Cripping Core Books: Beyond Accessibility in the Great Books Classroom

Abstract

Abstract:Metaphors of the body, and the spaces bodies occupy, permeate the language of pedagogy. It is normal to talk about “incorporating” readings into a syllabus, “foundational texts,” “building a foundation” for upper-level coursework, and making readings “accessible.” Within these metaphors, whose body is it, and what is the nature of the access being offered? Couched in the language of “making texts accessible” lies an assumption that the maker already has ownership of the text, literally and intellectually. Jay Timothy Dolmage writes, “Accessibility itself is an exnomination, a negative or inverse term, existentially second to inaccessibility. Accessibility is existentially second in a way that demands a body that cannot access. Nothing is inaccessible until the first body can’t access it, demands access to it, or is recognized as not having access” (53–54). Ableism creates inaccessibility, then offers accessibility as a second-class solution.