Deaf Culture in Hollywood: American Sign Language on Screen
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Deaf Culture in Hollywood: American Sign Language on Screen Abbey Marra University of Rochester Department of Visual and Cultural Studies _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Prior to 1965, the elusive term, “Deaf culture” was primarily recognized within Deaf communities. The majority of the hearing world viewed deafness simply as the condition of hearing loss and wondered how a group who did not claim any particular geographical space, religion, literature, or cuisine could be called “cultural.” Carol Padden and Tom Humphries sought to define “Deaf culture” in their book, Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988). They used the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of hearing loss and the capital Deaf when referring to a particular group of Deaf people who have a shared history, set of beliefs, practices, and most importantly, a common language— American Sign Language (ASL). Deaf characters have been portrayed on screen since the silent film era, but representations of them in Hollywood are routinely misguided and/or pushed to the margins. Directors regularly cast hearing actors in Deaf roles, with the assumption that a performer must only learn basic signs to properly convey the Deaf experience. This recurring practice can be seen as recently as 2017, with the casting of Julianne Moore in a prominent Deaf role in Todd Haynes’s Wonderstruck. Randa Haines’s film adaptation of the Broadway play, Children of a Lesser God (1986) achieved wide critical acclaim after featuring Deaf actor Marlee Matlin in the leading role, for which she went on to win an Academy Award. But while ASL features prominently in the film, its presence is significantly diminished by the fact that a hearing character is responsible for the telling of a Deaf protagonist’s story. In contrast, during the second season of Aziz Ansari’s Master of None (2017), a Deaf storyline is filmed in total silence using only ASL, featuring Deaf actors in Deaf roles. Until the entertainment industry recognizes that Deaf identity is comprised of more than hearing loss, Deaf culture will continue to be misrepresented in the primary medium in which it can be fully expressed. One of the most popular misconceptions about Deaf individuals remains that deafness is merely the absence of hearing. Richard Senghas and Leila Monaghan point out that “an estimated 6.2 million people currently living are prelingually deaf, and many have formed Deaf communities, often with distinct languages and cultural practices” (70). Furthermore, studies involving Deaf people “reveal issues of general anthropological significance,” even to those who might not have a particular interest in issues of deafness (71). Senghas and Monaghan list organization, identity, culture, ideology, and sociolinguistic variation as examples of issues that permeate studies of linguistic communities. They argue that deafness is, at least in part, a social construction, and that “understanding the complex nature of communities with Deaf members requires attending to how people use and think about language” (70). American Sign Language in particular plays a significant role in sociocultural studies of Deaf communities, and it is imperative that those in the hearing majority actively seek ways in which to better understand the culture of ASL. Until the 1970s, members of the Deaf population referred to their language as simply, “the sign language.” With the advent of scientific studies on sign language varieties, as well as William Stokoe’s publication of a sign language dictionary, it soon acquired the name, “American Sign Language” (Padden 54). This new terminology placed ASL in the class of human languages, while also commanding a different view of its history. The redefinition also made it clear that an abundance of sign languages existed throughout the world, each with its own history and grammatical structure, from Thai sign language to Ukrainian sign language. (59) American Sign Language is mainly practiced in the United States and some parts of Canada, and is distinct from other English-based sign languages, including British Sign Language. In Inside Deaf Culture, Padden and Humphries reframe the practices of Deaf communities as a “Deaf culture,” with the idea of “culture” giving them a useful construct for describing the varied lives of Deaf people in and around the United States (Padden and Humphries 67). Adam Kuper observes that the word “culture” should be “defined in opposition to something else,” and the new term allowed the previous description of Deaf people—that their behaviors were the consequence of them not being able to hear—to begin to fade away (67). Padden and Humphries cringe at scientific studies which tried to match degrees of hearing loss with specific social behaviors, suggesting an uncomplicated relationship between hearing loss and behavior. They argue instead that the specific and particular way of being Deaf is significantly shaped by a set of shared histories (68). Some of the very first films made in the United States featured two men eating pie, an elephant performing tricks, and a Deaf woman reciting the “Star Spangled Banner” in sign language. Dated 1902, the latter was among a collection of segments made by Thomas Edison to demonstrate the “potential for moving picture films” (56). Previously, film had only been accessible as viewed through a kinetoscope, the drawback being that only one individual could use it at a time. But once the vitascope was introduced, it allowed moving picture images to be displayed on a larger screen, widening the audience. In choosing a Deaf woman as one of his first subjects, Edison was able to convey the potential of film to communicate and show the body in movement. Nearly ten years later, the National Association for the Deaf (NAD) endeavored to produce their own films in hopes of advancing sign language and promoting Deaf people’s experiences throughout the United States (Figure 1). They wanted to show that Deaf people had something to say and that they could say it in their own language (92). What remains is a remarkable set of images that preserves what sign language looked like at the turn of century. The films featured no captions other than the names of the signers on title cards, and aimed to illustrate sign language in its purest form. The NAD films have “provided linguists with a treasure trove of examples of how signs have changed over time” (99). Some signs are emblems of the era, such as the sign for DOLLAR changing from a circular movement for “coin” to a change in hand motion to reflect bills. Similarly, one of the participants in an NAD film signs the word, TELEPHONE by holding two objects, one for the speaker device and the other for listening.’ Figure 1: George Veditz, president of the NAD, signs in The Preservation of the Sign Language (1913) The silent film era was a moment in time when both hearing and Deaf audiences could enjoy going to the cinema on a comparatively equal basis, with the exception of an orchestral soundtrack. During this era, a sizeable group of Deaf actors found work in Hollywood, including Charlie Chaplin’s long-time Deaf friend and actor, Granville Redmond. Deaf performers normally played hearing characters on screen, and when they were cast in Deaf roles, they were often reduced to stereotypes that painted them as victims who were alienated from society, depressed, or entirely dependent upon others (Schuchman 43). Unfortunately, stereotypical images of the Deaf population “survived the demise of the silent film era and continued to perpetuate misinformation and false images of Deaf people and their emotions to the American public” (29). Since most of those in the hearing majority rarely encountered Deaf individuals, “the movies exerted a powerful negative influence comparable to similar derogatory film stereotypes experienced by women and a wide variety of ethnic groups” (29). As Hollywood made the transition to “talking pictures,” Deaf actors who had previously worked in entertainment found it much harder to find work and were often pushed to the margins. Soon, hearing actors began to play Deaf characters in stereotyped forms. This common practice continued for decades in Hollywood. In 1969, Alan Arkin was nominated for an Oscar for his portrayal of Deaf man John Singer in The Heart is a Lonely Hunter (Miller 1969). One New York Times film critic praised his performance as “extraordinary, deep and sound; his use of his hands seems quite normal and personal, and when he walks in the night, talking, with his hands to himself, it seems a perfect dramatic expression of what the thinking is” (68). Schuchman argues that this review provides a perfect example for “the abysmal lack of understanding of deafness and the power and beauty of sign language” (69). Hearing actors’ signing was awkward at best, with words often misspelled or signs done incorrectly. After playing Deaf Smith in Deaf Smith and Johnny Ears (Cavara 1973), Anthony Quinn observed that “if every actor could play a deaf- mute once, it would be the best thing that could happen to him. I had to react to everything and everyone around me. It was a terrific experience for an actor” (104). Similarly, Alan Arkin recounted his experience while working on the set of The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, and recognized that Deaf people are “as multicolored and varied emotionally as they can be,” but the “one thing that the affliction does seem to cause is a great sense of isolation.” These reactions suggest that the actors appear to have neglected any study of Deaf culture or its rich history, focusing “on the absence of hearing, not on deafness” (104). In a direct response to complaints by the Deaf community about Hollywood’s failure to cast Deaf actors in roles for Deaf characters, filmmakers cast newcomer Marlee Matlin in the critically acclaimed Children of a Lesser God.