This week you will choose your own topic for the blog, working with the expectations of the assignment. The blog post must in some way address the ideas, materials, and discussions of our course, and in particular the study of life narratives. For example, it could:
- Take up an aspect of one of our readings that you don’t understand, or that you find problematic, or that you find particularly useful, and explore why;
- Raise one or two insightful new questions about what we’re reading and then explore your own questions;
- Take up another student’s post or comment in class as your own launching point (build on, rethink, develop the original’s ideas)
- Bring in new material (website, video, news story, image, etc., all properly attributed) relevant to our current discussions, and connect it to the scholars and writers we’re studying.
- Connect what we’re doing in ASTU 100A to a concept, issue, or discussion in another of your CAP classes.
What might that look like? Here are some starting points, if you are stuck:
- Take one of the recommended readings from Smith and Watson (see course schedule) and work with that concept in relation to Cockeyed, or another life narrative we’ve studied or that you’ve read.
- Look ahead to the blogs & videos I’ve asked you to look at for Tuesday’s class and write about them (I’ll post these separately).
- Apply Couser (or Whitlock, or another scholar we’ve read) to other life narratives, beyond our reading list. Take up an issue or the scholar discusses and use it to think about a new research site. Or connect one of our scholars to other scholarly and popular conversations.
- Consider representations of disability (or, taking a page from Whitlock, of subjects from the Middle East).
- Put 2 or more of the life narratives we’ve read so far into conversation: what do we learn about by looking at these texts together?
- Find new instances of life narratives working in the world: for example, how are US political campaigns using their candidate’s life narrative as a form of political rhetoric? Note that Hillary Clinton is featured on Humans of New York (and I don’t think Trump is, interestingly).
Posts are due Monday and comments Tuesday @ 9:30.
I really enjoyed reading Merial’s blog. Her elaboration of the rhetoric of emancipation in disability memoirs such as Cockeyed was expressed very nicely. She expanded on this abstraction (or mid level detail) by using memorable instances (low level details) of Knighton’s life in Cockeyed such as the time he didn’t get mugged because of his blindness – he felt it took his ‘dignity’. By doing this, Merial made my understanding of the rhetoric of emancipation clearer and opened my eyes to potential scenes where I could’ve applied this rhetoric. The message from Cockeyed that Meiral pointed out – ‘being blind does not mean he (Knighton) is unable to defend himself’ – allowed me to look at the mugging scene in Cockeyed with a different, more scholarly like perspective.
A few of the blogs I read focused on looking disabled. When reading these posts, Cockeyed and “but you don’t look disabled” I was intreged by several things. First Ryan knighton doesn’t want to look disabled at first but Juillayna Adamson says she found “pride” in being disabled and was offended when someone said she didn’t look disabled (granted the man did not say it in the best way). Also I am wondering what someone who does look disabled in the severe stereotypical way thinks about non disabled people’s reactions to them. I was also struck by the beauty standard Adamson discusses. Is it because there is something “wrong” with disabled people that makes them not beautiful? beauty standards critisize things beyond disability too. It makes me wonder, how, as a society we have come to view things this way? On a final note how does the beauty standard as it relate to disability, differ across cultures?
I found the way that Alex Chow integrated Sociological concepts into his understanding of Cockeyed very interesting. Through looking at Knighton’s life narrative in the context of sociology some of the unusual ways that Knighton reacts to his experience of going blind begin to make sense. As Alex highlights much of Cockeyed focuses on the way society interprets the “I” and the “Me”. Originally after reading the mugging scene I was confused. I wondered why Knighton would have wished to have been mugged. However, as Alex points out Knighton’s “I” wanted to be seen as different from how society’s “Me” perceives disabled as weak. Overall, Alex’s blog incorporated sociology into the study of life narratives in such a way that I was better able to understand the text.
Having read the articles for tomorrow, watching the interview, and now reading several blog posts, I’ve come to a far clearer understanding of the importance of applying the work we have been doing to a wider array of topics. Sociology especially appeared to coincide well with discussions of how disability is addressed. Alex Chow did a wonderful job of taking a specific sociological concept and applying it to disability memoir. Another similarity (which I did not find any blogs to be talking about, but I didn’t read every blog) was how advertising plays a role in both what Stella Young is talking about with disability and in what we are discussing with gender roles in sociology. The pieces I read varied in content and in the angles they were approached. Overall I felt that I was left with more questions than answers after reading these posts, which I believe reflects on their success in addressing issues that matter within the content we have studied so far in the year.
One common observation I notice that transcends the various blogs posts includes the reception of disabled people. Anna’s blogs presents a very interesting perspective that society seems to hold of people with “invisible disabilities”. Society seems to hold the idea that unless you have a physical disability that inhibits your mobility, your setbacks are only products of an individual’s determination or attitude. Anna identifies the different situations in which Ryan Knighton wishes people would recognize his disability, as it provides him with needed accommodation. With this idea in mind, how do remove the stigmas and expectations we have of the disabled so that it ensures all people are properly supported? Is it a question of media representation and its accuracy? Reading both class blog posts, as well as the readings and articles for class gives me a new perspective on the challenges people face everyday in society, one that is easily missed.
The following are my blog comments on the indicated people’s blogs (also posted on their blogs):
Gabriela Santana Ufret
I like how you mentioned that their life narratives don’t at all try to use statistics or any sort of numerical data to represent the struggle of their oppressed group. That instead they use their story to show the struggle and the significance. But, in a way their stories are like statistics. They can be just as, or even more, mind-blowing to the reader. The point of statistics is to show the numerical data and usually, it is used to show just how mind-blowing some facts can be. And these life narratives are meant to do the same thing but instead it focuses on the one being and their story and that is more than enough to show the struggle.
Maya Dong
After reading your blog it very much reminded me of a stand-up comedian named Bo Burnham. In his new comedy special “Make Happy” he thinks that everyone is a performer. He says that: “social media is just the market’s answer to a generation that demanded to perform. So the market said, ‘here perform everything to each other all the time for no reason.’” We sometimes do forget what we are doing. It has become so natural that we don’t see it as anything more. We don’t think of it as ‘performing’ or how Maya said: “a platform for the public to publish.”
Riva Siddiqui (was not able to post on blog)
After reading Riva’s blog post, I begin to wonder if the stories of the life narratives are truthful. According to Mead, we present ourselves in a manner that we like and that others will be attracted to. So if writers of life narratives were to also write in such a way, to project a certain ‘self,’ maybe not the real self, it causes me to question the integrity of the story.
After reading and watching the links on disability, that focused on DiSilva and a couple others out looks on disability. In the second half of Selena’s blog she focuses on how Knighton and Adamson both are seen as “non-disabled” by society, this brought up the interesting fact that we as society expect disability to show in some abnormal physical way. In Elena’s blog, she brings a similar point about how DiSilva suggests a sort of “invisibility factor” as a way that those in the USA ignore the disabled, in a way shutting out and ignoring the problem. They both point out the issues with how all disabilities are put into one group this can create misconceptions and cause either overcompensation or under compensation for the needs of the individual. These two blogs encourage me to think about my views of disability and how society has conditioned me to think of it as a problem or burden that should be ignored.
Through Yaoyao Pei’s blog, I noticed a detail about Cockeyed, I had not paid attention to while reading the life narrative. In her blog she points out, how often people would question Tracy about what Knighton wanted to do instead of Knighton himself. She explained how the “disabled” individuals are not viewed as part of the “normative” society, but rather are awkwardly treated. The discussion of counterhegemonic potential is clearly explained though the different views present in the blog through Knighton and Mercer, regarding societies awkwardness towards the addressing of marginalized groups.
I noticed that the topic of disability showed up in a lot of the blog posts. In Alex Chow and Riva’s posts both talk about Mead’s “Self”, with the “I” and “Me” in explaining how Knighton was viewed as a disabled person in Cockeyed.
Furthermore, Anna Colpitt’s blog on the invisible disabilities can be linked to the Mead’s “Self” in a way how Knighton’s cane represents his “invisible disability”. The cane makes people around him know that he has a disability and thus, is how society views him, just like how Adamson’s “But You Don’t Look Disabled” article talks about how the hearing aid made people see her differently.
Riva’s post talks about the struggle in self-identity Knighton wants his audience to see him as compared to how he actually is. This is related to Mead’s theory of the “Self” in a way that it is how the individual can be viewed differently from how they portray themselves and how they actually are. This raises the question of authenticity since they are trying to appeal to the audience.
I found that I agreed strongly with Merial’s realization that I had never experienced the perspective of a disabled person before these readings. It can be one thing to try to consider their perspective independently, however experiencing it through their eyes changes ones mindset quite drastically. As Merial stated, there needs to be a change in the way society perceives these individuals. Thankfully through the work of disabled authors and activists more focus and awareness is being brought to the issue.
I read Gurneet’s and Alex R’s blog posts, which were both about Cockeyed, like mine. I appreciated the different positions they took even though all three of our posts proved Ryan Knighton’s writing to defy social stigmas. Gurneet expanded on the expected physical appearance of what it means to be “disabled”–ugly–and how Knighton and other disabled people may be overlooked based on that. It revealed to me that the term “disabled” is often coupled with “mishapen,” which is a negative connotation that reinforces social construct. It also got me to think about the disabled person’s experience relative to his/her appearance. Does a disfigured disabled person suffer more than a “normal”-looking disabled person? That isn’t for me to judge. Alex R’s main idea further elaborated on Knighton’s ability to extend his disability memoir beyond the social stigma. She explains how his approach is to “drag” the readers away from viewing his blindness as a deformity, as commonly seen in disability, from the get-go. As a result, his audience doesn’t pity him but rather, connects with him as a human being. She also pointed out how Knighton had to adapt as he grew up with blindness, which reminded me of my own struggle with chronic illness. Personally, I can connect with Knighton’s desire to be seen as a human being–just a human being dealing with blindness. It appears in his methodology of connecting with the audience, he successfully removes the label of blindness as the mark of an identifying disease, but rather discusses as a part of his life experience. I too, have that wish.
After reading a few blogs I noticed multiple posts mentioned the idea of society’s views on disability. In general, people around the world tend to view disabled people as a marginalized group – even to the point where certain members of society feel as if disabled people are inferior. Elena mentions the “invisibility factor” brought up in Jason DaSilva’s interview with The Vancouver Sun; this raised a question to me of whether it is worse to ignore disability in public (the “invisibility factor,” as Jason DaSilva puts it) or to stare at a disabled person, segregating them because they are “different”? For me, I would not like to choose between either of those actions when encountering someone that is clearly disabled, as I am sure it would make both parties uncomfortable. Rather, I agree with the Natasha on how societal views of disabled persons should be changed so that people have a more accepting view of disabilities.
I like that Gabi mentioned in her blog post how effective personal stories can be for transferring knowledge within society. She discusses how life narratives do not demand that readers see the facts of the challenges the narrators are facing, but instead feel the experience of those challenges. It is powerful to imagine being in the shoes of the disabled when you read their personal accounts of their life. Though Couser’s work highlights the aspects of disability narrative in an academic context, there is no emotional aspect to the work, which does not agree with the human tendency to gravitate towards feeling. Though life narratives create a connection with the audience by “humanizing” concepts discussed in academic papers, at the same time we must question the legitimacy of those narratives. As Yaoyao mentioned in her blog, we cannot fall for stories developed for the drama and “happily ever after” of the Hollywood experience. When I think back to movies I have watched that focus on disability like Forrest Gump and I Am Sam, I see how the “triumph over adversity rhetoric” mentioned by Couser is constantly used to present disability as an obstacle. Both Gabi and Yaoyao remind us that the humanity that reverberates through books and movies must be examined carefully because by connecting with the audience at an emotional level, they wield tremendous power but may lack authenticity. So the question that is raised is:
What is the better way to present knowledge and experience: through personal accounts that can become skewed as the narrator becomes fixated on “selling” the product, or academic papers that do not develop connections with the reader?
In her blog, Natasha notes the continuing system in place that discriminates against people who are disabled. I agree with this idea that people who are disabled have continued to stereotyped and ignored. Because of this the importance of life narratives by writers who are disabled is critical to the transformation of the way in which disability is seen by society. Some might say that the growth of social media could lead to a development in the treatment of people who are disabled, because of a greater access to life narratives by disabled people. Maya’s blog challenges this notion and argues that social media is a platform which consists of manipulated life narratives that might not be entirely genuine. If this is true, social media might not be revolutionary to the way that disabled people are viewed by public, thus maintaining the current unfair system that is in place.
iiu reall
Nicole raises an interesting question in her blog regarding the amount and type of humour that Knighton uses in his writing- does his humour perpetuate the stigma towards disabled people? She makes a good point in saying his humour “normalize[s] his disability”. I mostly agree with Nicole in that he uses his humour to help readers understand that he is “a normal guy”. This can be connected to Gabi’s blog where she talks about whether or not “life narratives are the most effective method of addressing girl’s education…and the treatment of individuals with disability”. Essentially, addressing issues in general through life narratives. A life narrative is more or less going to be written in the way a writer chooses to, so it will reflect the points and events they wish to share. In terms of Knighton’s humour, then as Nicole says it demonstrates his personality. Not all narratives are written with the sole purpose of calling direct attention to a particular issue, although it may include it, some people just want to share their story, which some will find inspiration in. I suppose with life narratives the question to be asked is whether they are written for the writer or the reader? Obviously published books are written to be read, but once again as Nicole showcases in her post, Knighton’s humour is not fully accepted by all, but reflects his personality. Therefore, he does not care as much to cater to an audience, but writes in a way that reveals himself and the same can be said for many other writers.
I really enjoyed reading Anna Colpitts’s blog about invisible disability. Her blog compares the public treatment of people with invisible disabilities versus people with visible disabilities. It was very interesting the point she made about people with invisible disabilities and how they face resentment from the public for using handicapped privileges when they have no obvious limitations. She also discussed how people also with invisible disabilities are sometimes questioned by strangers in public for using handicapped privileges because they don’t have a wheelchair or something just as obvious.