Why is Calvin grown up but not Suzie?

That's his daughter, he gave her Hobbes.

It's out a bit but I read the 2 week arc where Calvin and Hobbes find the injured baby racoon that later dies at lunch today. I always forget about this story and it always blindsides me by how sad it is. I think this is probably the most emotional thing Watterson did in the series.

That's supposed to be Calvin and Suzie's daughter. It's why she has blonde hair, but Suzie's classic haircut. 

That was pretty frickin' amazing. 

-M

Fair point. I wonder if my reaction is an autistic thing. I was diagnosed a couple of years ago. The interviews took several days (with both my parents present!) and one of the key questions was how I played with toys. I never role played toys: I never acted out stuff, I saw toys as something to explore. I see toys and stories the same way I see the fields outside my window - as something that never gets old. As an adult I see the grass and flowers in a different way, but they are just as interesting as ever.

I find the idea of tools for imagination alien to me. I see them as fascinating in their own right, and that never gets old. The first toys I remember wanting were "Weebles" - egg-like characters with weighted bases so they can't fall over. I never gave them names or role played anything, I just loved their elegance. That never gets old : I feel the same way now, except I now had added appreciation for the physics and minimalism. It bothered me that later versions had colour added to the clothes or were larger - the colour added nothing, and therefore reduced their efficiency, showing that Hasbro never understood what they had

I am the same with comics: it probably explains why I love to study the Fantastic Four, and find endless depth, whereas others seem happy to just take the surface reading and move on to some other title. In a way I never grew up. I could spend my whole life exploring the first things I ever looked at.

I think this is why I never really grew up and had a career. I see others rush into things and focus on adult interests, and they have friends and money, they fit in, and I'm still where I was as a child - I can't understand why people would abandon their first discoveries without seeing what they have. In a way I admire them they must be so clever to be able to do so many things, when I still sit here and stare out of the window, as awe-struck as ever by a blade of grass or the fact that eyes can see.

Information overload is perhaps the defining feature of autism. I see so much. I notice so much, nothing is ever boring except change. Why change when there is so much undiscovered? Why discard a childhood idea just when we are about to learn something useful? I see the normal "growing up" as horribly inefficient and superficial. Yet on the other hand, in terms of the normal fast paced world of people, I am very slow and stuck at the start. I obsess endlessly over details. Neuro typical people miss the details and move on. In most situations being neuro typical is more efficient. But sometimes there is value in stopping and looking deeper. Neither is "right", the are just different ways of thinking.

This also explains my fascination with reasons for things (see my web site AnswersAnswers.com/ ) and why I like my art to be very detailed (I create portaits using fractals). And why I tend to write very long replies when others have the gift of brevity.