Unit 1: History and Background
For Day 1 [Monday, April 27]
Please do these three things (in order!)
- Watch this 10-minute TED talk by the late Stella Young, called "I'm Not Your Inspiration, Thank You Very Much"
- Read these guidelines for writing about disability--their main audience is journalists, but nearly everything here is relevant to academic/class writing, too. (You can read as a PDF instead of a website, if you prefer.) This is published by the Center for Disability Rights, who describe themselves as led and managed primarily by people with disabilities.
- Post a response in this forum by noon on Monday, and review everyone else's responses before class (you will not be able to see other responses until you post your own). In your response, address the questions I've posed in the discussion (and add anything else you like).
Update/addendum: a couple more perspectives on "inspiration porn," in case you're curious (they all make roughly the same point but in some different ways):
For Day 2 [Tuesday, April 28]
In today's class, we'll spend some more time looking at the history of disability (we'll keep to pretty recent history in this class, and mostly looking at US/Western experiences of disability, though of course this is a topic with a long history and global relevance).
In preparation for class, another pair of audio and text.
- The audio is a 50-minute episode of the 99 Percent Invisible podcast called "Curb Cuts." Note that there are two accompanying texts: the article on the linked page and the verbatim transcript. The article is optional (the podcast contains more information, organized somewhat differently)--and if you prefer the transcript, you can absorb the podcast that way, but I recommend the listening experience.
- The reading is the chapter called "The Social Construction of Disability" (Chapter 2) from Susan Wendell's 1996 book The Rejected Body. A PDF of the whole book is also available (the reading begins on p 42 of the PDF). You're welcome to read more than just Chapter 2, of course. It's 21 pages, but give yourself time to read it carefully, maybe 40-60 minutes.
Depending on what kinds of classes you've taken before now, you might find the reading slightly heavy going. So what follows is a kind of reading guide; things for you to think about as you read that may help you get at the main ideas. Below the reading guide, I'll add some questions for you to address in the forum.
This was published in 1996; quite a while ago. As you read, keep two big questions in mind:
- how different is the world she describes from the world you've been living in the last few years?
- how does the pandemic relate to what she's discussing? what (if anything) of what she says is "more true" or "less true" in these times?
Between pp 35-6, what is the author's argument in this chapter going to be? (She wants to convince her readers of something--what?)
On pages 36-42, the author gives several ways to think about her argument; several kinds or categories of evidence. List them (as you encounter a new one, write it down); maybe write a sentence or two describing it. How convincing do you find each of these kinds of evidence? What disciplines is she drawing from for this evidence?
At various points, the author talks about the beliefs and abilities of the "young, non-disabled man." To the extent you identify with this (e.g. I'm pretty sure you're all what she considers "young," many of you are "men," and your survey suggests that most of you identify as non-disabled), is she accurately characterizing you?
In the author's presentation of evidence, what challenges/changes your perspective? (For example, I found the discussion on pp 40-1 about "help" and "creating ability" to be really eye-opening and amazing.)
Starting on p 42, the author distinguishes "social" and "cultural" but doesn't necessarily give a crystal clear definition of how "cultural" things are different from "social" things. Based on what she's looking at, can you offer a definition that helps you make sense of her distinction?
(The paragraph on p 44 about Donna Haraway is almost impossible to follow unless you've read the article she's talking about--don't worry about it!)
The author talks about herself periodically--how does that affect your response to, or engagement with, the writing?
Why does the author use the word "deconstruction"? What is she getting at?
As you read pp 46-7, think about this specific question: what challenges exist on the Alma College campus (remember that place?) for someone who is over 6'6"? Be creative!
Near the bottom of p 48, she quotes someone saying, "All the professors would want to be disabled." (The "professors" aren't really the point--it could as easily be "Everyone.") Why is someone saying that? Have you heard similar things said, either in this context or others?
Starting around p 50, the author starts talking about obstacles. Just as you did at the beginning of the chapter, list the obstacles as she names them. For each one, do you agree with the characterization as an "obstacle"? Is it still an obstacle? Do you agree that "we" should remove all these obstacles?
What is the author's vision of "a society without disabilities"? What is yours?
After you've reflected on both these pieces, answer the two questions in the forum. Do this by noon, so we have time to read each other's responses before class.
Forum Questions
Would the makers of "Curb Cuts" (including the people interviewed, the lead reporter, and the podcast hosts) agree with Wendell's basic argument about "the social construction of disability"? Identify at least three points in the podcast (you can cut 'n' paste from the transcript, if you like) that you believe show either agreement or disagreement with Wendell. Quote the text from Wendell, and explain why this shows agreement/disagreement. (It could be that you find some points in the podcast agree and others disagree; that's perfectly fine.)
Wendell sketches a pretty specific vision of a society without disabilities. You may or may not have thought before about what a society without disabilities would look like, but reflect on this now, using her vision as a starting point. How is your vision of a society with disabilities different from hers? Maybe you want "more," or maybe you want "less," or maybe you actually have a totally different vision. Her vision is obviously based on the argument and evidence she presents in the chapter. So, where your vision differs from hers, do you disagree with some part of her evidence/argument? Explain.
Lecture Slides (based on slides from Elizabeth Patitsas)
Team Activity (borrowed from Elizabeth Patitsas)
For the disability you're working with, address these questions
- How does society marginalize people with this disability?
- Why would somebody with this disability feel proud to have it?
- Why would somebody with this condition not think of themself as "disabled"?
- Why would somebody with this disability identify as disabled?
- How is this disability socially constructed?
- How does this disability intersect with other axes of identity?
If you want to consult the internet, do so; just be sure to record the web address of anything you find useful.
Blindness
Stuttering
Delayed Sleep Phase Disorder (DPSD)
Down Syndrome
For Day 3 [Wednesday, April 29]
In class, we'll watch a new documentary, Crip Camp,
together (I'll host it--it's also on Netflix if you prefer to watch that
way). To prepare, there's some listening and reading to do. Both of
these give a little bit of background both on the making of the
documentary and the events it shows and discusses—think of these as
really hefty trailers for the documentary.
- A 27-minute podcast, a discussion with the two directors of the documentary, via the WNYC podcast All of It.
- And a slightly more "academic" review (also available as a PDF) by Ignacio G. Galán, a professor of architecture. (probably a 20-30 minute read)
Annotation Activity
In this activity, you'll annotate Galán's review of Crip Camp. Think of the review as a somewhat lengthy, somewhat academic 'trailer' for the documentary, but also think about how it engages with the materials we've already looked at.
I strongly recommend you review (some of) the resources listed here (and please read the use of "Facebook" as "nifty communication resource" rather than "annoying outdated platform), especially this one (it's directed at people analyzing texts for literature classes, but the basic advice is totally relevant to us), before you start.
Make at least three kinds of annotations, with the respective tags:
recognize For ideas that we've already seen from Monday's and Tuesday's material. In your annotation, explain the way in which you think the highlighted text relates to other materials. Be specific!
new For ideas that feel new to you (maybe these are ideas that seem like they'll get fleshed out in the documentary, or maybe it's not clear). In your annotation, be specific about what the new idea is (as far as you're able). What's your best conjecture about what the text is getting at?
curious For things that make you curious to see (some part of) the documentary. In your annotation: why are you curious about this thing? Is there anything about the highlighted text that contributes to your curiosity?
You're not absolutely required to highlight text that no-one else has highlighted, but I do expect everyone to contribute new ideas. So if you annotate something that's already been annotated, be sure you're adding something to the discussion. (As discussed in the second link above.)
Unit 1 Wrapup
To "wrap up" this unit, I'm asking you to do two things. The first is to write a relatively brief reflection on the Unit. I've asked you to write little bits of stuff here and there, but now I'd like to write a short piece (at least 300 words, no more than 600) reflecting on your thinking during these few days. You can can certainly repeat ideas from your earlier responses, but aim to "tell the story" of what you've been thinking about during this unit. This could include things that were new to you, beliefs that you held last week that were challenged by this unit, things we've talked about that don't quite make sense to you. Whatever your story is. (If there are aspects of your story you'd prefer not to share with the class, you may email me instead, but I think it's valuable to be able to see how other people are thinking/responding; it's always interesting the way the same material can strike people so differently.) I also encourage you to read others' stories and reply to them, as you're moved.
And, as a way to get directly engaged with the question of "curb cuts" and the build environment, do a simple accessibility audit of some building nearby. Use this checklist
of common access issues in existing buildings, which highlights common issues and considerations.