ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on the concepts covered in the preceding chapters of this book. The book shows that comedy films (and other comedy media) can easily work against valuing disabled people's lives. This is especially true of the conventional romantic comedy genre where the narrative often adopts a monologic structure. The evidence examined in the book suggests that concerns about risk are weighted in favour of white, non-disabled, middle- or upper-class males, and the idea that the perspectives of 'others' are too niche continues to predominate. The book seems to be true across comedic genres, even though satire and parody can provide a way out of some of the genre-bound impasses. It demonstrates that the perspectives of writers and directors are a crucial dimension of the monologism found in most disability films, but this is an area which has received little, if any, critical attention in film studies, disability studies, or auteur theory.
