The 'Normal' and the Monstrous in Disability Research

Abstract

Based on the key assumptions of a critical social research commited to a fairer society and that all knowledge is political, this paper highlights the way in which 'normal' research whether quantitative or qualitative can regulate and discipline research and effectively conceal important knowledge, and in this way control (discipline) substantive research outcomes. The concept of 'monstrous' can refer to repressed issues of disability, reprehensible social conditions of disability and research processes. The paper contributes to the ongoing discussion of doing and writing disability research by revisiting research as politics, exposing the meeting point of modern and post-modern approaches, and proposing a stronger materiality, and reintegration of theory and practice. The implications are that we need a personalised approach to explore critically across disciplinary boundaries, beyond unilateral discourse and into assumed knowledge. The paper discusses some key approaches, which when taken together support critical exploration.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.