In June 2018, two dozen scholars from Classics and disability studies (and cognate disciplines) congregated at King's College London. This conference was organised by Ellen Adams (KCL) and Emma-Jayne Graham (OU), and aimed to explore the potential of building bridges between the two areas. A constant theme throughout the workshop was the tension between the representation of disability and the real, lived experience of it. This tension is apparent in both antiquity and modernity.
Historians of medicine are increasingly aware that treatments should also look to the patient, and not just the disease. Otherwise, the medic is set on a pedestal and almost deified, while the patient is bound down and objectified, even dehumanised. A comparison of the patient's voice in antiquity and modernity offered an intriguing platform to re-evaluate the benefits and the limitations of the ‘medical model’ as defined in disability studies, with its emphasis on clinically treating and fixing the body.
We reassessed the classical ideal (as paradoxically often represented by fragmentary, broken marble sculpture), by setting it against modern notions of disability and normalcy (as explored, for example, by artists such as Marc Quinn and Mary Duffy). We also compared cultural representations of disabled and deformed people in antiquity and modernity, as defined in art, literature (including history), and drama (including comedy).
We explored bioethics and the value of life in the ancient and modern worlds. These issues are culturally specific, and governed by notions of normalcy and bodily ideals. We also considered the use of prostheses to counter the impact of impairments, and this particular type of relationship between people and things. A consideration of prostheses (and their users) in museum displays continued the ethical theme.
Conference programme (pdf)
Download