Hi All,
I'm looking forward to the letter from the director of the documentary, as
well as to the documentary itself. But I think the main point is not that
there were people who were experts about polio, or even people with polio
and post-polio who were consulted, but that directors, producers, and
writers should feel that they need to talk with folks who are familiar with
the overarching issues about disability. I agree with Phyllis that the
disability studies perspective is one that needs to be acknowledged as
legitimate. I'm not counseling that there be thought police or required
oversight by a monolithic group of censors, but that there be something
more than the current attitude which is that a writer like the one on ER
could talk to, through an interpreter, a few Deaf people and feel as if he
or she did his work. In other words, we need to help the media think out
loud about the things they are producing; we need to give them resources.
The current situation is one in which disability issues appear in the
media incredibly frequently, specifically in studio movies, and there is no
sense at all of accountability. The same stereotypes are promulgated
repeatedly. I just watched "Dangerous Beauty" on video, and one of the
Venetian aristocrats, played by Fred Ward, is shown using a wheelchair (in
Renaissance Venice?!!). He is doing so because he has sores on his feet,
and he is the only one of all the men in the movie who has a "paternal"
relationship to Veronica Franca, the courtesan and poet whom the movie is
about. All the other men have sexual relations with her. Instead, she
washes his feet. OK. That's only one example. I'm sure you all have more.
So what is the next step? I think that, through an already existing
organization like the Society for Disability Studies, a committee should be
formed to look into (sounds pretty bureaucratic already) the possibility of
setting up a standing body that would publicize its own existence to, at
least, the major studios and television production companies. Some high
profile publicity should be distributed to the major print and visual
media. There might even be some investigation into what protections are
afforded by the ADA for defamatory or demeaning images of PWD (I'm only
guessing here).
It's always easier to speculate on paper than to take action, but why
should organizations that represent other identity groups have
anti-defamation committees and PWD not?
Best,
Lennard
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|