Abstract
It is difficult to argue that the number of existing historical studies which comprehensively examine the experiences of disabled people in the past, and which offer critical alternatives to stereotypes, is sufficient. This remains the case despite disability studies now occupying greater space in disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, social policy, and media studies. Furthermore, the number of nuanced works that endeavour to unravel discourses about intellectual disability and the possible experiences of intellectually disabled people within a historical context is even lower: compared to physical disability, intellectual disability is relatively overlooked in the existing literature. Alice Equestri's Literature and Intellectual Disability in Early Modern England: Folly, Law and Medicine, 1500–1640 thus makes a much-needed contribution to alleviating this research gap in disability studies. The book provides a notable opportunity to expand our insights into the issue by analysing a number of historical literary texts, which are some of the most fruitful sources available to help unveil perceptions of intellectual disability in early modern England.
Challenging previous scholarship which suggests that disability discourses and symbolism in the pre-Enlightenment era were largely shaped by demonology and religion, the book concerns two primary themes: law and medicine, which, it is claimed had a crucial impact on early modern English intellectual disability literature. The book consists of eight chapters in total. The introduction covers the book's main arguments, overview, and its theoretical position – that is, the Cultural Disability Model, which stresses the significance of intersectionality between discursive categories such as gender, race, religion, and class. Chapter 2 concerns legal concepts and procedures, which were vital for defining and labelling intellectual disability and shaping intellectually disabled characters in early modern literary texts. Equestri argues that in some literary texts, such as Middleton and Rowley's The Changeling (1622), the portrayal of “natural” fools as more passive and silent than insane characters reflects the formal distinction between madness and artificial and natural foolishness (p. 37). At the same time, though the witty fools’ characters have some rhetorical advantages over the plays’ able-minded characters, scenes in which this occurs have often been used as mockery and comedy material (pp. 57–58). Chapter 3 unearths the twofold/reciprocal relationship between intellectual disability and poverty in Renaissance-era England. Intellectually disabled individuals were becoming economically hyper-marginalised as a result of the disenfranchisement of property and ableist discourses that they were lazy, lethargic, and lacking commercial skills (p. 70). Equestri contends that the incompetent fool archetype in literature concerning commercial activities, and the cunning able-minded characters who try to seize their property, could be intended to expose this injustice (pp. 79–80). Chapter 4 explores the abusive relationships between intellectually disabled subjects and their prospective families/guardians. Due to legal rights granted to guardians and families, the financial and interpersonal agency of intellectually disabled people was impaired. In neoclassical comedies like The Wisest Have Their Fools About Them, as wittier fools realize, wardship could create tension since it was required for basic care and needs, and fostered social exclusion and exploitative relationships (pp. 104–105).
Chapter 5, which moves on from law to medical issues, investigates the dialogue between medico-cultural ideas/concepts and literature in Renaissance-era England. Aristotle's Inner Sense theory, which linked with Ancient Greek ontological assumptions which presented intellectual disability as an inevitable part of nature which could not be cured or rehabilitated, was popular in early modern medical books, and so influenced expressions and metaphors in literary texts. On the one hand, derogatory expressions such as ‘blunt’ and ‘dull’ were used in literature and in medical discourses; on the other hand, such texts presented embodied/performed disability in a manner which challenged the audience's beliefs in an era in which the proto-medical model was tentative (p. 144). Chapter 6 demonstrates that bodily variation and intellectual disability intermingled in hegemonic discourse of the mind and body. Bodily variations, such as stuttering and other speech disorders, could be complementary and metatheatrical to representations of intellectual disability. Moreover, in Misogonus (1560), the intersectionality between bodily aesthetics and class is revealed through the direct relationship between foolishness and the villagers’ speaking style (p. 171). Chapter 7 illuminates how literary texts address not only depictions of intellectual disability but also its causes by accentuating the gendered dimension. The prevalent Renaissance-era view that there was a correlation between a lack of sexual restraint and intellectual impairment stems from repressive patriarchal values which imposed responsibility on women. Additionally, proto-eugenic desires that stigmatizes the sexuality of intellectually disabled people as deviant were also evident (p. 204). The epilogue concludes the book's main arguments and theoretical inferences and offers some suggestions for further studies. For instance, it is suggested that more must be done to explore the dynamic relationship between intellectual disability and notions of guilt, humanity, agency, will, knowledge, education, and honour (p. 220).
The book's strengths include its inclusive coverage of influences on early views of intellectually disabled people that have been overshadowed by religion, such as law, philosophy, cultural codes, and medicine. Furthermore, its elaborate discursive analysis of a wide variety of literary texts allows the book to meticulously examine inter-character dialogue and prose, avoiding over-generalizations and reductionism. The book misses the opportunity to explore intellectually disabled characters resistance to being labelled as natural fools despite their lack political and economic independence/power. The confiscation of disabled people's property in this era is also not explored, though it is perhaps outside the book's main subject area – though the depth of the book may have been enhanced by the inclusion of this topic.
All in all, Literature and Intellectual Disability in Early Modern England: Folly, Law and Medicine, 1500–1640 explores experiences of intellectual disability in early modern England from a number of interesting perspectives and, despite the aforementioned omissions, is an enjoyable read. Furthermore, it opens up a number of potentially fruitful avenues of study which may be explored in future works in disability studies, literature, and history.