The Invisible Boy

This thinking note abstract takes its point of departure in a recent focus group interview with young people from a 7th-grade class. The focus of this interview was on what they (pupils) do to promote class well-being and a sense of community in the classroom. At the beginning of the interview, the participants agreed that all students in their class are part of the community. Following the participants, a good class community is when ‘you do lots of things together’. However, as the interview progressed (after eight minutes), it became apparent that at least one student was isolated and stood outside the participant’s definition of ‘good community’. It seemed almost as if they had forgotten a particular student in the class, until a question refreshed their collective memory. Participants suddenly became aware that there is at least one student in their class who does not participate in any joint activities, either in or outside school.
The question about how a group of students can collectively forget that one student is isolated in the class must be raised. The aim of this thinking note is to explore the mechanisms around social stigma and attempt to shed more light on the issue surrounding the ‘invisible boy’.
This chapter examines the new Human Rights instrument and takes stock of its possibilities for application in the particular case of non-discrimination in film.
The chapter will argue, that questions of representation on screen increasingly relate to corporate responsibility to respect the right to non-discrimination. Furthermore, it is argued, that in a Danish context — where DR (Danmarks Radio) and DFI (Det Danske Filminstitut) are state-funded — it becomes even more important to work strategically with representation, as the state has a duty to respect non-discrimination, and not just a responsibility to respect it. This means, that the state (especially in terms of its’ legislation for DFI and the Public service law for DR) has the power to, and already has exerted the wish to, increase diversity and require equal opportunity and better representation.
The chapter introduces the term “strategic representation” — arguing for (and discussing) the strategic and financial advantages of representation. It introduces the quantitative studies from the US and DK, that show that better representation may be economically strategical. The challenges of these arguments will also be discussed and reflected on ethically — as the marketability of representation poses neoliberalist ideological impositions. If we are only to represent those who buy/ consume, will we then be classing/discriminating on grounds of ability/access and socioeconomic background?
LITERATURE
Bruun, Hanne. “The Qualitative Interview in Media Production Studies.”Advancing Media Production Research: Shifting Sites, Methods, and Politics (2015): 131.
Bonilla-Silva, E., (2006). The Strange Enigma of Race in Contemporary America in: Racism Without Racist