Dr. Matteo Farinella and Dr. Hana Ros’ “Neurocomic” is completely different from what I had expected the book to be. I didn’t know it was a graphic novel until mentioned in class, and I had no idea that the subject matter would be as scientific as it was because of the assumptions I made about it being a graphic novel. There were technical terms in the novel that I definitely had difficulty grasping. What I enjoyed the most, however, was the fact that the authors chose to use metaphor to explain such a complicated topic. It reminded me of Higashida’s writing style because of his love of metaphorical language to try to convey his experiences from within Autistic culture. For example, in order to explain how he feels in comparison to someone without Autism, Higashida uses the short story of Autisman. In his reply to the Earthling when asked why he feels “as if [he’s] got weights strapped to [his] arms and legs,” Autisman states, “Ah, but on [the Earthling’s] planet, [Austisman] always feels as af[he’s] swimming around in space, weightlessly” (Higashida 74). We may not be able to comprehend what it is like to have Autism, but Higashida uses prolific amounts of metaphor to illustrate his experiences. Language then, is not fully capable of conveying a direct experience and forces Higashida to turn to the next best thing: metaphor. By comparing two things that are not the same to explain how they are similar, the reader is able to have a mediated experience – mediated through text, and again through language.

Likewise, “Neurocomic” uses that same strategy to explain a concept that is foreign to most of the audience with the exception of those who have extensively studied the brain and psychology. In order to provide a learning experience that the majority of readers can comprehend, Drs. Farinella and Ros use two very specific methods: the use of metaphor and the graphic novel. One is a manipulation of language to make the information more accessible and the other is the use of images to help the brain make connections between difficult concepts. I found it particularly interesting when the female character in the Epilogue states that her “existence relies on the brain of the reader, which is able to see motion and hear sounds … on a flat sheet of paper” (Farinella 132). It’s fascinating that our brains are able to take black markings on a 2-dimensional plane of white paper and convert them into whole stories of adventure through a metaphorical forest, island, and ocean within the human brain. By using images and text that guide the reader to experience the information based on their own phenomenology, the authors successfully show that any concept can be productively communicated to any general and non-specialized audience.

The concept of using language or text or image as a means of mediation relates directly to our study of neurodiversity in many ways. I feel that this concept is most important and relative to our studies in the manner of how we approach a text written by someone who is neurodivergent or simply different from our personal thoughts. It is impossible to completely understand the life or experiences of someone who has Autism if you don’t personally go through it; and when reading texts written by autism or neurodivergent authors the neurotypical reader may subconsciously resist the information. As Joseph Straus points out, “autistic discourse has sometimes had to be mediated to some degree to make it comprehensible to a mainstream (neurotypical) audience” (Straus 469). However, I feel that the heavy use of metaphor along with other types of mediation (via editor, translator, or even form of novel) can be a productive way to help the neurotypical readership understand – to the best of their abilities – the culture and “coherent body of literature … that expresses a reliably authentic autistic world view” (Straus 470).