "active agent perpetuating an agressive act on a vulnerable, helpless 'victim'" (25). Rhetoric of "victim" markedly different when used to describe those "suffering from" or "afflicted with" HIV. Distinction is then made b/t "innocent" victims of blood transfusions and "complicit" victims of HIV from sexual contact and shared needles (26).

Other "victim" rhetoric: "afflict," "agonize," "excruciate," "rack," "torment," "torture" (26). Distinction b/t "living with" and "dying from" a disease. "Wheelchair bound" or "confined to a wheelchair" (27). "Invalid"

"Disabled people, who have often spent a great deal of time as patients, discuss the ways that we have been socialized in the medical culture to be compliant, and that has often undermined our ability to challenge authority or to function autonomously" (29).

the verb disable means "to deprive of capability or effectiveness" (30).

Sections of the dissertation?

Possible discussions/sections for the dissertation?

• Problem of Identifying Autism--
• "defining" autism, maybe a look through Burke's pentad w/ Kanner, Asperger, and today (Kirby? moving "autism" out of schizophrenia in DSM),
• semiotics/linguistics/discursive influence on autism as disability--or the lack of discursive/semiotic/linguistic construction in autistics
• high-low functioning distinction?
• metaphors describing autism?
  
• Identifying the "Gaze" of Autism--
• see blog post below
  
• discussion on high-functioning and low-functioning as it relates to an autistic's ability to disclose
  
• Identifying the "Suprahuman"--
• including discussion on autism and God, devil (presenting in November at SAMLA)
• savants' "superhuman" abilities
  
• Identifying the Commodities of/ Corporatization (?) autism-- (submit proposal to RSA for presentation in May? CFP on "responsibilities of rhetoric" so would fit well)
  
• white, upper-class condition,
  
• autism and productivity,
  
• autism and expensive treatments, therapies,
  
• autism and multi-million dollar non-profits and rhetoric of soliciting donations (all connecting to identifying autism and agency of parent and autistics to "cure" or treat autism)
  

Hmm... and within each section I would use Western media to support my claims (television, film, news, internet...) I keep coming back in my readings to identification and agency...

Starting on the prospectus...

Just some thoughts I've started getting together--it's pretty vague and sketchy still:

Since the DSM-IV first defined autism and autism spectrum disorders as pervasive developmental disorders separate from schizophrenia and childhood emotional disturbances in 1990, scholars in medicine, biology, chemistry, genetics, psychiatry, psychology, education, and environmental science have published thousands of books, journal articles, and research studies in an attempt to better understand this neurological condition. A simple search in any medical database at any university library on "autism" will pull up tens of thousands of entries.

However, a search on the "representation" of autism in the Humanities will yield only a handful of books and journal articles; in fact, many notable works in Disability Studies do not even mention autism. Discussions on mental illness often focus primarily on schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder. For instance, in Lauri E. Klobas' book Disability Drama in Television and Film, she cites thousands of instances when mentally and physically disabled characters have appeared in Western television programs and films; however, she does not cite one movie or television program with an autistic character, although autistic characters have appeared in more than fifty-five feature films and made-for-television movies, as noted by Stuart Murray in his article "Hollywood and the Fascination with Autism." Likewise, recent publications by James C. Wilson and Cynthia Lewinsky-Wilson (Embodied Rhetorics: Disability in Language and Culture (2001)) and Sharon L. Snyder and Brenda Jo Bruggemann (Disability Studies: Enabling the Humanities (2002)) do not even mention, much less discuss, the rhetoric or representation of autism.

While the recent media and public attention on autism have increased awareness and interest in this neurological condition, scholars in the Humanities have yet to discuss this matter as extensively as scholars in medicine and education have. More recently, two notable works on the construction of autism in Western discourses by Majia Nadesan (Constructing Autism (2005)) and Roy Grinker (Unstrange Minds (2007)) have been published; however, neither works examine the rhetoric of the representation and identification of autism, particularly in Western media.

While the recent media and public attention on autism have increased awareness and interest in this neurological condition, scholars in the Humanities have yet to discuss this matter as extensively as scholars in medicine and education have. Therefore, my dissertation will examine the rhetoric of agency and identification of autism spectrum disorders as reflected in Western media, including films with autistic characters or characters who exhibit autistic behaviors, youtube videos, and autism-related blogs. Through films, online videos, and online journals, autistic individuals and parents of autistic children are able to share their experiences with various treatments and news publications. [This part needs alot of work. Need to be much more specific.]

Little doubt exists as to the influence of films and television on our perceptions of society; our "visual culture" shapes both how we act toward each other and how we respond to those actions. The perceptions of the physically and mentally disabled are significantly relevant since such perceptions in turn shape how society, as a whole, treats, responds to, and cares for those who are primarily considered "inferior," "broken," or an "other" in society. Likewise, new media online video servers, such as youtube, and online journals allow autistic individuals and parents of autistic children to share their experiences with various treatments and their responses to and concerns regarding news publications. Therefore, my dissertation will examine the representation of autism spectrum disorders in Western media--films, television programming, youtube, and online journals--in order to illustrate how Western media both reflects society's anxieties regarding developmental (and invisible) disabilities and how those anxieties manifest in Western diagnosis, treatment, and care for individual with autism spectrum disorders.

As W. J. T. Messaris notes in his book Picture Theory, the importance and reliance on the visual has led to the current "pictorial turn"--a turn in which humans rely on images, rather than the text, to understand the world around them. This "pictorial turn" is no less important in regard to media and disability studies. The ways in which the disabled are "gazed" upon by the camera and online reflects non-disabled anxieties and concerns regarding the disabled--both of which shape how the non-disabled and the disabled, themselves, respond to those with disabilities when they are no longer visually represented in the media. Still, this concern for "visual culture" is particularly relevant in regard to disability studies because "visualizing" is often a passive activity--images flood us in all facets of our lives and we, in turn, "receive" them. We use those images to understand and construct the world around us. Humans, in turn, use what those images to as a means of signification--to identify, define, categorize, and interpret the world around us. Images allow humans to identify what an object is in respect to what it is not; in other words, images of the color "red" enable viewers to distinguish it from the color "blue." Likewise, humans use images to categorize what is "normal" from "abnormal"--wearing tennis shoes on our feet is "normal" while wearing them on our hands is "abnormal."

However, the ability of images in our visual culture to distinguish what is considered "normal" from "abnormal" has profound consequences when applied to the human body. Images of "health" and "vitality" become synonymous with "normal" while images of "difference" and "disfigurement" become analogous with "abnormality." Consequently, the "abnormal" body is separated, distinguished, and isolated as something to fear, loathe, and pity. As such, the disabled have throughout history been marginalized because of their perceived "differences." The ever-popular circus freak show in the nineteenth century illustrates the pervasiveness of the human interest in those whose bodies and minds render them "abnormal." During the twentieth century, the "freak show" moved out of the circus tent and into television programs and feature films. Audiences have been fascinated with the gruesomeness of the "monster" in Frankenstein, the deformed Hunchback of Notre Dame, and the remarkable "genius" of Rain Man. The marginalized "others" often serve as educational fodder for cable television, as seen on such programs as Medical Incredible on TLC (The Learning Channel) and the weekly specials often featured on The Discovery Health Channel. Such programs as "The Mermaid Girl," "The Boy Whose Skin Fell Off," and "400 Pound Tumor" have resurrected the circus freak show under the auspices of "education," "health," and "learning."

While those with visible disabilities are often "gazed" upon as "abnormal," those with invisible disabilities pose different concerns; namely, how do we "gaze" upon someone whose "abnormality" is invisible to the naked eye? What complexities exist for the disabled with their "abnormalities" or "differences" are not visible in this increasingly visual culture? Additionally, how does the visually-dependent media (specifically, the medium of television, film, and the internet) construct the images of those with invisible disabilities when their disabilities are not visible? The visualization and marginalization of those with invisible disabilities, especially autism, are represented and reinforced in Western media and in turn shape how those with invisible disabilities are treated (and not treated) by society. As such, these issues are just a few of the concerns I will address in my dissertation.

[After reading these last 4 paragraphs, I wonder if a major "section" (chapters?) of my dissertation will involve the "gaze" of autism. Particularly who is gazing? How does the "gaze" of those with autism, perhaps as reflected in Send in the Idiots, Mozart and the Whale, Born on a Blue Day, and other autism narratives, differ from the gaze of observers--parent's narratives, television, film, blogs? This conversation could include discussions on disclosure, particularly relevant for online electronic communities in blogs and online discussion groups.


I keep seeing two main discussions in my readings--identification and agency. Perhaps the meta-terms that connect the dissertation as a whole together? Then, I think looking at the "gaze" of autism would connect well within the larger discussion of identification and agency. Or, maybe not...]

"People with 'Learning Difficulties'"...

...in Corker, Mairian and Tom Shakespeare, eds. Disability/Postmodernity: Embodying Disability Theory. New York: Continuum. 2002.

I'm working today and tomorrow on the prospectus and reading around. Something of interest from Dan Goodley and Mark Rapley's article "People with 'Learning Difficulties'" that would be relevant for a discussion on the construction of autism based on discursive and linguistic abilities. Specifically, Goodley and Rapley argue that "assumptions and ways of talking about disability [...] are crucial to the production of persons as incompetent. Both approaches point to the political consequences of these ways of talking: to the silencing of people with intellectual disabilities. Both approaches draw our attention to disability as a socially produced phenomenon in a social world, and social worlds, we argue, are worlds that can be changed" (127).

Also relevant: "We challenge both the modernist construction of 'learning difficulties' as naturalized impairment, and also demonstrate that phenomena frequently understood as aspects of social interaction" (127).

Goodley and Rapley's article focuses primarily those with 'learning difficulties' tendencies to acquiesce. Specifically, Goodley and Rapley challenge how the tendency to acquiesce, which is one significant "marker" or characteristic of the mentally challenged that is often used to justify how the "utterances of people with 'intellectual disabilities' are not to be trusted as veridical reports of their actions, beliefs, or feeling states" (128), is based on faulty methodological practices that assumed to be neutral or objective. Goodley and Rapley note that just as "language talks to the world into being, discursive psychology insists that (research) 'methods' are always and already 'theory' in disguise (128).

An interesting point for a discussion on the social construction of autism: "Discursive psychology [...] grants prior status to language : without the prior existence of language, such 'psychological' things 'intellectual (dis)abilities', 'syndromes' or acquiescence 'biases' can, quiet literally, not sensibly be talked of" (128). While G & R focus primarily on discursive analysis of transcriptions, I think G & R's statement illustrates well how rhetorical analysis can be applied to discussions on the "construction" of autism in the past 2 decades.

I'm still working and reading...

...away at some books that I need to read. Foucault, etc. I haven't blogged in a while but I'm still working and my dissertation is on my mind about 23.4 hours of every day.

Upward Bound is kicking my butt. So, I'll work on the prospectus on Saturday. (Sigh).

I swear: I. will. not. get. a. full. time. job. until. I. finish. my. dissertation!! I can't find 2 hours to read quietly--let alone work on my prospectus, which the rough draft is due July 1. I don't know how someone could think about getting a full time job and writing a dissertation. It's impossible.