The Shape of Water and representation

My main impression from The Shape of Water was that it didn't deserve Best Picture.

There were things that were really good about it. There were some amazing visuals and great performances, especially Michael Shannon's, but a lot of those elements did not fit together well, which meant that the overall viewing was jarring. Having only seen Hellboy for other examples of Del Toro's work, I would have to guess that he might have some issues with taste and self-indulgence that may hamper him despite having some visionary brilliance. (Kind of a George Lucas situation.)

Despite that, it was also jarring to read articles critical of the movie's portrayal of Elisa, who is mute. Here is one article that links to some of the others I have read:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/shape-of-water-offensive-to-people-with-disabilities_us_5a8b798de4b0a1d0e12c48fc

My initial quibbling disagreement is that her scars being a remnant of a violent act is an assumption. With her being found as an infant near a river, with the scars and inability to speak already in place, I thought it implied that she was also originally aquatic, and going off with the Amphibian Man was rediscovering her heritage. I base that on what I know of Pan's Labyrinth and the fairy tale tone set in most of the movie, including Giles referring to "the princess" in his narration.

So while I did not in any way think that was the intent or purpose of the movie, that did not automatically negate what people who actually live with disabilities took from the movie, including a confirmation that they need to go off and be with their own kind because there is not a place for them in this world. That was not right, and it was the kind of situation where you can't help but feel like having a few consultants with that actual disability could have been really helpful.

I found that despite thinking I kind of disagreed with the criticisms (it appears I was not that firmly rooted in my disagreement), I suddenly kept finding examples of disability being used as a prop.

The conversation around Natalie Dormer and In Darkness may have been part of it - one could find many examples - but the one I am going to focus on is the recent Portland Opera production of Faust.

I don't know who - for this version - first came up with the idea of putting Marguerite on crutches, but I ended up really hating it.

If the actress had actually needed crutches I would have applauded it. If it had been something that made me look at the character of Marguerite differently, resulting in new ways of thinking about the opera, I could have been pleasantly surprised by that. It was nothing like that.

This was how they used it: during one musical section she briefly did not need to use her crutches. I suppose the idea was to give an extra reason for how giddy Faust's love made her, and to remind the audience that he had infernal powers. It didn't feel that way though; it just felt weird. The reasons to be suspicious of Faust are the jewels and ways in which he presses boundaries. They showed that so beautifully in the 90s.

It also showed a difference in that when her spirit went free (because her body was executed) she no longer needed the crutches. Also done much better in the 90s. And I think there was one more reason for the crutches: to make her situation more pitiable. That was really uncomfortable.

Some of this may seem like it doesn't matter that much, but there are real people with real disabilities. If media finds that to be a fun concept for experimentation, without looking at the reality of situations, that is highly irresponsible. That has real-world consequences. If most of what you know comes from media depictions and they are false, what you think you know about those real people is false.

I am going to share two things I have read recently. I regret not being able to point to who said them. If I can find them later I will add the information.

One was in a recent thread on things that get said to people with disabilities. A frequent comment - paraphrased - is "I would kill myself if I had to go through that."

That may sound like a compliment, because you are so much stronger for being able to deal with it. Another interpretation is "I would not find a life like yours worth living."

On a related note, there was a different thread on the opioid crisis. One reaction to it is severely limiting and trying to completely phase out certain drugs that are addictive, but are also a real help for people with chronic pain. That includes some things they are looking at in Oregon. If our state policy is going to be taking away remedies for pain but leaving suicide available, what are we saying about some lives? That may not be the intended message, but you can send very damaging unintended messages when you don't think things through.

We are living in a time when Nazis are back. Some of them are openly Nazis, some of them are repeating slogans that they have to know relate, but I also hear people echoing things that Hitler wrote with no idea. ("We aren't intended to get along with each other" being a big one.)

Certainly, people who aren't deeply evil should be able to follow those nihilistic trains of thought and see the logical outcomes, be repelled, and reverse, but if you silence enough voices - not even thinking about it - it's possible to make it pretty far down the path.

I reiterate that representation matters. Yesterday and today are about disability representation, other times it will be about gender, race, religion -- humans find a lot of ways to marginalize and hate, and we need to get better than this. Sometimes we are horrible in remarkably stupid and pointless ways.

More on that tomorrow. For now, this seems relevant:

https://www.ushmm.org/information/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/special-focus/nazi-persecution-of-the-disabled