Most people know I’m a regular concert goer. I’ve been to about 10 or 12 concerts in the last year and a half. All of them have been in the MD/DC/VA area and I usually don’t have a problem with getting interpreters for the show.
There was a concert that had three bands which I really wanted to see, even though I’ve seen all of them in concert before. This one was different, they were all playing on the same night. The only problem? They weren’t coming to the MD/DC/VA area. So I looked around a little more and saw that they had a couple shows in PA. It was just a matter of picking Philadelphia or Pittsburgh. I picked Philadelphia, an easy two hour drive and a cool city. Perfect for taking a break from work for a couple days, no?
When I called on December 4th, 2006 (yes I still have the receipt), about three months in advance. I spent about 30 minutes on the phone trying to figure out where the seats would be. I tried to explain that I was deaf and I also had limited vision, so it’d be easier if everything was in the same sight line. They said they couldn’t tell me where the seats were because it depended on how the stage was set up. It made sense, but usually they have a general idea of where the seats would be. Once I got the tickets, I called a month before the show and confirmed that they had booked the interpreters. It was taken care of.
Seems easy enough? Apparently that didn’t happen.
Problem 1: There were two interpreters, for four hours. and one’s usually backing up the other. I’m accustomed to events in the MD/DC/VA having three interpreters at a big venue. It just seemed like a lot for the two of them to handle.
Problem 2: The interpreters were not informed of the two “opening” bands, since the headliner was only on the ticket. I knew about all three bands playing since day one. If it were me, i would’ve gone online and checked to see if any other bands were playing with the headliner. But that’s just me. So the interpreters didn’t have the lyrics for the first two bands, and couldn’t really interpret as well as if they had the lyrics with them.
Problem 3: Our seats were right next to the entrance for VIPs, so they kept going in and out, which just obstructed my view of the interpreters since they were standing on the general admissions floor. I was frustrated, the interpreters kept telling people to move, even my friend thought it was annoying.
In between shows, I asked the interpreters if they usually put the interpreted section in the section where we were seated. One happened to be the go-to guy for interpreting concerts, and he told me that he’s never seen us placed in this section before.
We also had a run in with one of the security guy, but that’s a long story in and of itself.
A few days later, I gave the accessible seating at Wachovia Center to find out what happened and to give them some feedback. I asked to speak to the person in charge of putting people where they need to be. I spoke with two different people. One person said the main band (headliner) was responsible for where we were placed. That made no sense.
The other person (who said she was the person responsible for all people that request accessible seating) had a longer statement.
This is where we usually put the interpreted section, so the interpreters are not obstructing the view of other concert goers.
That is totally understandable, I couldn’t debate with that. I explained to her that when I ordered tickets, I wanted to find out what section we’d be seated in because I had limited vision. That way I would have the opportunity to know where the interpreted seats were located. I probably would’ve picked the high-visibility seats and avoided seats that would have been obstructed, like the VIP entrance. And I wanted to find out why the interpreters were not informed about the two other bands. She simply said that the band that’s on the ticket is interpreted and the opening acts usually change (I thought that was a load of crap she just gave me, sorry but true). She also told me to email the public relations department. What good will that do? I thought she was responsible for the accessible seating.
I explained that I probably would not be attending a concert at Wachovia Center any time in the near future due to the poor service that we were given. However, I would like them to be more aware of where they place the interpreted section in the future because of the surroundings. I know a concert is not the easiest place to figure out where to place people without having obstructing the view of other concert goers.
In my personal opinion, I don’t take being able to request interpreters for any concert I go to for granted. I genuinely appreciate having this privilege. But this was the worst experience I had at a concert, I felt like we were little mice to be scoffed at. Did I not pay money to see all three bands? Quite naturally, I expected all of the shows to be interpreted (after all they are paying them to be there for those four hours).
I’ve noticed whenever I go to a venue like Merriweather, the service is impeccable, as well as 9:30 club. Anything bigger, yuck, I just don’t seem to enjoy the show as much. Maybe it’s got to do with the fact that Merriweather and 9:30 club are run by the “little people.” I love those people. Corporations say they care about the “little people…” I might have a few words for them. And I work for one of them.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
No related posts
14 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
On one hand, interpreters shouldn’t be taken for granted. For too much of history, deaf people did not have access to interpreters. On the other hand, it shouldn’t be considered a “privilege,” it should be a RIGHT.
Ah, I can relate. I had a similar experience at the United Center in Chicago. I get much better service and seating at the smaller places.
Andreashettle-
You are right about what you stated. I get so annoyed with concert venues that purport to be supportive of deaf patrons when they, in reality, aren’t. They “shove” the deaf patrons to an area that is really inconveniencing us like they did to Erin and her friends.
What’s more, I really get disgusted with them when they give me lip service saying “well, we did give you interpreters, didn’t we?” In a way, they want to comply with the letter of the law at our expense meaning that its tough luck if we end up in an undesireable area even though they are following the spirit of the law. That’s pretty crappy service there and I usually don’t ever go back UNTIL they improve their locating of deaf patrons in an area that is unobstructed by ignorant hearing patrons who walk in front of the “deaf section”.
This also happened at a graduation event that I went to at Harvard University some years ago. My friend had gotten some interpreters for me so I could understand numerous speakers that were present that day. You know what? Even the same thing happened to Erin happened to me. Numerous people walked in front of the interpreter annoying me and the interpreter alike. The disability coordinator, who happened to be a “little person” tried to steer people behind the interpreter so that my view of the interpreter wasn’t obstructed. It was all for nothing because people still continued to ignore the disability coordinator. We both ended up being frustrated at this; I ended up asking her who really set up the seating area for the deaf. To my surprise, she said that she had no authority to select an optimal area…she said that it was pretty much up to those at higher levels of the administration. I didn’t really enjoy the event that much due to the obstruction I experienced.
I think the problem really doesn’t lie with the coordinators of disability services but with those people that these coordinators report to. I suspect that the supervisors haven’t a clue how important it is to the deaf that our viewing experience is critical to us. In other words, we will still keep getting shafted until these processes and people change the way they really accommodate us.
Just “complying with the letter of the law” of providing interpreters for us isn’t enough anymore.
Anyone agree?
Agree! I hope the movie theaters are listening too. And the FCC. And television and cable companies. And web sites.
No, you are not asking too much. I have seen almost all the plays here in Twin Cities, Minnesota (not community theaters). I often feel that I am asking for too much. More than 75% I am the only deaf person there in the whole theater. Grr. There are many issues I have to share. I am glad to know that I am not the only one.
Been there and feel you (for being a natural show-goer due to my upraising in Vegas), and you aren’t asking for too much-we have as much right as our hearing peers to have equal access to entertainment.
Equal access, yes, but as a hearing person, I don’t automatically have access to unobstructed seats. I take what’s given and/or available.
As a hearing person, though, you already have full access to the auditory component of the play. That’s half the entertainment right there. So if your visual access is imperfect, you aren’t missing quite as much. But for a deaf person, if our visual access is imperfect we’re losing a great deal more because we’re already automatically missing the auditory component. An interpreter of course helps, but is still imperfect: first, even the best interpreters can’t interpret every word exactly so there’s always going to be some content or nuance lost; second, a deaf person has to constantly choose between watching the interpreter and understanding the dialogue OR watching the stage action but missing the dialogue — given where they tend to place interpreters, it’s impossible to watch both. And even if they did have interpreters in the perfect place, which would be basically next to whichever actor was speaking at that time! And therefore quite distracting to everyone else!, well, that would make information prioritization *easier* but it still wouldn’t be quite 100% of what hearing people are getting. And because the theaters do have to compromise on where they put the interpreter (never directly on the stage itself), we’re already losing a lot of access right there. So I think it’s reasonable for a deaf person to want an unobstructed view — because that helps make up for PART of what we’re automatically losing for other reasons.
Think of it this way. If you go into the theater and find that you get imperfect seats that only give you a half view of the stage, then you’re getting 75% of the total content (all the auditory content PLUS half the visual content). But a deaf person looking back and forth between the stage and the interpreter will get AT MOST 75% of the content — ONLY assuming that he/she can get a full view of the stage for when she/he does choose to look in that direction. If we’re dealing with an interpreter (and all the inherent imperfections that implies) AND ALSO a less than ideal view of the stage, then we may be getting 50 or 30% of the total visual/auditory content.
We’re never going to get 100%. So why shouldn’t we get preferred seating, as well as interpreters, so we can at least count on getting the full 75% that IS possible?
i think its great to go to concert- the visual is awesome for deaf people. however—- my peeve is— interpreters are going to concerts for free and getting paid. i think its not fair.
my friend wanted to get on helicopter tour above volcano. he need an interpreter.. but he refused to call for one. he doesnt want to pay 500 buck to get on helicopter while interpreters get on for free and getting paid!
i agree with him.. if my friends can be an interpreter then she or he has to pay for it and come with us.
dont you agree?
j
Jessica, no, I don’t agree at all. When interpreters interpret at a concert, play, etc., they are too busy WORKING to really enjoy themselves properly. In fact, it consumes so much mental concentration to listen to words in one language, translate them, and then transmit them into another language that very often interpreters have zero energy left over to even REMEMBER the material they interpreted afterwards, as little as an hour later. So, no, they are NOT getting “free entertainment” while they are interpreting. Instead, they are working very hard and usually getting little direct benefit themselves. This is a JOB for them–yes, it’s a job that can have its rewards (meaning, they get to be in a role where they help facilitate communication, which is rewarding for anyone who understands just how important full and equal access to communication is), but it’s still a mentally and physically challenging JOB. And like anyone at any JOB, they deserve to be paid for it.
Sorry, Jessica…but I agree with Andrea on this one.
Yes, it might “seem” as if the interpreter is enjoying herself and having a good time for free. But in reality, the interpreter isn’t there for her own benefit…she’s there for YOUR benefit, and to assure that you are understanding and thus enjoying the concert, tour or whatever for yourself.
Having done some theatric interpreting myself and also worked with many individuals who do interpret for concerts, plays, etc. I can assure you that it is HARD work that takes many hours of preparation. A good interpreter doesn’t just show up on the day of the concert and start signing - she has probably put in a lot of time listening to and memorizing the songs, translating the lyrics, trying to determine the best signs to use, etc. etc. What you see are the results of those many hours, and yes… the interpreter deserves to be paid for such.
As for this helicopter tour, it is not your responsibility to hire and pay for the interpreter, so I don’t understand why it would be a concern. The helicopter tour provides the interpreter, and of course they aren’t going to make that person pay for the ride, because she becomes a contracted “staff person” for that period of time. She is there to do a job - just like the helicopter pilot is there to fly the helicopter, the interpreter is there to provide access for you and your friend. Why should she be expected to pay for doing her job? That wouldn’t make much sense.
Yes, sometimes interpreters might attend a concert or play for free as part of their preparation. But remember, they are doing this in order to get more information for their interpreter assignment, so they know what to expect on the job. This doesn’t always happen - especially with concerts, since they tend to be a “one night only” performance. It happens more often with plays, because they are on-going.
Also, some places might give the interpreter complimentary free tickets for their services - part of the payment agreement for providing interpreting services. I have a friend who interprets for a small local community theater that gives her four free tickets to every play as a “thank you” for her services, because she reduces her normal fee for them, as they can’t afford the regular cost. I think this is fair.
So, I’m sorry - but I think you need to reconsider the true role of the interpreter and their reason for being there…then perhaps your opinion and pet peeve will change.
I agree with andrea and virginia. When I attend concerts in this area, i usually try to get 2 of my preferred choices of interpreters.
In a way I can see that, oh they get to go to a show for free, but their backs are almost always to the stage, so they never get to see what’s going on the stage. the 2 interpreters that usually interpret for me do enjoy themselves, but i Know they put the time & effort into making sure that they know the music & the lyrics, to ensure that I’m able to enjoy the show. I request them because they do their jobs & they truly do enjoy listening to the music I listen to. There’s an advantage to doing this job, but to put in a week or 2 of practicing, listening to music and making sure they know what they’re doing for one night only. It’s almost as they should get paid more. It’s hard work to interpret for a concert.
The Verizon Center does a good job, in my opinion.
They consult with the performing band beforehand to determine stage set-up and from there, they decide where accessible seating should be. Interpreters are then positioned so that they’re within the line of sight to the stage.
The National Theatre’s approach could be improved. Accessible seating is in the mezzanine (middle section fo the theater). Interpreters are placed in Box B to the right and above the accessible seating. Can we say whiplash?
I’m also always appreciative of the interpreters who work extra hard to ensure they put on a good show alongside the performers. It takes a LOT of effort to be able to memorize lyrics and figure out what they actually mean!
I went to 1 show at verizon center. I can’t complain about the seats. i had good accessibility to the stage & the interpreters.
I definitely appreciate them.
However, when i go to a concert, i prefer more word for word, not asl. but that’s just me.