"So You're Telling Me That Non (Dis)abled Actors Play (Dis)abled Characters?" - (Dis)ability on Demand, Part One

In 1978, Mankiewicz and Swerdlow, in their seminal work, Remote Control: Television and the Manipulation of American Life, claim that television was the most powerful institution in our society at that time. Today, over thirty-six years later, I think their statement still rings true. Certainly, our technology has expanded quite a bit to include other forms of entertainment, including cellular smart phones, laptops, tablets and the like. The list could truly go on and on, and, with this endless amount of devices, we, as members of a digital age, have created this power, this need, to be "always on" (Rushkoff, 2013, p. 85; italics added for emphasis). However, no matter the number of other devices that we all may possess, millions, perhaps billions, of people still turn on the television each evening to tune into their favorite programming. I believe there is real power in this routine as well.

Yet, I wonder where this power derives from? Why do we feel this need to turn on the television? Is there something more than the value of amusement at work here? Many theorists have attempted to answer these very queries. Stonewall’s Citizenship 21 Project (2003), suggests that, “Many people use media, primarily television, as a source of experiencing reality, especially when they lack first-hand experience of an issue presented on screen.” Others, like Byrd, Byrd, & Dillon (1980) hypothesize that “We watch programs into which we can project ourselves” (p. 68). While both of these theories make genuine claims, I find the latter to be the most prevalent in my own television viewing preferences. Whenever I watch an episode of any of my never-ending favorite television programs (Game of Thrones, True Blood, The Walking Dead, Witches of East End, Orange is the New Black, American Horror Story, Big Bang Theory, etc.), I always position myself with the character I find most relatable (Sansa Stark, Sookie Stackhouse, Maggie Greene, Ingrid Beauchamp, Piper Chapman, Zoe Benson, Penny, etc.).

This is often a very simple task for myself to accomplish, but I fear that this connection may not be easily found for members of the (dis)abled community. I think back to all of the various shows that I have watched throughout my relatively short life, and I find it hard to count more than five (dis)abled characters that appeared regularly on these popular programs that I viewed (Nan from American Horror Story, Becky Jackson from Glee, Artie Abrams also from Glee, Gil Grissom from CSI: Crime Scene Investigation... That's it.). Victoria Lewis, as transcribed in “Written on the Body,” a written account of a symposium held by HBO for actors, writers, directors, and filmmakers held to discuss how to write about (dis)ability, echoes similar claims, that “the fact that these roles are few and far between” (HBO, 2007, p. 36).

Despite the appallingly low number of roles, some do exist, but many are not true portrayals of the (dis)abled experience. This fact is extrapolated upon David Kurs when he, also in “Written on the Body,” states:

Roles get cast here and there that may not be authentic. But because there’s a fear among actors that they might not get another role, another opportunity, even a deaf actor will play a non-authentic character; the roles are so few and far between that they’re grateful to get them. So that’s a struggle as well. I mean, you know, it’s work! (p. 37).  

While I have come to know that the life of an actor, especially in television, is certainly not easy, I realize now that the life of the (dis)abled actor is definitely more difficult. Additionally, as Wilde (2010) elaborates, these same “unauthentic” roles may only be a supporting or subsidiary character—the type of role we may not even recall when thinking about a program days, and most certainly years, later (p. 41). These roles, though scarce, simply are not memorable and revolutionary like the type of characters the (dis)abled community needs to change current stereotypes that exist.

Moreover, I have noticed that many of these roles for (dis)abled characters, whether small or large, are not always played by (dis)abled actors. I wonder why this could possibly be, because, as I mentioned above, (dis)abled actors find work so scarcely and will essentially take anything they can get (HBO, p. 37). To expound upon this unusual phenomenon, I believe that a further review of the preexisting literature on this matter and its impact on society, particularly within the realm of education, is in order. 

This and the three subsequent blog posts will contain said review, which I have entitled (Dis)ability on Demand. Furthermore, this review will be presented in a somewhat untraditional, multimedia format filled with pictures and links to relevant videos and website, as featured briefly above. 

Works Cited

Byrd, D., Byrd, K., & Dillon, C. (1980). 

Television and disability. Journal of 

Rehabilitation, October/November/December. 

67-69.

Citizenship 21 Project. (2003). Profiles of 

prejudice: Detailed summary. London, England: 

Stonewall. Available from 

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/documents/pdf_cov

er__content.pdf. 

Foss, K. A. (2014). (De)stigmatizing the 

silent epidemic: Representations of hearing 

loss in entertainment television. Health 

Communication, 29(9), 888-900.

HBO. (2007). A conversation about disability 

written on the body: Part two. Dramatist, 

9(5), 36-41.

Mankiewicz, F. & Swerdlow, J. (2978). Remote 

control: Television and the manipulation of 

American life. New York: Ballantine Books. 

Rushkoff, D. (2013). Present shock: When 

everything happens now. New York, NY: Penguin 

Group.

Wilde, A. (2010). Spectacle, performance, and 

the re-presentation of disability and 

impairment. Review of Disability Studies, 

6(3). 34-53.