Review of Metagnosis: Revelatory Narratives of Health and Identity

IF 1.1 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1353/ken.2022.0006
D. Howard
{"title":"Review of Metagnosis: Revelatory Narratives of Health and Identity","authors":"D. Howard","doi":"10.1353/ken.2022.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Danielle Spencer’s book, “Metagnosis: Revelatory Narratives of Health and Identity,” does many things. It is a work of autotheory, putting Spencer’s own embodied narrative in constant conversation with the testimony of others along with a remarkably diverse set of critical and theoretical approaches. In the book, Spencer coins a new term, “metagnosis”, which occurs when one is newly diagnosed in adulthood with a lifelong condition. The book explores Spencer’s own metagnostic experience involving her eyesight along with chronicling the experiences of others to highlight the ways in which newfound knowledge of a diagnosis can in itself transform us. Born with strabismus—“misaligned eyes,” Spencer is practiced at negotiating the meaning of having a non-normative visual experience and presentation. For the most part, growing up with the condition and frequently subjected to medical attention because of it, Spencer remained largely unconcerned about whether or not she saw differently. But, as the book chronicles, in adulthood, after enduring subpar medical treatment and a series of frustrating surgeries, Spencer is additionally diagnosed with a different visual field condition, homonymous hemianopia, that was likely sustained in infancy, but which up until the diagnosis neither she nor her various doctors had detected. Spencer describes how she discovers in her orthoptist’s office that she can see only half of the visual world of each eye. This discovery leads to a deep ambivalence on Spencer’s part—which includes feelings of physical vulnerability, shame that the condition had gone unnoticed for so long, as well as relief for not having to suffer through the stigma and exclusion that may have come with the additional medical diagnosis in childhood. It also leads to a theoretical examination of the limited narrative and theoretical resources that avail us in trying to make sense of such revelatory experiences and the frustrating inexplicability that such transformative experiences can have for others. This intimate narrative approach democratizes theory. As Spencer says near the end of the book, WEB CONTENT ONLY","PeriodicalId":46167,"journal":{"name":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2022.0006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Danielle Spencer’s book, “Metagnosis: Revelatory Narratives of Health and Identity,” does many things. It is a work of autotheory, putting Spencer’s own embodied narrative in constant conversation with the testimony of others along with a remarkably diverse set of critical and theoretical approaches. In the book, Spencer coins a new term, “metagnosis”, which occurs when one is newly diagnosed in adulthood with a lifelong condition. The book explores Spencer’s own metagnostic experience involving her eyesight along with chronicling the experiences of others to highlight the ways in which newfound knowledge of a diagnosis can in itself transform us. Born with strabismus—“misaligned eyes,” Spencer is practiced at negotiating the meaning of having a non-normative visual experience and presentation. For the most part, growing up with the condition and frequently subjected to medical attention because of it, Spencer remained largely unconcerned about whether or not she saw differently. But, as the book chronicles, in adulthood, after enduring subpar medical treatment and a series of frustrating surgeries, Spencer is additionally diagnosed with a different visual field condition, homonymous hemianopia, that was likely sustained in infancy, but which up until the diagnosis neither she nor her various doctors had detected. Spencer describes how she discovers in her orthoptist’s office that she can see only half of the visual world of each eye. This discovery leads to a deep ambivalence on Spencer’s part—which includes feelings of physical vulnerability, shame that the condition had gone unnoticed for so long, as well as relief for not having to suffer through the stigma and exclusion that may have come with the additional medical diagnosis in childhood. It also leads to a theoretical examination of the limited narrative and theoretical resources that avail us in trying to make sense of such revelatory experiences and the frustrating inexplicability that such transformative experiences can have for others. This intimate narrative approach democratizes theory. As Spencer says near the end of the book, WEB CONTENT ONLY
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
形而上学述评:健康与身份的启示性叙述
丹妮尔·斯宾塞的书《形而上学:健康与身份的启示性叙述》做了很多事情。这是一部自我理论的作品,将斯宾塞自己的具体叙事与他人的证词以及一套非常多样化的批评和理论方法进行了不断的对话。在书中,Spencer创造了一个新的术语,“后生症”,当一个人在成年后被新诊断出患有终身疾病时,就会出现这种情况。这本书探讨了Spencer自己涉及视力的后生经验,并记录了其他人的经验,以强调新发现的诊断知识本身可以改变我们的方式。Spencer天生患有斜视——“错位的眼睛”,擅长协商非规范视觉体验和呈现的含义。在大多数情况下,在这种情况下长大,并经常因此受到医疗护理,斯宾塞基本上不关心自己的看法是否不同。但是,正如书中所记载的那样,成年后,在经历了不理想的医疗和一系列令人沮丧的手术后,Spencer被诊断出患有另一种视野疾病,即同音偏盲,这种疾病可能在婴儿期持续存在,但直到诊断出来,她和她的医生都没有发现。Spencer描述了她是如何在骨科医生的办公室里发现自己每只眼睛只能看到一半的视觉世界的。这一发现导致了Spencer内心深处的矛盾心理,其中包括身体脆弱的感觉,对这种情况被忽视了这么长时间的羞耻感,以及对不必忍受童年时期额外的医学诊断可能带来的耻辱和排斥的宽慰。它还导致了对有限的叙事和理论资源的理论审视,这些叙事和理论来源有助于我们理解这种启示性的经历,以及这种变革性的经历对他人可能产生的令人沮丧的不可解释性。这种亲密的叙述方式使理论民主化。正如Spencer在书的结尾所说,仅限网络内容
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal offers a scholarly forum for diverse views on major issues in bioethics, such as analysis and critique of principlism, feminist perspectives in bioethics, the work of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, active euthanasia, genetics, health care reform, and organ transplantation. Each issue includes "Scope Notes," an overview and extensive annotated bibliography on a specific topic in bioethics, and "Bioethics Inside the Beltway," a report written by a Washington insider updating bioethics activities on the federal level.
期刊最新文献
Contributors Editor's Note Data Solidarity Disrupted: Musings On the Overlooked Role of Mutual Aid in Data-Driven Medicine Allergic Intimacies: Food, Disability, Desire, and Risk by Michael Gill (review) Green Light Ethics: A Theory of Permissive Consent and its Moral Metaphysics by Hallie Liberto (review)
×
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