What is Deafhood ?

University of Bristol Centre for Deaf Studies and Deafhood Studies

Author: Dr. Paddy Ladd, Senior lecturer, University of Bristol Centre for Deaf Studies http://www.bristol.ac.uk/deaf email: enquiries-cds@bristol.ac.uk

The Deafhood concept is a huge one, and cannot easily be summarised in a short definition. After all, it takes a year of study just to come to grips with some of what it implies ! There are now Deafhood groups and websites in several countries. Our own official website is www.deafhood.com . USA websites are www.deafhood.us and www.deafhooddiscourses.com . The latter were established via contact with CDS and share the same basic principles. But because each countrys situation and needs are different, application of Deafhood thinking in also varies between countries. It is important to stress that the Deafhood concept is not carved in stone. We are all on a journey of exploration, and are uncovering new layers of meanings, discovering new doorways and pathways all the time. There are 10 main components of the concept : 1. Re-framing traditional Deaf Studies. The Deafhood concept examines what we already know about Sign Language Peoples, and of Deaf Studies, and places this knowledge within a new, Deafhood framework, offering a new lens for viewing them. So some of what you will learn covers subjects you already know something about, such as sign language and linguistics but from wider and deeper perspectives. 2. A new Culturo-linguistic model. Deafhood Studies rejects the medical model inherent in the term deafness, and offers the word Deafhood to summarise the opposite perspectives, the beliefs and practices of Deaf communities/Sign Language Peoples in their languages, cultures, and histories over the past 200+ years. For example, the social model of deafness/disability is seen as one step in the right direction in that this leads to anti-discrimination legislation. But this usually benefits individuals. It does not necessarily benefit communities as a whole. The absence of collectivist thinking has also resulted in great damage to Deaf communities because of mainstreaming and the widespread closure of Deaf schools, which is where Deaf cultures, identities and languages are developed and passed on to future generations. Deafhood theory believes that a new, culturo-linguistic model is more appropriate. This enables us to explain to governments and publics that Deaf cultures are bona-fide national cultures, and that educational and social policies, if they want to be fully effective and genuinely anti-discriminatory, must operate from such a

model. In this approach, the innovative use of the new field of human geography by Gulliver and others at CDS, will become increasingly important. Deafhood Studies are thus founded on this basis of actively seeking out what might be termed Deaf Knowledge that is, Deaf ways of thinking and acting which can be used to make policies and practices more Deaf-centred and thus more appropriate. It can be be said that this description matches the CDS mission for the past 30 years the Deafhood concept has thus become a way of formalising this and in so doing, opening new conceptual doorways. 3. Deafhood and Colonialism. A vital part of Deafhood thinking involves recognising that Deaf communities and cultures have been damaged by oppression, most notably through the 120 years of Oralism. But the simple word oppression does not by itself help us to analyse how it works and what its consequences might be. In order to understand all this more fully, a more powerful form of analysis is needed. We believe the best tool for analysis is colonialism that is, the attempt by one society to colonise another through seeking to remove or minimise its language and culture. Colonialism can be found in several forms around Deaf communities, but its main site is Deaf education. It is also important to note that education is a high priority for both minority language communities and post-colonial societies. Taking this approach enables us to draw on useful literature from Post-Colonial Studies. This not only helps us to understand how the processes of oppression operate, but what the range of consequences might be, and also how to shape a decolonised future for the minority society with the help of both d/Deaf and hearing people as allies. Two new fields are central to this work. The first is minority language/culture studies, including official governmental recognition of sign languages. CDS colleagues working in this field include Batterbury, Gulliver and Ladd. The second is the concept of group human rights, currently being explored by Emery. 4. Deafhood vis-a-vis Deaf Cultures. A crucial aspect of the Deafhood concept therefore concerns Deaf cultures themselves, and the need to examine how they have been negatively affected by the colonialist mindset. This includes the extent to which lack of Deaf pride, of shame and absence of confidence has affected those cultures, and the extent to which the cultures have absorbed negative aspects of hearing societies views of them. But it also includes the ways in which they have then drawn inwards and reacted against both deaf ex-mainstreamed and hearing people. So what the Deafhood concept is saying to Deaf cultures is, in effect, You have done fantastically well to survive the past 120 years and still keep growing. But you still need to grow to your fullest size and achieve your full potential and that includes looking at where and how Deaf cultural ways you have learned under colonialism may have damaged you.

There has been so little funded research into Deaf cultures that most of what is taught about this subject is very sketchy, often cliched, and quite rigid. Government and social policies can never hope to serve a society well unless that society has been properly surveyed and understood. Hence the need for in-depth interviewing of a wide range of Deaf people (including both Deaf and hearing families) by researchers operating from Deafhood perspectives. This is particularly true for Deaf communities own minorities. This is why social and cultural histories are a basic necessity for every Deaf community in the world, and thus why more work such as the Deafhood-based cultural, sociological and anthropological research begun at CDS (Ladd, Kusters, de Meulder, OBrien) and by American colleagues such as Mindess and Holcomb, is so urgently needed. 5. Deafhood as a lifetime journey. Thus, because everyone has been damaged by colonialism, even the so called Big D Deaf people have much to unlearn from self study. Thus we see Deafhood as a journey to find ones largest Deaf self, to be the largest Deaf person one can possibly be. This is a journey on which everyone is travelling, for the most part unconsciously and without guidance. So the Deafhood concept rejects the Big D is superior to little d thinking seeing this as a product of colonialism which causes damage within and around Deaf communities, yet leaves the oppressors untouched. 6. Deafhood and Hearing people. The colonialist process has thus also damaged hearing parents of Deaf children, initially by severing them from normal healthy relationships with each other, and then through the frequent rejection by Deaf communities of hearing parents who have learned to sign. It has also damaged hearing children of Deaf parents, hearing professionals trying to work in a positive way with Deaf people, and other hearing people who want to be close to Deaf communities. Thus instead of having a strong Deaf community, which is both run the way its members wish, and also has powerful allies of large numbers of hearing people operating in and around the community, fragmentation and divisions, misunderstandings and unhappiness are prevalent and powerful concepts such as coalition-building, or real change in government and social policies remains a long way off. This is why Deafhood theory which has an understanding of colonialism offers new positive ways for d/Deaf and hearing people to relate to each other. It believes that both hearing and Deaf people must also be interviewed in depth in order for their own stories to be told. 7. Seeking larger Deaf selves Deaf History and philosophies.

It is one thing to describe how colonialism damages Deaf cultures. It is another to help people envisage, re-imagine, what ones largest Deaf self might be. So Deafhood Studies places great importance on any examples from Deaf history, especially those

prior to Oralism, which give us clues as to what the larger picture might be. The work of Lane (1984), Mottez (1993) offered the first clues. These were drawn into a Deafhood history framework by Ladd (2003) and continued by Gulliver (date) Outside of the CDS, there is recent valuable Deafhood-based work from Mirzoeff (1995), Carty (date) and Murray (date). The most sustained, most exciting site for important clues is France in general and Paris in particular. Firstly, from 1760 and the worlds first Deaf school, through to 1779, when Desloges wrote the first Deaf book, a period in which new and positive views of Deaf people by hearing philosophers such as CHECK MY BOOK Leibniz, Montaigne and Rousseau emerged. Then the importance of the French Revolution and Deaf involvement in this, and its effects on the writings and philosophies of the first Deaf people to receive a Deaf education, such as Massieu and Clerc (de Ladebat 1815). These constitute the first sustained evidence of Deaf philosophy. Then the importance of the work of Bebian and Berthier and others, building on this philosophical base to campaign for bilingualism and against the first stirrings of Oralism, culminating in the remarkable Paris Banquets from 1834 onwards, where the signed speeches were also recorded in print, so that we can see the full scope of their own visions of themselves, which Ladd (2003) describes as the tenets of Deafhood thinking, leading to Berthiers vision of the Deaf-mute Nation, electing its own Member of Parliament to represent that nation in government affairs. Study of this period of Deaf History (and of other periods where postive information is available) is therefore crucial to understanding how some Deaf people saw themselves prior to Oralist colonialism. This then offers clues about how to make the journey towards enlargening ones vision and becoming ones fullest Deaf self. 8. Seeking larger Deaf selves Deaf Arts. In modern times, following the Deaf Resurgence and the emergence of new generations of young Deaf people educated through sign languages, new, larger ways of being Deaf have begun to come into being in the 21st century. The most powerful example is that of Deaf arts. Artforms offer ways for human beings to utilise human creativity in order to express their fullest potential, so in order to gather clues about the largest Deaf self that might be realised, recognition of Deaf arts through Deafhood Studies is vital. Mirzoeff (1995) has shown how Oralism decimated Deaf visual arts in France, and Ladd and others have described its effect on sign language artforms. Thus it comes as no surprise to find that Deaf arts re-emerged once children were able to be educated in sign language. The remarkable work taking place all around the world in sign language arts, visual arts, Deaf film, Deaf cabaret, Deaf music, the sheer number of cultural festivals, conferences and raves, all constitute the first steps towards a Deaf Renaissance. These artworks form a core field for Deafhood Studies, because in so doing, all these momentary glimpses of larger Deaf selves can be then harnessed into forms which over the length of a course, can reveal a sustained vision.

At CDS, the groundbreaking work of Sutton-Spence (DATE) and Kaneko (Date) on sign language poetry, offers a good example of what is needed for other Deaf artforms. The valuable work of our Deafhood-inspired colleagues at NTID, Rochester - Christie, Durr and Kelstone on Deaf visual arts, sign language arts and Deaf theatre, and the work of Bahan and Baumann at Gallaudet are among other good examples of where Deafhood Studies might be headed. 9. Deafhood and equality.

All the above examples of Deafhood are underpinned by one crucial concept a belief in equality of worth of each person. This not only refers to d/Deaf people being equal to hearing people, but also to equality among Deaf people themselves. Deafhood theory sees the present structures of inequality and social division in the communities playing out in 2 ways. On the one hand a result of colonialism itself (setting deaf children above and then apart from Deaf children, and in the creation of Oralist elite schools like the Mary Hare in the UK). On the other hand there is also a reaction to colonialism, hence both the Big D better philosophy and the divisions between Gallaudet graduates and the grass roots Deaf communities of the USA. Thus Deafhood Studies emphasises the importance of indepth sociological analysis of Deaf communities, so that each countrys unique culture can be identified. However, there is also a persistent counter-philosophy running through Deaf cultures from 1779 onwards one which believes every Deaf person is of equal worth, of equal value. Collecting evidence of this philosophy is central to Deafhood Studies. UK examples are examined in Ladd (2003) and in other CDS work (see below). 10. Deafhood praxis in employment. Deafhood Studies emphasises the importance of complete re-evaluation of what is generally known as Deaf work that is, all areas of employment directly linked to the needs of Deaf Reconstruction. For such fields to operate at their most effective, appreciation of Deaf knowledge and Deaf skills is essential. An obvious example is Deaf education. CDS poses the challenge - how can anyone devise appropriate policies for Deaf education if Deaf children, adults and educators are not interviewed in depth, and if the work of Deaf educators in the classroom remains unexamined ? Thus Deafhood-centred research into such fields as Deaf education, interpreting, social welfare, social policy, d/Deaf organisations is urgently needed. CDS colleagues have begun an especial emphasis on education (West, Ladd, Goncalves, Smith, Hetherington). Griggs has developed the concept of Deaf Wellness for the mental health field. In the interpreting field the work of Stone has important implications.