Reimagining Disability as Knowledge: Empowerment and Identity in Selected Speculative Fiction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1603.24Keywords:
crip theory, biohacking, disability representation, speculative fictionAbstract
This paper analyzes the representation of disability as knowledge in two speculative fiction narratives, Annalee Newitz’s Autonomous (2017) and Robert Venditti’s The Surrogates (2006). Drawing upon disability studies theories, specifically Crip Theory, Cripistemology, and Crip Technoscience, this paper explains that in each work, disability is not understood as a deficit or lack; instead, disability is portrayed as a difference, an affirmative source of power, agency, and knowledge production (Johnson & McRuer, 2014). In Autonomous, the disabled heroine, Jack, uses biohacking to gain freedom, turning her body into a weapon and undermining her personhood. Meanwhile, The Surrogates serves as a scathing commentary on the technology industry and the beauty standards it promotes, as well as the plight of physically challenged persons in the computer-mediated avatar environment that favors the physically fit. By closely examining these texts, the paper demonstrates how they enable new modes of representing disability, which are made possible by digital and cybernetic bodies, and urges a future in which disability will be accepted as a form of human diversity and knowledge (Newitz, 2017). This paper contributes to the ongoing conversations in disability studies about how speculative fiction can challenge and expand our understandings of disability, alternative ways of knowing technology, embodiment, and justice (Siebers, 2008).
References
Bostrom, N. (2005). A history of transhumanist thought. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14(1), 1–25.
Cline, E. (2011). Ready player one. Crown Publishers.
Elcessor, E. (2016). Restricted access: Media, disability, and the politics of participation. NYU Press.
Fritsch, K., & Hamraie, A. (2019). Crip technoscience manifesto. Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience, 5(1), 1–33.
Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979 (G. Burchell, Trans.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Garland-Thomson, R. (1997). Extraordinary bodies: Figuring physical disability in American culture and literature. Columbia University Press.
Goggin, G., & Newell, C. (2005). Digital disability: The social construction of disability in new media. Rowman & Littlefield.
Hamraie, A. (2017). Building access: Universal design and the politics of disability. University of Minnesota Press.
Johnson, M. L., & McRuer, R. (2014). Cripistemologies: Introduction. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 8(2), 127–147.
Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Indiana University Press.
Linton, S. (2015). What is the place of technology in disability studies? In N. Watson & S. Vehmas (Eds.), Routledge handbook of disability studies (pp. 386–399). Routledge.
McRuer, R. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. NYU Press.
Newitz, A. (2017). Autonomous. Tor Books.
Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. Routledge.
Shaw, A. (2014). Gaming at the edge: Sexuality and gender at the margins of gamer culture. University of Minnesota Press.
Siebers, T. (2008). Disability theory. University of Michigan Press.
Venditti, R. (Writer), & Weldele, B. (Artist). (2005). The surrogates. Top Shelf Productions.
