Presented by Accessible Arts www.aarts.net.au
Paper Name:
Disability Arts – an art history perspective
Presenter Name:
Majella Flanagan
Day of presentation: Friday 26 March
Program session no: 5b
Aim: to present a new model of interpreting art works for those in the mainstream
as well as those in the margins. Discussion is on the marginal Disability Arts
Movement as research was carried out on the Movement in the UK and Ireland
for a MA study in art history.
For consistency, this discussion will use the terminology of the members of the
disability arts movement, which represents a mix of some new terms with some
terms reclaimed from the medical profession.
Introduction to the Disability Arts Movement in UK, Ireland.
The focus in this discussion is on the following issues within the disability arts
movement

research carried out showed a real desire by disability arts practitioners to
be included in the mainstream art sector

the disability movement and its development of the social model of
disability have been both inspirational and limiting to their practice

because of their marginal position, there is a lack of art historical or critical
debate about the artworks within the disability art movement.
Barriers to achieving mainstream credentials were identified as

the institutionalised discrimination of people with disability from daily life
as revealed through the acceptance of the Medical Model of Disability as
the only way to explore disability. This was the dominant Model from the
Enlightenment until 1970s.

the influence of the Disability Movement in UK and Ireland on the
Disability Arts Movement has tended to focus on lobbying and education
over artistic achievement
1

the tendency to produce art works by people with disability for people with
disability so limiting audiences and objective debate
What is Disability Arts
Discussion of the disability arts movement in UK and Ireland and its background
in the disability movement.
Disability Arts in UK and Ireland has developed from the establishment of the
disability movement, early 1970s. This was a period of dissatisfaction for many
marginalised groups such as racial, gay and feminist rights organisations that
sought equality. The disability movement likewise strove to reveal the
inequalities, discrimination and oppression, which its members had experienced
for many generations, and in all aspects of their lives. Its activities focused on
achieving equal rights for people with disability with regards to social, political
and educational interaction. Through dominating representations designed by the
medical profession and charities, which portrayed impairments as having no
place in economic, romantic, political or social activity, the public and personal
experience of disability was of ‘the other’ and not in line with what is ‘normal.’
Disabled people were “ ‘crippled,’ ‘confined’ to wheelchairs, ‘victims’ or ‘suffering’
from deafness, blindness, ‘mental illness’ or ‘mental handicap.' In short, disability
amounted to being a ‘personal tragedy’ and a social problem or ‘burden’ for the
rest of society.”
Historical attitudes to disability
Medical and Social Model of disability UK
I will remind you briefly of the view developed about disability through the
Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was a period of industry and competition.
People with impairments had no place in this environment, as they were unable
to work or contribute to the economy. They became excess to requirement, a
burden on society and charities were set up to deal with this 'problem.'
With industrial capitalism becoming the model to which society would aspire, in
the late eighteenth century, the hegemony of ‘able-bodied’ normality became the
yardstick for judging people with impairments as less than human. The areas of
life in which people with impairment did have a central role were science and
medicine, but only as the subjects of study. Thus, people with impairment were
again dehumanised. This view pervaded education, religion and the law.
Until the 1970s, the medical model was the dominating and respected opinion
when it came to issues of disability where the accepted terms about disabled
people were
“flawed minds as bodies...crippled, confined to wheelchairs, victims.”
These descriptions were naturalised through the medical model, which put the
doctor as expert and the disabled person as subject. Reparation was needed. Ju
2
Gosling writes, in her article, ”The Scientific Model of Disability”,
[T]he Medical Model of Disability locates disability as being a medical
condition experienced by the individual affected, and disabled people
are often referred to and defined by their impairments e.g. 'the blind',
'the deaf', 'epileptics', 'schizophrenics' etc. People with the same
condition are expected to share the same experiences of their
impairment and to have the same access needs, rather than each
individual having different experiences and needs (as is actually the
case).
The Medical Model was the target of many campaigns by disability rights activists
in Britain during the establishment of the disability movement, especially medical
language and terminology. Charities were also criticised for contributing to a
perpetuation of the belief that the disabled are helpless. New ways of describing
disability became an important part of the movement's campaigns. “Changing
language means changed attitudes.”
The Social Model of disability was one outcome of this campaign. It was
developed in the late 1970s by Professor Mike Oliver. He was inspired by the
Union of Physically Impaired Against Segregation’s (UPIAS) publication
'Fundamental Principles of Disability', which in 1976 stated that,
[i]n our view, it is society which disables physically impaired people.
Disability is something imposed on top of our impairments by the way
we are unnecessarily isolated and excluded from full participation in
society.
This publication offered a rethinking of disability away from an individual tale of
personal tragedy to a phenomenon in which the rest of society had a role to
assume. The impairment was separated from the disability, with the latter being
seen as the cause of discrimination, and a social construct not necessarily
based on truth. Mike Oliver's concept repositioned disabled people as citizens
with rights, and so challenged traditional views that led people to believe
disability was part of the nature of things. It gave the disability movement
grounds to seek equality and respect for its members and happened at a time
when many marginalised groups were gaining momentum regarding these same
types of issues. Feminist, gay and racial rights activists were calling for
oppressive social institutions to be replaced with equality. The disability
movement aligned itself to this same debate and brought about changes in
policy-making and legislation.
Until the Social Model was formed, disability was researched only in the
disciplines of medicine, psychology, special education and social work. The
Social Model caused a shift leading to disability being viewed as relevant to
socio-politics, the humanities and cultural fields.
Parallels have been drawn between the disability movement and other groups
such as women, gay, lesbians and black people. In an idea put forward by
3
academic Tom Shakespeare, the disability movement is a social movement and
that analysing it as such pays attention to the nature of the movement, which is
often neglected by a focus on how the movement can facilitate change (1993).
The direct action demonstrations, the Stop Telethon Campaign and the
Campaign for Accessible Transport (1990s), used direct action tactics, when
wheelchair users formed blockades into TV centres hosting charity fundraisers or
chained themselves to buses along Oxford Street, London. These, Shakespeare
points out, were reminiscent of the activities of the suffragettes’ pre First World
War or the civil rights campaigns in the 1960s. The movement's collective
identity and direct action activities are qualities he believes, which identify it as a
social movement. Shakespeare raises the problem of demographics within the
movement, which tends to be younger. In reality, the majority of six million people
in the UK who have impairment are older women. This skewing in the disability
movement, towards younger members, he surmises, is due to, the movement's
lack of attention for impairments, which must be addressed.
The Social Model of disability has more recently been criticised for having
shortcomings. It has received criticisms for failing to acknowledge impairment
and individual experiences. These included an assumption inherent in the model
which suggested that once society's barriers are removed, so too would the
impairment be removed. The model was also criticised for being too reliant on
sociology in its use of generalisations. There was also a fear that it would lead to
an essentialist view of the world which could not be understood by others.
My own opinion is that the social model was developed to replace the medical
model but in so doing, maintains the presence of the latter.
Despite these difficulties, the Social Model of disability is still thought of as
relevant today, and continues to be employed by the disability movement and in
academic circles, thirty years after it was conceived.
Alternative theories have been developed about disability, as impairment, as
presentations of power within society and as a commentary on the body. Very
few theories have been developed, from an art historical perspective, with
respect to the disability arts movement. It has tended to be treated as a wing of
the disability movement and shared its aims.
Allan Sutherland gives an accepted definition of disability arts.
The generally agreed definition of disability arts, the one that we in
the disability arts movement have found most accurately reflects
what we are doing, is that it is art made by disabled people which
reflects the experience of disability.
Disability arts is art. It is seriously intentioned creative work - poems
or painting or music or comedy or theatre or whatever - made with
some sort of aesthetic purpose. It is not a hobby to keep the cripples'
hands busy. And it is not therapy.
4
Disability arts is made by disabled people. So we're not talking about
anything that portrays us according to other people's perceptions:
Rain Man or Richard III or 'isn't it tragic' documentaries. In disability
arts we are in charge, we tell our own stories, we present our own
perceptions of disability and the issues around it.
A start date for the disability arts movement is given as the late 1970s, citing the
establishment of the London based theatre company Shape, in 1977, as an
important milestone. 1980 was when Graeae, the longest running theatre group
of disabled people, was founded by Nabil Shaban and Richard Tomlinson and
the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People was established the
following year, 1981. This was also the year of the International Year of the
Disabled. Government agencies began to support disability arts initiatives such
as the Arts Council of England and Greater London Council, mainly as funders.
Activities, exhibitions and performances tended to have a subversive nature and
created a profile that declared radical political and societal views. In the main,
most of the projects were urban, disability led, connected to community arts and
were produced from within the movement, rather than in collaboration with
established mainstream arts organisations. The progress was slower in Ireland,
North and South, but organisations were also set up to support disability arts.
They tended to be non-disabled led and were less radical in practice. The
disability arts movement is still widely recognised as a marginal art movement.
The decision to work outside the mainstream came from the desire to find
common stories, shared experiences and strength in numbers. The phrase 'crip
culture' has been used within the movement to describe it as a subculture.
(Oliver, Hasler and Shakespeare).
The images depicted in the art of the movement were expressions of negative
representations of disability, derogatory language, medical labelling, imbalance
of opportunity and a history of exclusion. It was clear, from the start, that
disability arts was not therapy, as this was seen as continuing the medical model
and did not acknowledge a disabled person as a producer of art. Works such as
Bored to Death (basket weaving) by Steve Jones is typical of the type of work
produced by members of the disability arts movement. In Bored to Death, the line
drawing is of a solitary woman sitting in her wheelchair. One hand rests on an
unfinished willow basket. She looks away from her task, bored, uninterested.
The background resembles a wash of batik in creamy yellow. This image recalls
typical daycare centre activities for disabled people, namely basket weaving and
batik making.
5
The artworks produced by the movement were also an illustration of the Social
Model which separated impairment from the construct of disability. “Disability arts
would not have been possible without a disability politics coming along first. It's
what makes a disability artist different from an artist with disability.” Colin
Barnes.
Disability arts, then, strove to show inequalities experienced by its members. Dr
Paul Darke goes further by saying that its artworks wished to show these
inequalities within the art world. “The Disabled Art philosophy is based upon
legitimising the experience of disabled people as equal within art and all other
cultural practices.” The movement also consciously was directed toward a
disabled audience, rather than the mainstream population and it used a
language exclusive to the movement. While this was important for developing
the movement's identity, and for highlighting exclusion, the impact of this modus
operandi was that it placed the movement and its artists in the margins with little
influence or impression made on the status quo, the latter remains unchanged.
Issues within the Movement
Research undertaken to show tensions within disability arts movement
and its aspirations
This paper is an extension of research undertaken for a Masters study. It will
address the exclusion felt by the Disability Arts movement from the new
perspectives of art history and art criticism.
Exclusion from mainstream has been a difficulty for some members of the
Disability Arts Movement, but its reasons have been circular. While the
mainstream disciplines of art history and criticism have overlooked the
movement’s members and their work because of historical and institutionalised
discriminatory habits, the Disability Arts movement itself has often chosen to
6
express divisive attitudes towards mainstream cultural practices and use styles
of work that have isolated itself from more mainstream perspectives. Such
postures have been detrimental to both perspectives.
It has been my intention then to develop a preliminary blueprint of a model for
reading artworks, based on narratives and aesthetics. The model proposed is not
strictly for those visual artworks produced within the disability arts movement.
Rather it will be applicable to any work within the visual arts field, once it has
been fine-tuned and tested. Its use promotes two outcomes: to incorporate the
artwork into the disciplines of art history and criticism, and, at the same time,
widen the boundaries of each of these disciplines.
I carried out interviews with a random selection of disability arts practitioners.
Some belong to the Disability Arts Movement while some do not. Their artworks
and comments have been explored to discuss body, identity, individuality, the
Social Model and the future of the disability arts movement, as seen through their
visual artworks.
Tensions do exist between members of the Disability Arts Movement with
regards to their place in the arts sector, their audience and their aims. Yinka
Shonibare, disability activist and disability artist said at a debate in Tate Modern,
2007,
“I don’t think as disabled people we have to do anything. I think there
is such a huge gap with educational opportunities for us disabled
people... I don’t think that it’s our fault, I don’t think that we aren’t
marketing ourselves well, I think it’s because by and large we are
discriminated against. We do have to change that culture but it isn’t up
to us because we don’t have that problem, they have that problem.
They need to sort it out.
Conversely Michael Morgan, former chair of the Arts and Disability Forum,
Ireland, writes in Face On, “Disability Arts should not be agit-prop for the
development of a Disability movement...Disability Arts tend to be tinged with a
distinctly public function.” Still, other members of the movement wish to focus on
the movement's aesthetic and feel there are more universal themes and practice
to offer today's society, such as the obsession with the body (plastic surgery,
longevity) identity (multiculturalism) and some technological advances by
disabled artists, especially in the Deaf culture, are opening up artistic practice for
artists with and without impairment.
The structures within which disability arts operates today also face challenges,
especially with regards to funding. Rather than award grants solely for artistic
pursuits, funding agencies which have a remit of disability arts (that hold charity
status) in their objectives, tend to make awards for equality training, community
arts initiatives and audience development. The London Disability Arts Forum, a
cornerstone of the early movement, has closed its doors due to lack of core
funding and it is recorded that in the UK a disabled arts organisation receives on
7
average £200,000 less per year than a non-disabled orientated organisation
receives.
Artworks reviewed
A disability arts perspective – work reviewed using social model
The following is an interpretation of an art work by an artist who belongs to both
mainstream and the disability arts movement. She keeps these worlds very
separate. She says about mainstream “I think as an artist with a mental health
condition you are taken less seriously.”(Jean)
This interpretation will illustrate some of the ideas behind the social model and
some of the consequent practices used in the movement.
Jean – Regime in Blue is 51cmx33cm, watercolour on paper
Regime is a painting she executed working inside the disability arts movement. It
mixes abstraction with text. Colours are muted and controlled within small
uneven areas on the picture surface. There is yet further restriction, as the letters
and numbers that make up the sentences are contained inside these areas. The
sentences are unemotional. Their purpose is to describe the facts of a particular
time and activity. The overall painting has a 'hand written' appearance, with lines
that waver and rectangles that are irregular. Some of the letters drift off the
picture plane or are cramped into a space that is too small for them.
The artist writes that her disability art works are about “challenging prejudice.” (
Jean) So from a disability arts perspective, this painting describes a day in the life
of a mental health patient, with a boring, repetitive schedule to guide his/her
activity. As the writing falls off the bottom off the image, the suggestion is that
this timetable will continue ad infinitum. The word 'Medication' runs onto the next
line, in a broken but also lethargic way, invoking the notion of disconnection,
perhaps even sedation. The background is quite regular, like bathroom tiles in
monochrome shades.
8
Maureen - Vincent in the Yellow House
oil on canvas, 96.5cm x 97.5cm
This artist is very clear about the purpose of her work. She paints within the
disability arts movement and promotes herself as such. She writes, The social
model has helped me to explore my experience of being a disabled
person/survivor. I have used that experience as a theme in my painting...As an
artist I naturally want my work to reach as many people as possible. That said, I
always make it clear that I am a disabled artist. (Maureen)
Her painting Vincent in the Yellow House is a depiction of Vincent Van Gogh
painting Starry Night. Van Gogh is one of the most famous artists in the canon of
art history. As Gombrich writes, “Most people nowadays know some of these
paintings; the sunflowers, the empty chair, the cypresses and some of the
portraits have become popular in coloured reproductions and can be seen in
many a simple room.” He is categorised as a post impressionist and worked in
the company of others, such as Gauguin and Bernard. He was especially
inspired by Millet and the Barbizon School, as well as by artists such as Pissarro
who used the Impressionist's vocabulary to convey a “social message.” Apart
from Van Gogh's revolutionary expressive methods of painting, he is also well
known for having eilepsy amd mental ill health. Infact, Starry Night was painted
by Van Gogh while he was a patient at the asylum in Saint-Remy, 1889.
Therefore it would seem unproblematic to make connections between the
disability arts movement and Van Gogh. However, Alan Sutherland explains the
movement's cautious affiliation, in Disability Arts Online.
9
Disability arts reflects the experience of disability. There have always been
disabled people who made art, and some of them were great artists: Homer,
Alexander Pope, John Milton, Ludwig van Beethoven, Vincent Van Gogh. But
those artists treated their disability as an impediment to their work. We would not
recognise Milton's Sonnet on his Blindness, which treats his impairment as a
burden that he has to bear, as disability arts. Disability arts regards the
experience of disability, not as an impediment, but as an appropriate and fruitful
subject for artistic work.
Most critiques of his paintings acknowledge his medical history but only as a way
to access a deeper reading. Art critic Simon Schama disregards any
interpretations of van Gogh's last work as those of a man filled with depression.
He writes that to read them as “suicide notes, expressions of despair at the
failure of his career” is really reading them “backwards, to sentimentalise them as
'cries for help'... Van Gogh may have killed himself exactly at the moment when
everything he had wanted from his work was on the point of spectacular
consummation.”
The purpose that Van Gogh wished for his work was not a discussion of any
political or social agenda, with a particular audience in mind. Schama writes that
it was a yearning “to make painting that was charged with the visionary radiance
that had once been supplied by Christainity. Jesus, he [Van Gogh] wrote, was an
artist whose medium had been humanity.”
In Vincent in the Yellow Room, this artist places Van Gogh inside his home at
Arles rather than in the asylum. She also paints him with his head bandaged,
reminiscent of the self portrait he painted after cutting off part of his ear. It is a
famous depiction of Van Gogh suffering mental ill health. The subject matter, an
interior that overlooks an open window, is a convention found in some of the
works of the impressionists and post impressionists. Van Gogh's use of the
colours yellow and blue are repeated here, and the moonlight blues of Starry
Night also appear in the open window, where gaunt faces call out in anguish.
They are much like the Dickensian characters with which Van Gogh was familiar.
From the corners of his room, to the lines of his easel, to the angle of the open
window, the picture plane has many converging lines. The effect is chaotic ,as
the viewer's eyes are led in many directions across the image. Van Gogh looks at
the viewer directly, with hallowed eyes and an unfriendly expression. From a
disability arts perspective, the palette used and the painting within the painting,
leaves no doubt as to who the central figure is intended to be, van Gogh. Here,
he is presented as the artist with mental illness, the artist who now famously cut
off part of his ear. The faces at the window may be other patients at the asylum,
or may be meant to suggest the state of van Gogh's state of mind: chaotic and
full of anguish. The title too, Vincent in the Yellow House, reminds the viewer of
where van Gogh suffered many episodes of epilepsy and bipolar breakdowns.
This depiction is of an artist with disabilities that cause pain and disturbance
which represents a much more limiting and naive reading of van Gogh than one
would generally find in scholarship. However, that is telling in and of itself—when
considering what the interpretation of van Gogh suggests about the artist herself.
10
Alternative Model of interpretation - The 'Narrative' Model'
An Alternative way of reading works that have been placed in the margins.
This model strives to unite practice and analysis rather than create more division
within the discipline of art history. Devising new methodologies, can sometimes
compromise the stability of established structures. Such methodologies might be
deemed unpredictable, or “a rogue art history.” Donald Kuspit warns that the
number of approaches to art history point towards “potential ungovernability,”
within the discipline. A model based on instabilities within any area of study will
be short lived, just as building a house on a weak foundation will lead to an
inadequate structure. In consideration of these challenges, the 'Narrative Model'
aspires to rework long-term artistic concepts with an enriched purpose. The aim
is to make possible, interpretations of artworks that have been marginalised from
the disciplines of art history and criticism. It is hoped that the outcomes will widen
the audience for these artworks, and, enrich the disciplines of art history, art
criticism and fine arts. My objective is to present an application of a model of
interpretation that will open up, in a transformative way, the relationship between
mainstream and marginalised artworks (and their creators). The proposed model
is transformational, in the sense that interpretations are not part of either the
modernist context (which is based on rational independent subjects with little
value given to impaired bodies) or the postmodern view (even though that model
seeks to 'trouble' social constructions of disability, thereby creating complex
social structures with their unstable meanings exposed through deconstruction).
Transformation will come from a new experience of the margins.
This model allows the move from the margins into the mainstream but “not at any
cost,” to quote one of the respondents who participated in this research process.
His concern, like that of some of the other respondents, is that moving into
mainstream might mean denying that he has an impairment, for fear of being
pigeon-holed. In other words, while the artist does not want special consideration
given to him/her by virtue of an impairment—he/she does want the flexibility to
use impairment (as any artist might use a characteristic) in order to communicate
a broader, more universal idea. The 'Narrative Model' is offered as a framework
to consider that artists in the margins, in this instance, artists with impairment,
11
have insights and practices, some of which are shaped by their impairments, that
can contribute to mainstream artistic inquiry and production. Additionally, the
Model allows for a revision of the margins. The objective of the 'Narrative Model'
is to use a narrative analysis, which embodies aesthetics in its framework.
The Narrative Model asks that several familiar concepts be considered from an
alternative viewpoint. These viewpoints are positive, they can relate to the
specific, and at the same time can relate to the universal. When engaged with
analysis, these viewpoints can provide a refreshing interpretation of an artwork.
They include: the consideration that people with impairment have a unique
understanding of constructing identity; the consideration that people with
impairment have a unique knowledge about how the individual can contribute to
his/her world; and, the consideration that people with impairment have a unique
knowledge of, experience with, and/or perception about the body.
During narration, the identity of the author/artist is established and can be
transformed. In this way, traditional or oppositional identities, (which are
tantamount to being the same) can be replaced by new and powerful versions.
This results in a new level of value being placed on the experiences of the artist
and consequently on the art produced.
The author/artist of the narration can also be reviewed in terms of his/her
contribution to the world, especially with respect to artistic inquiry. Questions, as
to whether traditional or oppositional constructions of the self inspired this
contribution and whether it will have universal appeal for a wide audience, were
asked.
Although highly precise answers may not always be possible,
considerations as to the methods an artist has used to execute a work of art,
and/or whether the work is discussing the body, through its application of the
elements of art, and/or principles of design, will enable such enquiries within an
art historical framework.
Definitions used
Aesthetics – this is the theoretical framework of the 'Narrative Model.'
It is understood as located in the mind and imagination and expressed
through sensations. These are organised into a pattern of values that
motivate activities for the common good.
Body – this is a principle of the Narrative Model. It is understood as the
point at which the artist makes contact with his/her world and also
where meaning is created.
Identity – this is a principle of the 'Narrative Model'. It is understood to
have flexibility of meaning depending upon the particular
requirements of the artist. It has the potential to design powerful,
transformed representations.
12
Individuality – this is a principle of the 'Narrative Model.' It is understood
in terms of how an artist contributes to his/her society. When based in
aesthetics, this contribution should be motivated by serving a universal
audience.
Narrative – this is the method of analysis employed in conjunction with
the 'Narrative Model'. It is understood as an activity common to all and
is the mechanism through which body, identity and individuality are
considered to reveal how the artist sees the world and how s/he feels
the world sees her/him.
The purpose of this discussion is to move artworks from the margins into the
mainstream. It is therefore essential to measure them against mainstream
methodologies with objectivity, or else the work remains in the margins. The
'Narrative Model' has been designed to bridge the gap that exists between the
mainstream and the margins, especially as that gap relates to artists with
impairment, as it was they who informed its criteria.
Application of the Narrative Model
Tanya Raabe – Piggyback. Oil on canvas Oct 2007
Raabe is an established member of the disability arts movement. She describes
the background to her work thus:
13
My work is based on and is about images of myself and other disabled
people in environments which are dominated by a society obsessed
with physical beauty and perfection. Disability is part of my life's
experiences therefore it is my art form. [My] paintings explore self and
my relationship with the way people interact with me as a: person;
disabled person; woman; friend; and girlfriend.(46)
Raabe's motivation is the same as other members of the disability arts
movement. It is disability (she defines it as dominating a society obsessed with
physical beauty and perfection) that informs her artwork. Her works attempt to
speak for herself and 'other disabled people,' suggesting shared experiences of
oppression. Raabe does raise the same point, that other respondents in the
research raised, about wanting to express other aspects of her 'self,' beyond
those that can only be associated with being a disabled person.
In a formal analysis of Piggyback, the image depicts two figures, which are in this
instance, two self-portraits. One is almost a full human body and is dressed in
casual clothes. Her face has its tongue sticking out, and the eyes are rolling
upwards suggesting some type of exertion or pressure. The pressures appear to
be exerted by the second, partial figure, sitting on the back of the first, in
'piggyback' fashion. The limbs have been developed using thick, tubular
applications of paint, with the results resembling piping or rope. Dark outlines
emphasise weight. These 'limbs' have wrapped themselves around the throat
and waist of the human figure. The grip of the partial figure's 'fingers' and 'feet'
appears to be tight, as they are interlocked. The expression on the face of the full
figure suggests that her position is unpleasant. In contrast, the smiling
expression on the face of the partial figure suggests a degree of satisfaction at
being able to maintain its hold. The swirling application of the paint, the rings
around the eyes and the 'limbs' wrapped around one another, give a sense of
constriction. The deep red colour that fill the spaces, provides the overall work
with a frantic energy, and again reinforces the sense of being confined.
The title of the work, Piggyback embodies a dual meaning which is relevant to a
social model interpretation. Not only does it mean to carry someone on your
back, it is also a medical term for the process of applying two intravenous lines
by injection into the same vein. It is a potentially dangerous procedure, rendering
the patient vulnerable to infection, and must be carried out with great care. In this
context, Piggyback could be depicting this process. The partial figure, like a
parasite, is, in this reading, the syringe and tubing, carrying with it a liquid from or
to the larger figure. Rather than suggest being constricted, the facial expression
of the human figure could be one of entering into a sleep brought on by the
effects of the injection. The expression on the 'injection' figure is menacing and in
control. Finally, the red background, in this interpretation, may represent blood,
the liquid which is being exchanged in the medical procedure.
In Piggyback, the viewer is shown two self-portraits. One is easily recognisable
as the human form, while the second, smaller one, a derivation of the first, has
less substance. The title usually refers to a person carrying another on his/her
14
back. In this definition, an image is conjured up of two people moving under the
power of one. This suggests a closeness that is possible between the two parties
but requires work to be effective. From the perspective of aesthetics as it applies
to the 'Narrative Model,' the painting Piggyback, immediately suggests a split of
some kind between the body of the artist and what may be a depiction of the
artist's mind or imagination. These two entities can be at odds with one another
and, as informed by aesthetics, the mind often struggles to overcome base
desires of the body in favour of morality, or to use Kant's terminology,
'disinterestedness.'. Using the four elements of narration, (Orientation, Abstract,
Complicating Action and Resolution), more information can be gleaned from this
image. The painting is being used to describe an event or moment. The two
figures painted, are infact, self-portraits, of the artist Tanya Raabe, so the viewer
may assume it is her story being recounted. A red background is offered as the
setting for the event and would seem to be metaphorical, rather than
representing a location. The event itself refers to a piggyback ride, where the
artist/narrator carries another smaller figure on her back. However, the facial
expression of the human figure suggests that she carries the smaller figure under
intense pressure, perhaps against her will. The tight grip of the partial figure
suggests not wanting to be released. The outcome of this narration, must be the
painting itself which takes as its subject matter the story of a single individual
presenting the artist's innermost personal feelings while at the same time inviting
the viewer to empathise. The body, in this framework, is where sensations are
experienced and valued as part of the human condition. It is where knowledge is
managed. In Piggybank, it is the body itself that is the site of conflict, the
protagonist and antagonist are one and the same. As such, there is no action in
Piggyback. Instead, there is a discussion about the construction of self, alluding
to the self-awareness of individuality. The event described is therefore a deeply
personal experience, but has a universal contribution that refers to the many
times a human feels inner conflict or tension. The painting represents an
opportunity to achieve community with other people. There is no suggestion as to
what the effect of this piggyback ride may be. No destination is sought. The
person depicted is represented as someone involved in a human occupation, and
is not linked to any particular group or identity of people. Raabe herself
acknowledges this aspect of her own work when she writes,
I work with the notion that my self-identity changes depending on what
situation I am in. I can be; a woman, a disabled woman, [a] person, a
disabled person, an artist, and a disabled artist. Who decides this and
when? It may be a particular experience that changes the way society
sees us. (47)
15
Jon Adams – WordWall. Part of the Alternative Platform series,
London Bridge Station, September 2008. 22 ft x 15ft
Jon Adams has a background in illustration. His website explains that he moved
into disability arts three years ago where he sought to explore,
new territory ...Adams' work seeks to challenge perceptions of
disability and communication in society. WordWall is a take on a quote
from French painter Jean Dubuffet: 'Real art is always lurking where
you don't expect it.' The artwork is made up of words from the quote,
which have been taken apart and dropped. Adams is quoted on the
website accompanying the installation. He writes, 'I wanted to site the
piece on a wall because, due to my dyslexia, words present a barrier
to me.'
Formal analysis: The entire wall, painted a dark grey, is the background for the
installation. Pale grey letters in capitals and lower case, and punctuation marks of
various sizes, tumble down the wall from what appears to be an open zipper.
This zipper is also painted in pale grey and is placed at the top of the wall.
Several letters have collected at the bottom of the wall and lie idle, much like
debris. The effect is one of random movement downwards.
The fact that the artist has dyslexia is significant to an interpretation that employs
the social model. In this context, the letters are a jumble of meaningless shapes
that do not make sense and do not function as words. They fail to co-operate and
deliver a message thus reinforcing Adam's claim that words are a barrier (to
effective communication) to people with dyslexia, a hidden disability. Much of our
environment and its methods of communication, rely on the written word. They
are not designed with due consideration for those people who have such an
impairment. Dubuffet's message, as depicted in WordWall is lost to all of us,
equally.
A relevant principle in aesthetics recognises that knowledge can be gained just
16
as validly through the senses, as through the written word. An image like
WordWall demands the reasoning part of our intelligence to understand the
letters. If the viewer follows this path of enquiry, however, s/he will only be left
guessing at the meaning of the message. Engagement with the image will be
unlikely. Aesthetics, however, allows knowledge to be processed through the
sensations, which WordWall stimulates. The message obtained will be personal
to each viewer, and consequently, will be the 'correct' one. The body of the
viewer plays an important role in this instance as the image asks for active
participation. The wider implication of this image, is that language is a barrier to
more than just people with dyslexia. It may engage issues around literacy and
nationality. With the changing demographics of the UK and Ireland, as
immigration increases, more of the population do not have English as their first
language. The letters in WordWall are part of the English Alphabet. The notion of
the 'Queens' English' adds another dimension to this appraisal. It is also called
Received Pronunciation or 'received wisdom,' which places an air of prestige
onto the English language. The experience of language as a barrier for
individuals, is one that is becoming more commonplace. WordWall can,
therefore, when read through the Narrative Model, of special relevance to a
different and wider audience than disability arts usually targets.
For the purposes of objectivity, the Narrative Model will be applied to an artwork
that is in the mainstream, The Two Fridas by Frida Kahlo.
Frida Kahlo - The Two Fridas, 1939
Oil on canvas 68 x 68 in. (173 x 173 cm) Museo de Arte Moderno, Mexico City
Frida Kahlo (1907 – 1954) is a well-known artist whose controversial life has
inspired biographical research, while her artworks have received much praise
17
and discussion. Her works are usually quite small and the majority are selfportraits. Born in Mexico, to a Mexican mother and German-Jewish immigrant,
her dual heritage was an important part of her identity and was often explored
through her artworks. Her paintings show the influences of realism, symbolism,
and, surrealism, as well as indigenous references. Although Kahlo herself was
reluctant to be associated with any particular movement, she is often cited by the
disability arts movement because of her impairments (resulting from the effects of
polio and a serious bus crash, which led to numerous surgeries and lifelong
debilitating pain). It has been suggested that the reason why her paintings tended
to be small was a direct result of her impairments, limiting the size of paintings
she could execute. The Two Fridas is one of her largest works. The disability arts
movement acknowledges that Kahlo worked inside the mainstream and did not
focus the theme of her paintings on physical disability. She used her personal
experiences of pain and hospitalisation to explore universal suffering. Art critic,
Carlos Fuentes explains that,
Frida found a way of painting pain...of permitting us to see pain and in
so doing, reflecting the pain of the world. She is a figure that represents
how...a person is able to make their life and reinvent themselves and
make that life be personally fulfilling. (48)
A Social Model interpretation of The Two Fridas would consider those elements
that suggest oppression. In this context, the two self-portraits may suggest a
psychological change, the result of an accident perhaps or the diagnosis of an
illness. The Frida on the right is the person before the change. She may
symbolise through a heart that is strong and well. The Frida, positioned on the
left, is a person who has become impaired. Her heart is damaged and blood has
been spilt, perhaps through surgery and injury. This latter Frida is the subject of
the medical profession and it is that lens which dominates how she is
represented: she is holding a pair of surgical pincers, replacing the intimate
keepsake (a portrait of her husband) that the former Frida, a wife, is holding on
her lap. Blood vessels join the two portraits, as if a transfusion is taking place of
healthy blood for spoiled blood.
Applying the 'Narrative Model' to The Two Fridas, affords an opportunity to use its
framework on artworks that are part of the mainstream. Once again, from the
perspective of aesthetics, the viewer is shown two different self-portraits, within a
single painting, suggesting a split in identity, or the representation of self. In The
Two Fridas, there is a confidence and faith in the body as a source of meaning. It
is unavoidable in fact, as it is a double portrait, so the power of emotions is also
multiplied. Consequently, feelings, and their corresponding meanings, dominate
the 'action' of the painting. The Two Fridas is so 'in tune' with feeling, its subjects
dictates the 'mood' of the weather above the two figures. The artist reinforced this
concern with feelings. She is quoted in The Life and Times of Frida Kahlo. “Since
my subjects have always been my sensations, my states of mind and the
profound reactions that life has been producing in me, I have frequently
objectified all this in figures of myself.”
18
There are two protagonists narrating the story of The Two Fridas. Their stories
do not contradict but reinforce the presence of the artist. Kahlo selected, with
care, how she would represent herself. She was known to have created a myth
around herself as a true Mexican. Her actual birth date was 1907 but she
declared it was 1910, the year of the Mexican Revolution. Just like Mexico, her
path was one of suffering and endurance. The tumultuous background in The
Two Fridas, conveys an upcoming storm, a period of being unsettled, an
uprising. It has often been noted how the self- portrait on the left shows Frida
wearing a European style wedding dress, while the self-portrait on the right
presents her in traditional Mexican garb. This has been read as symbolising her
dual heritage, which was a frequent theme in her painting, along with the
dualities of her personality. The date of the painting is significant to a deeper
exploration of the artwork. Painted during the separation and divorce from her
husband, painter, Diego Rivera, Kahlo has painted the Frida that Diego still
loves, wearing the traditional dress, while the unloved Frida is the European
style bride. This is described in how the artist depicted her two exposed hearts.
The traditional Frida's heart is still intact, while the European Frida's heart is
shown as broken. There is the suggestion of a transformation occuring, the
result of changes in the personal (relationship) and/or the public arena (political,
social). The Two Fridas is also thought to represent the split in her homeland, a
homeland in which an indigenous way of life led to happiness, but it was also
where European influences from the colonising North led to suffering and
hardship. Kahlo was an individual who clearly felt she had a responsibility to
describe her identity and opinions to her fellow countrymen and women.
19
The 'Narrative Model'
Aesthetics
Narrative
3. Identity
1. Body
2. Individuality
Aesthetics – the theoretical framework
Narrative – method of analysis used to investigate the three principles
1. Body – site of meaning
2. Individuality – site of contributions
3. Identity – site of representation
20
Profile of Disability Arts Movement
Research undertaken by Majella Flanagan. Respondents were disabled arts
practitioners, most were members of the Disability Arts Movement, UK and
Ireland.
Findings from questionnaires and interviews. 2007-08
Of those that were interviewed, all had qualifications in art with 50% holding a
postgraduate degree.
80% work within the community arts field. The significance of this is:
“Community arts” is relatively new, with the term having been coined in the late
1960s. (24) Its roots are in social justice and its practice uses informal
educational methods to engage with community members. The principle aims
are to empower people and, using arts workshops in community settings,
(schools, community halls, arts centres, hospitals, council venues), and to
address social issues such as racial division, rural deprivation, community spirit,
conflict resolution. “Arts as a Catalyst for Caring and Sharing. Join us in 2009
and be creative to raise an important issue you believe in,” is the title of the
World Community Arts Day, 2008. (25) The focus is on educating participants
about a particular issue and arts are used as a method of delivering this learning.
Monitoring and evaluation are important elements to ensure learning is taking
place. This focus, coupled with its informal practice and the type of audience,
have led to community arts being distinguished from professional arts activity.
Funding for workshops comes from charitable organisations that wish to support
social change, with less emphasis on artistic merit. There are similarities then,
between community arts and the disability arts movement. Both work in
community settings; both use arts to convey and educate on political and social
equality issues; and both are supported by charities whose remit is to improve
society and both tend not to focus on artistic innovation and/or furthering artistic
expression. The relevance of the above points to disability arts practitioners, is
that participating in community arts projects can keep their disabled artists'
practice focussed on social and political issues, where the question of quality is
not always a priority. It is likely, therefore, that separation from the mainstream is
maintained.
With regards to experiencing discrimination, it was almost equal at 50% between
those that had positive and those that had negative experiences at college and
at work. There was even a comment that within the disability arts movement
itself in the UK, there exists discrimination between practitioners with mental
illness. However physical structures and access were explained to often be
unfriendly to people with disabilities eg setting up exhibitions, being asked to
open/speak at exhibitions.
A common remark with regards to having work critiqued was how their artworks
are promoted, namely through health centres, hospitals or community arts
21
events rather than through art exhibits. This maintains a link with the medical
model of disability.
All respondents respect the influence of the Social Model in challenging stigma
and discrimination associated with impairment. Most spoke about how it (the
Social Model) has benefited them on a personal level: independence, raised
self-esteem, positive attitude, a source of motivation and empowering.
“When I first read a description of the Social Model it was like a revelation – that I
did not need repairing, but that society should adjust to me.” (Gus)
There was a feeling though that the Social Model had little relevance to a
universal artistic impetus, instead it focused on issues around limitations of
understanding and discriminations.
Final comments were around the disability arts movement itself with most
respondents (75%) explaining that they felt the while movement was very
supportive and offered great camaraderie, it also limited expression to being just
about the experience of disability. Most practitioners felt that art for them was
about universal themes, a chance for them to describe their world view, their
narratives and this needed dialogue with practitioners in the mainstream for
growth.
Majella Flanagan
Feb, 2010.
For the conference Access Arts
22