The Whole Mess

I recently finished the 2013 book Good Kings Bad Kings by Susan Nussbaum. Overall, it was a good read. The linguistics she uses with some of her characters left me a little uncomfortable, as Nussbaum is a white author writing as BIPOC characters. I hope that, at the very least, she consulted BIPOC readers and had them test-read the novel before publication.

Also, fair warning, there’s a fairly graphic scene where one of the kids is sexually assaulted by a staff member. Just something to be aware of if you decide to pick up the book. It’s most explicit on pages 64-67 in the paperback copy and 47-49 in the e-book.

All that said, one of my course assignments was to choose a character in the book and provide a character map focusing on a specific trait. We were then to connect to a book theme, which I decided to choose was disability culture/community. It was an interesting exercise and I thought I’d share my thoughts with you all as well.

Btw, I chose Joanne because I see so much of myself in her, both in how she became disabled and in her crip attitude and wry sense of humor. Honestly, I could hear her words coming out of my mouth. So, here goes:

Character Map: Joanne is Observant
One of Joanne’s defining traits is that she is deeply observant, not just of people but also of the subtle cultural and political dynamics surrounding disability. She notices things that other staff either ignore or normalize, and she identifies the underlying patterns of ableism shaping everyday life at ILLC. Early in the novel, Joanne observes how the institution uses euphemistic language to disguise harm: “Naming these places is all about misdirection” (p. 10). She even points out how “The kids here are called patients” (p. 11), or in Mrs. Phoebe’s case, “her angels” (p. 11). Joanne recognizes that the language of “care” functions as a mask, allowing the institution to appear benevolent while maintaining control over disabled youth. Her attention to language reflects how sharply she perceives the dissonance between what these systems claim to be and the lived reality inside them.

Joanne’s observations often extend to cultural knowledge that only emerges through shared disability experience. For example, she notes, “It’s well known in crip circles that the best place for a crip to get a job is a place that’s swarming with other crips” (p. 9). This is more than a practical comment. It shows her awareness of disabled community patterns, norms, and insider truths. She sees disability culture not as an abstraction but as something shaped through everyday survival and solidarity. Joanne’s observational skills are rooted in her lived experience as a disabled adult who understands the unspoken rules governing the world she navigates.

Theme: Disability Culture/Community; Joanne & Reclaiming “Crip”
A powerful moment of disability cultural expression comes when Joanne explicitly discusses her own language use: “I myself prefer ‘crip,’ or variations on ‘crip,’ strictly for personal use… Why not take back the king of all pejoratives, ‘cripple,’ and re-empower it by giving it the crip imprimatur?” (p. 106). This quote is a textbook example of disability culture asserting itself against the dominant norms that stigmatize disability. Joanne situates herself within a community conversation: some disabled people prefer not to use “crip,” others actively reclaim it. She then frames her own choice as an act of empowerment rather than as a source of shame.

What makes this passage especially meaningful is that Joanne articulates a distinctly crip-cultural logic: reclaim the slur, redefine it through community usage, and resist the stigma imposed by nondisabled society. Her language choices reflect an identity grounded in pride, solidarity, and political consciousness. In claiming “crip” for herself, Joanne marks herself as part of a cultural lineage within disability activism. This moment reinforces how disability culture is built through shared language, humor, resistance, and the refusal to let outsiders define what disability means.