>> I've been puzzling over this and I think it's a combination of understandable and problematic things - on the one hand, I have this uncomfortable sense that explicitly mentioning certain identities feels sort of forced and internet speak-y, which I think is in part an internalised self-consciousness that I want to work on. <<
To avoid this, observe conversations by trait-having people, especially with other trait-having people. It seems pretty consistent that some individuals are quite forward with their identity, while others rarely mention it or actively hide it. This applies to neurotype, sexual orientation, disability, etc. Further observe how they talk about it. Then just emulate that.
I have an edge because many of my disabled, ace/aro, etc. characters and their adventures have been prompted by trait-having people. But neither my fans nor the characters all talk the same way, which adds to the realism.
Frex, contrast the characters of Heron and Shiv, neither of whom are interested in sex. Heron is very out and will reply to total strangers, "Thank you for your interest, but I am asexual and also in a committed relationship." Shiv on the other hand is still hesitant to claim the identity, but will flag as asexual at social events to avoid unwanted advances.
>> But I also think that fanfic depictions of neurodivergence (and a-specness!) too often DO fall into over simplistic 'someone said the word, so they googled it and it described them and they felt good' fics that don't delve into anything especially complex or meaningful. <<
Often that's all we have to go on. A good writer will A) seek to portray diverse characters and B) if they don't know something will look it up. At least twice now, I have had trait-having fans pop up and point to something I got out of hardcore clinical sources and say, "That's wrong" or "That's a way people abuse us." :/ I have since collected large followings on both tracks after hunting down material written by and for trait-having people. I have also learned to look for that first and not trust "official" sources because they often know fuckall about what they're attempting to describe.
>> Overall I guess is the sense that I want to do something a bit more literary, that doesn't entirely rely on just saying the word in-story.<<
Go you! That's good writing. We need more of that.
>> So, okay. I'm writing autistic fic without using the word, at least as an exercise.<<
Any exercise that involves writing around something to leave out can be very interesting. It's good for writing blind or deaf characters, using other senses to make up for the missing one.
>> I had a fic idea (which I haven't fully worked out yet) that focuses on those traits, and the isolation that resulted, and the character finding commonality with the other character I intepret as autistic, all without either of them having a specific word to describe it all. Does that count? I think it does - it's a major focus of the piece.<<
It totally counts.
For comparison, think about stories where a character is not named as being lesbian, vision-impaired, out of shape, black, etc. but simply portrayed that way. It's pretty common.
>> But, what if it's not the primary focus? The character acts in ways consistent with ASD, and maybe I add a bit more than what comes up in canon just to make it very clear, deliberately adding some autistic culture type stuff in there on the sidelines, to be recognised by people who can spot it. Does that count?<<
There are different aspects to this.
One has to do with how fanfic is written. I write fanfic based on "derive in, extrapolate out." I start with a character or scene that catches my interest, imagine how they got that way, and then move forward to how that could influence future stories. Frex, Phil Coulson in the Avengers movies uses a lot of underdog techniques, but he is a white man in a government organization with a lot of power. So where the heck did he learn that stuff? I posited an impoverished upbringing, a disabled sister, and a mother with epic people skills. If you are adding more autistic examples to match things already shown in canon, that's a similar thing.
The other is the spectrum of emphasis, from the main theme and the main character to background parity and bit players. We need stories "about" autism. But it's boring if every story with an autistic character has to have that plot/theme. They should get to do all the stories other people do too. Autistic romance, autistic mystery, autistic gentle fiction, etc. If the main character is autistic, it always counts as autistic literature. Bit players and background parity are things that show autism is just an ordinary part of life, not something that always has to steal the limelight.
>> But we can go even further. For some characters, you don't need to add anything else to make them act like an autistic person. They already do that in canon. If I write this particular canon just as he acts in canon - struggling with body language and non-literal language, stimming with a comfort object to calm his turbulent emotions - does THAT count? Can I tag THAT as '____ is autistic'? <<
There it might depend on how much the character does it, how closely it fits the parameters of the condition. Consider "autistic spectrum" because that in particular is not a single set of traits but a large bin of possibilities clustered along a wide spectrum.
What "counts" is up to each literate person -- reader, writer, reviewer, editor, buyer, etc. -- to consider. How recognizable is the autism? How much does it appear in the writing? How important is it to the plot/theme (or not) in this work? How easy it is for a reader to recognize? Would an autistic person reading it probably feel represented by it? That too is a spectrum, from by autistic authors for autistic readers all about autism, to background parity.
Re: Thoughts
That's useful to know.
>> (BTW, this whole paragraph also applies to how I feel about ace/aro fic, as an aroace myself.) <<
I should probably mention that I write both neurovariant and ace/aro characters. For the latter see my posts on QUILTBAG characters, sexual orientations, and romantic orientations.
>> I've been puzzling over this and I think it's a combination of understandable and problematic things - on the one hand, I have this uncomfortable sense that explicitly mentioning certain identities feels sort of forced and internet speak-y, which I think is in part an internalised self-consciousness that I want to work on. <<
To avoid this, observe conversations by trait-having people, especially with other trait-having people. It seems pretty consistent that some individuals are quite forward with their identity, while others rarely mention it or actively hide it. This applies to neurotype, sexual orientation, disability, etc. Further observe how they talk about it. Then just emulate that.
I have an edge because many of my disabled, ace/aro, etc. characters and their adventures have been prompted by trait-having people. But neither my fans nor the characters all talk the same way, which adds to the realism.
Frex, contrast the characters of Heron and Shiv, neither of whom are interested in sex. Heron is very out and will reply to total strangers, "Thank you for your interest, but I am asexual and also in a committed relationship." Shiv on the other hand is still hesitant to claim the identity, but will flag as asexual at social events to avoid unwanted advances.
>> But I also think that fanfic depictions of neurodivergence (and a-specness!) too often DO fall into over simplistic 'someone said the word, so they googled it and it described them and they felt good' fics that don't delve into anything especially complex or meaningful. <<
Often that's all we have to go on. A good writer will A) seek to portray diverse characters and B) if they don't know something will look it up. At least twice now, I have had trait-having fans pop up and point to something I got out of hardcore clinical sources and say, "That's wrong" or "That's a way people abuse us." :/ I have since collected large followings on both tracks after hunting down material written by and for trait-having people. I have also learned to look for that first and not trust "official" sources because they often know fuckall about what they're attempting to describe.
>> Overall I guess is the sense that I want to do something a bit more literary, that doesn't entirely rely on just saying the word in-story.<<
Go you! That's good writing. We need more of that.
>> So, okay. I'm writing autistic fic without using the word, at least as an exercise.<<
Any exercise that involves writing around something to leave out can be very interesting. It's good for writing blind or deaf characters, using other senses to make up for the missing one.
>> I had a fic idea (which I haven't fully worked out yet) that focuses on those traits, and the isolation that resulted, and the character finding commonality with the other character I intepret as autistic, all without either of them having a specific word to describe it all. Does that count? I think it does - it's a major focus of the piece.<<
It totally counts.
For comparison, think about stories where a character is not named as being lesbian, vision-impaired, out of shape, black, etc. but simply portrayed that way. It's pretty common.
>> But, what if it's not the primary focus? The character acts in ways consistent with ASD, and maybe I add a bit more than what comes up in canon just to make it very clear, deliberately adding some autistic culture type stuff in there on the sidelines, to be recognised by people who can spot it. Does that count?<<
There are different aspects to this.
One has to do with how fanfic is written. I write fanfic based on "derive in, extrapolate out." I start with a character or scene that catches my interest, imagine how they got that way, and then move forward to how that could influence future stories. Frex, Phil Coulson in the Avengers movies uses a lot of underdog techniques, but he is a white man in a government organization with a lot of power. So where the heck did he learn that stuff? I posited an impoverished upbringing, a disabled sister, and a mother with epic people skills. If you are adding more autistic examples to match things already shown in canon, that's a similar thing.
The other is the spectrum of emphasis, from the main theme and the main character to background parity and bit players. We need stories "about" autism. But it's boring if every story with an autistic character has to have that plot/theme. They should get to do all the stories other people do too. Autistic romance, autistic mystery, autistic gentle fiction, etc. If the main character is autistic, it always counts as autistic literature. Bit players and background parity are things that show autism is just an ordinary part of life, not something that always has to steal the limelight.
You might like my discussion on identity literature.
>> But we can go even further. For some characters, you don't need to add anything else to make them act like an autistic person. They already do that in canon. If I write this particular canon just as he acts in canon - struggling with body language and non-literal language, stimming with a comfort object to calm his turbulent emotions - does THAT count? Can I tag THAT as '____ is autistic'? <<
There it might depend on how much the character does it, how closely it fits the parameters of the condition. Consider "autistic spectrum" because that in particular is not a single set of traits but a large bin of possibilities clustered along a wide spectrum.
What "counts" is up to each literate person -- reader, writer, reviewer, editor, buyer, etc. -- to consider. How recognizable is the autism? How much does it appear in the writing? How important is it to the plot/theme (or not) in this work? How easy it is for a reader to recognize? Would an autistic person reading it probably feel represented by it? That too is a spectrum, from by autistic authors for autistic readers all about autism, to background parity.