Just to get it all down for future reference... a work in progress (will add on as it develops).
Not definitive (I might break my headcanon to go in another direction for some fics), but this is what I believe... most of the time.
(
Red/Blue/Yellow + FireRed/LeafGreen )
I subscribe to all of your numbered theories about Red (and pokémon training in general), hence my mention of Red having Aspergers syndrome. Some individuals - Wikipedia has a pretty good article on historical figures who were speculated to have autism and another on confirmed individuals here - with Aspergers and autism are extremely brilliant because their condition has wired their mind in a certain way. The HBO movie on Temple Grandin comes to mind, which articulated what I'm attempting to here very well... There's a scene where the actress playing Temple Grandin describes how she came up with the idea for sweeping curved corrals and more humane methods of cow slaughter because she thinks the way they do. It was this unique connection, in addition to her intelligence, that allowed her to conceptualize and implement these ideas. I believe that situation parallels Red's. Red's condition renders him unable to connect to other people as easily as say, Gold or Leaf would, and this is due to the fact that his thought patterns are nearly identical to his pokémon's, thus making him a nearly unparalleled pokémon trainer.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I thought they weren't because there was this experiment at one point that showed where normal people and autistic people tend to focus in a movie. The normal audience focused primarily on human faces. The autists tend to focus on other things and avoid the faces (things like, there is a human body here, there's a table there, there's a painting on the wall, etc. rather than this is a female person who is sad and next to her is a man who is laughing, etc.) the conclusion of the experiment (according to the person writing the paper, anyway) was that autists weren't interested on humans. Instead of seeing [humans, maybe in X context] they see [object W, object Y, object Z etc. in X]. There was a lack of focus on humans and just treat them as neutral information. I guess that was why they didn't feel the need of interacting humans, because it didn't mean more than interacting with a table or a tree. (That's on a purely social level; if you ask them which to save between a kitten and a painting they'd probably still pick kitten.) Maybe that's what makes them "see everything" because what normal people tend to ignore/rule as not important they take it in without discrimination. I cannot remember the name of the experiment, only that I saw it while doing research for a film analysis homework or something. Over 3 years ago.
The autism spectrum is rather huge, so I guess that test doesn't mean much anymore or it was more precise (limited to one type of autism) but I don't remember.
Reply
Leave a comment