Was he autistic?

so he was just a beta puss?

Here's a thing I didn't understand. The opening page claims that no one thought much of him and students don't remember him, but towards the end he's described as becoming a sort of legend on campus and that his teaching can have a profound affect on his students. How do those line up?

I thought the same. The way I figured it is that the Lomax-Stoner drama was gradually swept under the rug, and his reputation then turned into being some eccentric cog in the degree-machine the university was becoming.

I don't know anything about clinical definitions of autism- apparently it's a really broad, inclusive spectrum of symptoms- but he was extremely introverted, one could argue pathologically so.

It's arguable that he was a bad husband and father. I'm confused why you think this is a matter of objective fact than subjective opinion.

It meant that the current crop of students at the university when he died don't remember him, not the students he actually taught.

>The son of his father is his father's son
Insightful, relly makes you think

are you unfamiliar with the term?

You're unfamiliar with my dick

haven't read, but why does he marry his wife in the first place if she's so bad? or is she nice at first?

they barely talk and get married pretty quick