|
I posted what I thought was a fairly neutral observation about some complex
features of list interaction where people come in from very different
experiences, stances and intellectual orientation. This arose from thinking
about some comments by S. Berg, which therefore I extracted (perhaps
misleadingly) at the head of my post; and also from a feeling of regret
that some people who have made useful contributions to this list at various
times over the ten years no longer do so. Two whom I miss are David, and
Mairian, both of whom, in very different ways, could sustain a thread,
broaden it, weave very diverse responses into a meaningful pattern,
recognise irony and respond with humour, and other gifts; but there are
others, who have not died, but were finally discouraged by the banging and
shouting, and left, sadly. Some of these people were deaf or disabled, some
of them were able-bodied, some were researchers, others were not; often I
didn't actually notice such categories - I was interested in what they had
to say, and how they initiated and conducted threads, or how they responded
to others.
Re-reading my earlier 'neutral note' a few times, it still seems to say
more or less what I intended it to say. It's hardly rocket science, nor is
it a research report. There are several jumps of thought, which probably
obscure the meaning for some readers. In a piece for publication, I might
spend two days trying to bridge those gaps and make everything clearer (at
risk of taking 3000 words on it). But on this list, with up to 800 assorted
members plus unnumbered lurkers behind bushes or blushes, one must take a
few risks or be silent. There has to be some confidence that perhaps 30-40
readers will grasp the essential points, and maybe one will post a sensible
response, or mail something privately.
The three responses (so far) seem too divergent for any 'continuation'
comment, and I would be happy if others take up any of the varied and
interesting points in them. The response that I understood most easily was
from B. Williams-Findlay -- probably because he and I are both older
British men (or blokes), and could probably argue with each other all night
without getting heated, because we have sufficiently similar cultural
practice and idiom.
However, since S. Berg addresses me directly, it might seem somehow
ungallant to fail to acknowledge that post. I also have a sense - quite
possibly mistaken - that some other would-be respondents out there might
hold off, thinking that it was 'my turn' (or my shout?) next. (But please
do pile in!) S. Berg's remarks about the non-disclosure of various markers
of status (if I have understood this correctly) naturally sent me to the
list archives search engine, to have a skim through the 100 or so posts she
has made during the past 5 years on a variety of topics.
Those posts do show some interesting patterns, and a kind of anticipation
and openness to inter-personal communication, that would, I think, tend to
create place and space in which others could open themselves. That is a
valuable and not very common skill, similar to ones displayed - each in an
individual way - by some of the people whose departure I regretted above.
In terms of 'representing', or 'listening to', viewpoints of researchers,
or of disabled people, or of disabled researchers (or whatever) this list
does also have some limitations. I find no problem with 'personal' views
and experiences being aired here (which would be out of place in a
discussion of agricultural botany, or cellular biology). Yet it is apparent
that those expressing views and experiences on this list, during the past
ten years, have been a highly privileged and non-random minority, very
largely comprising anglophone adult 'westerners' with internet access. My
own studies lie almost entirely outside Europe and the Americas. The
disabled people in these studies are all dead, and express very few
opinions. (I'm not complaining about that). The proceedings of this list
are mostly peripheral to my studies, but the human process itself is still
interesting and informative. Most of the views expressed seem to be based
on constructs of personhood and individuality that are sharply different
from the lives and perceptions encountered in the cultural histories of
Asia, the Middle East and Africa; and the former display little if any
awareness of the latter. (That is perhaps a pity; but it belongs to a
different discussion).
m99m
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|
