Kathryn[e] Born

Title of my reality show: 30 hr days balancing 30 things before I turn 30

[kaybeesknees]

The Veil Has Been Lifted

Before this course, I would probably have considered myself a fairly tolerant individual without realizing the danger in believing that. As a budding linguist, I’ve been taught certain methodologies that allow me to make neutral, productive, and progressive critical analyses of individual discourse. That being said, from the first Davis reading I was intrigued by the lexical impact of “normalcy” on our cognitive processes and subsequent political and social behaviors. Introducing concepts of intersectionality and identity politics as valuable (and accessible) perspectives will hopefully have a healing impact on our fragmented world/communities. With a deeper understanding of variability, I have accessed a new capacity for grace and patience that I hope will translate to everyone I encounter.

[kaybeesknees]

@atticuspoetry just gets me.

[kaybeesknees]

Do not become addicted to water, it will take hold of you and you will resent its absence.

Immortan Joe (Mad Max: Fury Road)

Mitchel and Snyder critique the ways in which “disability has been used throughout history as a crutch upon which literary narratives lean for their representational power, disruptive potentiality, and analytical insight” (224). They call this pattern “narrative prosthesis.” In other words, writers often depend upon disabilities “as a primary impetus,” to add dramatic value and make the story even worth telling but only if the disability is magically overcome (222). If the disability is not the crux of the matter itself, than it is typically used “as a metaphorical signifier of social and individual collapse” (222). Mad Max: Fury Road certainly brings us to a desolate dystopia where metaphor and reality are convoluted. 

But it is almost reminiscent of the “connection between disability and criminality” that Paul Longmore talks about in his analysis (133). Perhaps this movie is marginally more successful at implementing such an overdetermined “fugitive formula” (133). In an effort to live forever, “Immortan Joe” represents the hyper-masculine, marred and tyrannical villain who controls the one element required to live and is dethroned by *spoiler alert* a disabled woman. Ultimately it feels like the film just simplifies a much larger social dynamic of intersectional privilege. While bodies are being commodified to the most extreme levels, those with privilege, albeit to serve Immortan Joe, nourish their existence through the life of body bags, like Max (ironically seemingly very “able” and “healthy” people). By constructing this so grotesquely as an established practice necessary to survive, the film introduces just how problematic our obsession to be considered worthy can become. With the ideology of ability in mind, Mad Max reminded me that we live in an eco-system where existence can be spent constantly striving to meet capricious standards set in play by fragile facades of strength. 

[kaybeesknees]

Agency, Tutorials, and Tech Support

Oh boy. Although the readings for today were pretty technical and jargony, I was able to obtain some helpful information about the capricious role of social media in the professional sphere. 

Weber (2013) explores the different responsibilities and affordances that influence the level of authority an individual can have in a public atmosphere. The various scenarios involving consequences of litigation have contributed to establishing this topic as a necessary and increasingly relevant conversation. Seemingly written especially for those interested in technical writing professions but in reality Weber covers a multitude of professional experiences where understanding one’s role on social media is critical to professional success. 

While Weber writes more about the necessity of filtering what we post, Frith seems more concerned about how the information posted is successful in achieving its rhetorical purpose. Focusing on help guides, instructional manuals, and online tutorials, he identifies a community that has surfaced solely to address the questions and confusion of the masses. He adumbrates the various professional occupations that revolve around such information and the necessary attitude to have to be successful in that sector. 

In a combination of the two ideas, Lam and Hannah get more specific by explaining exactly how Twitter has evolved into a touchstone for dealing with unsatisfactory service. They identify the ways in which Twitter connects the consumer directly to the producer in order to get immediate feedback. In other words, employees, customers, and employers are converge onto one very visible platform. The scalability, shareability, and replicability afforded by Twitter makes this social dynamic especially critical to a company’s persistent reputation in the public eye. 

@tamuccrhetoric

[just-shower-thoughts]

Tetris taught me that errors pile up and accomplishments dissapear

[jessica-ortiz42-blog]

CGI Animated Short Film HD: “The Present Short Film” by Jacob Frey

Week 9

I remember falling in-love with this short animation the first time I watched it. This one definitely pulls at the heart string and evokes emotions of pity. This reminds me of Mitchell n Snyder’s definition of narrative prosthesis where a story relies on disability to create a conflict and tell the story. In this case, the conflict is the main character’s disgust with the puppy’s deformity. Initially it appears he is disgusted because the pup is not of the "norm" but rather disabled and presumed to be unable to perform like an average dog. The pup’s persistence on playing catch, enables him to get up from playing videogames, and instead play with the puppy. The end of the clip however, brings the viewer to the realization that his initial reaction was on a deeper level. His disgust was seeing the dog as a reflection of himself, not in actuality of the dog itself.  This can be seen as  a version of materiality of metaphor. The narrative uses the disability as a metaphor for disruptive issues that are outside the reasons of impairment. Though the disability of the characters see to be the overall issue, the real underlying issue is self-acceptance and social acceptance.

-Jessica Ortiz

@jasonsfarr

[kaybeesknees]

What a perfect example of inner and outer conflict. I love this little short. TEARS. 

[thejaydavenable]

TUMBLR POST 9

This weekend Kathryne and I saw the new Dr. Strange film and it made me think about the various superheros that arise from a disability.  I came across this article titled “With great power comes great disability” by Kathleen Hawkins, and she discusses 10 of the top superheros that are disabled.  For example, Daredevil is blind, Iron Man has a heart condition, and Professor X is paraplegic.  These are just a few of the many disabled characters that have become superheros throughout comics, which reminds me of Siebers’ chapter in the DSR that discusses how the ideology of ability turns disability into an advantage by making disability a “gateway to special abilities” (280).  This is a narrative prosthesis that Dr. Strange and many other comics take advantage of.  Dr. Strange begins by portraying Strange as an impeccable neurosurgeon with amazingly skillful hands, but shortly into the film he gets into a terrible car accident which completely vanquishes his ability to perform as a doctor.  Mitchell and Snyder argue in the chapter “Narrative Prosthesis” that disability “provides the riddle in need of a narrative solution” (232).  In this case, the film sets up Dr. Strange to have an inevitable desire to repair his hands in order to overcome his disability and be the person he once was.  However, if his hands were never mangled, Dr. Strange would have never become a superhero.  In fact, his disability led to his special ability or super-ability.  It is interesting to notice how many superheros, like Dr. Strange, follow this similar script.  

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-ouch-27883836

@jasonsfarr

[kaybeesknees]

Week 9/Post 8 (?? I’m losing track sorry!)

Interestingly enough, the Marvel film Dr. Strange came out this week and as @thejaydavenable​ and I sat in the second row of the IMAX and 3D screening of this film we couldn’t help but apply Longmore’s and Mitchell and Snyder’s analyses to the narrative and plot framework. I had no idea what to expect as I am completely unfamiliar with this character and storyline so it was exciting to view a new representation of disability on screen through the lens of the theorists that we have been working on in class. Although the story perpetuates some of the problematic representations of disability, Dr. Strange certainly attempts to introduce a new perspective outside of sedimented expectations, albeit unsuccessfully. 

Basically, Dr. Stephen Strange is a narcissistic neuro-surgeon who only works on patients who will be the most impressive recoveries and give him the most recognition as a master surgeon. This narrative certainly revolves around, if not depends upon, the disabling injuries of Dr. Strange’s hands in a car accident. Without his hands he cannot perform surgical procedures and Dr. Strange is left feeling useless and manic. Through his own physical therapist, he hears of a paralyzed man who should have had NO chance of recovery but that he had been seen walking around and playing sports. It turns out, Dr. Strange himself had denied seeing him due to the irreparable damage to his spinal cord. That introduced anoEEWther angle of the medical model I hadn’t considered. Once the limitations of western medicine had failed Dr. Strange he was forced to look outside of the framework he had built his entire life around. Desperate to be healed, he heads to India to seek out the cosmic healing the man told him about. 

Following the schematic outlined by Mitchell and Snyder on page 227, the narrative 1) exposes a deviance with the character of Dr. Strange. 2) His traumatic accident happens very early in the film; “cosolidat[ing] the need for its own existence by calling for an explanation of the deviation’s origins and formative consequences. 3) This deviance leaves the “periphery of concerns” fter we’ve had an eyeful of his violent outbursts (all Siebers’ ideology of ability right there) and places the deviance at “the center of the story” and 4) there is a “Revaluation of an alternative mode of being” introduced as a “repair of the deviance.” The film also encouraged us to think back to Shapiro’s critique of the super-crip; the disabled patient overcoming his impairment for the greater good is an undeniably prevalent theme throughout Dr. Strange. 

As you can see, there is plenty more to discuss about the nature of this film in respect to disability studies so I might just save that for a larger project that’s coming up. ;) See you guys Tuesday!

@jasonsfarr 

[kaybeesknees]

Week 6/Post 7

After reading Me Before You, I was curious as to how we were going to be able to compare it to Siebers’ ideology of ability and Finding Nemo. Although I have seen the film dozens of times, after re-watching it, this part really stood out to me. 

After Marlin gets a glimpse of Nemo upside down in the bag of water, performing a characteristic of death for a fish, he is unable to find the strength to continue on living himself. Marlin’s strength came from his role as a parent. After being unable to protect his wife and other children, caring for Nemo was his whole purpose in life. In this scene we briefly see Marlin swimming for the fishing grounds...knowing full-well what happens. Invisible to me as a child, but thinking about the element of physician-assisted suicide in Me Before You, it seems as though Marlin was seeking out fisherman-assisted suicide. I know, I know...seems like a stretch but what else can we call it? There were thousands of fish existing in that area, desperately trying to avoid being caught in that net and facing such a fate but Marlin swam towards it willingly.  It was then that I saw the parallel with Marlin and Will Traynor. Will felt his purpose was to be the philanthropic adventurer/bachelor that his class, race, and status that life had afforded for him to be. After losing that position in life he no longer feels worthy of living and conveniently opts out of it, despite knowing the love his friends and family feel for him. Marlin willingly leaves Dory in a precarious position despite all the help and love she has shown him throughout this journey. He does not allow anyone else’s relationships with him to deter him from swimming towards his death, much like Will and his relationship with Lou. Although Nemo shows himself to Marlin in time, it nearly costs him his life when they have to save the school of fish stuck in the net. The movie then presents a beautiful metaphor of a community working together and chanting “just keep swimming” until they break the barriers of the net. Unfortunately, there is not such a happy ending for Will because Marlin’s ability to father is restored where Will’s to walk is not. Either way, the theme of valuing someone’s life based off of their ability to perform their god-given role is prevalent across both narratives. 

@jasonsfarr (this is a make-up of last weeks)

[kaybeesknees]

After reading Longmore’s (2003) article, “Screening Stereotypes: Images of Disabled People in Television and Motion Pictures,” I was reminded of the the Netflix original movie, “The Fundamentals of Caring.” Starring Paul Rudd, Craig Roberts, and Selena Gomez, the trailer I posted above gives a small taste of the type of humor viewers can expect to see in the movie. Now, similarly to Me Before You, Roberts is in fact an able-bodied actor playing a character with Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy but this movie gives the relationship between the caregiver and their employer quite a different perspective. 

The impending consequence of death is certainly a concern within the narrative but it is certainly not the answer for Roberts’ character. With Rudd’s help, he experiences life beyond the security of his home and overbearing mother. Longmore (2003) identifies some of the major problems with representation of disabled characters in film is that “disabled characters lack insight about themselves and other people, and require emotional education, usually by a nondisabled character” (138). But in the Fundamentals of Caring, it is Rudd’s character that is compelled to confront himself. Unable to accept responsibility for the death of his child in a horrible accident, his wife is forcing him into a divorce and Rudd accepts the caregiving job in hopes to “give back.” But he quickly realizes that Roberts is far more astute than he expected and is forced to turn his past into a “positive growth experience” (139). This narrative also challenges the sexual incapacitation that typical accompanies disabled characters. Rogers and Gomez develop quite a typical teenage love interest despite Rogers’ paralyzed state. 

I think there are still some stereotypical aspects to the film that Longmore (2003) addresses as problematic but the writers approached the relationships among the characters in a much more progressive manner than the past has conditioned us to expect. They highlight the inaccessibility of many locations they visit but demand the barriers to be removed. Although it is extremely humorous, the film presents some very compelling scenarios that those with disabilities might  face in a tactful way. We have a long way to go in media representation but this film might be a sign of good things to come.

@jasonsfarr WEEK 7/POST 8 

[kaybeesknees]

‘Elephant man’ gets rid of 22-year-old face tumour at Delhi hospital - Times of India

Lalit Ram was in a strange predicament for 22 years—till he underwent a rare surgery for removal of a large facial tumour that looked like an elephant’s trunk.

POST 6/WEEK 7

I’d like to use this blog post to bring up another encounter from episode two of “An Idiot Abroad,” when Karl Pilkington interviews the revered Elephant Baba of India. This episode deals with both the medical and the social models of disability while also confirming how Siebers addresses the problems associated with the ideology of ability. There are several factors of the ideological framework that Siebers discusses on page 230 that are resoundingly present within the episode and even in this article:

1. “Overcoming a disability is an event to be celebrated. It is an ability in itself to be able to overcome disability.”

2. “Disabilities are the gateway to special abilities. Turn disability to an advantage.”

3. “People who wish to identify as disabled are psychologically damaged. If they could think of themselves as able-bodied, they would be healthier and happier.”

Because of Ram’s likeness to the Indian god, Lord Ganesha, he was revered by many elderly people but still an object of disfigurement to the younger populations. While he was able to “work” with this disability, Ram was in immense physical and psychological pain due to the nuerofibromatosis. After his appearance on the show, he was offered a free surgery to help him have the tumor removed and his family said they were “able” to find him a wife and rehabilitate him to society. On one hand, it is understandable that Ram would want to seek and accept medical intervention to not only prolong, but make his life more enjoyable. But on the other, it is also unfortunate that the psychological motivators of being excluded, or labeled as such a deviant, were strong enough to influence Ram to make the decision to take such a risk. The social and medical models were certainly “reciprocal”, as Siebers explains, to Ram’s complex embodiment and social representation (290). 

@jasonsfarr 

[kaybeesknees]

*Got a new planner* *Turned to the first month* New planner: "What's stopping you?" Me: "compulsory able bodiedness" Thanks McRuer.

[kaybeesknees]

The official site for Botched By Nature show clips, photos, videos, show schedule, and news from E! Online

WEEK 6/POST 5 

TLC is back at it again; The Learning Channel has created a new show called “Botched By Nature” to teach their viewers that there are much more unfortunate people than those just simply “botched” by other plastic surgeons. These people were botched by their own genetics. Even before this course I have to believe I would’ve shuddered at the concept regardless. This is a perfect example of what Siebers points at as “modern culture feels the urgent need to perfect the body” (278). The warm and personable doctor duo, Dubrow and Nassif, make heartfelt home visits to consult with patients who feel the need to make a change in order to function in their society, family, workplace, etc. The whole concept of this show is problematic in the sense of the medical model, but I find myself wondering if it is really up to me to say they need to accept their chronic pain and social discomfort and just love their bodies? I think the parading of it on television is an aspect that complicates this scenario. I think the title of this show highlights that most grotesquely. By Nature. Yikes. The patients on the show do not show any signs of rapid health decline or issues that need immediate attention… They are purely physical “abnormalities” that the doctors seeks to “normalize”… yes those are their words. Our cultural inclinations to watch and be satisfied/relieved for these “afflicted persons” is clearly the ideology behind the creation of such a show. If there wasn’t an audience for it, it wouldn’t be on TV. 

Siebers implores the reader to “consider that the strong focus given to the self in pain has epistemological value. Suffering is a signal to the self at risk, and this signal applies to physical and social situations” (287). Many of us can understand and even appreciate the medical advances for those suffering in pain…but the reason the patients on the show feel inclined to apply for surgical treatment is because they don’t feel comfortable in the clothes they wear, they are tired of the stares, they have spent millions of dollars trying to just look “normal”…one guy says he doesn’t even care about looking perfect as long as he can just feel like everybody else. :( That’s on us. Not on Nature. Our American emphasis on identity and social worth is inextricably connected to physical appearance, undoubtedly. But it is being perpetuated by shows like this. @jasonsfarr 

[just-shower-thoughts]

If you treat sick animals, you may be considered a veterinarian. If you fought for Germany in WWII, you may be considered a veteran Aryan.

[just-shower-thoughts]

We type things up but write them down

[just-shower-thoughts]

Every time a celebrity dies, someone has to go onto their Wikipedia page and change all of their verbs to past tense.

[just-shower-thoughts]

Now that Colorado is spending Marijuana money on bully prevention, drugs have done more for the kids than the war on drugs ever did.