Watching Disability: A Discourse Analysis of Representations of Disabled Characters in Scripted Television Programs

The University of Southern Mississippi The University of Southern Mississippi

The Aquila Digital Community The Aquila Digital Community

Dissertations

Summer 2020

Watching Disability: A Discourse Analysis of Representations of Watching Disability: A Discourse Analysis of Representations of

Disabled Characters in Scripted Television Programs Disabled Characters in Scripted Television Programs

Wilbur Martin

Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations

Part of the Television Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Martin, Wilbur, "Watching Disability: A Discourse Analysis of Representations of Disabled Characters in

Scripted Television Programs" (2020).

Dissertations

. 1819.

https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1819

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted

for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more

information, please contact [email protected].

WATCHING DISABILITY: A DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF REPRESENTATIONS

OF DISABLED CHARACTERS IN SCRIPTED TELEVISION PROGRAMS

Wilbur Justin Martin

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate School,

the College of Arts and Sciences

and the School of Communication

at The University of Southern Mississippi

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Approved by:

Dr. Christopher Campbell, Committee Chair

Dr. David Davies

Dr. Cheryl Jenkins

Dr. Vanessa Murphree

Dr. Fei Xue

August 2020

Wilbur Justin Martin

2020

Published by the Graduate School

ABSTRACT

This dissertation is a discourse analysis of three television series, Speechless,

Atypical, and Breaking Bad. A close reading of those series was performed to analyze the

representations of disability in those television series and whether those representations

enforced classic stereotypes or differed from those classic stereotypes for disabilities. The

representations were also analyzed to see if those representations enforced the medical or

social model of disability.

All three series had instances of stereotypical representations as well as

representations that were not stereotypical. All three series representations identified with

the medical and social model of disabilities. Series that used an outside expert consultant

and more disabled characters represented by disabled actors had more textured

representations.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thank you to Dr. Karen Coats, who allowed me to complete this work.

Thank you to Dr. Christopher Campbell, dissertation advisor, mentor, and

problem solver.

Thank you to my committee members, who have guided me in the classroom, in

the dissertation stage, and also in life.

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Nancy N. Martin, without whom this

would not have been possible. Thank you for your continued support, even when you

probably didn’t want to continue.

 
v 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iii 
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................... iv 
CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 
CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHOD ............................................ 13 
Television’s Role in Disability Discourse .................................................................... 13 
Analyzing Television ................................................................................................ 14 
Television as a Text .................................................................................................. 17 
Multiplicity of Messages........................................................................................... 19 
Disability Studies and Theory ....................................................................................... 21 
Defining “Disability” ................................................................................................ 21 
Defining Disability Studies ....................................................................................... 29 
Classic Disability Representation Theories .................................................................. 35 
In Literature .............................................................................................................. 35 
In Visual Arts ............................................................................................................ 40 
Educating About Disabilities .................................................................................... 43 
Medical vs. Social Models of Disability ....................................................................... 45 
Medical Model .......................................................................................................... 45 
Social Model ............................................................................................................. 49 

 
vi 
Alternate Models ....................................................................................................... 55 
Television’s Representation of Disability ..................................................................... 57 
Method .......................................................................................................................... 68 
CHAPTER III - DISABILITY JUMPS THE SHARK:  READING SPEECHLESS ...... 73 
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 73 
Season One, Episode One, Pilot ................................................................................... 74 
Representing Disability in Speechless .......................................................................... 78 
Casting Disability Representations in Speechless......................................................... 81 
Thematic Elements in Speechless ................................................................................. 84 
Problems in Speechless ................................................................................................. 92 
CHAPTER IV – “DUDE, NOBODY’S NORMAL”:  READING ATYPICAL ............... 96 
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 96 
Season One, Episode One, Antarctica .......................................................................... 97 
Stereotypes of Disability in Atypical .......................................................................... 104 
Classic Stereotypes of Disability: Pity, Evil/Fear, and Super Gimp ...................... 104 
Disability or Disabled Person as the Object of Ridicule ......................................... 111 
Disabled People are Sexually Abnormal ................................................................ 115 
Disabled Person as a Burden ................................................................................... 121 
The Medical Model of Disability Versus the Social Model of Disabilities in Atypical
..................................................................................................................................... 123 

 
vii 
Positive Representations in Atypical ........................................................................... 128 
CHAPTER V – BREAKING STEREOTYPES:  READING BREAKING BAD ........... 133 
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 133 
Season One, Episode One, Pilot ............................................................................. 133 
Walter Junior ............................................................................................................... 138 
Walter Junior and Disability Stereotypes ............................................................... 138 
Walter Junior and the Medical Model of Disabilities Versus the Social Model of 
Disabilities .............................................................................................................. 142 
Hank and Marie Schrader ........................................................................................... 147 
Hank Schrader and the Problems with Hank’s Disability Representation ............. 148 
Hank and Marie and the Medical Model of Disabilities Versus the Social Model of 
Disabilities .............................................................................................................. 153 
Positive Representations of Disability by Hank ..................................................... 155 
Hector Salamanca ....................................................................................................... 158 
CHAPTER VI – CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 164 
APPENDIX – LIST OF EPISODES ANALYZED ........................................................ 170 
REFERENCES .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
 

CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION

Gimpy, crippled, giant, retarded, infirm, lame, midget, handicapped, slow,

invalid, debilitated, deformed, incapacitated, dwarf, incapable, paralyzed: those words,

and many others, have been used historically to group people with a different set of

abilities than a typical person. The above descriptive words carry a general meaning that

most people have used to describe some aspect of a person, often in an unflattering light.

“His brother is a moron” is more likely to be used as an insult versus a strict definition of

a person’s brother using Henry Goddard’s archaic generalizations. In general, words used

to group people into a category tend to dismiss the value of the individual and relegate

that individual to a stereotype.

Robert Funk offers a thorough historical account of civil rights for disabled

people in his article, From Caste to Class in the Context of Civil Rights. Funk (1987)

starts by examining from the 1700s through 1920, and states that disabled were often

euthanized, were the responsibility of family, or were warehoused in state-operated

institutions, often grouped by disability (p. 9 - 10). Funk (1987) continues with a second

era, 1920 – 1960, which he terms a period of segregation and charitable care (p. 10). This

era is seen as more institutionalized care, but there were changes to entitlement programs

and expansion in rehabilitation and vocational training for disabled people (Funk, 1987,

p. 10). There was also considerable growth during this era in disability services and jobs

for professionals in physical and occupational therapy and rehabilitation counseling

(Funk, 1987, p. 10). While there were some changes, Funk (1987) states that “the

handicapped still retained their caste status in the public mind as dependent, unhealthy

deviants, who would, in the great majority, always require segregated care and

protection” (p. 14).

Funk (1987) calls the era from 1960 – 1975 the “Social Movements and Civil

Rights” era (p. 14). Disability rights followed the templates of other civil rights groups,

and disabled people started fighting for equality (Funk, 1987 p. 14). Handicapped was

added as a protected class regarding civil rights, and lawyers used equal protection

challenges to attack segregation (Funk, 1987, p. 16). Funk’s (1987) next era, 1976 –

1985, is named “A Changing Society” (p. 17). Disabled people, armed with new rights,

were now fighting for reforms versus family and friends having to do the fighting (Funk,

1987, p. 17). So, even in 1987, four years before the passage of the American’s with

Disabilities Act, Funk’s (1987) conclusion about the struggle for disability rights

recognizes that the public views disabled people as a distinct class “oppressed by

attitudes and images that perpetuate the caste of the handicapped” (p. 22). Funk (1987)

laments the lack of physical access, which has been addressed by the ADA, even though

there are still myriad problems with access, typically in rural or older towns (p. 25).

However, another lamentation that has not been altered by the passage of the ADA is “the

area of discriminatory attitudes and prejudice regarding the class of handicapped

persons” (Gleidman and Roth, 1980, p. 13-30, as cited by Funk, 1987, p. 26; Safilios-

Rothchild, 1970, p. 58).

Many laws have been passed in the U.S. with the goal of ending discrimination

toward disabled people, which comprise the largest minority in the U.S. (Brault, 2012).

The National Mental Health Act (P.L. 79-487, 60 Stat. L. 421) established the National

Institute of Mental Health, which is dedicated to researching psychiatric disorders. The

Social Security Amendments of 1956 added Social Security Disability Insurance for

disabled workers to US Social Security (1956 Social Security Amendments). The

American National Standard Institute published the first set of building standards for

disability access in 1961 (American Standard Specifications). The Architectural Barriers

Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4151 et seq.) requires federal buildings to comply with federal

access standards. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et

seq.) requires public schools to provide education to disabled students based on

individual needs. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. §§ 791 – 794) prohibits

discrimination based on disability in federal programs and employment. The Voting

Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. §§1973 et seq.)

requires physical access to people for federal elections.

Arguably, the most well-known law passed for the benefit of disabled people is

the American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA, signed into law on July 26, 1990,

sought to end discrimination toward disabled people (ADA.gov). However, as the 30

anniversary of the signing of the ADA nears, discrimination against disabled people is

alive and well. Walking around a downtown area most anywhere can reveal numerous

ADA violations with likely no plan of action to correct the situation. It is through the lens

of discrimination and social oppression that this research is considering disabled people.

Social oppression, for this research project, is informed by Iris Young (1990), who offers

this definition of “social oppression” from her book Justice and the Politics of

Difference:

[O]ppression refers to the vast and deep injustices some groups suffer as a

consequence of often unconscious assumptions and reactions of well-

meaning people in ordinary interactions, media and cultural stereotypes,

and structural forms of bureaucratic hierarchies and market mechanisms –

in short, the normal processes of everyday life. We cannot eliminate this

structural oppression by getting rid of the rulers or making some new

laws, because oppressions are systematically reproduced in major

economic, political, and cultural institutes (p. 41).

It is obvious that legislation alone will not prevent discrimination against disabled people.

Disabled people need change agents to help educate and alter the minds and

hearts of people in society. Educating the masses about the needs and desires of disabled

people is difficult. Traditional education in public schools might be an avenue, but school

days are crammed with academics and testing leaving little to no time for additional

subjects. Additionally, a required subject approach in public education would miss

students that go to private schools. Mandated classes would doubtless have as little affect

as all of the previous legislation. Beyond public primary schools, the costs of a college

education are significant, with undergraduates seemingly going broke to pay for classes.

With fully funded students, the motivation is time, stated as “I have to graduate this

semester!” While society might benefit from a required battery of classes regarding

subjects like race, gender, sexuality, ability, and basic logic, the classes that center on

disability are typically approached from the outdated “medical model” (described below)

(Rosa, Bogart, Bonnett, Estill, & Colton, 2016, p. 43). The best shot at educating society

about disability might come by way of a branch of research known broadly as Disability

Studies.

Disability studies scholar Simi Linton (2005) stated that the goal of disability

studies was

to weave disabled people back into the fabric of society, thread by thread,

theory by theory. [Disability studies] aims to expose the ways that

disability has been made exceptional and to work to naturalize disabled

people – remake us as full citizens whose rights and privileges are intact,

whose history and contributions are recorded, and whose often distorted

representations in art, literature, film, theater, and other forms of artistic

expression are fully analyzed. (p. 518)

Linton (2005) states that what keeps disabled people from fitting into society is

based in part on the “representational and institutional structures” disabled people

face (p. 518)

Classical literature is littered with centuries of negative and “exaggerated

stereotypes” regarding representations of disability (explored below), so those that teach

such literature might be able to correct or explain the disconnect (Margolis and Shapiro,

1987, p. 21). Those outmoded passages should nonetheless be discussed, not only for the

sake of the literature, but also to analyze the messages in light of the misconceptions

(Margolis and Shapiro, 1987, p. 21). By not providing a richer depiction of disabilities,

educators are not only misinforming students, but those educators also impact disabled

students (Schramm, 1969). Going beyond strictly literature, all mass media influence

users in forming reactions to situations (Schramm, 1974), especially in the case of

younger viewers (Meyer, 1973).

There are well-grounded theories that have been used to support the idea that the

actions people observe cause people to mimic or model the observed behavior, and

repeated exposure serves to imprint the actions on people (Bandura, 1969, as cited by

Hartjen, 1974). Bandura (1973) found that those people that modeled behavior based on

observation were partly determined by how the people were rewarded for modeling such

behavior (p. 122). Once the modeled behavior is transformed into memory codes through

repetition of the modeled behavior, a person’s memory codes act as guides for people to

reproduce the modeled behavior in like circumstances (Bandura, 1973, p. 122-3).

In 1975, Robert Liebert presented research regarding television and televised

programming and the impact of those on children precisely through the theory of

observational learning in a conference of New York state educators regarding children’s

attitudes toward disabled people. Liebert (1975) starts by defining “attitude” and the

components of an “attitude”: cognition, affectation, and behavior (p. 43-5). Liebert

(1975) states that those attitudes are created and maintained through observational

learning (p. 46). Often, a child’s attitudes about disabled people are formed from

observation of others’ interactions with disabled people versus direct instruction,

particularly when there is no disabled person in a child’s life (Liebert, 1975, p. 47). As

such, Liebert (1975) claims that a child’s likely first observation of a disabled person is

from a television program or a film (p. 47).

Liebert (1975) then goes through the steps involved in observational learning,

starting with exposure to a situation (p. 47). If a child’s exposure to a disabled person is

based in a stereotype versus a more nuanced and realistic representation of disability, the

attitude being formed is inherently stereotypical, too (Liebert, 1975, p. 47). Secondly,

acquisition is considered – what was learned as a result of an observation (Liebert, 1975,

p. 47). The last state is acceptance of the interaction observed – a child forming or

adjusting his or her attitude as a result of the observation (Liebert, 1975, p. 47). When

you consider the reality of a child’s life, because of the layers of social interactions with

teachers, peers, parents, and media, many different models of observations are subject to

being modeled by a child (Liebert, 1975, p. 50-1). What is most convincing for a child is

observing a consistent pattern of behaviors (Liebert, 1975, p. 51). Multiple observations

of realistic interactions with disabled people would have a large impact on a child

forming a realistic attitude toward interacting with disabled people (Liebert, 1975, p. 51).

Many televised programs are, of course, fictitious, but those observed interactions

provide children and adults with behaviors that are modeled after observations (Liebert,

1975, p. 56). As such, “fictional stories about fictional people do, remarkably potently,

teach real people lessons about how to deal with the real world” (Liebert, 1975, p. 57).

Bandura’s social cognitive theory of mass communication suggests even further

evidence of how a person’s experiences impact that person’s attitudes and behavior (see

Bandura, 2001). Bandura (2001) sees people as not only products of the social systems

they inhabit, but also as producers of social systems, which are integrated as

“codeterminants” influencing behavior (p. 266). People act, undergo self-reflection to

judge the adequacy of his or her act, and adjust future actions accordingly (Bandura,

2001, p. 268). When a person judges his or her action to a situation based on social reality

that is distorted from a poor media representation, the resulting future actions can be

distorted (Hawkins & Pingree, 1982, as cited by Bandura, 2001, p. 269). In addition,

when people depend more on media images to inform reality, the greater the impact of

those media images (Ball-Rokeach & DeFleur, 1976, as cited by Bandura, 2001, p. 271).

As such, these “electric modes of influence,” media images, are a major vehicle for social

change (Bandura, 2001, p. 271). Representations of reality in televised programs reflect

societal norms and shape a user’s belief (see Adoni & Mane, 1984; Flerx, Fidler, &

Rogers, 1976; Gerbner, 1972; O’Bryant & Corder-Bolz, 1978, as cited by Bandura, 2001,

p. 281-2). Media can be a behavior teacher, a behavior motivator, a social motivator

through people who have modeled media behaviors, and as such, media representations

originate behaviors and enforce behaviors, too (Bandura, 2001, p. 286).

If legislation and public education have been inadequate in affecting behavior

toward disabled people, but media have an obvious influence on attitudes, behavior, and

social systems, media representations of disabled people would arguably be a suitable

means to affect changes in behavior toward disabled people. While this researcher would

gladly welcome a change in society’s behavior and attitudes toward disabled people, it is

hardly something that one person can affect. The best course of action is to expose how

current representations of disabilities on televised programs serve to enforce or reject the

classic representations of disabilities in various media. With that being stated, the goal of

this research project is to build on previous research regarding media representations of

disability. This project will research character representations of disability in media,

considering the historical models of disability (disabled = defective, super crip,

inspiration) through previous discourse analysis of literature, film, and television to show

how the current models of disability representations were formed. This project will also

look at the various ways the treatment of disability has undergone a change from the

historical perceptions of the “medical model” into the more accepted “social model” as

well as the future of disability models. The major focus of this research project is to

conduct a close reading and critical discourse analysis on three contemporary television

programs, Speechless, Atypical, and Breaking Bad.

These three programs were chosen for the diversity of disabilities represented:

cerebral palsy in Speechless; autism spectrum in Atypical; cerebral palsy, paralysis, and

stroke in Breaking Bad. Regarding programs on television as of May two-thousand and

twenty, only Atypical and The Good Doctor, which is not a subject in this research, have

disabled characters in major roles. In addition, the three were chosen to see how

disabilities are represented in three diverse outlets: free, traditional broadcast television in

the case of ABC’s comedy Speechless; the evolving universe of subscription Internet

programming, Netflix in particular, is represented by the dramedy Atypical; and a basic

cable in the case of the AMC’s crime drama Breaking Bad. To be blunt, the shows being

analyzed are the only shows available to analyze.

From David Perry, the best thing about the television show Speechless is that “it

simply shows that that people with disabilities are human beings, and, like everyone else,

they have specific life experiences that can be used to fuel a classic family-centered

sitcom” (2016). Let us back up a bit.

Speechless is a sitcom that aired on the ABC network that features emerging,

disabled actor Micah Fowler as JJ DiMeo, a non-verbal teenager with cerebral palsy

(CP). (Broverman, 2016, p. 30). Scott Silveri, known for his work on Friends and Joey,

created the series to mimic his experience growing up, as he has a brother with CP

(Broverman, 2016, p. 30). JJ is non-verbal on the show, but he does have a voice, as such

– school janitor Kenneth Clements (Cedric Yarborough) (Rovenstine, 2016). Equally

large in the Speechless world is Maya DiMeo (Minnie Driver), who is a tireless and

fearless advocate and force for JJ (Perry, 2016). Kenneth also adds another dimension,

both as an advocate and spokesperson for JJ, but also as a separate character (Perry,

2016).

Speechless earned positive reviews, was nominated for four awards in 2017, and

won the 2017 Television Critics Association Award for “Outstanding Achievement in

Youth Programming” (Speechless awards, n.d.). The Television Academy, which

“recognizes programs that tackle social issues and use television as a forum advocate for

social change,” honored Speechless as well (American Speech-Language-Hearing

Association, 2017).

Netflix’s dramedy Atypical premiered Friday, August 11, 2017, and was a break

from the traditional Netflix model of “anything but TV” in that at the heart of Atypical is

the story of a boy, Sam Gardner (Keir Gilchrist), growing up (Barr, 2017). The twist is

that Gardner is on the autistic spectrum (Barr, 2017). Created by Robia Rashid, known

for her work on Will & Grace and How I Met Your Mother, early press called Atypical

one of the best shows of the year, with TV critic Merrill Barr saying Atypical is “the best

original series Netflix has ever produced” (Barr, 2017). Seasons one and two of Atypical

were received well by critics and viewers alike (Atypical, 2017), and Atypical was

nominated for the Best Musical or Comedy Series award in the 2018 Satellite Awards

(Pond, 2017). In addition, The Autism Society honored Atypical at the 2

Annual

AutFest film festival for portraying autism in a positive light and promoting autism

awareness (PR Newswire, 2018). Atypical received Spotlight Awards and its producers

participated in a question and answer session at AutFest (PR Newswire, 2018).

While the show received praise for comedic timing, Sam’s employment, and the

other characters’ advocacy for Sam, there were also come complains, most notably that

many of Sam’s character traits are stereotypical tropes, and while the characters advocate

for Sam, the character has little agency for himself (Felperin, 2017; Moss, 2017). Many

of the complaints about the stereotypical actions of Sam are corrected in the second

season, as more input from people on the autism spectrum were used to give Sam a

richer, more textured representation of autism (Luterman, 2018). However, the most

glaring complaint was that Keir Gilchrist is playing Sam Gardner in “autistic drag”

(Rowe, 2017).

At the most basic, Breaking Bad is a crime drama revolving around Walter

White’s desire to provide a future for his family by engaging in manufacturing crystal

methamphetamine that aired on the basic cable network AMC from January 20, 2008

through September 29, 2013 (Pierson, 2013). A major subtext in the program was the

fragility of stability for middle class families played out as a post-modern white hat/black

hat western (Pierson, 2013). Vince Gilligan, well known as a writer for The X-Files,

created the series with his friend, Thomas Schnauz, and AMC saw the show as a way to

draw male viewers and to shed the idea that AMC only showed classic movies (Pierson,

2013). Breaking Bad was a huge success for AMC, with plenty of critical praise,

including the number three spot on Rolling Stone’s “100 Greatest TV Shows of all

Time,” behind The Sopranos and The Wire (Sheffield, 2016). As a testament to the show,

through the five-year run of the series, Breaking Bad has been nominated for fifty-eight

television industry awards, winning twenty-eight awards (Breaking Bad -- Awards and

Nominations, n.d.). Breaking Bad is a large undertaking in that there are five seasons of

intense crime drama with three disabled characters: Walter White, Jr. was born with

cerebral palsy; Don Hector Salamanca, a Mexican mobster, had a stroke and cannot

speak or walk; and Walter White’s brother in law, a temporary paraplegic with Post

Traumatic Stress Disorder, DEA officer Hank Schrader (Breaking Bad wiki, n.d.).

CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHOD

Television’s Role in Disability Discourse

A discourse might be considered a discussion or possibly a debate on a topic.

Klaus Schneider and Anne Barron (2014) suggest a discourse can be considered

narrowly, or as “spoken language alone,” or more broadly, referring to discourse as “the

totality of a social interaction,” but may overlap and differ in meaning, according to use

(p. 1-2). Another view of discourse is that it is a systematic exchange of shared meanings

emphasizing power relations in which “the process of production and exchange are . . .

‘materialized’ within the text” (Acosta-Alzuru and Lester-Roushanzamir, 2000, p. 307).

John Fiske (1987) sees discourse as a “system of representation that has developed

socially in order to make and circulate a coherent set of meanings about an important

topic area . . . a social act which may promote or oppose the dominant ideology” (p. 14).

Fiske states that the people engaged in a discourse construct self-serving meaning that

reinforce common experiences (Fiske, 1987, p. 14). But certainly, those self-serving

meanings could also be used to challenge the dominant culture, too.

Stephen Schneck’s (1987) analysis of Michael Foucault’s viewpoint

metamorphosis regarding discourse, power, and knowledge shows 1) Foucault sees the

bourgeois/superstructure as enforcing the relationship between power and knowledge to

control reality (emphasis added) and therefore to control discourse; 2) if knowledge and

reality is controlled and influenced by power, all discourse is biased toward the desired

outcomes of the bourgeois/superstructure; and 3) knowledge is inevitably derived from

the relationship between power and discourse (p. 23-4). As Lennard Davis (1998)

mentions, Foucault offers a more complex and nuanced definition of discourse that does

not rely on class and exploitation, but rather on power, which, unlike class, “has a life of

its own” (p. 319). Being that television programs are the discourse being considered, and

television programs are the product of the superstructure, Foucault’s web of meanings

approach for television programs evidences that production companies produce programs

to create and enforce a reality in which they remain in power. That should be taken into

consideration.

Norman Fairclough (1992) says a discourse analysis must include a linguistic

analysis of the text, a detailed examination of the dialog, as well as an intertextual

analysis, or how the text has been influenced by other texts as well as how the text being

analyzed might influence other texts as well as the influence on differently situated

audiences (p. 194). There are others researchers (see Fiske, 1987; Fürsich, 2009; Gray &

Lotz, 2012; Molina, 2009; Newcomb & Hirsch, 1983; Philo, 2007; Williams, 1974;

among others) that argue a strict textual analysis of a discourse without considering

context, audience, history, and producers, is not sufficient. The later presumption

regarding discourse analysis seems to be especially fitting for this research project in

light of the above analysis of Foucalt’s concept of discourse and the triangulation

between power, knowledge, and discourse.

Analyzing Television

A great question regarding television comes from an early television critic,

Charles Siepmann (1950), who blankly asked, “[w]hat are the true ends (true in the sense

of socially constructive) of modern mass communication? What does it have to say? . . .

What policy will be adopted . . . [w]hose voice will be decisive in the formulation of a

policy?” (p. 330). Siepmann (1950) suggests the public will be clueless in shaping policy

(p. 330). Siepmann (1950), quoting Frank Stanton, a former head of CBS, stated that

broadcasters would seek to supply programming with “broad appeal” (p. 330). Siepmann

(1950) dismisses that end and states that “the glory of a democratic society [is] that it not

merely tolerates but encourages difference, that its concern is with the full flowering of

diverse individuality, not of conformity and mass-mindedness” (p. 331).

Siepmann (1950) finally accepts that the advertiser’s wishes of reaching the

largest audience will result in “lowest-common-denominator programming” (p. 333).

Siepmann’s (1950) patently bourgeois judgment of television users is obvious when he

mentions that the large number of middle- and lower-income television purchasers, rather

than the “well-to-do,” “affects the likely character of programs offered” (p. 338).

Siepmann (1950) does perceive a bright spot on television’s programming and purpose

when he mentions that the education of children is an obvious use for television, but

educational use requires skilled teachers (p. 349, 351).

Shortly After Siepmann’s speculation, in 1954, Theodor Adorno, the German

philosopher and social critic, weighed in on television with a pilot study considering how

to measure the effects of television. Adorno’s (1954) research sought to identify and

solidify the theoretical concepts through which the effects of television could be studied

(p. 213). Adorno (1954) also hoped that by exposing television programs’ effects on

viewers that he could educate the audience that the programs presented a “false realism”

so as to not be influenced by televised programs (p. 213).

Adorno (1954) believed that to make any judgments on the effects of television, a

researcher first needed to determine the similarities with “low” art, geared toward the

masses, and “autonomous art,” or art for art’s sake (p. 214). Adorno (1954) stated that

popular culture had “seized” all artist expression so pervasively that no one could escape

the influence, from the “rural” and therefore uneducated population to people with a

“higher level of education” (p. 215). Adorno’s (1954) prescient rumination about popular

culture, television in this instance, was that “[t]he more the system of ‘merchandising’

culture is expanded, the more it tends to assimilate the ‘serious’ art of the past by

adapting this art to the system’s own requirements” (p. 215).

Adorno (1954) hit upon the idea of television as being polysemic (discussed

below) when he stated that “the full effect of the material on the spectator cannot be

studied without consideration of the hidden meaning in conjunction with the overt one”

(p. 221). Adorno (1954) even somewhat naively questions whether the “sinister effect” of

the latent messages in programs is purposeful (p. 225). Similarly, Adorno (1954) believes

that stereotyping is a necessity, but also believes that rigid stereotypes will cause

television users not to alter his or her viewpoint based on personal experiences (p. 229).

Interestingly, no conclusions or suggestions of appropriate theories for television viewer

are suggested in the article, save for the idea that television is crude but complex, and

should be investigated.

In the book Television Studies, Jonathan Gray and Amanda Lotz (2012) write that

early television research, much like research into newspapers and radio, was rooted in

social sciences and likely focused on strong effects-based models, such as the

bullet/hypodermic needle theory (p. 8). When television was in full-swing, the post-war

economic and cultural boom of the 1950s, media research had changed into a more-

limited effects model (Gray & Lotz, 2012, p. 9). Fast forward just a bit to the 60s, and

television research by social scientists was augmented by the humanities, that researched

television “via linguistics, and joined with the anthropologists and literary critics who

were won over by the new semiology” (Katz, 1977, p. 27 as cited by Gray & Lotz, 2012,

p. 11).

The study of television was also augmented by the Center for Contemporary

Cultural Studies (CCCS), which was founded by Richard Hoggart in 1964 (Gray & Lotz,

2019, p. 14) Instead of studying television as an “art,” CCCS considered how television

supported the dominant culture (Gray & Lotz, 2019, p. 14). As cultural studies became

more accepted by the academy, television moved into the spotlight because of the broad

acceptance and appeal as entertainment (Gray & Lotz, p. 12). As suggested by Adorno,

television critics started to consider the patent and latent messages in television programs

as well as how the producers of these television programs supported dominant ideologies

through enforcing false consciousness regarding worker/class relationships, race

relationships, gender relationships, economics, sexuality, and ability.

Television as a Text

In reference to Roland Barthes, Bernard Dauenhauer (1982) states that Barthes

definition of a text is “a tissue of citations flowing from countless cultural sources” (p.

137). Barthes (1972) stated that “the unity of a text is not in its origin, it is in its

destination” (p. 15, as cited by Dauenhauer, 1982, p. 137). Similarly, Jacques Derrida

(1979) considered a text as “a differential network, a fabric of traces referring endlessly

to something other than itself” (p. 83-4, as cited by Dauenhauer, 1982, p. 137). The

seemingly unconstrained concepts of text, as posited by Barthes and Derrida, have been

stretched further by cultural studies such that any cultural practice or production can be

read (Fürsich, 2009, p. 240). A “close reading” method of discourse analysis is often

preferred for analyzing televised texts, as a close textual analysis can uncover ideological

assumptions underlying texts, can offer a nuanced explanation of those texts, and can also

discover what is missing from the texts (Fürsich, 2009, p. 240-1).

In further support of the openness and concept of “text,” Fiske (1987), in his book

Television Culture, states that “programs are produced, distributed, and defined by the

[television] industry: texts are the product of their readers” (p. 14). A television program

becomes a text when an audience member assigns a meaning to what was viewed (Fiske,

1987, p. 14).

Fiske (1987) continues, “[A] textual study of television, then, involves three foci:

the formal qualities of television programs and their flow; the intertextual relations of

television within itself, with other media, and with conversation; and the study of socially

situated readers and the process of reading” (p. 16). Adding to Fiske’s definition of a

textual study of television are Gray and Lotz (2012), who state that a textual study

considers not only the lighting, set, shot composition, and script, but also considers in

what ways the text relates to a culture’s dominant ideology: the discourse proposed by the

text (p. 37). Researchers should consider also how the dominant culture seeks to control

reality and knowledge, and therefore the discourse (Gray & Lotz, 2012, p. 22; see also

Foucault, as cited above).

As mentioned above, Fiske (1987) says a research project should focus on

“intertextual relations” regarding television analysis to derive at meaning from a text (p.

16; see also Fairclough, 1992 and Gray & Lotz, 2012, among others). Fiske’s (1987)

concept of “intertextuality” is that texts should be compared to similarly situated texts so

a researcher has a more broad basis of knowledge through which to decode the text in

question; one text does not define another, as such, but by considering similarly situated

texts, a researcher can get a more valid picture of the text being considered (p. 108).

Going further, Fiske (1987) states that having intertextual knowledge helps to “pre-orient

the reader to exploit television’s polysemy by activating the text in certain ways . . . a

text’s intertextual relations can provide us with valuable clues to the readings that a

particular culture or subculture is likely to produce” (Fiske, 1987, p. 108).

In addition to a researcher’s consideration into intertextuality, Gray & Lotz (2012)

suggest the concept of considering “paratextuality,” or texts beyond the program such as

promotion and public relations articles, producer or actor bonus material available online

or included with a show’s media, and similar pieces of ephemera that may exist

contemporaneously with a program (p. 133). The extra material might possibly work as

an intertext, as paratextual material likely influences a program’s audience and can

possibly shed light on some of the latent meanings in the programs (Gray & Lotz, 2012,

p. 134).

Multiplicity of Messages

As far back as 1954, Theodor Adorno was concerned with the patent and latent

meanings in a television program. Horace Newcomb and Paul Hirsch (1983) considered

that television programs displayed a pleasant veneer of “entertainment,” but also

considered that the underlying subtext of television programs were message delivery

vehicles supporting the dominant culture (p. 46). Fiske (1987) also noted that television

programs were proficient at provoking discourse among the audience, too, and much like

Foucault, Fiske (1987) sees the discourse provoked is used to enforce the

power/knowledge relationship that supports the dominant culture; this clearly helps

builds a reality that supports the dominant culture with the audience (p.1).

Further, Fiske’s (1987) belief is that television producers use codes in programs

that are “agents of intertextuality” that tie a text to other texts to compose and support the

dominant culture (p.4). In another nod to Foucault, Fiske (1987) acknowledges that since

knowledge is controlled and influenced by power, “reality” is also influenced by power,

and that shifts all discourse to support the dominant culture (p. 5). Specifically, Fiske

(1987b) said, “[c]haracters on television are not just representations of individual people

but are encodings of ideology . . . these [ideological codes] . . . relate the televisual use to

their broader use in the culture at large” (as cited by Fiske, 1987a, p. 9). The codes

presented to the audience are fluid, however, and different interpretations from

differently situated audiences should be expected (See Newcomb and Hirsch, 1983;

Fiske, 1987a). Newcomb and Hirsch (1983) state that television in general:

[P]resents a multiplicity of meanings rather than a monolithic dominant

point of view. It often focuses on our most prevalent concerns, our deepest

dilemmas. Our most traditional views, those that are repressive and

reactionary, as well as those that are subversive and emancipatory, are

upheld, examined, maintained, and transformed. The emphasis is on

process rather than product, on discussion rather than indoctrination, on

contradiction and confusion rather than coherence (p. 54).

As mentioned above, and revisited here, Fiske sees that television programs do

not become a text and enter the discourse only after being seen by an audience. Fiske

(1987a), like Newcomb and Hirsch (1983) and Adorno (1954) before him, sees television

programs as polysemic (emphasis added), stating, “a program provides a potential of

meanings which may be realized, or made into actually experienced meanings, by

socially situated viewers in the process of reading” (p. 15 – 6). Each audience member

brings his or her own experiences, attitudes, individualism, and will come away with a

unique read of the text; the reads will be inherently biased toward the dominant culture,

because knowledge and power exist only to support the dominant culture.

Disability Studies and Theory

Defining “Disability”

In choosing to write about a subject as varied as disability representations, a good

starting point would probably be to actually define “disability.” Tanya Titchkosky’s

article, Disability Studies: The Old and the New, presents a catalog of definitions,

signifiers, and significations of disability through history. Lennard Davis (1995a, 1995b)

traces “the disabled” as being cataloged as far back as the Enlightenment, albeit classified

as a “fascination” (as cited by Titchkosky, 2000, p. 200). Disability as a “social problem”

emerged because of medical advancements, soldiers returning from war instead of merely

dying on the battlefield, and the industrial revolution with the concept of the “deserving

poor” (see the “economic model” of disabilities explored below) (see Jones, 1994;

Liachowitz, 1988; Russell, 1998; Shapiro, 1993; Stone, 1984, as cited by Titchkosky, p.

200). Titchlosky (2000), in surveying disabilities in regard to academics, makes note that

sociologists have studied disabilities in some form for a long time (See Durkheim, (1964

[1895] as an example), but in a critical sense, is still a very new discipline (p. 202).

Erving Goffman (1963) gives disability a sociological treatment as he considers a

society’s reaction to a physical, mental or “tribal” “abomination” in a person; in his terms

a “stigma,” which makes a person less than human (emphasis added) (p. 4, as cited by

Titchlosky, 2000, p. 203). People who lack a stigma or an “undesirable difference” can

serve to stigmatize people, and are termed “normal” (Goffman, 1964, p.4 as cited by

Titchlosky, 2000, p. 203) As a disability can often be the result of a traumatic event, a

disability is a physical signification, a stigma, and an event, or the source of the stigma

(Titchlosky, 2000, p. 205). After the ADA was signed into law, and disabled people

gained the status of a person in the U.S., disabled people are still considered deviant,

although at times “involuntary deviant” (Sagarin, 1975, as cited by Titshlosky 2000, p,

206). “Disability” differs from “deviance” as “disability” is a condition and not a

conscious behavior, and disabled people experience the social sanctions that end up as a

stigma (Clinard and Meier, 1998 [1957], p. 482 as cited by Titchlosky, 2000, p. 206).

Titchlosky (2000) states that in modern sociology, a disability is a “condition,” and is

stripped of any social significance – which is also problematic in that society still

considers disabled people deviant based on reactions, and therefore not actually reflecting

society (p. 206).

Titchlosky (2000) excoriates the hackneyed definitions, portrayals and models

(along with much of the appurtenant writing about “disabilities”) by stating that

sociology teaches “normals” to associate their discomfort with disability as the fault of

the disabled person, and to disassemble the concept that a disability is not a possibility for

everyone (p. 209). Certainly, disability is not the norm – only 12.8% of the U.S.

population – the second largest minority (emphasis added) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018).

However, “normal” people “regard people with visible physical handicaps as being apart

from other human beings; many people today look on them with pity or avoid them all

together” (Clinard and Meier, 1998, p. 491, as cited by Titchlosky, 2000, p. 209).

Mike Oliver (1983) considers a person’s limitation, such as not being able to

walk, an impairment, while the inability to access a building as the true meaning of

disability; lack of sight is an impairment, and the inability to access material to read is the

disability (as cited by French, 1993, p. 17). However, Sally French (1993), a visually

impaired scholar, points out that her inability to read non-verbal cues in a conversation is

not a problem that a caring and mindful society could solve, thereby being impaired and

disabled (emphasis added) (French, 1993, p. 17-8). Oliver (1987) and Vic Finkelstein

(1990) suggest that wholesale education have been “remarkably unsuccessful” in

changing attitudes toward disabled people (as noted above). Continuing this thread,

Morris (1991) states that as much as a disabled person can charge society with

discrimination, the effects of discrimination are personal (as cited by French, 1993, p.

19).

As a part of the British government, Amelia Harris (1971) conducted a survey

regarding disability in the U.K., and had a three-tiered set of terms was identified for

classification of disabilities: 1) impairment signified the lack of a limb, or having a

defective body mechanism; 2) disability: a loss or reduction of a function; and 3)

handicap: a disadvantage or restriction caused by a disability (as cited by Oliver, 1993, p.

62). The U.K.’s definition of “disability” that is seen in the Disability Discrimination

Acts of 1995 and 2005 is paraphrased by Thomas as a “mental or physical impairment

that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his or her ability to carry out

normal day-to-day activities” (Thomas, 2007, p. 12). Thomas also cites the World Health

Organization’s International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps

definition of disability, which is “any restriction or lack (resulting from impairment) of

ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered normal for a

human being” (Bickenbach et al., 1999, p. 1175, as cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 12-3).

In her book Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American

Culture and Literature, Rosemarie Garland-Thomson (1997) seeks to transform disability

from being in the realm of a medical condition, to being “a form of ethnicity” (p. 6).

Garland-Thomson suggests moving the discussion of a person’s disability as a physical

state to considering that one’s disability “as a reading of bodily peculiarities in the

context of social power relations . . . a representation, a cultural interpretation of physical

transformation or configuration” (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p.6). Disability’s definition

under that schema is assigning a value to a body not based on strictly physical abilities,

but rather what culture deems a body should, or should not, do (Garland-Thomson, 1997,

p.6).

The ADA’s definition of a disability is found at Title 42, chapter 126, U.S.C. §

12102:

(1) Disability

The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual

(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more

major life activities of such individual;

(B) a record of such an impairment; or

paragraph (3)).

(2) Major Life Activities

(A) In general

For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not

limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing,

eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing,

learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.

(B) Major bodily functions

For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the

operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to,

functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel,

bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and

reproductive functions.

(3) Regarded as having such an impairment

For purposes of paragraph (1)(C):

(A) An individual meets the requirement of "being regarded as having

such an impairment" if the individual establishes that he or she has been

subjected to an action prohibited under this chapter because of an actual or

perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment

limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity.

(B) Paragraph (1)(C) shall not apply to impairments that are transitory and

minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or

expected duration of 6 months or less (The Americans with Disabilities

Act, Title 42, Chapter 126 § 12101 – 12213 and Title 47, Chapter 5, § 225

and § 611).

The ADA is considered the legal definition for disability in the U.S., yet there are

a significant number of words that are not satisfying when actually trying to parse the

answer to the question, what is a disability? Garland-Thomson (1997) states that

“‘impairment’ and ‘limits’ depend on comparing individual bodies with unstated but

determining norms, a hypothetical set of guidelines for corporeal form and function

arising from the cultural expectations about hoe human beings should look and act” (p.

7). Stairs, a “constructed impediment” for a wheelchair user, are no longer an

“impairment” if a ramp is also present (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 7). In essence,

disability is less about physical attributes, but about society’s representation of ability and

social relationships: “[O]ne group is legitimized by possessing valued physical

characteristics and maintains its ascendency and self-identity by systematically imposing

the role of cultural or corporeal inferiority on others” (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 7). In

that way, disabled people are the “stigmatized other whose social role is to symbolically

free the privileged idealized figure of the American self from the vagaries and

vulnerabilities of embodiment” (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 7). On the other hand, if a

person considers all of the characteristics that mark a person as being “normal”: gender

(male), age (younger), marital status (married, presumably with children), race

(Caucasian), region of the country (urban and in the north eastern U.S.), sexuality

(heterosexual), religion (Protestant), education (college graduate), and employed, the

number of people fitting that mold is hardly a majority (Goffman, 1963, p. 128, as cited

by Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 8).

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition of “disability” is almost a

mirror image of what many people in disability studied agree upon as the “social model

of disability” (discussed below):

Disability is not an attribute of an individual, but rather a complex

collection of conditions, many of which are created by the social

environment. Hence the management of the problem requires social

action, and it is the collective responsibility of society at large to make the

changes necessary for full participation of people with disabilities in all

areas of social life. (WHO, 2001, p. 28, as cited by Ferguson & Nusbaum,

2012, p. 73).

Vic Finkelstein’s (1993) belief is that a disabled person’s self-image has a lot to

do with that person’s concept of “disability” (p. 9). Jenny Morris (1993) mirrors that

statement by asking whether disabled people can have self-pride when able-bodied

people evidence negative beliefs regarding disabled people (p. 101). If a disabled person

sees a disability because of a physical or mental impairment, seeking assistance from

someone else is a normal activity; if discrimination is causing an impaired person’s

disability, then help eradicating the discrimination is the preferred assistance (Finkelstein,

1993, p. 9). Regardless as to the cause, the label “disabled” is a reality regarding access to

social services, and assistance devices are signifiers of the presence of a disability

(Finkelstein, 1993, p. 13). If the label “disabled” might harm a person’s chance at

success, then maybe an impaired person can rationalize him or herself at the top of the

heap as a variation of “normal,” and relegate the “others” as truly “disabled” (Finkelstein,

1993, p. 13). As a wheelchair user, I am merely “mobility oppressed” by the

environment; those poor souls with a learning disability, now they are the truly

“disabled,” thereby subjecting others with impairments to a medical label (emphasis

added) (Finkelstein, 1993, p. 14).

Alan Gartner (1984) also sees shades of racism and sexism afoot when disabled

people are forced into a definition determined only by “normal” people – just as when

white people force images onto black people and when males force their own images

onto females (p. 3, as cited by Margolis & Shapiro, 1987, p. 20). Gartner (1984) writes,

“these images have told us not only what is beautiful and right; they have warned us that

the image of disability is ugly – ugly and evil” (p. 3, as cited by Margolis & Shapiro,

1987, p. 20).

Lesley Fiedler’s thoughts from his work The Tyrany of the Normal is a fitting

conclusion to this section defining disability. Fiedler (1984) boldly skewers the medical

community and appurtenant bureaucracy of politics by stating that regardless as to

medical advances, the allowed expiration of disabled fetuses is as a result of “a vestigial

primitive fear of the abnormal, exacerbated by guilt” (p. 40). While doctors might attempt

to assuage their guilt by assuring themselves that she or her was only sparing the child of

suffering and parents and society of a financial burden, what is being shown is “how

dangerous enforced physiological normality is when the definition of its parameters falls

into the hands of politicians and bureaucrats” (Fiedler, 1984. P. 40-1). Fiedler (1984)

continues by stating that “it is especially important for us to realize that finally there are

no normals at a moment when we are striving desperately to eliminate Freaks, to

normalize the world” and that “the war against ‘abnormality’ implies a dangerous kind of

politics, which begins with a fear of difference and eventuates in a tyranny of the normal”

(p. 42).

Defining Disability Studies

Disability Studies, as an academic function, is a fairly new concept (See Barton

1996, Davis, 2005; Oliver 1983, Swain, et al, 2003, as cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 7).

Thomas (2007) states that the root of disability studies comes from Emile Durkheim’s

work (1964 [1895]) regarding “normal” and “deviant” in regard to social order (p. 11).

Talcott Parsons (1951) went further and included “illness, disease, and disability” as a

“deviance,” and a contributory force in “social dysfunction” (as cited by Thomas, 2007,

p. 11). This is discussed further below. Parsons’ approach faced criticism for the failure

to consider that there are some disabilities for which there is no cure or medical solution

(Thomas, 2007, p. 18). However, Parsons (1975) answered his critics, stating:

There are many conditions which are, in any given state of the art of

medicine, incurable. For them the goal of complete recovery becomes

impractical. However, recovery is the obverse of the process of

deterioration of health, that is, a level of capacities, and in many of these

chronic situations tendencies to such deterioration can be held in check by

the proper medically prescribed measures based on sound diagnostic

knowledge. (p. 259, as cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 18)

Parsons is stating that even though a person is disabled, that person still has a duty to

society: to remain healthy and to contribute to society in whatever way that person can,

albeit through the direction of a medical professional (Thomas, 2007, p. 18). Had Parsons

also put some duty on society to remove the architectural barriers as well as the social

barriers so as to make it easier for a permanently disabled person to contribute to society,

this would come close to fitting into the social model of disability, discussed below.

Garland-Thomson considers Erving Goffman’s 1963 book, Stigma: Notes on the

Management of Spoiled Identity, as support for disability studies in that the language

signifies the “other” is not “normal,” but is deviant (as cited by Garland-Thomson, 1997,

p. 30-31). Garland-Thomson’s (1997) view is that Goffman’s stigma theory enforces the

concept that disability is not the problem, but rather that the problem for a disabled

person is the “inequalities, negative attitudes, misrepresentations, and institutional

practices that result from the process or stigmatization” (p.32). Goffman (1963) states

that the stigmatized person is seen as “somehow less than human” (p. 3, as cited by

Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 32). Stigmatized people have an “undesirable difference,”

which society sees as a “deviance,” and this deviance is handled by society through

societal customs, such as discrimination, rejection, stereotypes, etc. (Goffman, 1963, as

cited by Garland-Thomson, 1997). Paul Abberly (1993) is also swayed by Goffman’s

concept of disability, but with an added dimension: Abberly considers the discrimination

foisted upon disabled people as a result of his or her stigma, or marker of disability, as

being a social control used by “normal” people to prevent a disability as being

normalized (p. 109-10). Robert Chubon (1982) also used the stigma verbiage in relation

to a social control mechanism, but rather than resistance to the “normalization” of

disability, Chubon considers the stigma of disability creates a social barrier to disabled

people in regard to social equity.

Jane Campbell and Mike Oliver (1996) consider the book Stigma: The Experience

of Disability by Paul Hunt as the beginnings of organization for disability rights in the

U.K. (as cited by Thomas, 2007, p 51). Stigma: The Experience of Disability contains an

unedited collection of twelve essays by disabled people, and started the desire for

disabled people in the U.K. to wrest control of their lives from the hands of medicine and

to formulate a social understanding of disability (Thomas, 2007, p. 51). In his essay in

Stigma: The Experience of Disability, Paul Hunt (1966) wrote:

Disabled people often meet prejudice, which expresses itself in

discrimination and even oppression . . . . Maybe it is invidious to compare

our situation with that of racial minorities in any way. The injustice and

brutality suffered by so many because of racial tension makes our troubles

as disabled people look very small. But I think there is a connection

somewhere, since all prejudice springs from the same roots (p. 152-3, as

cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 51).

Vic Finklestein picked up the baton of disability studies in the U.K. as a pioneer

after Hunt’s death and considered Marxism as a theoretical tool through which to view

the oppression of disabled people (Thomas, 2007, p. 52). Finklestein (2001) and others in

his peer group considered how able-bodied people and social institutions oppressed

disabled people by excluding disabled people from employment and education as well as

using environmental barriers to ensure non-participation and with forced poverty due

through inadequate welfare benefits (p. 5).

Philip Ferguson and Emily Nusbaum (2012) contribute a concise history lesson

about disability studies in the U.S. in the article Disability Studies: What is it and What

Difference does it Make? when they note that “The Society for Disability Studies – the

oldest academic organization explicitly dedicated to this area – traces its beginning to

1982” (p. 70-1). Joseph Shapiro (1993) also gives credit to disabled people advocating

for disability rights in the 1970s (as cited by Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 71) and the

efforts of able-bodied and disabled scholars to listen to and analyze the common

language of disabled people and their families (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 71).

Ferguson and Nusbaum (2012) credit medical sociologist Irving Zola’s newsletter

regarding disabilities, which would eventually become Disability Studies Quarterly, as

the first academic periodical that was devoted to issues that touched disability and the

lives of disabled people (p. 71). Starting in the social sciences, but branching into fields

such as history, art, humanities, education and many other scholarly fields, Ferguson and

Nusbaum (2012) state that the Society for Disability Studies definition of “disability

studies” is probably a sufficient definition for the field (p. 71). The Society for Disability

Studies’ mission states that:

Disability Studies recognizes that disability is a key aspect of human

experience, and that the study of disability has important political, social,

and economic implications for society as a whole, including both disabled

and nondisabled people. Through research, artistic production, teaching

and activism, the Society for Disability Studies seeks to augment

understanding of disability in all cultures and historical periods, to

promote greater awareness of the experiences of disabled people, and to

advocate for social change. (Society for Disability Studies, n.d.).

While interesting from a historical perspective, the history of disability studies doesn’t

really give anything satisfying to consider in regard to what disability studies “is.”

Garland-Thomson (2005) offers a concept of disability studies in the

article Disabilities and Representation by stating:

the aim of much disability studies is to reimagine disability, to reveal how

the storied quality of disability invents and reinvents the world we share.

Disability studies challenges our collective representation of disability,

exposing it as an exclusionary and oppressive system rather than the

natural and appropriate order of things (p. 523).

She then goes on to describe two representations of disability that she believes are

examples of “natural and appropriate.” First, Garland-Thomson (2005) talks about a

National Public Radio piece about Thomas Greene Wiggins, who she realized is about a

performer in “freak-shows,” known as “Blind Tom” (p. 523). Garland-Thomson (2005)

noted that while Wiggins’ blindness was mentioned, he was never referred to as “Blind

Tom,” and rather than associate Wiggins with freak-shows, the reporter referred to

Wiggins as an “American Composer” (p. 523). Garland-Thomson (2005) says disability

rights transformed “Blind Tom,” a freak show performer, into Thomas Greene Wiggins, a

major American contributor to music (p. 523). Similarly, Garland-Thomson (2005)

mentions two artists with disabilities, Claude Monet, whose move into impressionism

was due to his diminished sight, and Chuck Close, who moved from photorealism into a

cubist style because of his loss of dexterity due to quadriplegia (p. 253-54). For Garland-

Thomson (2005), Monet and Close both challenge representations of disability in that

neither artists worked to “overcome their disabilities,” but they changed their styles based

on their disabilities, and are both noted artists because of their disabilities, not in spite of

their disabilities (p. 524).

Ferguson and Nusbaum (2012) argue that there are five core concepts that make

scholarly work in disability studies important (p. 72). The first concept discussed is “[t]he

study of disability must be social” (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 72). This of course

gives rise to the Social Model of Disability (discussed below) in that “disability” is more

than an individual diagnosis, but “[d]isability must be studied in its social, cultural, and

historical context as much as the personal conditions of impairment and functioning must

be studied in their medical and educational contexts” (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p.

72). Medicine and medical research are of certainly important, too, but research in the

field of disability studies can offer a “disability centered” view in a social context

(Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 72) The second concept is that “[t]he study of disability

must be foundational” in that disability studies’ foundation is the “social construction of

race, gender, class, and other ways in which we differentiate ourselves from one another”

and the way things are classified as “normal” (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 73-4). The

third concept is that “[t]he study of disability must be interdisciplinary” in the same

manner that other disciplines, such as race and gender studies, draw upon sociological,

cultural, and literary representations to explore meaning (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p.

74). While education for intellectually disabled people and education in medical

rehabilitation could be seen as the natural places for disability studies in education,

disability studies should not exist as merely educational and medical support for disabled

people (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 74). The fourth concept is that “[t]he study of

disability should be participatory” in that disabled people should have a hand in the

direction of disability studies, from the role of the subjects studied, the types of questions

asked, and the people researching and analyzing the answers (Ferguson & Nusbaum,

2012, p. 74). Certainly not to suggest that able-bodied researchers have no place in a

disability studies program, but the under-representation of disabilities in academia

dictates that disability studies scholars should advocate for participation by disabled

people (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 74) The fifth concept is that “[t]he study of

disability must be values-based” in that a disability studies scholar’s zeal for advocacy

and critique of the more traditional “medical model of disability” should not cause a

researcher to dismiss someone’s real need for education or rehabilitation, even though

formal systems of “special education” and “rehabilitation” can be seen as systems that

have contributed to the “oppression and pathologization of children and adults with

disabilities” (Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 74).

In the midst of the theories and the concepts of disability studies, the question still

remains, who cares? As with the medical model of disability, a disability was considered

something to be “fixed” by medicine or ameliorated by institutions and accessibility

(Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 75). Research by disability scholars has revealed the

“construct that is labeled ‘disability’ as multi-faceted and complex (Ferguson &

Nusbaum, 2012, p. 75). By more engagement and research in the field of disability

studies, “disability” becomes more of a shared experience, and as people age and

inevitably become disabled (if he or she lives long enough), a natural part of life

(Ferguson & Nusbaum, 2012, p. 75).

Classic Disability Representation Theories

In Literature

The overwhelmingly typical representation of disability in literature is that the

disability acts as a metaphor – characters that seek to elicit pity from the reader or

disabled characters whose bodies represent disabled minds and are therefore to be feared

or pitied (See Fiedler 1982; Garland-Thomson 1997; Garland-Thomson 2005; Kent,

1987; Kriegel, 1987; Margolis & Shapiro, 1987; Rogers, 1978; Thurer, 1980; among

many others). Garland-Thomson (1997) laments that often, disabled characters are so

removed from reality as to render the character a “freak,” whose sole contribution is “a

single stigmatizing trait” (p. 11). Managing daily interactions in reality as a disabled

person is never simple, because a visible disability dominates the interaction with a

“normal” person (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p.12). Does the “normal” person feel fear,

pity, repulsion? – none of which are socially acceptable responses; should he or she offer

assistance? acknowledge the disability? is this person disabled, handicapped, handi-

capable? (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p.12). Similarly, will anxiety regarding the prospect

of rejection by the “normal” person be too great to continue the relationship beyond an

initial meeting? (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 12-3). One of many problems with a one-

dimensional representation of a disability in literature is that disability covers so many

variations among people that one of the standard disability signifiers; “wheelchair user,”

“blind,” or “deaf;” is false (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 13). At any rate, disabled

characters are found only in the margins, or made into a spectacle the writer wants to

enforce in the narrative (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 9).

Henri-Jaques Stiker (1997) notes that in the Old Testament of The Bible, disabled

people carried the legal designation of unclean, and could never become priests (p. 24, as

cited by Quayson, 2007, p. 5). Cain was “marked,” implying that the consequence for sin

is disfigurement (Thurer, 1980, p. 13). Greek society saw disabilities as punishment

(Stiker, 1997, p. 39-46, as cited by Qayson, 2007, p.5), while Greek gods were idealized

superhuman forms (Fiedler, 1984, p. 41). Haiphaistos, an Olympian god, was portrayed

as “lame,” and used as a joke (Fiedler, 1982, p. 57). In the middle ages, disability

vacillated between the realm of monstrosity and charity, with various disabilities seen as

a sign of God’s wrath (Quayson, 2007, p.6-7). As literature reaches the Victorian Era,

fear of a disabled character start to emerge as a theme (Fiedler, 1982, p. 64), and the title

character in Shakespeare’s Richard III gives rise to the idea that a character’s physical

disability must surely evidence a malignant heart and mind (Fiedler, 1982, p. 64). That

characterization shows up often: in Dickens’ The Old Curiosity Shop, as Quilp; in

Melville’s Moby Dick, as Captain Ahab; in Stevenson’s Treasure Island, as Long John

Silver; in Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter, as Chillingworth; in Hugo’s Hunchback of

Notre Dame, as Quasimodo, among countless other classic literary works (Fiedler, 1982,

p. 64-5).

In addition to the characterizations of disability as a curse, a monstrosity, and

something to be feared, the disabled character as pitiable and sad is a common theme.

Fiedler (1982) points to Tiny Tim in Dickens’s A Christmas Carol, as well as medical

miracles in Heidi and The Secret Garden as evidence of pitiable disabled characters (p.

67-8). However, Fiedler (1982) notes that in the middle of the pity shown, there is a

subtext of fear, too, in that the disabilities are so unfortunate that the miracle cures make

disabilities go away (p. 68). Howard Margolis and Arthur Shapiro (1987) also consider

the pity mechanism at play as disabled people are often depicted as “receivers” of pity

and charity regarding the disabled character’s relationships with the able-bodied (p. 20).

In a rebuttal to an article by Lesley Fiedler in the academic periodical

Salmagundi, Paul Robinson (1982) states his belief that the overwhelming emotion in

literature toward disabled characters is pity (p. 74). Robinson continues:

[G]reat literature reflects the more deeply felt responses, not merely to

disability but to all significant human experiences . . . Richard III - if I

may put the matter somewhat baldly - is about ambition and inhumanity,

while Moby Dick is about revenge, megalomania, and the quest for

transcendence. These works are about other things as well, but what they

are most emphatically not about is the problem of being a hunchback or a

pegleg (Robinson, 1982, p. 76-7).

Robinson (1982) says the disabilities are symbolic of the inward states Shakespeare and

Melville were seeking to portray (p. 78). That explanation is interesting but does little to

blunt Fiedler’s characterization that a visible disability is evidence of a malignant heart

and mind.

Margolis and Shapiro (1987) agree with the disabled body equating to disabled

mind trope when referencing author Somerset Maugham’s literary classic, Of Human

Bondage (p. 19). Regarding the character Phillip, Margolis and Shapiro (1987) state that

Maugham used that literary device with the character Phillip, whose clubfoot is the cause

of his “confused and warped personality” (p. 19).

Leonard Kriegel (1987) certainly sees the pity and fear, but tempers that with a

dose of compassion (p. 32). In addition to the pity and fear, Kriegel (1987) adds a couple

of other characterizations, choosing “Demonic Cripple” to describe Richard III and

Captain Ahab, turning Tiny Tim into what he calls a “Charity Cripple,” and then adding

“Realistic Cripple” to the lexicon by describing the character Berthold Lindau from

William Howell’s A Hazard of New Fortunes. Kriegel (1987) also offers a take on the

“supercrip” image, the “Survivor Cripple” in the form of the great character William

Einhorn of Chicago from Saul Bellow’s picaresque The Adventures of Augie March.

Kriegel’s (1987) sage words regarding disabilities and literature is that “the world of the

crippled and disabled is strange and dark, and it is held up to judgment by those who live

in fear of it” (p.33). While those are solely male characterizations of disability, it turns

out that female characters get the same treatment as male characters (Kent, 1987). Bertha

Plummer, a blind woman in Charles Dickens’s book Cricket on the Hearth, is the

recipient of charity and pity, while James Joyce’s Gertie McDowell, who is “lame,” from

the book Ulysses, displays bitter envy (Kent, 1987, p. 49).

Ato Quayson (2007), in his book Aesthetic Nervousness: Disability and the Crisis

of Representation, has a bit of a different view about disability representations in

literature when he states that “aesthetic nervousness is seen when the dominant protocols

of representation within literary text are short-circuited in relation to disability” (p. 15).

The basic level of “aesthetic nervousness” is the tension inherent when a disabled

character interacts with a “normal” character (Quayson, 2007, p. 15) However, most

narratives go beyond the basic level to into “the disposition of symbols and motifs,”

“dramatic perspective,” to the highest level of “aesthetic nervousness,” which no longer

occupies the text, but operates between the reader and the text addressing the reader’s

status (Quayson, 2007, p. 15). Quayson (2007) says the “short-circuits” that cause

“aesthetic nervousness” in a text come from the author’s representations of disability (p.

15).

Garland-Thomson points out some instances in modern literature where a

disability is represented with power, in particular, Eva Peace, a character in Toni

Morrison’s 1973 novel Sula. Peace’s leg is amputated by being run over by a train (it is

not clear if the amputation was an accident or purposeful) and uses the proceeds of her

insurance and thereby feeds her family (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 116). Garland-

Thomson (1997) sees a difference between Peace and Melville’s Captain Ahab in that

Ahab is confined by his amputation and obsession with Moby Dick, while Peace’s

amputation sets her free from poverty (p. 116).

In Visual Arts

Visual representations of objects certainly pre-dated written representations, and

these visual representations are not immune from stereotyping and de-humanizing

disabled people. Fiedler (1984) points out that art galleries are brimming with paintings

of “Freaks” from Goya and Velasquez, to Currier and Ives, who exalted one of P.T.

Barnum’s sideshow stars, General Tom Thumb (p. 41).

There is a more than a century-long affair between society and “freak shows” (see

Fiedler, 1984; Garland-Thomson 1997). In 1822, Tono Maria, a native Brazilian, was

displayed without any cultural context except that she was as an example of everything a

Western woman was not: sexually deviant and unrestrained (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p.

56). People with congenital defects were displayed as to allow “normal” people a way to

diffuse their own anxieties and inhibitions (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 56). P.T.

Barnum’s exhibitions served to challenge the audience – how do these bodily disabilities

fit into cultural definitions of “people” (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 58-9). Barnum’s first

exhibition, Joice Heath, was the antithesis of the able-bodied white male ideal: an old,

toothless, crippled black woman whose oddity prevented humanization, and existed as

“pure text” (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 59). Barnum even continued the dehumanization

of Heath after death, as her autopsy was a ticketed public event (Garland-Thomson, 1997,

p. 60). Freak shows turned bodies into text to be deciphered according to the needs and

desires of the audiences (Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 60). As such, freak shows also

satisfied the need of the audience to affirm “normal” and “other” (Garland-Thomson,

1997, p. 65). Freaks as entertainment in the guise of freak shows was a fairly typical

activity (Fiedler, 1984, p. 41).

In addition to paintings and freak shows, there are many representations of

disabilities of all kinds in films. An early example of disabled representations in films is

the 1932 Todd Browning film, Freaks, which is the subject of a multitude of film

documentaries, academic articles, theses, and dissertations. Freaks varied representations

of disability goes from visual oddity, to pity, fear, amazement, repulsion, and finally

criminal conspiracy when the performers seemingly brutalize and terrorize the able-

bodied starlet as a means of extracting revenge. The film has been banned, re-edited,

restored, and exists not only as a cult classic, but also as a powerful relic of the

representation of disabilities. Films with varying representations of disabilities, go from

the popular movies, like the above-mentioned Freaks, to the surreal art films of Fredrico

Fellini and Ingmar Bergman (Fiedler, 1984, p. 41).

Not terribly long after Browning’s film, a very different and yet important film

confronted varied disabilities in director William Wyler’s brilliant and somewhat flawed

masterpiece from 1946, The Best Years of Our Lives. With that film, American producers

and consumers of culture not only had a means to confront worries about men coming

back from World War II, but also were offered a template to resolve potential problems

with men reintegrating into typical American life (Gerber, 1994, p. 545). Harold

Russell’s portrayal of Homer Parrish was groundbreaking in that a disabled actor was

cast as a disabled character, an amputee as a result of fighting in World War II, but the

tried and true stereotypes of “pity and fear” would transfer from literature directly into

this film (Gerber, 1994, p. 546).

In addition to pity and fear, the “super crip” motif (see above) is used when Wyler

shows Homer Parrish accomplishing tasks with the hooks he has for hands, such as target

shooting, opening a pack of cigarettes, among other “tricks” (Gerber, 1994, p. 552, p.

560). On one hand, the movie is excellent for the realistic portrayal of disability, yet the

portrayal also seeks pity for Parrish, too (Gerber, 1994, p. 560). Parrish brings into focus

how Wyler played on the audience’s fear of the other through the classic representations

of disability in the film (Gerber, 1994, p. 560). In addition to the fear of being disabled in

the same way Homer Parrish is, the character also is menacing to the audience because of

repeated, yet unpredictable, bouts of anger (Gerber, 1994, p. 560). While the film has a

subtext of enforcing dominant culture in traditional roles for women and men, further

analysis of the film is really beyond the scope of this project.

Paul K. Longmore (1987) makes note of the large number of disabilities

represented in films, but the representations follow along with literary stereotypes: horror

film “monsters,” criminals, disabled veterans, among other stereotypes (p. 65). Longmore

(1987) considers the disabled “monster” stereotype to be a play on the disabled body, evil

mind stereotype with a twist of “extremism” in the form of a twisted and ugly face or

some gross bodily deformity, with the only solution being death of the “monster” (p. 68-

9). Longmore (1987) believes the stereotype of a disabled person as seeking suicide to

escape a disabled life as a parallel to the monster stereotype in that the disabilities caused

a loss of humanity and a loss of control, and the only remedy is the death of the disabled

person (p. 69). Longmore (1987) considers the adjustment to a disability trope developed

with the large number of disabled U.S. soldiers returning from World War II (p. 71).

Often the adjustment to disability can cross into the “supercrip” stereotype when the

disabled person takes his or her new life and does something extraordinary like playing a

sport or driving a car; the problem with being disabled isn’t discrimination and

stigmatization from society, but rather the person’s own acceptance of his or her

disability (Longmore, 1987, p. 72).

Longmire (1987) writes that the acceptance dramas serve a larger social function:

reinforcing the notion that people can cope and adapt to anything with the right frame of

mind (p. 74). If a disabled person can succeed, imagine how well you, the able-bodied

viewer, can succeed (Longmire, 1987, p. 74). In addition, the adjustment stereotypes

make adapting to life in an able-bodied world no longer about prejudice or discrimination

from society, but about the individual disabled person (Longmire, 1987, p 74).

Educating About Disabilities

“The disabled have a bad literary press,” states Sheri Thurer (1980, p. 12). Most

often, associating disabled characters as malignant stems from folk tales in a child’s

culture (Thurer, 1980, p. 12). From early education, children are given the burden to

parse the spate of negative representations of disability and to judge them as correct or

false, which is seemingly difficult since children “easily” accept the negative

representations of disability presented by literature (Barnes, Berrigan, & Biklen, 1978;

Schroedel, 1979 as cited by Margolis & Shapiro, 1987). The classic literary conventions

regarding literary characters are not hidden or nuanced as to make them accessible to

children readers, so what is signaled is “deformity equals immorality” (Thurer, 1980, p.

13).

In the opposition, being a good person is rewarded, too, as the “ugly ducking

becomes a swan; the frog, a king; and the beast, a prince” (Thurer, 1980, p. 14). Fairy

tales from classic literature, when used in an educational forum, transmit values to

children, as well as serving as models for actions by children (Baskin, 1975, as cited by

Margolis & Shapiro, 1987, p. 18). Child educators do not only have an opportunity to

correct stereotypes promulgated by classic fairly tales, but some believe child educators

have a duty to point out the injustices disabled people carry because of those stereotypes

(Margolis & Shapiro, 1987, p. 18).

Margolis and Shapiro (1987) suggest that when teachers are educating with

classic literature and fairy tales that use classic misrepresentations of disabled people that

teachers should ask three questions of the students: 1) is the character a person in the

story, or is the disability portrayed being used as a literary device? 2) is the disabled

character’s interaction with others mutually beneficial? and 3) what is the origin of

stereotypical characters and devices in literature? (p. 19-21).

While classic literature for children often carries the same stereotypes and

metaphors as mature literature, public television for children has been a better outlet

historically, as Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, Sesame Street, and Zoom, are classic

children’s programing that had disabled children as guests (Wagner, 1975). Mister

Rogers’ Neighborhood’s reasoning for the inclusion of disabled guests is that the

inclusion of disabled children supports the show’s “values and attitudes and acceptance to

children” (Wagner, 1975). Fred Rogers’s goal was to have an influence in children

regarding disabled people, in that a disability is just a “difference among differences in

people” (Wagner, 1975). Other literature from the era suggests that “[w]e are beginning

to move in this area of using television to foster positive attitudes toward the

handicapped” (Liebert, 1975. P. 66).

Medical vs. Social Models of Disability

Medical Model

At its most basic, the medical model of disability portrays disability solely as

pathology to be cured (see Dirth & Branscombe, 2017; Finkelstein, 1997; Gabel &

Peters, 2004; Hahn, 1987; Oliver, 2004). The World Health Organization (WHO)

combined its treatment of disability with illness and disease in 1980, naming it a

“medical model” (Llewellyn & Hogan, 2000). Harlan Hahn (1987) states that disabled

people were often defined from a medical perspective, with medical solutions to

disability as being the only solution (p. 181). Michael Oliver (2004) agrees with Hahn’s

assessment, but goes further by stating that “the medical view of disability tends to regard

disabled people as ‘having something wrong with them’ and hence the source of the

problem” (p. 20). In essence, person’s mental or physical limitation is why he or she

cannot integrate and function in society (Oliver, 2004, p. 20).

A problematic aspect of the medical model of disability is highlighted by Jennifer

Brooks (2014) who argues that the medical model of disability is so focused on the

individual that the preternatural focus tends to distance any social responsibility to

include disabled people; if a disability is caused by an individual’s choice, then the

decision to integrate should be solved by the individual, too (p. 5). That line of thinking

validates discrimination toward disabled people and dehumanizes a disabled person

(Brooks, 2014, p. 6). This dehumanizing aspect can be seen when people are grouped into

categories by a condition (paraplegic, schizophrenic, autistic, disabled), which relegates

disabled people to “terminological rubbish bins into which all the important things about

us as people get thrown away” (Brisenden, 1986, p. 174). The medical model’s focus on

a disability as being an individual problem can cause a disabled person to blame his or

herself as the cause of the disability as well as being responsible for finding the right

combination of medical treatments for the disability; in addition, the individual problem

presented by the medical model might decrease social support for disabled individuals,

too (Dirth & Brascombe, 2017, p. 434). As such, a key concept that is bundled with the

medical model is blaming the victim for his or her disability (Thomas, 2007, p. 19). Funk

(1987) also sees a negative toll on disabled individuals in dehumanizing disability,

because while the disability and care are individualized, a disabled person loses agency

regarding a cure, as that is completely the realm of the medical community, and that loss

of agency for disabled people continues into aspects of a disabled person’s personal live

(p. 13).

Another problem with the medical model is highlighted by Simon Brisenden

(1986), who writes that “[t]he medical model of disability is one rooted in an undue

emphasis on clinical diagnosis, the very nature of which is destined to lead to a partial

and inhibiting view of the disabled individual” (p. 173). Julie Smart (2009) agrees as she

argues that the medical model of disability:

essentially treats all individuals with the same diagnosis with identical

treatment plans, regardless of differences in the individuals' needs,

resources, or assets. This tendency to see the individual as a diagnosis has

led disability scholars to term the Biomedical Model “diagnosis-driven”

rather than “individual focused” (p. 4).

In the book Sociologies of Disability and Illness: Contested Ideas in Disability

Studies and Medical Sociology, Carol Thomas analyzes the differences between how

medical sociology and disability studies consider disability and disabled people. Thomas

(2007) notes Emile Durkheim’s juxtaposition of the social deviant with “normal” cases in

regarding to social order (p. 11). American Sociologist Talcott Parsons thrust disability

into Durkheim’s concept of social deviance in 1951 (Thomas, 2007, p. 11). William

Cockerham (2004) argues that disability as a deviant behavior is not a mere statistical

variation from average but carries a judgment: conforming to the social norm is positive;

deviation is not (p. 142-43, as cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 11). That characterization of

disability survives into current medial sociology (Thomas, 2007, p. 12).

In mentioning Parsons, there is a possibility for a sub-model, possibly a precursor

to the medical model of disability, the “economic model.” Parsons (1951) is a structural

functionalist in his approach to society, and as such he saw society as an interconnected

web of social structures, requiring healthy, “normal” workers to have stable families, to

work to build the economy, and to keep the social system healthy and functioning (as

cited by Thomas, 2007, p. 17). In that regard, the social system depends on limiting and

managing illness, which requires medical professionals and the institution of medicine

(Thomas, 2007 p. 17). When a person is occupying Parsons’ “sick role,” there are two

rights: 1) to be free of social sanction because of that person’s illness, and 2) to escape

blame for illness; and two duties: 1) to get well as fast as possible, and 2) to seek a doctor

and to follow the doctor’s orders (Thomas, 2007 p. 17).

Finkelstein (1993) also gives some weight to the “economic model” by pointing

out that a person’s participation in creating wealth was radically different when

manufacture was primarily in a person’s home on a small scale with personal mechanical

devices that offered individualized accommodation versus the machinery of mass

production, which did not allow for personalization, but rather was specifically designed

for any “normal” person off the street to operate (p. 12). Being “normal” became the

characteristic necessary for employment (Finkelstein, 1993, p. 12). Differentiating a

person’s status as either idle or torpid and unwilling to work versus legitimately impaired

and “unable” to work would, of course, require the judgment of a medical professional,

and would give rise to the medial model of disability (Finkelstein, 1993, p. 12-3). In the

same vein, Hahn (1987) sees the emphasis on the capacity to work over other life

activities as making “unwarranted and untenable assumptions about the linkage between

impairments and productivity (p. 182).

Ironically, society typically considers an economic disadvantage to be 1) the lack

of ability, or 2) the presence of a prejudice (Abberly, 1993, p. 111). But society is

prejudiced against disabled people because 1) disabled people are typically lacking

economically and 2) society removes any power a disabled person may have had prior to

a disability (Abberly, 1993, p. 111). Therefore, the lack of power and economic standing

regarding disabled people arises from society’s prejudice against disabled people

(Abberly, 1993, p. 111). When one adds the effects of economic disadvantage and lack of

power to the lack of resources society allocates to care, living expenses, the economic

model becomes a focus for many disabled people’s lifeves (Abberly, 1993, p. 111-2).

Funk (1987) laments that the lack of power and economic status is seen as a natural result

of having a disability (p. 7). Funk (1987) also is quick to also argue that “[p]eople who

are disabled have historically been treated as objects of pity and fear . . . who are neither

expected nor willing to participate in or contribute to organized society” (p. 9).

In closing this look at the medical model of disability, here is this gem from

Fiedler (1984):

[W]e are approaching with alarming rapidity a future in which the rich and

privileged will have as one more, ultimate privilege, the hope of a

surgically, chemically, hormonally induced and preserved normality –

with the promise of immortality by organ transplant just over the horizon.

And the poor (who, we are assured on good authority, we have always

with us) will be our sole remaining Freaks. (p. 42)

Social Model

While Parsons’s influence on medical sociology was critical in placing disabled

people in the position of relying on medicine to return them to health and supporting the

social system, Goffman (1963) was more concerned with interactions between people

that carried a social stigma, such as a disability, with “normal” people (p. 23, as cited by

Thomas, 2007, p. 23). Goffman found that “normal” people showed discomfort when

socially engaged with the stigmatized, and the stigmatized people carried the burden of

adjusting in an effort to make “normal” people comfortable (Thomas, 2007, p. 23).

(1997). Garland-Thomson (1997) notes that the extra effort from disabled people is not

necessarily to make a “normal” person feel comfortable, but more for a disabled person

to be considered “fully human” by the “normal” person (p. 13). So much so that disabled

people must approach meetings with “normal” people with “charm, intimidation, ardor,

deference, humor, or entertainment to relieve nondisabled people of their discomfort”

(Garland-Thomson, 1997, p. 13) Only if the disabled person is successful in blunting the

effect of a disability can the relationship move past the surface (Garland-Thomson, 1997,

p. 13).

The efforts made by the stigmatized to manage interaction with “normal” people

included removing themselves from social encounters completely or disguising/covering

a disability to pass as “normal,” which Goffman saw as unfair burden affecting a

stigmatized person’s sense of self (Thomas, 2007, p. 23). Morris (1993), reinforces that

idea some 25 years later when she writes:

Going out in public so often takes courage. How many of us find that we

can’t dredge up the strength to do it day after day, week after week, year

after year, a lifetime of rejection and revulsion? It is not only physical

limitations that restrict us to our homes and those whom we know. It is the

knowledge that each entry into the public world will be dominated by

stares, by condescension, by pity and by hostility (p. 104).

I have had similar feelings; the able-bodied stare is a part of my life some 50 years after

Goffman’s research. In a similar vein, Paul Abberly (1993) states, “[I]f disabled people

display psychological abnormalities, this is because they have been socialized into such

traits as a result of the ways in which society meets, or fails to meet, our needs” (p. 108).

For some, the birth of the social model of disability comes from meetings between

two groups, Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation (UPIAS) and The

Disability Alliance (Alliance) from a published meeting transcript from 1975 named The

Fundamental Principles of Disability (see Barnes, 2003; Dewsbury et al., 2004; Gabel &

Peters, 2004; Light, 2001; Murphy, 1987). The UPIAS (1976) publication states, “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” (p. 14). The theory of the social model of disability considers

problems a disabled person is having negotiating life and the environment and

environmental structures as the means of including or excluding disabled people, so that

society and the framing of disability is responsible for a person’s disability and not the

individual (see Barnes, 2003; Mays, 2006; Oliver 1986; Rothman, 2003; Tregaskis,

2002). At the heart of disability being considered a construct of society is the idea that the

dominant culture sets the parameters of “normal” and “deviant” (see Barnes, 2003;

Dewsbury et al., 2004; Tregaskis, 2002; Turner et al., 1996). In Hahn’s (1987) view,

“[T]he sociopolitical view stresses the role of the environment . . . and requires an

examination of the architectural, institutional, and attitudinal environment encountered by

disabled persons” (p. 182). With yet one more quote to fix the basic definition of the

“social model” of disabilities, Evan Kemp (1981) writes, “[B]arriers to employment,

transportation, housing, and recreation can be more devastating and wasteful of our lives

than the diseases from which we suffer” (p. 23)

Rather than a specific moment where the skies opened and the social model was

born, the social model of disabilities was developed out of graduate courses for social

workers at the University of Kent in the 1980s (Oliver, 2004). Oliver (2004), in a prime

quote regarding the social model of disabilities states,

In the broadest sense, the social model of disability is about

nothing more complicated than a clear focus on the economic,

environmental and cultural barriers encountered by people who are viewed

by others as having some form of impairment – whether physical, sensory

or intellectual. The barriers disabled people encounter include inaccessible

education systems, working environments, inadequate disability benefits,

discriminatory health and social support services, inaccessible transport,

houses and public buildings and amenities, and the devaluing of disabled

people through negative images in the media – films, television and

newspapers (p. 23).

Certainly the physical environment, or rather accommodations for disabled people

in the physical environment in the form of ramps, audible signals at stop-lights, braille on

plaques identifying buildings and rooms, sign language interpreters among others, are

ways in which society has altered the environment and are examples of the social model

in action. As mentioned in the section regarding the ADA above, laws mandate these

accommodations, and while not evenly enforced, this is still a societal action to

accommodate disabilities. Much of the continuing issues with the social model come

from older buildings not retrofitting access, as often building owners think that the ADA

does not apply to a building because it was completed prior to the ADA’s passage, which

is not the case. ADA violations for existing construction are not policed by a government

organization, however – a disabled person must take action on his or her own. Often the

only remedy is to file legal action, because after you write a company a letter and request

an accommodation, from personal experience, the letter might be read, but is then

summarily thrown into the garbage. Certainly, there is no better way to become a pariah

in a city than to file legal claims against small businesses. Eventually, the costs of

fighting an accommodation exceed the cost of making the requested accommodation, and

alterations are made. That is the easy part of the social model. The part of the social

model that affects disabled people the most are the economic and cultural barriers.

Paul Abberly (1993) bemoans that while architectural barriers can be altered

easily, the human needs of disabled people are met in “inappropriate and disempowering

ways” (p. 111). It is possible that when people view a disability through the social model

that some of the stereotypes about disabilities and disabled people can be ameliorated, as

the social model does promote awareness of discrimination in environmental and

physical barriers, and hopefully that carries on into awareness of structural

discrimination, too, which could lead people to support public policies that seek to reduce

inequalities for disabled people (Dirth & Branscombe, 2017).

Oliver (1993) suggests that everyone can play a part in twisting the social model

of disability by considering how his or her business of social organization contributed to

the social model of disability by examining environmental factors and whether a space is

navigable by people with various mobility impairments, examining an organizations

presentation of information and examining how the information is available for someone

with a sight impairment, and the how the services provided may be utilized by able-

bodied people as well as impaired people (p. 66). Oliver’s (1993) largest plea is that

research regarding disabilities should not be performed without input and oversight from

disabled people, to insure that the true experience of disability is represented (p. 66).

Oliver (2004) details criticisms of the social model, beginning with the idea that

while the social model addresses disabilities as a collective, the realities of an

individual’s experience is ignored, especially the subjective experiences of “pain”

stemming from an impairment or a disability (p. 24-5). In addition, some consider that

the social model isn’t able to incorporate other social divisions, such as race, gender, age,

sexuality, etc. (Oliver, 2004, p. 25). Another criticism of the social model is that

architectural and environmental barriers get the spotlight and the social and cultural

position of disabled people as the “other” is relegated to the background (Oliver, 2004, p.

26). Brooks (2004) also points out that removing a barrier does not suddenly cause a

person’s disability to vaporize, which stands in this category of social model critique (p.

8). Oliver’s (2004) personal criticism of the social model is that “too much time has been

spent discussing it rather than attempting to use it to produce social and political change”

(p. 30).

Eli Clare’s (2001) criticism is in the disability as collective vein, as he argues that

the social model considers the collective injustice of disability and discards a person’s

relationship with his or her body and how that might influence an individual’s

oppression. Claire (2001) states, “[T]here are disability thinkers who can talk all day

about the body as metaphor and symbol but never mention flesh and blood, bone and

tendon—never even acknowledge their own bodies” such that the social model ignores

individual experiences, such as the able-bodied stare, chronic pain, body shaming, and

other individualized experiences stemming from a disability (p. 364). Tom Shakespeare

and Nicholas Watson (1997) push for more inclusion in the social model when they write

that agency and structure should be combined, which is also hinted at by Oliver above.

Others also point out that bringing daily lives of disabled people front and center is

crucial when social problems are analyzed on a theoretical level as individual struggles

can be overlooked (see Anderson & Kitchin, 2000; Clare, 2001; Dewsbury et al., 2004;

Ferri & Gregg, 1998).

Of course, one model alone cannot stand for the myriad disabled experiences.

Oliver admits that the individual is ignored by the social model, many other scholars

argue that the “body” is not even considered by the social model (see Butler, 1993;

Hughes and Paterson 1997; Lang 2001; Siebers 2001). Robert Lang (2001) points out that

the definition of “disability” definition is flawed, too, in that the inability to read or write

would be a disability in an industrial society, but someone so situated in a rural society

would have the capability to fully participate in society, and therefore not oppressed at all

by a disability.

Alternate Models

From a disability studies frame, there are many emerging alternative models of

disability. While this project is not about models of disability theory, some of these

should be noted. Susan Gabel and Susan Peters (2004) researched and support a

disabilities theory deemed resistance theory that combines individual experiences of

disabled people in concert with community resistance and action. Gabel and Peters

(2004) suggest that images that portray disabled in ways that challenge the public’s

perception of disabilities, such as a topless female cancer survivor with visible

mastectomy scars or a paraplegic dancing on Lofstrand/forearm crutches, is a form of

resistance. Gabel and Peters (2004) offer that the 2001 addition of Franklin Delano

Roosevelt (FDR) in a visible wheelchair to the FDR memorial is an example of resistance

theory in action in that the addition shows a disabled person in an identity of power (p.

594). Resistance theory “functions as a way for disabled people to push against

dominance, while also attempting to pull society into disabled people’s way of thinking”

(Gabel & Peters, 2004, p. 594-5).

Another proposed model is advocated by John Swain and Sally French (2000), the

affirmation model, which they have defined as, “a non-tragic view of disability and

impairment which encompasses positive social identities, both individual and collective,

for disabled people grounded in the benefits of life style and life experience of being

impaired and disabled” (Swain & French, 2000, p. 569). Unpacking that word salad a bit,

the concept of the affirmation model is it addresses disability and what that means in

terms of a disabled person’s life and identity (Swain & French, 2000, p. 570). The threat

to many typical people is that a disabled person can live life on life’s terms, is still happy

to be alive and strive while not ignoring a disability, and proudly identifying as disabled

(Swain and French, 2000). Disabled people actively refute a typical person’s concept of

“normal,” and this rejection of the dominant cultural view leads to society with true

diversity, “without structural, environmental or attitudinal barriers” (Swain & French,

2000, p. 580). Colin Cameron’s (2008) critique of the affirmation model is that promotes

the patent differences between disabled and able-bodied people so greatly that it justifies

discrimination based on ability.

Brooks (2014) contends the most suitable model for disabilities combines the

individual’s impairment with social construction based on acceptance deemed able-

bodied acceptance, or how a person is accepted by society is based in “performance of

normality” (p. 10-1). The severity of an individual’s impairment, how a person’s society

is structured, and how closely a disabled person can conform to able-bodied standards all

play a part, such that individuals that can “pass” as able-bodied or seem less-disabled

than their reality would have more able-bodied acceptance (Brooks, 2014, p. 11). This

model seems to be a gimp’s way of code-switching.

Television’s Representation of Disability

Here is a fitting quote to begin this section:

[T]here are two issues here: First, should actors with disabilities get

priority in playing disabled characters? Answer: Intentional inclusion of

actors with disabilities in auditioning for these parts should be a given.

After that, it's up to the casting director. The second — and more

pervasive — issue is what effect these characters and images have on the

public's attitudes about disability (Gilmer, 2010, p. 4).

Like the examples of stereotypes in literature, paintings and film that are explored above,

television also has a tendency to deal with the same stereotypes (See Barnes, 1992;

Longmore, 1987). This description of a television movie from 1969 featuring a mentally

delayed actor is interesting for the inclusion of a disabled actor, if not shocking for the

language:

Billy Schulman, a 13 year[-]old mentally retarded youngster with the

mental age of an 8 year old, is the star of Hallmark's Hall of Fame drama,

Teacher, Teacher . . . children with mental retardation can learn, and can

use these learnings to cope with life's problems encountered outside of

home and school (Mentally Retarded Boy Stars in TV Drama, p. 403).

With that as a background, an early content analysis of television representation

of television between 1968 and 1978 showed a marked increase, with 149 television

programs with a disability representation in 1968 compared to 256 in 1978 (Byrd, et al,

1980, p. 323). The numbers in 1978 are attributed to PBS, with the partial explanation

being that “their traditional concern with public interest and service programming” (Byrd,

et al, 1980, p. 323).

In Disabling Imagery and the Media: An Exploration of the Principals for Media

Representations of Disabled People, Colin Barnes expands the classic pity, disabled

outside = disabled inside, inspiration, and super gimp stereotypes found in other media.

Barnes (1992) sees the British charity television shows Children in Need, and Telethon,

as examples of the disabled person as pitiable or pathetic stereotype, with the goal of

making the audiences feel proud to donate money to help (p. 15). In addition, Barnes

(1992) considers televised news images of disabled people in hospitals to perpetuate the

myth that disability equals illness (p. 16). Barnes (1992) notes disabled people being

portrayed as victims of violence as a stereotype, and states that a disabled character in a

television show is three times as likely to end up dead by the end of the show, mostly

enduring a violent death at the hands of law enforcement due to the disabled character

has committed a crime (p. 20). Disabled people as sinister and evil as a stereotype are

exemplified by the television show The Fugitive, where the entire series revolves around

finding a one-armed murderer. (Barnes, 1992, p. 23). Barnes (1992) sees the disabled

person as atmosphere or curio stereotype on television when television shows use a

disabled representation to add impact to a mysterious or depraved scene, reducing

disabled people to oddities (p. 24). Barnes (1992) sees the disabled person as super crip

stereotype on television in the detective characters Robert T. Ironside, who is a

paraplegic, but uses his extraordinary mind and logic skills to solve crimes, and Mike

Longstreet, who is blind, but is somehow gifted super-human hearing. (p. 26) Barnes

(1992) also points out the innumerable news stories of disabled people that triumph

despite disability (p. 26). Barnes (1992) points out the children’s cartoons are filled with

the disabled person as an object of ridicule stereotype in the form of Quincy Magoo, an

elderly, bumbling person with a vision problem (p. 27). Paul Longmore (1987) adds to

Barnes’s stereotype by pointing out that the characters Elmer Fudd and Porky Pig both

have speech impediments, and that the character Dopey is portrayed as mentally delayed

(p. 65).

Barnes (1992) lists the disabled person as their own worst and only enemy as a

popular television stereotype in that it portrays disabled people as able to overcome

difficulties if the disabled person would stop engaging in self-pity and meet a challenge

with courage and strength (p. 29), often as the result of a “get tough” type of speech

delivered by a conveniently able-bodied family member or friend (Longmore, 1987, p.

70). Barnes (1992) television example for that stereotype is the made for BBC movie,

Journey to Knock (p. 30). The disabled person as burden stereotype, Barnes (1992)

writes, comes from the idea that disabled people on their own are helpless, but with the

help of a supportive able-bodied person, the disabled person can be “normal” (p. 30).

Barnes (1992) uses the BBC televised play, Keeping Tom Nice as an example of the

stereotype, in that a family is destroyed when Tom’s father kills himself because of his

abusive relationship with Tom (p. 31). The disabled person as sexually abnormal

stereotype comes from the public’s typically incorrect presumptions about sexuality and

disability, and is displayed in the BBC television dramas, Goodbye Cruel World, and A

Time to Dance, where able-bodied men resort to adultery because of their wives’

disabilities (Barnes, 1992, p. 33). The disabled person as incapable of participating full in

community life stereotype is one of omission, in that in television films and dramas “less

than one and a half percent of all characters portrayed” are disabled (Cumberbatch and

Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as cited by Barnes, 1992, p. 34). Barnes (1992) last television

stereotype for disabled person is the disabled person as normal, using British TV dramas

The Trials of Rosie O’Neil, and War of the World as exemplary of this stereotype (p. 36).

Barnes (1992) states that this is welcomed but has the chance for discrimination in that

the characters are “largely one-dimensional” and don't necessarily reflect the true

experiences of disability (p. 37).

Longmore (1987) states that there are plenty of disabled characters on television,

as well as in films. (p. 65). A reoccurring theme in dramatic television is that the “star”

character in television often will often incur a disabling injury or condition, but generally

only temporarily (Longmore, 1987, p. 65). Longmore (1987) also mentions that

disabilities, in life and in media, are often not noticed or recognized because people are

anxious and scared the person his or herself will become disabled (p. 66). Longmore

(1987) notes television shows that fit into the stereotypes described by Barnes: Hawaii

Five-O’s Hookman episode, for instance, where a double-amputee sniper is seeking to

kill the police detective that foiled a bank robbery in which the sniper was involved,

causing the would-be sniper to lose his hands (p. 67). Dr. Miguelito P. Loveless, from the

show Wild Wild West, was a “criminal genius” in the body of a “hunchbacked dwarf”

(Longmore, 1987, p. 66) Longmore (1987) makes the claim that disabled criminals in

television serve to enforce prejudices against disabled people: “disability is a punishment

for evil; disabled people are embittered by their ‘fate’; disabled people resent the

nondisabled and would, if they could, destroy them” (p. 66).

It is possible that the ultimate ideals of disability representation stereotypes and

embodiments of the medical model are The Six-Million Dollar Man and The Bionic

Woman, whose lives would be profoundly different without modern medical technology

(Thurer, 1980, p. 13). The Six-Million Dollar Man and The Bionic Woman are prime

areas for the cultural significance of the medical model of disabilities – both characters

are reliant on medical technology for life. Medical advances not only saved their lives,

but enabled them with super-human abilities; super crips run amok.

The Six Million Dollar Man started as a made for television movie, based on the

Martin Caidin novel Cyborg, and aired from 1974 – 1978 on the television network, ABC

(Jenkins, 2011, p. 93). The television program’s opening montage features actual footage

of a spectacular crash of a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

experiment, and contains the classic quote, “gentlemen, we can rebuild him . . . we have

the capacity to create the world’s first bionic man” (Orpana, 2016, p. 90). Lee Majors, as

Colonel Steve Austin, is transformed from a victim of failed technology to a valuable

government property (Orpana, 2016, p. 99). Initially referred to as “scrap,” Austin signals

his transformation as inhuman, as he refers to his doctor as “Dr. Frankenstein” (Orpana,

2016, p. 99). Likewise, in The Bionic Woman, Linsday Wagner’s character, Jamie

Sommers, when informed by Austin that she is also “bionic” after a skiing accident

states, “I don’t want to be a freak! Why didn’t you just let me die?” (Jenkins, 2011, p.

106). That reaction plays into a stereotypical disability equals “freak” and better off dead

images.

A refreshing break from the typical stereotypes happened in the 80s, when

disabled comedienne Geri Jewell becoming the first actor with a visible disability to have

a recurring role in a television series, The Facts of Life (Haller, 2005). As a comedienne,

Jewell’s comedy is often self-deprecating and she makes a lot of jokes about her

disability, cerebral palsy, at her own expense. Jewell’s role on The Facts of Life was often

similar in that regard (Jacobson, 2012, p. 48). A review of a 1984 autobiography of

Jewell, Geri, is reviewed with an eye directly on disability stereotypes, as the book is said

to be “refreshing and optimistic . . . [Jewell] comes through as a realistic, likeable and

courageous person” (Johnson, 1984). Jewell also appeared in a much more textured role

in the mid-00’s western Deadwood, to good reviews (Haller, 2005). Jewell’s character

pays homage to the disabled people that were a part of live in the 19

century (Haller,

2005).

Airing from 1989 until 1993, the ABC family drama Life Goes On was

groundbreaking for not only having a mentally disabled star, Chris Burke, but also a

character with HIV, Jesse McKenna (Chad Lowe) (Elman, 2012, p. 317-8). Chris Burke,

as Corky, faces the problems a typical person might imagine a person with Down

syndrome might encounter from teachers and students (Elman, 2012, p. 317). Burke

brings significant texture to Corky, as Corky’s romantic relationship and eventual

marriage are a part of the story on the show (Elman, 2012, p. 319). The show also reveals

a rejection of the “medical model” of disabilities when Corky’s parents are advised by

doctors to institutionalize Corky just after his birth (Elman, 2012, p. 319). HIV/AIDS was

not included under the ADA’s definition of disability until 1988, after the show ended, so

that McKenna’s discrimination will not be discussed here (Elman, 2012, p. 320). Where

McKenna is a part of Corky’s character is when the school discovers McKenna has HIV,

and Corky sides with the students that want to kick him out of McKenna out of school

(Elman, 2012, p. 321). Corky’s father paints the movement to remove McKenna as

“abelist prejudice,” and tells Corky that Corky was the also the victim of the same

prejudice (Elman, 2012, p. 321).

Through Life Goes On, Corky seeks a romantic relationship with an able-bodied

character, but is rejected, which doesn’t play on a traditional literary stereotype, but does

highlight that the “other” has a difficult time with romantic relationships. Corky

eventually does encounter a romantic relationship with a character with Down syndrome,

Amanda Swanson (Andrea Friedman) (Elman, 2012, p. 323). Initially, Corky and

Amanda are not given any sexual agency by others in the show, but Life Goes On’s

writers give Corky sexual agency as the character resists discrimination regarding his

abilities (Elman, 2012, p. 323). Corky and Amanda elope, and Amanda’s parents seek to

have the marriage ended due to Amanda’s mental state, but her parents are thwarted by a

dramatic courtroom display from Corky (Elman, 2012, p. 323). While some stereotypes

exist in regard to Corky’s abilities on Life Goes On, the series seems to more realistically

depict a mental disability without becoming awash in the hackneyed literary tropes

explored above.

A couple of television programs in the aughts explored disabilities. Joan of

Arcadia and Friday Night Lights included significant characters with spinal cord injuries,

paraplegia specifically (Wiggins, 2013). Each program had story arcs devoted to how

each character struggled with disability. Friday Night Lights was the only show that had

any academic articles related to disabilities. In the premier season of Friday Night Lights,

Jason Street, the star quarterback, was rendered a quadriplegic due to a football injury

(Cherney & Lindemann, 2014, p. 2). As Cherney and Lindemann (2014) state, however,

that “western culture’s institution of athletic sport teaches homophobia and ableism,

twisting each together into a Gordian knot” (p. 4). While Street’s relationship with

football and his friends is complicated, in a narrative sense, there is not any clear

direction regarding disability models, although a nod to the medical model might be

found in the fourth episode of season one (Cherney & Lindemann, 2014, p. 10). In

episode eight of the first season, Street and another disabled friend end up on the floor,

and call for a nurse to help them back into their wheelchairs, which is also nodding at the

idea that medicine, or someone involved with the medical field, had to assist the two

characters (Cherney & Lindemann, 2014, p. 13).

Regarding Joan of Arcadia, the premise of the serial is a typical teenage girl, Joan

Girardi, having conversations with God. Joan’s older brother, Kevin (Jason Ritter), is a

former star athlete that is a paraplegic as the result of a motor vehicle accident (Ozer,

2004). Ritter is not disabled, which is sadly not unusual for an able-bodied actor to

undergo “crip drag” for a television role – even though there are plenty of disabled actors

that could likely have played the role of Kevin. Kevin exhibits anger towards people that

are seeking to help him, and at times is his own worst enemy, exhibiting a common

example of disabled representations (Ozer, 2004). Kevin does have a sexual relationship

in the series, which is a refreshing non-stereotypical representation of disability. (Ozer,

2004) Character’s interactions with Kevin are usually affected because of his

wheelchair/disability (Wilcox, 2005, p. 87).

A different type of television doctor, a disabled, addicted misanthrope, was a

fixture on the Fox television network from 2004 through 2012 with the television serial

House, M.D. (House, n.d.). Dr. Gregory House is unlike early television doctors, such as

Ben Casey or Dr. Kildare, who enforced positive images for doctors (Turow, 1996, as

cited by Strauman & Goodier, 2008, p. 127). Strauman and Goodier (2008) write, “House

. . . counters the overly positive images of television physicians of the past by casting the

doctor as a wholly human and often unlikable character” (p. 130). House has no faith in

patients, insults patients and co-workers, abuses Vicodin, injects morphine, yet is painted

as a brilliant doctor with borderline mystic capabilities in regard to diagnosis and

treatment of disease (Strauman & Goodier, 2008, p. 129-30). David Shore, creator of

House, M.D., said of the character, “there’s a little Sherlock Holmes in there, a little me,

and a little bit of me wanting to turn the traditional caring doctor on its head” (Dr.

Gregory House). Hugh Laurie, the British actor that beings House to life in “crip drag,”

stated that, “I couldn't imagine how someone that jagged and complicated and

superficially unlikable would be the center of a TV program” (Dr. Gregory House).

House’s disabilities are his noticeable limp, caused from a misdiagnosed blood

clot, as well as a Vicodin addiction resulting from the pain of his injured leg. (Rich et al,

2008, p. 224). House exhibits two of the stereotypes in that his disability makes him nasty

and unbearable as a person, and his brilliance at diagnosing disease is almost

supernatural, standing for the disabled seer/mystic representation, both discussed above.

Another wildly successful, well reviewed, and innovative Fox network serial,

Glee, features many disabled representations, most notably the character Artie Abrams

(Kevin Hale). Abrams was disabled at the age of 8 as the result of a car accident (Rucker,

2012, p. 27). Abrams is well liked and successful in the fictional world of McKinley High

School, although occasionally falling victim to the classic disability trope of “own worst

enemy” as well as occasionally “defensive” and “nasty,” which lands Abrams squarely

into the “disabled outside equals disabled inside” stereotype (Rucker, 2012, p. 27). One

could see the character of Abrams being a suitable model for disabled fans of Glee with

the exception of one glaring problem: Kevin Hale’s is in “crip drag” (Rucker, 2012, p.

28). Crip drag, if that was not obvious, is the term many disabled people use to describe

an able-bodied person portraying someone with a disability – disability’s version of

blackface (Kociemba, 2010).

Glee drew significant criticism not only for Hale’s crip drag version of Abrams,

but as well as for Glee’s creator Ryan Murphy refusing to engage in a dialog with

disabled activists regarding representations of disability (Wiggins, 2013, p. 66). Meredith

Wiggins (2013) also notes that Abrams is forced into a “heteronormative” sexual identity

in a relationship when Abrams suggests that vaginal intercourse is the only kind of sexual

expression that matters (p. 69-70) That story arc furthers the dominant culture just as

much as the “compulsory able-bodiedness” of Hale playing the disabled Abrams enforces

the able-bodied = good, disabled = other in dominant culture (Wiggins, 2013, p. 71).

Robert David Hall, a double amputee, laments the casting of Hale in the Abrams

role as another wasted opportunity to cast a disabled actor in a disabled character role

(Lynn, n.d.). Hall is a part of the cast of the long-running CBS crime drama, CSI: Crime

Scene Investigation (Lynn, n.d.). In defense of Glee, one of the principal casting agents,

Robert Ulrich, sought disabled actors, even contacting the Media Access Office (MAO),

but no actors were available that could fit the part of Abrams (Rucker, 2012, p. 29).

A content analysis performed on the show Glee found that disability was

represented as “normal” or not falling into a stereotype the most, while “pitiable or

pathetic” and “needing or receiving help” tied for second most often representation

(Rushing, 2012, p. 56). The ever-popular super crip “inspiration” stereotype was the third

most often found representation of disabilities in Glee, while “incapable of participating

in life” and “disability as a hassle” were fourth and fifth, respectively (Rushing, 2012, p.

56). Other stereotypes appearing in the content analysis of Glee representations of

disability were “disability as burden,” “atmosphere,” “object of ridicule,” “their own

worst enemy,” “ignored,” and “sexually abnormal” (Rushing, 2012, p. 57).

Regarding agency, Jill Rushing (2012) found that disabled characters in Glee

lacked the ability to voice agency, their agency was also either “short-lived” in that the

agency the character found might only last for a particular episode, or was based on some

event that might happen in the future (p. 58-9). Regarding power, Rushing (2012) found

that disabled characters displayed power only when the issue being portrayed is disability

related, and then only when a teacher or administrator creates the opportunity for the

display of power (p. 60-1)

Colin Barnes addresses the principles television and film should follow regarding

disabilities and disabled representations in his publication, Disabling Imagery and the

Media: An Exploration of the Principals for Media Representations of Disabled People.

First and foremost, Barnes (1992) states that discriminatory and “ableist” representations

will persist until disabled people are integrated in all area of media (p. 44). Journalists

and reporters should beware of the impairment/disability distinction, as well as such

stereotypically discriminatory words such as “crippling fear,” “blind trust,” and other

clichés (Barnes, 1992, p. 44-5). Able-bodied actors should not play disabled characters,

much like black characters are not played by white actors, and female characters are not

played by male actors (Barnes, 1992, p. 45). Writers have a duty to check the accuracy of

a disabled representation by seeking input from disabled people (Barnes, 1992, p. 45).

When a disabled character plays a part in a work, don’t skip over environmental or social

barriers the character might encounter and stay away from the stereotypical tropes

(Barnes, 1992, p. 45-6).

Method

For the purposes of this study, I will analyze the discourse of disability

representations and disability models portrayed in disability representations in television

serials that aired on a major network, on Netflix, and on a basic cable series: Speechless,

Atypical, and Breaking Bad, respectively. The analysis will treat the programs as text in

light of Barthe’s definition discussed above: a common thread of cultural artifacts

(Dauenhauer, 1982, p. 137). Fiske (1987) suggests that television programs are culture

artifacts that provoke the audience to form meanings as well as passing those meanings

through the culture (p. 1).

A textual, formal analysis, known as a close reading, which borrows much from

literary studies, rhetorical analysis, film studies, and semiotic analysis (Gray & Lotz,

2012, p. 26 – 35), will be employed to read the texts. Many theorists consider meanings

ascribed to texts as being socially constructed, and as such the ideological systems that

construct those meanings seek to use the texts to enforce the dominant ideology (Gray &

Lotz, 2012, p. 36 – 7). Close reading will be used to analyze the relationship between the

texts and the dominant ideology.

Anne O’Keeffe (2012) suggests that media discourse is changing rapidly due to

the audience participation in media discourse through changing “participation

frameworks” (p. 449). Because of Web 2.0, social networking primarily, O’Keeffe argues

that 1) audiences have many fora (websites, social media, email, among others) with

which to interact with media critics; 2) audiences are not passive message receivers, but

engage with other fans and media producers through email, blog posts, website

comments, etc.; and 3) audiences can provoke other media consumers to consume and

react, favorably or not, with reactions that last, as once something is posted on the

Internet, it will not evaporate (O’Keeffe, 2012, p. 450).

Jay Lemke (2012) postulates that all texts are windows into the cultures in which

they were produced, but also all interpretations of those texts are a window into the

analyst’s culture (p. 85). Lemke (2012) also states that any insightful discourse analysis is

always a critical analysis, in that interpretation of a text is selective based in the

analysist’s patent and latent ideologies (p. 85). In addition, Lemke (2012) argues that any

discouse analysis is not meaningful unless the analysis evidences a “feeling” (p. 85).

How an analyst feels about a text has a direct affect on the analyst’s “experiential reality

(Lemke, 2012, p. 86). As such, Lemke (2012) states that any discouse analyst “should be

able to see yourself, and not just your object of study, in the analysis you make” (p. 88).

With that in mind, I have performed a “critical discourse analysis” (CDA) of the

texts mentioned. CDA “brings the critical tradition of social analysis into language

studies and contributes to critical social analysis a particular focus on discourse and on

relations between discouse and other social elements (power relations, ideologies,

institutions, social identities, and so forth)” (Fairclough, 2012, p. 9). Fairclough (2012)

states that critical social analyses have long viewed “social reality” as “conceptually

mediated” because the texts are not only material being analyzed, but are also “semiotic

in character” (p. 9). Because of the dual role of a text being not only an object of analysis,

but also a way meaning is made, “critical social analysis has an interdiscliplinary

character . . . more specifically, a ‘trans-disciplinary’ character” because of how the

analysis reaches into many disciplines to develop theories and methods (Jessup & Sum,

2001, as cited by Fairclough, 2012, p. 9).

Critical social analysis, with its emphasis on constructed social reality, is

distinguished from mere social analysis in that critical social analysis considers how the

current social reality came into being, which might negatively affect some people, and

how those social realities might be altered positively (Fairclough, 2012, p 10).

Fairclough’s (2012) idea is that “values, evaluation and moral critique are necessary” in

performing a critical social analysis, because “changing the word for the better depends

on being able to explain how it has come to be the way it is” (p.10). Fairclough refers to

CDA as a “‘methodology’ rather than a ‘method’” as a methodology is “a trans-

discliplinary process of theoretically constructing the object of research” (Bordieu &

Wacquant, 1992, as cited by Fairclough, 2012, p. 13).

Fairclough (2012) suggests four steps in undergoing CDA: 1) “Focus upon a

social wrong, it its semiotic aspects” 2) “Identify obstacles to addressing the social

wrong” 3) “Consider whether the social order ‘needs’ the social wrong” and 4) “Identify

possible ways past the obstacles” (p. 13). Elaborating further, regrding step one,

Fairclough (2012) suggests a two stage approach, where in stage one, the researcher will

“select a research topic that relates to, or points up, a social wrong and that can

productivey be aroached in a trans-disciplinary way, with particular focus on dialiectical

relations between semiotic and other ‘moments’” and in stage two, the researcher will

“construct objects of research for initially identified research topics by theorizing them in

a trans-disciplinary way” (p. 13 – 4). For step two, Fairclough (2012) suggests a three

stage approach, where in stage one, the researcher will “analyse dialectical relations

betweeen semiosis and other social elements: between orders of discourse and other

elements of social practices, between texts and other elements of events,” stage two

would “select texts and points of focus and categories for their analysis, in light of, and

appropriately to, the constitution of the object of research,” and step three would “carry

out analysis of textx – both interdiscursive analysis and linguistis/semiotic analysis” (p.

14). Fairclough’s (2012) suggestion for step three is “to consider whether the social

wrong in focus is inherent to the social order, whether it can be addresses within it, or

only by changing it” (p.15). Fairclough sees step four as taking the analysis “from

negative to positive critique: identifying, with a focus on dislectical relations between

semiosis and other elements, possibilities within the existing social process for

overcoming obstackes to addressing the social wrong in question” (p. 15)

The data analyzed consisted of approximately eighty-two hours of television

programming: Speechless (sixty-three episodes, approximately 21 minutes each),

Atypical (twenty-eight episodes, approximately thirty minutes each), and Breaking Bad

(sixty-two episodes, approximately 49 minutes each). The episode database (Appendix

A), contains only episodes involving disabled characters that were further analyzed. The

final study will center on episodes that include specific representations of disability.

The textual analysis starts with a detailed analysis of each text considered, to

determine not only if the text has a representation of disability, but to also see how many

stereotypical disability representations exist and which models of disability (medical,

social, or other) are used in presenting the representation. The final analysis considers the

television programs and categorizes the representations in one of Barnes’s (1992)

stereotypical categories or not stereotypical, and will also categorize the representations

as either depicting a “medical model” (see Dirth & Branscombe, 2017; Finkelstein, 1997;

Gabel & Peters, 2004; Hahn, 1987; Oliver, 2004), or a “social model” (see Barnes, 2003;

Mays, 2006; Oliver 1986; Rothman, 2003; Tregaskis, 2002), of disability.

CHAPTER III - DISABILITY JUMPS THE SHARK: READING SPEECHLESS

Introduction

Why look at a television serial program as a device for constructing and

disseminating “disabilities” for analysis? Grosburg (1992) points out that television and

the associated serialized programs distributed by the medium, as well as popular music

and movies, construct how audiences make sense of the world and form networks of like

minds and empowerment (as cited by Gray, p. 58, (1995)). With modern entertainment

sources being scattered and personal in today’s climate versus the ubiquity of network

television in the 1980s and 1990s, if a television network isn’t seeking out the low

production costs of a game shows, “reality” shows, or a news magazine, using disabilities

to garner an audience might be the final frontier. As pointed out above, disabled people

constitute approximately 20% of the U.S. population according to the 2010 census.

“Disability” representation on television has yet to reach what Herman Gray

(1995) refers to as the “Cosby moment” (p. 79). Gray’s (1995) “Cosby moment” is how

The Cosby Show reconfigured a “black cultural style” regarding the representation of

black people and black culture on television (p. 79). Gray (1995) states that the critical

representation of black people The Cosby Show constructed is powerful because the

Huxtables are a typical upper-middle-class family through and through “that happens to

be black” (Dates, 1990; Dyson, 1989; Fuller, 1992; Gray, 1989; Greenly, 1987; Jhally

and Lewis, 1992; as cited by Gray, p. 80)

ABC’s most recent entry into the running for disability culture’s “Cosby moment”

is the situation comedy Speechless. Unfortunately for disability culture, Speechless was

cancelled in May of 2019. Speechless started off with strong ratings on Wednesday

nights, but after a couple of years of declining ratings, Spechless was sentenced to Friday,

the death knell for many television series. For all of the good things Speechless had, the

show did not have the mighty “Cos’” at the helm to construct “the Speechless moment”

for disabled culture.

For some background on Speechless, Scott Silveri, Speechless creator and

executive producer, got his start in television as a writer and a producer for some very

popular television shows, such as Mad About You, Friends, and Joey among others (Scott

Silveri, n.d.). The idea for Speechless is very personal for Silveri, as his older brother has

“special needs” (Nakamura, 2016). Silveri has stated that he wanted to share his

experience for a long time, but he did not want to have the story turn into an “issues

show” (Nakamura, 2016).

Season One, Episode One, Pilot

From season one, episode one, Pilot, Speechless sets up the DiMeo family as a

somewhat typical sitcom family: Maya, the scattered and manic mom; Jimmy, the

supportive dad; Dylan, the independent fireball youngest child; Ray, the neurotic and out

of place middle child; and the “star” of the family, oldest child JJ. The very first scene is

a chaotic race to exercise a restaurant’s coupon that is about to expire. Maya’s over the

top driving ends with the family’s van sliding into a handicapped parking spot at the

restaurant. Immediately Maya gets into a confrontation with an older woman who

complains about the van’s lack of a handicapped hang tag. The older woman asks if she

should be expected to walk a long way to get to the restaurant, just as JJ makes his screen

debut. JJ is in a power wheelchair on a wheelchair lift descending from the van. The twist

on the typical sitcom family is that JJ is non-verbal and has spastic Cerebral Palsy. Maya

then dresses down a couple of bystanders gawking at the scene, and JJ proceeds to give

the bystanders “the finger.”

Within the first two minutes of the series, the social model of disability is

enforced twice, and JJ’s character firmly rejects classic disabled stereotypes and paints

himself in a powerful position with a lot of agency. As the episode continues, JJ’s mode

of communication is revealed: a laser pointer attached to his glasses that he uses to point

at common words and spell uncommon words, which is a low-tech solution some non-

verbal people use. The DiMeo’s are changing residences because the school system will

provide a better situation for JJ. At the new school, JJ will have a full-time aide that will

be his “voice.” The house the DiMeo’s are moving into is referred to by Jimmy as “the

worst house in the best neighborhood,” and it is a wreck.

The DiMeo’s go to school for the first day with JJ’s aide, Jennifer, a middle-aged

woman that seems inappropriate for his needs. Out walks the well-meaning, but off the

mark school principal, Dr. Miller. The school’s wheelchair ramp is in the back of the

school, and while the ramp seems completely fine and legal, Maya DiMeo is not happy

that a “garbage ramp” is what JJ must use to enter or leave the school. A school

custodian, Kenneth Clements, a thirty-something year old black male, assures Maya that

the ramp was used to push “a sweet crippled grandmother” inside for a basketball game.

Uh oh. Maya goes into a diatribe about a new ramp and offers “a crash course in human

dignity” about Kenneth’s use of “crippled” when referring to a disabled person. Maya’s

exaggerated interaction with Kenneth seems mean spirited and was certainly written to

paint a picture to the audience about using the word “crippled.” This shows what many

disabled people and associates, and certainly Silveri, know is true, and that is that often

disabled people have to be demonstratively exaggerated and forceful to explain how a

person’s words and actions are distasteful, regardless as to whether the speaker or actor

intended to be distasteful.

Cut to JJ and Jennifer entering the classroom of the impossibly well-meaning but

overly politically correct English teacher, Mr. Powers. Mr. Powers leads the class in a

standing ovation for JJ, which is completely unnecessary and unwarranted. From

personal experience, few things feel more awkward than being put in the spotlight when

all you want is to be treated as any typical person would be treated. Mr. Powers uses a

heavily used trope when a disabled person is represented when he refers to JJ as “an

inspiration.” Obviously, that was used jokingly, and someone that has studied disability

representations would certainly know that is a hackneyed stereotype, but how many

people don’t know that the overture was meant as a joke?

As Maya petitions for a new ramp at the front of the school, Kenneth tells her that

the school knows about her reputation and they have been briefed on how to “handle”

her. This of course makes Maya angry, and she decides the school is not the place for JJ.

Ray argues that he likes the school and wants to stay there. This leads to what must be a

common sentiment in many families with a disabled child: Ray points out that his desires

and needs are taking a back seat to JJ. Maya eventually decides the family should stay at

the school, apologizes to Ray, and explains her position as a tireless advocate for JJ.

As the episode continues, JJ has a one on one meeting with Kenneth. JJ tells

Kenneth he sounds “cool,” and immediately tries to get Kenneth as his replacement for

the mismatched Jennifer. Kenneth and JJ speak to the school at an event, where JJ, with

Kenneth as his voice, announces his candidacy for Student Council President, which is

met with wild cheers from the students at the event. The stunt is to help Ray out of a tight

situation, and the stunt succeeds. However, that is the first of many unrealistic

demonstrations of support for JJ. This is addressed later in the chapter.

There is a close reading of the first episode, and it is being used to set the stage

for the series. The major characters are sketched out, and while the characters morph and

change through the series, the characters stay pretty close to this introduction. Some

aspects of the episode are great, in particular the running joke about how patronizing and

“over the top” school administration and teachers are regarding JJ and his disability.

Maya’s defensive nature toward JJ and her fierce advocacy in many situations is likely

how most families with a disabled child also navigate the numerous obstacles that

disabled children and, by extension the rest of the family, face.

Speechless is first and foremost a situational comedy, and the episodes are

presented like all other sitcoms: set-up, conflict, sometimes a side conflict, resolution.

The younger characters morph through the three seasons, both physically and mentally.

Dylan, the youngest child, is painted as a talented athlete, and at times embodies the

“meathead” athlete persona, which is interesting to see portrayed by a female. Ray’s

evolution is also interesting as he goes from awkward neurotic to love interest to nerdy

girl-crazy teen. JJ is fairly linear in his development, but his maturation is more mental

and emotional than physical. Most episodes in the first season of Speechless revolve

around JJ and have something to do with his disability, which is understandable. As

Barnes mentions in his list of stereotypes, a big stereotype regarding disabled people on

television is “incapable of participating full in community life” (Cumberbatch and

Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as cited by Barnes, 1992, p. 34). Barnes labels that stereotype as

one of omission since “less than one and a half percent of all characters portrayed” on

television are disabled (Cumberbatch and Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as cited by Barnes,

1992, p. 34). A short bit of research would show that there are not too many television

serials that feature a non-verbal person with cerebral palsy.

While JJ, his disability, and the world’s interaction with disabilities make up the

bulk of the subjects for the episodes in the series, one should make no mistake in thinking

this is a vehicle for Micah Fowler, the actor portraying JJ in Speechless. This television

serial is a vehicle for Minnie Driver, through and through. And to be honest, it would be

pretty hard to stand out and take charge of the screen when you don’t say a word. In

addition, the rest of the cast constantly takes JJ’s agency by finishing his sentences.

However, Speechless does manage to tell a credible story of disability and how a disabled

person negotiates life in a typical world.

Representing Disability in Speechless

As shown above, tried and true tropes used in literature and film easily transfer to

television characters. The DiMeo’s, and JJ in particular, seem to consciously make it a

point to not embrace or enforce those stereotypes in Speechless, on the whole. One reason

for this seems to be that Silveri, the show’s creator, stated that he wanted to present life in

a disabled family from a realistic point of view (Nakamuira, 2016). Regarding JJ’s place

within Speechless, Silveri has said, “[f]rom the very beginning, we wanted to make sure

that JJ was not a prop, that JJ was not something to be experienced by everyone else”

(Bernstein, 2019). Another reason is certainly because Micah Fowler, the actor playing

JJ, has cerebral palsy. The show is specifically written from a point of view that typical

society usually misses the mark when considering a disabled person or a similarly

situated disabled family from the outside. While disability activists and researchers are

keenly aware of the stereotypes, the lack of nuanced and textured representations of

disability in mainstream entertainment serve to perpetuate those stereotypes with a

typical viewer. A third reason would be the inclusion of Zach Anner, a talented

comedian, writer and a disabled person (Zach Anner, n.d.). Anner’s experience as

disabled lends more credibility to Speechless. Anner also plays a character on Speechless,

and the character becomes somewhat of a mentor for JJ.

The show typically evidences that it is not the disabled person that embodies the

traditional stereotypes, but rather how “normal” people are expecting JJ or the DiMeo

family to act in a stereotypical manner, and then how JJ or the family break with those

stereotypes. As early as the second episode of the series, Speechless presents JJ as a

stereotypical teenage boy. JJ reveals that while he may be disabled, he is as sexualized as

any high school sophomore. He ignores his mom’s phone call to ogle cheerleaders,

instead of checking in and explaining why he is not attending physical therapy. JJ and

Maya have an argument about JJ needing some space and time to be a teenage boy. Maya

eventually sees that Kenneth is a good thing for JJ to have in his life, as JJ’s dynamic

with life is more his own and not filtered through what Maya wants for him. This is

certainly something families that have a disabled person must face.

Speechless goes far to show the absurdity of accommodation at times; disabled

people want to be treated equally, not special. When asked how far Speechless might go

to address the failure of the ADA or the failure of society in addressing access issues,

Silveri states,

[A]s it stands, I think we’ve been able to carve out a sort of unique

and sometimes subversive tack without even delving into the political at

all. I take a lot of pride in our show being a kind show, and a civil show.

And I think, if there’s a statement, that’s it. We don’t all need to be sons of

bitches to each other. We can look out for each other a little more. That

seems to be a somewhat radical idea right now [laughs]. That’s as political

as we get right now. (Bernstein, 2019)

Scott Silveri, the show’s creator, in one of the interviews given regarding

Speechless, tackles the social model of disability head on. When asked about the

difficulty of travelling with Micah Fowler, the actor playing the role of JJ in Speechless,

Silveri mentions,

[T]he difficulty in travelling [with Fowler] is just a fact of

life. I notice that, not even when I travel abroad with Micah, which

I’ve now done, I notice that when I go out to lunch with Micah. As

heightened as my awareness is to these issues, I can’t go in a

restaurant and find a place to sit with this kid. I can’t go to get

coffee and find a way in that’s easy. The obstacles that are thrown

up in the way of people like Micah are very real, and it’s

something that we work hard to mine for story, and for comedy.

(Bernstein, 2019)

Silveri’s very personal connection with the social model of disability, and his apparent

keen awareness of historical disability representations on television, make Speechless a

very uncommon story approached in a common sitcom format. The alterations to the

classic sitcom come in the form of the cast, the themes, and the story told, which will be

analyzed below.

Casting Disability Representations in Speechless

From a 2019 report by GLAAD, formerly the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against

Defamation, from approximately 879 regular characters appearing in television shows,

27, or approximately 3%, of those characters are disabled. That is the highest number

found on broadcast television by GLAAD in the ten years since disabilities have been

included in GLADD’s “Where are We on TV” surveys (GLAAD, 2019). However, a

U.S. Census survey, the 2017 American Community Survey, shows the number of non-

institutionalized disabled Americans is approximately 13%, and the number is much

higher if non-apparent disabilities is included, so the number of characters fall far short of

reality (as cited by GLAAD, 2019).

Unlike other contemporary shows, Glee and Atypical, which is analyzed in this

writing, Speechless stars disabled actor Micah Fowler. According to IMDB, Fowler’s

first major acting role was in the 2013 film Labor Day as the character Barry (Micah

Fowler, n.d.). With Silveri’s experience growing up with a disabled brother, one would

only expect a disabled actor to portray the JJ character. Fowler is not non-verbal,

although his speech is certainly affected by Cerebral Palsy. Considering the great number

of shows that have “temporarily able-bodied” people, that minor detail has no

consequence.

As a disabled character, JJ is written really well, and rarely does the character

ever step into the worn stereotypes. JJ and the limitations typically highlight the social

model of disabilities, which is discussed in more depth below regarding episode themes.

The episodes in the first season of Speechless mostly focus on JJ, so there are lots of

examples of a disabled character engaging in conduct that embody being a teenage boy,

disabled or not. JJ, as a typical teenager, ogles girls, as mentioned above, seeks a

girlfriend and is rejected, plays sports, directs films, tours college campuses, and other

activities in which a typical teenager might engage.

In season one, episode five, H-A-L- HALLOWEEN, JJ attends a Halloween party

and wants to drink a beer, which Kenneth prevents. Kenneth leaves to get a non-alcoholic

beverage for JJ, while JJ convinces some teens to give him a beer. In a very funny scene,

JJ tries to communicate in a drunken state to Kenneth, and his pointer is not making any

coherent words, to which Kenneth exclaims, “You’re slurring your words!” “Drunk” JJ

starts howling and runs over Kenneth’s feet. Kenneth explains how this will make him

look bad as he was still earning JJ’s parent’s trust. As a drunken JJ and Kenneth return

home, JJ regurgitates in his lap, exposing his drunkenness, which sends Maya into a fit of

anger at Kenneth. JJ eventually admits that he tricked Kenneth so he could drink beer.

The parents revel in punishing JJ for being a “normal teenager,” which they correct to

“idiot teenager.”

There is a disability moms’ group and the DiMeo’s invite the moms and the dads

over to their house for an Oscar party in season one, episode sixteen, O-S- OSCAR P-A-

PARTY. Some of the disabled kids have apparent disabilities and others have non-

apparent disabilities. While the children with obvious disabilities need no explanation, I

would think that Silveri would not hire typical actors to play the role of disabled kids.

The climax of the episode has the disability moms in revolt and the disability dads having

a great time partying. Meanwhile, the disabled kids all fighting to the death, orchestrated

by Kenneth. In any other context, the scene with the disabled kids “brawling” might be

seen as exploitative or simply out of place, but within the confines of Speechless, the

scene of chaos is a fitting nod to being typical kids.

In a short episode arc, season one episodes nineteen and twenty, C-H-CHEATER

and R-U-N-RUNAWAY, respectively, JJ ends up “running away” from home after hearing

Maya discuss his future without his input or participation, discussed below. He ends up

going to a casino with the goal of going to a strip club. Instead, JJ ends up seeing another

disabled guy, Lee, portrayed by Zach Anner, an actor and comedian with cerebral palsy.

Anner gained notoriety with a reality show, Rollin’ with Zach, and has a series of shows

on YouTube that generally talk about his life and life with a disability. In the casino, JJ

sees Lee there with a girlfriend, and ends up meeting Lee. JJ ends up talking with Lee

about independence and how to live as an adult with a disability. Lee ends up as a mentor

figure for JJ in the episode and appears in later episodes. Lee suggests that JJ should seek

more independence and carve out his own space. A really truthful lesson, this is one of

the types of stories that makes Speechless a really truthful representation of disabilities.

After JJ has single-handedly turned Lafayette High School into a pantheon for

disabled people, there is a new group of disabled people at the school in season two,

episode two, F-I- FIRST S-E-SECOND F--FIRST DAY. Maya trains the new aides in

season two, episode four, T-R - - TRAINING D-A- - DAY, and a new cast of disabled

students becomes a part of Speechless in season two, episode six. Immediately, Kenneth

senses students “shipping” JJ, which is aggressively pushing two people into a

relationship, in this case JJ and a new disabled female student. The biggest plus out of

this event is that more actual disabled characters get to work.

Thematic Elements in Speechless

In looking at Speechless regarding classic disability representations, most often,

Speechless uses the classic representations and pokes holes in them - but not always. As

mentioned in the introduction to this chapter, the close reading of the first episode, when

the DiMeo entourage arrives at a restaurant, an older woman challenges the need for the

family to park there just as JJ is revealed on the wheelchair descending from the van in

which the Dimeo’s arrived. This is painting the disabled JJ as the foil for the older

woman’s challenge, which is funny and ironic. Just after, JJ gestures at a couple of

gawking onlookers, to which Maya proudly points out that JJ is “giving them the finger.”

So, while JJ is strong in his right to be parked in a handicapped parking space and is

showing significant agency by gesturing toward the onlookers, it is just as possibly a

viewer could consider JJ pitiable on the wheelchair lift, and then immediately as a

boorish person for his aggressive hand gesture. Most probably, though, any viewer to

Speechless would assume this is not a typical sitcom and would have viewed the scene as

comedic foremost.

Then there is Logan, Ray DiMeo’s girlfriend Taylor’s brother. Logan also has

cerebral palsy but is verbal. Although it is never really explained why, Logan and JJ are

rivals and do not get along. Logan shows up in season two, episode nine, S-T--STAR W--

WARS W--WARS. In that episode, Maya somehow magically gets two tickets from the

cerebral palsy foundation to the premier of the Star Wars franchise movie, The Last Jedi.

Ray is a huge Star Wars fan, but JJ decides to take a female classmate. To get back at JJ,

Ray takes Logan to the Star Wars premiere, even though Ray and Logan do not have

tickets. Film director Kevin Smith is at the premiere, no doubt because of his Star Wars

fandom, and gets Ray and Logan VIP treatment for the movie. The fact that a sitcom

decided it was good to give a disabled person a flawed character at times is pretty strong.

As funny as it is though, that does enforce the disabled body equals disabled mind

stereotype.

Disability and access also take realistic punches as early as season one, episode

three, B-O-N-BONFIRE, when JJ is excluded from attending a school function on the

beach. Speechless does a great job at pointing out the ridiculousness of how people go

above and beyond to “accommodate” disabled people in ways that are not wanted and

typically not necessary. The school is hosting a bonfire on the beach, which JJ can’t

access. JJ is disappointed, and why wouldn’t he be? Disabled people have to “suck it up”

often, because the disabled person isn’t considered when an event is planned. Maya

overreacts and the principal moves the bonfire to the gym, which is a colossal flop. The

students have a mini revolt and get angry at JJ because the bonfire was moved, and the

character of the event suffered. While of course it didn’t occur to anyone that JJ might

have a problem on the sand, JJ’s mobility issue would be nothing a few sheets of

plywood wouldn’t solve.

The “inspiration” stereotype is something that appears in all media but is

completely out of touch in a news setting. Anytime a disabled person does seemingly

anything other than existing, most news outlets treat a disabled person like an inspiration

to humanity. Speechless is great at pointing out the absurdity of that typical trope. In

season one, episode four, I-N-S-INSPIRATIONS, JJ and Kenneth leave for a day all

about JJ, with no family and no Maya. Kenneth and JJ get special treatment on an outing,

because people in the scene were “inspired” by a disabled kid eating out, with another

person paying for their meal. This special treatment has never happened to Kenneth, as he

is able-bodied, so Kenneth decides he and JJ should take extreme advantage of people

“because we’re inspirations!” Seeing Kenneth and JJ being treated as royalty is very

funny, from free baseball games with VIP seats to throwing out the first pitch at Dodger

Stadium. JJ gets increasingly angry at being exploited by Kenneth, and states, “Today

was about what I wanted. You took my voice. You don’t get to do that.”

The subplot of that episode is that the rest of the DiMeo family has a JJ free day.

They have a great time playing paintball, which of course would be impossible for JJ.

The family starts to feel guilty because they are having so much fun without JJ. The

obvious real moments like that one really makes Speechless’s representation of disability

so much better than most television programs. Other seemingly apt realistic issues such

as disabilities and relationships and long-term care and living for disabled people are

explored further below.

Season one, episode twelve, H-E-R-HERO tackles the “inspiration” issue as well

as the inherent costs of being disabled. Ray has the bright idea to write an essay about

how JJ is his hero, as he believes that would win a contest and the cash prize. When he

asks JJ about his plan, JJ rejects the idea because he tells Ray, “Because I’m not your

hero.” As it turns out, another student, Donald, uses JJ as a hero in the essay contest. JJ is

mad at being used as “inspiration porn,” and then states, “I blame Tiny Tim.” JJ and

Kenneth confront Donald about the essay, and JJ flatly states, “I don’t exist to make you

feel better about yourself.” JJ relents and agrees to be an inspiration for Ray, to hopefully

out pity and out hero Donald’s speech. JJ says that Ray needs to write about how happy

JJ is always, and that JJ’s desire is to “help able-bodied people grow.” This excites

Kenneth, who exclaims, “Hey! This is the magical negro,” referring to the stereotypical

role of black people in stories that serve only to help the white character along and

provide a curio to the story. JJ remarks, “We both get clichés” in reference to Kenneth’s

observation. Ray is laying his inspiration on thick at first, but in the middle decides he

can’t feed into the inspiration porn stereotype, and states that JJ isn’t brave or trying to

inspire anyone but is only living his life. In true Speechless form, Ray does not win the

contest, but Donald’s unrealistic JJ hero essay wins the contest.

A very interesting issue the show highlights, but maybe goes a bit too far with, is

the idea that possibly disabled people use a disability to get an unfair advantage in some

situations with season two, episode eighteen, N-O--NOMINEE. This squarely falls into

the disabled mind equals disabled body stereotype at first glance. Maya enters JJ’s

student film into a festival and specifically mentions JJ’s disability to hopefully curry

favor with the nominating panel. JJ gets upset because he believes the only reason he is

nominated for an award is because of his disability and not his work. JJ remarks that this

is another situation in which he is not seen as a person but as a wheelchair/disability.

Later in the episode, JJ decides to go to another festival at which he was being honored so

he can at the least eat the festival food. However, it turns out the festival organizer did

not know JJ was disabled, and JJ’s movie was honored on its merits.

Another theme in Speechless, especially in the first season, is how Jimmy

describes the DiMeo family in season one, episode two, N-E-NEW A-I-AIDE. Jimmy

points out “our family has a complicated life; things are gonna fall through the cracks.”

Jimmy points out that the DiMeos are messy, unkempt, and probably won’t meet any

expectations the neighbors might have. Jimmy says that the DiMeo’s should exhibit that

they are idiots, and as such people won’t care about them and will leave them alone. The

family is always in a hurry, is always late, and is generally a mess. Certainly “typical”

families can and do exhibit the same characteristics at times, but the consistent picture of

disabled family = mess does seem to be forced into Speechless. The family uses the time

without JJ to get their life together as a family in the first episode of the second season,

W-E--WE’RE B-A--BACK, but Jimmy does mention to Ray that the change will not last,

and it does not.

Season one episodes nineteen and twenty, C-H-CHEATER and R-U-N-

RUNAWAY, respectively, which are mentioned above regarding casting disabled people,

explore a couple of very real themes for disabled people and parents: how does a disabled

child approach adulthood and what about caregivers and aides after high school. In

episode nineteen, this starts with JJ being called out for cheating on schoolwork by a

teacher. As the claim is true, JJ starts working hard and taking tests on his own. Ray

questions Jimmy about JJ’s future and needing to contribute and be prepared, which is

certainly a topic for a family to have about a disabled child. Jimmy and Maya have a talk

about JJ’s future with Dylan and Ray, supposedly with JJ not there or involved in the

discussion. However, JJ makes a solo entrance and hears the family discussing his future

without his input, which makes him hurt and angry, so he “runs away” to Kenneth’s

residence. As episode twenty begins, Kenneth calls Maya and explains the situation about

JJ hearing about planning his future without him. JJ expresses his anger to his family, and

Maya decides to help JJ run away, to prove JJ needs her for something. JJ eventually tells

Maya that he needs to be independent and that she can’t solve everything for him, which

is a recurring theme in several episodes. JJ ends up speaking to another person with

cerebral palsy, the aforementioned Lee, and they strike up a mentor/mentee relationship.

Being able to see someone succeed that is in the same situation is certainly empowering

to JJ, as well as others in that situation.

JJ’s independence theme recurs in season one, episode twenty-two, M-A-MAY J-

A-JAY which starts with a particularly funny scene when JJ refuses help buttoning his

shirt. JJ’s lack of dexterity with his hands practically makes intricate moves like

buttoning a shirt practically impossible without some helper tools, which all disabled

people have available. From bendable spoons and forks with big handles to make use

easier for people that lack dexterity to securely grip typical silverware, to button hooks

and shoehorns, there are life tools available for most any situation. The scene with JJ and

the shirt button encompasses an entire day/night for him trying to button the buttons in

time lapse. The theme of the episode is that JJ wants to go away for the summer and learn

more independence. Maya finally realizes that JJ needs independence, and decides JJ

does need the shot at independence, and the camp would be a good exercise. The episode

does drop in a little bit of “inspiration porn” when Maya tells JJ he inspires her, which is

probably heartfelt, but it is a cliché, nonetheless.

The inspiration porn carries into season two, episode one, W-E--WE’RE B-A--

BACK as JJ makes a call to his parents from camp. As JJ describes all he has been doing,

Dylan asks him how he does it. JJ’s answer is “I find a way. Disability is no excuse

here.” Textbook inspiration porn, for some reason. The family goes on a wild goose

chase to find JJ’s summer camp romance, and of course they find her. Speechless rarely

gets sappy and cliched, but this episode certainly gets an extremely happy ending.

The show addresses friendship between able-bodied and disabled people fairly

directly in season two, episode fifteen, U-N--FORGETTABLE P-A-PAIN. Aaron, one of

JJ’s classmates, and JJ connect over their love of films, so Aaron asks JJ to see a movie

together. This makes JJ anxious about going out with Aaron, as JJ believes he will be a

burden to Aaron and will not have a good time. This is the disability as a burden

stereotype being displayed. Dylan decides to go along to help with JJ as an aide, so JJ

will be more at ease with going out with a friend. The episode does address some very

real issues, especially the lack of accessible taxis or public transportation. In addition, the

sidewalk is cracked and not accessible, either, so JJ has move from the sidewalk into the

street. Then it begins raining, and the water shorts the wheelchair controls out. The

shorted controls render the wheelchair useless, and everyone gets wet. JJ gets frustrated

and thinks he is bothering Aaron, so JJ suggests Aaron leave him in the rain. JJ believes

all of his possible friends get annoyed at having to alter events for his disability. In the

episode twist, Aaron believes that JJ was annoyed at him. Aaron and JJ end up being

friends because of the hardships - Aaron saw them as a challenge rather than a bother.

There are other issues that are expressed by the shows that a typical family would

not generally consider. A theme that comes up a couple of times is romantic relationships

with JJ, and by extension disabled people. In season one, episode six, D-A-T-E-DATE?, a

temporarily disabled female student, Claire, and JJ strike up a friendship. Kenneth

attempts to facilitate a romantic relationship between JJ and Claire, by suggesting

physical therapy together. As a side note, it is interesting how Speechless dives right in

regarding JJ’s physical therapy needs, something many people may have never

considered. As the episode progresses, Kenneth suggests that Claire might be interested

in JJ, to which JJ replies, “You don’t understand, I know how girls see me, like a friend

or a teddy bear.” There are not many examples of disabled people and temporarily able-

bodied people in romantic relationships on television, in films, or in books. Certainly,

being disabled must present an interesting picture regarding romance to some people, and

no doubt being disabled is a hard “no” for some people. The relationship occurs in a

couple of other places, such as season two, episode one, W-E--WE’RE B-A--BACK where

JJ is shown to have a romantic relationship with a deaf girl, but it is not explored beyond

that episode. Later in season two, episode six, S-H-SHIPPING, JJ’s classmates all push

him into a relationship with another disabled female student.

Going further with the relationship theme, JJ does end up in a romantic

relationship with a classmate, Izzy, in season three, episode 11, H-E-HEY, YOU. JJ is a

film director for a class project, and Izzy is in the film. As Izzy and JJ work together, they

connect romantically. The relationship lasts until the end of the series. They graduate

high school, search for colleges together, and then the series ends. This situation will be

addressed further below.

In looking at the series in total, Speechless goes a long way in addressing the

stereotypical issues and well-worn tropes used throughout literature, films, and television

to represent disability. First and central to the story is JJ, who is a disabled actor

portraying a disabled character. This is not a small issue, as many popular shows,

mentioned above, have used actors in “crip drag” to represent a disabled character. The

social model of disability is enforced quite often, and the few medical model scenes that

exist, such as the physical therapist stretching and working on JJ standing, offer a typical

viewer the chance to consider the reality of muscle tone, spasticity, and the nitty gritty of

disabilities. The stereotypes that are used are tongue-in-cheek or over the top to make a

point. The episodes that cover inspiration porn; season one, episode four, I-N-S-

INSPIRATIONS; and the disabled heroic character; season one, episode twelve, H-E-R-

HERO; are quite pointed, and thoroughly eviscerate those topics. The cast is funny, and

the episodes show mostly the reality of what life is in a house with a disabled child. With

all of the good, why did the show only last for three seasons, fading away on the Friday

night home for disabled situation comedies?

Problems in Speechless

The biggest problem with Speechless is the elephant in the room - the lead

character does. not. talk. The show is based on a disabled star that doesn’t utter one word.

While this is the only way to juxtapose the young white guy with the hip aide, and allows

for some funny situations, it is hard to get to know a character that only speaks with

someone else’s voice. As such, JJ’s ability to speak up and voice his displeasure or

support for a situation is moderated. This takes JJ’s agency away. By everyone speaking

for JJ, this reinforces the idea that disabled people can’t speak for themselves. It also

highlights the social model of disability in that JJ’s social barrier is derived from people

not looking at him for his words, but listening through his attendant, whether that person

is a sibling, a parent, or Kenneth.

Another problem with Speechless is the “Hollywood/predictable” aspect of the

series - every episode’s conflicts resolve mostly to the benefit or good-fortune of JJ. At

the end of the series, the good guy gets the girl and the princess finds the prince, or

whatever fairytale ending you would choose to substitute. Sure, the show is a situation

comedy, and the audience is mostly looking for a pressure valve to diffuse problems, but

the lack of reality in some respects does not make the series have any impact. There are a

lot of issues touched here, which could be drilled into for some reality, but the easier sell

is to side-step the difficult story. Access in international travel is treated like a mere

inconvenience in season three, episodes one and two, L-O-N--LONDON, versus the

reality of travelling abroad, especially in an old country such as England. The

cobblestone streets are quaint but make traveling while in a wheelchair a hazard. Rather

than having an earnest look into insurance issues such as disabled people have to

constantly negotiate or beg for everything from non-durable/disposable medical supplies

to durable needs like wheelchairs, they portray the insurance fight as a game in season

one, episode twelve, H-E-R-HERO.

The disabled family image - this is hinted at in a few places. As Jimmy puts it,

families with a disabled person are a mess, and society shouldn’t expect much of families

with a disabled child in season one, episode two, N-E-NEW A-I-AIDE. Maya and the

model mother of a disabled child butt heads because Maya thinks the “perfect” mom

makes her look bad in season one, episode sixteen, O-S- OSCAR P-A- PARTY. Instead of

Maya using the experience to become a better time manager, house manager, JJ manager,

etc., she blames the ideal picture of a mother with a disabled child. What Speechless also

fails to do in regard to the disabled family image is to point out the reality of how hard

life is for families that have fewer resources. Everything is more expensive; insurance,

whether private or state-run, is a minefield; social security assistance is never enough;

and being poor and always wanting takes a tangible mental toll on parents and children.

JJ’s image with his peers in school is problematic, because it is not realistic. The

kids at school go out of their way to include JJ in all aspects of high school life.

Everybody likes JJ, and JJ is admired. This is low-key disability porn in disguise.

Although not a part of the literature review or the subject of this study, a brief mention of

Terror Management Theory (TMT) needs to be mentioned. Terror Management Theory

suggests that when a person sees something that reminds them of the fragility of life and

the unpredictable nature of the genetic lottery, this produces terror in people (Greenberg,

J., Pyszczynski, T. & Solomon, S., 1986). People manage this terror relying on their self-

esteem to cope with the resulting anxiety from the terror produced (Greenberg, J.,

Pyszczynski, T. & Solomon, S., 1986). In considering Speechless in light of TMT, JJ is a

constant reminder that sometimes life doesn’t work out the way you hoped and that your

own life is fragile. The self-esteem a person would use to manage this terror is simply the

easiest one: you remove the reminder from your life. You don’t want to feel terror? Don’t

hang around with JJ. And yet, by the end of the first episode, season one, episode one, P-

I-PILOT, Kenneth has convinced JJ’s high school to vote for him for student body

president. Later in the series, JJ has a high school romance with Izzy (mentioned above),

with whom he plans on attending college, but for the ending of the series.

The last problem to mention is the hardest one, and that is the writing of the show.

Speechless was a good idea, but the yearning for ratings was the downfall of the series.

The first season is the best season of the show, as it takes the most realistic view of life

with a disabled person in a family. Season two starts off fine, but the show devolves

pretty quickly into themed episodes and celebrity tie-ins. The Halloween show, season

one, episode five, H-A-L-HALLOWEEN is fairly typical, so it gets a pass. But Maya

hiring a helicopter to fly to JJ’s summer camp to say goodbye in season one, episode

twenty-three, C-A-CAMP is nothing but a spectacle. On a baggage handler’s salary, no

less. Not buying that one. The Star Wars tie-in during season two, episode nine, S-T-

STAR W-A-WARS when Kevin Smith just happens to be at the movie theatre where JJ is

for the movie premiere is very hard to believe. Involving John Cleese as Maya’s father in

a two-episode arc in England for Maya to mend a fence with, season three, episodes one

and two, L-O-N--LONDON was a noble attempt to engage viewers, but even John Cleese

can’t save the episodes.

By the end of the series, the reliance on the fairytale ending to every episode was

tiresome. There is a definite shift in the writing somewhere toward the end of the second

season, and the third season is basically inspiration porn. I guess the idea was to get the

ratings higher, but the celebrity tie-ins and fairytale sheen remind me of another series

that had a lead character jumping a shark on a motorcycle in a later episode. Sadly, by the

end of the series, and certainly the last episode of the series, Speechless “jumped the

shark.”

CHAPTER IV – “DUDE, NOBODY’S NORMAL”: READING ATYPICAL

Introduction

Netflix has its own entry in the race to find the above mentioned “Cosby

Moment” regarding disability culture in the dramedy, Atypical. The initial reviews on

Atypical ran the gamut, being heralded by TV critic Merril Barr (2017) as “the best

original series that Netflix has ever produced,” to being slammed by autistic actor Mickey

Rowe (2017) for having a neurotypical actor, Keir Gilchrist, play the lead role of Sam

Gardner, and for the creative team not including anyone on the autism spectrum. Unlike

Scot Silveri, creator Robia Rashid does not have a family member on the autism

spectrum as the impetus for creating a show with a disabled lead character but has stated

that she has experience with someone on the autism spectrum (Fernandez, 2017).

While Atypical has a lot in common with Speechless, the biggest difference, from

a presentation and storytelling standpoint, is that Atypical is not delivered by a terrestrial

television network but is produced and distributed by Netflix. Fans of the show might

purposefully make the decision to watch the show by subscribing to the service versus the

possibility that some viewers of Speechless might watch out of convenience. When the

new season of a show is delivered by Netflix, the entire season is available immediately,

often causing fans of a show to watch an entire season of programming in a weekend

rather than having to wait weekly for a new episode. The “binge-watching” aspect allows

many Netflix series to engage with the audience very differently than a typical television

series. Each season of a Netflix show operates more like an extended movie. Many plot

elements take several episodes to develop and resolve on most Netflix series, while

typical sitcoms develop a conflict and resolve it in twenty-two minutes with little carry-

over.

Season One, Episode One, Antarctica

Season one, episode one, Antarctica, starts with Sam mechanically narrating

about Antarctica. “That’s why I like it. It’s not what it looks like,” is self-referential in

that people perceive Sam as a “weirdo,” but he is just a boy navigating life. In reality,

Sam is mechanically snapping a rubber band he is holding with a pencil sitting in his

therapist’s office. Sam is talking to his therapist, Julia, and mentions that he would like to

study Antarctica and awkwardly blurts out, “I can see your bra. It's purple.” Immediately

reinforcing three stereotypical personality aspects that are foisted on people on the autism

spectrum: obsession over a specific topic, in Sam’s case, Antarctica; a lack of personal

boundaries; and self-motor stimulation. Sam narrates often what is in his head, typically

to set up a joke or to give more insight into his character. While riding the bus home later,

Sam narrates that some tactile sensations, like a bus seat pressing on his back, are

annoying, thereby enforcing another stereotype aimed at people on the autistic spectrum,

extreme texture or stimulation aversion or attraction.

The episode cuts to Sam at home with his family to eat dinner with his mother

Elsa, father Doug, and sister Casey. With the family at the dinner table, a couple of series

elements unfold: Elsa is controlling and protective of Sam; Casey, Sam’s sports star

younger sister, is often overlooked and in Sam’s shadow; and the writers use Sam’s

autism to make inappropriate jokes about everything from death to relationships. At four

minutes into the first episode of Atypical, many stereotypes about people on the autism

spectrum are enforced. Nothing but the therapist hints at the medical model of

disabilities, and only a fleeting sideways glance from a bus passenger when Sam rambles

aloud about Antarctica approaches the social model of disabilities.

As the episode continues, Sam goes to school, noise-cancelling headphones in

place, narrating about his life there and about girls, with his goal to obtain a girlfriend.

Then a cut to Sam’s job, at an electronic store, Techtropolis, where we meet his girl-crazy

“friend” and co-worker, Zahid. Cut to Sam in his room, taking a very awkward “selfie”

and setting up a digital dating profile. Casey, his well-meaning and caring younger sister,

thinks the idea is funny, but “helps” Sam by writing his profile as if Sam is a neurotypical

high school senior. Elsa appears and attempts to dissuade Sam from online dating, once

again attempting to commandeer Sam’s life.

Elsa then goes to Sam’s therapist, Julia, who also teaches psychology at a local

college, to confront her about suggesting Sam seek a girlfriend. Julia points out that

people on the autistic spectrum are less likely to marry, but she could give Sam strategies

to navigate dating. Elsa says she believes that Sam’s inability to read people is

“magnified” by dating, and Sam is not ready to pursue a relationship with a female,

which really means that she does not want to deal with Sam pursuing a relationship with

a female, in essence.

Sam is in his room, researching dating a woman online. Of course, since the series

has already enforced Sam’s lack of nuance regarding behavior and language, Sam takes

everything peddled by every digital pick-up artist, as well as typical high school students

at his school, as reliable and proper. The episode moves forward to Sam at work, with

Zahid suggesting he flirt with a customer. Sam’s awkward, toothy smile scares off the

customer thereby ending any possible interaction, with Zahid noting the failure to Sam.

The next scene is back to high school, but this time from Casey’s perspective. A

couple of girls are bullying another girl, Beth Chapin, and Casey gets involved by

punching one of the female bullies in the face. Cut to home, and another dinner

preparation, where Elsa is lecturing Casey about the interaction, which further drives the

obvious wedge into Casey and Elsa’s relationship. Casey declares that the person she hit

is a “twat.” Sam starts narrating that sometimes he will obsess on a word, which is to set

up his internal dialog repeating “twat” in various ways, once again using a stereotypical

autistic spectrum behavior, echolalia, or repeating words, as a vehicle for humor. Beth

Chapin, the girl Casey defended from the bullying, and her older brother chauffeur Evan,

show up at the Gardner home with a cake to thank Casey. Sam busts open the front door

of the house and yells “TWAT!” at Beth and Evan. Evan is shocked and asks “what the

hell is wrong with him?” to which Casey defensively steps in and says, “Hey, nothing’s

wrong with him. Get away from him.” Casey wrangles Sam inside, and leaves the

Chapins confused outside. Inside, Casey slaps Sam on the back of the head and calls him

an “asshole.” Sam then narrates that Casey will constantly defend him and won’t let

anyone hurt him, “except herself.”

Sam is next in an appointment with Julia, running down his life since they last

interacted. Sam related that he is still looking for a relationship, he scared off the girl at

work, and Sam ends by saying “and we had meatloaf twice, and I hate meatloaf.” Julia

asks “How?” obviously to inquire as to how Sam scared off the girl at work, but literal

Sam answers, “My mom just made it in the oven.” Once again using a version of the

Abbot and Costello “Who’s on First '' routine to elicit laughter at Sam’s literal nature,

which is used a lot. But the show is a dramedy, so the comedy aspect is natural, although

100

the laughter is typically at Sam’s expense. At any rate, Sam shows Julia his awkward,

toothy smile that scared the customer off. Julia suggests a less intense smile to avoid

being seen as “creepy.”

Back at the Gardner home, Evan stops by with the motive of retrieving Beth’s

cake pan. Casey sees through the veiled attempt, especially when Evan asks her to “go

out.” Casey states that she is very focused on running, but Evan suggests that he will

change her mind. Sam busts up the conversation by excitedly stating that someone has

replied to his dating profile and wants to meet. The potential paramour, Bree, suggests

meeting Sam for coffee, which upsets Sam, as social gatherings offer a variable that Sam

cannot control, such as a noisy coffee shop. Sam is shown in Julia’s office and speaks

about having a “strategy” to overcome the variable, but it is not clear if Julia is actually

there. Often, Sam’s narration that appears initially to be non-diegetic is often Sam visibly

talking in Julia’s office, which is obviously diegetic. At other times Sam speaks non-

diegetically as internal narration. As the series progresses, Sam’s narration is always from

his seat in Julia’s office, which is somewhat strange, as Sam and Julia part ways later in

the series. Sam’s “strategy” to overcome the noisy coffee shop atmosphere is to wear his

noise-cancelling headphones. Of course, Sam looks very awkward trying to make

conversation with Bree, who in turn also looks awkward. Sam’s toothy, awkward smile

makes an appearance, and Sam tries mimicking the online pick-up artists and would-be

Romeos he saw at school. The date crumbles from there, and although the eventual

outcome is not shown, the obvious message is that the date was a failure.

At Sam’s work, Zahid asks about Sam’s love life, and Sam responds by saying he

is no longer interested in a relationship because of his experience and that he is “weird.”

101

Zahid responds, “so what.” And that really distills the entire series: people are weird, and

so what. The customer Sam scared away comes back in, and Zahid suggests Sam ask her

out. Sam’s direct, literal approach to the customer is a success, and the celebration with

Zahid is funny and endearing.

Sam and Riley, the customer, end up eating pizza at the break table at

Techtropolis on the eventual date, a place where Sam is comfortable and in control. This

seems odd to Riley, who tells Sam that she thought Sam was joking when he made that

suggestion, to which Sam answers, “I don’t do that.” Riley finds Sam’s lack of a facade

and complete honesty “refreshing” and “hilarious.” Sam mentions that he has never had

sexual intercourse, and Riley takes that as a cue to take Sam’s virgin card.

Sam and Riley end up in Riley’s dorm room sitting on Riley’s bed, with her

intention to have sex with Sam. Sam, being completely inexperienced and awkward,

really doesn’t know where to begin, but narrates that light pressure bothers him, but

heavy pressure is fine. Riley, of course, attempting to be sexual, lightly rubs up Sam’s

arm and attempts to rub his face. Sam’s aversion to the light touching causes him to

violently throw Riley off the bed. Riley is shocked, Sam immediately apologizes, but

Riley asks “What is wrong with you? Seriously, are you retarded? Is there something

wrong with your brain?” Sam stands there, but it is obvious that Riley’s accusations hurt

him. Riley throws him out of her dorm room, and Sam is seen presumably walking home.

Sam appears at home while Evan and Casey are talking outside. An obviously upset Sam

goes inside, followed by Casey and Evan. Sam says, “Sometimes I wish I was normal.”

Evan replies, “Dude, nobody’s normal,” which reaches back to Zahid’s earlier sentiment

to Sam.

102

Doug and Sam are then shown at the aquarium looking at the penguins. Doug

tries bonding with Sam over his recent failed romantic interlude. Sam states he wished he

had a time machine, he would go back and not ask the girl out, but also that he would go

to the middle-ages “because, jousting.” Doug expresses that he is proud of Sam for

working on a relationship with a woman, and that while the immediate situation was a

failure, Sam will figure romantic relationships out. Doug also nails down the series

message again when he suggests that Sam will find someone who understands and loves

all of Sam’s personality, and Sam should not be worried about being different. Sam

mentions that penguins mate for life to Doug, which is a harbinger for things to come in

the series, and an obviously affected Doug says “good for them.”

Back in the office with Julia, Sam tells her that Doug told him that he should

“find someone that appreciates me for what I am, which is a weirdo.” Sam also mentions

that he had talked a lot with Doug, and it seems that Sam and Doug are coming to a

turning point in their relationship, as Sam seems to trust Doug’s advice. This plot point is

Sam expressing his desire for Elsa to stop being so controlling, but this will be more

obvious later. Sam expresses a story through non-diegetic narration that a certain

penguin’s mating ritual is to present a gift to his potential mate, and if the female penguin

accepts the gift, the pair are coupled for life. At the very first of this episode, Julia asks if

Sam would donate his brain for research after his death, something Elsa vehemently

objected to at dinner. It becomes apparent that Sam now sees Julia as his next romantic

conquest, because Sam uses his decision to offer his brain for research as equivalent to

the penguin presenting a potential mate with a gift. Sam tells Julia he would like to

donate his brain for research, but says “Julia, I’ve decided I want to give you my brain.”

103

Julia expresses happiness for the decision, and Sam seems to take that as she accepted his

mating gift.

Atypical’s first episode, like any first episode, gives the viewer a broad sketch of

the major characters that live in the show’s world. The overbearing, commanding Elsa,

the lovable oaf Doug, the athletic younger sister, Casey, and the star of the series, Sam.

Much of the first season presents Sam as what television critic Leslie Felperin

(2017) refers to as “a human whiteboard illustrating the triad of impairments” regarding

someone on the autism spectrum. Sam’s rapid-fire conversation, lack of nuance in social

situations, and his obsession with all things Antarctic, seem to be directly out of any

college psychology textbook (Felperin, 2017). Felperin (2017) also points out how much

the writers for Atypical present the rest of the Gardner family as still learning about Sam

after eighteen years. A lot of the episode is used to educate the audience about people on

the spectrum of autism, and seemingly Robia Rashid seems to have decided to bludgeon

Sam with every stereotype of people on the autistic spectrum.

The first season of Atypical is pretty much episodic, in that the shows move

through an issue in approximately thirty minutes and the conflict situation is done. In the

subsequent seasons, Rashid adopts the more popular approach of other digital streaming

series, as a season develops as an extended episode approach. This allows for deeper

character development and more nuanced and complex stories to be offered.

With that in mind, another change is that Rashid enlisted the services of Dr.

Michelle Dean, a former employee of UCLA’s Center for Autism and Research and

Treatment, as a consultant on the show (Thaxton, 2017). There is no timeline available to

determine when Dean became involved with Atypical, but beginning in the second season

104

depiction of people on the autism spectrum became more realistic and less like a college

psychology textbook. In addition, after the inclusion of Dean, more actors on the autism

spectrum were cast in the series. The disability model also seemed to shift from the

medical model to the social model after the first season, too. While there are still plenty

of issues to be seen in seasons two and three, season one is rife with stereotypes and

uneven representations of the autism spectrum. This chapter is organized by stereotypes

and the ways in which Atypical either enforces or breaks from those stereotypes. In

addition, the medical and social models will be discussed in a section after the

stereotypes are discussed.

Stereotypes of Disability in Atypical

Classic Stereotypes of Disability: Pity, Evil/Fear, and Super Gimp

While these are touched on in Atypical, they aren’t present in many episodes of

the series. But as early as season one, episode two, A Human Female, Sam narrates that

when he was angry or anxious as a younger person, his typical behavior would be self-

harm, by banging his head or yelling. On-screen, as a teenager, he is shown furiously

pacing around his bedroom as a replacement behavior for self-harm. Doug comes in and

suggests that he and Sam talk, but Sam states that he should “talk to mom,” since Elsa

has always been very engaged in Sam’s life. Doug tells Sam that “that’s usually how

things work around here,” but then goes on to tell Sam that Elsa is at her autism support

group’s meeting, and that Doug might have something useful to say about Sam’s

situation.

Sam relents, and tells Doug he likes “a girl,” but Sam does not say that the girl he

likes is Julia Sasaki, his therapist. Sam only says that “she” has a boyfriend, “stupid

105

Miles.” Not knowing the situation, Doug suggests that Sam should be persistent, and he

might be able to steal the girl away from her boyfriend. Doug still does not know that

Sam is talking about Julia, though. Had Doug known that Sam was interested in Julia, he

could have stopped Sam from the huge series of events that is to come. As the

conversation comes to a close, Doug remarks that “this went well,” and Sam agrees,

which also sets up another change that is to come in the series, and that is Sam relying on

Doug rather than Elsa for support, as well as Doug taking a more active interest in Sam,

too. This stereotype enforces the classic pity for a disabled character stereotype, as

someone that self-harms and has no sense of boundaries would elicit pity from many

typical people. This also enforces that many people on the autistic spectrum lash out or

engage in self-harm when there is a stressful situation, or the person has a seizure. This

scene touches on Barnes’s disability representation stereotypes of a disabled person as a

burden, as Sam must always be supervised. Sam is shown as not understanding

boundaries, too, when it comes to a romantic relationship in that a high school male his

adult female therapist represents the disabled character as sexually inappropriate.

Season one, episode three, Julia Says, continues with Sam’s interest in a romantic

relationship with Julia. Sam’s narration is musing about the concept of practice makes

perfect, with the intention of getting a practice girlfriend with the eventual goal of Julia

being his girlfriend. Sam’s first attempt at a practice girlfriend is someone that he was in

school with during elementary school. He awkwardly tries to ask her out, and after a

couple of rejections from the girl, he tells her that she would be his “practice girlfriend,

the person I really like is Julia, my therapist, if that makes it any better.” The girl

responds with “it makes it worse” before telling Sam “you’re really weird.” This casts

106

Sam in the pitiable stereotype in that people would look at the situation and pity Sam for

being so awkward and inept with females as well as generally with life. The underlying

comedy of the moment oversteps that, which is common in Atypical. The comedy in

Atypical, especially in the first season, often happens at the expense of Sam, most often

because of his inability to communicate well enough to understand metaphors or jokes,

which squarely hits Barnes’s stereotype of a disabled representation as the object of

ridicule, discussed further below.

The pitiable stereotype appears in season one, episode four, A Nice Neutral Smell,

as Sam, Doug, and Elsa are attending a track meet to watch Casey run. Elsa leaves Sam

and Doug to retrieve her cell phone, which she dropped below the stadium bleachers.

Sam has on noise cancelling headphones, to mask the crowd noise. As the race starts,

everyone stands up, and a girl standing in front of Sam keeps tossing her head around.

Her hair is brushing Sam’s face, and Sam’s aversion to being lightly touched is

highlighted. Sam’s narration is pointing out that the deadliest creature on the planet is the

mosquito, which is “annoying.” Sam then grabs the girl’s ponytail. Doug tries to get

Sam’s hand off of the girl’s hair, and when he succeeds, Sam falls, cutting his arm on the

bleacher’s edge. This is a combination stereotype here, as someone could believe that

people on the autistic spectrum are evil, as well as pitiable in that Sam can’t even attend a

sporting event without supervision. This scene also fits the disability equals burden

stereotype, in that everyone in Sam’s life has to supervise him to prevent Sam from

reacting to something in a violent or inappropriate manner.

The pitiable stereotype continues in this episode, too, with Sam sitting in the hall

of his school. Paige Hardison, a classmate, is interested in Sam romantically, so she

107

walks up to engage in conversation with him, but Sam points out he has on noise-

cancelling headphones. Paige gets Sam to take them off and asks if he would be

interested in studying together for a biology test as a ploy to spend some time with Sam.

Sam asks, “Why would I want to do that?” and mentions that his current grade in biology

is an “A” while Paige has an “A-,” so studying with Paige would be of no benefit. Sam

then puts his headphones back on his ears. This hints at the disabled people are pitiable

stereotype, because Sam’s lack of communication and language nuance causes him to not

recognize that Paige is flirting with him. This also enforces the disabled as sexually

abnormal stereotype, in that a typical boy would possibly want to spend time with an

attractive girl that is seemingly interested in him.

There are few instances where the representation stereotype of the disabled equals

evil or villainous stereotype, but they are notable. In season one, episode two, A Human

Female, Doug drives Sam to Julia and Miles’ house, unknown to Doug, for Sam to

deliver chocolate covered strawberries to Julia. It is at night, and the house is dark. Sam

knows from his previous interactions with Julia that she is not fond of the doorbell, so he

opens the window and climbs through. This is not very realistic, as not only is the

window unlocked, but Sam would surely know better than to break into someone’s

house. Doug runs to retrieve Sam from Julia and Miles’ house, and on the way out, Sam

stumbles and a chocolate covered strawberry falls out of the container and rolls under a

chair. The scene sets up a huge event in the series, and it is all predicated on the

strawberry. This seems like lazy writing. Although people on the autism spectrum might

not recognize appropriate behavior or communicate as a typical person might, someone

portrayed as high functioning as Sam would know better than to break into someone’s

108

house. Sam finally tells Doug that Julia is the object of his affections as Doug is getting

Sam to leave the house. Sam narrates that in the animal world, mating is innate, but “it’s

us humans that make it complicated.” That enforces the disabled person as sexually

abnormal, pitiable, and unable to fit into typical life.

Later in that episode, Doug and Sam have another talk, as Doug is finally fully

informed about Sam’s intent to steal Julia away from Miles. Doug tells Sam he should

stop seeking to have a relationship with Julia, not only because of the inherent conflict of

interest but also that Sam should date someone his own age. Sam suggests “like a practice

girlfriend before I date Julia.” Doug only says, “I wouldn’t call it that.” Surely Doug

would know about Sam’s tendency to obsess over something and misunderstanding of

language cues after eighteen years. Sam tells a story of an Antarctic adventurer making

practice excursions before tackling exploring Antarctica, so Sam should get a practice

girlfriend to prepare for Julia.

Doug suggests that Sam find a girl his own age, without fully extinguishing Sam’s

desire for Julia. Sam tells Doug, “That’s excellent advice.” For Sam, though, the door is

still open for a relationship with Julia. Sam closes by asking Doug if he is going to tell

Elsa about the event. Doug asks, “Do you want me too?” To which Sam replies, “No,

thank you.” Doug obviously wants to have that connection with Sam grow, so he does

not betray Sam’s wishes. Of course, Doug should have told Elsa, as she would have made

the situation with Julia implicit and would have had Sam change therapists immediately,

which is probably what should have happened. This is once again very stereotypical, and

the show is using Sam’s inability to communicate typically, to read cues, or to understand

boundaries. Sam’s representation of a person on the autism spectrum is used to drive a

109

major plot point. It seems very exploitative and wrong to use a disability as a plot point

on a series, especially a very negative and destructive plot point, discussed further below.

In season one, episode four, Julia Says, while in her office waiting for Sam, Julia

is on the phone with Miles. Miles has sent Julia a bunch of flowers, and Julia is thanking

Miles on the phone, while stating that while the flowers are pretty, the flowers don’t

explain how the chocolate covered strawberry that Sam dropped in their house got there.

Julia believes that Miles must have dropped it, and since Julia was not aware that Miles

purchased chocolate covered strawberries, Julia leaps to the conclusion that Miles must

be having an affair with another woman. Julia states, “It’s a sex fruit, Miles.” This sets up

Miles moving out of the house, and all because of Sam’s inappropriate behavior. While

not a purposeful incident by Sam to derail Julia and Miles, it does touch the disabled

equals evil or villainous stereotype as well as disabled people not being able to fit into

typical life.

The disabled representation stereotype super crip makes an appearance in

Atypical, in season one episode four, A Nice Neutral Smell, when Sam walks into Julia’s

office, he notices the flowers that Miles bought her, remarking that he should have gotten

her favorite flower, “ranunculus.” Julia says, “I can’t believe you remembered that”

suggesting it must have come up in a previous therapy session with Sam, which supports

the “savant-like” memory stereotype that some people associate with people on the

autism spectrum. This also enforces the super gimp stereotype in that despite Sam’s

disability, he has an encyclopedic memory.

Super crip makes an appearance in season two, episode four, Pants on Fire. In the

episode, Sam is talking with Ms. Whitaker, his high school’s guidance counsellor. Sam’s

110

focus in this episode is a college entrance essay. Sam is shown in Ms. Whitaker’s office,

and she is reading from Sam’s essay, which she does not believe is very good. Sam’s

essay is about his biggest accomplishment, which he claims is seeing an exotic dancer’s

“boobies” in anticipation of being intimate with Paige in the first season. Sam argues that

he believes the event is one of “his greatest accomplishments,” however. Ms.

Whitaker also tells Sam that he also wrote about not participating in any extracurricular

activities and did not take gym because the mesh shorts “ride up your butt.” The

stereotypes at play here are that disabled people are sexually abnormal, engage in

inappropriate behavior, as well as Sam’s disability being a butt of the joke. This is a setup

for Ms. Whitaker painting Sam with the super crip stereotype.

Ms. Whitaker asks Sam why he wrote about those things in the essay, and Sam

says, “because it’s true.” Ms. Whitaker tells Sam that in a college entrance essay, truth is

not as important as writing something “appropriate.” Ms. Whitaker suggests that Sam

write about dealing with life so well as someone on the autism spectrum as Sam is a “real

success story.” Sam says that “autism isn’t an accomplishment, it’s something I was born

with.” Ms. Whitaker is characterizing Sam with the super crip stereotype in that he is

disabled, but he is accomplishing great feats, like graduating high school and holding a

regular job. Sam sees that Ms. Whitaker is aggrandizing what Sam sees as typical, and

suggests that Ms. Whitaker wouldn’t write about having “ten fingers and ten toes, would

you?” This is an interesting situation, because on one hand, Atypical is hinting at the

“super crip” stereotype but acknowledging the society model of disability in that society

is tough to navigate for someone on the autism spectrum, just as it is for someone with a

mobility impairment or any number of other disabilities. Navigating life as someone on

111

the autism spectrum, especially a higher functioning person like Sam, is certainly more

difficult than a typical person because society is not readily accessible for any type of

disability, but this is discussed below.

In season two, episode eight, Living at an Angle, at the suggestion of Ms.

Whitaker, Sam compiles his notebook drawings into a formal portfolio to use as part of

his college application. Sam’s drawings are great, which paints Sam’s representation with

a little bit of the super-gimp stereotype meets savant ability that some people ascribe to

people on the autism spectrum. Sam is accepted to the Rhode Island School of Design

(RISD). Sam is anxious because RISD is on a hill, and he “doesn’t like the idea of living

at an angle,” the menu at the cafeteria doesn’t have “chicken fingers,” and many artists

die “penniless and alone,” but he was trying to be optimistic. In that scene, in addition to

the super crip nod, Atypical is once again using Sam’s disability as a joke, by using

Sam’s inherent characteristic of literal language interpretation as the joke rather than Sam

being in on the joke.

Disability or Disabled Person as the Object of Ridicule

This stereotype, as mentioned above, is when a person’s disability is used as the

object of ridicule, or the behavior of a disabled person is the punchline of a joke. Atypical

is guilty of using this stereotype most often, and generally because people on the autism

spectrum typically do have trouble with language and communication. Interactions that

require a more nuanced level of communication, such as sarcasm, colloquial phrases and

non-standard word usage might be a problem for some people on the autism spectrum,

but not all. The Sam character, however, does have problems with understanding nuance

112

and takes what people say very literally. This stereotype is used heavily in the first

season, but it also is present in subsequent seasons, too.

In season one, episode two, A Human Female, Sam starts caring about his

appearance more because he wants Julia to be his girlfriend. During the first season,

Doug and Sam’s interactions are distant, and Doug is portrayed as not being able to

successfully communicate with Sam. However, after 18 years, how could Doug still not

know how to interact with Sam? Most often, Sam is the butt of a language

misunderstanding that plays out some variation of the Abbott and Costello burlesque

comedy classic skit, “Who’s on First.” Sam ends up the butt of the joke because he is

taking something someone says literally versus understanding that the person is joking or

using a euphemism. In this episode, Doug tells Sam he was “cock of the walk” because of

Sam’s new concern about his hair and looks. Sam replies “That makes no sense. I look

nothing like a rooster. Roosters don’t even have hair, they have a cockscomb, which is

fleshy.”

Later in that episode, Sam is at his job at Techtropolis. Doug has earlier suggested

that he stole Elsa away from someone, and not knowing that Sam was asking about Julia,

Doug suggests that Sam could steal a girl away from a suitor. Zahid says that Doug’s

advice is good, and that Sam’s love interest is fair game until marriage. Zahid also does

not know that Sam has a romantic interest in Julia. Sam’s narration expresses a desire to

be “smooth, like Zahid.” Zahid is boorish and crude, but Sam is enamored with Zahid’s

tales of romantic encounters and bravado, which Sam believes that is how typical males

behave. Sam asks Zahid about how to steal a girl, and Zahid replies “get a GPS, because

I’m taking you to poon city,” Sam states that poon city is “not a real place.” Zahid

113

suggests Sam should be “hella charming,” find out what Julia doesn’t like about Miles,

and Sam should get Julia “chocolate covered strawberries.” The scene cuts back and forth

to Sam in Julia’s office attempting to be “hella charming” with a story about Antarctica,

and then asking for a list of Miles “three biggest weaknesses,” but she could include more

than three. This is also part of the chain of terrible events that is to come.

In season one, episode three, Julia Says, Sam is still concerned with his

appearance and goes to the mall with Elsa and Zahid. Sam finds a blue t-shirt that he

points out has “eight Antarctic whales on it” as well as a leather jacket, at Zahid’s advice.

Sam tells Zahid he hates the leather jacket, and that it “doesn’t feel like me.” Zahid tells

him “you’re trying to get girls, the last thing you want to be is yourself.” On the ride

home, Elsa asks Sam if he really wants a girlfriend and whether he is afraid of “getting

hurt.” Sam jokes “not unless I date a great white shark,” which is a positive interaction

because Sam is in on the joke instead of being the butt of a joke he doesn’t understand.

As the discussion continues, Sam mentions that he is getting older, and “I really, really

hope I get to see boobs.” Which is inappropriate, but funny, leaving Elsa speechless.

Directly after a positive representation the writers jump into another joke with Sam’s

inappropriate behavior as the punchline.

Later in the same episode, Sam has on the whale t-shirt and the leather jacket at

school. You sense from his mannerisms the jacket is bothering him. The sound of the

leather rubbing together produces a loud squeak, and the buckles and zippers are clanging

on the metal desk. Sam narrates, “When a lobster gets too large for its shell, it molts.

When a snake is feeling a growth spurt, it sheds.” This is setting up a metaphor and an

action. Sam is growing more independent and needs to shed his skin in the series, but also

114

Sam is uncomfortable in the leather jacket. Sam gets out of his desk, very fast and

flustered, to throw the leather jacket in the garbage, narrating “sometimes you have to get

rid of your outer layer.” The class grinds to a stop and the students and teacher stare at

Sam. The teacher finally asks, “Is everything ok?” Sam replies, “Yes, thank you.” This is

a little bit of the stereotype of a disabled person not being able to participate in a typical

life, but also Sam’s sensory issues that are a part of his disability are the butt of the

physical humor.

Later in that episode, Paige makes an entrance into the series. Paige is hopelessly

nerdy, makes flawless grades, is cute, and is interested romantically in Sam. Paige tells

Sam, “I like your shirt.” Earlier in the episode, Casey told Sam, “nice shirt.” When Sam

thanks her, Casey says, “I was being sarcastic.” Remembering that, Sam asks Paige “are

you being sarcastic?” Paige says no, and Sam tells her “then thank you” before walking

away. This hints at the stereotype of disabled people being sexually abnormal by Sam

continually not picking up on Paige’s flirtation, and also uses Sam as the object of

ridicule in that he completely misses the point of Paige’s interaction.

In season one, episode six, The D-Train to Bonetown, Sam tells Zahid that Paige

wants to go to the winter formal, which Sam says sounds “dumb.” Paige told Sam he

could “come over” afterward, as Paige’s parents will be out of town. Zahid tells Sam that

Paige wants to have sex with him. Sam is skeptical, but Zahid tells him that “‘come over’

is ladytalk for have sex.” Sam says he will ask Paige if that was her intention, and Zahid

says that Sam shouldn’t. When Sam is with Paige next, he asks her if “come over”

actually meant that she wanted to have sex with him. Paige acts very awkward and

stutters “maybe.” Zahid tells Sam that “in this case, maybe means yes” which Sam again

115

clarifies with Paige. Sam then says that “the proposition of sex makes the dance more

worthwhile.” Admittedly, it was very funny watching Sam be inappropriate and directly

asking Paige to clarify if she wanted to have sex with him, but this is completely making

Sam the object of ridicule in this scenario.

Many of the interactions with Sam are in the “Who’s on First” vein, although

sometimes his behavior is used as the punchline. Using Sam’s innate behavior

characteristics as a joke pretty much stops after the first season, but the language

misinterpretations continue through all of the seasons. Later in the series, Sam’s

communication and use of language gets better, and he makes a few jokes of his own. As

mentioned above, Robia Rashid hired a consultant with a background in autistic spectrum

research. Although the timeline was not found as to when the consultant was hired, the

representations and ridicule of Sam’s behavior are toned down in the second season and

beyond.

Disabled People are Sexually Abnormal

As mentioned above, Barnes’s characterization of this stereotype is society’s

incorrect presumptions about sexuality and disability. Virtually the entire story of

Atypical, especially in season one, revolves around Sam wanting to be involved in a

romantic relationship with a girl. This section dissects Sam and his desire to be

romantically involved with Julia, his therapist.

Among the college textbook characteristics of someone on the autism spectrum

that Sam is given in the first episode, the episode ends with Sam agreeing to give Julia his

brain for research after Sam dies. Sam internally sees that as a male penguin’s gift to a

female penguin as part of a mating ritual, and Julia’s acceptance as her interest in Sam.

116

In season one, episode two, A Human Female, Sam is in Julia’s office, where his

narration describes how he is researching Julia for her relationship potential by getting

her input about “important” things, like her favorite lemonade, whether Julia likes

movies, her fears, her favorite “winter sports.” Sam also discovers that Julia has a

romantic partner, Miles. Julia is oblivious to why Sam is questioning her, mentioning that

it is good that Sam is taking an interest in someone besides himself, as that is something

that Sam usually does not engage in with other people. While showing Sam as sexually

abnormal, this is also enforcing a typical trait of someone on the autism spectrum, being

self-centered.

Later, in season one, episode four, A Nice Neutral Smell, Julia asks Sam about

how his conquest for a romantic relationship is proceeding, Sam answers “Bad. Bad, bad,

bad.” He then relates that most girls ignore him, “except Paige.” Julia asks Sam about

Paige, who Sam describes as “an annoying girl who’s always bothering me when I’m

wearing my headphones, and she wants me to study with her, even though we’re both

getting As.” Julia suggests that Paige might be interested in a romantic relationship to

Sam. Sam, seemingly surprised, replies, “Oh. I guess I should make her my girlfriend,

then.” Julia points out that Sam just described her as annoying, to which Sam replies,

“Does that matter?” Julia says that Sam should figure out if he likes Paige, although Sam

says that he doesn’t know how to make that decision. Julia tells Sam to “get to know her

better and weigh the pros and cons.” Sam says that is what he did when trying to decide

on getting a pet, “but I’ll never find a girlfriend as good as Edison,” which is Sam’s pet

turtle’s name.

117

As mentioned above in this episode, Sam tells Doug he likes “a girl,” but Sam

does not say that his intended relationship subject is Julia. As mentioned, Doug suggests

that Sam should be persistent and available. Then comes Sam’s quest for a “practice

girlfriend” for eventually being romantically involved with Julia. Sam breaks into Julia

and Miles’ house and drops the chocolate covered strawberry. Sam confides in Doug that

he is interested in Julia, which Doug does not effectively eliminate from Sam’s

relationship intentions.

In the middle of the Julia romance saga, part of the Paige story fits, as Sam is

battling at this point over whether he loves Paige or Julia. Paige surprises Sam by telling

him that she loves him. Sam is concerned because he doesn’t know if he loves Paige,

Zahid tells Sam that “you just know.” Later, Sam then asks Elsa how she knew she loved

Doug. Elsa tells Sam that she knew because Doug was the first thing she thought about

when she woke up. Upon asking Doug, Doug said that Elsa “makes him a better person,”

Sam makes a checklist for Paige with their answers. Elsa offers another characteristic of

love is that the person you love “is your go-to person” in any situation, to which Doug

agreed. The next morning, Sam wakes up and thinks about Paige, and checks that box on

his love list. Sam decides that Paige makes him less “annoying” so that checks the

“makes me a better person” box. Later at work, Sam decides he should tell Paige about a

sale at Techtropolis, which checks his “first person you want to tell good news to” box. In

Sam’s mind, since Paige checked all the boxes for loving someone, he decides he loves

Paige, and tells her so.

Due to Sam’s dropped strawberry, Julia eventually drives Miles out of her life

with her suspicions. Julia, in need of a television after Miles moved out and took the one

118

in their house, shows up at Techtropolis to pick-up one she previously purchased. Julia

looks like a complete mess and is embarrassed after seeing Sam there. Sam gets Julia’s

television, and puts it in her car. Julia thanks him and tells Sam that seeing him “made

my day.” Sam responds that Julia has “made his day” a lot of times, so I guess this is me

paying you back.” Sam also tells Julia he is looking forward to their next session because

he has a lot of things to talk to her about.

Julia asks about the dance and if Sam is nervous about dancing. Sam says he

learned “hip hop” dancing while watching his sister’s dance class as a child, and proceeds

to demonstrate his dance moves. Predictably, Sam’s moves are awkward and stiff, but he

does say he is nervous about slow dancing. Julia tries to show Sam how to slow dance,

the perspectives on the event from “reality” and Sam are very different: Sam sees Julia

dressed very well and they dancing was very romantic; while in reality, as mentioned,

Julia is not well dressed and looks a mess, and the slow dancing was stiff and awkward,

as expected. After the encounter, his list about Paige and loving her are dropped, and Sam

mentions that Zahid’s advice was right in that “sometimes you just know,” and instead of

being in love with Paige, he actually loves Julia.

Later in the episode, Sam is at a restaurant with Paige and all of her family, and

his inner dialog is just repeating ‘Julia” over and over. Sam awkwardly yells “Julia!” at

the table, which stops the conversations taking place. Sam turns to Paige and says,

“Paige, I’m sorry to inform you of this, but I shouldn't be here because I don’t love you.”

Paige is confused and asks Sam “what?” Sam states that he thought he loved Paige

because she passed his checklist, but the simpler test was “just knowing, and you failed

119

that one. So, I think we should break up.” Sam then arises from his seat, says goodbye to

everyone there and closes with “see you at school Paige.”

The next day, Sam shows up at Julia’s office without an appointment, carrying

chocolate covered strawberries. His intent is to profess his love to Julia. Julia mentions

the lack of appointment, but Sam says he “wanted to tell you something, and I wanted to

do it in person because this message involves a gift.” Sam states, “Julia, I’ve wanted you

to be my girlfriend since the day that I gave you my brain.” Sam then says that he later

found out that Julia was in a relationship with Miles, and that there would be a conflict of

interest with her as his therapist. He goes on to say that Doug suggested that Sam get a

practice girlfriend, Paige, to help him prepare to be in a relationship with Julia.

Julia tries to be nice and stop Sam, but Sam continues about the things he can now

do because of Julia, and that he doesn’t need her as his therapist anymore. Julia tries to

explain things better for Sam, but he reveals his gift to her - chocolate covered

strawberries. Julia starts to put things together about the strawberry she found at her

house that she believed Miles dropped and asks if Sam broke into her house with

chocolate covered strawberries. Sam said, “No, the window was open, and I just silently

climbed in.” Julia, getting angry at Sam, says, “Well, you dropped one.” Julia, now

visibly angry with Sam, tells him to leave. Sam tells Julia that when they danced in the

parking garage “he just knew” he loves Julia, and then asks, “didn’t you?” Julia asks

Sam, “Are you asking if I want to start a romantic relationship with my teenage patient?”

Sam replies, “Yes, exactly.” Julia is angry and is caustic by explaining why that is not

possible. Julia tells Sam she is very upset and what Sam did was inappropriate. Sam gets

120

very confused, and the stress of being rejected, and worse, having the person you believe

you love angry at you, causes him to start repeating Antarctic penguin species.

Julia’s voice fades into the background, but as she notices Sam’s stress, she says

she’s sorry for upsetting him. Sam leaves Julia’s office hurriedly and walks out of the

building into the parking lot, almost being hit by a car. He gets onto the bus to go home,

but as he gets more and more stressed, he starts beating his back/head against the bus

window and has a seizure. The bus driver, Eduardo, recognizes Sam because of their

interactions, and Eduardo calls Doug and Elsa about Sam. Eduardo and Doug speak

outside the bus, while Elsa goes inside to find Sam in a ball on the bus floor. Elsa calms

Sam down and the three go home.

Doug confronts Julia about upsetting Sam, saying, “He let his guard down with

you, he trusted you. You know how many people that kid has in his life that actually treat

him like a person, and that’s what you do? You crushed him.” Julia tells Doug that she is

not the only person to be blamed in the scenario, that “you knew Sam had a crush on me.

You enabled those feelings.” The entire Sam-Julia situation would have been much

different had Elsa been more aware of Sam’s actions, one would believe. Doug kept most

of that from Elsa to have something that he and Sam could bond over, even though the

end result was bad for Sam. Doug ends up telling Elsa that he knew about Sam’s crush on

Julia, and that he should have told Elsa.

The entire first season’s story of Sam’s quest for Julia evidences sexually

abnormal behavior. The missed cues with all of the girls he attempted to go out with, the

missed cues with Paige, and the meltdown with Julia cause Sam’s representation to be

terribly naive and destructive based on his sexual inappropriate behavior. There are other

121

instances, but Sam’s quest for Julia is the main expression of the sexually abnormal

stereotype.

Disabled Person as a Burden

Barnes’s characterization of this stereotype, from above, is that disabled people

on their own are helpless, but with the help of a supportive able-bodied person, the

disabled person can be “normal” and without a typical person, a disabled person is unable

to participate in life (Barnes, 1992, p. 30). Atypical is filled with this stereotype. Sam’s

relationship with Zahid has Sam asking for advice about relationships and girls, fashion,

lying, among other topics. Sam and the audience are made to believe that Sam can only

be a typical man by emulating and relying on Zahid, Elsa, and Doug, especially in the

first season. Elsa and Doug are constantly supervising and guiding Sam through life, and

often when Elsa or Doug are not able to help Sam negotiate life, he ends up in a seizure

or elopes, or worse, breaks up a relationship, as with Julia and Miles. Much of this is in

the first season, and the show relaxes this more as Sam becomes more nuanced and

complex, and likely because the above-mentioned Dr. Deen helps guide the show in a

more realistic and less stereotypical direction.

In season one, episode two, A Human Female, Sam is “researching” relationships.

At school, Sam sees a girl, Bailey, and a boy, Arlo, kissing among some other students,

although Sam saw Bailey kissing a different boy, Henry, the day prior. Sam immediately

goes up to Bailey and asks her how Arlo “wooed” her away from Henry. Sam refers to

Bailey as a “skank,” which is how Casey described her in an earlier scene. Arlo is

annoyed, and he and the other students start making fun of Sam because Sam is awkward

and answers their questions inappropriately. Sam starts narrating and says, “People think

122

I don’t know when I’m being picked on, but I do. I just don’t always know why, which,

in some ways, is worse.” The sensory overload of the students talking and laughing

causes Sam to shut down. Bailey sees Sam is troubled, and states that the students should

“leave him alone, he’s not all there.” Sam, in obvious distress, runs away from the group.

Elsa picks up Sam from school, and the next scene shows him sitting in his bed,

engaging in repetitively saying the four types of Antarctic penguins, Adélie, Chinstrap,

Emperor, Gentoo, over and over. That is very stereotypical behavior for people on the

autism spectrum to display in stressful times. Doug asks Elsa about Sam, and Elsa says

Sam won’t speak to her and he has locked himself in his room. After Doug asks if Sam is

OK through the door, Sam opens the door, and says he wants to talk to “dad,” which

shocks both Doug and Elsa. Sam says he was doing what Doug suggested, and

formulating a plan to steal Julia from Miles, although Sam does not tell Doug that Julia

and Miles were the objects of his plan. Doug suggests that Sam misunderstood their last

conversation. Sam related the situation at school, and how the students were making fun

of him, but Sam did not know why. Sam states very emphatically to Doug, “I am all

there! I am!”

In season one, episode five, That’s My Sweatshirt, Paige and Sam are in Sam’s

room, and Paige comments on his room being cluttered by stating that she has been doing

some research, and that some believe people on the autistic spectrum are “always neat,

sometimes they’re not.” Paige starts picking up Sam’s tchotchkes and starts to pick up

Edison, his turtle. Sam tells Paige not to pick up Edison. The next scene is Sam sitting in

front of his closet doors, and Doug comes in, asking Sam “what’s going on?” Paige says,

“Hi Mr. Gardner” from the closet. Doug asks about the disembodied voice from the

123

closet, and Sam says that Paige was “being annoying, so I locked her in there.” Doug

makes Sam let Paige out of the closet and tells him “you don’t lock girls in your closet,”

and that Sam should apologize. Sam says, “But I’m not sorry, I did what I needed to do.”

Paige says that she read that people on the autism spectrum have “outsize reactions to

stuff,” and that everything was fine. Paige then says, “Let’s be honest, I can be a handful,

even for neurotypicals.” There are many more episodes in that vein, where Sam has

endangered himself or engaged in potentially harmful actions without a typical person

being there to help him navigate the situation. These primarily happen in the first season

but are scattered through the series.

The Medical Model of Disability Versus the Social Model of Disabilities in Atypical

From above, the medical model of disabilities treats a disabled person or a

disability as a pathology to be cured (see Dirth & Branscombe, 2017; Finkelstein, 1997;

Gabel & Peters, 2004; Hahn, 1987; Oliver, 2004). The social model of disability comes

from a 1976 UPIAS publication that states, “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” (p. 14).

Atypical shows Sam’s representation as identifying with both models, in very distinct

ways throughout the series.

The very first scene of the series shows Sam in Julia Sasaki’s office, engaged in a

therapy session. Julia is a psychology professor at the fictional Denton College, and her

specialty is people on the autism spectrum. Sam relies on Julia heavily in the first season,

and he looks forward to his weekly sessions with Julia in which she offers Sam advice

about navigating life. Sam’s entire relationship with Julia is an enforcement of the

124

medical model of disabilities. Elsa is very rule-bound and immediately after Sam and

Julia end their therapist and patient relationship, she starts shopping for other therapists to

replace Julia. The entire first season of Atypical is very reliant on the medical model of

disability being displayed. Sam needs Julia to act appropriately, and by extension, people

on the autism spectrum need a trusted therapist to help them navigate the world of

neurotypicals.

Atypical also breaks with the medical model and starts to play up the social model

of disabilities in various scenes. Whenever Sam is under duress or is unable to

communicate because of a sensory overload or some language barrier, the social model of

disability is on display. In season one, episode two, A Human Female, Sam is

“researching” relationships, as mentioned above. When the students start making fun of

Sam while Sam starts narrating and says, “People think I don’t know when I’m being

picked on, but I do. I just don’t always know why, which, in some ways, is worse.” The

sensory overload of the students talking and laughing causes Sam to shut down. Bailey

sees Sam is troubled, and states that the students should “leave him alone, he’s not all

there” which is an enforcement of the social model of disabilities in that many people on

the autism spectrum are certainly “all there.” And Sam, who ends up graduating with the

3rd highest grade point average in the school, is certainly a very intelligent character.

In season one, episode three, Julia Says, Sam asks Elsa to take him shopping at

the mall for clothes. Elsa attempts to talk Sam out of that and relates a story about the last

time they were at the mall. Elsa mentions the harsh lighting, the music, the crowds, and

that Sam had an incident and slapped someone, and they were banned from the mall. Sam

argues that Julia told Sam she thought he was ready. Sam insists, however, telling Elsa,

125

“I’m not a little kid. I can do things.” Elsa relents, and Sam has Zahid meet them at the

mall, “because he’s the most stylish person I know” declares Sam. Elsa then engages with

a store associate she spoke with on the telephone about making the store more friendly

for people on the autism spectrum. This scene very solidly identifies with the social

model of disabilities, in that the store could make some brief alterations to accommodate

someone on the autism spectrum but did not. Elsa gets a bit angry with the store associate

and, by example, pushes the associate on the shoulder, which results in Elsa being thrown

out of the mall this time. Of course, the twist on the story from earlier is very funny, but it

is inconsistent. The store is loud, harshly lit, there are lots of people and children crying

in addition to the overwhelming amount of different clothes. It seems like a perfect place

to send Sam into sensory overload, but rather than use a characteristic of someone on the

autism spectrum, Sam is undeterred by everything. Seemingly his desire for updating his

style is greater than his disability.

In season one, episode six, The D-Train to Bonetown, Paige tells Sam that she

wants to go to the “winter formal” with him. Sam says that he could sit outside in the

hallway with his noise-cancelling headphones, but Paige doesn’t like that idea. Paige

attends a parent-teacher association meeting with the intention of having the school

change the winter formal to a “silent” event, where the music would be played through

wireless headphones. Paige explains that her boyfriend, Sam, is on the autism spectrum,

and that events like the winter formal are difficult for Sam because of the sensory

overload that dances present.

Paige makes that argument that although Sam is on the autism spectrum, he

should still be able to participate in school activities. One of the parents at the meeting,

126

April, turns to Elsa, who is also at the meeting and says, “Let me guess, this is all your

idea?” However, Elsa had no hand in Paige’s decision to present the idea to the parent-

teacher organization. Paige says that she believes Newton High “should be a place that’s

inclusive of all students.”

April also addresses the meeting and says that she is having her daughter’s hair

styled at significant expense, and that the headphones will harm the hairstyle. In addition,

April says that the winter formal is highly anticipated by students, and questions whether

the character of the event should be changed “for one kid?” and that a silent dance is “just

sad.” Elsa replies that what she believes is “sad” is that Sam is excluded from many

events, because of sensory overload issues, and that expensive hairstyles are “not on my

list” of events to care about. The meeting attendees vote to have the dance with wireless

headphones.

As the meeting adjourns, Elsa stops April and asks why did April vote against the

silent dance idea. April responds, “Because the world doesn’t revolve around you.”

Interesting reply, as the world definitely does not revolve around disabled people. There

is no government enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act, so any attempt at

gaining access in an inaccessible building must be done by private citizens who pay out

of pocket for a lawyer. The penalty is very low, so most lawyers will not take those cases

on a contingency, either. Disabled people are routinely excluded from life, and this is a

great example of the social model of disabilities being recognized.

The biggest nod to the social model of disabilities versus the medical model is

Sam and his relationship to therapists. In season two, episode three, Little Dude and the

Lion, Doug, Elsa, and Sam are in the office of the school guidance counsellor, Ms.

127

Whitaker, and the conversation moves to Sam applying for college. Elsa says that after

graduation from high school, Sam will live at home and take a couple of classes at a

community college. Ms. Whitaker tells Sam that she hosts a group of students that are on

the autism spectrum with the goal of helping each handle transitions, such as transitioning

between high school life and college. Doug is positive about the group, but Elsa is

immediately negative, as Sam being independent would decrease her influence over Sam.

As mentioned above, after Dr. Michelle Dean, a former employee of UCLA’s Center for

Autism and Research and Treatment, was hired as a consultant on the show to help with

the representation of people on the autism spectrum, Atypical’s depiction of people on the

autism spectrum became more realistic and less like a college psychology textbook

(Thaxton, 2017). Sam participating in a peer group for support versus Sam seeing a

therapist relaxes the medical model of disability that the first season almost single-

handedly enforces.

Later in the episode, Doug suggests Sam go to the peer group Ms. Whitaker

mentioned, but Sam is skeptical and asks why he would want to listen to people talk

about “stupid problems.” Doug reminds Sam that the group participants are also in the

autism spectrum. Sam ends up going to the autism spectrum peer group, which is right at

the time when Elsa set up a meeting for Sam with another therapist. In a big step for

positive and appropriate representation, all of the actors that play the characters in the

peer support group are people in Sam’s peer group are actors on the autism spectrum,

which is a very positive move for Atypical (Patton, 2018). The motto of the autism

spectrum community is “nothing about us, without us” (Rowe, 2017).

128

Sam ends up identifying with the students in the peer group. Sam ends up telling

the peer group about all of the changes he is undergoing and that he felt like a “pack

animal with no pack” and that he is scared. Ms. Whitaker suggests that when Sam feels

scared, he should ask for help, and assigns each student to ask for help in the next week.

Sam tells Doug and Elsa that he thought the peer group was not a good idea, but that he

enjoyed seeing people that are “just as strange as me.” Sam then tells Doug and Elsa he

wants to go to college after graduation. This really shows Sam becoming more

independent and Atypical firmly rejecting the medical model of disabilities. Sam says that

college might be difficult, because of the changes involved, but that if he needs help “I’ll

ask for it,” an idea he just got from the peer group. Elsa expresses her support for Sam’s

newfound independence and decision.

Positive Representations in Atypical

While there are plenty of negative representations of disabilities in Atypical, there

are positive representations, as well. As early as season one, episode five, That’s My

Sweatshirt, Paige seeks out Casey at school, and asks for advice about Sam. Casey says,

“Yep, stop seeing my brother.” Casey then accuses Paige of seeking “extra credit for

dating the weird kid.” Paige states that Casey’s accusations are not right, that she “really

likes Sam.” Casey asks Paige, “What happens when he starts to rely on you, and you

leave? That shit can really mess him up.” Casey says Paige is making everything worse.

Based on Paige’s conversation with Casey, Paige ends her relationship with Sam.

In a therapy session with Julia, she asks Sam about Paige, and Sam relates that he and

Paige are no longer in a romantic relationship. Sam tells Julia that, “Most people I meet

don’t even try to get me. Paige tried, and that was nice.” Sam says he only focused on

129

Paige being annoying and didn’t consider the “good parts.” At home, Sam tells Casey

that Paige broke up with him because of what Casey said to her at school, and angrily

says, “You drove her away.” Casey says that all Sam did was complain about Paige. Sam

tells Casey, “Well, I like her I think . . . I don’t need you messing with my life.” That

interaction is a positive representation for disability, in that it shows something other than

a stereotype. Sam is just a typical person angry because his sister ended his relationship.

Later in the episode, Sam interrupts Paige’s French class, shocking the teacher,

the students, and Paige. Sam tells Paige that he hated it when she touched his tchotchkes

and stole his hoodie, but that he “hated it even more when you were gone.” Sam then

gives Paige a penguin necklace to wear instead of his hoodie. Paige gets up and she and

Sam kiss in front of a poster of the Eiffel Tower, a reference to Paige mentioning that she

and Sam could go to France and kiss in front of the actual Eiffel Tower earlier. This is the

first really positive representation in the series, in that Sam is not the butt of a joke or

engaging in any overtly stereotypical behavior, other than being a young man that makes

a scene to romance a young woman.

In season two, episode four, Pants on Fire, Sam narrates that there is one person

who always treats him “normal and tells me the truth,” which is Zahid. Sam relates a

theory that Zahid has about people on the autistic spectrum are “the normal ones, because

we see the world as it really is.” The line is from his college entrance essay that Ms.

Whitaker starts reading in the guidance counsellor’s office. Ms. Whitaker continues

reading that Sam doesn’t see a friendship between someone on the autistic spectrum and

a typical person, but Sam just sees “two friends. And for me, that is an accomplishment.”

Ms. Whitaker tells Sam his essay is “real good.”

130

In season two, episode five, The Egg is Pipping, in Sam’s peer group, Ms.

Whitaker is giving the students statistics about employment among people on the autism

spectrum and asks who in the group has a job. Sam raises his hand, and another group

member asks Sam, “What do you do with your money?” Sam mentions that when he is

paid, he gives his paycheck to Elsa. One of the other peers says Sam’s lack of a bank

account makes him seem childish. So, Sam’s new focus is his own bank account.

Sam tells Elsa he wants a bank account, to become responsible with money. Elsa

refers to herself as “the bank of Elsa” and that Sam’s money is there. Elsa is negative

about Sam’s intention because of the responsibility and the added stress of managing the

bank account. Doug says that Sam should have a bank account and decides he will take

Sam to open a bank account. In the bank associate’s office, as Sam and the associate are

wrapping up opening Sam’s bank account, the associate tells Sam if he has any questions,

and asks if “it always smells like nothing in here?,” if the volume of the ATM machines

could be regulated by users, ending with how many “lollypops am I allowed to take?”

The bank associate tells Sam he can have as many as he wants, to which Sam replies,

“This is wayyy better than the bank of Elsa.” While the scene does end by laughing at

Sam, he did make a pretty funny observation. This is how a lot of the jokes involving

Sam evolve after the first season. Rather than Sam or his disability being the punchline of

the joke, Sam is in on the joke, or Sam is making the joke. There is still a bit of the

“Who’s on First” routine scattered about in the episodes, but more often than not, innate

characteristics are not the butt of the jokes.

In season two, episode eight, Living at an Angle, Sam tells Ms. Whitaker about

being anxious about college, and she reminds him it is “normal to be nervous around

131

transitions.” Sam admits that the move away from home is “scary.” Ms. Whitaker

suggests that Sam does not have to move to go to college, because there are other

colleges in the area. Ms. Whitaker tells Sam that Denton University, where Julia’s office

is, has a scientific illustration program. While a positive representation of disabilities,

here is a moment when Atypical goes into happy ending “Hollywood” mode. Not

everything has to be a neat and tidy ending. Sam is, of course, great at science and art.

In season three, episode three, Cocaine Pills and Pony Meat, Sam has started

college at Denton University, and is expressing frustration about college. Sam decides

that he will not seek any assistance from the Office of Disability Accommodations

(ODA), that he will be fine without assistance. However, Sam narrates that “no

expedition goes exactly as scheduled,” just as he enters the ODA office to apply for

services. Rudolph, the director of the ODA, has multiple sclerosis, and is played by a

disabled actor, Scott Rosendall (Scott Rosendall, n.d.). Rudolph introduces Sam to one of

the ODA staff, Sidney, who is played by Tal Anderson, an actor on the autistic spectrum

(Fabian, n.d.). Jasper, who is one of Sam’s high school peer group members, is also

signed up with the ODA at Denton. Sam, Sidney, and Jasper are talking, and Sam is

amazed at the services they offer. Jasper tells Sam that even if Sam doesn’t sign up for

any services, “you can still use the bean bags.” It seems that Rashid took the early

criticism of not using disabled actors to heart, as Atypical uses a lot of disabled actors.

The representations in this episode are good.

The biggest positive is that Atypical was recently renewed for a fourth, and what

Robia Rashid says will be the final season. Regarding the series on the whole, if the first

season is the only consideration, the series is not a positive representation of disabilities.

132

That the entire season is a litany of one stereotype after another, and as mentioned reads

like a college psychology textbook chapter regarding someone on the autism spectrum.

The kitchen sink approach to Sam, the enforcement of the medical model of disabilities,

and the overt reliance on a disability as the object of ridicule, among the other stereotypes

mentioned, make season one uncomfortable to watch, more often than not. The first

season of Atypical, while very entertaining, is a poor representation of disabilities.

As was mentioned above, there is no clear timeline to discern when Dr. Deen was

brought in to consult for the show, but starting with the second season, the

representations of people on the autism spectrum became more nuanced and relied less

on stereotypes to represent people on the autistic spectrum. In addition, the medical

model of disabilities is almost fully rejected by Sam and the other characters on the show,

with the social model of disabilities taking the lead. Sam begins relying on peers, which

are played by actors on the autism spectrum, versus a therapist, Sam is often telling the

joke rather than being the punchline of the joke, and while there are surely some

problems with the representation at times, the bulk of seasons two and three are mostly

positive representations of disability. After the missteps of the first season, the writing

and acting are so good that there is the temptation to give Atypical a pass on the

representation. Atypical does not deliver the “Cosby Moment.” The end result is a net

positive for entertainment, but Sam’s representation of disabilities is mixed, at best.

133

CHAPTER V – BREAKING STEREOTYPES: READING BREAKING BAD

Introduction

Although not a pay channel such as HBO, the basic cable nature of A&E allows

for more mature subject matter in Breaking Bad. Breaking Bad adhered to a weekly

schedule, so that does make it similar to Speechless, as a viewer had to seek the series out

or a viewer might stumble upon the program while channel surfing. Breaking Bad is

similar to Atypical in that both series included more mature subject matter. The biggest

difference Breaking Bad has to either of the aforementioned series is that the lead

character is not disabled. However, there are three major characters that are disabled

representations to analyze. This chapter will be broken into four sections, beginning with

a reading of season one, episode one, Pilot, and then each disabled character has a section

with a short biography and how the character either enforces or breaks from a

stereotypical disability representation. The ways the character supports the medical

model of disabilities or the social model of disabilities will be addressed in that

character’s section, with a section of positive representations and a general analysis of the

character’s representation at the end of the sections.

Season One, Episode One, Pilot

Breaking Bad chronicles the White family: Walter, Skyler and Walter Jr. (Walt

Jr.). Walter White is a public high school chemistry teacher that was involved in a

significant venture as a younger man that did not work out in his favor.

From the first shot of season one, episode one, Pilot, it is clear that this is not a

typical series. A pair of khaki trousers, once airborne, lands on a dirt road, immediately

run over by a large recreational vehicle (RV). Walter White is driving the RV, wearing a

134

gas mask, and a pair of underwear. There is a person passed out in the passenger seat, and

other people are also seemingly passed out on the floor, with some sort of liquid and

glass on the floor of the RV. White’s driving lands the RV off of the road, stuck in a

crevasse. White, nervous, exits the RV as sirens from some type of emergency vehicles

sound in the background. White makes a confession video with a camera addressed to his

family: Skyler and Walt Jr.

The shot shifts to the White’s home, three weeks into the past. Walter awakes

early, and half-exercises on an approximation of a stair machine. Walter notices an award

on his wall, recognizing his contribution to a Nobel prize. That scene juxtaposes Walter’s

huge scientific achievement with his lacking financial situation. At breakfast, it is Walter

White’s fiftieth birthday, as evidenced by the number fifty displayed on his breakfast

eggs with “veggie bacon” and Skyler White wishing Walter “happy birthday.” Skyler

suggests that Walter has a second job, and she wants Walter home at a reasonable hour

after his work there.

Enter Walt Jr. on Lofstrand arm crutches, with a “hey.” Walt Jr. appears at

breakfast a lot in the series, so much so that the fan wiki mention that as a Walt Jr.

characteristic (Walter White Jr.). Walt Jr. asks Walter, “So, how’s it feels to be old?”

Walter replies, “How does it feel to be a smart ass?’ Walt Jr. replies, “Good.” This, and

most of Walter and Walt Jr.’s interactions are mostly free of stereotypes.

Walter White is a high school chemistry teacher, and Walt Jr. attends the same

school. Walter pulls into an accessible parking space at the school and tells Walt Jr. “see

ya at home.” Walter does not pander or attempt to assist Walt Jr. out of his car, which is a

positive representation, and certainly a high school student that has lived with cerebral

135

palsy for life would not need or want help getting out of a car. Walter is a good teacher in

that he is passionate about the subject. Walter lectures on how chemistry traces the

evolution of life, which foreshadows the series. On the drive home from Walter’s second

job at a car wash, he notices the handicapped parking pass hanging on his rear-view

mirror. He grabs it and attempts to close the hang tag in the glove compartment, but the

glove compartment will not close.

Walter arrives home and Skyler has arranged a “surprise party” for him. It is

revealed that Skyler is pregnant with a second White child. At the party, it becomes

apparent that Walt Jr. respects his uncle, Hank Schrader, and is enamored with Hank’s

tales of glory and his boisterous, alpha-male demeanor. Hank jokingly mentions that

Walter has a “brain the size of Wisconsin, but we won’t hold that against you!” Hank is

married to Skyler White’s sister, Marie. Hank is a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA)

officer, and seemingly exaggerates his position, a bit. During the party, Hank turns the

television on to show the news that he captured a drug dealer. There is about seven-

hundred thousand dollars at the scene of the arrest. Hank suggests that Walter ride along

with him one night to see what Hank’s job is like.

Later in the episode, Walter collapses at his part-time job at the car wash. On the

ambulance ride to the hospital, Walter tries to get the emergency medical tech (EMT) to

“drop me off at a corner” and reveals that he doesn’t have good insurance. After noticing

a cough and stressed breathing in the ambulance, the EMT has Walter take a magnetic

resonance imaging (MRI) scan at the hospital. The MRI evidences inoperable lung

cancer.

136

At the White’s home later, Skyler is talking with an apparent bill collector about a

payment. Apparently, a public high school teacher’s salary doesn’t really make the ends

of the month meet. Walter doesn’t tell Skyler about the collapse or the cancer diagnosis.

The next day, Walter angrily quits his job at the car wash. Later, at home, Walter calls

Hank and asks about the offer to ride along.

Presumably the following afternoon, Walter is in a ride-along with Hank and his

partner, Steve Gomez. They bust a methamphetamine (meth) manufacturing lab and

arrest the home chemist, Emilio, because the DEA has a tip. Walter asks to take a look at

the “lab,” but notices a former student, Jesse Pinkman, escaping from the house next door

to the site of the lab. Walter discovers where Jesse lives and goes to Jesse’s house. After

the initial greeting, Walter suggests to Jesse that Walter’s chemistry knowledge and

Jesse’s street knowledge of selling meth could be lucrative. Walter goes to his school and

steals the requisite glassware for manufacturing meth. Jesse suggests a recreational

vehicle (RV) that would be a suitable portable meth laboratory. Walter has hatched a plan

to manufacture and sell meth, so he can leave a nest egg for the White family after his

death.

In the next scene, Walt Jr. goes shopping for jeans with Walter and Skyler. Walt

Jr. is struggling with putting the jeans on in the dressing room, and Walter comes into the

dressing room to help Walt Jr. This is the disabled person as a burden stereotype making

an appearance (Barnes 1992, p. 30). The scene switches to Walt Jr. in the store, checking

out the jeans in a mirror. There is a group of a few typical people in the store, and they

are making fun of Walt Jr., which enforces the society model of disabilities. Walter glares

at the trio making fin of Walt Jr., and Walter is concocting a reaction up in his mind.

137

Walter leaves the store, and Skyler suggests to Walt Jr. to ignore the people that are

laughing at him.

Walter enters the store from the other entrance and knocks the person that was

vocally harassing Walt Jr. the ground, grinding his foot into the person’s calf muscle.

Walter lets the person up, and the other person is larger in stature than Walter. The

typically mild-mannered Walter, to the horror of Skyler, but to the delight of Walt Jr.,

attempts to provoke the much younger person into a fight. That scene is where Walter

“breaks bad” and is a plot point for the entire series. This is solidly in the social model of

disability, as Walt Jr. was being mocked and ostracized because of his disability.

Later, in the Navaho Nation reservation, Walter and Jesse are going to

manufacture meth in the RV Jesse purchased. Walter disrobes, except for his underwear:

white cotton briefs, known as “tighty whiteys.” Jesse brings out a video camera to capture

the scene, which Walter immediately ends. Walter manufactures very pure meth, and

Jesse is impressed. Jesse wants to ingest the meth Walter manufactured, but Walter says

not to ingest what they have made. Jesse is hesitant but agrees and sets up a meeting with

a drug dealer, Crazy Eight, to distribute the meth.

In the next scene, Crazy Eight drives up where Walter and Jesse are set up to

manufacture meth with his cousin, Emilio, who was the person arrested on Walter’s ride-

along. Crazy Eight and Emilio are there to kill Walter and Jesse, but Walter says he will

teach them how to create pure meth, such that Walter manufactures. Jesse is unconscious

on the desert ground. In the mobile lab, Walter tricks Crazy Eight and Emilio, and sets up

a chemical reaction to poison them in the “lab.” Walter frantically gets Jesse into the RV

and drives away – this is the initial scene in context.

138

Walter eventually discloses his cancer diagnosis to his family and tries to hide his

life as a drug manufacturer. Often, his outward expression about his criminal life is that

he is trying to provide for his family, but that falls at the end of the series. Walter is

engaged in a criminal enterprise because he enjoys the atmosphere and the game aspect,

at the essence of the character. What seems like a typical procedural detective show on

the surface belies some of the underlying issues, but this is not that analysis. This analysis

of the first episode of the series is to provide a sketch of the major characters and to set-

up how those character’s identification might change over the series.

Walter Junior

Walt Jr. is Skyler and Walter White’s first child. Walt Jr. has cerebral palsy and is

played by actor R.J. Mitte, who also has cerebral palsy. Mitte’s cerebral palsy is not as

severe as the disability he plays Walt Jr. (Walter White Jr.). Walt Jr. is a typical high

school student, who is often with his friend Louis Corbett. Walt Jr. has a slight speech

impediment and walks with the assistance of Lofstrand arm crutches.

Walter Junior and Disability Stereotypes

In season one, episode five, Gray Matter, at the end of a silent and tense

breakfast, Walt Jr. stands up from the table, and Walter asks him if he is ready to go to

school. Walt Jr. replies that he’s “taking the bus.” Walt Jr. is upset about Walter’s cancer

diagnosis, and Walt Jr. thinks Walter is being weak for not wanting to try to fight the

cancer diagnosis with treatment. Walt Jr. is distancing himself from Walter.

Later, Walt Jr. and some friends are shown outside a gas station, trying to get

someone to purchase beer for them. One of the acquaintances suggests that Walt Jr.

should ask someone to purchase the beer, and Walt Jr. asks why he should be the one to

139

do the asking. One of the friends says, “Give me the crutches and I’ll ask.” Without more

context, the assumption would be that the crutches would make him appear pitiful or

worthy of charity. Walter Jr. does ask someone to purchase beer for them, and the person

is an off-duty policeman. The policeman makes Walt Jr. call his dad, but instead of

calling Walter, he calls Hank. Hank tells Walt Jr. that it is “not cool” that he called Hank

instead of Walter to pick him up from the police station. At home, Skyler expresses anger

at Walt Jr. for his actions, and Walt Jr. goes to his room. Hank suggests Skyler not tell

Walter about Walt Jr’s actions. Hank suggests Walt Jr. is acting out because of Walter’s

cancer diagnosis.

Later in the episode, the Whites and the Schraders are at the White’s house, and

they are staging an intervention of sorts to convince Walter to undergo cancer treatment.

When Walt Jr. speaks, he says the entire exercise is “bullshit.” Walt Jr. is angry at Walter

and calls him a “pussy.” Walt Jr. is mad that Walter is giving up on life, and asks him,

“What if you gave up on me?” Walt Jr. continues by picking up one of his Lofstrand arm

crutches and reminds Walter that being a teenager with cerebral palsy is hard and berates

Walter for being “scared of a little chemotherapy.”

The first scene in this episode is free from any stereotypes, and just evidences a

typical boy that is dealing with his father’s cancer diagnosis. The scene with Walt. Jr. at

the convivence store is stereotypical on one hand, but also typical. Walt Jr. is certainly

acting out by trying to have someone purchase beer for him and the friends, but that is not

a stereotype of a disability representation but is more of the action a typical teenager

might attempt. The stereotype comes in the disability as pitiful form, when the unnamed

friend seems to be suggesting that the key for the trio being successful in their quest for

140

beer would be to illicit pity for someone disabled that used arm crutches to walk. The

scene with Walter’s “intervention” of sorts is a reverse on the disabled person as their

own worst enemy trope, which, as Barnes (1992) states, is where a disabled person could

rise above and meet a challenge with strength rather than self-pity with help from the

well-meaning able-bodied friend (p. 29). In the above scenario, instead of the typical

character giving the get-tough speech to the lowly disabled character, Walt Jr. delivers

the message, with his very pointed question to Walter, “What if you gave up on me?”

In season two, episode four, Down, Walter and Walt Jr. are alone in the house.

Walt Jr. tells Walter good morning, and asks about Skyler, who has gone. Walt Jr. asks,

“Where’s breakfast?” Walter suggests the two of them go do “something fun.” The

“something fun” is Walter teaching Walt Jr. how to drive in an abandoned parking lot.

Walter is complimentary of Walt Jr.’s driving, and Walt Jr. tells Walter that “Louis has

been helping me.” Walt Jr. is driving with his right foot on the gas pedal, and the left foot

on the brake, because “it’s way easier.” Walter stops Walt Jr. from that and tries to get

Walt Jr. to only use his right foot for the gas and the brake. Walt Jr. is jerking the car and

says, “I can’t do this. My legs don’t work that way.” Walter tells Walt Jr. not to “set

limits” for himself. Walt Jr. takes off again, and in a moment of frustration, gets confused

about the gas and brake, eventually stopping just as the car hits a traffic barrel. It is

interesting that Walt Jr. would not be learning to drive a car without hand controls, as

certainly it would seem he would have to have accessible hand controls to drive as a

restriction on his license. Also, Walter’s cheerleading about Walt Jr. setting limits seems

a bit misplaced.

141

During the driving lesson, there seems to be two stereotypes playing out. When

Walt Jr. initially is driving, he is using both feet, which is not typically how people drive

a car. This is making Walt Jr. a burden, because if he cannot drive a car, he will always

rely on someone to drive him where he needs to be. Walter admonishes Walt Jr. for

saying, “I can’t do this” regarding Walter telling him to use his right foot for the gas and

the brake. When Walter tells Walt Jr. not to “set limits for himself,” the disabled person

as their own worst enemy stereotype comes into focus. Walter is playing the able-bodied

person that gives a get-tough speech to a disabled person. Walt Jr.’s statement that “my

legs don’t work that way” is self-pity over not having “typical” use of his legs, and

Walter’s admonition about setting limits is there to give poor disabled Walt Jr. courage to

succeed.

The other stereotype that Walt Jr.’s character enforces is the disabled character as

a curio. As mentioned above, Barnes (1992) sees a disabled character as atmosphere or

curio is when a disabled representation is used to add impact to a scene, reducing

disabled people to oddities (p. 24). However, Walt Jr.’s disability has no bearing on the

series. This is analogous to Herman Gray’s (1995) statement about The Huxtables and

The Cosby Show, in that their representation is powerful because the Huxtables are a

typical upper-middle-class family “that happens to be black” (Dates, 1990; Dyson, 1989;

Fuller, 1992; Gray, 1989; Greenly, 1987; Jhally and Lewis, 1992; as cited by Gray, p.

80). Walter White, Jr. is a typical high school teenager that happens to be disabled. It is

possible that Walt Jr. is represented as disabled to give Walter some justification for

breaking the law, but there is no indication of that in the series.

142

Walter Junior and the Medical Model of Disabilities Versus the Social Model of

Disabilities

There are no scenes where Walt Jr. enforces the medical model of disabilities.

There are few scenes involving Walt Jr. that touch on any disability models at all. One of

the notable scenes that enforce the society model of disabilities comes in season one,

episode one, Pilot, when Walt Jr. is harassed by the people at the clothing store buying

jeans. That almost fits the disabled person as a crime victim stereotype. But this certainly

fits the social model of disabilities in that the people harassing Walt Jr. would certainly

not seem to go out of their way to accommodate for Walt Jr. in anyway. In addition, by

showing a scene where a disabled person is being harassed by typical people, it shows

that disabled people are not wanted in the typical world, and just being present at a place

puts a disabled person at risk of being harassed.

The other time when Walt Jr. enforces the social model of disabilities comes in an

interaction with Hank. In season three, episode twelve, Half Measures, Walt Jr., Marie,

and Hank are playing cards in Hank’s hospital room. Hank was shot and has incurred a

spinal injury as the result of a shoot-out. Walt Jr. and Hank are making small talk, and

Marie tells Walt Jr. that the doctor said that Hank could leave anytime “he wants to.”

Hank asserts that he won’t be leaving unless he walks out of the hospital. That is a

complete enforcement of the medical model by Hank, as the only way to move must be

walking, and the only way to walk is through physical therapy. Walt Jr. rhetorically asks

Hank if “people in wheelchairs should be in hospitals?” Walt Jr. then asks, “What about

people on crutches? Maybe I should be in here, too.” This is an example of someone that

is fully enforcing the medical model of disabilities, Hank in this case, coming face to face

143

with the social model of disabilities, represented by Walt Jr. In Walt Jr.’s situation, he

would not be able to walk without the Lofstrand arm crutches, while Hank’s insistence on

walking won’t even allow him to use a wheelchair for mobility.

Positive Representations of Disability by Walter Junior

One could argue that the whole of Walt Jr.’s character is a positive representation

of disability, in that Walt Jr. is just a teenage boy that happens to have cerebral palsy.

There are a few notable scenes that exemplify the positive representation of disabilities

by Walt Jr.

Walt Jr. is at breakfast, predictably, with Walter and Skyler in season one, episode

two, The Cat’s in the Bag. Walter is relating a story about senior girls presenting photos

for the yearbook with excessive cleavage because of a special bra. Walt Jr. laughs and

says “the Wonderbra.” This is a positive representation of disability in that while Walt Jr.

is disabled, he is aware of fashion trends, and certainly knows about something young

girls might wear to enhance a bustline. Similarly, Season one, episode seven, A No-

Rough-Stuff-Type Deal, Walt Jr. is capturing video footage at Skyler’s baby shower. A

typical interaction with the family and party guests. As Walt Jr. is capturing video, in a

very typical moment, he captures a woman showing a lot of cleavage standing to his side.

In season one, episode four, Cancer Man, Walt Jr. confronts Walter about his

behavior. Walter has been diagnosed with cancer and has started manufacturing

methamphetamine (meth) to provide for a pregnant Skyler and Walt Jr. Walter is trying

to hide his secret life and is not doing a very good job. Skyler and Walter are talking

about treatment options for Walter’s cancer. The out of pocket expense is significant, and

Walter suggests that he wouldn’t want to leave Skyler with a large amount of debt in the

144

event the treatment was not successful, and Walter succumbed to cancer. Walt Jr.

overhears Walter and Skyler talking, and yells, “then why don’t you just fucking die,

already!” A teenage boy would be angry and scared at the thought of a parent dying, and

probably angrier if the parent didn’t try to fight a disease to remain alive to be with the

family. A perfectly normal interaction a teenage child might have with a parent in the

same situation.

In season two, episode ten, Over, Skyler organized a gathering of people to

celebrate Walter’s cancer being in remission. Walter, Walt Jr., and Hank are sitting

around a table. Walter pours himself and Hank a shot of tequila, and pours Walt Jr. a

shot, too. Walt Jr. starts coughing after drinking the shot, and Hank laughs, while patting

him on the back. Walter pours another round for all three, and Hank reminds Walter that

Walt Jr. is only sixteen. Walt Jr. is looking at Hank, and Walter asks Walt Jr., “What are

you looking at him for?” Walt Jr. and Walter drink their shots, without Hank. Walter

starts to pour Walt Jr. another shot, but Hank puts his hand over Walt Jr.’s cup, but

Walter continues, and pours tequila on Hank’s hand. The atmosphere is tense, and Hank

suggests Walt Jr. not drink the shot Walter poured him, as Hank gets up and takes away

the tequila. Walter yells after Hank, “Hey! Bring the bottle back.” That makes Walter

very angry, and he gets up and angrily confronts Hank. Hank tries to diffuse the situation,

but Walter insists on the tequila. Walt Jr. then falls out of his chair and starts to vomit.

Walter sits back down and drinks the shot he poured. This seems like a very typical

teenage boy reaction, and the scene does not have any dependence on Walt Jr.’s

disability. Later, Walter apologizes about being intoxicated and making a scene at the

celebration. Walt Jr. says, “But I kept up, right?” Walt Jr. is seemingly proud of drinking

145

too much and throwing up in the pool. Seems like a very typical father and son reaction,

disability or not.

In season four, episode ten, Salud, Walter has moved out of the White’s home and

is living in a condominium because Skyler wants to insulate the rest of the family from

Walter’s life and interactions. Walt Jr. is upset and goes to Walter’s condominium.

Walter and Jesse Pinkman, his meth manufacturing partner, had a fistfight in the previous

episode, so Walter is bloody and bruised. Walter tells Walt Jr. that he got into a fight

because of his gambling addiction. Walter, crying, says he “made a mistake.” Walt Jr.

tries to comfort Walter and helps Walter to bed. In Walter’s groggy state, he mistakenly

calls Walt Jr. “Jesse.” Walt Jr. spends the night at Walter’s condominium, and Walter

tells him that he doesn’t want him to remember Walter in the state he was in last night.

Walter tells Walt Jr. a story about seeing his father dying of Huntington’s disease as a

young child. Walter said he was scared of Walt Jr. remembering Walter as hollow and

empty. Walt Jr. says that last night as a memory would be good, because at least Walter

was “real.” Perfectly typical interaction between Walter and Walt Jr.

In season five, episode fourteen, Ozymandias, Walt Jr. is manning the cash

in private with Skyler and says that “son looks like he can hold down the fort.” Marie

tells Skyler that Walter has been arrested by Hank. Marie is under the assumption that

Hank has arrested Walter based on Hank’s information to Marie earlier in the day,

however, the reality is that Hank and Steve Gomez were killed in a shoot-out in the

desert. After Marie leaves, Skyler talks to Walt Jr. in the car wash office, and tearily tells

Walt Jr. the truth about Walter. Walt Jr. is breathing heavy and he tells Skyler, “You’re

146

completely out of your mind.” Walt Jr. is furious that he wasn’t told the truth much

sooner. Walt Jr. accuses Skyler of being “a liar.” Walt Jr. declares the story “bullshit” and

says he wants to speak with Walter. Walt Jr. is angry and storms out of the office.

Later in the episode, Skyler, Holly, Skyler and Walter White’s baby girl, and Walt

Jr. arrive at home, as Walter is hurriedly packing bags to get them out of town. Walt Jr.

peppers Walter with questions, but in the heat of the moment, Walter waives them off.

Skyler is confused, because Marie told her that Walter was in custody and repeatedly

asks, “Where is Hank?” Skyler accuses Walter of killing Hank. Walt Jr. asks, “You killed

Hank!?” Walt Jr. is demanding Walter talk to him. Skyler grabs a kitchen knife and

demands that Walter “get out.” Walter tries talking to Skyler, and moves closer to her,

but Skyler slashes Walter on the hand with the knife. Walter and Skyler tangle on the

floor over possession of the knife as Walt Jr. demands they stop. Walter gets the upper

hand in the fight, and Walt Jr. pulls Walter off of Skyler and jumps in the way of Walter

trying to get at Skyler. Walt Jr. gets his cellular phone and calls the police, which makes

Walter grab Holly and run out of the house. The scene starts with Walt Jr. working in the

White’s car wash, which is a positive representation, just a normal teenager with a part-

time Saturday job. The rest of the scenes mentioned are far from typical, and Walt Jr.

predictably reacts with shock and anger. At the White home, Walt Jr. pulling Walter from

Skyler would also be a seemingly typical reaction.

In season five, episode fifteen, Granite State, Walt Jr. is taking a test in class, but

is called to the office over the school intercom, for a call from Marie. Walter is the one

that made the call, however. Walt Jr. is shocked, angry, and awash with emotions. Walter

tries to rationalize his actions to Walt Jr. by saying that he was just looking out for his

147

family. Walter tells Walt Jr. that he is sending money to Walt Jr.’s friend, Louis Corbett,

for Walt Jr., Holly, and Skyler to use. Walt Jr. angrily accuses Walter of killing Hank.

Walter Jr. eventually asks Walter, “Why are you still alive? Why won’t you just die

already? Just die!”

After Walter’s nature is revealed to Walt Jr., it would be very typical for Walt Jr.

to be angry and confused. After the confrontation where Skyler and Walter fight at home,

certainly Walt Jr. would be less than happy to hear from Walter.

Walt Jr. is a positive representation of disability in Breaking Bad. There are very

few instances when a disability stereotype is used to govern the relationship with Walt Jr.

and the world around him. Walt Jr.’s characterization of the social model of disability is

also a very positive and forward approach for a disabled character. Walt Jr. is a high

school aged boy, going through the same things many high school buys encounter: peer

pressure to drink underage, learning to drive, awkward or strained relationships with

parents occasionally, among other characteristics.

Hank and Marie Schrader

Hank Schrader is married to Marie, Skyler White’s sister. Hank is an up and

coming DEA agent, is full of bravado, and is a success at his job. Marie is an x-ray

technician. Hank takes Walter on a drug bust in the first episode, Pilot, where Walter sees

Jesse Pinkman, a former student, and Walter gets the idea to manufacture meth.

In season three, episode seven, One Minute, Hank assaults Jesse Pinkman. In

season three, episode eight, I See You, Hank is suspended from the DEA over the

Pinkman incident, and he is forced to turn in his gun because of the suspension. After

Hank is suspended from the DEA, he stops by a shopping center to buy gifts for Marie.

148

As Hank is leaving the shopping center, he receives a telephone call. An electronically

altered voice tells Hank that two men, Lionel and Marco Salamanca (The Cousins), are

coming to kill him, and he has one minute to leave the parking lot. Hank believes the call

to be a prank but looks at the clock in his car and looks around nervously. Hank calls

Gomez, but Gomez does not answer his phone. Hank leaves a message, suggesting that

Gomez made the threatening call, but he also wants Gomez to call him. Hank is

anxiously looking around, and goes for his pistol, forgetting he was relieved of that at the

DEA office earlier.

Hank looks up, and sees The Cousins walking toward his car. One of The Cousins

shoots the rear window out of Hank’s car’s and shoots Hank in the arm. Hank backs his

car into the cousin, gravely wounding him. The other cousin shoots out Hank’s driver’s

side window. Hank is shot a couple of times in the stomach area by a cousin in the

ensuing shoot-out, but eventually kills the cousin with a shot to the head. This incident

causes Hank to lose the ability walk, presumably with a spinal cord injury. Hank’s

disability representation is stereotypical in a few places, but the most significant negative

characteristic about Hank is how much he and Marie enforce the medical model of

disabilities. Hank is shown disabled only temporarily, so he fits Longmore’s (1987)

reoccurring theme, that the star often incurs a disabling injury or condition, but generally

only temporarily (p. 65).

Hank Schrader and the Problems with Hank’s Disability Representation

Before Hank is disabled, in season one, episode three, And the Bag’s in the River,

Hank’s wife, Skyler’s sister Marie infers from a phone conversation that Walt Jr. is

smoking marijuana. Hank suggests that Walter or Skyler intervene, but Marie suggests

149

that Hank could take Walt Jr. along for a ride and scare him straight, which Hank does.

Hank takes Walt Jr. to a seedy motel and calls over a supposed prostitute. The woman

asks Walt Jr. if he is disabled, and Hank replies “he broke his leg playin’ football.” This

shows Hank being embarrassed about Walt Jr. being disabled or that Hank is ignoring

that Walt Jr. has a legitimate disability. The event plays into what Barnes (1992) refers to

as a stereotype of omission, disabled people aren’t able to participate in life since there

are so few disabled characters represented (Cumberbatch and Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as

cited by Barnes, 1992, p. 34).

In season three episode nine, Kafkaesque, Hank is in the hospital recovering after

surgery from the shooting incident. Hank is despondent over the spinal injury. Marie says

she will seek press coverage if Hank doesn’t get the PT and health care “a hero” like

Hank deserves. Marie declares, “He is not going to be in a wheelchair at forty-three.” Not

Marie so much, but Hank approaches being disabled as a death sentence. For Hank, a

disability is repugnant, and he can’t fathom living life disabled, especially if he can no

longer walk. Hank feels useless and doesn’t want people to see him as disabled. Both

Marie and Hank represent the disabled person as a burden stereotype mentioned by

Barnes (1992 p. 30).

In season four, episode one, Box Cutter, Marie is sitting in her car in front of the

Schrader house. Marie appears to dread going inside the house. As Marie enters the

house, Hank is engaged in his new hobby, collecting minerals. Hank looks depressed and

has not shaved in a few days as he bids on minerals on an Internet website. Marie walks

into the bedroom and asks Hank about his PT session, which she hears “was very good.”

Hank grunts in acknowledgement. Marie continues that the therapist told her that Hank

150

“broke new ground.” Hank is sullen with his arms folded across his chest, and he repeats

“broke new ground.” Marie asks Hank to tell her, and Hank says, “I walked sixteen feet

in twenty minutes.” Hank then goes on to sarcastically compare that to yesterday’s

session. Hank says, “I need the thing” which is his request for a bedpan, as he answers

Marie’s inquiry of “numero uno?” with “dos.” Marie helps Hank roll over and she places

the bedpan under him.

A lot of that scene is not realistic. The bathroom in the house would have been

modified for access with a wheelchair. Hank would have been taught how to roll over and

how to transfer into and out of his wheelchair as first skills from a physical therapist.

Hank is sullen and defeated. What is being constructed with Hank is the “own worst

enemy” stereotype moment that Barnes mentions (1992, p. 29), with an able-bodied

person delivering a “get tough” speech. Hank is resisting PT and any bit of a return to a

typical life because he is no longer able-bodied. This does fit Hank’s character, as he

denies that Walt Jr. is disabled earlier, and talks about being disabled like it is a death

sentence.

In season four, episode two, Thirty-Eight Snub, Hank is shown examining his

mineral purchases late at night with a lamp. Marie is in bed beside him, and she asks

Hank if he is “OK.” Marie mentions it is very late. Hank is sarcastic and biting toward

Marie’s inquiry, and states, “The last I counted, there are four bedrooms in this house, if

I’m keeping you awake and all.” Marie, resigned to the fact that Hank isn’t making life

easier for her, attempts to go back to sleep.

Later in the episode, Hank is shown in PT, wearing white, Velcro closure athletic

shoes, and walking with a walker. The therapist, Chuck, excitedly says, “Way to go

151

Hank, way to soldier up!” Hank is struggling and is sweating. Chuck is doing his best to

be a cheerleader for Hank, and Marie yells, “Look at you, way to go honey!” Hank walks

into the bedroom and sits. Hank says excitedly, “Hells yeah!” as he gives Chuck a high

five. Marie cheers and gets a high five from Chuck, but Hank does not excitedly give

Marie a high five when she offers her hand. As Marie walks Chuck out, he remarks

“great session, lots of positive energy.” Marie agrees with Chuck and tells him “it’s so

great to see that.” Marie tells Chuck that he has “a way with him (Hank).” Marie walks

into the bedroom and tells Hank that he was “so strong today.” Marie tries to make other

conversation, but Hank tells her “get out.”

The writers are still setting up Hank’s “own worst enemy” moment, by Hank

behaving miserably toward Marie. Hank’s “walking” is unrealistic for a couple of

reasons, the first of all being that Hank is not wearing any ankle-foot orthosis, typically

called a leg brace. No therapist would allow a paraplegic to attempt to walk with a walker

without any foot orthosis to stabilize a patient’s foot while walking. Hank is shown

walking on twisted ankles, which would typically cause someone to tumble and fall.

Hank and Marie are heavily enforcing the medical model of disability. Surely Hank

would be grieving the loss of his ability to walk, and his grief and anger would probably

cause him to be moody and coarse, occasionally.

In season four, episode seven, Problem Dog, Marie is at the car wash, talking to

Skyler. Skyler asks her about Hank and his recovery. Marie tells Skyler that Hank’s

mood has improved, and “he is like a maniac with PT.” Walt Jr. drives Hank to a fried

chicken restaurant, Dos Hermanos, that Gus Fring, the local drug “boss” uses as a front.

152

Miraculously, Hank can now walk with a walker, and no orthosis. Hank remarks, “Jesus,

ain’t we a pair.”

Later in the episode, Hank walks into the DEA office, this time using a cane.

Miraculous! Hank is in a meeting with Gomez and George Merkert, the agent in charge

of the Albuquerque DEA office. Merkert is very complimentary of Hank walking again,

and remarks that he “can’t tell you what that means to all of us.” Hank says it is because

of “clean living and vitamin pills.” It seems that people that work for the DEA really see

walking as the only method of moving from one place to another. Hank’s rapid recovery

is very problematic. In a matter of a month, or less, Hank has gone from not walking, to

using a walker with no leg braces, to using a cane. That would suggest to people that are

watching that have no experience with a spinal cord injury that someone in a wheelchair

just didn’t put in the hard work and time with physical therapy.

Walter has seemingly become Hank’s chauffer in season four, episode eleven,

Crawl Space, as Hank does not drive. A lot of that is to build tension between Walter and

Hank, but part of that is also that Hank has not learned to drive a car with appropriate

hand controls after his injury. Walter ends up purposefully wrecking his car, with Hank

as a passenger, to avoid suspicion about Water’s drug manufacturing. The White family

is at the Schrader’s house, and everyone is checking up on Hank. Marie ends Walter’s

position as Hank’s chauffeur. Hank says he ordered a “gimp mobile,” a handicapped

accessible car. Hank’s character enforces Barnes’s “disabled as a burden” stereotype,

because Hank says he “needs to stop being a damn burden to everyone.” As Hank has

stated he is getting a car equipped with hand controls, maybe this is a bit positive, too.

153

In season five, episode four, Fifty-One, Hank is back at work, full-time. Hank

walks with a limp. A DEA administrator is in part-time as Merkert’s replacement and

offers that job to Hank. This moment could have been a great representation of disability,

in that a disabled person becoming the head administrator of a DEA office would be a big

breakthrough. However, Hank’s disability or the diversity of having a disabled special

agent are never mentioned. The stereotype at play here is Barnes that disabled people are

“incapable of participating in community life,” which Barnes calls a stereotype of

omission (Cumberbatch and Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as cited by Barnes, 1992, p. 34).

Omission because as Barnes states, “less than one and a half percent of all characters

portrayed” are disabled (Cumberbatch and Negrene, 1992, p. 136 as cited by Barnes,

1992, p. 34). Hank could be a strong representation of disability in a very strong

character, but the decision of the writers on the show to ignore Hank’s disability is

problematic. Hank, though still disabled, does not have any interactions about his ability

or lack of ability for the duration of the series.

Hank and Marie and the Medical Model of Disabilities Versus the Social Model of

Disabilities

Hank is in the hospital post-surgery in season three episode nine, Kafkaesque, and

is in pain. The doctor comes into the room, and starts testing Hank’s sensation on his feet,

and Hank indicates that he cannot feel anything. Hank indicates that he can feel

something about half-way between his ankle and his knee on the front of his shin. Marie

asks the doctor if Hank’s sensation is good news, and the doctor mentions that Hank

appears to have some nerve function returning. Marie excitedly asks the doctor “when

will we get him walking again?”

154

In another room without Hank, the doctor tells Marie that Hank will need “many

months of hard work,” and even then, the odds are “not great.” Marie suggests that the

doctor can’t know for sure, and Hank should get physical therapy (PT) seven days a week

as soon as possible. The social worker tells Marie that Hank’s insurance covers four

sessions a week. Marie asks the doctor that if Hank had more PT sessions, “would it be

more likely that he would walk?” The doctor tells Marie that he could not say that with

any certainty. The social worker tells Marie that she should not go out of the network for

PT, and then mentions all of the extra costs involved with a disability, like home health

care and modifications for access. Marie is undaunted and wants the best physical

therapists available for Hank.

With Hank’s law enforcement experience, and Marie’s medical experience, they

both heavily enforce the medical model of disabilities. Being disabled is not what anyone

wants, but Hank and Marie hope for a miracle for Hank to walk again. I guess

stereotypically, a law enforcement agent might put more trust and faith in institutions like

medical doctors and treatment to cure any medical issues.

In season three, episode eleven, Abiquiu, Hank is suspended above a walking

platform, in a PT session. The physical therapist is trying to get Hank to take a step, but it

is too painful for him. Marie suggests that pain “is weakness leaving your body.” Hank is

frustrated and in pain and ends the PT session. Walt Jr. tries to be uplifting, telling Hank

“you can do it,” but Hank is rude to Walt Jr. and asks him to leave.

Marie goes to see Hank in the hospital and tells him he will be released at the end

of the week. Hank asserts that he isn’t leaving the hospital “‘til I’m well.” Hank seems to

be insisting he will stay in the hospital until he can walk again, a full-throated

155

endorsement of the medical model of disabilities. Marie tells Hank he is getting stronger,

and he can do PT at home. Marie tells Hank she made some changes and put a hospital

bed in Hank’s room. Hank gets very angry at Marie and tells her to “get that out of my

house.” Hank then tells Marie, “I leave this hospital, when I walk out of here,

understand?”

People grieve the loss of function and a typical life in different ways, but the

reality is that no matter how much physical therapy a person undertakes, some things are

not possible. Hank and Marie completely reject the social model of disabilities, because

the things that a disabled person depends on to live with a disability, such as an

accessible bathroom, a lightweight wheelchair, an accessible car, and other life tools are

rejected out of hand, mostly by Hank. Interesting that the bathroom was not accessible,

but Marie got a hospital bed for Hank.

Positive Representations of Disability by Hank

In season three, episode twelve, Half Measures, Marie is giving Hank a bath in

the hospital bed. Marie asks if Hank wants to be “lying in a hospital bed.” Marie tells

Hank it is time to go home, but Hank insists, “not until I’m well.” Marie begins

manipulating Hank’s penis with her hand, and bets Hank that if he obtains an erection, he

will go home. Hank asks what that will prove, and Marie responds that will prove that

“you’re not completely hopeless.” Hank decides to take Marie’s bet. The next scene

shows a sullen Hank in a wheelchair, being rolled out of his hospital room, with a smiling

Marie behind him. Even though Marie is seemingly questioning whether Hank has any

worth if he is not sexually aroused, this does show Hank in a positive sexual light, rather

than the sexually abnormal stereotype that has perpetuated in media.

156

In season four, episode three, Open House, Hank is watching pornography when

Marie enters the house, which could be seen as the sexually abnormal stereotype for a

disabled person. Hank grabs the television remote and hurriedly turns the television off.

Marie has gone out her way to get things that Hank will appreciate, but Hank’s only

comment is that Marie got the wrong snacks. Hank’s behavior is insufferable.

Just afterward, Albuquerque detective Tim Roberts comes to the Schrader house

and asks Marie to see Hank. Detective Roberts wants to get Hank’s help regarding a

murder with illegal drugs as an angle. Hank quips, “What am I, Ironside?” This is the

first hint that Hank is being accepting of his disability. Self-deprecating humor is typical,

and Hank making a joke at his expense is a very typical event. However, Hank asks if

Detective Robbins is giving Hank something to do out of charity. Robbins tells Hank that

because of Hank’s background with the DEA, that Hank’s knowledge could be useful.

Hank tells Robbins that he’s “lying there like third base . . . I’m not even useful to

myself.” Robbins asks Hank to reconsider, and Hank tells him “whatever” and motions

for Robbins to leave the portfolio on a table. Hank gazes at the portfolio after Robbins

leaves, but turns on the television. Later, Hank grabs part of Robbin’s portfolio, and starts

intensely reading the material.

Rather than having an able-bodied person give Hank a “get tough” speech, the

writers had Hank to use the portfolio from Robbins as the impetus to cause Hank to move

back into society. This scene is positive because Hank, while questioning his usefulness,

does make a joke at his expense. In addition, Hank’s attention to the information that

Robbins dropped off inspires Hank to want to start working again at the DEA.

157

In season four, episode four, Bullet Points, Walter, Skyler, and Walt Jr. are having

dinner at the Schrader’s house. Hank mentions the gravity of Walter’s “gambling

problem,” and suggests that if Walter wants to talk, he “isn’t going anywhere” and

motions about his wheelchair. Walter also tells Hank that if he wants to talk, he can tell

Walter anything. This leads Hank to get the portfolio out to ask Walter some questions.

This scene is a very positive scene for Hank. Hank is fully engaged in the portfolio from

Robbins, and his DEA passion for finding illegal drugs and drug dealers is being re-

kindled, regardless of his disability. The portfolio is a great catalyst for Hank to become

engaged in society again.

In season four, episode five, Shotgun, Detective Robbins arrives at the Schrader

house to see Hank. Robbins tells Hank he will keep him apprised of any updated

information about the case. Marie comes home, and sees Hank pouring over some papers.

Upon asking Hank about the papers, Hank says Detective Robbins dropped off some

additional work on the murder case on which Hank was assisting. Hank apologizes for

making a bit of a mess. Marie is glad to see Hank interested in working again. Once

again, a very positive representation. Hank is no longer belligerent and sarcastic with

Marie and is not slovenly anymore.

Hank is a complex and mixed representation of disabilities, mostly negative.

While Hank’s character doesn’t evidence a lot of stereotypes, the biggest problem with

Hank is that being disabled is so distasteful to him, and walking is so important, that any

of the positive aspects Hank could have represented for disabilities are outweighed by the

overt reliance on the medical model of disabilities. Between Hank denying that Walt Jr.

was disabled, to Hank’s insistence of walking out of the hospital, to the writers

158

completely ignoring the positive aspect of a person with a spinal cord injury being an

administrator for the DEA, Hank is a mixed representation of disabilities at best.

Hector Salamanca

Hector Salamanca is the uncle, “tio,” of one of the drug dealers in the series, Tuco

Salamanca. Hector has a backstory and significant history in the series, but that is

unknown at this point. Hector uses a wheelchair for mobility and does not speak as the

result of a stroke. Prior to the stroke, Hector was a very violent and sadistic drug “boss.”

Hector makes his first appearance in season two, episode two, Grilled. Walter and Jesse

Pinkman, Walter’s chemistry student cum drug manufacturing partner, have been

kidnapped by Tuco Salamanca. Tuco takes Walter and Jesse to Hector’s house in the

desert, because Tuco believes Walter and Jesse are working for the DEA.

The first shot with Hector shows him in the remote desert house, watching

television. Hector has an oxygen line and appears to be unresponsive to any stimulus.

Assuming Hector is unable to comprehend anything, Walter and Jesse hatch a plan to kill

Tuco by poisoning his food. However, Hector has a brass bell affixed to the arm of his

wheelchair and uses that to communicate. Before Tuco eats the poisoned food, Hector

rings his bell to get Tuco’s attention. Hector slings the poisoned food onto the floor. Tuco

gets angry and questions Hector’s intentions. Hector weakly points his finger toward

Walter.

Later, Hector repeatedly rings his bell to get Tuco’s attention, while Hector is

looking directly at Walter. Tuco suggests to Hector that he doesn’t like Walter, and

Hector rings his bell once for “yes.” The absence of a bell ring is Hector’s way of

communicating “no.” Tuco asks Hector if he doesn’t trust Walter and Jesse, and Hector

159

rings the bell. Walter and Jesse are getting more and more nervous with every bell ring.

Tuco asks if Walter and Jesse did something that Hector didn’t like, and Hector rings the

bell. Tuco gets angry and starts fighting with Jesse, and they spill out of the house onto

the grounds. Walter and Jesse manage to incapacitate Tuco, and they leave the house.

Hank kills Tuco outside of the house, and the episode ends with Hector ringing his bell in

the house, as the scene fades to black.

Hector is the strongest disability representation in this series. Initially, Hector is

set up to be an object of pity, or merely a curio to add to the insanity of the setting and the

story. However, Hector uses his eyes and his bell to communicate well with Tuco and

others. When Hector pushed the poisoned food off of the table, in an act of self-

preservation, his desire to live does not evidence anyone sad with life, pitiful, evil, or any

of the typical stereotypes. Of course, Hector Salamanca is a sadistic, violent former drug

kingpin, too, but that is unknown about Hector at this point in the series.

In season two, episode three, Bit by a Dead Bee, Jesse is arrested because his car

was at Hector’s house, where the shootout that killed Tuco’s occurred. Jesse is in jail,

being questioned by Hank and his partner, Gomez. You hear Hector’s bell ring off

screen. As Jesse looks into the hall of the DEA office, he sees Hector, who has been

brought in for questioning in connection with Tuco’s killing. Hector briefly looks at

Jesse and then looks down into his lap.

As Hank and Gomez question Hector, Hector has a laser focused stare at Jesse.

Jesse states that Hector is not lucid, and “doesn’t know what planet we’re on!” Gomez

asks Hector if he is on Mars or Saturn, and Hector does not ring his bell. When Gomez

asks if he in on Earth, Hector rings the bell. Gomez asks Hector if Jesse was at his house,

160

and to Jesse’s surprise, Hector does not ring his bell. Hank asks if Jesse was doing

business with Tuco, and Hector does not ring his bell. Hank asks Hector if he will help

them out, and Hector looks at Hank and defecates. As angry as Hector may have been at

Jesse for being involved in killing his nephew, Tuco, Hector’s distaste for the DEA

outweighs that anger. Hector once again is a strong representation in that rather than be

state’s evidence in the killing of his nephew, Hector chooses to disrupt the state’s case.

Gomez mentions to Hank later that Hector is “OG,” and “stroke or no stroke, old school

gang-bang Mexicans don’t help the feds.”

Hector’s next appearance comes in season three, episode two, Caballo Sin

Nombre, at Casa Tranquila, a nursing home where he has been living since Tuco’s death.

Hector is sitting with Lionel and Marco Salamanca, The Cousins. They have a Ouija

board, and Hector is spelling something, by ringing his bell when a Cousin’s finger is on

the letter Hector desires. Hector has spelled “Walter White,” and when one of The

Cousins shows Hector what was spelled, he rings the bell repeatedly, and attempts to

scowl in anger. This is sort of an endorsement of the medical model of disabilities, but

Hector’s character is not making a statement about any models of disability. He is set on

revenge against Gus Fring and will use anything at his disposal to extract revenge, from

The Cousins to later, Walter White.

In season three, episode four, I.F.T., The Cousins take Hector to meet with Gus

Fring and Juan Bolsa, a Mexican “boss.” The meeting is in a trailer, and there is no ramp,

for which Gus apologizes to Hector. Juan explains to Gus the situation with the Mexican

cartel and Gus’s territory. Juan also explains that Hector wants Walter White killed

because of the incident with Tuco, and Hector rings his bell in agreement. Gus suggests

161

that as Walter is working for him now, that Hector should wait to kill Walter, which

angers Hector. Hector starts ringing his bell furiously.

In season four, episode eight, Hermanos, Hector is watching news coverage of

The Cousins death on television at Casa Tranquila. Gus Fring enters the room and pulls

up a chair across from Hector. Fring tells Hector about The Cousins and Juan Bolsa’s

death. The news is making Hector very angry, and he is shaking.

Fring visits Hector again at Casa Tranquila, and asks Hector “is today the day?” A

flashback reveals why Hector and Fring have tension. As the scene switches to present

day, Fring is gloating to Hector about now being in a position of power, and that makes

Hector seethe with anger. Fring pats Hector on the shoulder as he walks away, leaving

Hector to drool on himself.

In season four, episode eleven, Crawl Space, Gus Fring and Jesse Pinkman go to

see to Hector at Casa Tranquila. Fring tells Hector that he has killed some of Hector’s

former drug cartel friends in Mexico. Gus shows Hector a necklace one of Hector’s

friend wore to prove his boasting. Hector is visibly angry and shaking. Gus further tells

Hector that Jesse shot his only grandson, leaving Hector as the last Salamanca in his

blood line. Hector never acknowledges Fring.

In season four, episode thirteen, Face Off, Walter goes to see Hector at Casa

Tranquila. Hector initially gets visibly angry and upset at the sight of Walter. Walter tells

Hector that while Hector would like to see Walter dead, that Walter can help Hector kill

Gus Fring.

Hector gets in touch with the DEA, and arranges a meeting, but only wants to

speak with Hank. At the DEA office, Hector only spells profane words to Hank, so the

162

visit was of no use to Hank. However, Hector’s visit to the DEA office was to alert Gus

Fring’s lookouts, and to draw Fring to Casa Tranquila to visit Hector. When Hector

returns to Casa Tranquila, Walter emerges from the bathroom and confirms that Hector

will help Walter kill Fring.

Gus arrives at Casa Tranquila, and asks Hector, “What kind of man talks to the

DEA? No man.” Fring sits down across from Hector, and one of Fring’s henchmen

prepares a needle meant to kill Hector. Fring continues to berate Hector, referring to him

as a “cripple little rata (rat in Spanish).” Fring gets the needle from the henchman and

tells Hector, “last chance to look at me, Hector.” As Fring starts to inject Hector with the

needle, Hector looks him in the eyes, and starts to tear up, but then gets very angry and

starts ringing his bell. The camera shows wires leading from Hector’s bell to a bomb

Walter has planted under Hector’s wheelchair. Fring notices, and tries to get out, but the

bomb blows up, killing Hector, the henchman, and Fring.

All of Hector’s screen time after his stroke evidences a strong person, that has no

regard for his disability. Hector’s initial scene with Jesse and Walter, shows him playing

a game with them. Hector doesn’t identify Jesse Pinkman to the DEA, because as much

as he might not have liked Pinkman for being involved with killing Tuco, he dislikes the

DEA more. Fring and Hector have a history because many years earlier, Hector killed

Fring’s partner in his restaurant business. Fring enjoyed extracting revenge on Hector’s

cartel and Hector’s friends. Gus reveled in Hector’s family getting killed. And at the end,

Hector takes the opportunity to extract out the ultimate revenge on Fring, killing himself

in the process. The ultimate in agency.

163

Breaking Bad has mostly positive representations of disabilities, save for the

misstep with Hank and his return to work. Had Hank’s disability been given more

attention and texture, Breaking Bad would be even better. Hank and Marie’s enforcement

of the medical model of disabilities is also problematic. Certainly, anyone that has

incurred a spinal injury will need physical therapy, and there is no way to suggest that a

person with a spinal injury would not have any relationship with the medical model of

disabilities. However, walking is not the apex of humanity, and a disability is not a death

sentence. As an external example, Dr. Steven Hawking had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

(ALS), was married twice and fathered three children, in addition also being a best-

selling author and award-winning physicist. Walter Jr. is a typical high school teenager

that has the wants and needs as anyone else, he just happens to have Cerebral Palsy.

While other characters may react to Walt Jr. in a stereotypical manner, Walt Jr. does not

enforce any stereotypical behavior. Hector Salamanca was a brutal, sadistic and cruel

man prior to having a stroke, and he lived his last breath extracting revenge on a rival.

Out of the three series analyzed, Breaking Bad contains the best writing and the best

disability representations.

164

CHAPTER VI – CONCLUSION

The goal of this research was to conduct a close reading and critical discourse

analysis on the prime-time television serials Speechless, Atypical, and Breaking Bad.

What was discovered is that the serials analyzed in this work contained significantly

better representations than most historical serials that were considered in the research

leading up to this analysis. The three serials also contained better representations than

much of the contemporaneous serials researched, as well. All three shows contain

examples of the medical model of disabilities as well as the social model of disabilities.

In addition, while some classic stereotypes of disabilities do appear in all three serials, the

reasons for the stereotypes differed in a few ways.

More often than not, Speechless uses a stereotype to point out the ridiculousness

of the stereotype as it applies to JJ DiMeo. Watching Kenneth Clements using JJ’s

“inspiration” treatment to point out the ridiculousness of that stereotype does not serve

to enforce the stereotype but would hopefully cause a typical viewer to question that

characteristic applied to other situations involving a disabled person. Similarly, how Dr.

Miller and Mr. Powers were both misguided and overly sensitive regarding JJ is

pointedly taking a hammer to the overtly politically correct treatment that some disabled

people receive. The most interesting part about researching Speechless was this quote

from Scott Silveri, however, “I think we’ve been able to carve out a sort of unique and

sometimes subversive tack without even delving into the political at all (Bernstein,

2019). Creating a prime-time serial that aired on a major network with a disabled star

actually played by a disabled actor is a political message, whether that is what Silveri

intended or not.

165

Over time, Speechless changed, but not in regard to falling into stereotypes to

paint a picture of JJ. If anything, the desire to have the audience feel good about JJ and by

extension, feel good about disabled people, blunted any significant points that could have

been made with the show. Silveri had a great opportunity to explore what Jenny Morris

(1993) states about being disabled, that the able-bodied world has the effect of deflating a

disabled person because of the “rejection and revulsion” (p.104). It is possible that since

Silveri is able-bodied, he didn’t have first-hand regarding the able-bodied gaze that he

could bring to the show. However, as the brother of a disabled person, he surely saw how

people reacted to his brother and his family, since has stated that was part of the reason

that Speechless was created (Broverman, 2016, p. 30). To escape from life, doubtless

anyone that stumbled onto Speechless might recoil if the person faced with raw reality.

Atypical, after the first season, anyway, offers a lot of interesting interactions with

and representations of people on the autism spectrum. Robia Rashid never admits that she

was using a scatter gun approach to someone on the autism spectrum, or that she was

painting a composite picture of a person on the autism spectrum when she created the

series, but that is the reality of the first season. Atypical shares something in common

with a contemporaneous serial, The Good Doctor, in that the focus of the shows are both

on the autism spectrum. Another similarity to the Good Doctor, is that Dr. Shaun

Murphy, the lead character in The Good Doctor, is played by a neurotypical actor,

Freddie Highmore. In addition, both shows are also inclusive of actors on the autism

spectrum in other roles. What is different, at least in the first season of Atypical, is that

the executive producer of The Good Doctor, David Shore, consulted with Dr. Melissa

Reiner, a top expert on the treatment and education of people on the autism spectrum

166

(Garrett, 2019). While Hightower, like Kier Gilchrist, is also performing in autistic drag,

Hightower’s performance from the beginning is more nuanced and less of a composite.

Unlike Speechless, Atypical, gets much better after the first season, as Rashid

relied on an expert consultant to assist with developing Sam and the show. Much like

Silveri, Rashid would probably not characterize Atypical as a show that purposefully set

out to make a statement about the representation of disabilities. But as mentioned in

connection with Speechless, however, simply having a character with a disability is a

statement, whether that is the intent or not. The upcoming final season of Atypical will

have a lot to do with the legacy of the show and its place in the history of disability

representations.

Breaking Bad is significant for three distinct representations of disabilities in the

characters in the series. None of the characters are the lead characters in the series, but all

three occupy big roles in the show. Walt Jr.’s representation by a disabled actor puts the

show above Atypical, if there is a hierarchy to these shows. Walt Jr.’s pointed argument

with Hank about the medical model of disability versus the social model of disability is

ground-breaking. No other show researched ever set the two models face to face and

pointed out that Hank’s insistence on walking out of the hospital might suggest that

people in wheelchair should be relegated to institutions, as Walt Jr. suggested. That is a

“bravo” moment in the history of disability representations on television. Then again, that

is also why Breaking Bad is so loved by critics and the audience alike.

Breaking Bad really missed the chance to advocate for disabled people with Hank

and his miraculously disappearing spinal injury. While it is possible that some people

have put in a lifetime of physical therapy and have recovered some ability to walk, the

167

likelihood that Hank could do so in such a short time is dubious at best. Hank working as

a DEA supervisor from a wheelchair would be a great way to undo the super crip image

of Ironside or Longstreet. In addition, Hank’s miraculous recovery paints a typical

disabled person as a lazy slug for not achieving the same return of function as Hank.

The strongest disability representation out of all three shows researched for this

work is Hector Salamanca. Hector did not speak or walk, yet he harassed the DEA and

helped to orchestrate the death of his rival, killing himself in the process. However, due

to the nature of the character and the show, there were no profiles in courage or any great

awards from disability groups for Hector, and that is too bad. Hector Salamanca is dead!

Long live Hector Salamanca!

Television is a significant culture vehicle, and the representations being proffered

by television producers serve to give cues to people regarding interactions with disabled

people in viewers’ daily lives. The common example of that exists in the how the

dominant ideology is constructed. More textured representations of disability are

important for disabled people in that realistic representations of disability can help

alleviate the stigma attached to the “other” by serving to educate the typical population.

By seeing a more realistic representation of disabilities, typical people will learn that they

can interact with a disabled person as a person rather than a wheelchair or the butt of a

joke. As seen in Speechless and Atypical, a television producer that uses consultants that

specialize in the disability being represented can make a tremendous difference in the

texture of the disability and the character. Regarding all three series, it is obvious that

using disabled actors can bring the reality of their lives to the character and the story.

168

Showing the disabling aspects of life that are caused by society, from big picture

items like employment discrimination to more individualized items as menial as using a

handicapped parking space out of convenience without regard for the needs of disabled

people, will help people alter behaviors in a positive manner. In analyzing the underlying

ideologies of stereotypical representations one can see how those stereotypical

representations might be used to cement the dominant ideology and narratives regarding

disabled people: evil, scary, pitiable creatures that rely on medicine and social benefits

for life.

This research is important for the field of disability studies, in that there is a great

paucity of critical discourse analysis regarding disabilities (Grue, 2011, p. 533). Jan Grue

(2011), a scholar in critical discourse analysis and disability studies, states that

disabilities should be a major focus of discourse analysis given the social and political

focus of critical discourse analysis (p. 533). Grue (2011) concludes that discourse

analysis is a fitting method to develop disability studies as the current disability models

appeared through considering discourse regarding disabilities and that discourse analysis

can also play a part in changing the current models of disability, too (p. 544). Simply put,

the more discourse analysis that is given to disability depictions and representation in

media will contribute to the changing and future models of disability in society. This

discourse analysis regarding disabled representations and the models of disability in

television serials follows much of the discourse analysis about aesthetics and visual arts.

More textured disability representations are helpful to help alter the discourse about

disabilities and disabled people.

169

More research regarding disability representations is necessary and proper. While

television has come a long way from the characters of Dr. Loveless from Wild Wild West

or Fred Johnson, the One-Armed Man from The Fugutive as suitable representations of

disabilities, the noticeable lack of disabled characters on television is out of balance when

compared to the population of disabled people in the U.S. Television news coverage of

disabled people, disabled people on game shows, disabled people on cooking shows,

disabled guests on home decoration or home make-over shows, disabled sports

competitions are all rarities and are ripe for research.

170

APPENDIX – LIST OF EPISODES ANALYZED

program

season

episode

aired

Speechless

1 - P-i-Pilot

9.21.2016

Speechless

2 - N-e-New A-i-Aide

9.28.2016

Speechless

3 - B-o-n-Bonfire

10.5.2016

Speechless

4 - I-n-s-Inspirations

10.12.2016

Speechless

5 - H-a-l-Halloween

10.26.2016

Speechless

6 - D-a-t-e-Date?

11.9.2016

Speechless

11 - R-o-Road T-r-Trip

1.4.2017

Speechless

12 - H-e-r-Hero

1.11.2017

Speechless

16 - O-s-Oscar P-a-Party

2.22.2017

Speechless

19 - C-h-Cheater!

4.5.2017

Speechless

20 - R-u-n-Runaway

4.26.2017

Speechless

22 - M-a-May-Jay

5.10.2017

Speechless

23 - C-a-Camp

5.17.2017

Speechless

1 - W-e-We're B-a-Back!

9.27.2017

Speechless

2 - F-i-First S-e-Second F-First Day

10.4.2017

Speechless

4 - T-r-Training D-a-Day

10.18.2017

Speechless

6 - S-h-Shipping

11.1.2017

Speechless

9 - S-t-Star W-Wars

12.6.2017

Speechless

18 - N-o-Nominee

3.21.2018

Speechless

1 - L-o-n-London: Part 1

10.5.2018

Speechless

2 - L-o-n-London: Part 2

10.12.2018

Speechless

11 - H-Hey, You

1.18.2019

Atypical

1 - Antarctica

8.11.2017

Atypical

2 - A Human Female

8.11.2017

Atypical

3 - Julia Says

8.11.2017

Atypical

4 - A Nice Neutral Smell

8.11.2017

Atypical

5 - That's My Sweatshirt

8.11.2017

Atypical

6 - The D-Train to Bone Town

8.11.2017

Atypical

3 - Little Dude and the Lion

9.7.2018

Atypical

4 - Pants on Fire

9.7.2018

Atypical

5 - The Egg is Pipping

9.7.2018

171

Atypical

8 - Living at an Angle

9.7.2018

Atypical

3 - Cocaine Pills and Pony Mean

11.1.2019

Breaking Bad

1 - Pilot

1.20.2008

Breaking Bad

2 - Cat's in the Bag...

1.27.2008

Breaking Bad

3 - ...And the Bag's in the River

2.10.2008

Breaking Bad

4 - Cancer Man

2.17.2008

Breaking Bad

5 - Gray Matter

2.24.2008

Breaking Bad

7 - A No-Rough-Stuff-Type Deal

3.9.2008

Breaking Bad

2 - Grilled

3.15.2009

Breaking Bad

3 - Bit by a Dead Bee

3.22.2009

Breaking Bad

4 - Down

3.29.2009

Breaking Bad

10 - Over

5.10.2009

Breaking Bad

2 - Caballo sin Nombre

3.28.2010

Breaking Bad

3 - I.F.T.

4.4.2010

Breaking Bad

7 - One Minute

5.2.2010

Breaking Bad

8 - I See You

5.9.2010

Breaking Bad

9 - Kafkaesque

5.16.2010

Breaking Bad

11 - Abiquiu

5.30.2010

Breaking Bad

12 - Half Measures

6.6.2010

Breaking Bad

1 - Box Cutter

7.17.2011

Breaking Bad

2 - Thirty-Eight Snub

7.24.2011

Breaking Bad

3 - Open House

7.31.2011

Breaking Bad

4 - Bullet Points

8.7.2011

Breaking Bad

5 - Shotgun

8.14.2011

Breaking Bad

6 - Cornered

8.21.2011

Breaking Bad

7 - Problem Dog

8.28.2011

Breaking Bad

8 - Hermanos

9.4.2011

Breaking Bad

10 - Salud

9.18.2011

Breaking Bad

11 - Crawl Space

9.25.2011

Breaking Bad

13 - Face Off

10.9.2011

Breaking Bad

4 - Fifty-One

8.5.2012

Breaking Bad

14 - Ozymandias

9.15.2013

Breaking Bad

15 - Granite State

9.22.2013

172

REFERENCES

1956 Social Security Amendments, Pub. L. 84-880, 70 Stat. 807.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-70/pdf/STATUTE-70-

Pg807.pdf.

Abberly, P. (1993). Disabled people and ‘normality.’ Disabling Barriers – Enabling

Environments. V. Finklestein, S. French, M. Oliver, and J. Swain eds. London:

Sage Publications.

Acosta-Alzuru, C., & Lester-Roushanzamir, E. P. (2000). All you will see is the one you

once knew: Portrayals from the Falklands/Malvinas war in U.S. and Latin

American newspapers. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 1(4), 301–

345. https://doi.org/10.1177/152263799900100402.

Adoni, H., & Mane, S. (1984). Media and the social construction of reality: Toward an

integration of theory and research. Communication Research, 11(3), 323.

https://doi.org/10.1177/009365084011003001.

Adorno, T. (1954). How to Look at Television. The Quarterly of Film Radio and

Television, 8(3), 213-235. https://doi.org/10.2307/1209731.

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2017, June 1). Speechless recognized

for social change advocacy, Leader 22(6), 10.

https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.NIB2.22062017.10.

Anderson, P., & Kitchin, R. (2000). Disability, space and sexuality: Access to family

planning services. Social Science & Medicine, 51(8), 1163–1173.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00019-8.

Atypical. (n.d.). Metacritic website. https://www.metacritic.com/tv/atypical

173

Ball-Rokeach, S., & DeFleur, M. (1976). A dependency model of mass media effects.

Communication Research, 3, 3–21.

Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of Behavior Modification. New York Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Bandura, A., & Jeffery, R. W. (1973). Role of symbolic coding and rehearsal processes in

observational learning. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 26(1), 122-

130. https://doi-org/10.1037/h0034205.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology,

3(3), 265–299. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0303_03.

Barnes, C. (1992). Disabling Imagery and the Media: An Exploration of the Principals

for Media Representations of Disabled People. Halifax, England: Ryburn

Publishing Services.

Barnes, C. (2003). What a difference a decade makes: Reflections on doing

“emancipatory” disability research. Disability & Society, 18(1), 3.

https://doi.org/10.1080/713662197.

Barnes, E., Berrigan, C, and Biklen, D. (1978). What's the Difference? Teaching Positive

Attitudes Toward People with Disabilities. Syracuse: Human Policy Press.

Barr, M. (2017, August 8). Atypical is the best show Netflix has ever made. Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillbarr/2017/08/08/atypical-review-the-best-

show-netflix-has-ever-made/#42cacda2224b.

Barthes, R. (1972 [1957]). Mythologies. Annette Lavers (Trans.), New York: Hill and

Wang.

174

Barthes, R. (1972). The death of the author. The Discontinuous Universe. S. Sears and G.

Lord, eds. New York: Basic Books.

Barton, L. (1996). Sociology and disability: Some emerging issues. Disability & Society:

Emerging Issues and Insights. L. Barton, ed. London: Longman.

Baskin, B. H. (1975). The Handicapped in Children's Literature. Proceedings of The

Special Study Institute, Fostering Positive Attitudes Toward the Handicapped in

School Settings. The Division for Handicapped Children, New York State

Education Department, Rensselaerville, New York. pp. 143–164.

Bernstein, A. (2019, March 3). SPEECHLESS: Creator Scott Silveri talks about season 3

and John Cleese. AssignmentX.

https://www.assignmentx.com/2019/speechless-creator-scott-silveri-talks- about-

season-3-and-john-cleese-exclusive-interview/.

Bickenbach, J. E., Chatterji, S., Badley, E. M., & Üstün, T. B. (1999). Models of

disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments,

disabilities and handicaps. Social Science & Medicine, 48(9), 1173–1187.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00441-9.

Blau, H., Robinson, P., Gilbert, S., & Brickner, R. (1982). Responses to Leslie

Fiedler. Salmagundi, (57), 70-86. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40547500.

Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (1992). An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge:

Polity Press.

Brault, M. (2012 July). Americans with Disabilities: 2010. US Census Bureau website.

https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2012/demo/p70-131.html.

175

Breaking Bad wiki. (n.d.). Fandom website.

https://breakingbad.fandom.com/wiki/Breaking_Bad.

Breaking Bad -- Awards and Nominations. (n.d.). Fandom website.

https://breakingbad.fandom.com/wiki/Breaking_Bad--

_Awards_and_Nominations.

Brisenden, S. (1986). Independent living and the medical model of disability. Disability,

Handicap & Society, 1(2), 173–178.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02674648666780171.

Broverman, A. (2016). Micah Fowler of new sit-com Speechless speaks. New

Mobility, 27(276), 30–31.

https://newmobility.com/2016/09/micah-fowler-speechless/.

Brooks, J. D. (2014, August). Drawing the Line Between Impairment and Disability: The

Theory of Able-Bodied Acceptance [Conference paper]. American Sociological

Association conference. San Francisco, CA, United States.

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex”. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Byrd, E. K., McDaniel, R. S., & Rhoden, R. B. (1980). Television programming and

disability: A ten year span. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research.

Internationale Zeitschrift Fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue Internationale De

Recherches De Readaptation, 3(3), 321–326.

https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-198009000-00001.

Cameron, C. (2008). Further towards an affirmation model. Disability Studies: Emerging

Insights and Perspectives, Vol. 2. Leeds: Disability Press.

176

Campbell, J. and Oliver, M. (1996). Disability Politics: Understanding our Past,

Changing Our Future. London: Routledge.

Cherney, J. L., & Lindemann, K. (2014). Queering Street: Homosociality, masculinity,

and disability in Friday Night Lights. Western Journal of Communication, 78(1),

1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2013.792388.

Chubon, R.A. (1982). An analysis of research dealing with the attitudes of professionals

toward disability. Journal of Rehabilitation, 48(1), 25–30.

Clare, E. (2001). Stolen bodies, reclaimed bodies: Disability and queerness. Public

Culture, 13(3), 359–365. https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/26252.

Clinard, B. M. and Meier. R. (1998 [1957]) Sociology of Deviant Behaviour, 10th Ed.

Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Cockerham, William C. (2004). Medical Sociology. 9

Ed. London: Pearson Education.

Cumberbatch, G. and Negrene, R. (1992). Images of Disability on Television. London:

Routledge.

Dates, J. (1990). Commercial television. Split Image: African Americans in the Mass

Media. J. Dates and W. Barlow, eds. Washington, DC: Howard University Press.

Dauenhauer., B. (1982). Authors, audiences, and texts. Human Studies, 5(2), 137–146.

https://doi.org//10.1007/BF02127673.

Davis, L. (1995a). Constructing normalcy: The bell curve, the novel, and the invention of

the disabled body in the nineteenth century. Enforcing Normalcy: Disability,

Deafness, and the Body. New York: Verso Books. 23 – 49.

https://hdl.handle.net/2027/fulcrum.4j03cz77z.

177

Davis, L. (1995b). Universalizing marginality: How Europe became deaf in the

eighteenth century. In Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body.

New York: Verso Books. 50 – 72. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/fulcrum.4j03cz77z.

Davis, L. (1998). Who put the the in the novel?: Identity politics and disability in novel

studies. Novel: A Forum on Fiction, 31(3), 317–334.

https://doi.org/10.2307/1346103.

Davis, L. (2005). Disability: The next wave or twilight of the gods? PMLA, 120(2), 527-

532. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25486179.

Derrida, J. (1979). Living on. Deconstruction and Criticism. H. Bloom, P. DeMan, J.

Derrida, G. H. Hartman, & J. H. Miller, eds. New York: Seabury Press.

Dewsbury, G., Clarke, K., Randall, D., Rouncefield, M., & Sommerville, I. (2004). The

anti-social model of disability. Disability & Society, 19(2), 145–158.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0968759042000181776.

Dirth, T. P., & Branscombe, N. R. (2017). Disability models affect disability policy

support through awareness of structural discrimination. Journal of Social Issues,

73, 413– 442. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12224.

Downing, J. (1988). The Cosby Show and American racial discourse. In Smitherman-

Donaldson, G. and Van Dijk, T.A. (eds.), Discourse and Discrimination (46-74).

Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.

Durkheim, E. (1964 [1895]). Rules of Sociological Method. New York: Free Press.

Dyson, M. (1989, September). Bill Cosby and the politics of race. Z Magazine, 26-30.

Elman, J. P. (2012). Cripping safe sex: Life Goes On’s queer/disabled alliances. Journal

of Bioethical Inquiry, 9(3), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-012-9379-6.

178

Entertainment Weekly. (2010, June 1). 100 greatest characters: Nos. 76-100.

Entertainment Weekly, 1105/1106, (89).

https://ew.com/article/2010/05/28/100-greatest-characters-nos-76-100/.

Fabian, R. (n.d.). Meet Tal Anderson, the actor who plays Sid on Atypical. yahoo!life.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meet-tal-anderson-actor-plays-225505036.html.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and text: Linguistic and intertextual analysis within

discourse analysis. Discourse Society, 3(2), 193-217.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0957926592003002004.

Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. The Routledge Handbook of Discourse

Analysis. J. Gee and M. Handford, eds. London: Routledge.

Felperin, L. (2017, August 14). What Netflix comedy Atypical gets right and wrong about

autism. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-

radio/2017/aug/14/atypical-netflix-autism-spectrum-depiction-cliches.

Ferguson, P. M. and Nusbaum, E. (2012). Disability studies: What is it and what

difference does it make? Research & Practice for Persons with Severe

Disabilities, 37(2), p. 70-80.

https://doi.org/10.2511/027494812802573530.

Ferri, B. A., & Gregg, N. (1998). Women with disabilities: Missing voices. Women’s

Studies International Forum, 21(4), 429–439.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-5395(98)00038-7.

Fernandez, M. (2017, August 15). Atypical creator Robia Rashid on autism: ‘I had to do a

lot of real learning’. Vulture website. https://www.vulture.com/2017/08/atypical-

showrunner-robia-rashid-interview.html.

179

Fiedler, L. (1982). Pity and fear: Images of the disabled in literature and the popular

arts. Salmagundi, (57), 57–69. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40547499.

Fiedler, L. (1984). The tyranny of the normal. The Hastings Center Report, 14(2), 40-42.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3561884.

Finkelstein, V. (1990). ‘We’ are not disabled, ‘you’ are. Constructing Deafness. S.

Gregory and G. Hartley eds. London: The Open University.

Finkelstein, V. (1993). The commonality of disability. Disabling Barriers – Enabling

Environments. V. Finkelstein, S. French, M. Oliver, and J. Swain, eds. London:

Sage Publications.

Finkelstein, V. (2001). A Personal Journey into Disability Politics. The Disability

Studies Archive U.K., Center for Disability Studies, University of Leeds.

https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites

/40/library/finkelstein-presentn.pdf.

Fiske, J. (2011). Television Culture (2

ed.) New York: Routledge.

Fidler, D. S., Flerx, V. C., & Rogers, R. W. (1976). Sex role stereotypes: Developmental

aspects and early intervention. Child Development, 47, 998–1007.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1128436.

French, S. (1993) Disability, impairment or something in between. Disabling Barriers –

Enabling Environments. V. Finkelstein, S. French, M. Oliver, and J. Swain, eds.

London: Sage Publications.

Fuller, L.K. (1992). The Cosby Show: Audiences, Impact, and Implication. Westport, CT:

Greenwood.

180

Funk, R. (1987). Disability rights: From caste to class in the context of civil rights.

Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images. A. Gartner and T. Joe, eds. New York:

Praeger.

Fürsich, E. (2009). In defense of textual analysis: restoring a challenged method for

journalism and media studies. Journalism Studies, 10 (2), 238-252.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700802374050.

Gabel, S. and Peters, S. (2004). Presage of a paradigm shift? Beyond the social model of

disability toward resistance theories of disability. Disability & Society, 19(6),

585-600. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968759042000252515.

Garland-Thomson, R. (1997) Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in

American Culture and Literature. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Garland-Thomson, R. (2005). Disability and representation. PMLA, 120(2), 522–527

https://www.jstor.org/stable/25486178.

Garrett, A. (2019, March 4). The Good Doctor Freddie Highmore isn't autistic - how

he makes his performance so believable. Distractify website.

https://www.distractify.com/p/is-the-good-doctor-autistic.

Gartner, A. (1984, August). Disabling images. The Disability Rag. 3-4.

Gerber, D. A. (1994). Heroes and misfits: The troubled social reintegration of disabled

veterans in The Best Years of our Lives. American Quarterly, 46, 545.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2713383.

Gerbner, G. (1972). Communication and social environment. Scientific American, 227(3),

152–160. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24927435.

181

Gilmer, T. (2010). The real thing. New Mobility, 21(196), 4.

https://www.newmobility.com/2010/01/the-real-thing/

GLAAD. (2019). Where are we on tv: 2019.

https://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/GLAAD%20WHERE%20WE%20ARE

%20ON%20TV%202019%202020.pdf.

Gliedman, J & Roth, W. (1980). The Unexpected Minority. New York: Harcourt Brace

Jovonovich.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Gordon, S., Rohlich, M. & Rashid, R. (2017 – 2019). Atypical [TV series]. Exhibit A,

Sony Pictures Television.

Gray, H. (1995). Watching Race. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Gray, J., & Lotz, A. D. (2012). Television Studies. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T. & Solomon, S. (1986). The causes and consequences of a

need for self-esteem: A terror management theory. Public Self and Private Self.

R.F. Baumeister, ed. New York: Springer.

Grossburg, L. (1992). We Gotta Get Outta this Place: Popular Conservativism and

Postmodern Culture. New York: Routledge.

Grue, J. (2011). Discourse analysis and disability: Some topics and issues. Discourse &

Society, 22(5), 532–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511405572.

Hahn, H. (1987). Civil rights for disabled Americans: The foundation of a political

agenda. Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images. A. Gartner and T. Joe, eds.

New York: Praeger.

182

Haller, B. (2005). Deadwood. Disability Studies Quarterly, 25(3).

https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v25i3.593.

Harris, A. (1971). Handicapped and Impaired in Great Britain. London: HMSO.

Hartjen, R. H. (1974). Implications of Bandura’s Observational Learning Theory for a

Competency Based Teacher Education Model [Paper presentation]. Annual

Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL, United

States. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED091326.pdf.

Hawkins, R. P., & Pingree, S. (1982). Television’s influence on social reality. Television

and Behavior: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the Eighties,

Vol. II. D. Pearl, L. Bouthilet, & J. Lazar, eds. Rockville, MD: National Institute

of Mental Health.

House. (n.d.). IMDB website.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0412142/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1.

Hughes, B., & Paterson, K. (1997). The social model of disability and the disappearing

body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability & Society, 12(3), 325–340.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727209.

Hunt, P. (1966). Stigma: The Experience of Disability. London: Chapman.

Jacobson, D. S. (2012, April 1). I’m walking as straight as I can: Transcending disability

in Hollywood and beyond. New Mobility, 23(223), 48–49.

Jenkins, T. (2011). Nationalism and gender: The 1970s, The Six Million Dollar Man, and

The Bionic Woman. Journal of Popular Culture, 44(1), 93–113.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5931.2010.00821.x.

183

Jessop, B. and Sum, N.-L. (2001). Pre-disciplinary and post-disciplinary perspectives.

New Political Economy, 6, 89 – 101.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13563460020027777.

Jhally, S. & Lewis, J. (1992). Enlightened Racism: The Cosby Show, Audiences, and the

Myth of the American Dream. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Johnson, P. (1984, August 1). School Library Journal, 30(10), 93.

Jones, R. (1994). Their Rightful Place: Society and Disability. Toronto: Canadian

Academy of the Arts, Inc.

Katz, E. (1977). Social Research on Broadcasting: Proposals for Further Development.

London: BBC.

Kemp, E. (1981, September 3). Aiding the disabled: No pity please. New York Times.

19A. https://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/03/opinion/aiding-the-disabled-no-pity-

please.html.

Kent, D. (1987). Disabled women: Portraits in fiction and drama. Images of the Disabled,

Disabling Images. A. Gartner and T. Joe, eds. New York: Praeger.

Kociemba, D. (2010). “This isn’t something I can fake”: Reactions to Glee’s

representations of disability. Transformative Works & Cultures, 5, 14.

https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2010.0225.

Kriegel, L. (1987). The cripple in literature. Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images.

A. Gartner and T. Joe, eds. New York: Praeger.

Lang, R. (2007). The Development and Critique of the Social Model of Disability.

London: University College London.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/epidemiology-health-care/sites/iehc/files/wp-3.pdf.

184

Lemke, J. (2012). Multimedia and discourse analysis. The Routledge Handbook of

Discourse Analysis. J. Gee and M. Handford, eds. London: Routledge.

Liachowitz, C. (1988). Disability as a Social Construct: Legislative Roots. Philadelphia:

University of Pennsylvania Press.

Liebert, R. M. (1975). Television and attitudes toward the handicapped, presented at

Fostering Positive attitudes Toward the Handicapped in School Settings

conference, Albany, NY. Albany, NY: New York State Education Department.

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED115068.

Linton, S. (2005). What is disability studies? PMLA, 120(2), 518-522.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/25486177.

Llewellyn, A., & Hogan, K. (2000). The use and abuse of models of disability. Disability

& Society, 15(1), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590025829.

Longmore, P.K. (1987). Screening stereotypes: Images of disabled people in television

and motion pictures. Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images. A. Gartner and T.

Joe, eds. New York: Praeger.

Luterman, S. (2018, September 15). How season 2 of Atypical improves the show's

depictions of life as an autistic person. The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/11/arts/atypical-season-2-autistic-depiction-

improvements.html.

Lynn, E. (2009, November 11). No Glee for disabled performers. Toronto Star (Canada).

https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/television/2009/11/11/

no_glee_for_disabled_performers.html.

Mar, M. & Silveri, S. (2016 – 2019) Speechless [TV series]. Silver and Gold Productions.

185

Margolis, H., & Shapiro, A. (1987). Countering negative images of disability in classical

literature. The English Journal, 76(3), 18-22. https://doi.org/10.2307/818530.

Mays, J. M. (2006). Feminist disability theory: Domestic violence against women with a

disability. Disability & Society, 21(2), 147–158.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590500498077.

Mentally Retarded Boy Stars in TV Drama. (1969). Exceptional Children, 35(5), 403.

Meyer, T.P. (1973). Children's perceptions of their favorite tv characters as behavioral

models. Educational Broadcasting Review, 7, 25-33.

Micah Fowler. (n.d.). IMDB website.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5094896/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t5.

Morris, B. K. (n.d.). Routines, rituals & compulsions: Discussion & practical strategies

for parents. Synapse website. https://autism-help.org/behavior-compulsions-

routines-rituals.htm.

Morris, J. (1991). Pride Against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability. London:

The Women’s Press.

Morris, J. (1993). Prejudice. Disabling Barriers – Enabling Environments. V.

Finkelstein, S. French, M. Oliver, and J. Swain, eds. London: Sage Publications.

Moss, H. (2017, August 11). My autistic opinion: Atypical is a stereotypical

representation of autism. Huffington Post website.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/my-autistic-opinion-atypical-is-a-

stereotypical-representation_us_598e2e04e4b0ed1f464c0abd.

Murphy, R. (1987). The Body Silent. New York: Holt.

186

Nakamura, R. (2016, August 4). How Speechless creator got to tell his deeply personal

story after 20 years. The Wrap website.

https://www.thewrap.com/speechless-creator-scott-silveri-micah-fowler-tca/.

Newcomb, H. M., & Hirsch, P. M. (1983). Television as a cultural forum: Implications

for research. Quarterly Review of Film Studies, 8(3), 45–55.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10509208309361170.

O’Bryant, S. L., & Corder-Bolz, C. R. (1978). Effects of television on children’s

stereotyping of women’s work roles. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 12, 233–

244.

O’Keeffe, A. (2012). Media and discourse analysis. The Routledge Handbook of

Discourse Analysis. J. Gee and M. Handford, eds. London: Routledge.

Oliver, M. (1983). Social Work with Disabled People. Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan.

Oliver, M. (1986). Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. London:

Macmillan.

Oliver, M. (1987). Re-defining disability: A challenge to research. Research, Policy and

Planning, 5(1). 9-13.

Oliver, M. (1993). Re-defining disability: A challenge to research. Disabling Barriers –

Enabling Environments. V. Finkelstein, S. French, M. Oliver, and J. Swain, eds.

London: Sage Publications.

Oliver, M. (2004). The Social model in action: If I had a hammer. Implementing the

Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research. C. Barnes and G. Mercer, eds.

Leeds: The Disability Press.

187

https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/Barnes-

implementing-the-social-model-chapter-2.pdf; 7.8.2018.

Orpana, S. (2016). We can rebuild him and her: Bionic irony, hysteria, and post-

Fordism’s technological fix in The Six Million Dollar Man. English Studies in

Canada, 42(1/2), 89–114. https://doi.org/10.1353/esc.2016.0008.

Ozer, J. (2004). Book & film reviews. Disability Studies Quarterly, 24(2).

https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/499/676.

Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. Glencoe, U.K.: The Free Press.

Patton, R. (2018, September 5). Watch young actors with autism get their chance to shine

in Atypical season 2. Bustle website.

https://www.bustle.com/p/sams-peer-group-in-atypical-season-2-is-comprised-of-

8-budding-actors-with-autism-video-11506867.

Perry, D. M. (2016, September 21). Speechless is breaking new ground on television. The

Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/09/speechless-review-

abc/500444/.

Pierson, D. (2013). Breaking Bad: Critical Essays on the Contexts, Politics, Style, and

Reception of the Television Series. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Pond, S. (2017, November 29). Dunkirk, The Shape of Water lead Satellite Award

nominations. yahoo!entertainment.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/dunkirk-shape-water-lead-satellite-award-

nominations-080128252.html.

188

PR Newswire. (2018, May 1). SONY Pictures Entertainment, ABC’s The Good Doctor &

Netflix’s Atypical honored by Ed Asner and Autism Society at 2nd Annual

AutFest Film Festival. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sony-pictures-

entertainment-abcs-the-good-doctor--netflixs-atypical-honored-by-ed-asner-and-

autism-society-at-2nd-annual-autfest-film-festival-300640011.html.

Quayson, A. (2007). Aesthetic Nervousness: Disability and the Crisis of Representation.

New York: Columbia University Press.

Rich, L. E., Simmons, J., Adams, D., Thorp, S., & Mink, M. (2008). The afterbirth of the

clinic: a Foucauldian perspective on House M.D. and American medicine in the

21st century. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 51(2), 220–237.

https://doi.org./10.1353/pbm.0.0007.

Rogers, B. (1978). Richard III: Shakespeare was quite wrong. Britain, 33, p. 3.

Rosa, N. M., Bogart, K. R., Bonnett, A. K., Estill, M. C., & Colton, C. E. (2016).

Teaching about disability in psychology: An analysis of disability curricula in

U.S. undergraduate psychology programs. Teaching of Psychology, 43, 59 – 62.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620885.

Rothman, J. C. (2003). Social Work Practice Across Disability. Boston: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Rovenstine, D. (2016, September 20). Speechless: Micah Fowler is the breakout

star. Entertainment Weekly, 1431/1432(69).

https://ew.com/article/2016/09/20/speechless-micah-fowler-breakout-star/.

Rowe, M. (2017, August 8). Netflix's Atypical was a major disappointment for autism

representation. TeenVogue website.

189

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/netflix-atypical-autism-representation.

Rucker, A. (2012). Seriously? Person of the year? New Mobility, 23(220), 26–32.

https://www.newmobility.com/2012/01/seriously-person-of-the-year/.

Russell, M. (1998) Beyond Ramps: Disability at the End of the Social Contract. Maine:

Common Courage Press.

Safilios-Rothchild, C. (1970). The Sociology and Social Psychology of Disability and

Rehabilitation. New York: Random House.

Sagarin, E. (1975). Deviants and Deviance: An Introduction to Disvalued People and

Behaviour. New York: Praeger.

Schneider, K. P., & Barron, A. (2014). Pragmatics of Discourse. Berlin: De Gruyter

Mouton.

Schneck, S. (1987). Michel Foucault on power/discourse, theory and practice. Human

Studies, 10(1), 15-33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20008986.

Schramm, W. (1969). Aging and mass communication. Aging and Society. M. Riley and

A, Foner, eds. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1968-1972.

Schramm, W. (1974). Mass communication. Psychology and Communication. G. Miller,

ed. Washington, D.C: Voice of America Forum Series.

Schroedel, J. G. (1979). Attitudes toward Persons with Disabilities: A Compendium of

Related Literature. Albertson, New York: National Center on Employment of the

Handicapped at the Human Resources Center, 1979.

Scott Rosendall. (n.d.). IMDB website.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2423728/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t17.

190

Scott Silveri. (n.d.). IMDB website.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0798859/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1.

Shapiro, J. (1993). No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging a New Civil Rights

Movement. New York: Times Books.

Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (1997). Defending the social model. Disability & Society,

12(2), 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380.

Sheffield, R. (2016). The 100 Greatest TV Shows of All Time. (cover story). Rolling

Stone, (1271), 26. https://www.rollingstone.com/tv/tv-lists/100-greatest-tv-shows-

of-all-time-105998/.

Shilling, C. (1993). The Body in Social Theory. London: Sage.

Siebers, T. (2001). Disability in theory: From social constructionism to the new realism

of the body. American Literary History, 13(4), 737-754.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3054594.

Siepmann, C.A. (1950). Radio, Television, and Society. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Smart, J. F. (2009). The power of models of disability. Journal of Rehabilitation, 75(2),

3–11.

Society for Disability Studies, (n.d.). SDS mission.

http://www.disstudies.org/index.php/about-sds/mission-and-history/.

Speechless awards. (n.d.). IMDB website. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5592146/awards.

Stone, D. (1984). The Disabled State. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

191

Strauman, E., & Goodier, B. (2008). Not your grandmother’s doctor show: A review of

Grey’s Anatomy, House, and Nip/Tuck. Journal of Medical Humanities, 29(2),

127–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-008-9055-3.

Stiker, H. (1997). A History of Disability. Trans. William Sayers. Ann Arbor: University

of Michigan Press. First published in French in 1982.

Swain, J., & French, S. (2000). Towards an affirmation model of disability. Disability &

Society, 15(4), 569–582. https://doi.org./10.1080/09687590050058189.

Swain, J., French, S., and Cameron, C. (2003). Controversial Issues in a Disabling

Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Thaxton, R. (2017, July 18). Watch: Netflix's Atypical trailer is hilarious, but will It be

poignant? Paste. https://www.pastemagazine.com/tv/atypical/watch-netflixs-

atypical-thriller-is-hilarious-but/.

Thomas, C. (2007). Sociologies of Disability and Illness: Contested Ideas in Disability

Studies and Medical Sociology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Thurer, S. (1980). Disability and monstrosity: A look at literary distortions of

handicapping conditions. Rehabilitation Literature, 41(1), 12–15.

Titchkosky, T. (2000). Disability studies: The old and the new. Canadian Journal of

Sociology = Cahiers Canadiens De Sociologie, 25(2), 197–224.

https://doi.org/10.2307/3341823.

Tregaskis, C. (2002). Social model theory: The story so far …. Disability & Society,

17(4), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590220140377.

Turner, C. S., & Louis, K. S. (1996). Society’s response to differences. Remedial &

Special Education, 17(3), 134.

192

https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259601700303.

Turrow, J. (1996). Playing Doctor: Television, Storytelling and Medical Power. New

York: Oxford.

Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation. (1976). Fundamental Principles

of Disability. London: Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation.

https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/UPIAS-

fundamental-principles.pdf.

United States Access Board. (n.d.). Introduction.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/14-

architectural-barriers-act/467-uniform-federal-accessibility-standards.

United States Department of Justice. (n.d.) Introduction to the ADA. ADA website.

https://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm.

US Census Bureau. (n.d.) Selected Social Characteristics in the United States.

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?d=ACS%205-

Year%20Estimates%20Data%20Profiles&table=DP02&tid=ACSDP5Y2017.DP0

2&vintage=2017.

US Census Bureau. (2018, July 26). Facts for Features.

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2018/disabilities.html.

Wagner, J. (1975). When children ask about handicaps. American Education, 11(7).

Walter White, Jr. (n.d.). Breaking Bad wiki. Fandom website.

https://breakingbad.fandom.com/wiki/Walter_White_Jr.

193

Wiggins, M. J. (2013). Integration and Transformation: An Examination of the Role of

Sexuality in Formulating a Queer/Crip Subjectivity for People with Disabilities.

(Unpublished master’s thesis). https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/1752.

Wilcox, R. (2005). God’s clothes, God’s bones: The ethics of representation on Joan of

Arcadia. Studies in Popular Culture, 28(1), 85–97.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23416217.

Williams, R. (1974). Television: Technology and Cultural Form, London: Fontana.

The World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning,

disability and health: Short Version. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health

Organization.

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/42417/9241545445_eng.pdf.

Young, I. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Zach Anner. (n.d.). IMDB website.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3278761/?ref_=tt_cl_t5.