The Sight Sickness

By Christine Faltz Grassman

It was an epidemic. It was a plague that shocked both those who got it and those who did not. It was coined the white sickness. For inexplicable reasons, random citizens became blind, and the sickness was believed to be contagious. Instead of teaching people to manage their disability, the government rounded up the newly-blind and caged them like animals. The quarantine facilities had no organization, no plumbing, no electricity, and no law and order. Both the blind and the seeing were terrified.

When the crisis subsided, the officials in charge were tried for their role in the inhumane treatment of the citizens; they were acquitted. One vigilante group is not satisfied with the verdict. Calling themselves the Cellmates, they kidnap seven people and hold them hostagekeeping them blinded so they can experience the same fears as those who were blinded in the plague.

A blend of social commentary, criticism, parody, and polemic, author Christine Faltz Grassman offers an anti-sequel to Blindness, a psychological thriller written by Jos Saramago. The Sight Sickness, Grassmans personal response to the publics fear of blindness, works to show that with the right attitude, the right tools, and the right techniques, blindness is manageable.

• Language: English
• Publisher: iUniverse
• Release date: Mar 5, 2009
• ISBN: 9780595632183

Christine Faltz Grassman

Christine Faltz Grassman was born blind. She is an attorney and English teacher. She holds a BA in English from Princeton University, an MS in education from Pace University, and a JD from Hofstra School of Law. She lives with her husband and two children in Nassau County, New York.

Book preview

Contents

DEDICATION

PREFACE

AUTHOR’S NOTE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

INTRODUCTION

PROLOGUE

CHAPTER 1

CHAPTER 2

CHAPTER 3

CHAPTER 4

CHAPTER 5

CHAPTER 6

CHAPTER 7

CHAPTER 8

CHAPTER 9

CHAPTER 10

CHAPTER 11

CHAPTER 12

Dedication

I lovingly dedicate this book to my husband and two children, each of whom, like me, is blind, and to my parents and brother, three people who recognize that blindness does not relegate me to a life of dependence, helplessness, or tragedy. I further offer this book to all those families, friends, educators, rehabilitation specialists, and members of the public who, when they take the time to learn the truth about blindness, decide to join the struggle of blind people for first-class citizenship.

Preface

This work is a novel, a polemic, a parody. I shall not apologize for my strong opinions, sarcasm, or irreverence—I have earned many times over the right to use language in defense of the truth. I love to use words—as tools and, if necessary, as weapons. Consider this work my personal arsenal against the omnipresent, ongoing literal and figurative fear of blindness.

It is time to rip the latest literary fashions off the age-old manipulations of blindness. To actors and directors who make fools of themselves trying to simulate blindness, who believe they are being sensitive and politically correct when they seek a psychology of blindness, who believe that, while there is a seventy percent unemployment rate among working-age blind people, it is appropriate for them to learn to act like us and make money while doing it, I say, enough! If the sighted world really wants to see, then do so. Do not insult my intelligence and that of my blind brothers and sisters. Do not grasp at awful metaphors that fail because of the fallacy of their comparisons, and do not profit from your ceaseless quest to do so. A Nobel Prize in literature, millions invested in film production, the best intentions, and the most superior acting or directing will not blunt the nasty, continuously thrusting sword of generalization, fear, and psychobabble cloaked in the robe of entertainment.

Author’s Note

At certain points in this story, characters will appear or be mentioned, and quotes and references to events will be used, alluded to, or paraphrased from José Saramago’s Blindness. Additionally, quotes from and my commentary upon Reed Johnson’s January 27, 2008, Los Angeles Times article, Eyes Wide Open to a Grim Vision: A Harsh Parable Comes to Life, will form the basis of my introduction. Any resemblance to persons living or dead is most likely coincidence, but you might recognize a bureaucrat or two.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks go to Diane Croft, director of publishing at National Braille Press, for her suggestions and support. Thank you so very much, Rosalie Reeves, friend and colleague, who took the time to review, review, and review with me. Many, many hugs, kisses, and piles of gratitude to my children and husband, who put up with the hours I spent working on the book.

I want to acknowledge, with thanks, two of the very few authors I have encountered who tried to get it right by depicting multi-dimensional, fully human blind characters—by which I mean those who possess both abilities and frailties, and who acknowledge blindness but do not make it the end-all and be-all of the plot. Thank you, Kim Stanley Robinson, for The Blind Geometer, a story I encountered with delight over two decades ago at the age of seventeen. When I saw the title, I cringed, thinking that once again there would be a loathsome depiction, some weird supernatural twist, or yet another miserable blindness-inspired metaphor for human nature. As a relatively new science fiction fan initiated into the fold by the Braille edition of Isaac Asimov’s Science Fiction magazine, I was delighted not just by the presence of some sex in the story—most teens are happy to encounter a dose of erotica now and again in their reading material—but also with Carlos, the main character, the blind genius/mathematician. Sure, references were made to the blind detective Max Carrados, whose fingertips were so sensitive he could read printed newspapers with them–but one can only work with what one has, and exemplary blind role models in literature are not easily found.

Thanks also go to Tom Harris, for his reasonable, realistic depiction of Reba McClane in The Red Dragon. Reba was gainfully employed and self-sufficient. She was sexual in a manner typical of both real-life and fully developed fictional characters. Her blindness, though clearly not ignored or swept to the side, was acknowledged and dealt with in a healthy manner, and others’ reactions to it were rendered realistically. She demonstrated real emotions and vulnerabilities, not all of which had to do with her blindness. Neither her blindness nor Carlos’s was utilized as a metaphor for misery, societal ignorance, poverty of the spirit, or some other dark and foreboding facet of human nature, which have long been associated with the inability of the eyes to work in whole or in part.

I offer a special, special acknowledgment, from the depths of my heart and spirit for a gift that can never be matched, to Louis Braille, as his two-hundredth birthday approaches: January 4, 2009. Thank you for true literacy, the kind that makes it possible to inform, fight back, make a difference, and continue the struggle. Rest in peace, Louis. We will take it from here.

Christine Faltz Grassman

November 2008

Introduction

Imagine that you open a book, or you go to the theater, to experience a Nobel Prize–winning work entitled Trapped in the Dark. It has been touted as a commentary on racism, on the ridiculous, harmful, but persisting hatred of people of color, a slap in the face of alleged civilized society. You figure it will probably be a little preachy, perhaps even nauseatingly politically correct. However, it is (or is based upon) the work of a critically acclaimed author, who, fearing the abuses of Hollywood, was initially loath to sell the rights to the movie. The author reportedly placed certain conditions upon its shooting location and other little details when he eventually gave in. You begin reading or viewing. There is an Everytown—it could be anywhere in the developed world. Only a few minutes into the novel or film, an attractive, middle-aged, successful-looking, smiling white man enters his home and greets his wife and child. After a few mundane pleasantries about each other’s day, they sit down to dinner. Suddenly, the wife and child are staring fixedly at the man. He stares back at them, wondering what is wrong. The child sits, fork halfway to his mouth. The mother rubs her eyes. The child looks away and then turns back. His mouth quivers; he looks frightened.

What the hell is wrong with the two of you? the man demands. In the book, you do not yet know, but on the screen, it is apparent why his family is shocked and bewildered. Although his voice is the same, and his facial features are the same, and his clothes and build are exactly the same, the man has become, irrefutably and inexplicably, a man of color. His medium complexion has darkened to the color of moderately strong coffee, his eyes have been transformed from ice blue to chocolate brown, and his hair has gone a rich dark brown, curling closely about his head.

As the story and film unfold, it is apparent that some mysterious melanin plague has entered some unidentified developed country. Everyone who is not a person of color is becoming one. The government’s reaction is to panic, placing all persons who are white or Asian into gated communities in order to protect them. They are not allowed to bring their darkened friends or loved ones with them, as it soon becomes apparent that this bizarre affliction is contagious. If anyone in the gated communities becomes melaninized, he or she is summarily excommunicated. Geneticists and other scientists soon determine that it is, for some reason, impossible to determine the born people of color from those who have been transformed (the plague has warped primary DNA signatures of its victims). Therefore, all persons of color are directed to make good on their own, outside the well-ordered, civilized gated communities.

The conspiracy theories start hitting the newsstands and other media. Some say white supremacist groups have unleashed germ warfare against people they consider liberal and those who are gay, Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim. The white supremacists respond that this is an attempt to degrade the human race on the part of people of color, a plot by such individuals to dominate the world. Others say it is a terrorist plot to sow seeds of dissension, and we therefore must stop giving in, or we are letting them win.

Editorials are written: So what if we all become people of color? No one has determined any negative side effects to the strange transformations. Why this knee-jerk reaction? Responses come: just because negative side effects have not yet been recognized does not mean they are not possible. DNA is affected, and this likely means serious health consequences—if not now, then later.

The book or movie proceeds in this manner, with an ever increasing pileup of negative stereotypes about people of color being demonstrated, reinforced, and used metaphorically, all spiraling toward total chaos. The ousted people of color begin fighting among each other, trying to determine who is genuine and who is not. Attempts to separate the real from the transformed result in riots, murder, rape, and all manner of degradation. Gated communities are attacked, with many casualties on both sides, while white and Asian women and young girls are raped to promote the true race. A mulatto woman, unaffected by the transforming plague, eventually manages to facilitate a truce. But it is clear by the end of the book/movie that we have a long way to go to heal, change, accept, and live with each other as we are.

This sounds like a great vehicle for a message, doesn’t it? A literary way for people to swallow harsh truths about government, corruption, and human nature. Why not? Who cares if in the process, men, women, and children of color are depicted in all the negative and harmful old ways they have been striving to escape from in real life, in literature, and in Hollywood?

Some might say this sounds like a great idea, that they would see that movie or read that book. Americans, and others who are citizens of countries considered melting pots, might say, I know that in our multicultural society there are good and bad in every group. What if, however, you lived in an extremely homogeneous community or nation—not all that farfetched, even in our seemingly small world. What if your only knowledge of people of color were derived from slanted, narrow commentary, limited media, and prejudice in your home, community, or place of worship? When and if you happen to meet a person of color—a tourist, an immigrant applying for a job where you work, a family moving into your community—what would your reaction, overt or otherwise, likely be?

Now let