language . . . narrative is no longer linear and prosaic. Instead, the essence of sign language is to cut from a normal view to a close-up to a distant shot to a close-up again, even including flashback and flash-forward scenes, exactly as a movie editor works . . . Not only is signing arranged more like edited film than like written narration, but also each signer is placed very much as a camera: the field of vision and angle of view are directed but variable.’ This quality is particularly apt given that Sign literature is necessarily for performance. Undoubtedly then, where such a unique language is the vehicle for creative construction rather than just a cipher for communicating ideas, there might blossom a very different creative process and, therefore, product. Neurophysiological studies suggest that, in the early years, the acquisition of Sign as a primary language seems to wire the developing brain in a way different to that found in hearing subjects. Furthermore, that in the brains of native signers, there is a completely separate representation of ‘linguistic’ space from that of ordinary ‘topographical’ space; i.e., that native signers have developed a new way of representing space, a new type of space that has no equivalent in the hearing and these two spaces are processed in different areas of the brain. Sacks suggests that the strong visuality of deaf people may dispose them to certain ‘visual’ types of memory and thought – that ‘given complex problems with many stages, the deaf tend to arrange these and their hypotheses in logical space, whereas the hearing arrange them in a temporal (or “auditory”) order.’ Experiments conducted in the 1940s and1960s comparing written composition in hearing and deaf students found that the compositions of deaf students were very different in structure – with much use of redundant or recurring phrases, less complex sentences and deviations in word order, disparities which reflect the structural differences between Sign and spoken English. But what about non-verbal rather than verbal composition?