sonamdolma said: "Hello. I know your question is quite old now, but in case anyone finds this discussion while Googling, I'd like to add my two cents. I'm a sign language interpreter. I have talked to several Deaf people about The Who's Tommy, and they confirmed my initial feeling that yes, the story demeans Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Blind people yes, it is offensive. It doesn't matter that the character Tommy wasn't truly deaf or blind (which is a little contradictory, he can't see or hear but he's not deaf or blind?). And it's not simply the phrase "deaf, dumb, and blind" which is offensive. It's not merely those three words that matter.
What matters is that the big crisis of the story is that Tommy, who was born hearing and sighted, is now deaf and blind. And the moment he loses his sight and hearing, this is represented by him becoming totally unresponsive, catatonic, practically a zombie on the stage. He spends his whole childhood in a daze like this, and does not respond to his family's touch or movement or any attempts at communication, because he can't hear or see them.
Deaf, blind, and deaf-blind people are not zombies. They are normal people. If you get to know them, you find they are just normal people. If this doesn't make sense to you, it means you haven't met Deaf, blind, or deaf-blind people. They have relationships just like everyone else. This story is a very ignorant, (and outdated) portrayal of this community and their experience. It appears it was written with not much research, not much attempt to get to know a real Deaf-blind person, but represents Deaf-blindness strictly from the point of view of hearing, sighted people who imagine and project all kinds of crazy ideas onto Deaf-blind people. THAT is the problem with this show.
If anyone thinks this is a picky point, listen, I LOVE the music of this show. But seeing Deaf people in the audience, squirming uncomfortably all through the show, looking disgusted, depressed, and dejected while the hearing audience is cheering and having a great time, come on, can we ignore that? It ruins the show for me. I love the music, and I love Pete Townshend, but it's not worth hurting whole communities of people. It's really hurtful. I want to say, "Pete, please could you re-write this show and just make it about a boy who is severely traumatized, and can't communicate, and just leave it at that?" Don't drag the deaf and blind and deaf-blind communities into it, who are already so misunderstood by most people in the world. Leave them out of it.
Besides the deaf, blind, and deaf-blind audience members having to endure this ignorant portrayal of people like them, then they have to witness the Deaf-blind character, being assaulted, bullied, tortured in many ways, and also repeatedly subjected to a different kind of assault at the hands of the medical system.
Oh but wait, then comes the jubilant happy ending... he CAN actually hear and see... he is "normal", hooray, phew, he's healed, and everything is okay, he's not deaf and blind after all, phew, he's free. Free from the "prison" of being deaf-blind, hallelujah. Then family and audience and Tommy himself rejoice rejoice rejoice. and that's the happy ending.
So it's very good that you sincerely asked this question-- Is The Who's Tommy offensive? If you don't have the benefit of having deaf or blind or deaf-blind people in your life, like I do, you still can get close to the answer, yourself. Just think, really try to imagine-- how would you feel if you're a deaf or blind or deaf-blind person in the audience? You buy your ticket, you've heard this is a great show, you love theater, you and your partner get your seats and are ready to enjoy the show, and then as the story unfolds, you witness this ugly, misguided portrayal of life as a deaf-blind person, and the hearing audience singing along and loving this story. Isn't that something like a minstrel show? Do YOU think it's offensive?
Or, look at the story again, and try to imagine, what if this story is describing Tommy has the characteristics of you and your people? Think about something central to your identity, something that people don't understand, and imagine, that the crisis of the story is that Tommy had a trauma that made him become like YOU in this way, like you and your people. And then instead of the story showing the characters learning that there is nothing wrong with being that way, it's actually fine, that the problem was society, not Tommy. But no, the joyful ending is that, thank goodness, Tommy is not that way at all. He's not like that part of YOU that people misunderstand, no, he's normal, he is just like everyone else, in just the way they wished he would be. So we can all be happy and sing and feel great, because it turns out Tommy is okay, he's not like YOU at all, thank goodness.
I hope I don't seem to be shaming anyone for not understanding these things at first. If you haven't met deaf, blind, or deaf-blind people, then how would you know? You would never have a chance to know that they are just regular people like yourself. And if the offensiveness of Tommy ends up creating discussions like this, where hearing, sighted people can think about WHY it really is offensive, how it feels to that community of people, well then maybe something good can come out of it.
With all due respect, Pete Townshend should just re-write the story."
Will all due respect, they are missing the point. Tommy isn't a realistic depiction of a person with sight, hearing and speech disabilities--it's an allegory of pain and spiritual development. It isn't meant to represent reality at all (the original album takes place between 1921 and 1941 or so, but there's pinball before the game was invented, and somehow a WWI but no WWII). I'm certainly not telling anyone how to feel about the work, but it simply isn't about real disabled people. Who becomes deaf, blind and mute psychosomatically? It's a very beautiful work, though I don't much care for the stage version.
