Zachary Welsh’s Thoughts on Readings for 4/15/2021

Two readings from today that really stood out to me were Don’t Mourn For Us by Jim Sinclair and Apologies to my OB-GYN by Rebecca Foust. Specifically, the the relationships between disabilities and society that is seen within the two pieces. With his piece, Sinclair portrays to readers how society influences the way in which a parent. reacts to their child being diagnosed with. autism. He mentions that oftentimes parents see their kid being diagnosed as autistic as some king of “great. tragedy” but then immediately. follows that up with. saying that the parents are more upset by the idea of not having what society would consider to be a “normal” child than their kid actually being autistic. This ferocious follow up allows Sinclair to paint to readers, an image that society molds the way an individual reacts to receiving a diagnosis. Sinclair further develops this idea by saying that. autism is “not an appendage,” it is “not a impenetrable wall,” and it is not “death.” Sinclair mentions that to view autism as a sort of “shell” that a person wears, is to essentially wish that the autistic child they have did not exist, and that they had a different, non-autistic child instead.

With her poem, Rebecca Foust touches on the pressures that society forces the families of disabled individuals to face. Specifically, Foust does so by having a mother apologize for and address the ways in which her physically disabled newborn son creates issues for the abled bodied individuals around them. The first example of this is seen in the very first stanza when Foust states “sorry that my boy birthed himself too early,” something that no mother should feel the need to apologize for, yet due to the increasing pressures of society, this mother feels obliged to apologize for it. Another example is seen in the opening lines of the second stanza when she states “sorry we were such pains in your ass asking you to answer our night calls like that.” This is yet again something that no individual should feel the need to apologize for (I mean after all answering calls regardless of the time is part of the nurses’ job) and yet, this mother feels the need to. I would. argue that the most telling line of the poem comes near the end of the poem when our speaker says “sorry he took so much of your time / being so determined to live.” Here Foust essentially speaks on the entire point of this poem, that these individuals are in a fight for their lives and society is doing nothing to help but make them feel pressured and like some sort of inconvenience.

I’m interested in what you guys thought of the readings or if you interpreted them in a different way than I did so feel free to leave your comments below!

Salem Smith, MPP – Nothing About Us, Without Us

To Kill a Mockingbird takes place in the 1930s southern US, an era of eugenics and Jim Crow laws. While the story is one of tragedy and injustice, it is told from the perspective of a young white girl, who is personally unaffected by these oppressive complexes. This prioritization of white, abled, and wealthy perspectives or interpretations dilutes the logos of the narrative. To Kill a Mockingbird and other memoirs like it are disability and Black trauma pornography that serve to invoke the sympathy, and assert the lack of culbability, of white abled readers, while doing none of the same for Black disabled readers.  

This story is told exclusively from the perspective of Scout Finch, between the ages of 5 and 9. Harper Lee, the author, is also a white woman, and is likely the real voice behind Scout, referring to her own childhood in the south. Scout, while being a strong-willed and outspoken youngster, is still a white perspective, and a limited one at that. Scout and her brother Jem, are only friends with other young white children, like Dill, Cecil, or Walter. Most of the adults in her life are white, with the exception of their nanny, Calpurnia. Even when she reacts to racist sentiments, it’s to distinguish her father as an (white) individual separate from the Black clients he defends. While Scout is being raised to stand in solidarity with those less fortunate than her, her father never interrogates whiteness with his children, only moral platitudes of fairness or non-violence. From chapter 9, 

“ ‘If you shouldn’t be defendin’ him, then why are you doin’ it?” 

‘For a number of reasons,’ said Atticus. ‘The main one is, if I didn’t I couldn’t hold up my head in town, I couldn’t represent this county in the legislature, I couldn’t even tell you or Jem not to do something again.’ 

In Atticus’ own words, defending Tom Robinson’s hopeless case is a matter of personal reputation, of upholding his own excellent defense record. He doesn’t ask Scout to empathize with the Robinson family, or to consider the real reasons behind being “licked a hundred years before we started.” Rather, he continues;
“…we’re fighting our friends. But remember this, no matter how bitter things get, they’re still our friends and this is still our home.” 

Scout is, of course, about 6 years old during this conversation. But what sort of conversations should we expect people in Tom Robinson’s situation to have with their own children? Certainly not that everyone is still friends, or that Maycomb is still home. This teaching solidifies for Scout that 1) the Finch family is still white, no matter who Atticus represents, 2) cases like Tom Robinson’s are practically inconsequential since the outcome is obvious. Some other implications tied in may be that Atticus is the main subject of the case, that others’ perception matters more than being equitable. These are the priorities, to defend white reputations of modesty or class rather than to renounce hateful racist rhetoric and white privilege. 

Another way that this story prioritizes whiteness is that the Black population of Maycomb hardly ever directly speaks on their pain. Lee expresses certain tensions, undertones of Jim Crow laws, but throughout the whole book, no Black person actually speaks the full truth of their pain over Tom Robinson’s trial. Given that this story is told from the perspective of a white child, it’s easy to explain away Scout’s limited view. The issue is that not only does the novel lack these candid, agonizing moments; instead we have just as many reminders that despite being children, they are still treated as better than Black adults. When Jem and Scout visit Calpurnia’s church in chapter 12, their entrance is a show-stopper.

 “When they saw Jem and me with Calpurnia, the men stepped back and took off their hats; the women crossed their arms at their waists, weekday gestures of respectful attention. They parted and made a small pathway to the church door for us.” 

It becomes clear that some want the Finch children to leave, but the majority are excited to have them, to give them “respectful attention.” During Tom Robinson’s trial, four unknown Black attendees voluntarily give up their front row seats for Jem, Scout and Dill. Later on during the trial, Reverend Sykes begs the children to leave, worried about what their father might say, and yet Jem, at only 12 years old, has enough authority to refuse the request. Interactions like these are commonplace, routine, and unquestioned by everyone in the room, and those who disagree are shunned and excluded. Whether out of compassion and understanding for two white children who have yet to comprehend the full sin of racism, or fear of retaliation from white adults, there is no widely shared discomfort with this intrusion upon Black spaces. The Black adults here are portrayed as welcoming, genial, loving, and ironically, color-blind. Even when Tom’s case is lost, despite Atticus’ attitude of resignation, the Black community comes down on the Finch household in droves, with whatever they could get their hands on to express their appreciation. Atticus doesn’t refuse their offerings, even though he immediately acknowledges what an expense this must have been. Throughout the rest of the novel, the Black community of Maycomb is invisible. Culminating with Tom’s eventual murder, the issue of anti-Blackness is neatly wrapped up. As Atticus puts it, 

“We know all men are not created equal in the sense some people would have us believe…some people are born gifted beyond the normal scope of most men.” 

And what this statement does, in line with the ultimate conviction, is re-establish that white supremacy is an undeniable truth. To Atticus, and to the white people of Maycomb, no matter how Black people suffer, it will always be this way and it should, because Black people simply were not made equal. This acceptance of the status quo, this maintenance of privilege, solidifies that To Kill a Mockingbird is a story for white readers, despite what other loosely held sentiments may be thrown in for good measure. 

In much the same way that the Finchs’ racism is unbeknownst to them, it is inconceivable that a disabled person like Boo Radley could have his own personal narrative. Boo is immediately characterized as an oddity, a recluse with violent tendencies. As the novel progresses, and his character slowly opens, almost agonizingly, it becomes clear that Boo Radley’s circumstances are not his own doing. The argument of nature versus nurture is sure to have been beaten to death in the gossip circles of Maycomb, when it comes to Boo Radley. Yet, unlike Tom Robinson, Boo Radley’s circumstances are not seen as incontestable. From Calpurnia, we know that Mr. Radley, Sr was the “meanest man God ever blew breath into,” and from Ms. Maudie Atkinson, “but sometimes the Bible in the hand of one man is worse than a whiskey bottle in the hand of-” 

The people of Maycomb are aware of what sort of abuse goes on in the Radley household, but don’t see any pressing need to intervene. They pity Boo Radley, and speak sympathetically to his situation, because it is a natural fact to them that Boo Radley deserved better treatment than he received from his father. As true as this statement is, the closest thing we have to direct characterization of Boo at this point in the novel is that, in his younger days, according to Ms. Maudie, “…He always spoke nicely to me, no matter what folks said he did.” But who is Boo Radley now, more than 30 years later? What chances has he had to tell his own truth?

The answer to this, is sadly, none. Arthur Radley, like many neuro- or physically diverse people, has a narrative of violence, inhumanity, and pure evil placed upon him. It is only through Scout and Jem’s companionship that Boo Radley is rehumanized, instead of through his own words or explicit feelings. Boo’s only line in the entire story comes from the last chapter, as he timidly asks 8 year old Scout to walk him home. Despite this clear evidence of his affection for the Finch children, as he gently caresses an unconscious Jem, or humors his vertically-challenged walking partner, he is not expanded upon or revisited after this passage. Scout recalls, “Atticus was right. One time he said you never really know a man until you stand in his shoes and walk around in them.” And yet, Scout isn’t really walking around in them; she’s reshaping Boo’s narrative into one that works for her. Where she had earlier acknowledged that she and Jem hadn’t done much of anything to reciprocate Boo Radley’s friendship, she then turns to create a romanticized ideal of the isolation Boo has experienced. 

In their book, Cultural Locations of Disability, Sharon L. Snyder and David T. Mitchell posits the following; “Even in the face of benign rhetoric about disabled people’s best interests, these locations of disability have resulted in treatment, both in the medical and cultural sense, that has proven detrimental to their meaningful participation in the invention of culture itself” (Snyder, Mitchell, 3). Meaning that, regardless of best intentions, actions and behaviors that consistently dehumanize disabled people, whether it be by race or neurodivergence, are simply a reiteration of institutional power that these disenfranchised people will never be benefited by. It doesn’t matter that Atticus saw it as his ethical obligation to defend Tom Robinson just as he would any other client; Atticus was not able or unwilling to interrogate the ways in which his own attitude and “private” beliefs affected the outcome of the case. The Finch family as a whole never seems to take pause and really consider their role, or how much space they take up in the Black community of Maycomb (both figuratively and literally.) In the same vein, it’s meaningless that so many people had an opinion about the way Mr. Radley Sr brought up his sons. Because no one intervened on behalf of Arthur Radley, whether they found it necessary in the first place, or important in the second, Arthur too, was never given a real chance to contribute to his community. Sentiment and prayer, while lovely to taste, have no real substance. Imagine if perhaps, that those who were so inclined, such as Mr. Link Deas, had taken it upon themselves to resolve Mr. Ewell and his smear campaign against Tom Robinson? Or if Ms. Maudie had marched herself right up to the front porch of the Radley house and invited Arthur over for tea whenever he might want it? Those small steps taken by sincere allies, would’ve opened up a world of possibilities for people put into unfortunate circumstances like Tom Robinson and Arthur Radley. 

Works Cited 

Mitchell, David T., and Sharon L. Snyder, Cultural Locations of Disability, Chicago: U of Chicago, 2006. Print.

Major Paper/Project, [Hannah Foleck, Kim Eastridge] and [11 works]

We created a website! Here is the link: http://hannahrfoleck.com/

I have also attached our Google Docs link with our write-up explaining the process, goals, and issues we had while creating this website.

Karlie Jahn: Major Project

Karlie Jahn

Dr. Foss

ENGL-384-01

13 April 2021

Knight: Until

In my piece, “A New Perspective”, I was responding to Ayisha Knight’s slam poetry Until. Which is a piece about reclaiming one’s deafness from the way society puts those of differences in a box. My piece shows the process of hearing the words of hate thrown at you to nothing at all. Words like what Ayisha talked about in her poetry “not deaf enough”, “not straight enough”, and the ever ominous “I SEE YOU”. The flowers behind the girl are covered in black paint like the venom that gets spilled from the mouth of those that think differences are bad. The words and flowers flow around and through her ears to show that even if they can’t hear the words, the hate is still apparent. The feeling of hate is ever present around those that are not “normal” whatever that word even means. Then on the other side we see that of static waves, the symbol of no noise. The noise of nothing, and the sound of silence. The flowers on this side are as bright and beautiful as seeing the other side of hate. The colors were choosen to be like that of a rainbow to show that love is love, and that being deaf gives you another way of viewing life. It gives a new perspective. 

Going into this process I really wanted to do something surrounding that of the deaf community because I was a part of it, and may be in the future, so I understood the hate that can flow from people’s mouths. I wanted to gather the sadness and the hurt on the darker side that I had in me due to the loss of understanding that losing my hearing even for a couple months gave me. I saw people I respected and trust turn their backs on me just because I was different. Though I also wanted to showcase the new perspective that experience gave me. The bright colors were the friends that stayed by my side and helped me through the hard time. My friends were like the rainbow flowers, they helped me feel normal and helped me see that everything had changed but it could be so much better if I only looked at it from the right perspective. They helped me to gain a new perspective.

Seeing the conviction in Ayisha Knight’s movements in her piece is what caught my eye the first time we watched her piece. This caused her video to be the only thing on my mind when I figured out I wanted to do a piece about deafness for this project. Watching it a second and third time made it no less amazing to watch. My roommate even after seeing only a second or two of the video said to me that her emotions were so clearly seen. She showed so much emotion and gave so much of herself into the piece that I knew I needed to do this project justice, and I hope I did.

Words: 501

Pledge: Karlie Jahn

Elena Marshel Major Paper: Race and Disability in Of Mice and Men

Elena Marshel
Professor Chris Foss
ENGL-384-01
13 April 2021


Crooks: The Intersection of Race and Disability in Of Mice and Men
For decades, John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men has held renown as an account of the hardships and tragedies of migrant workers during the Great Depression. Steinbeck illustrates the difficulties workers faced in finding stable jobs, building savings, or attempting to own property through the story of two friends, George and Lennie, as they travel the country looking for work. The novella also explores the ways people during this era formed and maintained relationships with others and the effect of social structures, such as classism and sexism, on these relationships. One social structure examined in Of Mice and Men is that of disability and ableism; Lennie, one of the main characters, has an intellectual disability, and two workers on the ranch have physical disabilities. Candy, an elderly swamper, has an amputated hand, and Crooks, the elderly stable buck, has a crooked back; both of these injuries were received on the job and affect their ability to work, but Crooks and Candy hold relatively permanent positions on the ranch. However, despite their physical similarities, their superiors and peers treat them very differently. While Candy sleeps in the bunkhouse with the other workers and holds social relationships with them, Crooks is banned from the bunkroom and maintains emotional distance from the others on the ranch. These differentiations in treatment stem from an important difference between the two men: Crooks is the only black man on the ranch.
While other disabled characters in the narrative face ableism and discrimination, they are able to maintain some level of basic respect from most of their peers. This is often because the ranchers are able to overlook their perceived deficiencies in certain contexts. However, as a visibly disabled black man in the postbellum era of segregation, Crooks is unable to distance himself from his oppressed identities. There are no contexts in which both of his “defects” are irrelevant as physical health and race both play important roles in determining the social order on the ranch. Crooks is not only black, not only disabled, but both, and it leaves him with little option but to accept his mistreatment and subjugation on the ranch, leading to his social detachment and bitterness. The intersection of race and disability in the character of Crooks creates a story of extreme dehumanization through racism, manipulation, and exploitation.
Crooks’ status on the ranch is evident as soon as he is introduced as a character. When George and Lennie arrive late, Candy describes to them that their boss was upset with their tardiness, finishing his story with, “he give the stable buck hell, too” (Steinbeck 20). This elicits confusion from George because, without knowledge of Crooks’ identity as a black, disabled man, George doesn’t understand the relationship between the boss’s anger and his treatment of the stable buck. Candy seems to understand why George is confused, explaining with the simple statement, “Ya see the stable buck’s a n*gger” (Steinbeck 20). This answer implies that if the stable buck was white, the behavior would be inappropriate, but because “the stable buck’s a n*gger,” he is the rational target for the boss to take out his anger. In his explanation, Candy positions Crooks’ race as the most important aspect of his identity in determining how he should be treated.
Candy goes on to describe Crooks as a “nice fella” and then immediately explains how he has “a crooked back where a horse kicked him” (Steinbeck 20). The description of Crooks as a “nice fella” directly contradicts many of the later descriptions of Crooks as aloof and antisocial. Therefore, it seems likely that Candy’s positing of Crooks as a “nice fella” is not an attempt at an accurate depiction, but rather to separate himself from his boss’s behavior and establish to George that he doesn’t hold inherent aggression towards black people. Candy’s next sentence further justifies Crooks’ position at the bottom of the social hierarchy by revealing his physical disability, yet another visible difference that separates Crooks from the rest of the workers. Candy’s conceptualization and explanation of Crooks reveals how he is viewed on the farm: first and foremost, he is the only black person and therefore he is treated poorly; if more justification for his mistreatment is needed, he is also visibly disabled.
As further proof of Crooks’ social position, Candy tells George a story about a special occasion where their boss had given them a gallon of alcohol and “they let the n*gger come in that night” (Steinbeck 21). The social inclusion of Crooks is portrayed as a rare, unique event. Even then, Candy describes how Crooks was still not fully included, but rather used as a source of entertainment when another worker began to fight him. The others placed restrictions on Crooks’ challenger in order to accommodate his disability, which only serves to increase aggression towards Crooks: “If he coulda used his feet, Smitty says he woulda killed the n*gger. The guys said on account of the n*gger’s got a crooked back, Smitty can’t use his feet” (Steinbeck 21). This treatment of Crooks’ disability is illustrative of the simultaneously protective and harmful effects it has on his life. Because the workers hold such a high emphasis on physical fitness and the ability to defend oneself, Crooks is given accommodations on the basis of his disability that allow him to partially combat the racial discrimination he receives. However, using these tools ultimately increases the animosity the white workers feel towards him. This creates a cycle where discrimination leads to accommodation, which then leads to more discrimination.
Despite the discrimination he faces, Crooks is a long-term worker on the ranch. This is not necessarily out of loyalty or love of the job, but instead due to a lack of options and fear of worse treatment elsewhere. Specifically, his disability is listed as a reason for the stability of his position: “being a stable buck and a cripple, he was more permanent than the other men” (Steinbeck 65). He shares this position with Candy, who says once he can’t work on the ranch he “won’t have no place to go, an’ [he] can’t get no more jobs” (Steinbeck 59) due to his disability and age. It is this sense of hopelessness that feeds the cycles of subjugation described above. If the employees who have work-related disabilities (Candy and Crooks) believe their current positions are their only option, they will withstand more poor treatment than they otherwise would. Curley and his father need only provide them with the most base level of respect and kindness in order to keep them in their positions, and for Candy, a white man, the base level of respect is far higher than it is for Crooks. Again, disability-based and race-based discrimination compound upon one another.
Crooks is completely isolated from the other members of the farm on the basis of his race physically, socially, and intellectually. Much of this isolation arises from the fact that Crooks is not allowed into the main bunkroom where the rest of the employees sleep and socialize. When the worker with an intellectual disability, Lennie, asks Crooks why he isn’t allowed in the bunkroom, Crooks responds, “‘cause I’m black… they say I stink” (Steinbeck 67). His exclusion from the main point of social contact is justified in precisely the same way another character justifies his request for Candy to keep his elderly dog out of the bunkroom. The same issue of odor is used to encourage Candy to allow his dog to be euthanized: “He don’t have no fun… and he stinks to beat hell. Tell you what. I’ll shoot him for you” (Steinbeck 47). These parallels show how the comfort of those higher in the social hierarchy is valued more than the quality of life (or life itself) of those deemed inferior. The parallels also illustrate how dehumanized Crooks has become in the eyes of his peers, as his social standing is disturbingly comparable to that of Candy’s dog: inherently beneath all others.
As seen in the expulsion of both Crooks and Candy’s dog from the bunkhouse, the comfort of the white, able-bodied workers takes precedence over the comfort of others. This is another contributing factor to Crooks’ alienation on the ranch. With the other disabled characters, disability is viewed as a deficiency that can, nevertheless, be overcome and consequently overlooked. When George introduces Lennie, he repeatedly tells the others, “He ain’t bright. Hell of a good worker, though” (Steinbeck 34). George attempts to keep the others as comfortable as possible with Lennie by simplifying his intellectual disability into a matter of “brightness” and immediately compensating for that deficiency with physical fitness and profitability. This explanation is more or less accepted by the others, and by preserving the comfort of those higher in the social hierarchy, Lennie is given access to the bunkhouse that Crooks isn’t afforded. Despite their disabilities, Lennie and Candy are protected by their whiteness, which immediately identifies them as similar to the other workers in at least one important way.
Contrastingly, Crooks is immediately identifiable as inherently different from the others through his skin color, which is almost universally deemed as inferior. So, as he must start at the bottom of the social pyramid, his disability is viewed as an additional defect, as opposed to a singular fault that can be more easily overcome. Instead of being an obstacle to physical and social success, Crooks’ disability solidifies his place at the bottom of the social hierarchy. When Crooks is talking to Lennie and realizes he isn’t listening, he says, “This is just a n*gger talkin’, an’ a busted-back n*gger. So it don’t mean nothing, see?” (Steinbeck 69). Again, his most important identifying feature is his race, which automatically discredits him, but the addition of his “busted back” merely confirms his inferiority. The fact that Crooks himself is the one saying this shows how much he has internalized this narrative due to its constant reinforcement by others.
In order to deal with this isolation, Crooks becomes a “proud, aloof man” who “kept his distance and demanded that other people keep theirs” (Steinbeck 66), even when it goes against what he truly wants. In order to endure abuse as painlessly as possible, Crooks has learned to rid himself of any outwards expression of desire, contempt, or emotion, in general, to avoid giving his abusers additional leverage. When Curley’s wife comes into Crooks’ room and sees the three disabled characters, Crooks, Lennie, and Candy, she refers to them respectively as “a n*gger an’ a dum-dum and a lousy ol’ sheep” (Steinbeck 77). Again, Crooks’ major deficiency is not his physical disability but his race, which therefore places Curley’s wife above him on the social hierarchy. Therefore, she feels free to abuse him in a manner she doesn’t attempt with either Lennie or Candy, who are disabled white men and therefore of fairly equal standing with her. When Candy yells at her, she merely laughs and teases in response, but when Crooks loses his temper and asks her to leave, she responds with a threat to have him lynched. In response, Crooks “drew into himself… seemed to grow smaller” and finally “had reduced himself to nothing” (Steinbeck 78-9). The practiced nature of this process and his history of taking the brunt of aggression on the farm show how consistently Crooks is exposed to this kind of abuse. His persona of “proud aloofness” is a coping mechanism for the long-term anguish of constant belittlement and threats.
Crooks is consistently and unequivocally placed at the very bottom of the social hierarchy on the ranch in Of Mice and Men. This is not totally because of his race nor his disability, but because of the combination of those two identities. His race causes him to automatically be deemed as inferior to the other white workers, but his disability creates a dependence on the system that oppresses and discriminates against him. Crooks’ personality as described in the novella- detached, rigid, unkind- is, therefore, a direct result of his treatment as a black disabled man.






I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work. -Elena Marshel


Works Cited
Steinbeck, John. Of Mice and Men. New York, N.Y., U.S.A: Penguin Books, 1994. Print.

Zachary Welsh’s Major Project/Paper

For my Major Paper/Project for our Disability and Literature course, I have decided to go for the visual art project option. Specifically, I will be producing a short, few page, mixed medium comic that will be laid out, written, edited, illustrated, lettered, and colored by myself. In terms of which of our texts from the first eleven weeks of class my comic will be discussing and responding to, I have chosen Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Specifically, I will be discussing the central theme of the novel that it is society that creates monsters; that an individual with a physical disability is only perceived as something to fear because of how society reacts to and treats said individual. My comic will primarily be made up of one primary, central character that I will use as a way to speak on and provide commentary about Shelley’s novel. While simultaneously providing commentary and a stance on the argument presented within the novel, I will have my character introduce himself with a plan to commit a horrendous act such as a bombing, a robbery, or a murder. In what will be set up as a sort of final recording explaining his actions, my character will read and provide a textual analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. As he is doing so, the central character will discuss events that transpired in the creation’s life and compare those to events that have occurred in his own life. Doing this will not only provide an almost meta commentary on the book and the themes within it, but it will also create a sort of parallel between the creation and my main character, as he sees himself and his future actions as a product of society. As the comic goes on and the character compares his life to that of Frankenstein and explains his motivations for his future actions, he will slowly start critiquing the society represented within the book and how it handles or responds to individuals with a disability. While the comic has admittedly been primarily a parallel to Mary Shelley’s book, I want to be able to push the comic and the character a bit further than what readers saw in the novel. Now that’s not at all to say that I am attempting to create a better piece of literature than that of Shelley, but rather that I want to build on her ideas and concepts presented in her novel. In order to achieve this, I will have the main character reach the ending of the Shelley’s book and have a moment of self-reflection while discussing the similarities between him and the creation and the similar paths in which they are traveling. In said moment of self-reflection, the character comes to realize that he is not in fact the monster that he comes to believe himself to be, and that he can triumph over the negative connotations that are associated with his disability. In deciding this, he will ultimately choose not to follow through with his previously stated actions that he planned on committing. As the character gets up to walk away from his final confession, it is only then that readers get to see that he himself has a physical disability. In having the character be disabled, and reject his previous plans stated at the beginning of the comic, I create with readers, another parallel between him and the creation, but he himself serves as an example of how a disabled individual can overcome society and its way of making monsters out of disabled individuals, something that the creation was never given the opportunity to do. He also serves as a way to reject the societal belief that disabled individuals are someone to be scared of. 

In terms of the actual artistic side of the project. One may notice a surprising choice of color in the comic. To parallel the main character believing himself two be a monster, he is depicted in black and white (similar to a classic Hollywood monster movie.) However, I made it so that the objects that help him realize his innocence and his humanity are in color. These include the video camera, the book, the candle, etc. Upon realizing his humanity, the character actually starts to gain some color and by the time he fully realizes that his interpretation of himself was warped and unrealistic, he is shown in full color and ultimately walking towards a brighter future. I also used repetition in the panels (many similar panels but with a change in the colors) as a way to highlight and underline the color effect used in the comic. 

Honor Pledge: Zachary Welsh

Major Project, Eliana Black, Collage

Eliana Black

Professor Foss 

Disability in Literature

13 April 2021

Major Project Art Collage of Disability Depiction in the Media

Disability is a key part of society as it makes up 15% of the population according to the World Health Association, yet mass media often has a skewed perception that is pushed onto viewers. Incorrect stigmatization, no matter how well intended, forms harmful stereotypes in societal norms that affect people with disabilities. In my piece, I focused on examples of real media taken directly from newspapers and magazines which exhibit contribution to a warped viewpoint including those we’ve spoken about in class such as infantilization and savior complexes. 

Media has a substantial influence on sociological and societal norms which are developed by continuous acceptance and production of certain views for what is considered ‘normal.’ Already there is a lack of representation of disability in each source that we take in. Seen on the top middle area in my collage, The Ruderman White Paper is portrayed which refers to the study that shows 95% of characters with a disability are played by non-disabled actors. This creates yet another division for a person with a disability, as even the representation in television is somewhat of a lie as well . To the right of that photo is a scene from American Horror Story which is one of my favorite, more accurate depictions of a character with a disability. The character Nan is played by actress Jamie Brewer, who has Down Syndrome. Instead of using Brewer’s Down Syndrome as a character trait, American Horror Story incorporates her as a main character, living the same way as the other girls in the house. The subtitles show a scene in which one of the girls asks Nan if she’s a virgin, and she says “Hell no. I’m not a virgin. I get it on all the time and guys find me hot” (“The Replacements” 12:26). In this scene, the rest of the girls talk about their sexual interests, but Nan’s claims are never second guessed or disputed by the others, but rather accepted. This scene connects to the class reading from the Introduction of Sex and Disability, where normalization of sexual desire and acts often exclude people with disabilities. 

Another seemingly small but incredibly impactful is the diction used when referring to disabilities in the media. Highlighted in my piece are article titles such as ‘How to handle grandma with cancer’ and ‘Texas HS football player gives the cutest promposal to his special needs friend.’ Headlines and wording like these contribute to the infantilization of people with disabilities, and takes away agency as their own person. These representations also idolize the caregiver for their job, which instills the mindset of disability as an issue or a nuisance to be cared for. In the reading Coming out Mad, Coming Out Disabled, author Elizabeth Brewer highlights the negative connotations associated with disability and how ever then society still has an expectation for those with a disability to come out. The concept of coming out furthermore creates alienation for people with disabilities and other viewpoints are easily unconsciously changed. 

Ableism is exhibited in a variety of ways throughout society, some of which are not always direct or visible. In an attempt for allies or supporters of the disabled community to make disability more normalized, there is also the risk of over-encouragement. Statements seen in the collage graphic titled Spectators exhibits a man in a wheelchair completing his race, as the crowd holds up a sign saying “handicapable” and the audience remarks on his ‘bravery.’ The Teen Vogue piece shows a model in a wheelchair for their Disability Awareness Special. Referring back to the promposal article displayed, the football player praising was broadcasted nationally, for a simple high school dance. Examples like these are controversial in the disabled community and although the intentions may be positive, the actual execution contributes to even more segregation of disabled people in society. It creates the concept of ‘inspiration porn’, which is defined by Wikipedia as “the portrayal of people with disabilities as inspirational solely or in part on the basis of their disability” (Wikipedia).

In my collage piece I demonstrated a handful of the vast examples in the media that either misrepresent disability as a whole or aid in the formation of harmful prejudice and accepting generalized views. It creates an environment in which disability is seen as an issue or a lack of ways of life, where instead it needs to be more accepted and easily accommodated. Media is only one of the many impactful variables that create society’s conforming definition of disability onto people who have a disability. As inspirational author and advocate Robert M. Hansel states, “There is no greater disability in society, than the inability to see a person as more.” (Quotefancy.com)

“I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work.”

Eliana C. Black

Works Cited

“Inspiration Porn.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 2 Apr. 2021, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inspiration_porn.

“Robert M. Hensel Quotes.” Quotefancy, quotefancy.com/robert-m-hensel-quotes.

Woodburn, Danny, and Kristina Copic. “Employment of Actors with Disabilities in Television.” Ruderman Family Foundation, 3 Oct. 2017, rudermanfoundation.org/white_papers/employment-of-actors-with-disabilities-in-television/.

“World Report on Disability.” World Health Organization, World Health Organization, 14 Dec. 2011, www.who.int/teams/noncommunicable-diseases/sensory-functions-disability-and-rehabilitation/world-report-on-disability. 

“The Replacements.” American Horror Story, created by Ryan Murphy, season 3: Coven, episode 3, FX Networks LLC, 2013. 

css.php