Content area
Full text
Introduction
Autism is a complex phenomenon that is widely spread throughout society, unconfined to the clinically situated discursive agency and positivist gaze of psychiatry (Lester and Paulus 2012). In the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, it is officially defined as a spectrum of social, emotional, and sensory impairments (American Psychiatric Association 2013). However, this taxonomic list of symptoms alone is not enough to grasp the full production and circulation of autism as a discourse. In order to more fully consider this issue, research questions must attend to the contingent specificities of autism discourse. Following Foucault, I ask, what can and cannot be said about autism in a given point in time, and where, and by whom (Foucault 1972)? The word "autism" is not neutral but carries a complex medical and social history that was subject to at least two paradigm shifts: a shift to a neurobiological scientific practice, and an acknowledgement of the voices of people who identify as autistic themselves (Waltz 2013). Prior to this, psychoanalytical explanations of autism were dominant, while autistic people were perceived as being unable to voice themselves due to a lack of introspective skills (Sacks 1995). Furthermore, outside of the scientific and clinical realm, the word "autism" is widely colloquially used, often metaphorically or as a throwaway reference to pathology in popular culture (see Murray 2008; Connor 2013).
This essay aims to explore broader themes and theoretical frameworks for the study of these wider discursive practices of autism. In line of Lester and Paulus (2012), it aims to consider how discourse shapes the study object of autism rather than the other way around (260). Of concern is the "textured life of disability" (Titchkosky 2007). This approach is concerned with the way in which the social construct of disability (rather than the presumed biological reality behind impairment) is interwoven into everyday life through omnipresent texts and as such gains form and significance (Titchkosky 2007, 17). I do not only count the written word as text: it also refers to cultural objects from visual and aural media. The goal in studying cultural texts that use autism as a discourse, rather than an alleged (bio)logical reality, is to interrogate power/knowledge. Power/knowledge entails the...