Deaf in the Story – Visual Stories of an Invisible People

Every person has a life story. We all have a story to tell – in fact a lot of stories – about our lives.

Each of us is also a part of many other people’s life stories. And it’s important for us to share these stories, so that we know where we fit into each other’s life stories.

Deaf people are part of the story of hearing people; and hearing people are part of the story of Deaf people. Deaf people are only too aware of this. But hearing people are often unaware of the Deaf people who live around them, or about their life stories.

Most of the big decisions in society are made by hearing people, who don’t know anything about the stories of Deaf people. So, often they make decisions that affect Deaf people, without any understanding of the impacts they can have on our lives.

That’s why BSL:UPTAKE and Heriot-Watt University worked with many partners to stage a special day of British Sign Language storytelling at the Scottish Storytelling Centre in Edinburgh on Saturday 5 November 2011 – ‘Deaf in the Story: Visual Stories of an Invisible People’. Funding for this came from Edinburgh Beltane – Beacon for Public Engagement.

Our partners included organisations from the Deaf world – Deaf History Scotland, Deaf Action, Scottish Council on Deafness, Donaldson’s School, and others – all part of the rich history of the Deaf community in Scotland. They all have stories to tell that can help the rest of society understand the Deaf community better.

But Deaf people are also part of the wider history and culture of Scotland, just as British Sign Language – BSL – is one of the many languages of Scotland. The more we know about and respect each other’s languages, the better we’ll understand each other’s stories – and the different kinds of lives we all lead.

So we worked with the Scottish Storytelling Centre, who appointed the first BSL storyteller in Scotland, Mark MacQueen; and the School of Scottish Studies Archives at Edinburgh University, to translate some of the marvellous Scottish stories in their collections into BSL. Some of these are being made available online for everybody to enjoy, on the BSL:UPTAKE website and elsewhere. Search online for the websites of all our partners to find out more about the wonderful stories they have to offer.

We hope these will give you some ideas as well, about the stories you too have to tell, whether in BSL, Scots, Gaelic, English – or whatever language comes most naturally to you.

The Old Woman Who Sold Her Soul To The Devil

A traditional joke/story by Stanley Robertson

With thanks to Tocher,

The School of Scottish Studies Archives,

University of Edinburgh

There was this old spinster an she was aafa crabbit an she bade by hersel. And she never hed nae friends and the only thing she hed wis this big black cat. Oh, an this big black cat wis aa wey wi her, ye ken. And the folk in the toon aa thocht she wis a witch because she was that uncivil to the folk, and, och, she wisnae worth nothin really.

But the Devil came til her one day. “Ye know,” he says, “you’re wastin your time here,” he says. “You’d be better comin with me an let me give ye some wishes,” he says, “because your life’s so dull, you’ve did nothin.”

She says, “I know,” she says, “but people’s made me like this. It’s just the way I am,” she says. “I don’t have a husband, I don’t have good looks, and nobody likes me, an,” she says, it’s just the way I am,” she says. “I’ve naething to be happy about.”

So the Devil says til her, “Well,” he says, “if ye sell yir soul tae me, A’ll give ye three wishes. Three wishes and ye could have plenty of friends to ­”

She says, “I don’t want friends. I’ve never liked friends. I don’t want to make friends with anybody,” she says, “but A’ll take the three wishes an A’ll make the bargain wi ye.”

So she maks this bargain wi the Devil. Fan her time comes she’ll go to Hell wi him… but she would have a long, long life in Earth. An she says, “”I’d” – she wouldnae be disturbed by naebody, ye ken, she’d hev peace an quietness.

So he says, “I’m goin to give ye yir three wishes.” He says, “Now what are they?”

She says, “Well, firstly,” she says, “I want to be young an beautiful. I want to be the beautifullest creature ‘at’s  walked the face of the Earth.”

So she gets made intil this lovely creature. She looks in the mirror an oh, she’s jist a pure Marilyn Monroe, ye ken, really beautiful. Oh, ye couldna have gotten a bonnier woman.

And she says, “I want to live in a beautiful castle on a hill, everything that I need, my food, my clothes … But I don’t want no friends or ‘at,” she says. “If A got servants I dinna see them.” She jist wants to be with hersel. And she said, “I don’t want to see anybody because I don’t like people. An I want just tae be on… ken, without anybody ‘at I don’t like,” . . . she says.

The Devil says, “But A thought you’d have liked a man.”

She says, “Oh, yes,” she says, “I want a man. Yes, I do want a man, she says, “but my man – I want ma big Tom (the cat). I’ve aye loved my big Tom, but I want ye tae make him this handsomest young dark-haired curly-locked man.”

An ‘e Devil grants her her wish. An it was ‘se handsomest fella ‘at ever walked the earth came in.

An she says, “Oh, this is really good,” she says, ’cause the wish was… but she wants no interruptions fae outside . . .

An the Devil says, “Well, that’s your three wishes.” So … her an this handsome laddie they dine and wine, and they dance an they listen to beautiful music. An it comes fir night. An they come to make love, ye ken, in their bed. So she dresses in her most beautiful gown, she’s her expensive perfumes an she lets her hair lang. An she looks in the mirror an she says, “A’m so gorgeous.” An she looks at the lad. An the lad puts oot the light. An she says, “Oh, he’s so gorgeous. A’ve got everything an nothing could be happier!”

So she gings into the bed wi the fella and . . . She starts to cuddle an kiss him. An he says, “There’s only one thing A would like to say tae ye.”

An she says, “What’s that, darling?” she says.

“Remember the time ye took me to the vet, many years ago…?!”

(Laughs)

To listen to the audio go to: http://www.tobarandualchais.co.uk/fullrecord/65452/1

Storytelling as a Family Activity

Stanley Robertson

interviewed by Barbara McDermitt

and Virginia Blankenhorn in 1979

With thanks to Tocher,

the School of Scottish Studies Archives,

University of Edinburgh

STANLEY ROBERTSON

When we were children…When I was a child we lived in very poor circumstances. We didn’t have no wireless. There was no television in that days. We sometimes got to the pictures if we wis lucky. But normally what would happen is ma mither – ma father wis usually drunk, but where he wisnae drunk he would aye come an tell ye stories – but ma mither used to sit an tell us stories every night. An ma granda bade wi us and he wis an old, old man, an he sut an told us stories aa the time, ye ken? We aa used to sit an jist tell each ither stories ‘at we knew an heard an kent. An it wis jist a case whar yir repertoire built up aa the time – same as ma wee bairns can sit an tell ye hundreds of stories, oot o the blue, ye ken, an it used to be fun.

But the best stories wis when you were in the country: ye were maybe bidin in an aald road, like the Waa Steedins or the Aald Road o Lumphanan, where aa the traivellers used to sit in a circle -they wis jist like Indians. And the bairns jist sut very quietly, and ye listened, every word -ye jist sort o luxuriated in every word, ye ken, at wis said. An ye got some super stories.

I remember once a man telt – there wis one man, really funny – an this is a very – jist a smatterin o a story – and he startit tellin this story, he says he wis waalkin along this road. Dirty, dirty, caald night. But the moon wis high, but it wis caal an sharp wi frost. An he waalked along this lonely road. An he sort o paused. An – “Ah”, we’d say, “but – but fit happened?”  He says,”Oh naething happened – jist it wis aafy dark an caald!” (Laughter) … An even the wee smatterin o a story – can ye remember them?! An they used tae -  They didnae only tell creepy stories, though ye likit them the best, but they used to tell ye their adventures an queer happenins – an things that happened… aa this stuff…

BARBARA MCDERMITT (?)

Well, um, this was when you were camping out? Did you do most of your camping out in summertime?

STANLEY

Aye, it wis mostly – fae spring up till aboot autumn.

VIRGINIA BLANKENHORN (?)

You’d be sittin around a fire or something tellin the stories, would that be it?

STANLEY

Aye … we’d aye a huge fire wi maybe a pot o soup on it an at. It used to be good, it wis … really a good way o life, it’s a shame that, ye know it…

BARBARA (?)

I was wondering if you could remember how old you were when you first started to tell stories. Did you start when you were young?

STANLEY

Fan I first ? It’s so long ago I can’t remember. It always hes. It has always been. Because I remember once when I wis a wee laddie an I wisna at school, we wis aa campit oot at the Waa Steedins in Dess, an they were haein a sort of a ceilidh thing an ma Auntie Jeannie says to me – I wis jist gaan to school – an she says to me “Go on, sing one o yir wee songies, laddie, sing a wee nursery rhyme song.”

An she thought I wis gaan tae sing “Baa baa black sheep” or “Humpty-Dumpty”, and I started tae sing her “Bheir mi ho robhan o”. And she says, “My goodness,” she says, “how did a bairn ken a song like that?” So we wis accustomed to hearin aal-fashioned things when we wis – ye ken, we never… we never went through the wee baa baa stage, we aye seemed to be the grown-up stage, ye ken, as children.

But my sister Charlotte, she telt us a story which she composed: it was cried – I couldnae tell ye because it would take – she would’ve won – ye ken the Arabian Nights when Scheherazade telt the story an it lasted for ever an ever an ever? Ma sister Charlotte would’ve won it. She started tellin us a story, an it was on the go all my – since ever I could remember. It was cried The Kelly Dog. It wis aa this story aboot a dog lookin for a bone, a sugary bone. An it used to include aa this different adventures, but she used to mak it up every night in her bed. It lasted for fourteen years, that I ken o! An it wis a bonny story, it wis like a continuin story: every night this story went on! She used to sing songs, went through the actions, and she never – ye ken, she made it up, but it was spontaneous, an it never stopped … It was tremendous. ‘Ken, television killed that art. But in that days, because ye were so engrossed with each ither, whit they had – an we used to read – Same when we wrote poetry, ye ken. Aa my brithers an sisters could aa write poetry, though we jist used to write on bits o wallpaper an that. But we all hed ‘is creative spark within us, an every one o them could dae it.

VIRGINIA (?)

And you’d tell stories to one another, the other brothers and sisters in the family?

STANLEY

Oh aye – aye!

VIRGINIA (?)

What about the grown-ups? Would you tell stories to your own parents or other grown-up people as well?

STANLEY

Oh aye, aabody dis it, everybody took a turn in tellin. I mean to say, if my bairn’s tellin me a story, I’ll jist sit an listen, same wey as my parents would’ve listened to me if I was tellin a story. Or sometimes my father… if he wisnae drunk, he would come hame an he’d maybe start tellin us some o his stories – he had some good stories. Ma father’s tradition is so different from ma mither’s, and Burn Bonnet’s Maggie’s again is so different. A haenae even touched her material yit… Her material’s very old – cos that wis Aald Bill stories. And I have got aboot twinty tapes o Maggie in there… an A’m the only body who can decipher fit she says, cos she speaks in aald Romany style, ye ken. Lots o times A’ll tell stories an A’ll jist speak a loot o – a good lot o it in Romany, A’m speakin… tae youse A’ll jist speak in my sort o Doric tongue. If A’m tellin the bairns, A tell them it in cant! (Laughs) So – they’re good…

But it is an old tradition, an I have preserved it. It’s aye been wi us, an same it’ll be wi ma family. I could take ony o my family wi’in an they would tell ye a story, ye ken, fae the aaldest tae the youngest. An eh… Of course the Church encourages this. The Church encourages ony kind o family thing tae carry on – ken, tae carry on family traditions an aa that, because ye should preserve cultures.

To listen to the audio go to: http://www.tobarandualchais.co.uk/fullrecord/65165/1

PART II – Background to the study

In the introduction citizenship was identified as a popular and contemporary concept, albeit one which is contested and wide-ranging.  Since the downfall of communism in Eastern Europe, it has increasingly been drawn on as a concept to address social issues and social problems.  In particular, it has been applied to minority cultures, women and disabled people, but has yet to be applied to the Deaf community.  Given the significant developments in relation to research on sign languages and Deaf culture, and political actions worldwide that have achieved the recognition of sign languages by several nation states, it would seem the time is ripe to analyse the Deaf community using the concept of citizenship.  It may also be particularly apt to do so given that Deaf communities globally and Deaf people individually continue to be at a disadvantage in a world which is constantly in flux, in spite of recognition developments.  The next two chapters will identify the literature in Deaf studies and citizenship, to ascertain the extent to which the concept has been used in relation to Deaf communities.  An outline will be provided of the approach taken by the researcher in the analysis of the issue in the Deaf community.  These two chapters will therefore form the background to the study.

Chapter 2 – The Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

This is the first comprehensive study on citizenship and Deaf communities, so in that respect the work is unique; however, as indicated in the introduction, the concept of citizenship touches many disciplines.  The study being undertaken is focussed on the issue of the social exclusion of Deaf citizens within parameters set by wider society – social policy for example.  There is a general consensus that Deaf citizens do not experience equal citizenship, with organisations of Deaf people campaigning to redress this inequality (Alker, 2000; Alker & Turner, 2002).  What is less addressed is precisely how citizenship can be used as a conceptual tool to work towards a society in which Deaf citizens are not so disadvantaged in spheres of citizenship and civic participation.  The issue here is to what extent Deaf citizens experience social exclusion in comparison to hearing citizens.

The literature review assesses work in a number of areas.  Firstly, there will be a clear conceptualisation of ‘the Deaf community’ that is being referred to throughout this thesis.  The concept of what the Deaf community entails is contested in the literature, and this will be addressed.  Secondly, an outline will be given of the definition of citizenship that is used throughout this work – namely that of T.H. Marshall (1950).  This framework is a liberal one, and that factor will also be highlighted.  Once these terms have been clarified, the third part of the chapter will explore work which has directly referred to the citizenship status of Deaf people.  These are few and far between so this part will be brief.  That will contrast with the fourth part, which will investigate literature which has indirectly referred to such a status.  The field here is vast, and this will be broken down into four parts: work which relates to civil citizenship; that describing political citizenship; references to social citizenship and that relating to obligations.  The fifth and final part will explore a number of concepts that have been addressed in Deaf studies and whose relationship to citizenship will be considered within this thesis.  These include, in turn, the concept of oralism; the concept of audism; transnationalism; group rights; and finally, phonocentrism.

PART V – Conclusion of the Study

Chapter 9 – Conclusion and recommendations

9.1 Introduction

The objectives of this final chapter are to firstly address key issues in the research process, secondly to bring together and summarise the key findings of this research, and thirdly to make some suggestions and recommendations arising from the analysis.  Throughout the chapter suggestions for further research will be made.

PART IV – Implications of the Findings

An analysis of the data findings was presented and a critical discourse analysis undertaken.  Chapters 4 and 5 had shown the extent to which Deaf communities experienced social exclusion.  The concept of citizenship was demonstrated to be a highly useful and relevant framework wherein Deaf citizens, through focus groups and a Research Consultation Group could share their experiences.  In Chapter 6 the findings of research into the views of the elite stakeholders were presented. While it appeared from the data that these participants shared and understood the reality of disadvantage that Deaf people experienced in relation to hearing people, a critical discourse analysis highlighted that there were, nevertheless, fundamental power differences between the elite stakeholders and Deaf communities.  This difference was explored by means of a focus on the discourse that elite stakeholders used in relation to Deaf citizens.  Elite stakeholders appeared to be ‘outward looking’, while the emphasis of Deaf communities was ‘inward looking’.  Elite stakeholders, however, had some windows into the world of policy making, and they used discourse strategies that enabled them to operate in these worlds, namely by understanding the ways different discourses operate in the Deaf and hearing world.  Deaf citizens tended to be excluded from such worlds unless they could master these discourse strategies as well as understand the culture of the institution, so attempts to stress that the Deaf citizen could make use of structures and institutions to bring about change needed also to take account of the way discourse operates and effectively excludes Deaf people.  The focus and concentration in those chapters has been on discourse; the following chapters offer a re-evaluation the concept of citizenship in light of these interpretations.

The following two chapters will address the usefulness of citizenship as a concept in exploring the issues faced by Deaf people.  The chapters deal with theory and practice in turn.  In Chapter 7, interpretations of the text will be offered, affording insights into those Deaf citizens’ experiences that might lead to a review of the concept of citizenship.  The notion of citizenship is not abandoned but updated and ameliorated extended. By considering citizenship through a Deaf lens, that is from a Deaf perspective, alternative understandings of the concept become possible. In addition, Marshall’s concept of citizenship will be critical re-evaluated in light of this new evidence.  The use of critical discourse analysis will also be addressed.  Chapter 8 will re-examine concepts raised in the literature review, such as audism.  Education was a prominent topic in the data that was collected, and so this chapter will consider current literature on the education of deaf children and explore its implications using citizenship as a tool.  In line with critical discourse analysis practices this exploration of the issue of education will be undertaken with the power imbalance between Deaf and other citizen’s experiences in mind.

PART IV – Implications of the findings

An analysis of the data findings was presented and a critical discourse analysis undertaken.  Chapters 4 and 5 had shown the extent to which Deaf communities experienced social exclusion.  The concept of citizenship was demonstrated to be a highly useful and relevant framework wherein Deaf citizens, through focus groups and a Research Consultation Group could share their experiences.  In Chapter 6 the findings of research into the views of the elite stakeholders were presented. While it appeared from the data that these participants shared and understood the reality of disadvantage that Deaf people experienced in relation to hearing people, a critical discourse analysis highlighted that there were, nevertheless, fundamental power differences between the elite stakeholders and Deaf communities.  This difference was explored by means of a focus on the discourse that elite stakeholders used in relation to Deaf citizens.  Elite stakeholders appeared to be ‘outward looking’, while the emphasis of Deaf communities was ‘inward looking’.  Elite stakeholders, however, had some windows into the world of policy making, and they used discourse strategies that enabled them to operate in these worlds, namely by understanding the ways different discourses operate in the Deaf and hearing world.  Deaf citizens tended to be excluded from such worlds unless they could master these discourse strategies as well as understand the culture of the institution, so attempts to stress that the Deaf citizen could make use of structures and institutions to bring about change needed also to take account of the way discourse operates and effectively excludes Deaf people.  The focus and concentration in those chapters has been on discourse; the following chapters offer a re-evaluation the concept of citizenship in light of these interpretations.

The following two chapters will address the usefulness of citizenship as a concept in exploring the issues faced by Deaf people.  The chapters deal with theory and practice in turn.  In Chapter 7, interpretations of the text will be offered, affording insights into those Deaf citizens’ experiences that might lead to a review of the concept of citizenship.  The notion of citizenship is not abandoned but updated and ameliorated extended. By considering citizenship through a Deaf lens, that is from a Deaf perspective, alternative understandings of the concept become possible. In addition, Marshall’s concept of citizenship will be critical re-evaluated in light of this new evidence.  The use of critical discourse analysis will also be addressed.  Chapter 8 will re-examine concepts raised in the literature review, such as audism.  Education was a prominent topic in the data that was collected, and so this chapter will consider current literature on the education of deaf children and explore its implications using citizenship as a tool.  In line with critical discourse analysis practices this exploration of the issue of education will be undertaken with the power imbalance between Deaf and other citizen’s experiences in mind.

Chapter 4 – Analysis of focus group data

4.1 Introduction

The six focus groups comprised the core fieldwork for this research project.  The groups were set up in local communities across the UK; Deaf people coming together to discuss issues relevant to citizenship.  The research interest here is on the particular discourses that Deaf citizens used when relating their experiences and points of view.  Each particular element of citizenship, civil, political and social, was addressed here and, in line with a critical discourse analysis reading, where necessary there will be reference to the context within which the discourse was being debated and the power relations that may not have been apparent.  Included in this chapter are participants’ reflections on issues of responsibility and also their views on group rights.

Chapter 8 – Policy implications

8.1 Introduction

Having considered the implications of the research findings to theory, this chapter addresses the potential and possible impacts on social policy.  Before doing so, an outline of some of the key findings will be repeated.  The topic of education raised most concern amongst Deaf people in the focus groups; the RCG also addressed and discussed this issue.  Education is raised in detail here to indicate a) the discourses that were used, b) how it was often a polemical debate but more importantly, c) the references to citizenship that were made by all sides of the debate.  The extent of the domination of oralism will be indicated but the other main approach often referred to in the literature, sign bilingualism, will also be considered.

This chapter continues to use a critical approach; the role of those with power will be addressed and the extent of this power will become evident in the section on audism.  Additionally, and as was touched on in the previous chapter, the way in which our society is phonocentric will be explored in further depth.  The implications of these issues, however, will be explored in relation to citizenship and Deaf communities.  It is important to repeat and clarify that an exploration of these particular concepts has arisen following an analysis of the fieldwork data.  Attempts are made in this chapter to suggest areas that might be addressed in social policy.

In the previous chapter, emphasis was given to the ways in which the Deaf world interlinks with the hearing world and, although the identified differences are not downplayed, this interlinking has suggested that possible ways of addressing problems might lie in taking a holistic approach.  What this could be extrapolated to mean in practice is that the Deaf world wants their particular language and cultural mores recognised; they want policies and practices in place that enable such worlds to flourish (and not be assimilated); and they insist the responsibility for doing so should be relinquished to Deaf communities.  Co-operation between institutions of civil society and Deaf communities is suggested as the way forward to achieving this, and this chapter will explore ways in which that might be possible.  Brief mention is made of the possibility of encouraging transnational networking and group rights to further this end.

Finally in this chapter there will be an examination of the methodological approach taken in the thesis.

Chapter 5 – Two areas of major contention in the core data, the views of the Research Consultation Group (RCG), and issues of translation

5.1 Introduction

The final part of the data analysis process is two-fold.  The first section of this chapter, therefore, will provide an analysis of two spheres within the data where there were fundamental differences of opinion i.e. when participants were discussing issues related firstly to ‘social workers’, and secondly to ‘immigration’.  The second section of this chapter will then analyse the discussion meetings held by the RCG, i.e. a group of Deaf citizens who came together to reflect on the researcher’s analysis of the focus group data.

9.4.7 A special case?

Deaf communities have a number of significantly unique features.

- They are a linguistic minority group also labelled as disabled in society.

- Ninety percent of Deaf citizens have parents who are hearing.

- The Deaf community is not concentrated into a geographical nation, but occupies a variety of spaces.  The number of these spaces has increased in recent years to include regular international gatherings.

These aspects contribute to factors that leave the community vulnerable.  Such vulnerability does not suggest a desire for the paternalism that has been a feature of the past, but it does recognise that there is a need to protect the minority from the practices of the majority language and culture (in very much the same way as legislation protects and enhances the Welsh language, for example).  No other linguistic minority is labelled disabled, other disabled people do not form a language minority; and neither is there any other linguistic group in society where the vast majority of parents use a non-native language.  Whilst there might be some similarities here with Gay and Lesbian people (who may also exist in every country of the world), it is again the language issue that makes the Deaf community unique.

The case for some form of protection and enhancement is all the more urgent considering the results of these research findings.  Deaf citizens have virtually no control over policies that have a fundamental bearing on the future children of the Deaf community.  It is widely agreed that medical interventions do not cure deafness; a treated deaf child remains deaf and so there will remain a need for a Deaf community. Audism, however, is institutionally embedded in our society, and there is a need for widespread change to eradicate this.  Similarly, phonocentrism is a feature of modern citizenship. It is not that Deaf citizens need support or help because of their deafness, rather that there is a need for some form of protection to enable sign language and Deaf culture to develop and grow, and for Deaf citizens to be at the forefront of any new order.