The curious incident of the dog in the night-time

Post Reply New Topic

I wanted to get some feedback and opinions on this book. The reason I'm posting this is because the book which the title of is the subject of this message, has been somewhat controversial. The author, Mark Haddon, claims to have written it to give what he believes to be an accurate view into the mind and world of someone with Asperger's or autism. However, while many Aspies and autistics feel this is an accurate portrayal of their lives, others aren't so sure. That's why I wanted to open this discussion regarding the matter. Allow me to begin by sharing my own views, and being open to everyone else's. I personally think this book is the very best attempt any NT can possibly give in portraying one of us, but it's not completely accurate or truly reflective of the live of an ASD person because in order to truly understand what it means to have an ASD, you can't just understand such a life, you have to LIVE it as well. Despite the fact that Mr. Haddon has experience working with autistics, and supposedly Aspies as well, he himself is a NT, so he unfortunately he cannot trulty know entirely what it means to be an Aspie, because he himself isn't one. These are my views on the matter, now I'd like to hear what some of yours are, if you feel you can expand on this at all, and especially if you have any differing views you'd like to share.

I believe there is a thread on this already in the entertainment section where books etc are discussed. However, personally, I found it highly exaggerated. I have not come across any with AS who are that seriously affected, and I considered it to more of a cross between classic autism and AS. It seemed a real mish mash...and the behaviours all seemed to be presented in an extreme way, when to my knowledge, it is rare for someone to have all the behaviours at such an extreme level. I found the book amusing and interesting, but the overdoing of the traits annoyed me no end and contrary to belief, as one can see from Aspie forums, those with AS do have emotions and do display them in wider ways than the protagonist in that book... he came across, for the most part, as totally non feeling, which I believe is untrue.

This character does not speak for me. I found the story interesting, but there was way too much coarse language for my taste. He was way too cold for me.

My dad handed me that book a few days ago, but I have not read it yet as I have been busy with other things.

That was the only full-length novel I read in a single night. The book really spoke to me because I realized how many of the main character's traits I shared, and it made me start to wonder if I was "somewhat autistic." I later discovered that this "somewhat" was indeed Asperger's Syndrome. I think what is inherently difficult about writing a book such as that is that there are many different ways in which Autism manifests itself. Those affected aren't going to have the exact same behavior. That's one of the problems... I think people had a tough time seeing the main character as a real person because he was just one Autistic individual.

I don't know what to say. I definitely enjoyed the book, and I didn't have an issue with his portrayal of Autistic individuals. Of course, as a piece of fiction, the portrayal will never be spot on 100% perfect, but it's amazing what an NT has done in that regard.

Graelwyn said it all, pretty much.

I read it shortly after I first heard I might have AS, last year. Even then I could recognise that the portrayal was extreme. The poor kid had every AS/ASD problem, in spades, plus a broken home.

However, I did enjoy it, as a book. I did learn from it. I am still impressed that Mark Haddon conveyed as much as he did. Certainly it was less than perfect. B for effort.

I feel the book was very important for me, I read it days after I first joined WP and recognized myself for who I am in an Aspie sense. It has also been a starting point for the Aspie character in my story, Kipo, although WP has been immensely helpful in making her more 'authentic' to Chris. However, it was a great read, and a great insight, even if some things are a bit controversial to some.

EDIT: The three things I picked up from Chris are the math skills, the style of speech, and the learning (he, in one chapter, says that he learnt that people have 'minds', so don't know everything that he does). A major difference is that Kipo find out about her 'label' and why she's different.

I think it is great that you are writing a story...would like to see that when you are done with it. I am not sure I am ready to attempt to write anything on Aspergers... I haven't gathered my thoughts enough for one...and I have lived many years and many experiences which, I fear, might make me lean more towards an NT in some ways, such as my understanding of people intellectually...and I will not consider myself to be able to say for sure I have AS until I have the official Dx... no offence to anyone here who is self diagnosed, I simply have no trust of my own judgement, lol. Have you written anything else? Also, why did you choose to write about a female, or are you female yourself? I have not checked, in honesty, lol.

*checks*

Nope, I'm a guy.

I actually have more girl characters than guys! I chose a girl Aspie because of the common belief among some that AS shows up in boys more than girls. To tell you the truth Kipo was originally a guy (with the same name) purely because I forgot the fact! I quickly changed her drawing and was done with it. I also find that having her as a girl helps to pull off the innocent and naive side of her that Chris didn't necessarily get in his story.

Things that Kipo also gets with her story that Chris doesn't include a group of friends in school who are NT, and yet care greatly about her, The Cure (taking advantage of the futuristic setting), and a mother who wanted perfection but got Kipo (no offense to Kipo), and so hates her guts.

EDIT: Another thing Kipo gets that Chris doesn't is CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT.

Methinks a contradiction? I "understand" maths. I now know that I don't "understand" people. Intellectually, I can often compute a simulation of an artificial model of understanding of them, but it's regularly wrong.

Ditto (if I'm to decide on anything non-scientific). Another thing I've started to try to get across to my NT friends, etc. without any success.

Interesting that you write about characters with it. That was actually what started me on my journey. I have two characters I regularly use that are comprised of myself, my best friend and my aunt, then things of their own. I was asked to write what I felt was a boring story on a forum, so I brought in my characters to spice things up. I always thought of them as somehwat HFA with some other things going on (not knowing anything about Asperger's until about six months ago) and one of the readers actually spotted it immediately and said, "She's Autistic! She has Asperger's." Everyone else posted, "She's weird." "She's strange." "She gives me the creeps." I guess that's because I write very descriptively to "show" what's happening so many of the mannerisms come across very strongly from the start. The inappropriate staring, the awkward pauses when she doesn't understand, then almost inappropriate laughing. The abruptness that NTs take as rude behavior. The meltdown (she's introduced when she's run away from home after a meltdown). The interest shows up immediately. Inappropriate questions (she asks extremely personal questions almost immediately).

The interesting thing was that after that comment about Asperger's I went and looked it up. The more I read the more I was like ohoh! I mean I've written about all kinds of characters with all kinds of things happening and never had the ohoh moment. So, that led me here.

As to an NT writing about someone with Asperger's or Autism, it's possible, but you lose something almost inevitably. If you think about Hannibal Lechter created by Thomas Harris, he's pretty convincing as a Sociopathic killer, but I'm sure there are holes. Not being a sociopathic killer though, it would be hard to say how accurate it is. No, fictional character can cover the entire spectrum of Autism or AS because it is simply too broad. You just have to pick the mannerisms that fit that character and go with it. Now, he could have used a plot device to reveal that to the audience. He could have introduced a somewhat flat, narrator type character who tells other characters what is going on or reveals it through his analysis of the AS character. I have used that (my one AS character is married to a Neurologist so he can explain much of what is going on in her brain to people who have trouble with her). There are different forms you can use to do that, but then you get into telling, not showing. I don't know that an NT can ever completely show because we have complicated minds, emotions and lives.

My biggest concern if he doesn't show these things is that I know from my own experiences that some of the audience starts to have the typical NT misunderstandings of what is happening with an AS/AU person. That is a real problem because it continues the myth. You fight this enough when you have another character occasionally "explaining." I can't imagine how bad it is if no one is doing that in the book. It's a fine line and hard to say what is the best solution.

One good way to look at it is that at least he tried to understand us as well as he could. So many people just feel we have to "act" like them and don't care that we never get it or have to pretend for the rest of our lives. At least he didn't do that and tried to "know" as best he could.

A good summary.

The only other AS fiction I've read (so far) is books by Elizabeth Moon (She's NT but with an AS son). I'd say she does better than Mark Haddon, but still not too well. I'm uncertain of her opinion about "The Cure". She discuses such a thing, but she leaves it up to the reader to decide whether it would be a good thing or not - she presents, calmly, both sides of the argument.

I've read it, and I've found it to be very exagerated. Most aspies aren't that affected, me included.

I liked Elizabeth Moon’s “The speed of dark” much better than “Curious incident”. It read much more natural, and the end made me cry. She made it sound like Lou made the wrong choice in taking the cure, and that it ultimately wasn’t worth it, not at the expense of him losing his unique personality and his feeling towards the woman he had once loved. I’m a bit confused about this, really. The book was somewhat emotionally baffling, and I’m still not really sure what point Elizabeth Moon wanted to make, and why did Lou choose to accept the cure. It looks most like Lou himself decided that it was worth it, regardless of the sacrifices he’d have to make, and that the advantages he’d have in the end (like finally having his lifelong dream come true and becoming an astronaut) would pay off, while the author was mourning the person he used to be and was telling us that it just didn’t make sense to want to be “normal” at such a price. Correct me if I’m wrong, I know I could be wildly off about this.

I loved one bit, towards the end, where the Lou goes to the park (I think) to enjoy things in his own special way one last time before taking the cure, and touches a fern frond with his tongue to feel its texture. It was something I could have done myself. It also touched me how he described red maple leaves as “glowing”; again, it was something I could definitely relate to.

Still, I think she could’ve done better (it seems I do have a problem with expecting explicit descriptions and symbolism from every book I take into my hands). In one interview I read somewhere online, Moon said that it took some time before she really started to walk in Lou’s shoes, and his thinking started to feel understandable to her, rather than like that of an alien. It made me wonder – while I was reading the book, I didn’t think Lou to be especially strange, let alone an “alien”. Most often he seemed to be simply a shy man, who is easily embarrassed and loses his ability to speak when stressed, and who has a certain preference for routine. But nothing out of the ordinary, and certainly no line of thinking that’d make me scratch my head and wonder what sort of creature it came from (which was how Moon was making it sound in that interview).

What I really disliked was the abuse of the word “normal”. It was everywhere – normal, normalcy, normals, think normal, act normal. Maybe it’s just me, but I never saw real life like that. It made me wonder how natural it really is for an autistic, or for that matter for a person with any kind of problem, to think about themselves and their relationship with other people in such terms. I mean, feeling inferior because you’re “different”, the way Lou does, is perfectly understandable, but not like this – not going “oh, I’m not normal” or “oh, I wish I were normal” with every breath one draws, every little thing one does, from having a pizza in a canteen to watching a ceiling fan to enjoying the scenery. I’m not normal; I don’t even *breathe* like normal people do, do I. It’s not natural. All the more that Lou is in his forties, and I think by that time most people would have reached some sort of acceptance of themselves, while Lou is still self-conscious and muses about his identity like a teenager.

The overuse of “normal” seemed to give this enhanced ideological slant to the book, which I didn’t particularly like. It made it especially clear how Moon wanted to make a point with the whole thing, except I wish I knew what that point really is. Besides, while I like it when various issues are brought up in fiction, I don’t like it when they become this tangible and start to overshadow the characters.

Last edited by ixochiyo_yohuallan on 04 Mar 2007, 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think this goes not only for autistics vs. non-autistics. This goes for just about anybody. Ultimately, I think, we can only write about ourselves, our experiences, or at least about something we can empathize with really well (which also amounts to saying we have a bit of it inside - otherwise we wouldn't be able to understand it). I think this is natural. That's why I avoid sticking any labels to my characters, and just write the way the words write themselves. I know I'll end up writing about some part of myself anyway, and there seems to be no point in trying to find an official "name" to go with it. It's just - there, and that's it.

Thanks for reminding me of some of the detail inn S of D.

I get the impression at times that you are saying "Why isn't Lou exactly like me, and everyone else with AS?"

As I said before, and you quote E Moon as saying herself, she hasn't offered an answer to the "cure" question.

I really liked how you finished off:

I'm 58. I haven't "accepted myself". I'm wildly self-conscious and I muse about my identity like a three year old.