Ableist Rhetoric: How We Know, Value, and See Disability

RSA Series in Transdisciplinary Rhetoric

by James Cherney

Ableism, a form of discrimination that elevates "able" bodies over those perceived as less capable, remains one of the most widespread areas of systematic and explicit discrimination in Western culture. Yet in contrast to the substantial body of scholarly work on racism, sexism, classism, and heterosexism, ableism remains undertheorized and underexposed. In this book, James L. Cherney takes a rhetorical approach to the study of ableism to reveal how it has worked its way into our everyday understanding of disability.

Ableist Rhetoric argues that ableism is learned and transmitted through the ways we speak about those with disabilities. Through a series of textual case studies, Cherney identifies three rhetorical norms that help illustrate the widespread influence of ableist ideas in society. He explores the notion that "deviance is evil" by analyzing the possession narratives of Cotton Mather and the modern horror touchstone The Exorcist. He then considers whether "normal is natural" in Aristotle's Generation of Animals and in the cultural debate over cochlear implants. Finally, he shows how the norm "body is able" operates in Alexander Graham Bell's writings on eugenics and in the legal cases brought by disabled athletes Casey Martin and Oscar Pistorius. These three simple equivalencies play complex roles within the social institutions of religion, medicine, law, and sport. Cherney concludes by calling for a rhetorical model of disability, which, he argues, will provide a shift in orientation to challenge ableism's epistemic, ideological, and visual components.

Accessible and compelling, this groundbreaking book will appeal to scholars of rhetoric and of disability studies as well as to disability rights advocates.

Genres: Disability

200 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2019

Reviews

[Maren Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

My professor wrote this book, and tbh, he totally was cooking here. It was actually interesting to read, accessible, and helpful.

[Allison Brenneise · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'd like to give this 4 stars because the first and fifth chapters do important work but I can't get past what the middle chapters do. Chapter 3 has some flaws that I perceive as fatal to the argument. I really wanted this book to do some work that I think society needs to have done to actually change how disability is viewed, especially because communication is constitutive. Additionally some of the rhetorical choices made to use euphemisms instead of direct language when writing about extinguishing life were confusing and the misspelling of a prominent feminist disability scholar's name repeatedly throughout the text was more than disappointing.

Bracketing those monumental issues, as a teacher of argument I learned some new ways to talk about the component parts of the Toulman model and how understanding stasis might help students develop better arguments.

But I'm really overall quite sad about this book because I had really high hopes for it and I defended it before reading it and I learned a lesson that just as you can't judge a book by its cover, what you think you know going into something doesn't always play out the way you think it will. It's interesting that I just said that because that's kind of a message in this book.

[Moira Allbritton · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars because the intro (Chapter 1) is so accessible and the conclusion (Chapter 5) *finally* illuminates the model.

Rounding down because I fear most will not stick around to the end to get the synthesis.

1 star that a rhetorical/critical scholar utilized "euthanasia" over and over in a context that represented the opposite of "good death".

1 star that the publisher and author misspelled a prominent scholar's name throughout the book. It is Rosemarie Garland-Thomson. If words matter, then getting a name correct needs to matter.

Chapter 2: 3.5 stars
Chapter 3: 1.5 stars
Chapter 4: 3.5 stars

[Trinity Thompson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having just read Bodies that Matter by Butler for class, I enjoyed the common language of Cherney’s book that clearly and directly lays out an argument for a rhetorical model of the body that exposes entrenched rhetorical ableism. Although this reinterpretation of texts diverges from the tradition of rhetorical studies, Cherney’s rhetorical theory still draws heavily on Burke and Toulmin, as if they still have to access this problematic scholars to make their point and bridge rhetoric out of its crisis.