Aspies For Freedom

I thought it was ok.  I enjoyed reading it -- but, to me, it was apparent that the author is not an Aspie, himself.  It seemed to me that he tried pretty hard to "get inside" the mind of an Aspie, but it didn't quite get there.  Apparently, he has worked with (if I remember correctly) Aspies and/or autists in some sort-of clinical/therapeutic setting.

[Warning - spoilers below!  In case you haven't read the book....]

I didn't really relate to the protagonist, Christopher.  In some things I did -- I particularly enjoyed his thoughts the existence of God -- and what aliens might be like.    I was also very touched by his thoughts on his mother when he still thought she was dead.  And, of course, I appreciated very much that he wanted to investigate the death of the neighbor's dog.

But, I thought the author portrayed him as particulaly clueless.  Not all Aspies are as lost as Christopher -- some are, of course.  But not all.

All in all, I thought the book was ok.  But, after I read it I thought -- well now everyone out there is going to think that all Aspies are exactly like Christopher -- and that's certainly not true.

I've only had a look at the book in a bookshop. I believe the main character has a photographic memory (or whatever the proper technical term for that is). I don't have a memory like that at all. That's not to say that I don't have a good memory or that I don't remember details, but my memory is not like a photographic record. I have no idea how many aspies have this kind of memory.

Eidetic memory.

I thought The Curious Incident etc was gorgeous.  I felt the question of who killed Wellington became greater than the book itself and seemed to have a life of its own.  I did feel that I had been very much like Christopher at that age, though I had rather different interests and quirks.  Like Christopher, Sherlock Holmes was my favourite reading then, and I still often read the same stories now, and never tire of them as NTs would. I like knowing what happens next.


Stella

When I was very small I used to have vividly bright daydreams about being all alone in the Antarctic, except for a sledge which had my cuddly toys on it, and this was the most comforting thought I had, a haven of perfect safety.  Very much like Christopher's in the book, except that I have never hoped for a cataclysmic end to the world or to other people, not even to the NT civilisation which hurts us so.

Stella

That is such a beautiful imaginary 'world'
(Of course in reality the toys would probably freeze, but who cares about reality! )

I think it's interesting the way the medical definition of ASD has mutated over the years. About 1980, when Dr Lorna Wing wrote her famous paper rehabilitating Asperger's forgotten work of 1944, she described a child such as I was, who had created what she called a highly detailed imaginery world. Now an absence of imagination, or the inability to imagine, is taken as one of the defining features of ASD. There are many more subdivisions of PDD today than there were when I was a child, and perhaps I would now be consigned to the Atypical Autism box, or one of the "Not otherwise specified" dustbin categories of the American diagnostic system, as if any of that mattered, or could change anything for me now.

Stella

I'm sure many of us have gone through nuclear phases.  :grin:  When I was about 12 I wanted to have my own nuclear reactor and thought and talked about nothing else.

Stella

Has anyone else heard of, or seen, the nuclear bunker at Hack Green.
Its great! :grin:

It was a real Ministry of Defence bunker, and was sold after the cold war ended, its now an interactive museum, you can walk around the whole place (almost entirely underground of course).

Its in Cheshire.

Coo I haven't Amy, but it sounds like really good fun! There's a group called Subterranea Britannica ( http://www.subbrit.org.uk/ ) which goes on explorations of old Cold War bunkers and other military tunnels, and I've been thinking about joining.

Stella

Wintermute wrote

Wintermute, I don't want to be rude to you, but I've got to say, you have asked a dumb question or have asked the wrong question.  :roll: The quotes from the book say nothing about the aspie character's "relationship to other human beings". I will explain as plainly as I can.

If you are an autistic person who has never met any other autistic person, and you have no affinity neurotypical people (for whatever reason, and there could be very good reasons), then it might appear (to yourself or to everyone) that you are a misanthrope. But this is a premature assumption. There is always the possibility that an autistic person could feel an affinity with other autistic people, but that possibility might never be realised, so therefore the aspie might not be a misanthrope, but might just be a person who is aware of the gulf that lies between the autist and the neurotypical.

Apparently the aspie character fantasizes about a world in which the only people are "special people like me". Well that pretty much proves my argument, doesn't it? He doesn't dislike the company of ALL people, just one particular type of person.

I personally have had many a happy daydream that began with a nuclear winter or some viral holocaust.  :twisted: I believe my husband is an aspie like myself. I have little time for completely normal people, or odd people who subscribe to the values of the majority. If I could replace all of the "normal" people in my life with more genuine and interesting people, I would without hesitation.

cant_think_of_a_username wrote

Well, I think that is what you are suggesting, and I think you are wrong on that point.

You say you would prefer a person who is average but has a giving nature. What if that person who has a giving nature gives you things that you don't want, that are even harmful to you, which they think you should be grateful for, and then they get all bitter and twisted at you because you are not grateful? What use is a giving nature if the person who has it has little intelligence and understanding?

I don't think I have ever met a neurotypical person who understood much about my needs or the way I think or feel. Maybe one of my parents had half a clue when I was a little kid. I can't remember that far back. I'm sure there are people in my past who think they did the right thing by me, but they didn't. I believe most people think they understand a whole lot more than they really do. They are just having a wan*.

cant_think_of_a_username,
if you believe NTs have the monopoly on some form of wisdom or knowledge, why don't you give some real life examples of times when you have been enlightened by some gem of insight from an NT. It has never happened to me in ordinary life. The only great knowledge that NTs have bestowed upon me has been obtained from the pages of books, and I can't really be sure all of those great authors really were NT.

NTs have virtually no reason to try to understand other people who think differently, because they are the majority. Even some NTs who work with autistic people evidently have few clues. It suits their interests to pretend that there are no differences or genuine misunderstandings because then they don't need to have any pangs of guilt when they victimise someone for not following their rules. I see this kind of thing all the time when ordinary Australians behave in a racist way. It's so easy to criticise the blacks for breaking white rules.

Cant think of a username - you said "From now on I will be a person."

This shouldn't be a surprise, but you are already a person, and so are we all.

You can talk to me anytime you feel like it, good luck :smile: