On TV, I watch a governor of some state or the president
talk about some disaster the state or the country is going
through—the pandemic, a flood, fire, frozen pipes and
downed power lines. Most ever day or so there are incle-
ment or calamitous happenings somewhere. It’s a big
country, and shit happens now and again.
Anyway, positioned to the right of the official in a
separate box on the screen is a man or a woman
who signs to benefit the hearing impaired. Suppos-
edly their hand movements and facial expressions
are synchronized with the message being verbalized.
I, who hear quite well most of the time, am quite
captivated and impressed with the speed in which
those handicap facilitators do their job. Those folks
are fast and very expressive.
I am, however, a bit suspicious, about the accuracy
of their speedy transmission. Do all those gyrations
of finger, hand, arm and mouth match up precisely
with what is being verbalized to the viewers? Or do
they sometimes synopsize, scrutinize and editorialize
what is actually being said?
Mostly, the speakers are either so-called experts in
their field or politicians with questionable motives.
Granted, I am not proficient in the language of sign
for the hearing impaired, but wonder about word
for word accuracy.
As an aside, I once worked with a woman who was
deaf from birth. She taught me how to sign, Thank
you. It took me awhile to get it right. It is similar to
how one would throw a kiss—hand to mouth, yes,
but without the lip smacking and blowing afterwards.
Anyway, as I watch frenetic motion of the signer on
TV, I pause to wonder if they ever interject their own
personal opinion as to what is actually being said. I
watch for little telltale signs (like the flash of a middle
finger) which may indicate the hint of a subjective
critique—Perhaps, That’s a crock of shit, or sure,
yeah, right. Some of those signs sped up past the
eye look pretty suspicious to me. Kind of like, now
you see it, now you don’t.
-30-
Chris Hanch 2-27-2021
No comments:
Post a Comment