Discourses of Autism on Film: An Analysis of Memorable Images that Create Definition
The characteristics that provide a platform for a categorical distinction between being ‘disabled’ and ‘abled’ is arguably dependent on the shared understanding and socially agreed upon ideas of a group of individuals. Collectively, groups derive meaning through communications and interactions with each other and their environment using particular language and common assumptions (Prawat & Floden, 1994; Rogoff, 1990). The intersubjectivity of the community aids in shaping personal meaning of their position in relation to another person’s position. Some argue that the intersubjectivity, or shared understanding, creates social meaning and knowledge of ability and disability which are socially constructed dichotomies, and that through the polarised construction people are positioned on one side or another of an apparent factually based line of difference (Kang, 2009; Scully, 2009; Titchkosky, 2003; Williams et al., Chapter 4, this volume). The construction and definition of disability arise through a variety of mediums including social, cultural, historical, and political discourses (Scully, 2009). As disability is constructed so to is the ‘line of difference’ that distinguishes the abled from the disabled. This line of difference is continuously constructed and reconstructed to coincide with changing cultural, political, and personal landscapes. These landscapes are constantly changing as a result of multiple influences including, although not limited to, gaining new information or exposure about a topic.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edition). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
- Anderson, L., & Shimamura, A. P. (2005). Influences of emotion on context memory while viewing film clips. The American Journal of Psychology, 118(3), 323–337.Google Scholar
- Baker, A. D. (2008). Recognizing Jake, contending with formulaic and sectacularized representations of Autism in film. In M. Osteen (Ed.), Autism and representation (pp. 229–243). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Collins, K. M. (2003). Ability profiling and school failure: One child’ s struggle to be seen as competent. London: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Fischoff, S., Cardenas, E., Hernandez, A., Wyatt, K., Young, J., & Gordon, R. (August 2000). Popular movie quotes: Reflections of a people and a culture. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Retrieved on 1 May 2015 at: http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/moviequotes.htm.
- Gabbard, G. O., & Gabbard, K. (1999). Psychiatry and the cinema. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar
- Garner, A.R. (2014). What’s Showing: film industry portrayals of autism spectrum conditions and their influences on preservice teachers in Australia, Doctor of Philosophy thesis. Wollongong, NSW: University of Wollongong.Google Scholar
- Greenburgh, B. S. (1988). Some uncommon television images and the drench hypothesis. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Applied social psychology annual (television., Vol. 8). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Kang, J. (2009). A teacher’s deconstruction of disability: A discourse analysis. Disability Studies Quarterly, 29(1) online.Google Scholar
- Kozloff, S. (2000). Overhearing film dialogue. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Mallett, R & Runswick-Cole, K. (2012). Commodifying autism: The cultural contexts of ‘disability’ in the academy. In L. Goodley, D. Hughes, & B. Davis (Eds.), Disability andsocial theory: New developments and directions (pp. 33–51). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
- —. (2008). Hollywood and the fascination of autism. In M. Osteen (Ed.), Autism and representation (pp. 244–255). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- — (2012). Autism: Me. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: An educational perspective. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Scully, J. L. (2009). Epistemologies of embodiment. In M. U. Walker, H. Lindemann, & M. Verkerk (Eds.), Naturalized bioethics: Toward responsible knowing and practice (pp. 23–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Titchkosky T. (2003). Disability, self and society. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
- Vygotsky L. (1986). Thought and language. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Wing, L., & Potter, D. (2009). Assessment of autism spectrum disorders. In O. S. Goldstein, J. Naglieri, & S. Ozonoff (Eds.), Assessment of autism spectrum disorders (pp. 18–54). New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
- • Murray, S. (2008). Hollywood and the fascination of autism. In M. Osteen (Ed.), Autism and representation (pp. 244–255). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar