By now you might have heard that the popular TV series Glee recently aired an episode entitled “Wheels,” which was all about disability. It was a mixed bag. For the most part it was better than the sorts of cloying, sentimentalized depictions of disability on television–shows often advertised as “a very special Punky Brewster” (or whatever).
The main premise is that one of the regular characters, Artie (played by Kevin McHale), uses a wheelchair, and is going to have to find his own way to a glee club competition because the school district doesn’t have any accessible buses. The episode starts with Artie being framed by an individualized rhetoric of triumph over adversity–Artie is used to overcoming obstacles, Artie doesn’t mind–but it quickly undermines these messages. Artie does mind, and for most of the show the nondisabled glee club members are required to get around in wheelchairs. This of course is a learning experience for them, and it has the effect of visually challenging the normality of bodies not in wheelchairs for the show’s viewers. The show ends with a wheelchair dance number that’s nicely done, and is a lot of fun.
So there are good things about this show. But I had a number of problems with it, too. The most obvious problem is that it became the disability episode. Not only do we have Artie and his wheelchair, but we have two characters with Down syndrome. And while I am delighted to see actors with Down syndrome on any mainstream TV show, these two characters were used in problematic ways. The first, Becky Johnson, played by Lauren Potter, tries out for the cheerleading squad and is accepted. The good aspect of this is that she’s pushed really hard by the coach, who says that Becky wants to be treated like the other cheerleaders: she refuses to coddle her because of her diagnosis. The bad aspect is that she’s terrible, just terrible. She can’t do even the most basic things that the rest of the squad does.
And the worst aspect of the inclusion of the characters with Down syndrome is that they’re ultimately used, as the New York Times Arts Beat blog argues, “as a prop in the continuing humanization of [cheerleading coach] Sue Sylvester.” We find out that the coach let Becky onto the squad because her older sister (played by Robin Trocki) has Down syndrome, and we find this out when Sue visits her sister and reads her Little Red Riding Hood. Again, a mixed bag: many folks in the world have people we love with disabilities, and it’s nice to put that message out there. The scene with Sue and her sister was trying to be very loving and affectionate, and it sort of worked, but sort of verged into that cloying, a very special Glee kind of place. Is it sweet that Sue was reading her sister–her older, very clearly adult, sister–Little Red Riding Hood, or was it infantilizing of the sister for the sake of making Sue seem sweeter?
Ultimately the show can’t fully escape from the individualized triumph over adversity rhetoric that permeates a lot of mainstream treatment of disability. Near the end of the show, the character Kurt, as part of another plot line, tells his dad, “Being different made me stronger.” In some ways this is the message that the show leaves with its viewers, and it’s a message I have strongly mixed feelings about.
Comments 13
Sasha_feather — November 17, 2009
This post has been included in a linkspam at Access_fandom. Thank you!
Deborah Siegel — November 18, 2009
What a thoughtful post, Alison. I am forwarding link to friends in disability studies as well...
Tina Hanson — November 19, 2009
First - I must qualify - I do not know anyone closely with a disability and I am a Glee Devotee!! That said, I thought this particular episode dealt with several aspects of disabilities rather cleverly in the short 20 minutes it had and still maintained that campy glee feeling. I am not sure if it made Sue sweeter but certainly more human (at least that's how Sue "C's" it!!!!
It was a great opportunity to open discussion about issues surrounding disabilities however. Specifically the cheerleader episode - do we only let those that fit our idea of "good" participate or is it enough for her to have the passion and desire of a cheerleader to be an effective Cheer - leader? In many ways, people with disabilities have trouble fitting in at the same level of expectation for non-disabled persons but to continue with those expectations will forever limit their participation in many activities. Just my "outsider" thoughts.
Thanks
Tina Hanson
Bob Lamm — November 25, 2009
I wish you'd noted that the one member of the GLEE ensemble who plays a character with a disability does NOT use a wheelchair. With all the disabled actors who can't otherwise find work, GLEE cast a nondisabled actor in this role. Typical Hollywood.
I watched the first few episodes of GLEE and was appalled at the same-old-tokenism of Hollywood. The main White heterosexual characters each had TWO love interests, while the four "tokens" (one African American, one Asian American, one gay male, one male who uses a wheelchair) had a collective total of ZERO love interests.
And it's worth mentioning on a feminist blog that in the early episodes of GLEE there were TWO crucial female characters lying to the men in their lives about their alleged or real pregnancies. Having two key females lying in this way is completely misogynistic.
Mel Goldsipe — November 30, 2009
Bob Lamm,
You have very valid points about the pregnancy storylines, but I think it's outside the scope of the focus of this review, which was specifically about disability.
I *would* love to hear Alison's take on Glee as a whole from a feminist perspective. I love this show, but it's *so* problematic all around. I mean, the lip synching is terrible. The songs are autotuned within an inch of their life in addition to having more voices than characters singing.
It should be pointed out that one of the female white heterosexual leads is Jewish and has two dads, though.
Alison, I hope you'll tackle some of these other Glee issues next, when you're back from your Girl Zines tour!
Bob Lamm — November 30, 2009
Quite true that Ms. Piepmeier's focus was on one recent episode of GLEE and on GLEE's depictions of disability, whereas my comments were on the first few episodes and on other issues as well as disability issues. Is that forbidden? Am I not allowed to comment on other episodes from the same series? Am I not allowed, on a feminist blog of all places, to criticize the misogyny of a very popular TV series? And isn't it relevant to Ms. Piepmeier's review for me to mention that the lead disabled character is played by a nondisabled actor? At a time when disabled actors virtually never get cast in ANY roles in Hollywood!
I would love to see Alison Piepmeier and anyone/everyone else from GirlwPen.com address GLEE from a feminist perspective.
gwp_admin — December 1, 2009
Thanks to all for your comments. Thanks to Bob and Mel especially for your thoughtful engagements with my post and with the show as a whole. I had heard that the actor who plays Artie doesn't use a wheelchair--and like Bob, I find that to be an unfortunate choice on the part of the show's creators. The pregnancy stuff also sounds really problematic.
I haven't watched many episodes of GLEE, but maybe I can catch up over the holiday break so that I can offer more feminist analyses of the show.
--Alison
Bob Lamm — December 2, 2009
Many thanks, Alison. I certainly hope that you (and others) will offer feminist analyses and critiques of GLEE.
dez — August 21, 2010
I've been looking for feminist analysis of Glee because, although I LOVE the show, the female characters are all a little hollow and a little weak. I would venture to say the script writers more closely resemble a Finn or Mr. Shue or even a Curt -- characters with dimension, respectability, earnestness, falterings, triumphs.
I do love how Rachel (and the actress who inhabits her so well) really learns her lessons, falls, gets back up and strides on. But, her character, while adorable and funny, is not as believable as Finn's or Will's or Curt's. Rachel is more what an ambitious girl might seem like to someone who doesn't really understand her. Rachel is a little crazy, Will's wife Terri is deranged and crazy, Emma is a touch crazy and mostly a sounding board.
Santana = mean/sexy, Brittany = dumb/good dancer.
But I do love the show and I love the genuine emotions and life lessons delivered with fun and over the top singing and dancing. And the episode themes. I always appreciate the themes.
cash for gold — October 24, 2010
How It Comes Too Quick
Mark — November 25, 2010
I think the producers had the right idea when writing the episode, but with every controversial topic you're gonna step on some toes. cash for gold
Elise Coppernoll — September 3, 2011
Took me time to study all the comments, but I definitely enjoyed the write-up. It proved to become quite beneficial to me and I am certain to all of the commenters right here! Its constantly good when you can not only be informed, but additionally entertained! I am positive you had enjoyment writing this write-up.
buysell — September 20, 2011
when we think about website I love to us for your very goodnews. I will bookmark it.