#it's so odd bc it really is a Uniquely upsetting experience. i feel like it's somehow tapping into my ocd tendencies

[panspaming]

Don't mind me I'm giving myself therapy in the tags

[theunconcernedembalmer]

what’s the issue with elisop? is it just bc you hc aesop as ace? im so concerned by seeing ppl adamantly opposed to mlm/wlw ships but im also genuinely curious about why you dislike it and other lgbt ships so much lol

hmm. that is a strong accusation, n i find it just a bit odd. are you new here? or perhaps you are taking personal offense at my dislike towards a favourite ship of yours and using the lgbt argument as moral high ground?

whatever the case may be, i thank you for asking. if u r truly looking for an answer, its below the cut n it is very very long. mind u these are all my personal opinions n i am in no way policing how others enjoy ships. just in case this wasnt clear; i dont wish to start discourse on this blog, especially since my takes are probably... unpopular.

firstly i would like to address the “disliking lgbt ships” bit, because this has very strong implications in itself. i have nothing against lgbt ships. i enjoy them, even. if the two characters have chemistry between each other, i ship it. however, the moment characterization is broken for the sake of romance, i lose interest. this is generally my stance on ships in general, n this applies for both straight n lgbt ships. 

the ships themselves are fine. however, i do have issues with the ship dynamics, so ill let u in on that.

i want to touch on mlm ships in particular; i believe u are familiar with the top/bottom dynamic that is rampant in these kinds of ships? (i wont deny that this dynamic can be found in other types of ships, but for arguments sake i will be focusing on gay ships because i feel that this occurs more commonly here) its such a popular dynamic that is prone to stripping the personality from one if not both characters, only for them to be reduced to being dominant/submissive. for a character to be pigeonholed into a stereotypical category based on... preferred sexual positions? its just downright insulting, never mind the larger more problematic implications of it. top/bottom is not indicative of someones personality, by the way. flattening multi dimensional characters into these stereotypes is so so so insulting.

unfortunately this is The Most Popular portrayal of just about any gay ship around. ive seen it being used everywhere in so many fandoms n it just about becomes apparent to me that ppl come to stories looking for a Ship. not the stories, nor the characters, just a ship. while id like to say theres nothing wrong with that, keep in mind not everyone is just looking for 2 characters that look pretty next to each other. if i ship something, i see interesting n meaningful interactions between 2 characters, which is so often not the case once u bring in the top/bottom dynamic. why is it so popular? because somehow this is what ppl like from a gay ship n hence it sells. ppl want the drama, characterizations be damned. ppl want to see the big kiss that happens in the end, n maybe the sexy parts that come after. characterizations be damned.

so u can say im a little wary of gay ships when they cross my feed. hell, as a joseph aesop shipper i see this trope everywhere n im pretty disappointed as well. small tangent but i feel like this is the reason why zh0ngli n ch1lde is so popular in g3nshin. i try to see the appeal, i really do, but after a long while of analyzing their respective characters i dont think they have as much chemistry as ppl think they do. dont even get me started on how incredibly ooc they make either of these very interesting n unique characters in ship portrayals. all because of the top/bottom dynamic that ppl want to see. i say this for that particular ship, but this is pretty much the case for a lot of ships out there, n the latter part is painfully true even when the 2 characters do have potential between each other. ill say it again im disgusted by the blatant disrespect to the characterizations if all ppl ever want is 2 pretty puppets to mush lips together. cos thats what theyre essentially reduced to this way.

n its so obvious to see when an artist subscribes to this rhetoric, because u can so clearly see it in the way they draw their characters. the “top” generally has sharper features to go with their “dominating personality”, while the “bottom” has disturbingly softer, feminine, dare i say sometimes child like features “to submit”. n thats where the uwu soft gay trope comes from, i believe. which, in case u still dont know, i hate with a burning passion.

so again for ppl with impaired reading comprehension, im fine with ships, including lgbt ones, but the moment u break characterization for the sake of the ship, im not that okay with it. u want to do it for a short crack comic? fine. but if thats the only way ur portraying the 2 characters then im immediately wary of ur content. ill still look at it cos usually the art is really good, but im very very wary. so im not “adamantly opposed”, just very critical of how the ships are being portrayed. if other ppl want to enjoy their ships like that, sure. just dont expect me to join in on something i dont agree on.

.

now id like to address not shipping “because i hc aesop as ace”. for ppl who are new to the blog (hello there), im an ace in a romantic relationship, so thats definitely not the reason i dont ship elisop. its more of being in a relationship has largely shaped my views towards romance as a whole. even before i met my boyfriend, i hated the romance genre in stories n media. most of it comes off as incredibly forced, especially those love triangles they seem to love putting into teen novels. thats one reason why i stopped reading when i was younger, but i digress.

did i partake in shipping when i was younger? i did. for a gay ship too (if anyone really wants to know, its kurotsukki from haikyuu. at least this was one that i can remember, i was mostly working on my 20 odd ocs for the longest time). i also used to write little short romance ficlets that i never posted anywhere cos i hated (n still do hate) my writing. but writing romance when u dont have experience was really just a way of projecting n probably a way of coping for myself, not that i knew at that time. but after i actually started a relationship with my boyfriend (whom i love n cherish a lot thank u very much), i began to see how much all these have skewed my views towards romance n have actually done some harm to our relationship. the bullshit that the general media feeds u constantly doesnt help in the slightest either.

quick topic shift to elisop in particular (about time, right?). i already stated that i only ship characters if i sense chemistry between the two personalities, n if u have seen the part where i dont ship elisop then u must have seen how agonized i am over not being able to have a concrete personality for eli. that is the main problem i have with elisop: eli does not feel like a solid character to me. n that is a huge problem, because if he doesnt have any defining characteristics besides being mild n nice, then he can be whoever i want him to be. (i have done this in my exorcist comics, i will admit this. n the fact that i can just do that... it really does not sit well with me personally.)

n that is dangerous.

back to young me doing lil ship things. i think its also pretty safe to say when u really do ship 2 characters, chances are u kinda really relate very very hard to at least one of them. that very quickly can turn into projecting, n shipping therefore is not “exploring the relationship between 2 characters” n it becomes “my preferred dating simulator 101″. of course this isnt always the case, but at least it was for me, n subconsciously it might be for lots of ppl too. n since this is ur mental playground, u call the shots, n there is no consequences if u slightly (or even entirely) alter one or both personalities to fit ur desired narrative. n u wouldnt even notice or know, cos ur blind to ur own biasness.

we bring our perceived notions into real life, im sure u know that. so when ur partner does not become that perfect knight in shining armour, or when they get upset at things that u do (which is a very normal thing by the way), n u think (very subconsciously), That isnt what my otp would do, something is wrong here (nothing is wrong, actually its just ur skewed perception of a stable romantic relationship). why wouldnt ur otp do this? because u are both halves of ur otps, there is no hidden secrets between them (apart from the pining part but thats irrelevant), n again they have been altered to fit ur preferred narrative. 

a real relationship requires a lot of communication between parties, because newsflash, liking someone doesnt mean that u have to like every single thing they do, they will make mistakes n it will hurt u, n guess what, the reverse is also true. if u do go with absoutely anything that they would do with 0 objections whatsoever, ur not crushing on someone, ur idolizing them, n that power imbalance is detrimental to a relationship. these things are not obvious to ppl, especially when the whole climate is hell bent on getting into romantic relationships by a certain age or some bullshit. communication is key n is pretty much the only way to solve relationship issues, because the other person has a lot that u r not seeing n vice versa. as similar as 2 ppl can be, i doubt u can have 100% the same thoughts on all things. i dont make the rules.

so in ur mental playground u focus on the fluffy parts, maybe there is communication, but rarely is there any meaningful conflict. thats unrealistic, n if u bring that mindset to an actual relationship, thats not going to end well. i say meaningful conflict, because yes, generally u shouldnt have conflicts with ur significant other. but inevitably when ur with each other for long enough, u will realize that there are habits that u must change in order to be with the other person. habits that are harmful to the other person directly, or harmful habits towards yourself that indirectly harm the other person. these are meaningful in a sense that if left alone, it will manifest into larger problems that will harm u, the other person n the relationship as a whole. its meaningful to the relationship.

all these is made even worse if ur neurodivergent. maladaptive coping practices, self sabotaging behaviours, inherent disabilities. all these must be adjusted n addressed. im so incredibly thankful for my boyfriend for being incredibly patient with me when working all these out, n it has not been easy for me to work on myself n all my problems, n im still not done working on them. this aspect is often not explored in romance in general (or properly), n there is a very good chance i would have still been stuck in the unhealthy mindset of “this isnt like my otp, maybe we’re not meant to be”. because loving someone is a choice. no one is made for each other, it is a conscious choice made between 2 ppl to make things work. this is how arranged marriages work, i am told, n i do see the appeal, not that it actually does appeal to me culturally.

special mention to the kurotsukki ship, cos from there i found a very, very good fic that explored their relationship before n after getting together, n it actually showed aspects of this problem in the incredibly slow burn of (at that time) 20+ chapters. it was just one fic (n a very good one at that, i believe it was called Leviticus), but it had a lesson i never thought i needed to learn, n learn it i did, with a lot of help from my dear. 

this is also probably the reason why i dont really want to delve too much into romance now. i know its a lot of work, n everything (mostly) that the media feeds u is really false advertising, but ppl eat that shit up n so it remains one of the most popular genres to date. im just very wary that if i do start on a romantic story, i want to be able to show it in a way like that fic did, the truths of relationships, because i dont want to make something that sells, i want to make something that meaningful to me, if a little indulgent. n that also includes being very careful in how the respective characterizations will change in a relationship. almost too careful now that i think about it, but its not something that i mind. i was never one for romance from the start, n now im very careful about shipping because of what happened to me persoanlly.

okay enough about me, lets talk about aesop. in any au u put the character in, the essence of the character must remain despite the change in environment. so lets say we have ur typical modern au. dead mom, check. shitty mentor doing illegal stuff? also check. autistic boy with social anxiety? we’re good to go. all these have implications on aesop as a character, n while ppl are aware of this, again the way they go about portraying it can go, in my personal opinion, very wrong. ppl who immediately woobify aesop completely because he has autism annoy me. ppl who reduce him to uwu soft boi cos he has social anxiety do not know how the disorder really works n as someone who has that i hate it to the core. ppl who do all these for the sake of ship have lost my respect. its insulting.

remember the top/bottom dynamic? not that elisop is completely free from that (even if i dont know much about eli, to put him in either one of those stereotypes feels very insulting to his character. i wont even say anything about doing it to aesop its so upsetting), but its not entirely made up of either. but now i want to introduce another trope i am very wary of, which is “i can fix him”. im sure u guys have seen the meme going around poking fun at this trope (for those who havent, its along the lines of “u can fix him? well i can be his worst nightmare”) n no doubt yall would have seen it n gotten sick of it in some forced hetero romantic bullshit. we have one damsel in distress with a saviour that solves all their problems just by existing n being romo with each other.

remember “my preferred dating simulator 101″? this is not mutually exclusive n from my point of view this is dangerously close to this trope. lets be real, if it was actually a thing that all ur deep rooted trauma magically disappears if someone were to waltz into ur life, we would want it. definitely. no painfully dissecting ur own problems n constantly facing them head on. real life states that this is not the case, but it will not stop us from dreaming. n so this trope is born n lives n will go on.

(finally) pulling aesop n eli into this, at least in my mind, u have one severely traumatized boy with lots of issues n u have this. nice mild guy who can be anything u want him to be. i hope u can see where im going with this, n thats the direction i see some elisop heading towards (i dont read a lot of elisop to be fair). if u came from my eli character talk, i mentioned that it is incredibly one sided. this is exactly what im talking about.

putting it all together in case u havent already, aesop is the damsel in distress, whose problems magically disappear because of elis godly kindness n little to no work on improving himself, n they lived happily n gayly ever after.

can u tell how much that does not appeal to me. 

never mind the butchering of character that inevitably happens somewhere somehow, the unrealistically perfect themes n implications of this trope makes me so viscerally uncomfortable. this is, of course, due to personal reasons, n i definitely see the appeal of this dynamic because i would probably have been interested in this once upon a time as well. but as i am now, with everything i have explained up there n everything i have been through, i would politely rather not.

n its difficult to think of another dynamic, because of how little i know about eli apart from him being this saint, which easily makes him a candidate for being aesops trauma panacea. never mind aesop rarely, if ever, does anything for eli as a character in return, n its so damaging to buy into this rhetoric, where a person like this who would solve all ur issues no strings attached exists somewhere in the world. they really dont. a relationship has to be mutually benefitting, or it will be draining n disastrous. maybe u say, Oh its nice to imagine it once in a while. n yeah, i agree, except once in a while is a little difficult to keep track of n that is sort of what happened to me. id rather stay as far away as possible from this kind of unrealistic fantasy, i just got this shit sorted out with myself n my boyfriend.

i have some other reasons, but theyre more personally problematic, so i wont go into them here. but this is mostly n generally why i do not ship elisop romantically. if u do, u do u, and have fun, but again dont expect me to join u. thank u for coming to my ted talk, this took a lot longer than expected.

[moiraineswife]

Do you have any Autistic!Rook headcanons you would like to share??

AS IT HAPPENS. I HAVE SEVERAL. BECAUSE THIS AS A CONCEPT DELIGHTED ME WHILE READING. HERE WE GO: 

(I would like to note that i am NOT reading this as a catch-all ‘fair folk in general are autistic’ bc a)- I don’t think they all do, Rook is specific and unique in this regard, and b)- I dislike the idea of just ‘all these inhuman characters are autistic’ bc icky associations with autistics then being inhuman...which we are not) 

ODD DISCLAIMER OVER. ONWARDS AND UPWARDS. 

Rook + Cat Metaphors: 

This sounds like an odd place to start but it was legit my favourite thing. Cats are fairly often associated with autistic people, as it happens, and are a generally more accepted symbol for it than...Other unspeakable things. Not getting into that, though, there were two things that made me die with delight...Which I will now explain: 

And yet looking at Rook Iimagined a cat proudly bringing its master dead chipmunks, only to watch thetwo-legged oaf lift these priceless gifts by the tail and fling them unceremoniously into thebushes.

Cats, like autistic people, generally have their actions/behaviours misunderstood. What they see as giving affection tends to be met with a reaction contrary to what they were expecting. See: above. 

Through it all Rook wore anexpression of aloof perplexity, as a cat might watching its favorite furnitureget moved about without its permission.

This one was The Best. Cats, like autistic people, typically have big problems with change, and can actually become genuinely stressed out/ill with changes in their household being made, such as moving the furniture around. Rook just being ???? ‘why are we doing this’ was too much. 

Then he strode right overand, in one smooth motion, insinuated himself into the bed next to me, facingme, under the covers, with the bold and unselfconscious vanity of a cat sittingdown on an open book.

I can’t explain exactly why this strikes me as being connected to an autistic thing but it just...It just does. and it’s another cat metaphor I deeply enjoy. 

Right, self-indulgent enjoyment of cat metaphors out the way, here are many more things: 

Difficulty Identifying Emotions/Trouble with Social Cues: 

“How can this be,” he said to himself quietly. That wasall it took; I gave a strangled sob. He crouched and scrutinized my face, whichI’m sure at that moment looked anything but attractive. “What do you require?”

Rook being baffled by the human notion of having to cook things is one thing, but the way he scrutinises her is more telling for me. Isobel gets caught up in thinking that she probably doesn’t look too attractive at this moment in time, but I’m pretty sure Rook is just trying to...Figure out wtf she’s feeling/how he should respond to this. And his response is deeply pragmatic. He doesn’t respond to her emotional needs/reactions, purely her practical ones. (There are a LOT of examples of this, I won’t go through them all) 

As an aside here, this is where I think Rook differs from other fair folk, and what tips him onto the spectrum. He isn’t human, so it’s reasonable to assume that human emotions are something he struggles with. But the thing is that the other fair folk who have experience with humans are much better at this than he is. The entire plot revolves around Gadfly knowing Isobel well enough to predict how she’ll respond to his promptings, so he can manipulate her into doing what he wants. 

Lark is also a good example of this. Before meeting Isobel, she had no contact with humans whatsoever. However, in a relatively very short space of time/very limited experience, she’s able to understand Isobel’s reactions/ways of displaying emotion and translate them to recognise other situations they should be used in. (She witnesses Isobel crying, understands it’s a display of sadness/upset, and correctly mimics it during her apology, because she understands that’s an instance where that emotion should/can be correctly applied) 

So the fair folk quite obviously have the capacity for recognising and understanding human emotions, as well as understanding how to respond to them. Rook, however, has definitely had contact with humans before, and has had enough of it to enable him to fall in love with another human before Isobel, but remains utterly hopeless at identifying her emotions. 

He drew in a breath. “I know it’s—wrong, that I care so much aboutthe pin. I can’t explain it. It’s—”

“It isn’t wrong.” My voice was so soft I barely heard myselfspeak. “Rook, it isn’t. It’s just human.”

This I’m saying is an example of Rook not being able to identify his own emotions (alexithmya) which is fairly common among autistic people. (Isobel’s response would be a tiny bit grating if Rook was canon!autistic, but given that he’s not, and given how ‘human emotion’ gets lumped together in this book, I’m dealing with it.) 

I whirled around. “Your blood did this.”

Rook stood watchingme, a conflicting clamor of emotions in his eyes: fascination observing myhuman response. Hope that I would find what he had created beautiful. Andbeneath that, sorrow, as raw as an open wound.

Desperation flashed across his features. He struggled to composehimself, but couldn’t. Finally he turned on his heel and put his back to mewith a dramatic billow of his coattails, drew his sword a few inches, and pretended toinspect the blade.

The way that he ‘observes’ her response, as though learning (which he likely is) consciously how to interpret her...But also the fact he has no idea how to process/regulate/respond to HIS OWN emotions, and that he retreats to something familiar to avoid looking at Isobel, and also to calm himself down. 

“You could offer to sleep on the floor, like a gentleman.”

He appeared horrified by the suggestion.

I love this bit, bc for all the fair folk are very much concerned with politeness and proper behaviour, this one is just...Totally lost on him. Like excuse u why would I offer to sleep on the floor Isobel??? The floor is hard and uncomfortable? How does this prove I am a gentleman? How is this polite??? Isobel I think this is impolite, that you would suggest I sleep on the floor. Do you not like me Isobel??? Do you not want me to be here?? Isobel?????? 

“And I’m not certain you’re in any state to protect me,” I wenton, sensing a lost cause. “Just now you were almost assassinated by a teapot.”

“Isobel.” Rook looked at me gravely. “Isobel, listen. The teapotis of no consequence. I can defeat anyone, at any time.”

“Oh, is that so? That’s the truth?”

“Yes,” he replied.

 I love the teapot line, you love the teapot line, we all love the teapot line. But I just...love the way that he talks. The pattern of it strikes me as an autistic thing. Just the way that he talks. And the very simple answer that he gives ‘yes’ it’s just a kneejerk thing, he doesn’t even think about it. (I know fair folk have to tell the truth, but that doesn’t mean that they have to answer questions like this) 

Especially when this one is definitely rhetorical. Because she knows full well that he’s speaking the truth, because he can’t lie. But this is another missed social cues thing: Isobel asks a question, Rook answers it. 

“Have you ever stopped to think that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should?”

His eyes narrowed. “No,” he said.

 Same thing here. 

Comfort Objects/Stimming: 

He patted at his chest in alarm and then ducked to hunt throughthe wildflowers. This wasn’t the leisurely search of someone who’d lost apocket watch or a handkerchief. Rather, heclawed at the ground with a wide-eyed desperation that could be inspired onlyby the loss of a priceless and irreplaceable treasure. When he found it, hegripped it tightly in his hand. He moved his thumb to the hidden clasp. Butthen he stopped himself, remembering I was there, and started to put it in hispocket instead.

My heart hurt for him. It was painful to watch Rook reduced to this over something so small. He cared moreabout that pin than most people cared about everything they owned in the world.

I know the raven pin has sentimental significance because it was a goodbye present from his lost love, but this just reminds me of the panicked search for a lost comfort object, something which a lot of autistic people have. (Especially with the way his thumb moves towards the clasp even after his found it, which could definitely be a stim, because it’s clearly a habit he uses to soothe himself)  

Speaking of stimming...

His hand had wandered to myhair, and he spread it out on the moss, combingthrough the strands with his fingers until it gleamed as straight and smooth asit could get. It seemed impossible that someone who had lived for hundreds of years and hunted fairybeasts for sport could find this entertaining, but his expression wastransfixed. 

That’s definitely what this is. 

“What a lovely bird,” Irepeated in a syrupy voice. “Yes, you’re the loveliest bird.” I stroked hisback. He made a pleased muttering sound in his breast. Soon his smug silenceindicated that he was quite content to remain as he was, so long as I continuedmy praise.

and this tbh. 

Literal Thinking: 

“Rook,” I said, trying to keep my voice steady, “before I get up,you have to promise to never touch me again without my permission.”

“I can touch whomever I please.”

“Have you ever stopped to think that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should?”

His eyes narrowed. “No,” he said.

“Well, this is one of those things.” I saw he didn’t understand.“Among humans it’s considered polite,” I added firmly.

A muscle jumped in his cheek, and his smile had faded. “Well, thatdoesn’t sound in the least reasonable. What if you were being attacked, and Ihad to touch you to save your life, but I couldn’t because I needed to requestyour permission first? Lettingyou die wouldn’t be polite.”

“Fine. You can touch me in that case, but every other time youneed to ask.”

 I really love this bit. She knows he doesn’t get what she’s saying, so she rephrases it somewhat to something that he will understand. But I love his response even more. He understands what she’s saying, but he still doesn’t quite GET it. And his brain goes immediately, (and often), to practical thoughts. 

She puts this rule in place, and he immediately starts...Not looking for loopholes, but considering the practical problems that it might pose. What if they’re in danger and he has to save her life? She would never have considered this as being unreasonable, because she would expect him to adapt, and realise that is a situation when it’s acceptable to touch her, because of the risk it poses. But he needs her to accept that as a limitation, and see his way of thinking. And they reach this...Little compromise that weaves through the rest of the story. Which I like a lot. 

Before I could find my voice and ask him to set me down, hedropped me like a hot coal. I landed inthe wildflowers with an undignified whump. Horrified, I squashed my legs together, hunchedinward with my arms clamped over my chest, and stared up at him. He looked asaghast as I did.

“Why did you just—” I began, at the same moment he blurted out:

“You stopped being in peril, and I couldn’t touch you any longer!Are you all right?”

 This harks back to their earlier promise, and poses some potential problems in the literal thinking category because there’s fair folk no lying/keeping promises magic wrapped up in it. But I think it’s still an expression of the way Rook’s mind works. I’m fairly sure other fair folk would have been able to work around their promise by telling themselves Isobel was still in enough danger to merit them touching her (still being naked and vulnerable in the spring court) but Rook is just....Too literal for that. 

“A fire, to start with. Some . . . some branches tomake a spit out of, I suppose. Or maybe we could cut it up and skewer it? I’venever cooked a rabbit outdoors before.” I might as well have started reciting an incantation. “Wood,” Irevised for him. “Some kindling about this size”—I spread my hands—“and a long,thin, sturdy stick with a pointy end.”

“Very well.” He rose. “I will bring you your sticks.”

 This isn’t strictly literal thinking but goddammit I love the ‘I will bring you your sticks’ line. But it also is. Isobel reels off her instructions and he just gets up and off he goes to get her what she needs. No muss, no fuss

. It’s also an example of rigid thinking. Isobel gives him a set of clear, precise instructions, and he follows them to the letter. (And I can get this in with APD, and the struggle to follow verbal lists, given his confusion of her initial explanation of what she needs. Once she gives clear, concise instructions, which she also pairs with a visual demonstration of what she wants, he understands and obeys) 

He halted just as he was about to disappear, shoulders stiff.“Will that be all?”

A devilish part of me wondered how far I could push him. If Ipretended it was necessary for my Craft, could I command him to stand on hishead or turn in a circle threetimes while he prepared the hare? Only my empty stomach’s increasingly urgentdemands prevented me from having some fun at his expense. “For now,” I replied.

 She probably could have done tbh. Not to say Rook, or autistic people, are incapable of critical thought but it’s more...A combination of literal thinking, and the struggle with reading people’s intentions. Isobel knows about this thing, and he does not, he has no reason to assume she would lie about what she needs, and without any knowledge of the required steps involved in cooking, and also without the inclination to suspect Isobel of having any intentions that aren’t purely practical/are in any way malicious, he’d probably be inclined to do whatever she asked, see: ‘I will bring you your sticks’. 

Organisation/Piling: 

However, as I crunched afterhim through the brambles, which disintegrated at a touch, my eyes fell on theneat pile of twigs and leaves he had taken from my hair—and despite myself Ismiled.

I love this little detail, too. Because not only did he pick the twigs and leaves out of her hair, but he further felt the need to pile them up neatly instead of just dumping them on the ground as twigs and leaves tend to be. This one is a little stereotypical but it’s also not false (and is a thing i know I would unconsciously do as well, so you know...) 

Difficulty With Empathy/Responding to Emotional Upheval: 

Grief smashed through my final defenses like a battering ram. Igave a strangled sob, so tired I couldn’t tell if my scratchy, aching eyes owedthemselves more to exhaustion or tears.

Rook sank onto the end of thesettee. He hesitated, then peeled his coat off and laid it over me. It was warmand smelled of him. Overwhelmed by his gentleness, I began weeping again inearnest. He drew back in alarm, clearly thinking he’d made things worse.

“Er,” he said. He patted the nearest part of me he could reach,which was my foot. “I apologize for . . . that. If you wouldstop crying now,” he added, a trifle desperately,with a note of princely command.

 This was the part that officially finished me. He knows Isobel is upset, and that he should do something to help/wants to help, but isn’t quite sure what to do. He also misreads her renewed crying, assuming that he’d done the wrong thing in giving her his coat. And then we reach the foot patting which is just...A hilarious ‘rules gone wrong’ type thing (Internal Rule: Human is upset - pat the human, this makes them better. Application: *Rook pats Isobel’s foot* A+++ Comfort Skills) 

And it’s all topped off by ‘If you would stop crying now’ which is just....The most wonderful response to a crying person EVER (and also mirrored in the way he orders her to get control of herself when she’s laughing hysterically over the hare incident near the beginning of the book). The desperation is perfect too, it’s like, I know this crying is an expression of your upset, and I don’t want that to be the case, I don’t know what to do, it’s making me uncomfortable please stop I don’t know how else to help you. 

The confusion in ‘I apologize for...that’ is good too bc he’s like ???? Isobel ???? Isobel what am I apologising for????? Isobel I did the right thing ???? Isobel why are you like this I do not understand. 

(the princely command is amazing too, like, maybe if I give it as an order that’ll work. Like we have transcended comfort here, he tried that, that didn’t work, now he’s just moving on to other ways of dealing with a situation. Which is grand in a practical problem but...Not ideal when it comes to emotional ones) 

OKAY. I THINK THAT’S ENOUGH TO BE GOING ALONG WITH. 

TL;DR: Rook is my precious autistic bean and this headcanon improved my enjoyment of this book by approximately 10000% bc god bless characters I can relate to on this level tbh. 

((As a fun side note: I also read Isobel as autistic, and did so before I did Rook. I think if she wasn’t set beside Rook, this would be far more obvious, but it’s still there with her. And honestly, I’m tripping over hc rep in this book and I’m Delighted. BLESS U FOR THIS QUESTION))