The Speed of Dark, by Elizabeth Moon

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, I know a thread or two has been made about this book already, but I'm not a necro.

Anyways, I borrowed it from the library and read it over the weekend. Plot overview: Protagonist Lou Arrendale, an autistic, works in a devision of his company staffed entirely by autistics employed for their impressive pattern-analysis skills in near-future America. Autism by this point is cured prenatally or in infancy, so Lou and his friends (mostly in their 30s, and the youngest is 26) are the only autistics remaining. (NOTE: This refers mainly to LFA, NOT Asperger's, the fate of Aspies is ambiguous but they have presumably all been cured) The younger people who would have been autistic if not for the cure they received prenatally are supposedly the same, but without the autism, but it is obvious to Lou and the other true autists that these people do are not "one of us" and do not share autistic patterns of thought. They are not as adept at pattern analysis. Lou, unlike his autie friends, interacts with neurotypicals on a regular basis in a fencing club, where his pattern analysis enables him to become one of the stronger fencers. Their division gets a new boss who attempts to bully the autistics into undergoing a dangerous experimental cure for adult autism, or risk losing their jobs. This is obviously illegal, in today's world and in the book, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. The purpose of the treatment (there are not enough adult autists left to make such research profitable just to cure autism) is to use the autistics as lab rats to learn how the procedure works and then use it in reverse- make NT's just a little bit autistic so that they can have some of the special abilities and will work harder. Eventually, the illegal threats of this boss are found out and he is fired, and the autistic employees are assured that the treatment is purely voluntary, but they still leave the option there for them. Bowing to societal pressure, Lou (and most of his friends, including the most outspokenly proud autist Linda) accept the treatment. Not much is seen of the others after treatment (though there are hints that it went extremely poorly for at least one) but Lou is clearly not the same person anymore. He has lost his interest in fencing, in a woman he loved (and who loved him back) in his old friends (including the NT's), in the beauty he used to see in patterns, and possibly even in his favorite music. He also has lost some of his abilities. Before the treatment, he completed the equivalents of college courses in biology, chemistry, organic chemistry, biochemistry, and neurology in his spare time over a week as he tried to figure out what the researchers wanted to do with his brain. However, once he was freed of the autistic label-note, I said label, not the autism that was holding him back- he was able to pursue his dream of going into space. Both Lou and Linda (another autistic) and presumably others, were bullied by counselors and told what they were and were not capable of. It did not matter if they had an interest in astronomy or astrophysics; the counselors told them to go into applied mathematics and they did. Once they were no longer autistic, people did not prevent them from pursuing their goals.

Hm, a long summary. Sorry for the giant block of text. I found the book interesting, especially for how the neurotypical author took a strong stand for autistic rights. The last 15 pages or so, and especially the epilogue, are saddening to me. Lou gives in, and has to start his life over from scratch. It reminded me of the end of 1984 (with my name, could I be expected to avoid a connection to that book?) where Winston is finally made "sane" and the last line is "He loved Big Brother." That is what the end of The Speed of Dark felt like to me- the autistic finally being forced to give in, to become normal, and his normal self acknowledging that it is not Lou-before but someone else entirely. He has been destroyed and then molded into what society wanted, and he can never recover his unique attributes again.

I read this book not too long ago. Really enjoyed it, but yea, it is kind of a sad ending.

I read it awhile ago. I hated it. The writer has an autistic child and its obvious from the book she wants him to be "normal" instead of accepting him for who he is. Thats why he had the main character take the "cure". I felt she was telling the reader that being autisitc is totally unacceptable and they need to be 'cured". Sends the totally wrong message that people need to comform to be accepted. should have had the main character not take the cure and be happy with who he is.

@KenM: I actually got kind of the opposite impression, that Moon portrayed autistics favorably. She also clearly sympathizes with the autistic rights movement, and dedicates the book to (among others) "parents of autistic children, in the hope that they also find that delight in difference." So she doesn't seem to have a negative view of autistics or autism.

I agree with Orwell on this, I got the feeling Moon was almost "siding" with the autistics and saying that being different is better then being something you're not. Although I have never been the best at getting meanings out of books so I could be wrong.

It is told from an autistic perspective, and shows some clear anti-normal bias. For example, Lou is berated for lack of social nuances, and thinks to himself "Lying is not a nuance. Lying is wrong." And of course, the two main villains of the book are anti-autistic. Don and Cremshaw both dislike autistics. I at several points got the impression of autistics being portrayed as actually superior- they even look down on the younger John Lee, who was "cured" in the womb and so isn't really autistic. His work is not as sophisticated as theirs because he is not capable of the same feats.

I read that book in my sci-fi literature class a few years back. Aside from the (very sad) ending, I absolutely loved it - and was surprised at how much I could relate to the author (this was before I knew much about autism). Of all the books in that class, that was the only one, or maybe, MAYBE one of two, that I absolutely could not put down. I've recommended it to a bunch of people since.

I would agree that the author was anti-cure, or at least with extreme reservations about the ramifications of it. Although I didn't like the ending in that he actually took the cure, I think the author did it exactly because she wanted to show the audience that even though he attained his dream job, he also lost almost everything else he ever cared about - his favorite hobby, his love interest and several of the friends who had accepted him unconditionally before. It was in fact a very good warning about changing oneself to fit another's standards, if not an extremely depressing one.

Interesting comparison with 1984. I had never thought of it that way, but it really does fit. Wow, that makes the ending seem even more sinister. D:

I tend to connect almost any piece of literature back to 1984. You can probably guess one of my Aspie obsessions...

kind've odd given she's a sci-fi author too...but then again Orson Scott car (The guy who wrote Ender's Game) is a radical mormon and supposedly went far to the right when he went older...people have their biases; even those who are supposedly more educated and enlightened..

EDIT: have to read that file. apparently no one got the book from tpb lol.

Nope. I prefer to avoid illegal materials. But we've already been over that. I still got it for free from the library though. You could come over to PPR for a while if you're interested in a discussion about copyright law/intellectual property. I've been thinking of making a thread on it anyways.

Two words: Interlibrary loan.

Many public libraries can pull in books from across the country through that system.

Regarding the ending, I got the message that Lou didn't survive the cure; only his body and memories did. The narrator even talks about the time before as having belonged to another person. And the thoughts he has just beforehand are spookily similar to those of someone considering suicide... or, anyway, they are spookily similar to mine when I was, last time I did. They're the thoughts of someone who doesn't want to die, loves life, but can't see any place for himself in the world. When I thought there was no place for me, because I could not find a place to live or a job to do, I decided to enjoy one last week... everything took on an importance it had never had before. I don't think I was even depressed, because when I found a solution, the plans I'd made for suicide vanished. It's a very strange feeling.

I got the same impression from 1984, actually. Brainwashing that thorough doesn't leave you alive after, even if you are still walking. Then I thought about it for a week and realized that the 1984 dystopia is nowhere near as permanent as it is portrayed to be, because language is fluid and some people will always be more intelligent than those in power... intelligent enough not to show how intelligent they are.

I read the book very recently and it's clear to me that Lou decided on his own to take the treatment. He also retained all his abilities, so in addition to being more normal in NT terms, he has his intelligence and special skills, which actually makes him pretty superior to just about anyone.

And, although it's mentioned very briefly, the author tells us that the treatment failed drastically for one of the early volunteers and he was never seen again. I think she shouldn't have downplayed the dangers of the treatment, but at least she offers the very realistic idea that not everyone is the same and that not everyone will respond favorably to treatment.

I also think she glossed over Lou's reasons for taking it rather than making us understand why he was willing to take the risk.

When you say "LFA", do you mean that these people all have associated mental retardation, but that they are savants in that they obviously have special skills, like Rain Man [but with less overall intelligence]?

Orwell, your original description of the book reminded me more of Vergil, the blind man who has his sight restored in An Anthropologist on Mars, than of 1984 (but perhaps that's my bias).

Some of Elizabeth Moon's writing is very good, but I have never been able to bring myself to read this one. Big chicken, I guess.

Callista: Interesting points. I got some of the same impressions, but it had not struck me that Lou was actually dead- and you're right, Lou after the treatments says "I" and then refers in third person to "Lou-before" who no longer exists except as a memory. Lou has been destroyed and replaced with someone else. Lou's friend Tom sees Lou after the treatment and seems to notice this: "Lou- or what had been Lou-..." and also "The man with Lou's face-but not his expression" show that Lou is not the same person anymore.

I meant that it refers to Kanner's Autists who would, in our day, be classified as Low Functioning. However, drastic improvements in early intervention and therapy have put them up on a very HFA level, and Lou at least retains several savant abilities as well as incredibly high general intelligence.

I felt the ending was a happy ending. The main character got to go into space and that was what he always wanted.