1. I would describe the main characteristics that describes Autism as socially separated or isolated, lack of eye contact and facial expressions, showing detachment from emotions, demonstrating a strong talent and interest, and many times non-verbal or mute. I think it plays out in Asperger’s especially with their specific interest(s) that seem ritualized (repetitive and obsessive) and can take the form of a savant. This is described as one who has an extreme talent in one or a limited number of subjects that is facilitated mostly through visual imagery and auditory stimulation. There is a deep-rooted question of whether these formulated aspects such as drawing in the case of Stephen are actually derived from the mind and emotion or from complete black and white memory.
2. Based on the reading, it seems like expression and emotions of autistic artists are something that is brought out through practice and constant support of the individual. However, this emotion and expression is very minimal or if at all present depending on the individual. I think their art is possible of being expressive and emotive because in the reading Stephan made sexualized drawings of girls. Maybe this was not connected to his mind, but I feel like there was more of an analytical approach compared to the slightly altered architectural spaces. However, then again, was he actually identifying with this or had he seen these images from observing reality? I think, depending on the circumstance and individual autistic individual, they do have the possibility to identify with their work, but it seems to happen briefly and with genuine support and interest in their work. In a way, this squares with the reality of students without autism- many need support and guidance from teachers. It seems apparent through many autistic individuals that when they produce art, they lack the analytical skills of meaning and concept. My question is how would one define “construction” and “creation”? Is creation driven by concept? I think that creation can be driven by formal and technical skills and implementing a concept into a piece of art would be integral to a “typical” students work. However, children on the autism spectrum think and perceive differently, so I think what constitutes their creation versus our creation is very different. Yes, I do think that they create. Like in the case of Stephan, he created successful drawings from memory and altered them, so why would that be a construction?
3. I think autistic gifts are used to their advantage because they help the individual become very interested, motivated, and involved in something. Then the deficits function as something that most likely brings their intelligence levels down in certain aspects. I think that they do and don’t work together. I think that they do work together because they may balance each other out, but at the same time they don’t work together because the individual then becomes only interested in one or minimal things. This narrows their field of learning. I think this has to do with multiple intelligences because they have different types of intelligences through either different ways of learning or different types of learning.
4. I think that through support, and working on skills, autistic children can change from low functioning to very high functioning on the spectrum. They may not even appear autistic because they only may have a few characteristics of autism. Although, I do think this requires effort! I believe then they can become more active in other fields of knowledge, raise their IQ, publish books, and essentially create meaning in their lives (although I think it is dependent on the individual and how much effort they are able to put in). What other factors contribute to this?
1) Do you think that a person with autism has a self? What does that even mean? How could you incorporate the idea of the self into a lesson plan?
2) Do you think that a person with autism is capable of complex, abstract thought? What are factors that would be dependent on this?
3) Margaret and Stephen seem to form a better relationship than Chris and Stephen. Stephen at one point said that he didn’t want Margaret to die because she was feeling sick. Why do you think Margaret and Stephen had a better relationship? Do you think he had emotions with Margaret? Why or why not? How was this depicted?
1. Something that this chapter brought up for me was ideas about connections. Stephen could make incredible connections between what he saw even for a second and what he represented on paper. But in relation to making connections to meaning, such as in the context of his artwork, there wasn’t much of that at all. Thinking about teaching students with Aspergers should we be providing a context in which we are trying to enable students to make meaningful connections in their art? Should this be our ultimate goal? Or would this question be more on an individual student level?
2. In relation to making connections through art, in discussion about his relationships with people, Stephen definitely struggled. There was evidence that over time he grew fond of people based on his reactions, such as when Margaret was sick. Besides this though it seemed as though Stephen was disconnected from much emotion, as characteristic of people with Aspergers. Is this something that can change over time? Can the ability to express feelings develop? Is it something that can be not necessarily taught directly but brought up through other subject matter in an educational context?
3. The idea of a prodigy in this sense was sort of amazing to me. Not only in Stephen’s case but the range of incredible talents was quite interesting. As it is often the case with those with Aspergers, to have something that they are extremely good at, is there a fear of diminishing this talent as children with Aspergers are learning to function in other realms of society? Should this be a great concern? If you had a child with a talent such as Stephen’s would it be more important for you that he learn other things and be a more well rounded individual with the risk of losing his strong drawing ability that has brought him such acclaim?
1. This chapter describes the people as what they are, not as patients. There is a personal level and with that an increasing insight that there many different sides to humanity and certainly the human race has many different sides to it. How do we as teachers make this known to the world?
2. Often those with aspergers have extremely interesting and vast talents. Their wide range abilities outweigh their social disabilities. Do you "treat" aspergers by teaching those with the disability to interact with society? Is it more important when "treating" the disability to focus on how it has benefited the person or harmed them?
3. If aspergers is a mental disability that effects social interaction and creates extreme ability, does it effect the ability to think cognitively? If cognitive thought is effected, is it negatively or positively altered?
1. Is calling attention to autisic individuals with special talents a good or bad thing? Is it good because it raises autism awarenss or bad because it exploits these individuals and their "special trick."
2. Is it possible that autistic people feel love and other emotions in different ways that we just don't know or understand?
3. Normally, when a person looks at the world around them they take all the visual details. Because the conscious mind can't focus on all this information at once, it filters this visual information and gives us a sort of blindness to everything but important focal points. Is it possible that the minds of autistic people do not have this filter and that is why they can become so overwhelmed and unable to deal with other details like interaction?
Stephen has an extraordinary story, which leaves me questioning just how much those with autism do feel in the realm of emotion. Although they are clearly distant through normal observation their abilities almost always speak differently. Do you think they could begin to express themselves, if channeled properly? Like Stephen with his brief stints of music and performance?
Do you feel we have suppressed the possibilities of many Autistic children through assumptions of their limitations, rather than rearing their potentials?
Do you believe there is any limit to what subject a savant can be extraordinary at? Say a savant of physics, or a savant of an intelligence we have no knowledge of ourselves?
1. I wonder how many different types of savants have been identified and how many fields of study they cover besides music, math, and drawing mentioned here.
2. I wonder how an understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open a better and greater understanding of the nature of intelligence and talent in general. I also wonder how an understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open a better and more comprehensive understanding of the very vast realm called the cognitive unconscious mentioned in this chapter on page 196.
3. I wonder if there are studies currently happening that are exploring and addressing artistic talents in savants; whether there might be a 'distinctive "autistic" form of perception and art in savants,' as thought of by the author.
Without that sense of "self" is it really art or are they just drawing straight from memory?
Since someone with autism seems to lack the sense of understanding meaning and emotion is it possible to bring that out of them or does this disability completely prevent that?
It seems a lot of what autistic kids are good at is recalling things perfectly from memory. Would this make a good starting point for them when creating art? How can we harness this ability to better help them understand meaning and emotion?
1. As we have discussed in class and Sacks brought out in "Prodigies", Kanner and Asperger both quickly realized that a major quality of autism is aloneness due to an inability to connect with people. Is this mental aloneness what allows for autistic savants to have the unique ability to focus on "raw talents"? This separation from the rest of society seems to allow them the ability to be independent of cultural expectations and norms. Could this possibly be connected to their quality of aloneness? For example, the chapter brings out how Nadia lost her ability to draw with such a unique perception after acquiring language skills. Is this because she became less alone and somehow more aware of social norms? If so, why?
2. Sacks brings out how art is full of symbols, images, and conventions of representation. He brings out how these conventions were acquired by artists during childhood and usually include the entire history of western art. I agree with this, and realize that young children are taught basic methods of drawing that are in no way based upon what an object actually looks like: blue clouds, perfect bolts of lightning, and a turkey made by a hand silhouette. These are all specific things that are taught to young children, yet the things we learn from society go very beyond these simplicities. Monet told us we need to deconstruct these past ideas of how to draw a specific object. Sacks suggests it is easy for autistic children to not succumb to using these previous ideas because they never made symbols in the first place. Again, this seems to go back to autistic children being alone. How do other people disregard these previous notions? Is it possible as teachers to help our students break down how we look at things?
3. Sacks brings up the idea of this "flatness" of emotions. Is this a true feeling, or does it only appear that people with autism do not have deep emotions? Is it possible that they simply do not know how to deal with these emotions, and therefore just push them aside?
1. How would you describe the main characteristics that define autism and how does that play out in Aspergers?
On main characteristic for both is aloneness, being mentally alone or having the ability to be mentally alone. Having an obsessive insistence on sameness is also another attribute. They may have incredible powers of literally recall of something. They lack a real understanding of different emotions, not being very intelligent or sensitive in this human area. They could be psuedosocial though. They may also have no sense of vanity or modesty also. They are incapable of in depth of feelings. Yet they can have very abstract patterns of awareness and visual analysis. Autistic people don’t talk much. They make sounds more. Predictability is a big thing with autism, more of a connection with autism.
Someone with Aspergers is more able to function in society than someone with autism. They focus on routines. They have obsessions to the routines. They are routine orientated. They have extremely good memories, photographic memories especially with their favorite subjects. They are really smart in terms of facts. But they are unable to read visual expressions and body language. Socialization is the issue, being anti-social somewhat.
2. Do you think that autistic artist can be expressive and emotive?
I am not entirely sure about that. I think they are still more just technical and enthralled with the process of creating or replicating something with their uncanny abilities like Stephen and Nadia had.
Do you think they can identify with their work?
I am not totally sure about that either. I believe they must to some degree because different people with autism show different fascinations with different subjects just like ‘normal’ artist do. Subject matter is an individual choice and they tend to like different things. Steven liked to draw cars as much as buildings.
Are they (their work) “constructions” or “creations”?
I think they are more creations than constructions, because they don’t have to necessarily even spend a lot of time observing their subjects before creating them or creating some resemblance of them. Even though the detail in which they replicate what they are drawing is incredible, it is not the exact reconstruction that is the focus of their creations, which makes what they do phenomenal and incredible.
3. How do you think autistic gifts and deficits work together in an individual?
I think the deficits help the individual focus on the gifts and talents even more. There are less distractions and more focus on the artistic development or talent.
What does this have to do with multiple intelligences? I am not sure what this has to do with multiple intelligences. The abilities that autistic people have are astounding to us. Maybe they actively are using their brains more and are tapping into areas of intelligence that we ‘normal’ people haven’t even begun to use or realize exists within us. I still wonder how a greater understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open up a better and greater understanding of the nature of multiple intelligences and talent and even the area called cognitive unconsciousness.
1)Prodigies who can calculate complex mathematical problems in their minds and come up answers without a justifiable reason of how they come up with it, seems so puzzling to me. In An Anthropologist on Mars, Sacks explains that this is connected to “subliminal mentation”(Sacks 194). What exactly is subliminal mentation? ( I took it as some sort of physics ability that cannot be explained by science or phycology) What other theories can explain this phenomenon?
2)Where do you think autistic children’s fascination with a certain subject matter comes from? (Like Stevens fascination of drawing buildings and Jessie Parks obsession with weather and stars) Is there a reason they are resistant to change subject matter? I wonder If they feel like they have to investigate every aspect of that subject matter until they move on, maybe doing something else just makes them feel like something is missing and incomplete.
3)What are some ways of helping autistic children cope with the loss of a loved one? In An Anthropologist on Mars when Steven loses his father he starts acting out by screaming, rocking and waving his hands around. It made me think what would be an effective way to help a child with autism who is dealing with the death of a loved one. In what ways can we help these kids express their emotions and deal with the grief?
How can someone who has lived with such emotional deficiencies for most of their life, all of a sudden "learn" to care or feel emotional attachment to someone else? Or was it something about Margaret specifically that made Steven feel attached to her?
Steven did not have any (or very little) emotional attachment to his work or the places/things he drew. Does this kind of monotonous art making have less value than a works of highly emotional subjects/artists?
Is there any reason behind why someone is born a savant? Or what area they are a prodigy in? Why was Steven a prodigy in drawing when other autistic savants are prodigies in math or numbers? What determines what area their brain will excel at?
Prodigies
ReplyDelete1.
I would describe the main characteristics that describes Autism as socially separated or isolated, lack of eye contact and facial expressions, showing detachment from emotions, demonstrating a strong talent and interest, and many times non-verbal or mute. I think it plays out in Asperger’s especially with their specific interest(s) that seem ritualized (repetitive and obsessive) and can take the form of a savant. This is described as one who has an extreme talent in one or a limited number of subjects that is facilitated mostly through visual imagery and auditory stimulation. There is a deep-rooted question of whether these formulated aspects such as drawing in the case of Stephen are actually derived from the mind and emotion or from complete black and white memory.
2.
Based on the reading, it seems like expression and emotions of autistic artists are something that is brought out through practice and constant support of the individual. However, this emotion and expression is very minimal or if at all present depending on the individual. I think their art is possible of being expressive and emotive because in the reading Stephan made sexualized drawings of girls. Maybe this was not connected to his mind, but I feel like there was more of an analytical approach compared to the slightly altered architectural spaces. However, then again, was he actually identifying with this or had he seen these images from observing reality? I think, depending on the circumstance and individual autistic individual, they do have the possibility to identify with their work, but it seems to happen briefly and with genuine support and interest in their work. In a way, this squares with the reality of students without autism- many need support and guidance from teachers. It seems apparent through many autistic individuals that when they produce art, they lack the analytical skills of meaning and concept. My question is how would one define “construction” and “creation”? Is creation driven by concept? I think that creation can be driven by formal and technical skills and implementing a concept into a piece of art would be integral to a “typical” students work. However, children on the autism spectrum think and perceive differently, so I think what constitutes their creation versus our creation is very different. Yes, I do think that they create. Like in the case of Stephan, he created successful drawings from memory and altered them, so why would that be a construction?
3.
I think autistic gifts are used to their advantage because they help the individual become very interested, motivated, and involved in something. Then the deficits function as something that most likely brings their intelligence levels down in certain aspects. I think that they do and don’t work together. I think that they do work together because they may balance each other out, but at the same time they don’t work together because the individual then becomes only interested in one or minimal things. This narrows their field of learning. I think this has to do with multiple intelligences because they have different types of intelligences through either different ways of learning or different types of learning.
4.
I think that through support, and working on skills, autistic children can change from low functioning to very high functioning on the spectrum. They may not even appear autistic because they only may have a few characteristics of autism. Although, I do think this requires effort! I believe then they can become more active in other fields of knowledge, raise their IQ, publish books, and essentially create meaning in their lives (although I think it is dependent on the individual and how much effort they are able to put in). What other factors contribute to this?
1)
ReplyDeleteDo you think that a person with autism has a self? What does that even mean? How could you incorporate the idea of the self into a lesson plan?
2)
Do you think that a person with autism is capable of complex, abstract thought? What are factors that would be dependent on this?
3)
Margaret and Stephen seem to form a better relationship than Chris and Stephen. Stephen at one point said that he didn’t want Margaret to die because she was feeling sick. Why do you think Margaret and Stephen had a better relationship? Do you think he had emotions with Margaret? Why or why not? How was this depicted?
1. Something that this chapter brought up for me was ideas about connections. Stephen could make incredible connections between what he saw even for a second and what he represented on paper. But in relation to making connections to meaning, such as in the context of his artwork, there wasn’t much of that at all. Thinking about teaching students with Aspergers should we be providing a context in which we are trying to enable students to make meaningful connections in their art? Should this be our ultimate goal? Or would this question be more on an individual student level?
ReplyDelete2. In relation to making connections through art, in discussion about his relationships with people, Stephen definitely struggled. There was evidence that over time he grew fond of people based on his reactions, such as when Margaret was sick. Besides this though it seemed as though Stephen was disconnected from much emotion, as characteristic of people with Aspergers. Is this something that can change over time? Can the ability to express feelings develop? Is it something that can be not necessarily taught directly but brought up through other subject matter in an educational context?
3. The idea of a prodigy in this sense was sort of amazing to me. Not only in Stephen’s case but the range of incredible talents was quite interesting. As it is often the case with those with Aspergers, to have something that they are extremely good at, is there a fear of diminishing this talent as children with Aspergers are learning to function in other realms of society? Should this be a great concern? If you had a child with a talent such as Stephen’s would it be more important for you that he learn other things and be a more well rounded individual with the risk of losing his strong drawing ability that has brought him such acclaim?
1. This chapter describes the people as what they are, not as patients. There is a personal level and with that an increasing insight that there many different sides to humanity and certainly the human race has many different sides to it. How do we as teachers make this known to the world?
ReplyDelete2. Often those with aspergers have extremely interesting and vast talents. Their wide range abilities outweigh their social disabilities. Do you "treat" aspergers by teaching those with the disability to interact with society? Is it more important when "treating" the disability to focus on how it has benefited the person or harmed them?
3. If aspergers is a mental disability that effects social interaction and creates extreme ability, does it effect the ability to think cognitively? If cognitive thought is effected, is it negatively or positively altered?
1. Is calling attention to autisic individuals with special talents a good or bad thing? Is it good because it raises autism awarenss or bad because it exploits these individuals and their "special trick."
ReplyDelete2. Is it possible that autistic people feel love and other emotions in different ways that we just don't know or understand?
3. Normally, when a person looks at the world around them they take all the visual details. Because the conscious mind can't focus on all this information at once, it filters this visual information and gives us a sort of blindness to everything but important focal points. Is it possible that the minds of autistic people do not have this filter and that is why they can become so overwhelmed and unable to deal with other details like interaction?
Stephen has an extraordinary story, which leaves me questioning just how much those with autism do feel in the realm of emotion. Although they are clearly distant through normal observation their abilities almost always speak differently. Do you think they could begin to express themselves, if channeled properly? Like Stephen with his brief stints of music and performance?
ReplyDeleteDo you feel we have suppressed the possibilities of many Autistic children through assumptions of their limitations, rather than rearing their potentials?
Do you believe there is any limit to what subject a savant can be extraordinary at? Say a savant of physics, or a savant of an intelligence we have no knowledge of ourselves?
1. I wonder how many different types of savants have been identified and how many fields of study they cover besides music, math, and drawing mentioned here.
ReplyDelete2. I wonder how an understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open a better and greater understanding of the nature of intelligence and talent in general. I also wonder how an understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open a better and more comprehensive understanding of the very vast realm called the cognitive unconscious mentioned in this chapter on page 196.
3. I wonder if there are studies currently happening that are exploring and addressing artistic talents in savants; whether there might be a 'distinctive "autistic" form of perception and art in savants,' as thought of by the author.
Without that sense of "self" is it really art or are they just drawing straight from memory?
ReplyDeleteSince someone with autism seems to lack the sense of understanding meaning and emotion is it possible to bring that out of them or does this disability completely prevent that?
It seems a lot of what autistic kids are good at is recalling things perfectly from memory. Would this make a good starting point for them when creating art? How can we harness this ability to better help them understand meaning and emotion?
1. As we have discussed in class and Sacks brought out in "Prodigies", Kanner and Asperger both quickly realized that a major quality of autism is aloneness due to an inability to connect with people. Is this mental aloneness what allows for autistic savants to have the unique ability to focus on "raw talents"? This separation from the rest of society seems to allow them the ability to be independent of cultural expectations and norms. Could this possibly be connected to their quality of aloneness? For example, the chapter brings out how Nadia lost her ability to draw with such a unique perception after acquiring language skills. Is this because she became less alone and somehow more aware of social norms? If so, why?
ReplyDelete2. Sacks brings out how art is full of symbols, images, and conventions of representation. He brings out how these conventions were acquired by artists during childhood and usually include the entire history of western art. I agree with this, and realize that young children are taught basic methods of drawing that are in no way based upon what an object actually looks like: blue clouds, perfect bolts of lightning, and a turkey made by a hand silhouette. These are all specific things that are taught to young children, yet the things we learn from society go very beyond these simplicities. Monet told us we need to deconstruct these past ideas of how to draw a specific object. Sacks suggests it is easy for autistic children to not succumb to using these previous ideas because they never made symbols in the first place. Again, this seems to go back to autistic children being alone. How do other people disregard these previous notions? Is it possible as teachers to help our students break down how we look at things?
3. Sacks brings up the idea of this "flatness" of emotions. Is this a true feeling, or does it only appear that people with autism do not have deep emotions? Is it possible that they simply do not know how to deal with these emotions, and therefore just push them aside?
Prodigies (4 questions) Freida Wright
ReplyDelete1. How would you describe the main characteristics that define autism and how does that play out in Aspergers?
On main characteristic for both is aloneness, being mentally alone or having the ability to be mentally alone. Having an obsessive insistence on sameness is also another attribute. They may have incredible powers of literally recall of something. They lack a real understanding of different emotions, not being very intelligent or sensitive in this human area. They could be psuedosocial though. They may also have no sense of vanity or modesty also. They are incapable of in depth of feelings. Yet they can have very abstract patterns of awareness and visual analysis. Autistic people don’t talk much. They make sounds more. Predictability is a big thing with autism, more of a connection with autism.
Someone with Aspergers is more able to function in society than someone with autism. They focus on routines. They have obsessions to the routines. They are routine orientated. They have extremely good memories, photographic memories especially with their favorite subjects. They are really smart in terms of facts. But they are unable to read visual expressions and body language. Socialization is the issue, being anti-social somewhat.
2. Do you think that autistic artist can be expressive and emotive?
I am not entirely sure about that. I think they are still more just technical and enthralled with the process of creating or replicating something with their uncanny abilities like Stephen and Nadia had.
Do you think they can identify with their work?
I am not totally sure about that either. I believe they must to some degree because different people with autism show different fascinations with different subjects just like ‘normal’ artist do. Subject matter is an individual choice and they tend to like different things. Steven liked to draw cars as much as buildings.
Are they (their work) “constructions” or “creations”?
I think they are more creations than constructions, because they don’t have to necessarily even spend a lot of time observing their subjects before creating them or creating some resemblance of them. Even though the detail in which they replicate what they are drawing is incredible, it is not the exact reconstruction that is the focus of their creations, which makes what they do phenomenal and incredible.
3. How do you think autistic gifts and deficits work together in an individual?
I think the deficits help the individual focus on the gifts and talents even more. There are less distractions and more focus on the artistic development or talent.
What does this have to do with multiple intelligences? I am not sure what this has to do with multiple intelligences. The abilities that autistic people have are astounding to us. Maybe they actively are using their brains more and are tapping into areas of intelligence that we ‘normal’ people haven’t even begun to use or realize exists within us. I still wonder how a greater understanding of idiot savants and their gifts could open up a better and greater understanding of the nature of multiple intelligences and talent and even the area called cognitive unconsciousness.
1)Prodigies who can calculate complex mathematical problems in their minds and come up answers without a justifiable reason of how they come up with it, seems so puzzling to me. In An Anthropologist on Mars, Sacks explains that this is connected to “subliminal mentation”(Sacks 194). What exactly is subliminal mentation? ( I took it as some sort of physics ability that cannot be explained by science or phycology) What other theories can explain this phenomenon?
ReplyDelete2)Where do you think autistic children’s fascination with a certain subject matter comes from? (Like Stevens fascination of drawing buildings and Jessie Parks obsession with weather and stars) Is there a reason they are resistant to change subject matter? I wonder If they feel like they have to investigate every aspect of that subject matter until they move on, maybe doing something else just makes them feel like something is missing and incomplete.
3)What are some ways of helping autistic children cope with the loss of a loved one? In An Anthropologist on Mars when Steven loses his father he starts acting out by screaming, rocking and waving his hands around. It made me think what would be an effective way to help a child with autism who is dealing with the death of a loved one. In what ways can we help these kids express their emotions and deal with the grief?
How can someone who has lived with such emotional deficiencies for most of their life, all of a sudden "learn" to care or feel emotional attachment to someone else? Or was it something about Margaret specifically that made Steven feel attached to her?
ReplyDeleteSteven did not have any (or very little) emotional attachment to his work or the places/things he drew. Does this kind of monotonous art making have less value than a works of highly emotional subjects/artists?
Is there any reason behind why someone is born a savant? Or what area they are a prodigy in? Why was Steven a prodigy in drawing when other autistic savants are prodigies in math or numbers? What determines what area their brain will excel at?