Last week in our class, “Including Differences,” I presented artworks to celebrate my friends and their deafness to Clair De Boer, Director of Arts & Health at Penn State Health Hershey and Betsy Blyler, Artist-in-residence at Penn State Health Hershey.
De Boer & Blyler were excited about the inclusion of American Sign Language in the paintings. I shared some of the words in the artwork–which came as the result of my interviews with my friends who are deaf, my personal and academic relationships with those in the Deaf community over the years, and an interview with Angela Burgett, ASL interpreter. I should note I have a one-year certification in Deaf Studies from Mott College, Flint MI. I have dated a deaf man, I have designed and implemented classes for the deaf and disabled for students at the Michigan School for the Deaf for classes held at the Flint Institute of Arts. So I have a bit of experience with Deaf Culture in the United States of America.
One of the signs in the series of paintings is the word for “bound” and I gave a brief reason for the use of the sign in the work. Another person in the class spent about 25 minutes explaining why this word is “inappropriate,” “insensitive” and “not inclusive” to the women from Hershey. I would suggest that more reflection and learning of Deaf Culture in this country is needed. I share my explanation of the art work and its inclusive properties in context of Deaf Culture .
Historically, within Deaf Culture, there have been battles regarding the use of sign language to communicate. There are those that say “read lips only”, and those who say “sign only”, and there are those that say “do both.” In the 1860’s the oppression of sign language began and was later “made official at the 1880 Milan Congress, “a pivotal event in the ‘war of methods’ between the oral and manual schools in the education of Deaf children (Schertz & Lane, 2000). At the height of oralism, Schertz and Lane also share that sign was thought of as a “primitive and fundamentally flawed method of encoding a spoken language and that signed language was perceived as an obstacle to the acquisition of English-language skills. During this time frame, students were forbidden to use sign of any kind, those who did were severely and swiftly punished according to Schertz and Lane. During my own studies and talking to people I knew, who were older, they too shared stories and experiences of this oral-sign battle in the 1980-90’s.
The artwork, Ameslan Prohibited, by artist Betty G. Miller is the result of this historical background. A work in Pen and ink, the drawing “of a disembodied, shacked pair of hands with dismembered fingers” (Schertz and Lane). Ameslan means American Sign Language, so children are told their language is prohibited. This oppression shares that their culture, their language–has no value–they are BOUND. As a community, as children, they clearly understood this reality.
Not having control of ones communication is oppressive. Not being able to talk is oppressive. Being forbidden to sign is oppressive. My art works, my inclusion of this sign “bound” opens the door for dialogue–as I mentioned before in my brief presentation: “Who is bound? Who is behind the wall (brick texture) or in front of the wall of communication?” Who is bound today?” I would answer, those who do not understand Deaf Culture in this country–or in ANY country are bound! I understand this history of being bound, not being able to speak or sign–hence my inclusion of the word bound, in my works over and over. The Deaf are not bound any longer! But many hearing people still are, and will remain so–the sign used in this work opens the door for conversation, not continued oppression.
Multi-media artist, Michelle McAuliffe shares that her “parents started me out as an oralist, I developed a multiplicity of approaches to my deafness, communication and view of my work over the years” (Witteborg, 2014). She continues to share that most of her elementary years were spent learning to lip read, she missed lots of information in the classroom but she says “I was a young Jedi learning how to use my intuition. I became more sensitive to my everyday environment” (Witteborg). Yet if she had been supported in learning sign, she would have not been academically behind. She was the only deaf student in her school and she did not have any sort of assistance in gathering academic information, her hands were “bound” and her learning slowed. She was forced to learn in different ways, ways that luckily she is able to use in her artwork today–she has removed the binding in her creative works.
Artist Camille Jeter-Lorrello says “Our hands with ASL are like magic: they accurately express whether you sign some on your right side, or sign something on your left side with your left hand…or together!” (Witteborg) she continues by sharing the experience of performing a play by Molière, a French farce playwright, who plays with words and volume of presentation. Jeter-Lorrello explains that one line says, “why, why WHY!?” the artist signs this word and its accentuated volume by “starting at the normal face level to the floor with a dramatic flair. The audience could really relate and connect to the expressed idea/concept” (Witteborg). Her work as an artist was no longer “bound.”
Yes, the word “Bound” is in my paintings—all six of them in the series. Because there was once a time when the Deaf did not have control over their own education, communication and though this can be different for children learning today, there are still divided schools of thought regarding lip reading and learning ASL. Hearing culture will always seem to clash with Deaf culture–supposing that one is better than the other–the hearing culture–but its the unknown, unfamiliarity and differences that cause this way of thinking. Yet there are many who work to teach inclusion, the value of, not a deaf or a hearing method of communication, but rather COMMUNICATION. I include the signs in my work as they express my own frustrations of learning a new and different language–a language that is grammatically challenging and very different from English, my primary language.
But the word “bound” in context of the art is appropriate. Let me address the words of concern, “inappropriate,” “insensitive” and “not inclusive.” Let me share from SECOND THOUGHTS, Avoiding Assumptions: Communication Decisions Made by Hearing Parents of Deaf Children by Janet DesGeorges:
Lizzy, age 7 months, had just been identified as deaf, and her parents were preparing to make decisions regarding communication choices for her, such as whether to pursue cochlear implants or teach her sign language. Lizzy’s parents were encouraged to attend a workshop on decision making in deafness by her early intervention clinician. When they sat down at the first session and looked around, they saw many deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH) people in the audience signing to one another. Lizzy’s mother couldn’t help herself—privately, her first feeling was grief. She thought, “This has nothing to do with our daughter, with our family.” How could her daughter be part of something that felt so foreign to her?
As she looked up on the stage, there was one person speaking and an individual next to the speaker signing. “Ah, they must have an interpreter up on stage,” the mom surmised. As she focused her attention on the speaking person, however, she gradually became aware that the presenter was in fact the person who was signing, and the interpreter was voicing for that person. She had just assumed that the presenter was the hearing, speaking individual.
The description of the school was also a surprise to Lizzy’s parents. For the all-deaf student body, accessibility was provided through visual communication (paging systems, captioning, and sign language). For the first time, Lizzy’s parents could visualize a world in which deaf people could thrive, not defined by the “deficit” of living in the world without the sense of hearing
When those around them learned they were undertaking this process, everyone seemed to have opinions they weren’t shy about sharing:
“If you sign to your child, she will never speak.”
“If you don’t sign to your child, she will grow up to hate you and turn from your family to Deaf culture and community.”
“Your daughter has a right to her natural language: ASL.”
“It’s a hearing world, and you need to be hearing to make it through” (DesGeorges, 2016).
Even today hearing parents struggle with what to do regarding the education of a their deaf child. “Historically, there seem to me to have been two primary viewpoints on deafness. In one, deafness is viewed as pathological, a medical condition or disability, and in the other deafness is embraced as a cultural difference, something to be celebrated” (Sparrow, 2005). I am not being “insensitive” I am being direct. This struggle is still a reality today, yet “decision making regarding communication and language choices for children often weighs heavily on parents” (DeGeorges, 2016). My use of the word “bound” is not “not inclusive”, its use is informed on the reality of what many parents today must deal with while raising a intelligent, healthy, happy, and vibrant deaf children and how they feel as they maneuver the choice making processes. I am very sensitive to the struggles that parent must face from hearing family members and the hearing medical community upon learning first that they have a deaf child, to then raising that child. The use of “bound” includes hearing parents who are dealing the difference of having a deaf child–and their struggle is recognized in my art work. Today though “experts’ views have evolved to include the idea that parents don’t need to make a “choice” between spoken or signed language but can incorporate both—some form of bilingualism—into a child’s development” (Napoli DJ, Mellon NK, Niparko JK, et al., 2015).
Words to describe the hearing like “see,” “mediate for peace,” “talk to much,” “depending on hearing, not see it,” or “too loud,” are not offensive–though they could be thought of as such by hearing people. The words are direct commentary to the hearing from the deaf participants. In addition, “look with sign,” “speak hands,” “don’t hear listen,” “vision,” “read lips” and “express” are just as direct and their use inclusive in the work. These words came from my direct inquiry with deaf people. Along with written text that also came from deaf respondents. These words were part of their answers to the question “what would you say to the hearing?”–to demonstrate that as a people, with its own culture, they were once bound, but are no longer. Yet, had I not mentioned the word in class, the only people who would have noticed it would be those who speak ASL and they would understand the context. For those who do not understand the context, the art would be the beginning of the dialogue. Sometimes we are all “stuck” with the words we use. I would like to note, from my experience, that in Deaf Culture, there is no delaying or avoiding talking about something difficult or unpleasant, no “beating around the bush” or discussing a matter without coming to the point–they are a direct people. The art shares this direct point of view and is inclusive in the cultural fact of being direct.
In the responses from the interpreter were the words to the deaf: “patient, hearing, communicate, coordinated, straight forward, sociable, clear, inclusion” and many of these words will be in the last two panels. Again, the words describe and show the perception and reality that the deaf are no longer bound. They have so many choices today to communicate and share personally and professionally.
Angela Voice, 1–her second piece will be done, in a bit. All the paintings will hang out vertically as a set. Each set of 2 paintings hangs in pairs.
Each panel is part of the series “Skin, Hair, Water and Earth” a collection of 50 watercolors. Each painting is $850, USD.
Imagine a whole collection of art made by deaf students with their hands, saying all the words they want to say–drawings, photos, and/or paintings. I would love to lead such a project! By displaying works of art that celebrate friendship, family, and future, communities can take a stand to stop social and class divisions. In addition, having art with signs within displayed in the Penn State Health Hershey says that this space, this hospital, is a space for ALL people…not just hearing people. The display (or possible display of the art) is in itself an act of inclusion.
ABOVE: Painting 5 in process–Angela B’s thoughts to the Hearing. the two paintings will be completed in reds and oranges–to compliment the blues greens and violets of the first 4 paintings as suggested by De Boer and Blyler.
I was once bound by my own lack of knowledge. But today I am not. I work to bring accessibility to all though my professional practices as an artist, activist and teacher.
As of 5 December one can see the final artist statement on my website, click on:
The Elephantworks Studio
Join me.
Learn about Deaf Culture and American Sign Language.
DesGeorges, J. (2016). Avoiding Assumptions: Communication Decisions Made by Hearing Parents of Deaf Children AMA Journal of Ethics. vol.18(4):442-446. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.sect1-1604.
Napoli DJ, Mellon NK, Niparko JK, et al. (2015). Should all deaf children learn sign language? Pediatrics. vol.136(1):170-176.
Schertz, B. & Lane H., (2000). Elements of a culture: Visions by deaf artists. Visual Anthropology Review. Vol. 15 (2). 20-36.
Sparrow R. Defending Deaf culture: the case of cochlear implants. J Polit Philos. 2005;13(2):135-152.
Wexler, A. (2018). #BLACKLIVESMATTER: Access and equity in the arts and education.
Witteborg, J.G. (2014). Raising the Stakes of Human Diversity: Deaf Gain and the creative arts: interviews with Deaf artists. (Minneapolis, MN). University of Minnesota Press.