Representations of Disability, History of

Author(s):  
Jane Buckingham

Historical analyses, as well as more contemporary examples of disability and work, show that the experience of disability is always culturally and historically mediated, but that class—in the sense of economic status—plays a major role in the way impairment is experienced as disabling. Although there is little published on disability history in India, the history of the Indian experience of caste disability demonstrates the centrality of work in the social and economic expression of stigma and marginalization. An Indian perspective supports the challenge to the dominant Western view that modern concepts of disability have their origins in the Industrial Revolution. Linkage between disability, incapacity to work, and low socioeconomic status are evident in India, which did not undergo the workplace changes associated with industrialization in the West.


2015 ◽  
pp. 108-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aimi Hamraie

In this article, I argue for historical epistemology as a methodology for critical disability studies (DS) by examining Foucault’s archaeology of cure in History of Madness. Although the moral, medical, and social models of disability frame disability history as an advancement upon moral and medical authority and a replacement of it by sociopolitical knowledge, I argue that the more comprehensive frame in which these models circulate—the “models framework”—requires the more nuanced approach that historical epistemology offers. In particular, the models framework requires greater use of epistemology as an analytical tool for understanding the historical construction of disability. Thus, I turn to Foucault’s History of Madness in order to both excavate one particular archaeological strand in the text—the archaeology of cure—and to demonstrate how this narrative disrupts some of the key assumptions of the models framework, challenging DS to consider the epistemological force of non-medical fields of knowledge for framing disability and procedures for its cure and elimination. I conclude by arguing that DS must develop historical epistemological methodologies that are sensitive to the complex overlays of moral, medical, and social knowledge, as well as attend to the social construction of scientific and biomedical knowledge itself.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Jenifer L. Barclay

This chapter introduces the ways that The Mark of Slavery moves between experiences of disability in everyday enslaved life and the discursive relationship between racism and ableism forged in antebellum medicine, law, politics, and popular culture. The “new” disability history and, in particular, this field’s use of a social (as opposed to a medical) model of disability is central to the project of writing a disability history of slavery. Disability’s power to stigmatize derived from its relationship to abnormality and its ability to rationalize inequality hinged on one’s real or imagined proximity to it. As disability intertwined with the broader metalanguage of race in the antebellum years, it minimized or amplified specific qualities imagined as innate to whiteness or blackness, racializing and delimiting “normal” bodies.


Author(s):  
Richard Sandell ◽  
Jocelyn Dodd ◽  
Ceri Jones

Because of the determined efforts of disability activists, public historians, and other scholars, the hidden history of disabled people is emerging in the public sphere. Although museums and other cultural institutions hold wide-ranging material in their collections that links to the lives of disabled people, its significance is often underresearched and poorly understood. Although disabled people desire greater visibility, like other groups who have been marginalized or misrepresented, they also want to be involved in the process and empowered to make decisions about their representation. Drawing on insights from research and experimental practice, we suggest that the idea of the “trading zone,” the creation of a space of exchange for collaborative and equitable dialogue, provides a way forward for disabled people to make their voices heard in the museum and for museum staff to confront and develop new ways of incorporating disability history into their collections and displays.


Author(s):  
Heather Battles ◽  
Rebecca Gilmour

Epidemics and pandemics are typically discussed in terms of morbidity and mortality, susceptibility and immunity, and social responses to and impacts of the immediate epidemic event. Much less attention is paid to the longer-term consequences for individuals and populations in terms of the sequelae of infections, such as blindness after smallpox, deafness due to congenital rubella, and paralysis after polio. This same tendency is observed in the COVID-19 pandemic, with counts of cases and deaths, questions of immunity, and economic impacts at the foreground and long-term or chronic health impairment of COVID-19 survivors receiving less attention. Much of the existing research on the effects of such disease sequelae has come from disability history; in addition, the bioarchaeology of impairment/disability is an emerging area of research that can contribute insight into experiences of disease consequences. In this article, we give an overview of published work on survivors of infectious disease using both bioarchaeology and disability history. Using the example of post-polio paralysis, we propose a theoretical approach to the bioarchaeological study of infectious disease that is inclusive of the history of impairment and disability, which we refer to as a survivor lens. We structure this discussion through scaffolded questions that move through multiple levels of analysis: from the individual and relational to the drivers of cultural change. We argue that bioarchaeological research on past epidemics and pandemics that attends to morbidity and lasting impairment and disability can contribute to wider conversations about infectious disease and disability in the past and present.   En général, les épidémies et les pandémies sont considérées en termes de morbidité et de mortalité, de susceptibilité et d’immunité, et de réponses sociales et d’impacts immédiats de l’événement épidémique. Moins d’attention est accordée aux conséquences à long terme pour les individus et les populations en termes de séquelles d’infections, telles que la cécité après la variole, la surdité due à la rubéole congénitale et la paralysie après la polio. Cette même tendance est observée lors de la pandémie de COVID-19. Il y a moins d’attention accordée au nombre de cas et de décès, aux questions d’immunité et d’impacts économiques au premier plan, et aux problèmes de santé à long terme ou chroniques des survivants de COVID-19 reçoivent. Une grande partie de la recherche existante sur les effets de ces séquelles de la maladie provient de la recherche sur les déficiences/handicaps. De plus, la bioarchéologie de la déficience/handicap est un domaine de recherche émergent qui peut contribuer à mieux comprendre les expériences des conséquences de maladie. Dans cet article, nous donnons un aperçu des travaux publiés sur les survivants de maladies infectieuses en utilisant à la fois la bioarchéologie et l’histoire du handicap. En utilisant l’exemple de la paralysie post-polio, nous proposons une approche théorique de l’étude bioarchéologique des maladies infectieuses qui inclut l’histoire de la déficience/handicap, que nous appelons une lentille de survivant. Nous structurons cette discussion à travers des questions échafaudées qui traversent de multiples niveaux d’analyse: de l’individu au relationnel, jusqu’au aux changements culturels. Nous soutenons que la recherche bioarchéologique sur les épidémies et pandémies historiques qui examine la morbidité et le handicap peut contribuer à des conversations plus larges sur les maladies infectieuses et le handicap au passé ainsi qu’au présent.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document