Autism in Media
How Many Representations Are Still Problematic and What We Can Do to Fix Them
Do you remember the first time you were recommended a supposedly “good” movie and you watched it out of curiosity only to be disappointed at the end?
Well, that is exactly how I felt when I watched Rain Man.
First I was excited. Hungry, even. I was craving answers, I wanted to find something in Raymond that could help me understand myself.
Something that would explain why I felt so different.
I was undiagnosed at the time and incredibly uneducated about autism. I thought a movie could help. But what I watched that day did not make me feel good. It made me feel even worse about my suspected identity and I did not know why.
It took me several years to understand what happened: autism wasn’t the problem. The issue was how the story was being projected on the screen.
As a filmmaker myself, and especially an autistic one, let me tell you something: the way cinema represents autism to this day is not simply wrong. It is truly alarming.
Suppose art is a mirror held up to society, showing people exactly how they look.
The artistic portrayal of autism is a type of mirror found in a fun fair: it stretches and squashes the reflection into bizarre shapes, producing a distorted depiction of reality.
I’m aware that Cinema is based on stereotypes and all sorts of media hardly respect the social groups they try to appeal to, but when it comes to telling the stories of autistic individuals, rarely do film and television offer a real insight into our lives.
Indeed, these representations are limited to a constant succession of not simply clichés, but harmful myths that aim to pathologise and isolate autistic people from the rest of society.
What is Autism
Before diving into the ways the media seem to denigrate us, I think it is important to understand what autism truly is and what non-autistic people, often referred to within the autistic community as “allistic” or “neurotypical” think autism is.
According to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (as cited in Posar) autism spectrum disorders (also known as ASD) are:
“lifelong conditions severely impairing social skills and autonomy whose main characteristics feature persisting deficits of social communication and interaction; restricted and repetitive behaviors, interests, activities”.
Hence, from a medical perspective, autism is a neurological disorder that affects the way the brain works and can be labeled as “high-functioning” or “low-functioning” according to the displayed range of characteristics (also referred to as “spectrum”) above mentioned.
Luckily, as it often happens with marginalized groups, over the years the autistic community has tried to re-appropriate the definition of autism, trying to spread a more positive message regarding its nature.
Today we see autism as a dynamic disability, a different way of thinking and being, which is part of our individuality.
It is what researcher Sinclair (as cited in an article written by Ressa) calls “a natural human experience and identity, and just like race, sex, or gender, a difference as naturally occurring in society irrespective of one’s family status, class, race, nationality, region, or culture”.
In other words, according to the autistic community, autism can be seen as a “neurodivergence”: it is not a pathology, not a disorder, and not even a condition per se, but a different form of existence.
We simply want to be seen as people belonging to a multicultural human existence. We are not machines and do not perform highly or severely. And yet, the type of portrayal we receive is simply ableist, which isolates us and strips us of agency.
The Stereotypes and Their Dangers
A false representation only creates stigma and spreads misinformation. Autism can manifest itself in a range of different characteristics as it is a spectrum that differs from one person to another. It is quite rare to find two autistic individuals who share all the same traits. Despite this, one of the biggest flaws of media portrayals is the process of simplification and agglomeration.
The researcher Prochnow argues that the autistic characters in film and television can all be included and condensed into the same four categories:
- the savant;
- the different/quirky;
- the undiagnosed/unlabeled;
- the realistic autistics;
These labels serve to simplify the concept of autism to the viewers and to make it look more interesting to them. Prochnow even states that the media tend to prefer portrayals of autistic characters that can appeal to the neurotypical audience, and that is the reason why non-speaking autistics (or the “severe” or “low-functioning autistics” as referred to by neurotypicals) are rarely shown as main protagonists.
The problematic aspect is that this narrative prefers to rely on clichés rather than consulting us directly. The exclusion of non-speaking autistics is even more concerning, as it is based on severe ableism and false information. I know many non-speaking autistics who are poets, writers, and painters. Do you think they have nothing to express? Are you sure they cannot artistically represent us?
But here we are, seeing representations created by non-autistic people. Because who can know better than them, right?
The Savant
Think of the characters in the movie Rain Man or the TV show The Good Doctor. Raymond and Shaun are geniuses in their fields: the first is an excellent mathematician and the latter is a renowned medical professional. But their incredible abilities are used more as a narrative trick to justify their presence in the story and to establish a better connection with the audience, rather than an authentic aspect of their lives.
Raymond and Shaun are not represented as complex and real people, but simply as savants who are useful to the secondary characters. Indeed, in the end, the real protagonists are the people who interact with Raymond and Shaun.
They are the ones who change for the better thanks to their relationships with the autistic person.
This mechanism is a sort of “abled savior” complex, where the non-autistic characters get the audience’s approval and a longer screen time, while the autistic characters exist only because they are special.
The superior intelligence shown by the characters of Raymond or Shaun is what Autism Specialist Murray (as quoted in Loftis) identifies as a “compensation cure”, a sort of reparation for the sorrow and problems that a diagnosis of autism could cause.
He believes that these skills act more to compensate for the disability they are linked with, rather than being real traits people present.
What Murray is arguing is that the choice of portraying this advanced form of autism is not simply due to entertaining reasons only, but is the direct result of some ableist propaganda as well.
Film and television want to show how these characters can overcome their diagnoses thanks to their high level of intelligence.
What these characters lack in some fields due to their disability, they have gained in other aspects, hence their autism is not so bad as long as it is a sort of superpower.
According to Loftis, the savant portrayal is very problematic because it not only shows how these people are considered worthy only when they are special and reject their disability, but also because it puts so much pressure on the autistic individuals who are not savants, and therefore can be easily labeled as just outcasts and freaks by a society that does not accept the way they are.
The idea of the autistic savant is also scientifically incorrect since savant individuals make up less than a third of both neurotypical and autistic communities ( according to Nordahl-Hansen et al as cited in Ressa).
The Quirky
These characters are rather different. They have officially been diagnosed with autism, and yet they look different because they choose to, and not because their autism makes them so.
According to this character type, these people are different because they embrace and accept their different behaviors as intrinsic parts of themselves rather than considering them as the direct results of their diagnosis.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Stephen Daldry is one of the many examples of contemporary media displaying this type of autism. The film tells the story of Oskar, a young boy trying to come to terms with his father’s death after 9/11. Throughout the plot, Oskar is always presented as special.
He generally likes to do or wear weird things; in one scene, he walks around the city playing his tambourine, wearing multilayered clothes along with various backpacks all at once. He is fascinated by all sorts of scientific subjects, including a passion for astrology, biology, and maths.
Although he clearly says he tested for autism with the results being inconclusive, he always explains to people he is just the way he is because he is a bit unconventional, and that his potential diagnosis has nothing to do with that.
The idea the movie conveys is that even if Oskar was neurotypical, he would still be a bit odd, but simply because he is a free soul, nothing more.
Although the intention of this type of characterization of an autistic person is not harmful in itself, it is still quite disputable at its core.
It erases the autistic experience because it makes diversity look like a personal choice when it is not.
Autism cannot be controlled and the characters in this kind of portrayal who are presented as simply quirky are not individuals controlling their autism, but people suppressing their real identity, being too ashamed of admitting that, indeed, autism makes you different.
The biggest failure of this type of representation consists in deciding not to explain to the audience that although autism can make a person look different from the rest of the neurotypical society, it is also what makes people who they are.
People are autistic, they don’t simply have autism.
Therefore, the choice of depicting Oskar as he tries to defend his oddness as a natural part of his existence and not as a consequence of his autism confirms how much stigma is still present. Oskar would rather prefer being called a freak than simply being acknowledged as an autistic child.
The Undiagnosed
Another character type that shares the same issue of this sort of internalized ableism is the non-diagnosed autistic. In many portrayals, some protagonists display some common behaviors of ASD and yet do not have an official diagnosis.
In Martian Child, the main protagonist, David, is a best-selling writer and widower who wants to adopt a child after his wife’s passing.
He is soon contacted by a woman named Sophie, who runs an institution, to see if he could be interested in a child named Dennis.
Dennis is a very peculiar young boy who is shown as quite isolated from the rest of the world from the very first moment he appears. When David meets him for the first time, Dennis is sitting inside a cardboard box with only the slit to look out of, and he is often described as “a weirdo” by the other kids.
But Dennis’s behavior is not simply described as quirky, but troubled. His reports state:
“uncommunicative, tendency to steal things, inability to form personal attachments or distinguish between right and wrong, and he thinks… he thinks he’s from outer space”.
Dennis shows many traits of ASD, and yet he is never referred to as autistic or a child with different needs, but he is rather considered a child with a troubled past and some behavioral problems.
This lack of an official diagnosis creates the same phenomenon that the trope of the quirky autistic does: it implicitly declares that being autistic is far worse than being considered odd.
The Realistic
The last common representation of autism in media is what Prochnow defines as “realistic”. In her opinion, these portrayals can be considered authentic because they:
“most closely match the criteria laid out for ASD in the DSM-5 […] The characters are neither over-the-top in their behaviors nor subdued in the display of their symptoms. They are also not portrayed in an overtly positive or negative light” (2014, p. 142–143).
To better explain her argument, Prochnow cites Temple Grandin. The film is a biopic that tells the story of the homonymous autistic scientist, and it is a recollection of her experiences during her childhood and adulthood.
However, what Prochnow ignores is that although the movie is presented as a biopic, it does not simply tell the story of Temple, but of all the people she has met throughout her life.
Similarly to what can be observed in Rain Man, even in this movie the autistic character is never truly the central protagonist of the narrative, but more like the pivot around whom the stories of the other non-autistic characters rotate. This same opinion is shard by researcher Oren, who states (as quoted in Ellcessor and Kirkpatrick):
“…The film’s narrative relies on supporting characters’ (Grandin’s mother, aunt, admiring teacher, etc.) points of view and emotive responses to mark the film’s emotional high and low notes…”
Once again, this concept is problematic because it wants to stress the importance of neurotypical people in the life of the autistic character, implicitly arguing that such people should be celebrated for the simple fact of befriending the autistic character. It strips of agency the autistic characters and glorifies the actions of non-autistic people for just being kind.
Naturally, assuming that my article tries to explain everything about the representation of autism would be wrong.
The evidence gathered comes only from Anglo-American films and television programs, and other problematic aspects of the modern representation of autism (such as the lack of internationality, which follows a representation of mostly male, cisgender, straight, and white autistic characters) were not taken into account.
Moreover, I participated in the critical analysis closely, being part of the autistic community myself and thus subject to my own bias as well.
However, it is still possible to argue that contemporary representations of autism are still highly ableist and morally incorrect.
What I want to stress is how deliberate every representation seems to be.
After all, everything in film and television is an intentional act.
What is shown on the screen has been carefully selected and willed by the director (or, in some cases, even by the producer).
As I have heard myself say many times during my studies in filmmaking, cinema is a political act, since everything framed by the camera must be intended as an indirect message to the viewer.
Consequently, today’s portrayal of autism is very harmful and superficial propaganda because it focuses on the wrong aspects of our diagnosis.
Ultimately, the main issue I have with modern representation of autism is that it s always intrinsically very much linked to our identity.
Autistic people are not seen simply as people, but as neurodivergent people.
Autism is not a taboo, and I appreciate the effort to make autism accessible and understandable to the general public.
But I also want to see stories that authentically represent us.
I am proud of my diagnosis, but I also believe that autism is not the only aspect that makes me who I am.
And that is why it is important to create stories of autistic people living ordinary existences.
Lastly, it is good to remember how the entire entertainment industry is in desperate need of an internal revolution as well.
It is not enough to show people with disabilities on screen, one must make them active participants in the creative process too.
Every production should consult and hire autistic and disabled actors and workers in front of and behind a camera.
Art belongs to everyone. It is time to prove it, though.
References
Ellcessor Elizabeth and Kirkpatrick Bill (2017) Disability Media Studies. New York: NYU Press.
Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (2011) Directed by Stephen Daldry. [Feature Film]. Bur- bank, CA: Warner Bros. Pictures.
Loftis, SF 2015, Imagining Autism : Fiction and Stereotypes on the Spectrum, Indiana Uni- versity Press, Bloomington. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central.
Murray, S. (2008) Representing autism : culture, narrative, fascination. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press (Representations).
Posar, Annio et al. (2015) “Autism according to diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders 5(th) edition: The need for further improvements”, Journal of pediatric Neurosciences, 10 (2), pp. 146–8. doi:10.4103/1817–1745.159195.
Prochnow, A. (2014) “An Analysis of Autism through Media Representation,” ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 71(2), pp. 133–149.
Ressa, T. (2021) “Histrionics of Autism in the Media and the Dangers of False Balance and False Identity on Neurotypical Viewers,” Journal of Disability Studies in Education, 1–26, pp. 1–26. doi: 10.1163/25888803-bja10009.
Rain Man (1988) Directed by Barry Levinson. [Feature Film]. Beverly Hills, CA: MGM/UA Communications Co.
The Good Doctor, (2017–2024), ABC, September 25.
Temple Grandin (2010) Directed by Mick Jackson. [Television Film]. New York City, NY: HBO Films.
