I recently picked up Sarah Tomp's The Easy Part of Impossible from the library. It was tagged as psychological fiction that featured child abuse, so I knew it wouldn't be a light read, but it was also tagged with ADHD and neurodiversity. Those are the biggest reasons why I picked up this book. It's a relatively new book (published this past April), so I wanted to read it and see how neurodiversity was handled.
Frankly, I'm disappointed in this book. I struggled with the star rating on this one - 2 stars felt a bit harsh because I did like the main characters (Ria, Cotton, and Maggie, at least) and the plot was decently written. But there were several areas where the handling of the neurodiversity left a lot to be desired.
For those who are unaware of this book, here's a quick summary: Ria is a diver who's on track to compete at the Olympics before an incident at a meet ruins everything. Her coach kicks her off the dive team and she has to learn how to live life without diving - and without Coach Benny controlling and abusing her.
With that said, let's look at why I gave this book 2 stars. I've broken this down into two categories - the good, which would've brought the score up, and the bad, which outweighed the good enough to bring the score down.
THE GOOD
Ria learning to navigate a world she's barely participated in before was interesting to read, and was portrayed well. Anyone who's ever had their diet strictly controlled would behave much like she does right from the beginning - having no idea what junk food is good or 'right' to bring to a party, or even that there are so many choices. Her relationship with food is skewed as a result of more than a decade of diving training. When handed a cup of beer, she "immediately wondered what food group beer fit into. It tasted like pure carbs." And later, when her dad mentions that she didn't eat breakfast, her response is that she "had enough calories".
She also had drastically inaccurate expectations about the party. From the book: "This was nothing like the picture of a party she'd had in her head. Instead of beautiful people dressed in fabulous clothes having a wildly hilarious time, it was a bunch of kids standing in the dirt sipping from red plastic cups. Of course no one had set up a table for gourmet hors d'oeuvres, or even pointless potato chips."
Due to her previous schedule with diving and meets, Ria has a modified school schedule that leaves her afternoons free for practices. Now that she's no longer on the swim team, she finds herself with a lot of empty hours to fill. One day as she goes running to fill those hours, she comes across Cotton, a friend from her childhood. They rekindle their friendship, and it's through this that Ria finally comes to terms with the fact that Benny is abusive. Eventually the two become romantically involved, and near the end of the book Ria finally stands up for herself and refuses to take Benny's abuse anymore.
I was glad to see that it didn't turn into some poorly contrived redemption/forgiveness arc. I wasn't sure how it would turn out, and not knowing is the primary reason I kept reading, even when other issues were handled poorly. The only thing that would've been better about this ending would've been if Ria had not only come to the realization about the abuse, but also if she'd had a realization that she didn't deserve any of it, and that Benny was entirely in the wrong. The climax of that arc was primarily an "I'm not hiding your secrets anymore" declaration, but there's no point where Ria acknowledges that he was the one fully in the wrong. Her thinking throughout the earlier parts of the book is centered on "he did it to make me better" and "we need each other", and even in the end she only says that he's taken something from her, and she's taking it back.
THE BAD
The story being told, the characters involved, and the resolution are what make up the 'good' category. So what's left? What makes up the 'bad' category? There aren't multiple issues; in fact, there's really only one: the handling of the neurodiversity.
Let's start with the most obvious: Cotton is clearly autistic (the author even confirms that in response to a question on GoodReads), and yet the word 'autism' is never once used in this book. They call Ria's ADHD exactly that, but they won't use the word autism.
Autism isn't a dirty word. Use it.
And let's look at the autistic character's name. Cotton. Cotton. Okay, so this is apparently a nickname, and his actual name is Connor, but that isn't mentioned until 200+ pages into the book, and it's only revealed in a throwaway line that makes no impact (and when I read it I actually wondered if it was a typo). Cotton is receiving an award, and the announcer calls him 'Connor' instead of 'Cotton'. But that's the only time the name is used. When Cotton is first introduced, Ria calls him 'Cotton', and there's no mention of it being a nickname. (EDIT: It's been brought to my attention that I did miss one other instance of 'Connor' being used: when Cotton meets Ria's dad, he introduces himself. "My name is Connor Talley. But everyone calls me Cotton." So that's something. Still, that's 100 pages into the book. A brief mention earlier on wouldn't go amiss.)
A name like that, when everyone else is named something like Maggie or Leo or even Ria (which is short for Victoria, by the way, and that's clear in the book) is very othering. Intentionally or not, it marks the character as different. And for that othering to be used for the one autistic character isn't a good look.
Now, to be clear, Cotton isn't the only character with an unusual name. There are two others: Flutie and Jelly (whether these are also nicknames or not is unknown, as it never comes up in the book). So okay, Cotton isn't alone. That would actually mean something, if not for the fact that all of these unusually-named characters were in the same family. Flutie, Jelly, and Cotton are siblings. So again, it's very othering. It sets the family apart as different.
Beyond that, there's the issue of how his autism is handled. In terms of behavior, it's mostly fine, but there are a couple of exceptions. Here are some examples:
--"Just because I ask doesn't mean you have to answer," he said. "Sometimes I ask inappropriate questions. It's because I have poor social skills."--
--"I did not have a lot of friends in elementary school. I had trouble acclimating to and interpreting social nuances. But I remember you were always acceptable."--
Autistic people don't refer to themselves like this. Especially that second point. That reads like Cotton is quoting a clinical note from someone analyzing him.
Those are the only significant times Cotton says something like this. The rest of his characterization is pretty well done. But other problems abound, especially with Ria's reactions to his behavior early in the book. Here are the biggest issues I saw:
--"[...] Cotton circled Sean, looking at him from every angle, all the while his hand flapped against his thigh. She wasn't sure if he was studying him or performing some kind of ritual."--
--"She studied the way his fingers fluttered against his thigh, wondering if he was sending her a secret message and if she could crack the code."--
Again, the fact that the word autism is never used in the book does a huge disservice to autistic people and autistic rep as a whole. To anyone who has experience with autism - whether they're autistic themselves or not - it's obvious what Cotton is doing in both these scenes. It's called stimming, and it's a totally harmless behavior that impacts no one but the person doing it. This could've been a great teachable moment; not just for Ria, but for readers too. It could've been a way for Ria to realize that Cotton was autistic instead of just "weird" (yes, that's in the book too), and if Cotton had felt comfortable explaining it to her, it could've been a huge step in the development of their friendship/relationship.
These examples aren't the only ones; they're just the worst ones.
The lack of proper autism rep is my biggest problem with this book. It would've been so easy to just do it justice, to talk with actually autistic people about how they wanted to be represented, and then to follow through on that. But that isn't what happened here. And how the neurodiversity was handled as a whole is what prompted the rating it received.
I wanted to fully enjoy this book. I was excited to see more neurodiverse characters. I appreciate that an attempt was made to tackle a lot of difficult subjects, but unfortunately the negative points outshine the positive ones.