Provisos, Stereotypes, And Vocabulary
The reader should be well aware that this is not a study which will compare medieval and modern diagnoses of illnesses. It is not relevant to this study whether or not people are thought to be possessed by a demon or if they suffer from a chemical imbalance in their brains. Rather, what is central to this work is how people are treated and how they are portrayed in media. Is a person suffering from possession considered to exercise agency in his own life? Is he deemed dangerous on account of this disposition? What about in the modern era? Have representations of people suffering from similar symptoms changed very much? These are the questions with which this study is concerned.
That said, many of the documents discussed herebelow will feature references to demons and possession, and it is therefore fruitful to explain the term. However, as Kroll and Bachrach (1984) point out
although we often assume that we understand in a straightforward manner what the term “possession” means [in medieval texts] in fact this is a very vague and complex concept for which we have no helpful natural models…Just as the term “nervous breakdown” means and meant many different thing, and undoubtedly had a different range of meanings to medieval persons from what it has to us (510).
This is true across medieval literature. An excellent example of the is The Little Flowers Of St. Francis Of Assisi, in which a demon is typically just a negative or vindictive thought. Thus, the term needs to be contextualised, and should not be ignored as primitive, but understood as a means of comprehending, or at least allegorically describing, the things which people witnessed. This term was not a static, fixed, or universal in definition, but differed from place to place, time to time, and, likely, even person to person. To this day colloquial and ill defined terms such as lunatic, psycho, disabled, and cripple are used to describe those with a range of impairments and, like the vocabularies of medieval peoples, these terms have many different meanings depending on their context.
Furthermore, despite what many think, medieval people cared for those with mental and physical disabilities. As early as the late sixth or early seventh century, Pope St. Gregory The Great makes reference to a hospital in which continual care is offered to those with both mental and physical disabilities (Gregory, 1911). They understood that a wide range of aetiological factors could influence one’s health including “humoral imbalances, intemperate diet and alcohol intake, overwork and grief” (Kroll & Bachrach, 1984; 507). In fact, in 1984 Kroll and Bachrach demonstrated that in eleven of the most popular pre-crusade books sin was only related to mental illness or disability sixteen percent of the time. What is more, the physical weakness or impairment of many, many medieval saints and the references to the medical nature of monasteries indicate that the Church did not consider sin and disability to be related. Hildegard Von Bingen (Boivin & Phillips, 2007) and Basil of Caesarea (Gonzalez, 2010) were both physically very ill for much of their lives. Likewise, St. Giles and the blessed Margaret of Castello were both physically disabled, and others such as St. Thomas More, actively advocated the rights of the disabled (see timeline for details). Other popular saints were commonly oppressed by demons and yet lived exceptionally meritorious lives. The best example of this is The Vita Antonii written by St. Athanasius, which became exceedingly popular (Athanasius, 1980). Both Antony and Athanasius were well remembered and popular in the medieval period, and yet, according the his hagiography St. Antony was routinely dogged by demons and harassed by them (Athanasius, 1980). Similarly, in his Lausiac Histories bishop Palladius of Galatia (1918) notes that many of Antony’s followers struggled in the desert with demonic possession. Just as it is today, mental illness in the middle ages was known to be caused by a multiplicity of factors in one’s life, and this was well represented in the popular media of the day.
Many may also find the vocabulary used to describe disability surprising or even downright offensive. This is because many of the translations of these texts which are readily available are somewhat antiquated, and the terminology has changed significantly since their publication. The reader ought, therefore, to focus primarily upon the general meaning behind the words, and not become bogged down in semantics and criticism of language over half a century old. Secondarily, I have made an effort to use a range of terms so as to avoid repetition.
It is also essential that it is understood that only the most popular modern media will be employed in this study. This is partly due to the brevity of this study, but it is also because obscure works of little influence tend to be far less indicative of of popular opinion. Commercial films, like the popular bardic tales of the past, and popular or commercialised books, such as Dune (1965), The Simpsons, Psycho (1960), and so on, both influence common opinion and reflect it (Shepherd, 2007). As Samsel and Perepa (2013) observe:
for many people media, primarily television, is a source of experiencing reality, especially when they lack first-hand experience with an issue presented on screen. (139).
Shepherd (2007) argues for this power influence with regards to television specifically when he states that:
[w]eekly television series have more influence on American society than any other form
of media, and with many of these series available on DVDs, televisions series are radically accessible to most consumers…Often in life, it does not matter how things really are, but how they are perceived. This is especially true [of] how individuals with disabilities are perceived in media (1-2).
This influence can only have increased with the accessibility offered by websites such as Netflix. Madhusudan (2015) also chimes in, noting that
Movies are a staple source of entertainment and command huge popularity worldwide. Through motion pictures, film makers create an overwhelming dream like visual experience blending it with sound stimulus, replete with high octane drama and emotions, capturing the imagination of and having a lasting impact on their viewers, even if it amounts to disconnecting from reality (1).
And this presentation, as alluded to above by Madhusudan (2015) can be positive or negative. When it comes to disability, “[t]he popular media has increasingly been portraying individuals with mental retardation in a positive image” (Greenbaum, 1996; 128). This may be true in some genres, as the popular film Forrest Gump attests, however, while discussing horror films, Goodwin (2013) asserts that “films [still] frequently present audiences with inaccurate depictions of psychosis” (201). Thus, this incredibly important and influential form of media is mixed in its representations of disability.
As a result, the modern public, just like those in centuries previous, is exposed to a variety of representations of disability. Because this website is aiming to understand how this most vulgar representation has either changed or remained static, only the most popular of medieval texts have been chosen, likewise only the most popular of modern media have been chosen. It is the author’s ambition that a greater sample will be created when time allows.
St. Gregory, The Great. (1911). Dialogues. (Phillip L. Warner, Trans.). Retrieved Jan. 23rd, 2015, from www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_00_dialogues_intro.htm.