Was So-and-So An Aspie...

Post Reply New Topic

I'm just rereading a novel I remember quite enjoying as a(n undiagnosed) teen, and in just the first couple of chapters I'm seeing things that now really leap out at me and make me wonder about the author.

The first pages deal with one character's struggle between faith and logic and the personal tendency to over-analyze and obsess over anachronistic details. Then we see that character's own observations of another character and puzzling over character 2's habit of obsessively absorbing new interests until each topic is drained of all possible information and experience, then casually dropping it to move on to the next interest. He even thinks to himself that character 2 behaves as if they were an alien marooned on this planet (sort of foreshadowing the X-Files-like theme of the whole book). Hmmm...

As all writers realize, since every character in a story springs from the same mind, all exhibit to a greater or lesser degree, elements of the author. I'm just saying, does it sound to you like this writer could be one of us?

I'm only positing it as a rhetorical question - if you're curious, seek out and read H G Wells' lesser-known novel STAR BEGOTTEN.

Oh, we've trampled this path quite a bit.

Was this character an ASpie?
What about that person?
Novelist, painter, artist, famous person in general.

I expect to hear that Churchill must have been Autistic any day now ....

If anyone says Cgood old Churchill was aspie I think I will scream at the screen lol he was like the anti Aspie

I think I already heard that somewhere.

I don't like the was-X-an-Aspie type of stuff, because ti si impossible to diangose someone after they've died anyway.

Also the guessing game of who an author based a character upon.

We can speak in terms of probability, but really,what's the point???

The chacers in a story don't all spring from the authors mind, in the sense that they aren't based on the author. I occasionally base characters on other people I know, or stereotypes I've heard of.

Saying that, I'm writing a short story in first person, and the main character and her brother are based almost exclusively on me (they're werewolves, by the way)...

I read a book a while back on historical figures suspected of being on the spectrum. There was a pretty good argument presented for H.G Wells. 'Genius Genes: How Asperger Talents Changed the World' - It's an interesting book, despite what I find to be a cringe-worthy title.

Doesn't matter who you base a character on, as far as behaviors that you give them - they are birthed in the chemicals of your brain and therefore, can only be such-and-such a person interpreted by you. You may even steal an attitude or phraseology from someone else, but how that character thinks is ultimately your version of what you suppose is going on in their head. Try as you might, unless you're suffering from clinical MPD, every character you create is composed of pieces of yourself. To deny that is self-delusion.

It would be like putting on a werewolf costume and actually believing that it turned you into a real werewolf. No matter how convincingly you play the part, there's still a human being inside there.

Until you actually kill and eat somebody. Then there's a real monster, but there's still no werewolf.

(Apparently I should have posted the definition of RHETORICAL)

I researched Robert Louis Stevenson and found out that he in fact knew people who had known pirates, and that is why "Treasure Island" rings so true. On the other hand, HP Lovecraft (probably) never knew anyone who worshipped diabolical entities. The argument cuts both ways ....

Willard, I can write a character based on a stereotype of an Arab lesbian schoolgirl. Doesn't mean I share any personality traits with an Arab lesbain schoolgirl.

Although I'd find it easier, especially if writing in first person, to slip my own traits in, because it makes it easier to write. Doesn't mean I would.

*cough*

All those characters reflect part of John Steinbeck. So he's a very unpleasent mentally ret*d person who happens to be the voice of reason.

Okay...

Are you people being intentionally obtuse, or are you just incapable of grasping a concept?

Write all the Arab lesbian schoolgirls you want - write a dozen different ones - they will still all posses some attributes of who you - as an individual - are. You can't prevent that from happening. Your characters are never completely separate from yourself - they can't be - they sprang from your synapses, they are part of you whether you're smart enough to see that or not. I am not talking about intentionally giving them your own daily habits and behaviors, dufus. Is this notion rocket science or something?

The personal lens through which you view the world is unique to you, and colors and influences everything you think, do or create - if you can't see that, you're missing the self-awareness required for truly mature creativity.

And yes, all Steinbeck's characters existed in part within Steinbeck himself - else he could never have given them such depth. It's what infuses two-dimensional characters with the third dimension of humanity. But it comes not from the pen or word processor, but from the mind, the thoughts and yes, the personality of the author.

:::Whew!::: I swear, my dogs have more practical comprehension.

Tut tut, your assertion was that characters in a book spring entirely from an author's mind. That, to me, is a very strange assertion.

Take George, for example. If Lennie was entirely based on Steinbeck's imagination, including his mental retardation.

Now, there are two alternatives:

a) John Steinbeck independantly invented the concept of mental retardation all on his own, and attributed it to Lennie.
b) John Steinback learned about mental retardation from an external source, it was not based on his own mind.

Last edited by Henriksson on 04 Aug 2009, 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You really can hold a civil discussion.

a) John Steinbeck independantly invented the concept of mental retardation all on his own, and attributed it to Lennie.
b) John Steinback learned about mental retardation from an external source, it was not based on his own mind.
c) John Steinback learned about mental retardation from an external source, it was not based on his own mind, however he pasted his own views on it... on mental retardation

I understand your point Willard

Last edited by scorpileo on 04 Aug 2009, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.