Al Capone Does My Shirts

Throughout the reading of this narrative, I kept questioning why they would not say what exact condition Natalie had. I obviously knew it was some kind of form of Autism, but I didn't understand why they werent establishing it until reading the Author's Note at the very end. This book takes place in 1935 and Autism was not identified until 1943; but then I question is this book depicting all of the stereotypes that Tal describes in his article for disabled people? Common stereotypes in books "include portraying the disabled character as weak or pathetic, a burden to others, or incapable of participating fully in everyday life". Even though Natalie was able to participate in everyday life, she still had some major struggles. Al Capone Does My Shirts was published in 2004, 3 years after Tal's article about criteria for evaluating children's literature about disabilities came out. Therefore, when producing this text the author obviously knew all about different stereotypes that existed with children's literature. I know that all of Natalie's characteristics depict the elements of Autism, but it goes right along with the stereotypes within literature as well. I understand that the books setting takes place in 1935 so these "stereotypes" were not classified thus far, but reading the articles after reading the text really makes me question some of the factors in the text. Another thing I questioned while reading the text is the way Piper's character is used towards Natalie in the beginning. She uses words such as "retard", "stupid", and "different" to describe her. Also in the Tal article it goes on to explain ways to avoid stereotypes within text; "Information about the disability needs to be accurate and up-to-date, and the language describing the disability chosen with sensitivity and an awareness of current usage". With this quote it helps explain how important and crucial it is to be sensitive when portraying characters with disabilities in the text, because as shown in the Williams, et al article they too are considered their own "group". I am not trying to put this book in a bad light because I really enjoyed it and would really consider using it in my classroom; but if someone is not there to explain these different aspects to children will they really understand that along with differences there are many similarities between them and children with disabilities? Or will this be a way of justifying their actions when they use those types of words towards other students? Not every book is perfect and I can understand the different reasons as to why an author may or may not include certain things, but just as the Williams, et al article describes that by reading books about children with disabilities and chronic illness it opens the door for discussion thus helping to build a foundatino for acceptance of people who may look or act differently. This type of discussion is the exact ways I, as a future educator, will help my students realize the various aspects of text and make it relatable to their life while hopefully concluding with an accurate portrayal of certain groups.