DECONSTRUCTING THE FORCEDASSIMILATION OF DEAF PEOPLE VIA D E ' V I A

RESISTANCE AND AFFIRMATION ART

PATRICIA DURR

Historically many outstanding artists who weredeaf have contributed to the visual arts, such as: LouisFrisino, Felix Kowalewski, Granville Redmond,Cadwallader Washburn, and Regina Olson Hughes.While these distinguished artists have enhanced thefield of art, their work has not focused on the Deafexperience itself. With a heightened appreciation,acceptance, and acknowledgment of Deaf culture andAmerican Sign Language (ASL), we see a virtualexplosion of Deaf artists moving away from main-stream art to art that gives voice to their unique culturalexperiences. This movement in the United States isknown as Deaf View/Image Art (De'VIA). This paperwill discuss the historical contexts for a shift in subjectmatter by North American Deaf artists and the meaningof Deaf View/Image Art. In addition, an analysis of twomajor Deaf artists and their significant impact on thefield of visual art will be presented.2

The importance of such politically-charged art is afocus on thematic choices that reflect and represent theshift from a rhetoric of victimization to resistance - arejection of the "hearingization" of Deaf people:

Deaf people have always lived within other people'sworlds. Their local communities are located withinlarger communities of people who hear and use adifferent language. What does this mean for Deafpeople? How does it show up in the ways Deafpeople talk about and explain things? We are nowat the problem that Deaf people have of developingand holding an independent understanding ofthemselves while living in a world surrounded byothers who have a different theory about them, infact, a 'science of deafness." [Humphries 1991:232]

This "science," which seeks to restore the Deafperson to hearing society by making them as hearing-like as possible, has long deprived Deaf people of theirown voice and self-determination, hence the termhearingization.

DFAF CULTIRE AND AMERICAN SLGN L\N(,L\UE

LITERATURE

Deaf people have long been attracted to professionsin the visual arts, such as drawing and painting, graphicdesign, architecture, and more. As visual learners(since their largest source of input comes through theireyes), Deaf people have been noted for their giftedobservatory skills and their desire to communicate theirexperiences back to the world in a visually accessiblemanner. For many centuries, American Deaf peoplehave conveyed their history, culture, and language viaAmerican Sign Language (ASL) literature in suchsigned language forms as ABC and number stories3,jokes, folklore, poetry and storytelling. This visual"oral" tradition, which thrived in Deaf residentialschool dormitories and Deaf clubrooms, was essentialas a keeper of the culture for a group of people in whichonly 10 percent are born into their parents'culture. Therest must learn aspects of the culture such as beliefs,norms of behavior, language, heritage, and values laterin life and usually from their peers.4 While ASLliterature is a very powerful, breathtaking, and exquis-ite vehicle for preserving Deaf culture and ASL, tounderstand ASL literature, one must either be fairlyfluent in ASL, utilize a voice interpreter or rely oncaptions for a translation. As with any form oftranslation, layers of meaning and importance are often

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 47

lost when moving from one language and culture toanother.

TRANSCKNDIM; THK LINGUISTIC BARRIER

The most accessible ways to transcend this linguis-tic barrier and pass on the importance of culturalexperiences and the language of Deaf people is throughthe use of visual art. Visual art may be expressedthrough the medium of paintings, prints, illustrations,sculptures, multimedia, video, and photography. Whilethese art forms may or may not include text, generallythey only require that a person interpret the imagesconveyed in front of them without any particular levelof literacy in ASL or English. In the case of Deaf people,while many of us are bilingual, visual art can speak toall people on many levels, and for non-signers it doesnot require translation from one language to another forthem to understand. A striking painting featuring ayoung girl with big sad eyes wearing an oversized body[hearing] aid will trigger emotions in all people whetherthey be Deaf ASL users, deaf oral people, hard ofhearing as well as hearing.

DISENFRANCHISED PEOPLE'S ART

Before delving into explanations of Deaf View/Image Art, it is important to understand that manydisenfranchised groups communicate their acts of resis-tance and affirmation via art. Disenfranchised groupscan be defined as a group of people who have beendeprived of their rights and basic human privileges bythose in power. Art takes on important significance inmany cultures; especially for disenfranchised groupswho have been oppressed in their educational experi-ences and do not traditionally have full access to toolsfor disseminating information. The use of murals andother visual art forms to communicate political infor-mation in cultures and countries where illiteracy is highillustrates this point. They use their art as a visualtestimony of their shared experiences. Visual art servesas a pictorial text for many cultures in which writtenlanguage is not accessible to the disenfranchised. Asbell hooks notes in Killing Rage, "[i]t is the telling ofour history that enables political self-recovery."(hooks

1995:47)Some important examples of disenfranchised an

movements rest in the Chicano Art Movement, HarlemRenaissance, the Feminist Art Movement, NativeAmerican and Deaf View/Image Art. Within each ofthese movements there are ample examples of howindividual artists have been called forth to give witnessto a collective consciousness and perception of theother. Here it is important to call attention to thedifference between members of a disenfranchised anmovement versus individuals who happen to be of thesame cultural group or gender. There are some artistswho may happen to be African American, Chicano,female or Deaf who actively choose not to communi-cate their experiences as a member of that group in theirartwork. In fact some become quite incensed if they arecategorized as such. While it is important to recognizeand respect their preference, assertion, and autonomy,it can lead to a philosophical debate regarding how theycan deny the influence of their cultural experiences andidentity upon their artwork, regardless of the subjectmatter.

RESISTANCE AND AFFIRMATION ART

It is essential to recognize the two different catego-ries of art typically utilized by disenfranchised groups- resistance and affirmation art. The expression ofresistance art illustrates how disenfranchised groupmembers experience domination by the majority cul-ture, and the art serves as an act of resistance. AsRosemarie Garland Thomson postulates in her book ondisability, "[bjecause representation structures reality,the cultural figures that haunt us often must... bewrestled to the floor before even modest self-determi-nation, let alone political action, can occur" (Thomson1997:28-29). Frida Kahlo often engaged in resistanceart regarding women, cultural identity, and disability.Betye Saars also utilized resistance art in her work whenexposing the degradation of African-Americans in theU.S. through her use of stereotypical figures such asAunt Jemima and other symbols. Deaf Artist, ChuckBaird's "Why me?" artwork depicts the depersonaliza-tion and hearingization of Deaf people. Affirmation artinvolves members of a disenfranchised group celebrat-

Patricia Durr has a BA degree in Sociology from LeMoyne College and a MS in Deaf Education from the University ofRochesterandNTID. She has been teaching attheNationalTechnical Institute forthe Deaf (NTID)acollegeofRITforthepast 10 years. She can be contacted at her email address: PADDHD@RIT.EDU

48 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

ing and highlighting the positive aspects of their cul-ture. Georgia O'Keefe's graceful paintings of flowersand still-lifes to represent the beauty and the sexualityof women are notable examples of affirmation artwithin the Feminist Art Movement. Ann Silver's illus-trations utilizing Andy Warhol pop culture style paint-ings with culturally appropriate labels on crayons forDeaf culture demonstrates affirmation art within DeafView/Image Art.

ORIGINS OF DE-VIA - DEAF VIEW/IMAGE ART

While most Deaf people do not identify them-selves as a disabled group, but rather see themselves asa linguistic, cultural minority, how they are viewed anddefined by the other is otherwise. "Disability, then isthe attribution of corporeal deviance - not so much aproperty of bodies as a product of cultural rules aboutwhat bodies should be or do" (Thomson 1997: 6). Theart of Deaf people is an iconography of universals andcommonalties experienced by Deaf people as theystruggle to articulate their definition of self with eachother and the outside world. In the case of Deaf View/Image Art, we have seen a debate unfold in thequestions of whose art should be considered to be DeafViewAmage Art, and who will be the judge? As pointedout by Deaf artist and activist, Dr. Betty Miller in her1989 paper on Deaf View/Image Art for the Deaf Wayconference proceedings:

Some Deaf artists feel that visual art can be a 'wayof life' among Deaf people and a part of Deafculture in the same manner that music is a way oflife among the hearing society. Visual art canenlighten Deaf and hearing observers by presentingexperiences reflective of a Deaf person's worldview. This, in turn, can strengthen a Deafobserver's sense of identity within the Deaf culture.(Miller 1989: 770)

De'VIA then must examine "hearingness" as apolitical cultural construct. It recognizes how theinvisibility of "hearingness" allows for the colonizationof the norms of being Deaf. Miller goes on to ask:

Is there such a thing as Deaf Art? The works ofemerging Deaf artists seem to show evidence ofexperiences that represent facets in the lives and

expressions of the millions of Deaf individuals wholive in the United States. Many characteristicsseem to be born out of a common Deaf experience,whether this be growing up in a world of muffled,indistinct sounds or one that involves communicat-ing with visual rather than auditory symbols. Andfinally, there are the political and cultural visualstatements that are expressed in the works of certainDeaf artists. These characteristics need to beexplored and examined.(Miller 1989: 771)

To better understand Deaf View/Image Art in thecontext of a disenfranchised art movement, it is criticalto have an understanding of its history and inception.As with many art forms and movements, works of DeafView/Image Art were being created long before it wasever given a name. Dr. Miller is often cited as one ofthe first public Deaf artists who clearly incorporatedDeaf themes into her artwork, although many speculatethat Goya and other less well-known artists createdDeaf View/Image long before this movement wasidentified (Sonnenstrahl 1996: 132). Most likely Deafpeople have been creating artwork that depicts andreflects their unique experience long before the 1970s;however, because this era was a time of raising Deafawareness, Deaf power, mass communication andempowerment. Dr. Miller has been honored with thetitle "mother of Deaf View/Image Art."

Miller merits this title because of the type of workfeatured in her first exhibit, and the responses itinspired:

The reactions from the viewers who saw my showin 1972 who were not only hearing but Deaf as well.They were very upset with my artwork. The Deafpeople were angry with me about my implications,although they knew that the exhibit was expressingthe truth. It was during a time of strong denial fordeaf people. Many were professionals who workat Gallaudet Uni v ersity, plus some from outside thecampus. ... A few hearing people from outside,who had no real knowledge about deafness stillsomehow understood. Especially those who un-derstood oppression. ...It was not really until theearly '80s when ASL became more accepted, andthe Deaf culture became more acceptable did myartwork gain acceptance. (Miller personal commu-nication 2000)

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 4 9

Dr. Miller's works such as "Ameslan Prohibited"and "Bell School, 1944"\ with their graphic illustrationsof the oppression of American Sign Language (ASL)and victimization / puppetorization of deaf children atthe expense of oralism offended many people. Deafpeople were worried about how it might offend hearingteachers of the Deaf (this being a strong example ofinternalized oppression) and hearing professionals feltthis challenged their benevolent / paternalistic attemptsto restore Deaf people to hearing society.

I started my artwork after I became sober... butbecause many of my artwork pieces are so provok-ing and so ahead of our time regarding deafness andoppression that I stopped painting and drawinguntil for the next ten years... .sigh... In my processof recovery, 1 could not deal with many angry andupsetting reactions to my artwork..as I had to dealand cope with my own anger and other emotions inmy process of recovery. I honestly felt that thosepieces of work had really helped me through theprocess" (Miller personal communication 2000).

AsDeaf artist and art professor Deborah Sonnenstrahlspeculates:

When a deaf person views Miller's work, he or shemeets the actualities of his or her deafness face toface. Her art does not camouflage or soften theperils she experienced during her growing years.She has received criticism as a "negative" artist bythose who found her style too raw to absorb or whoperhaps preferred to forget the realities of deafness.They possibly did not want to be reminded of ourhand-slapping incidents while students at oral-oriented schools for Deaf students. Perhaps, theydid not want to be reminded of these heavy hearing-aid sets they were required to wear during classhours. Perhaps, they did not want to be remindedof those endless hours of speech therapy with atongue depressor forced down in their throats"(Sonnenstrahl 1996: 133)

When a Deaf artists' community in Austin, Texaswas founded called Spectrum: Focus on Deaf Artists'Summer Festivals in 1977 and 1978, Miller finally hada forum in which to discuss what "Deaf art" was orshould be with other Deaf artists. It was here that the

conundrum of the philosophical debates were wagedconcerning classifications such as what is it, whocreates it, and mediums used. The Spectrum environ-ment was essential for laying the groundwork to estab-lish the concepts and terminology for this genre Deafart.

It was not until 1989, almost 10 years after theSpectrum group convened and almost two decades afterDr. Miller first exhibited her work, that Deaf art wasgiven a name. Shortly before the landmark first inter-national Deaf Way conference and festival in Washing-ton, DC, a group of Deaf artists

...worked, argued, debated, considered, collabo-rated, and finally came to an agreement on theformal elements and characteristics of De'VIA,which is an acronym for Deaf View Image Art.This choice evolved out of much discussion on therelative merits of an English or an ASL name.De'VIA reflects a combination of the two, with thenatural flow of ASL, as the predominate consider-ation," writes Nancy Creighton, the wordsmith ofthe group. The signs are as follow in sequence:deaf-blow up (visual image)-art. Alternatively, ithas been signed deaf-view (sign deaf-then 'seefrom eyes to hand-shape of image')- art. Thehandshape that represents the painting is the im-age.' The sign for De'VIA embodies the Deafcharacteristics or elements in art" (Sonnenstrahl1996: 132).

Dr. Betty Miller, Dr. Paul Johnston, Dr. DeborahSonnestrahl, Chuck Baird, Guy Wonder, Alex Wilhite,Sandi Inches-Vasnick, Nancy Creighton, and Lai-YokHo were the nine Deaf pioneers who coined the termDeaf View/Image Art and wrote a manifesto definingand describing it. While it is very unusual for a groupof artists to come together to define and name their owngenre, it is not unheard of for disenfranchised groups todo so.

While this may appear to give less credence to themovement, it is important to acknowledge the lack ofinterest and scholarship in this field by art critics andhistorians. Susan Dupor, a Deaf artist, shares herdiscontentment with this slight when saying:

I feel unfortunate that the Deaf Art has not receivedany attention in the mainstreamed art world. Many

50 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

minority arts such as Latino, African-American,Gay and Lesbian and feminist art are gaining theirrespects but Deaf Art is largely neglected. Maybethere are not enough powerful sponsors for Deafartists or maybe art critics believe their works arepremature or critical that Deaf Art lack aestheticsor definition? (Dupor personal communication1998).

The term has its critics as seen in the thumbs downsection of the Deaf newspaper, Newswaves:

Thumbs down to the tiresome and pretentiousexpression "De'VIA,"used to describe artworkthat conveys deaf themes. Its originator, BettyMiller, said in a recent Deaf-Digest report, "oneshould not use De'VIA unless it is necessary, as itis an abbreviation of Deaf View/Image Art." Howabout not using it at all? Just call it what it is, DeafArt, and forget the gussied-up, pseudo-Frenchwords, especially if you want to be understood andrespected by the hearing world {Newswave.s 15March 2000: 8).

Miller explained the distinction between Deaf Artand Deaf ViewAmage Art in her 1989 presentation atthe Deaf Way conference:

The term "De'VIA shows more respect for theartist, because De'VIA is INTENTIONALLY cre-ated to express that aspect of the artist's life. As anyartist knows, unintentional aspects always show upin the artwork, our lives influence and inform all ofour work. But an artist should have the right todecide for themselves if their work is an exampleof De'VIA work or not. Of course, all art is basedon the experience of the artist. In the case of Deafartists, their cultural and physical experiences asDeaf people inform and influence all of their work.De'VIA, however, is created when the artist inten-tionally draws to the criticism of De'VIA as atechnical term and the greater popularity of DeafArt... Deaf Art is a term that is more accessible tothe average person. Which is probably why it ismore popular. But... it\s simplistic and open to alot of vagueness and misinterpretation. De'VIA isan acronym for Deaf View/Image Art, and the keyhere is "deaf view" — the artist's view of deafness.

I think most of the people who object simply nevertook the time to learn or to understand artists onthose life experiences (to tell their story or expresstheir feelings) (Miller et al, 1989).

The abbreviation itself is an act of resistance bytrying to create a totally new term that would reflect themeaning in the spirit of ASL rather than in English, thelanguage of the dominant culture. This sets the tone forwhat De'VIA is about - bringing the hearing paradigmof deafness under the Deaf artist's gaze. Hence, thistiny, unique term was created to shatter the politicalcultural construct of deafness by the "other" andsignified a shift in artistic consciousness from object tosubject.

Deaf people have long struggled with how tocapture ASL concepts and ideologies into a written /spoken form. Often you will see major historicalmovements, events, organizations or groups namingthemselves in English first and then originating a signbased on the English name or using an acronym. It israre for a naming to take place in ASL first and then tohave English follow. It seems fitting that a visuallybased expression to describe a concept born of aspecialized visual art would seek to preserve its unique-ness and abstractness. Deaf ViewAmage Art mayevolve into a new term over time, but the importanceof its origin and distinction should be honored.

THE D E ' V I A MANIFESTO AND SOMK OF THE ARTISTS

The assertions and defining principles and charac-teristics of Deaf ViewAmage Art are important tounderstand, explore, and critique. The manifesto,which was drafted by the original eight Deaf artists,may be lacking in some areas, yet is still revolutionaryto the field of art.

De'VIA represents Deaf artists and perceptionsbased on their Deaf experiences. It uses formal artelements with the intention of expressing innatecultural or physical Deaf experience. These ex-periences may include Deaf metaphors. Deaf per-spectives, and Deaf insight in relationship with theenvironment (both the natural world, and Deafcultural environment), spiritual and everyday life.

De'VIA can be identified by formal elements such

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 51

as Deaf artists' possible tendency to use contrastingcolors and values, intense colors, contrasting tex-tures. It may also most often include a centralizedfocus, with exaggeration or emphasis on facialfeatures, especially eyes, mouths, ears, and hands.Currently, Deaf artists tend to work in human scalewith these exaggerations, and not exaggerate thespace around these elements.

There is a difference between Deaf artists andDe' VIA. Deaf artists are those who use art in anyform, media or subject matter, and who are heldto the same artistic standards as other artists.De'VIA is created when the artist intends toexpress their Deaf experience through visual art.De' VIA may also be created by deafened or hearingartists, if the intention is to create work that is bornof their Deaf experience (a possible example wouldbe a hearing child of Deaf parents). It is clearlypossible for Deaf artists not to work in the area ofDe'VIA.

While applied and decorative arts may also use thequalities of De'VIA (high contrast, centralizedfocus, exaggeration of specific features), this mani-festo is specifically written to cover the traditionalfields of visual fine arts (painting, sculpture, draw-ing, photography, printmaking) as well as alterna-tive media when used as fine art, such as fiber arts,ceramics, neon, and collage (Miller 1989: 772).

To better illustrate what Deaf View/Image Art isabout and how it impacts upon Deaf and hearingculture, the artwork of two Deaf artists will be exploredand compared. It is essential to note that there are manymore outstanding Deaf artists who have been and arenow beginning to create art utilizing motifs and themesto reflect on and explore the Deaf experience. Withinthe past two decades many more Deaf artists such asPaul Johnston, Chuck Baird, Mary Thornley, RobinTaylor, Irene Bartok, Thad Martin, Joan Popovich-Kutsher, Ann Silver, and Ethan Sinnott, and the de-ceased Harry Williams and Lee Ivey have been gener-ating in this genre. Without question, gallery exhibitsat Deaf Studies conferences and the National TouringExhibit of Deaf Culture Art and web page spear-headedby Brenda Schertzhave played a vital role in this growthof interest and support for Deaf View/Image Art. With

the acceptance of ASL, the promotion and recognitionof Deaf culture and empowerment through Deaf Stud-ies programs, and the 1988 Deaf President Now move-ment, 5 Deaf people's attitudes shifted from the oppres-sive days of Dr. Miller's initial exhibit where politi-cized art was shunned to a desire to know, understand,see and create art that gives voice to the Deaf experi-ence.

SOME BACKGROUND ON MILLER AND DUPOR

Before exploring the two Deaf View/Image Artworks of Dr. Betty G. Miller and Susan Dupor, somebackground information is in order. Dr. Miller wasborn in 1934, and although she had Deaf parents, shewas sent to Bell School, an oral day school in Chicago.In that time period it was typical for Deaf people tointernalize the values of the external dominant culture.The ability to speak was equated with intelligencelevel. It was thought that the better one could speak,the better she or he could think and succeed. Later,she went on to attend public schools. It was not untilMiller entered Gallaudet College (now University) thatshe recognized the richness of ASL and Deaf culture.

Gallaudet was a shock for her, culturally, despitethe fact that she had Deaf parents who used signlanguage during her entire childhood. Growing up,Betty viewed herself as a "hearing person," and theonly Deaf people she saw were her parents and theirfriends. She didn't make the connection betweenthose Deaf people and herself, and didn't make thatconnection until she came to Gallaudet and sawDeaf people who belonged to her age group,members of her own generation" (Listisard 1997;25).

The daughter of a Deaf commercial artist. Millerhas a BA degree from Gallaudet College, MFA fromMaryland Institute, College of Arts, an a Ed, D. fromPennsylvania State University. "Among her influencesshe cites her father, the Deaf artist Ralph R. Miller, Sr.;one of her professors at Pennsylvania State University;and Nancy Creighton." (Schertz 1995:7). Miller is anauthor, teacher, counselor, and artist. She has createdworks of art in ink and paint illustrations with andwithout typography, multimedia sculptures, and neonglass.

52 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

Conversely, Susan Dupor was born in 1969 andattended self-contained classroom and mainstream pro-grams in Wisconsin throughout her childhood. Despitehaving a hard of hearing brother, she did not know orutilize ASL until much later. In contrast to Miller beingraised in an ASL home and oral school, Dupor learnedSigned English [an artificial form ofcombining signingwith English words and grammatical word order] fromwatching her sign language interpreter and teachers ofthe deaf. She at times felt isolated and escaped into herworld of art.

Dupor says, "My deafness has been a great impacton my development of art. I have told people if Iwere hearing, I probably would be playing music!I was drawn to art because it was kind of like mybest friend in grade school. I was educated in amainstream setting plus I was shy with hearingpeople. Art filled in the void when I felt alienated.Showing my ability to create art was a way to gainacceptance and break down communication barri-ers with hearing people. Fine art is an outlet to gainempowerment of oneself." Dupor recalled whenshe was in second grade, "I declared in front of myclass that I wanted to grow up to be an illustrator.Today, my artwork is narrative, which is very muchan illustration concept" (Dupor personal commu-nication 1998).

As with Miller, it was not until Dupor enteredcollege at the National Technical Institute for the Deafin Rochester, NY (NTID) that she first embraced ASLand Deaf culture. For Deaf people who have beensocialized to be hearing and are introduced to the wholeworld of Deaf culture and language for the first time,this can be a startling awakening. Knowing that shewanted to be an artist and wanting more specializedtraining, Dupor transferred to the School of Art Instituteof Chicago and immediately began creating artworkwith the Deaf themes that have informed her worksince.

Dupor has a BFA from the School of the ArtInstitute of Chicago and an MS in Deaf Education fromthe University of Rochester and NTID. "Deaf history,culture and education has become an everlasting sourceof inspiration for my artwork. Many artists inspire meand I am especially interested in the American SocialRealism painters of the Great Depression era. They

emphasize a lot on social issues which is similar to mygoals in my art," states Dupor. (Schert/ 1995: 5) Shealso shares, "'I'm immensely drawn to Frida Kahlo'ssurrealism paintings because she is so bold and disturb-ing and explores issues of cultural identity." (Duporpersonal communication 2000) Dupor is an art teacherat a Deaf school and an artist. Her works of art havetaken the form of animation, paintings, paintings withtextiles, and multimedia.

While Miller and Dupor are a generation apart inage, their themes, motifs, focus, and experiences arestrikingly similar.

I see some similarities with Miller's works withmine... Both of us look back at our education,analyze it, figure out how it can be improved byshowing people how it felt to be a deaf child. Manydeaf children could not speak for themselves, theywere not taught to analyze and criticize about theireducation. Then by the time they have grown up,it was too late, some have suffered from it indifferent degrees in the long run. I am not sayingmy total communication-main.streaming educationwas disastrous (on a social peer level it was anawkward experience for me), but I can see it wasnot effective for some of my classmates in differentrealms. I am sure Betty feels that way with oralism"(Dupor personal communication 2000).

Such conjunctions have led this author and othersto conclude that there are commonalties of the Deafexperience whether or not one comes from a Deaf orhearing family, was raised orally, with Signed Englishor ASL, went to a Deaf school or was mainstreamed.

THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE GAZE OF

MILLER AND DLPOR

When doing a thematic analysis of Miller's andDupor's resistance and affirmation Deaf View/ImageArt, it is startling to see so many similarities. This isespecially surprising when we consider that the twowomen were raised in completely different eras in theU.S. and taught using very different educational meth-odologies. Furthermore, they had not met each otheruntil 1998, nor studied one another's work. As RosemarieGarland Thomson (1997) compellingly argues it isthrough the expression of a disabled woman's gaze that

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000

otherness examined a,s a political cultural construct maybe critically examined. The expression of such a gazealso allows for the movement from \ictimization toactivism through constructive rage and celebration.Resistance and affirmation are the ying and the yang ofMiller and Dupors works. As Dupor states, 'therewere moments when I \ ented my emotions, and otherswhen I wanted to celebrate the uniqueness of Deafculture and seek the ironies of being Deaf in a hearingworld" (Schertz 1999: 7). Comparing and contrastingthematic points of congruence in their work becomes away, then, to look for universals of the Deaf experience.

MlLI ER \\1) DlPOK's RhSISTANCE ART".

RF(ORD OK P\ST IMI SUCKS

Miller's and Dupor's two most comparable workswere created 20 years apart, yet both depict class photosto illustrate the effect of Deaf education on children. In

the case of Miller, it was at the oral Bell School inChicago. For Dupor it was within self-containedhearing impaired classrooms in public schools in Wis-consin, both worlds and decades apart. Yet Miller's"Bell School, 1944 and Dupor s I" Interesting Ham-ster" have a striking resemblance. Miller's work is anillustration ot four students in the back row and threestudents in the front. Each student's mouth has linesdown the side as it a puppet. Their eyes are non-existent, and their hands are oversized, bulky, andawkwardly placed. Immediately upon seeing this. Deafpeople who have experienced an oral education orspeech therapy, say that they identify with that feelingof being trained to be a puppet—to say the word "justthis way. The hands are made to seem like foreignobjects that are useless and, in fact, dangerous. Thesource of this depiction is clear to many aware viewers,because punishment for signing was common in aural/oral programs. It also illustrates how children of

GGG BB

r- i #» *J u- k

(

\

rrr HM c

i l»'

R R RR

LT 2 B ^ <

fytfr

1 iJii

•

LL DOO

JA«B

P'ft*'

riv-

BBB BB GG LL

• m% •

DD DDD WW

;i C

11]

Fig. 1. Be// Schoo/, 1944. Betty G. Miller.

54 Volume 15 I\lumber2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

disenfranchised groups are taught to feel that what isinherent to them is abnormal, bad or evil.

As Miller shares, "much of my work depicts theDeaf experience expressed in the most appropriateform of communication: visual art. I present thesuppression of Deaf Culture and American SignLanguage as I see it... This oppression of Deafpeople by hearing is actually cultural, educational,and political (Schertz 1995: 7).

Similarly, Dupor's 'I Interesting Hamster" fea-tures a school class photo of four students in the backrow and three in front. In addition, there is one verylarge teacher on either side of the group. The childrenin this colorful painting are shown in profile with justthe insides of their mouths and ears indicated. Thisillustrates what is known in Deaf cultural discourse asthe "pathological" view of Deaf people within the

ducational svstem and dominant culture generally.From this perspective, being Deaf i.s a deviant charac-teristic, and the system must do everything it can tosocialize young deaf children into that view by disso-ciating them from a Deat-centered one that valuessigned languages, visual traditions such as ASLstorytelling, and culturally Deaf people. Social prac-tices that arise from a perspective in which deafness isseen only as a pathology of the ear involve an emphasisusing any residual hearing via hearing aids and inten-sive speech therapy.

The children in Dupor s class have no eyes, and,while the teachers have clear exterior facial features(indicating they are normal / hearing), their eyes aresmudged and muted. I interpret that to express how thteachers were not visually attuned and did not under-stand anything visually communicated to them by thechildren, only that via an auditory mode. In the middleof the first row of children is a sign sa>ing "Hearing

Fig. 2. / Interesting Hamster, Susan Dupor.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000

3

. • • »

!»****% ' •

k M I*

Fig. 3. Ameslan Prohibited, Betty G. Miller.

Fig. 4. Implantation Lot, Susan Dupor

56 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

Impaired." Thus, what the child cannot do—hearnormally—becomes her or his defining characteristic.The work is also a social commentary on what HarlanLane refers to as "forced assimilation1' when talking ofmainstreaming in his book Mask of Benevolence. Ineach of the corners of this picture is a little hamster,hence, the name of the piece: "I Interesting Hamster."

As the artist, Dupor, shares, "I Interesting theHamster' is a painting that reflects the self-con-tained classes for deaf and hard of hearing childrenin hearing schools. This was a very commonpractice in the seventies but nowadays more stu-dents are being mainstreamed in the hearing class-rooms. Self-contained classes still exist, some-times deaf students are placed with hearing chil-dren with other disabilities.

The hamster in glass cages are a metaphor to selfcontained classes. Students have no control of theirlife, they are determined how to be taught andraised, their interaction with hearing peers arelimited. Mainstreamed public schools like to showoff their unique programs for deaf and hard ofhearing children, people come look at the selfcontained rooms, like children looking at hamstersin glass cages which is a big deal in their class-rooms. Mainstreamed school think they get the bigcredit for this, but do we know the deaf and hard ofhearing children are comfortable, happy and get-ting quality education? Who evaluates this? Hear-ing administrations? What do they know is aqualityDeaf Education program? Cute furry critters!(Dupor personal communication 2000).

PATHOLOGIZING THE PATHOLOGY PERSPECTIVE

One of Miller's most well known works—"AmeslanProhibited"—is an illustration of two large hands inchains with the fingers severed at the knuckles. Look-ing like a political cartoon, it certainly makes a politicalstatement. The work calls the viewer to recognize theoppression of Ameslan (an earlier combined name forAmerican Sign Language, now shortened to ASL).While schools for the Deaf in the U.S. had originallybeen founded in the early 1800s by many Deaf leadersand utilized sign language for instructional purposes,by the end of the century things shifted in Euro-

American deaf education with the influence of AlexanderGraham Bell. Bell considered himself primarily as aspeech teacher and was a staunch supporter of an oralonly education (hi.s invention of the telephone was a by-product of his work with the Deaf). He felt that signlanguage was an abomination and a crutch for Deafpeople. In his 1883 paper to the Philosophical Societyof Washington, Bell states:

Nature has been kind to the deaf child, man cruel.Nature has inflicted upon the deaf child but onedefect — imperfect hearing, man's neglect hasmade him dumb and forced him to invent a lan-guage which has separated him from the hearingworld. Let us, then remove the afflictions that weourselves have caused... let us banish sign languagefrom our schools. If..it is our object to destroy thebarriers that separate them from the outside worldand take away the isolation of their lives, then I holdthat our energies should be devoted to the acquisi-tion of the English language as a vernacular in itsspoken and written forms. With such an object inview we should bring the deaf together as little aspossible and only for the purpose of instruction.After school hours we should separate the deafchildren from one another to prevent the develop-ment of a special language and scatter them amonghearing children and their friends in the outsideworld (Bell 1883: 76-77).

The oralist philosophy of using only spoken com-munication gained ascendance over signed language, asituation that lasted well into the 1970s in the U.S. Atthat time, the failure of the oralist philosophy resultedin sign language slowly being allowed back into theclassroom, yet not in the form of ASL, but in asystematic codified form of representing English (SignedEnglish).

Miller's artwork is a strong testimony of the abusesof an oral-only education. The chained hands andbroken fingers show the mutilation and enslavement ofa deaf person. Oral schools often utilized punishmentas a way to coerce children into not doing what camenaturally to them, that is, to communicate using avisual-gestural language. Hands were tied up, fingerswere rapped hard with yardsticks, and children wereforced to hold stacks of books on their outstretched armswhile kneeling.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 57

A deeper meaning in Millei s work is illustrated bythe chains at the wrist of these innocent-looking pair ofhands. Often oral educators preached and publishedatiainst the use of ASL. arguing that it would serve asa crutch for deaf people and deny them the opportunityto reach, or prevent them from reaching, their properplace in society The argument was that signing wouldmake them disabled and handicapped. Miller s workturns that perspective upside-down. From the Deat-centered perspective it is the oral only approach thatplaces a Deaf person in a handicapping condition,crippling and enslav ing her or him. Thus she exposesthe pathology of how Deaf people were treated:pathologizing the pathology model of an oral onlyeducation. Instead of showing how Deaf children areviewed in a pathological / pathetic manner as is done in"Bell School, 1944. she turns the table to show howdenying a Deaf person s natural language is a patho-logical practice. The irony of this inversion is not loston those who shared this experience. As Lane states,"[ejducation conducted in a way that negates the childs

identity, fails to use his language, and isolates him frompeers is disabling." ILane 1992: 84]

Similarly, Dupor's "Implantation Lot" focusesupon the exposure of oppressive practices by those withthe power to suppress deaf signed and cultural tradi-tions. At a quick glance, this colorful painting looksplayful and happy, while further examination revealslayers oi meaning and commentary. The work featuresa toddler wearing a red and white polka-dotted hospitalgown encircled by various animals commonly featuredin tables and nursery rhymes. Each cheerful and kind-looking animal wears a lab coat, stethoscope and othermedical paraphernalia. The laughing child and animalentourage are standing in a parking lot as indicated bya few yellow lines and cracked tar where weeds andgrass pop through.

Although there is nothing overly-menacing in thepicture, the child's shaved head with his or her longhalf-moon scar behind the ear certainly doesn't seemright to the viewer. It disturbs, as this is such anunnatural image. Yet, the medical profession argues

11cc c

Fig. 5. Untitled, Betty G. Miller

58 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

quite effectively, and sometimes effortlessly, to hear-ing parents that this is the most normal course of actionfor them to take for their profoundly deaf child - thesurgical implantation of a cochlear implant device intheir skull. The argument by doctors for the implantturns upon an appeal and a gloss of complexity as if tosay: "we have the technological capabilities to restoreyour child to society. Would you deprive them of this?"As Lane puts it, *'[t]he more we view the child born deafas tragically infirm, the more we see his plight asdesperate, the more we are prepared to conduct surgeryto unproven benefit and unassessed risk. Our represen-tation of deaf people determines the outcome of ourethical judgment." [Lane 1992: 238]

Dupor's bright colors, playful images, in a parkinglot give the viewer the feeling of people at a fast foodrestaurant parking, easily pulling in and out. Yet, in thisshort hospital visit, a child is altered forever, pro-foundly, quickly. She succeeds in calling into questionthis pathological view of the Deaf child and raisesanother: whose actions are really pathological and in

need of repair like this cracking parking lot? Dupordoes leave us with a hopeful s>mbol in this work byhaving the grass peek through the concrete >ffenng animage that natural elements will persevere and defeatthis contro\ersial and invasive medical intervention.

SOCIAL Ai lK

In Miller s untitled multimedia piece featuring aface ot clay with a wire grid across the eyes and a metalrod through the mouth, emotions of abuse, torture, andmistreatment are clearly communicated. As with manyof Millers works, printed text serves as a border andbackground. In this piece she states: '"Mama, Papa, Godmade Deaf. You want me talk, talk, talk. Me fail..'The text conveys a feeling of isolation, stigmatization,and alienation. It is as if the child is trying to teach theparents/society to reframc deafness as one of G-d'sdesigns, too. By having the ey es look out through a grid,the artist signifies the imprisoned state of the subjectand the inability to have full and equal accei

Fig. 6. Family Dog, Susan Dupor.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 1 9

Fig. 7. Supression of the Body, Betty G. Miller.

world. The metal rod through the mouth gives a puppet-like appearance that also illustrates the oppression ofvoice, being torced to speak and artificial constraints totry to change or alter the subject i n i nhumane ways. Thebackground text is a series of white words on blackbackground, such as B» BA«A«ALL»L»LLLWW. Formany Deaf viewers this will trigger memories of speechtherapy sessions where we were drilled to repeat wordsagain and again, sounding out each letter in an unnaturaland methodical manner At the bottom the word FF UCCC K appears before the text continues with anotherB word to practice. The profanity exemplifies thesubject's frustration and feelings of entrapment. Thelack of any dots in between each letter and the wordbeing smaller in si/e than the others ma) indicate a morenatural outburst of the word, an unrestricted mental

vocalization.In Dupor'.s well-known uork, "Family Dog." the

painter prominently displays the social alienation expe-rienced by a Deaf child in a family that does not sign.Here we see a young girl lying on the floor in a posturemuch like that of a dog. Behind her is a yellow coffeetable that looks like a yellow guard-rail fencing in thefamily pet, this child, from the rest of the unit. Thefamily is represented by six people who face oneanother and away from the deaf child's visual field,chatting in a way that renders hopeless any attempt bythe child to lipread. Outlines of their eyes and teeth areindicated, but the rest of their facial expressions are atotal blur. The child's face is complete with wide, alerteyes and an outstretched tongue as it panting andbegging. Many of us coming from very loving and

Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

accepting homes can still identify with this bold paint-ing, as this feeling of social alienation due to commu-nication banners, access issues and lack of affiliationcan be stigmatizing.

'Most disabled people are surrounded bynondisabled families and communities in which dis-abilities are unanticipated and almost always perceivedas calamitous. Unlike the ethnically-grouped, but morelike gays and lesbians, disabled people are sometimesfundamentally isolated from each other, existing oftenas aliens within their social units" (Thomson 1997: 15).While this sense of isolation is notably less for Deafpeople who come from a Deaf family and/or attendeda Deaf school or large program where sign languagewas utilized, all can still identify with this painting intheir own life among 'others' at home or at work.

Much like Millers original work, this paintingcreated quite a stir when first exhibited at a Deaf Studiesconference in 1995. Easily interpreted by Deaf view-ers, it makes people uncomfortable in its bluntness andits rage. Even Miller was surprised by Dupor's directmessage. Miller is quoted as having said, "Buy it? No,thanks!" - shaking her head - "Too powerful for me! Ithought I was bad, but shes much more powerful1' sheexclaims. "If that painting had been done during mytime, people would DIE!' (Listisard May 1997: 29.31).

Ms. Dupor states that throughout her childhood,creative art served to help her deal with the lack ofgenuine socialization that accompanied hermainstreamed education.

My emotions and experience growing up Deaf areseen and felt in most of my pieces. Today, constantexposure of the Deaf culture at NTID is an ongoinginspiration to create new paintings with Deafthemes. Creating any art form is truly therapeutic.At times when I was a sprouting adult, I was oftenfrustrated to discover the inequality and conde-scension of the hearing society and would ventthose feelings in my artwork. There are times thatI desire to show the audience that others and I hadpride in being Deaf by expressing those feelingsthrough art that there is nothing wrong with beingnon-hearing.

In deaf history, deaf people have often been de-prived of direct communication with hearing people

and 1 feel I have subconsciously attempted to getmy messages across to various audiences quickerthrough figurative art (Schert/. 1995' 5).

MARC;INAI ITV

The issue of identity (crisis and formation) isexpressed in many De VIA artists' works. This conceptis undoubtedly a significant theme for Miller andDupor. Psychotherapist Neil Glickman has delineateda Deaf Identity Development theory, describing acontinuum of psychological development for manyDeaf people through four levels of being: hearingcentered, marginal, immersed in Deaf culture, andbicultural. Miller s work "Suppression exemplifiesthe two middle stages. In this piece we see an inkillustration of a young woman holding her hand up toher face as if to sign MIRROR with a duplicate image

Fig. 8. Deaf.American, Susan Dupor.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 61

Fig. 9. GrowinginASL, Betty G. Miller

on the left. The middle image features a reflection ofthese portraits showing the back of the young woman'shead and hand with a red and orange colored image inthe center shaped much like a womb. One eye appearsin the center and the outline of a nose and lips arepresent. The border of the entire image is drawn in inkby double lines, and the outline of ears appears in eachcorner. Similar to Dupors hamsters in each corner of"I Interesting Hamster' our inability to hear becomesthe framework in which ourlive.saredefined. The girl'sdual images indicate a splitting ot self,and how her self-concept is deplorable to her. Thomson notes: "It.disabled people pursue normalization too much, theyrisk denying limitations and pain for the comfort ofothers and may ed«e into the self-betrayal associated

with"passing" (Thomson 1997: 13). In this painting,we are only shown one eye, as her hand covers theother as well as her nose and mouth. The coloredwomb center draws the viewer's attention and featuresthe girl's inner eye and center a.s she stands at thethreshold of a valued self identity as a Deaf person.The title, "Suppression, indicates that she is presentlyin denial of her Deaf identity struggling with her lackof acceptance 'The cultural other and the cultural selfoperate together as opposing twin figures that legiti-mate a system ot social, economic, and politicalempowerment justified by physiological differences"(Thomson 1997: 8).

Dupors self-portrait entitled "Deaf Americanwas one of her first De'VIA works. Here she placesthe viewer in the vantage point of looking down uponher while she holds her stomach w ith one hand and herhearing aid in her other, outstretched hand. TheAmerican flag is hanging behind her as a full back-drop. Although less direct than some of her otherworks, this piece communicates Dupors sense ofotherness, how she feels she is seen by others.

This self-portrait indicates the confusion andmarginalization of being in both Deaf and hearingworlds. When I painted this picture, it was my firstyear out ot NTID and was in a cultural shock beingin an all hearing art school. My deafness accentu-ated psychologically and emotionally at that point.The reason why the hearing aids in my hand, is asif I am suggesting. Are you looking at me as aperson or a Deaf person':' Which is more importantto you' The hearing aids I wear or my physicalbeing'" This was inspired by the man\ incidentsriding on the KL train in Chicago, people wouldstare at my hearing aids while standing or sittingdown quieth minding my own business. The>would stare a.s if a knife stabbed me (Duporpersonal communication 2(X)0).

Resistance art serves as a very important socialvehicle to express raee for people who have beenpowerless and often suffocated with fear of the conse-quences of resisting in other ways. Through resistanceart, the articulation of unspoken rage allows for thepossibility to evolve politicalh and socialh fromvictimization to affirmation and activism. As a JeffMcWhinney is quoted by Lane, "[t]o destroy the

Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

dangerous relationship between hearing people s con-trol and deaf people's learned inadequacy, we have toovercome our own fear of helplessness in the face of theapparent power of hearing people" (Lane 1992: 97).Dupor explains, "[m]y earlier works show a lot ofactivism—now the works I'm creating seem to revealcommunity action with more attention to the Deafchildrens natural upbringing or mockery of theirupbringing in an inclusive [mainstream] setting.Through this very public and accessible resistance,De'VIA serves as a torum under which collective andholistic questing begins, as Deaf people shift fromobject to subject.

Because of the boldness of Miller and Duporswork, they have both been harshly received by some.

Many times deaf or hearing audi-ences can immediately relate to mypaintings employing D/deaf themes.Also, I strive to take the eyes ofhearing people and show them whatit is like to live in a deaf or Deafworld. Sometimes hearing peopledeny some of my paintings thinkingit's farce; in deaf education historyhearing educators and parents feltresponsible to woefully help deafpeople. Sometimes my paintingsare like whiplash, having some ofthem realize their benevolence hasbecome menacing. Some deaf willsmirk in agreement with the artstheme of mocking irony (Duporpersonal communication 1998).

M ILLER AND DUPOR'S AFFIRMATION

ART: CULTLRM. PRIDE VIA ASL

Miller s "Growing in ASL' is arichly-colored work which features ahand in three different placements as ifsigning GROWING. All the colors arewarm and inviting, and the size of thehands are full and natural as opposed toher other works that feature hand motifsthat are stiff, rigid, broken, or dispropor-tionate. The artwork and the titleemanate a very positive and affirming

message that ASL is natural, beautiful, 'ind desirable.The recognition of ASL as a full-fledged language inthe 1960s by Dr. William Stokoe, ahearing professorofEnglish at Gallaudet University, was a watershed forDeaf pride and empowerment. The 1960s are seen asa time of re-birth tor Deaf communities where ASL wasutilized and celebrated. The National Theatre of theDeaf was created, and Deat people began to value andcherish their heritage and cultural experiences, whichfor so long had existed underground. As Miller says,'one aspect of my work, .shows the beauty oi Deafculture and American Sign Language. 1 hope this work,and the understanding that may arise from this visualexpression, will help bridge the gap between the Deafworld, and the hearing world' (Schert/ 1995: 7)

Dupor's oil painting on wax entitled "Cookie

Fig. 10. Cookie, Susan Dupor.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 6 3

Fig. 11. Birth of a Deaf Woman, Betty G. Miller.

Fig. 12. Elysium, Susan Dupor.

64 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

displays a young child in double image in order to showthe production of a sign, which requires movement. Inthe background are bear and clown-shaped cookie jars.In contrast to Dupor's other works that show childrenin child-like settings that are menacing or unnatural,this is a joyful work with rich and inviting colors, andthe child is comfortably signing COOKIE with shiningand hopeful eyes. This piece indicates both an ease andgreat sense of joy about being Deaf and using ASL.From the point of view of thematic analysis, thisaffectively very positive image represents Deaf peopleas agents rather than victims.

SELF-WORTH AND CULTURAL AFFILIATION

Miller's breathtaking "Birth of a Deaf Woman"with its hues of pink, blue, and purple merges manydifferent meanings. The colors chosen may indicate abalance of the feminine and masculine in each of us. Iinterpret the nude woman in the painting to be arejection of the popular American cultural idealizedimages of the desirable female shape and a celebrationof the natural curves and plumpness of motherhood.The woman is about to sign the word BIRTH and islooking downward. Her face is minimized while herbreasts, hands, and hips are embellished. The viewer'seyes focus on the hands, which seem to be moving toa position to cradle an infant. This inspiring paintingengages Glickman's fourth stage of identity formation,that of a bicultural identity. The woman gives birth toher self—a whole person with a fully-developed senseof self worth and cultural affiliation as a woman and aDeaf person. For the disenfranchised, especially thoselacking parents or teachers of the same cultural group,the transition into adulthood is often an especiallydifficult journey. With Miller's work we clearly haveseen a transformation through the years in themes andmediums as her rage was given voice through her work,allowing for other emotions to find a voice, too.

The last piece to be discussed is Dupor's "Elysium."which means paradise or Utopia. This majestic paintingis of four Deaf women under a purple starlit night inthe woods around a campfire. The canvas itself is inthe shape of a half sphere that gives it an organic feelof the earth and sky. The two pairs of women aresigning to each other in an engaging interchange. Theglow reflected from the unseen fire communicates asense of warmth and peacefulness. This snapshot of

solidarity through a common language, gender, andcultural experience conveys a strong sense of tranquil-lity, euphoria, self-worth and belonging through theease and comfort with which these women converse.Nature and naturalness are the emphasis here. The titleitself provides some insight into what Dupor wasthinking as she created this work—desiring to capturea perfect moment/world where no interpreters wereneeded, no overt oppression was experienced, andinformation and human connection were free and open.When Thomson talks of Audre Lorde, a nearly blind,African-American lesbian, poet and author, she makesthis observation, "[i]f her physical difference is thesource of her social alienation, she also makes it thesource of her poetic and erotic affirmation. Such self-authorization, Lorde insists, is a political and personalact of survival, a 'transformation of silence into lan-guage and action' that achieves significant culturalwork" (Thomson 1997: 127).

While gender did not appear to be a focal point ofMiller's resistance art, it is a shared image of bothMiller's and Dupor's affirmation art, indicating that sexand Deaf identity are dual statuses that ensure theartists' holistic self-acceptance. Both identity them-selves strongly as being Deaf women artists, emphasiz-ing the importance of their gender to them. In her work."Pussy," Dupor has explored issues of sexism withinthe Deaf community where sexually-related signs aremore graphic and often more offensive when describingwomen. She has also examined sexuality and thehearingization of young Deaf women in her work "Rapeand Her Little Bambis." Dupor states, "[ajs an artistwho is Deaf, I am constantly exploring my identity asa Deaf woman. I have been painting within this themefor the past ten years, and my perspective has changedthroughout the years" (Schertz 1999:7). While Miller'swork does not focus on gender issues, several of herworks feature women and girls, and she recently sharedthat 44[t]oday..I still am doing some artwork based onoppression, but I am now working on new artwork,trying to ex press myself as a Deaf woman and a lesbian"(Miller personal communication 2000).

RACK AND THE SKCRIT OF JOY

Many people have expressed some surprise anddiscomfort with the number of resistance artworkpieces that Dr. Betty G. Miller and Susan Dupor have

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number 2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 65

produced in comparison with other Deaf View/ImageArt artists who have a stronger collection of affirmationpieces. Jt is fascinating to me, as this is what drew meto their works — the volume and poignancy within theirpieces. Susan B. Anthony has often been quoted forhaving said, 44[cjautious, careful people, always castingabout to preserve their reputation and social standing,nevercan bring about a reform." I am an admirer of bothMiller's and Dupor's work because of their strongconvictions, daringness, and their artistic talents. Be-cause I, too. like many others, have felt that rage ofinjustice but felt paralyzed to do anything with it —feeling it inhibit and corrupt the joys that lie within meas well. Given the backgrounds of these two artists andmany of us Deaf and hard of hearing people and drawingfrom a description of Black rage as described by bellhooks, we may reach a deeper understanding of howthis has come to be. When reading the following quote,it may be useful to mentally replace the term Black withDeaf and white with hearing. Speaking of middle class,educated Blacks, hooks states:

Their rage erupts because they have spent so muchtime acquiescing to white power to achieve -assimilating, changing themselves, suppressingtrue feelings. Their rage surfaces because theymake these changes believing that doing so willmean they will be accepted as equals. When theyare not treated as equals by the whites they haveadmired, subordinated their integrity to, they areshocked (hooks 1995: 28).

However, Miller and Dupor do not allow this shockand rage to express itself in and unhealthy or harmfulmanner. Nor do they repress it as so many Deaf and hardof hearing people do. This self- repression is anoutcome of the intense fear of the political powerhearing people hold over Deaf people's lives, work, andautonomy. Lane states, "[W]hen the audist is un-masked for the deaf person, dependence is no longertolerable. The dependent's inferior standing seems agross injustice. There is a clear standard of justice: Thetreatment providers afford each other. The formerdependent now insists on that treatment — equality.The slave returns the look of the master. In thismoment a man is born' (Lane 1992: 98).

Dupor and Miller have chosen expressive meansfor telling our history in a way "that enables political

self-recovery" (hooks 1995:47). Other De'VIA artists,who may have been raised more STRONG-DEAF(ASL sign for those with Deaf parents, Deaf residentialschooling, and native ASL users), may be less in-touchwith their rage at oppression and injustice. Or, they maybe more in touch with the affirmation aspect of theirupbringing, as their experience may parallel an"underclass black person who has never trusted whitepeople or endeavored to please them to receive re-wards" (hooks 1995:28). STRONG-DEAF peoplewere not raised within the dominant culture as an eliteor selected group or trained to aspire to be as hearing-like as possible.

While all artists and art genres will continue tochange, it is interesting to note the similarities inDupor's and Miller's life experiences and how rage andjoy have shaped them and their work.

When I was in college I was angry, and mypaintings at that time were angry, I was confusedabout the two worlds and which one I belong in. Ifelt my upbringing had sheltered me in some way.Now I'm not angry anymore, I've accepted that thetwo worlds are the way they are. I'm not mad aboutmy upbringing. It is what molded me and made mylife unique. Nowadays as a teacher at the DeafSchool, I sense less oppression and tension amongthe students there. There is a daily contentednessto see that the students are lively, happy andcomplete. (Dupor personal communication 2000)

As for Miller, she says, "In the early 1970s .. therewas a lot of anger projected in my artwork., which wastherapeutic, showing my anger based on my experi-ences as a Deaf person..and oppression displayed inmany places where I live, and work" (Miller personalcommunication 1998)

In Alice Walker's book. Possessing the Secret ofJoy, the reader is at times mortified, spellbound, andshocked at the trials and tribulations an African womanexperiences as the result of genital mutilation. Just asWalker uses her craft to make political statements andto call our attention to outrage, oppression, and injus-tice, so do Miller and Dupor. And, just as the leadcharacter in Walker's novel discovers, so too do theseDe'VIA artists—resistance is the secret to possessingjoy (Walker 1992:286).

66 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review

CONCLUSION i KN(»VVI.I.IH;MI:NI.S

In summary, the existence of affirmation andresistance art within De'VIA is critical as both avenuesfunction as a gauge and a visual testimony of politicalprogress and social change, call the viewer to reflectionand action, and facilitate the formation of a strong,positive bicultural identity. Deaf View/Image Art is anaccessible way to preserve Deaf culture by serving asa pictorial text of the Deaf experience—oppression andempowerment alike. As any educator will attest -knowledge is power. The inclusion of Deaf View/Image Art into Deaf Studies. Deaf Education, ASL andinterpreter training curriculum can foster greater dis-cussion, discourse and discovery in this art movementand to enhance a deeper understanding of Deaf historyand Deaf culture.

Deaf Art expresses the values of Deaf culture: thebeauty of sign language and its painful oppression,the joys of Deaf bonding, communication break-downs between signers and non-signers, the dis-covery of language and community, and the historyof Deaf people. Deaf Art or, more precisely, DeafView/Image Art, is a genre that uses formal artelements to express the "innate cultural or physicaldeaf experience." Deaf Art is created when theartist intends to express his or her Deaf experiencethrough visual art. [Schertz 2000: 2]

As we have seen from this delimited analysis of theresistance and affirmation art of two artists within theDe'VIA school, close attention to the symbolic lan-guage, representations, and messages of the artistsoffers a rich source of knowledge of the Deaf experi-ence. Continued attention to other aspects outside thescope of this study concerning sexism and genderissues, language rights, and pedagogical practices rep-resented in the visual art of Deaf people are significantfor several reasons. First, the De'VIA school and theart of others from nondominant social groups givesvisual "voice" to social injustices that a moral societyneeds to acknowledge. Also, these perspectives arisefrom rich veins of experience and sources of creativitythat render them a social good in themselves.

The author would like to acknowledge several keypeople for their assistance, support and encouragementin creating this article: Susan Dupor and Dr. Betty G.Miller; background research and interviews: Leigh-Anne Francis, Paula Grcevic and Brenda Schertz;editing: Dr. Karen Christie, Laksmi Fjord, and StephenJacobs.

NOTES

1. As is customary in most publications discussing Deafculture and people who are deaf, the use of capital D inDeaf is used in this article to recognize Deaf people asa cultural entity. The lower-case d in deaf is utilizedwhen referring to the audiological condition of deaf-ness.2. The article draws a great deal from RosemarieGarland Thomson in her book Extraordinary Bodies:Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture andLiterature. It also relies on concepts, paradigms andtheories challenged andexamined in bell hooks' KillingRage: Ending Racism and Harlan Lane's Mask ofBenevolence: Disabling the Deaf Community.3. ABC and number stories are specialized forms ofASL literature in which letters of the manual alphabetor signed numbers are used in an unique order to createa story or poem.4. Carol Padden's and Tom Humphries' book Deaf inAmerica: Voices from Culture, Sherman Wilcox'sAmerican Deaf Culture: An Anthology, Harlan LanefsMask of Benevolence and Journey into Deaf-Worldwith Hoffmeister and Bahan cover this concept in depthas do many other books and articles on Deaf culture.5. Deaf President Now (DPN) occurred when Deafstudents at Gallaudet University and community mem-bers demanded the appointment of a Deaf president topreside over the only Deaf liberal arts col lege in the U .Sin 1989.6. Drawn largely from the Black Identity DevelopmentScale by William Cross, Neil Glickman explores DeafIdentity Development theories and scales in Chapter I:What is Culturally Affirmative Psychotherapy andChapter 5: The Development of Culturally Deaf Iden-tities in the book he edited with Michael Harvey entitledCulturally Affirmative Psychotherapy with Deaf Per-sons.

Visual Anthropology Review Volume 15 Number2 Fall Winter 1999-2000 6 7

REFERKNCES

Baird, Chuck Crawford1995 Chuck Baird: 35 Plates. San Diego, CA.

DawnSign Press.Bell, Alexander Graham1883 Fallacies Concerning the Deaf, and the Influence

of Such Fallacies in Preventing the Amelioration oftheir Condition. Wahsington: Judd & Detweiler.

1991 Chicano Art: Resistance and Affirmation, 1965-1985, LA: Wright Art Gallery. University ofCalifornia.

Cummins, J., & Danesi, M.1990 Heritage Languages: The Development and

Denial of Canada's Linguistic. Montreal, Quebec:Our Schools / Our Selves Education Foundation.

Dupor, Susan1998 to 2000 Personal communication.Gannon, Jack R.1981 Deaf Heritage: A Narrative History of Deaf

America. Silver Springs. MD: National Associa-tion of the Deaf.

Glickman, N. & Harvey, M.1996 Culturally Affirmative Psychotherapy with Deaf

Persons. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Helene, Amy1995 Aaron Douglas: Art, Race, And the Harlem

Renaissance, Jackson: University of Mississippi,hooks, bell1995 Killing Rage: Ending Racism. NY: Henry Holt

and Company, Inc.Huggins, Nathan Irvin1971 Harlem Renaissance. NY: Oxford University

Press.Humphries, Tom1991 An Introduction to the Culture of Deaf People in

the United States: Content Notes and ReferenceMaterials for Teachers. In Sign Language Studies,Fall 1991, Vol. 72, p. 209 -240.

Johnston, P., Miller, B., Baird, C , Wilhite, A., Ho L.,Creighton, N.,Wonder, G., Inches-Vasnick, S.,Sonnenstrahl, D.

1989 Manifesto of DefVIA and Presentation.Lane, Harlan1992 Mask of Benevolence: Disabiling the Deaf Com-

munity. NY: Alfred A. Knopf.

Lane, H., Hoffmeister, R., & Bahan, B.1996 A Journey Into the Deaf-World. San Diego, CA,

DawnSignPress,Listisard, Michele1997 Neon, Sunflower& Double Illusions: Betty

Miller Continues to Grow as an Artist and Advo-cate. In Deaf Life magazine May 1997.

Miller, Betty G.1998-2000 Personal communication.1989 De'VIA (Deaf View/Image Art). In the Deaf

Way: Perspectives From the International Confer-ence on Deaf Culture. Washington, DC: GallaudetUniversity Press.

Moore, M. & Panara, R.1996 Great Deaf Americans. The Second Edition,

Rochester, NY: Deaf Life Press.2000 Newswaves editorial, Rochester, NY: Newswaves,

March 15, 2000, p. 8.Padden, C. & Humphries, T.1988 Deaf In America: Voices from a Culture. Cam-

bridge Harvard Press.Schertz, Brenda1995 Deaf Artists' Exhibit Gallery Guide: Deaf Studies

IV Conference. Boston, MA.Schertz, BrendaDeaf Artists' Exhibit Gallery Guide: Deaf Studies VI

Conference. Oakland, CA.Schertz, BrendaNational Touring Exhibit of Deaf Culture Art Gallery

Guide - Elements of a Culture: Visions by DeafArtists. Rochester, NY.

Sonnenstrahl, Deborah1996 De' VIA—What An Odd Word!: A Historical

Perspective. In Deaf American Monograph. SilverSpring, MD: NAD.

Thomson, R.G.1997 Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disabil-

ity in American Culture and Literature. NY:Columbia University Press.

Walker, Alice1992 Possessing the Secret of Joy. NY: Harcourt,

Brace, Jovanovich.Wilcox, Sherman (editor)1989American Deaf Culture: An Anthology.

Burtonsville, MD: Linstok Press.

68 Volume 15 Number2 Fall-Winter 1999-2000 Visual Anthropology Review