We recently caught up with Matt Malzkuhn to ask him questions about his recently published book "Home Movies Hardly Silent: Unlocking Our Deaf Folklife Films." This is the first book of its kind, marking a groundbreaking development in both film/media studies and Deaf studies. His thorough answers provide valuable insights into the development of the work and his and his co-author's contributions to the relevant fields of research.
What prompted you to develop this research? Was it an initial interest for you when you entered academia, or did something specific prompt you?
I would like to give credit to my co-author and colleague, Dr. Ted Supalla, who is the director of the Sign Language Research Lab at Georgetown University, where I worked during the middle parts of my PhD studies. Ted initially spotlighted the importance of Deaf folklife films back in 1994 in a short article, and since then, little traction has been made in this field. So when I worked for Ted, and I was in the process of figuring out my research directions, he suggested I should take a look at a unpublished manuscript on Charles Krauel that he wrote (he produced a documentary on him) so I read it and realized this was a perfect opportunity to make this a life’s work because its more about unlocking buried epistemologies and spotlighting the deaf talents of their times. This closely tracks my areas of focus in performance studies and political economy/Marxism.
Did you approach it from an interest in film/cinema studies, or an interest in the American Deaf community?
This is a good question, and I actually approached this from an interest in the Deaf community in a global sense. I am deaf myself, natively so, and it was natural for me to feel inclined to immerse myself in histories as told by grassroots deaf as they clearly provided an authentic and refreshing representation of what it was like to be Deaf through the times.
In the description of the book, it says that silent films gave “Deaf people the opportunity, one that went largely unrealized by others outside of their community, to capitalize on this novel technology wherein all cultural activities preserved and shared on film were naturally embedded with sign language, therefore debunking the widely held belief that these home movies are silent only because they are without sound.” Could you expound upon this?
Certainly, this is among the theses of our book as these amateur filmmakers didn’t just document their family or community lives, but they also documented sign language used by the deaf in the exact context shown on film. People were filmed signing in their natural settings and narrating events. So with sign language embedded in films, these movies could speak for themselves in a wide sense, so it contradicts the widely accepted view that these movies do not speak for themselves. The inclusion of sign language on film not only opened doors for consideration about the ideal relationship between a visual language and a visual medium, it also invites a realignment in perspectives about what communication consists of and whether it still thrives when sound is absent. The advent of home movie making starting in 1923, only had silent movies as there was no sound technology that came with the new handheld cameras, and it was in 1973 that magnetic sound strips were incorporated on the super 8mm reels, hence opening the door for sound to be recorded. So the first fifty years of the amateur industry was largely silent, especially so with hearing people using home movie technology to record their lives.
How did your experience in the GMU Cultural Studies Program influence or guide the research and development of this book?
The program gave me an interdisciplinary viewpoint, which I appreciate and hope is manifested throughout the book. This research on deaf made home movies perfectly espouses the human agency often discussed in Cultural Studies, and as a potential mode of “resistance,” even if it wasn’t always intentional. I do believe these films have the potential to challenge the conventional history of what it means to be deaf because they are primary sources made through the lens/eyes of the deaf filmmakers of their time.
Looking back on the research process, writing, and the publication of this book, what stands out as a valuable or meaningful experience for you? Further, what would you suggest is the book's most valuable contribution to film studies or studies of the American Deaf community?
I think the most valuable part of the process is actually working with families that trusted us to work with their films, in assisting in the digitization process, so that they can finally enjoy their familial treasures after so many years. This work to restore family and community memories is a significant undertaking, which has only begun with the release of this book, which we hope will inspire a new generation of people seeking to reconcile our histories. Many aspects of the deaf life have become extinct or are endangered, so this work on historical films is even more important to rescue and study so that we can teach future generations about the worlds and sign languages that existed before their time, in their real time, preserved on films. Finally, this also emphasizes the importance of including the grassroots efforts and experience in the deaf historicization process.
Were there aspects of this project that you were not able to focus on as intensely as you’d like, which might lead to a future research project?
This is a great question, and yes, there are plenty. Since this is a first of a kind in terms of focusing on deaf folklife films, we took a measured approach highlighting the historical process and describing the methods we used to work with these films. We also shared some key findings in the book, and in the final chapter, we discussed some future outlooks that can be beneficial to Deaf studies as a field as we continue to incorporate findings from a wide range of home movies that become available to us. I think I would like to talk more about the concept of “Deaf Sovereignty” more down the road as I continue to work on different films across generations, borders, and languages. When Deaf people are in charge of their mode of labor, they understand what they own and what they choose to preserve (on film), and they answer only to themselves rather than a higher authority that has always been the narrative of the deaf experience throughout history. What does this change in terms of preexisting or conventional knowledge? What are the contradictions? What has changed in terms of the past and present, and how would the technology of its time differ from the technology of our time today in terms of documenting personal and community life? These are some questions that I want to expand on. Additionally, we would like to pursue more global participation in this project as we have learned more about deaf made movies existing around the world that would only add to the growing yet evolving deaf epistemology.
To learn more, please visit DeafFolkLife.Org. You can purchase the book here.
June 01, 2025