ASL/Open Caption Performances

Posted: 5/5/17 at 11:27pm

I bought tickets for the Hamilton tour not realizing that the performance I'm going to is ASL/open captioned.  I am not hearing impaired, so I'm just wondering what to expect.  Is it distracting, or does it actually help you appreciate the performance?

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 5/5/17 at 11:51pm

I've seen a Broadway show like this before, I just can't remember which one, I believe it was a roundabout one though. It was a play though not a musical but I have no clue if there would be any differences. There was a man and a woman standing in front of the stage on the left side if you were looking at it. They would rotate every half hour or so with another man and woman to take a break.

I also hadn't known about it when I had gotten tickets, I wouldn't willingly buy tickets for it again cause I'd rather other people attend who need it but I honestly didn't find it distracting or anything of that nature.  Since they weren't on the stage I actually forgot they were there after a few minutes. 

Updated On: 5/5/17 at 11:51 PM

[hork]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:13am

Every performance at the Pantages in L.A. has ASL interpreters. It can be distracting, mainly because I'm always aware of a light at the left side of the stage that isn't part of the show, but I've learned to ignore it. Darren Criss worked them into his ad libs in Hedwig (and it was hilarious).

I always have to wonder how many people are actually partaking of this service. They have to be A. deaf, B. seated on the left side of the theater, and C. somehow able to watch the interpreters and what's going on onstage simultaneously, which seems impossible to me. But what do I know?

 

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 12:13 AM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:48am

I'm a lyricist myself and accustomed to seeing my work interpreted in ASL. Most of my stuff is done by gay choruses and the like, so there's no "illusion of realism" to destroy, but how many musicals are "realistic" anyway?

Personally, I think signing is beautiful and I love seeing work done that way, my own or that of others. For that reason, perhaps, i've never thought to ask how many customers are drawn by that feature.

But assuming it's just a few, and the purpose is only to aid them so that for two hours they can enjoy a piece with everyone else: wouldn't that be reason enough?

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:57am

"I always have to wonder how many people are actually partaking of this service. They have to be A. deaf, B. seated on the left side of the theater, and C. somehow able to watch the interpreters and what's going on onstage simultaneously, which seems impossible to me. But what do I know?"

You obviously know little. The Deaf population encompasses a huge community that have the right to enjoy theater just like everyone else. Actually, even if it were only one member of the Deaf community, he or she still have the right to theater. It doesn't matter the size, theater should be accessible to everyone.

And yes, they will buy seats in a section close to the interpreter. They're not stupid. Impossible to you it may be, but easy for most. Please don't spread your ignorance to others about certain groups of people.

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:59am

As to the original OP's question - no, it is not distracting. Please don't use the term "hearing impaired." Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing is preferred by the community. 

[Ahmy]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 1:53am

This was at a different theatre so it'll probably be different for you. But when I saw Evita last May, there was a screen above the stage that had the lyrics & any dialogue on it so anyone who had trouble hearing the actors could still follow along. It wasn't distracting at all.
(The sound was a bit sketchy at times because the company doesn't usually work with microphones, so it was nice to have.)

[ClumsyDude15]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 2:42am

I've seen a few ASL performances on tours that come through Philly and they keep them off to the side of the stage and it is done in a way that it isn't distracting. The most distracting experience I had was when I saw Wicked in Syracuse and I was seated a few rows away from them and it was very distracting plus the women doing it didn't seem like they were that into what they were doing.

Also, it depends on the show how much they sign - during The Sound of Music in Philly, the ASL interpreters didn't really do too much signing but during a show like Book of Mormon they did. I will say you haven't lived until you've seen Hasa Diga Eebowaii or "f*ck frog" being done in ASL.  

 

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 02:42 AM

[mailhandler777]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 8:50am

I've seen a lot of ASL shows in touring houses. Some were open captioned and some were closed captioned. The most distracting one was in Baltimore for Wicked. I won lotto seats and I was 2nd row way to the side. The 2 ladies and 1 guy signing were right in front of me blocking my view of 3/4th of the stage. 

 

Also as Rob said above me the ladies in Syracuse looked like they had no interest in being there. I'd look over at times and neither were signing. They were just standing there.

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 9:39am

"Also as Rob said above me the ladies in Syracuse looked like they had no interest in being there. I'd look over at times and neither were signing. They were just standing there."

If neither were signing, then that means there was nothing to interpret. Unless you are Deaf and know ASL, you have no right to say that "they had no interest in being there." These are professional interpreters, they know what they're doing. They're not there for your entertainment.

I find it annoying that entitled hearing people who get to see whichever show they want, whenever they want, are complaining about being distracted by something that makes theater more accessible.

[mailhandler777]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 10:16am

HenryTDobson said: "If neither were signing, then that means there was nothing to interpret. Unless you are Deaf and know ASL, you have no right to say that "they had no interest in being there." These are professional interpreters, they know what they're doing. They're not there for your entertainment.

I find it annoying that entitled hearing people who get to see whichever show they want, whenever they want, are complaining about being distracted by something that makes theater more accessible."

 

Oh there was plenty to interpret as it was during a song and during some speaking scenes.

I really don't care if there are signers there as long as they aren't blocking my view as they were in Baltimore. 

 

 

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 10:17am

"Oh there was plenty to interpret as it was during a song and during some speaking scenes."

That's simply not for you to say. If you don't know the language, how could you know what they were saying? It's also possible that this was a practice session for them and signing everything wasn't a requirement. 

[mailhandler777]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 10:22am

HenryTDobson said: "That's simply not for you to say. If you don't know the language, how could you know what they were saying? It's also possible that this was a practice session for them and signing everything wasn't a requirement."

 

I know the show well and have been to a lot of ASL performances before so I know where they should be signing. If it was practice then those poor deaf people that paid a lot of money to be there at that show got ripped off. 

[hork]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 11:08am

HenryTDobson said: ""I always have to wonder how many people are actually partaking of this service. They have to be A. deaf, B. seated on the left side of the theater, and C. somehow able to watch the interpreters and what's going on onstage simultaneously, which seems impossible to me. But what do I know?"

You obviously know little. The Deaf population encompasses a huge community that have the right to enjoy theater just like everyone else. Actually, even if it were only one member of the Deaf community, he or she still have the right to theater. It doesn't matter the size, theater should be accessible to everyone.

And yes, they will buy seats in a section close to the interpreter. They're not stupid. Impossible to you it may be, but easy for most. Please don't spread your ignorance to others about certain groups of people.

 

Where did I say they didn't have the right to it? Jesus Christ. And stupidity has nothing to do with it. If they're going for the first time, they may not know or check beforehand (but I like how you said "They're not stupid," like the deaf are the one segment of the population that's immune from stupidity). And how is "impossible to me" a judgment or an expression of ignorance? I mean, I came right out and admitted my inexperience. Get off your damn horse.

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 11:08 AM

[ClumsyDude15]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 11:15am

I just want to clarify my comments above as I feel like there were elements of them that were poorly worded. I love that performances like the ASL performances exist to include everyone in the experience of live theater and like PT mentioned above me many an experience has been beautiful to see lyrics and words put into the movement of ASL. The Pennsylvania Ballet this past year did a relaxed performance of The Nutcracker (which while not the same as an ASL performance is similar in the allowing for accessibility to the arts) and I loved that they did that because it does allow for more people and families to come. 

I am very aware of how privileged I am to get to see shows whenever I want and despite the previous comment about the performance of Wicked I saw there was moments of that I found lovely. It was a little distracting being as close as I was to them, but again - that was not for me, nor should I feel at all impressed upon given that it allows for more people to experience things. I just wanted to clarify and check myself for the above comments.

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 11:15 AM

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 11:44am

mailhandler777 said: "HenryTDobson said: "That's simply not for you to say. If you don't know the language, how could you know what they were saying? It's also possible that this was a practice session for them and signing everything wasn't a requirement."

 

I know the show well and have been to a lot of ASL performances before so I know where they should be signing. If it was practice then those poor deaf people that paid a lot of money to be there at that show got ripped off. 

"

Again, you don't know the language so you can't say if they're being ripped off. You literally don't know what they're signing so how could you know if they're right or wrong. Your opinion is fruitless. 

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 11:50am

"Where did I say they didn't have the right to it? Jesus Christ. And stupidity has nothing to do with it. If they're going for the first time, they may not know or check beforehand (but I like how you said "They're not stupid," like the deaf are the one segment of the population that's immune from stupidity). And how is "impossible to me" a judgment or an expression of ignorance? I mean, I came right out and admitted my inexperience. Get off your damn horse."

Your statement of "how many people are partaking in this service" implies that because there may not be enough people using the interpretation, there's no need for it. This is making this show unaccessible to Deaf people and stripping away their right to see it. 

Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing people LIVE with their Deafness. They know that if they're going to an interpreted show, they must inform the box office so they can be placed near the interpreters or closed captions, wherever that may be. Of course there are Deaf people who are stupid. They're probably less ignorant than you, though.

[hork]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:14pm

HenryTDobson said: ""Where did I say they didn't have the right to it? Jesus Christ. And stupidity has nothing to do with it. If they're going for the first time, they may not know or check beforehand (but I like how you said "They're not stupid," like the deaf are the one segment of the population that's immune from stupidity). And how is "impossible to me" a judgment or an expression of ignorance? I mean, I came right out and admitted my inexperience. Get off your damn horse."

Your statement of "how many people are partaking in this service" implies that because there may not be enough people using the interpretation, there's no need for it. This is making this show unaccessible to Deaf people and stripping away their right to see it. 

I just found it strange that they do it for every performance. That's not a judgment, I'm just surprised they'd pay for interpreters even when they're not needed. Although, according to the web site, they only have them for select performances, so either they changed their policy, or I've somehow only been going to ASL-interpreted performances for the past several years. Relax, no one's trying to strip anyone's rights away.

Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing people LIVE with their Deafness. They know that if they're going to an interpreted show, they must inform the box office so they can be placed near the interpreters or closed captions, wherever that may be. Of course there are Deaf people who are stupid. They're probably less ignorant than you, though.

You make a good point, although I don't see why my innocuous musings deserve such vitriol. I'm just saying, maybe they don't even know there are ASL interpreters. It's not exactly a common practice in theater. It's not ignorance to assume that the occasional deaf audience member will pick the wrong seats. Or maybe not. Maybe that never happens. Nobody knows the answer to this, so you're as ignorant as I am in that regard. Why does it matter? Seriously, get off your horse. There's no battle here, and you certainly don't need to be such an ass about it.

 

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 12:14 PM

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:23pm

"I just found it strange that they do it for every performance. That's not a judgment, I'm just surprised they'd pay for interpreters even when they're not needed. Although, according to the web site, they only have them for select performances, so either they changed their policy, or I've somehow only been going to ASL-interpreted performances for the past several years."

Unfortunately ASL interpretation is not always a guarantee. Depending on the run of a show, there's usually one or two weekends reserved for ASL interpretation. It must be a coincidence that you attended several ASL interpreted shows.

"You make a good point, although I don't see why my innocuous musings deserve such vitriol. I'm just saying, maybe they don't even know there are ASL interpreters. It's not exactly a common practice in theater. It's not ignorance to assume that the occasional deaf audience member will pick the wrong seats. Or maybe not. Maybe that never happens. Nobody knows the answer to this, so you're as ignorant as I am in that regard. Why does it matter? Seriously, get off your horse. There's no battle here, and you certainly don't need to be such an ass about it."

Of course they know there are interpreters! They are Deaf, if they want to attend a theatrical performance, they find out when there will be interpreters and then buy their tickets. Again, this is nothing new to them. They know their options are limited because that is their life. They want to see a movie? They have to find the closed captioning options. They want to buy a coffee at Starbucks? They need to write their order down. They want to make a phone call to a hearing person? They must use a videophone with an interpreter. This list is endless. They know what they're doing because they live it everyday.

I don't mean to start a battle with you or anyone. I do get upset, however, when people who are ignorant about something pretend like they know what they're talking about. 

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:30pm

"I just found it strange that they do it for every performance."

Point of Clarification: there isn't a single road house in the US that has ASL or open caption for every performance. More specifically, the Pantages has ASL and open captioning for every production, but not every performance. It typically only occurs once or twice during a run of a show. 

Updated On: 5/6/17 at 12:30 PM

[hork]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:38pm

Are you saying deaf people never go to a musical unless there are interpreters? That seems unlikely, given how many deaf people there are, how few ASL-interpreted shows there are, and how easily musicals can be enjoyed by the deaf even without interpreters. But whatever, it's silly to argue about this.

[HenryTDobson]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:46pm

hork said: "Are you saying deaf people never go to a musical unless there are interpreters? That seems unlikely, given how many deaf people there are, how few ASL-interpreted shows there are, and how easily musicals can be enjoyed by the deaf even without interpreters. But whatever, it's silly to argue about this.

"

I'm sure they do. My point was, however, that Deaf people know their options. If they want the show to be ASL-interpreted, they know how to find when it will be and which seats to sit in. They are accustomed to making sure these accommodations are in place.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 12:55pm

ASL interpreted performances sell fast, especially here in NYC since they're so limited in dates where they're done. 

 

And if you knew what it takes to actually be one of the terps hired to do these performances, you probably wouldn't say they "were bored and didn't want to be there". So I'm sorry but I don't believe you when you say that they were just standing there and not interpreting what was happening on the stage. The outrage from the deaf audience would be very obvious if they were disprespected like that. 

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 1:21pm

I've attended and performed during many ASL-interpreted shows. It's usually an incredible performance and the interpreters very much get into it. It's not just word-for-word translation; the interpreters have to convey tone and intention, and ASL has different syntax than English. Much of the time when you see them just standing there or watching the stage, there's either stage business or they have to figure out how best to translate what is being said or sung. With all the made-up non-English words and double meanings in Wicked, for example, how best to sign that? It's very interesting to see different people's interpretations. No two interpreters sign a show the same way.

Anyway, I think it is an invaluable service to a very underserved community. As an audience member, I've enjoyed watching the interpreters as much as what is onstage. As a performer whose show is being interpreted, it means so much to have what you are doing being conveyed to even just one audience member who wouldn't typically be there. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 5/6/17 at 2:47pm

There's a big misunderstanding as to what exactly ASL is. It's not a direct word for word translation of the English language. It's closer to Chinese as far as  syntax and whereas we might use 20 words to say something in English, it can be can be translated in only a few signs.