Can a Pen Pal Save Your Life?

“The Promise of Hotels” by Bill Cotter

Helen Chaissen was on United 228 to Newark when she learned of the death of her old pen pal, the writer Gabriel Ulloa.

She had boarded in Dallas thinking she had an aisle seat, and was not happy when she realized she had somehow been assigned a middle seat instead. Wedged between a man wearing an Ohio State football jersey engrossed in a newspaper, and a young woman holding a large but placid infant, Helen found that her only chance at spatial liberty was to put down her tray table, prop up her elbows, and rest her head in her hands. Forty-five minutes into the flight she found a certain balance, and thought she could, maybe, endure the remaining two hours and four minutes in only minor discomfort. She hoped she wouldn’t snore if she fell asleep.

When they reached cruising altitude and the cabin began to grow cold, the Buckeye folded up his New York Times and handed it to Helen. She took it without a word. She read Krugman, an article on prison escape, and some book review by an author she’d never heard of. She completed the unfinished crossword in her head. She scanned the unknowable tables of stock prices, and even read about all the Yankees on injured reserve.

The paper was just about spent. Helen flipped past the obits, but a name caught her attention, and she turned back.

Gabriel Ulloa, Memoirist and Essayist on Depression, Dies at 44.

Her breath caught, and she read on.

Mr. Ulloa, a writer whose subject matter was mental illness and the havoc it wrought in his life and in the lives of friends he had made in the numerous psychiatric hospitals he had been committed to since the age of 14, has died of an apparent suicide at his home in Manhattan. He was 44.

His death was confirmed by his partner, Ursula Majaniev.

Mr. Ulloa, who initially wrote about his struggle with major depressive disorder in his memoir, The Bearing Wall, in 2006, subsequently published essays in leading magazines and journals.

Mr. Ulloa wrote that his depression was the direct result of years of systematic abuse at the hands of his older brother, which only ended when the brother died in an accidental drowning when Mr. Ulloa was 13. He was first hospitalized at 14 at Hartford’s Institute for Living. At 16 he was hospitalized at McLean, in Belmont, Massachusetts, for 17 months, where he underwent electroconvulsive therapy, one of the only treatments he claims actually helped his depression, though the cost, in terms of severe memory loss and cognitive impairment, was high. In his mid-twenties Mr. Ulloa married the writer Ava Bass, and enjoyed a period of relative psychological calm. Ms. Bass’s suicide in 2008 plunged Mr. Ulloa into a renewed depression from which he never recovered.

According to Ms. Majaniev, Mr. Ulloa had attempted suicide three months earlier and was hospitalized for six weeks. She stated that he seemed in good spirits in the days before his death.

The obituary went on—details about Gabriel’s writing life, surviving family members, and where to send donations.

Helen sat back in her seat. She closed her eyes.


Nine years ago, in 2007, Helen had sent Gabriel an intelligent, funny fan letter about The Bearing Wall, confessing she’d also been at McLean, though for manic depression, and noting that they’d had the same doctor, a proto-Freudian coconut named Jonah Gaspard, whose office was papered in Dubuffet posters and who seemed interested only in one’s sexual dreams and masturbation practices. Gabriel wrote back, and the two maintained a snail-mail correspondence, largely free of innuendo and flirtation; in fact Helen shared her letters with her boyfriend at the time, Roger, and Gabriel had shared Helen’s letters with his wife, Ava.

As Ava’s depression started to get out of hand, Gabriel began to confide more and more in Helen, always by mail. Helen started keeping these letters secret from her boyfriend. Gabriel wrote to Helen that Ava couldn’t seem to get off the couch in their living room, that she wasn’t eating.

Ava won’t talk, Helen, except to read me articles on the internet about artists or writers who committed suicide, Gabriel wrote, in scrawly green ballpoint on a long sheet of lined yellow legal paper.  She describes their circumstances and their methods in terms of appraisal, as though kicking tires. I can’t trust her to take her medication, and she won’t talk to her therapist, sitting in clenched, enraged silence for 50 minutes twice a week. She’s losing weight. She won’t wash or brush her teeth for days or weeks at a time. She can’t even take joy in the affections of Thiago, you know our peculiar little tuxedo cat I sent you pictures of? What a terror   

Here Gabriel’s green ballpoint dies out, and a thick, inky blue felt-tip takes over. 

and he so enlivens the place. But she doesn’t see him. The only times Ava exerts herself is to cry, which she does several times a day—hard, choking displays of pure wet need: she looks at me as though starved; famished for a sustenance she cannot name. Then she’ll fall asleep for hours, even half a day, sometimes more, finally waking disoriented in a humid knot of blankets on the couch in the living room. She eats Gummi Bears and drinks lemon-lime Gatorade. I guess it’s good she consumes anything at all.

I’m sorry about this, Helen. I’m sorry about this report.

Gabriel signed his letter, as he always did:

Yrs &c.,

G. U.


When Gabriel found himself in Dallas on New Year’s Day, 2008, he called Helen from his hotel room. He wanted to know if she wouldn’t mind meeting in the lobby so they could talk. It was 10:30 at night. Helen told Roger she was going out to karaoke with her friends.

Had she not told that lie, things might have been different.

“Helen,” said Gabriel, rising from a fake Eames chair in the thrum of the crowded lobby, a beer in one hand. “Is that you? It looks like you. At least it’s how I imagined you. Damn. I’m happy to make your in-the-flesh acquaintance, at long last.”

Helen ignored his outstretched hand and gave him a long hug and a kiss on the cheek. “I need a drink,” she said, looking around for a waitress. Gabriel looked around too.

Helen took the opportunity to study Gabriel. She’d seen his photos online of course. Dark eyes, broad nose, full, almost feminine lips, black hair cut short and parted on the left. He was taller than she had anticipated, more muscular; she had expected a degree of withering, a cant of decay in a man who’d been through what he had. He had suffered at the hands of his brother. Gabriel may have murdered him. No one drowns in the bathtub without a lot of help.

“How is Ava?”

“Oh Christ,” said Gabriel, sitting back down in the leather chair, exhaling with finality. “Bad. I feel like maybe I shouldn’t have left her alone. I never do. Usually, anyway. Ah! Bloody hell. She refuses to use the phone, text, even email. I do what I can to make sure she’s not trying to kill herself. A friend, in the apartment building across the street, we’re both on the fifth floor? He watches her with binoculars, like freaking Rear Window, and texts me with reports on her movements.”

I do what I can to make sure she’s not trying to kill herself.

He reflexively checked his phone, then put it away, all in four seconds. 

“God, Gabriel.”

Helen leaned forward in her chair, conscious of her bare knees, the old scar on the left one, a skateboarding injury, a gouge shaped like the sardonic Amazon smile.

“There is nothing, I swear nothing, in that apartment she can hurt herself with, and she never goes out. When I left I took a souvenir pocketknife I got at Epcot when I was a kid, a big bottle of generic Advil, and a jumbo box of trash bags. I left everything on the floor of a cab on the way to JFK.”

“So give yourself a break,” she said, falling into the same rhythm of familiarity she used in her letters. “What’re you in Dallas for, anyway?”

“Conference. ‘Mental Illness and the Arts.’ Giving a talk, Dallas Museum of Art, part of a series.”

The waitress brought beers. “What’s it about?”

“Writing and depression,” said Gabriel. “How it’s difficult to write when one is depressed, and almost impossible to describe depression with the clumsy blocks of language available in the English tongue, blah blah. I’m using a number of historical examples—the writings of Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Sylvia Plath, William Styron, you know, the noonday-demon pantheon of white Anglo-Saxon et cetera. Plus myself, aargh, such a solipsist. Whatever. But Ava, too. Ava is a particularly acute example, because she is the only one of those, besides me, who is still alive, and the only one who is currently depressed and unable to write.”

Gabriel stared at Helen. He looked as though he were waiting to be stabbed. “Does she know you’re going to talk about her?”

“She’s insensate. I don’t even think she knows I’m not home. She might not know I exist at all, or that I ever did.”

Helen thought about Roger, home alone, thinking up caustic, witty, and original observations on the infelicities of Man, God, sex, and the Dallas Cowboys, reducing them to 140 characters, and posting them in hopes of 1) awing and 2) adding to his precious 12,157 followers; this endeavor Helen knew he would occasionally place in abeyance to surf pornography—he confessed as much to her, though he would not tell her the nature of what he viewed, the frequency he “used” (his term) porn, the expenditure of passion, the magnitude of lust, the degree of satiation, anything. They had been together three and a half years, and the fun had gone out of sex after about two months. Their now infrequent couplings were characterized by haste and almost vicious kissing, always in the dark, always in the early morning, just as their alarms were going off. All Helen could think about when Roger’s iPhone’s seagull-themed alarm sounded was the bath she was going to take when it was all over. She thought briefly about why she was with him at all. He was easy, and it could be so much worse.

“Shouldn’t Ava be in a hospital?”

“Money. Insurance. No one has any. You know? And I don’t want her in Bellevue or some county place. I think that would truly fuck her up.”

“ECT?”

“Same story, money. I’m paying for her shrink and her meds, at cost, and it’s all I can do. I’ve borrowed money from my sister, thank God for Stella. But she only has so much, and she’s got her own shit. At least the shrink does house calls, for what it’s worth. Only in New York.”

The crowd in the lobby had begun to thin, and Helen had a sense of how cavernous it was. A kind of agoraphobic panic started to climb her esophagus, accompanied by the crushing certainty that this—whatever this happened to be—was in the process of ending, and that she would never see Gabriel again.

“Look,” she said, the gambit forming in her head. “Gabriel. I know we don’t know each other all that well, but I have a good job. What if I. . .”

Courage always tasted like aluminum, a light metallic tingle way back at the base of Helen’s tongue.

“. . .what if there was money?” she said, the words spilling out fast. “Say I gave you money for a course of electroconvulsive therapy for Ava. Not a loan. I have the cash.” 

She did have it, from her aunt Carolyn, who died alone in a Beaumont nursing home, her will penciled on a wall, leaving everything to Helen—her tiger figurines, two steaks in the freezer, and the suitcase under her bed filled with five-dollar bills. It was not as much money as it looked like. 

“Why don’t you let me, Gabriel. It works, as you know.”

The waitress brought their third round of beers and informed them that the lobby bar would be closing in ten minutes.

“Jesus, Helen. I don’t know. I just don’t know what to say. Should we go somewhere?”

“This is Dallas, not New York. The whole city’s closing for the night. So,” she continued, “maybe we should go to your room?”

In the moment before he responded, anything was possible. When Helen was seven she jumped off a ledge into a quarry full of pellucid blue water. Before she hit, when she was alone in the air, her heart felt like a ball of frost in her chest—that feeling returned to her now, in the lobby of the hotel.

They found an elevator. Helen was on a lot of medication, and two beers plus a few sips of a third had made her wobbly. The spasm of agoraphobic panic and resulting flex of courage had rendered her hyper-aware—she could feel her pupils dilated to a comical breadth. She squinted in the low light. She was glad to be alone in the elevator with Gabriel, the warmth and closeness of walnut and brass and the columns of amber buttons; the pale pressure of subtle acceleration.

“Are you okay?” said Gabriel, gently reaching out to hold her by the elbow.

Helen nodded, and leaned into him more than she needed to. Gabriel opened the door to Room 1236. A bottle of champagne sat in a metal bucket of melting ice.

“I forgot about that,” he said. “Somebody sent it up.”

Helen wondered whether this was true. She studied him as he stared down at the sweating bottle, but he betrayed nothing.

Gabriel sat on one bed, she on its twin. They faced each other, their knees a few inches apart. Her old scar throbbed. They placed their beers on the side table separating the beds.

“Your offer. . .I can’t accept.”

“Of course you can,” said Helen, as certain as she had ever been about anything. “Someone’s life is at stake here, Gabriel. You must put your personal values, your ideas about debt and loans and obligation and pride, put them all aside, accept the money, and get her help. Look, I won’t miss it, it won’t matter to me.”

“I still—”

“What do you think it will cost, a course of six treatments, about $15,000?” 

“Helen—”

Helen opened her purse. She got out her checkbook. With the same hesitant care that she had always used to pen her letters to Gabriel—drawing the letterforms so they would be clear and never misunderstood—Helen wrote out a check for $15,000, dated it, then signed it, the leaning, childish cursive of her full name filling the whole of the signature line. She sat down next to Gabriel, tore the check from the book, and placed it in his hands.

“If you’re absolutely sure.” 

She nodded, no longer sure.

“To be paid back,” he said. “With interest.”

She closed her eyes. Zeroes floated in the darkness behind her lids. Too many. She felt lightheaded. She opened her eyes. Negative images of the zeroes remained for a moment, then vanished. 

“The beer’s gone,” she said.

“Well then,” said Gabriel, ”let’s open the champagne.”

Helen was seeing double now. She felt goofy, wonderful, terrified. She smiled at Gabriel. He smiled back. She saw herself in him. She didn’t really have an extra fifteen thousand dollars.

Gabriel handed Helen a plastic champagne flute. The pale liquid rose fast, bubbling over the rims, down the sides and over her hand. She laughed, and Gabriel’s smile widened.

“Do you like football?”

Her heart sank a bit at the question. Helen hated the game. Roger lived for it. 

“Honestly, no.”

“I mean futbol. Soccer.”

Soccer made her think of collapsing stadiums and death by trampling. Hooligans and vomit and missing teeth.

“Well, I don’t really know.”

“Right now, Liverpool is playing Chelsea.”

Gabriel turned on the TV. He made a dramatic show of puffing up pillows for himself and Helen, and propped them up against the headboard on the bed he was sitting on. Then Gabriel leaned back on one side and messed distractedly with the remote. Helen lay gently next to him, as the TV before them glowed green with the grass of the pitch.

Helen’s body began to ache in a way that made her think of solar flares. Neither of them moved. It lasted for ninety minutes.

When the game was over, Gabriel clicked the TV off and they lay in silence, drinking the last of the warm champagne, Helen’s head almost on his shoulder, close enough that she imagined she could hear the sound of blood rushing through his veins.

“You probably shouldn’t drive,” he whispered, as though there was someone else in the room who he was afraid of waking. “Should you call Roger?”

“I lied to him. I told him I was out with my friends Patricia and Janelle, singing karaoke.”

“I see. What happens if you perseverate the lie?” 

Helen called Roger, waking him.

“I got drunk, baby. I’m going to sleep on Patricia’s couch.”

“Did you drive?” said Roger, his voice burred with suspicion.

“No. Yeah, I’ll get the car in the morning.”

“Do not get arrested. That’s all I need, for my girlfriend to get a dewey.” 

“I’m not driving, shit!”

“Good.”

“Good night.” Quietly, she added, “I love you.” 

“Yeah, love you.”

Helen put her phone in her purse and her purse on the floor. She sat on the edge of the bed and took off her bra without removing her blouse. She stood, started to unzip her skirt, stopped. In the dark of the hotel room Gabriel Ulloa lay on the bed, his legs crossed. He did not move. She could not tell if he was looking at her. The only light in the room came from a bright red LED clock on the side table: 2:41.

“What are you thinking?” she asked.

“I’m angry with you for tempting me away from my damaged wife. In fact I hate you for it. But you’re just drunk, I understand that. Me too. And this is all my fault, really. I see that. Soccer. Jesus fucking Christ.”

Helen sat on the floor. Gabriel turned on a light and went into the bathroom. Helen climbed under the covers of the other bed, fully clothed. This was the end of it. It was over and all was lost, but at least there was no pain.

She listened to the shower run, then turned the light out.

In the morning he was gone. A knock at the door.

“Housekeeping,” said a voice.


At least he cashed her check.

Helen learned of Ava’s death five months later from, of all people, Roger. Ava had published her suicide note to Facebook, and in it, had said she would miss sex when she was gone, and hoped the afterlife was an erotic one. The note went viral, and eventually Roger happened upon it.

Ava had published her suicide note to Facebook, and in it, had said she would miss sex when she was gone, and hoped the afterlife was an erotic one.

“Weren’t you friends with this chick’s husband?” said Roger, turning his laptop around and pushing it across the kitchen counter early one morning before work.

“Oh God.”

Helen went in the bedroom and dialed Gabriel. 

“You calling about your money?”

“Jesus, Gabriel, no, I’m calling about Ava.”

“You want to know how she did it? That seems to be all anyone’s interested in.” 

“I just want to know if there’s anything you need, anything I can do?”

“I don’t need anything.” 

“Gabriel, I—

“I finally confessed to Ava about what happened in Dallas, between you and me.” 

“Nothing happened,” said Helen, fierce; quiet. “Fuck, Gabriel.”

“Ava was dead two days later. She used a roll of packing tape to seal off her nose and mouth, suffocated. While I was out getting Indian. Saag paneer. I thought she was doing better, going to eat a proper meal instead of pure sugar. I got home and her head was mummified. She was still alive, she fought me weakly for a while. I accidentally cut her face trying to remove the tape with scissors and a knife. When I finally got it off she was gone.”

“I—I don’t know what—”

“It’s best if you don’t call again.”


In 2012 Helen received a cashier’s check from Gabriel for $17,500. There was no note attached. She sent him a long letter, which was returned unopened. Daveed, Helen’s boyfriend at the time, intercepted the letter.

“Who’s Gabriel Ulloa?” 

“Long story.”

“I’m sure curious.”

Daveed sat on the end of the couch, ready to go pick up the takeout he’d ordered from the shawarma place on the corner. In one hand he held an umbrella he’d pinched from a hotel in Memphis long ago. Rain strafed at the windows of their apartment. They listened to the hushy roar of it. Then Helen sat down next to Daveed, and told him everything.

“Why don’t you go up and see him?” 

“He hates me, clearly.”

“Maybe not. And besides, anger is not the same as hatred.” 

“I’ve googled him, he has a girlfriend.”

“Meaning. . .” said Daveed, tapping the metal tip of the umbrella on the old wooden

floorboards.

“Meaning. . . I doubt I’d be welcome.”

The rain stopped. Sudden, as though the sky had finally emptied. 

“Maybe the girlfriend sent the letter back.” Helen considered this. “At least call him.”


“Gabriel?”

“Helen?”

“Wanted to thank you for the check. You didn’t have to do that. But it came at a good time.”

“Good to hear your voice.”

Helen thought about Daveed, his jealousy glimmering in the low light of their apartment. Helen thought about Ava, and the force it must require to peel adhesive tape off of human skin.

“I sent you a letter.” 

“You did?” 

“It was returned.”

“Oh,” said Gabriel. “My partner. Ursula. I bet she saw a woman’s name handwritten on the return address and sent it back. She’s a bit like that.”

“Is she good to you?”

“Listen, I haven’t been well. Three hospitalizations, lots of meds, nothing working, even ECT not having much effect. They’ve dialed it down from the old days. You know? I sleep nineteen hours a day, the other five hours I weep and plot ways to kill myself so that it won’t upset my parents and sister and whoever finds me. It’s exhausting. I manage to do a little writing, but my themes are ordinary, arguments thin, sentences anemic, all just meatless skeletons, and everyone is rightly refusing to publish the crap. But to answer your question, yeah, Ursula’s good to me. She makes sure I eat and take my pills and she drives me to appointments. She reads to me, my only pleasure, short stories, Nadine Gordimer, W. G. Sebald, Steven Millhauser. Screech’s Montaigne. Ursula’s a fine editor as well, and I trust her with my work. She’s overprotective, though. She’s out at the moment, or she would not have let me answer the phone. So we’re lucky we’re getting to talk, Helen. Tell me about you.”

Gabriel took a deep breath after his monologue, uttered in seconds. 

“Nothing to tell. Stable. Dating a good guy for a change.” 

“Not a Roger.” 

“Not.”

“Ursula’s home, I should go.”

That was the last communication Helen ever had with Gabriel Ulloa. Two more letters sent were both returned, presumably the work of Ursula Majaniev.


Helen waited at the carousel until her old black suitcase tumbled down the belt and wedged itself between a Louis Vuitton trunk and huge military duffel bag. Helen, stumbling along with the carousel, could not dislodge her old American Tourister. The man in the Ohio State football jersey, who’d given her his New York Times, grabbed it for her, and gently placed it on the pocked linoleum. Without thanking him, Helen fled baggage claim, found a taxicab, and within an hour was checked into her hotel on 53rd.

Helen drank water out of the sink, ate both the granola bars she’d brought along, and watched the ash gray of the city through a small, south-facing window. She showered. The scent of the hotel shampoo made her cry, hard, and later she fell asleep on a threadbare loveseat trying to remember what it was about the essence of pomegranate that brought her to such wailing despair.

She woke, dressed. Down on the street the drizzle was turning to rain. She bought an umbrella in a bodega and headed toward Gramercy. Helen always associated the borough of Manhattan with death: she’d tried to commit suicide here once, and had known three people other than Gabriel who’d succeeded. She’d known two people who were murdered, half a dozen who’d died by other means. It always made her think of Jim Carroll, his song “The People Who Died.” She had written to him once, but he did not write back.

The gray, the damp, the stink of the walk pressed the spirit of death against her cheek like the flat of a sword.

Helen pushed the intercom button next to #504 Ulloa/Majaniev, where he’d always lived.

“Yes?”

“Hi, I’m Helen Chaissen? I was a friend of Gabriel’s? May I speak with you for a moment?”

No response. After a moment Helen buzzed again. Nothing. She was about to leave when a young woman dressed in a long black coat emerged from the building.

“Shall we get a coffee and talk?”

In silence Ursula led them a block east to a diner called Colonel’s. They sat across from each other in a tall, private booth. A waiter brought mugs of coffee, even though they hadn’t ordered them. Helen added cream and sugar to hers, felt Ursula staring at her. Finally she looked up.

“Helen, you said?” 

“Yeah.”

“And you’re here. . .”

“I’m in town for work for a couple days. Listen, I was not a close friend, just a fan. We corresponded. I just happened to read about Gabriel in the paper on the plane up, not three hours ago. I’m sorry to blindside you. You’re probably overwhelmed. Overwrought. Over-everything.”

“It’s all right. I’m not, actually. I’m glad to see you.”

Ursula Majaniev smiled. In the umber light of Colonel’s, a gold tooth, way back in the buccal recesses, glimmered like a dying star.

“Suicide is a kind of repellant, and keeps people away,” Ursula said. “Very few people have approached me, and it makes me angry. It’s one of the only times in my life I’ve felt truly enraged, like I could put my fist through sheet metal, or kill someone with a screwdriver.”

Ursula smiled again. Gold.

“I have to ask you something, Ursula. I wrote to Gabriel a few times, and you returned my letters. Why?”

Ursula stopped smiling. She lifted her coffee to her lips, drank, put the mug down, without ever taking her eyes off the woman seated across from her.

“I would never have returned letters, never did. On the contrary, it was my duty to open and read letters to Gabriel, fan letters, notes from friends, doctors, editors, lawyers, lovers, if he wanted me to. If any were returned, he did it himself. Can I ask, are you the hotel girl, from Dallas?”

Helen blushed.

“That’s me. The hotel girl.” 

Ursula smiled again, coruscating.

“He wrote about you, about that night, about his ultimate confession to Ava of what he’d fantasized about you in that hotel room. He wrote about Ava’s death by suffocation. Esquire was going to publish the piece, but he killed it. I think he was worried you would recognize yourself as the girl, even though he didn’t use your name. He called the moment ‘by far the most potently erotic moment of my life, and as well the arc between a childhood of unwanted mouths and an adulthood of enfeebling depression.'”

“Jesus Christ, nothing happened!”

“Yes,” said Ursula. “I know. It didn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. Everyone is dead, but for you and me.”

Helen stared into her coffee. It was strong, thick stuff, the sort that cream had little effect on, and she wanted to shrink down, climb over the hot ceramic lip and disappear into the sweet swirling mud of it, suck it into her tiny lungs, a few seconds of blind, pressing panic, then death, and utter freedom from this moment, from Ursula’s words, Gabriel’s words, the lo-fi spooling-off of a devastating confession of nothing, made all the more sonic and piercing by Ursula having known the text of it by heart and delivering it not like a poem or a speech, but like a stillbirth: with calm, patience, and the confidence that comes in knowing that the failure was not hers.

Ed Park Isn’t Sure He Answered The Question

One of the great things about running a digital publication is the freedom to try something new, just because. Yes, I am always inspired by books. But lately I’ve been feeling equally invested in the author as person—perhaps because as of this year, I am one. I wanted to try a different model of speaking with established authors, one in which we get to know them as a person, a thinker, and a creative practitioner, while having fun along the way. Introducing “23 Questions With Ed Park.”

Denne Michele Norris
Editor-in-Chief

1. Describe your publication week in a six-word story.

Ed Park: Brought near tears by Rachel Aviv.

2. What book should everyone read growing up?

EP: Robert Cormier’s I Am the Cheese

3. How do you start from scratch?

EP: I’m always on the lookout for curious turns of phrase, any lexical sequence that sparks something. I keep a list of aspirational titles, for which I hope someday to write a fitting story or novel. Same Bed Different Dreams is an example—an old Korean adage that I knew would make a good title. I’d periodically try to cook something up that would do it justice, but I didn’t start to crack the code till 2014.

I was on a plane the other day, sitting in coach, and as the flight attendant pushed the cart up the narrow aisle, he chanted, “Elbows and knees, elbows and knees.” That’s a good title or perhaps a bit of dialogue from which I can build. I’m not sure I answered the question. 

4. Three presses you’ll read anything from:

EP: New Directions, New York Review Comics, KAYA Press.

5. Hardcover, paperback, or e-reader?

EP: All.

6. If you were a novel what novel would you be?

EP: Pale Fire, or The Cave of Time (a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure)

7. Describe your ideal writing day.

EP: Up at dawn. Coffee in hand, I discover I really did jot a few evocative, enigmatic lines from the incredibly strange dream I just had (instead of dreaming that I scrawled them down). These conjure the basics of the story, and I just have to fill in the gaps with lambent lines that by some miracle come easily to me, for hours on end. I work through lunch, take a nap, write some more. Then I watch an episode of Fisk.

8. Typing or longhand?

EP: Typing on a typewriter.

9. What’s a piece of writing advice you never want to hear again?

EP: Write what you know.

10. What’s a piece of writing advice you think everyone needs to hear?

EP: Write what you know.

11. Realism or surrealism?

EP: Surrealism.

12. Favorite and least favorite film adaptation of a book:

EP: Favorite: The Swimmer—a movie of extreme psychological horror, derived from a Cheever story that’s just a few potent pages long. (Runner-up: Inherent Vice.)

Least favorite: White Noise—I’m sure there are ones I’ve liked less, but this is one I tried most recently. Maybe it gets better. I liked the scene of Adam Driver (as Jack Gladney) taking German lessons. I admire Baumbach for swinging for the fences. But the tone is not the tone in my head.

13. What’s your favorite comfort snack?

EP: Peanut butter on crackers

14. Edit as you go or shitty first draft?

EP: Immaculate first draft. Then take it apart, make it better, as the larger structure and ambition of the project become clearer to me.

15. Best advice for pushing through writer’s block?

EP: Break it down. Use short numbered sections.

16. Write every day or write when inspired?

EP: Every day, as close to a fixed schedule as possible. 

17. The writer who made you want to write:

EP: Vonnegut, Brautigan, Douglas Adams, Stephen King—in high school, I read virtually everything they wrote up through the mid-’80s. And in college, immersion in Nabokov and Faulkner and Ulysses sparked a different kind of literary ambition. After that: John Irving, Don DeLillo. Discovering George Saunders in the early ’90s (“The 400-Pound CEO”) and Kelly Link in the late ’90s (“The Girl Detective”) were also turning points. 

18. How do you know when you’ve reached the end?

EP: Last sentence feels unimpeachable.

19. Writing with music or in silence?

EP: A little of both. If I have music on, it’s usually without words, often something Baroque—Scarlatti, Telemann.

20. Describe your writing space.

EP: A desk off of the kitchen in our New York apartment. To the right is a small CD player. There are binders of notes and drafts, plus books stacked on the surface that I brought there from the shelves in other rooms because I consider them research material for whatever projects I have going on. But a lot of these titles go unexamined. I have a few icons—a stone statuette from Jeju island and a matryushka that my friend Amanda gave me featuring Buffalo Sabres players from the late ’90s, such as Dominik Hasek and Miroslav Satan.

There’s a banker’s lamp, jars and mugs stuffed with pens and bookmarks and earplugs and things, a bulletin board, and a Webster’s with the cover mostly detached at the spine. 

21. How do you keep your favorite writers close to you?

EP: I memorized Yeats’s “The Second Coming” earlier this year, and I dial it up on the old mental database whenever I’m stuck in a long line, or in a waiting room with no end in sight. Its terrifying imagery and all-seeing tone struck me with unusual force during high school, but I like it even more now. 

22. What’s the last indie bookstore you went to?

EP: Skylight in L.A.

23. What does evolving as a writer mean to you?

EP: Finding new forms of narrative energy—honing my style without repeating.

The Medication Kept My Mind in a Loop

Halfway through my idea, an axe came flying to chop it apart. This happened every day, all day. I could not think!

The human mind wants to flow in long lines, spin up stories, hatch plans, and solve problems. If thoughts are trains, then mine were a wreck in a desert landscape, keeled over on its side. Wandering around the mess I was heartbroken, toes banging against a piece of bent metal here, remains of an armrest there. Hoping to get sharp again I kept pounding coffee and RedBull. But my mind just looped, like a line of broken code firing up and never executing. This was what the medication did: olanzapine is a substance similar to antihistamines, the drowsy allergy relief. The difference is that it never put me to sleep. It just got me part of the way there, when thoughts become vapors. On the outside, I gave the appearance of being calm and at peace. But inside I was browbeaten, stuck, grieving my once free thoughts.

“You look happy,” says a psychiatrist to a woman in Shulamith Firestone’s book Airless Spaces, a 1998 collection of portrait sketches of women at the New York hospital. The scene is a soup kitchen Christmas function. A mental patient shows up after a year of living alone. Her affect is flat. She’s heavily medicated.

“She made a wry face: ‘Not quite.’ He tried again: ‘Content, at least?’ She shook her head no. He finally settled on ‘Stabilized?’

‘Stabilized, yes,’ she granted.”

                                    From the story “Stabilized, yes.”

To stabilize means to cause something to become fixed and stop changing. It’s cruel to do this to a human mind. The mind wants to move around, shape-shift, spiral, explode. The word “stabilize” comes from carceral psychiatry and the context of punishment and enforcement. But over time, it has become part of everyday conversations about care,, support, kindness and wellbeing. It has entered the context of family, love, friendships and work relationships, where it is squarely misplaced. Once, a mentor I had in graduate school told me about a student who used to be troubled and overdramatic, “but now on medication, she’s really stabilized.”

I froze. I knew this was supposed to be a good news story and I was expected to applaud it.

I was the one who took her to the psych ward.” My mentor’s voice held the satisfaction of the end of a fairy tale: “I got her help.”

“Did you go visit her?”

“No,” my mentor gazed quizzically into the middle distance. “I didn’t want to intrude, and she never contacted me afterwards. Not even to say thanks!”

It seems like a coin with three sides, on which the first-person experience does not match with its medical record, does not match with the appearance to an outside observer. The three threads–self, science, and society–are knotted in a web of mutual misunderstanding, deception and misprision. 

We’ve all heard the story about a “chemical imbalance in the brain” that medications are going to correct. But when considering the first-hand accounts of the people who’ve actually taken the medications, we may hear that chemical peace feels oppressive, stabilization can be like a chokehold, and the promise of balance is just a lie. Meanwhile, there’s adverse effects like drowsiness, lethargy, and impacts on heart, liver, and hormonal health. Finally, there is one more paradox: To say the meds don’t work, or that they’re bad, is to be mentally ill. The Diagnostic-Statistical Manual (DSM) of psychiatric disorders has that baked into the list of symptoms, so to have first-hand experience will lessen, not strengthen, your authority on the subject. I used to butt my head against this stone wall of barmy logic. What world is this?


When I heard about the memoir Unshrunk by Laura Delano, I was excited. With a subtitle like “A Story of Psychiatric Treatment Resistance,” I hoped it would go into that dark and tense field of when the meds don’t work, the meds are bad, and the more you say it, the more they want you to take them. 

Unshrunk maps that under-examined experience through the auto-anthropology of Laura, a young woman from a super well-heeled background (New York debutante balls!) whose early brush with mood swings at thirteen lands her the first appointment with a therapist, that will turn out to be the first of hundreds more.

The three threads–self, science, and society–are knotted in a web of mutual misunderstanding, deception and misprision.

Delano, who is in her early forties today, writes in her preface that she spent the best part of her teens and twenties as “a professional psychiatric patient” (her words—I’ll refer to the author as Delano, and the protagonist of the memoir as Laura). No expense was spared to give Laura the best of everything, especially when it came to medical and mental health care. She got therapist after therapist, medication after medication. To no avail. 

Laura studies at Harvard, but has to miss a lot of school. She does not learn or grow like other college students. No dramatic broadening of horizons takes place, no academic romance with a new subject. There’s no “coming of age” like in Elif Batuman’s The Idiot, nor even (not really) any of the sexy, messed-up stuff from Elizabeth Wurtzel’s Prozac Nation. Despite all that Harvard can offer young people, Laura fails to plan a career, let alone find her calling. After college she’s adrift and hops between therapy appointments, group sessions, treatment centers, and sundry social gatherings where she cannot talk about how she’s really doing, nor share the experiences that constitute her daily life. Increasing differences isolate Laura from the rest of her cohort, who are consumed with talk of internships, jobs, weddings, births, the property ladder; here, Laura’s life fades in comparison, and stays hidden behind a fence of shame and internalized ableism.

In recent years, the memoir market has seen many mental-health memoirs that resolve in redemption through therapy, or are built as tales of salvation-is-a-pill. By contrast, Delano’s Unshrunk takes a resolute stance against that trend. Unshrunk is one of the first, if not the first, traditionally published memoirs that explicitly writes back to the institutions of therapy, psychiatry, pharmaceuticals, and the pillars of what we think is a good family: so concerned with their daughter’s demeanor and appearances that they bankrolled an experience of over-medication, in what some might argue is a subtle form of gender-based violence.


It’s one of society’s many injustices that those who most urgently need mental health care–often unhoused, middle-aged, Black men–are denied access to the most basic services, while others—young white women from wealthy backgrounds—whose needs are less urgent, receive it in overabundance, to the point of it being counterproductive. Laura’s medications beget side effects, creating the need for more medications, begetting more side effects. Meanwhile, the insurance keeps paying, and everything snowballs. 

Blown up to the scale of a cultural practice in North America, this dynamic has led to the creation of the “rich, overmedicated daughter” cultural phenomenon: a growing population of young women with multiple health issues and diminished autonomy. These young women bear the brunt of the medications’ side effects, which can include thyroid, kidney, liver, skin, and cardiovascular illness, cognitive impairment, stunted emotional growth, as well as professional, educational, and social limitations.

She got therapist after therapist, medication after medication. To no avail.

Laura’s story is part of a bigger picture. Her memoir follows in the celebrity footsteps of recent books by Paris Hilton and Britney Spears: Paris (2023) tells the story of Hilton’s ordeal in an institution for troubled teens, a place she describes as being somewhere between a boarding school, a prison, and an old-fashioned reformatory. Her handlers were intent on breaking her spirit, so that she would be “fixed” once and for all, and stop embarrassing the conservative Hilton family. Meanwhile, in the highly publicized case of Britney Spears, the singer received psychiatric treatments at the behest of her father, who engaged the American court system to extend his legal authority over her into adulthood.

Spears’ memoir exposes the legislative and social structures that enabled her entrapment–the mental health conservatorship, the tabloid press and its hostile coverage of her quarter-life crisis, misogyny in the music industry–and how tricky it was to detangle herself from these intercogged and combined locks.

“My world didn’t allow me to be an adult,” Spears writes, and: “The woman in me was pushed down for a long time. They wanted me to be wild onstage, the way they told me to be, and to be a robot the rest of the time.” (The Woman in Me, 2023)

It resonates deeply with a quote from Delano’s Unshrunk: “I was beginning to see my psychiatric medications more clearly for what they were,” she writes: “instruments of behavior control wielded upon me by professionals who saw it as their right to decide what went in my body. It was a right I’d once afforded them, but not anymore.”

Fueling all three women’s narratives are serious allegations of autocratic cultural practices in America: consent-violating paternalistic and socially malign customs that particularly affect women, especially in situations where money is involved. 

The climax of Unshrunk is when Laura quits her medications, and then fires her therapists one by one. Laura comes to realize that the medication she took stopped her from feeling and thinking through “the deeper existential questions [she] was grappling with—ones about identity, performance, meaning, purpose, womanhood, body, and self.” Once aware of the damage done, Laura begins her journey of making up for her years of stalled development, missed milestones, and stifled personal growth. A cloud of brain fog lifts, the tomb under her feet cracks—she can breathe, expand, take up space. She becomes “unshrunk.”


One of Unshrunk’s most interesting sections is precisely the story of how Laura went off her meds. It’s a personal experience report of dramatic withdrawal, with horrific symptoms that encompass sensory disturbances, bodily, mental, and neurological dysfunctions, and an astronomical level of brain noise. The symptoms of psych med withdrawal are so severe, they include difficulties staying oriented, out-of-body sensations, mood swings, sleep issues, disruptions to normal thought processes. All of these are apt to bring on strange behavior in the person experiencing them, and produce symptoms that strongly resemble a psychotic break or serious mental illness like schizophrenia. They may even resemble mental illness more so than mental illness itself. Thus, for many people who’ve tried to withdraw from psych meds, these symptoms can become an invitation to say: “See, there. You have a mental illness. You need to get back on your meds!”

But that’s not right. Withdrawal is a different beast, biologically and chemically speaking. Delano’s book does a good job of explaining the difference, and really drills down on the bio-weapon that psychiatric medications are, focusing on their internal and endocrinological agency. She introduces concepts like homeostasis and iatrogenesis to dig deep and long into the physiology and biology of what happens when psychiatric medications enter and exit the mix of our bloodstream. (Spoiler alert: it is much, much more complex and all-encompassing than “a chemical imbalance in the brain”). Delano’s self-report of the weirdness, considerable pain, and bold-headedness it took to persevere in the face of lacking community support to wean herself off psychiatric drugs doubles up as a practical resource for people in the same predicament.

A few news pieces in recent years have noted that it’s notoriously hard to quit psychiatric medications. Some articles have spread the latest insight on how best to do it: “do it very slowly.” This conjures up the image of a slow and plodding procedure, assuming buy-in from the community and a sympathetic prescribing doctor who wants to help with the project–which it can be impossible to get.

A cloud of brain fog lifts, the tomb under her feet cracks—she can breathe, expand, take up space.

But let’s say that the first gigantic hurdle has been cleared. The medical aspect of the procedure is an equally tall order. The drugs are powerful, ridiculously so, even though our modern world seems to have forgotten that. But dip into their history and at the beginning, the clue was in the name: Thorazine. This early antipsychotic (developed from the 1930s and brought to market in the ‘50s) was named after Thor, the Norse thunder-and-hammer god. It was believed that Thorazine would be “a hammer” to the walls of insane asylums. It was such a strong sedative, it calmed even the most violent patient right down, without nevertheless putting them to sleep. This technology enabled a mass exodus of asylum patients, and their diaspora. Free to go home, some ended up in jail. Many more went on to live alone, shunned by former friends and family, like the woman in Firestone’s Airless Spaces. They took the asylum with them—orally, nano-technologically, delivered through the blood-brain barrier in pill form or as monthly injections. One might say that psychiatric medications installed the mental asylum at the molecular level, in chemical form, as an edible asylum if you will.


Today, the drugs’ Thoric strength is seldom remembered. Prescribing doctors rather emphasize that the newer generation of pills is easier to swallow. The patients’ jury is still out on whether that is true. Regardless, doctors now prescribe antipsychotics to all kinds of people for all sorts of conditions. Trending towards an aesthetics of cosmetic and elective pharmacology, psychiatry seems increasingly dedicated to preserving sameness, padding and blocking out anything that could be remotely ugly, uncomfortable, or unpredictable—and using the big guns to do so. The result is a growing base of people, like Laura, for whom the medication is wildly overcorrecting, and creates a “botoxed” inner self that is so motionless it has no wrinkles, but also, no life.


To make matters worse, with the rise of telemedicine and increasingly doing away with face-to-face consultations, especially in the mental health space, it looks as though in the future it’s going to become harder, not easier, to go off-script. When the doctor from the iPad only asks questions from a script written by AI, which was trained on centuries of hateful theory, could it be that we’re going back in time, not forward? This kind of thing keeps me up at night.

Our pharmaco-asylumian narratives stand for a secured, fixed, and immobilized state of order—especially for girls—not for disorder, nor dynamism, explosiveness, nor any kind of shape-shifting, transitional state outside of the sane/insane binary, nor for states that may be indecipherable, illegible, mixed-up, nor for any form of psychic entropy, chaos, change, self-divestment, nor spontaneous growth… The list goes on.

As the machine learning models are trained to know and perpetuate the abysmal status quo in mental health care, I often have dystopian visions of everyone I know lining up to get onboard a never-ending marble run of repeat prescriptions, until one day we’ll all be living in the edible asylum forever. So, before that can happen, we need to talk about mental illness as a two-way street, not a one-way destiny. When it comes to medications, we need to talk about the off-ramp, not just the on-ramp, and not just about prescriptions, but also de-prescriptions. Most of all, we need to come off the negative “stabilization” trip and prioritize becoming, growth, optimism, possibility, enablement, learning, revelation, nurture, connection, discovery, transformation and rebirth. Personally, I believe all of those things are possible and achievable for all of us, and I think Laura’s story and Unshrunk are a piece of living proof that it can work… and just how difficult it is. 

The drugs are powerful, ridiculously so, even though our modern world seems to have forgotten that.

Delano’s work forges a path of emotional growth and possibility, despite how rough the medication withdrawal is and despite the bridges that had to burn as a result of her decision. Sitting with the unpleasantness, and pushing for change, she has emerged from her quest clenching a compilation of useful resources on what we know about psych med withdrawal—and how much we don’t. She highlights how no drug manufacturer ever ordered a trial to find out how to safely get patients off their psychiatric medications. Delano’s quick dive into (publicly available, but seldom scrutinized) clinical trial information, turns up that the drugs were trialed for just four to eight weeks before they went to market. No pharmaceutical lab or medical research facility has documented what happens to people after one, two, five, or ten years of constant psychiatric medication use. This means that next to nothing is known officially about the impacts of long-term use. What there is instead, however, is plenty of so-called unofficial knowledge: consumer-led knowledge bases, patient-led initiatives, that collect oral and anecdotal evidence, creating a preponderance of community-owned knowledge. Delano’s book points those who are interested in the right direction so they can learn more. 

It’s certainly sobering to note that the scientific and medical literature has never thought this knowledge worth having, or worth producing an answer to the question of how modern psychiatric medications affect our brains and bodies when taken in the long term. But, for those who do wish to inquire, I guess a great way to find out might be to go and ask your local wealthy blonde girl. She might know.

Writing the Story You’ve Sat on for Fifteen Years

Peter Orner is a novelist, essayist, and short story writer with eight books under his belt. He’s also a swashbuckling reader who doesn’t shy away from discussing his influences and making the case for reading great, lesser known like Wright Morris, Breece D’J Pancake, and Gina Berricault (as he did in Recommended Reading here). And yet, for such a dedicated reader, there’s nothing fussy about Orner’s prose. His sentences roll off the page with the cadence of a conversation. One moment he lands a pulpy punchline, the next he delivers a quiet, devastating observation. A doorway becomes the dissolution of a marriage, a rainy Sunday becomes a best friend’s death, a dime becomes a grandmother. Razor sharp observations that land without a hint of gravitas. He’s just talking on the page, just remembering family stories that were whispered in the hallways at night. These moments might appear within the space of a couple pages yet they don’t crowd each other out. There’s a lightness to the language that allows them to glom together and distill each other. That’s the intangible, contradictory magic of Orner’s writing. 

Back in 2013, Recommended Reading published his short story “At the Fairmont.” For the release of his latest novel, The Gossip Columnist’s Daughter, we sat down to discuss the new book, the old story, and the experience of looking back on a multi-decade writing career. This proved auspicious because The Gossip Columnist’s Daughter is a leap forward in Orner’s writing—it simultaneously reconstructs and fictionalizes a painful rift between his grandparents and famed Chicago columnist Irving Kupcinet. The novel becomes a genealogy, an autobiography, and also, in an unexpected turn, crime fiction. It follows a writer obsessively trying to understand the truth of Irv Kupcinet’s daughter’s death. Is it a murder? Is it a suicide? Why does she play a key role in JFK conspiracy theories? And why did the writer’s grandparents and the Kupcinets stop talking after she died? These questions might have answers, but The Gossip Columnist’s Daughter isn’t about that. It’s a gorgeous reckoning with the answers we can’t have.

We met continents apart via Zoom—Orner was in Namibia celebrating the rerelease of his first novel The Second Coming of Mavala Shikongo—and dug into indelible questions of craft that fill writers’ days.


Willem Marx: Recommended Reading published “At the Fairmont” more than a decade ago. Is it a story you return to?

Peter Orner: Before you publish a book, you get an uncorrected galley. I wrote that story after the galley for the book Last Car Over the Sagamore Bridge was printed. I had to insist that the story get included. It felt like the book needed to have it. So, it is an important story to me. I had heard an old story about my grandfather who was in the South Pacific during World War II, he was stationed in San Francisco for a little while. I was imagining him and my grandmother meeting in a hotel in San Francisco—things didn’t go very well in my imagination, I’m not sure they went so well in real life either. It’s a personal story and one I fought for.

WM: Why was it so important to have the story included?

PO: I think it was a story I always meant to try and tell—this reunion in San Francisco that was built up between two people and then doesn’t quite meet their expectations to say the least. The Fairmont Hotel is in a fancy part of San Francisco, Knob Hill, the area I did not live in, but I often walked by it. God knows, I’m not sure if my grandparents had anything to do with the Fairmont Hotel, but it was this iconic place. I think I hung out in front of it one day and wrote that story or a draft of it.

WM: Do you recognize ways that your writing has changed across books?

PO: I feel like I’m still learning. I’m still trying to figure out how to do this. The one thing I can say is that I feel less confident now than I did before. I look at earlier work, and I’m like, damn, you really thought you knew what you were doing. Now I’m like, did I

But it was nice to feel like that. I took a lot of chances and I trusted myself. Now it’s different. Maybe I’m more at ease with myself, more contemplative. I rushed things earlier. There’s a time when everything you see is fodder for a story. Things are much harder now. I wish I had that sense of finding a story everywhere—right now it takes me a while to get a story under my skin. I’ve noticed that difference. There’s this old tale about Chekhov: Somebody challenged him and said, “You can write a story about anything, can you write a story about an ashtray?” And the next day, there was the story about an ashtray. I had a period of time when I could have done that. Now? No way! I would need three weeks to figure that one out. I’m lying in wait more than I used to, I’m not in as big a hurry.

WM: In another interview, you say that during Covid, you learned to “eavesdrop” on yourself and your memories. The phrase jumped out to me because it feels so relevant to the way you lace characters and family histories together across stories and books.

When I think about a character, I think about what that character remembers.

PO: Memory is what I work with. When I think about a character, I think about what that character remembers. That’s usually how I figure out a way into a story: What is it that my character can’t stop remembering? You’re supposed to ask, what’s that character doing? What kind of movement? But what prevents your character from moving? Where’s the paralysis? I’m interested in that.

Memories are so personal to us. What else have we got that’s only yours? You’re going to have shared memories, but that’s where there’s going to be that friction because people are going to remember differently. I’m endlessly fascinated. What sticks?

WM: You have two non-fiction books—two essay collections—and both are called “notes” in the subtitle: Still No Word from You: Notes in the Margins, and Am I Alone Here? Notes of Reading to Live and Living to Read. I wonder about this emphasis on notes. What are notes for you?

PO: It’s a way of approaching an essay in a less pretentious way for me. I’m not trying to accomplish anything. I’m just taking notes. It’s a way of tricking myself into thinking out loud a little bit. I’m not building something up so I have to make a point, I’m just taking some notes. It’s helped me immensely—sometimes it’s copying stuff I’m reading, literally verbatim, and then maybe thinking of something off of that. And that, somehow, is movement towards some kind of essay…maybe.

WM: You’re leaning away from telling yourself what you’re doing.

PO: It’s a trick, but it’s also something I truly believe in. I tell my students this: just take some notes. It’s very, very hard to create a story or an essay that works, we know that. But what if we just take some notes and don’t worry?

I’ve even thought, what if I didn’t have a story, just notes for a story? Isaac Babel’s 1920 Diary—those are literally notes for stories. In some ways, they’re better than the actual stories that grew out of that book. I’ve been thinking about that for 30 years, that particular process—not going back and fully realizing that those notes were in themselves extraordinary. Maybe the artifice he created out of the notes is slightly inferior. Arguably. I’ve taken that idea and run with it over the years. 

Babel has a line in the diary that I steal in the new book. He writes, “Describe the wounded man.” When he went and wrote the story, he described the wounded man but in the diary it’s just “Describe the wounded man.” In The Gossip Columnist’s Daughter there’s a burial scene—Jews line up to put gravel and dirt on a grave—and I had a note to myself, “Describe this sound, the stones.” I just left it in the book. My editor was like, “Wait, what?” And I was like, “No, no, that’s what I mean.” I want you to get there with the sound—I can’t give it to you, the book doesn’t come with a soundtrack, but you probably know the sound, or you can imagine it.

WM: One thing that stands out in The Gossip Columnist’s Daughter—it’s also in your stories—is the way you shift between first and third person POVs. A lot of writers lean toward one perspective or the other, but you’re very much at home in both. You even blend the two within the context of a single character. How do you choose what perspective is right for a piece?

PO: This is something I’m obsessed with. Over the years I’ve become convinced—more convinced, because I was always suspicious—that it’s a limitation to name the point of view. My first-person narrators can talk in third-person. And my third-person narrators can talk in first-person, and all the shades in between. The worst thing is to be dogmatic about any of this, but I am dogmatic when it comes to people who are dogmatic about point of view. I think of them as “the point of view police.” They say, “wait a second, no, no! That is a third person!” First of all, go back and read some Joyce or Cervantes. Great writers are always slippery with point of view.

My first-person narrators can talk in third-person. And my third-person narrators can talk in first-person, and all the shades in between.

I try to open myself up to be free to make those slippages, and it’s only because I learned from other people. The less transition the better, a reader will follow you or not. In this new book, Solly, the uncle, is a favorite of mine. Sometimes we slide into his point of view, but more often it’s Lou, the grandfather. He’ll be being described in third-person, and then he’ll start thinking in first-person. I gave myself the freedom to do that.

WM: That’s a question I had, even when we are with Lou and Solly—the older generation—I could feel Jed, the grandson and the central narrator, behind them. I would wonder: Is Jed telling this? Am I in Jed’s imagination now or have I actually moved in time to see things that happened before he was born? You can’t tell. I mean, you can tell, but there’s always a small doubt. Maybe not.

PO: That’s what I’m looking for. I want you to forget, then remember; forget, then remember.

WM: As a writer, are there certain questions you used to ask yourself that you don’t ask anymore? And are there new questions that you ask now as you’re coming to a new project?

PO: I think the biggest one is: Do I have the stamina to do this? Time becomes different. It can become a killer if it’s in your head and you’re thinking: Do I devote my time to this story or this story? When I was younger, I would devote my time to all the stories. Now I feel, “all right, you’ve got to start choosing.” It’s not a good thing. There’s time, there’s time even if you’re ninety-five and have two more years. There’s time for these stories you need to tell. I’m trying to tell myself, “Chill out. You’re going to be able to tell as many as you want.” But part of me is nagging back…maybe you don’t have time.

WM: Is that nagging voice connected to the fact that there’s a story you want to tell that you’re sitting on?

PO: This whole new book is that idea embodied. Jed is trying to tell a story over many years. Jed is not me, but his struggle to tell the story mirrors my own. I did not rush this story as I might have when I was younger. I let this one have the fifteen years it needed. I wanted it to feel urgent, but to get that I had to be more patient. Isn’t there the phrase, “hurry slowly?” That is what I was doing here.

WM: Coming away from the book, I really wanted to ask why the Kupcinets? At a certain point, I started Googling their names and realized these are all real people. You know so much about this Chicago gossip columnist; the deep relationship Jed’s family has with the Kupcinet family feels so lived. Where did it all come from?

PO: This story’s been kicking around my head for a long, long time. My family was friendly with the Kupcinets, and there was a falling out. My grandfather—and this is all documented in columns that Kup wrote—was one of the people that would go on the annual fishing trip with Kup every year. And then between 1963 and 1964, suddenly my grandfather was no longer the captain of the fishing trip. The Kupcinets were never spoken of in my family. I was sort of haunted by this. No one else was, by the way. Nobody cared. People laugh at me. The Kupcinets are a little bit of a joke in Chicago. He was around for so long, he was a very powerful gossip columnist, but he ended up being a bit of a joke. So Jed is obsessed with somebody who people have long stopped thinking about. But my grandparents were friends with the Kupcinets at one time, there was a falling out, especially between the two women, and I was intrigued by that. That’s all I knew. I went from there.

WM: Did you have conversations about the Kupcinets with your grandmother the way Jed does?

PO: No, it was just something we didn’t discuss. I think I wanted to tell a story that was almost forbidden to tell. And I waited a long time to create the fiction around a real family mystery about why the relationship ended. It haunted me for my whole life, but it wasn’t something you could talk about. It’s sixty years old now, my grandparents have been dead a long time, so I had to recreate the whole world.

WM: The book does feel really different from your other writing. There’s the element of reality, actually weaving the real world into the story, and then there are these genre elements too. At a certain point it morphs into a detective story, and then Jed has a line where he addresses that explicitly: “This isn’t a detective story or a police procedural. It’s not a mystery. A mystery would leak through my hands like water. God knows I’d write one if I could.

PO: I’m glad you pointed out that line. I was sort of trying to write an anti-true crime. I read a lot of Raymond Chandler and Charles Williford when I was writing this book. I learned a lot from them, but I come from where I come from—my preoccupations are different. There was a cover up. There was an attack on an actor who had nothing at all to do with Cookie Kupcinet’s death. There were real world consequences that I was interested in, in a true crime sense. But the crime here was more of the heart. This is where the fiction comes in. It’s about punishing your friends for things that happen in your life. It seems cruel to me, but also very human.

WM: Jed’s a writing professor, you’re a writing professor, and the book lampoons writing maxims and teaching writing in general several times. Do you have any writing maxims that you do ascribe to?

PO: I try to stay away from them. I feel like you invoke them at your peril. There are some metaphors I can appreciate, but are they helpful in terms of writing a story? Probably not. 

If I have any maxim, it’s just hang in there. Hang in there with a story. Hang in there with the writing life. Anyone who loves it enough is gonna be able to do something. I’m hanging in there, that’s been my career motto. 

WM: Finally, so much of your work brings attention to other writers—your essays, and your podcast, The Lonely Voice, in particular, discuss influences and drawing lines between overlooked authors. Do you see that as a kind of overarching project? 

PO: When it comes to literature, there’s always stuff we don’t know out there—stories that may have a huge impact on us that we just don’t know yet. I’ve made it my small task to help people understand that this is not a finite universe. Go into a library and you’d be amazed to see what has been overlooked. I wouldn’t do what I do if I hadn’t found what I found. There’s a beautiful line of Kundera where he says something like, if he hadn’t found certain works in translation, he wouldn’t do what he does. He needed to go out of his own language—which he had a weird relationship with anyway. He almost needed another language. If we box ourselves in, only reading certain kinds of work or only reading work by certain kinds of people, we miss out on significant human experience. Even my characters are always looking for what’s been overlooked. And since so much is overlooked, it’s a never-ending business.

I Wish I’d Inherited Baba’s Sense of Belonging

Habibi Baba by Rasha Shaath

After my father died, I stopped watching television. It was the beginning of the summer in Riyadh, notoriously hot and dry—a suffocating heat that commingled with grief to create a force field of loss and longing. For months after he was gone, I stuffed my nose into the headrest of his navy La-Z-Boy and smelled him—Lagerfeld cologne and that intoxicating human scalp odor of sweat and grease and pillows. Baba would prop his thin, athletic legs onto the large footrest and often called out to one or all of his daughters to sit across from him so he could simultaneously watch the screen and talk to us. Whether in Amman—where I spent most of my childhood and teen years—or later in Jeddah and then Riyadh, where my family now lives, the living room was where we congregated. Like all families, we have our own rituals and habits, and nothing was more classic Shaath household than spending an evening together with the television on in the background while we ate, talked, argued, laughed, and ate some more.

For as far back as I can remember, the soundtrack to my life has always been Baba’s television, with the volume increasing as the years went by, announcing both the worldly and the mundane. His television consumption could be grouped into three distinct themes with accompanying emotional valences: Arab politics instigating spiraling despair, Hollywood action films inciting a boyish excitement, and football—his true and lasting passion—eliciting the purest joy. I could have opposing thoughts on everything with little resistance from him, which gave me a wide berth to form my own views. Still, he had his red lines, never to be crossed: Palestine and football. These were sacrosanct. There was only one point of view, and it was his.


When I moved to New York City in September of 2022, awash in fresh grief after Baba’s too-quick death seven months before, I was relieved I didn’t have a television in my apartment. Football, or soccer as Americans call it, was far from the national psyche. It was a global obsession that had not caught on in the U.S. as much as that other sport they call football. I naively thought that avoiding certain stimuli would make the grief contract. I wanted to believe that the respite of New York City could help eradicate my all-encompassing sadness. But alas, Baba was everywhere.

In November of that year, the FIFA World Cup kicked off, bringing the football fanatics out from the woodwork with their special brand of feverish fandom. Mired with the controversy of the tournament being held in Qatar, the analysis in the media took on a noticeably prejudiced bent. I opted not to tune in. Racist coverage of Qatar’s winning bid to host the World Cup reached a fever pitch in the weeks leading up to the opening, and being so far away from home only fueled my disdain for how western media was portraying the game. Football, coupled with that exhausting narrative of the Arab world, was far too much Baba-territory to traverse alone.

For as far back as I can remember, the soundtrack to my life has always been Baba’s television.

On the day of the opening ceremony in Doha, alone in my tiny apartment in the West Village, eight time zones away from home and 254 days since Baba left us, I hid under a wooly blanket and flung my phone away. I would, I said to myself, I could avoid the addictive sound of football fans in a packed stadium for the next month. I didn’t want to hear that most ubiquitous, most uproarious, most jubilant of wails—“goooooooaaaaaaaaaaaal.” Why watch if Baba’s joy wasn’t on display? Why watch without his witty commentary? Why watch without his animated presence? Why watch and pretend to care without him there?

That sense of listlessness—what felt like an entrenching disenchantment—was new to me. I had made the decision to move to New York, energized by a sense of possibility; a burning, itching, twisting desire to live the dream version of my life as a writer in the only city that mattered. I chose an apartment on Carmine Street in the heart of the Village, perched atop Joe’s Pizza and overlooking Father Demo Square, a tiny park and garden that operated like an Italian piazza, gathering people of the neighborhood, tourists in search of the city’s perfect slice and the homeless in search of a bench. In the dream version, this was supposed to locate me in the heart of the city’s creative life with friends and books and ideas. The reality, however, was a hollow and emptied out facsimile, like a vacant Hollywood set waiting for a scene to begin.

Those first couple of months in the neighborhood, as New York gloriously turned into shades of red, orange and copper, I mostly spent sitting in the park staring at the pigeons drinking out of its fountain or else finding refuge in the nearby Our Lady of Pompei church—just a Muslim girl in a Catholic church, lighting candles and crying over the dead.


After his family fled their home in Gaza during the ongoing Nakba in 1949, Baba first landed in Alexandria, Egypt where members of the larger Shaath clan had relocated. My grandfather, Tawfiq, who at the time of leaving Gaza thought it would be a temporary move and a return to Palestine was inevitable, heard of an opportunity for work in the rapidly developing Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and decided to take his family there. At the time, Jeddah was a small port town with only the beginnings of the infrastructure demanded by cities. Baba, then only seven years old, found his footing, so to speak, in the streets, playing football with neighborhood kids. One of twelve children, Baba was in the middle of the order and had the personality to match. He assumed responsibility at a young age, helping keep the family in balance and, later in life, becoming the fulcrum that maintained its stability. The family relied on his moral sturdiness and street-smart charisma he showed from childhood up until his last days, a seductive combination of responsibility and mischief.

He would spend his days walking the streets of Jeddah in western style shorts which contrasted the conservative, long, white robes worn by Saudi kids.  Learning how to make his own way, he struck up friendships with older men who taught him the ways of the world, both good—how to negotiate—and not so good—low-stakes poker. I think it was those shorts that marked Baba’s slow assimilation into and embrace of both a Palestinian and Saudi identity, finding a delicate balance he would maintain for the rest of his life. While my grandfather left Gaza as a temporary measure, the creation of the state of Israel changed that relocation to a permanent one, one that ushered in a new identity, that of refugee. My grandfather, because of his access, was able to request an audience with King Abdul-Aziz, the founder of Saudi Arabia, and ask for his support, which was duly granted, giving him and his family Saudi citizenship, thus changing their status once again, and in many ways, their destiny. This adjacency contributed to my father’s sense of belonging to this new country as well as his eventual path towards a more legitimizing profession and a small part of Saudi lore.

Unlike millions of football fans all over the world, Baba was not only a fan, but also what people dream of yet rarely become—a professional player. Baba’s career as a footballer was brief but brilliant. He played for the newly established Al Hilal, Arabic for Crescent Moon, today one of Saudi Arabia’s most beloved clubs, as a defense player starting in 1964. His stories about those years are filled with markers of how different the world was back then—often playing barefoot, which would yield him a lifetime of painful, gnarly toenails that we grew up making fun of. His tales about his teammates, many of whom were not literate and operated on a mixture of simplemindedness and superstition, were never disparaging. Instead, these stories pointed towards how fitra—what Muslims believe is an inborn state of purity and what some liken to Kant’s philosophical equivalent of “ought”—guided people towards their righteous paths. As one of the few players with a school education—the 16-year-old Baba was given a moniker by the other players of “Ustaz”, which is Arabic for “teacher.” I have a handful of memories of Baba bumping into one of his teammates. I would watch him transform into someone I didn’t know, a more jocular, mano a mano performance where it appeared like he was speaking a whole other language. Clearly, Baba existed in many worlds separate from the one he inhabited with us, and in this one, he was a revered athlete, the Ustaz.

Baba only played a few short years, but he became one of the team’s board members in the early 1980s. He pushed to hire the first foreign coach to elevate the team’s standards. He recruited a Brazilian coach, a move that elevated the team to be one of the best in Saudi and gain prominence across the Arab world. As a child, I remember sitting cross-legged in front of the television with my sisters, watching my father, pitch-side, reflected back to us from the screen. A tiny Baba on a television set, far away and close all at once. That part of my father’s life barely intersected with his family life, two worlds that remained separate and only touched when we watched a match together. So many of those people from his football days reached out to offer their condolences on the passing of Captain Ziad. A tweet by the Al Hilal account on the night he passed shows him in an archival image—black and white and smudged by time—standing with nine other teammates on the football pitch. Everyone is staring straight at the camera except for Baba, who is glancing to the side as if staring at the horizon, a point in the future. They had asked for a more recent photo to accompany the archival image, and I sent one of him in the barr, the Saudi desert, with his head wrapped up in a red and white shemagh, the Bedouin headdress. He has a wistful look in his eyes, as if he’s staring back at a younger self.

For Baba, Al Hilal was the only team that mattered. Its position was only trumped during the World Cup, when the Saudi national team would take precedence above club rivalries.


Two days after the Opening Ceremony, I successfully avoided watching. I got up early, vaguely aware that the first Saudi match against Argentina would be airing, but firmly committed to my stance. As I scrolled through my phone, it became obvious that social media would foil my plans before it even began. Countless videos revealed a manic energy surrounding the match. The excitement surprised me because a matchup against Messi could only result in one way: a defeat. My oldest sister Reem, chief archivist and record keeper of our clan, sent a photo on our family WhatsApp group of my mother watching the game, eyes glued to the screen back home in Riyadh in their early evening, her hair in curlers, an air of celebration permeating the tableau. I felt a pang of resentment, which I later realized was a combination of wanting my father in that chair instead, as well as the broader bitterness that she didn’t care much about football when he was alive. Haya, my youngest sister, was also in the frame, leaning forward towards the television, a visible tenseness in her hunched shoulders. At first glance, the photo landed with a thud of vindication, confirming a belief that my grief was more encompassing than theirs because I chose not to watch the match. But the photo told me something else: My family was continuing a ritual despite their pain, one that I decided to avoid fully, a pattern I had repeated throughout my life, trying to carve a place for myself that was in opposition to everyone else, a classic middle child move. 

I kept zooming into the photo, looking for clues that might lead me to some conclusion that would make the heartache soften. I searched for myself, or at least a spirit of myself, and could not locate it. My escape to New York, far from the pain born of familiarity, was proving to be a botched attempt at reconciling with death; the photo was proof. Instead of communion, I chose isolation, and now, far away from home and hurting, my awareness struck me hard. I did not want to face what a new configuration of family would feel like and chose distance as a route to imagined salvation.

That match ended with an unprecedented win for Saudi Arabia, making it the greatest upset in World Cup history, made all the more gratifying when Argentina eventually went on to win the grand title, a series of unlikelihoods that would have prompted Baba to say something like, “Once upon a time, we beat the winners.” The Saudi win made me cave; not watching the game, even after the fact, would be a betrayal. I wish I could recount those two goals the way Baba would have, with spare and elegant language that would give the listener a full-throttle emotional immersion. I can’t. Gripping my phone tightly, I watched again and again, that second goal fly in a soaring arc, enter the goalpost and then after a beat, the cameras panned towards the stadium filled with fans going absolutely crazy, erupting into euphoric joy. I watched the striker, Salem Al Dawsari, stave off his incoming teammates, barreling towards him in congratulations in true football fashion, and execute a graceful and instantly iconic backflip with ballet-esque precision. I got to my feet, my body unable to contain the adrenaline rush, and softly whispered “goooooooaaaaaaaaaaaal”, understanding why people call it “the beautiful game.” I never expected to cry. But at that moment, tears began streaming down my face, a combination of grief and patriotism that was completely new to me. It dawned on me then that football was becoming a generational glue connecting our family with Saudi across decades and lives.

My family was continuing a ritual despite their pain, one that I decided to avoid fully

I watched the ripple effect of this win play out across the world, ranging from disbelief to celebration. Nine of the players on the Saudi team are Hilalis, and I fantasized about how Baba would’ve reacted to what everyone called an “upset” but to me felt more like a coup. I canceled all my plans, went deeper into my feed and blanket, manically switched between news reports, articles, and TikTok videos of Saudi men and women dancing in the streets of Doha to the tune of electronic dance music from the 1990s. A particular video entranced me, where  a group of Saudi men outside the Lusail stadium in a mishmash of local wear—classic white thobe and red & white shemagh while others were draped in emerald green football jerseys—crowded together and danced to “Freed from Desire,” an iconic Eurodance song from 1996 that reaches a famous crescendo before dropping with a “na na na na na na na, nah, nah, nah, na na.”  This was the most animated I’ve ever seen Saudis, which revealed the scale of the win against Argentina and its significance not only to Saudis, but to Arabs and Muslims all over the world. For the first time in a very long time, that part of my identity—the Saudi part—felt legitimized without explanation or defensive arguments. This victory ushered in me a new understanding of Baba’s embrace of his identity—that being Palestinian and Saudi could exist as a refuge outside of politics and perception, signified by something as simple and as universal as football. This win was about skill, tenacity, strategy and perseverance. And perhaps, a dose of good luck. But in that moment, there was no reason to listen to or defend Saudi from the usual attacks—autocracy, money, oil, Islamic extremism, human rights abuses, or whatever else is deployed to flatten an entire country down to a string of labels. This was just Saudi beating Argentina, fair and square, as Baba would always say.


When people ask me where I’m from, I’m quick to rattle off the list of countries I belong to in some tangential way, because all of my belonging feels tangential. I say I’m Palestinian but my father’s mother is Iranian. I say I’m also Saudi, not because of blood but because I’m lucky to have the passport. I say I grew up in Jordan and that my mother was formerly Jordanian but is now Saudi because of that passport. But she’s originally Syrian. I usually say this with a mixture of weariness and pride, as if I’m revealing something special about myself. All my life, I’ve wrung my hands and contorted myself into an all-defining identity crisis which feels like a comfort zone but operates like an enormous limitation, disavowing any chance for a real stake in the ground. My father, on the other hand, was dignified in balancing the different parts of his identity, able to gracefully blend in wherever he was and rise up to what was required to perform that identity. Without a doubt, his football career demonstrates this but a kind of historicity was at play as well. Baba experienced and existed within the major eruptions in the modern Middle East that defined the era I was born into in 1979—the dissolution of the British Mandate in Palestine and the formation of the State of Israel, the rise of Saudi Arabia as the wealthiest Arab state, Iran’s dramatic shift to becoming an Islamic Republic. But history aside, in his personal life too—whether in football or later as a businessman during Saudi’s oil boom in the 1970s onwards or even more ephemerally as part of the first generation of displaced Palestinians—his posture was active. I could go on but I suppose the point is this: My father lived the thing that culminated in creating my own complex identity. He was able to assimilate and maintain a sense of belonging because he had in fact belonged and I suspected that a part of that belonging had to do with witnessing and participating. That belonging may not only be about a nation-state but a culture-based connection that ties you forever with place.

I, on the other hand, inherited all that in adjacency, not truly experiencing any sense of belonging to any one of those different legacies, a kind of arm’s length existence. The two things I held onto my whole life were first, that the Shaath family name was immediately recognizable for anyone who followed Arab politics because my uncle, Nabil Shaath, was a long time member of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and had been one of the chief negotiators for the now defunct Oslo peace process, therefore legitimizing my Palestinianness. And the second, that if my father was a founding player for Al Hilal, it meant I was, I am, a bona fide Saudi despite having no blood, no customs nor even the right accent to match that nationality. With his death, these two claims have largely disappeared, and I find myself gasping for air.


Baba’s illness was too quick. The four months and eleven days between diagnosis and death were breathtaking, as if we were experiencing cancer at 2x speed, as if swiftness would make the loss more tolerable. I could understand muscles weakening and strength waning. I could read medical reports and navigate hospital bureaucracy and feed and bathe and lift Baba. I could do all that forever if I had to. But the measure for that quickness which threw me was how a man defined by his charisma—a storyteller par excellence—became in a matter of months someone who hardly spoke, his voice a mere whisper, his appetite to regale us with tales gone. He lost the ability to walk quite suddenly, a mere two months into his diagnosis and two months before his death. He fell in the bathroom one night and, from that day on until he passed, was unable to walk unassisted and, gradually, not at all. I think that was a turning point for him. It had always been a source of immense pride that he had an athlete’s physique and agility, able to maintain a trim and fit figure his whole life, erect posture, and an uncanny knack to “fall well,” as he would say. A couple of months before his diagnosis, he slipped down a flight of stairs in an attempt to swat away a gecko with his slipper because Mama was scared of them. I wasn’t there to see the fall, but Mama says she looked down in horror, convinced his body was broken beyond repair. But because he knew how to fall, he emerged with just a dislocated finger on his right, slipper-swatting hand. Later, when he proudly recounted the story to his friend Abu Abdulrahman, his friend responded, “Ya Sheikh, don’t repeat this story or you’ll be hit with the evil eye.” Baba, never a believer in the occult or even slightly superstitious, dismissed the advice. A part of me believes Abu Abdulrahman was right.

During his last two long stays in the hospital, my sisters and I insisted on daily physical therapy, optimistic that this was all temporary, and that we were not anywhere near the point of no return. That soon, he would start responding to the treatment. That soon, his atrophying muscles would bounce back to their fullest capacity. That he could “fall well” into his cancer. I remember the first physical therapist who walked into the hospital room, a Saudi man, slight but seemingly capable. He introduced himself to my father. I, overbearing and always trying to strike harmony, urged Baba to converse with him, “Why don’t you tell him who you are?” I said, “Tell him that you’re an athlete.” And Baba, not wanting to disappoint me despite his recent reluctance to engage, grudgingly told him that he had been one of the original players for Al Hilal. The young physical therapist was in absolute awe despite being a fan of Al Nasr, one of the other major Saudi clubs, drilling him about the history of the club and the years that my father was the manager. Baba indulged him, albeit in a voice raspier than his usual clear and round pitch but animated nonetheless. My father could put anyone at ease, and in a strange reversal of roles, he took command of the dynamic between him and the physical therapist. Their bonding over rivaling Saudi clubs made the desperation of the situation feel a little lighter. Standing up on his skinny legs, made even skinnier from his illness, Baba circled his hospital room, regaling us with tales of the past. The storytelling seemed to revive Baba, to give him a reason to push forward, to try to stand up and take a few steps, to lean into his athleticism. 

When people ask me where I’m from, I’m quick to rattle off the list of countries I belong to in some tangential way.

The last time Baba spoke was the morning of Thursday, March 3rd, 2022. We brought him home from his third stint in the hospital the evening prior, a long stay where he caught Covid-19, adding a further layer of strain on his lungs and a palpable silence as he struggled to breathe without the support of an oxygen tank. That complication probably had an exponential effect on the amount of days we had left with him. We knew we were close to the end because we were relieved to be home, happy that if it were to happen, he would be in a familiar place, the house of love he and Mama built for us. That morning, propped up on his navy-blue reclining chair, he looked so small. My sisters and I, along with my mother, who remained a reluctant bystander, incapable of accepting this reality, crowded around him as he seemed to momentarily regain his older self. His voice, full bodied and creamy, rose up as if readying himself for one last story.


Since my father died, Saudi football has risen in stature, skyrocketing in both reputation and skill. They’re in place to host the FIFA World Cup in 2034, unleashing a fresh wave of accusations for “sportswashing,” echoing the outraged reactions to Qatar’s winning bid a decade prior, which presumes that wealthy nations in the Arabian Gulf should be scrutinized through a different lens with different rules meted out. They’ve recruited global superstars like Cristiano Ronaldo and Karim Benzema to the local clubs Al Nasr and Al Ittihad and attempted to woo Lionel Messi, who after losing to the Saudi team at the Qatar World Cup, went on to win the trophy for Argentina. The wooing party was none other than my father’s team Al Hilal. Messi went on to join Inter Miami but his name is constantly bandied about as a possible addition to Saudi football anytime international players are newly acquired. In moments when time and reality collapse, I imagine Baba, reclined on his blue chair, his arm resting behind his head, wryly commenting that he was never a Messi fan anyway and settling back to watch the beautiful game. 


Back in real-life New York, change kept apace and life, miraculously, moved forward. The seasons turned; each one offering a kind of distraction that led to the eventual softening of that grout-like grief. The starkness of winter was for burrowing, the fecundity of spring brought with it the possibility of joy and with the summer, glimmers of lightness returned. I spent the better part of those months walking the length and breadth of Manhattan on what I came to call “grief walks”, logging in 30,000 steps at a time, convinced I was crossing an invisible void to go back to a place where I could feel fully alive again. And then the fall crash landed with all its glory and I remember towards the beginning of October walking from 116th on the west side all the way down through Central Park and then flanked by the Hudson River winding towards the Village with a sense of clarity and presence descending upon me that signaled whatever it is people mean when they say, “I’ve moved on.”

The Village and specifically my little corner of the neighborhood also changed. New places cropped up where old establishments once held court, a cruel double reminder of the city’s two truths: the real estate market rules our collective fate and everything has an expiry date—places, people and above all, cultural currency. A cool Yemeni coffee shop opened next to Joe’s, replacing a pandemic-era Italian spot and bringing with it throngs of the city’s young and hip, predominantly Arabs and Muslims and with a healthy smattering of the brown-curious community, not to mention, a solid population of football-obsessed young baristas. On the other side of Joe’s, a bodega, also owned by Yemenis, quickly became a daily stop for me—for water, snacks, and breezy conversations with the guys manning the cash register. By breezy, I mean politics (Palestine) and religion (Islam), of course and by guys, I mean twenty-something men already too burdened by life, displacement, and loss but burnished with inherited wit and wisdom, reminding me of different versions of Baba from throughout his life.

It wasn’t just storefronts. It was the mood. Long before Mamdani became the enfant terrible of Muslim New Yorkers, I began sensing a vibe shift wafting up from below my fire escape. I would yank up my windowsill in the morning and instead of hearing the usual expletive-laden cacophony of the city’s homeless moving locations and the last drunks of the night, I would catch the pronounced lyricism of the Quran wafting up to my first-floor walk-up. Instead of the aloofness of a New Yorker nod of recognition, I was now greeted with a “salam sister”, multiple times a day. I would sit on the small wooden bench that the bodega guys propped up in front of the store for evening tea-drinking purposes and watch that little strip between Bleecker and Sixth become a modest fashion runway; an aesthetic marriage between hijabi chic and cool urbanite that made me want to cover my bare arms. There was a quality of subtle sweetness to it all and it felt good. My tall and lanky neighbor John, who has lived at 11 Carmine for over 40 years, sits at our building’s entrance every evening at around six o’clock with his long legs crossed on a foldout wooden chair, a Tupperware of finger sandwiches next to him and a gin tonic garnished with a thick cucumber slice in hand. He usually has a tattered paperback on his lap, alternating between reading and people watching with the old timers stopping to say hello. One evening that fall, as I crouched down next to him enjoying the cool breeze and talking conspiracy theories, he looked over at me with his doe-like eyes and said in his thick, gravelly voice , “All of a sudden it feels like we live on a nice, quiet street.”

Just like a fragile peace however, my momentary relapse into a state of normalcy was not meant to be. By November 2023, just one short year after that World Cup win, I found myself back on my white boucle couch, with a few more stains and a lot more sunken, unable to get myself out of the house. It was early days, but many already knew what we were witnessing—a full scale genocide, an unspeakable horror then, now. Gaza, the seaside town of my Baba’s youth, became the center of the world and the bleeding heart of the collective consciousness. And my grief, what I whittled down into a manageable nugget and began to carry lightly, exploded into a mushroom cloud of something else. Something unrecognizable that barreled through me and over me, flattening me into a mere wisp of myself. It went from being an insular and individual experience to a larger, all consuming, many-tentacled monster of an emotion rattling with white-hot, capital R, Rage. The flood of sorrowful tears and fetal positions and listlessness of Baba’s loss transformed into a clarifying fury, sinewy and muscular; dominated everything. It was an electric rod version of that grief but with a forcefield of destruction with an ever-widening scope. All to say, it ate me up.

But unlike losing Baba, instead of avoidance, I went the opposite way. I bought a television. The news cycle, relentless and endlessly enraging, became a twisted kind of raison d’etre. Every morning till evening, for days and weeks, just like Baba had done for his entire lifetime, I would sit on the edge of my couch, head in my hands and alternate between watching with utter disbelief and cursing in despair and devastation.  Countless days, pacing up and down the uneven floorboards of my railroad apartment, hyper conscious of the booms and bombs and screams emanating out of my state-of-the-art speakers connected to my screen and into the hallways of my building. Countless nights, walking in a safe loop up Sixth Avenue onto Cornelia Street down Bleecker and back to Carmine, frantic and at a loss, listening to voice notes from friends echoing identical bafflement. Finishing up my degree at Columbia and focusing on my writing receded quickly into the background and time took on a different quality, forcing all energy for practically everything to just dissipate. Like Baba, I found myself slumped in front of the screen, chain-smoking, heartbroken.

For so many people in New York City and around the world that fall and winter, my life began revolving around marches and protests and talks and vigils and sit-ins, getting me out of the house and into the street. Prior to that I had no history of protesting, no experience in activism, nothing that I could point to as an expression of solidarity beyond financial support for causes that I believed in. And I remember, I remember so clearly trying to ignore the loud and admonishing voice of Baba in my consciousness telling me it is futile. I didn’t want to hear it then and I don’t want to face it now but after every one of those acts of solidarity—ones that absolutely feel futile almost three years into this horror—I would walk home to my little corner of the city, stopping by Qahwa House for a Yemeni chai and a little chat on the bench in front of the bodega, trying to convince myself I had made a difference, even if infinitesimal. I don’t know how many nights I spent like this, indulging in idle people watching, by far the city’s greatest pastime, and tuning into the patois of Arabic and English and Urdu and Farsi, of dialects and accents and regional tonalities, mingling together as droves of people walked past me, that sonic background drowning out a truth I did not want to acknowledge. I don’t know how many times I was momentarily pulled out of a mindless reverie, to find myself locking eyes with a younger guy—they were always younger—and smiling, something of their posture reminding me of Baba, mistaking that flash of recognition as some kind of sign from the afterlife, a signal of his approval. I would shoot out a message to my sisters saying something to the effect that I feel Baba would be proud of me for doing this or saying that, for marching here or chanting there. I did all I could to ignore what he would have actually said with a long and weary shake of his head that spanned the length of time and said everything about his despondency.

By March, I made a decision to pack up my dream and my apartment and my life and leave New York. By the end of August, I was out, leaving America and an unshakeable sense of complicity behind and a once-again shattered heart. As hard as I tried, in the end I had to face the reality that Baba would have told me what he always told me—come back home to where you belong.

10 Books of Poetry for Insistence & Resistance

Poetry is having “a moment.” Beginning with the first Trump presidency, through the dark days of the pandemic, and carrying into this time of extreme chaos and uncertainty, even sworn poetry-haters (I mean really?) are shaking the dust off English lit textbooks, scrolling the web, and tuning into poetry podcasts in search of the solace and enlightenment that poetry offers. Meanwhile, poets do what we do, writing through the darkness of this dystopian moment.

That’s how my latest collection tic tic tic came into being. I woke up on January 1, 2024, thinking about all that has happened in this short decade. Then, after a strong cup of coffee, I turned to the page to make sense of how to live through this urgent, tumultuous time, and frame it within the long expanse of history. How did we get here? What are living through? And what can we call on? These are the questions I wrestled with as I wrote in the months that followed. tic tic tic wonders if love’s small affections can buffet the storm, and if faith is a last resort or an act of defiance in a wrathful world. I arrived at more questions than answers in the process of writing, yet I came to realize that the human spirit is a persistent creature and that “the quick tsk of hope” is at the heart of our resilience.

Along the way, I gathered inspiration from poets who are responding to the rise of Trumpism, enduring violence, war, racial targeting, technology’s spiraling reach, and the increasing peril presented by the climate crisis. Their books give lyrical voice to fear and anger but also resolve. The ten collections gathered here brim with restive, resistant poems that speak into our moment, and nonetheless shed light on how to keep living with honesty, humor, faith, love, and an extra helping of hope.

Soft Targets by Deborah Landau 

The lyric sequences in Deborah Landau’s collection name our vulnerabilities, the soft targets of our bodies and our beings in the spaces we once thought safe. Fear is in the cities and our bedrooms, “Stay off the beach, the street, the plane—.” It takes the shape of leaders and terrorists and a raging earth. If there is any sense of refuge, Landau rips that away line by line: “I’ll antioxidize as best I can/bat away death with berries and flax/but there’s no surviving/this slick merciless world.” These are smart poems laced with, albeit gallows, humor. Yet Landau offers up love and, in the final poem, the hope of “something tender, something that might bloom.” 

[ominous music intensifying] by Alexandra Teague

American hymns and patriotic songs play through Alexandra Teague’s collection [ominous music intensifying] with titles such as “Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory” and “My Country, Tis of Thee” that set the reader’s earworm in motion. The familiar song thrums in one’s head as the poem rings with the discordant tune, “and thee I sing  of the sacred into and the clamped quiet/woods of shame bottle spatter and condoms spent…” an imagining of human cries and lives trampled by the industrial beast of our own making. In these poems, something is always out of tune, like the country riven by politics, gun violence, climate crisis and a pandemic. Teague probes this landscape of horrors with playful outrage—turning Americana inside out like a soiled sweatshirt.

Of Tyrant by Leah Umansky

In the face of rising political tyranny, Leah Umansky has given us a book of poems that name the tyrants all around us. What these poems discover is that, in being named, the tyrants are diminished. These are poems that march in the street, that chant their resistance with fury and urgency: “gather/gather your good/gather your good appetite/gather your filling/gather your filling/of hate.” These are not poems of solace, they are angry, demanding action, inciting the reader to shout them out loud. Go ahead, run out in the street and rage with the poems from Of Tyrant

Kontemporary Amerikan Poetry by John Murillo

John Murillo speaks to the violence afflicting our communities with the voice of someone who has lived through it. The opening poem describes a moment when the speaker nearly shoots a man, “because I loved the girl, I actually paused/before I pulled the trigger–once/twice, three times–then panicked/not just because the gun jammed,/but because what if it hadn’t.” With his strong sense of musicality, Murillo creates a powerful chorus of voices that serve as witness to racial violence and social injustice in his spectacular crown sonnet, “A Refusal to Mourn the Deaths, by Gunfire, of Three Men in Brooklyn.” Within the framework of ars poetica, Kontemporary Amerikan Poetry realizes the role that poetry has in chronicling and illuminating our life and times.

The World That the Shooter Left Us by Cyrus Cassells

Cyrus Cassells wrote The World That the Shooter Left Us as an urgent response to the “Stand Your Ground” murder of a friend’s father. These poems stare the reader down with their honesty and brutality. They rage against a multitude of horrors such as child sexual exploitation and slavery and what has sadly become the backdrop of our lives, police brutality, political violence,  plagues, school shootings. Cassells seems to dare the reader to look away. But we can’t. In the long poem for immigrant children forced into cages, “Icebox,” Cassells asks: “Was it your callous voice/Refusing the herded girls/Sanitary napkins, insisting/Let them bleed….”. Cassells’ invigorating and vivid language stands in powerful resistance to systemic violence and hatred.

To 2040 by Jorie Graham 

What does the world look like after we’re extinct? Jorie Graham has been writing the clarion call as we barrel toward extinction in book after book. With To 2040, Graham brings us poems that are quiet in their warning: “…You there. Wake up. But/nobody’s here,/just the earth.” These poems contain the silence of what’s been lost, what remains, and what survives us. I am reminded of how the birds empty my garden and a quiet descends when the wildfire smoke arrives where I live. Despite, or maybe because of its spareness, To 2040 is a terrifying and energizing leap into the near future that climate catastrophe portends. 

Regaining Unconsciousness by Harryette Mullen

Consider Regaining Unconsciousness a missive from the near future, as AI’s sentient soldiers take over, as the light is extinguished from the skies. Yet rather than dwell on the ravished landscape of our own creation, Mullen’s writing surprises with lush lyrical illustrations of the world we live in, “Origami-folded toads/lost in arched lands/where mountain snows might/whet the thirst of desert flowers” while slyly taking it away. Mullen shakes us awake with poems from our broken world delivered with bite and humor.

Smother by Rachel Richardson

Rachel Richardson confronts the challenges of raising children in a burning world with a mother’s courage and care. Smother is an embrace of motherhood, in all its challenges and complications. How exactly does one protect and nurture children in the face of catastrophic wildfires? How do you mother a family and a planet? Richardson responds to the questions of our times with poems that sing with heart and humor. In the title poem, smoke is personified: “The smoke never appears in family pictures./The smoke got up this morning and ran a marathon./She came in/first in her age group without trying.” Wildfire smoke may not appear in the family photos, but it is a real and present danger in Smother

To Phrase a Prayer for Peace by Donna Spruijt-Metz

When Hamas terrorists breached the Gaza-Israeli border, slaying and kidnapping civilians, Spruijt-Metz started writing daily poems that chronicle the borders of her emotions and faith. In dialogue with God and biblical Psalms, questions and prayers accumulate like days, poem by poem. Each calling out to the divine from the remove of daily life, “ You get up/every morning,/dress in blacks/and greys, and/write poetry/about the war.” These are poems grounded in the self and aspiring to the spiritual.

Something About Living by Lena Khalaf Tuffaha 

Lena Khalaf Tuffaha has been a powerful voice for the Palestinian people as long as she’s been writing poetry. In the National Book Award-winning Something About Living, she meets the genocidal moment we are in with poems of protest and anguish. Unflinchingly, Khalaf Tuffaha brings the devastation waged against the Palestinian people onto the page and into the reader’s mind,, “We bury our dead at the fence, let their roots reach the other side of home..” And yet offers a thread of hope, “Let the stars fall. I have no idea/what hope is, but our people/have taught me a million ways to love.”

My Husband’s Dream Woman Will Outlive Me

3D-Printing the World and Other Dreams

Dream-me is acting all batshit again. Husband is mad, asks why I can’t act normal in his dreams at least? I’m not sure how to respond. Honestly, I kind of like the idea of dream-me pulling stunts. The last time real-me did anything out of the ordinary was when I used the 3D printer at work to make a model of my left boob. I use the boob as a dish to hold keys, paperclips, spare change, etc. Husband says it freaks him out. It’s supposed to be ironic or something, since that boob no longer exists. 

Unclear if dream-me has use of both breasts. Note to ask husband. 

Apparently dream-me has a bit of a wild side. Which is funny, since husband thinks I’m too passive in real life. Too much of a procrastinator. Let’s make a bucket list! he says. YOLO and all that! He gets out a block of Post-it notes and waits for my ideas. I try to explain that it’s not passivity on my part, it’s survival. (Bad word choice, he says.) Dying is actually pretty exhausting, I don’t know how other people have the energy to do the whole bucket list thing. My plan is just to hang out until the end? Husband isn’t too happy about it. He asks am I really going to procrastinate death, too? I tell him that Death Procrastinator would be a good band name. 

In comparison, dream-me is the freakin’ energizer bunny. Husband’s latest dream involves me burning everything I own. I’m sitting pretzel-style on the living room rug with an armory of candlesticks. (So romantic.) I pick up my possessions one by one and singe them over the flames like a real pyro. Birthday cards and sweaters and houseplants. Husband says that dream-me even burns the rug, which technically belongs to him. He’s so outraged by this that he gets up in the middle of the night to check that it’s still intact. 

Crazy, I say, though now I’m thinking that dream-me has a point. I mean, no need for the fire hazard—our building alarm goes off even from burnt toast—but I don’t think I want husband and other well-wishers poking around my things once I’m gone. My old diaries, photos, mixtape CDs from ex-boyfriends, personalized World’s Best mugs, sexy lingerie I wore like maybe once—it’s all got to go. Once husband leaves for work, I sit on his living room rug and start bagging it all up. I save only a love letter from husband and some tax documents. 

It’s official: dream-me is smarter than I am. 

When husband gets home, he doesn’t put his keys in the 3D breast dish, but I let it go. I don’t want to annoy him. I need more info about what dream-me has been up to. Luckily, everybody loves to talk about their dreams, even husband. He tells me dream-me’s wackiest exploits, which are less useful than I imagined in preparing for the afterlife. In the last few weeks, dream-me has taken to biting people as a greeting, hijacking metro cars, and planting plastic gnomes in all the neighbors’ yards. We should make a drinking game for dream-you, says husband with a yawn. 

I tell him I’ll put it on the bucket list.

Secretly, I’m hoping that dream-me will send real-me an important message via husband. I haven’t been sleeping much anyways, so I watch him at night. While I’m waiting, I do crossword puzzles and draft semi-inspirational emails for friends and family. It takes a few nights, but finally husband gasps awake and I hit the jackpot. 

Dream-you is 3D-printing the world, he says. 

What do you mean? I ask.

Like the boob, he says, but worse. 

Intriguing, I think, except I don’t really understand the logistics of it. I ask husband to clarify how dream-me manages this. Can skyscrapers and donuts and trees be put through a 3D-printer? Husband is reluctant to give details, turns over and falls back asleep. I mull it over and decide that dream-me is a genius. I could go into my old office tomorrow and start 3D-printing more shit. I’d start with my heart, I think, that would be a romantic gesture for husband. He could put it on the coffee table and use it as a conversation starter. 

Next, I could try to recreate the whole world, though I probably won’t have time. (Doc says three months.) But I could at least preserve some things in one-thousand-year plastic for husband. I could even make a 3D-printed dog to keep him company. And before husband snuffs it, he could 3D-print his heart too and set it on the coffee table and there our hearts would remain forever or at least until the sun got too hot and melted them back into red goop. There’s nothing normal about ceasing to exist, I think. But dream-me gets it. In the end, we procrastinate death as long as we can.

7 Speculative Memoirs Featuring Monsters

Memoir and speculative fiction are often treated as separate spheres, burying the truth that these two genres can go far deeper when brought together. If the mermaid is more potent, more expansive in its possibilities, than either fish or woman alone, then so, too, is the speculative memoir more punchy than either the autobiography or the work of speculative fiction. Like the monsters they feature, the power of the seven books on this list is derived from their very hybridity. There is also a cultural critique at the center of each of these books, showing another feature of this hybrid genre’s power— speculative writing allows questions of this world to be transformed from the frustration of what is to the wonder of what could be. This is speculative writing at its mightiest because it’s aimed directly at realities that require revision, realities that the memoiristic aspects of these books elucidate.

Holding that quality of playing with truth in mind, my book, Goblin Mode: A Speculative Memoir, tells the story of someone who is and isn’t me, on a surreal journey through a dystopian Brooklyn full of flashers and parrots who talk to her on the subway. This character lives a life that is and isn’t mine—teaching and writing, raising two rowdy kids, dealing with the daily fallout of being a woman, in a world on fire, in a house that may be haunted—when along comes a goblin. Throughout the book, you’re never sure if the goblin is actually there or not. Is it an eccentric, intrusive, slimy metaphor? Or is there a monster in this story? Either way, the goblin is there to provoke this woman to live more fiercely, whatever that may mean for her. I call this book a speculative memoir because it blends elements of memoir and speculative fiction, but also because it speculates on various ways a book could be, a reader could be, a woman could be, the world could be.

As Goblin Mode speculates on how to reinvent the world, the book, the writer, and the reader by way of experimental forms and monsters, so to do these seven groundbreaking books. Most striking of all, these authors use the monstrous to tear apart the bodies of those old chestnuts—“genre,” “self,” and “literature”—and build something entirely new and audacious. Although not all their authors may think of them this way, I consider these books to be speculative memoirs—books that mix the autobiography with the tools and techniques of speculative fiction. Whether it is literal monsters, or more figurative wonderings about what could be, what could have been, how any given story can be radically reimagined because of the way it is framed, these book tell familiar stories in brand new ways.

Incubation: A Space for Monsters by Bhanu Kapil

Bhanu Kapil’s postcolonial hymn to hybridity is the kind of book that resists definition. The closest I can come is to call it a memoir for weirdos who love poetry, speculative fiction, and theory (I count myself as one of these, so I’m allowed to say it). Laloo, our resident monster-cyborg, much like the book she inhabits, refuses to stay within the bounds of definition. Instead, she hitchhikes across borders both literal and figurative, creating ornate literary patterns of social critique. Laloo is the artist who refuses to be domesticated so that she can create art, but she’s also tied to biological creation, a baby-mother who gives birth to herself, and becomes a monster just after. Laloo is an immigrant to a nation and world whose narratives don’t include her, so she rewrites them.

Monster Portraits by Sofia Samatar

In her experimental manifesto, with haunting illustrations from her brother Del, Samatar uses monsters to explore the contours of both imagination and mixed-race experience. She works towards a theory of how monsters have been used when it comes to culture, race, gender, and genre. Samatar recounts calling up her brother one day to ask if he wanted to, “tell our lives through monsters.” Monster Portraits shows what it is to be a hybrid, a monster, a woman, a writer, a Somali-American. This book offers the autobiography of how Samatar monsters herself into art, refusing to abide by all the rules that were never written for her.

One! Hundred! Demons! by Lynda Barry

In this gorgeous graphic novel, Barry uses monsters as section headings to examine the haunting memories that made her. These specters resurface in the form of her demons (ranging from “girlness” to the “Aswang” of Filipino folklore), inventively illustrated through text and image without pinning down any single notion of “truth”—a technique Barry refers to as “autobificitionalography.” Barry zooms in on forms of darkness within herself, the spaces where demons-monsters-ghosts thrive, as she wrestles with trauma and the complexities of growing up as a Filipino American. Special care is given to how monsters have origin stories that render their monstrosity legible, almost predictable, unlike her unpredictable, sometimes violent mother.

A Bestiary by Lily Hoang

Hoang fuses myth, monster, and fairytale to create something all her own with this book. She even examines the process of getting there—transforming a more conventional book to speak in a language of magic-tinged fragments. Using the Chinese zodiac as a structuring device, Hoang explores elements from her life—the diasporic Vietnamese American experience, troubled romantic relationships, the loss of her sister, illness of her mother, and addiction of her nephew. She muses on the “other Lily,” the lifesaving doctor her parents wanted. This other Lily pops up in the book from time to time, a speculative take on who she could have been if she’d followed her parents’ dreams. And in another speculative take that earned A Bestiary its place on this list, the animals of the Chinese zodiac are at times rendered monstrous by human misunderstanding, foregrounding the way Hoang doesn’t feel understood herself. These fables, too, seem to come from another Lily—one who speaks only in parables because that is where she finds truth.

The Night Parade by Jami Nakamura Lin

Japanese myth and narrative structure gives this book shape, as do the bestiary illustrations of Lin’s sister, Cori Nakamura Lin. Yet it is, ultimately, a creation all Lin’s own. Lin stresses the power of writing as a speculative form immediately. From that first once upon a time, she makes clear how she will play with narrative, that this will be a writer’s story of monsters, loss, and invention. Lin employs the monstrous as a way of discussing her experience of being both creative and bipolar. She explores mental illness in ways that transcend the typical stories, replacing the more conventional Girl, Interrupted type tale with her own wildly inventive mythologies.

Women and Other Monsters by Jess Zimmerman

Electric Literature’s former Editor-in-Chief, Jess Zimmerman, uses the lady monsters of Greek mythology to understand her own woman self while moving through a world not constructed for her. Her memoir uses the stories of female monsters to recount attempts to fit into the stunningly slim confines of “womanhood.” Zimmerman reflects on what her life might look like if this sort of monstrous power were respected, but also on how she can rebel by harnessing it, respected or not. Throughout the book, Zimmerman draws provocative connections between monstrosity, trauma, ambition, power, and creativity. She wants you to know that, through the monstrous, “The stories we’re given can be rewritten, reconceived, even redacted.”

Magical/Realism by Vanessa Angélica Villarreal

From the first pages of Magical/Realism, Vanessa Angélica Villarreal aims to rewrite everything from the tropes of so-called “magical realism” to the hero’s journey—which she reimagines as the Migrant’s Journey. She breaks old boundaries, borders, and forms to make room for the immigrant woman’s experience, reminding us why a hybrid approach is necessary when, as she sees it, such things as trauma and magic are intertwined. She refers to the speculative mode as “the reparative imagination” that can go back and right old wrongs, give voice to the formerly silenced and conceive of new ways of being. Whether it’s The NeverEnding Story, Game of Thrones, or The Witcher, Villarreal tells her story through pop culture and its monsters because they are legible in American culture, and she wants her story to be heard.

7 Books That Reckon with Larger-than-Life Mothers

The symbolic mother is impossible to get away from. Across cultures and throughout history, in folklore, film, and literature, mothers have been given a symbolic weight that serves as an anchor within both the narrative and the family she created. They are portrayed as nurturers: warm and tender, stern and noble, fiercely protective. Their absence creates a vacuum, a vulnerable opening for evil step-mothers, paranoid governesses, bad influences, or vice. 

This abstract, larger-than-life mother has the ability to haunt all of us. While writing my debut memoir, Holding, I discovered her role in my own narrative. As an anxious child and a risk-averse teen, I was not the type to get wrapped up in intravenous drug use. And yet. What I’d been after in all of those dopamine blasts, in that dreamy fog of opiates, was not thrills but solace. I was seeking my mother, the comfort and safety she provided when I was an infant, before I was aware of my separateness from her, of the pressing demands of society. 

In my book, mother is both flesh-and-blood woman and the figurehead of my anxieties: she is a void, an enigma, a mirror. Sometimes she is not my mother at all but someone or something else entirely—a less-crucial stand-in for the relationship I both desired and denied, one I could test the limits of. Or keep in my pocket, put in my body.

The following reading list is comprised of both fiction and nonfiction books that engage with the symbolic mother. These works push her away and pull her in, stare into her harsh reflections. They acknowledge the gifts she bears as well as the scars she’s left. They attempt to scale her outsize dimensions, to remember, in the end, that she is human.

Mother as Echo

The Edge of Water by Olufunke Grace Bankole

Bankole’s debut novel follows three generations of women as they navigate trauma, tradition, independence, and desire. Beginning in Nigeria, Esther makes the first passage, leaving her husband despite cultural taboo and social ostracization, to start anew in her own flat with her daughter, Amina. Though Esther herself is headstrong and individualistic, she is unsettled to notice those same attributes in her daughter. After Amina moves to the United States, Esther writes in a letter to her: “I wanted you to be like me, yet walk a separate path. I prayed to see you become who I had hoped to be.”

In New Orleans, two pivotal events—the birth of Amina’s daughter Laila and the landfall of Hurricane Katrina—bring about tragedy and hope, forgiveness and regret, reunion and loss. The Edge of Water is a poignant portrayal of lineal ongoingness, the infinite echoing that’s passed from mother to daughter.

Mother as Paradox

Love is a Burning Thing by Nina St. Pierre

In her searing debut memoir, St. Pierre attempts to grasp the slippery complexities of her mother, a woman whose adult life was bookended by self-set fires—first to her body and then to her home. Because her mother’s undiagnosed schizophrenia was camouflaged in the esoteric language and practices of New Ageism, St. Pierre could never quite see it for what it was. Her mother’s delusions “formed the boundaries of [her] own imagination.”

Through deep examinations of mental illness, spirituality, poverty, and art, St. Pierre reconciles the woman who both protected her and potentially exposed her to danger, who kept their lives adrift and ungrounded as a means of rebirth, not destruction. 

Mother as Ghost

Loved and Missed by Susie Boyt

British writer Susie Boyt’s first American offering is a study of quiet grief, gentle affection, and steady, watchful hope. In gorgeous, somehow autumnal prose, Boyt tells the story of three generations of women. Ruth’s adult daughter, Eleanor, is a semi-estranged heroin addict whose infant daughter, Lily, is not only exposed to the drug and its hazards at home, but was in the womb as well—spending her first weeks in the neonatal unit on a morphine infusion. To keep her granddaughter safe, Ruth assumes custody of Lily and raises her from the preternaturally wise child she is to the sensible, mature, and caring teenager she becomes.

Throughout the novel, Eleanor rebuffs Ruth’s attempts at family. She flakes out, pulls away, recoils at any hint of intimacy. Ruth chastises her own “forced mildness” around her seldom-seen daughter, which she suspects may be the reason for Eleanor’s feral-cat temperament. “I wished she would hand me a script, a set of instructions, what to say what to do what to feel…. Sometimes I thought the more Eleanor evaded and erased me the more I needed her.” For Lily, her mother’s absence—or worse, avoidance—eventually surfaces as tidy, self-aware rage that she allows herself to feel. It is precisely Eleanor’s occasional resurfacing, her near proximity, that are so difficult for both Lily and Ruth. Not a complete severance, Eleanor haunts the edges of her mother’s and daughter’s lives, reminding them that they are not worth her time or effort. Yet despite the bleak acceptance of this, the story is limned in the soft glow of resilience and beauty. 

Mother as Tide

At the Bottom of the River by Jamaica Kincaid

The works in Kincaid’s slim 1983 collection resist definition. They’ve been described as short stories, prose poems, and essays, but transcend these limiting taxonomies, becoming, instead, words and ideas that stick in our minds long past reading them. I first read “Girl,” the book’s opening piece, in high school. I’ve never let go of its rhythms, its fully-lived advice, its refrain about resisting “the slut you are so bent on becoming’’—both an accusation and admission, the blurring of mother and daughter.

“My Mother” is made up of several vignettes, all of them surreal and vivid, tracing the evolution of a mother-daughter relationship. They illustrate the necessary and normal push and pull between mother and daughter: instruction and rebellion, anger and adoration, longing and rejecting, impressing and repulsing. In the penultimate vignette,  the daughter comes to understand what they are to one another. “We eat from the same bowl, drink from the same cup; when we sleep, our heads rest on the same pillow. We merge and separate, merge and separate.” 

Mother as Behemoth

Everything/Nothing/Someone by Alice Carrière

In her memoir, Carrière takes the reader through a childhood of disorder and neglect amongst the celebrities and freewheeling bohemians of New York City’s art scene. Her mother, Jennifer Bartlett, was a larger-than-life visual artist, not only in her success or by the vast scale of her paintings, but in her singular personality. “She brought her own atmosphere with her wherever she went,” Carrière recalls, “—a  cloud of perfume, a cloud of smoke, a cloud of utter fucklessness…. She was the center of attention all the time, but the way she tugged on the spotlight seemed protective, as if she were trying to conceal herself with the glare.”

This hiding Bartlett did—behind her star power, her artistic genius, her unconventionality and over-the-top stories—kept Carrière astray in her own home, unprotected and detached from any intimacy. This detachment found its way into her mind: She suffered from dissociative disorder in her teens, which was further fueled by overmedication, self-obsession, and an inappropriate relationship with her laissez-faire father. It isn’t until Bartlett receives a cancer diagnosis that her godlike enormity comes into correct focus, shrinking to the dimensions of a human, a mother that now needs her daughter to care for her.  Though she finds her mother’s change in demeanor infuriating and alien, it is also where she locates a tenderness she theretofore had no access to.

Mother as Stranger

What My Mother and I Don’t Talk About edited by Michele Filgate

Defamiliarization in art (or ostranenie) is the idea that by making something strange, the viewer or reader will regard it anew and therefore understand it more completely. In this robust anthology, the mother is gazed at with impartial, sometimes clinical curiosity. Removed from her taken-for-granted role in the essayist’s life, she is made strange. 

This book is chockablock with  literary heavyweights, featuring essays like Carmen Maria Machado’s “Mother Tongue,” in which Machado grapples with the shame she feels around her unrelenting mother, whom she describes as an “immovable, illogical object”, and Alexander Chee’s “Xanadu”, throughout which his mother seems off to the side until her curious near-omission ultimately reveals itself as the center, the eye of a storm created by tragedy, abuse, and guilt. A place where Chee keeps her safe.

Mother as Secret

Madwoman by Chelsea Bieker

Clove, the central character in Bieker’s gripping novel, has a gorgeous, Instagram-worthy life, one she meticulously constructed from lies and facades. She is a wife to a supportive husband, a mother of two cuties, and a minor social-media momfluencer whose trad-lite, woo-ish aesthetic earned her almost 40k followers—but the people who orbit her life know nothing about her at all.

Though Clove’s life has been built around countless secrets (her name is not even Clove) the biggest secret—the mother of all secrets—is that of her mother, who is carrying out a life sentence for pushing her violent husband—Clove’s father—off a high-rise lanai. Now, Clove’s mother has a chance for retrial and ultimately, freedom, but only if Clove is willing to testify on her behalf, an act that  would unravel Clove’s entire life. Like Godshot, Bieker’s 2020 novel about a religious cult and an estranged mother, Madwoman is populated with mentors and guardians who stand in the void the mother has left. There’s Christine, the feminist neighbor who hatches Clove’s escape plan; Velvet, the straight-talking matron who runs a de facto boarding house for wayward girls; and Jane, the luminous woman Clove fortuitously meets in a roadside fender bender. Though this book has the movements of a thriller, complete with a satisfying twist, its essence lies in its allegorical rendering of domestic abuse and the lengths its victims will go to for survival—the backstories fabricated, the realities curated, and the men shoved off balconies.

The Annihilating Impact of a Mother’s Silence

“Are you teaching me how to live without you?” Jeannie Vanasco asks in A Silent Treatment, her new book about the silences her mother imposed when they shared a house together.  On certain days, only their smoke detectors were on speaking terms.  Some silences went on for a few hours, while others stretched for months at a time, adding up to a year and a half across a five-year period. The cause for the abrupt distancing usually appeared inexplicable or mundane, such as being left out of a household errand or chore, and often were only broken by a medical issue, such as her mother fearing she was having a heart attack before realizing it was actually a panic attack.  

In her third memoir, which began as an essay published in The New York Times, Vanasco tenderly, searchingly captures the intimate, often fraught connection with her mother—and implicitly invites the reader to do the same with their own loved ones. Vanasco nods to various research that has been done about silence and power in relationships, including a psychological study that indicates 75% of Americans have received the silent treatment.  She tenderly crafts a portrait of her mother, who was born into the Silent Generation during the McCarthy era, the daughter of an especially cruel and physically abusive woman. Vanasco’s mother, who wants everything for her daughter that she couldn’t have for herself, and who wanted most of all to be a mother, is an eager subject. She is perhaps as anxious as her daughter to understand why she does what she does. “She expects me to interpret,” writes Vanasco. “And I interpret. Every day.”  

Often reflective, sometimes poetic, the work echoes so much of the pacing we all do in our own heads when it comes to aging parents. A Silent Treatment reads as a plea to be heard—and a vow to listen with generosity.  

Jeannie and I spoke over Zoom about female rage, how silence can be both powerful and punishing, and how hard she worked to get Nicolas Cage into the book.


Annie Liontas: Is silence annihilating? 

Jeannie Vanasco: So many of us say we want silence. Some people pay a lot of money for it. Silent retreats, quiet neighborhoods, special lounges in airports. It can be a luxury. But it can also be upsetting. There’s that anechoic chamber in Minneapolis. It’s supposed to be the quietest place on earth—so quiet people can hear themselves blink. They freak out. They don’t know how to orient themselves. When I first read about it, I thought, Well, that’s a nice metaphor for my mom’s silent treatment. Her silences were so disorienting I’d often get dizzy listing all the reasons she might be mad. So when silence is a punishment, and it’s from someone you love, and you don’t know why they’re doing it, “annihilating” is a good description. Because you reach a point—I did anyway—where you ruminate about all the ways you’ve failed that person. And the longer the silence lasts, the more ways you can imagine. I eventually questioned whether she really loved me, and I’d never done that before.

AL: You write, “Artists tend to put their fingers in the wounds, in the silences, and in the wounds in the silences.”  How do you understand loneliness and silence, and even suffering in isolation, after writing this book for you and your mother?

I eventually questioned whether she really loved me, and I’d never done that before.

JV: My mom isolated herself when she already felt lonely, and at first it seemed so counterproductive. She was hurt that I wasn’t spending more time with her, yet she was choosing not to spend time with me. But when you feel profound loneliness, self-isolation can make sense. You’re showing your pain. You don’t have to deal with words. If finding the right words were easy, I would have met my book’s original deadline. And I sure wouldn’t have obsessed over whether a comma belonged between “wounds” and “in.” But that’s what I often do when I’m stuck with writing: prioritize punctuation instead of confronting the subject matter. 

An inability to confront, though, makes for good narrative conflict. It’s often a character’s tragic flaw. If they would just do or say this one thing, the story would end. Had my mom and I confronted the situation sooner, the book would be very different. For the record, my lack of confrontation had nothing to do with preserving a narrative arc. (laughs) I told myself I was giving her space. Really, I was afraid. Her loneliness and suffering were hard to acknowledge, for both of us. And the longer the silence went on, the more I tried to avoid her. 

AL: Your mother goes quiet, even cold, when she is upset. When I’m upset, because I’m a hot-blooded Greek, I sometimes get too loud. What does it look like for you?  

JV: I used to say, “I’m not angry. I’m just disappointed.” Or, “I’m not angry. I’m just sad.” I want to talk through things. But if somebody is being unreasonable and won’t listen, I just apologize. Usually, I apologize. I’m probably afraid to confront the fact that I’m angry, or confront that somebody else is angry, because I want to make people happy. 

AL: In your experience or research, does it seem like the silent treatment is often employed by women working in a patriarchal framework that alienates them from their own expression of anger, disappointment, rage? Is there power in silence for someone like your mother?  

JV: Silence can be a really effective tool when people won’t listen to you. Psychologists say that women and men use the silent treatment equally, but I wonder if that percentage was different in, say, the 1940s, when my mom was born. Women of her generation—the Silent Generation, appropriately enough—had way fewer rights. So maybe they inflicted silence more, I don’t know. Research into social ostracism, as a formalized area of study, only started in the 1990s. 

Hindsight is very misleading. It often makes life seem far more organized than it really is.

I do think silence was my mom’s way to gain power and independence. She used it on my dad—more than I realized at the time. And after she moved in with me, she used it fairly regularly. She depended on me for a lot, and I know that bothered her. Later, she told me, “You know, I think I was on a power trip.” So there’s one reason of many. I know she had a hard time communicating her anger and sadness. I’m not saying her silent treatment was okay behavior, but context is important. She was in a really difficult situation. She’d retired, sold her house in Ohio, moved in with me—it was a lot at once. On a certain level, I admired how long she could go. She used the silent treatment for six months during the pandemic. This was pre-vaccines. I remember thinking, If anybody makes it out of this alive, it’s my mom. She is a pro at social distancing. 

But while silence can be a powerful tool, if you’re repeatedly using it to punish a loved one, you’re alienating them when you actually want a closer relationship.      

AL: You talk explicitly about your mother’s agreement—even enthusiasm—about this book, yet you also grapple with the responsibility of exposing her, not wanting to hurt her. I’m struck by how thoughtful and reflective you are in these conversations, and I’m wondering how this project feels genuinely collaborative for you both. Can you take us to those early conversations with her when you suggested the project?  

JV: My mom should be the patron saint of memoirists. From the very start, she said, “Write what you need to write. You don’t need my permission. If I were to tell you what to put in or to take out, then it wouldn’t be yours anymore.” When I told her that the silent treatment would be the narrative frame, she responded that [it] was a great idea. She said, “A book needs conflict.” I don’t think many parents would necessarily be that understanding. Still, I worried about her response to being written about. So I used my New York Times essay, which addressed her silent treatment, as a test, and I guess I passed. Her response was, “Seeing it in print, I realize it was kind of stupid what I did.” But then she did it again. (laughs

A lot of our collaborating has to do with her permissiveness and her openness to answering difficult questions, like, Why are you doing this to me? She said she didn’t know. I think we’re both a bit wary of clear answers, of any story that shows an easy cause and effect. She did write her story out—her life story—for me. And for a while I thought maybe I was going to reconstruct some of that. But then I risked implying: okay, she’s doing this because her mother abused her, or she’s doing this because…And I wanted to avoid reductive logic. Hindsight is very misleading. It often makes life seem far more organized than it really is. Conventional wisdom is, Wait to write about something until you’ve got enough distance. But I doubt we ever have perspective on our feelings, which is why I prefer to write from within an experience. My experience with my mom’s silent treatment is kind of like my experience with memoir writing. When it’s happening, I’m often miserable. When it’s over, I’ve forgotten how bad it felt. I’m just happy it’s done.

AL: Have you heard from other mothers and daughters after they read your essay in The New York Times

JV: I have, and that’s been wonderful. Readers have said it helped them feel less alone. But with the essay, I had maybe nine hundred words. With the book, I could address more of the nuances. Just the other day, a librarian emailed. She read an advance copy of A Silent Treatment and said she felt like she could give my book to her mom and it wouldn’t feel aggressive. She thought it came from a place of love. 

AL: In addition to traditional methods, you often employ parentheticals to introduce your mother’s voice into the narrative, such as (Mom: you are such a disappointment.) How did you arrive at this structure and how does it function to create not only a longitude of your relationship with your mother, but also allow her voice to interject on the page when she has gone silent in real life?

JV: I remember being really bored by the manuscript. It read as this happened then this happened then this happened. And I had too much exposition. I forget when the parentheticals became a solution, but I remember feeling suddenly excited. Because they offered narrative momentum, texture, a means of transition. Whenever I needed to pivot or make a leap, I could interrupt a scene with something she said and see where it took me. And that was true to my experience. I’d remember her words at unexpected moments. They became intrusive thoughts. And because she wasn’t actually talking to me, parentheticals seemed like the right formal trick to bring in her voice. They could show how she was simultaneously absent and present in my life.

AL: You reference films and television and films, such as The Old Dark House and The Conjuring.  How do such texts help you understand or frame your own relationship to your mother, and perhaps other mother-daughter relationships?

I love the challenge of writing out of love.

JV: Watching possessed mothers felt cathartic. In The Conjuring, the mother gets possessed in the basement—my mom was living in the basement—and she becomes horrible to her children. You can’t really blame her. It’s the demon. So, from a child’s perspective, the possession allows for emotional distance. The mother isn’t herself anymore. And as soon as the possession is over, she’s hugging her kids, and they’re okay with it. Everybody’s acting like nothing happened. I was like, Yeah, that’s kind of how my mom wants to act when the silent treatment’s over. Like nothing has happened. Like we didn’t just live out this painful experience. Weirdly, Nicolas Cage helped me frame my mother-daughter relationship. I think he’s a brilliant actor. My mom disagrees. What do I care? We even got into a dumb argument about whether he was handsome. Including it offered some levity. And I think other daughters can connect with that—that urge to argue with your mother just because. 

AL: Seeing your mother as you do—in all her complexity, with all she’s lived through—seems like a great gift.  Are memoirs, perhaps at their highest existence, both for and about the people we love? 

JV: They can be. I love the challenge of writing out of love. It’s hard to do and make interesting. I also think it’s impossible to portray anybody accurately. My mom in the book is like my mom. It’s her and it’s not her. I selected the details. But I tried to write as honestly and lovingly as possible. I hope she sees the love. She hasn’t read it. She’s waiting until after it’s published. She’s the reader I most care about.