.
The author Georgina Kleege, a blind university professor, criticizes Keller's story. She states that she is an "unrealistic model for blind people" (274 Kleege). She claims this because she feels Keller set an impossible standard for other blind people to realistically live by. As well, she states that her accounts were "ghost written" (275 Kleege) and not a true depiction of her life. Perhaps this could be true, as Keller was never photographed without being posed, and her eyes, which signified such resolve and serenity to the public, were fakes. Maybe Keller's response to Kleege would be that "the calamity of being blind is immense, irreparable. But it does not take away the share of things that count, service, friendship, humor, imagination and wisdom" (Keller 215). In contrast, that these two authors have different views because life may have been simpler when Keller was alive or Kleege is just hateful. Either way, blind is blind! In an anonymous book review from the time of Helen Keller's book, The World I live In, the reviewer argues with Kleege when she refers to Helen Keller's account as possibly being a fabricated "wonder story" (Anonymous 227). All the mentioned writers have different ways they interpret disability. Some causes for this could be because of different time periods, different personalities and different social views.
.
Sack, Lane and Linton argue that there are misconceptions of disabled people and reform is needed. Oliver Sacks, a neurologist, professor and award-winning author, admits that prior to visiting Gallaudet, he viewed deafness as a "condition, a deficit that had to be "treated"" (Sakes 237). He held this initial opinion, but it changed after he saw students involved in the protest at Gallaudet. Sakes states that "when visiting Gallaudet in 1986 and 1987, I found it an astonishing and moving experience. I had never before seen an entire community of the deaf" (Sacks 236).