Different not Less (?)

Last night Marli and I watched Temple Grandin, an HBO movie about the eponymous real life person, Temple Grandin (wiki link) . I confess I wouldn't have rented this movie on my own because I generally find made-for-TV biographies (and movie biographies in general) to be overblown (dramatic where they need not be dramatic, and wrong where they should be accurate). What bothers me is that these sorts of movies take a story which is potentially already inspiring on its own, and take it into glurge territory by making everything into a hyper-real, one-vs.-all, "nobody helped me" story of personal triumph. It's rare that you get a biography that "feels real", and this is all too often confirmed when one reads into the actual history behind what is portrayed. It's like a war story where the original story is amazing enough already, but screenwriters have to add a love story, add four superfluous characters who get killed unnecessarily, make three important historical people into one "composite character" and then change some of the plot so that it makes less (or no) sense from a historical viewpoint. Oh, and change the nationality of some or all of the people in uniform. [*cough* (U-571) *cough*]

You know, minor editing like that.

Temple Grandin (the movie), to its credit, generally steers away from this sort of hyperbole (mostly). It did make me want to purchase the book to get a better sense of her thought processes and individual challenges away from the screenwriter's (and producers') need to make everything into a drama.

In a nutshell, Temple Grandin (the person) is a woman with autism who uses her particular way of looking at things (she used it as the title of her book "Thinking in Pictures") - as a springboard to an education (and later career) in Animal Science and autism advocacy. To explain much more would spoil some of the more interesting twists and turns of the movie.

It's well acted, and Claire Danes, playing Temple, seems to nail a lot of the mannerisms and "looks" that I've seen Kenshin do. In particular, one scene in which she has a bit of a breakdown over not understanding social cues during a society party, she covered her face with her hands with palms out and interlocked thumbs in front of his nose exactly the way Kenshin does when he's particularly upset. Danes definitely had the "chops" for this role.

The story is definitely quite inspiring while at the same time bittersweet. I can envision Kenshin having to endure much of the same prejudice and misunderstanding that Temple went through as an autistic person who otherwise appears quite normal. I also look forward to encouraging Kenshin to use whatever gifts or strengths he has now or manifests later. I'm very glad that Marli coaxed me into watching it. I'm going to recommend it to others, especially in my family.

That said, I think there are problems with it.

Not to say that it is bad, or the problem is IN the movie itself, but for me it is the expectations that it raises. Temple Grandin is a high-functioning autistic person with an exceptional gift of insight and intelligence. Her way of "thinking in pictures" while not uncommon in autistic individuals, is exceptional because she has learned to articulate and put it into action in engineering applications as well as her psychological research and lecturing.

Even in my very limited exposure to people with autism and understanding of it through reading and research, many, many people with autism (I do not have the numbers back up a statement to say "most" or "a large majority", but I do suspect it is the case) won't have this particular "presentation". Many are bright. Many have unique ways of looking at things and can express that somehow (through writing, speech or drawing) to non-autistic people. Not all of them have both characteristics.

There is a trend now, generally in society, but increasingly in biopics like this, that all persons with disabilities have this or the other barrier/disability/impairment - whatever - which sets them up as an outsider in "normal" society but they invariably have this other ability (frequently so remarkable so as to seem superhuman) which outshines the disability and helps them to earn the respect and admiration of others - showing the "normals" that they are as good or better than the rest.

"Forrest Gump" overcomes physical handicap and mental disability and lives a remarkable, event-filled life (earning the Medal of Honour, no less). John Nash uses his unique viewpoint to earn a Nobel Prize, sidestepping delusions and paranoid schizophrenia along the way, in "A Beautiful Mind". David Helfgott, played by Geoffrey Rush in "Shine", puts aside his mental illness (schizoaffective disorder) to win accolades as a concert pianist (quite aside from the ongoing difficulties of the real life David Helfgott). Raymond Babbit is the "Rain Man" with remarkable powers of recall and mathematics who manages to humanize his selfish brother and win a lot of money through gambling as a bonus.

What worries me about these movies and the popular Hollywood portrayal of mental illness, developmental challenges and disorders like autism is that they show the "minus" column - the challenges, the prejudices, the sensation of being outcast, but there's always a huge "plus" on the other side of the equation - Forrest Gump's tremendous courage, heart and remarkable running ability, John Nash's mathematical "beautiful mind", David Helfgott's piano-playing, Raymond Babbitt's card counting and instant recall. Somehow they're all "savants". They all have superpowers!

Rarely does one see a screen character for whom the equation of their abilities and disabilities are equal... or, heaven forfend, leave them less capable than a person without a disorder.

The wiki article I just linked to about Savants quotes a study by Dr. Darold A. Treffert who indicates that 1 in 10 individuals with autism may exhibit "remarkable abilities in varying degrees". Yes, that's amazing and it should be celebrated... but there's 9 other individuals who aren't Savants. Where are the movies about them? Should it be necessary that all parents of autistic children have to patiently explain to well-meaning strangers that, no, their son/daughter does not have eidetic memory, the ability to see numbers and equations floating in the air and connect them with glowing lines, or play grand pianos with the fingers of a maestro? What about the autistic kids who can't walk down a hallway without bumping into people, or can't read social/visual cues at a birthday party in other kids' faces, or don't know enough to not run into a street if they're having a tantrum about something?

I'm exaggerating a little here, of course. Most people don't have an inkling of what autism is past a single viewing of Rain Man (if that). But so many movies about people with disabilities portray them as paragons of virtue (or, occasionally, embodiments of vice) with these strange, superhuman abilities that I worry that people like Kenshin will never be viewed as people - with strengths and weakness like everyone else - and that they may not have enhanced senses or tremendous gifts. They can just be ordinary (with the "asterisk" of their mental or physical illness or disorder). Do they need the "asterisk"? I don't know. I think so, at this point in my life.

Anyhow, that's a long-winded way of me ranting about the portrayal of disabilities in Hollywood. I don't want anyone to take the idea that people with disabilities/disorders/illnesses shouldn't be portrayed, or should always be venal or self-pitying individuals. They should be real, fully-three dimensional characters with all the good and the evil that implies.

Temple Grandin is/was remarkable. She's a hero and a figure of hope for many. As I look at the potential I see in Kenshin, I'll keep her in mind. "Different, not less" is a good starting point... I would temper that naked optimism with "Different, not less of a person." They may have a lesser ability to read social cues, regulate their behaviour, and establish communications. They MAY have abilities which are better, in their own way. They may not.

That all depends on the individual. Kenshin is very much an individual, and I'm going to treat him as one. I'm not going to expect Savant abilities, but I'm not going to dismiss evidence of them either.

He may be completely ordinary, aside from the autism. Or he may become a world-leading expert on Robotics for all I know, because of his fascination with Wall-E and electronics. I'll be there to help him, if that's what he wants and he's able. Temple Grandin, eat your heart out.