In their thesis “The Importance of Deaf Representation In Animated Media” Sharafina binti Teh Sharifuddin, Vimala a/p Perumal and Hushinaidi bin Abdul Hamid (2023)argue that “the representation of disabled people, specifically deafness, is still a work in progress.” Their study aimed to show how d/Deaf representation in animation films can educate society, especially children, who are the majority of animation films’ target market. In this way, the authors posit that stereotypes and myths can be quelled and addressed in a quiet, soft way and lay the foundation for compassion and understanding. Their view is that early exposure to educational content on sign language and the lives of d/Deaf people can equip young children with knowledge about the d/Deaf community and encourage them to be more accepting and empathetic towards individuals with disabilities.
Their main argument is that d/Deaf representation on the screen has improved drastically since Marlee Matlin became the first Deaf actor to win an Academy Award in 1989. But in Malaysia, there are still stereotypes and inaccuracies with regards to d/Deaf characters on the screen. They argue that persons with disabilities are still largely overlooked in mainstream media, and that “for the deaf community itself, seeing themselves being represented in a positive light in animated media brings a huge benefit to their confidence within a society where most people are not disabled.” The method of study that was used was mainly a qualitative one. The authors researched journal articles, as well as the effect that animation films had on Japanese and United States audiences. A historical study of minority representations in film was done, specifically deaf representation in animation, which was done through content analysis. Malaysian animated films from 2013 to 2023 were reviewed through the lens of disability representation.
The findings of the study are that Japan and the United States have produced the highest number of animation films in recent years and that they need to showcase more persons with disabilities. In this way, the future of d/Deaf representation in Malaysia’s animation industry holds promise for showcasing the country’s diverse population. Of the twelve Malaysian animation films that were released between 2013 and 2023, only two films had some form of disability representation in them. A compilation of statistics was done by the National Research Group in 2022, which showed the percentage of minority representations in Hollywood films. Black minorities were represented onscreen as high as 76%, but d/Deafness only at 5%.
The authors also note that it’s important to remember that, when using sign language in animation films, sign language itself is a diverse language. Filmmakers need to acknowledge the cultural context of the story’s setting in addition to ensuring the accuracy of the sign language, as sign language varies by country. They conclude that “Deaf representations in animation can be an important step to making society a better place of understanding and tolerance of those who are deaf to include in mainstream media.” So, the authors say, exposing young children to persons with disabilities in animated films can help educate and influence them in a positive, healthy way.
This study considers children as the main target of animation films, excluding adult audiences, underplaying the fact that children are but just a certain percentage of film viewers. Also, the study did not entail findings of the responses of actual d/Deaf audiences. This is an aspect which my study will focus on. I won’t focus just on hearing audiences, but d/Deaf audiences as well, and that in the South African context. By exploring a broader spectrum of films representing d/Deafness, I hope that my study will highlight the possibilities of a positive representation of d/Deaf characters, adding a diversity of disabilities to South African films as well.
In Miriam Nathan Lerner’s article, “Narrative Function of Deafness and Deaf Characters in Film”, d/Deaf stereotypes are explored. (M/C Journal, 2010). Her study aimed to show that “films with deaf characters often do not focus on the condition of deafness at all.” The author believes that films tend to use d/Deafness to support a specific storyline and/or hearing characters. She also states that films are an educational platform used to teach the hearing audiences on what deafness really entails, but that it is often misrepresented. Her main argument is that “films shape and reflect cultural attitudes.” Because d/Deafness is rare and not part of the majority, hearing persons can easily be taught in an inaccurate way of what d/Deafness is all about.
Lerner herself is a sign language interpreter, and she watched forty-six films that had d/Deaf characters and/or elements in it. Through a comparative analysis of those films, she discovered quite a few harmful classifications that the d/Deaf characters have been subjected to on the screen. Her findings includes but is not limited to: d/Deafness used as a plot device, where the comic aspects of d/Deafness may be deemed politically incorrect in this day and age; d/Deaf characters created merely to support the hearing protagonists, where “the deaf character may be fascinating in his or her own right, but generally the deafness is a marginal point of interest”; sign language used as a plot device to save the day; the relationship between d/Deaf and hearing characters, where “it may be tempting to assume that growing up deaf or having any kind of relationship with a deaf individual may not pose too much of a challenge”; a normal man/woman who happens to be deaf, where deafness is not the main story; a storyline where a person suddenly becomes deaf due to intense trauma, which is an incredibly rare occurrence; d/Deafness viewed as complete silence, which is inaccurate due to a wide spectrum of hearing losses; d/Deafness as a mere symbolic commentary on society; and sign language used as a clever way to interpret what a hearing actor can’t or won’t say verbally. To summarize Lerner’s findings, she feels that those forty-six films’ plots revolves around “certain gimmickry, provide(s) a sense of danger, or relational tension.” She also believes that these films highlights certain repeated themes, and that sign language is used in a way that is only beneficial towards hearing characters.
The author hopes that the findings of her study will help others be more alert when it comes to d/Deaf onscreen characters, and to “formulate more theories as to where they fit in the literary/narrative schema.” She, however, does not give answers or alternatives to how d/Deafness can be accurately portrayed on the screen. She merely highlighted the problem in those films. My study shows what can be done to write accurate onscreen d/Deaf characters, through the four films that I have watched and done a comparative analysis of.
In “Power in Silence: Captions, Deafness, and the Final Girl”, a thriller film, Hush (2016), is reviewed by Gwyneth Peaty for Curtin University (2017). The film is about a d/Deaf-mute woman who uses ASL (American Sign Language) as her means of communication. The character lives into the woods to overcome her writer’s block and write a book in solitary. She then encounters a masked man who tries to kill her. Peaty’s article aimed to show through a textual analysis of the film “how the interplay between silence, text, and sound invites viewers to identify with the heroine’s experience and ultimate triumph.” The study also examines the creative ways how the protagonist’s Deafness is used as a plot device to amp up the horror, suspense and thriller elements of the film.
Peaty then compares Hush to another film focused on a disability, Wait Until Dark (1967) with Audrey Hepburn (1967). In that film, Hepburn is a blind heroine who overcomes her disability’s disadvantages to show that she is, in fact, empowered by it. Hush’s director, Mike Flanagan, co-wrote the script with Kate Siegal. They both were inspired by Wait Until Dark and drew heavy inspiration from it. Through watching Wait Until Dark, the screen would cut out to black, forcing the audience to use their listening senses to figure out the story. “Likewise, Flanagan and Siegel use silence to effectively deafen the audience at crucial moments,” writes Peaty. The audience are drawn into the Deaf heroine’s world and experiences sound the same way she does.
Peaty’s main argument is that most films usually struggles to show the audiences how they can identify with disabled characters. She believes that is not the case with Hush, and that the opposite is proven. “The audience is consistently encouraged to identify with Maddie (the protagonist)… In this way, Maddie’s disabilities are not solely represented as a space of limitation or difference, but a potential wellspring of power,” writes Peaty. Deafness is seen as gain, and not a loss. “She (Maggie) represents a holistic vision of a disabled heroine rather than an overly glorified stereotype.” The author also notes that this film challenges the stereotype that persons with disabilities have been subjected to in previous films. It forces hearing audiences to identify with the world of d/Deafness. “Maddie is a powerful survivor who shifts between weak and strong, frightened and fierce, but also between disabled and able,” writes Peaty.
The author’s findings are that that Hush is a film that future filmmakers should take note of, and learn from. Hush is groundbreaking in the sense that most horror films do not break the boundaries and push stereotypes, but this film does just that – and it also quells the misconception that deafness is just a plot device.
What this article did not entail, is the fact that other genres of films with d/Deaf characters were not explored. It only explored one film, and it is not sufficient enough for filmmakers to use in their research when writing d/Deaf characters for the screen. My thesis study covers this where comedy, drama and action films are concerned.
In “Film: Deaf Characters”, the different stereotypes and inaccurate portrayals that d/Deaf characters have been subjected to are explored by Miriam Nathan Lerner and Edna Edith Sayers. With a focus on American and foreign films, the authors aimed to show through their study that certain specific films have no understanding or grasp of d/Deaf persons and/or Deaf communities. This results in a flawed and inauthentic creation of d/Deaf characters for the screen. The authors also believe that casting d/Deaf actors to play the d/Deaf characters is not a perfect solution, for “Deaf actors can portray authentic use of a sign language but are often limited by the script, the director, and the editing process.”
This study aimed to show through a comparative analysis of certain films, that they lacked the proper research and background study of the d/Deaf characters. A thorough viewing was done by the authors on biographical films that have Deaf actors as main characters in films. “Other than these movies based on true stories, only a few films have a main character who is deaf.” However, the film Children of a lesser god (1986) was not biographical and had a Deaf main character, and was based on the Deaf community and a Deaf school. But through this film, Deaf communities were shunned when it came to camera angles and editing. “In many films, however, the only function of the deaf character is to give the audience context for the main (hearing) character,” argues the authors. Also, it is also argued in this study that older thriller films often had Deaf characters in peril, and also used to use Deafness as a punchline and/or a joke. Quite a few films had Deaf characters as minor characters who just happened to be Deaf. The authors also argue that certain films uses Deafness as a metaphor when it comes to the powerlessness and vulnerability of a certain specific social group or culture, such as in the case of the Chinese during the Communist Revolution, the siege of Sarajevo, and the French Revolution. Another problem that the authors addressed were the use of d/Deafness as a trauma response or consequence. It creates a problem in the way that “these roles allow deaf characters to speak clearly and require hearing actors.” Deafness is also used as a heightened sensory ability in some films.
The paper concludes with the positive findings that several other films explore the theme of isolation in an accurate way when it comes to Deafness. “Sign (language) is wrongly seen as more immediate, more intimate, and the(se) films show that this is not the case—the deaf characters are like everyone else in having trouble really getting through to others,” the authors note. “Authenticity is subject to the overall goals of a film’s writers and director.”
Even though is journal article covers vital points found in various films, my thesis goes even further and covers even more topics and themes found in other films.
Soledad Zárate wrote a chapter, “Who Is Our Audience?” in the book “Captioning and Subtitling for d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing Audiences”. (UCL Press, 2021). The author’s study focuses on the importance of remembering d/Deaf and hard of hearing audiences when it comes to captioning and subtitling. The author argues that it’s important to remember that the d/Deaf and hard of hearing people are a diverse and complex group. The Deaf community with a capital “D” is addressed here, as well as the fact that the Deaf doesn’t consider their hearing loss a disability at all. This results in conflict where hearing aids and cochlear implants are concerned, as not all d/Deaf persons wants to use those forms of aids. When creating d/Deaf characters for the screen, it is also important to grasp that not all d/Deaf persons uses sign language as means of communication, and not all d/Deaf persons can lipread and/or speak with their audible voices. Deafness is also “measured by determining the loudness of the quietest sound heard, using decibels (dB),” according to the author.
The author also shows that the ear is a complex part of the body. It is divided into three parts: “the external or outer ear (pinna and ear canal), the middle ear (eardrum, hammer, anvil and stirrup) and the inner ear (cochlea, organs of balance and auditory nerve).” The causes, types and degrees of deafness are also addressed in this chapter. The degrees of deafness and what it means are also listed, which range from mild to profound. Hearing aid devices are listed, among them hearing aids and cochlear implant devices – which have become increasingly controversial over the last few years. In the case of cochlear implants, it is not a miracle cure, but instead, parents need to understand the “long-term intensive training, supported by speech therapists” that follows after the operation. In the United Kingdom, 78% of d/Deaf children go to mainstream schools, while only a small percentage (3%) go to Deaf schools. Also, 67% of severely and profoundly d/Deaf children use spoken language as their first means of communication, while only 7% use sign language as their means of communication.
This study’s findings show just how diverse and complex the d/Deaf person is. It is not a one-size-fits-all box; there are layers and degrees to it. When creating d/Deaf characters for the screen, it’s important to keep these research results in mind. As for my own results, through comparing those four films, I kept in mind all these vital points.
John S. Schuchman wrote a journal article titled, “The Silent Film Era: Silent Films, NAD Films, and the Deaf Community’s Response”, in which his study aimed to highlight the connection between silent films and the Deaf community. He believes that access is of high importance in this day and age we are living in, as well as human rights. He also addresses the fact that it is every person’s right – the d/Deaf person’s right included – to have access to all information and data. “Older citizens who are deaf or hard of hearing recall the years of silent films (1893-1929) as a ‘‘golden era’’ in the cultural history of the American Deaf community,” states the author. It was a time when the average d/Deaf person had equal access to the movie theaters. The author also notes that it was a time when there was no need for sign language or lip-reading interpreters, subtitles, louder sound systems, or hearing aids. Unfortunately, when the breakthrough invention of “the talkies” was established, the days of free access and equality were suddenly over.
The author highlights a dark time in American history when there was a campaign against ASL (American Sign Language). “So-called oralists demeaned the use of sign language and in some instances supported legislation that banned its use in schools for deaf students,” the author argues. This resulted in the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) being established in 1880. A strong advocate for sign language, this organization produced a series of films for the d/Deaf audience. It included poetry, lectures, memories, and stories, all told in ASL. This also resulted in amateur films being made by Deaf filmmakers. The author also argues that deaf persons are natural actors because of the way they use their facial expressions and body language. In fact, “during the silent-film era, a few deaf actors performed in various commercial films.” Because there was no need for the actors to use their audible voices, Deaf actors had a place in silent films.
Ever since the Silent Era, Deaf actors have been hard at work in making films accessible to Deaf filmmakers and deaf audiences. “The use of captions, the continued training of deaf actors, and the creation of sign language films” are but a few ways the Deaf filmmakers are taking a pro-stance. Captions – or subtitles – only came in later due to a lack of funding from the government. “Today most major film producers caption their works voluntarily… nationally it is still true that most deaf people cannot routinely go to the movies and expect to see captioned films,” the author notes. Instead, deaf persons chooses to buy the DVDs instead and watch the films at home. The Deaf community also feels that hearing actors can’t accurately portray their culture. “Most portrayals of deaf characters by hearing actors tended to be wooden in their use of body language and facial expressions. Their use of sign language was often abysmal…” the author remarks.
The author’s findings is that television networks were the first to give Deaf actors a foothold into the industry; the film world only caught up much later after Marlee Matlin won the Best Actress Award in 1986. The author feels hopeful where today’s film and television industry is concerned, as “today, the overwhelming majority of deaf characters that appear in films and television are played by deaf actors, enabling hearing audiences to see a wide variety of sign language usage, including ASL.” Because of the use of closed-captioning, television programs are now widely available towards Deaf persons, “access to movies in theaters continues to be limited.” The author concludes on a hopeful note and states that the film industry have come a long way where Deaf characters and Deaf accessibility is concerned. “Much of the credit for these changes cannot be given to the film industry itself—which has fought change consistently and vigorously—but goes instead to deaf people who understood the importance and value of equal access to entertainment and who explored and created alternatives in the wake of the demise of silent films,” the author writes.
Through my comparative analysis of the four films, I took note of where real-life Deaf actors were used, or whether it was hearing actors. I did the same with accessibility towards Deaf audiences – where was the camera angle? Were there subtitles available? Did they use any methods of sign language and/or other means of communication?
To summarize this chapter, these are the recurring themes I have found in these literature reviews: previously, onscreen d/Deaf characters have been subjected to stereotypes and myths. Filmmakers need to expose and address the inaccuracies so that the audiences can be properly equipped. As for sign language in film, it is vital to keep in mind that each country has its sign language and that its signs differ from each other. There is no universal sign language that everyone understands. Deafness is also often used as a plot device and it is harmful towards the Deaf community. It is also important to keep in mind the difference between the deaf and/or hard of hearing community, and the Deaf community. Authenticity is also of utmost importance when creating onscreen d/Deaf characters, for d/Deaf persons are diverse and complex human beings. Simply casting d/Deaf actors to play d/Deaf roles is not the only and final solution, for careful research has to be done in advance. Filmmakers need to do their proper research before creating onscreen d/Deaf characters.
I also picked up on the following trends and patterns: d/Deaf representation on the screen has improved drastically in recent years, and more and more films are starting to showcase more persons with disabilities. Films are also starting to show that d/Deaf characters’ hearing disadvantages are, in fact, empowerment. Audiences are also starting to identify with d/Deaf characters, for the only thing they can’t do is hear. Deafness is finally being seen as “gain”, and not a “loss”. These approaches have become more and more popular in recent years.
The gaps I have noticed are as follows: it is d/Deaf actors and filmmakers who are making a stand and speaking out to the inaccuracies and stereotypes that d/Deaf characters and storylines have been subjected to. It is time for hearing filmmakers to also become advocates for d/Deaf persons. Captions and subtitles also need to be addressed when it comes to movie theatres. Access is important, and d/Deaf persons should also be included in the discussion. What is also missing, is that more d/Deaf actors should be cast in films, as well as d/Deaf filmmakers should be given the space to create as well.