'The Collected Schizophrenias' by Esmé Weijun Wang | Book Discourse

Experience shapes identity. For better or worse, nurture defines who we are. This is not to say that we are forever victims of circumstance, but rather that the reality of our circumstances are part of the truth of our being. So to deny those circumstances is to deny the truth of our being. Ableism is a denial of that kind. Let us discuss the consequences of ableism via a discourse on a collection of essays about experiences with schizophrenia.
Feel free to follow me:
Blog: theblackponderer.wordpress.com
Twitter: @blackponderer
Background Music:
Chillhop: / chillhopdotcom
Birocratic - Tony's Belated Breakfast: / birocratic
Bonus Points - Pizza and Video Games: / bonuspoints
Brock Berrigan - Split Decision: / brockberrigan
Globuldub - Foreign Exchange: / globuldub
GYVUS - This Time: / gyvus
GYVUS - Tôzen: / gyvus
Joakim Karud - Canals: / joakimkarud
Joseph Jacobs - Tune In: / joejacobs
L'Indécis - Happy Hours: / lindecis

[@esmeweijunwang3440]

Hi! I’m the author of The Collected Schizophrenias & I’m honored to have my book discussed & considered in such a thoughtful way. Thank you for taking the time to read and share it.

[@theblackponderer]

I have learned so much from reading your book. Thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts. Your book has helped me become more thoughtful and compassionate.

[@dellanedawnseeker2136]

They tend to erase folks like me with paranoia schizophrenia. In an interesting way. Because I'm both expected to have delusions, rambling and paranoia at all times. (What if I was lying because it 'gets me attention' and 'the help' I am usually denied anyways.?) But also expected not to when its inconvenient to abled people. :X There is also the baggage of how media always portrays folks like me. That feeling is so dehumanizing. I'm just trying to be me and that is considered bad. There is also the reverse that 'glorifies' me(When its convenient to a narrative. Like calling me 'psychic.' Because I have to be extraordinary to have any person hood.) but that's another discussion and makes me really feel othered. ._. "The worst part about having a mental illness is people expect you to behave as if you don't." Sorry for the ramble from a stranger but I felt it was relevant, since the way I am treated by society was being discussed..

[@ambar4223]

I had never thought about how race and ethnicity made interpretation different for everyone... always keep me thinking after one of your videos. Great job!!

[@maryanc8753]

So glad I found this video! Really thoughtful analysis; thanks for including the quotes & page numbers! I haven't read the book yet, but now I really think I'll get it.

[@j.h.miretskay3430]

Hey, I recently discovered your channel and really enjoy your discussions on various literary works and philosophy. Great job and compelling analysis. I have been reading Wang's book in bits and pieces, and while I found certain aspects of it interesting, overall I cannot help but be critical, even though, fundamentally, the book is intended as a biography and a memoir. The fundamental issue is identity and perception of identity, and the conflict and interplay between social norms and personal truths that shape identity formation. Mental illness is an interesting concept, in that we can debate the influence of psychosocial and the purportedly genetic factors. If mind is an emergent property of brain, then the 'diseased' brain creates a fundamentally diseased mind, where the person's essence is inextricable from the mental illness, and assertions to the contrary are merely exercises in political correctness. To be mentally ill in our society and to be of 'good insight and judgment', in the parlance of psychiatry, is to fully surrender mind, body, and spirit to the will of others who are 'sane', for they alone are able to tell truth from falsehood, and discern flawed perspectives from rational reality. In many respects, the labeling of someone as 'mentally ill' remains the single most efficacious tool for erasure of credibility, right to agency, and one's ego identity. Personally, I view mental illness as nothing other than the individual failing to adhere to predominant social norms of a given culture and era. The problem isn't so much that Wang hallucinates and experiences delusions -- it's that society has labeled her experiences as unacceptably pathological and grounds for detention in psychiatric facilities against her will. The question isn't so much the delusion, but what constructs are seen as socially appropriate and socially inappropriate delusions, given how many social beliefs and systems are irrational and even delusional when critically examined. Perhaps Wang's greatest 'psychosis' is identification with and participation in a system that socially and legally erases her humanity...

[@theblackponderer]

Thanks for watching! I cannot help but be critical of your conclusion. The keywords that you brought up are biography and memoir, a.k.a. her personal experience. Although much of her struggle from mental illness comes from false social constructs that does not mean that those effects on her are not true. We can philosophically analyze the falsehood of social norms till the cows come home but that doesn't change the fact that we actually do live in that falsely constructed society and therefore do experience the true effects of that truth denial which actually do shape our identity in real ways. The very negation of her experience shapes who she is as a person. Also, not all the effects from her mental illness are social. The mental and physical toll of her delusions, hallucinations, etc. has shaped her mind and body in real ways on a shear biological level, independent of society's influence.

[@nicknack191]

Great discourse! I love the introduction and your takes on the text. :) I always look forward to watching your videos in my free time. Thanks for your excellent content.

[@ronaldm4835]

Love your channel! Your reviews & analysis are easy to follow & right on the mark. Once again, I'm off to the bookstore!

[@lulamax7942]

Just found your show. Love your content! Love the books and discussions about them you choose!

[@survivingmy40s]

This content is exactly why I subscribed to you. This video is gold, thank u.

[@eliasE989]

Thanks for the thoughts! I agree with you and the author.

[@SavageStephen]

this information is still useful for people generations from now

[@gsamsa]

Great channel!

[@Emma.E.Emerson]

Thank you.

[@TimbreTonante]

(New subscriber here) I liked your approach on the matter. Psicosis are definetively a subjective experience of perception and being in the world (so is neurosis and perversion of course). There are some good thoughts about this matter in the psychoanalysis discourse, mainly Lacanian oriented. About the social issues implied in ableism there's, of course, Foucault's interesting insights and some inside critic of psychiatry by the hungarian psychiatrist Thomas Szasz that worth the read. Cheers, man! :)

[@j.h.miretskay3430]

I highly recommend Thomas Szasz. He is probably one of the most brilliant thinkers in the area of human rights, identity, and how society conceptualizes 'mental illness'. His arguments and analyses get to the fundamental core of issues and his distills complex notions to their simplest elements. Foucault is also worth reading.

[@zosoo7]

Thank you for sharing. I can't help but think that an atheistic worldview is intrinsically linked to some of the issues mentioned. I don't mean to say that the author herself is an atheist, but more-so that many perceptions that permeate our culture and institutions are atheistic in nature and lead to the issues the author is covering. Two specific points come to my mind. The first is the question of identity. Can one EVER be content with trying to define and convince others of one's own conceived identity as opposed to identity endowed through a creator? The second question is in the absence of a creator, do we view suffering as something intolerable that should be cured? I do believe that is the mindset behind our attempt at separating our conditions from our being and calling them illnesses.

[@theblackponderer]

I would argue that one's true identity cannot fully be realized not because one is trying to reconcile with a creator's designated identity but because society has imposed an identity which is not aligned with one's true self. The objective of this socially imposed identity is not the realization of truth but rather the control of socioeconomic power. So I would say this is not a religious issue but a socioeconomic one. The erasure and dehumanization of disability has more to do with enforcing societal standards and keeping people in line with social norms than it does with one's belief or non-belief in God.

[@zosoo7]

@@theblackponderer Thank you for the response. Along the topic of identity, I was trying to articulate that modern people are in the bleak situation of trying to establish their own identity, not so much a need to reconcile it with a creator imposed identity. The true self as you put it, I would argue is unexplainable. Thus if the onus is on ourselves, I believe you then get a proliferation of "isms" that attempt to interpret reality often terms of power struggles and oppressor/oppressed. Religion vs. socio-economics seems to be the great battle when it comes to philosophical foundations to understanding history. I acknowledge the impact of both, but I personally believe the former is more powerful than the latter when it comes to the impact on human behavior. With regards to my comments on pain, I was extrapolating ideas from Ivan Illich in the context of mental illness (which might be an error). If you are still interested in the topic of the book, I think an interesting short companion read would be Chapter 3 from Medical Nemesis called The Killing of Pain (see www.soilandhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/0303critic/030313illich/Frame.Illich.Ch3.html) The book you covered reminded me of this excerpt: "Culture makes pain tolerable by integrating it into a meaningful setting; cosmopolitan civilization detaches pain from any subjective or intersubjective context in order to annihilate it. Culture makes pain tolerable by interpreting its necessity; only pain perceived as curable is intolerable." Using Illich's point, the question that pops in my head is could it be that our highly technical society (that's probably more to the point than atheism) that views pain as curable annihilates or erases people with disabilities because the disabilities seem incurable? I'm likely overly fixated on this question compared to the rest of the content of the book, but what you described around 17:00 sparked the thought.

[@theblackponderer]

​@@zosoo7 Why do you argue that the true self is unexplainable? What makes you think this?

[@scottwagner9307]

So how do you do you identify with your illness, after you already know it is what it is and have grown from trying to deny it? What I meant, is why would you want it to harshly define your everyday life if it is despair, a sickness that you cannot cure and you wish to free yourself from it? Can you at least object from a feeling of being encapsulated by it, and isn’t it possible to at least cure an inevitable sense of despair that comes with understanding it, and not making it your sole identity? Why is it necessary to have a sense of despair in everyday life, when there is widespread faith in a possibility of becoming other things than just your illness? Personifying yourself as YOU and relating to Wang’s writing, is it difficult to accept your overall abilities, just because there’s an inability to recover from a disability or feelings of disparity from the unrecoverable. Is it possible Wang argues any of that? Does she argue positively ever for herself or just is the focus just on disparity? I am trying to figure out the fine lines between ideas of erasure and ableism or other concepts in schizophrenia and identity? Is it her style to ever get into rational positivism and coping in the Collected Schizophrenias? Does she ever argue, I have other identities than a person with schizophrenia and illness that need to be acknowledged or addressed? Anything concerning, her talents and and overall direction you can add as part of your recommendation?

[@theblackponderer]

"How do you identify with your illness?" Well, that's for you decide. That decision should be based on your own personal experience. That's Wang's point. She's not speaking for anybody other than herself, and she chooses to incorporate her illness as part of her identity. Not all of it, mind you, but a significant part of it. The issue is when society rejects or denies defining aspects of a person's identity, which Wang feels society has actively done to her. If you, personally, feel your illness doesn't define you, then you should have the liberty to identify yourself outside your illness, but you shouldn't be forced or pressured into doing that, as Wang suggests. Identity is a personal choice.

[@saled8477]

what is the difference between being wise and being smart ?

[@theblackponderer]

You're asking about intelligence versus wisdom? It's like book smart versus street smart. Intelligence is about knowing facts and figures. Wisdom is about how well you apply those facts and figures into something worthwhile and constructive. Intelligence is about theory, wisdom is about practice.

[@saled8477]

@@theblackponderer 1. which comes first ? wise man is intelligent or the other way around intelligent man is wise. 2 Is that possible to know facts and not being wise or otherwise ?

[@theblackponderer]

It's absolutely possible to be intelligent but not wise. You see it all the time, particularly in politics. You also see it on the internet, people throwing facts and figures at each other in highly intellectual ways but focusing entirely on winning arguments rather than making any meaningful point. Some of the most unwise people I've ever met had postgraduate degrees. And on the flip side, some of the wisest people I've met have no college education at all. Rather they use what they know in highly constructive and positive ways.

[@nicholaspilote1961]

Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing that a tomato doesn't go into a fruit salad.

[@saled8477]

very well, how do u differentiate between this two knowings ?

[@leif_erikson0688]

The metaphysical, spiritual, and philosophical helps me cope and empowers me. There is a great nuemona behind the empirical world, something atheists just don't always seem to get or simply understand; religion is soul. Some pride themselves on identifying with a void, but more or less I would say you have to identify in finding God at some point. It's a rarity never to question.. "Erasure" is something I never want, neither is a "sickness unto death" concept.. ableism is something I would advocate, which is why this book is probably a very soft & easy but the hardest lesson to learn. I would struggle because it would help me to heal, but heal too much, if that makes sense. I have to accept that I'm a healthy person, not forever ill.

[@theblackponderer]

A major theme of this book is that your ability to "accept that I'm a healthy person, not forever ill" is not entirely dependent on you. Society also plays a role, meaning that even if your highly metaphysically, spiritually, or philosophically capable, if society is constantly bombarding you with the reality that you will always be ill, then you cannot actually be healthy. That is ableism. Ableism takes away one's ability to be healthy no matter how capable an individual is because its effect is on a societal level.

[@leif_erikson0688]

@@theblackponderer I feel that. I just never felt weak by my illness, because the schizophrenia is acute. I do worry I rely on family too much. It's not a cop out, but I try harder every day to gain more independency. I have to read it myself probably, to get a better idea. I've always enjoyed your channel!

[@leif_erikson0688]

I also tried my best to rid myself of the meds, unsuccessfully.

[@theblackponderer]

@@leif_erikson0688 Everyone has moments of weakness and everyone has to depend on someone sometimes. No one is truly independent. That's not to belittle your personal experience with mental illness or to dismiss its extremity. It's just that you shouldn't feel bad to take medicine or depend on others for support, because we all need support. Our dependence on each others is what makes us human. Society pushes this false idea that to be successful is to be independent and to need as little help from others as possible. This is a lie and a method of control. It allows people with disability to be exploited and discriminated against.

[@leif_erikson0688]

@@theblackponderer the only thing is I didn't understand ableism.. misleading term. I really think it's something to recognize it exists and try my best to find my identity with disability and know my limits and when someone treads on that, it is important to defend myself... But maybe also, let it change my attitude or my behavior, if it's vital enough.

[@kerycktotebag8164]

algorithm boost

[@michellemcintyre9245]

There is nothing wrong in calling yourself the Black ponderer. I am a mixed race viewer. The world is not colour blind. So why should we be?