I agree. The show troubled me and pissed me off. The somber voice
of Olympia Dukasis saying, over and over, cripple, crippled, the
crippler (meaning polio - and always gendered as "male") as in this
quote (pretty close): "The crippled ones remained. Even the well off
were confined to back rooms out of sight in the love and shame of
their families. Bad enough to be crippled, worse to be a constant
reminder."
If that kind of narrative had been analyzed to uncover the impact on
disabled people, and the prejudice on which those views are based, I
would have no objection - but it was dropped in with no comment.
The dcotors and nurses were portrayed uniformly as good and
benevolent people. We know this wasn't always the case. The doctors as
saviors. A quote: "A number of doctors and scientists set sites on
polio, it promised glory to the *man* who cracked the code." This,
despite the fact that we see many women working on the research.
The people who spoke - the talking heads - from the present moment
were only shown from the waist up, except a quick glimpse of hugh
gallagher which included his chair, and a woman who is in an iron lung
(are they still called that??) And nothing they said (due to editing,
questions asked, or their own inclinations???)
described the discrimination they faced/still face in employment,
access, education etc. There was only one mention of employment and
one of education - very off-hand remarks.
And then there's the title:
A PAralyzing Fear: The Polio Story in America.
It's one thing to do a documentary on the fear of contracting polio,
another to call it *The* polio story in America.
So let's get that Anti-Defamation League up and running!!!!!! And
couple it with a speaker/consultant bureau to provide alternative input.
Simi Linton
---Lennard Davis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> This really is about the polio documentary. I finally had a chance
to see
> it, and due to my inept taping of the show, I missed the opening and
the
> ending. I thought the program had interesting elements, but it
woefully
> lacked a disability perspective. The essence of the program was how
> horrible a disease polio was (it was), how great the March of Dimes
was (it
> was, too), how the little children were saved by the work of Jonas
Salk and
> his dogged rival Sabin (they were great). But there were also
elements
> that were relatively undeveloped. The voices of people with polio
were
> certainly allowed, but mostly their speak was "victim" speak. The
adults
> recounted their experiences as youthful patients, but there was no
sense of
> disability as a positive experience. Also, the poster child issue was
> mentioned but not really developed. There was no explanation why
polio was
> essentially privatized, and there were no governmental programs for
the
> treatment of polio and the development of a vaccine. Was money for
polio
> seen essentially as charity and not as a program in the public
interest?
> Also, although the program mentioned that Salk's testing of vaccine
was not
> supervised by any governmental organization, there was no
explanation why
> this was so. Given the widespread testing on children, only the
fact that
> the vaccine worked legitimized this rather unethical project. If
Salk had
> failed, he would no doubt be considered one of the monsters of
American
> medicine, and the show just touched on Sabin's valid objections to
Salk's
> widespread testing of young children. I'm not sure how the show
ended and
> how it treated the current post-polio issue. But in general I will
stand
> by my initial hesitation. I think this show would have greatly
benefited
> from a disability-studies and disability-activist perspective. It
would
> have been a better and more nuanced show than what I saw.
>
> I say this with the understanding that there is no one, single
perspective
> from the disability movement possible. But, in the absence of input
and
> advice, the one perspective that emerges every time is the ableist
one.
> There, at least, there is a single perspective. To counter that
endless
> repetition, we do need to have an information-providing committee or
agency
> that can alert documentarians, writers, and directors that the area of
> disability is a nuanced one and that producers can't just pull the
> disability card out without knowing something more about the issue.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Lennard Davis
>
>
==
|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|
Simi Linton
[log in to unmask]
212 580 9280 (phone and fax)
|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|