What do we know of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time?
We know it was written by Mark Haddon.
We know that “Aspergers” was used on the cover of the book.
What we know is that it has nothing to do with Asperger’s Syndrome.
How do we know these things?
We know these things because Greg Olear, a father of a boy with Asperger Syndrome, gives us the facts. In fact, in an excellent article for the Huffington Post, he goes so far as to seek out the author’s blog and then tells us what author Mark Haddon had to say about the book.
Here are some choice quotes from Mark Haddon’s blog exactly as it appears on his blog, all in lower case letters.
Regarding autism and Asperger syndrome: “i know very little about the subject.”
Regarding his research into autism: “i did no research for curious incident. i’d read oliver sacks’s essay about temple grandin and a handful of newspaper and magazine articles about, or by, people with asperger’s and autism. i deliberately didn’t add to this list.”
Regarding the book itself: “curious incident is not a book about asperger’s.”
Regarding his use of the word Asperger’s on the cover of his book: “i slightly regret that fact that the word ‘asperger’s’ was used on the cover.”
Greg Olear says in the Huffington post:
“What I find objectionable is that he seems unaware of — or, worse, indifferent toward — the fact that he has made both his name and his fortune exploiting the Asperger’s community, my son included.”
Now here’s what I have to say: Every autistic who has trumpeted this book as being the definitive book on how those with Asperger Syndrome behave can pretty much be quiet. About the only thing that can be said about Curious is that the if the character in the book shares traits with people with Asperger’s, it’s probably either superficial or coincidental.
What Olear omits in his article is that what many Aspies do is take some piece of fiction or fictionalization and use it to promote their own disorder. I cannot tell you how many times I have observed or participated in online discussions where people with AS gravitate to an autistic character in a work of fiction because that character has admirable or heroic traits. Of course the irony here is that whenever an Aspie is painted with bad traits, like in newspaper articles where an Aspie is arrested for a crime or convicted for a crime, Aspies blast the newspaper for printing a “slanderous” view of people with Asperger Syndrome.
What it boils down to is that The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time is a metaphor for The Emperor’s New Clothes. People look at it and see what they want rather than what is actually there. So I ask everyone who is reading this, if you have promoted The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time as a book that depicts Asperger Syndrome perfectly, what does that say about you? And what kind of damage are you doing to the autism community when you perpetuate the illusion?
Now before all you Aspies of the world unite and start writing all kinds of comments to this blog objecting to what I’ve said above, perhaps what you need to do is take a look at something else Haddon wrote in his blog entry:
labels say nothing about a person. they say only how the rest of us categorise that person. good literature is always about peeling labels off. and treating real people with dignity is always about peeling the labels off. a diagnosis may lead to practical help. but genuinely understanding another human being involves talking and listening to them and finding out what makes them an individual, not what makes them part of a group.
In other words: If you’ve seen one Aspie, you’ve seen one Aspie, and to think that there is a single description that fits all of them — good or bad — is wrong.
Will Haddon’s words about labels fall on deaf ears? How much do you want to make a bet they will?
Thomas D. Taylor
Co-Creator
MIDNIGHT IN CHICAGO
November 19, 2011 at 4:36 PM
The Huffington post article irked me for numerous reasons! When the author of the book makes his claim “imagination always trumps research”, that may very well be in the world of fiction. Here in the real world, scientific fact is NOT subject to a democratic process, or a popular vote. As Jack Webb would say in the old “Dragnet” TV show, “Just the facts, ma’am!” That goes for you “Sirs”, too!
The second thing that bothered me is the author of this review uses the dreaded stereotype, “Asperger’s tends to be a relatively mild form of autistic spectrum disorder. Most aspies are “high-functioning.” I know a number of people with Asperger’s and a few High Functioning Autistics as well. Each are unique individuals. To stereotype and try to pigeonhole people because of a trait or condition they exhibit is deplorable, in my opinion.
Sure it’s easier to go with generalizations. One doesn’t need to think for themselves then.
November 19, 2011 at 5:11 PM
I read your article with interest, trying to determine just what your basic point was. It seemed to be an objection to the use of the word Asperger’s on the book cover.
But was it? The author’s admission that he knows, or knew, very little about it, says nothing about the value of the book as a portrayal of someone with the condition.
Many have said that it is a lifelike portrayal and, I assume therefore, that he was at least acquinted with someone or was able to study someone who has Asperger’s.
You make reference to Aspies’ tendency to identify with fictional characters – many of whom, like Sherlock Holmes, were created well before Asperger’s had been identified.
These have only been given the posthumous label of Asperger’s because their character as written in the books leads one to identify them with the condition.
Consider then, that if the ‘Curious Incident’ had not had that word on the cover, that it might still have had those who identified the character as an Aspie. Would Mark Haddons ignorance have caused any qualms in such a case?
I think not.
Would it not have been put down to a good writer writing about behaviour he had observed?
And why denigrate by saying: “Now here’s what I have to say: Every autistic who has trumpeted this book as being the definitive book on how those with Asperger Syndrome behave can pretty much be quiet. About the only thing that can be said about Curious is that the if the character in the book shares traits with people with Asperger’s, it’s probably either superficial or coincidental.” ?
The only judgement that can be made is that by those reader’s who identify with the character.
You may, with just cause, object to the cover and/or the writer’s admitted lack of learning on the subject, yet it is going too far to use those arguments to deny others what they have seen, or read there.
I write this, not in any sense of criticism, but rather in the sense of opening the window through which you are viewing the subject a little wider to gain a better perspective.
I enjoyed your article by the way, as I have enjoyed others in this area.
John.
November 20, 2011 at 3:18 AM
I appreciate your comments.
I think you make a good point that even if the main character was never identified as having AS, there will be some people with AS who will identify with the main character.
Where the danger lies is when we have people who use books like these to bolster their claims the behavior of the main characters represents how AS presents itself in every person with AS. AS presents itself differently in everyone, and it would be a shame for people to believe that one character who was labeled as having AS is the definitive example of AS, especially when the author of the book admits to knowing nothing about autism.
I have some AS characters in every book I write, but I never tell my audience who they are. Why? Because so many diagnosed Aspies are the kind that fly under the radar in real life AND there is no sure-fire way to do a characterization of AS.
November 19, 2011 at 6:42 PM
I never heard of the book. That alone should speak volumes. Autism and aspergers is a hot market and many Tom, Dick and Harriet, NT or AS are writing books with a lot of delusional representations.