The world is a much richer place because of these people.
So "others" thought Michelangelo or Nash to be "aloof", "loners" or "strange"? Who were these "others"? Does anyone remember them? Does anyone know their names? Did those well-adjusted, judgemental "others" contribute to the arts one half as well as Michelangelo, or Nash?
These journalists and psychologists who pass judgment on Michelangelo, Nash, and other individuals like them - did they ever do anything so wonderful as these "flawed" men? Did any of these expert labelers of humanity ever create so beautiful as Nash's works, or Michelangelo's David?
I would wager that the problem belongs not to Michelangelo, or to Nash, but rather to the "others" who judged them to be strange. Those "others" may have suffered from that common and sometimes fatal syndrome known as "jealosy".
How often are the "strange" people, who have much to offer in their gifts, shunned because their perceived social ineptness?
Perhaps Asperger's syndrome is not a marker of a defect - rather, in all of it's strangeness and social non-conformity, it may be the marker of potential greatness...
You put it better than I did -- thanks.
I tend to believe that a lot of what we call "sociability" and the "popular" crowd are actually attempts at either covering up strong insecurities with schmoozing or trying to climb the social ladder.
And yes those types are very put off by the nonconformists.
I think that, too. From what I've read, and the few Asperger's children I've known, there's a lot of creativity and intelligence there.
I read a book a few years ago, called Touched by Fire, about the high incidence of depression and bipolar disorder in many famous artistic and literary figures, also how drugs like prozac can actually stifle creativity.