I Survived a Lot of Edwards and Now I’m Team Bella

I met Bella Swan in the middle of 2008, when the anticipatory Twilight movie poster circulated at my school. I took her home and hung her on my wall, blacks and grays covering the coral paint near my headboard. She gripped the folds of Edward Cullen’s dark denim jacket. They both looked like teens, but anyone who’d read the books knew he was a vampire, ninety years older than her. Edward looked off to the distance, to abstracted danger, to the movie’s simultaneous bomb and success, too busy to think about anything besides how the woman—girl—at his side reinforced his being a man. 

But Bella looked right at me. 

She was familiar. She could be anything I wanted her to be. Chestnut hair and dark eyes, a soft glow. Blank skin blank face blank canvas, her skin fine-toothed paper. I was envious of her beauty. I wanted to bask in it. She was too sweet, and I was too young to have my own story. I looked to her for answers. She looked cold. I wondered what it would feel like to hold someone, to share their warmth. To be desired. I wanted to be the apple cradled in her hands.  

The text on the poster promised that nothing would be the same. 


At Hot Topic, past the racks with Jack Skellington’s face stitched onto black book bags, past the clerk who preened her electric blue highlights in the reflection of the body jewelry showcase, I found two rows of shirts. All sizes, all black, with white lettering: Team Edward and Team Jacob.

It was my freshman year in high school, and everyone was divided. People who hadn’t seen Twilight, people who had, people who didn’t want to care found themselves unwittingly subscribing to either side of the binary. I came to school with Edward’s name branded on my chest. I was in the minority. My friends, most of whom would go on to choose healthier relationships later in high school and college, chose Jacob. 

Over the next ten years, I chose a lot of Edwards. They were tall and short, monied and broke.

Over the next ten years, I chose a lot of Edwards. They were tall and short, monied and broke. They spoke Spanish and Italian and came from Columbus and Ft. Meyers and Perth. After the flowers and fine dining came a bounty of brooding, clipped responses, and slammed car doors. They showed up uninvited to my house. They held phone calls hostage with self-absorbed monologues or punishing silence. My friends and parents despised them. They all had charisma. They knew how to convince me that while it was forbidden to be with them, they were precisely what I needed. They knew how to convince me that I was special but also disposable. They lured me into the forest, called themselves Lion, and named me Lamb. The percarity was intoxicating. They knew I’d chosen Team Edward without ever needing to see my T-shirt. 

When I gave in and made them the center of my world, they gave up. When they said they loved me, they would disappear. Their skin did not shimmer. 

I chose Team Edward because Bella chose Edward. 


In 2009, First Boyfriend Edward dumped me so he could reunite with his ex-fiancée who lived somewhere in Michigan. I was 14, he was 18. Age wasn’t supposed to matter, but suddenly, it did. Of course it did. It wasn’t a 90-year age gap, but it was something. 

I locked my bedroom door and sulked like Bella did in New Moon, after Edward abandoned her “for her own good.” Breakup protocol called for me to delete our texting history, but I couldn’t bring myself to do it. Loss had my stomach bottoming out. I sat at my desk, which overlooked the front yard, and my questions yawned into the night. 

What had I done wrong? How had I failed? 

I convinced myself that this breakup would mean that I was now free to find my real, true match. I had to let it all go. My laptop screen glowed dim and blue. On iTunes, Paramore’s Hayley Williams mused on “Decode”: 

Do you see what we’ve done? 

We’re gonna make such fools of ourselves… 

Bella had found her Edward, after all, and so would I. 


Between the Edwards, there were the Rosalies. They were electric, beautiful, accomplished. They floated in and out of my life, suggestions made in a language to which I did not have the code. Toronto Rosalie liked to ask me to come to MAC with her to try on lipstick. Soccer Rosalie was from Montenegro, well over a head taller than me, with a full tattoo sleeve and Amazonian features. During her English tutoring lessons, I was always the one who got tongue tied. When I ran into Cheerleader Rosalie in a bar after high school, she asked how I had been doing, and I responded by promptly spilling an entire glass of water down my shirt. I wanted to sparkle for each of them. 

Toronto Rosalie and I were in Dublin when she let me kiss her on the lips. We were in a club called Dicey’s Garden, drunk on Guinness. She tasted like strawberry chapstick and malted barley. We smiled, sheepish, half-embarrassed that we had done it, that we had enjoyed it. We were friends, so we never spoke of it again. 

My mind could not write a happy ending for Team Rosalie, although I could feel her interest each time through the foggy haze of my self-denial. She wanted me, but she didn’t need me. There was no trap door behind her smile. My inability to interpret her openness, coupled with a heteronormative society that lacked the visibility of queer romance, was enough to let her iterations slip away again and again. 


First Boyfriend Edward came back after things didn’t pan out with his Michigan ex. It was a ten-year cat-and-mouse, between all the other Edwards. He often brought me to the bar and left me near the tap, making sure I saw him flirt with all the blondes who wanted a piece of his shiny new police badge. 

She wanted me, but she didn’t need me.

There was Writer Edward, who waxed poetic about Eros but was never interested in my creative writing, who took me into his arms after a steamy Miami evening in his bed, only to say, “I don’t think I could ever love you.” 

And of course, there was Abuser Edward. In a spontaneous moment of mania, he insisted on whisking me away to Venice for a weekend filled with a gondola ride and fine dining, only to lash out later, accusing me of being a “financial burden.” I put up with it, knowing that even if he was mad at me, that it meant he wasn’t talking to other women, which was his near-constant compulsion. Sometimes, on the phone he would say: “When I’m inside her, I’m thinking about you. Can you feel it?” 

Different faces, same name, same ending. 


In my senior year in college, I watched the Twilight movies with my friends. We all piled on the couches in the living room, boxed wine in coffee mugs. Everyone—my roommates, their boyfriends, and a few guys trying to become my roommate’s boyfriends—laughed at her, Bella for staying with a clown like Edward. 

This was the same time that I was compulsively checking my phone for a message from Abuser Edward, wondering what I had done this time to get the silent treatment. He lived in Australia, but we had met during my study abroad semester in Dublin. In the same breath Abuser Edward had been swearing he wanted to marry me—he’d even lived with my family for a month the previous summer—he’d claimed he needed to get back with his old girlfriend in Perth to “let her down easy.” I soon realized that this girlfriend hadn’t known that Abuser Edward was gallivanting around Ireland with an American ten years his junior for several months. I had become the Other Woman, growing dizzier by the second as I watched Bella spin through the seasons, alone in her bedroom. 

The same friends who were gently urging me to dump my abuser were now laughing with disbelief that Bella had fallen into an unrelenting depression, sitting in her room for months after Edward had disappeared from Forks. Their sensitivity for the situation evaporated as they fell into a harsh, albeit valid criticism, of the movie. 

Bella’s so ridiculous, what the hell? I can’t believe this. Who would ever do something so sad? Get over it, girl, move on. 

And I probably curled into my part of the sofa, feeling self-conscious, even though everyone’s eyes were trained on the screen. My heart had probably started hurting, a sharp pang had been the trend back then, and I wiped my palms on the legs of my jeans. But she loves him, I thought. She’s waiting for him. What’s so silly about that? 

I wondered if the thoughts my friends shared with the screen were the thoughts they shared in private, to each other, when I wasn’t around. 


Twelve years after its release, I would watch Twilight again in 2020, this time with a guy named Adam. After an agonizing breakup from Abuser Edward, I didn’t know who I was, only that I wanted to write. I moved from my hometown in Maryland to Miami, Florida to pursue an MFA in Creative Writing. Adam had used his miles to fly down from Maryland for a visit. 

After an agonizing breakup from Abuser Edward, I didn’t know who I was, only that I wanted to write.

The movie’s saturated grays and deep blues washed my West Miami apartment with uncharacteristic maudlin. Adam and I were still in the dating phase, marked by a respectful distance between us on the bed. Later I would find out he suggested watching the Twilight Saga because one of my college girlfriends told him it would get him points with me. It did.

We were at the point in New Moon where Edward is telling Bella that she shouldn’t leave her house. She plans to resist him and leave anyway, but doesn’t get far. The thin veil of protectiveness tears to reveal his controlling, obsessive nature. Somehow, he’s managed to deflate the tires of her 1953 Chevy. A snake twisted in my stomach. This scene hit differently from when I was a teen. 

I asked Adam which team he would choose. I realize now that this question was a test. Edward is toxic, he said, point blank. Besides, Jacob is better-looking. Just look at that hair. He ran a hand through his own black coils, which had sprung to life in the late summer heat. It was probably the queerest thing he’d ever said, and would ever say again.  

Right around this time in 2020, I started to read Stephanie Meyer’s newly-released Midnight Sun, which is really just Twilight, but retold from Edward’s point of view. In an ironic, self-referential twist, law-school dropout Glasses Edward had given me Midnight Sun as a gift. Sensing things were getting serious with Adam, Glasses Edward had started dropping poems in my mailbox every day for the past few weeks. He was “just happening to be in the neighborhood” with all of my favorite groceries in hand. He brought me to his apartment, blindfolded, to reveal his studio transformed into a bistro for two, complete with stringy-lights and a three piece tuxedo. Against his deep anxiety over phone calls, he had started ringing me when I stopped responding to his texts. 

As it had with any Edward, this one’s gallantry had broken away into the vampiric fear that his emotional supply was leaving him. So I silenced my phone and, with satisfaction on a sunny afternoon, pulled out his gift and started to read.

Too quickly, a shroud of dismay overcame me. I had expected the prose to be lackluster, and it was certainly that. But even still, there was supposed to be something magical going on. Not even my nostalgia could salvage my expectations for this book. The way Edward described first seeing Bella in the school cafeteria was wooden, even less than an object. She was like a granola bar half-chewed and left for birds to pick at the fragments. It was all about Edward’s hunger. Stephanie Meyer was selling the same insidious story. I could only stomach the first three chapters before I put it down for good. 


I made myself find Adam. I really did. 

In a rebellious fit against Glasses Edward, I thought of the nicest person I knew and dared to believe for a moment that I deserved someone kind. Adam came to mind, with his shy sideways grin and starry brown eyes. We’d met at a mutual friend’s birthday party six months before, but I doubted he even remembered me. We had nothing in common – or so I thought – as he was the founder of a non-profit internet service provider, and I was, well, me. I was close to broke, writing pages and pages of a novel that nobody else had seen. In spite of this, I asked a college girlfriend to set us up. And to my shock, he agreed to meet for a date. 

While walking together around the Baltimore neighborhood of Fed Hill – it was the middle of the pandemic and we kept a polite distance – Adam wouldn’t look me in the eye. Or look at me at all. Being so used to Edwards raking their eyes over me, I thought perhaps this was a mistake, that he didn’t even want to be there. It took a moment to realize he was trying to be respectful. 

He was kind to me, he asked questions, and actually, actually listened. I let him in. I told him about my Nana who was grieving the recent loss of my Pop Pop, about how my passions for Irish history and queer desire had made their way into my novel-in-progress. After a while I would sputter, wondering why the spotlight was still on me, how it hadn’t yet been yanked away for a self-indulgent monologue. I truly didn’t know how to continue, and attempted to remove myself to the sideline of conversation. But Adam held space for me, encouraging me to keep talking. I was baffled. I had no script for this. We walked and talked for eight hours and shared a pizza on top of Fed Hill. Below, the city twinkled quietly. 

It was normal. It was a gift. 

As an adult child of alcoholics, my neurological destiny had been written; a narcissistic, ego-driven Edward could sniff out my anxious attachment from miles away. I had been conditioned to look for thrills, to expect them, alongside the uncertainty. The headrush of the love-bombing, the bottoming-out from the emotional withdrawal. Edwards were a project for me to fix; they were damaged goods that I could cure with my unending love. My voice had become small. I covered my brittle confidence in eyeliner and a busty tank top. I saw in myself only what I could give — my energy, my body. 

But Adam is not an Edward. He is self-effacing and kind. Motivated and curious. And startlingly, unbelievably silly. He was the chaotic kid in school who had the messy backpack filled with loose papers. He was a running back for his high school football team. He’s a Runescape legend and knows how to build his own computer. He’s an uncle. He has a Greek tortoise named Buddy that likes to get massages with a toothbrush. He’s my best friend. Adam is not a mystery, he is not a trophy, he is not larger than life. He is life. 

We understand that Bella is nestled somewhere between the spaces of my ribs. That this is my story, and I am learning how to be the center of my own heart. We know that it’s my task, this work towards self-loving. We affirm to each other that a healthy relationship is the joyous third entity shared between two self-assured people. His hands are ever-warm, like the world under his skin is constant sunshine. 


Nearly three years later, Adam and I strike out to Forks for my birthday weekend getaway. We had relocated to Seattle six months prior; it was the only way we could convince his Muslim parents that we should live together, by coincidentally getting jobs in the same city on the other side of the country. 

For those first six months, we—meaning I—talked of visiting Forks. By the time we got our car onto the Kingston ferry, the trip was taking on the glow of a pilgrimage. February is the gloomiest month out here in the Pacific Northwest, and this trip was no exception: the forecast called for rain and gusting wind. Rows upon rows of bleak coniferous trees ebbed into mist. It was perfect, because this was the weather that vampires went to school in. 

I wondered how many of us end up marrying our Edwards because we don’t see any other path for ourselves.

Forks is a small logging town in the northwestern corner of the Olympic Peninsula. Bella wasn’t kidding when she said she “exiled” herself there to live with her Dad. Only in my research en route had I discovered that the Cullen house, and other notable landmarks, had been filmed in Oregon. When we got to Forks, the main street held fuzzy street lamps, under which black lifted trucks and huge vehicles with felled trees rumbled through an insistent rain. The Twilight fandom had breezed through this town and dried up after the series ended, leaving behind old posters in storefronts and a shuttered cafe once called The Twilight Lounge. Adam and I grabbed reheated carry-out pizza from the only open restaurant. We ate on a concrete bench under an awning, watching the mist. He joked, not without edge, that he might be the only brown person on the entire peninsula. 

Eventually we found Native to Twilight, the only fan store still open. 

Inside the store, beyond kitchy coffee mugs and signed posters and movie props for sale, there was a giant cardboard cutout of Edward and Bella on their wedding day. They stared at one another with a vacant sort of passion, and the fluorescent lights cast a synthetic glow around them. There they were, and there I was with Adam, foils of what had been, what could be. 

I wondered how many of us end up marrying our Edwards because we don’t see any other path for ourselves. I had seen firsthand how an Edward can masterfully distort reality to make leaving them feel like theoretical self-annihilation. But it’s all a selfish mirage, constructed from their own fears of abandonment and inadequacy. If we settle for the familiarity of hurt, what do we end up sacrificing in return—our dreams of safety and validation? 

I wanted to gently take Bella’s hands, and tell her to look, look at Adam, see how tender he is. There is no danger in his eyes, but a promise of adventure, yes, and of warmth. There is room for you here. It is possible. I wanted to take Bella to Hoh Rainforest in Olympic National Park, where the spruce and hemlock and cedar trees have shallow roots. It rains so much that they don’t need to dig deep. All they have to do is reach hundreds of feet into the sky, and trust the rain will come. 


On the drive home, the sky in front of our windshield is gray, the tendrils of low clouds hover over the evergreens that march up the mountains. No thunder echoes through the valley, but it may as well have, because it does in my mind. I scroll through Spotify and play Supermassive Black Hole for the umpteenth time, reliving the scene where the Cullens play extreme vampire baseball under the cover of a thunderstorm. 

Again? Adam’s guessing there’s a Twilight connection. He’s mildly mystified, and charmed that I can’t let these notes go. He knows this is more than a fandom. While I am bobbing my head to the song, his hand is a warm anchor on my thigh. 

I really don’t like Forks, he says. 

I laugh. I don’t think I do, either. 

Then Bella’s Lullaby is the next track to play, and the delicate piano notes drip like rain onto the hood of the car. 

I suspect the world will always need Twilight. In the years to come, Twilight will be a model for what not to do when looking for love. It will be a comedy of wooden acting and a poorly written screenplay, a time capsule of de-fanged nostalgia to share with friends. I will continue to learn from and laugh at Twilight, yes, but not at Bella—never at Bella. If I did, then it would mean I would be laughing at myself, at others who have been completely consumed by a toxic relationship. 

Edward and Bella, they failed me. They were supposed to meet me here, at the end of the world. They were supposed to grow with me, out of themselves. All there is, of course, is trees. And flat, cardboard characters. Adam’s hand is reassuring on my leg. I turn up the music, and open the window so the rain can tap my skin. 

But the trip to Forks wasn’t totally a wash. In front of the cutouts of Edward and Bella was a registration book, where fans could record where they were visiting from, and of course, which Team they were on. My heart sank as I flipped through the pages. Not a single person in hundreds had written they were for Team Bella. 

So I picked up the pen, set it to the next blank space, and did what I should have done fifteen years ago. 

I chose Team Bella. The sun is going down and the clouds steadily darken. Perhaps, in a way, Edward and Bella had met me here at the end of the world. This music is mine, this romance is mine, I re-write it with every re-visiting. I tell Adam, which is to tell myself, all the ways they got it wrong. The rain doesn’t sting, it’s a blanket of mist over me. In spite of them — and perhaps because of them — I’ve found something deeper, richer, than twilight.

The Many and Various Uses for Mayonnaise

The Many and Various Uses for Mayonnaise

One little pale fresh tennis ball of rain
bounces across my forehead. Fifteen-love.

I have very bad posture. An only somewhat
inquiring mind. But they tickle me

the many and various uses for mayonnaise
considering there is only one use for poetry.

To lose money. To lose money. Toulouse Monet.
I think we just connected, you and I.

We’re inside of really quite a touching moment.
Balloons lost in the trees. Balloon fruit.


Rottenway

the rotten the rotten way you therotten
way you look in the morningthe rotten way
the bedroomrotten in the morning the rotten
bright wind the rottenbrightwind in the trees
the bright wind opens a gate in the trees

I am wide awake the rotten way you look the breath

the apple is a white dumpling the rottenway
you look in the bright wind morning opens

wide awake and whitesoft and blossomy

I close the window and really it’s a thrill

lopped off on the wet grass this bloody rose
your crown of moss your moss-wings

how dreadful to find out you’re awake
that it all carried on and without much fuss


The Lying Nude

When I say this view is bananas
you know I mean it’s gorgeous.
I tried pointing an app at all that sky.
My phone said result type: masonry.
You have a face like a face being torn to shreds.
I fucking love you so much right now
my hair hurts and there’s fancy mustard
where once upon a time I had a belly button.
When I say you you know I mean
thee. One fine meadow offers clemency.
The stubborn red tulips make keystrokes
in the paltry breeze and I think
whoever built the first arch was crazy smart.
Oh your dirty elbows. Hello.


I Was Too Quick To Call Out Cultural Appropriation

I don’t remember exactly when I first heard it but it was in high school sometime in the early nineties. I was listening to the radio after school but before my parents returned home from work. Rock music was the sound of my teenage rebellion. It was forbidden in our house so I had one ear on the radio and the other on the garage door. Suddenly I heard a familiar twang in an unfamiliar place. It was the distinct sound of a sitar, but in a rock song: The Beatles’ “Norwegian Wood.” How strange to hear the sitar alongside English rockers crooning about a long-lost love? As a first-generation Indian American who spent my weekday afternoons illicitly jamming to pop and rock while doing homework and my weekends at Indian classical music concerts, I found myself constantly humming the tune. 

But even that didn’t prepare me for when I turned the radio dial and blaring back at me came, “Ha-re Krish-na, Krish-na Krish-na, Ha-re Ra-ma, Ra-ma Ra-ma.” I couldn’t believe chants to Hindu deities Krishna and Rama, which I was accustomed to hearing in the sanctity of a Hindu temple or uttered by my grandmother in prayer, were being sung in a rock song. That was my introduction to the iconic hit song “My Sweet Lord.” 

In truth, I couldn’t yet admit to liking the song because it felt a bit like when white girl rockers like Gwen Stefani wear a bindi as a costume. Doing so, I felt, might make me a bad Indian, betraying my culture by falling prey to the wiles of a culturally appropriative yet masterful performer. Yet, this song oddly captured my essence—a little bit Hindustani, a little bit rock ‘n roll. And the lyrics about the singer’s search to find and be found by his “Sweet Lord” spoke to my own quest to find my identity and be seen in my totality as an Indian-American—a person formed by these two bold, and often opposing, cultures. It would still be a few years until I learned that one musician was behind the Indian influence in both of these songs: rocker George Harrison.

This song oddly captured my essence—a little bit Hindustani, a little bit rock ‘n roll.

These perplexing feelings would come rushing back to me during my initial interview with Grammy-nominated, Hindustani singer Lakshmi Shankar—the subject of my first book—when she mentioned that she went on a fifty-city stadium rock ‘n roll tour and sang alongside George Harrison. I was stunned. I had known Lakshmiji, as I affectionately referred to her, my whole life, had been to dozens of her concerts from the age of five onwards, and counted her amongst my most favorite singers. Her repertoire of Hindustani ghazals, thumris, and khyals were imprinted in my mind, part of the indelible soundtrack to my childhood. 

Lakshmiji had pulled out a cassette tape, during our interview, and had played me, “I Am Missing You,” a sweet ballad where she implores Lord Krishna to show himself, confessing she is missing him terribly. In all the years of listening to her music, I had never heard Lakshmiji sing in English. Yet, here she was not only singing in English but accompanied by a rock band—keyboard, saxophone, bass guitar, and drums! Lakshmiji flipped the tape over and a second version of the song played, this time her voice was accompanied by Indian instrumentation—santoor, bansuri flute, and tabla. She called “I Am Missing You” a “Hindustani pop song”—it was unlike anything I’d ever heard. 

Ravi Shankar, renowned sitar player and her brother-in-law, composed the song and none other than George Harrison produced it. “This is amazing, you’re a rockstar, Lakshmiji!” She laughed as I sat in disbelief wondering what else I didn’t know about this traditional Hindustani singer, close in age to my grandmother, always clad in a sari and a bindi. In that moment, I had a dawning realization that my assessment of George and his relationship to Indian music and culture might be, at best, incomplete, and at worst, unfair.

In truth, before embarking on writing Lakshmiji’s biography close to ten years ago, I had already made up my mind about George. I believed he and all the other white rockers of the late 1960s, casually strumming the sitar or playing guitar riffs inspired by Indian ragas on their rock songs, were cultural appropriators. They were indiscriminately poaching and misappropriating Indian music with little regard for its significance or context to Indian culture. For them, it served merely as a trendy “exotic motif” to spice up their music and image. 

Before embarking on writing Lakshmiji’s biography close to ten years ago, I had already made up my mind about George.

I wasn’t entirely wrong. For many rock bands of that era featuring Indian musical and cultural motifs, playing pentatonic scales while donning kurtas and malas cemented their appeal with hippie and counterculture audiences.

But as I delved deeper into my research into the journey of Indian music to the west and George’s role in this cultural transmission I began to realize that perhaps he had transformed himself from a cultural appropriator to an ambassador for Indian music as he evolved his own understanding and appreciation. My feelings and beliefs about George as an artist and as a person began to shift and evolve, as perhaps his own feelings and beliefs about Indian music had. Admittedly, it had certainly been easier for me when I could consider George solely as a cultural appropriator and cancel him in my mind. However, this experience had now complicated my thinking on cultural appropriation, making it more complex and nuanced, more gray rather than starkly black and white. 

I had been working in racial justice when I began to be haunted by the need to write the life story of Lakshmi Shankar, a Grammy-nominated singer who was the most prominent Indian female musician in the movement that brought Indian music to the west in the 1960s, a movement sparked by her own brother-in-law and frequent collaborator, sitar maestro Ravi Shankar. Yet, it was white rockers like George Harrison and the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, and The Byrds who received the most attention and accolades for making Indian music hip and cool, even when it sometimes came at the expense of stripping it of its cultural context. One of the more insidious ways that racial injustice works is by erasing the stories and contributions of those already marginalized by society. Through my biography, I had hoped to remedy what I saw as the racist and sexist historical perspective of white chroniclers who had left her out of the history books.

And as far as I had been concerned, George Harrison and his appropriation of the sitar and Indian music was part of this biased history. 


George, I learned, first came across the sitar on the set of The Beatles’ movie, Help! in 1965. Like many movie depictions of Asian culture at the time, Help! featured a problematic, Orientalist plot about the Beatles trying to escape the clutches of an Indian swami and his cult. George picked up a set musician’s sitar and began strumming it. Soon after, he would ignite a “sitar craze” by plucking out the indelible melody of “Norwegian Wood” (1965)—one of the Beatles’ most iconic songs—on the sitar.

At this stage, George was like most white rockers, who in their search for the newest sounds, was drawn to the exotic, mystical scales of Indian ragas and the tinny, harp-like sound of the sitar—a faraway cousin to the guitar. There’s no escaping the irony of cutting-edge rockers turning to a foreign musical tradition dating back hundreds of years to find their latest sonic trend. But in doing so, most of them didn’t bother learning much about the culture of its origin or the theory or techniques of Hindustani music, satisfied to just appropriate from the tradition to score their next hit song.

At this stage, George was like most white rockers, who in their search for the newest sounds, was drawn to the exotic.

Then again, this wasn’t surprising given that both The Beatles and the Rolling Stones had appropriated the sounds of Black musical traditions, including the blues, soul, and gospel, in creating their own “trademark” sound. And history rewarded white artists including The Beatles and Elvis by crediting them as the “inventors” of rock ‘n roll rather than Black soul rockers, James Brown, Little Richard, or Sister Rosetta Tharpe. 

In my mind, cultural appropriation by white artists and erasure of indigenous artists by white cultural gatekeepers were twin blades working together to diminish indigenous cultures and artists and their role in the world. Hence, irrespective of his artistic intent, I viewed George as an appropriating white rocker who fetishized and capitalized on Indian musical motifs.

George went on to compose other songs as part of the Beatles repertoire, which reflected his growing interest in Indian music, including “Love You To” (1966) and “Within You Without You” (1967). The Indian influence on these songs is boldly evident from the melodies, to the instrumentation, to the metaphysical lyrics inspired by Hindu philosophy. In fact, Indian musicians from the Asian Music Circle, including a sitar player, tabla player, and others play on these tracks. Also boldly evident is the erasure of these Indian artists given that none of them are credited in the album liner notes. 

What is more emblematic of bald-faced cultural appropriation than the biggest rock band in the world using indigenous musicians to create their distinct sound while erasing them from musical history?

I needed to know, was he an appropriator of Indian culture and music or was his relationship something more complicated?

But as I delved further into my research for Lakshmiji’s biography, I also found myself falling more deeply into the wormhole of George’s music, becoming obsessed with trying to discern George’s true motivations. I needed to know, was he an appropriator of Indian culture and music or was his relationship something more complicated? Something harder to label?


Even as I labored on my own biography seeking to lift up the story of an overlooked Indian female artist who helped bring Indian music to the west, I couldn’t completely deny that the Indian-inspired songs composed by George and recorded by the Beatles had helped bring Indian music to legions of new fans. Appropriative or not, their interest in Indian music and culture, helped set off a broader cultural curiosity and hunger which would have a lasting impact in the west. 

But perhaps more is revealed by the impact Indian music had on George. It became clear to me that experimentation with Indian music helped George find his voice and served as inspiration for him as a composer and lyricist in a band where Paul McCartney and John Lennon were understood to be the de facto songwriters and singers. Just as importantly, his exploration of Hindu spirituality helped him make sense of the world and his purpose amidst his helter-skelter ascent to fame and fortune.

In his memoir, I Me Mine, George talks about the influence on his songwriting of Indian ragas, which are more like musical moods than the key signatures of western classical music: “… it really did help me as far as writing strange melodies and also rhythmically it was the best assistance I could have had.” And he went on to elaborate, saying, “It seems to me that for a certain type of writer, it is not so much what he feels or stories about what he is going through, but it is more like a craft. This Indian music we are listening to now is directly conveying the feelings of the player. So to try to write a song is, to me, more a case of being the vehicle to get over the feeling, of that moment, of that time.” 

In truth, reading George’s account of the impact of Indian spirituality and music on his life and music, I begrudgingly realized how much I related to his journey towards finding deeper purpose and meaning and to finding his own voice as a singer and songwriter. I only became a writer close to the age of forty, sparked in large part by my mission to tell Lakshmiji’s story. But to do this meant I had to get over the fact that despite committing myself to writing full time and to telling Lakshmiji’s story, I still didn’t see myself as a writer, and neither did many around me. I didn’t have the educational credentials of a writer or the experience, just a deep-seated desire to express my perspective on the world through my words.

My hypersensitivity around cultural appropriation was rooted in the fact that I came to writing after having worked in racial justice only to find that the literary and publishing realms were unbelievably undiverse and inequitable. Writers of color, including myself, were struggling to publish our own authentic stories because they were often viewed by gatekeepers as too niche, while white writers’ stories were framed as universal and culturally relevant. When Black and brown writers wrote of their experiences being marginalized, it risked being viewed as grievances, while when white writers wrote about marginalized communities outside of their identity and experiences, it was often hailed as heroic.

When white writers wrote about marginalized communities outside of their identity and experiences, it was often hailed as heroic.

But this was not my first encounter with cultural appropriation. I had found my way to yoga in my early twenties as it was growing in popularity across the country and globe during the late 1990s. I had come to treasure it as a practice that strengthened my mind and body, while connecting me to my culture and Hindu spirituality. At first, I was glad to see this aspect of my native culture find a place in American society but I soon became uncomfortable as I watched yoga be increasingly severed from its cultural and spiritual roots and appropriated and commodified by white, upper-class influencer “yogis.” 

My first yoga teacher was, in fact, white and approached the practice and teaching of yoga with great respect. But she soon became the exception. When a white yoga teacher, who had anointed herself with the name Parvati—the name of a Hindu goddess—fetishized my “brown skin” and “exotic name,” I abandoned yoga, only finding my way back to it twenty-five years later, amidst the pandemic. 


George’s interest in Indian music didn’t dissipate after “Norwegian Wood.” Instead, he craved a deeper understanding of Indian music so, he sought out Ravi Shankar, whose mastery over the sitar was earning him international attention. Ravi and George first met in London in 1966 and George asked Raviji if he would teach him the fundamentals of sitar and Hindustani music. 

George made trips to India—with The Beatles and on his own—during the height of his fame, in order to learn more about Hindu spirituality and Indian music. Explaining the importance of his relationship with Raviji as his conduit to Indian music, George said in Ravi’s memoir Ragamala, “(Ravi) was the first person who impressed me in a way that was beyond just being a famous celebrity. Ravi was my link into the Vedic world. Ravi plugged me into the whole of reality … The moment we started, the feelings I got were of his patience, compassion and humility.” But beyond this, George also valued Raviji as a close friend as captured in Martin Scorsese’s documentary, George Harrison: Living in a Material World: “Just to be able to be his friend is an honor and a joy.”

I couldn’t deny the power of George and Raviji’s enduring friendship and collaboration.

I couldn’t deny the power of George and Raviji’s enduring friendship and collaboration. Theirs seemed, to me, like an unlikely musical brotherhood between a rock star and an Indian classical musician, transcending cultural identity, a friendship based on mutual admiration and affection, rather than exploitation.


With the dissolution of The Beatles in 1970—a breakup that shook the whole world of rock ‘n roll—George was finally free to pursue his own musical interests, and he continued to follow his passion for Indian music and spirituality. His first solo album, All Things Must Pass, whose title itself refers to the temporality of life, a conceptual bedrock of Hindu spirituality, featured “My Sweet Lord,” a song unlike anything heard before or since, fusing the musical chanting of the Hindu Krishna Maha Mantra, “Hare Krishna, Hare Rama,” with the sounds of Christian gospel through a refrain of “Hallelujah,” with rock instrumentation. The spiritually-focused song featuring a choir of Hare Krishna devotees, (at the time, Harrison was involved with the Hare Krishna spiritual movement), became an unlikely yet resounding hit climbing to #1 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 and staying in the Top 50 for four consecutive weeks before being certified gold by RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). 

Even today, more than fifty years later, I’m in awe that George could create a rock song centered on spirituality rather than romance or desire, the stuff of most rock songs, one that included both Christian gospel and Hindu chants, and have it become the most popular song in the country. 

George knew he was taking a big chance in making “My Sweet Lord” but felt it reflected where he was spiritually. “I wanted to show that ‘Halleluja’ and ‘Hare Krishna’ are quite the same thing. I did the voices singing ‘Halleluja’ first and then the change to ‘Hare Krishna’ so that people would be chanting the Maha Mantra – before they knew what was going on! I had been chanting ‘Hare Krishna’ for a long time and this song was a simple idea of how to do a Western pop equivalent to a ‘mantra,’ which repeats over and over again, holy names.”

My understanding of George’s musical legacy, however, would once again be complicated by appropriation when I learned that George ended up being sued for plagiarizing “He’s So Fine,” a 1963 hit song by The Chiffons, a Black, all female group. The judge found the musical themes of George’s “My Sweet Lord,” and The Chiffons’ “He’s So Fine” uncannily alike and George was eventually found guilty of “subconscious plagiarism.” While the judge noted that he didn’t think George had set out consciously to plagiarize, it still constituted plagiarism. 

George had to pay more than $1.5 million in damages and the case haunted him as a songwriter and musician.

George had to pay more than $1.5 million in damages and the case haunted him as a songwriter and musician. “I wasn’t consciously aware of the similarity between ‘He’s So fine” and “My Sweet Lord’ when I wrote the song as it was more improvised and not so fixed, although when my version of the song came out and started to get a lot of airplay people started talking about it and it was then I thought, “Why didn’t I realise?’ It would have been very easy to change a note here or there, and not affect the feeling of the record.” 

When I thought more about the case and its outcome, I wondered if perhaps white artists, like George, can grow so used to appropriating the sounds of marginalized cultures, that perhaps they start to subconsciously believe that those sounds are their own or, at the very least, they’re entitled to them.


Raviji approached George deeply distressed about the death and suffering from the war engulfing Bangladesh, homeland of his musical guru, Ustad Allaudin Khan. As a Bengali, who shared a language and other cultural aspects with Bangladeshis, Raviji wanted to put on a concert to raise funds to aid the people of Bangladesh and hoped George might participate. Instead, George responded by taking the reins, inviting an incredible line up of rocker friends including Bob Dylan, Eric Clapton, Ringo Starr, Billy Preston, and Leon Russell. 

George composed and performed a song “Desh,” about how everyone can and must find a way to help the people of Bangladesh while Raviji performed his own original composition, “Bangla Dhun” alongside master sarod player, Ali Akbar Khan, who was Ustad Allaudin Khan’s son and Ravi’s own brother-in-law, accompanied by his favorite tabla player Alla Rakha. The August 1, 1971 show sold out so quickly that organizers added another show on the same day, which also sold out.

The recording of the landmark Concert for Bangladesh featuring a chock full of rock ‘n roll heavy hitters and performances by George and Raviji ended up winning a Grammy for Best Album of the Year. But just as importantly the Concert for Bangladesh, itself, raised millions of dollars in aid for Bangladesh, becoming the model for future rock benefit concerts, including 1984’s Live Aid and the ongoing Global Citizen concerts. 

Burned in my mind are the images of emaciated Ethiopian children playing on loop over a soundtrack of “Drive” by The Cars.

Detractors may unilaterally frame efforts like the Concert for Bangladesh and Live Aid as the work of “white savior” rockers. It’s true that organizers, who were overwhelmingly white, often promoted these events using “poverty porn,” problematic images and rhetoric, which tended towards reductive portrayals of countries like Bangladesh and Ethiopia in paternalistic and monolithic ways, emphasizing poverty and destitution rather than acknowledging their cultural richness or the complexity of the crises they faced. This is evident in the stark cover image of The Concert for Bangladesh vinyl box set, which features a beleaguered young Bangladeshi child beside an empty plate. 

My father was born and raised in Bangladesh, a country so often overshadowed by its neighbor, India, so George’s monumental, even if imperfect gesture, holds particular significance for me. Although I wasn’t born in time to witness the impact of the Concert for Bangladesh, I remember watching the live telecast of Live Aid while staying at my parents’ closest Bengali friends’ home in London, en route to India. Burned in my mind are the images of emaciated Ethiopian children playing on loop over a soundtrack of “Drive” by The Cars. They reminded me of the malnourished children I witnessed begging on the side of the roads during our trips to India. My friend and I felt compelled to scour her parents’ house for spare change to donate. 

While it’s undeniable that the framing of these events smacks of cultural arrogance and insensitivity, I wonder, is it not a different type of cultural arrogance to summarily dismiss the life changing impact these musical events had in raising awareness and lifesaving funds for often ignored regions of the world? Ultimately, through the Concert for Bangladesh, George and Ravi, demonstrated how friendship and music can be forces that change our world for the better and provided a model for future humanitarian endeavors by artists.


George created his own record label, Dark Horse, and was busy working on pushing out his second solo album of the same name. He had launched his label with the vision of putting out records by eclectic artists he loved, such as Black gospel singer Billy Preston and an ensemble album by Raviji and fellow Indian classical musicians, including Lakshimiji. 

But George went further. He approached Raviji with the radical idea of doing a combined, cross-cultural tour for his new Dark Horse album and Raviji’s Music Festival from India ensemble album.  

As I immersed myself in researching the 50-city Dark Horse tour, reading chronicles of it in Rolling Stone and elsewhere, I found myself desperately wishing I could have been a fly on the wall for this breakthrough musical event that brought together both of my cultures. It’s especially uncanny and poignant that this tour was launched November 1974, the month and year I was born. Whenever I wonder what was happening in the world as I arrived into it, this is the event I come back to, time and again.

Raviji, Lakshmiji, and several of the best Indian musicians set out on a cross-country tour alongside George and his stellar rock ensemble, including the likes of singer Billy Preston. I was mesmerized by the behind-the scenes photos Lakshmiji shared with me, including a photo of the chartered plane George had custom emblazoned with an “Om” symbol. Snapshots of Indian musicians in their saris and salwar kameez rehearsing and hanging out with rock musicians clad in mostly bell-bottom jeans and t-shirts. I paused when I came to a tender photo of George and Lakshmi hugging each other. 

She talked to me about how George had been a kind man with an “Indian soul” who took such good care of all of them and how she had loved feeding him her home cooked dishes on his visits to India. Lakshmiji was both one of the most talented musicians I admired as well as one of the warmest people I knew and I felt compelled to reconsider George through the lens of her deep affection.

George, a chief villain of my story, had unexpectedly become one of its unlikely heroes.

Some critics weren’t kind in their assessments of the tour, the Dark Horse album, and George’s voice, which had been strained from working furiously to complete his own album and produce Ravi’s ensemble album. They saw the Indian ensemble as an exotic and unnecessary distraction for American rock fans who were itching to see George perform, especially since he was the first Beatle to tour the U.S. since their break up in 1970. 

When interviewed mid-tour by Rolling Stone, George offered his sanguine take on some of the criticism of the tour: “At every concert,’ he said, ‘something good has gotten across to the audience. There’s been bad moments in each show, but I mean it doesn’t matter, because the spirit of everybody dancing and digging it. And if you get 50 drunkards who are shouting, bad-mouthing Ravi or whatever, … you get 17,000 people who go out of there relatively pleased, some of them ecstatic and some of them who happen to get much more from it than ever thought …”

Why had George undertaken this grand endeavor of a cross-cultural tour, the likes of which had never been attempted before, putting his own musical reputation and resources at stake, if not to promote Indian music and musicians and to demonstrate the power of musical collaboration? 

I had envisioned the chapter in my biography of Lakshmiji about this breakthrough era when Indian music made its way to the west as a chance to call out white rockers like George who had appropriated Indian music for their own artistic ends. But then, George, a chief villain of my story, had unexpectedly become one of its unlikely heroes. When I close my eyes and think of that legendary tour, I have a vision of Lakshmiji clad in a sari, her serenely smiling face anointed with a large, round bindi, standing next to George in front of a mass of screaming fans, their voices soaring in unison.


Ever since Lakshmiji played me that cassette tape of “I Am Missing You” and I learned of the remarkable cross-cultural Dark Horse tour, I’ve grown more and more confounded and fascinated by George. It’s true, George seemed to have begun as a cultural appropriator but I believe he transformed into one of the most passionate and dedicated cultural ambassadors for South Asian music and culture through his words, his deeds, and of course, his music. 

George was someone who brought people and cultures together. This was evidenced by the range of performers at the historic Concert for Bangladesh in 1974 and decades later at the 2002 “Concert for George,” which marked the one-year anniversary of his death, where his son Dhani and Ravi’s daughter Anoushka performed. And it was obvious at George’s posthumous Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony concert in 2004, where Prince, the great Purple One, himself, paid tribute to George with the most epic guitar solo to George’s Beatles ballad, “While My Guitar Gently Weeps.” 

These days, I often have George’s music on rotation, whether on digital or vinyl, captivating me with his melodies and inspiring me with his lyrics about the temporality of life, the essentialness of love, and the belief that periods of difficulty and darkness often precede those filled with joy and light. His songs have never been more relevant and comforting than during the recent pandemic. In 2020, during the harrowing days of the pandemic’s peak in New York City, one hospital began a tradition of playing George’s uplifting “Here Comes the Sun,” as they wheeled discharged COVID-19 patients through their lobby and into the waiting arms of family and friends, after long and frightening recovery periods. So, it’s fitting that “Here Comes the Sun” made history recently by becoming the first Beatles song to hit one billion streams on Spotify, beating out iconic songs from McCartney and Lennon.

Sometimes as I listen to his music, I allow myself to imagine if I had come of age as a teenage girl when The Beatles burst on to the stage. I can see myself swooning over George, “the quiet Beatle,” especially during his hippie phase, with his gorgeous long, brown, locks and stark cheekbones making him look part rock god, part Indian ascetic. 

I admit, George has frayed my intellectual resistance; he has changed my mind through his music and his life. Yet, the irony is not lost on me that it was my deep dive into researching the life of an overlooked Indian female musician that opened me up to understanding how a celebrated white male rocker’s relationship to my own culture transformed and blossomed in ways that brought the world a bit closer together.

I’m less interested in erasing or excusing George’s acts of appropriation, but instead more interested now in seeing them in the context of his own evolution as a person and as an artist of his times. George’s life and work has offered me a new, more complicating lens, for examining and revising my own understanding of cultural appropriation while reaffirming my belief in transformation, that one can start out a cultural appropriator, and then if open to listening and honoring the voices of a culture, one can evolve into a cultural appreciator. George sang of how “all things must pass.” Just as they can emerge into existence, they can evolve. And, so can we.

Justin Torres Re-Maps Queer History

Justin Torres’ much-awaited follow-up to We The Animals, Blackouts is a wandering conversation between an unnamed young queer narrator and Juan, an older man on the verge of death in a decrepit palace in the desert. At its center lies a book of sexology from the 1930s, Sex Variants: A Study in Homosexual Patterns. The book is a study of queerness and also an object of theft. The work, based on the research of writer and nudist Jan Gay, was appropriated to pathologize and “cure” homosexuality.

Torres retakes the Gay’s findings, and fills in the homophobic erasures with redacted pages from the book, illustrated works by Gay’s partner, Zhenya, and old photographs, with a foreground frame that is a remix of references including Juan Rulfo’s Pedro Páramo, Kiss of the Spiderwoman, and much more. The fragments are exhilarating in their seemingly tangential transitions (from a surreal scene out of Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire in real time to Voodoo Macbeth via Edna Thomas, who features in both and also in Gay’s study as “Pearl”) and linkages that forms a collaged, intimate (one family photo of a couple and their baby is “A personal image from a personal collection”) re-mapping of queer history. High concepts aside, the book is also hilarious. The narrator meets the literary dimes Juan drops in conversation with awe-filled purity: “…beyond quoting from Elizabeth Bishop’s ‘Visits to St. Elizabeths,’ which I misheard as  ‘tell the time of the wretched man that lies in the House of Bedlam…’ and misunderstood to be a command; I thought Juan spoke to me of himself.”

The book’s dialogues apparently occur in multiple dimensions at once; in the characters’ past, present, and future; in and with other books and art; and most elegant of all, the reader. In a scene after Juan quotes extensively a passage about loneliness, “quaint homiletic posturing,” and reading memoirs from Kathleen Collins’ story “Interior” in Whatever Happened to Interracial Love? the narrator makes a connection to his own life and his presence at the Palace. Juan’s comeback, which ends the fragment, is “Oh? I thought this was a story about me, not you.”

I first met Torres when he came to a literary festival I curated in New Orleans to discuss We the Animals in 2013. Of the many illuminations he dispensed on panels, I remember most his wisdom about losing inhibitions: sing ten Whitney Houston songs in a song out loud and in your underwear before you sit down to write. Everyone’s (including the National Book Award judges, who put Blackouts on the shortlist of the 2023 prize before its pub date) favorite writer crush and I spoke about winking, reading, and growing into a gay literary tío.


J.R. Ramakrishnan: I am looking at Alexander Chee’s blurb about this book being a wink as it passes. It’s 1001 winks! How did it all start?

Justin Torres: I think you’re right about it being 1001 winks. I’m going to steal that and use that! That is one of the places that I started, which is this idea of a knowingness one has about the past and the broader connections to queer history. The narrator is in search of that knowing. I started with this Sex Variants: A Study in Homosexual Patterns, which I found when I was working in a used bookstore. I just knew I wanted to engage with that. After We the Animals, I was working on a horror story collection or a novel about a sex worker in his twenties in New York, but I lost that manuscript when I left my laptop on the train. There were the little pieces I had from that; from there I wove together the narrator, who’s living this life, and is lost in it, and from another man, who is much older. They’re in dialogue with each other, and the book itself is in a dialogue with itself.

JRR: I was re-reading Pedro Páramo again and in Susan Sontag’s introduction, she says he threw pages away for years.

JT: Yes, I read that he got rid of a lot! You have these moments that are difficult to put together but when you do start to understand the puzzle that Rulfo is building, it is really gratifying and brilliant. I wanted to do something similar and I’m not somebody who’s really interested in writing historical fiction. And whenever I tried, too much of the present got involved in trying to write about the past. So I just got rid of all that and emphasized the problem of being incredibly in the present and trying to write about the past, and really just bumping up against all these gaps in these erasures. I came to this textual engagement with the past that’s full of holes, instead of trying to write something very smooth like Wolf Hall. I enjoy those books, but I could never do it myself.

JRR: There’s a lot of sex, and then there’s the intimacy of the narrator and Juan, which is a friendship maybe. But, you say, they’d only known each other for a very brief period in a mental institution before the long conversation of the book.

JT: In a mental hospital, time has no interruptions. You are cloistered in silence, and the hours seem to stretch forever. Juan shows up and sits with the narrator and engages when he’s ready to. There’s an intimacy that develops under that pressure and alienation from your own life. This can be both incredibly magical and unforgettable. The narrator is at a point in his life where he is really using his sexuality to ingratiate himself with people. In the second encounter, he’s a different person altogether. He still wants to parade himself in front of Juan but it’s not the main point of their relationship. The sex is probably still there but their relationship is something sweeter.

JRR: Their conversations are about reading in general, and maybe the whole book too is about reading, literally and also in a deepest sense of being able to read life. You have that fantastic epigraph: “…human beings reveal themselves in whatever they read and write.” Then you have Juan making fun of the narrator and telling him that he doesn’t need to memorize passages, while Juan is quoting voluminously from all art!

JT: I had so much fun writing the character Juan because he is so literary and I am not. I’m not that person who can carry full quotes in my head. Yeah, I don’t have that Rolodex of reference points that some people can access so quickly. I really admire that. I love that you use that word “reading” because there’s so many connotations to that word. That someone or something can be read can mean a lot of different things, and it’s a real necessity to be able to read situations, read the world around you, and look for the subtextual. Certainly for queer communities, you have to be able to look to read and understand the subtext; the things that aren’t immediately relevant. The book is so much about reading absence. There are so many literary references and the children’s books [by Zhenya Gay] which get read for the subtext of what they have to say about race relations and queer childhood.

JRR: Can we talk about your endnotes? They are rather unconventional and at points, highly amusing while being quite educational overall.

After We the Animals, I was working on a book about a sex worker in his twenties in New York, but I lost that manuscript when I left my laptop on the train.

JT: I wanted the book to feel disorienting, in much the way that some of my favorite books are. My editor Jenna Johnson thought that there should be edited notes but she didn’t think the reader should know that they’re coming while reading. It made brilliant sense because it’s not the narrator’s project, he doesn’t quite know how to finish it, and he doesn’t quite know what he’s supposed to do with it, so the end notes are written from the perspective of the narrator. They’re not from me; they are fictional notes about facts. While they’re not going to explain everything, there are really clear arrows. If you’re interested in Voodoo Macbeth, I am giving you just enough to search it out. This is one of the things, honestly, that the book is about. When the narrator comes in and talks with Juan, he doesn’t know a lot. Juan is much smarter than him, and yet he’s also incredibly kind and generous. He says things that he knows are going to go over the narrator’s head, but he also invites the narrator to be curious. I love having people like that in my life.

JRR: I wanted to talk about the redactions and the erasure of history and you filling in the blanks, but you make a lot of links. I am thinking of the actress Edna Thomas a.k.a. “Pearl” (featured in Sex Variants study) and how you go from her scene in A Streetcar Named Desire to Voodoo Macbeth, and then how you draw a line from Jan Gay to the JFK assassination via Emma Goldman, with whom Jan’s father was in love.

JT: It’s one of the things that happens doing research if you’re not an academic, and you are not immersed in a tradition or have a purpose. Edna Thomas played the Mexican flower seller in the film adaptation of Streetcar. She is that connection to the study, in which most subjects were anonymous and untraceable, and she had a direct connection to Orson Welles, Tennessee Williams, and all of these other people. Jan Gay lived with Andy Warhol when he arrived in New York. The mind spins when you think of the overlaps and the ways in which people are connecting each other. When we look at history, we tend to separate the thirties from the sixties, when actually so many people are living through both times and they’re all touching each other, you know? Yes, I wanted the reader to have that experience of just being overwhelmed by the archive, but also being fascinated by these overlaps.

JRR: I want to ask you about queer lineages and families. I am thinking of when Juan chides the narrator for not knowing that Edna Thomas is “one of us.” Jan and Zhenya are parents of Juan for a while.

JT: I think about generations and lineages all the time. I’m of the generation just after the one that was decimated by the AIDS crisis. I grew up very, very aware and close to these people, who had lived through the worst. After it was over, there was this desire really to move on, which is natural. But it is a rupture and that I think that, unlike in heterosexual, normative family structures, where you’re just around people of another generation at that time and you hear their stories and you have this connection. With the lack of these intergenerational ties, it becomes incredibly important to actively seek out the parents, grandparents, and the ancestors. I want to understand what are the lineages, what are the inheritances, and what’s getting passed on to us.

JRR: Would you say then to the younger people coming to this book, you are something of a queer uncle? How do you think people will come to this book after We the Animals?

I want to understand what are the lineages, what are the inheritances, and what’s getting passed on to us.

JT: It’s been a while since We the Animals, and you know, I’m old now so maybe yes, I am the queer uncle now. I hope I’m not too full of it though! Some people might just give up on this book; not every book needs to be for everybody. I think the pleasure of We the Animals has to do with a sort of galloping lyricism and people were, “Oh I just read a whole book back-to-back and it’s been a couple hours.” It took me six years to write, by the way. There’s a pleasure in that immediacy that keeps a reader turning pages, but there’s another pleasure in the challenge of slowing down and figuring it out. For people who are into that slow burn, this might be the book for them. Maybe this is my more tantric work.

JRR: There is a lot of nothingness in this book, and it ends with the super clever riddles from Puerto Rican folklore, and you have the final, mysterious redaction in the end notes.

JT: At the start of the book, the narrator is having these blackouts, and just loses time. I believe it has to do with defense; sometimes it’s a protective gesture not to record what’s happening around you. You blackout and you are just not here. And then, there’s all the blacking out of the text, which is also a protective gesture to get rid of all this pathological language that’s been overlaid on top of these participants in this study from the 1930s and try to do something else with the text. The word “blackout” has connotations—blackout drunk or electricity grids failing—that are not necessarily the most positive. It’s the same for nothingness. Maybe not a very productive act but it can be a very protective one. Sitting with nothingness is the goal of Buddhism and yoga, right? To have an ambition towards nothingness and an acceptance of the inevitability of death, the final nothingness. We are all moving towards it, and Juan is trying to move with grace.

JRR: That 1001 winks comment I made earlier came from my reading of the book as a sort of Arabian Nights, and the stories being told as being life-giving or life-saving.

JT: That’s a brilliant reading and I think that the narrator sees himself as a kind of Scheherazade, right? He’s keeping both himself and Juan alive by stringing out these sexual tales, a bit of megalomania on his part. It’s the fantasy that I think that we all have about the power of stories to keep us alive. There’s also something really true about it also. The participants in Sex Variants study, like Edna Thomas and Thomas Painter and all the other anonymous subjects, do live on through this text in the stories that they told about themselves. So in a way, Juan is being kept alive by the act of the narrator putting together this book as well.

Juan is always quoting this Ezra Pound Canto: “What thou lovest well, remains, the rest is dross. What thou lov’st well, shall not be reft from thee.” I love this idea that if you invest in what you love, it remains. What you put effort into—the books, texts and literature—stays on but the rest falls away, which used to be true until very recently. A lot of things should be blacked out. A lot of things should succumb to the nothingness. Now, what you post, you are, on Instagram forever. It’s terrifying. But anyway yeah, I am sounding like that uncle now.

Betrayed by the City That Raised Me

“The Waiting Room” by Annesha Mitha

I sweat through my blouse in a police station in Kolkata, not far from the house where I grew up. Kolkata is an unkind city in July.

The officers look at me like a foreign object. I want to say, bhai, how are you? Or bhai, any news? But all my energy goes towards breathing: one moment, then another, then another. Each breath, each moment, is a kind of failure. This wasn’t supposed to happen.

I hold tightly to my passport. It helps to have an American passport. It garners an ugly sort of respect. And though it is the thought of a selfish person, I want these men to help me before they help anyone else.

I shouldn’t be here, waiting. I lost hours to panic when I should have been searching carefully, logically. When I realized she was missing I ran. I rushed through the stalls, asking strangers if they had seen a girl, a little girl, alone, my little girl, alone. I yelled her name, the syllables singing my tongue. Tears escaped me. I looked under tables and behind curtains, hoping beyond hope that my Mrittika was playing hide and seek, that her smiling face, smooth and mischievous, was just one step, one glance, away from me. In this way, I searched almost the whole market, losing time I could not afford. But the police assured me that it was their job to find her, my job to wait. The moment is unyielding, a pebble in the throat. Maybe fifty years from now I will think: if only I had stayed calm, searched methodically. If only I hadn’t lost my head. I lived in this city at least as long as these police officers have, with their barely-there mustaches. I know where a frightened child could be hiding.

July barrels through the city. It’s part of the reason I came, part of the reason I brought Mrittika. I wanted to remember what heat felt like. I wanted to teach her what sweat does to skin, how lucky she is to be cool whenever she wants. I knew she would suffer in Kolkata. At eight years old, she has never experienced temperatures like this, heat that sweeps headlines. She still thinks the word inside is synonymous with relief. I thought, like my mother thought before me, that suffering makes girls strong.

And maybe if I had been more careful in the market. If I had held her hand, even when she grew sweaty and restless, her fingers squirming in mine like a fistful of worms, even when she wrenched with the force of a wild animal, feral and unkind. Maybe if I had trusted the city less. I told her—you can explore the stalls next to this one, but no further. And come back to me in five minutes. She smiled and ran so quickly her shoes bruised the pavement. I knew that smile spelled trouble, but I pushed that sense of trouble back into my gut. I wanted her to like this city. I wanted her to like me. I watched her dart towards the long-nosed goats. I started towards her, I tripped over the curb, I picked myself up, I looked up, she was gone.

The quietest places in Kolkata can still be louder than American’s loudest. You have to listen differently here. In America, I could be talking to the dry cleaner, or picking out a new scarf, and all the while I would hear the butterfly sound of her footsteps in the glow-in-the-dark sneakers she had begged me for last Christmas. There were always, even in the most chaotic mall or the loudest highways, small pockets of silence, a way to listen to the world. I could hear the rustle of her summer dress against her scraped knees, or the open-mouth way she breathed when she was thinking very hard about something. And once I turned away from my errand, I would know, instinctively, which way to move my body so that our bodies would reunite.

But in Kolkata, sounds bleed freely into one another. There is no isolated breathing, only the combined breath of an entire block. Haggling drowns haggling. Metal drowns metal. Teeth and tongue and spit and all the sounds a person can make. Who could be prepared to witness this beautiful chaos for the first time? Not my daughter, a child of the suburbs. Maybe if I had prepared her.

I only looked away for a second, I told the police, and they smirked at me. They thought I was a bad mother, and were they wrong? I thought I could still hear her, but the sounds of so much living tricked me. My daughter vanished into the sound.


A woman walks into the station. She counts the tiles on the floor to keep from fainting or screaming. Her sari is green, slightly damp, and she holds the end of the transparent cloth over her face in what was either an effort to block the sun or a sign of modesty. I know from her hands that she has worked hard all her life. I know from the stretch marks encircling the soft pout of her stomach that she is also a mother.

She approaches the officer, who sits in the cold air behind the plastic divider. Her words come out quickly, and my eroded Bangla picks up only snatches. Her son, an entire week, gone. He seems interested until he sees her hands. His remaining interest is lost when she gives the age of her son: sixteen.

“A sixteen-year-old boy should be just fine on his own, shouldn’t he?” He looks cruel behind the flat plastic glass. The American passport burns in my pocket, but I know that he would have listened to me even if I were not American. I have soft hands, the hands of someone who was born with a powerful father. And though I am ashamed, I was glad that the police were out looking for my daughter, and not this woman’s son. Let every other child in the world be lost, I thought, only let her be found. It’s such a lie: that suffering makes us kinder.

The mother sits down on the other side of the station, a clipboard and pen clutched awkwardly to her chest. She looks at me with a strange sort of pity, and for a minute I wondered if the police officer had told her why I was here, what I had done. But then I realize that I am drenched in a horrible amount of sweat. Sweat: the first sign of a foreigner, someone whose body has become accustomed to the cold.


I hadn’t slept well last night, though Mrittika did. All night she snored softly next to me, rumbling awake only once or twice to wipe the sweat from her forehead. Children’s bodies sweat with grace; they don’t smell, or don’t smell of anything other than human. They are comfortable with the salt and shine. It bothered me, for some reason, that Mrittika was no exception. It bothered me that she didn’t ask for the air conditioner. Watching her comfort, I felt as though we had somehow switched lives: me, the awkward American, her, the confident Kolkata child.

When I was little, I liked pretending that my dolls were helpless and not very smart. I would teach them everything: what the sun was, how to walk. And then they would forget so I could teach them again. I secretly loved when Mrittika was helpless. Every day she doesn’t need me, I feel a sense of loss. Sometimes I think Mrittika is too smart of a girl. I miss her babyness, her soft, pliable stupidity. I thought it would return here, where she barely knew the language, forming words in a clumsy American tongue, but she was bright, brave, and though I should not have been, I was annoyed. Maybe if I was not annoyed.

I scolded her all morning. I scolded her for not folding her towel. I scolded her for walking too quickly down the stairs, to where my sister-in-law had prepared a breakfast of maggi noodles. I scolded her for not holding her grandmother’s hand, when we went into her bedroom to say good morning. Then, I scolded her for holding her grandmother’s hand too tightly.

She looked at me with anger so incandescent I wouldn’t have been surprised if she unhinged her jaw and swallowed me whole.

By the time we were in the autorickshaw on our way to New Market, Mrittika was full of rage, all fists and sweat and narrowed eyes. She looked at me with anger so incandescent I wouldn’t have been surprised if she unhinged her jaw and swallowed me whole. Instead, she scooted all the way to the other side of the rickshaw, which worried me, because it was close to the open window where the cars whooshed by. I remember being a child and being clipped by the side mirror of a car, nursing the flat bruise for months. But I felt guilty for snapping, so I said nothing.

I have never felt unsafe in New Market. I know the old stalls; the Jewish bakery, my favorite kati roll place, the Bhutanese woman who sells beautiful silver jewelry. So I did not take Mrittika’s rage seriously. I would get her a snack or a bangle. I would let her pet a friendly dog, as long as she used antiseptic wipes to clean her hands afterwards.

But in the market, she wouldn’t hold my hand. Maybe if she had held my hand.


The shadows lengthen. I watch the only scrap of street visible from my sticky plastic chair. My sweat has dried and crystallized, the sharp salt cutting the tender folds of my skin. There is a fan, but I sit out of its scope. I don’t deserve relief. I deserve the stickiness under my arms, between my thighs, every bit of discomfort this world has to offer, I deserve it.

A white man walks in, and everyone jumps. Whiteness is rare in the city of Kolkata, most of the tourists are drawn to Agra or Delhi or Goa. But still, some still have the false song of Mother Teresa in their heads. To them, the city is an endless wound, a place to pour your good intentions and never, ever run out. We could tell that this was one of those white men, a missionary with a cheesy Bible verse on the back of his shirt and a collar of sweat even thicker than my own. He filled out a form for his lost phone and left. The policeman said, in a stilting English, that they would contact him if the phone was found, and the American looked happy, as if he expected the phone to be found. He did not bother waiting.

A street dog ambles into the police station, shivering with age. He has a scrap of coconut shell between his worn teeth, and he spits it onto the floor and licks at it furiously, trying to coax the last few drops of sweetness from the husk. He has the same snout as our beagle back at home. The officer chases him away, but not violently, with an affectionate tap to the rump. The officer treats the dog with more tenderness than the mother, who still sits across from me, clutching her clipboard like a shield. The dog sighs and sits on the front steps, watching the street just as I am. He does not look at me, does not even turn to smell me. I do not smell of food or friendship. We look out at the street together.

I am looking for my daughter. I cannot say what the dog is looking for, maybe food, maybe nothing. He soon falls asleep under the umbrella of my gaze.


If we had stayed in the house, like my mother had asked us to. I haven’t called her yet, said those words into the phone, “Mrittika is missing.” She’s the kind of old that can’t tolerate heartbreak. She used to sleepwalk, tottering, as if by magic, on legs that couldn’t hold her in the daylight. Our concrete floors put an end to that. She fell one night, pulling down a bookshelf on top of her. Her shins broke, the white bone winking from a rift in her flesh. She didn’t wake up, but she screamed. She screamed and screamed until my doctor brother came downstairs and bandaged her legs and injected her with morphine, scolding her all the while. She’ll die before she walks again.

When I left for America fifteen years ago, my mother had strong bones and paper-thin wrinkles into which morning light pooled, so that in sleep her face looked like sculpture. She was aging well, “with grace,” as they say, her neck still long and straight. Her skin peeked through the cracks in her sari, soft and alive.

If I hadn’t left, I would have been able to cradle her through her aging. I would have been able to comb her silver hair, even as it fell away in my hands. Instead, news came to me in fragments over the phone, usually relayed by my brother. I learned of her stomach bugs and sinus infections, her reduced mobility, the way her spine began to shrink into her body after the fall. I learned of it all but I did not witness it, and it became so that I could not bear to look.

“Stay with me today?” she asked in the morning, when I pulled a cranky Mrittika into her room.

“We’re going to New Market,” I yelled in her ear. I talk to her by holding her hand, kissing her forehead, stroking her hair.

“No,” she said, smacking her toothless gums together, “stay with me.”

“We can’t,” I replied, even though we could. But you can’t spend forever with your mother. That was the logic that brought me to America, the logic that took me to the market this morning. Maybe if I had spent forever with my mother.


I know this street corner. I know almost every street corner. There. The place where, once, I spilled ice cream all over my school frock. Ma said no ice cream for a month and I cried. That’s where the street dog used to snuffle at me while I waited to cross. I kicked her once, by accident, and spent the evening crying in shame. No name, spots, skin red and cracked with mange. There used to be a man there, over there, selling Coca-Cola spiced with tamarind, which I always eyed but never bought, remembering my doctor father’s warning: soft drinks, built for addiction.

I grew up so slowly. I was thirty before I was married and still, in many ways, a child. I was still living at home. It was impossible, in those days, to be a woman without a husband. I tried my hardest to avoid a husband and so remained trapped in the amber of girlhood, untouched, uncurious, unobserved.

But my daughter has such an ease with the world. She is fearless. She will feel older than me in a few years.

Two years ago, my daughter had a seizure. She died, then came back to life, a moment of silence between her two heartbeats. In my panic, I couldn’t remember the number I needed most: 911. I kept dialing the India numbers, time blasting around me, I was a girl again, and who was this child I was holding in my arms? She could not possibly be mine, yet she was sick, a sick child who would die without me. I called and called, my voice landing nowhere. I felt like I was in Kolkata again. I could not understand that America existed, let alone that I existed inside of it. Eventually, my senses snapped back into place. The ambulance came. It was a fever, the doctor told me, her brain cooking in its shell. No brain damage, I was reassured, and it was unlikely to happen again.

After that, I noticed a troubling bravery in my daughter. She’d wander further away from me, into street puddles, and several times I had to yank her from the path of cars. I would yell at her until tears streamed down her face, but she would do it again, and again. Within a year she had fractured both wrists, but even the casts seemed like a game to her. She’d come back from school with both of them covered in kindergarten scrawl.


Two blocks from here is the kati roll stall where I had my first beef. My college friends and I, disillusioned with the stuffiness of our Hindu parents, ran there giggling after class.

There’s a version of Hinduism where you lose your faith the minute beef touches your tongue. We wanted to lose our faith, with the same thrill I’ve seen at Mrittika’s sleepovers, when the girls take turns running to the bathroom and screaming, “Bloody Mary Bloody Mary Bloody Mary” with the lights off, except we were so much older, thirty-year-old children. The Muslim shop owner recognized us and rolled his eyes—spoiled girls, he thought, seeking rebellion. He gave us the beef rolls, beef udder for the more adventurous of us, but with extra, extra spice, then burst out laughing as we squealed from the heat. We stuck out our tongues in a joyful defiance, and that only made him laugh harder. Our tongues were swollen, red.

I can feel the joy I had in this city slowly being rewritten, rewired. This isn’t the city where I grew up anymore. This is the city where I lost my daughter.


I wanted Mrittika to feel free. My mother filled me with stories of men stealing girls, driving them out to the countryside, raping them, leaving them there to be mauled by tigers, the remaining flesh picked clean by vultures. She filled me with fear of the rain, how it could wash me away, slide trees down the hillsides to the street, swell the Ganges’ large tongue, fill the car, freeze my tender skin. She filled me with stories of disease. The smallpox that blistered my uncle, in those days before the vaccine, the malaria that sweat the life from an aunt. The elephantiasis of the man down the street, his leg brutal and bruised, larger than his waist. How my father used to chase him down the street with a vaccine, promising the cure, but the man was more afraid of needles than he was of his swollen leg.

I didn’t want that for Mrittika. Instead, I told her about how, when I was seven, my cousin, the one with the telescope glasses (no, not the one who was mean to you on Whatsapp), bet that I wouldn’t drink street water. I did, my mouth wet and smiling. I didn’t tell her how I came down with typhoid, only that I won the bet. I told her about chai wallas on street corners, how you couldn’t replicate that exact mixture of sweet and spiced in America. How the city was so gray that each scrap of green—a tree, a leaf—came as a soft-spoken gift. How there are entire streets that love dogs, take care of them. Entire other streets that love cats, leave bowls of milk outside. I told her about the amusement park on the Ganga, the rides that swirled and bucked in the same cadence as the black waves. I told her about the food in Tangra, shrimps as big as my palm, fried and doused in chili paste. Tangy, crunchy, cauliflower. I told her about her grandmother’s food. Ilish maach with so many bones you had to sift through them with your fingers. Like searching for treasure, I said.

I told her about the monsoons, how they filled up the entire sky like the earth was only another room to be flooded. I told her how the kids would stream outside, clothes wet, sucking rainwater down their throats. I didn’t tell her about how, each year, the flooding became worse, the water circling city center, tilting the buildings inwards. I didn’t tell her that by the time her children’s children’s children are old enough to understand the world, Kolkata might not be here at all.

I wish now I had told her the horror stories, too, the ones that every city has. The murders and rapes and bridge collapses and riots. I wish I had kept her a little afraid.


Another police officer walks inside. He looks too young. He has the wringable neck of a chicken, and his mustache curls outwards, as if to swallow his head. He doesn’t look at me, but avoids me with a consciousness that makes me think he is here because of me, because of Mrittika. He whispers to the cop behind the window, who whispers back. They speak in a Bangla too low for me to understand.

The officer leaves again, stepping over the sleeping dog. He leaves pity behind. The pity is for me. I am a thing to be pitied. My phone rings. It’s my brother, wanting to know why we weren’t home, if his wife should prepare something for dinner. We’ll be home soon, I tell him, and yes, dinner. For both of us, I say.

A boy wanders in from the street, around the same age as my daughter. He’s wearing the shirt of an American rock band I recognize vaguely. He looks tiny in it, his skinny body wavering in the black cotton. The acrylic lettering is stretched and worn from washing. Before I can wonder who he is, what he wants, he walks up to the mother on the other side of the waiting room. She touches his shoulder, and he leans into her soft arms. They do not speak to each other. He has come to keep her company in her waiting. 

I think about the loneliness I feel in this moment, how it blankets all my memories in a soft and pulsating blue, how it seems to extend before and behind me in an endless sourness. I multiple that loneliness by ten, by twenty, by, as if I was a child again, infinity. That must be the loneliness my daughter feels.

I can’t stay still. It is obscene to stay still, waiting, when I could be searching, yelling, calling her name. I straighten, give the woman and boy a sad smile. I rush out into the street.


I had a choice. Marry that man, go to America, or stay in Kolkata, study horseshoe crabs by myself, wait to be married off or else remain—though it seemed impossible, in those days—single.

The day I left, I came to my mother’s room to hug her goodbye. My father and brother were cold against me, furious that I was leaving, furious that I was going so far. I didn’t care. It isn’t love, I thought, that they want me to stay and keep house, to cook and clean the same dishes and floors that my mother and grandmother and great-grandmother had cooked and cleaned before me. That’s not love.

My mother was the hard knot of shame in my stomach, the doubt in my dreams.

But still, I felt guilty about my mother, and I saved her goodbye for last. My mother was the hard knot of shame in my stomach, the doubt in my dreams. I wanted her to hug me tight, and to feel the weight of forgiveness vanishing between us. When I looked for her, she was burrowed under the covers, and for a moment I was shocked by her lack of movement, my constantly busy, constantly occupied mother, but then I realized that she was mending my father’s dress pants, the movement so known to her that she could do it amid a sea of blankets.

“Ma?” I said to her.

She only grunted, peering at the darting needle.

“Ma?”

Finally, she looked up. I drew closer, then instinctively held my hands out towards her. My mother liked to touch my hands, feel the softness of my unworked palms. She looked at me in a way in which few have looked at me since. The whole of me.

She touched my hands, picking at the purple fingernails I had gotten done in the salon, preparing for my American debut.

“What an ugly color,” she said.

What would have happened if I had let her disgust pull me out of my new, delicate life? If I had simply not gone to the airport? It was years before I saw my mother again.


I rush past the familiar streets of my childhood. Or are they familiar? They begin to melt, alley into alley, shadow into shadow. Is that where—no. But that must be—no. The map in my mind blurs. I didn’t realize how many of my landmarks had melted away over time, how many of them were organic, built to melt away. I am lost. Like my daughter, I am lost. I walk more, waiting for something to happen. Maybe the same forces that took her away from me will take me too, and we will meet at the bottom of the city like stray hair tangling in a shower drain. Maybe, if I walk long enough, we will turn up on the beaches of the Ganges together, the way that lost items do.

It’s dark now. Well and truly dark. And the dark brings the ghosts with it. I hate the thought of my daughter alone with the ghosts. I try to think of ways that she could be alright. Maybe she was waiting for a bus, fell asleep on the bench, would wake up any second, remember where she was, and find a pay phone, like she’d been told. But she didn’t have money for the pay phone. And she’s too young to think of the bus as anything other than a box that takes her places while her mother holds her hand. Or maybe she was wandering, one street corner away from a kind stranger who would ask, “Where are you going, are you ok?” Strangers in Kolkata can be surprisingly kind when shocked out of the heat, out of the quick-tempered days and countless errands. But you have to know how to speak to them, to say, hey, can you tell me which way to…no, I forgot the street name…the house is blue? To say, do you have a little change, I’m trying to find an autorickshaw?

Once, I saw a motorcycle wheel over a street dog’s paw, turning her bones into a bloody streak. The street ran to her, brought water to her panting tongue, wrapped her blood and bones in paper towels and trash bags, stroked her head. They knew she would die. The foot would become infected, and when scraps were thrown out the butcher’s window, she wouldn’t be able to catch them as quickly as the others. They kissed her small ears. They made her dying kinder.

But my daughter does not know how to speak to strangers. Even though she’s always bold, she’s still a little shy in her Bangla, she knows that it is weak. She hides it behind her tongue, preferring to communicate in the few English words that everyone knows. Yes, no, school, I don’t know, maybe, red, blue, dog, cat.


What was I thinking? The city sprawls, fourteen million heartbeats wandering in its dust and concrete. Did I really think that this could be mine, that it belonged to me at all once I left it? I pass by a street light, then another. A mother bathes her child in an alleyway. A broken neon light fills the street with a mechanical hum. From a balcony up above, I see a man smoking a cigarette, the cherry ember vanishing into his mouth. The ash dribbles down to mix with the dust on my shoe.

Mothers talk, sometimes, about an invisible line that connects them to their daughters. They talk about knowing in their hearts if their daughters are alive or dead. I search my soul, or the jagged shape that feels like my soul, for her weight. I find nothing, not even an absence. Kolkata was never mine. My parents never allowed me to explore. I was given permissible routes: school, pharmacy, father’s office. I didn’t know the city, I knew a bold line on its map. It was only afterwards, in America, that I allowed myself to believe the myth that the city was mine, mine alone. After all, Kolkata was not there to deny it.

Earlier, I had to give my daughter’s description. I’ve lost the habit of describing her in specific ways. In America I can just say Indian, I can say curly black hair and that’s it. Here, that description describes every girl.

All I wish for is the edge of relief. It seems like out of all possible pains the world holds, there is no worse pain than this. All I want is the possibility that I could cast this day into memory, no longer live in it, live wiser, kinder, hold her squirming in my arms.

My brother calls, lighting up the phone. He sends me a WhatsApp message, “???” I swat him away. I don’t exist outside of this moment, not until my daughter is delivered safely into my arms.


And it’s true that if I did not have a daughter, I would not be missing her now. I created this girl-shaped animal, and now that she exists, I will always be missing her. I love my daughter, I do. But when I was on that birthing bed, my own smells in my nose, everything white and red, the creature that would become my daughter separating my hips with her head, I thought that anything, anything would be easier than this. When she was put in my arms, a new door of loss came in my life. I nursed her, watched her, kept her from railings and potholes. I kept the door closed.

It’s been six hours since our hands last separated. Daughter, I hope that one day I’ll tell you about this, and you’ll laugh and maybe throw a pillow at me, chastising me for almost losing you. And I’ll laugh, too, ignoring the hurricane of guilt in my chest, because any amount of guilt is better than losing you. I promise. I promise because I love you so hard I will bring you to me. I love you hideously, I love you selfishly. My hideous, selfish love will wrench you out of the corner where you are lost, or out of the arms of those who would take you, I will float you into this street so that your little feet are in my lap, and you stand on my thighs, your head taller than me. Just like when you were little.

Or maybe not. Maybe I need to realize that love isn’t enough.

I see a blue light in the distance. It’s a police station. I squint—it’s the police station, the one in which I had been waiting. All this searching, and my body still knew how to form a circle. I hoped my daughter’s body, too, was traveling in a long loose circle, and very soon she would be back to where she began. The mother is gone, along with her son. Instead, I see a police officer perched in the waiting room, a small girl on his knee. They would have called me, wouldn’t they? Did I miss it? I walk towards the fluorescence, the late-night cars and rickshaws bumbling around me. The police officer shifts the girl from his right knee to his left.

And for a moment, I cannot tell if the girl is you or someone else. Her arms are thin, her hair curly, your arms are thin, your hair curly. Your nose—is it really shaped like that? There is a line of light in the station, and I know that after I cross it, everything will become clear. Features will snap into focus, and you, if it is you, will cry out in that beautiful, bell-like voice. But everything is frozen. I walk, and wait, and even though I have walked and waited all day there is no ease to these last seconds of waiting. Daughter, I will live in this moment until the day that I die.

Drown Out the Patriarchy by Getting “Hysterical”

Author Elissa Bassist is obsessed with the patriarchy. She once texted me, “BENNY needs to go pee, and I need to go tell him he’s a GOOD BOY for PEEING, which is TYPICAL PATRIARCHAL BULLSHIT.” 

Reader, Benny is a dog.

To read Elissa Bassist is to be in awe of Elissa Bassist. A self-proclaimed “aspiring witch,” Bassist’s powers are evident in Hysterical, her tragicomic memoir. Through a blend of narrative storytelling, research, and cultural criticism, she shares how a patriarchal society made her silent, which in turn made her physically ill, and how healing her body meant finding her voice. It is with this authentic voice–witty, indignant, pained, impassioned, and profound–that Bassist wrote Hysterical

In the introduction to Hysterical, Bassist writes, “Despite the rumors it isn’t so easy to just speak up. Since women are trained to disappear while being looked at constantly, we become our first and greatest critics and censors–so, speaking up for ourselves is not how we learn English. Instead, we’re fluent in Giggle, in Question Mark, in Self-Deprecation, in Asking for It, in Miscommunication, in Bowing Down. These are all really different silences–we speak, but exclusively in compliments (‘Your sexism is so well said’) and in apologies and in all ways right.”

Hysterical is a memoir of learning (to speak, to protest, to laugh at the absurd) and unlearning (objectification, self-objectification, silence).

In Google Docs, I asked Bassist everything I’ve ever wanted to know about how, when, and why we can turn tragedy into comedy. We discussed the myth of the suffering artist, the life-saving necessity of self-advocacy, how to improve archaic fairytale plotlines, and so much more.


Sarah Garfinkel: You begin Hysterical with a perfect “Rule of Three” joke—a comedy writing technique. But the joke introduces a serious topic: the beginning of your two-year illness. How can humor help us cope with trauma? And how might it allow writers to rewrite the narrative of impossible events?

Elissa Bassist: It happens all the time: you write something, then everything changes. Plot, events, characters, how you think, whatever was seen, forged, or felt. You can just sort of redo the whole thing. And jokes are the way in–by taking us out of trauma to help us process it. Joking is alchemy; repurpose a feeling like humiliation into a joke so that humiliation means nothing.

During one memorable panic attack—when I was refreshing browser tabs in a ritual of disappointment—I had a realization. From the hardwood floor, where I’d often drop to the fetal position in a pose of clinical depression to map out my funeral, I thought, This is absurd. My thought-spirals were bonkers. Like, I was envious that a baby got more “likes” than I did. Instead of think this, I could use it, turn my thoughts into “prose,” into “art,” into jokes, which is also a way to cope, with perspective, lightheartedness, and snot. As writers and people we have two options: amplify our truth or hide it. Hiding it has zero personal, public, or medical benefits.

SG: I love the concept of joking as alchemy. Humor can make harder subject matters easier to digest. Not the actual sexism/misogyny/patriarchy, of course, but the experience of reading about these systems of oppression. Without humor, the feelings of despair might engulf us. As Mary Poppins basically sang, “Just a spoonful of funny helps the hard stuff go down.” Would you agree with MP? Can comedy help us stomach reading about trauma and also write about it? 

EB: Mary Poppins nailed it. My mom also likes to say/sing, “When you laugh, the whole world laughs with you. But when you cry, you cry alone.”

People listen to a joke when they may ignore a sob story or criticism or an accusation. Laughter is an emotional reaction, and jokes trick people into hearing you, even into understanding you and what you’ve been through. Jokes get the same dark point across in a clever, entertaining way.

If you can’t say something straight (because it seems too preachy, saccharine, confessional, harrowing, or demented), then say it slant. Especially when writing trauma, we can’t always use its own words. The current words and depictions are violent and gratuitous, even trite and taboo, as if meaningless—yet they represent the most meaningful experiences. And reproducing trauma as it is is a downer and retraumatizing. So we must tell the same stories differently, with new words, new syntax—ordinary, everyday sentences can be altered, revamped, surprising—and with our own sense of humor to convey the shape and size of our singular experience.

I could not survive writing about what I write about if I didn’t make myself laugh about it.

SG: Your bio ends, “She is probably her therapist’s favorite.” For the four years I’ve known you, you have always been open about your overlapping experiences with mental health, therapy, and writing. Can you talk about when and how writing can be healthy or unhealthy?

EB: In my twenties I’d wanted to die because (I thought) I couldn’t write a book. I had a lot of stupid, shitty beliefs, like that wanting to die for one’s art was the meaning of life. And that if I had to choose between living and writing, then I’d choose writing. Since I believed in the myth of the suffering artist, I didn’t prioritize my health, as if I didn’t need it. While I did need all of the feelings to write, depression isn’t a feeling—it’s a disease to treat. When I was depressed, I just…had to be depressed. In the middle of a tragedy is not the time to write it. In the middle, you just have to survive it and get to the next inhale. Then, ten years later, you can turn it into art if you want. 

SG: If tragedy plus time equals comedy, then tragedy plus no time equals…just tragedy. And a need to prioritize healing. 

EB: That math checks out. 

SG: For me, the fear of not being believed about physical pain, or about having too many types of pain, has at times kept me from mentioning it or seeking help and healing. From your research, will you explain why we’re conditioned to keep quiet about pain in particular?

EB: We don’t want to be perceived as annoying or difficult or demanding or whiney or dramatic or overemotional or oversensitive. We don’t want to bother or alarm or frustrate or take up space or make a scene or “play the victim.” 

Also, in medical literature (and in engineering, design, politics, and everything else), the cisgender white male body is considered the human body, so white men experience pain but no one else does, and their pain and suffering represents and eclipses all pain and suffering, so uterine pain is unfathomable and “not that bad.” When “other” pain doesn’t count and should not exist, then why mention it or seek help? And isn’t there a better blowjob that you should be learning how to do?

SG: Speaking of sex, in an episode of Broad City, Ilana visits a sex therapist for a secret issue: she hasn’t orgasmed in six months. The session clarifies the issue: she lost the ability to climax after the 2016 election. The therapist comforts her and shares that since the election,“Orgasms have been down 140%.” You write about how rage and systems of oppression made you physically ill, and how you fought to reclaim your voice to release some of the pain. What advice do you have for other people trying to maintain their ongoing physical and emotional well-being?

In our culture girls learn silence, and women are routinely silenced. It’s just not cute to wear our hearts on our sleeves.

EB: Move to outer space where there is no news cycle. And when you have a secret issue, share it as soon as you’re able, with a sex therapist or other type of therapist or an acupuncturist. Sharing works. Anne Carson writes in her essay “The Gender of Sound” that in “Hellenistic and Roman times doctors recommended vocal exercises to cure all sorts of physical and psychological ailments in men, on the theory that the practice of declamation would relieve congestion in the head and correct the damage that men habitually do to themselves in daily life by using the voice for high-pitched sounds, loud shouting or aimless conversation.” Although men were treated for sounding like women (rude), the underlying idea is that to treat a problem you must treat the voice. Tell people your secrets. Scream. Vocalize. Use your voice to save your (sex) life.

SG: In your research, you learn anxiety and self-censoring is a part of girlhood. What should readers know about silence as a symptom of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder? And how does emotional pain manifest as physical pain?

EB: “Silence can be a symptom of OCD,” my psychopharmacologist explained to me, “in that you stay quiet, compulsively, because you fear, obsessively, that you won’t say things as they ‘should’ be said.” 

In our culture girls learn silence, and women are routinely silenced. It’s just not cute to wear our hearts on our sleeves. Plus, our words don’t seem to matter and our voice grates and our attitude incriminates us, so silence cures us of ourselves and cures the world of us. 

SG: In the book, you share your high school morning routine, which reminded me of my middle school morning routine, when I woke up early to straighten my curly hair every day. But one day I was running late and had no choice but to let the curls out, and several people assumed I had curled my “straight” hair. And then they COMPLIMENTED me on my curls. Which I’d worked so hard to heat-damage away. You write about “self-objectification” in Hysterical, which was a lightbulb moment for me. How do we unlearn it?

EB: Change happens first through awareness of how messed up everything is. I used to apologize to doctors for my unshaved legs, but after researching body hair—and writing about its bogus historical links to lunacy AND about how Gilette invented leg shaving to sell razors to women while men, their market, were at war—I stopped shaving my legs and apologizing for it. I’ve never shaved my legs “for me.” I’ve hurt my back while shaving; I’ve scratched my legs until I’ve bled 1-2 days after shaving; and I’ve been mortified by my own body. And for what? Capitalism? Or to be loved? By those who’d love me based on my leg hair and who can’t see beyond it?

Probably we should stop shaving if we want to. And delete social media. Or at least we can try to remember that our value is not in our hair.  

SG:  From your experience, what is your best advice for navigating our current healthcare system?

EB: My advice is to be the expert and authority on your own body. Which is easier said than done because being an advocate, an authority isn’t “nice.” Adrienne Rich calls it being “disloyal to civilization,” one that has been disloyal to us.   

SG: Yes–self-advocacy is so important, especially for those privileged enough to be heard. How will you share your stories in Hysterical to support those for whom it’s not yet safe to speak out or share their stories?

EB: To quote Adrienne Rich, “When a woman tells the truth she is creating the possibility for more truth around her.” I hope I’m doing that, not only by telling the truth, but also by quoting, referencing, and citing other voices, which gives others visibility and legitimacy while acknowledging difference.

My advice is to be the expert and authority on your own body.

In Hysterical I wrote from my own experience, which is not everyone’s, just as a man’s experience isn’t mine as a woman. But feminism isn’t women vs. men, for at least two reasons. 1.) Feminism means equal rights for all, 2.) Feminism does not mean “women” because “women” in our culture stands for “middle-class+ heterosexual cis white women.” White women writers like me must include perspectives other than our own to promote and lend authority to perspectives (and humanity) other than our own. 

So many voices remain unheard (suppressed, undervalued, obscured, erased), as if they aren’t required, as if they don’t influence equal rights, as if Black, Indigenous, and People of Color’s voices are marginal instead of central to feminism and feminist writing. I learned this from Rafia Zakaria book Against White Feminism: Notes on Disruption. My favorite quotation is, “The new story of feminism will be a different story from the one we know today.” Zakaria expands “feminist qualities” to include, “resilience…sense of responsibility…empathy,” and “capacity for hope.” 

Personally, I plan to keep changing and keep talking about change and keep calling out biased bullshit and keep brainstorming new stories.

SG: Let’s talk about brainstorming new and improved stories. In Hysterical, you expose the problems in the plot of the 1989 Disney version of The Little Mermaid. This is a pattern among plots with classic female protagonists. Ariel: Exchanges her voice for physical changes. Belle: Exchanges her freedom for her father’s and is how many of us learned the term “Stockholm Syndrome.” Sleeping Beauty: kissed awake, in a situation in which she could in no way give consent (again, not awake). We need new fairytales, or at least updates. Instead of marrying a voiceless mermaid-out-of-water, maybe Ariel’s prince gets scuba certified so they can date in the sea? What do you think? Should we overthrow the fairytale/damsel-in-distress canon?

EB: Yes, and I think you just started the rebellion. 

SG: You once said that when you moved to New York, you named your wireless network “Famous.” Will you share the backstory?

EB: I had a high self-esteem problem, which was really a low self-esteem problem. Also I believed in the law of attraction. And, like everyone else, I wanted to be famous and thought I should be for no reason. When I wasn’t famous after one month in New York, or after one decade, I needed a new goal and a new wireless network name. Now I’m humble and connect to Atria5c87b.

To Write Her Debut Novel, Molly McGhee Had to Leave Publishing

On March 11, 2022, Molly McGhee shared a resignation letter on Twitter. She was quitting her job as an assistant editor at Tor, despite the fact that her first acquisition, The Atlas Six, had debuted at number three on the New York Times Bestseller List. She cited “systemwide prejudice against junior employees, rooted in the invisibility of junior employees’ workload” among her reasons for leaving. McGhee wasn’t alone. That week, she joined a rash of junior and midlevel publishing employees making an exodus from their underpaid posts and the industry writ large. The Times responded to the #publishingburnout phenomenon with an article titled “When Will Publishing Stop Starving Its Young?”

In retrospect, these were among the first rumblings of a labor movement that has come to define 2023. As I write this, from Los Angeles, at the epicenter of Hot Labor Summer, multiple strikes have seized the public’s attention. Biden is moving forward with plans to cancel student loan debt. Executives who were, until recently, heralded as visionaries and geniuses—like Iger and Musk—are being recast as villains. Workers are having a moment.

Re-enter Molly McGhee. She’s back, this time as the author of the hotly anticipated Jonathan Abernathy You Are Kind. The novel’s eponymous protagonist is barely getting by until a loan forgiveness program offers him an unusual job editing the dreams of middle-class workers to improve their corporate productivity. A surrealist look at the twin burdens of crushing debt and exploitative work, Jonathan Abernathy is at times dark and even terrifying. Still, the book contains humor, heart, and maybe even hope for the future of the American workplace.

I sat down with McGhee on Zoom where she shared the influence of horror novels and bad jobs on her work as well as her thoughts on our debtor system and the current state of the publishing industry.


Kate Brody: Let’s start with your Paris Review essay. In it, you wrote about the experience of handling your late mother’s estate. Did dealing with her medical debt influence the character of Abernathy, who is also saddled with inherited debt?

Molly McGhee: I’m going to say something melodramatic: writing nonfiction feels like carving out my soul and trying to live with it outside of my body. I’m a very slow writer when it comes to telling the truth. The truth is a hard thing to capture. It’s much easier to pin down in fiction. My mom passed away unexpectedly at the outset of COVID. I spent a year debilitatingly depressed, but I still had to worry about handling her estate and going to work the next day. For me, dealing with those two elements in parallel illuminated the way American bureaucracies work and the lack of humanity that we have built into our systems. I was the person in my family who handled all the details of my mom’s passing. Every person that I talked to on the bureaucratic side, including the hospital administrators, were so jaded. The entire experience felt Sisyphean and hopeless. I found a lot of reprieve writing Jonathan. It allowed me to explore that hopelessness without it overwhelming me.

KB: Your novel was the first time that I’d seen the question of inherited debt in fiction. My sister and I dealt with something similar last year and found ourselves frantically Googling all the time, trying to figure out—what’s the law here? Could somebody come for us and collect on our parent’s unpaid hospital bills? And it does feel very dehumanizing to be forced into a mindset, during a personal tragedy, of: am I going to have to pay for this?

MM: The entire debtor system in America is dependent on keeping the lower classes ignorant. So, when you get a call from a debtor who is trying to collect on the debt of the deceased, you might not realize that what they’re doing (contacting you) is actually illegal.

Cory Doctorow just did a really interesting essay about how there are no effective legal limits on debt collection. I felt deeply taken advantage of as a 25-year-old woman grieving the loss of my mother, getting 10 to 20 calls from these people who were avidly trying to convince me that I owed to them and threatening to sue me if I didn’t pay. It seems deeply, deeply inhumane—and it is— but the reality is that those people on the other line have to get a paycheck or they’re going to be on my end of it. I don’t think people who have a substantial financial safety net have to worry about these things in the same way. They just hire other people, like lawyers, to deal with it.

KB: There’s a lot in the book about work, as well as certain cultural narratives around capitalism. Abernathy, for being a victim of this system, has internalized a lot of these narratives. For example, although he has a system of positive affirmations, he obviously believes he’s a loser who is at least partially to blame for his own predicament. Relatedly, the minute he gets a taste of “success,” he’s “pulling himself up by his bootstraps” and recasting the menial work of strangers as virtuous and good. This felt really true and also sad. Why do you think these narratives are so hard to step away from?

MM: It is a huge truth to grapple with that our entire nation is built on the exploitation of others. Because if that is true and you experience success, then you have to deal with fact that you are now part of that system, participating in the exploitation of others. And that is hard to hold, especially if you come from a place where your loved ones were exploited, because it’s not invisible to you in the way that it’s invisible to a lot of people. I understood Jonathan’s arc, because a lot of the folks that I grew up with—I would describe them as having a lower income. But their pride would never allow them to think that way about themselves. They would say they were “having a hard time” or “down on their luck.” When you’re broke, you just think you’re one move away from it all working out. The relief that I feel now that I have a little bit of money is astronomical. I can see how for some people, in order to tamp down the tragedy of leaving other people behind, they convince themselves that their own success or talent has brought them good fortune. But it’s all luck. It doesn’t have anything to do with how good of a person or how bad of a person you are. It is comforting to think that if you are just good enough things will work out. But it never really works that way. Even if you luck out, you can’t bring everybody in the lifeboat with you. That’s something I struggle with a lot.

KB: I wanted to bring up Jennifer Wilson’s piece in The New York Times, “Student Debt Killed the Plot.” I know you’re quoted in that piece. She says, “If plots a sequence of events, then the student loan crisis is upending the scale at which storylines real and fictional can progress.” And one fascinating thing about the book is that it does kind of break this rule of fiction that characters have to want things because Abernathy doesn’t—and can’t—really want anything. Because of his debt, he’s pure survival.

MM: I’m a huge nerd for plot, which might be an unpopular thing to confess. Event sequencing imitates life in that it keeps going. There’s no such thing as opting out of the progress of time. Many of the characters in this book might not have wants that traditional readers of fiction will recognize, because their wants on the page are technically needs. In a situation where you can only meet your needs, waking up the next day is all that matters. Psychological pain is very similar neurologically to physical pain. When we’re in pain, we want the pain to stop, and we would do just about anything to make it stop. The characters populating this novel are incapable of thinking weekly or monthly. They are in so much pain they can only focuses on a day at a time.

KB: I’m glad you brought up time because I wanted to talk to you about the way you use time in the novel. Jonathan—and, by extension the reader—often becomes disoriented when he’s performing this job. So as much as he might be thinking day to day, he loses big chunks—sometimes days or weeks—working double shifts.

[After my mother passed unexpectedly,] I spent a year debilitatingly depressed, but I still had to worry about handling her estate and going to work the next day.

MM: I knew when I started the book that one of the key themes I wanted to explore was the subjectivity of time. Intense focus on the day to day can warp our understanding of how our actions are impacting other people. I am personally very interested in time, consciousness, death, love. And I’m often embarrassed by those interests. I’m pretty sure they’ve been done a million times at this point, and I’m not sure what I can add to the conversation. But I have a lovely editor at Fourth Estate, Kishani Widyaratna, and she encouraged me to not shy away from those topics. She felt that time was really central to the story and encouraged me to bring that to the forefront in edits.

KB: There is another oft-cited rule of writing from workshops that is basically: you shouldn’t write dreams. And obviously, the whole book is filled with these gorgeous, terrifying dream sequences. So I was wondering how you approached writing those scenes. They’re like little horror novels within the larger story.

MM: You just picked up on one of my pet interests. I was helping launch a horror imprint when I was writing this novel, so I was reading a lot of horror novels and thinking a lot about what horror could look like in the future. How do I want to put this? Sometimes rules don’t make any sense. Art imitates life. For me, dreams are a big part of my life. I have severe insomnia, and all of my ideas come to me in dreams. A lot of “rules” exist because teachers are tired of reading badly done tropes. What I tell my students is: if it’s important to you, and it’s been done a million times, you’re welcome to try, but figuring out how to make an over-done trope interesting for the one millionth and first time seems harder than doing something new.

KB: Your novel is doing something different in the sense that the dreams are not purely operating on a symbolic level. Abernathy is literally inside people’s dreams, manipulating them, so the dreams become another setting.

MM: It’s never fun to read about a character who is not facing any consequences or whose behavior isn’t actually impacting their life. Like when people write at the end, “and he woke up,” the reason people are mad at those writers isn’t because dreams aren’t interesting, it’s because that choice negates everything that happened before it, emotionally and physically. So readers feel robbed. I really hate that in fiction, when I’ve invested so much, only to have the catharsis ripped away from me at the end.

KB: You have these short chapters peppered throughout the book, and taken together, they outline almost a philosophy. I highlighted chapter 30: “What does it mean to be successful? People ask themselves this question to the point of obsession. They believe it’s their mission in life to “succeed,” as if life is something to be climbed on top of and bested. Abernathy is one such a person. Though, of course, like most people who are afflicted by preoccupation with success, he remains oblivious to the true pleasures in life. As such, he is willing to sacrifice them.” And then we get a chapter and section break.

Psychological pain is similar neurologically to physical pain. When we’re in pain, we want the pain to stop, and we would do anything to make it stop.

MM: I came to writing as a poet when I was younger, which is embarrassing to admit. I had no success as a poet whatsoever, and I switched mediums because my lack of ability kept breaking my heart. In my fiction, you can still tell. I like to leave gaps for the reader to think and feel alongside the text. Sometimes contemporary fiction can be really claustrophobic with its insistence on continual temporal, action-oriented narration.

KB: Your book announcement came on the heels of your viral tweet about leaving the publishing industry. I wonder about how your own work experience affected or didn’t affect the writing of this book.

MM: I have always been interested in systems. Publishing was a system that I was very interested in as soon as I knew that I wanted to write. I was one of those misguided writers who thought: if I go into publishing, everything will become clear to me. This is a common misconception. I found it very depressing, as an artist, to learn how the meat is made. If you have ever thought of yourself as an artist, don’t go into the business of your art. Business and art are not compatible.

What I will say is that I loved the ability to meet, promote, and teach new authors. I also learned a lot while I was at my former company about how art is commodified. And I find comfort in that, because I feel very protective of my work. I now know enough about the process that I can tell when something is bullshit.

KB: Is it strange, with the book coming out, for you to be interacting with the publishing industry as an author who has publicly critiqued the industry?

MM: What I have in my favor is that I’m very southern. My personality when you first meet me is exactly the same as it is always, so I don’t think a lot of people who knew me were surprised. I seem to be pathologically incapable of ignoring an elephant in the room. Molly has thoughts and feelings once again, etc. I am not coming from a malicious place. I don’t want to see the whole industry burn down. I love books. I love the art of making books. I love reading books. I love writing books. To me it’s about problem solving: what can we realistically do? How can we face hard truths without being made helpless by them? The weirdest part of being an author now is that people actually care what I have to say.

KB: The timing of this book’s release is really interesting given all the conversation around student loan forgiveness and the labor strikes. I’m in LA, so all we talk about all day is the dual strike. Do you feel any hope that we might see some change when it comes to debt or working conditions?

You have to be able to pay your rent and feed your family. There’s a limit on how much labor can be stolen from you.

MM: A lot of our language around these conversations are strangely religious. Even student loan forgiveness. We could just as easily call that market correction, but there’s something about the word forgiveness that implies judgment. And humans love judging other people in relation to themselves. I don’t know whether things will work out or not. I feel a lot of anxiety about it every day. What I do know is that the methods of exploitation that we relied upon in the late 20th century are no longer going to work for us in the 21st century. The world is changing. I am hoping that the ownership class—the wealthy class who are charge of our economics—realize that they are not better than anyone else and that it is very important to treat the people working for you with dignity, because those people do not have to work for you. It’s their choice to work for you. Yes, you’ve made it really hard to choose something else. But—and you see this with the writers’ strike—eventually people are not going to suffer anymore. You have to be able to pay your rent and feed your family. There’s a limit on how much labor can be stolen from you.

KB: The book is realistic about the burdens of work and debt, about the inescapability of some of these systems. But there is a kind of hopefulness that appears in a character like Timmy, who is quite young. Maybe I’m projecting, but I felt like, she’s so bright and precocious, she’s not going to accept this system that trapped Abernathy and her mother.

MM: And time exists. Our perspective of things changes depending on when we come into the narrative. There are a lot of folks coming into the narrative of America who were not alive in the 1980s. They feel no responsibility or alliance to the economics of the 1980s. I think there’s going to be a lot of individual suffering as those people try to convince their elders that things have changed, especially considering we live in a gerontocracy, where a majority of our leaders and representatives are so far removed from what it’s like to be a citizen coming of age in the world they’ve built.

We’re seeing with COVID, everyone’s saying: “there’s a worker shortage. We don’t know why, but we can’t hire anyone.” And it’s like—yeah, that makes sense, because they all died! Yes, your service is going to be interrupted. You can ignore the consequences of your actions for as long as you would like, and maybe you will be protected for a while. But eventually your life will be made worse because of your own cruelty. Individual sufferings compile, and enough individuals becomes a collective.

7 Stories for Every Kind of Cat Person

Most of my really potent reading memories have less to do with exact books or passages, and more to do with the city I was living in, the people I was surrounded by, and the things happening on the fringes of my life as I read. It’s for this reason, in part, that I tend to keep a near-religious accounting of the books that I’ve read and the movies that I’ve seen and the records that I’ve listened to, each operating as a sort of snapshot of wherever I was in time. Years removed now, and I have no recollection of how House of Leaves ends, but I vividly remember turning the pages feverishly in tandem with an old roommate during the final weeks we lived together, or shotgunning Murakami books at a coffee shop the summer after I finished college, or extending silent reading time by an additional few minutes in my old seventh-grade classroom just so I could finish the last few pages of Sing, Unburied, Sing.

Far and away the most consistent presence across these memories is my cat, Kula, a half-domesticated former stray who’s moved with me now, across the country, from Colorado to Illinois, back to Colorado, back to Illinois, and finally—for now—to Southern California. Kula’s been by my side for each of these moves, and by this point, countless novels and short stories and poetry collections: brushing up against my legs as I combed through Stories of Your Life and Others on the outdoor couch; pretzeled on his cat tree as I shivered reading Friday Black the winter that I couldn’t get my bedroom window to shut all the way; nipping at my hair at the onset of the pandemic as I reread Station Eleven for a preposterously timed speculative fiction class. No matter what I’m reading, Kula always seems to embed himself in the story. 

Not all cat people are readers, of course, and not all readers are cat people, but it’s unarguable that reading, a supposedly solitary activity, tends to pair well with this supposedly solitary animal. With that in mind—and with apologies to “Cat Person”—below are seven great, cat-centric Recommended Reading stories published over the years by Electric Literature. A warning: many of these stories are not for the faint of heart, featuring less-than-ideal narrative outcomes for our furry companions.

Horribilis” by Amanda Marbais

“One evening, I ran over a cat,” begins Amanda Marbais’ claustrophobic and darkly funny “Horribilis,” which originally appeared in her 2019 short story collection Claiming a Body. “Upon impact, its flat eyes reproached me, like it hadn’t known pain before,” the opening paragraph continues. “I got out of the car, stood in the headlights, and cried . . . I’m a vegetarian!” Following this nightmarish opening for cat lovers (or, hopefully, for anyone), our narrator, already afraid of nearly everything, develops agrizoophobia—the fear of wild animals—with the phobia taking a particular fixation on cats specifically. “To have a cat phobia is not to be able to use the Internet,” our narrator reflects wryly. “It’s all porn and cat videos.”

Can a Cat” by Olivia Parkes

Can a cat survive falling off a skyscraper? The perennial internet debate/bar trivia question is the catalyst for Olivia Parkes’ “Can a Cat,” in which the opening scene finds an unhappy couple arguing over this exact question. An event of morbid coincidence—a cat plummets from the sky and lands on a nearby table, where it, after an agonizing couple of moments, finally dies—interrupts them. “The idea that our marital strife could have made a cat fall from the sky, though fantastic, was weirdly in keeping with my research, or at least with the wispy thought of the New Age gurus it had led me to on YouTube,” reflects our narrator, surmising that she and her partner’s argument may have summoned the cat to its death. “I did not know what I believed—only that the cowardly and increasingly unreal nature of our discord was having a violent effect.”

Eau de Mims” by Nick Otte

The conceit of Nick Otte’s “Eau de Mims” may seem like a relatively straightforward fabulist premise, but it amplifies in strangeness the more time you spend with it. At the start of the story, our narrator realizes that her deceased mother has come to inhabit the mouth of an alley cat named Jodie who lives behind her New York City apartment building. “Jodie is a tabby, marble-eyed with orange peel stripes along her back,” remarks the narrator. “I feed her and the other kitties in the alley beside my building every morning . . . it was fun for a while, that is until Mims took up residence behind Jodie’s sharp little teeth and started carrying on.” Is the narrator’s mother really occupying the stray cat’s mouth, or is the narrator just experiencing a manifestation of her grief? 

It Is What It Is” by Azareen Van der Vliet Oloomi

“She’s an average cat,” our narrator’s roommate informs her, midway through Azareen Van der Viet Oloomi’s “It Is What It Is,” in a refrain that will be familiar to many cat lovers whose friends and family just can’t seem to understand what’s so special about a given pet. “Stop projecting on her.” The plot follows our narrator, who, after seeing a social media post about a cat in Canada whose Iranian owners have been shot down over Tehran, sees a reflection of the traumatic state of global affairs in the cat’s story. She reaches out to the cat sitter about adopting the animal, and, when its arrival at her apartment immediately presages the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, she comes to view it as a kind of omen. “Don’t you think it’s possible that [the cat] was intimating news of the cosmic violence we are engulfed in?” she asks her roommate in April of 2020, as the world around continues to spiral more and more out of control.

The Cat” by Tove Ditlevsen

Originally published in Tove Ditlevsen’s 1952 short story collection, Paraplyen, “The Cat” follows an unhappy couple who come to blows over, of all things, a cat. “He let it out, and she let it back in,” we’re informed by the narrator. “When they lay in bed in the evening, they heard the faint meowing outside their front door, and she got up to give it something to eat, while an incomprehensible resentment arose in her husband. ‘Don’t let it in,’ he yelled to her. But in the morning there it was down in the living room, jumping elegantly up onto her lap.” The conflict at the center of the story will ring true to anyone who’s ever been in conflict with a significant other over feline affection, as will the lack of a tidy resolution.

In the Rain” by Steven Barthelme

“She was a nice wife, even liked me for a time,” begins Steven Barthelme’s “In the Rain.” “I enjoyed her company, and in the early days, when sleeping together had this scorched-earth sort of magic, we mistook that for love . . . this is what I was thinking, standing in the rain, the day the cat came back.” Having been left the cat (“old Rilkey”) by his ex-wife, our narrator finds himself saddled with an animal that he cares for without really meaning to, even as he suspects that it has only been bestowed upon him because of a new boyfriend with an allergy or a distaste for cats (“. . . not that I blame him,” he can’t help remarking). After the cat drags itself back into the house, soaking wet after being out for several days in the pouring rain, our narrator remarks: “I loved him. That’s a feeling, isn’t it?”

A Cat Called Grievous” by R. L. Maizes

In R. L. Maizes’ “A Cat Called Grievous,” a bored, childless couple adopts a cat named Grievous. “People are fond of saying that ‘dogs have masters and cats have servants,’” writes Halimah Marcus in her introduction to the story. “[This] statement [is] mostly true, and, I will argue at the risk of revealing myself as a cat person, makes cats richer subjects for fiction. Dogs are loyal, and cats are indifferent. Give a cat an owner, and there is already a conflict.” And, sure enough, conflict develops for Maizes’ characters quickly. “Sometimes I think you love that cat more than you love me,” one partner says to the other, and we’re off to the races.

Joan Didion, Meet Seema Patel

In “A Hundred Years Ago,” the eighth episode of the second season of Max’s Sex and the City spin-off, new addition to the group Seema—played expertly by Sarita Choudhury—tells Carrie what many of us are afraid to utter aloud, lest we make the fear real: there probably isn’t a great love out in the world, waiting for her. 

“From everything I’ve heard, it sounds like you’ve had these two great loves. And I’ve had none. No, please, don’t say I will, because I might not, and I can live with that.” She pauses, considering how to tell Carrie she’s not comfortable spending the summer as a plus one to her and her boyfriend, “But I can’t do this summer. That’s not true, I could, but I don’t want to.” 

Seema’s mentioning her lack of “great loves” isn’t an admission; she’s not embarrassed by this fact. She doesn’t cry, she doesn’t whisper this declaration—she looks Carrie in the eyes, cigarette in hand, and candidly explains her perspective. Seema Patel gives And Just Like That viewers a visual demonstration of what Joan Didion elucidated in her pivotal essay, “On Self-Respect.” Didion’s essay doesn’t provide a how-to on self-respect; she’s divulging to the reader how those with self-respect conduct themselves. 

Didion defines feeling the need to maintain the personae ascribed onto us as “alienation from self.” She writes: 

“We are peculiarly in thrall to everyone we see, curiously determined to live out…their false notion of us. […] Every encounter demands too much, tears the nerves, drains the will, and the specter of something as small as an unanswered letter arouses such disproportionate guilt that answering it becomes out of the question. To assign unanswered letters to their proper weight, to free us from the expectations of others, to give us back to ourselves–there lies the great, the singular power of self-respect.”

Seema’s indifferent towards this topic, yet she finds herself avoiding Carrie during the episode’s duration.

Explaining this phenomenon
to Carrie invites pity and Seema’s
life is not deserving of pity.

Seema lives the dream: she’s rich, beautiful, and successful. Unfortunately, she understands those traits aren’t as impressive for a woman without the most coveted commodity of all—a great romantic love. 

It’s rare for a female character to address being alone and not have it act as a plot device, an easy way to get the audience on her side before her love interest bumps into her at a coffee shop or makes fun of her dancing at a club. Seema’s declaration was not one of loneliness—it was her not allowing anyone to make her question the life she’s created for herself. Didion calls this displaying character: “character—the willingness to accept responsibility for one’s own life—is the source from which self respect springs.”

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a woman reconcile with the worst fate of all—loneliness—quite like I saw this one. The most recent iteration of “lonely woman” I can recall is in Greta Gerwig’s Little Women. Saoirse Ronan’s “I Want to be Loved” monologue has a piercing pitch, almost like a dog whistle for women in their twenties: “I’m so sick of people saying that love is all a woman is fit for, I’m so sick of it! But I’m, I’m so lonely!” But Seema’s explanation isn’t romantic: there aren’t books or candles scattered about, she isn’t tearful, and she’s a brown woman in her mid-fifties. She doesn’t feel compelled to smile at Carrie’s well intentioned jokes and she feels no remorse about canceling their summer plans. Seema’s version of loneliness isn’t empowering or aspirational or beautiful, it just is

The familiarity of Seema and Carries’s conversation sat at the pit of my stomach, anchoring me to my bed after finishing the episode. I’m at a precarious age, one where other twenty-somethings all somehow got the memo: “It’s time to settle!” Everyone’s either moving in with their partners for cheaper rent (though citing love and happiness), or ferociously swiping on dating apps with the hopes that soon, they too will get to move in with someone for cheaper rent. I didn’t get that memo; I was unaware that life had become a race. Social-distancing rendered dating nearly impossible, and that affected my desire to find a romantic relationship. I didn’t realize everyone else wasn’t undergoing that same shift. We are still encouraged to scour the streets for the most conventionally attractive twenty-something guy, faster than the next girl can. Finding a partner has become a full-time job; we’re expected to put hours into dating apps, go on multiple dates a week, and visit the bars with the most men.

At this age, people start to get married
and have children, and I’m happily
not included in that population. 

But I was reminded of something that happened a few months prior. I got an impromptu call from my best friend, asking if his new boyfriend could join us on the trip we’d been planning for months. His asking me that felt like the end of an era. When Seema confronts Carrie she says, “When you invited me to dinner, you said ‘we’ wanna take you to dinner. Carrie, you’re already a ‘we.’” When I wasn’t paying attention, I lost my best friend to a “we.” 

It’s a circumstance we think we can ignore out of our lives, the dissolution of our friendships. I was confronted by many fears at once: aging, loneliness, having to share those that mean the most to me. I started to understand the imaginary pressure everyone feels to get tied down. We’re all so lonely, why wouldn’t you always be on the hunt for a person to spend all your time with? Someone who asks you about your day, someone to hang out with, someone who validates you? Why wouldn’t you go out with the sole intention of finding the love of your life when our lives are devoid of it? 

The romantic relationships I’ve been confronted with haven’t seemed filled with love and tenderness. Moreover, I see relationships where two former college kids found themselves lost when COVID hit. Couples who live together yet work opposite shifts, openly admitting they rarely see their partners. These kinds of relationships appear to be the product of social pressure. The fear of not having a romantic partner is why people strive to acquire one. Their deepest connections are to their societal roles. 

Moving back to Alabama, my home state, from New York has plunged me into an environment of young women whose primary goals are to get married and have children. My coworker gushes about her partner over late night cocktails, but the source of the gushing is what stands out. When discussing rent and capitalism and existentialism—typical Friday night conversation for four zillennials—she lets us know that soon, she’ll be married and money will pose no question to her. Her boyfriend has been begging her to marry him and once he earns enough to grant her stay-at-home-wife status, then she will agree to matrimony. 

I realized then how little I know about her partner. He’s often a focal point of our conversations, yet I can’t recall his favorite TV show. His hobbies. His personality traits. But I do know he makes $40,000 a year and is hoping to be a married father before he turns 27. I’ve met many women who boast about their partners wanting a girl who aspires to dote on her husband and children—with no other outstanding qualities—and subsequently how lucky their partners are to have found them at the bottom of the gallery screen in their Zoom class. And the women can’t provide any interesting facts about their partners either—wanting to get married is the primary trait they require. When they talk about their romantic partners, I don’t learn about funny stories or endearing moments.

I get told—with a tone drenched in smug—
that their looming marriages
will save them from the workforce.

Platonic bonds, in my experience, have been more enriching than romantic ones. Friendships have to be sought out and cultivated, maintained. You choose to go out of your way to sustain them; they’re voluntary. Yet friendship has managed to find itself at the bottom of our list of priorities. On the How to Talk to People podcast from The Atlantic, producer Rebecca Rashid says “the American mainstream culture of individualism and the voluntary nature of friendship is a tough thing to balance.” Having a relationship that feels reciprocated and supportive—that doesn’t involve sex as a major contributing factor—has allowed me the ability to connect deeply with strangers in a post-COVID world, and given me more confidence in myself. But then, why do I feel the same pressure as everyone else? 

I’m scared I judge people as a defense mechanism; I want to protect myself from the reality that despite being financially independent, driven, and accomplished, I’m the weird one, and they’re socially on track. Didion’s concept, alienation from self, racks around my brain. Freeing oneself from societal expectations is what Didion considers “the great, the singular power of self-respect.” It’s hard to admit to myself that I am not there yet. 

Most embarrassingly, I’m insecure
about what people think
of my lack of romantic life.

I live in a perpetual state of fear. I am incessantly caught in the throes of grotesque anxiety; I spend my days lying on my bed, staring up at the ceiling, reviewing conversations I’ve had. Reworking them, chastising myself for not coming off as put together or interesting. I am crippled by imposter syndrome. Didion says to “say no without drowning in self-reproach is an alien idea to [alienation from self],” which I’m deeply familiar with—I punctuate every no with an exclamation point. I hope it reads as coquettish and sweet, and not like I spent five minutes rearranging sentences so as to not come off as a mean girl.

The weird looks I may get from sitting at a restaurant alone, or people thinking I’m brave for attending a movie by myself plague me. Being able to divorce myself from any ability to worry about what’s being thought of me is a tenant of self-respect I haven’t conquered. 

I found myself overcome with emotion at the episode’s conclusion: Seema surprises Carrie by joining dinner with her and the entire gang, boyfriend included. Seeing her take time for herself, without being portrayed as an antagonist or malicious—something not often afforded to women of color—and reentering Carrie’s life on her own, thoroughly established terms, was simultaneously powerful and loving. While it’s disheartening that this phenomenon might last my entire life, should I choose to remain single, the stunning display of self-respect illustrated by Seema showed that the frustrations are not only manageable, but worth it for other meaningful relationships.

Every Age Is a Tender Age for an Artist

Mona Simpson’s latest novel, Commitment, is a tour de force that takes place in the early 1970s and follows three siblings—Walter, Lina, and Donnie—as they grow up in Los Angeles, into adulthood, and discover themselves while deciding whether to live an artist’s life, or a stable one. Each character uniquely confronts this question after their single mother, Diane, suffers from a debilitating depression and is committed to a long-term stay in a mental hospital, leaving them alone financially and emotionally. As the Aziz children try to stay afloat with part-time jobs at ice cream shops to cover rent and a little help from their friends, Diane lingers in the background of the book, as present as a ghost, and becomes a focal point for the siblings as they intermittently reconcile and reunite in her hospital room after years of living apart. 

Commitment is as much about finding one’s identity as it is about losing one’s self. Simpson’s three protagonists experience self-discovery and romantic love, intricately interwoven in its various forms, while simultaneously risking everything they have for art in its many heartbreaking shapes. Throughout their early twenties, Walter dreams of becoming an architect, Lina studies painting without public success in a graduate program at Columbia, and little Donnie gets caught up in a world of addiction. All three are secretly falling apart until they come together in one room where time stands still. In profound, beautiful, and tragic chapters, Commitment shifts between each Aziz child’s perspective and ruminates on economic insecurity, the inheritance of mental illness, growing up, losing innocence, gaining independence, and how to situate that hazy and elusive idea of “adulthood.” 

Simpson and I met at Caffe Luxxe in Santa Monica and spoke over Americanos and indie music. Her first novel, Anywhere But Here, was made into a major motion picture in 1999, and now she serves as the publisher of The Paris Review—so we spoke about her thoughts on movie adaptations, the writers’ strike, and where the publishing industry is heading. Throughout the rest of our interview, Simpson discussed writing Commitment with a young consciousness, the perceptions and invisibilities of one’s social class, the secret charms of Los Angeles, and how her perspectives on love and art have changed over the years. 


Kyla Walker: Commitment beautifully and, at times, tragically captures the fears, anxieties, dreams that twenty-somethings often have about becoming artists and simply growing up. I was curious—what drew you to write about that specific period in each of the characters’ lives?

Mona Simpson: I think I wanted to write a story about, in part, the mother who struggles with mental illness. And I wanted her to be kind of there, but not there in the book and to see her through each of her kids and how they deal with what happened to her. They accept her loss and her tragedy. That became my organizing principle. I found myself going to the period of their lives where they had to actually come to terms with that. So it was at different times for each of them because they were different ages when it happened. But I think that [one’s twenties] is one of the hardest times of life for various reasons. The two oldest [characters] are especially interested in being artists. The oldest in architecture. The second one in visual art. But I think for those two in particular, especially since the arts are insecure, famously insecure, and they weren’t coming from a world with a lot of stability and safety nets. They really didn’t have any nets. So I think they struggle to do this. It was a risk on top of a risk. 

KW: Was it easy for you to access that youthful state of mind again? Did you keep a journal in your early twenties that you returned to? 

MS: Oh. No, no, I didn’t think of that. I do remember myself at that age. But also I have two kids at that age, and I teach students [at UCLA]. It is a very tender age. And it’s a brave thing to want to be an artist. It’s interesting now to see enrollment in the humanities drop. Both of my kids are pursuing what they really want to do, and I’m happy although scared for them too. I hope it works out. But at the same time, I also worry about the other group. I’ve seen a lot… I’m always telling my students, I’ve met a lot of unhappy lawyers who construct the whole world and an edifice that they’re going to this job that they essentially do not like, and that is a big problem. 

KW: That affects mental health in another way.

MS: Yes, and spiritual health as well. 

KW: At times, money feels like another character in the novel and almost feels like the antagonist for the Aziz children. I was thinking about how it serves as a driving force of the plot and a genuine concern for many college students today. How do you think financial concerns shape the narratives differently for Walter than for Lina? 

MS: I think it shapes both of them in different ways. It’s funny, I have a friend who said to me, “Your characters are all such believers in education.” And I realized then how far I’ve come from my upbringing. I think that Lina’s and Walter’s mother was a middle class person, but I think that she grew up in a lower class, and she saw education as the only way for her children to have a better life, and yet it’s so intoxicating for Lina when she actually starts working at the department store and has a salary. She found her little niche there. She could decorate windows and was the protégé of the most artistic woman there. It was hard, in a way, for her to give that up. 

KW: It seems like all the patients in the mental hospital are treated equally, in terms of resources, no matter what their class is. I found an interesting parallel to the college campuses where Walter and Lina were attending because it seems they were also given the same resources regardless of their socioeconomic status. Was that an intentional parallel to structure the book upon? 

MS: Well, in the case of both of them, while they’re there, there might be a kind of equality, but we all bring so much of our past, our constraints, and our anxieties with us. So I think that in a way, Walter felt so close to Ken [his roommate], but his experience in college really was quite different because half of his mind and heart was with his family back in L.A. and with his mother in the hospital. Whereas Ken didn’t have those things to deal with.

KW: It was fascinating too how Walter went all the way to Berkeley to study, yet still fell in love with two girls that went to Palisades High, his old high school. 

MS: I know! That was funny. 

KW: I was curious if that was maybe because of a deeper insecurity he had. Was it possibly linked to his illegitimate student status and never quite feeling like he belonged at Pali High?

It’s a brave thing to want to be an artist.

MS: Yeah. I think his goal was kind of what he got. He came back, as an adult, to the neighborhood in which he’d never really been a part of, and he’s now a part of it. It’s nice to see that, though. I think that when I was growing up here, everyone in high school just wanted to get out and go far away. I went to Berkeley and friends of mine went East. We all wanted to be away. We never thought we’d come back to L.A. And now, it seems like all the kids I know go away for maybe a year, a couple of years, but they all plan to come back.

KW: Do you think that’s specific to L.A. or just the case with hometowns in general? 

MS: I think L.A. has sort of come into its own. It used to be kind of a cultural idea that it had a negative valence. There was a tendency to put down L.A.—it wasn’t New York. It was Hollywood, in a bad way. But I think now it’s kind of a city you can live in. There’s mountains and the ocean. I love L.A. It’s a well-kept secret.

KW: So in the end, each of the Aziz children do end up finding companionship or love in some way, which is in contrast to Diane’s and Julie’s lifestyle. Do you think that they each sought out a partner, or just someone to share their life with, after watching their mother go through this down spiral that they might’ve connected to loneliness? 

MS: Yes. Although, I think they each did it a little bit differently. I think Donnie had the most classically romantic story. And Walter really married a friend. He didn’t marry the one he was dreaming of all through college and afterwards. He came to terms with that and felt good about that. He felt he made the right choice for his life. I think they had varying degrees of romantic capability. 

KW: That was a beautiful thing about the novel—it shows you all the different ways you can love someone and share a life with them. On a different note, there’s a quote on page 196 that felt like another central idea in the book:

“Getting ready for a party while still debating whether people who loved what they did for a living ought to be paid less because they received nonmaterial compensation, Lina asked, ‘Do I look alright?’ and Lauren said, ‘Of course.'” 

That is such an interesting way to put it— that if you love what you do, maybe you should be paid less. I’m just curious about your thoughts on this. 

MS: That’s an old Marxist idea. I think I was thinking of that in terms of the last few years, so much of what we’re probably all feeling, is the homelessness crisis. The unhoused crisis. And there has to be a way that we can arrange society that’s better than this. So that’s one thing that people have posited: why should people who love what they do get that benefit and make more money for it? Maybe it’s not the most unfair thing that artists often don’t make as much money as bankers. You know, it’s probably much more exciting to be an artist. You have much more freedom, you have much more agency throughout your day-to-day life. 

KW: Do you think that writing this book changed your perspective on that at all? 

I always think that art is useful just by being art, not necessarily to serve any particular message or any particular ideology because I think that gets dangerous.

MS: I think my perspective has changed a little as the years have gone by. I think that in my lifetime, not yours probably, but really in my lifetime, I’ve really seen the income gap become incredible. And it wasn’t always so huge. In the last few years in L.A., people who are working essential jobs can’t afford their rent because of the housing laws in this city. It’s become insane. Even the writers’ strike… I think they’re really right. So you see it everywhere. You see the vast distance. I think most of us in the English Department [at UCLA] were probably really backing the graduate students, 100%, when they went on strike last fall because lecturers and adjuncts are—to quote one person who wrote in an article in the New York Review of Books—they’re servicing academe. And often these people are teaching the core courses that most students who come to the major want to take. They want to take Shakespeare. They want to take the Bible. They want to take the 19th-century novel. A lot of these essential courses are being taught by people who have huge teaching loads and are compensated for little.

KW: Yeah, it’s really very sad… Do you see any way that this is changing now or could change in the near future? 

MS: Well, the strike, the collective bargaining, made a big change in that. I actually took a hike with a friend of mine who was deep into the housing problem in L.A., and there are a lot of ideas but there are also a lot of things in the way of them too…

KW: So what are your thoughts now on the meaning of art and the role it plays in our society? Can it serve the working class in any way, or is it increasingly designed more for intellectuals and academics?

MS: I always think that art is useful just by being art, not necessarily to serve any particular message or any particular ideology because I think that gets dangerous. But I think that beauty is useful for everyone alive.

KW: My last question is—where do you see literature heading in the next five years? 

MS: Well, that’s a hard question! I don’t think it’s under one tent. It’s interesting. I just met with a group of booksellers, and we were talking about how we’re at a point where, even for book people now, a lot of times they go to a dinner party or something and talk about what show they’re watching—whereas ten years ago, five years ago, people would be talking about what book they just read. And now they’re talking about television, which is interesting because the good television shows that we all like are often character-driven and a lot more like the 19th-century novel. I know that I like to be subtle, but I want to make sure that I actually am decode-able and accessible. Because I think we do want to engage people about the most important emotional events of our lives, and we do want to be clear to an extent. There’s no benefit to obscuring. So, I’m not sure where we’ll be. We’ll see.