The Cinema of Isolation: A History of Physical Disability in the Movies

by Martin F. Norden

Filmmakers have often encouraged us to regard people with physical disabilities in terms of pity, awe, humor, or fearas "Others" who somehow deserve to be isolated from the rest of society. In this first history of the portrayal of physical disability in the movies, Martin Norden examines hundreds of Hollywood movies (and notable international ones), finds their place within mainstream society, and uncovers the movie industry's practices for maintaining the status quokeeping people with disabilities dependent and "in their place."

Norden offers a dazzling array of physically disabled characters who embody or break out of the stereotypes that have both influenced and been symptomatic of societys fluctuating relationship with its physically disabled minority. He shows us "sweet innocents" like Tiny Tim, "obsessive avengers" like Quasimodo, variations on the disabled veteran, and many others. He observes the arrival of a new set of stereotypes tied to the growth of science and technology in the 1970s and 1980s, and underscores movies like My Left Foot and The Waterdance that display a newfound sensitivity. Nordens in-depth knowledge of disability history makes for a particularly intelligent and sensitive approach to this long-overlooked issue in media studies.

Genres: Disability, Nonfiction, History, Disability Studies, Film

406 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 1994

About the author

Martin F. Norden teaches film history and screenwriting as professor of communication at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He has more than one hundred publications to his credit and has presented his film research at dozens of professional conferences across North America and Europe. He served as a consultant on the documentary films CinemAbility and Be Natural: The Untold Story of Alice Guy-Blaché.

Reviews

[Ricky Taylor]

This is academic book. A long time ago when I was a student at Gallaudet University, I had a class which the adjunct professor required us to read the selected chapters in this book. Since I wanted to read the whole book, I decided to keep the book for more than 20 years. Now I finally get to read the whole book and it was interesting.

As disabled (Deaf) person, I'm always fascinated with the films focusing on physical disabilities. This book focuses from the beginning of the moving image to early 1990s. Obviously, this book needs to be updated.

However, I was pleased that the author categorized the films in different trends: Feel Good, Tragic Victim, Elderly Dupe, Obsessive Avenger, Sweet Innocent, Noble Warrior, Saintly Sage, Civilian Superstar and Comic Misadventurer.

When the author did do that, it makes sense on which disabled characters were placed in which category. The conclusion is something that I always suspected but could not pinpoint until the author did - it fits with the idea of Hollywood on people with physical disabilities.

Again, this is academic book and I would recommend this to anyone who wants to research on the films that deals with physical disabilities.

[Callie Cox]

Read for a course on Disability in Film. Dense, as textbooks normally are but full of rich history and references to hundreds of films throughout.

[Fraser Sherman]

I thought I was going to hate this book given Noden's fondness for Freudian analysis, but it's actually very good. Noden traces the history of disabled movie stereotypes through the 20th century--the naive blind person, the spiritually enlightened blind person, the obsessed avenger (Ahab), the saintly cripple (Tiny Tim). The title comes from Noden's view that movies present the handicapped as people set apart, impossible to mainstream (it's common for the film versions to renounce love on the grounds they aren't worthy of an abled lover).

[Jen (Remembered Reads)]

As a general overview of depictions of disability in American cinema in the 20th century, it's a fabulous book. The problem with covering so much ground though is that none of the topics can have very much depth - there just isn't room for the extra analysis.

Still, worth the read.