Bodyminds Reimagined: (Dis)ability, Race, and Gender in Black Women’s Speculative Fiction by Sami Schalk

Abstract

Reviewed by: Bodyminds Reimagined: (Dis)ability, Race, and Gender in Black Women’s Speculative Fiction by Sami Schalk Constance R. Bailey SCHALK, SAMI. Bodyminds Reimagined: (Dis)ability, Race, and Gender in Black Women’s Speculative Fiction. Durham: Duke University Press, 2018. 192 pp. $94.95 cloth; $24.95 paperback; $14.49-$24.99 e-book. Sami Schalk’s Bodyminds Reimagined: (Dis)ability, Race, and Gender in Black Women’s Speculative Fiction sits at the intersection of black feminist criticism, [End Page 364] disability studies, and the burgeoning field of black speculative studies. Comprised of an introduction, four analytical chapters, and a conclusion, both the digital and hard copy of Schalk’s Bodyminds Reimagined retail for around $20.00, making it a worthwhile investment for both the critic and speculative fiction fan. Schalk opens Bodyminds with the disclaimer that before Octavia Butler exposed her to the intriguing and often political narratives within speculative fiction, she was not a fan of the genre; however, in spite of her late arrival, Schalk has done black speculative fiction and Butler’s legacy a great service. In addition to analyzing two of Butler’s works—Kindred and Butler’s Parable series, in chapters One and Three respectively—she contributes to the growing body of scholarship on the works of contemporary writers in the field. In addition to the previously referenced novels of Octavia Butler, Schalk examines Phyllis Alesia Perry’s Stigmata, N. K. Jeminson’s Broken Kingdoms series, Shawntelle Madison’s Coveted series, and Nalo Hopkinson’s Sister Mine. In the introduction Schalk lays out the most important concepts and terms in the manuscript—Bodyminds and (Dis)ability, explaining that the former rejects the Western dichotomy between the mind and body. For the latter, she uses the parenthesis because she “believe[s] the parenthetical curve as opposed to the backslash better visually suggests the shifting, contentious, and contextual boundaries between disability and ability” (6). She then discusses the influence of intersectionality and crip theory, a division within disability studies, on Bodyminds. She closes out the introduction with her methodology—a theoretical and thematic frame for her analysis followed by a close reading of the text(s) and an overview of the four critical chapters. The most compelling aspect of Bodyminds Reimagined is its simplicity and accessibility to both layperson and academic alike. In fact, this is a point of pride for Schalk who writes, “I worked to keep my sentences direct and clear because I hope that this book is useful to a range of individuals, including artists, fans, and activists” (29). To Schalk’s credit, she has produced a sophisticated argument that is clearly laid out, makes important contributions to the field, and is relatively free of academic jargon—a nigh impossible feat. This is not just important because of the marketability or potential mass appeal of the monograph, though it has both; Schalk has managed to generate a critical text that “practices what it preaches.” In Chapter Two Schalk makes one of the most compelling arguments of Bodyminds—that able mindedness is socially constructed. The ease of understanding Schalk’s claim about able mindedness probably reveals more about academics than any impairment of the average reader. If readers cannot understand our jargon or highbrow rhetoric, educators might be better served by using more accessible language in place of convoluted or abstract claims. Schalk does not explicitly critique the inaccessibility of most scholarly criticism in Bodyminds; however, her careful and consistent signposting lays out her argument for all readers and reflects a commitment to deconstructing binaries of simple/complex, able/disabled, and theory/praxis—ideas reflected in the introduction. Throughout this review I have used ‘our’ and ‘we’ in keeping with Schalk’s own embrace of the first-person pronoun in Bodyminds Reimagined. Rather than her authority being undermined, Schalk’s credibility is reaffirmed when she acknowledges that her subjectivity informs her research. She announces this early so that we readers are aware that our thoughts and ideas are being shaped by judgments that she herself has already made. Such transparency is refreshing because it acknowledges the humanity of both readers and writers, of both the critic and the audience. The straightforward and clear...