‘Some days it feels like I’m a starving animal, happy to accept the tiniest crumbs someone is willing to throw my way’: Blind critic Olivia Muscat calls for a total rethink of our ideas about inclusion
As someone who is blind, it becomes really easy to accept the bare minimum. The bare minimum of access, the bare minimum of inclusion, the bare minimum of respect. It sounds kind of bleak. Because it is.
Some days it feels like I’m a starving animal, happy to accept the tiniest crumbs someone is willing to throw my way. Not always, but definitely sometimes. Sometimes, I’m thrilled about the smallest steps to accommodate my access needs. And then I think about it and realise that what was done was really easy and probably didn’t require the level of gratitude I bestowed. They could’ve done so much more.
Last month, I attended a workshop at Malthouse Theatre that was focused on community engagement for Blind and Vision Impaired (VI) people in performance and the arts more broadly, hosted by Description Victoria. It wasn’t aimed at me, and I am already aware of all the issues discussed. But it was interesting none the less, and I’m very glad I went.
All Blind and VI people are unique, and there is no universal access solution. But there are many simple things that companies, organisations and venues can put in place to ensure that everyone has equal opportunities to experience the array of performances, exhibitions and other events that our city has to offer.
For as long as audio description (AD) has been available in Melbourne, which as far as I can glean has not been for that long in the grand scheme of things, it has been provided by Vision Australia volunteers. It’s provided at varying levels of quality for large scale productions or shows put on by the larger, better known companies, usually once, or maybe twice during a show’s run. In the case of the Melbourne Theatre Company, AD is offered pretty consistently on a Tuesday evening and Saturday matinee, with a tactile tour offered before the Saturday show.
We can view this in a couple of different ways. One view, which I held for a long time, is that it’s fantastic that the service exists and I should be grateful and not complain. What choice do I have? Another, which was discussed at the workshop, is that that this is the very bare minimum we should expect, and that the way we view access and inclusion needs a complete redesign.
Don’t get me wrong. I am grateful that these volunteers give up their time and I appreciate their efforts. But when I have to put up with a describer talking over dialogue, or laughing instead of describing, or censoring visuals they think are inappropriate, I won’t go out of my way to attend an AD show. Also, Tuesday evenings at 6.30pm or Saturday afternoons at 2pm are just not my preferred times to be going to the theatre. I honestly believe that venues and organisations, and non-disabled people generally, think that disabled people don’t go out late at night. This is not, in fact, true.
The concept of trust was broached by every single speaker at the workshop. Each talked about personal experiences that made them either gain or lose trust in an organisation or venue. I’d never thought about it in those particular terms, but it is entirely true. If a venue does something as small as offering me a water bowl for my dog, my trust in them grows significantly. I feel welcome and included, and not like an unwanted burden, and the chances I’ll return in the future are pretty high. As I said above, I am very grateful for the tiniest things.
On the other hand, if I can’t access a venue’s website to find information about a performance, or the staff are completely unaware of how to show basic human decency to a person with a disability, they lose my trust quickly and I probably won’t rush to attend anything else they’re putting on. I’ll probably warn a good number of other Blind people against it as well. I have a very basic understanding of the way business works, but even my limited knowledge says that losing customers is bad. Right?
In order to build trust, organisations need to go above and beyond what is currently considered acceptable. Start by offering a high-quality audio description. That’s a fantastic initiative. It’s also the most basic level of accessibility for someone who is Blind or has low vision. Cool. Again, if we attend your show, we might know what is going on visually, but we also have to get there. Even more basically, we need to be aware that you’re offering this service. If your website is inaccessible or you don’t advertise the service somewhere that people might actually find it, how is anyone supposed to know?
A representative at the workshop, from an organisation that I won’t name, mentioned that her organisation offered AD for an exhibition but didn’t offer it again because only a couple of people used the service. I receive the email newsletter from this organisation, and not once have I seen audio description or audio tours mentioned. I can’t go if I don’t know it’s on.
It may take some time to build up the trust and the audience when a service is new, but if you persist, we will come. Seriously, we will. We’re just a little too used to services and opportunities being pulled out from under our feet. And if you think your particular performance or event wouldn’t be interesting to a Blind or VI person, you are probably wrong. We are all interested in different things, just like regular people.
Even if the particular performance is only interesting to one Blind or VI person, doesn’t that person deserve the right to attend and experience it as fully as possible?
What’s offered in terms of access and inclusion is so very basic. Instead of just offering AD, venues need to consider how exhausting it can be for people with disabilities to just get themselves out of the house and to an event, and do everything they can to make the experience less taxing and more welcoming. Here are some suggestions: staff with disability and access training, well-lit venues, places to toilet service dogs, even a staff member to meet people at a nearby public transport point and make sure they can get to and around the venue safely and quickly.
Things as simple as adding information about things like nearby landmarks, good drop off points for taxis or good places to meet friends can take an enormous amount of stress out of a Blind or VI person’s day. It doesn’t take much to add that information to a website, but it makes my anxiety levels go down by about 389 per cent. And they’re simple adjustments that benefit all patrons, not just the disabled ones.
Telling a Blind or VI person that they shouldn’t come to your venue unless they are accompanied by a carer or friend is not the “easy” solution. (This isn’t a hypothetical, it happens.) Sometimes, a lot of the time, we want to, or have to, attend things alone. I am constantly floored by the how many people are surprised that I go out on my own. Access needs to be incorporated in every aspect of a performance or exhibition, not just on the main attraction. Getting to a venue, moving around the venue, being able to access important facilities, such as bathrooms, food and wine, are all vital aspects of access and inclusion.
The easy solution is to consult the communities you need to include, to listen to their needs and suggestions and then to put them in place. It does no good to assume the best ways to include a community without any input from the community itself. That is, to put to baldly, just as ableist as making no attempt at access and inclusion at all. And there are many Blind and VI people who are willing to discuss everything from web accessibility to guide dog etiquette.
Another important issue that was touched on by every speaker, and which is possibly the most interesting to me personally, is the idea of inclusion at all levels, not just audience members and patrons. Many of the speakers at the workshop mentioned that they know it is scary for non-disabled people to talk to, and engage with Blind people. This is a sad reality. So many people just do not know what to do when confronted with a disabled person.
If arts organisations begin to employ people with a disability at all levels, it makes an anormous difference. And it would help to dispel the strange myth that disabled people don’t have a place in the arts beyond being somebody’s inspiration fodder. Not to mention the fact that if Blind and VI people are employees, they can be consulted on matters of accessibility and can often offer practical and simple solutions, or suggest somebody else who can.
And then there is the issue of artists with a disability.
When I say all areas of a venue need to be accessible, I really do mean all areas. An artist or performer, or several artists and performers, will be using backstage areas or other areas not open to the public, offices for example. It is already a struggle to be taken seriously and accommodated as a disabled artist. We shouldn’t have to put up with poor or zero access to a work space. Consult artists with a disability, find out what works, and act on it.
I have barely begun to scratch the surface of what was covered at the workshop. But the main message is that when it comes to the arts, Blind and Vision Impaired audiences and artists deserve a lot more than we are currently given. More can be done, and more needs to be done, to ensure that all people in all communities have full access to the things they love. The arts are not there simply to enrich the lives of those who can access them without any adjustments. The arts are for everyone. And I’m done with shutting up and accepting the bare minimum.
15 comments
Olivia this is a great article and I agree with everything you are saying. I used to be a volunteer audio describer with VA (for four years) and I am mildly concerned about how you have characterised the service. It sounds an awful lot like the poor rhetoric Description Victoria bandied about when they first set up shop in Melbourne. I know from my training and from working over 4 years with other describers (we always work in pairs) that our training and practice is very strict about not talking over dialogue unless absolutely necessary and the policy is to say what you see within the confines of what space between the dialogue exists. We also always prepared preshow notes which were sent out to booked clients with detailed information on sets, costumes, cast and generally included a couple of reviews to make sure as little as possible was missed in the experience of listening to your describer. As far as I am aware VA audio description has been around for over 20 years and the service always maintains best international practice with regular training refreshers and monthly meeting to discuss issues, problems and solutions. I am sorry if you have had a bad experience, but that is not the norm for the Vision Australia service and just because the volunteers are not paid that does not mean the clients are not getting a world class service despite what the commercial new kid on the block is spinning as their PR. Having said all that, even Vision Australia agrees that audio description should be available for any performance and have been muddling over that for a few years. The problem is figuring out how to do it in a cost effective and affordable manner, and who can/should bear whatever costs there are.
Hi Samsara, thanks for your comment. I’m sure that Olivia, as a frequent user of this service, can speak to her own experiences. But speaking over dialogue was certainly something she noted in her review of The Architect at the MTC. I am not sure what your problem is with Description Victoria, but certainly this event sounds like a necessary opening of dialogue between the industry and Blind and VI arts fans, so maybe it’s something that ought to be welcomed. And yes, as I’ve discovered myself, resources are definitely a problem.
Hi Alison, yes, I am not disputing anything Olivia says about the need for more and better services. Everyone, even Vision Australia is trying to solve that one. It is always a difficult balance for describers, particularly in scripts which are script heavy, trying to provide enough description and some describers are, of course, better than others. I guess my problem with Description Victoria is they needed the help of Vision Australia to get started and used their equipment but came right out of the blocks saying our service was crap and saying we were sub par when, in fact, our training equaled if not surpassed their own. (They are from SA). To be honest, this contempt and deliberate slurring of us as describers is exactly why I stopped doing it. I stopped doing it because of this slurring which they were only doing to drum up business without actually ever knowing what we did or how we did it. I will admit Vision Australia was to blame as well because their policy is to support all vision services and so they did nothing to support our reputation. Who knew the world of disability support was such a hotbed of politics?! There is also the question of why companies are prepared to pay Description Victoria but never paid a cent to Vision Australia…
Hi Samsara. Will here, Director of Description Victoria. We’ve never met nor communicated directly about any of the issues you’ve raised here. My contact details are publicly accessible on our website should you ever wish to do so. We have never discussed my training, my experience, my values, or Description Victoria’s vision for audio description. For your reference, Description Victoria is an incorporated not-for-profit association that receives no funding, and is governed by a committee with a majority of members who are Blind or have low vision.
You seem to make many assumptions. I take great exception to your claim – made without evidence, may I add – that we have been “saying [your] service is crap, saying [you] were sub par”, or that we have been “slurring” anybody, and what this implies about us and our motivations.
My interest is in the quality of experience for clients regardless of service provider, and in centering the voices of people who are Blind or have low vision in this conversation – especially when those voices are critical. Ultimately, it is and must always be about them. I would hope that you can judge us on our work and impact, and take seriously the very important points raised by Olivia and others who are Blind about their experiences in the arts.
Samsara, maybe Blind arts consumers are the people to speak to these questions? And of course disability access is political. It’s hard to see how it wouldn’t be, tbh.
Posting from Olivia Muscat:
Hi Samsara. I’m so glad you agree with what I have to say. My characterisation, as you put it, of the Vision Australia AD service, comes solely from my own personal experience of being a client for almost a decade. I appreciate the service, and what it does on the whole, and would never criticise unless I had good reason. Every point I mention in the essay is taken from things I have personally experienced on more than a couple of occasions. But as AD is the very least of what I mention in the essay I hope you, and others, can get past the perceived slights to VA and focus on creating a more inclusive arts experience for all. Whatever organisation you happen to be affiliated with.
Hi Olivia and Will, I understand the point of view of the artical and I mention in both my comments I totally agree with the access issues you raise and, as I mention, Vision Australia has been wrestling with these issues for a very long time now and I hope with so many advocates the issue is redressed somehow.
Will, I absolutely do have proof, which includes the very first press release Vision Australia put out publicly advocating your services. I have also been in discussions with other describers who have approached you and spoken to you personally and I know you insist that even experienced describers have to go through your full training program to work with you with no consideration for any skills or experience they already have which clearly speaks to you attitude about them. With the NDIS being implemented and the opening up of the disability sector to an open market economcy it was always going to happen and it is true Vision Australia was never prepared and are still rather intractable about changing with the times. I also understand you came into what was, effectively, a monopoly market demanding no economic cost and had to have a angle to get people to pay for a service they were getting for free. I also agree that describers should be paid just as Auslan interpreters are. I have no problem with any that. It is just worth noting the position you took playing the ‘volunteers aren’t skilled or professional whereas we are’ had casualties and the biggest losers in the end were blind and low vision people. A significant number of audio describers have dropped of the Vision Australia roster because of it. Having said that, it was not so much the marketing tactics of your company so much as the lack of support Vision Australia showed in terms of marketing their own services in a competition market place. Description Victoria is well established and I wish you well. You did everything you were entitled to do to gain market share and I have no doubt you do the job well.
Hi Samsara. There’s a lot in here, and it’s very concerning to me that you’re choosing to air impressions you have formed based on hearsay in a public forum as if they are fact. As I said, you are welcome to contact me should you wish to discuss any issues you have.
It is absolutely our prerogative to ensure that people who work with us meet a standard of practice we’re happy with. You’ve heard in this very thread from someone who has had poor experiences with audio description in the past. Our goal is to ensure that doesn’t happen again.
We created 41 accessible and inclusive arts experiences for and with people who are Blind or have low vision in 2018, in addition to the full seasons that were delievered by Vision Australia. We’ve also run advocacy and training events with artists and arts workers in a variety of contexts, and are currently working to support Blind artists, researchers, and writers to advance their practice. I fail to see how that equates to a loss for the community.
Hmm. This is obviously a sore point Samsara, but I really don’t understand why audio describers would stop volunteering because some Blind people said the service could be improved or another organisation said it needed to be more professional? Forgive me, but to an outsider it sounds very like men calling themselves feminist “allies” but pulling support the moment women say that they’re being sexist…
Firstly, it is not hearsay when it is happening to me directly, Will. I was there. I heard it, I saw it, and it happened to me. In fact, I was the first describer to find evidence of the public rhetoric being thrown about and brought it to the attention of the VA audio description service. I have also said I agree everything which was said and done was entirely your right and many consequences were not your fault.
Alison I don’t think that is a fair analogy and just because people may have stopped describing because the environment was one of disrespect does not mean many of us have not found other ways to provide support, advocacy, and services for the disability sector generally and the low vision sector specifically. And yes it was a very sore point because at least half the describers during my time were, like me, extensively experienced and highly trained theatre practitioners as well as highly trained audio describers. The intention of VA describers has always been to increase access to theatre and entertainment events and we all started at a time when the idea of it being a commercial enterprise would never have even been entertained by either the disability or entertainment sector.
Regardless, as I said earlier, I do wish everyone in the sector well and I do look back fondly on my time engaging with audio description. I even occassionally do ad hoc projects on special requests. I am just not strong enough to cope with more impuning of my reputation – even if it is just by association – and yes, that is my weakness. I also reiterate, Description Victoria did nothing technically wrong.
Will, I do take your point that I have never met you but I also would like to point out you never made an effort to make any contact with us either and it was you who was ‘moving into our territory’ so to speak…
Anyway, c’est la vie, and as the Libs keep trying to tell us, more open market competition is always a good thing 🙂
Samsara, I suggest that you take up your beef with Will in another forum. You are totally sidelining Olivia’s important points in order to centre your own hurt feelings. I will say, however, that painting Description Victoria as a neoliberal commercial enterprise is absurd.
Alison, you can’t end with a sentence like that and assume the conversation would end. Firstly both you and Will have been complicit in this conversation so it is not my sole responsibility it has continued. I merely respond to you provocations as you do to mine. Secondly I never characterised Description Victoria in such a way although I don’t understand why you say it is absurd. They are a commercial enterprise, that is all I have said as well as discussing the changing market structure under the NDIS for all disability services which has a direct impact on Olivia’s ideas because if Audio Description becomes an eligible service it might be that participants can fund audio description themselves and not have to rely on specific predetermined dates and times. However, it was also relevant for me to respond to Olivia’s comments about the Vision Australia service because she is the one who brought it up. Finally, in nearly every response post I have brought us back to Olivia’s article and specifically mentioned how I support her ideas on increased accessibility. I understand you may have taken Will under your wing to champion and you do that well for everyone you support, but dismissing my comments in this thread as emotional detritus is not promoting debate on any issue. Yes, my feelings were hurt, but more importantly the issue is that one of the two organisations providing the service is being continuously demeaned and disenfranchised by the kind of negative comments which occur in this article and in other important places – comments which were never in the conversation prior to competition entering the field. Rather than strengthening the industry in providing these services and looking for workable solutions to increase access for blind and low vision people, this kind of rhetoric diminishes it. Olivia is right about crumbs. I have disabilities too and I know what she is referring to but maligning people who have been working hard for decades to provide a service no-one was paying for (we invested approximately 20 hours per show into preparation activities x 2 people and I know I averaged 5 – 7 shows a year not to mention monthly meetings and regular training refreshers). It is important these type of articles play the ball, not the man – or the volunteers in this case. My feelings were hurt yes, but that was a couple of years ago now. Now I am talking about broader issues of industry support, sustainability, and service provision. Vision Australia provided this support with contact lists and partnership with Description Victoria when they started up. It is hard to see what came back to the organisaton in return to strengthen and increase services for the low vision community which is what Olivia is asking for.
Samsara, I suggest the main message here is to listen to what Olivia and other Blind and VI people have to say. You have instead focused on taking offence at Olivia’s descriptions of her own experiences and turned this into a singularly profitless airing of grievances. Olivia’s comments are measured and also fair (she said she is grateful for the service). Nobody is maligning anybody here, aside from your weird animus against DV. Again: this is not the forum for this and you are derailing the discussion.
Full disclosure. My name is Penny Stevenson. I’m a former staff member at Vision Australia and of course long time client. I have been to many many audio described shows over the years. I am on the executive of Description Victoria and presented at the session that Olivia described in this article.
I identify as being blind / low vision.
Olivia represented well the events of the day as well as her personal experiences. These mimic my own.
Last weekend I attended Twelfth Night put on by MTC. The description was provided by volunteers. There were at least 3 occasions when the audience was laughing at things happening on stage which were not audio described. I attended with my mum who let me know what was going on. All were physically bawdy gestures. The first was Andrew Aguecheek riding a wine barrel like a horse and thrusting against it. The next one was something physical with Toby Belch… i can’t recall the third. There was no dialogue to overlap. This sort of censorship has occurred at least once or twice for every performance I have attended with volunteer describers. The whole audience has been laughing and I’ve missed the joke. These are the moments when I want audio description the most. These are the moments where I feel disabled because the service is letting me down. It’s worse than not having audio description at all.
We need many AD providers and there is room for volunteers and professionals. But we need quality providers. I also wonder if the mix is right. Mainstream huge budget shows with volunteers? Who is filling the niche of the fringe? The low budget who can’t afford to pay?
We need people who are blind or have low vision as the driving force behind the description organisations. I was working in NZ a few years back for the then RNZFB (Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind). It had changed it’s name a few years previously. It used to be FOR the blind. A very subtle change but I think it sums up succinctly the mindset that has and still pervades in many organisations where blind people are almost an afterthought. At every intersection there needs to be the question of ‘how can I empower a blind person’. Another big thing is are we truly valuing the blind by providing employment.
Will and this Description Victoria facilitated the recent forum however had no editorial intervention in any of the panel members discussions. In fact panel members didn’t collaborate between each other in their presentations. It was amazing however the same themes that kept reoccurring. This to me says that there are systemic problems that need addressing and one of those is the discrepancy in quality of audio description providers. Another is the lack of people with disability (specifically people who are blind or have low vision) in the arts at all levels.
The same can be said for television and film. The quality of description that was offered by Australia on the ABC trial was inferior compared to the British description of their shows. We were grateful to ABC for giving us the trial but we deserve the same high standard that the UK and America is getting.
I would challenge anyone who is following this thread to attend their next arts event wearing low vision simulators or if you’re really game, a blindfold. To take it one step further, try the whole process, booking, travelling, having a meal, meeting up with friends… that means you can’t drive. You could get a lift or take an Uber or taxi but no driving…
To any volunteer describers I’d like to ask you to try going cold turkey to a performance (one you don’t know) and experience the performance that your service provides with a blindfold. No cheating.
But even then remember you are coming at the world from a sighted lens. You know the colour yellow, you know how a leaf acts as it falls from a tree. You have a background of understanding how the world is formed.
I’m a bit dismayed that the lived experience of people who are blind is seemingly so quickly dismissed.
[…] For further recommendations regarding accessibility specifically related to blindness and low vision, please read this article written by blind critic Olivia Muscat following a community engagement work… […]
Comments are closed.