All The Young Dudes

Music & Sign Singing

June 9th, 2008 | 7 Comments | Posted in Artz, Music, Performing Arts, Sign Language

I love music. I am song and dance man, not so much a fan of instrumentals. As is the lot of Deafies and deafies, some of us may well be able to speak, but when it comes to singing, we probably sound like Pierre and his choir of felines in heat.

Still, there is sign singing, which art form in itself. The point of this post is not to analyse the artistry, creativity and techniques of sign singing, but to ask the question, why do Deafies congregate around the crappiest pop songs?

I’m listening to music now, and reading the lyrics at the same time [I always do], and that question cropped up again. I really love good lyrics. I love songs that play on many levels. I love poetic and literate lyrics. Sure, every now and then I give in to my baser instincts and listen to crass, commercial pop.

What prompted this question? My experiences in sign singing always seem to involve vomit inducing song choices [not saying what, but GOD knows!], revolving around themes of love, overcoming adversity, and emotions; or when used for marketing/ PR purposes, “Money, ****ing, Money!” I’ve had the pleasure of an interpreter who sign sung, Foxy Lady by Jimi Hendrix and Piece of My Heart by Janis Joplin for me, so all is not lost.

I do wonder if here are any Deafies out there who are translating stuff like:

Ways To Be Wicked [Lone Justice]

Yeah I can take a little pain
I could hold it pretty well
I can watch
your little eyes light up
When you’re walkin’ me through hell
Well I’ve
been your fool before, babe
And I probably will again
You ain’t afraid
to let me have it
You ain’t afraid to stick it in

Yeah you know so
many ways to be wicked
But you don’t know one little thing about love

Yeah those cobra eyes
Light with a smile
You take pride
In
that devil down inside

And G.O.D’s own favourite song [in fact, her theme song]:

Devil Gate Drive [Suzi Quatro]

When they reach their teens, that’s when they all get mean
Down in Devil Gate Drive
When I was sweet sixteen I was the jukebox queen
Down in Devil Gate Drive
I lead the angel pack on the road to sin
Knock down the gates!
Let me in. Let me in
Don’t mess me ’round, cause you know where I’ve been
To ‘The Dive’ down in Devil Gate Drive

So come alive. Come alive
Down in Devil Gate Drive
So come alive. Come alive
Down in Devil Gate…down in Devil Gate
Down in Devil Gate Drive
Down in Devil Gate…down in Devil Gate
Down in Devil Gate Drive

I do wonder too, if any Deafie has sign sung The Rocky Horror Picture Show.This would be one hell of a show done in sign. As Rocky Horror is a homage to all the B Grade Sci-Fi movies of the mid 20 Century, with its satire on boy meets girls, and good vs evil. Though, the major challenge lays in its references to movies, singers, actors, and movie plots. I do prefer the Australian Cast recording with Reg Livermore.

Why don’t you stay for the night (night)
Or maybe a bite (bite)
I could show you my favourite obsession
I’ve been making a man
With blond hair and a tan
And he’s good for relieving my . . . tension

Well I was walking down the street just a having a think
When a snake of a
guy gave me an evil wink
He shook-a me up, he took me by surprise
He had a pick-up truck and the devil’s eyes
He
stared at me and I felt a change
Time meant nothing, never would again

Another show that would be great translated into sign, would be Return To The Forbidden Planet, a show I have seen when I was living in the UK nearly 10 years ago.

Yes! I am a rebel, and I do love my freedom and thumbing my nose at society songs! Meanwhile you can watch someone who has brought sexy into sign singing, Zombie Coterie!

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part Three

January 14th, 2008 | No Comments | Posted in Communication, Culture, History, Identity, Personal Development, Politics, Sign Language, Tales Of The Deafhood

As I wrote in the post, Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part Two,setting the agenda for debate is major theme in chapter two of Paddy Ladd’s Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood, and is a question that is overlooked in the debates that rent the Deaf and deaf communities. Not only are we so conditioned to think in terms of “it is us who are lacking” and that many of us don’t ever question this conditioning, the terms of reference are so narrow, and deliberately so, that we never consider the questions of class, age, race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality. We are defined purely by our “hearing loss/ impairment”, and any other issue is deemed irrelevant.

But Deafies as a minority group are not immune to influences from the dominant culture. More to the point, we are the product of that culture, and class, race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality affects not only how we live our lives as “hearing impaired” people, but also how we define ourselves as Deaf people and the kind of culture we are create. More pertinently, the oppression that results from class, age, race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality, adds to the oppression we receive as Deaf/deafies [this is a post for another time].

As it stands, there are many who dismiss the Deaf Identity and Deaf Culture under the patronising guises of people who HAPPEN to be Deaf, freedom of choice in communication methods, we are all the same whatever our hearing loss, we all should share the same goals because we all have a hearing loss, and so on. This attitude is further reflected in how funding is targetted, which further influences the types of projects that are created to secure this funding.

This can be best exemplified in the numerous projects that target YOUNG people. In one fell swoop, paying no regard to those of us who are not young, and further compounding the disadvantages that older Deaf people have experienced in their lives.

The differences of class, age, race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality are keenly felt, but they either are dismissed as irrelevant to deafness, or dealt with in a superficial manner, in a manner akin to the patronising we are all equal, let’s put all over differences aside and get along now shall we! This has the added affect of stifling honest debate.

Which brings us to the question, in the success or failure of various projects and initiatives targetting the Deaf and deaf communities, what the terms of reference when analysing these successes or failures. Particularly the failures? Are issues of class, age, race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality factored in when giving and receiving feedback?

When discussing and researching deafness the question of sexuality.This is the driving force behind the survey I wrote about in Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities: Deaf Gays And Lesbians. While the survey itself is specific and targetted at Deaf Gays and Lesbians, we have been encouraging our Deaf heterosexual, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters to participate in this survey, as it was recognised that deafness has ramifications on all Deaf and deaf people and how they learn about their bodies and their sexuality, and how they access this information, and whether this information is created and made available.

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part Two

December 27th, 2007 | 2 Comments | Posted in Communication, Culture, History, Identity, Personal Development, Politics, Sign Language, Tales Of The Deafhood

As many [or some] of us are aware, The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, is currently a hot topic. Fueled by heated rhetoric, many blog posts, articles, forum entries and emails are currently discussing the issue, but they all share a glaring incongruity between what the The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill is actually about and what people are actually responding to. Emotionally charged and polarised responses, that are ignorant of the bill and the source material.

An exquisite irony that is lost on the hearing [and Deaf and deaf] respondees [it should be respondents, but respondees sounds rather apt].

Inspite of their access to information and explanations regarding the Deaf response to the The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, via the STOP EUGENICS campaign, the editors of the [Sunday] Times Online CHOSE to frame the article in terms of Designer Baby Chic! The whole concept is encapsulated in the title of the article, Deaf Demand Right To Designer Deaf Children.This had the effect of inflaming rather than encouraging debate. It created a spectacle whereby blog readers, forum attendees, email posters, and commentators were responding the terrifying image of mutilated children and selfish Deaf people, conjured up by the words: Deaf Demand Right To Designer Deaf Children, so much so that the rest of the article, let alone the actual Bill and other source material, is irrelevant .

I have already posted an analysis,and my concern here is the issue of who sets the agenda when discussing Deaf and deaf issues, and the terms of the debate thus laid out. Setting the agenda for debate is major theme in chapter two of Paddy Ladd’s Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood, and is a question that is overlooked in the debates that rent the Deaf and deaf communities. We are so conditioned to think in terms of “it is us who are lacking” and this process is encouraged, that many of us don’t ever question this conditioning.

This process is so ingrained in many Deaf and deaf, that they can often [sometimes?] be found on the same side as uninformed hearing people when engaged in debates such the The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill: follow the links in the Media Watch: Hearing People Still Don’t Get It! Part Two, particularly the FARK thread. Also of note, is the stubbornness of a poster in the Engineering Deaf Babies For Deaf Couples US and Britain Debate The Selection Of Deaf Embryos and Adopted Childrenblog post.

But the more pertinent point is the unwillingness to question the mainstream accepted assumptions of disability, Deafness, language and culture [which goes along way to explaining the many conundrums that populate discourse - dialogue, debate - between people].

With regards to The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, the terms of the debate has been set by an article written by a hearing person, and published in a hearing newspaper and website, encapsulated in the words, “Deaf Demand Right To Designer Deaf Children”. The ensuing debate has been hijacked by hearing people whose understanding of disability and disability issues is uninformed and ignorant. Many of the respondees [lovely word] are vehemently reluctant to entertain any other ways of looking at the disability issue other than the “something is missing or not working” variety. This is not helped by popular media who abdicate their responsibility to INFORM, and engage in sensationalism and spreading FUD [Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt]

Which makes engaging with Hearing world all the more problematic. Many people’s favourite pastime is to blame the Deaf person for the ill effects of living under the yoke of Hearing assumptions. Further blame is apportioned to Deaf people for the failure of any attempts to engage with the Hearing world. All this ignores completely [turns a blind eye to] the Hearing world’s own culpability in the process. A culpability that is willful.

As it stands, current debate in the Deaf and deaf worlds [and indeed between them] is so fragmented. Emotionally charged and polarised and intellectually lazy. A reflection of our mainstream culture. Which is a Hearing one.

There is blame [and accountability], but that is an issue for another time and another post. There is one more post discussing the major themes in chapter two of Paddy’s book, which I hope will shed further light in understanding Deaf Culture.

Meanwhile,

If I say “Woof!”
They say, “Speak English.”
To which I reply, “Exactly!”

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part One

December 22nd, 2007 | 1 Comment | Posted in Communication, Culture, History, Identity, Personal Development, Politics, Sign Language, Tales Of The Deafhood

Ever since that pivotal moment when I decided to learn sign language, little did I know the direction that the road was going to take, or what the scenery was going to look like. Or, that there were going to be some significant moments. One of which was being on the sub committee that wanted to promote a positive image of Deafness that led to the establishment of Deaf Pride Week [which has morphed into, or was replaced the National Week of Deaf People].Though I was put out when not everyone wanted to go down the same road as me.

As it happens, the next step in my journey was when started my first job, with the Australian Taxation Office. I was put in the same section as another Deaf guy. And wouldn’t you know it, it turns out he knew my Deaf brother. Same school and all. And I do remember my first words to him. “Do you lipread”? I asked. He replied in the affirmative. But it as good a moment as any, and I asked him at some point if he would teach me to sign. He was very good to me.

From there began my education in earnest.

The biggest lessons learned, was that not everyone with a “hearing impairment” thought the same. Which further introduced me tot he tensions between those who defined themselves as “disabled” and continue to do so, and those who define themselves

As Deafies, we are all familiar with labels. Many of them invite vicious disagreement as to what they actually mean. It must be understood that the term DEAFHOOD, is not prescriptive in its definition. Paddy has offered up the term as a starting point with which we DEAFIES and deafies can use to explore how WE see ourselves and OUR place in the world. More to the point, how we can derive at a definition of ourselves that does not rely on [without resorting to] Hearing people or the Hearing view of deafness, for us to measure ourselves against. This is not to say that Deaf or deaf should segregate themselves from the Hearing world or that ghettoism is wrong or that bridging the Deaf and Hearing world divide is impossible.

It is saying that, we Deafies and defaies need the same to have our own dialogue about who we are, what we are, what we hope to be, and as it is our Deafness [deafness] it should be our definiton of self that determines who and what we are. Not the Hearing world’s.

Paddy does offer hope that the Deaf and the Hearing worlds can build bridges. He has also said that inspite of the prevailing negative views of Deafness, there are positive moves from the hearing world towards interaction with Deaf, and in CULTURAL terms! A much more positive response than the ruling hegemony [the dominant thinking] would have you believe.

For all the debates we have, and the dismissal of Deaf culture, culture is summat people do understand and is something they readily respond to. This point was rammed home, at the last few times I presented Deaf awareness training. Using the social model had far more impact than the mere medical model.

As hard as life is, and as difficult as things get with being Deaf, I refuse to define myself as disabled. And so do many others! Unfortunately, many Hearing people and indeed, deaf people [the Capital D is culture man!] still see themselves as disabled.

Oralism, as Paddy points out, has had a far more devastating effect on Deaf people, than the debate of education and communication methods would have you believe. It’s wreaked havoc on Deaf people’s esteem, their sense of self worth, and ultimately shape Deaf and deaf culture. One of its lingering effects can be witnessed in some of these debates we have. A lingering negative self image.

This negative self image, this lack of self esteem, et al, is internalised and is then expressed as anger, turmoil, hatred even, and it polarises and pits people against each other. In essence pro-signers and pro-oralists, if you like. The target, however, is often Deaf people, especially those who sign, and in the ensuing bedlam, the instigators of Oralism, the movement responsible for this mess, are conveniently forgotten.

Oralism has its supporters and it has is detractors. Where a lot of the tension arises, is where the term is defined purely as the right to speak, or the right to choose the communication method you are comfortable with, and its wider manifest [aims and objectives] ignored. This is where a lot of people get it wrong. Very wrong.

In Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search Of Deafhood,Paddy likens Deaf and deaf people, to that of a conolised [conolized, but I prefer the Australian spelling] people. This is something Harlan Lane wrote about in his book, The Mask Of Benevolence. It didn’t make sense at first, but progressive reading [AND THINKING AND RELATING BACK TO OWN EXPERIENCE] of Paddy’s book, shows how our “hearing impairment” is interpreted as a loss and a disability, and remedial action is based on assumptions about what “hearing impairment” actually is and actually does.

The ensuing Oralist melodrama has been about imposing Hearing Cultural values and ways of seeing, as much as it has been about educating using oral methods.

Reading Matter In The Meantime:

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities: Deaf Gays And Lesbians
Tales Of The Deafhood - The Epiphany
Tales Of The Deafhood - An Introduction
What is Deafhood?
Deafhood: A Process Of Self Repression
Many Tribes

Sphere: Related Content

Tales Of The Deafhood - The Epiphany

December 4th, 2007 | 2 Comments | Posted in Culture, History, Identity, Personal Development, Politics, Reading, Viewing, Listening, Research, Sign Language, Stories, Tales Of The Deafhood, Words, Writing

Before I commence the next chapter in the on going series, Tales Of The DeafHood, I would like to present you with a word that keeps cropping up, at various points in my life. More so, since beginning the work of self awareness that took me through counselling, reading, courses, workshops, social events, much angst, before finally culminating in the pinnacle of great self esteem, that I decided that I would work my way through the spunks that made up the sign language class that I was dragged along to, at The Fox, in the backstreets of Birmingham [yes, THE UK, NOT the USA] Sorry Liam, that is a story for another time, maybe when I’m drunk. Incidentally, this is where I met my X [and that too is a story for another time! Right Alison? And our friendship is yet another story. When do the laughs begin I hear you ask?].

Anyway, the word is EPIPHANY. The meaning as I have come to understand it, is as follows:

1. Epiphany

a. A sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something.
A comprehension or perception of reality by means of a sudden intuitive realization: “I experienced an epiphany, a spiritual flash that would change the way I viewed myself” (Frank Maier).

2. Epiphany

A revelatory manifestation of a divine being.

3. Epiphany

A sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something.
A comprehension or perception of reality by means of a sudden intuitive realization: “I experienced an epiphany, a spiritual flash that would change the way I viewed myself” (Frank Maier).

Unlike Deafies who were born into Deaf families, or went to [or grew up in] Deaf [boarding] schools. My path took a different route. I was assessed as not needing support of any kind, and as a result, I was placed into a hearing school, which was the mainstay of my education all the way up to college.

At it was at college, that my first epiphany occurred. For years I had been labouring under the misapprehension that I was disabled. That I couldn’t do anything like normal people could, and that I was an object to be pitied. Never mind the logic of the situation, the fact was I thought like a victim. And ironically enough, it was this thinking that led me onto the path to salvation and redemption. My intention was to carve out an alternative niche, if I couldn’t participate in the hearing world.

The source of the epiphany was the film, AND YOUR NAME IS JONAH, and if my memory serves me right, that film was also my first introduction to sign language [though I do have a hazy recollection of having a white card, with the Auslan Alphabet prior this].

As I near the end of chapter one, Deaf Communities, in Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search Of Deafhood,the memories come flooding back. The ignorance, the misunderstandings, the lack of understanding, the confusion, the learning, networking, friends, the faux pas, and ultimately self awareness.

Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search Of Deafhood, shares much in common with Harlan Lane’s, The Mask Of Benevolence, but it goes further in underscoring, just how big an effect, oralism had on the Deaf community. It’s influence went way beyond the bickering over communication methods, a red herring of an argument, which is the right to choose the communication method you are most comfortable with. When I first encountered this argument over 10 year ago, on my second trip to the UK, I could see it for the bullshit it was. It raised more questions than it answered, and gave people a convenient excuse to avoid answering the hard questions raised by the wreckage of Deaf education and Deaf people’s lives.

And that is where I will leave you my dear friends, in anticipation of the next installment in, Tales Of The DeafHood!

Reading Matter In The Meantime:

Tales Of The Deafhood - An Introduction
What is Deafhood?
Deafhood: A Process Of Self Repression
Many Tribes

Sphere: Related Content

Music & Sign Singing

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part Three

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part Two

Tales Of The Deafhood - Deaf Communities Part One

Tales Of The Deafhood - The Epiphany

Recent Post

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Archives

Meta

Recent Posts

Meta