Radiohead - AS?

Post Reply New Topic

@ Delirium: "everybody who's remotely famous" - I don't see the more charismatic and famous rock groups like Aerosmith, AC/DC, Metallica, Led Zeppelin, Santana, Queens of the Stone Age, etc... being speculated to have Asperger's. Admittedly, there are a lot who are speculated which don't seem to make much sense.
(The Beatles, for example, can't have Asperger's. They knew how to work a crowd, and handle popularity really well. Their eccentricity, especially in their later days, was largely because of their associations with drugs - Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. Everyone knew that...)

And I'd assume everyone here knows they can't technically diagnose anyone, which is why it was called speculation.

The point of the thread wasn't necessarily whether the members had Asperger's or not; That was thrown in at the end. Even still, I only thought one of them "comes close to it" - I didn't full-out say one of them had to have the full Asperger's diagnosis. If they don't have it at all, then life goes on.

The point of the thread, taking from a previous thread, was if Radiohead was the band that people with Asperger's relate to the most.

Last edited by Dnuos on 24 Aug 2010, 4:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ps you come across as an arrogant little s**t, how's that working out for you?

welp, sorry I jumped to conclusions. I guess I'm just assumed you were trying to armchair-diagnose the members with Asperger's.

And I don't relate to Radiohead, although that's probably more because I don't listen to them. From what I understand they tend to appeal to people who feel socially alienated in general, not just people with AS.

whatever, btw i'm sorry for calling you an arrogant ----, i was being childish, WP isn't the place for that kind of talk, "girl from the county hell"? i'm assuming you like The Pogues, they're my favourite band

I don't know, I've grown to strongly dislike Radiohead. Being a big fan of Brit bands like Oasis, Kasabian, Nine Black Alps, Muse, etc they all get compared to Radiohead. Even though I've tried listening to their songs, I just find all songs of theirs boring. Like some people have stated in this thread I have a hard time realizing what is so great about them.

When it comes to the rock music I listen to, it's less about stirring emotions, and more about having good guitar and singer. But one band I can relate to is Muse. I don't like to "armchair diagnose" celebrities with AS, and there are only 6-7 famous people I am certain had/have AS, and Matt Bellamy is one of them. Every song on Showbiz, their first album and one of my all time favorite albums, could easily pass as being written by a person with AS, look up the lyrics to Cave or any other song on that album.

Also, social alienation does not necessarily = autism spectrum. Not all people with AS are socially inept, and not all socially inept people have AS. The singer from The Vines has diagnosed Asperger's, and he seems totally different from the Radiohead singer. Maybe the Radiohead singer is socially alienated because he is an as*hole, if what all the other British singers are saying about him is true.

The comparisons have always been stupid, especially Radiohead vs. Muse. I dare anybody to find a single similarity between Origin of Symmetry and Kid A (Muse fan here too, OoS being my favorite). Matt Bellamy seems a lot more sociable however. Definitely eccentric at least, though. Thom Yorke (Radiohead's singer) is notorious for not being sociable. People like Jack Black, for example, congratulate him after a show and he didn't reply back. He's much more awkward in (most) interviews compared to other bands, stims and slowness and all. He doesn't seem like an as*hole, just someone that doesn't know how to have social etiquette.

But I'm not trying to diagnose anyone, so hey, anyone's possible.

Some of their early albums were kind of bland (such as The Bends) but they started incorporating more and more electronic and experimental influences (most noticeably starting with Kid A). Some people just don't click with that stuff, and there's still the "stirring emotions" part which some others don't click with, so... they won't appeal to everyone.

Mmkay, you get a free cookie for guessing where my title came from.

You enjoy other bands, that's fine. It is, however, nothing to do with speculation regarding Yorke or Greenwood. Considering the complexity of Radiohead's music, the constant evolution of their sound and the blending of multiple musical styles I'm a little surprised that you find them 'boring' - especially as you list Oasis as one of your favourite bands. Perhaps you're confusing 'boring' with 'challenging'.




You admit that you only enjoy a limited style of music. I listen to Muse fairly often, but was less than impressed with the last album. Bellamy might be on the spectrum, but I wouldn't put my money on it. He comes across as very gregarious in the few interviews I've seen, which makes me skeptical.



After stating your certainty that Bellamy has AS I'm wondering if perhaps you're just trying to find a way to relate to your favourite singer. Social alienation is not the sole reason for speculation about Yorke.



And this is an irrelevant piece of information when speculating on another individual. Or are you now going to argue that all people with AS should act exactly like Nicholls? And let's not forget here that Nicholls AS was not diagnosed when he used it an excuse for kicking a photographer. Considering the alcohol and drug abuse he was subjecting his body to at the time, I believe his diagnosis should be taken with a pinch of salt.



An as*hole according to who exactly? Who are 'all the other British singers'? If you're on about the Gallaghers, they regularly pick fights with artists who have more clout than themselves when a new album is due for release. Strange, eh? You really should learn to form your own opinions instead of blindly believing what famous people tell you to believe.

Thom Yorke is one of the most highly regarded singer/songwriters in music, and is often asked to collaberate by 'Rock Royalty', such as U2 for example. He's also a very active campaigner against climate change, using his own resources, his profile and his time to support Friends of the Earth. Insular? Yes. as*hole? Hardly.

Tony Attwood diagnosed him.

this thread is a funny tug of war.

It seems like a lot of people like to speculate about famous people having AS so they can identify with them personally. It seems a bit of a stretch for me to be able to identify with any kind of famous person so I don't bother trying to "diagnose" them. Besides, I feel like there's too much difference between people on the autism spectrum for autism to be an identity.

That said, Thom Yorke seems like a more likely candidate than most others people on this forum mention. It seems fairly pointless though because I can't possibly claim to know him. His face and his political stances/involvement are well documented but he doesn't exactly reveal much about his personal life. He might be much more social around friends and family than he is when fans and other celebrities accost him.

Even Attwood is not infallible.

Has Tony Attwood actually met Thom Yorke and tested him for Asperger's? Otherwise, it's just speculation on his part.

surely less fallible than internet speculation. are you serious??

how could alcohol abuse could cause AS symptoms? if anything, being a heavy drinker might mask some of the social effects. and as far as I've read, Craig wasn't doing anything but smoking a lot of pot. pot generally makes people easygoing. i've never seen or heard of anyone smoking pot and becoming violent. i certainly don't know of anyone who smoked pot and then became autistic.

speculate all you want but undiagnosing someone diagnosed by Tony Attwood is ridiculous. the discussion here seems more about personal insults and one-upmanship than anything else. you said that to discredit another poster, not because it makes any sense. this isn't real discussion, but a game of "yo mama .. "

as for the guy from muse or anyone in radiohead, unless one of them goes public about it, no one will ever know.

Thom Yorke really wouldn't surprise me, but there it is. who knows.

i find these topics interesting, but they always provoke argument.



not Thom Yorke, Craig Nicholls. why on earth would Tony Attwood speculatively diagnose someone he'd never met?

( ^ not angry; just incredulous)

Nobody is perfect. There are dozens of possible reasons that any psychologist might misdiagnose AS. The issue here is not relative fallibility.



Nobody stated alcohol abuse caused AS symptoms, however excessive dependence on pot and/or alcohol can lead to a large number of mental health and behavioural problems. Considering the speculation about his AS materialised shortly after he was brought up on charges, I have always been dubious of both the defense and the diagnosis. I think you'll agree that I'm entitled to my opinion.



Even if the only substances he was abusing are the two he acknowledged - alcohol and pot - the chances of his acting irrationally or violently are magnified greatly. Heavy pot use alone has been shown to have serious long-term mental health repercussions. Do you seriously expect me to believe that he claimed to have a problem with pot and alcohol, yet was just getting mellow once in a while?



The pot is not responsible for the violence, Nicholls is.



Had anyone suggested this was the case it might be relevant. My point is that I doubt his diagnosis, and that Attwood is not perfect. These are both statements of simple, indisputable fact.



I wasn't aware that speculation required your permission. Nobody in this entire thread has made a diagnosis of anything. We have stated our personal, subjective speculation. If you want to put forward your own opinions on matters then I for one will gladly read them, but all you've done so far is set up a series of strawmen and set them alight. If you're going to quote me I'd appreciate if you didn't put words in my mouth (or at my fingertips).



The thread was started in order to discuss a theory, not to establish a fact. I think we're all quite aware that we're not going to see their medical records.



What is wrong with debating opinions? Should we steer away from challenging conversations on the forums? I've spent enough of my life trying to avoid doing that in the real world to start doing it online. If you're uncomfortable with debate descending into argument, then you have the option of not posting in the thread.

you cited heavy drug use as a reason his condition might have been misconstrued.

i was making a distinction between arguing for the sake of arguing, to prove someone wrong, and arguing with the intent of arriving at a reasonably accurate conclusion.

you seem to be doing the former, i was attempting to interject the latter.

you're reading far too much emotion / aggression in my words.



and i have no idea what this means.

Which has nothing to do with the section you quoted. Heavy pot and alcohol use can cause a wide variety of psychological problems that could be mistaken for Aspergers. But as I already said, this is merely my opinion in light of the circumstances surrounding his diagnosis.



So you believe that your opinions somehow have more value because of your subjective view that my own opinions were stated merely 'for the sake of arguing'? You will forgive me, of course, if I treat this attitude with more than a little disdain.



According to whom? I have made no reference to your emotional state because it is irrelevant to the conversation. This is your second presumption in the space of two sentences.



This is apparent.