Friday, 22 February 2019

Round up.

Deaf Arts,is it worth it?

Image result for deaf artsReading recent concerns by deaf artists they aren't getting their own way. Deaf Theatre is not reflecting deaf or other people with hearing loss and appear to have own spin on what culture is by redefining it themselves.

Just look at the image shown at the start, 'The Deaf Identity'!  Just how many areas are these deaf involved with to gain funds for 'Deaf Culture'?  Some examples below.

Candoco –  dance group that integrates able and disabled dancers.

Graeae – champions accessibility and provides a platform for new generations of Deaf and disabled talent through the creation of trail-blazing theatre

DASH Arts – a disability arts organisation in Shropshire.

Disability Arts Cymru – disability arts organisation for Wales

Deafinitely Theatre – a Deaf-led theatre company gaining extensive funding from:-

Arts Council, England
Arts Council National Lottery Project Grants
Autograph Sound Recording
Children in Need
City Lit
Edwardian Hotels London
Global's Make Some Noise
New Diorama Theatre
Old Diorama Arts Centre
Regent's Place
The Royal Court Theatre 
Wellcome Trust
White light Ltd
29th May 1961 Charitable Trust

The National Lottery, and 15 others!

Cash they ain't short of!  What is the 'complaint' regarding 'others' defining the 'Deaf' arts?  They take lots of funding to promote exclusively signed output and much more funding to promote deafness and sign through disability funding too.  They heavily campaigned against caps on ESA despite well over £46K a year being claimed for their participation in it, and got near a 50% increase.

What really seems to irk those involved with Deaf Arts is the fact the funding comes with strings, these 'strings' being inclusion and other access as well as suggestions they appeal to wider areas to justify output and work alongside disabled too.  

Some Deaf involved in the arts are pretty much doing their own thing with no bottom line to include most with a hearing loss except adding captions occasionally to comply with inclusive remits, whilst still developing output that is irrelevant to them and singular to signing areas. Our very own Deaf Elitists. Whilst art is subjective anyway, they are a one trick signing pony using culture to prevent everyone from ignoring the imbalance of it.  At the same time, it is only accessible to those living in major cities leaving most Deaf with no way of seeing it.

Notwithstanding and despite a minority within the hearing loss worlds, they are funded far too much without checks on the accessible output of it all.  It's excessive in proportion to actual grass root support even and despite 2 primary TV programs funded for gratis, yet, when did the majority OF deaf really take any viable interest?  They still complain about how their ability to 'control' how deafness and the image, is being limited by access and inclusion rules.  'Deaf do this, deaf do that..' of course is their mantra, and never the Hard of Hearing twain should meet.

As one social media poster stated:

The biggest exploiters, are those running the Deaf arts which consist of a select band of over-privileged deafie luvvies managing the whole thing for their own benefit and getting far too much funding for exclusion and irrelevant output.

Why Bilingualism is Best.

And why futures and deaf outcomes are being stunted by an inability to acquire it and vested interests opposing it.  There is also an issue of deaf claiming bilingualism yet having little abilities to display it, except in sign use, and requiring support to use it, just when is Bilinguality a false claim by these deaf?  The true bilinguals are their support.