Deviating from Monstrosity

Zoe Copeman
{"title":"Deviating from Monstrosity","authors":"Zoe Copeman","doi":"10.3828/jlcds.2023.32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Between 1800 and 1807, Napoleonic reforms to obstetrics exposed more physicians to “monstrous births” (congenital anomalies). These reforms followed post-Revolutionary France’s need to re-define the “individual” and the Enlightenment’s attempts to naturalize the “monstrous.” Drawing on foundational eighteenth-century natural historical and medical texts, the article argues that the French Revolution was a major turning point in the conceptualization of dis/ability. To illustrate this, the illuminated volume Les Ecarts de la Nature (1775) by Nicolas-François and Geneviève Regnault and its 1808 edition revised by the physician Jacques-Louis Moreau de la Sarthe are analyzed through contemporary disability studies. The late eighteenth-century’s eventual eradication of monstrosities from the natural realm would lead to certain human bodies becoming normalized and others pathologized. This pathologization involved systematically categorizing human beings into forced binaries. Yet, by attempting to order that which does not fit into a binary, Les Ecarts attests that the dichotomy between “normal” and “abnormal” is a false narrative.","PeriodicalId":37229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies","volume":"1 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/jlcds.2023.32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Between 1800 and 1807, Napoleonic reforms to obstetrics exposed more physicians to “monstrous births” (congenital anomalies). These reforms followed post-Revolutionary France’s need to re-define the “individual” and the Enlightenment’s attempts to naturalize the “monstrous.” Drawing on foundational eighteenth-century natural historical and medical texts, the article argues that the French Revolution was a major turning point in the conceptualization of dis/ability. To illustrate this, the illuminated volume Les Ecarts de la Nature (1775) by Nicolas-François and Geneviève Regnault and its 1808 edition revised by the physician Jacques-Louis Moreau de la Sarthe are analyzed through contemporary disability studies. The late eighteenth-century’s eventual eradication of monstrosities from the natural realm would lead to certain human bodies becoming normalized and others pathologized. This pathologization involved systematically categorizing human beings into forced binaries. Yet, by attempting to order that which does not fit into a binary, Les Ecarts attests that the dichotomy between “normal” and “abnormal” is a false narrative.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
偏离怪物
1800年至1807年间,拿破仑对产科的改革使更多的医生面临“畸形出生”(先天性异常)。大革命后的法国需要重新定义“个人”,启蒙运动试图将“怪物”归化,这些改革紧随其后。根据基本的十八世纪自然历史和医学文本,文章认为,法国大革命是残疾/能力概念化的一个主要转折点。为了说明这一点,我们通过当代残疾研究分析了nicolas - franois和genevi Regnault的照明卷Les Ecarts de la Nature(1775)及其1808年由医生Jacques-Louis Moreau de la Sarthe修订的版本。18世纪晚期,自然界的怪物被彻底消灭,导致某些人的身体变得正常,而另一些人则被病态化。这种病态化包括系统地将人类分类为强制的二元。然而,通过试图将那些不适合二元的东西排序,Les Ecarts证明了“正常”和“不正常”之间的二分法是一种错误的叙述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies
Journal of Literary and Cultural Disability Studies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Rethinking the Species Divide About the Contributors Cripping the Ordinary: Veena Das’s Life and Words in “Unprecedented Times” From Freak Shows to Freaknature Index to Volume 17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1