Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale!bunker!hcap!hnews!272!94!Fran.O'gorman
From: Fran.O'gorman@f94.n272.z1.fidonet.org (Fran O'gorman)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Sign films
Message-ID: <19048@bunker.isc-br.com>
Date: 25 Apr 91 21:24:35 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.isc-br.com
Reply-To: Fran.O'gorman@f94.n272.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:272/94 - Monroe Electronic M, Monroe NY
Lines: 66
Approved: wtm@bunker.hcap.fidonet.org

Index Number: 15236

[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]

Hi Jack,

 JO> I didn't notice any "Lassie-type" thing, but since the sound track
 JO> was lost on me I could have missed it.

Actually the way William Hurt did it, it was almost like he was
thinking out loud, kind of mentally registering it, and his
affection and esteem for her was so obvious, I really didn't think
he was treating her as at all inferior, but from what they were
saying (Richard, et al) was that it came across that way.  I
realize that the tone of voice one's using could influence the
'feel' of what one is saying and when deaf that further input is
not available.  As a hearing person I can only say that his tone
was, if anything, full of love and so much regard, it was not at
meant as belittling, at least that's how it struck me.  In fact,
the fact that it could also double as a sign interpretation was
almost masked because of the way he was doing it.  She, as a
person, was a puzzle to him, and he seemed to be musing out loud
over what bits and pieces of her inner self she was prepared to
reveal to him at different points in the movie.

 JO> But then
 JO> later, when it was released on videotape, closed captioned, I
 JO> watched it again.  Several times in fact.

So they did close caption it eventually, that's good.  Too bad
they didn't from the start like when it was in the movies too, but
then I guess, they can't --that's subtitling then-- closed
captioning is only for TV sets I guess...

 JO>  I still did not notice
 JO> any condensation in the dialog as captioned, but maybe I'm not as
 JO> sensitive as others.

He was kind of echoing what she signed, almost with what I
would describe as an 'inner voice' sort of, kind of 'taking it in'
reflectively.  That's how his tone came across, it was like he was
speaking to himself with the idea of mentally (and sometimes
emotionally) taking it in...

 JO> I thought it was a great movie, and that
 JO> Marlee richly deserved her Oscar for it.

Me too!  Actually the story itself did addresses some of the
issues we've all been discussing in the echo, and I thought the
way it was phrased in the end, "perhaps there's a place in the
middle where we can 'meet'", or something like that (can't
remember the words) wherein there was a commonality, and the
differences didn't matter...

Anyway, I thought it was a great movie too, and am glad not
everyone found something disparaging in it, I'm sure it wasn't
intentional, if it was for some, also...if it opens an awareness
of the concerns and difficulties of deafness for the hearing, then
it accomplished something good too.  So many have taken an
interest in learning sign as a result of that movie for one thing.

--Fran

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!272!94!Fran.O'gorman
Internet: Fran.O'gorman@f94.n272.z1.fidonet.org