Notes on Progress: The Reflections of a Film Juror
Ms. Kolucki was a member of the distinguished jury which judged the film entries in the Film Festival at the XV World Congress of Rehabilitation International June 4-8, 1984 in Lisbon, Portugal. Following the Festival, she was frequently asked by producers who had entered films and others, how the jurors made their selections and how films could be improved. The following articles is, in part, a response to their inquiries.
You should be proud. The film jury at this year's World Congress of Rehabilitation International viewed 67 films. They included public service announcements, dramas and documentaries from 18 countries around the world.
You should be proud. We viewed growth, both in the number of entries, the number of entered countries and most importantly, in the quality of the films entered.
Awards have been given. For those who won, the awards will hopefully stimulate them to continue their fine work. But what about the people responsible for the remaining entries? Each of them obviously set out to make the best possible product with whatever resources were available. Did they accomplish their goals? Why didn't they win? What can they learn from the award-winning products? What will encourage them to try again--to improve on what they have already begun?
From whatever perspective you read this article, hopefully you will find new ways of treating the vast area of disability. Hopefully you will recognize new ideas and perspectives you can use or pass on to others to continue the development of media products that are sensitive, accurate and encourage positive integration.
First, let's be realistic and get something out of the way at the beginning. There still are lousy pieces of media being produced. In every country, we still see, hear and read about miraculous recoveries or people with disabilities performing super-human feats. And superstitions, gross inaccuracies and generalizations are still there. However this article is not designed to criticize, but to provide lessons and alternative suggestions which can help make winners.
A booklet, Improving Communications about People with Disabilities was published by the United Nations in 1982 and it seems that many of those involved with the films shown in Portugal have either read the booklet or are inherently good producers of media who are sensitive and willing to take risks. Let's look at the positive elements of what was seen and relate them to the Guidelines in the U.N. booklet.
People with Disabilities are Speaking for Themselves
This element was seen in many films of different formats and styles. Children talked about their disabilities, their adjustments, friendships and goals for the future (Jennifer and The Acorn People are two examples). Adults spoke of changing legislation, their careers(or lack of), and their attitudes and those of others. (Independent Living Options for Disabled People, Statement of Intent, Captives of Care, The Terry Fox Story, Living with Grace) In nearly all of the films, including the dramas, people with disabilities portrayed themselves, rather than non-disabled actors being cast.
Humor, Curiosity, and Awkwardness were Depicted
Thank goodness that more and more people are realizing that disability needn't always be such a heavy issue. That people (both disabled and not) sometimes make mistakes. That it is O.K. to be scared, or ask questions. And that we can laugh with (not at) every single one of us.
The best filmakers have continually shown us that even in tragedy, there can be a lighter side. In fact, they use humor to give us cathartic "relief." In the grand prize winner at the Festival, Living With Grace, humor naturally comes out and puts into perspective the rehabilitation notion of "who's treating who." Grace, who has Alzhiemer's disease, is constantly forgetful and emotionally upset-so much so that her husband must seek day care for her while he is at work. She is being interviewed by a woman at the Center who says something like this to Grace: " Grace, I,d like to ask you a few questions. Then we,d like you to decide if you would like to come here." With that statement, Grace wrinkles her foreheads and looks directly into the eyes of the woman and says "But I,m already here.".
Not scripted or rehearsed, Grace naturally makes us laugh, with her and ourselves. And don't we, as human beings, like to stare at something which is new to us? Don't we many times wish we were children again so that we could try to scare a person who is deaf to see if they really can't hear? Or ask someone who uses a wheelchair how she or he performs "personal" activities of daily living? Well, quite a few of the films did exactly that. We saw a camp counselor in The Acorn People, with the use of camera techniques (albeit exaggerated) stare and squirm when he saw, for the first time, a child with no arms or legs, another one drooling and yet another speaking with a voice box. Slowly, we, along with the actor, became accustomed to the differences until no, they didn't go away, but because the kids were neat kids, we didn't either. Probably the best examples seen at the Congress of humorously confronting absolutely silly stereotypes was one of the films that tied for first place in the Drama category, Hold Up. A robbery takes place in Any town. Three people with various disabilities witness different parts of the sequence YET no one will believe their versions of what happened. How could they possibly give an accurate description of the robber or provide an essential clue to the police? The general attitude is "Thanks a lot but this is serious. Let the REAL people solve this crime."
This attitude persists despite the fact that each of the people who are disabled have solid jobs and are, for the most part, successfully mainstreamed into the community. Yes, the film makes us laugh-and think-about very real behaviors and very real obstacles to society's utilization of everyone's talents in daily life.
Practical, Helpful Information was Shared with the Viewer
Many films answered questions like "What do I do if...?" about meeting and interacting with people who are disabled. Films quickly go up in this author's estimation when the film contains something that will help the viewer the next time he/she meets a man, woman or child that is disabled. Knowledge lessens fear and fear can hinder interaction. And the biggest boost to accurate information again leads back to people speaking for themselves-the actors who have disabilities, the parents, siblings, friends.
Briefly, here are a few additional areas where films demonstrated growth in both quality and content:
- Timely issues were raised in such a way that the average viewer could understand AND be interested in them, e.g. legislative changes, accessibility, adaptive house planning, technological advances, assistants for people with disabilities, etc.
- Vital areas of the total rehabilitation process were portrayed. The most outstanding example, and one that applies to nations at every stage of development is that of Early Intervention. It was mentioned in many films, but in a few (Hiro Walk Tall, Kids and An Alternative Approach) Early Intervention was demonstrated. Viewers witnessed the benefits of detecting disabilities in children at the earliest possible stage, of infant stimulation and participation of family members as well as the use of simple adaptive devices to ensure that children go through, as much as possible, normal stages of development.
- The winners (not only those who won the prizes) were all short stories of interest to general audiences, children as well as adults. Yes, there is a place for specialised films on particular topics about disability. But this Congress was about communications, attitudes and information. Inherent in those words is all people, i.e. the general public. Those specialised films, we know, mainly preach to the converted. But we must also keep in mind that everyone can learn something about better communication and attitudes-including the converted, people in rehabilitation, people in the media and people who are disabled.
- Commonalities with the viewing audience were depicted, rather than just specialised settings and circumstances. Surely the better films stressed similarities in feelings, work and home life, leisure activities, etc. Medical and rehabilitations settings are important but that is all the viewer sees, it can perpetuate inaccurate stereotypes about people with disabilities not having a life outside of a hospital, not being able to work, or being in needs of our dimes and pity.
- The power within ourselves to make life more positive was a powerful theme throughout many films. A common but erroneous attitude is that people who are disabled must wait for outside resources to help them. Another erroneous belief is that a disability means a lesser quality of life. These attitudes simply are not true, as many of the films from all over the world depicted. And much-so much- has to do with our attitude and how we deal with what life gives to us. Jennifer's parents talked about how, more than anything else, they wanted their daughter to learn to be positive and go after all the possibilities that life can offer. In Living with Grace, Grace's husband learns to accept that which he cannot change and be happy about what he still has. Let's not confuse this attitude with being a doormat or being unrealistic. Let's appreciate it in the message the films gave us-the quality of one's life is as much dependent on our attitude about ourselves and our belief that we can change people's insides as it is dependent on improving people's outside.
Progress in the field of rehabilitation and communications can be divided into at least two categories: first, striving to improve the messages we send regarding disability via the media and second, using the media to naturally integrate messages about people with disabilities into their products.
Let's look at the first category for a moment. Here are some questions to ask before, during and after the development of any media product about disability:
- If dealing with prevention, does the message state clearly that we are trying to prevent the disease and not the person? -If the message is about rehabilitation, does it avoid presenting people with disabilities, as well as people who work with them, as extra-ordinary?
- If the message is about change, does it show how this change can benefit everyone?
- If the message is about attitudes, does it avoid placing blame and, instead, stress that attitudes can be changed with accurate information?
- If the message is about behaviour, does it give examples of how this behaviour has already been successful?
Regarding the second category of progress, striving to integrate messages about people with disabilities into existing media products, there is certainly a gold mine of ideas that were viewed in the films at the Congress. Unfortunately, many were simply too long and detailed, but if the story was shortened and integrated into another existing program-news, sports, interview, children's show, soap opera (telenovela), etc.-the message would have interested and hopefully benefited a much larger audience.
Special note should be made of the importance of including people with disabilities in children's programs. We can hope that the millions of dollars currently being spent to change existing negative attitudes won't be as necessary for a generation who has grown up with peers who are disabled. Anecdotally, we already see glimpses of these positive effects-from people with disabilities integrated on Sesame Street in the U.S. and in other countries-to messages about health and prevention on a popular puppet show in the developing regions of the world, for example Indonesia's SI UNYL.
Finally, there is the problem of getting the media interested in including people with disabilities in their products for other than a sensational or absolutely heart- rending story. We must always remember that those working in the media are part of the general public who need to be sensitised and educated-and acknowledged when they have done well. Two closing examples illustrate this point, and show that anyone can change-if we and they are willing to take a few risks.
The Hong Kong Government was planning to produce a public service announcement on Friendship: A Way to Integration. Until last year, many PSA's dealt with charity or employment of people who are disabled. They wanted a new approach yet were afraid of being too bold for a mostly conservative Chinese community. So they listened to advice from people who were disabled, people in the rehabilitation field and the people in the media. The Committee on Public Education in Rehabilitation and the creative staff of the Government Information Services viewed a selection of tapes of different types of television programs which dealt with the theme of friendship. They conceived the idea of taking a group of disabled and non-disabled children to a local park and letting them play together. The producer took risks, but sensitively shot pictures of children who were blind, physically disabled or had Down's Syndrome-on trampolines, slides and playing with tame animals. On the surface, it didn't seem like much. Was it really creative? Did it have any message at all? Would the audience like it? Well, the answer is YES to all three questions. Sensitive, fun pictures of playing together conveyed the message of Friendship beautifully. The PSA won first prize at the Congress in Portugal. And any doubters in the media became believers.
The second example is also an award winner in the documentary category-Walter: A Perfect Ordinary Person. It's a film about the making of a film, Walter, in the United Kingdom. The actors, director, technicians previously had little or no contact with people who are disabled and many of the actors used in the film had physical disabilities or were mentally retarded. In the film we see and hear the stereotypes people came in with at the beginning of the filming, the process of strangeness dissipating and the mutual admiration that developed.The people with disabilities broke down the negative stereotypes themselves- more than any "expert" consultation or campaign probably could have. Is there any lesson from all of this? Maybe there are none at all. But, at the moment you are reading this, many new films are in the process of being planned or produced. Many of them will be at the next World Congress in 1988 in Japan. And progress undoubtedly will be made again-in both the quantity from the countries all over the world as well as the quality. It doesn't really depend solely on one's budget, well-known actors or whether the country is less or more developed. It depends on whether we learn from both the winners and those who tried and didn't win-this time.
return to International Disability Video Catalogue