What I do know of Touch is that it concerns the relationship between a widower (who lost his wife in the
I
am the author of a trilogy of books that address the potential for many—not
all—people on the autism spectrum to be open to receiving information on an
uncommon level. The books are: Autism and the God Connection, The Soul of Autism, and The Autism Prophecies.
Each book was published two years apart though all of what I’ve written was
known to me at the time I was composing the very first. I did this
intentionally. In addressing unconventional possibilities for some persons with
autism, ranging from spiritual gifts such as the prophecy of Touch’s child protagonist to the ability
to commune with animals, I realized the necessity of approaching the material
with great sensitivity, care, and respect. In so doing, I also recognized the
need to parcel out the knowledge that was shared with me by those individuals
and their families in bite-size, digestible portions—after
all, this was uncharted territory.
Let me explain using a metaphor. When the movie Jaws was being filmed, Peter Benchley, the author and shark expert, chastised director Steven Speilberg for altering the climax of Benchley’s original novel. In the book, the Great White shark simply succumbs to the cumulative effects of his battle wounds and sinks to the sea floor, dragging with him an entangled Quint, the crusty counterpart to Moby Dick’s Captain Ahab. Speilberg had other plans for dramatizing the shark’s demise with a spectacular explosion triggered by the hydraulic tank lodged in the shark’s maw. Benchley strongly suggested that audiences would find it laughable that a shark would tolerate such an obstruction in its jaws let alone try to chomp down on it; but Spielberg replied that if he had the audience with him up until that point, they’d believe him then, too. And he was right.
Let me explain using a metaphor. When the movie Jaws was being filmed, Peter Benchley, the author and shark expert, chastised director Steven Speilberg for altering the climax of Benchley’s original novel. In the book, the Great White shark simply succumbs to the cumulative effects of his battle wounds and sinks to the sea floor, dragging with him an entangled Quint, the crusty counterpart to Moby Dick’s Captain Ahab. Speilberg had other plans for dramatizing the shark’s demise with a spectacular explosion triggered by the hydraulic tank lodged in the shark’s maw. Benchley strongly suggested that audiences would find it laughable that a shark would tolerate such an obstruction in its jaws let alone try to chomp down on it; but Spielberg replied that if he had the audience with him up until that point, they’d believe him then, too. And he was right.
I
wrote each of the books in my trilogy with the same thought: the great
importance of approaching the subject matter with the utmost reverence at the
outset so that what was revealed might be accepted as more plausible when
placed in proper context. Here’s where I may take exception with Touch’s premise. Critics of my books,
largely individuals who haven’t read them or haven’t read them thoroughly, have
sometimes jumped to unrealistic conclusions about their content. For this very
reason, when I was interviewed on the country’s most prominent paranormal radio
show a couple summers ago, I was assertive in maintaining that prior to any
discussion of otherworldly aptitudes, it was necessary to “ground” the
discussion about autism from the perspective of some salient truths: that
people with autism are intelligent beings and that the spiritual giftedness
experienced by many was accessible to us
all.
My
reservation with Touch is that, in TV
terms, it has already “jumped the shark” before it’s begun. That is, there is a
danger in polarizing people with autism as hopeless individuals void of
competence every bit as much as it’s inadvisable to glorify them in some
outrageous manner that lacks authenticity. We’re not talking about “God’s
Special Angels,” we’re talking about human
beings with a variation in brain wiring that causes them to interpret the
world with an alternate logic. The movie Rain
Man was a disservice in giving rise to a stereotype of the autistic savant instead of acknowledging
that we all possess gifts and talents regardless of who we are. I hope that Touch seeks to temper this fundamental
notion fairly and with just cause instead of veering left into the uneasy and
disparaging realm of sensationalism for the sake of ratings.
© 2012, William Stillman




I don't intend to watch it and have an aversion to TV as well. I also don't look to fictional programming to teach me about autism. The only place to get a true sense of autism is through active involvement in the life of someone living on the spectrum.
ReplyDeleteI've been wondering what you would think about this show and the mysterious abilities that this character is described as possessing, so I was very glad to see this commentary. Not only is it concise and well-argued, it also mirrors my own feelings. I do hope the writers and producers don't fall into the familiar stereotype of the superhuman individual, but like you, I am wary.
ReplyDelete