Thanks to the COM352 students for contributing a bunch of new pages! I'll be moving these pages into the main area of the wiki soon.

From UMassWiki

Peer Review of Steph's first draft, by Phil

I have friends who communicate through voice-recognition systems, use wheelchairs to get around, and require personal assistance for a range of private, household, and work-related tasks. To look at me, one wouldn’t think I’m disabled and indeed, I do not meet the federal requirement of impairment of a major life function (Americans with Disabilities Act). Yet I had a repetitive motion, overuse injury that temporarily disabled me (for nearly two years), threatening my career as an American Sign Language/English interpreter, and increasing my appreciation for the skills and talents of survival and enrichment cultivated by persons with longer-lasting disabilities. I can understand why Janet, the protagonist in All Families are Psychotic, learned to tell by a glance who could deal with her daughter (born with one hand) and who could not – and dismissing those who couldn’t. For how long and how deeply will superficialities be the measure of human relating?

“Could you refill my water glass?” “Would you mind changing into scent-free clothing?” Where does one draw the line between a reasonable request and one that asks too much? How much courage does it take to ask for help in a society that prizes independence above all else? I’ve pondered and debated these questions with disabled friends and nondisabled allies, as well as with people in the Deaf community who consider that they are not disabled but rather members of a unique linguistic culture. (Connection with the idea of bodily superficiality: using the impaired body in useful ways that counter expectation.) Our very bodies – the ability to move, the parameters of range (space) and duration (time) – shape us as essentially as culture. Disability brings everything into question: aesthetics, potential, possibility…what is valuable if the body itself is constrained?

Body is not all, of course. There is also emotion, and mind. Shall we privilege one of these over the other? What if disability is cognitive, neurochemical, the result of addiction? Who draws the line, (This is a recurring question that can be connected with the ‘gray area’ created by questioining traditional ideas of ability vs disability.) where? Why? Foucault has traced the medicalization of the body, a discourse of pathology producing images of disease, implying visions of perfection. Pressure. Conform! Look beautiful; move gracefully. But I am flawed. Is it a crime to be aware? Only if you let others know. [What if it can’t be hidden?]

I have never consistently been able. I fail much more frequently than I succeed. I celebrate small triumphs with all the gusto of national championships. Why not?! The odd thing is that movement lends itself to speed, haste, rushing … things overlooked, (Breaking down typical understanding of stillness & movement, ability & disability.) cues missed, opportunities lost: wisdom becomes elusive. Stillness inspires depth. How much have I learned from my friends who contemplate the same visual horizons, or immerse themselves in the nuances of power in its most intimate manifestations? I lament how long it has taken me to learn to enjoy listening for its own sake!

Movement is not only physical. Growth often occurs unseen, with no outward evidence. Influence has an intangible trajectory. Power is not limited to physical strength, nor is it reducible to sheer endurance. Beads of sweat, infusions of affection, perceptive interventions in the small, still moments – such fruits of disability are offered to any who will simply s l o w d o w n.

Summary: You are breaking down traditional binaries here – manifested outwardly through the human body – and questioning the values assigned to these binaries. It is interesting that you connect the body with the mind by focusing on ability/disabilitye in context of both and how each can be viewed in a relative manner. I would maybe flesh out the theme of “Who draws the line?” and question if a line can even be drawn at all. I was a little confused at first by the jumping around from personal knowledge to ideas to Foucault – but I think this structure grabs the reader’s attention and forces he/she to think. I would maybe talk about independence in the context of moving beyond the binaries.