Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

Disability and Difference in Global Contexts: Enabling a Transformative Body Politic

Rate this book
This book explores the possibilities and limitations re-theorizing disability using historical materialism in the interdisciplinary contexts of social theory, cultural studies, social and education policy, feminist ethics, and theories of citizenship.

238 pages, Hardcover

First published November 15, 2011

6 people are currently reading
236 people want to read

About the author

Nirmala Erevelles

5 books1 follower

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
19 (54%)
4 stars
11 (31%)
3 stars
5 (14%)
2 stars
0 (0%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
Profile Image for Alfie Hancox.
27 reviews7 followers
July 24, 2019
Would be far stronger if it had engaged with Marx's own historical-materialist theorising of humanism, instead of equating humanism with bourgeois universalism and relying on poststructuralisms as a foil.
Profile Image for Mary Frances.
476 reviews
October 24, 2018
An amazing book that foregrounds systemic violence and asks us to use disability as an essential lens and not just tack it onto other categories as an afterthought.
Profile Image for Ghaida Moussa.
Author 4 books13 followers
September 14, 2019
A must read, and a model to follow in truly accounting for the entanglements of disability and structural power.
Profile Image for Ben Kearvell.
Author 1 book10 followers
February 12, 2019
While Erevelles emphasis on a historical-materialist approach to disability studies is to be applauded, not least for the attention to detail brought to it, I take issue with the way posthumanism is presented. It strikes me that Erevelles has not understood Deleuze and Guattari's concept of desire, or the contribution posthuman philosophy has made to political economy (and vice versa). First off, contrary to the author's opinion that D&G's theory of desire neglects historical materialism, I would argue that historical materialism is foundational to desire as they see it. From a disability studies perspective, this objection may seem obscure or unnecessary - the problem is, Erevelles sets historical materialism against posthumanism, misrepresenting it and drawing it into an unnecessary dichotomy.

Beyond that, this is a worthy contribution to disability studies, and worth a look if you're interested in the work Michael Oliver and Colin Barnes.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.