Abstract
Kaschak produces a thought-provoking and much needed study, which centralizes the traditionally marginalized voices of persons who are blind. Adhering to the paradigm of feminist research, Kaschak creates space for these persons to speak for themselves. Their narratives are enriched by an interdisciplinary perspective that includes psychology, neurology, mindfulness, gender studies, sexuality studies, and race studies. The two identities, which are most prominent in the narratives, are being a person who is blind and its intersection with gender. As a feminist scholar, Kaschak discloses aspects of herself and the research process, rejecting the pretense of objectivity.
As recommended in narrative ethnology, Kaschak spent years getting to know her participants, and she and her team interviewed them multiple times. This relational process provides greater opportunity for sharing, observation, and insight. From these relationships, the reader comes to consider multiple aspects of the experiences of persons who are blind. Some of the themes which arise across participants who vary by gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, and socioeconomic status include (1) the pressures from themselves, friends, and family members for them to pass as sighted; (2) a double consciousness of sorts, which requires them to understand both their own world and aspects of the world of persons who are sighted; (3) the desire to have a partner with vision; (4) lack of a political movement; (5) repeated experiences of discrimination, stigma, bullying, and microaggressions; (6) the capacity to engage in multiple professions with challenges and successes; and (7) the reality of intersectional identities that can magnify the ways in which they experience oppression.
There are three primary challenges to the text—the treatment of race, the author’s response to the traumatic experiences of the participants, and the framing of the participants’ narratives. Regarding race, Kashak discloses that she felt awkward writing the sections on race, and it is clear it is still an area that is in development for her; she shares that she has spent much less time considering race than she has studying gender. This is evident in the first chapter when she shares her background as the frame for the ethnographic study but does not disclose her race, although she gives the racial background of her team. A quarter of the way through the book when she does self-disclose, she writes that she would be considered White and that her grandparents were Jewish.
Throughout the text, she uses phrases such as “considered to be” Black or White and then at other times she notes that someone is Black without clarification given for the change in language. In addition, she primarily speaks of race in the negative, with little attention to positive racial experiences or strengths. When strengths are mentioned, the discussion is brief and supported by two citations that are over 20 years old. She and her African American research assistant chose not to disclose their race or ethnicity to the participants who are blind. It is quite possible that the responses they received may have been different if people knew more fully with whom they were speaking.
Another area that needed more development was when participants shared experiences such as being spat on, taunted by kids, and having people move their stick or trip them on purpose. Kaschak discloses that her response to the participant was, “I can’t believe that.” There was not any follow-up given to the participant or to the reader about the importance of supportive responses when persons disclose traumatic experiences. Finally, as a feminist scholar and clinician, I was left wondering how some of her participants would feel if they heard the way they were described in the book. Participants may feel disrespected by such descriptions of them as being not pretty, not truthful, hungry for attention, and having disgusting table manners. Given the background provided, it seems that the participants would know who they are, and I hope they would come away from a feminist research project feeling valued and respected.
As Kaschak notes, we all have blind spots internally and externally. Although there are a few blind spots in the text, it is worthwhile to read it. The book contributes to the literature in significant ways, including attention to the international ways identity markers shift geographically. The centralization of the lived experiences of diverse people who are blind and the analyses of their narratives from an interdisciplinary perspective make it a text that adds to our vision.