From FairsparkWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Therefore, Puar's intervention into disability research examines the ways by which the difference of incapacity is produced and how explicit forms of incapacity change into valorized. Intervening within the ways through which the binary of disabled and abled is produced by way of the lens of capability and debility makes it doable to question the methods during which the distinction of disability reifies an exceptionalism and simplified conceptualization of incapacity that only sure privileged disabled our bodies can occupy (ibid.). In this manner, Puar's mission grasps on the nonidentical-how incapacity might be theorized when the idea of disability shouldn't be contained by processes of normativity. Puar's intervention is uncomfortable for disability studies insofar as she challenges the methods through which the sphere of inquiry reproduces disability as an oppressed identity and an aggrieved subject enacted by "wounded attachments" (Puar 2012, 157). Puar's project of rethinking disability is to maneuver from incapacity to debility, not in order to "disavow the essential political gains enabled by disability activists globally, but to invite a deconstruction of what ability and capability mean, affective and otherwise, and to push for a broader politics of debility that destabilizes the seamless production of abled-bodies in relation to incapacity" (166). In doing so, Puar asks: "How would our political panorama remodel if it actively decentered the sustained reproduction and proliferation of the grieving topic, opening instead toward an affective politics, attentive to ecologies of sensation and switchpoints of bodily capacities, to habituations and unhabituations, to tendencies, a number of temporalities, and becomings?" (157). Puar thus requires a non-anthropocentric affective politics that moves us away from exceptional aggrieved human subjects whose damage will be transformed into cultural capital.

Here is my webpage