Entertainment | Page 23 | www.brendonwilson.com

June 19, 2003April 21, 2012 by Brendon J. Wilson

CSI and Disabilities

It’s funny how you see something once, see it again, and then when you see it a third time notice something entirely new. It happened to me last week, while watching the show CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, when I noticed how the show subtly includes people with disabilities as characters.

Those of you who are familiar with the show undoubtedly know the subplot that’s been developing throughout the season: Gil Grissom, the show’s main character, has been slowly growing deaf and struggling to conceal this development from his colleagues. Ok, so that’s not so subtle. But that was only the first sign. The second sign was the coroner in the show, Dr. Robbins, whom I hadn’t noticed had crutches until last week. The final sign was a passing scene in last week’s show, where one of the characters interacted with a fellow officer in a wheelchair. It continued this week, with a prosecutor who was also a paraplegic, due to a crime that wove itself into the episode.

I’d be interested to know how intentional the show’s producers and writers are acting to include positive role models for people with disabilities in the show. Is it part of a master plan, possibly a technique being used to reinforce the main “Grissom is going deaf” subplot? Or is it something else, perhaps evidence of a personal history of dealing with disabilities on the part of one of the production team?

As it turns out, the acting playing the coroner actually is disabled. He lost both his legs after being hit by a drunk driver and sustaining burns over 65% of his body. So the inclusion of disabilities, beyond the main Grissom subplot, could just be coincidence. Any hardcore CSI fans out there know for sure?

in Entertainment 3 comments

February 15, 2003April 23, 2012 by Brendon J. Wilson

Wacko Jacko

Exams are over for the moment, so that means it’s time to turn the ol’ brain off. And I expected there’d be nothing better than a TV special like “Living with Michael Jackson” to put synaptic activity into full retreat, perhaps to the point where my brain would crawl out my ear and run down the hall for cover. Such was the state of vegetabledom I was seeking after last week. Unfortunately, the exposé of the King of Pop’s personal life turned out to be just too damn interesting. Curses! Foiled again!

First, let me just say that I’m not a Michael Jackson fan, at least not lately. Though I like his earlier material, I suspect my appreciation of his music is limited to a Pavlovian association with the image of my first grade teacher, Mrs. Donovan, teaching us aerobics in a one-piece leotard. Ah, catholic school. It’s not as bad as you would have thought.

Alas, I digress.

The King of Pop bared it all: Never Never Land, his mansion, his lifestyle. What was interesting about the interview was just how painfully shy Jackson is, even about things for which he’s world-renown, such as his dancing. More surprising was the frankness with which Jackson discussed his own upbringing, complete with the stories about how his father would watch the Jackson Five rehearse dance steps brandishing his belt in his hand. Jackson’s upbringing was, in a word, brutal. His stories revealed the extent to which he had been deprived of his childhood, providing ample explanation for his childlike behaviour later in life.

The interview touched other subjects, such as the amount of surgery Jackson had done to his face. Though Jackson had revealed earlier that his own father had taunted him about his complexion, he denied having extensive cosmetic surgery. This topic seemed too close to a point of extreme personal pain. The interviewer also pressed Jackson on the inappropriateness of the Never Never Land sleepovers that had continued despite the allegations of child abuse in the nineties. Jackson just doesn’t seem to understand why this would be inappropriate – in many ways, he is still an innocent. I, for one, don’t believe his interest in children is anything other than an extension of his own desire to reclaim his childhood.

The most interesting thing about the program was watching how people reacted to Jackson in public. People who were allowed past his security were only interested in one thing: a hug. The people were visibly moved when Jackson hugged them, to the point of tears in most cases. It reminded me of a documentary in Ireland, in which the narrator traveled throughout the world to find religious experiences. In India, he found the one experience that actually moved him, a hug from an Indian woman who travels across India, giving people hugs. People would line up for hours for a hug from this woman. The effect that she had on these people was exactly the same as Jackson’s effect on his fans.

It seemed the only thing Jackson wants these days is to protect his kids and spread love. The sad thing is how suspicious we are of his intentions, a reflection of our own mistrust of a society which espouses one set of values but lives by and values a completely different set of values. So who’s crazy: Jackson, or us?