The life of Alan Turing

There are so many ways the idea takes hold.

Consider the 2014 film “Imitation game”. It is based on the life of the British mathematician Alan Turing. The source was the excellent biography Alan Turing: The Enigma, by Andrew Hodges that I had read.

I was interested in Turing. Of course, he was an eccentric person. He suffered from seasonal allergies and during hay season, rode his bike in a gas mask. But what a compelling character he was. Not only because of his brilliance, but also because of his integrity. Turing was gay; homosexual activity was illegal in Britain at the time. So gay men usually married a woman and led a double life. Turing, too, had been engaged briefly to a fellow mathematician named Joan Clarke. However, he eventually decided against a sham marriage and chose to live true to his nature, openly. This courageous and ahead of his time choice cost Turing his life.

In the movie, Turing, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, has no sense of humor and doesn’t understand implicit language. When a colleague says, “Hey Alan, we are going to get lunch”, he doesn’t know it’s an invitation to join. He is aloof and indifferent to other people’s suffering. There is an extraordinary scene when he is hired to the code breaking team by a high-ranking military guy. The guy says, “We need to stop Hitler who is killing thousands of people a day in Europe.” Turing’s response? “I don’t care about politics but mathematically, the problem is interesting.”

There is no evidence whatsoever that Turing was anything like this. He had a wonderful sense of humor and was beloved by his colleagues. The Enigma machine, his breakthrough, was a team effort. He was the driving force behind this breakthrough, but the work was collegial.

The film crew gave a bunch of interviews promoting the film. They were asked, repeatedly, if the movie claims Turing had autism. They denied it, despite obvious hints and implicit pointers to autism cliches. They wouldn’t say the word “autism” as if it was Lord Voldemort. 

So, my question is, why not say, explicitly, that he had autism, which he probably did, and then show him as the delightful person that he was? Not only it would be the accurate depiction of history and the right thing to do, it would do a good service, not a disservice, to individuals like Max.