---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Boopathi P <pathis...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:34:44 +0530
Subject: {Disability Studies India} Blindness: Is Literature Against Us?
To: getkarthik4u <getkarthi...@gmail.com>, sivaramanvvs
<sivaraman...@gmail.com>, send2kmn <send2...@gmail.com>,
disability-studies-india <disability-studies-in...@googlegroups.com>,
brailleacl <braille...@googlegroups.com>, reachingsuresh
<reachingsur...@gmail.com>, Madhulika Nirmal
<madhulikanir...@gmail.com>, hatemalshamaa <hatemalsha...@gmail.com>,
Ade Jyothi <944jyo...@gmail.com>, sivakumarnanban
<sivakumarnan...@gmail.com>, Karthi Govarthanan
<karthimaengl...@gmail.com>

Blindness: Is Literature Against Us?
An Address Delivered by Kenneth Jernigan
   President, National   Federation of the Blind
   At the Banquet of the Annual Convention
   Chicago,   July 3, 1974
History, we are told, is the record of what human beings have done;
literature, the record of what they have thought. Last year I examined
  with you the place of the blind in history—not just what we have
done but what   the historians have remembered and said we have done.
The two, as we found, are   vastly different.
This year I would like to talk with you about the place of the blind
in   literature. How have we been perceived? What has been our role?
How have the   poets and novelists, the essayists and dramatists seen
us? Have they "told it   like it is," or merely liked it as they've
told it?
With history there is at least a supposed foundation of fact. Whatever
the   twisting or omission or misinterpretation or downright
falsehood, that   foundation presumably remains—a tether and a
touchstone, always subject to   reexamination and new proof. Not so
with literature. The author is free to cut   through facts to the
essence, to dream and soar and surmise. Going deeper than   history,
the myths and feelings of a people are enshrined in its literature.
Literary culture in all its forms constitutes possibly the main
transmission   belt of our society's beliefs and values—more important
even than the schools,   the churches, the news media, or the family.
How, then, have we fared in   literature?
The literary record reveals no single theme or unitary view of the
life of   the blind. Instead, it displays a bewildering variety of
images—often   conflicting and contradictory, not only as between
different ages or cultures,   or among the works of various writers,
but even within the pages of a single   book.
Yet, upon closer examination the principal themes and motifs of
literature   and popular culture are nine in number and may be
summarized as follows: blindness as compensatory or miraculous power,
blindness as total tragedy;   blindness as foolishness and
helplessness; blindness as unrelieved wickedness   and evil; blindness
as perfect virtue; blindness as punishment for sin;   blindness as
abnormality or dehumanization; blindness as purification; and
blindness as symbol or parable.
Let us begin with blindness and compensatory powers. Suppose one of
you   should ask me whether I think there is any advantage in being
blind; and suppose   I should answer like this: "Not an advantage
perhaps: still it has compensations   that one might not think of. A
new world to explore, new experiences, new powers   awakening; strange
new perceptions; life in the fourth dimension."l How would   you react
to that? You would, I suspect, laugh me out of the room. I doubt that
 a single person here would buy such stereotyped stupidity. You and I
know from   firsthand experience that there is no "fourth dimension"
to blindness—no   miraculous new powers awakening, no strange new
perceptions, no brave new worlds   to explore. Yet, the words I have
quoted are those of a blind character in a   popular novel of some
time back. (I don't know whether the term has   significance, but a
blind "private eye," no less.)
The association of blindness with compensatory powers, illustrated by
the   blind detective I have just mentioned, represents a venerable
tradition,   reaching back to classical mythology. A favorite method
of punishment among the   gods of ancient Greece was blinding—regarded
apparently as a fate worse than   death—following which, more often
than not, the gods so pitied the blinded   victim that they relented
and conferred upon him extraordinary gifts, usually   the power of
prophecy or some other exceptional skill. Thus, Homer was widely
regarded as having been compensated by the gift of poetry. In the same
way   Tiresias, who wandered through the plays of Sophocles, received
for his   blindness the gift of prophecy.
The theme of divine compensation following divine retribution survived
the   passage of the ages and the decline of the pagan religions. Sir
Arthur Conan   Doyle (one of the most eminent novelists of the last
century, and the creator of   Sherlock Holmes) conjured up a blind
character with something of Holmes's   sleuthing talents, in a book
entitled Sir Nigel. This figure is   introduced as one who has the
mysterious ability to detect by hearing a hidden   tunnel, which runs
beneath the besieged castle. His compensatory powers are   described
in a conversation between two other people in the novel:
"This man was once rich and of good repute [says one], but he was
beggared by   this robber lord who afterwards put out his eyes, so
that he has lived for many   years in darkness at the charity of
others."
"How can he help in our enterprise if he be indeed blind?" [asks his
companion.]
"It is for that very reason, fair Lord, that he can be of greater
service   than any other man. For it often happens that when a man has
lost a sense, the   good God will strengthen those that remain. Hence
it is that Andreas has such   ears that he can hear the sap in the
trees or the cheep of the mouse in its   burrow . . ."2
The great nineteenth-century novelist Victor Hugo, in The Man Who
Laughs, reflected the view of a host of modern writers that blindness
carries   with it a certain purity and ecstasy, which somehow makes up
for the loss of   sight. His blind heroine, Dea, is portrayed as
"absorbed by that kind of ecstasy   peculiar to the blind, which seems
at times to give them a song to listen to in   their souls and to make
up to them for the light which they lack by some strain   of ideal
music. Blindness," says Hugo, "is a cavern to which reaches the deep
harmony of the Eternal."3
Probably it is this mystical notion of a "sixth sense" accompanying
blindness   that accounts for the rash of blind detectives and
investigators in popular   fiction. Max Carrados, the man who talked
of living in the "fourth dimension,"   first appeared in 1914 and went
on to survive a number of superhuman escapades   through the nineteen
twenties. In 1915 came another sightless sleuth—the   remarkable Damon
Gaunt, who "never lost a case."4 So it is with   "Thornley Colton,
Blind Detective," the brainchild of Clinton H. Stagg; and so   it is
with the most illustrious of all the private eyes without eyes,
Captain   Duncan Maclain, whose special qualities are set forth in the
deathless prose of   a dust jacket:
"Shooting to kill by sound, playing chess with fantastic precision,
and, of   course, quickening the hearts of the opposite sex, Captain
Maclain has won the   unreserved admiration of reviewers."5
Even the author is carried away with the genius of his hero: "There
were   moments," he writes, "when powers slightly greater than those
possessed by   ordinary mortals seemed bestowed on Duncan Maclain.
Such moments worried   him."6
They might worry us, as well; for all of this mumbo jumbo about
abnormal or   supernatural powers doesn't lessen the stereotype of the
blind person as alien   and different, unnatural and peculiar. It
makes it worse.
Not only is it untrue, but it is also a profound disservice to the
blind; for   it suggests that whatever a blind person may accomplish
is not due to his own   ability but to some magic inherent in
blindness itself. This assumption of   compensatory powers removes the
blind person at a stroke of the pen from the   realm of the normal—the
ordinary, everyday world of plain people—and places him   in a limbo
of abnormality. Whether supernormal or subnormal does not matter—he
is without responsibility, without rights, and without society. We
have been   conned into this view of second-class status long enough.
The play is over. We   want no more of magic powers and compensations.
We want our rights as citizens   and human beings—and we intend to
have them!
It is significant that, for all his supposed charm and talent, Maclain
never   gets the girl—or any girl. The author plainly regards him as
ineligible for such   normal human relationships as love, sex, and
marriage. Max Carrados put it this   way in replying to an
acquaintance who expressed great comfort in his presence:   "Blindness
invites confidence," he says. "We are out of the running—for us human
 rivalry ceases to exist."7
This notion of compensatory powers—the doctrine that blindness is its
own   reward—is no compliment but an insult. It robs us of all credit
for our   achievements and all responsibility for our failings. It
neatly relieves society   of any obligation to equalize conditions or
provide opportunities or help us   help ourselves. It leaves us in the
end without the capacity to lead a regular,   competitive, and
participating life in the community around us. The blind, in   short,
may (according to this view) be extraordinary, but we can never be
ordinary. Don't you believe it! We are normal people—neither
especially blessed   nor especially cursed—and the fiction to the
contrary must come to an end! It is   not mumbo jumbo we want, or
magical powers—but our rights as free people, our   responsibilities
as citizens, and our dignity as human beings.
Negative as it is, this image of compensatory powers is less vicious
and   destructive than some others which run through the literature of
fiction and   fantasy. The most damaging of all is also the oldest and
most persistent:   namely, the theme of blindness as total tragedy,
the image summed up in the   ancient Hebrew saying, "The blind man is
as one dead." The Oedipus cycle of   Greek tragic plays pressed the
death-in-life stereotype to its farthest extreme.   Thus, in "Oedipus
Rex", in which the king puts out his own eyes, the statement   occurs:
"Thou art better off dead than living blind." It remained, however,
for   an Englishman, blind himself, to write the last word (what today
would be called   "the bottom line") on blindness as total disaster.
John Milton says in Samson   Agonistes:
Blind among enemies, worse than chains, Dungeon, or beggary, or
decrepit   age!... Inferior to the vilest now become of man or worm;
the vilest here excel   me, They creep, yet see; I, dark in light,
exposed To daily fraud, contempt,   abuse, and wrong, Within doors, or
without, still as a fool, In power of others,   never in my own;
Scarce half I seem to live, Dead more than half.... a moving   grave.8
What is most striking about this epic poem is not the presence of the
 disaster concept (that might have been expected) but the fact that
Milton of all   people was the author. His greatest writing (including
"Paradise Lost") was done   after his blindness. Then why did he do
it? The answer is simple: We the blind   tend to see ourselves as
others see us. Even when we know to the contrary, we   tend to accept
the public view of our limitations. Thus, we help make those
limitations a reality. Betrayed by the forces of literature and
tradition,   Milton (in his turn) betrayed himself and all others who
are blind. In fact, he   actually strengthened and reinforced the
stereotype—and he did it in spite of   his own personal experience to
the contrary. The force of literature is strong,   indeed!
The disaster concept of blindness did not stop with Milton. "William
Tell",   the eighteenth-century play by Schiller, shows us an old man,
blinded and forced   to become a beggar. His son says:
Oh, the eye's light, of all the gifts of Heaven the dearest, best! ...
And he   must drag on through all his days in endless darkness! . . To
die is nothing.   But to have life, and not have sight—Oh, that is
misery indeed!9
A century later the disaster concept was as popular as ever. In
Kipling's   book, The Light That Failed, no opportunity is lost to
tell us that   blindness is worse than death. The hero, Dick Heldar,
upon learning that he is   to become blind, remarks: "It's the living
death .... We're to be shut up in the   dark ... and we shan't see
anybody, and we shall never have anything we want,   not though we
live to be a hundred." 10 Later in the book, he rages   against the
whole world "because it was alive and could see, while he, Dick, was
dead in the death of the blind, who, at the best, are only burdens
upon their   associates." 11 And when this self-pitying character
finally manages   to get himself killed (to the relief of all
concerned), the best Kipling can say   of him is that "his luck had
held till the last, even to the crowning mercy of a   kindly bullet
through his head." 12
Joseph Conrad, in "The End of the Tether", kills off Captain Whalley
by   drowning, as a fate much preferable to remaining alive without
sight. In D.H.   Lawrence's "The Blind Man", there is a war-blinded
casualty named Maurice, whose   total despair and misery are
unrelieved by any hint of future hope; and Rosamond   Lehmann, in her
novel "Invitation to the Waltz", goes Lawrence one better- or,
rather, one worse. Her war-blinded hero, although he appears to be
living a   respectable life, is portrayed as if for all practical
purposes he were a   walking corpse. He leads, we are told, "a
counterfeit of life bred from his   murdered youth." And when he
brings himself somehow to dance with a former   sweetheart, it is a
sorry spectacle: "She danced with him," says the author, "in   love
and sorrow. He held her close to him, and he was far away from her,
far   from the music, buried and indifferent. She danced with his
youth and his   death." 13
For writers such as these, the supposed tragedy of blindness is so
unbearable   that only two solutions can be imagined: either the
victim must be cured or he   must be killed. A typical illustration is
Susan Glaspell's "The Glory of the   Conquered", of which an unkind
critic has written: "It is a rather easy solution   of the problem to
make her hero die at the end of the book, but probably the   author
did not know what else to do with him." 14
Let us now leave tragedy and move to foolishness and helplessness. The
blind   man as a figure of fun and the butt of ridicule is no doubt as
old as farce and   slapstick. In the Middle Ages the role was
regularly acted out on festive   holidays when blind beggars were
rounded up and outfitted in donkey's ears, than   made to gibber and
gesticulate to the delight of country bumpkins. Reflecting   this
general hilarity, Chaucer (in "The Merchant's Tale") presents a young
wife,   married to an old blind man, who deceives him by meeting her
lover in a tree   while taking the husband for a walk. The Chaucerian
twist is that the old man   suddenly regains his sight as the couple
are making love in the   branches-whereupon the quick-witted girl
explains that her amorous behavior was   solely for the purpose of
restoring his sight. Shakespeare is just as bad. He   makes the
blinded Gloucester in "King Lear" so thoroughly confused and helpless
 that he can be persuaded of anything and deceived by any trick.
Isaac, in the   Old Testament, is duped by his son Jacob, who
masquerades as Esau, disguising   himself in goatskins, and
substituting kid meat for the venison his father   craves—all without
a glimmer of recognition on the part of the old man, who must   have
taken leave of the rest of his senses as well as his sense of sight.
An unusually harsh example of the duping of blind people is found in
the   sixteenth-century play "Der Euienspiegel mit den Blinden". The
hero meets three   blind beggars and promises them a valuable coin to
pay for their food and   lodging at a nearby inn; but when they all
reach out for the money, he gives it   to none of them, and each
supposes that the others have received it. You can   imagine the
so-called "funny ending." After they go to the inn and dine
lavishly, the innkeeper demands his payment; and each of the blind
beggars   thereupon accuses the others of lying, thievery, and
assorted crimes. The   innkeeper-shouting "You people defraud
everyone!"--drives the three into his   pigsty and locks the gate,
lamenting to his wife: "What shall we do with them,   let them go
without punishment after they have eaten and drunk so much, for
nothing? But if we keep them, they will spread lice and fleas and we
will have   to feed them. I wish they were on the gallows." 15 The
play has a   "happy ending," but what an image persists of the
character of those who are   blind: criminal and corrupt, contagious
and contaminated, confounded and   confused, wandering homeless and
helpless in an alien landscape. Their book of   life might well be
called "Gullible's Travels."
The helpless blind man is a universal stereotype. In Maeterlinck's
play, "The   Blind", all of the characters are portrayed as sightless
in order to make a   philosophical point; but what emerges on the
stage is a ridiculous tableau of   groping, groaning, and grasping at
the air.
One of the very worst offenders against the truth about blindness is
the   eminent French author of our own day, Andre Gide, in "La
Symphonie Pastorale". A   blind reviewer of the novel has described it
well: "The girl Gertrude at   fifteen, before the pastor begins to
educate her, has all the signs of an   outright idiot. This is
explained simply as the result of her blindness ....   [Gide] asserts
that without physical sight one cannot really know the truth.
Gertrude lives happily in the good, pure world the pastor creates for
her ....   Gertrude knows next to nothing about the evil and pain in
the actual world. As a   sightless person she cannot consciously know
sin, is blissfully ignorant, like   Adam and Eve before eating of the
forbidden fruit. Only when her sight is   restored does she really
know evil for what it is and recognize sin. Then, on   account of the
sinning she has done with the pastor without knowing it was   sinning,
she is miserable and commits suicide."16
In literature not only is blindness depicted as stupidity but also as
 wickedness, the very incarnation of pure evil. The best-known model
is the old   pirate "Blind Pew," in Stevenson's "Treasure Island".
When the young hero, Jim   Hawkins, first encounters Pew, he feels
that he "never saw a more dreadful   figure" than this "horrible,
soft-spoken, eyeless creature"; and when Pew gets   the boy in his
clutches, Jim observes that he "never heard a voice so cruel, and
cold, and ugly as that blind man's." 17
A much earlier version of the wicked blind man theme is seen in the
picaresque romance of the sixteenth century, "Lazatillo de Tormes".
Lazarillo is   apprenticed as a guide to an old blind man, who is the
very personification of   evil.
"When the blind man told the boy to put his ear to a statue and listen
for a   peculiar noise, Lazarillo obeyed. Then the old man knocked the
boy's head   sharply against the stone, so his ears rang for three
days......"18
Throughout the ages the connection between blindness and meanness has
been   very nearly irresistible to authors, and it has struck a
responsive note with   audiences--audiences already conditioned
through folklore and fable to believe   that blindness brings out the
worst in people. Given the casual cruelty with   which the blind have
generally been treated, such villainous caricatures have   also
provided a convenient excuse and justification. After all, if the
blind are   rascals and rapscallions, they should be handled
accordingly- and no pity   wasted.
Alternating with the theme of blindness as perfect evil is its exact
reverse:   the theme of blindness as perfect virtue. On the surface
these two popular   stereotypes appear to be contradictory; but it
takes no great psychological   insight to recognize them as opposite
sides of the same counterfeit coin. What   they have in common is the
notion that blindness is a transforming event,   entirely removing the
victim front the ordinary dimensions of life and   humanity.
Blindness must either be the product of sin and the devil or of angels
and   halos. Of the latter type is Melody, in Laura Richards' novel of
the same name:   "The blind child," we are told, "touched life with
her hand, and knew it. She   knew every tree of the forest by its
bark; knew when it blossomed, and how ....   Not a cat or dog in the
village but would leave his own master or mistress at a   single call
from Melody." 19 She is not merely virtuous; she is   magical. She
rescues a baby from a burning building, cures the sick by her
singing, and redeems alcoholics from the curse of drink.
It is passing strange, and what is strangest of all is that this
absurd   creature is the invention of Laura Richards, the daughter of
Samuel Gridley   Howe, a pioneer educator of the blind. Like Milton,
Mrs. Richards knew better.   She was betrayed by the forces of
tradition and custom, of folklore and   literature. In turn she
betrayed herself and the blind, and gave reinforcement   to the
stereotype. Worst of all, she doubtless never knew what she had done,
and   thought of herself as a benefactor of the blind and a champion
of their cause.   Ignorance is truly the greatest of all tragedies.
The sickest of all the romantic illusions is the pious opinion that
blindness   is only a blessing in disguise. In "The Blind Girl of
Wittenberg", by John G.   Morris, a young man says to the heroine:
"God has deprived you of sight but only   that your heart might be
illuminated with more brilliant light." Every blind   girl I know
would have slapped his face for such insulting drivel; but the reply
of this fictional female is worse than the original remark: "Do you
not think,   sir," she says, "that we blind people have a world within
us which is perhaps   more beautiful than yours, and that we have a
light within us which shines more   brilliantly than your sun?" 20
So it goes with the saccharine sweet that has robbed us of humanity
and made   the legend and hurt our cause. There is Caleb, the "little
blind seer" of James   Ludlow's awful novel, "Deborah". There is
Bertha, Dickens' ineffably sweet and   noble blind heroine of "The
Cricket on the Hearth", who comes off almost as an   imbecile. There
is the self-sacrificing Nydia, in "The Last Days of Pompeii";   and
there is Naomi, in Hall Caine's novel, "Scapegoat". But enough! It is
 sweetness without light, and literature without enlightment.
One of the oldest and cruelest themes in the archives of fiction is
the   notion of blindness as a punishment for sin. Thus, Oedipus was
blinded as a   punishment for incest, and Shakespeare's Gloucester for
adultery. The theme   often goes hand in hand with the stereotype of
blindness as a kind of   purification rite--an act which wipes the
slate clean and transforms human   character into purity and goodness.
So Amyas Leigh, in Kingsley's "Westward Ho",   having been blinded by
a stroke of lightning, is instantly converted from a   crook to a
saint.
Running like an ugly stain through many of these master plots- and,
perhaps,   in a subtle way underlying all of them-is the image of
blindness as   dehumanization, a kind of banishment from the world of
normal life and   relationships. Neither Dickens' blind Bertha, nor
Bulwer-Lytton's Nydia, when   they find themselves in love, have the
slightest idea that anybody could ever   love them back- nor does the
reader; nor, for that matter, do the other   characters in the novels.
Kipling, in a story entitled "They," tells of a   charming and
apparently competent blind woman, Miss Florence, who loves children
but "of course" cannot have any of her own. Kipling doesn't say why
she can't,   but it's plain that she is unable to imagine a blind
person either married or   raising children. Miss Florence, however,
is magically compensated. She is   surrounded on her estate by the
ghosts of little children who have died in the   neighborhood and have
thereupon rushed to her in spirit. We are not meant to   infer that
she is as crazy as a hoot owl--only that she is blind, and therefore
entitled to her spooky fantasies.
The last of the popular literary themes is that which deals with
blindness   not literally but symbolically, for purposes of satire or
parable. From folklore   to film the image recurs of blindness as a
form of death or damnation, or as a   symbol of other kinds of
unseeing (as in the maxim, "where there is no vision,   the people
perish)." In this category would come H.G. Well's classic "The
Country of the Blind"; also, "The Planet of the Blind", by Paul Corey;
and   Maeterlinck's "The Blind". In the short story by Conrad Aiken,
"Silent Snow,   Secret Snow," blindness becomes a metaphor for
schizophrenia.
In virtually all of these symbolic treatments, there is an implied
acceptance   of blindness as a state of ignorance and confusion, of
the inversion of normal   perceptions and values, and of a condition
equal to if not worse than death. The   havoc wrought upon the lives
of blind people in ages past by these literary   traditions is done,
and it cannot be undone; but the future is yet to be   determined. And
that future, shaped by the instrument of truth, will be   determined
by us. Self-aware and self-reliant-neither unreasonably belligerent
nor unduly self-effacing—we must, in a matter-of-fact way, take up the
challenge   of determining our own destiny. We know who we are; we
know what we can do; and   we know how to act in concert.
And what can we learn from this study of literature? What does it all
mean?   For one thing, it places in totally new perspective the
pronouncements and   writings of many of the so-called "experts" who
today hold forth in the field of   work with the blind. They tell us
(these would-be "professionals," these   hirelings of the American
Foundation for the Blind and HEW, these   pseudoscientists with their
government grants and lofty titles and impressive   papers) that
blindness is not just the loss of sight, but a total transformation
of the person.
They tell us that blindness is not merely a loss to the eyes, but to
the   personality as well—that it is a "death," a blow to the very
being of the   individual. They tell us that the eye is a sex symbol,
and that the blind person   cannot be a "whole man"—or, for that
matter, presumably a whole woman either.   They tell us that we have
multiple "lacks and losses." 21
The American Foundation for the Blind devises a 239 page   guidebook22
for our personal management," with sixteen steps to help   us take a
bath, and specific techniques for clapping our hands and shaking our
heads. We are given detailed instructions for buttering our bread,
tying our   shoes, and even understanding the meaning of the words
"up" and "down." And all   of this is done with federal grants, and
much insistence that it is new   discovery and modern thought.
But our study of literature gives it the lie. These are not new
concepts.   They are as unenlightened as the Middle Ages. They are as
old as Oedipus Rex. As   for science, they have about as much of it as
man's ancient fear of the dark.   They are not fact, but fiction; not
new truths, but medieval witchcraft, decked   out in modern
garb—computerized mythology. What we have bought with our federal
tax dollars and our technology and our numerous government grants is
only a   restatement of the tired old fables of primitive astrology
and dread of the   night.
And let us not forget NAC (The National Accreditation Council for
Agencies   Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped). When the
members of NAC and its   accredited minions try to act as our
custodians and wardens, they are only   behaving in the time honored
way of the Elizabethan "keepers of the poor." When   they seek to deck
us out in donkey's ears and try to make us gibber and   gesticulate,
they are only attempting what the country bumpkins of 600 years ago
did with better grace and more efficiency.
We have repudiated these false myths of our inferiority and
helplessness. We   have rejected the notion of magical powers and
special innocence and naivete.   Those who would try to compel us to
live in the past would do well to look to   their going. Once people
have tasted freedom, they cannot go back. We will never   again return
to the ward status and second-class citizenship of the old
custodialism. There are many of us (sighted and blind alike) who will
take to   the streets and fight with our bare hands if we must before
we will let it   happen.
And we must never forget the power of literature. Revolutions do not
begin in   the streets, but in the libraries and the classrooms. It
has been so throughout   history. In the terrible battles of the
American Civil War, for example, the   writers and poets fought, too.
When the Southern armies came to Bull Run, they   brought with them
Sir Walter Scott and the image of life he had taught them to
believe. Ivanhoe and brave King Richard stood in the lines with
Stonewall   Jackson to hurl the Yankees back. The War would have ended
sooner except for the   dreams of the poets. And when the Northern
troops went down to Richmond, through   the bloody miles that barred
the way, they carried with them the Battle Hymn of   the Republic and
Harriet Beecher Stowe. It was Uncle Tom and little Eliza who   fired
the shots and led the charges that broke the Southern lines. Never
mind   that neither Scott nor Stowe told it exactly as it was. What
they said was   believed, and believing made it come true.
To the question IS LITERATURE AGAINST Us, there can be no unqualified
 response. If we consider only the past, the answer is certainly yes.
We have   Conventional fiction, like conventional history, has told it
like it isn't.   Although there have been notable exceptions, 23 the
story has been   monotonously and negatively the same.
If we consider the present, the answer is mixed. There are signs of
change,   but the old stereotypes and the false images still
predominate—and they are   reinforced and given weight by the writings
and beliefs of many of the "experts"   in our own field of work with
the blind.
If we turn to the future, the answer is that the future—in literature
as in   life—is not predetermined but self-determined. As we shape our
lives, singly and   collectively, so will we shape our literature.
Blindness will be a tragedy only   if we see ourselves as authors see
us. The contents of the page, in the last   analysis, reflect the
conscience of the age. The structure of literature is but   a hall of
mirrors, giving us back (in images slightly larger or smaller than
life) exactly what we put in. The challenge for us is to help our age
raise its   consciousness and reform its conscience. We must rid our
fiction of fantasy and   imbue it with fact. Then we shall have a
literature to match reality, and a   popular image of blindness to
match the truth, and our image of ourselves.
Poetry is the song of the spirit and the language of the soul. In the
drama   of our struggle to be free—in the story of our movement and
the fight to rid the   blind of old custodialism and man's ancient
fear of the dark—there are epics   which cry to be written,and songs
which ask to be sung. The poets and novelists   can write the words,
but we must create the music.
We stand at a critical time in the history of the blind. If we falter
or turn   back, the tragedy of blindness will be great, indeed. But,
of course, we will   not falter, and we will not turn back. Instead,
we will go forward with joy in   our hearts and a song of gladness on
our lips. The future is ours, and the   novelists and the poets will
record it. Come! Join me on the barricades, and we   will make it come
true!
FOOTNOTES
1. Ernest Bramah, "Best Max Carrados Detective Stories", p. 6.
2. Arthur Conan Doyle, "Sir Nigel", p. 102.
3. Victor Hugo, "The Man Who Laughs", p. 316.
4. Isabel Ostrander, "At One-Thirty: A Mystery", p. 6.
5. Baynard Kendrick, "Make Mine Maclain", dust jacket.
6. Ibid., p. 43.
7. Bramah, op. cit., p. 7.
8. John Milton, "The Portable Milton", pp. 615-616.
9. Friedrich Schiller, "Complete Works of Friedrich Schiller", p. 447.
10. Rudyard Kipling, "Selected Prose and Poetry of Rudyard Kipling", p.   131.
11. Ibid., p. 156.
12. Ibid., p. 185.
13. Rosamond Lehmann, "Invitation to the Waltz", p. 48, quoted in
Jacob   Twersky, "Blindness in Literature".
14. Jessica L. Langworthy, "Blindness in Fiction: A Study of the
Attitude of   Authors Towards Their Blind Characters," "Journal of
Applied Psychology",   14:282, 1930.
15. Twersky, op. cit., p. 15.
16. Ibid., P. 47.
17. Robert Louis Stevenson, "Treasure Island", p. 36.
18. "The Life of Lazatillo de Tormes", summarized in Magill's
"Masterplots", p. 2573.
19. Laura E. Richards, "Melody", pp. 47-48.
20. John G. Morris, "The Blind Girl of Wittenberg", p. 103.
21. Reverend Thomas J. Carroll, "Blindness: What It is, What It Does,
and How   to Live With It". This entire book deals with the concept of
blindness as a   "dying," and with the multiple "lacks and losses" of
blindness.
22. American Foundation for the Blind, Inc., "A Step-by-Step Guide to
 Personal Management for Blind People". This entire book is taken up
with lists   of so-called "how to" details about the routines of daily
living for blind   persons.
23. There is a tenth theme to be found here and there on the shelves
of   literature—a rare and fugitive image that stands out in the
literary gloom like   a light at the end of a tunnel. This image of
truth is a least as old as Charles   Lamb's tale of "Rosamund Gray",
which presents an elderly blind woman who is not   only normally
competent but normally cantankerous. The image is prominent in two
of Sir Walter Scott's novels, "Old Mortality" and "The Bride of
Lammamoor", in   both of which blind persons are depicted
realistically and unsentimentally. It   is evident again, to the
extent at least of the author's knowledge and ability,   in Wilkie
Collin's "Poor Miss Finch", written after Collins had made a serious
study of Diderot's "Letter on the Blind" (a scientific treatise not
without its   errors but remarkable for its understanding). The image
is manifest in Charles   D. Stewart's "Valley Waters", in which there
is an important character who is   blind—and yet there is about him no
aura of miracle nor even of mystery, no   brooding or mischief, no
special powers, nothing in fact but naturalness and   normality.
Similarly, in a novel entitled "Far in the Forest", H. Weir Mitchell
has drawn from life (so he tells us) a formidable but entirely
recognizable   character named Philetus Richmond "who had lost his
sight at the age of fifty   but could still swing an axe with the best
of the woodsmen."
Back to top
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Foundation for the Blind, Inc., "A Step-by-Step Guide to
Personal   Management for Blind People", New York, 1970.
Barreyre, Gene, "The Blind Ship", New York, Dial, 1926.
Bramah, Ernest, "Best Max Carrados Detective Stories", New York, Dover,   1972.
Bronte, Charlotte, "Jane Eyre", New; York, Dutton, 1963.
Caine, Hall, "The Scapegoat", New York, D. Appleton and Company, 1879.
Carroll, Reverend Thomas J., "Blindness: What It Is, What It Does, and
How To   live With It", Boston, Toronto, Little, Brown and Company,
1961.
Chaucer, Geoffrey, "Canterbury Tales", Garden City, translated by J.U.
  Nicolson, 1936.
Collins, Wilkie, "Poor Miss Finch", New York, Harper and Brothers, 1902.
Conrad, Joseph, "The End of the Tether", Garden City, Doubleday, 1951.
Corey, Paul, "The Planet of the Blind", New York, Paperback Library,   1969.
Craig, Dinah Mulock, "John Halifax, Gentleman", New York, A.L. Burt, nd.
Davis, William Stems, "Falaise of the Blessed Voice", New York, The
Macmillan   Company, 1904.
Dickens, Charles, "Barnaby Rudge", New York, Oxford University Press,   1968.
-----, "Cricket On the Hearth", London, Oxford University Press, 1956.
Diderot, Denis, "Lettre sur les Avengles", Geneva, E. Droz, 1951.
Doyle, Arthur Conan, "Sir Nigel", New York, McClure, Philips and
Company,   1906.
Gide, Andre, "La Symphonie Pastorale", Paris, Gallimard, 1966.
Glaspell, Susan, "The Glory of the Conquered", New York, Frederick A.
Stokes   Company, 1909.
Hugo, Victor, "The Man Who Laughs", New York, Grosset and Dunlap, nd.
Kendrick, Baynard, "Make Mine Maclain", New York, Morrow, 1947.
Kipling, Rudyard, "Selected Prose and Poetry of Rudyard
Kipling", Garden City, Garden City Publishing Company, 1937.
Kingsley, Charles, "Westward Ho!", New York, J.F. Taylor and Company,   1899.
Lamb, Charles, "The Tale of Rosamund Gray and Old Blind Margaret",
London,   1798.
Langworthy, Jessica L., "Blindness in Fiction: A Study of the
Attitude of Authors Toward their Blind Characters," "Journal of
Applied   Psychology", 14:282, 1930.
Lawrence, D.H., "England, My England and Other Short Stories", New
York, T.   Seltzer, 1922.
Lehmann, Rosamond, "Invitation to the Waltz", New York, 1933.
"Life of Lazarillo de Tormes", 1553, summarized in Magill,
Frank Nathen, "Magill's Masterplots", New York, Salem Press, 1964.
London, Jack, "The Sea Wolf", New York, Grosset and Dunlap, 1904.
Ludlow, James M., "Deborah, A Tale of the Times of Judas Maccabaeus",
New   York, Fleming H. Revell Company, 1901.
Lytton, Bulwer, "The Last Days of Pompeii", Garden City, International
  Collectors Library, 1946.
Maeterlinck, Maurice, "The Plays of Maurice Maeterlinck", translated
by   Richard Hovey, New York, Duffield, 1908.
Marryat, Frederick, "The Little Savage", New York, E.P. Dutton and
Company,   1907.
Milton, John, "Paradise Lost", New York, Heritage Press, 1940.
-----, "The Portable Milton", New York, Viking Press, 1949.
Mitchell, H. Weir, "Far in the Forest", New York, Century Company, 1899.
Morris, John G., "The Blind Girl of Wittenberg", Philadelphia, Lindsay
and   Blakison, 1856.
Ostrander, Isabel, "At One-Thirty: A Mystery", New York, W.J. Watt, 1915.
Richards, Laura E., "Melody", Boston, Estes and Lauriat, 1897.
Sachs, Hans, "Der Eulenspiegel mit den Blinden".
Schiller, Friedrich, "William Tell", translated by Robert
Waller Deering, Boston, Heath, 1961.
-----, "Don Carlos, Infant of Spain", translated by Charles E.
Passage, New   York, Ungar Publishing Company, 1959.
Scott, Sir Walter, "Old Mortality", London, Oxford University Press,   1925.
-----, "The Bride of Lammamoor", London, Oxford University Press, 1925.
Shakespeare, William, "King Lear", New Haven, Yale University Press,   1947.
Sophocles, "Oedipus Rex", translated by Robert Fitzgerald and Dudley
Fitts,   New York, Harcourt Brace, 1949.
-----, "Oedipus at Colonnus", translated by Charles R.
Walker, Garden City, Anchor Books, 1966.
Stagg, Clinton H., "Thornley Colton, Blind Detective", New York, G.
Howard   Watt, 1925.
Stevenson, Robert Louis, "Treasure Island", Keith Jennison large-type
 edition, New York, Watt, nd.
-----, "Kidnapped", New York, A.L. Burt, 1883.
Stewart, Charles D., "Valley Waters", New York, E.P. Dutton and Company,   1922.
Twersky, Jacob, Blindness in Literature, New York, American Foundation
for   the Blind, 1955.
Wells, H.G. "The Country of the B@d," Strand Magazine, London, 1904.
West, V. Sackville, The Dragon in Shallow Waters, New York, G.P.
Putnam's   Sons, 1922.

source: https://nfb.org/Images/nfb/Publications/convent/banque74.htm

-- 
Regards
Boopathi P
PhD research scholar,
department of English Literature,
School of literary studies,
EFL University.
Hyderabad-500007
India.
Mobile: +91-9843693951

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Disability Studies India" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to disability-studies-india+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to disability-studies-in...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/disability-studies-india.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 
Avinash Shahi
Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU

The list has now migrated to www.accessindia.inclusivehabitat.in

You should now post to the id: a...@accessindia.inclusivehabitat.in




Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/

To unsubscribe send a message to
accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the 
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;

2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent 
through this mailing list..

Reply via email to