wrote about 3/4 of this review and then hit the chapter where Silberman mentions that the guy who developed aversion therapy (cattle prods) for flappy hands/headbanging/etc also helped develop gay conversion therapy and it was truly like the Scooby-Doo mask came off the whole world at once. truly an “oh—oh, DUH” for the ages
as an offshoot of this, I'm a little obsessed with the story here about the precarious nature of the “healthy” body or the “healthy” mind as the able & typical communities of this world define it; one of the first things I heard when I started learning about disability studies (I think this is not uncommon) was the idea that rather than thinking of some people as able, we might think of them as temporarily able, since disability is more or less a guarantee for every person fortunate to live long enough to develop one. and yet despite this, disability is placed on the other side of a red line from the presumed citizen who lives in built spaces and communicating societies, treated as a shuddering horror which reflects on the moral character of the person experiencing it... autism is not a disability that people develop as they grow older, lol, but what I mean by making the connection is: I’m reminded of a wonderful essay about Fleishman is in Trouble discussing the emotional tribulations of wealthy white parents in this country—their astonishing levels of stress, the precarity of privilege, and the unspoken absolute certainty among these people that a life outside the charmed circle of wealth might as well be death—they are so entirely conscious that they treat people outside their social group as inhuman, and that if they slip, they’ll become inhuman, too.
this is ostensibly a book about the history of the autistic community, but what emerges is a comprehensive and damning portrait of the neurotypical one, with a little bit of issue creep into the history of violently enforced social conformity (not that these are separable, ofc!). (there's a weird line for Silberman to walk here between identifying/celebrating human difference and positively hyperpathologizing it?) disability studies is often so tremendously exciting because digging into it lights up SO much invisible stitchwork of other types of oppression and liberation—questions of labor! questions of autonomy and dependence! questions of family! the anxieties of the body, the anxieties of the body public!
Silberman has, I think, a fascination with autistic adults who have few support needs—which is a pretty typical preoccupation among people writing about autism these days, as far as I understand things—and though he does paint a wide-ranging picture of variance in the autistic experience, this sort of “Gifted People” figure (including a very 2015ish fetishization of the Silicon Valley genius boy, which is eyeroll-worthy in all the usual ways) does still come through to some extent; not helped by the fact that his subjects of study are overwhelmingly wealthy and overwhelmingly white. (also, weirdly and overwhelmingly Jewish? I'll get more into this later but I feel like 75% of the autistic people quoted in this book and probably 90% of the doctors are Jewish. genuinely made me wonder whether autism diagnosis rates are higher for Jews, and if they aren't, ???) anyway: for a book with such a delight in identifying and describing undiagnosed autistic behavior in people who lived prior to diagnoses—I recognize the scholarly problems with this habit, but I do have a lot of time for it, if only because descriptions of these people are so breathlessly joyful in a way that's really refreshing—you'd think it would be a little more interested in seeking out undiagnosed autistic behavior outside of absent-minded 18th-century European geniuses and ham radio operators?
this focus does go to an end, which is demonstration after demonstration of the institutionalization and abuse of joyful, interesting kids who have committed such crimes as “wanting to be a spaceship captain”; difficult to read some of these chapters without crying with anger, difficult to think about anti-vaxxers saying “vaccines will give my kid autism!” without wanting to respond “you should be so fucking lucky”—but this last is sort of what I mean about there being a slightly corny “it's a superpower!!” attitude here, lol, though I think Silberman is aware of that and tries to mitigate it with mixed results. I don't know that it's precisely inspiration porn—certainly no one is Bravely Overcoming autism and Silberman clearly would not want them to, and though there is a certain amount of focus on “look at all the Contributions these Savants have made to Humanity!” (again, apparently exclusively in the form of becoming computer programmers; first of all, whether that's a contribution to humanity is dubious, and second of all, hyperlexia who, I guess?) the thesis of it all seems to be less “now, you may only see autistic people's terrible personality flaws, but it is important to note that they are also useful to real people”, and more “autistic people are fun and cool”. an uncommon and welcome take! and yet: one that, again, seems to create a narrative where autistic people with few or no support needs have a perspective that's urgently needed, but when it comes to autistic people with more support needs, parents remain the protagonists of the story; all opinions about autistic people's lives worth hearing are parents' opinions. mmm. of course there's naturally more difficulty for the writer in trying to get the opinions of autistic people who communicate far less than others, or communicate in ways that are very different from others; but then again the value of putting in the effort to do that communication is pretty explicitly the thesis of the book.
a couple of intersections that jumped out at me: firstly, how autistic children have been so consistently used, against their will, as a stick to beat women with—the early diagnoses of autism as caused by mothers having college degrees or being too interested in having an intellectual life outside the home! more recently, particularly in the chapter where Silberman discusses the “cures” for autism that have emerged among America’s snake oil salesmen, in which not only vaccines but food come under the neurotypical microscope, it’s impossible not to draw a connection between the legal, socially acceptable child abuse shown here and the disordered eating perpetuated by fad diets, liposuction, Ozempic, and more. the conspiratorial thinking and fear that infects the “healthy” people of the U.S. around what is eaten and what is fed to children, these recurrences of an obsession with ingesting poison or disease, with needing to purge the body and the family of uncleanness and indulgence—there's probably a whole book to be written (if it hasn't been already!) on the figure of The Mother in anti-vax circles, the expectations placed on her, the social consequences if she is a “failure” (has children on the spectrum), this surprisingly intertwined history of autism and pathologized gender nonconformity! this extremely physiological figuring of the neurodiverse kid as a product of an infected or poisoned body...
anyway, not unrelatedly, the second is that the history of autism and its diagnosis is a surprisingly Jewish one—not only the quantity of Jewish doctors and parents involved in the institutional history from the '50s onward, but that its earliest identification and description as a condition took place during the rise of eugenics. not coincidentally. the fascinating book Stepchildren of the Shtetl: The Destitute, Disabled, and Mad of Jewish Eastern Europe discusses the meme, perpetuated by both Victorian anti-Semites and Victorian Zionists to different purposes, of the “neurotic” diaspora Jew. this is the Jew afflicted with anxiety and hyperchondria and despair, the weedy and crooked and unathletic Jew, the obsessively intellectual and self-analytical and sexually dysfunctional Jew, the Jew who is essentially unattractive, essentially untrustworthy, and essentially unfit for polite society. this was of course purposefully used in propaganda by the Nazi Party later, but this figure existed well before they did—again, it was a regular argument among some political groups that moving to Israel would "cure" the Jewish community of these people—and the history of American eugenics and Hans Asperger is one with it; when this book explores the history of the autism diagnosis and its roots in pre-Nazi Austria, it shows the mass murder of Jews and the mass murder of people with disabilities as not coincidentally linked by our shared murderers (as was seen in post-Holocaust analysis, as people in the US worked to develop a worldview which could reject Nazi beliefs en masse and prevent their developing in future, and yet still accept lobotomies, compulsory sterilization, and other routine abuses of patients), but deeply intertwined through notions of abnormality and through the nightmarish possibility, embodied in the urban educated Jewish doctors that studied gender variance and neurodiversity, that the plague of abnormality would come into YOUR house—would steal YOUR child—and replace them with a thing you can't control, wearing your child’s face…
like I said! many thoughts! mostly about neurotypical neuroses! I kept thinking of A Wrinkle in Time, which in retrospect so clearly has a relationship with neurodiversity (tired: this kid has ADHD and dyslexia because he is the son of Poseidon genetically wired to fight monsters. wired: three angels need kids to defeat a giant evil brain and the only people capable of handling this are two kids with autism and Calvin. inspired: my favorite of the three angels speaks almost exclusively in echolalia?) and its specific fears about the underlying logic in a world that looks like Camazotz.
profoundly struck by what that doctor who invented aversion therapy and conversion therapy said about both autism and what institutions then referred to as “sissy-boy syndrome”: listen, we don't think there's anything actually morally wrong with what this kid is doing. but we know damn well the world will punish him for it. and between changing one kid and changing the world—well, which one is easier?