Cover not available
Part of
Disability in Dialogue
Edited by Jessica M.F. Hughes and Mariaelena Bartesaghi
[Dialogue Studies 33] 2023
► pp. 199–208

Disability in dialogue

A heteroglossary

| University of Waterloo

This chapter offers a heteroglossary that that gathers and redefines what has already been said in this collection in an attempt to push these ideas into further dialogue and towards change. In doing so, this afterword channels another value from within the disability rights movement: the idea of positive redundancy (access Smith 2013). That is, it is always good and useful to repeat ourselves, to offer clear and simplified definitions of what has already been said.

Keywords: embodiment, interdependence, voice, aids, mediation, mutuality, resistance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Embodiment
  • 3.Interdependence
  • 4.Voice
  • 5.Aids
  • 6.Mediation
  • 7.Mutuality
  • 8.Resistance
  • References
Published online: 19 September 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.33.09dol
References
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
1981 The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. by Michael Holquist, trans. by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Goodley, Dan, Lawthom, Rebecca and Katherine Cole Runswick
2014 “Posthuman Disability Studies.” Subjectivity 7(4): 342–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, Beth
2019 “Authentic Disability Representation on US Television Past and Present.” In The Routledge companion to disability and media, ed. by Kate Ellis, Gerard Goggin, Beth Haller, and Rosemary Curtis, 88–100. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirschkop, Ken
2021 “Heteroglossia.” Oxford research encyclopedia of literature. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kafer, Alison
2021 “After Crip, Crip Afters.” South Atlantic Quarterly 120(2): 415–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kopit, Alison
2019 “Defiant Memory as Disability Justice: An Interview with Patty Berne of Sins Invalid.” American Quarterly 71(2): 415–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauldin, Laura
2016 Made to Hear: Cochlear Implantation and Raising Deaf Children. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Price, Margaret and Stephanie L. Kerschbaum
2016 “Stories of Methodology: Interviewing Sideways, Crooked and Crip.” Canadian Journal of Disability Studies 5(3):18–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanchez, Rebecca
2015 Deafening Modernism: Embodied Language and Visual Poetics in American Literature. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Schalk, Sami
2013 “Coming to Claim Crip: Disidentification with/in Disability Studies.” Disability Studies Quarterly 33(2). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schalk, Sami and Jina B. Kim
2020 “Integrating Race, Transforming Feminist Disability Studies.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 46(1): 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siebers, Tobin
2008 Disability Theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, Kel
2013 Digital Outcasts: Moving Technology Forward without Leaving People Behind. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Rua M.
2020 “Falsified Incompetence and Other Lies the Positivists Told Me.” Canadian Journal of Disability Studies 9(5): 214–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar