Last month I tested positive for Covid-19 (for the second time in 7 months!), so, like most people self-isolating, I ended up spending my days watching TV and scrolling through social media. I spent the first few days watching the Tracy Beaker series, and reliving my youth; but once I'd exhausted myself with the sheer chaos of that show, I was left searching catch-up TV for something else to watch. As you can probably guess from this post's title, I settled on watching Then Barbara Met Alan. So, I told Tracy to 'Bog Off!' and joined Barbara at the bus stop, to learn about how she and Alan 'Pissed On Pity', and fought for disability rights in the UK.
Image Description: Barbara and Alan are handcuffed to a bus' windscreen wipers, with pink, fluffy handcuffs. Barbara is sitting in a black powerchair, and beside her is Alan; he is standing in red shorts, with his calliper visible on his left leg. (Image from BBC Two, https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0015p4q)
This punky biopic is just over an hour long (67 minutes to be precise!), and the time is gone in a flash. When I first saw Then Barbara Met Alan advertised, I thought it was a series, maybe similar to It's a Sin, although I'm not sure why that's my point of reference?! But anyway, it's a film that's based on real people and real events - specifically, those people are Barbara, Alan and their friends, and the events are largely related to the UK Disability Rights Movement during the 90s. I'm going to try not to spoil it for you, but obviously, the nature of a review is that there will be some spoilers - so, you have been warned!
The drama stars Ruth Madeley, as Barbara, and Arthur Hughes, as Alan, focusing on the characters' role in establishing DAN (The Disabled People's Direct Action Network). Both Madeley and Hughes are disabled actors; it was great to see the number of other disabled actors also starring in this film, as so often, non-disabled actors are cast to play disabled characters. I think it would have been a huge injustice not to have cast disabled actors in the film, as this type of inclusion is what DAN were fighting for back in the 1990s!
It was oddly validating to see how, even some 30 years on, I can still relate to some of the situations Barbara and Alan found themselves in! Early on, we're introduced to the ITV Telethon and the issues in the way it used disabled peoples' stories as inspiration porn. I'm sure most people are familiar with the term 'inspiration porn' and have seen it for themselves on social media. I'm also positive that the disabled community can understand the anger Barbara and Alan felt towards the Telethon, for encouraging problematic attitudes towards disabled people.
Misrepresenting disabled people's stories to encourage pity and increase charity donations, is not only morally wrong but also supports the misconception that disabled people are incapable of helping themselves. Disabled people don't need sympathy, we need rights and that's what DAN were fighting for.
Barbara explained the problem with charity, and I'd say it was one of my favourite moments in the film. She says that the problem with charity is that it sees disabled people as passive victims, who are unable to help themselves. However, it's the society that is disabling individuals by not providing adequate access. So, if disabled people were given equal access to society, they would be able to help themselves. This leans into the Social Model of Disability and the thinking that disabled people are restricted by societal barriers, not their disability. I think it's something I and many other disabled people are familiar with, but I've never heard it explained so well before.
Image Description: This infographic outlines the Social Model Of Disability and the many ways in which disabled people are excluded from society. The access barriers include: No Lifts, Inaccessible Transport, Badly Designed Buildings and Discrimination. (Image from: Inclusion London, https://www.inclusionlondon.org.uk/disability-in-london/social-model/the-social-model-of-disability-and-the-cultural-model-of-deafness/)
Despite telling a relatively serious story of oppression and discrimination, it seemed to be written in a light-hearted and comedic style. This helped to highlight the ridiculousness of not having equal rights for disabled people. For example, when Barbara and Alan get arrested, the police officer asks if they're happy to wait in the police van for a few hours because 'there are steps down to the cells'. Again, when Barbara appears on a TV talk show to discuss the ethics of the ITV Telethon, the studio isn't wheelchair accessible.
In 1995, the Disabled Discrimination Act was passed as a result of the movement, which was an acknowledgement that disability discrimination existed; however, nothing in the Act was enforceable by law. This was largely (if not wholly!) due to the government not wanting to burden businesses with the monetary costs of making premises accessible. I think the view that making the world accessible for disabled people is too expensive, is still very much present today. This can be seen when restaurants don't have accessible bathrooms, when music festivals don't provide adequate wheelchair access or when houses aren't adapted properly for a person's needs - most of it comes down to money.
Image Description: Nash is in his powerchair, being led towards the platform lift, by a DLR staff member dressed in costume. The photo is of the back of the two. The wheelchair access on public transport today is a result of the fight for disability rights in the 90s.
Final Thoughts
The history of the Disability Rights Movement in the UK is a story that needed to be told. Then Barbara Met Alan feels like a firey protest story told by the people who fought for equal rights for disabled people. It was a great opportunity to learn about what it took to pass the Disabled Discrimination Act and take the first steps towards an accessible society for all.
However, as much as I enjoyed the story, I was ultimately left wanting more from this biopic! There was so much more to include, and attempting to cover the full story in just 67 minutes felt rushed. It would have been great to have gotten to know the characters better, and maybe have experienced the after-effects of the Disabled Discrimination Act being passed. Instead, Barbara told us what happened after the Act was passed and how nothing really improved until the Equality Act came into play. Personally, I would have rather seen this included in the film, than have it shoehorned into a closing statement.
All in all, I think this film is definitely worth a watch and provides a great introduction to the Disability Rights Movement that took place during the 1990s. After watching it, I felt as though I was part of a larger community and empowered to take action.
Comments