On March 14, 2011, El País ran a story titled ‘Familiares y trabajadores protestan por el “cierre salvaje” de tres centros de discapacitados’ [Family Members and Workers Protest the “Savage Closing” of Three Centers for the Disabled] (‘Familiares’). Three hundred and five people were booted out of the centers with less than 24 hours’ notice. Protestors in the Puerta del Sol (and in one of the centers themselves) subsequently called for a re-opening of the centers—which had been allegedly closed because of structural issues—and denounced the lack of government planning and oversight that led to the abrupt closures and the redirecting of those affected to other overcrowded centers. This story points directly to the question of the continuing need to advocate for disabled populations, generally speaking. Following on the heels of this story—and taking advantage of the more intimate tone made possible through the choice of the title ‘Epilogue’ for these thoughts—I would like to briefly indulge in a personal anecdote as a way of introducing larger questions surrounding academic research on disability and the matters of advocacy signaled in this El País piece.

The following anecdote explores an anonymous (peer-evaluation) response to an earlier draft of the analysis of Angelicomio that appears in chapter 3. When I submitted that earlier essay to a journal in the field of Hispanic studies (not the Bulletin of Spanish Studies, where it was subsequently accepted), one reader recommended publication while the second reader voiced the following unexpected (in my view) concern: