3.5 stars
Ok book - various essays on disability. Essays of varying quality.
Interesting essays:
- The 'Right' Way to Sign: Sign Language, Inclusion and the Deaf Community in Singapore - basically, there are a few different sign languages; there is a question of which one is used. Writer seems to be an academic, but writes in an accessible way.
- And Suddenly We Appear: Reflections on Disability Arts by Alvan Yap - "Another common perception of disabled people in Singapore, is encapsulated in the phrase used to describe us in the media, particularly in conjunction with fundraising appeals: "the less fortunate". The result is that disability art ends up in yet another charity ghetto, creating yet another stereotype of disability, and hence the persistent notion that the quality of art produced by disabled persons is necessarily inferior to that of non-disabled peers. The purpose of such art, at least for those publicly shown or sold, appears to be about raising awareness and funds, rather than appreciating their intrinsic qualities."
- Meritocracy and Disability in Singapore: the Curious Case of Pathlight School in the Present Time by ME (pseudonym, but seriously, he should have picked a better one. I thought it was "me", like the pronoun).
On the bad side: the last two essays were... uhh.. extremely academic. Daryl Yang's essay talked about rights and disability rights activism. It points out that the DPA (Disabled People's Association) focuses more on bread and butter issues, steering clear of rights activism. It's interesting, because when you talk about the philosophy of rights - there is a corresponding duty. No one in this whole book talks about: "what are the duties are disabled person (or non-neurotypical person) owes to society? Is this the same as a neurotypical person?" Other essays kind of skirt around this at various points: the view that disabled people must be productive and judged against the meritocratic narrative. (But then again, and in general: no one really thinks about corresponding duties. Rights are sexy. Duties are not.)
The ending essay by Jace Tay was full of rage when asking for change - but very fluffy change. By fluffy, I mean adding disability to the constitution, asking for systematic change... which is a cool idea in theory. But after reading the other essays which are more "bread and butter" - e.g. Singapore implements sign language. Which sign language do they implement? How do they change? - I'm reminded that the devil is in the details. Jace has a meta analysis of various academia articles (both Singaporean and non-Singaporean), and she uses her personal history to ground the essay - but when you put this against the other personal essays in this volume grounded by lived interviews with other people, it's an essay that falls flat. (I'm not even going to go into the details, where she rages against "neurotypical standards" - which are never defined.)