Nov 4, 2014_SUBJECTIVITY_Reading Response

According to Nyman (2013), “difference is both a process and product; it characterizes how we process reality as well as how exterior forces and energies work upon us.” Thinking about difference as a notion that cultivates productive and enriching forces made me revisit my memory of having a conversation with a museum visitor named Alvin as part of my research a few years ago. Alvin was a college student majoring in communication studies. He shared his story of learning American sign language while standing with me in front of three Buddhist gilt-bronze sculptures from the Joseon period.

“When I was looking at the three Buddhas over here, I was guessing the hand positions of these must be very important. It reminded me and my mom and sister learning American sign language when I was younger…So I was wondering what he is trying to say. What he could be saying in American sign language which obviously is not the case. But perhaps he’s saying something still. But why in sign language? Maybe it’s more kind of a universal language.”

The viewing experience encouraged him to take notice of the sculpture’s distinctive hand sign, which also made him relate his experience to this specific feature. Alvin assumed that knowing the meaning of the hand sign, or mudra, of the Buddhist sculptures plays a critical role in interpreting the artwork. Being unaware of the different meanings assigned to the mudras, he tried to apply his knowledge of sign language to make sense of the object. Being a communication studies major, Alvin was interested in both making personal communications through sign language and learning about communications across cultures through art. Those two “languages” are based on the use of symbols, which Alvin attempted to interrelate. 

The TED talk, given by Joseph Valente, touches upon the bilingual abilities of the deaf culture. The focus is not on the “impairment” that needs to be fixed. Decentering normative views of this culture elicits a whole new perspective that focuses on a unique and different ability—the ability to see and perceive the world with a different “language.” Alvin acknowledged that his application of sign language to the interpretation of a Buddhist sculpture would not make sense in an art historical context. But for me, his interpretation of the object made me think of something that I had never thought of. By blending in his own cultural background to the surface manifestations of art, Alvin was trying to make sense of the object on a very personal level. The process also enriched my insight of viewing the artwork with a different perspective. Overlapping the readings with my narrative, I wonder how to apply this cross-cultural encountering/co-creative process beyond the museum and to everyday life and how this would enrich our lives.