Special Guest Post: Stop Harping On What We Can't Do And Start Thinking About Who We Are, by Rachel M.
Monday, August 23, 2010
I am a deaf woman. I was born deaf and I have lived my entire life as a deaf person in a world built by and for hearing people. Like most people of any type of disability, I have experienced abuse, discrimination, isolation, lack of information, and rejection. For as long as I have been able to read, I have used books to escape from all of it. At the age of 10, I discovered The Hobbit and I have been a devoted fan of the fantasy genre ever since.
Fantasy meets my needs for escapism in ways that no other genre can match; with gods and beasts, magic and absolute evil, and the titanic struggles of characters to hold on to themselves. Growing up, I often found a deeper connection to characters in the books I read than with actual people around me.
None of the characters I connected with were disabled.
Today, I make a practice of avoiding books that feature disabled characters. Often, how those characters think, feel, and react to the world around them rings false. They feel flat, hollow, and paper-thin, their stories too predictable, too boring. I'd rather enjoy stories about able-bodied heroes that feel real to life instead of reading underwhelming reiterations of a formula that is mistaken. This formula is deeply rooted in our culture’s narrative about what disability means, as defined by those who are not disabled. It is a privileged and myopic narrative, created by an able-bodied majority, and falls far short of reflecting the actual experience of disabled people.
The most crucial error the Able-bodied Narrative makes is the proposition that the disability is the most important and most interesting thing in that person’s life. IT IS NOT. That is not to say that our disabilities are inconsequential; our bodies have quite a big impact on how we live our lives. I am saying that OUR DISABILITIES DO NOT DEFINE US. Disability is but a part of our experience, not the totality.
Thinking of disabled people as being their disability ignores all the other things that make us fully realized and active human beings; our loves, desires, hobbies, thoughts, fears, hatreds, ambitions, and failures. It ignores the conflicts that have actual meaning to our lives and relationships—conflicts that contain within them the seeds of stories so much richer and deeper than the Able-bodied Narrative could ever allow for.
Instead, The Able-bodied Narrative defines people by their disabilities and results in stereotyped characters in predictable plots: the struggle to overcome our obvious suffering, the search for a cure or at least normalcy, and the inspiring greatness of the "Supercrip."
In the first sort of plot, the writer envisions a disability to be the worst thing to ever happen to that character, and must therefore be the most interesting thing about that character. This is a failure of imagination. What about poverty and unemployment? Abuse? Disempowerment and lack of agency? All of these are arguably more devastating than not being able to hear, or see, or walk a mile. Those listening to and writing the narrative are so focused on the “obvious” tragedy they miss the fact that most disabled people do not experience their disability as suffering. Our bodies are not abusing us. The only abuse we receive is from those who treat us as lesser beings. From those who see only a disability rather than a person with a disability.
The second plot follows from the first and concerns the search for a cure, and if that is unattainable, then the struggle to be “as normal as can be.” To the able-bodied perspective, this is only natural, right? For after all, how can anyone not want to be a part of society? And since it is obviously so impossible to be a part of society while disabled, then of course they’d want a cure! Well, that’s not really true, and it is actually kind of demeaning.
“Fix the defect” is a form of victim blaming. Except in this case, the victim is only a victim because others have said that he or she is. It is a label that is ascribed to us but which we never claim for ourselves. We do not experience ourselves as being victimized by our bodies. Our bodies do not beat us. Our bodies do not deny us employment. Our bodies don’t reject us when we seek opportunities to achieve our goals. We become victims only when others victimize us. No amount of fixing can erase that.
What we want is compassion, understanding, and respect. We want access to social structures such as entertainment, work, businesses, and transportation. We want the freedom to choose to use assistive devices or not as we will, without a moral imperative imposed upon us. Disabled people have more important and more interesting things to concern them than in fixing problems that really aren’t.
The third plot is also the most pervasive and most cherished in the Able-bodied Narrative, and the one that most bothers me. It has been dubbed the “Supercrip.” Supercrip is the “inspiring” and “amazing” disabled person who has “suffered” and “overcome” the “terrible limitations” of disability. Bitch magazine explains it thus:
Supercrip provides a way for non-disabled folks to be “inspired” by persons with disabilities without actually questioning—or making changes to—how persons with disabilities are treated in society.... Supercrip cannot just be human; she or he must be superhuman and surpass not only her/his disability, but the realms of “normal” human achievement. Supercrip allows some non-disabled folks to feel better about themselves; this is quite evident when it comes to statements like, “What an inspiration!”
In fiction, particularly fantasy, the Supercrip trope is interpreted in its literal sense—the disabled superhero, a la Daredevil, a blind man with super-sensitive hearing and touch that completely negated the effects his blindness and therefore of his experience as a blind man. It is a form of fixing and normalizes disability by rendering actual conflicts and difficulties of being disabled as irrelevant.
Conclusion
A few weeks ago, I shelved a long-time WIP due to intense dissatisfaction with the story I was crafting. I felt very disappointed and frustrated with myself for giving up so easily when it was only halfway done. But I just couldn’t get anywhere with it because I hated it so much. I couldn’t figure out exactly what I hated and what I needed to fix, so I boxed it for a later date.
It took writing this post to make me understand what I was doing wrong. I had created a character with a disability and then constructed a plot with all three forms of the Able-bodied Narrative at play: she suffered from an extreme form of color-blindness that made it impossible for her to perform the magic she was born to, she overcame that blindness by discovering the ability to sense the Power by touch, and thus became the only person in the world able to detect the demon eating away at the heart of existence, she then mastered her power and defeated the demon.
This character became the very essence of what I avoid reading. If I had encountered this character in someone else’s book, I would have dumped it in the trash. I didn’t even realize what I was writing. This narrative is so entrenched in our culture’s language it is invisible. All I knew was that my character felt completely false to me, the story I tried to build felt utterly flat. Which is exactly what the Able-bodied Narrative does to every piece of fiction that contains it—turns what culd have been an interesting character into a cardboard cut-out and devolves an entire story into able-bodied propaganda.
------------------
Further reading
From Feminists with Disabilities, an analysis on how the language of disability as suffering is oppressive
From Locus Magazine, an article about various manifestations of disability plots
Another fantasy reader writing about how disability is handled in fantasy specifically
My name is Rachel M. I am a struggling writer-type person and I have too many WIPs to count. I also occasionally blog at Rachel's Lessons Learned, where I write about things that don't matter to anyone but myself.
Love this. :)
Nicely done!
This was great. I can't agree with all of it (when I lost most of the use of my hands for a year there was nothing I wanted more than a cure) but I do find the "Supercrip" plot sounds awful, and awfully familiar.
Thanks, Rachel. I think what really struck home was your confession about your WIP. We all assimilate this shit - disability, race, gender, class - and sometimes it feels like you need a barn shovel so you can clear it away and tell the story that wants telling. Tho' now I'm curious what you're going to do next...
Supercrip also sums up my pet peeve about the So You Think You Can Dance tryout episodes.
I'd be interested to see a post on what the author thinks of People First language, too.
A fine, impassioned essay.
...the search for a cure or at least normalcy.
I like how this issue has come up lately with those with autism who rightly bristle when a cure is bandied about in such a way that says, “You can be like us. Wouldn’t that be GREAT?” (The X-Men mutant cure also addressed it, and of course there was “Children of a Lesser God,” which justly put such assumptions to rest.)
By the way, looking at your blog, I remembered your Writers Corner photo from a month ago. I remember checking out the gear and reading through your list, and not once did I notice that there weren’t any computer speakers or stereo. And you didn’t mention it, either.
That’s the way it should be - taken for who you are, with no need to explain.
I never thought of that particular plot in 'Supercrip' terms before . . . It certainly is pervasive.
Rachel,
So much to think about here--thanks for this.
I once read that the so-called "Able-bodied" should actually be called the Temporarily Able-Bodied (or TABs, for short!).
Time catches up with even the most "able" of us, something we TABs are prone to forget.
Thanks much for the thought-provoking post. And I like the TAB idea--it's so, so, so true.
Thanks, Rachel, for sharing. Great essay.
This may be the best post I've ever read on this blog (sorry, Le R.).
OMG, Joseph, THE WHOLE WEEK is going to be this great. We are sort of worried about how bored people will be when it goes back to being us.
Le R, I don't think you have anything to worry about there, but... yeah, this post is gilded in liquid awesome. Brilliant. Can't wait to read the other guest posts. :)
Thank you, Rachel!
A week of posts like this one sounds MOST PLEASING.
I grew up with a disabled sister, so I find a lot of the "inspiring tales" out there pure, unadulterated rubbish. There are some very awe inspiring tales. Yours is one of them. You don't use your disability as a way to say, "Hey, look at me! I'm special!" You use yours to say, "Hey, look at me! I'm a person!"
Thanks for posting this. It actually helped me understand my current WIP is going nowhere because of me writing some serious misconceptions that I personally despise other people foisting off on me...and here I am trying to browbeat readers into acknowledging them as The Truth.
*grin* (BTW, just found your blog, Rejectionist. All I can say is...WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE POINT ME THIS WAY SOONER? Awesome!)
I am disabled from birth too. Not profoundly but "moderately severe", enough so no aspect of my life is untouched.
I agree with the analysis of the existence of the three stereotypes of disability in literature (and in life). I too have seen these in multiple novels over the years (and watched people perpetuate them in real life too).
I disagree though with a lot here.
Like any stereotype there is a little bit of reality in each...some of my strengths as a person are clearly the result of my adaptations and general personality as shaped by my disability. Had I not grown up with it I would have develop different strengths/be a different person. So to dismiss the concept that people's "gifts" stems from their challenges is too superficial for me. I partly know this because other gifts of mine also are direct results of challenges/wounds in my life that are not tied to my disability. And I've seen the clear strengths and gifts of friends also have roots in their individual challenges.
While the stereotype of the supercrip does exist, I also have to say the many disabled people I know (in all senses of disability) are really freaking amazing. Yes, they have shadow sides, petty moments, whiny natures, learned helplessness and more...which would make us like everyone else...nevertheless I have seen an generalized ability of meta-awareness for lack of a better word. That to not get to 'coast' through life as able-bodied often does allow for a vision of how boundaries are often self-imposed and limiting. So many people live amazing lives of richness and a shiny grasp of life's core essences despite outward-appearing challenges.
Lastly, the idea that our disability doesn't define us. As I've said several times, each of these stereotypes exist yet...it's like a fish in water...it's not thinking that much about the water but nevertheless it's swimming in it all the time. No, I don't think about my disability to the degree the stereotype suggests nor does it define me solely. Yet, if it "does not define us (me)"...well, only to the degree that "who are our parents are do not define us" either or other central life experiences. Define no...profoundly shape or influence? I'm gonna say yes.
So the supercrip, the compensating strengths, and the centralness of disability in person/character's life and identity as the three stereotype...yep, they all exist.
BUT...to my experience and thoughts, any narrative which includes people with disabilities and keeps their characters and stories in the shallow end of the writing pool...it's bad writing. Period.
Thank you all, for your praise! I am very flattered. And thanks to leR for the platform.
Marisa: Like I said in the beginning of my post I am not saying that our disabilities are inconsequential to our life experiences, but are actually quite profound--and what I meant by not being defined by them is that our disabilities, however profound they are, are not the whole sum of who we are. There is so much more to us as people and how we live our lives than our disabilities--what we do, feel, accomplish, desire, we live REGARDLESS of the disability we have. What I have accomplished in my life--school, work, love and friendships, hobbies and art-- and all that I will henceforth accomplish, is not BECAUSE of or even in SPITE of, my deafness. Our disabilities, are as you said, the water in which we are suspended and breathe; it shapes us, but it is not us. That is what I mean by not being defined by disabilities.
The problem I attempted to highlight in this post is that all too often, people who are not disabled fixate on our disabilities as if it were the only thing that makes us interesting or if it were the only thing we cared about. That dismisses the actual essence of what makes us--abled and disabled--people.
I really liked this post. As an able-bodied person (temporarily able-bodied?), I'd honestly never given much thought to disabled characters in fiction.
Hi Rachel
Thanks so much for your thoughtful response to my comment. I totally get the point you make in the original post and in your response regarding your viewpoint of disability not being defining.
I'm just saying I disagree in how I view the same concept. I think my accomplishments are SPECIFICALLY defined by who I am, which encompasses my disability (and my family dynamics, my socio-economic status, my gender, my height, and so on and so on). I'm just saying it's not "in spite of" or "regardless" and so on. It's "because of" in my view.
I just think that's what makes for powerful writing... when an author gets that a character is all of these filters/layers/traits/experiences AT THE SAME TIME (which is part of your point, I know :)) then some cracker-jack story-telling can happen!
So I'm okay with novels that specifically include disability in a character and have aspects of the stereotypes of disabled characters. Because if the novel is well written and the character well realized... you've just done me a huge service.
Partly what's so effective about writing that is done well is the chance for all of us to "step out of" our own nature and temporarily visit other perspectives shaped differently by similar forces or even entirely by different forces (which is why I particularly enjoy science fiction and fantasy).
Anyone attempted to write a novel about a cheerleader recently? Kind of hard not grapple with the stereotypes in either rejection, embracing, going beyond, etc.
The greatest thing about when this is done well is that we might then "return" to our skin/lives with a slightly looser fit, allowing us to encompass a richer internal sense of diversity and forms of humanity.
So bad writing = unreflective stereotypes of disabled people (and others like gender, race, sexual orientation) and good writing = three-dimensional characters.
What I think is great about your post is your voice pointing out the stereotypes involved with disability. Speaking out with specifics against stereotypes (of all kinds) is so essential for humanity and for writers who have a special communication link straight into the minds of their readers.
Just FYI, what I'd like to call for is simply MORE novels and characters with disability. What I find more frustrating than any incorporation of stereotypes is the MYOPIA of authors to the sheer percentage of people who live with disabilities of one type or another and this is NOT reflected in any kind of realistic percentage in story-telling.
Hmm. I'm going to be thinking about this post for a long time.
I was born with genetic problems which caused painful but 'invisible' disabilities in my childhood and then became more visible in my teens. Then this led to that, blah blah blah, and I was 'disabled'-- even before I went blind.
I am lucky- with multiple surgeries and world class surgeons I am again partially sighted though they don't know how long the level of vision I have will last.
My multiple disabilities do not define me but I have to say that I think that- how do I put this- as someone else said bad writing is bad writing.
There are plenty of one-dimensional characters, able bodied or otherwise out there in every genre- 'people' who are defined by one major aspect of their personality. It's that way on TV and in movies too.
It's that way in schools where people take on the label of 'geek' or 'jock' or what have you.
A label is a label. I don't want to be labeled by anyone- there are so many to choose from but no single one defines me.
I also think that well written characters overcoming the trials of living daily with disability do have an important place in books- they might inspire someone who is struggling to cope with their own disabilities to keep working to see what they can achieve. In your case able bodied characters did that- but for especially a younger child perhaps, maybe knowing that they're not alone could be a comfort.
I would hope that our experiences as people living with physical challenges might make us just the right people to properly write a character that might just inspire someone in the end (though to date I have not really written much for a disabled character- other than a sub plot in an online sci-fi series about a family who actually opts not to have their daughter's deafness 'corrected'. Hmm. So I guess I have written about it!)
Sorry, I know this comment is long already but one more thing- you said "Our bodies do not deny us employment. Our bodies don’t reject us when we seek opportunities to achieve our goals."
I wanted to respond to that. Yeah, for some of us, our bodies do just that, every day.
For some of us it's our first (but definitely not our favorite) full time job every day to push and at the same time learn to respect the limitations our bodies put on us. That's not a free pass to sit life out and say 'poor me'. But it does just go to show that everyone's life experience, even among the disabled, is different.
~bru
I've given this a lot of thought. I've known people from every spectrum: born with their challenge, acquired through injury or illness, or, like me, currently losing an ability and facing the future.
Each experience shapes you. The way you see yourself before losing an ability (to see, hear, talk, even eat) and after changes dramatically if it happens after your self-image is formed.
I get the frustration of focusing on the "disability". I think it can be applied across the board to other cultures, sexual orientations, etc. But these things DO shape us.
I'm from Alabama. I've had my fill of the black kid who meets his or her potential because some benevolent white person can see past their own nose to reach out. That does not mean that growing up black in the Deep South has no bearing on your self-image or the strengths you develop as a result of the inherent challenges.
But I don't want to read one more story about how the poor black kid got plucked from the wreckage of black society to be saved by whitey, just like I don't want to read about the blind superhero who magically manifests the ability of echolocation to operate on equal footing with everyone else.
The trick, I think, is to write a character in lieu of a charicature. When we rely on the characteristics to define the MC, we lose the individuality.
Rachel, you are an awesome writer!
Rachel, Marisa, I was really glad to be able to read your exchange. I'm a cis writer with a trans protagonist in my WIP, and the same question of one particular thing "defining" a person is HUGE in the trans community. Should there even be a trans community at all? Or are there just men and women getting on with their lives... that kind of thing. Many trans people do want to just be "normal"--though often it seems to me they get worn out with having to explain.
I guess I have a whole new class of literature and stuff to read up on to give me other people's feelings about similar problems.
Thank you so much, for posting and commenting both.
Awesome post and it's great to meet Marisa, Rachel and read these wonder comments.
My mom was paralyzed from polio when I was a baby so for me it was a big surprise to realize every house didn't have a wheelchair ramp. I agree, her disability defined a lot of the details of her day and activities, but not her thoughts.
Recently I became acquainted with Kathie Snow and her DisabilityIsNatural.com website and People First language and think able-bodied persons would benefit applying such common sense to their own lives. :)
Great post! Awesome guest choice LeR! And yes we all love your posts - and what you promote.
I too am partially deaf. As I was growing up my hearing loss was treated as a half-lovable, half-annoying quirk amongst my family and friends. I don't know whether anyone thought of me as disabled, because no one treated me as though I was disabled.
But as my movement through the world has widened, I've gotten some painful first-hand glimpses of how people with disabilities are sometimes treated. I totally identified with this post, and it's alerted me to behavior I'm sometimes guilty of myself. Lots of food for thought. Thanks for writing it.
I really appreciate the conversation in the comments, here. I had some of Marisa's reaction as well, and it has been a pleasure to read the intelligent back and forth in the comments.
Reading all of this reminded me of an experience I had recently. I gave a talk to a church group, and within my talk I gave a description of the not-so-great parts of my childhood. I spent all of my teens and the first part of my twenties dealing with it, and once I'd dealt with it, I was quite happy to just let it sit on the road behind me, as I continue to walk away.
But, for the purposes of this church deal, I was willing to share my story. Afterwards, a very nice lady came up and said she had a cousin "who was a survivor, too."
And I really wanted to punch her in the face.
Because, really, she'd said Survivor, with a capitol S. And unless I've been on a hit reality show on CBS, I really don't want anyone to ever refer to me as a Survivor, with a capitol S.
Thing is, for many years, I internally called myself a survivor, and I considered it compliment. And then, at a certain point, it was language I stopped self-applying, because I realized it wasn't enough to survive, I wanted to thrive.
Labels are limiting, angering, frustrating things. But they are also often accurate. I was (and am) a survivor.
What made me want to punch that nice lady in the face was her presumption, even if she wasn't that far off. It's like she was guilty of bad writing. I don't think bad writing is limited to the page. Sometimes it crops up in real life, too.
Great discussion here. Definitely widening my awareness.
I'm just chiming in to say Christy Brown would love this post. I pulled his My Left Foot from the shelf last night, and while he surely didn’t portray himself as a supercrip, others seemed to want to make him just that.
People always thought it was a marvelous thing that I could paint with my toes and told me I was lucky, yes, quite a remarkable boy. But what difference did painting with my left foot make? What good was it saying I was remarkable? I didn’t want to be remarkable – I only wanted to be ordinary, like everyone else. I used my foot simply because I couldn’t use my hands, but it did not make me feel proud or unique.
Brava!!!
I think this is true of all non-majority characters. A character can't be gay or black or muslim, without being defined by that. I've been black my whole life, and I'd be exaggerating if I said even 1% of my existence centered around that fact.
Wow! Great post and discussion on a subject that doesn't get dealt with well by the general public. Or, it seems, in books.
Marisa, I agree with you that there is some truth in the stereotypes. I've met people with disabilities who let their disability define them, spend a lot of their energy looking/hoping for a cure (like Christopher Reeves and Michael J. Fox) and those who are "supercrips" (though I'd never heard that term). But there is always so much more to the person beyond the stereotype, and maybe the problem is that most characters in books don't make it to that point.
This is brilliant, Rachel, incredibly well-written and so much to think about here.
If I may address Jennifer H briefly, I think it should be noted that neither Reeves nor Fox was born with his disability, and a person's response to one acquired in adulthood after a perfectly "normal" life would be different from that of a person born with it.
I think it's great that Rachel has opened this subject to discussion because we can all learn so much from each other.
Post a Comment