Press at renders them mute and alien. and mute them renders at ents, families, siblings, friends, doc- from “all climates” and “all faiths” the the faiths” “all and climates” “all from

video (2009) video s, as an upli f ing guitar theme and the

“does not represent Autistic people or or people Autistic represent not “does assume assume aquarium, beach, school yard?

University University Duke Duke Still from “I Am Autism” YouTube Autism” Am “I from Still 3 Chapter /

In In the second half of the video, the crisis is abruptly averted. e T scenes T e most striking objections to this video come have from autistic indi-

FIGURE 3.1 3.1 FIGURE of autistic children of their and marital sleep, hope. With bliss, each money, briefof the landscapes wholesome in the vignechildhoodseen es t threat, ? pen, baseball backyard, playground, of chil-gestures the innocent while the ofvectors, form disease the potential dren as they strum their hands across a table or stare into space begin to re- symptoms the ofsemble th epidemic an are played over but as family portraits: a new cast siblings, of characters ? envelop to screen fo - from emerges friends and families, ?extended parents, the children in a communal embrace. T e video speeds up, and the frozen faces of the children break into smile sounds of youthful laughter announce their release into sociality. Parallel- ing these reversals, a chorus of predominantly female voices takes over the vocal commentary on behalf of the par tors, and therapeutic sta f of autistics their across united are told, are we of warriors,” “community isT over. world di by erences f their common to quest “knock for a down” cure for autism ? the “wall” imprisoning their children by any means necessary, be it “tech- In unison they speak studies.” back or “genetic “voodoo,” “prayers,” nology,” a voice!” have “We autism: to concerns. their ventriloquize to empts t a Speaks’s Autism vidualsresent who “Autism Speaks,” these 104 critics argue, Press

T e f rst half of this video fuses a char- the words it ers u t in the f rst person: 2 University University

at was was at T me. ignored . You . combined. . diabetes and cancer, , Directed by the award- winning director Alfonso Cuarón, him- Cuarón, Alfonso director winning award- the by Directed Duke e video unfolds with autism promising to divest the families families the divest to promising autism with unfolds video e T 1 3 aids NOTICE: This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17 U.S. Code) Chapter 3 Chapter VOICE” A “HAVING Toward an Autisticof Documentary Counterdiscourse “I Am Autism” foun- autism largest research 2009 September In Autism Speaks, the world’s the from autis- protests vocal video drew raising that a fund- released dation, video from the to link the remove to organization the forcing community, tic its website. self long video, the titled “I parent ofAm minute- an autistic child, the four- was met Autism,” with “horror” by ofrepresentatives the Autistic Self Ad- vocacy Network, who organized a series of protests denouncing the “fear- oftacticsmongering” Speaks. Autism of documentary home realism ofwith the f the lm trope horror the acteristic of succession a In autism. offor urgency the cure on insista movief nding to ofa number like scenes, silent, soli- anonymous, down video–home slowed- tary to children be are revealed the victimsunsuspecting of the protagonist, autism, whose acousmatic voice emanates menacinglyscreen. fromT e o f - cool objectivity of this male voice, set o f by the metallic hiss of the sparse audioscape, heightens the horror of “I am autism. visibleI’m in your children, but if I can help it, I am invisible to you I too until late. know where it’s you live. And guess what? I live there moral- no religion, no allof barrier, around color no hover I know I you. too. no I ity, currency. speak Andyour language withf uently. every voice I take away, I acquire yet another language. I work very quickly. pediatric I work faster than a mistake.” ), a technique in which in technique a ),

the positivist documen- fc Press ice- to- text and other assistive assistive other and text to- ice- sence of articulate speech is 10 t. T is stance, which is explicit in ictory investments of social justice sm is an integral part of their iden- ethnographies ethnographies that purport to objec- s, and other are “primitives,” believed Disability studies scholars have echoed echoed have Disability scholars studies sh insight into tly exhibit echolalia, or the repetition of 9

T e acquisition of speech and language, like

8

University University Duke Duke 3 Chapter /

From a humanitarian standpoint, the ab T e predicament of autistics confronted by humanitarian agents speak- ing ing on their behalf also provides fre tary tradition of presenting a subjective perspective about the world as an objective statement of fact. T is tactic has historically been used, accord- ing in to Fabian, traditional Johannes tively depict non- Western tively Western cultures. depict Just non-as the ethnographic native is said autistics are highly talkative and articulate, while others are nonverbal or vo through communicate and verbal minimally technologies,including facilitated communication ( hand a to ers facilitator le t guidesor icons one’s on a the keyboard, reading wordsandsentences aloud.autistics Many developlanguage nonnorma-a on tive timeline, and some been have known to lose their verbal faculties later in life. In addition, autistics frequen certainwordsphrasesorsocially in inappropriate irrelevantor circumstances, meanings. conventional their from detached en f o this human; becoming toward necessarystep a considered is recognition, self- animal like children, is why autistics, to require a vocal delegate speaking on their behalf until they can speak themselves. In stark contrast, many autistics for their regard ofrange verbal ca- pacities as a spectrum of neurological diversity that they wish to preserve, and they assert the value of atypical neurological development as a normal human variation. Tey protest that auti not tity, an imposition from without, ominous as rendition Autism Speaks’s of the voice of autism Whilesuggests. proponents of neurodiversity do not they caregivers, their and autistics offor life challenges everyday real the deny also acknowledge the desirable aspects of living with autism that would be a or of need in “saving” are autistics that assumption T e cure. a by eliminated “cure,” they argue, idea an elimination ?worse, ofor, is need f cation in recti disease a as di f erence profoundly “neurotypical”:oppose. strongly autistics many that it misrecognizesthis viewpoint, pointing out the contrad neurologicaldiscourses in metaphors “ableist” of bodily ability as (such speech and mo- bility) as benchmarks of political subjectivity. 106 regarded regarded as a sign of underdevelopmen Autism Speaks’s video, also implicitly guides the therapeutic treatment of autism spectrum disorders.

5 7 105

/ ese criticisms criticisms ese T 6

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press nd cultural fraught questions of cross- video (2009) video

al competencies and inclinations: some inclinations: and competencies al for them and their families to be heard. be familiesto their and them for

arian recognition and inclusion: giving a inclusion: and recognition arian

commonly understood as a liberatory act understood commonly University University

Furthermore, its a t empts to do so actively “silence the voices of 4 Duke Duke Still from “I Am Autism” YouTube Autism” Am “I from Still e problems T e ofproblems autistic voicing hone in on one of the most familiar and FIGURE 3.2 3.2 FIGURE us.” for speak diitf cult make and people” autistic One activist shirts group emblazoned produced withT- the text, “Autism Autism. I have I can speak for Speaks myself.” can go away. what kind out,” of“speaking interiority is presupposed by a voice, and what kind of themselves? for speaking autistic the await to said be can outside paradigmaticmetaphors of humanit thevoiceless.voice to metaphorT e of “having drivesthat voice” adiscourses of social justice turns on the importance of speech for participating in any out” is “Speaking political process. of giving expression to an interior idea, thought, opinion, or wish that inau- hu- into indeed, and, sphere political the into entrance subject’s the gurates of gure f is a a in voice’ speech to ‘coming As LisaCartwright “ notes, manity. range of political movements connoting the achievement of agency, usually belatedly or through a political struggle before which the individual or col- ” lective subject who speaks or isbeen ‘invisible.’ ‘silent’ to have understood man- autism since autistics, for challenges concrete presents voice” a “Having verb of nonnormative range a in ifests activate some activate of the most persistent a someone be Whoto as: What such mean voice? it a does has representation, mouthpiece? or Does speaking something’s necessarily or to equate agency, When speak? to to comes it whichpay in not does it circumstances there are , while Baggs’s

logos Press served conversation. Bill Nichols ng ng a Rathervoice. than capitulating evokes an autistic counterdiscourse ance to the documentarythe to ance f lm genre: ied modes ofied and re- making meaning of interiority and personhood comes comes personhood and of interiority rthes, autistic accounts of language and and language of accounts autistic rthes, thes in producing a critical counterdis- therapeutic interventions around autism autism around interventions therapeutic

, promising intimate and authoritative access to

University University

fc Duke Duke 14 3 Chapter /

Wurzburg’s flm belongs within a humanitarian tradition that reinforces I I argue thisthat ofautistic counterdiscourse the voice demands a critical ), a short self- made video video made ), a self-short 2007 Baggs, aka Amanda Baggs, Mel (dir. guage” by Baggs. In addition to participating in and producing posted on YouTube very di ferent conversations around autism, these two foflms index an au- as alsoover illustrate voice- person rst-f the regarding stances contradictory autobiograph- Rubin’s Sue fprotagonist lm, Wurzburg’s In subjectivity. tistic featuring scenes “over” speaks surrogate, female a by voiced commentary, ical of use laborious Rubin’s experimentalvideo on draws Baggs of world Meanwhile, autism. interior the of translation poor hir a as over voice- person rst-f the position to techniques one whose promise language,” “native ofwith every aspect en- [hir] conversation of “constant cost a the in at being vironment.” a logocentric equation of voice withor “inner speech,” over subversionpersonvoice-of thef rst- of speech. shadows lurks the in legitimate that or one articulate ofvoicing ? I propose that Baggs and other autistic writers, like RajarshiTito Mukho- padhyay, Dawn Prince, and Temple Grandin, extend the work of scholars like Mladen Dolar and Roland Bar courseof Likethevoice. Dolarand Ba communication locate the voice in a space between the body and language embod paralinguistic, opens onto that T ese autistic lationality. accounts of voicing stage a compelling critique of humanitarian notions of having and givi tothe humanitarian call to “speak out” orthey to voice,” “come rede f nevoice under- is it as human, the toward exclusively oriented not is that something as of mode the that paradoxically, show, ey T tradition. logocentric the in stood contemporary in cultivated voicing bears all of the characteristics commonly t ributed a to autistic communica- tion. reassessment of the role of the speaking voice in documentary. “Voice” is of and metaphorical signiboth literal f c documentary has historically distinguished itself from ction f f lms through an emphasis on the spoken word, in the form of vocal such conventions as over, the interview, the and voice-the ob plays on this emphasis when he employs voice as a metaphor for a docu- 108 107

/ Fabian 11 Film scholar 12 , , and “In My Lan- “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

(dir. Gerardine Wurz- Gerardine (dir.

cnn Press riptwriters. I isolate and perform perform and isolate I riptwriters. Autism Speaks’s video enacts a t provides a point ofpoint for a providesdeparture t 13 autism and the parents and families communication and relationality in a

immediacy and persuasiveness of the

Autism Is a World World a Is Autism speech speech is thought to transmit. ethnography deny the coevalness or con- or coevalness the deny ethnography

University University Duke Duke When we reframe the question of speaking and being spoken for in this this in for spoken being and speaking of question the reframe we When I I begin with a survey of documentaryrecent f lms that depict autistic in- to to be “born with by rhythm” the anthropologist who did not see him grow the autistic islearn, or up, seen (per practice and by heard Fabian), humani- tarian organizations like Autism Speaks as a primitive, lacking the capacity for mental reasoning that “proper” to positivistapproaches that argues temporaneity of other cultures by placing them in a frame temporal outside audience. their of and present ethnographer discursive the the Fatimah Tobing Rony describes the ethnographicWestern tendencycultures to represent as non- taxidermymatic mummiorprimitive f cation:practiceseeksathat arti to f cially salvage or outsidea dying way of life modernby freezing it in time. historysimilar temporal manipulation. T e ejection ofas autistics from the intersub- a form of cine- jective dialogue between the voice of ofthat is, the various autistics humanitarian agents speaking ? on behalf of positions autistic modes ofautistics ? time. outside world referential self-private we way, can see how the rhetorical video turns in over on Autismdistancing the Speaks’s temporal of au- voice- ofinsigh T ismodes tistic communication. documentary tropes the when happens what examine I which in chapter, this inquirycenters My autistics. to voice” a “give to used are of speech persuasive of immediacy authoritative T e over. documentaryperson voice- f rst-the on video offor the voice in Autism Speaks’s employed in autism, has this trope, of number a by respond documentary borrowed f that been lms years recent politics ofto the representational problematic video by Autism de- Speaks’s for speaking themselves in autistic picting the protagonists form of the rst-f Whereasover. this trope person is voice-synonymous in the humanitarian context with having a voice, and thus with being human, I argue that from an autistic perspective it can be seen as one a documentary immediation ? whose ects f e of presence unmediated and proximity are achieved by deny- ing the coevalness of autistic modes of communication, language, and rela- tionality. sc and f lmmakers, protagonists, dividualsas of readings close two of f these lms: burg, ), 2004 a television documentary produced for My My (dir. (dir. Autism Autism Is a Jam Jar Jam , featured , di- featured

(dir. Douglas Biklen, Biklen, Douglas (dir. Press us, each of these parodies parodies of these each us, T 16 T e March of Time perspectives ofperspectives A autistic people. order order to understand what is gained the perspec- the ? perspective own its (dir. Gerardine Wurzburg, 2004 ), . Many documentaries of the Grier-

“I Am videoAutism” but also in several recent

University University

Autism Is a World a Is Autism Duke Duke and Baggs’s “In My Language” in in Language” My “In Baggs’s and 3 Chapter / rst- person voice- overhasStrikingly,person become thethevoice- fidiom rst- of choice not Before I turn to these over, I reappropriations ofperson voice-the f rst- T e authoritative, incontrovertible message of Autism Speaks’s video

regarding the pathology of autism is the combined e f ect of severalconventions classicof Griersonian narration rst- person voice “I’m Autistic: for ody, I reclaims the the Can au- Speak,” f rst- tistic.of e T plain background red this video ention on t focuses the a voice, weak,” not erent, f itselfdescribing “di as commentary, altered an sings which “smart,” “sensitive,” and shows how Autism Speaks “equalcamouages f in humanity.” itself introducing by oftive of voice the as discourse medical (“I”) autism ? behalfon (“you”) audience an of who can- to speaking victimsits (“autistics themselves”). for speak not only among parodists of the the authenticate to documentaries seeking the deploy decades two last ofthe number over documentaryshorts released individuals authoritatively autistic speak enable to to over voice-person rst-f about their and experiencesdirectly with autism. ese T include SimonEverson, 1995 ), Classic Life as an Artist: A Portrait of Larry Bissonne t e Amanda Baggs,2007 With).the exception (dir. Language” 2004My and), “In YouTube on published and directed, wrien, was whicht Language,” ofMy “In by Baggs, the fremaining lms were produced by allies and in advocates col- Donna respectively Williams,laboration with Larry autistic subjects ?Bis- Rubin. Sue and e, t sonne unpack how “I Am uses Autism” one of the oldest rhetorical tropes of doc- convey authoritatively to God narration ? of- voice- umentary immediacy ? then I intervention. urgent requiring emergency humanitarian a is autism that examine the uses and subversions of this trope in Wurzburg’s World over is deployed to give a voice person voice-and what is lost when the rst-f autistics. to sonian school, inspired by the iconic series dactic expository commentary in a delivered male stentorian voice speaking screen. T e in hierarchical location ofthe third person from o fthis- acous- the diegetic matic sounds voice “above” and its images, emanation from an unknowablescreen ospace,f - and its economical and detached delivery 110 109

/ lity studies, lity studies, , also map onto onto map also , “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having autistic Another popular par- popular Another 15

, and ,

as ?, and “In My Language” Press logy studies, disabi contemporary diagnostic debates resistant ee Voice- Overs Voice- ee , ng the genre’s evolution from objective, objective, from evolution genre’s the ng dominant Autism Autism Is a World nalysis of Thr of nalysis

, as a guide to the humanitarian discursive history of discursive humanitarian the to guide a as , University University

Autism? An A An Autism? Duke Duke nal section of the chapter, I use Michel Foucault’s landmark study, study, landmark Foucault’s Michel use I of section chapter, nal f the the In mentary’s social point of point social mentary’s charti view, Griersonian exposition exivef to more re modes of as narration an indicator of its gradual departure from its realist, rhetorical origins. Other documen- a featuring f lms locating narrative, Nichols’s corroborated taryhave scholars docu- to alternative enlightened an as over voice-person f exivef rst-re highly role enduring the critiques of voice concept autistic T e the mentary realism. of the speaking voice in documentary’s reality ects f e and, in so doing, joins the e f orts of feminist documentary critics and f lmmakers who have chal- lenged the equation of speaking out and T isprogress. critique also points to the limitations of the way re f exivity is understood detail. in greater in up takes 4 documentary chapter that theme a ? Civilizationand Madness method in autism. this Foucault’s foundational book, which aimed to make unreason speak without destroying it, allows me to situate my three media “I Am Autism,” examples ? di f erent points along the spectrumrepresentational of documentary voic- which dub voices, I T ese ing. the major tendencies representational in around autism and productively illuminate the contradictions of producing to- bringing by debates these approach I reason.” of on unreason “discourse a gether perspectives from science and techno of on analysis isT light sheds also autism for whospeakstheory. critical and the dif erent voices speaking for the child and for the disaster victim in the previous two chapters. for Speaks Who In the weeks following the release of Autism Speaks’s controversial video,responded withadvocates number au-oftistic self- parodies that foregrounded the epistemological sleight of hand involved in the original video’s f rst- over person commentary. voice-T e anonymous blogger Socrates’s video “I Am Autism Speaks” makes a conservative but ingenious change to the text of the original commentary to reveal that the “I” in the videoports to thatbe the voice pur-of autism itself is in fact the voice of the organization Autism Speaks. Much of the track image is le f intact, while the delivery of the commentary in a voice electronic casts monotonous Autism Speaks as a driven soullesscorporation. and shamelessly f t-pro 20 f these lms , My My Classic Life as Jam Jar Jam e representation representation e T

22

23 , and Press rs the so- called autism rs epidemic the so- e therapeutic assistance is exacer- s, medical experts, and other “foreign Autism Autism Is a World , continues continues to be used in iouslyhumani- ? commentary has been employed in recent manitarian intervention. manitarian

Jam Jar Jam University University

e rhetorical urgency ofurgency rhetorical e T expository ex- didactic narration rst- person voice- over over voice- person f rst-f a employ thislms all end, three To

21 24 Duke Duke as a way of foregrounding the perspectives of perspectives ofprotago- the autistic their way a as foregrounding 3 Chapter / isT drowning out takes place at multiple textual levels in the “I Am Au- over, expository didactic voice-a by o f ered advantages strategic the Given

an Artist an power power to introduce or comment on the voices that overlay this world. We ” of world the covers over ‘diegesis.’ the voice- that then, say, to want might ens over t the f a mean- describes,as Wolfe the video. Formally, tism” voice- ings that lie beneath it in Furthermore, the the narra- audiovisual hierarchy. complex the condenses storytime compress to over ofcapacity tive voice-the speaks it history discursive Rhetorically, of event. timely tense, a into autism directly to the audience, unlike the person more distantvoice, elid- third- face conversation. to-ing oflayers mediation in an to implied face-reference clarity denotational in gains it What ofform this complexity, in loses voicing it isand authorityan especially ? compact, sharply de f ned, and impactful ofform speech. ofpre- out fell favor Wolfe, to according which, conventionthis? why plains cisely because it took itself too ser tarian media: here, it unequivocally rende as an emergency requiring action, not contemplation. of autistics as victims requiring immediat in strategy of ation f routine con a the isisT with by autisticschildren. bated lifelong a is autism though even advocacy: autism mainstream contemporary vulnerabil- coded the nonverbal, are autistics all not and condition, spectrum projective for target universal a them makes children autistic ofity nonverbal hu for thus and identication, f over it is unsurprising that voice- documentary f lms such as nists over and above those of doctor of Williams, protagonist the Donna quote To observers.” documentary”a autis-making an from to approach out “inside-an take to aim perspective. tic as their rhetorical spine, through which all other perspectives are mediated. In addition to providing an “inner perspective” on autism, this technique is control authorial much exert as to subjects disabled enabling in ective f e also as possible over the ofmessage the f lm, short of producing the f lms them- over is also chosen person for voice-its suitability selves. T e in f rst-trans- lating the writingsautobiographical of the protagonists into an audiovisual idiom. In each of these f lms, the vocal commentary is compiled from the 112 111

T e / 19 the hap- the within

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press 17 ation in classical documentary, Charles ages, or whether it hovers around them, them, around hovers it whether or ages,

e T voice of autism makes overt the im-

18

University University Duke Duke e voice of autism in “I Am Autism” bears the trace of voice- of- God nar- God of- of trace voice-the bears Autism” Amof “I voice in T e autism T e urgent, forceful temporality of this video is also an e f ect of the ex- plied menace of its acousmatic presence when it states, “I am invisible to you you to invisible am “I states, it when presence of acousmatic menace its plied worked in concertworked with its meta- its social reinforce and to rhetorical coding physical status and objectivity. Such a voice forcefully drew ention t a away and earn- its from embodiment toward message, its own materiality, source, openly Grierson John vocal of narration.” God form of-this ofof moniker informal “voice- the ing point the propaganda: of form a as documentary viewed an- by possible, as much as clarity denotational for strive to was commentary that grain the minimizing ofas well fas or meanings xingchoring the images play. interpretative to up them open would withration, all of of its connotations and omni- omnipotence, omniscience, ofto much presence has voice disembodied commanding this e T presence. location its diegesis, the beyond space “other” an from emanation with its do everything we see “above” and and hear, the fact that its source remains un- voice is that voice heard to Michel Chion, (a an seen. According acousmatic vulnerabil- psychic dramatic and archaic evokes seen) not is source whose but ities for the subject, spectating including those withassociated the mother’s of e T unseen voice. audiovisual architecture cinema has the distinct capac- real presence than- screen voice he ity, withwrites, to a imbue more-the o f - on the relies uncertainthat ofabsence an is body actual that appear to liable in the visual eld f at any moment. It is unclear untilwhether too late.” it’s autism speaks from im the in seen children voiceless less, moment. any at them possess to threatening coded sonic over’s logic ofpository subtraction. voice-Although the voice- over is “added” in the manner of a supplement, it works, as Rey Chow has from the information image. or subtracting out,” by “hollowing-noted, removalof autistics from the intersubjective you”)exchange (“I- between the offunction a as hollow- this regarded be can spectator the and voice speaking ing out of over: the autistic children in the represented by image the voice- the video appear devoid of subjectivity because they are ectively f e reduced to visual evidence shoring up the video’s message that autism is a narr vocal de on f citessay an In impairment. or Wolfe describes this comment on, or drown know, out sounds dynamic from the world a f lm depicts, but as follows: reciprocal no have register isasymmetrical: that from voices relationship the “T ose who speak in voice-over may , fc , Wurzburg’s , Wurzburg’s In her confer- her In 27 A twenty- six- year- six-A twenty- Jam Jar

and Press erances are are erances t u her phrases, and rds in classes, classes, in ?conversations all other . Although several of . Although several comments my - person voice- over as a documentary documentary a as over voice- person - r side, or preprogramming questions specially her di f culties with commu- Autism Is a World. ce, ce, Rubin explains, this communication

conferences for and about those on the the on those about and for conferences

nd doctors, and she so relies on on ? University University My Classic Life as an Artist Autism Is a Is World Autism

at the age of thirteen, before which she had been believed Duke Duke fc her transformation from to a a “nonperson” successful student living 3 Chapter / e, Rubin’s Rubin’s e, t Bissonne and Williams about lms f aforementioned the with As In addition to serving as its thematic preoccupation, Rubin’s di fculties e e T question then arises in to relation an aesthetics of immediation: Are

fc with verbal communication also set up the formal problematic of Wurz- burg’s f lm when it comes to the discursive conventions with her of verbally documentary. communicates she Although nonverbal. is mostly Rubin ing, or drowning out commonly seen in the Griersonian mode of voice- over over of mode Griersonian the in seen voice-commonly out ing, drowning or narration. commentaryover person expository voice- in rst-f involved the subtractions quality mediated and time protracted the impact they do How temporal? also of I willautistic communication? answer this a question through close read- fing oflm Wurzburg’s are equally pertinent to nominatedtelevision documentary Oscar-allows seetheexclusionsusto and ofsubtractions the interventionist rst f as well as the immediation larger medial ? and ideological frameworks that particularly a in crystalline form. exclusions these by place in held ?are personal struggles with autism, and e nication, de f ne the narrative arc of old college history major at the time of therelease, Rubinf lm’s t ributesa to in- being upon transformation Rubin’s chronicles f lm Te spectrum. autistic troduced to to be mentally With retarded. practi system helped her to recognize voices and words in the sounds that f oated even though she continues beganwake “mind to up,” Her struggle overto her. movements. and sounds uncontrollable and echolalia with o f ers en o f Rubinf lm, the in ofsome featured presentations, are which ence the to individualsas [autistic] “enlighten to aims and a f rmation motivational ofpotential own their voices.” support sta f and family through a few wo For people. most to comprehensible not at conferences, with professors a picking out ers le t individually on a keyboard that are then aloud read by a sta fsupport- member who sits by he 114 in an assisted- livingin an facility, an assisted- involved participant in decisions regarding her life, and a frequent speaker at 113

/ rst- rst- f

interventionist

perceptual perceptual world of “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press rst- person voice- over convinces convinces over voice- person rst- f sumes a referential and rhetorical rsonal, autobiographical, rsonal, and autobiographical, highly evidences the operation of a pervasive nd directly addressing the camera, while whilecamera, the addressing directly nd ical challenges, and T e merger between expository and perform-

25

nd an emotive, embodied, and expressive mode University University , the commentary is read aloud by surrogate voice

e seemingly countervailing impulses of objectivity of objectivity impulses countervailing seemingly e T

26 fc Duke Duke rst- person voice- over narration that com- that narration over voice- person of mode a rst-f employ f lms ese T When subjectivity is mobilized for humanitarian purposes, as it is in the ative ative modes of voicing in these f lms protagonists’ writings: protagonists’ Williams her own writingsreads aloud and alternates a narrator frame servinga between as in the cases of Rubin and e, Bissonne t who are mostly and nonverbal com- municate through artists. bines didactic exposition a of address. T ey straddle the line between what Nichols calls the exposi- tory and performative modes of documentary and borrow elementseach: whereasfrom the expository mode has a rhetorical and mode polemical performative the objectivity, to appeal agendaan through accomplished is that a with pe exploring concerned is more subjective perspective on the world, eno f that of an underrepresented or group. social misrepresented idiom of humanitarian that I representation will call the T is over. form ofperson voice-narration documentary’s “pirates legendary ofdescription per- Lebow’s Alisa from borrow to use,” personal for authority sonal documentary. of ect f e combined estab- the have over typethis subjectivityof in and voice- lishing the unequivocal authority of personal, sub- the autistic protagonist’s on the world. perspective jective aforementioned f lms about autism, it as function, far from being rendered in a complex, uncertain, or hybridized of mode performative the t ributes to a Nichols that traits are er t la (the light person voicing). T e interventionist f rst- inte- oflegitimacy and speaker’s the authenticity, offorcefully us validity, the rior interiorityexistence. isT serves,subjugated in turn, as a factual ground viewsmedical and correct whichfrom ofcounter to posi- would autism that tion it as an impairment. At such becomes moments, an autobiography evi- subjectivity the grounding of or ect f e tethering the has that dentiarypractice of the autistic in the identitarian domain of their e T disability. protagonist authoritatively of and informant directly expoundingsorts, native a becomes on the subjective experience, pract living with autism. e T forceful authority of person the interventionist rst-f derivesover fromtheexpository voice-techniques of hollowing out, subtract- is framed and Rubin’s commen- , her cable network 29 cnn

in order to center Rubin’s Rubin’s center to order in Press fc Autism Autism Is a World over spelling and grammar that she ective nature of ofnature mode this ective commu-

iqués and edits out the mediations of sometimes interrupted by episodes of

iple. Subsequently, the remainder of the remainder the Subsequently, iple. University University in bringing autistics to voice has been questioned owing questioned been has voice to autistics bringing in

fc Duke Duke rst- person voice- over, to to over, voice- person rst-f the by implied subjectivity singular e T 28 3 Chapter / Wurzburg’s truncation of scenes depicting To accord with the time constraints of with constraints time documentarythe accord genre, broadcast the To

sponsor and coproducer ofsponsor and coproducer the f lm. bin’s behalf. isT laborious process isbin’s echolalia that cause Rubin to stumble support her by . f sta prompted correct, to back goes then these long scenes are presented in a truncated and heavily edited form that captures the gist ofcommun Rubin’s Much of her facilitator. the lag time is cut out so that we hear the facilitator ese T sentence. or phrase complete the by of followed couple a ers, t le name elisions are especially in noticeable scenes where Rubin is shown interview- her center f to the lm by used technique a condition her about ?doctors ing in that her perspective erances ?u t are subject to visible mediation while those of her interviewees are not. Although marketed as a f lm narrated by an autistic voice, the unavoidable display of to but voice Rubin’s to not ests t a these like moments at interference editorial as well as Wurzburg’s, to the determining power of intersubj resolutely the disavows voice nication, as well as the complexly form interconstitutive of subjectivity that States, United the in introduction its since that Cartwright notes facilitates. it oflegitimacy the fa- their by of manipulated voices the are anxiety autistics that widespread to cilitators. which turns Wurzburg to resolve the dilemmas of allowing Rubin to “speak for herself,” wards o f this anxiety. T e f lm is cohered together by autobi- ographical commentary composed writer), by as Rubin the (credited f lm’s voiced by the face actress Julianna Margulies. AsRubin’s the fname lm opens on “My say, voice Margulies’s hear we home, of her doorway the in framed my about thoughts these wri en I’ve t old. sixyears twenty- am I Rubin. Sue is really talk.life I because don’t isT is not but voice, my these words.” are my With this announcement of the centrality of message rather Rubin’s than its vocal medium, her commentary is established from the start as the f lm’s princ and voice organizing narrative f lm as is a linguistic represented speech, even though event ofMar- Rubin’s does “dramatic,” and “sensitive” as praised been has which delivery, gulies’s of tone f lm. the subjective and emotional the set to much ofmuch supplies the that f lm the throughout presence ent t intermi taryan is 116 115

/

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press is antagonistic to the discursive fc w and the observed conversation, in in observed the and w conversation, are are never delivered spontaneously in mediated form ofform also communication mediated ectual life, she also confesses to feeling nd occasionally responds to others on Ru- by Gerardine Wurzburg (2004) Wurzburg Gerardine by

are necessary and valuable subject er t ma for the University University fc

Autism Is a World World a Is Autism Duke Duke Still from from Still Scenes depicting FIGURE 3.3 3.3 FIGURE even But electronically. device can be replayed that generating a speech-into as Rubin acknowledges how language and facilitated speech have allowed her to participate in social and intell and in by exhausted focused the during ortf stay e to conversations required into retreat out,” “zone to needs she when times are ere T lectures. college her solitude, and let part the of “autistic She does this [her] by brain take over.” run water a through watching faucet, or the over drizzling spoons water that carriesshe of with about unexplainable source an as her comfort. negotia- interpersonal and technological the demonstrate they that in f lm, At the people. autistic for nonverbal conversation in everyday tions involved visiblyand prolonged this time, same presents an obstacle when it comes to version soliciting ofRubin’s events interviews.of mode through Asa address, immediacyof documentarythe intervie comments and responses that Rubin’s her own a whovoice. Instead, facilitator, reads o f ers le t and words one by one, occasionally stopping to predict the text, voices them. T e facilitator en o f provides her own interjections, prompting Rubin with facial expres- sions and interpretive remarks, a Press es interiority. In this way, f es allIn this interiority. that way, onto onto a di erent, f autistic of economy rather than its referent. Structurally, Structurally, referent. its than rather expression among others. T us, even ion or events in their own right. Te imely, meaningful imely, illustration that can ningless” ningless” about autistic communication

. T e illustrative sounds and images that serve University University , is e f ectively denied. In the formal ofhierarchy the

fc Duke Duke Autism Autism Is a World 3 Chapter / What is more, the superior location of Margulies’s voice-over in the audio- the in voice-over Margulies’s of location superior the more, is What T e precise through operation which the f lm this achieves e f ect of tem- A viewing of “In Baggs’s My Language” makes it clearer that the autis-

s elsewhere, never remain on- screen long enough enough long screen on- remain never elsewhere, dri s f ention t a her when tic voice to which a f lm such as lays claim Wurzburg’s is a casualty of the visual naturalizes itshierarchy status as the telos of communicative Rubin’s own desire one to be f ects that re Rubin’s seen as e f ortsa thinking,? feel- rather than one mode of ing person ? over seems like an innocuous, natural, and voice-empa- though Margulies’s thetic inner choice voice, its for operations are Rubin’s quite complex. T e consequence of representing over thiscommentary voice- as the ideal, suc- is potential the communicative that coevalness ofcessful realization Rubin’s of all of the other, autistic forms of communication in which she is shown engaging, including f lm, these halting, erances are t u cast nonverbal as the primitive precursors over. of voice- evidenced the in speech “proper” the of logic durational the abbreviates it how observed in be can distancing poral autistic communication into visual motifs or bridges. T e scenes of Rubin “zoningout” by watching tap water f owover a spoon, or the moments during fc to assume the status of communicat e T as former employed briefare out altogether. er edited are t la transitions if as face Rubin’s on in zooming en f o camera with the scenes, other between over, to e T emphasize her superimposition humanity. of voice- Margulies’s in editorial conjunction and with compositional choices, Wurzburg’s turns the scenes that might potentially open voicing into a form of evidence that signi “mea of or potentially is time” “out a f lm t into by is Wurzburg’s turned be within accommodated the standardized duration of the television docu- mentary. over person voice- interventionist f rst- , is the in 2007 YouTube to whichposted video, Baggs minute-long this eight- inverse of mainly as supporting evidencef lm in are the Wurzburg’s main event in the halfrst f of which entirely consists video, of of number a Baggs’s encounters the resembling transitory scenes where Rubin ese T is shown out.” “zoning scenes are presented without explanatory commentary, accompanied only 118 117

/ in its fc “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

by Gerardine Wurzburg Wurzburg Gerardine by Press rsonal rsonal insights that it also in operates

Autism Is a World World a Is Autism

University University Duke Duke Still from opening sequence of of sequence opening from Still e association of Margulies’s voice with Rubin’s face in close- up T e in association the of face in voice withclose- Margulies’s Rubin’s FIGURE 3.4 3.4 FIGURE story content and providing momentum: con- introducing characters, f lm’s scenes. between transitions providing and present, to past text, connecting ac- screen, -f o from emanation withvoice’s the coupled scene, opening f lm’s in the pres- are we music, also signals that by fso , contemplative companied ofdocumen- performative evocative the choice a voice, inner of ence Rubin’s over en o f tary plays over scenes wheremode. T e Rubinvoice- is engaged in conversation with her facilitator or with a third party, o fering intimate with relationships her support . f sta more than In one ections f on re Rubin’s interviewed being shown is Rubin which in scene only the including instance, over f lls by in Wurzburg, the the response voice-time during which Rubin Mar- feeling. “really” is she what us tell to answer, her types out painstakingly behav- autistic own of sense makes Rubin’s retrospectively also voice gulies’s iors, o f ering such explanations as: “When I watch I water, am zoning out blank, I and goes mind My ofpartover. autistic take the brain ing t le and my over it the ismoments when at precisely the voice- Strikingly, thinking.” stop most and intimate pe ers f o up Rubin’s a ectively f e mirroring didactic capacity, the in translation involved way of explaining and making sense of otherwiseRubin’s opaque feelings behaviors. and (2004) Press

by Amanda Baggs (2007) Baggs Amanda by by Amanda Baggs (2007) Baggs Amanda by

University University Duke Duke Still from “In My Language” My “In from Still Still from “In My Language” My “In from Still FIGURE 3.6 3.6 FIGURE 3.7 FIGURE 119

/ T e soundtrack

.

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press Autism Autism Is a World s, the camera framing becomes s, part the becomes framing camera r times the camera looks awry so that looksawry that camera so the times r the following scenes, Baggs interacts

by Gerardine Wurzburg (2004) Wurzburg Gerardine by University University

Autism Is a World World a Is Autism Duke Duke Still from from Still As these encounter through we move FIGURE 3.5 3.5 FIGURE by a wordless voice that hums to meditatively itself. e T video opens with a medium shot of Baggs, backlit by a apping f hir window, hands and moving back and forth in hir living room. In with a series of everyday items in hir home in ways that don’t necessarily correspond to their uses as objects or their status as “things” that belong to a di erent f ontological category than humans: sie strums hir ngers f across a and pats keyboard, computer icksf ers t u f a at in a receipt necklace, beaded the wind, the strokes ridges of a griddle pan, vigorously fondles the knob of n-f hir wags and book, a waves and against smells rubs and face hir drawer, a camera. the before gers of the textural world being explored, as Baggs zooms and reframes without concern for focalizing the “event” in each scene with any particular f delity. Sie moves in or out to focus on the texture of the object or the movements othe at and hir, ofinterest that hand hir the action is limited to a corner of the frame. Hir face is seldom in focus, so our organize not does voice, speaking the in, stand- its or face human the that relationship to the diegesis, as it does in

31 Press ntinues, “It is not enough to look to enough not is “It ntinues, see hir smelling hir hand, listening to to listening hand, hir smelling hir see lmmaker Trinh T. Minh- ha’s de- ha’s Minh- T. Trinh f lmmaker and r , I have to do those to the right things.” things.” right the to do those to , I have

t- person voice can speak “near” and not not and “near” speak can voice person t- oughly exceeds any single signifying op-

University University Duke Duke 3 Chapter /

My My language is not about designing words or even withevery visualconversation constant a in being symbolsabout is It interpret. to people for sym- doesn’t ofpart this water videothe ofIn the aspect environment. my interacts with as the water the anything.water I bolize am just interacting ongoing an is move I that way the purposeless, being from Far me. with response to what is around me. Ironically the way that I move whenof world a “beingmy in as re- described is me everything around to sponding ifwhereas own” with set of I a limited interact much more and responses only to react a much more limited part of my surroundings people claim with true the world.” up to interaction I am “opening that T e divergence between Baggs’s “native language” and its over voice- Baggs insists that hir own spoken words are merely an impoverished transla- impoverished an merely are words own hir spoken insists that Baggs language, the scenes that continue to play alongside hir commentary alongside remain play to continue that the scenes language, synchronizes Baggs which in instances of one rare the In opaque. beguilingly hir explanation to an action is(sie moving hir f ngers in a stream of water), hir only explanation is that the action has no symbolic content or hidden comments: Sie message. tion of a mode of voicing that thor eration. Bearing out this critique, the content of over refuses the hir voice- documen- in word spoken the to assigned conventionally charge explanatory tary, as well as the interpretive f nality that would otherwise be guaranteed by the location of hir verbal commentary hir “over” other audiovisual ex- pressions. istranslation beautifully in at a soon hinted scene follows.tellsthat us, Baggs “I smell things, I listen to things, I feel things, I taste things, I look at things,” we statements ifthese as and illustrate to a dreidel by rubbingspinning it near tasting hir a a against ear, face towel, smells sie that fact e T ear. hir at iflook as to sideways eye hir turning and pen, of dissonance the singular the indicates only things” “wrong allthe tastes and only not “you” a sees which promiscuity, relational and perceptual withhir “I” co sie hir; everything in around but people in and listen and taste and smell and feel At best, sie seems to be saying, a f rs “for” oneself, to invoke feminist schola veryitselfclose on come can f ects and ofscription“re of form that a speaking to a subject without, however, seizing or claiming it.” 122

121 hirs

/ 30 , and hir , sie ) in hir “transla- hir in ) “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having mine ,

me

, I Press r you are seen as a real person . person . real . a as seen are you r binary engendering of “proper” e camera, in hir hands, be- hands, hir in camera, e T rials. this statement, in that Baggs uses uses Baggs that in statement, this immerse immerse hirself in textures, sounds, e point point e T of s gender. or personality en commu- en o f and nonverbal entirely t e lure of insight lure e T authentic tongue. le world where how close you can appear appear can you close how where world

use of pronouns the genderless

University University Duke Duke rst- person pronouns ( pronouns person of use insistent rst-f Baggs’s In the second half of the video, titled “Translation,” these scenes are re- peated peated over with commentary subtitled in voice-the f rst person by Baggs in which sie describes the previous part of the video as expressions of hir converges randomly converges hummingandserendipitously with Baggs’s as theimage, drowned times other at and rhythmically, punctuated occasionally are sounds out, by the scratching, tapping, grating, and feringu t withmate various interactions hir through sounds produced comes a haptic, sonic eye, to borrow Laura descriptionMarks’s of this femi- nist video technique: rather than scrutinizing the object in each scene with a controlling, penetrating gaze, sie grazes the surface of the materials with which sie using interacts, the camera to of hirself instead movements and abstracting environment. hir from “native language.” Since Baggs is over almos consists of based interfaces, hir voice-typed com- through nicates text- de- e T speech-generating fso speech ware. to-words hir mentary text-using vocalized renders ltered f is commentary typed Baggs’s which through vice an as it read to empt t a the ects f de that monotone mechanical uncanny an in sign for it scan to or monologue interior of tells the us, Baggs hir “bizarre isvideo, bare not lay to workings of the au- tistic mind” but to acknowledge “the existence and value of many di f erent a in interaction and of thinking kinds toa speci f cone of them determines whethe rights.” any [with] might tion” seem incongruous in light of them to claim and authenticate hir own unique form its in complex of as iswhich commentary of?subjectivityvery point the Baggs’s But voice. and by of implied modes the relationality how show to is articulateis it ? as logic to access hir mediate forcibly speech articulate and personhood grammatical Baggs’s political recognition. similarly comments on the restrictive and decision pronominal to forms. withholdBaggs’s this commentary until the second half of the video, and to frame it as a translation, is a provocation: it points out that the autistic voice cannot be heard, seen, or acknowledged recognizab a in speak to begins it until ful video as never f lls. Even Baggs’s is mind autistic that one “native” the into called native implies the so- an label interpretive key “translation” to Baggs’s : “a : con- “a

adynata Press a counterdiscourse a ofcounterdiscourse voicing ggs’s address isaddress to humanitarian ggs’s voicing that cannot be “possessed” tive tive and expository functions asso-

ringing together of impossibilities’ as a as of impossibilities’ together ringing

ornton and Gruben intervene in the Grubenin intervene and T ornton nd nd reporting on authoritatively their con- University University

33 Duke Duke 3 Chapter / But cinematicwhereas Trinh’s experiments aimed to alter the sensibili- In the following section, I situate Baggs’s critique of the In following Baggs’s section, and I verbal- language situate lm,” Peckham writes, thus locat- of Peckham the center at doubt and disturbance the f lm,” ing the enabling failure implied by the dual de f nitions of ofmeans speaking.” ofties viewers,a f lm ethnographic habits of classical Hollywood Ba spectators, audiences. Baggs extendscritique Trinh’s to the humanitarianperson f rst- theasliberalized called over, guisevoiceless turnedwhichinare the so- voice- informants observing native into a wishers. T e dition mismatch of to between their well- sound and image ? the and authority, clarity, immediacy of verbal commentary Baggs’s and hir insistence on its poverty as a translation ofpowerfully hir expressive acts ? the reveals inadequacy of the notion of interiority withassociated the rst-f Baggs ofvoice. trope privilegeda humanitarian a having as over, voice-person evokes a parallel, unspoken of economy but that emerges through the f ict con between linguistic signi f cation and a comportment. choice of embodied communicative Hir expansive, more the over person as voice-the f rst- vehicle for this critique is both striking and counterintuitive: whereas the performa withciated this mode of voicing are typically withassociated the discursive humanitarian the that reveals Baggs of legitimation interiority, and liberation an from ning f con thoroughly as of seen conception be fact in interiority can autistic perspective. those as well of as writings context other hir larger the in videothis in ization of other autistic commentators. I argue that autistic accounts of language and communication contain the elements of with the ofwork resonates that criticscultural like and Dolar Barthes. T ese of ofcritique notion powerful logocentric a the mount interlocutors unlikely au- surrounding discourse therapeutic humanitarian the orients that voice the of course the over show to on go AsI vision of implied its and humanity. tism historyofthe to documentaryrelevant deeply alsois critique this chapter, the and its in investments the (speaking) voice as a marker of social and repre- progress. sentational 124 fession that words fail us” and “ ‘a fession st that ‘a words fail us” and “ 123

/ “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

( 1982 ), a collage of frag-

) ( 1983 works just as well Press Adynata ve both experimented with mute- s as an unspeaking spectacle. Linda spectacle. unspeaking an as s humanitarian intervention. Trinh is humanitarian intervention. Trinh Reassemblage gs gs within a corpus of feminist experi- doubling of doubling classic in exclusions these strategies that comment on the patriar- comment that strategies by Amanda Baggs (2007) Baggs Amanda by

Her flm

32

University University Duke Duke Still from “In My Language” My “In from Still “In My Language” is evocative of Trinh’s experimental f lms in is ofits Language” evocative My “In decon- Trinh’s FIGURE 3.8 3.8 FIGURE struction of the documentary tropes of well known for her critique of the totalizing language of ethnographic cin- person ema, narration notably and expositorythe observational third-con- ventions ofangle framingwide- and minimal editing, for its way of disguis- information factual scienti or as c f perspective subjective f the lmmaker’s ing cultures. Western aboutnon- of nearby” of the strategy images operationalizes mented “speaking Senegal, in the form of over that a acknowledges the whispering,fu- voice-accented tility of distilling the complexity of the African continent into a meaningful f belon lm arguably soundbyte. Baggs’s Gruben, Patricia and T ornton, Leslie Trinh, includes that f lmmaking mental among others. T ornton and Gruben ha and ness, aphasia as inarticulateness, ofexclusions re chal the and language, bodie female depict that f lms Hollywood Peckham’s description of T ornton’s as fa descriptionlm of f lm: “ T e Baggs’s arrested articulation opens a space of e e T 40 .” to have have to not have a voice have already already

with with a meaning Press reside within the body in the form that that is, iflanguage and speech ? we olar’s elaboration ofolar’s this phenomenon therapeutic therapeutic interventions is not a voice already

According to this narrative, the voice, or the the or voice, the narrative, this to According

39 University University

T e metaphysical turn inSocratic post- philosophy, as Fran-

38 Duke Duke of of bequest human God; the the Word speech, the inner or , logos 3 Chapter /

Baggs Baggs suggests that we can grasp an alternative, autistic concept of the er” to achieve reason weighs weighs reason er”achieve t to ma of above imperative e T “rising humans the structure of a human rights claim in that Baggs claims that sie too has a voice and deserves, on that basis, to be as recognized human. In this regard, Baggs might seem to con f rm the conservative, humanitarian vision of hu- manity that is grounded in essential characteristics as (such and voice) that includes progressively excluded subjects on the condition that they exhibit more careful these parsing that reveals Baggs stra-characteristics. However, tegically uses human rights discourse to critique the con fning form ofmanity hu-that humanitarian agents believe they liberate by giving autistics a autistics who that insistence cannot speak Baggs’s voice. in suggests that what such is “given” the extension, by and, humanitarian the ? to unement t a an rather but se per of speech. conventions persuasive articulate, documentary ? voice if we disarticulate the voice from ofthought perspective are whothe those from voice the approach one in the so In rst f doing,place. sie calls into question one of the most en- during refrains of philosophy, Western dating back to Plato and Aristotle: the belief that humanity abides in the capacity for externalizing interiority speech. through Dysonces noted,haswas characterized thebyimperativesubject to thebody its etherealize and corporeality its banish would that process puri f cation a to true inner substance: reason. existssoundings, meaning,physical make produce to capacity specito callyf linguistic meaning. T is is what is believed to set humans apart from other animals. Animals, Aristotle famously proclaimed, do not a have voice even though they produce sounds, for “voice is a sound to is thought question in meaning ofsoul, a be exteriorized. by which the vehicle it may is voice merely on the voice in a In this particular logocentric way. mode of privileging the ofmodes mean- embodied making social, its of over content linguisticspeech ing, the voice is as treated a “vanishing mediator” whose corporeal content evaporates in the act of erance.u t D of explanation paradoxical the clear its for length some at is quoting worth dualism between mind and subjectivitybody, and that corporeality, struc- writes: Dolar thinking. metaphysical tures 126 125

/ Baggs’s Baggs’s 37 35 “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

e common denom- common e T

34 Press tegration therapies. numerousToo ors, and, neurological most recently, ches (e.g., behavioral, psy- cognitive, ches (e.g., of customizable therapeutic interven-

ain in question, over seventy er years a f which encompass various permutations permutations various encompass which

supports of vocal sounding toward the us feature prominently in its diagnosis and and diagnosis its in prominently feature us Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental of Mental Manual Statistical and Diagnostic inative behaviors and interests. and behaviors inative University University

36 Duke Duke , published by the American Psychiatric Association, nes which f de Association, by , the published American Psychiatric cit in communicative capacity remains, called by citf de capacity remains, in communicative this so-Overcoming It is precisely this con fation of language and speech with voice that Autistic Counterdiscourses of the Voice the of Counterdiscourses Autistic com- to failure a historyas diagnostic its throughout regarded been has Autism th voice and language and municate, T e treatment. causes of autism rem the pioneering ofresearch Leo Kanner and T e Hans Asperger. hypotheses varied are moments historical erent f di at research autism propelled have that and controversial: they include neglect, maternal metabolic imbalances, vac- fact genetic toxins, environmental cines, and integration. in sensory perception abnormalities of the edition h ff released recently Disorders communication social in impairments involving disorder spectrum a as autism of and a range and interaction imag and the large, goal of the growing list disorders, spectrum autism for tions of speech, occupational, and sensory in to systematize, the therapeutic approa chopharmacological) currently employed in the treatment of autism spec- trum disorders on draw dierent f scienti c f models, employ dierent f curric- ula, and diactivate f erent forms of relationships between the therapist and including the basic competencies they seek patient. However, to cultivate ? eye contact, social interaction, compliance, ention, t a and imaginative- are symbolicall skillsimplicitly or explicitly? designed to cultivate a com- portment toward human voices, faces, and language and to orient the cog- nitive, physiological, and a f ective ofproduction words. Baggs disputes when sie writes, “Not everyone has words but everyone has a voice and a means of communicating. And not everyone who uses words sees words as their primary voice or their primary means of understanding hav- see automatically and facts, these miss to seem people things. . [M]ost . . ing a voice as the same as using speech or at least using language.” statement is deceptively simple. On the surface it appears to correspond to inator of with inator fascination a communica- a as been autism has diagnoses these the in out borne is T is speech. abilityand language impacts that disorder tive 42 Here, Baggs re- Baggs Here, 46 Baggs writes, “I don’t don’t “I writes, Baggs 45

44 Press either: he proposes that while that proposes he either: what does not contribute to making making to contribute not does what nes the voice as the coun- the as voice the f nes rede olar s the con f nes of linguistic signi f ca- plains, for instance, that hir mode of ing the world as a rich a as tapestry world the ing of pat- empts empts t a of a number of autistic com- r proposes that the r voice isthat proposes the nonsig- uage uage and turned into a mode of the ar-

at contemporary treatments for autism

ry information from the environment and and environment the from ry information

University University Duke Duke is category would then accommodate all of the corporeal sound- corporeal of the all accommodate then would category is T e voice, he writes, is “the material element recalcitrant to meaning,” meaning,” to recalcitrant element material “the iswrites, he voice, e T ” 3 Chapter 43 /

With these considerations in mind, D mind, in considerations these With nition f ofrede Dolar’s a voice as an comport- embodied, communicative en been understood as understood been ofen o f materiality has the music, voice and the voice of consistency. metaphysical and sense, presence, to threat potential a terintuitive, abjected remainder of Western thought’s irreconcilable invest- ments in the ofconcept Dola a voice. “ or nifying withincommunication, element sense. “that which cannot be linguistic,said,” “the non- the extralinguistic element itself cannot but phenomena, speech which enables linguis- by discerned be tics.” ings that are believed for by instance, Aristotle in not themto “soul” have ? like expressions nonverbal timbre; and intonation, accent, like qualities vocal laugh- hiccups, coughs, as such erances u t involuntary mechanical, song;and sighs,ter, breathing, echolalic babbling, and the like although?Dolar argues that even these are captured by lang linguistic a not is voice while the that insists Dolar time, same the At ticulate. body the in situated be cannot it phenomenon, of the body from in the manner it separates a the body, from stems the voice missile; the voice therefore belongs neither to the body nor to the realm of both. to alien recalcitrantly remains but language ment that precedes, exceeds, and elude tion dovetails closely with the recent to mentators articulate how their modes of voicing remain at odds with the faculties of language and speech th spectrum disorders take as their goal. Baggs, who has wrient extensively about hir experiences with autism, ex ofsensory consists perception perceiv terns in motion. Sie explains that conventional language, which is based on abstract symbolic categories rather than erns,t pa is fundamentally inade- quate for the uid f world of hir sensory impressions. hard is it that detail great such in in comes world the me to buers; f many have they way the use; people most that it on interpretations easy the put to me for divide it into pieces and make it abstract is foreign to me.” prioritizing,processing, in of dierences f range neurological broad the to fers senso integrating and interpreting, the body that make it di f cult for those on the autistic spectrum to abstract 128 127

/

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press rnal to those sounds themselves, or themselves, sounds those to rnal ith the intention of intention the ith signifying some- emporary humanistic inquiry renders Derrida’s discussion of Derrida’s themetaphysical

41

University University Duke Duke We can make various other sounds w sounds other various make can We thing, but there the intention is exte in, they a functionmetaphorical substitute as for a the voice. stand-Only itself” subjectivity a implies which “expresses voice the itself and inhabits the means of expression. But if bearer natural the voice is thus the quasi- to recalcitrant strangely be to ofofproves alsoproduction it meaning,the it. If we speak to signify, in to order convey something,sense,” to “make then the voice is the material support of bringing about meaning, yet it me- vanishing the like something rather, is, It itself. to contribute not does use diator (to the terms made famous by for Jameson Fredric a dif erent it makes the erance possible, t u but it disappears in it, ? it purpose) goes level banal most the on Even produced. being meaning the in smoke in up of daily experience, when we listen to someone speak, we may at rst f be very much aware of his or her voice and its particular qualities, its color and accent, but soon to we it accommodate and only concentrate on the e isT that meaning voice itselfconveyed. is like lad- the gensteinian t Wi der to be discarded when we successfullyhave that climbed to the top ? the is voice of e T peak the meaning. to ascent our made have we whenis, instrument, the vehicle, the medium, and the meaning is the goal. T is gives rise as a opposition where materiality spontaneous appears to voice opposed to the ideality of meaning. T e ideality of meaning can emerge only through the materiality of the means, but the means does not seem meaning. to contribute to In the philosophical scenario summarized by Dolar, the voice’s sole pur- pose is as a vehicle for linguistic meaning: as a corporeal, bodily thing, it is ofexpression the Dolar divineto speech. of obstacle medium an the and both Jacques in articulated clearly not is that voice the regarding stance a identi f es famousDerrida’s critique of the metaphysics of presence surrounding the as a whole tradition is character- the metaphysical Derrida argues that voice. ized by a phonocentric bias in which the voice covers over the work of the signiproducing f er, an illusion presence: as ofa result, speech isself- privi- leged over wrien t communication as the ground of interiorityunmediated that demurs Dolar consciousness. or bias and its enduring impact on cont always not was voice the which history in philosophical complex a consistent discourses Socratic of in post-as the seen ground On the contrary, presence. are vital translation translation vital are

fc , 50 Press it it can ? than” than and less- more- into into the narrow channels of inter- seen as disabled or trapped. How- trapped. or disabled as seen tions, and the vocal channel localized localized channel vocal the and tions, ubtract from expressive and receptive receptive and expressive from ubtract T e body must similarly be subtracted on language into consideration, Man- 51 . Prince, on the other hand, shows how

fc University University

52 Duke Duke 3 Chapter / Drawing Drawing on autistic perspectives such as these, Erin Manning has noted it is undeniable allthat For linguistic these forms “subtractions,” of com- mind, in statement Baggs’s with these as such accounts approach we When

language language can behave as a kind of connective tissue linking di f erent regis- focusing his muscle movements on the act of act the typing,on body withoutmovements hiswhich muscle his focusing overwhelmingsensoryde- the to response in uncontrollably moves and aps f pulls and at all in him comes tail directions. that that, unlike neurotypical individuals, autistics are not exclusively t uned a to human language or faciality, as the two orienting coordinates of the voice. Autistic perception, she argues, is en o f immersed in the world as a system of entangled relations that encompass human, nonhuman, organic, and in- organic t unement registers. In this to life unhierarchized “a as an incipient ecology of practices” that is constantly in the making, the abstractions in- volved in language are frequently experienced as an imperative of distilling an in f nite mélange of sense impressions subjectiverelationsand signi f cation. rela environmental exploratory its from occur. to speech for order in organs other the from diand erentiated f munication, such as speaking, writing, typing, and However, the complex capacity of languageexperienced en f o is question in subtraction the tothat means ways shapemeaningful experience in socially of ofprotagonist Wurz- the Rubin, state hibernation. a from awakening an as fburg’s lm, has described her mind as “waking up” er a f lying “fallow” for years upon being introduced to ters and dimensions of experience when it is ofrelieved its usual signifying perspectives both Taking functions. ning proposes that language can be “both s and to add on, foreclose and multiply once. all at potential of counterdiscourse voic- autistic an than less nothing er f o they that nd f we ing the that complicates logocentric humanitarian notion of having a voice. a From humanitarian the perspective, autistic dwelling in an nite f in eld f of perceptual and relational possibilities is ever, when we look at speech from an autistic perspective, it that issubtracted, been possibilitieshave whichthese voicing from sense, “normal” in the 130 tools withoutfor autisticsthese mediating ?forms, it would be di f cult, if not impossible, to engage with autistic modes of voicing in the f rst place. 129

Tito / 48

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

, which was capable of capable was which , Press this in encountered Language, ter. She writes, “To me, it She was writes, a ter. “To 47 great great insight about her inability s when it comes to verbalization, hippopotamus them with the reassuring associations ng new sense impressions, such as the

ic, mimetic Prince explainspotential. her

University University as preferable, en f o is ers t le to pointing or Typing

49 Duke Duke , , ndsf speaking to be profoundly dissociative. He describes speech fc e primatologist Dawn Prince, who was diagnosed with autism only well well only autism with diagnosed was who Prince, Dawn primatologist e T ested to the extraordi- the to ested t a have Grandin, Temple including autistics, Other Rajarshi Mukhopadhyay, an autistic writer and poet who communicates erences, di f erences, T ese objects. from subjects and environment, the from body the Baggs explains, pose particular di f cultie heavily which on the faculty of relies abstraction. into adulthood, has similarly wrien t with to reconcile herself to the arbitrary abstractions of linguistic describesmeaning. her own encounters with Shelanguage as a sensoryconcrete, horizon in its own right, where words resist being assigned to speci f c concepts or an elast have and instead situations word the withrepeating fascination own absorbing and bequeathing the associations of context and memory wher- ever she went. T is word would bring familiarity and order to overwhelm- ing new sensory situations, investing of her grandmother’s muted makeup colors, the smell of a cedar chest, or the sensation of it loved Simultaneously, ones would become nearby. a re- ceptacle for singling out and collecti joyful sound and warmth of running bathwa completely valid response when someone asked me, ‘Do you need to go to ” ‘Hippopotamus.’ answer to bathroom?’ the of existence that joins subjects and environments, and humans with other and with animals commune abilityto her t ributes a Prince indeed, species ? with language. encounter this mimetic to plants naryofdegree sensorial,muscular, cognitiveandfocuslistening demanded by to unement t a an that explains Grandin speech. meaningful producing and to tuning words out sometimes requires phatic sensory cues, including the nu- ances of vocal tone and facial expression to which autistics are presumed to be impervious and which they themselves f nd di f cult to produce. using as a futile of process a ordering bundle of bodily resist being that sensations writes,elu- particularlyis he faculty, vocal e T organs. or faculties as “zoned” was making him feel sive: histhat “autism voice was a distant substance that was required to be collected and put somewhere inside his throat. But he was unable to f nd it.” in Savarese assists of facilitator presence a calming e T reports. Savarese J. D. way, is less a medium of communication than a living and malleable medium medium malleable and living a of than medium a communication less is way,

58 56 .”

, a video from from video a , Press nder voices, racially in fected ernst pa of Baggs’s electronically itarian subjects whose voices are eld of a language.’ Contrary to sig- Contrary to ofeld f a language.’ Tsang expresses her solidarity with with solidarity her expresses Tsang , which ‘the he de f nes elsewhere as “ Shape ofStatement Right Shape a emendous emendous ortf e in involved her perfor- ention to ention to ithout t our subtitles lassoing a ssed ssed plainly in a black top and nude skull curtain. T e background is as f amboyant aneously mark her androgynous body and androgynousbody her mark aneously theencounter between languagea voiceaand

ance signi f University University Barthes also writes that the grain of the voice inheres 57 cannot be reduced, therefore, to communication, repre- communication, to therefore, reduced, be cannot

. Like female voices, transge Duke Duke grainy

ance ance signi f too lms, which “typically demonstrate a wider wider a demonstrate “typically which lms, f documentary in Even 55 3 Chapter / Transgender f lmmaker and artist Wu e complexities of the autistic voice are further illuminated iffurther complexities ofilluminated are e T to turn voice we autistic the inappropriately inappropriately pitched, idiosyncratically syntactic, socially disruptive, or ering,stu t autistics resemble other minor deemed voices, and the or voices regionally ofaccented the ill, and the the aged, dis- turbed, autistic voices are infrequently encountered in mainstream media forms. variety of accents, dialects, and erns t speech than pa those found in f ction a subtitled, or clarity for edited routinely are voices hyperembodied f lms,” Ruo f frey maximizeJe the serveshistorian to f lm to according that measure intelligibilityofof interference the while grain. minimizing speech its their ofin dilemmas these voicing autistic 2008 in performswhich re-Tsang the second part of Baggs’s “In My Lan- the faces camera, dre Tsang guage.” ofsilver front shiny in a framed cap, in ect f re to seeming surface shimmering its is neutral, appearance Tsang’s as simult that excess and lack the turn repeats voice.“translation” Baggs’s word Tsang for word, replicating exactly the mechanical tones, pauses, and speech generated speech, but without face subtitles. remains Tsang’s perfectly ex- occasional her and eyes her in welling tears the but speaks, she as pressionless sharp intakes of the betray breath tr e T ect f e is mance. disorienting. W Tsang’s words, registers those precisely inhabit to empts t a ifas is Tsang It delivery. we vocal liar are invited ofto voicing cast are that usually in out, subtracted, service or subordinated of experience become to asks us she us, to communiqués these addressing In intelligibility. the texture and with audience the which seeks voice autistic communion. the grain of her pecu- that writes Barthesof ofnitionf de grain voice. cited the the commonly less a the grain opens the voice to ofend in a given possible operations un- ni f cation, expression.” sentation, . of. . space veryprecise “the in He would seem here lis- or to reader the be whereby describing encounter, textual a as the interpreted opening been typically of signif ance, which has 132 in

131

/ lacking “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

e autistic voice may seem seem may voice autistic e T Press 53 communicate, even when communicate, they do

reduce vocalization to a depersonalized depersonalized a to vocalization reduce

, , humming, sway- others’ words, echoing University University

In other instances where their vocalization is echolalic,

54 Duke Duke , a perception that is further when exacerbated autistics communicate Baggs,Prince, and other autistic writers entivet area theto mimetic poten- e autistic voice, understood in such terms, resonates with Barthes’s no- with Barthes’s resonates terms, such in understood voice, autistic T e is revealed is to be revealed disabled, it lacking, would not closeted, and constrained ? be an exaggeration to call it thoroughly autistic. T is is what Baggs argues when sie those that proposes who withoutrespond hesitation in a recogniz- limited a to ned f con are voice a have call to humanitarian the to tongue able ofconception humanity. tial by activated the process of communication, before it is to subordinated nes f of the con signifying sanctioned comport- forms. eir T communicative ment is one in which the a f ective and physical supports of vocal sounding resist being harnessed as a medium or channel of elds f for emerging with exteriorizing merger ongoing an in inner instead expe- participate but rience sensation. What is more, the voice, as autistic it, invoke interlocutors is not restrictednarrowly to the production of sonorous soundings through the lar- ynx, and diaphragm, mouth but to a refers more broadly more complex ges- tural that paralanguage includes some of the common behaviors tributed a as staring vacantly autistics, such to ing, or apping. f As Baggs insists, autistics are accused of being uncommunicative (existing in a “world of their own,” “avoiding eye contact,” sociallywhen be to deemed are their failures communications (nonsensical, engaging in are communiqués these that alternative an as propose might We disruptive). “obsessive or repetitive”not antisocial T ey an communion or represent ongoing uncommunicative. activities) with the ongoing response to to borrow what world Baggs’s (“an is around,” or words from “In My Language”) rather than being oriented solely toward a neurotypical human subject. If these communications an have orientation, own their in image. being hail into to hope they that audience an isit toward tion of the grain of the voice. Barthes de f nes the grain of the voice as an erotic, prelogical, and corporeal element in communication that exceeds its coded, sanctioned forms of embodiment and signi fcation, or “the material- ity of the body speaking its mother tongue.” of voices the fre- ests, are t autistics a As critiqued. Grandin been has Barthes quently as at perceived f with“ li t le in f ection and or no rhythm,” grain that devices generating speech- using mechanical sound. at at f rst to be at odds with the organicism of Barthes’s concept, for which and “In

,

Autism Autism Is a World Press minoritarian subjects) as evidence evidence as subjects) minoritarian eci f cally, I propose that concept of ofspeak- the in documentarystudies lyvocality. T ese lyvocality. questions also per- nre), documentary scholars continue continue documentaryscholars nre),

as a metaphor for the implied worldview or worldview implied the for metaphor a as nd univocal modes toward polyvocal and University University

Documentary Duke Duke the Voice of Voice the 3 Chapter / I argue that the seemingly innocuous metaphor of “the voice of docu-

Reassessing implications has out laid of have I counterdiscourse autistic e T that voicing for the study of documentary that go beyond the speci f c representational of voice concept autistic the the level, general more ofa challenges At autism. urges us to revisit the role of the speaking voice as documentary’s de f ning of metaphor as well as the central formal feature documentary Doc- studies. of sobriety” “discourse moti- a as BillNichols by ned f de once umentary was by vated rhetorical rather than aesthetic goals and, hence, a organized genre around the spoken word rather than the image. Although it is now widely that agreed the horizons of the documentary have far genre exceeded these interventionistnarrow parameters(Nicholshassince rescinded his de f nition ge rhetorical of sober a documentary as toreference Nichols’s use of voice perspective of a documentary f lm, as well as a ofmeasure literal the genre’s inclusion of the ofperspectives previously disenfranchised or sub- voiceless jects. For instance, a number of documentary critics, from Michael Renov to Catherine Russell, regard the emergence of documentary f lms featuringperson vocal en commentaryf by (o f rst- is that one to worldview or voice objective an from progression ofgenre’s the exivef re inclusive. and more by and, of mentary”indication an as logocentric seen enduring be the can ? investments humanitarianextension, ? like ofinterlocutors ention t autistic a e T of humanity. measure a as voice ing read to us of allows dimensions voicing embodied paralinguistic, the to Baggs these investments against their grain. Sp the autistic a feminist,voice minor, activates ofregister analysis of Nichols’s the voice of Whereasdocumentary. Nichols traces documentary’s progres- sive evolution from totalitarian a thus more inclusive modes of voicing, the autistic voice comments on how documentaryof withthe tropes e f ects up bound reality documentary the are of persuasive speech, and raises questions the regarding narrative of docu- mentary’s f exivere progress po toward Using over. voice- person rst-f the on documentaryscholarship recent to tain overs in of“I my readings Am Autism,” the voice- My Language,” I examine how the autistic voice can potentially unground 134

all 133

/ . “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having voice, rather than ret- than rather voice, as

gured in this manner, manner, this in gured f Recon

encounter between encounter corporeal 59 Press in the autistic counterdiscourse counterdiscourse autistic the in rs the stabilizationthe rs of But meaning. Barthes, we might say that signi fance imensions imensions of do not that vocalization temporal tween the plane of enunciation and the the and of enunciation plane the tween

is ultimately undone by the slippage and and slippage the by undone ultimately is

ven shape as communication. as shape ven r and Barthes, call the nonsignifying ele-

University University Duke Duke Reading Barthes’s grain of the voice against its grain, as it were, we can we can as it were, grain, its of against grain voice the Barthes’s Reading sees words uses who everyone “not that statement Baggs’s to Returning empting to master language master to empting t a tener of slide perpetually signi that the er f defe Barthes’s with conjunction in quote aforementioned the consider we when ofevocation the grain as the ofmateriality we are able to envision the body, signiance f as in a a dierent f register, rephrase To materialities. linguistic and in emerges the existential interval be which in plane gi and is it bounded broad- isT binaryoperation. its than rather movement temporal its on focus ofexample preferred song, ownturning Barthes’s beyond perspective our ens his essay into an invitation to experience all vocalization, including speech, from the ofperspective nonteleologically, the voice rospectivelyfrom the perspective of language. the grain of the voice o f ers a means of understanding the temporal, dura- ofimplied dimension tional communication ofof opening e T voice. the vocabulary a provides writ- signi ance f what for awakening the as to gesture Rubin and Prince, Baggs, Mukhopadhyay, like ers sus- temporary a as experiencedis that one communicationof ?to body the gathered be must it before environment the in body di the f uses that pension account servicethe (Mukhopadhyay’s ofin speech localized and articulate up T us, vivida reminder). is throat his in voice his put and “collect” of to having those d as signi the invokes grain f ance of destination the in culminate intelligible speech. theirwordsasprimary voicetheiror primary meansof understanding things,” time this in suspended which refers sie to “primary the voice” locate can one of communicative potential. T e writings of Baggs and others, in conver- sation with Barthes and enable Dolar, us to see that the autistic voice does not belong exclusively to autistic individuals but is a spectral presence in speech. T e conditions of possibility of its emergence can now be under- ofopen remain conventions voicing the whichof to terms extent in the stood to what we might, following Dola interval the or withinment of communication, signiance f

66 in- by a few few a by

, published , Press Reality Representing h closely parallels Dolar’s account account Dolar’s parallels closely h antial elaboration in Nichols’s essay essay in Nichols’s elaboration antial depend depend ? persuasiveness and ibility, unique perspective or worldview of ects of In other words, the reality e f ects of 65 Introduction to Documentary rical aims. When approached through through When approached aims. rical applies to all modes of modes all documentary.” to applies

ndeed, it would seem as though Nichols University University

64 Duke Duke relation to the historical world” in support of factual claims, speech speech claims, of factual support in world” historical the to relation 3 Chapter / Nichols’s account of documentary speec is metaphor receives T isits most metaphor subst receives

Intriguingly, Nichols any privilegeddisavows connection between Intriguingly, the voice of documentary and the documentary tropes of speech persuasive when he writes isvoice dialoguesimply to that or commentary. not spoken restricted his of textbook edition second the In on its audience through voices that explicitly (e.g., voice- over exposition) or exposition) over voice- explicitly that voices through on (e.g., its audience interviewimplicitly (e.g., argue footage) its stance. us, T the flm invites an unspoken “yes” in to response the question it poses: “ T is it?” He isisn’t so, “ its mobilize to aims documentary where instances those in that writes dexical behaving as the esh f supplement material to by fact,” “adds means of which the mute facticity of audiovisual evidence is shot through with social mean- credible. made and ing ofof materiality the between opposition spontaneous the ide- the and voice of(“ideality T e tradition mean- logocentric Western, ofalitythe in meaning does means the ofbut materiality means, the the through only emerge can ing not seem to contribute to meaning”). cred authority, its is, that documentary ? of on f esh” the its “ in success subordinating documentary grain, speech (its or signiin f ance) service of its rheto the concept of ideas er f o commen- a suggestive the Nichols’s autistic voice, tary on how the rhetorical immediacy of documentary is achieved by both mobilizing and disavowing those registers of voicing that might potentially destabilize its intended meaning. I were referring to the ways in which the vanishing materiality of the speak- ing voice inspires documentary’s reality e f ects when he employs the voice of documentary as a metaphor for the every documentary f lm. predates which of Documentary,” e Voice “ T ‘voice’ “By writes, Nichols essay, this from passage cited frequently a In years. style: us than a to sense ofwhich that narrower conveys something I mean a text’s social point of view, of how it is speaking to us and how ing the it materials it isis presenting to us. organiz-In this sense, ‘voice’ is not restricted to any one code or feature such as dialogue by unique the formed ern t pa orlike spoken commentary.moiré- intangible, that to akin Voice is perhaps it and codes, of f lm’s a interaction all 136 135

/ Repre- He notes that “com- that notes He “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having 62 Since “arguments require 61

Grierson’s promotion of this this of promotion Grierson’s 60 Press 63 tanding tanding of how the metaphysical at- ages beneath it in the audiovisual the in it hier- beneath ages esentational esentational burden rests on the sound porters, interviewees, and other social

emerge from its rhetorical motivations as a a as motivations rhetorical its from emerge University University Nichols reframes Grierson’s innate grasp ofinnate this Nichols meta- reframes Grierson’s

( 1991 ), Duke Duke , located located , 1942 in writingGrierson, that noted I chapter, introductory my In more ofarts oratory speaking documentarywith the linking persuasive In Over half a in centuryhis magisterial study later, of documentary, the humanity that this vocal trope tacitly authenticates, and point toward the its and humanity this point that toward vocal tacitly trope authenticates, openings. “regressive” the generic speci f city of aesthetic” vocation. Gri- documentary in its “anti- erson is also known for pioneering the use of over expositorycom- voice- a mentary, technique of narration derided by ction f f lmmakers as the “last resort of the for incompetent” its violation of the cherished ideals regarding of lm. f discourse invisible and focus visual technique re f ected an intuitive unders tunement to the speaking voice as a bearer of rather linguistic meaning ? withthe combined be could intelligibilityits to obstacle embodied ?an than of ect f e rhetorical ofimmediacy. the achieve documentaryarchitectonics to T e “I Am videoAutism” o f ers an excellent illustration of how expository to functions “vanishing narration as mediator,” the over quintessential voice- description quote Dolar’s of how voice is in treated the metaphysical tradi- e f ect the has screen of f -o from emanation T e voice tion. disembodied this sounds other im and of above” “rising as well archy, as its own and source, embodiment,materiality, to forcefully assert message. its Realitysenting of principle role of pivotal physical the the hypothesis a as regarding voicing documen- that claims Nichols e f ects. reality documentary’s in voice speaking stylistic distinctive tary’s features of and authenticity of spectators the persuade sobriety” to “discourse aiming credibility of Documentary its social claims fregarding reality. lms, Nichols “representa- a logic”requiring “informing an around organized are proposes, world.” historical the about argument or case, tion, infers Nichols images,” than easily more far bear to able are words that logic a that the onus of documentary’s repr speech. speci on callyf and image, the than rather track mentary over narrators, re by voice- documentary.” most in strongly gure f actors than with the visual arts of composition and montage, Nichols highlights the rhetorical e f ciency of the speaking voice in collapsing the ideological distance between text and His spectator. point is that documentary works 72

One such example of of example such One

71 Press ve addressed the proliferation of and subsets of f exive, re personal

ese labels labels ese T f person rst f lm.” “ and lms: Nichols Nichols f lms: such to given been ve

aturinga highly re f exivepersonf rst-

University University Duke Duke 3 Chapter / A number of documentary scholars ha Whileof emphases all iso-the they vary importantauthors ways, in these tational tational force f eld in contemporary documentary studies, whose focus has overwhelmingly shiedf from the rhetorical to poetic, subjective, spectacu- or performative, to sentimental the lar, relations real. the primitive,God authoritariannarration to days ofof- Griersonian voice- more inclusive and exivef re modes of voicing can be seen in the enthusias- of embrace criticalfe documentaries tic politics the to approaches sophisticated most of one genre’s as the over voice- of representation. I turn now to these critical accounts, with the following Nichols’s in undertow autistic say ? even might one spectral the ? proposal: metaphor of the voice of documentary urges us to examine how the reality e f ects over ofin person the voice-f exivethe re f rst-mode are powerfully bound up with our ideological unement t a to speech and language as mark- with words, other in logocentrism. ofers or, humanity, en f (o the from “spoken” are that s 1970 the since documentaryproduced flms but not always marginal) subject position of the fwholmmaker, may also ha names Di f erent protagonist. a serveas groups such f lms under the rubrics of the performative and exivef re docu- mentary modes, whereas Michael Laura Renov, Rascaroli, Catherine Rus- sell, and Alisa Lebow respectively employ the labels “new autobiography,” “the essay “autoethnographic f lm,” f lm,” ention draw t a to di f erent permutations documentary f lmmaking. Rascaroli, for instance, is in interested the essay- istic empt t to a textually incorporate the process of and reasoning thinking, whereas Russell is concerned with f lms that deconstruct ethnographic vec- tors of oppression such as race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality from eitherofside and of Renov asymmetrical relations subordination. and domination sub- problematize that f lms in interested each are hand, other the on Lebow, jectivity from an perspective autobiographical and in terms of the relation individual the between community. or culture their and late two common offeatures their overlapping, and continually expanding, documentaryT e f rst fislmography. a commitment to deconstructing the uniautonomous, ed, f and objective subject position traditionally associated is second e T of mode expositoryGriersonian commentary. “sober” the with the over ofcommentarypresence in the rst f a person exivehighly f re voice- 138 the consensus around Nichols’s narrative of documentary’s “evolution” from from of “evolution” narrative documentary’s Nichols’s around consensus the 137

/ New Documen-

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press that democratize progressively iersonian expository mode through expositorythrough iersonian mode entary and disappears in the act of general signi f er of documentary’s ex- ectlyamong themselves, an interactive ical potential as a metaphor that iden- ncy in approach the to genre’s media- In other words, documentary “speech” 67

69 University University

68 Duke Duke rst edition of her book book of her edition rst f of the publication the Since 70 , Bruzzi has been a vocal critic of Nichols’s chronology of the the of chronology Nichols’s of critic vocal a been has Bruzzi , 2000 in Nichols’s use of voice as a metaphor for the elusive element that both Some critics, genealogy like of Stella Bruzzi,criticized have Nichols’s the holds together the message of a docum its erance u t insists on the very connection between voice and speech that has immense he critdisavows. Voice ti f es an enduring logocentric tende , in Nichols 2010 employs speech as a possibilities,pressive writing the “voice that of documentary speaks with all the means available to its maker.” regarding the relationships between sounds and images (composition, selec- which a through ofmode exclusion, inclusion, arrangement, tion, narration) his explainsin Nichols as Or, truthclaims. convincing make documentarycan “we think we may hear history or essay, reality to speaking us 1983 a through f lm, but what we actually hear is the voice of the text, even when that voice itself.” ace f e tries to tion, especially in those instances where those who are by represented doc- “ is e T striking, that It therefore, themselves.” for “speak umentaryto appear ofVoice Documentary” argues the isT opposite. f es identi essay a series of roughly chronological documentary modes oftruthclaims Gr the underminethe and a more complex and inclusive distribution of voices and modes of address. ese T include over an commentary observational mode that eschews voice- of indir speaking favor in actors social mode in which interviewees step up to the camera to report their testimony off exivemode re a documen- and fwithlmmaker, the dialogue a in engage or of ects the f e regarding conscious ofmodes its chosen vocal- tary is self- that ization. Nichols has since thisupdated list to include a performative mode over and a poetic mode typicallythat that a highly involves voice-subjective altogether. speech avoids evolving modes of documentary as an overly linear and schematic “family tree.” tary dichotomies false produces argues ofshe whichmodes various documentary, between ideologically and regressive documentaryprogressive approaches based on flms that share formal features. However, Nichols’s account of documentary’s departure from its rhetorical sober, origins remains a gravi- encompasses encompasses not only literal speech but every possible enunciative choice Autism Autism Autism Autism Is

editing; it is also to linked Press hear an acousmatic voice speak- voice acousmatic an hear elements that I have described as I have elements that

stless, silent, and unresponsive faces faces silent,stless, unresponsive and and e- over comfortably claims the status status the claims comfortably over e-

University University Duke Duke ention over other over ention t a commands argues, Chion voice, speaking a : clari f es that the relational bonds of this collectivity are de f ned rst- person voice- over similarly rises above the other audio- other the above rises similarly over voice- person rst- f e T . In “I Am Autism,” we see faces we see faces “I . AmIn Autism,” 75 3 Chapter /

rst- person voice- over over to interhuman reinforce rela- e T capacity person ofvoice- the rst-f T e relationship between the person Rubin we hear f rst-in Margulies’s progress: it shows that even though documentary has seemingly been acquit- been seemingly documentary though has even that shows it progress: tedof its representational realism, a more entrenched form of realism inheres insistent use in ofthe genre’s pronominal verbalization to demonstrate that is present.” being human “a of extension an dubs as Chion understood principle be that the can tionality vococentrism sounds, much as a human face is accorded a special privilege images. over other and relational nonetheless communicative wit- can of voice the We to whencomes it documentary. voice autistic the ? of Am over “I voice- person rst-f expository the in action in principle this ness over in as Autism” well person as voice- in the interventionist rst-f a World li the because But person. rst f the in ing acous- the nonrelational, thus and nonfaces, of as coded are children autistic voice stands matic as in even it as paradoxically an presence, implied human speaks from the inhuman perspective of of the “disease” autism. T e inter- function a simply not is ofvoice expository an speaking power such pellative of set a through technical ected f e as ofhierarchy, audiovisual the in place its manipulations such as sound design, volume, and a to relation subjectivityin its constitute to pronoun person ofuse f rst-its the identify. to invited is audience withthe which collectivity, human logocentric andtheRubinover struggling seewe with autismWurzburg’s in voice- Is a World by the exclusion of autistic. T is the “nonrelational” relationship nonverbal, ofof voice the faces the and exists between which autism that is unlike not autistic children in “I Am Autism.” T e Rubin who addresses us in the frst perfect English unbroken, fso melli, using voice uous f Margulies’s in person assumes the status of a subject, speaking about that abjected part of herself that su f ers as from autism” an “awful object to be observed, described, and over though Even is overcome. the unseen, source the of voice- Margulies’s ofcoherent, correspondingly image a mental the of qualityconjures voice her feminineable, bodystands that of inastheabsent “face” thef lmandentreats person voic our identi f cation. T e f rst- 140 visual elements of documentary including speechthose? nonverbal but 139

/ 74 relational- regressive “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

, and Press rst- person person rst- f the by designated vity inhuman , s teaches, s and teaches, as others such as Em- is necessarilypersonhood ?consti- gh they can also be expressed through through expressed be also can they gh ations. T e unspoken associations of interpersonal or interhuman relation- interhuman or interpersonal lm critics like Trinh and Peckham in in Peckham and Trinh like critics f lm tural preconceptions the regarding so- Not only does this type ofperson f rst- mine its benchmarks ofbenchmarks its mine representational 73 . As. writes, Lebow

impersonal

eivable in isolation. First person f lm merely lit-

University University

relational Duke Duke that that is, in the relation ?plicitly constructing a subject always in-already f rst person plural. As psychoanalysi manuel Levinas and Judith Butler have argued, the self is always a rela- conc never er, t ma tional not to mention narration ? the and self-fact eralizes that apparent makes autobiographyis never ?the sole property of the speaking self. It prop- un- be would maker the withoutcollectivitieswhich larger to belongs erly story no tell. to have would herself,ectively f to e and recognizable lm implicates others in its quest to represent a self, a im- represent to quest its in others f implicates lm autobiographical that employs strategies such as irony, unreliability, contradiction, digression, digression, contradiction, unreliability, as irony, such employs strategies that and Ascontrapuntality. Russell over remains notes, the the primaryvoice- ofthou even site deconstructions, these ofimage. look the the or camera the over o f er voice-an economical means of centering the perspective of for- exivef re politically a subjectivities ?unacknowledged or marginalized merly but its formally exivef actre mode ?of exposition means that the speaking split, incoherent, and, per- multiple, as fragmented, is subject problematized important, most haps trans- a as widelyis regarded over voice- person exivef rst-f re the up, sum To in speak to right the with whohas grapples only not that convention gressive documentary but also dismantles cul called voice or worldview of a given documentary f lm. T e concept of the autistic voice pinpoints what remains underinterrogated in these accounts: person f lm Ifmakes it over. rst-f the logocentrism person ofvoice- the rst-f apparent that “the self as Lebow is argues, always a then er,” t relational ma the autistic voice argues that the subjecti a linguistic pronoundesignation ?of in tuted to a in relation linguisticthisWhereas collectivity. dis- relationality, with equivalent less or is more course, the ality, autistic voice joins feminist the foregrounding seemingly ities that escape such linguistic design over with person realist concepts voice- such the as f rst-honesty, truth, or stable interiority have already been successfully deconstructed. By adding voice autistic the concepts, oflist the realist these to relationality interhuman exa re- to documentarystudies urges

76

talism, to en- talism, to Press discursive formations that have modern industrial capi science and technology studies, and the various claims regarding interior- the various claims regarding

entions around autism. T e exercise of

technology,from which some of the most

University University Duke Duke 3 Chapter /

T e connections between autism and Foucault are far from accidental. My proposal is that my three examples of documentary voices speaking com- the from emerges voice) dominant will the this call(I voice rst f e T Foucault’s work on the institutionalnamed and andde f ned medical disorders (such as the asylum, psychiatric science, science, and the has medical been gaze) instrumental in shaping the eld f of of studies and sociological science enabling contributions to contemporary on research autism emerged. have the regarding Foucault by raised questions philosophical more the However, of civilization not yet from the space of have outcasting Western “unreason” been substantially taken up in relation to autism. I turn now to these ques- of stakes the out tease to order in tions ity and nement f con exteriority, and contempo- that emancipation, animate rary medical as well as media interv en f o the unearthhistory of discursive to the me allowsalso mapping autism contradictory and ambivalent threads of ownFoucault’s ideas in this early of workings the on book subjection. and power autism regarding debates contemporary onto generally more map autism for in ranging as f elds medicine, as wide- critical disability studies. In these practice, voices are thoroughly entangled and overdetermined, and the contentious status of autism means that any central short.T e fall only can engenders it positions the schematize e f ortto facts about autism about which there is consensus, as many scholars note, are that yet we know don’t much about it at all and that no two autistics are exactly alike. As Chloe Silverman notes, various interest groups remain in should autism about evidenceexistingempirical the how to as dispute heated be see the mobilized: advocates for example, some (but not all) autistic self- their own unique abilities, as devaluing while for a cure search psychologists use autism as a platform for constructing theories of cognition, and parent- research. genetic or therapies innovative pursue to resources seek advocates functionvoices of the describingmain from claritythree Still,gained the the this positions makes a worthwhile these variegated exer- through weave that cise. of by the emergence pulsion, mandated of individual capable minded work able-and bodied, able- visionhealthy, the as the norm of the human. T is voice has its counterparts in the voices of the white man, the colonizer, the heterosexual, the anthropologist, and so 142

141 and

/ “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

, a book whose philosophical Press autistic approach to political to andautistic approach s between three di f erent types of testhe spectator’s tacit identi f cation pacity. pacity. T e di f erence is that Baggs Baggs Baggs suggests, must be the dizzying documentary’s disparate elements into into elements disparate documentary’s

ng ofng perspective. that University University

Madness and Civilization Duke Duke rst- person voice- over, onthe over, other electronically hand, person Baggs’s voice- generated frst- lm’s voice, whereas this category and the humanity it connotes never never connotes it humanity the and thiscategory whereas voice, off the lm’s on- forth Rubin’s from pitch soundsthat incoherent the to appropriate seem body. screen the that suggests autistic voice is precisely what must be isonedt je from the speaking voice in order to evidence a recognizable mode of personhood. Hir use of this trope seems to exemplify the kindby Rascaroli, ofRussell, and Lebow, others, in commentary that re fBaggs’s exivityself- described consciously thematizes its evidentlyown self-positive value as a marker of humanity, interiority, and relational ca critiques over at the a epistemic level limits that is ofperson voice- the frst- questioned: rarely sie calls out the thoroughly relation- limiting interhuman ality that a speaking voice, particularly one speaking about itself, is thought a make words claim on behalf as Baggs’s ofEven activate. to hir humanity in of mode promiscuous hir how inter- demonstrate also they “translation,” the acting with the world in the f rst part of the video is both activated by paradoxically con f ned by the logocentric communicative logic of modes ofthe consider com- to us urges theBaggs f rst-way, this In over. voice- person and that representation remain in munication, relationality, the shadows of as the this starting convention point for an over person voice- use formal exivityoff re Baggs’s in the documentary. rst-f claim Nichols’s to us returns voice” to of meaning the undermine “coming to voice If (speaking) a credible. claims truth documentary’s makes speech that coheres that something elusive that is invi that perspective overarching single a and approval, then the autistic voice, and kaleidoscopi multiplication Humanitarianism on Discourse Autistic an Toward T us far, I have considered the dynamic voicesspeaking forautism theyaspertain thepolitics to of documentary rep- resentation. I now expand my purview to address how these voices also an- imate the broader discursive history of autism. My analysis is guided by a reading of Foucault’s withengagement the prehistory of t itudes a disability toward Western also dis- autistic an produce to means it what commentary on compelling a ers f o humanitarianism. on course , institutional, light of mutu- Autism Speaks’s 78

79 Press use of use phrase sensationalist this uence uence f advocacy ofmove- the self- enti f c, technological s to s be to in understood entions of autism, including depicting

gard the “autism epidemic.”

University Others focus on socialUniversity aspects of the discursive

80 Duke Duke 81 T is critique, which is o f en leveled directly at Foucault, misses some 82 3 Chapter / Hacking’s work has been immensely in f uential in dissipating the popular, the immense value of as they acknowledge Even these social constructiv-

ist interventions, some scholars argue that this approach reinforces a world- reinforces approach this that argue scholars some interventions, ist view in which of the autistic person is as seen receptacle a passive discursive ment, and the generic ment,forms and conv and the generic standpoint from which to re exampleof one just is campaign popular the to emphasize the dramatic rise in the incidence of ofautism time the writingofat hundred chap- a this from in one to s 1970 the one in thousand in two ter. Tis increase in incidence is frequently explained in explanations of voice: positivistforce medical naturalisticenduringthe the evidence that terms envi- imbalances, metabolic mothers,” “refrigerator by parenting bad include watching, television phenomena, related weather- vaccines, toxins, ronmental factors. genetic or neurobiological recently, more and, sensationalist withpreoccupations autism and situating its emergence as a diagnostic category within a seriesbroad of discursive transformations that comprisetogether what has Foucault called the biopoliticization and medi- arguing lead, Hacking’s followed ofof number have A calization scholars life. called autism epidemic need the that so- ally informing transformations in the sci and called social - f studies de Several realms. focus racked have from the so- rang- phenomena to ending t a cits of background, this to discursive autism ing from the deinstitutionalization of mental to the retardation, broadening improvements to spectrum, a as condition the of assess to criteria diagnostic in medical to increased knowledge technology, and ofawareness autism in medical and lay spheres. matrixshapesthat the autistic spectrum targetmotion,inaas including shi f s of of role organization socialexpertise, ective f a and parents the status the in and communities of the care, growing in “conversion” or “recovery”pendency. narratives and stereotypes of savantism and de- forces. of the f ner points ofanalysis that tackle the Foucault’s di f cult question of these on elaborate can We it. withoutdestroying speak unreason make to how points ending by to t a a voice second, that speaks“resistant” out the against humanitarian deployment of the dominant voice by appropriating its tech- niques of legitimation. Zana Briski in , chapter 1 Lessin Tia and Carl Deal in 144 143

/ Madness and and Madness

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press c discourse measures its rational rational its measures discourse c ice ice of the television news as anchor, es and the behaviors, norms, and self-and norms, behaviors, the and es s, has become a foundational critical al constructivist approaches to the study study the to constructivistapproaches al

77 most well- received insights in insights received well-most

University University is that the voice of medicine, speaking at once in the eternal tones Duke Much of the contemporary critical literature on autism refers to this domi- the content ofnegative create the positivistseeks Foucault to re-medical on. Looking back at the previous chapters, we can locate the voice of the photojournalist, and the traditional vo speak- described voice by Margaret Morse, as iterations of humanitarian this the subject is position. In the voice dominant the Autism,” Am “I video ing in the guise of autism iden- in Fabian a over. didactic expository voice- ti f es the epistemological hypocrisy in involved such speech: the dominant otherness about whilespeaksvoice objectively posi- its own subject acing f e acement f e authorizes the dominant tion. voice to isT describe self- autism in a as citf de positive behavioral terms a in psychological empathy disorder, a or neurological capacity, relational or disability, a genetic disease. Autism has been treated alternately in all of these ways since Kanner’s pioneering lies in as its a re- coding lack , but the denominator common in 1943 research As quiring correction. a “impairment” been consistent has previously noted, of classication f evolving diagnostic autism. ever- the in theme model ofcit”f or “medical” isT autism. about thinking as the “de voice nant whosevoiceis analogousthevoiceof development to Fou- reason,” fc“scienti era cault precursors traces ofcenturythrough the classical- the nineteenth- ofOne asylum. mental Foucault’s Civilization tells and ofus Law, more Family, about Judge, its the own Father, genealo- a as ne f de seeksto it that patient) (the object the about than norms and gies deviation from these norms. Along these lines, Amit Pinchevski argues that relative ofention t amount a scienti c f disproportionate a racted t a has autism ofcase paradigmatic in communication, arrest as “a because, incidence its to the constitutes it impasse, ultimate the as and development, and socialization scienti f medical-the which against antipode mind.” another accessing for tools voice by paying entiont a to its economic, legal, and moral conditions of surge ofsoci current e T possibility. of autism consistently adopt an archaeological ofreading that Foucault at- dierent f at statements medical shaping architectonics discursive the to tends ofin application strain this direct a is work Hacking’s Ian moments. historical of concept or the mutual the “looping thinking. Hacking’s e f ect,” Foucault’s categori classicatoryf between shaping identi f cations of autistic individual

er and disability and er studies Press ries of catoryf counteridenti per- most familiar kinds of identity poli- oritarian sphere that punishes abnor- exively emu- exivelyf re that one as voice stant

McRuer’s point is that visibility isthat isinclusion point or McRuer’s

86 University University e growing intersection of intersection T e growing que 88 is idea builds on the queer theorist José Esteban Muñoz’s notion of of notion Muñoz’s Esteban theorist buildsJosé queer isT the idea on 3 Chapter 87 /

T us, McRuer’s analysis brings a certain complexity to the existential T e geometric (rather than archaeological) logics in Foucault’s think- disidenti f cation, which refers to the survival to minorityavailable strategies subjects when navigating a phobic maj f ction f lms autistic feature but characters that the inclusion of these char- frequently acters serves as a means of centering a neurotypical protagonist: the disabled character animates and enables the narrative trajectory of the like assistance either by savant-providing protagonist, bodied) able-(usually in the dilemma at hand or by serving as an emotional enigma that the pro- through. work must tagonist visibility since context, a such of in strategy resistance viable a necessarily not place. rst f thrives the currency in the en is which order on f o dominant the whilevisibility, and ortsf e agency, of access, individuals whodisabled desire of with such ideals abilitynormative associated the critiquing simultaneously describesagency. He the political work of speaking out against normative no- embrac- involves times “at that practice a crip”: out oftions “coming abilityas ing and at times disidentifying with the tics.” mality. For Muñoz too it is imperative that the minoritarian agent remain f exible in order to parry the f uctuating modalities of neoliberal power; he describestherefore disidenti f cation as a se mimic actions that formative the mechanisms and oftropes as, (such power through dierence, f with a but voice) humanitarian dominant the case, our in practices of recycling, t ing,reforma reappropriating, remaking, repossess- ing, mutating. and ofconceives resi second, therefore the of mode improv- strategic a as ofexiblef structure the power neoliberal lates asymmetrical highly relations. ing power ing about madness and reason usefully illuminate the present discussion of especially the asymmetrymovement ?and symmetry out in crip” “coming from interiority exteriorityto implied by this one Michel Serres, concept. of Foucault’s most discerning commentators, a dense parsesbut historyrich about paragraph ofFoucault’s madness: from “Far these logics as follows, history the in of chronicle, a being is history a madness of of variation the dual . structures. ofnonsense . and spaces two reason the in . structureslocated . . of ofseparation, ofrelation, fusion, of opening ofup, foundation, of rejec- tion, of in short,of all reciprocity, the exclusion, or ?even of ‘nourishment’ 146

145 and

/

“Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Press assert her own autistic perspective sibly and spectacularly tolerant of rnessing of the testimonial codes of to successfully to iden- dominant maintain the humanitarian aesthetic of aesthetic innocence humanitarian the imes they are eliminated outright (or per- (or outright eliminated are they imes is new techniques of “Neolib- is techniques exclusion: new 85 McRuer contends that this order was orga- was order this that contends McRuer 83

“In many cultural representations, disabled,

84

University University Duke Duke McRuer points out that under neoliberalism, the exclusion of disabled mi- Robert McRuer’s seminal work in critical disability studies articulates the the criticaldisability in articulates studies work seminal RobertMcRuer’s , and Wurzburg in such empt a this allenable to , 2 voice t to and chapter chapter a Wurzburg “speak out.” Rubin’s appropriationto over expositorytic, documentaryvoice- of the isover an example of this kind person voice- of authority an using interventionist rst-f associated withresistant voice. Kimberly Roberts’s ha a didac- of use students’ Briski’s and liveness examples. other are complexities of this appropriative mode of resisting the dominant mode of domi- is,the that bodiedness, of regime the that argues McRuer able- power. nant voice against which autistic critics have spoken out, “still largely mas- as oforder so even more as the querades than natural a nonidentity, things,” heterosexuality. counterpart, its nized until recently by a dialectic of visibility, whereby the invisible in f u- ence of the dominant identity was by maintained its spectacularizing others as pathological. audiovisualT e retrograde politics of “I Amexem- Autism” plify this waning regime, representational in which the normative status of the vocal, articulate speaking subject is tacitly reinforced by the visible audible pathologization of the McRuer autistic argues nonverbal body. that the rigid binary between normality and pathology has become f exible and suppleourinpostmodern, neoliberalized whichin climate, theboundary line between the two is perpetually redrawn to f ect re the erns t changing of pa tolerance. T e result, he explains, eralism and the condition of in postmodernity, fact, need increasingly able- bodied, heterosexual subjects who are vi queer/disabled existences.” queer f gures no longer embody absolute deviance but are still visually and narrativelysubordinated,andsomet in thehaps f exible? newlaid parlanceo f?). Flexibility again works both and withqueer work texts such in characters bodied able- heterosexual, ways: dis- and expanding,while and queer exiblyf minorities,contracting disabled minoritiesexibly f abled comply.” norities need not take the form of outright exclusion: the instead, inclusion ofor tolerance dican f erence serve tities. T e visibilityincreasing of autistics in Hollywood f lms is an example of this strategy at work. Stuart notes Murray that an increasing number of

e two halves halves two e T

92 Press gh a series of “coming out” acts acts out” ofseries a gh “coming

stant voice divides and subdivides into into subdivides and divides voice stant University University

that paradoxically awaits hir resisting voice. hir resisting paradoxically awaits that Duke Duke no “core,” since identities are performatively (de- )constituted. )constituted. (de- performatively are identities since “core,” no is 3 Chapter / nement nement f con

We can, f nally, detect a third, autistic, voice that is at entive to the gridlock video makes explicitBaggs’s the ironic commentary that is embedded in disabilities. T e subtext is the that always authentic real, voice of autism has not yet been heard and that further intervention is to required draw out its spectral- ofostensible the kind,protest this each With interiority. subjugated resi the ofityby disabilityrepresented T e core. of excluded search essential, in its inward looksever that structure a power; hypothesisvoice thus subscribes regarding a to repressive “resistant” it proposal that interprets disabled McRuer’s individuals out should “come crip” as a call to liberate this excluded core, whereas larger point McRuer’s that there called ofessence identies f madness the the so- regarding conjecture Serres’s aporia at the heart of this view of disability: the resistant or voice “crip” is inside, up stilllocked iswhich out, come yet not has which that as seen always throu only located be therefore can which and whichrecycled. in and otherness perfected, isned, f endlessly re existing between the rst f two voices, in which the resistant voice is thought dominant the by excluded and abjected content elusive ever- the represent to voice. canWe glimpse this third voice in “In Baggs’s My Baggs Language.” disidenti f es with the dominant notion of the human and stages a perfor- out” mative “coming of sorts, but sie goes the extra step of acknowledging the of video Baggs’s beautifully illustrate this point. T e f rst half of the video, which demonstrates an autistic mode of voicing, unfolds on its own terms. However, when Baggs gra f s the explanatoryhalf commentary,second the in of material this onto video, the over orvoice- person “translation,” rst-f the of the previous part of the video becomes coded retrospectively as autistic in relation to the “normal” mode of communication of the over. voice-Baggs brilliantly uses the content of over to comment hir on voice-the impover- of in a “having convention voice” ofdocumentary ishment this normative autistic to relation registers those ofgrainy, communication that it excludes as the over ofvehicle this person voice- choice of Hir and disavows. the f rst- documentary ofthe a tropes give that to used critique suggests immediation voice disenfranchisedto social should subjects be seen as a discursive closet liberation. to path a than rather trap, or the pensive, erotic photographs analyzed in chapter 1 and in cyn-Roberts’s ical mobilization of liveness in chapter 2 . T e dominant, humanitarian per- 148 147

/ ultimately ultimately “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having Serres is referring to Fou- to referring is Serres 89 T is leads him to conjecture

91 Press writes,“always Serres beration,” er in disability studies critique but not necessarily in the manner lation between normal and impaired impaired and normal between lation utuality. He extends Butler’s critique Butler’s extends He utuality. rmits a counterintuitive analysis of the wer operating purely through exclusion riably closed, opened, or connected these riably closed, or opened, connected

90

University University Duke Duke in a process of process a in clari epistemological cation. f ongoing T e Butlerian maneuv (or Foucauldian) Serres’s intervention protests the usual relegation of Foucault’s history of of the intervention usual relegation protests Foucault’s Serres’s is enabling precisely because is it because precisely enabling pe cault’s narration ofnarration cault’s the loss of madness as a voice in dialogue with as reason a series of va breaks that epistemic dominant regime (in this case, the regime bodiedness) ofas one that able- is crippled by its own compulsory is T and exclusions. delusional is also structures imaginable and imagined, more or less in unconsciously, history, in this double including unity, the unending circle that allows moving from withoutinterruption.” other the into domain one decon- he when oftype maneuver a similar performs McRuer spaces. two structs the strict binary bodiedness between and able-disability by recon- ceptualizingthehierarchical andstatic re ofone m as and bodies interdependency of a position that is heterosexuality impossibleas ? an “inevitable comedy” to the bodiedness, by to norm fullyshowing of that no inhabit body ?able- capacity. peak at operates the point of analysis ofhistory Serres’s of Foucault’s Serres madness. shows that in every case where a line of for instance, exclusion during is drawn ? scale internment ofthe large-the mad alongside other social “degenerates” sub- or, half century, second ofthe in seventeenth the Europe western across the practice sequently, of sequestering the mad from criminals in the eigh- of sides both on work logicat isregulatory a line. there the century teenth ? and the other excludes, One side protects, as criminals from mad ofthe instance er t separating la the In apparent. is that a it humanitarian measure, is the prisoners who from are the protected mad “ pseudoli T e around. way other the not and enclosure.” real more and obscure more a hides that the “liberation” of madness is not exempt from a coercive regulatory logic in which the essence of madness is in always located what is excluded madness as an early account of po a position is Foucault and thought repressionto ?have revised in his later in the also discourse autis-works. contradiction among a points central to It is wherereproach advocates, that a the common complaint and tic self-self- voices speaking out against the pathologization of autism are those of the functioning” autistics, vocal, and “high- not autistics nonverbal with serious Press nevertheless permanently seem in- that this is “why, despite so many pains- so many despite this is “why, that includes Autistic people who visibly Autistic people includes are Speaks’s response to these objections is objections these to response Speaks’s s at greater length later in the chapter. the in length later greater at s

. , 6 . 4 . Also chapter see 200 , University University Moral Spectatorship Moral .” Discipline and Punish and Discipline psa 2 Chapter to Notes / Autism Speaks’s ultimate goal is to cure autism and create a world where Autistic a world and create autism cure is to goal ultimate Autism Speaks’s like myself oppose people strongly youth and exist. Autistic adults longer no Most defective, are we that believe not do of we idea the because ourselves “curing” of need in or diseased, broken, disability a f that being mean not does Having xed. represent not does Autism Speaks because with wrong is Yet something us. there ortsf e their put can some- they for us, for looking speak Autistic or into people of most that thing is T want. not do us speaking, who well as Autistic as people do non- and disabled, severely disabled, achment of of achment t of a the transparency the that ing arguing rights testimonies, human of conventions medial the prevents to journalistic realism advocates humanitarian of element constitutive a as media fully from them engaging and political their . 9 304– Rights,” “Human McLagan, See goals. identitarian populations certain inclusion, at empts t a taking . 19 “Introduction,” ofcapable f ourishingwithin achieving lives those institutions.” Biever, “ ‘Poetic’ Autistic Film.” Autism Autistic Film.” ‘Poetic’ “ Biever, ” Am‘I Autism.’ “ Wallis, in noted Unless website. Autism the Speaks through available is longer no It . 112235562 / otherwise individual the from all transcribed from f future quotes noted, are lms viewing personal my of f the lms. Speaks for mobilizing stereotypesfor of autistics violent as of destructive or way a as em- of urgency the as phasizing stigmatized hurt expressed and being at cause, their “So, Rose, of instance, for source a families. See, their for torment and hardship of mother the child, autistic an Commandatore, Dana Problem?” the What’s bring, deserves son “Whateverargues, er may autism my t be that challenges the misrepresentation Speaks’ Autism society. on burden a as presented being than “Dis- in Ne’eman, Quoted life and the life of my makes child di f cult.” more my ability Condemns.” Community of against action when legal Autism took Speaks redoubled was voices autistic them.

. approache discussI therapeutic 8 these writes, Brown Autism Speaks.” . “Responding to L. Brown, See 9 85 . Foucault, 86 . Timothy Campbell and Adam Sitze explain Chapter 3: “Having a Voice” a “Having 3: Chapter . of chronicle A 1 this video to objections in found be can community’s autistic the “Disability Condemns.” Community . 2 Ne’eman, See .com vimeo t video h viewed be ps:// at currently can . Am “I e T Autism” 3 Also Rosen, M. see “Autism Autism Speaks.” . “Responding to L.4 Brown, See 210 criticized Autism Speaks ” Others have of “Voices Autism ‘Silenced.’ . Biever, 5 See the “silencing” that protests AspieWeb Bullied.” Being “AspieWeb . MMadmin, See 6 Cartwright, . 7 149

/ that is sought is sought that “Having a Voice” Voice” a “Having

humanity Press erentiation to lead to an image of of image an to lead to erentiation f te, but understand, in so doing, that that doing, so in understand, but te,

s reversal in terms of terms in is reason reversal s way the nal chapter. nal f furthernext and up the in University University

93 And, suddenly, it isAnd, they suddenly, who are going to appear insulated norm. Duke and and If Baggs responds to emptst a Foucault’s to articulate what Serres calls spective, spective, which is t uned a to and normative human language, relationality, voicing, sees the autistic, dwelling in an in f nite feld of perceptual and re- lational possibilities, as disabled, trapped, or lacking in relational capacity. the but autistic the is not it that video reveals Baggs’s for hir by humanitarian in agents the form of a resisting, articulate speaking voice that is limited, locked up, andand con finned fact? thoroughly au- tistic. T is astonishing reversal is an extension of commentary Serres’s on explains thi Serres “pseudoliberation.” limited by the exclusion of unreason: “for there to be clari f cation, analysis, of thisdi dierentiation f for and unreason, both turn, their in de f ne, to has one ofallthat implies, sudden, a rational, the reason ga a behind madness up Lock limited. and reason.” limit you apropos or, this to articulate chapter, discourse ?“a of unreason on reason” an autistic it discourse is on by humanitarianism acknowledging ?that an autistic voice can only be articulated within and against the con f nes of im- medial conditions that are thoroughly compromised. But sie also issues the following, challenging questions: What it would mean to free documentary to inhabit an autistic voice? whatTo forms of communica- mute mediationthese interpret and hear to able must be to order in we accustomed become take I that questions are ese T tions? Diag- , employ employ , Autism Is a Is Autism Jam Jar Jam . e Autism Ma- Autism e T ). and and

techniques fc Press ; see American Psychiatric Associ- American see ; Psychiatric My Classic Life Classic My ), while Majia Holmer while), 8 , and Holmer Majia 7 , 5 , 4 s. ergence ofergence biogeneticist and cognitive of 2 and 1 Chapters autism. Chloe Constructing Autism Constructing ions until she “automatically,” compul- ions until she “automatically,” vioral therapies involving parents and and parents involving vioral therapies al, occupational, psychopharmacological, psychopharmacological, al, occupational, pacity of and forms ordering for narrative order his “spatial awareness.” Williams, awareness.” his “spatial order e describes t Bissonne ways: meaningful ly cance of of signi and cance f also explains nature the (“ ‘A Child Is Being Beaten’: Beaten’: Being Child Is ‘A (“ 3 chap. , and 9 7, – w communication therapies have molded their their molded have therapies communication w er an informative and nuanced reading of reading nuanced and the informative an er f o as a “potholder” a as “ladle or of mean- language doing Nominated.”

fc

. Marks’s concept of concept “haptic Marks’s . visuality” is at discussed University University iams, the protagonists of protagonists the iams,

Moral Spectatorship Moral Autism Is a World Is Autism Duke Understanding Autism Understanding Skin ofSkin Film the . See “ . See ers a wide- ranging account of account ranging beha wide- a ers f o 3 Chapter to Notes / pany, State of State Art, the news articles numerous in about seen be can pany, World if as object an to point not does tify, or subject is it speaking distant the from itself on ects f re that speaking A come can and place. speaking the from absent the touch- based method of method based touch-the the revised of diagnosis spectrum autism in the ff of disorder h edition the of Manual Disorders Mental Statistical and nostic Spectrum Disorders.” “Autism ation, ect in Facilitated Communication”). Communication”). Facilitated A in and off ect Disorders Agency, Authorship, that criminal case recent a which recounts eld,” f Stubble “Anna Also Engber’s see surrounding controversies the to contributed has . 4 length chapter in ‘Speaking “ Trinh, it.” claiming or seizing without,very subject a to close however, . 87 ” Nearby,’ Speak.” to history diagnostic the in of approaches and Silverman’s wellimpacts as the as Kanner Asperger, including and research, autism in pioneers Gil Eyal, approach. psychoanalytic elheim’s Brunot Be around controversies and Rossi’s Natasha and Oren, Neta Onculer, Hart, Emine Brendan trix ofermath f a the in roles ofautistics active in deinstitutionalization the mental chap (see 1960 the in onward and s retardation em the to ention t particular a pays Nadesan Nadesan, in 6 and 5 chaps. (see paradigms erent metaphors to articulate ho articulate to metaphors dierent f ofperceptions social in time and space ingfully” and collect allows to him that living texts about with explains autism, autobiographical who wri has several en t own her act understand not could she that of pages the “listened” and them to about wrote books her talked they as sively, ca the to Williams gestures Here, her. to experience: everyday while through working linguistic forms, Williams favors mysteries.” up “clear and “order,” “frame,” e to t Bissonne helps painting

. Contemporary behavioral, development . behavioral, Contemporary 36 e and Will e and . t Bissonne 27 com- production work,. voice Wurzburg’s by descriptionsese T of29 Margulies’s . Marks, See 30 objec- not does form a that of to describes commitment her “speaking . Trinh 31 Eye.” “Mechanical Trinh, instance, for . 32 See, “About . Also Armatage, see 186 ; 183 with Speaking Language,” “Not . Peckham, See 33 . 34 of number A of books contextually richer f o accounts recent phases historical Association . 35 Americane T Psychiatric 212 . . Cartwright,See 28 211

/ is a myth in two Notes to Chapter 3 3 Chapter to Notes Introduction to Documen- to Introduction . 3 1, – 3 , works by discarding sonic sonic , works discarding by 3

mp

mp . See Baggs, “Glossary.” Baggs has has Baggs “Glossary.” Baggs, See . Press Baggs describes hirselfBaggs genderless as

hirs e March of March e T Time . , 31 delity f through not operate to tend . 209 199, 71 – , 167 – as argued in this regard that disability that and this in argued as regard a persistent and systematic tendency to place place to tendency systematic and persistent a , and and , pose might also be productively analyzed analyzed also might productively pose be hir , sie

. 91 , , xxiii. Time and the Other the and Time University . 29 , 17 – ” .

Introduction to Documentary to Introduction Jam Jar Jam Duke Duke First Person Jewish Person First Time and the Other the and Time Voice in Cinema in Voice . 68 , 167 - tural logic through which this purposeful, opinionated voice eradicates other other which eradicates logic through this voice tural purposeful, opinionated pur its from detract might that voices Sterne of Sterne. terms in Jonathan by of notion the elaborated as compression, forms media postmodern that argued has the example, main His compression. through but not present as very as is present not disabled. there . that . know not majoritydo e T . people of orga- any that assume with people most because Autism Speaks controversy such for the community. with things good dealing must be doing autism nization YouTube. of prototypical the with variety associated listener, the on mythicalect f e desired the have not did narration such ) 1 ( senses: - f o employed documentaries that classical not, even than en f o more ) 2 ( and experiment and with complicate omniscient its to tended narration vocal screen qualities. omnipotent and ciphers of coded as dependency in interchangeably employed childhood both are People.” Disabled Up “Making visualthe of Evans, culture See charity. tary material that cannot be detected by the human ear and is therefore deemed irrele- deemed is and therefore ear human the by detected be cannot that material very of the through process gains it but en- an compression extraneous or vant ? Sterne, See down intelligibility. pared- and hanced the referent(s) of anthropology in a Time other than the present of present of the producer than the of other an- Time a in anthropology referent(s) the discourse. thropological and uses the pronominal forms pronominal the uses and has but Baggs, Melissa Amanda and Baggs Amanda names the under published hirself to refers and Baggs, as Voicy Amelia Evelyn to name hir formally changed follow this I nomenclature. Baggs. Mel . See Nichols, . Nichols, 25 See . Lebow, 26 . Fabian, . Schalk, See Speaking.” “Metaphorically 10 Fabian, . 11 “ means of. denial 12 By Fabian coevalness, . 104 100 – Ethnography,” Romantic and “Taxidermy . Rony, 13 Language.” My video “In . Baggs’s from 14 Quote YouTube. on titles)” with Sub- . Added video the 15 See Am “I Autism (Now Speaks ” on of . Autistic: ‘I Am Parody Autism’ the videoSee Autism Video “I’m Speaks 16 Also” Nichols, see of‘Voice God.’ “ Wolfe, . Charles See 17 Chion, . 18 . 35 Passage,” the er f “A . Chow, 19 . 150 ” of‘Voice God,’ “ . Wolfe, Charles 20 cul- normalizing the . Although explore21 cannot I this in this chapter, connection . Wolfe argues that “Voice of “Voice narration God” argues that . Wolfe 151 ” of‘Voice God,’ “ . Wolfe, 22 Charles h Evans . Disability Jessica scholar 23 studies . from 24 Quote hu- too . T e f lm, Deej

(Independent Television Ser- Television (Independent Press . I do not discuss Cavarero’s discuss not do I . 12 , Cavarero’s . 10 , itvs d, omniscient voice, especially that especially that omniscientd, voice, ound ofound is counterpro- uniqueness, a at Dolar is thoroughly unsympathetic unsympathetic is Dolar thoroughly at ity of is equally voice the unhelpful and sneezing) can be uncanny to encounter, encounter, to uncanny be sneezing) can in this chapter not only because space space because only not this in chapter tive obligations of obligations tive seman- phonemic, the sentiment when she describes the pleasures when describessentiment she pleasures the , 52. . , 152 . , 161

Image, Music, Text Image, University University an One Voice One an T More For . 30 ; 2510 – 9, – , 25 . Beyond the Silence the Beyond an One Voice One an T More For

Emergence Emergence Duke Duke an One an T More Always One an T More Always 3 Chapter to Notes / writer, co- producer, and protagonist of protagonist and television documentary the producer, co-writer, by produced co- and Robert by Rooy, directed man has noted th noted has man t Pe Dominic Dolar, and of anchoring of Barthes’s grain the the to that insisting organic, the in voice the of uniqueness singular the argues that man t to pinned be cannot voice Pe bodies. impersonal alien the on insistence Dolar’s which in is and singular both voice manner the enigmatic the confront to neglects 155 . esp. Podcast,” “Pavlov’s man, t Pe See once. at plural apo- the that Dyson proposes programs. radio mainstream on encountered voices of instances theosis of certain in paradigmatic radio the is achieved speech inner space of space anaerobic the dead where anechoic the invokes studio the voice, disembodiee T chamber. inner of mind’s the of perfect the as medium from of behaves severed male, white language older, an not but human be must voice “proper” e T of interference the body. the of devoid involun- or clues, voice emotive mechanical a accent, intonation, man ? . 82 – 177 of Dyson, “Genealogy See voice. male ideal the Radio the Voice,” horizon a or of of concentrate experience permits to one that voice,” as “voice the interpre the from liberated vocal, the on Cavarero, See realm. tic important book of interpretation her because allowmainly not but does this horizon in vocal sug- Manning’s and ofterms Baggs’s to runs individual uniqueness counter human gr the as understood human, the that gestion voicing, understand which to through framework whichductive actually reveals . as of is in production vice), 2016 November tary sounds (laughter, coughing, clicking,tary sounds (laughter, of excess an but missive the of from idiosyncrasies these distract can mind. the excluded habitually are di their erence f announce audibly isT that is voices why with accord to ections f in vocal their modulate they unless radio, mainstream from

. Baggs et al., “What We Have to Tell You.” Tell to et al., “What. Have Baggs 46 We “ . Between.” Silence e T Prince, 47 . Grandin, See 48 . Mukhopadhyay, 49 is the Savarese with Me.” Commentary: Communicate “Cultural . Savarese, See 50 214 . 51 Manning, . 52 Manning, of analysis comparative astute an Barthes In . 182 of . Barthes, “Grain 53 Voice,” the 54 . Grandin, See hegemonic the to Dyson relation in length wri this on has topic at en . t 55 Frances 222 . of . Ruo Documentary,” in fSee Sound “Conventions , 56 in note translator’s . Heath, See 57 . 181 of . Barthes,58 “Grain the Voice,” similar a expresses . Cavarero Adriana 59 213

/ Autism Autism , Applied Be-

jasperR

Notes to Chapter 3 3 Chapter to Notes istic and Related Communication Communication istic Related and Press ility, endurance, transcendence, and and transcendence, endurance, ility, our inquiry if we are to follow Baggs’s inquiryour if Baggs’s follow to are we counterweight, however elusive, to the the to elusive, counterweight, however scuss these therapies in conjunction with conjunction in therapies these scuss nd instabilitynd of those to visuality and catory relationship disidenti and catoryf vexed relationship ), the Early Start Denver Model, and Occu- and Model, Start Early Denver the ), . 2 and 1 chaps. esp. , . 15 14 –

, . , 15 also all; 70 , see of (“ 1 Linguisticse T of chap. the 52 . 42, –

teachh University University At the time of time the At writing, variety a of are approaches therapeutic ux and becoming (accom- ux f around becoming and where, worldview a organized

), Treatment and Education of Education and Aut Treatment ),

Voice and Nothing More Nothing and Voice bce Duke dir Voice and Nothing More Nothing and Voice More Nothing and Voice More Nothing and Voice More Nothing and Voice Spectrum Disorders. Disorders. Spectrum ofen- t A treatment the in Joint the combination in including autism, employed ( Regulation and Model Engagement, Play, Symbolic tion, in the work of the pre- Socratic philosopher Heraclitus) was restructured by the the by restructured was philosopher Heraclitus) Socratic of work the in pre- the philosophies of works the in found of being Plato, philosophers including later which stab (in René and Descartes Aristotle, of characteristics as shie T traced f favored true knowledge). were permanence of Dysonby cosmologies from a aurality prehistory of longer the as stability of read be to denigration demands the mi- of modes metic further to hope I . 4 discuss chapter in discussed the knowledge mimesis, and aurality between whichrich easily accommo- be connections cannot work. within of scope the separate a in dated this chapter, erences, and Relationship- based based Relationship- and dierences, f Individual- Analysis, Developmental, havioral ( Model een years are re- are years een ff past the in autism to approaches treatment neurological and of books, many recent viewed numerous in which American the on focus context ofSimp- instance, for parents the See, children. autistic toward oriented are and Cook,t Tapsco and Ganz, Byrd, tO Myles, Griswold,, Smith Boer- de son, tO Griswold,, Smith Boer- de Simpson, Sensoryerapy T Integration. pational di Cook t Tapsco and Ganz, Byrd, Myles, approaches. psychopharmacological 300 500 – Voice”). For Dolar, Lacan’s theory of intract- that to key the provides object the Lacan’s Dolar, For Voice”). alterity ofable of voice (the interrupts voice the function its that an as other) the objectivity obdurate e T presence. mirror” illusion the facilitating of“acoustic self- of positive a ers f o proposes, he voice, the Neverthe- entity. signifying yields negative purely a as that subject the operation compromises Lacan on solely relying less, a has the autistic voice that indication is like this structured scene other even Lacan, to according since, with language, of equation any this reason, of with voice autistic the realm the For language. a un- simplistic. also impulses overly be conscious would modating impermanent, corporeal, and unstable modes of modes unstable and seen as impermanent, corporeal, modating knowledge, Handicapped Children ( Children Handicapped alization ofalization period the in occurred cosmological shi that f within voice the broad a . 573 . Anima,” “De Aristotle, 40 . Dolar, 41 . 42 Dolar, . Dolar, 43 Dolar, . 44 . Baggs, “Bunch of . “Bunch Baggs, .” f Stu 37 . Dolar, See 38 demateri- the Dyson. 72 situates 168 – . of Dyson, “Genealogy See 39 Radio the Voice,” . See Baggs, “Up in the Clouds.” the in “Up . Baggs, See 45 ; and and ; entitled entitled Moral Moral ; Eyal et al., ; Eyal Fisher, “No “No Fisher, , 166, also; see

Representing Autism Representing Gender Trouble Gender Press Understanding Autism Understanding Disability Studies Quarterly Quarterly Studies Disability ; 12 and 11 chaps. esp. , al. Although I cannot address this more this more Althoughal. address cannot I Autism manipulation of manipulation mahout, the by animal the sion ofsion of perception analogous the autistic

; Silverman, Silverman, ; , and the persistent failure to identify to failure persistent the and , fully and University University . 31 , 4 , 12 – , 9. – 10 . , 1 , 2 . . , 18 . , 57 ; Murray, Murray, ; 10 chap. esp. , Constructing Autism Constructing (“ ‘A Child Is Being Beaten’: Disorders of Disorders Author- Beaten’: Being Child Is ‘A (“ 3 chap. , and 9 7, – Crip T eory Crip T eory Crip T eory Crip T eory Crip T eory f cations Disidenti 3 Chapter to Notes / trinsically embody impossible to itself heterosexuality withwithout reveals positions these incoherence only not inevitable an as but comedy.” compulsory a as law, McRuer, ect in Facilitated Communication”). Facilitated A in and f ect Agency, ship, Autism Matrix Autism Murray, “Hollywood”; Murray, Subject?”; No Search, of reading persuasive a ers f o the Evans People.” Disabled Up “Making Evans, structures of cipher “impairment” the in of embedded projection and ing t spli Christian cosmology Judeo- a from derives which, autism, notes, she representing whichin biological wholeness divine. is as seen of way di a erent f indeed sensibility di a erent f to entive t a ? “remain is aim to of us while reminding time same the at the perceiving, and in, being world the ? of construct category the to pos-need manner capacious most the in human the also dis- authors e T ” Half ‘Superior of Speaking.’ “ Savarese, and Savarese sible.” mahout’s hand guides the elephant’s trunk, of author the that and guides elephant’s the hand paintings these mahout’s anim the not and human the is therefore of perception the here, substantially possibilities the and of in worth through are thinking collaboration, interspecies discus Lisa Cartwright’s to relation skepticism the and regarding facilitators, their by manipulated being as children two the between bond of basis the as interpersonal the trustworthy legitimate, a Cartwright, See ). 3 ofmode chapter in discussed (also communication Spectatorship “Autism and the Concept of Neurodiversity,” in which Baggs is a contributor, hir hir is which in contributor, a Baggs of Concept the and Neurodiversity,” “Autism length. origins the cuss at of neurodiversity around debates and

. 4 3 – Representation,” and “Autism Osteen, instance, for . See, 82 . McRuer, 83 . McRuer, 84 . 85 McRuer, “Hollywood.” . Murray, See 86 . McRuer, 87 . Muñoz, 88 . 41 of “Geometry . Serres, 89 Incommunicable,” the in- are “heterosexuality. sexual that writes positions Butler that 90 normative ers f o . 42 of “Geometry . Serres, 91 Incommunicable,” the of issue recent a to introduction the quote . 92 To . 51 of “Geometry . Serres, 93 Incommunicable,” the . See Nadesan, . Nadesan, See 81 Surrender Art of Documentary The 4: Chapter Painting.” Elephant . “Original See 1 . 2 of the One that is skeptics by idea the mentioned frequently most objections the 216 215

; / Cin- . , 88 . 89 77, – Autism Introduction to Doc- to Introduction Notes to Chapter 3 3 Chapter to Notes Documentary Display Documentary . 4 and 1 chaps. esp. ,

. See Murray, Murray, . See Press t ie, ; Bea Introduction to Documentary to Introduction ; and Lebow, introduction to to introduction Lebow, and ; Autism ect, these too are turned into a mode mode a into turned are ect, too these voicing that might operate at odds with at operate might that voicing Autism Matrix Autism . Also see Nichols, Also. Nichols, see 18 17 –

. When. 72 , in speech on focus does Nichols . 15 , f Kozlo Sarah . 22 provides historical also see 8; 6 , – 15 .

; Rascaroli, “Essay Film”; Russell, Film”; Rascaroli,; 19 “Essay 104– esp. , , , xii. First Person Jewish Person First ; and Nichols, Nichols, and ; 116 , . 18 , . , 21 . , 21

. 3 , Subject ofSubject Documentary . University University . 6 , 5 – . 64 , 134 – Invisible Storytellers Invisible

First Person Jewish Person First Documentary Understanding Autism Understanding

. Duke . 209 , 19966 – , 162 – Duke Representing Reality Representing Documentary to Introduction Representing Reality Representing Representing Reality Representing Reality Representing New Documentary New Voice in Cinema in Voice Subject ofSubject Documentary Voice and Nothing More Nothing and Voice Representing Reality Representing city, his analyses are limited to the rhetorical devices evidentiary and rhetorical the to limited are his analyses speciits f city, with of impression the contents its endows which speech through conventions style, and delivery, refutation, arrangement, metonymy, metaphor, as truth (such brief the In two nonlinguistic, or the eshly f where turns he to on). so paragraph ofdimensions f a or gesture as such speech, of of conviction the a reinforce than supports as that rather articulate, the speech, spectrum autistic portal a parallel, of onto 77 ( voice wri documentary’s a – has elsewhereen about Nichols Although t ). 93 of write not grain the does he about excess, and rhetoric terms. these in speech Reality: Rhetoric What to and Exceeds “Sticking It,” chapter the instance, for See, in ethnography”; Lebow, “Auto that the human is both “more and less than one,” as the title of Manning’s book book of title the as Manning’s one,” than less and is “more both human the that suggests. over variety a for context of transmedial and voice- against widely prejudices held of have I those to emergence the from addition narration In f sound onward. lm over, of associations theatrical literary and the addresses she mentioned, voice- the of shadings subjective the and speech. redundancy, narrative regarding concerns Smaill,and of the causes surrounding in his autism book ema ofema Me umentary . . Bruzzi,70 64 . Nichols, . 65 Dolar, . 18 of . “Voice Documentary,” 66 Nichols, 67 . Nichols, . 20 of . “Voice Documentary,” Nichols, 68 of “Voice . Documentary,” Nichols, 69 See Renov, instance, for . 71 See, . 72 Renov, 63 . Nichols, . f. Kozlo , 60 See . 61 Nichols, 62 . Nichols, . 277 . Russell,73 “Autoethnography,” . Lebow, See 74 75 . Chion, 76 . Silverman,. 171 . Incommunicability,” Pinchevski, “Displacing 77 . Hacking, “Kinds of78 People.” of account debates accessible and recent comprehensive a ers f o . 79 Stuart Murray Rossi, and Oren, Hart, Onculer, . Eyal, See 80