Laurent, SD
Years ago in college, I knew a guy named Marvin Miller. He graduated from the same high school my wife did, and worked on our college newspaper. He hired me as news editor, but instead of working under him, I left school for a while. When I came back, Marvin had himself left and moved on to other endeavors. I've only seen him a few times since; while we're always glad to see one another, we never have time to sit down and catch up.
These days Marvin is no longer in the world of journalism; instead, he's become a dreamer, a visionary, and quite well-known. His latest dream is to establish a town in the middle of the prairie in South Dakota, a town that will be for sign language users. Yesterday's New York Times carried an article about the proposed town of Laurent, South Dakota.
While I find the subject interesting, and you can learn far more about Marvin's vision for Laurent here, I have some serious doubts about the town's viability. Still, I read the NYT article with a great deal of interest, both professional and personal. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. For one thing, the article's first quote and perspective on Laurent other than Marvin came from someone at the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. For starters, it is an association that is *FOR* the deaf; this implies paternalism. More seriously, the article/writer made no mention of the fact that AGBAD is pro-oralism, and that it does not encourage the use of signs in communication. Hardly the appropriate group to canvass for an opinion! Naturally, I can't see AGBAD supporting the concept of Laurent, even if 100,000 people were to live there.
Second, by including AGBAD in an article on Laurent, the author either assumes everyone knows about oralism v. manualism, or invites mention of the controversy in order to clarify the differing perspectives in the article. But the article makes no mention of the history of oralism v. manualism, the history of AGBAD, or does anything to include resources or guide its readers on where to educate themselves as to the historical/sociological/cultural background of why a town like Laurent might even be proposed. The author does briefly touch on Martha's Vineyard, but again, mentioning this particular community lacks the context neccessary. A more appropriate community to compare would be the deaf community in Akron, Ohio, in the mid-20th century. Mention is made of places like Rochester, D.C., and Sioux Falls, SD (but omits Fremont, CA), but doesn't really explain how the presence of a large deaf population impacts and influences the community around it, or how the experience of living in such a community prompts many to believe a place like Laurent would be viable.
Last, a lot of the commentary in the article is slanted towards the fallibility of Laurent: locals in McCook County, SD, don't see Laurent as a workable concept; others quoted cite the dwindling numbers of deaf people in the future thanks to cochlear implants, gene therapy, and the like. While I share those same concerns (but most likely for different reasons!), I concluded that the article was not as balanced as it could be. It also cried out for expansion, because there is so much information necessary to even begin to understand why Marvin first came up with this epiphany. It's laudable that the NYT would want to cover this subject, and I'm sure Marvin welcomes the publicity, but it was not the best possible article that could have been written.
I've seen his website and the list of those who have signed up and indicated a preliminary commitment to living there; it's a mix of unknowns and Deaf community Who's Who types. It'll be interesting to see in the coming months just who puts their money where their mouth is. Personally, I see problems with the idea; the first being, "South Dakota?!?" The second is the viability of jobs. Are people going to be willing to move from established communities, good job markets, and families and friends just to move to Laurent? Third, as the article mentioned, who's going to be financing all of this? Marvin and his mother-in-law are taking a big gamble on this succeeding; it might work, and then again, it might not. While they might get enough people in to set up something, its the durability that will show whether this is an idea whose time has come, or whether it is a pipe dream of a brilliant dreamer. Make no mistake, Marvin is a smart man, friendly and very hard-working. I admire him. I truly hope for his sake it succeeds. But with the weakened state associations of the Deaf, the demise of Deaf clubs, the proliferation of techonological aids, medical advances and the like, the Deaf community isn't the same as it was even twenty years ago, not to mention forty, fifty years ago. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next year or so, as things move from paper to some sort of reality.
These days Marvin is no longer in the world of journalism; instead, he's become a dreamer, a visionary, and quite well-known. His latest dream is to establish a town in the middle of the prairie in South Dakota, a town that will be for sign language users. Yesterday's New York Times carried an article about the proposed town of Laurent, South Dakota.
While I find the subject interesting, and you can learn far more about Marvin's vision for Laurent here, I have some serious doubts about the town's viability. Still, I read the NYT article with a great deal of interest, both professional and personal. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. For one thing, the article's first quote and perspective on Laurent other than Marvin came from someone at the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. For starters, it is an association that is *FOR* the deaf; this implies paternalism. More seriously, the article/writer made no mention of the fact that AGBAD is pro-oralism, and that it does not encourage the use of signs in communication. Hardly the appropriate group to canvass for an opinion! Naturally, I can't see AGBAD supporting the concept of Laurent, even if 100,000 people were to live there.
Second, by including AGBAD in an article on Laurent, the author either assumes everyone knows about oralism v. manualism, or invites mention of the controversy in order to clarify the differing perspectives in the article. But the article makes no mention of the history of oralism v. manualism, the history of AGBAD, or does anything to include resources or guide its readers on where to educate themselves as to the historical/sociological/cultural background of why a town like Laurent might even be proposed. The author does briefly touch on Martha's Vineyard, but again, mentioning this particular community lacks the context neccessary. A more appropriate community to compare would be the deaf community in Akron, Ohio, in the mid-20th century. Mention is made of places like Rochester, D.C., and Sioux Falls, SD (but omits Fremont, CA), but doesn't really explain how the presence of a large deaf population impacts and influences the community around it, or how the experience of living in such a community prompts many to believe a place like Laurent would be viable.
Last, a lot of the commentary in the article is slanted towards the fallibility of Laurent: locals in McCook County, SD, don't see Laurent as a workable concept; others quoted cite the dwindling numbers of deaf people in the future thanks to cochlear implants, gene therapy, and the like. While I share those same concerns (but most likely for different reasons!), I concluded that the article was not as balanced as it could be. It also cried out for expansion, because there is so much information necessary to even begin to understand why Marvin first came up with this epiphany. It's laudable that the NYT would want to cover this subject, and I'm sure Marvin welcomes the publicity, but it was not the best possible article that could have been written.
I've seen his website and the list of those who have signed up and indicated a preliminary commitment to living there; it's a mix of unknowns and Deaf community Who's Who types. It'll be interesting to see in the coming months just who puts their money where their mouth is. Personally, I see problems with the idea; the first being, "South Dakota?!?" The second is the viability of jobs. Are people going to be willing to move from established communities, good job markets, and families and friends just to move to Laurent? Third, as the article mentioned, who's going to be financing all of this? Marvin and his mother-in-law are taking a big gamble on this succeeding; it might work, and then again, it might not. While they might get enough people in to set up something, its the durability that will show whether this is an idea whose time has come, or whether it is a pipe dream of a brilliant dreamer. Make no mistake, Marvin is a smart man, friendly and very hard-working. I admire him. I truly hope for his sake it succeeds. But with the weakened state associations of the Deaf, the demise of Deaf clubs, the proliferation of techonological aids, medical advances and the like, the Deaf community isn't the same as it was even twenty years ago, not to mention forty, fifty years ago. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next year or so, as things move from paper to some sort of reality.
posted by Mr. Sandman | 7:16 PM
<< Home