Disability studies: an interdisciplinary introduction
Disability studies: an interdisciplinary introduction
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/09687599.2011.567809
复制
发表时间：
2011-05
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
John Swain
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
John Swain
这本书是关于学术的，残疾的理论化，在残疾研究的学术领域实现和发展。它是关于残疾研究，而不是残疾，通过阅读它，我意识到，是的，它们是不同的。如果你是它所针对的非常广泛的受众中的一员，并且想要“学术”，你会在这里找到大量的。有太多的学术术语(本体论、认识论和术语，你可能会遇到，但我没有，手头需要一本词典)。就最新的文献而言，这是无可挑剔的：如果不参考文献，就很难找到对事实的陈述，而且有许多很长的参考文献。就其本身而言，这本书也是全面的，触及并借鉴了残疾研究的边缘。如果你想要的是学术研究，我可以毫不犹豫地推荐这本书。但我猜我开始听起来很消极，事实上，我确实为此而苦苦挣扎。我本想欣赏这本书并与之建立联系，但总体上我做不到。我将一章一章地阐述我的担忧和这本书的优点。在这样做时，我知道对这项审查有一些相反的论点，我应该在这里列出这些论点。可以说，我寻求简化残疾研究。这可能是真的，尽管我会说我只是想知道。也可以说，我是一名强势/激进的第一波社会模型主义者(或者，无论如何，我可以被归入这个后现代世界)。嗯，我希望如此，尽管我希望我能听到。因此，第一章《全球残疾研究》为背景做好了铺垫。对我来说，这是一个良好的开端，以残疾的全球性质和残疾政治为开端。它列出并比较了四种模式：社会模式、少数群体模式、文化模式和关系模式，并用有用的表格对比了每种模式的基础。第二章，“政治残疾研究”，继续从残疾研究的问题开始，然后转移到障碍，我们开始看到‘残疾研究’的发展方向。我们被告知，学术界，尤其是社会模型学家，已经将注意力从个人残疾转移到了残疾公众身上。第三章《不同的残疾研究》对我来说位置恰当，内容丰富，涉及性别、种族、性取向和阶级。虽然这符合这本书的总体方向，但我确实想知道‘同性恋’在‘性爱’部分的集中程度。这符合这本书的总体定位：你越走到边缘，你就越能更好地理解残疾。
This book is about the academic, the theorising of disability, as realised and developed in the academic area of disability studies. It is about disability studies rather than disability, and through reading it I came to realise that yes they are different. If you are a member of the very wide audience that it is aimed at and want ‘academic’you will find it here in abundance. There is a plethora of academic jargon (ontology, epistemology and terms you might have come across but I hadn’t and needed a dictionary at hand). It cannot be faulted in terms of up to date literature: it is difficult to find a statement of fact without a reference to literature and there are a number of long lists of references. It is also, in its own terms, comprehensive, reaching to and drawing in the edges of disability studies.If academic is what you are looking for I can recommend this book without hesitation. But I guess I am beginning to sound negative and indeed I did struggle with this. I would have liked to enjoy and connect with this book but overall I couldn’t. I’ll go through chapter by chapter to illustrate my concerns and the strengths of the book. In doing so I know there are counter-arguments to this review which I should set out here. It can be argued that I seek a simplification of disability studies. This is true probably, though I would say that I just want to understand. It can also be argued that I am a strong/radical first wave social modelist (or however I can be categorised in this post-modern world). Well I hope so though I hope I can listen. So, chapter 1,‘Global disability studies’, sets the scene. For me it is a good start, opening with the global nature of disability and the politics of disability. It sets out and compares four models: the social, the minority, the cultural and the relational with useful tables that contrast the foundations of each model. Chapter 2,‘Political disability studies’, continues to set the scene beginning with issues of disability research but then moving to impairment and we begin to see where ‘disability studies’ is going. The academic area, in particular the social modelists, we are told, have turned attention away from the personal of impairment to the public of disability. Chapter 3,‘Diverse disability studies’, was for me well placed and informative, tackling gender, race, sexuality and class. Though it fits with the overall orientation of the book I did wonder about the concentration of ‘queer’in the ‘Sexed’subsection. It fits with the overall orientation of the book: the more you move to the edge, the better you will understand disability.