[stylist] Here is history of the white cane
James Canaday M.A. N6YR
n6yr at sunflower.com
Wed Dec 3 05:05:20 UTC 2008
peter,
that's my favorite passage in the Bible most certainly. and I also
had noted that Jesus didn't lead the man to the pool to wash. also,
he was well known in the community as being blind. I've always
wondered if part of his being so well known was the use of a
staff. when you read the words recorded from the blind man, you also
find he is intelligent, outgoing, and maybe has a sharp whit.
jc
Jim Canaday M.A.
Lawrence, KS
At 09:11 PM 12/2/2008, you wrote:
>Hello Robert and listers,
>
> Wow! I wish the recount of the blind man in John Chapter 9 was included
>as Jesus himself recognized that the blind were able to travel on their own.
>Read John 9 and it should jump out at you. After putting clay on the blind
>man's eyes Jesus could have picked him up and carried him to the pool of
>Siloam so he could bathe and receive his sight. But instead he tells the
>blind man to, "Go and wash in the pool of Siloam." While we don't know how
>this blind man got around on his own Jesus knew he must test this
>gentleman's faith, that he wasn't helpless, and that he was quite capable of
>finding the pool of Slam on his own.
>
> A history of the cane wouldn't be complete without mention of the NFB,
>the establishment of White Cane Week and White Cane Safety Day, the Model
>White Cane Law, our further refinement of cane use, and our role in
>increasing the availability of O&M to the civilian blind, blind children,
>and the insistence on training and employment of qualified blind cane travel
>instructors.
>
> You can find tons of information on the history of the guide dog
>movement, but scarcely little on the use of the cane by the blind through
>the centuries. Jeff gave us a springboard from which to launch. Now let's
>take the plunge.
>
>Peter Donahue
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert Newman" <newmanrl at cox.net>
>To: "'NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List'" <stylist at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 6:46 PM
>Subject: [stylist] Here is history of the white cane
>
>
>I wrote Jeff Altman, the Nebraska Training Center travel instructor.
>He has two articles dealing with the history of the cane and our use of it.
>Here is the first article. There will be a second one that apparently gets
>more into facts or something.
>The History of Orientation and Mobility
>
> The use of the cane or the staff by the blind dates back to antiquity,
>but the organized study of cane use is perhaps as recent as the last half of
>the last century. Cane technique as we have come to know it today, with the
>use of the Long Cane, dates back to World War 11. This is roughly fifty
>years ago. The prime mover in the technique, Richard Hoover (a man of
>remarkable talent) died in 1986.
>
> The roots of blind mobility are often attributed to the Old Testament.
>The concern for the blind is traced to Deuteronomy X.X.V.1.1., 18, "Cursed
>be he that maketh the blind wander out of his way, and all the people shall
>say Amen." The use of the staff by the blind has its roots in Greek
>Mythology.
>
>"The ancient Prophet Teresias was deprived of sight for an offense against
>the gods, he was compassioned by the goddess Charicolo, who in pity for his
>misfortune gave him a staff, by which he could conduct his steps with as
>much safety as if he had use of his eye sight"
>
> In the Biography of the Blind, James Wilson (I 83 5) offers these
>observations on the use of a cane:
>
>"A blind man inclines to the hand in which the staff is carried, and
>this often has a tendency to lead him astray when he travels on a road with
>which he is unacquainted."
>
>Wilson goes on to describe the establishment of The Asylum of the Blind in
>Belfast in the year 1800. If a formalized program for cane instruction
>existed there was not made clear by Wilson.
>
> The first formalized system of cane travel was offered by William Hanks
>Levy (I 872) in Blindness and Blind. Levy's basic technique was as follows:
>The cane is held in the right hand. It is held vertically six inches in
>front of the user. The hand grasps the hook (crook) of the stick,
>protecting the hand with the body of the cane. (Note that a straight cane
>would not be usable with this method.) Before starting, "the stick should
>gently sweep the ground in front." While in motion the user waves the stick
>from left to right in step with the feet.
>
> Levy's system also includes the need for use of the other senses.
>Hearing detects the approach of people and things. Smell helps detect
>landmarks. And the use of thin shoes literally helps the traveler get the
>feel of the terrain.
>
> The qualities of the stick are also addressed. It needs to be light
>but not elastic, so impressions can be transmitted. The handle must be like
>a hook. Height should vary with the individual, though no measuring system
>is offered.
>
> Levy's (1872) method for obstacle exploration is almost identical to
>today's use of a cane. However his true innovation in cane use came in
>detecting drop-offs and steps:
>
>"When steps, or other hindrances are anticipated, the stick should be
>advanced to its full length, so as to perceive at the earliest possible
>moment, the circumstances of the position."
>
>This is the first recorded use of the cane extended as a probe or bumper.
>
> Levy (1872) did not, however, advocate truly independent travel. This
>is made clear in his descriptions of street crossings;
>
>"Comparatively quiet streets may be crossed without a guide but those of
>considerable traffic should not be attempted. Just touching a first passer
>- asking him to lead you across the street is better than risking your
>neck..."
>
> In our next installment of the History of O&M we'll look at another
>novel nineteenth century travel system from England.
>
>
>The History of Orientation and Mobility, part II
>
> This is our second installment of the history of Mobility. In the last
>installment we looked at the system proposed by William Hanks Levy. The
>next two systems also come from England.
>
> After Levy, the next observations in cane travel came 24 years later by
>E.F.B. Robinson (I 896) in his book The True Sphere of the Blind. His
>actual cane technique, though novel, did not prove as useful as Levy's,
>however, his observations on travel and the traveler were most insightful.
>
> Robinson's cane technique calls for a straight stick. To start the
>traveler taps the edge of a sidewalk for the first few steps to draw a
>straight line of travel. To hold the line of travel Robinson notes that the
>traveler must walk erect and quickly. The following describes the actual
>use of the cane;
>
>"As he is in a quiet part of town he walks rapidly and balances his cane
>immediately in front of him, keeping it oscillating like the pendulum of the
>clock to guard his shins and knees..." (pg. 55)
>
>Robinson made other observations about traveling in the environment. He
>noted people by "tacit agreement," walk down the right side of the sidewalk.
>Like Levy, he also stresses the feeling of the surface by the feet of the
>traveler. For the cane itself, he suggests steel. Despite the fact it is
>heavy, its durability and conductivity qualities are extolled.
>
> World War I gave the world the first experiment with mass casualties in
>this century. The British rehabilitated their war blind at St. Dunstan's.
>Sir Arnold Lawson (1922) in describing the blinded soldier in his book War
>Blindness at St. Dunstan's, gives us a psychological insight into the newly
>blind;
>
>"When sight is first lost the patient is plunged into an intellectual abyss.
>He finds or rather fancies himself completely dependent on others for
>everything. He cannot walk, eat, or amuse himself his every action seems to
>necessitate an appeal for help." (pg.131)
>
>To combat these problems a mobility system was developed. Lawson describes
>it as follows;
>
>"Thus to enable him around to find his way about the building, narrow strips
>of carpet, the edges of which can be detected by the stick and which each
>man is provided, are laid along the corridors: and handrails where necessary
>afford further help, whilst stairs are indicated by patches of rubber or
>wood which feet instantly detect." (pg. 132)
>
>This would seem to indicate the British supported an organized use of cane
>for mobility. Perhaps this statement by Sir Arthur Pearson (I 92 1), a
>blinded war veteran, and later the person in charge of St. Dunstan's will
>shed light on cane use;
>
>"Not long after my sight went I gave up the use of one unless I was walking
>by myself in a place I didn't know well or I was going for a tramp over
>rough country... I am quite sure that I got along much better without than I
>did when I depended upon one. I walked more naturally and felt more
>confident. The experience of the men of St. Dunstan's who accustomed
>themselves to this habit agreed with mine." (pg. 34)
>
>Surprisingly, Pearson described a fairly sophisticated cane technique. It
>includes point forward, with occasional tap side to side. He advocates
>occasional sideways tap along the curb or the wall at the side of the walk
>to draw a line of travel. Though he sees the cane as the elongation of the
>arm, he warns that a heavy cane is a reminder of a beggar. This theme is an
>important one in acceptance of cane use.
>
> Observations of the environment were also made. He cautions the blind
>traveler to pay sharp attention to the dip in the road prior to reaching the
>curb. He also warns that horse drawn carts may mask the approach noise of
>fast cars.
>
> In our next installment we will look at Richard Hoover and the impact
>of World War 11. We will also look at the V.A.'s initial refusal to deal
>with blind rehabilitation.
>
>The History of Orientation and Mobility, part III
>
> We left off with the british using than discarding their canes. In the
>late 1920's Seeing Eye came into being. In the late thirties a young
>instructor, Richard Hoover, at the Maryland School for the Blind had asked
>the Principal, Warren Bledsoe if he could experiment with independent travel
>using a cane. The answer at that time was no. But, World War 2 would
>forever change the field of Mobility.
>
> A special committee was created by The Office of the Surgeon General in
>the Spring and Summer of 1942 to investigate agencies for the Blind in
>America and overseas. It was believed the war was certain to create many
>newly blinded servicemen. On May 28, 1943 Valley Forge and Letterman
>General Hospitals were designated the special treatment center for blind
>casualties.
>
> Pooling its patients also meant pooling its resources. The Army put
>out its call in the ranks and to civilians to recruit personnel with
>experience working with the blind. This is how people like Richard Hoover
>and Warren Bledsoe Junior found their way to Valley Forge. Two other
>individuals played significant roles at Valley Forge. Father Thomas
>Carroll, affectionately known as "the blind priest," was a frequent visitor
>to Valley Forge, and Chaplain at Avon (Old Farms). Kathern Gruber was in
>charge of the program for the war blinded for The American Foundation for
>the Blind. Both would become members of the Veteran Administration's
>Citizen Advisory Committee, and play key roles in the establishment of the
>VA's Blind Rehabilitation Center at Hines.
>
> Initially, the Army believed the VA would receive discharged servicemen
>and complete their rehabilitation. In his article on the account of Army
>rehabilitation of blind servicemen Colonel James Greear, suggests that is
>was believed the VA would establish an institution similar to St. Dunstan's.
>However, the VA refused to do this. The matter was temporarily resolved on
>January 8, 1944 when President Roosevelt made the Army the office of primary
>responsibility to establish a servicing institution for blinded servicemen.
>
>((Editor's Note: The V.A. was in the midst of a huge scandal that was being
>congressionally investigated when World War 11 broke out. All this action
>was tabled. In the light of these major problems, it is not shocking they
>refused to become the sole source provider of blind rehab, a daunting task
>if one expected World War I type casualties. After the war Omar Bradley, a
>five star general was appointed to head the V.A. and clean up the
>problems.))
>
> The V.A. did obtain Avon Old Farms School in Connecticut in Spring
>1944, and opened on May 21, 1944 as Old Farms Convalescent Home. Veterans
>were to go here for follow on training after their Army rehabilitation. On
>August 25, 1944, Dibble General Hospital (present day Menlo Park) replaced
>Letterman.
>
> Colonel Greear was Chief Ophthalmologist and Hoover's commanding
>officer at Valley Forge. In recounting the Army's rehabilitation efforts
>for the blind in an article in "Outlook for the Blind" (1946) he describes
>how a soldier would learn orientation:
>
>"He was expected to learn fairly quickly to get around alone with, and
>without a cane; to travel easily with people; to get in and out of
>automobiles, buses and trains: to go up and down stairs and escalator; to go
>through revolving doors; to walk along unfamiliar streets, following
>directions, and to explore unfamiliar terrain by using his cane..."
>
> In discussing Avon, Greear makes no mention of orientation. Russell
>Williams offers a far more telling description:
>
>"Avon, at the outset of its establishment, held that a cane was not
>necessary, modifying this doctrine to some extent as time went on with
>regards to downtown travel, but always appearing to ascribe some particular
>virtue to avoidance of its use whenever possible."
>
>Warren Bledsoe recounts that the Saturday evening Post did an
>article on Avon entitled "They Learn to See at Avon Farms." The use of
>facial vision was the topic. The Office of the Surgeon General got involved
>in favor of the Valley Forge Program. In the summer of 1945 they dispatched
>an orientor from Valley Forge to Dibble to train staff. This was to insure
>that service-members reached Avon trained in cane use already.
>
>In our next installment we will look at how the
>Mobility program at Valley Forge really got off the ground. Then we will
>look at the resistance to it in the outside community. As part of the last
>installment a will provide a complete bibliography for those interested in
>further information.
>
>The History of Orientation and Mobility, part IV
>
> In the last segment we looked at the establishment of special Army
>training centers at Valley Forge and Dibble. In this segment casualties
>mount as the Normandy invasion begins in mid 1944.
>
> Richard Hoover in his writing recalls that one day at a staff meeting
>at Valley Forge someone said:
>
> "Does anyone here think the blind people in America do a good job
>getting around. I think they do a poor job."
>
>However, Bledsoe recalls the scene quite differently. After the Battle of
>the Bulge in December 1944, the topic of discussion at a staff meeting was
>the supposed shattered morale of the newly receive blinded soldiers. It was
>Hoover who said:
>
>"I think the first thing they need to know is how to get around. We've been
>working on it, but not enough. People say blind people in this country do a
>good job of getting around. I don't think they do a good job. They do a
>hell of a poor job. 55
>
> This may have offended some of the staff in the room, but it did prompt
>then Lieutenant Colonel Greer (Chief of Ophthalmology and Hoover's boss) to
>examine the possibility of Orientation Training.
>
> By this time Hoover was ready to offer formal practical course of
>training. Colonel Henry Beuuwkes, Hospital Commander, was impressed with
>Hoover's proposal. He not only agreed to adopting his Long Cane training,
>but to allow screening and selection of instructors, and the necessary
>manpower to allow effective training.
>
> The following curriculum comes from a 1946 article written by Hoover.
>Rehabilitation for the blind was slated for 16 weeks, but Valley Forge was a
>treatment center which could extend the time of a soldier's stay. The
>orientation course consisted of 98 hours and was broken down as follows:
>
>1. Travel (20 hours)
>2. Special Methods (12 hours)
>3. Demonstrations (12 hours)
>4. Sports (12 hours)
>5. Background Lectures (12 hours)
>6. Discussion (10 hours)
>7. Detail Duty (6 hours)
>8. Tests (8 hours)
>
>To travel independently the use of five natural aids was taught. They
>included sound, touch, scent, muscular sensation and obstacle sensation.
>Hoover remarks that the first three were depended upon most, the last two
>the least.
>
> Editor's Note: There is very little written about the training in
>obstacle sensation. The movie "Bright Victory" with Arthur Kennedy does
>have a scene where he is being trained in this, and this is probably an
>accurate rendition of techniques used.
>
> The hospital itself was the initial setting for lessons. The first six
>without a cane, the next 16 were with one. This setting provided a
>challenge to the pupil and in Hoover's words, "yet not so difficult to
>invite defeat in the very beginning." The next nine lessons were taught
>downtown. Successful completion brought the pupil a furlough. No mention
>of remedial training is made, but it is logical to assume it was available.
>
> The gift of Valley forge goes deeper than just cane technique. It is a
>comprehensive system that includes the traveler orienting himself and
>protecting himself even when a cane is not used. Hoover's protection system
>is the forerunner of the current day Upper Protective Technique.
>
> The cane techniques taught by Hoover are almost identical to their
>successors today, the Touch Technique and Diagonal Technique. Hoover's two
>true innovations are the length of the cane, and touching it in front of the
>foot about to step instead of the traditional cane and step on the same
>side.
>
> The cane itself had been a limiting factor. Hoover's outdoor method
>(Touch Technique) called for an extended cane to follow the principle of
>cane tip forward suggested by Levy. The added length allowed a safety
>margin in searching for curbs, obstacles and dropoffs. Wooden canes proved
>undesirable. In 1945, 300 aluminum canes weighing between six and eight
>ounces each were obtained. All were a standard length of 45 inches.
>
> ((Editor's Note: Aluminum was used in production of airplanes,
>diversion of this for cane making was a major coup of the time and shows the
>emphasis given the rehabilitation effort.))
>
> In our next installment we will look briefly at Hoover's philosophy on
>Mobility training and what happened to him after the war, the resistance in
>the field, and the establishment of Hines.
>
>The History of Orientation and Mobility, part V
>
> In our last segment, Richard Hoover had won approval of his idea for
>Mobility training for the blinded troops sent to Valley Forge.
>
> With the approval of Hoover's mobility plan Colonel Beeuwkes had also
>agreed to the screening of additional staff as orientors. The initial Army
>move to establish Valley Forge and Dibble as blind rehabilitation centers
>brought experienced staff, but now Orientors had to be recruited, screened
>and trained. In recalling the selection process Hoover describes the
>following:
>
>"It has been said that the patients were allowed a very large
>amount of time to learn their basic skills (months). Such was not the case
>, however, with their instructors, who had to produce or be disqualified
>within a few short weeks."
>
>A staff of 50 was eventually selected. The peak load at Valley Forge was
>estimated at about 360 pupils. Their actual screening method was not
>recorded by Hoover, but by the time they arrived for screening Hoover had
>developed his Long Cane techniques and was experimenting with them under
>blindfold. Performance under blindfold seems to have been one of the
>standards required.
>
> Hoover was released from active duty as a First Lieutenant at the
>beginning of 1947. The VA had approved the opening of Hines on July 12,
>1946. The program would not actually begin until July 4, 1948.
>
> Hoover was repeatedly offered the position of being in charge of the
>Blind Rehabilitation Program at Hines. He refused repeatedly. Instead, he
>entered Johns Hopkins Medical School, and eventually became an
>Ophthalmologist. He stated; "I think the best thing you can do for the
>blind is make them see." He was however, in an unprecedented move, made a
>consultant to the VA Department of Medicine and Surgery while still a
>medical student.
>
> Warren Bledsoe filled the position at Hines which Hoover declined on an
>interim basis. Later the position would be filled by Russell Williams.
>
> Hoover did not abandon mobility. He continued to teach orientation
>classes while in medical school and residing at the Maryland School for the
>Blind. He taught students and members from various agencies servicing the
>blind community.
>
> Why was Hoover so concerned to teach orientation? Hoover had been
>trained to work with the blind, and worked at the Maryland School for the
>Blind before the war. He offered these thoughts in 1947:
>
>"Individuals also become functionally deficient to a certain degree when
>encountering a more intricate and complex environment. So most of us go on
>to seek training and education to cope with new situations and lend
>ourselves pliable to these many situations arising in the competitive
>world."
>
>Hoover goes on to compare Orientation to Plato's ideal concept of education,
>which is achievement of all one is capable of:
>
>"So, consider now, how paramount it is to give an education which
>establishes an intelligently functioning sensory and motor whole which
>cannot be produced in part and aims at the ultimate in education of which
>Plato spoke. Surely, walking without a guide would fall into this category
>besides its being a necessity, a joy, a right and a privilege."
>
>At Valley Forge the population was naturally servicemen. After the war,
>controversy existed over who could benefit from Hoover's program. The Army
>had dealt with once sighted male adults, who at the very least, had
>previously been sighted, and in excellent health. None had been
>congenitally blind, none had been over sixty. Hoover (1947) clearly
>addresses what he thinks
>is the potential target population for training:
>
>"...this speaker believes the time to begin orientation and travel is at the
>earliest possible moment. In the case of the infant the free use of the
>upper and lower extremities should be encouraged with authoritative training
>beginning with creeping movements and progressively continued the adapted
>throughout school years.. For those losing sight at a later age the hospital
>is the place to start orientation and travel, and it should be continued
>until the individual is independent and satisfied. There is no limit as to
>age, but here again, anyone entertaining the foolish notion that absolutely
>everyone should learn to travel should erase such a wild idea immediately.
>There are just as many in comparison, no doubt, not mentally or physically
>prepared for such an event as there are those of us not adequately suited
>for flying a P80."
>
> ((Editor's Note: It is important to consider the time that this
>statement was made, and the fact that little in the way of blind
>rehabilitation was being done with multiply involved individuals. This 1947
>reference is the only time Hoover expressed his thoughts on this topic in
>writing, he did write other articles on establishment of the Valley Forge
>program.))
>
> In our final installment we will look at the controversy over Mobility
>training. We will also look at the lengths the army went to distance
>themselves from the controversy.
>
>The History of Orientation and Mobility, part VI
>
> Seeing a blind person traveling with the aid of a cane may or may not
>be an every day sight for everyone, but it has certainly become a common one
>in our society. It seems incomprehensible today to fathom what all the
>resistance to teaching travel skills was about. At the very least one would
>reason that independent cane travel was worth trying. Why was there so much
>bias about the idea of a person with a cane?
>
> Art often mirrors and colors the impression of the viewer, and society
>in general. The art with blind as subjects in western culture has often
>represented them as pitiful, tattered beggars, often holding a cane. This
>idea certainly did not escape Pearson, as shown earlier. Rembrandt's Tobias
>shows a blind man reaching out, groping as if completely, hopelessly lost.
>Bellange shows a blind man, staff raised to heaven, speaking or questioning.
>Lagendyk and Parry each did poignant portrayals of blind beggars with canes.
>
> Perhaps the idea met with the same inertia all new ideas first meet.
>Hoover shares this recollection of one visitor:
>
>"We had a number of prominent visitors. One outstanding educator of the
>blind, himself sighted, seemed the epitome of mental blindness one day when
>he was supposed to be observing a lesson in foot travel and spent most of
>his time with his
>back to the instructor and blind soldier, giving a long lecture to his host
>on what a mess the Army was making of its program for the blind."
>
>The position of the Army is very hard to define. Colonel Greear was
>supportive of Hoover and writes praises of the Orientation Program in his
>1946 article. Curiously, in an article published in May 1944 in the same
>magazine, Outlook for the Blind, he fails to mention anything about Hoover
>or orientation. It is easy to suppose that the program really did not bear
>fruit until 1945.
>
> This is true, but in the 1946 article Hoover is not mentioned either.
>There is only a reference to a highly qualified enlisted man who was later
>commissioned and in charge of the physical reconditioning program, which
>included orientation.
>
>The person is Hoover. Few people are mentioned by name in the
>are is another incident involving the Army and Hoover. Hoover addressed the
>American Association of Instructors of the Blind, 38th Stated Meeting, held
>at Perkins School, June 24-28, 1946. When the proceedings were published
>after the meeting, Hoover is listed as Lt. Richard E. Hoover. His November
>article in Outlook for the Blind fails to carry his military rank, though he
>was still on active duty at the time of print.
>
> But why should people in the Army or anyone for that matter be negative
>on cane use? World War 2 provided dazzling scientific breakthroughs. Sonar
>and radar were perfected. The jet engine was invented and atomic power
>introduced. In comparison to these great scientific strides, and those that
>have subsequently followed, the Long Cane or guide dog might seem primitive.
>Also, there is the desire to make the blind individual undetectable to the
>general public while traveling. When considered from this standpoint,
>independent travel is no longer the issue.
>
> Facial Perception, the magic sixth sense, seemed to be the main
>competition to Long Cane travel. The idea of something natural, internal,
>replacing sight is very appealing. Levy, Pearson and Hoover, though the
>last was somewhat skeptical, mention it. Today we know it is based on
>hearing. Ironically, in an obscure article titled "Can Orientation Be
>Taught Blind Students?", published in the March 1945 edition of Outlook for
>The Blind, Toger Lien comes to that conclusion. After experiment he states:
>
>"From this I concluded that ability to detect obstacles was entered in the
>ear that the facial sensations were only secondary effect." Perhaps the
>inertia to this idea is similar to the inertia facing Long Cane use at the
>time."
>
> Why did Orientation work at Valley Forge? The had the right clients,
>people who had once been independent and wanted to be independent again.
>They had the right instructors, the Army had taken a new generation willing
>to break from tradition. They had the right cane, the six to eight ounce
>Long Cane was vital. They had the right method. Levy, Robinson and St.
>Dunstan's had greatly influenced Hoover, but his idea of projecting the cane
>to the side of the following step was purely his own. And finally, they had
>Richard Hoover. Bledsoe offers this assessment:
>
>"Other hospitals had somewhat similar resources, but did not have Hoover.
>He found a way not only to get the right men together to teach soldiers, but
>knew how to handle both
>patients and how get the best out of them."
>
>(Editor's Note: A bibliography of the materials Bob Kozel used to research
>this series is available upon request.)
>
>REFERENCES:
>
>Bledsoe, C.W. (1969). From valley forge to hines: truth old enough to tell.
>American Association of Workers for the Blind, Annual. Washington, D.C.
>97-137.
>
>Bledsoe, C.W. (1983) Originators of orientation and mobility training. In
>Foundations of Orientation and Mobility, chapter 18.
>
>Grear, J.N. (1944). Rehabilitation of the war-blinded soldiers, Outlook for
>the Blind, 38, 121-124.
>
>Grear, J.N. (1946). Rehabilitation of the blinded soldier, Outlook for the
>Blind, 71, 271-278.
>
>Hoover, R.E. (1946). Foot travel at valley forge. 38th Stated
>Meeting of the American Association of Instructors of the Blind, 138-143.
>
>Hoover, R.E. (1946). Foot travel at valley forge, Outlook for the Blind,
>40, 246-251.
>
>Hoover, R.E. (1947). Orientation and travel technique for the blind.
>Proceedings of the American Association of Workers for the Blind, 27-32.
>
>Hoover, R.E. (1968). The valley forge story. Blindness 1968, American
>Association for Workers for the Blind Annual, 55-65.
>
>Lawson, A. (1922). War blindness at St. Dunstan's, London: Frowde, Hodder
>and Stoughton.
>
>Lein, T. (1945). Can orientation be taught blind students? Outlook for the
>Blind, 39, 64-67.
>
>Levy, W.H. (1872). Blindness and the blind. London: Chapman and Hall.
>
>Pearson, A. (1921). The conquest of blindness. London: Hodder and
>Stoughton.
>
>Robinson, E.F.B. (1896). The true sphere of the blind. Toronto: Briggs.
>
>Williams, R.C. (1972). Orientation and mobility, background discourse. In
>R. Hardy & J Cull (Eds.), Social and rehabilitation services for the blind,
>chapt. 13. Springfield: Thomas.
>
>Wilson, J. (1835). Biography of the blind. Birmingham: Showell.
>
>
>(Editor's Note: The "History of O&M" is a six-part series which appeared in
>the BVA Bulletin throughout 1997. Thanks go out to Bob Kozel, the VIST
>Coordinator in San Diego, for researching and writing this material.)
>
>
>Robert Leslie Newman
>Email- newmanrl at cox.net
>THOUGHT PROVOKER Website-
>Http://www.thoughtprovoker.info
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of Kasondra Payne
>Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:46 AM
>To: stylist at nfbnet.org
>Subject: Re: [stylist] history of the cane
>
>I believe that book was written by Tom Bickford. M y husband and I love
>that book, and we try to share that with everyone including our children's
>travel instructors. By the way, we have been thinking about writing a
>children's book from the point of view of a cane. Sighted kids hear and
>read about Braille in school, but a lot of them are mystified by the cane
>and what it is used for. What do you guys think?
>
>Kasondra Payne
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Angela fowler <fowlers at syix.com>
>Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 6:21 PM
>To: stylist at nfbnet.org
>Subject: Re: [stylist] history of the cane
>
>That book was written by Eric Woods and a few other travel instructors from
>Louisiana and Minnesota.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of LoriStay at aol.com
> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 3:05 PM
> To: stylist at nfbnet.org
> Subject: Re: [stylist] history of the cane
>
> Don't know if it will help, but get hold of "The Care and Feeding of the
>Long White Cane," a book that should be available through NFB. It was one
>of the Kernel books, I think. If it does not have the history in it,
>then the writer most certainly will.
> Lori
>
> In a message dated 12/1/08 1:16:23 AM, n6yr at sunflower.com writes:
>
>
> > dear Robert, and listers,
> > so far, I'm not finding such a book on the history of the cane. and, >
>what is on the web is surprisingly shallow. on a dozen or more sites > is
>identical, or nearly identical, text.
> >
> > find nothing at nls.
> > jc
> >
> > Jim Canaday M.A.
> > Lawrence, KS
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> **************
> Life should be easier. So should your homepage. Try the NEW AOL.com.
> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&
> ncid=emlcntaolcom00000002)
> _______________________________________________
> stylist mailing list
> stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/fowlers%40syix.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> stylist mailing list
> stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/kassyp36%40msn.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/newmanrl%40cox.net
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/pdonahue1%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/n6yr%40sunflower.com
More information about the Stylist
mailing list