Scan barcode
A review by kaylamoran
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I'm genuinely torn on this book. As far as enjoyment, I loved it. But I don't think I can give it more than a 3 or recommend it because it just felt like a collection of autistic stereotypes clumsily thrown together. Not that any of the behaviours are necessarily inaccurate, but I'm tired of how autism is only ever portrayed one way, we aren't all like Sheldon Cooper or Rainman. We need different portrayals too.
Also, I'm a bit alarmed by how many reviews describe Christopher as high functioning. It's not the functioning labels that bother me, I only recently learned they were problematic myself. It's the fact that Christopher clearly has very high support needs, and the fact that he's being considered high functioning reminds me of how autistics who are good at masking aren't believed. If this is what's considered high functioning, we need more of an understanding of what autism is.
And I blame no one for that (if you wrote that in a review I totally get it, and I'm not upset and I don't think you did anything offensive). Because it's BECAUSE this is the only portrayal we get that that causes the lack of understanding, it's not the reader's fault at all. The lack of societal understanding of autism is largely due to this.
So yeah. Portrayals like this are the reason I hear stuff like "you can't be autistic, you're too good at reading emotions" or "you're sarcastic" or "you're too pretty" or "girls aren't autistic." And I guess it's not the books fault either, because it's a valid experience of autism and some people do fit this description. I guess I just wish it wasn't the only one we saw.
Also, I'm a bit alarmed by how many reviews describe Christopher as high functioning. It's not the functioning labels that bother me, I only recently learned they were problematic myself. It's the fact that Christopher clearly has very high support needs, and the fact that he's being considered high functioning reminds me of how autistics who are good at masking aren't believed. If this is what's considered high functioning, we need more of an understanding of what autism is.
And I blame no one for that (if you wrote that in a review I totally get it, and I'm not upset and I don't think you did anything offensive). Because it's BECAUSE this is the only portrayal we get that that causes the lack of understanding, it's not the reader's fault at all. The lack of societal understanding of autism is largely due to this.
So yeah. Portrayals like this are the reason I hear stuff like "you can't be autistic, you're too good at reading emotions" or "you're sarcastic" or "you're too pretty" or "girls aren't autistic." And I guess it's not the books fault either, because it's a valid experience of autism and some people do fit this description. I guess I just wish it wasn't the only one we saw.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Ableism, Animal cruelty, and Animal death
Moderate: Cursing, Emotional abuse, Panic attacks/disorders, and Gaslighting
Minor: Infidelity and Physical abuse