Re-Presenting Disability: Section Three

I particularly enjoyed this final section of Re-Presenting Disability. At first, I was confused by the editor’s decision to title this section Unsettling Practices. The stories in this section are far from unsettling; rather, they are some of the most inspiring and motivational of all the case studies because they present some way to negotiate the crisis of representation surrounding people with disabilities and museum work. Perhaps what the editors really mean is that these are all examples of museums re-evaluating and changing their practices rather than remaining “settled” in the their old ways.

I found Chapter 15 “Transforming Practice: disability perspectives and the museum,” to be a revealing look at how the decision by the National Holocaust Memorial Museum to discuss issues of disability rights led to other important changes. I found it interesting that the museum was forced, for the first time, to look deeply into issues of accessibility when they invited the activist and lawyer Harriet McBryde Johnson to speak about disability rights. People in many departments had to prepare space and staff for a diverse audience including many people with various disabilities. While this scramble to make the museum accessible may not be an ideal scenario, it is important to recognize that if this exhibit and symposium had not happened, the museum would likely still not be as physically accessible as it is today. In addition, the museum forged relationships with individuals from communities of people with disabilities who can act as advocates for continued attention to these issues.

Chapter 16, “Reciprocity, Accountability and Empowerment: emancipatory principles and practices in the museum,” carried on the theme of the importance of involving people with disabilities in the planning of museum exhibits, elements and programs. The author, Heather Hollins, frames her discussion with the ideas of emancipatory research, wherein people with disabilities are involved in the development and implementation of museum exhibits and policies. Emancipatory research is different from other forms of partnership or consultation. There is an expectation of accountability and action on the part of the museum to improve in the areas identified as problematic by the researchers, and the relationship between researcher and museum is reciprocal and mutually beneficial. I am left wondering about local museums that use contractors to carry out accessibility analysis and research. Is the museum expected to act on the recommendations of the consultants? What is a museum’s ethical responsibility in this case?

I was also pleasantly surprised to learn about the existence of a program like the Pioneers Forum, a group encouraging young people with disabilities to stand up for their rights and advocate for accessibility. Their participation in emancipatory research for the Holocust Center in England got me thinking; are there programs like this in Indianapolis, or in other cities? I couldn’t find information on any. What a great opportunity for improving the lives of these young people and making the museum more inclusive at the same time! Do you think a museum could implement and lead a program like the Pioneers Forum?

I am glad the editors chose to make “Collective Bodies: What museums do for disability studies,” by Katherine Ott the final chapter. Ott presents some ideas on how museums can truly become places of healing and social change. She makes many excellent points, but my favorite is her discussion of the power of words. In several places in this book, words have played an integral role. They can cause anger when used improperly, in the case of the Museum of Sex and the Intimate Encounters exhibit, and there is always much deliberation by museum workers when determining what words to use in an exhibit. Ott suggests that this is the inherent problem with words; they are by their nature generalizing, and disability studies eschews the general in favor of an individual person’s concept of their disability. Museums have the power to turn the general into the particular through the use of objects. An object is, imbued with the story of the individual who owned and used it. By displaying, for instance, a wheelchair and the story of the person who used it, we can focus on the importance of individual people instead of generalizing and compartmentalizing with words.