The Disability-Research Discussion List

Managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds

Help for DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives


DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Archives


DISABILITY-RESEARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Home

DISABILITY-RESEARCH Home

DISABILITY-RESEARCH  June 1999

DISABILITY-RESEARCH June 1999

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Dis. Texts

From:

David Mitchell <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

David Mitchell <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 20 Jun 1999 11:01:44 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (175 lines)

Dear Dona, Readers for composition courses pose all kinds of problems and
the ones you describe below are not surprising.  I usually avoid
composition readers all together and use my own course packet of readings
that I xerox and put on reserve in the library for my students to use.
However, I've responded to each of your queries below by placing an * (vs.
the >) in front of my comments.

At 01:06 AM 6/20/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Okay, all; new dilemma to ponder.  I just got the textbooks I am to use for
>1st-year Composition (freshman English, for the un-PC), and I was alternately
>appalled and excited by one chapter in particular.
>
>In this anthology (Janet Marting's *The Voice of Reflection: A Writer's
>Reader), Chapter 5 is called "Self-Portraits," and includes essays by Gloria
>Steinem (her adolescent chagrin at being fat and too-tall), Elizabeth
>MacDonald (on anorexia and the tyranny of slenderness), Joseph Epstein (on
>being a short male), Linda Ellerbee (on alcoholism), and Scott Russell Sanders
>(male heroes of the upper class, vs. broken bodies of the laborers).  So far,
>so good: makes for lively discussions of performativity,
>media-and-beauty-ideals, self-improvement vs. self-satisfaction.

*The one thing I'd be wary of in many of these essays is the way that they
have a tendency *to use physical differences as a platform for everything
but corporeal difference.  Because *disability studies has not yet become a
widespread paradigm of analysis most of these *writers will tend to
overlook this more germain analysis in exchange for the more
tried-and-*true such as gender, race, class, etc.  In fact, in some ways
I'd be just as alarmed at these *essays because they will have a tendency
to inadvertently stigmatize physical differences *in the process of
critiquing the ideologies that govern our perceptions of the other *categories.

>Now comes three essays IN A ROW, which, by their presence here with the
>others, and by the rhetoric they employ, make me verrrry uncomfortable--not
>only as to whether I should assign them or censor them (or both, which I will
>probably do), but as to HOW they will be dealt with by our corps of teaching
>assistants who--like many people--may be unaware of the harm these essays may
>enact, if taught without sensitivity to the social model of disability.
>
>LEONARD KRIEGEL uses phrases and images such as "surrender myself"
>(to polio), "absence," the monster of Dr. Frankenstein, "the contempt I felt
>for my own weakness," "badge of normality," and "shame."

*I've just written a critique of Kriegel's new book that argues about the
perversity of his *attachment to a bygone model of masculine
self-sufficiency and disabled singularity (I'll
*send this to you if you're interested in the development of this
critique).  But
*the encounter with one's own internalization of the culture's disgust for
disability is an
*important issue to take up and examine in a classroom.  In some ways
Kriegel is very
*useful because his writing is symptomatic of all kinds of cultural
prejudices that allow *students to interrogate his own psychologization.
It can also be a great lesson in    *helping students critique another
writer's affectations for embracing a perverse vocabulary of *self denigration.
>
>MATTHEW SOYSTER's essay is introduced with the editor's comment: ". . .the
>passion that once 'defined' him are gone and...confined to a wheelchair, he
>must search for other passions."  The author himself writes, "What disturbs me
>most [about MS] is not how others see me, but how I've lost my vision of
>myself."
>
*I like the writer's own description here but would use his more complex
version of himself
*to critique the editor's more conventional comment.  There is no antidote
in literature to
*the kind of political empowerment you may be looking for -- one wrestles
in writing with *one's own demons (usually of cultural making) and any
classroom discussion must aim to
*understand personal narrative as an expose of the ravages of the encounter
between *society and self.  All good writers are wedded to explaining this
dynamic -- and those who *don't address it directly can still be taught so
that students recognize what seems beyond *the ken of the narrator (I would
venture to say this example is most common and most *useful in teaching).

>JOHN UPDIKE's title is "At War with My Skin."  He writes about how psoriasis
>tends to "singl[e] you out from the happy herds of healthy, normal mankind. .
>. ."  And this: "self-examination is endless.  You are forced to the mirror,
>again and again; psoriasis compels narcissism, if we can suppose a Narcissus
>who did not like what he saw."  He uses "monstrosity," and "handicap [his
>abilities]," and refers to himself as "leper," and admits to wanting to "cure
>myself."  He says he "counted myself out of any. . .jobs. . .that demand being
>presentable."  But he found someone who could love him: "a comely female who
>forgave me my skin.

*Since Updike is first and foremost a satirist of middle class values it's
tricky to pin him *down on his own attitudes.  He tends to send up his own
fears and obsessions in order to
*get his readers to assess their own class-bound or gender-bound manias.
Last semester
*I paired Updike's piece on the male body with Atwood's essay on the female
body in order
*to demonstrate the gendered myths that they both attempt to expose without
having to say
*what they personally think about the situation.  They both parody widely
held assumptions
*about gendered bodies while telling stories from the point of view of
characters who don't
*understand the assumptions themselves.  This is a good way of involving
students in
*critical thinking because they have to provide the authorial commentary on
the meaning of
*the action events in their essays.
>
>Even the 'Questions for Discussion' bother me.  After Ellerbee's essay, we are
>to discuss her tone: "Is she angry? bitter? hateful? conciliatory? confused? .
>. .Do you think Ellerbee will stay sober?"  For Epstein's essay, we are asked:
>"Do you feel sympathy for Epstein['s being short]? Do you feel scorn and
>embarrassment for him?  Or is your reaction one of amusement?. . .Explain in
>what ways Epstein's dealing with his height is similar to or different from
>John Updike's reconciliation to having psoriasis or Leonard Kriegel's to
>having polio."  And for Soyster's writing, students are asked, "Do you think
>Soyster wants his readers' pity? sympathy? compassion?. . .Do you think
>Soyster's thinking is representative of most people when they become
>disabled?"

*Yes, I never rely on the editor to provide questions that my students and
I are better at
*developing.  They are almost always a deterent to good discussions
particularly in
*composition readers.
>
>The editor claims that these essays "provide unusual and powerful examinations
>of what it means to be physically challenged in a world designed primarily for
>people without restrictions."  Fine.

*Yeech!  I would ban students from reading the editor's insipid comments
and have them
*read the literature itself!

But then: "you will see something much
>different from self-absorbed or egocentric descriptions. . .You will be
>invited to witness epiphany: how the writers' understandings have taken shape.
>. . ."  Sorry, but I feel these writers have understood nothing but the
>medical, the individual loss, the tragic perspective on their "transformed
>vision" of themselves.
>
*Well, writing is not so much a solution but a platform for engaging in a
dialogue with your *students.  The point is to use writers to help students
recognize the complexity and myriad
*ways their own personal experiences provide materials for assessing larger
social contexts.

>So I put to you my position: Is there something I can do to ensure that some
>40 English MA students (generally) and  a handful of seasoned English
>profs treat this section with care?  I've thought of arranging an 'awareness
>session,' or an in-service training period--with someone like fellow-Arizonan
>Nancy Mairs as guest speaker.  Provided our department chair agrees that this
>section of the text is loaded with issues that need guided discussion.
>   At the very least, is there something I can do while teaching 22 students
>in my classes--short of spending ALL semester on this one power-pack of 8
>essays?

*Sounds like a great idea if you can get your department to go along with
it.  Or, the next
*best thing might be to discuss the problems in a GA meeting before or
during the *semester.  Finally, you might send some of the more interesting
comments from this forum
*around on e-mail to your fellow teachers to raise awareness of the problems.
*Good luck, David Mitchell.

>   Is there something I'm overlooking...do you all agree that this selection
>of essays seems warped?  I'm *thrilled* to see disability make an appearance
>in an English text... but perhaps THIS representation does more harm than
>good?
>
>    Apologies for the length of *this* essay; I get rattled, therefore I
>write.
>
>Dona



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager