General Observations using Disability Studies

Monday, June 20, 2005

"Normal"

Sometimes the phrase can be heard, "She's pretty normal, whatever that means." It's more the second part of the sentence that I'll be focusing on this post.

The word "normal" is often applied to the body / mind of people. Another question, in particular in conjunction with a man or woman who is struggling to find a mate, is, "Why can't I just find somebody who's normal?" The answer to that question may be the seeker is focusing too much on the body / mind for attraction, rather than the qualities of a mate. If people search for a "normal" body to have or be connected to in a relationship, they'll be disappointed much of the time. As has been discussed before on this blog - even if a person's body / mind starts off "normal," it doesn't mean it will stay that way. Anything can happen to any one at any moment; for instance, look at Christopher Reeve. If it had been the body his wife was solely wedded to, the years of their marriage post-injurty would not have been as helpful and supportive.

What's interesting to note is that the word normal has applied to the body for only the last 150 years. This information is according to Lennard Davis' article "Crips Strike Back: The Rise of Disability Studies" from the fall 1999 edition of American Literary History journal. 150 years in human history is not a very long time. Davis explains the word normal began to be applied to the body in conjunction with the rise of statistics, census taking, psychology, eugenics, and the industrial revolution. All of these areas demand categorizing.

The other thing to take note of is that industry demands a high paced work schedule. A one armed farm worker has to work hard to adjust to his situation, but can, to a degree set his own pace; whereas, a one armed factory worker may have a harder time keeping up with the assembling line. Thus industry wants to make the one armed man feel excluded, and therefore society as it becomes statistically and industrially orienated deems people "normal" who can work tireless hours feeding industry interests. Those who can't then become shunned societally.

One other observation - I'm diabetic, so my pancreas doesn't work. I have a friend who has cerebral palsy, but his pancreas works. As defined by our bodies, which one of us is normal, then? Or is neither of us? Or my pancreas stopped working when I was 9 months old. A friend of mine got type 1 diabetes when he was 21 years old. Was he normal as a child, and I wasn't? And now he's not normal either?

In the end, then, the word "normal" is actually arbitrary. It depends on the time, setting, situation, and context as to what it means to be "normal," meaning, this word, especially as it applies to the body, will never have a fixed definition. A table most likely will be a table will be a table. But a "normal" body, truly who in the world knows what that means?

2 Comments:

At 7:37 PM, Blogger Hayden said...

interesting time line. I know that in times gone by it was quite surprising to find "regular features" without some glaring difference. Look at the history of the royals. It isn't all a problem of inbreeding.

 
At 7:39 PM, Blogger Hayden said...

(my point was that it was simply accepted as normal for people to have some visible difference from the "statistical average")

 

Post a Comment

<< Home