Sarah Chihaya’s Relationship With Books Is Complicated

When I think about reading, I think about a kind of hunger that only exists in my memory. As a child, I did not think about time or food or my physical body or even where I was, really, while reading. I devoured books in a way that now seems almost mythical, with a fullness of attention I find difficult to summon for anything these days. 

I used to think of this hunger as love––until I read Sarah Chihaya’s memoir Bibliophobia, in which she describes the titular condition as occurring “when someone has, crudely stated, loved books to a dangerous degree.” In her memoir, Chihaya artfully unpacks the different ways our consumption of books can nourish or poison us, offer a refuge, a mirror, or fundamentally change who we are. Some books even ask us to revise the narratives of ourselves and our lives with an intensity that can feel almost like violence. 

Chihaya pairs moments of deep personal upheaval, like a nervous breakdown that leaves her unable to read for a time, with an examination of books that she terms “Life Ruiners,” demonstrating the ways that books are inextricably linked to her life, self-perception, and the ways she learns to read others. In incisive and lively prose, Chihaya makes space to ask questions about the ways that reading can provoke questions about the wider world: Where is the line between loving something and losing yourself in it? What separates creation from destruction, and is there really ever a way to disentangle the two? What nourishes and what poisons? And what happens when we are drawn to consume a text that nurtures and harms us at the same time?

I had the opportunity to speak with Sarah Chihaya about the relationship between reading and academia, the way disruptive forces can lead to creation, and how she sees herself as a reader now. 


Jacqueline Alnes: In addition to all the reasons we love books, I love how you write about the way they can be a disruptive force and encourage us to hold a mirror up to ourselves. Books can be something we avoid, at times, because there is something in them we don’t want to engage with. What was it like to unpack these different ways that books are in our lives?

Sarah Chihaya: Books are not always black or white––they are always in a grey zone, and that is something we should celebrate about them. If we knew what they were supposed to tell us or how we were supposed to unpack them, it would be a dull enterprise to read. Getting into that middle, that in-between space, was very hard. It’s still hard to think back on childhood reading, this magical experience of encountering books, and separate that from this more complicated feeling. I thought a lot about teaching while I was writing this book because so much of teaching is helping students put words to that feeling of not knowing how to respond to a book. 

The books that stay with me the longest are the ones that have made me the most uncomfortable. It’s not just discomfort, it’s this kind of excitement. It’s being uncomfortable with that fact of confrontation, of having to look at the thing and ask yourself why this makes me unsettled or stressed or whatever it does to you. It’s being uncomfortable with yourself. It’s both the thing itself and the act of looking that is hard. My hope for this book is that it encourages  readers to do this on their own and come away interrogating their own reading habits and thinking about why certain books stay with them, why they are troubled by certain books, and why they can’t finish certain books. 

JA: The way you bring up the relationship between academia and reading, the way that it feels like a double-edged sword, is interesting. At first, in your memoir, reading is a space where you find confidence and validation. Later, it becomes a stressor, a pressure to participate in a way that no longer feels like that ravenous, childhood form of reading—it’s more of a “Where is your conference paper?” then “Where is your chapter?” form of engagement. I wondered if you could talk about that relationship. 

SC: I think every academic has some version of this, where there is a sense that there was a real kind of reading you did that grows less and less accessible and grows less and less rewarded by the academy. There is a line in A.S. Byatt’s Possession where the two main characters talk about why they study what they study—they say something about how it’s what survived their education. I’ve thought about that a lot. It’s kind of a funny line, to think you go back to the things that survived this process of being formed, but it’s also very sad. There is something tragic about education being this war that you have to survive in order to come out the other end and work on something and be productive. 

I reached this point where I did not read novels any more because I thought, if I read this, I’ll have to write about it.

When I was a scholar, I worked on Contemporary Literature and I reached this point where I just did not read novels any more because I thought, if I read this, I’ll have to write about it. That feeling of dread that you would be responsible is an unfair burden to put on the text because you are saying if I read you, book, you have to do something for me because it will be professionally expedient. It’s a pressure on yourself to make something. You can’t just let a book be itself. You are always privileging the self over the book because you have to make something that will contribute to your career. So often, in the academy, we are told who you are is what you make and productivity equals your personality. Even if it’s a book you love, a book you have really felt passionately about, you still feel the need to make it your own, in a way. It was hard to disentangle from that mode of reading and I’m still working on it. It’s a work in process, but I’ve found it very rewarding to try to be less productive, if that makes sense.

JA: Your book made me think about that moment when my students come into class just excited to talk about a reading. It made me wonder: Do you think our relationship to reading necessarily has to evolve because we all get older and become part of, as you say in your memoir, a world where microplastics are in everything and many of us are part of different insidious systems? Do you feel like it’s possible to retain that initial pleasure while reading or is it something we are just bound to look back at with some level of nostalgia? 

SC: That’s a good question. I taught fiction and the first question I always asked was, “Did you like it? How did you feel about it?” Before we start talking about it, how do you feel? They are always shocked. We are not asked in academia, how do you feel, but we are asked if something was interesting. What interests you about it? What makes you think you should write about it or talk about it? I think reading changes for those of us who go to grad school. You have to report something. There is also some of that for everyone else. Maybe you’re right, that “takeaway” mentality does sort of seep into us, especially the way things are now. 

Books have to be useful, in some way. They are asked to be useful politically or personally. We like to champion books that tell us how to do things. The books that tell us how to do things are often wrong and so often, oversimplified because they think they have all the answers. We should be championing books that don’t have answers and that make us question and make us uncertain. Now, of all times, it would be helpful to put the emphasis back on books that don’t claim to have an agenda or claim to be able to tell us what is the correct thing to do. We’ve all been convinced that we should have a takeaway or an answer from every book. It’s a productivity mindset that extends far beyond academia. We are all guilty of it, or it’s imposed on all of us, this need to demonstrate why something is worth our time. I think that we could all take a step back and learn how to sit in uncertainty and not know for sure why something is politically expedient or personally helpful or financially gainful. 

To take it back to students, part of the reason that they feel that excitement on the first day is that they are not yet writing papers. They don’t have to make anything yet. They can just come in and say, I felt this. They don’t yet have to say what the point was. They can just respond very immediately. That moment of response is one we are not asked to take very often. We are asked to skip ahead to identifying what is valuable about this thing.

JA: I try to teach my students (and remind myself) that you don’t have to come away from a book knowing it. You can come away just knowing you experienced it and have permission not to be an expert. I was reminded of this in your memoir, when you write about how the first reading of a book can be so different than later encounters, and how being asked to know a book—and yourself—on a first read is a really big ask. 

There is a lot of pressure to be able to account for whatever we encounter—whether reading or viewing or the news—to be able to give what is essentially a book report.

SC: Totally. I think there is a lot of pressure to be able to account for whatever we encounter—whether reading or viewing or the news—to be able to give what is essentially a book report. I have comprehended this event or I can account for this thing that I’ve read. But actually, education should be for the sort of not-knowing and figuring out what you do think about things, instead of being pushed into a major or a thesis or an explanation of a thing. 

I’m trying very hard, as you can tell from the end of the book, to sit with uncertainty and not knowing. There will always be a thing that you can explain or think you understand, and there will always be things that are incomprehensible or too hard to look at. That process of trying to render them encounterable is a work in progress. I’m trying to be more open to that sense of ongoing revision.

JA: I love the line in your book: “The word was not the world and it never had been.” Your book made me think about the relationship between our history as readers, our lives as writers, our lives reading other people, our lives trying to figure out our own lives, revising the truths of our childhoods depending on our own healing. 

SC: Until now, my life has been this series of four-year increments of college and grad school and being a junior faculty member and writing this book. I’m always waiting for a decision that’s deferred until a later date, like waiting for the reviews to come in for the book and after that’s done I’ll be waiting to see how my next project is received and what my agent thinks. The error that I have made, that I am probably still making, is thinking that all will be done someday. 

In the academy, I thought when I got tenure, I would be done. Number one, that didn’t happen, but also, all the senior people I talked to were like, you’re never done. Now that I’m out, I never have to be done which means I can let go of the idea that completion would be imminent, if I was good enough. I don’t even know what it would mean to be done now. My career is different. I no longer have this very concrete goal. That might be a good thing.

JA: You write about a mental health crisis and hospital stay that prompted a break in reading. What did that interruption in regard to reading or to life mean to you?

SC: When it happened, it felt like the end of everything. I could not conceive of what was next. But now, years after, and having written this book and having left the professional stuff, I do feel like it was necessary. I think it’s too positive to say it was an awakening, but it was a jarring moment, an abandonment, as though I had been abandoned by all the things that had carried me along until that point, whether they were the pressure from my family or from my university or from myself. 

I had suspicions that I was headed for a crisis, but I just thought if I could make it through…You know, a lot of people collapse after tenure or after all these things have happened. I was kind of always betting against that and hoping I would wait until after to have my collapse. But it came when it had to; it wasn’t up to me. In a weird way, I’m glad it happened then, before rather than after. If I continued writing the academic book and I continued with this career I was unhappy with and life I was unhappy with, I might have produced more or produced the thing I was supposed to produce, or I might not have. 

I have to stop thinking about things in regard to success and failure, but I might have failed to do the thing undramatically, without ever having had this chance to reevaluate. I might have just not done it and been like well, why didn’t I do it? I might have failed without having a chance to learn from it. I am grateful to the collapse now for having shocked me into looking at myself and all the things I was hoping to sweep under the rug for long enough. It’s hard to say it was good or bad, but it was a necessary thing.

JA: Who do you see yourself as a reader right now? 

I’m trying to reclaim some of the feeling we see in students, a sense of surprise.

SC: I’m trying to not be an expert anymore. I was just thinking last night about why it’s been an ongoing struggle for me to read. I read in fits and starts. I think it’s because I’m always trying to remind myself that I am only accountable to myself right now, when reading, except for when I’m accountable to someone for work. Because my work is being a book critic now, there still is some of that, that you owe things about a certain topic by a certain deadline. But, it’s a different kind of owing. 

The only thing I owe right now is my opinion. It’s very different from being accountable as a scholar writing something peer-reviewed, where you sit down and ask, “Have I read every scholarly source about this? Have I read everything this author has written and have I read everything that everyone else has written about this author?” I will have a momentary impulse where I think that I can’t read something until I read everything that has ever been said about it.

I’m trying to reclaim some of the feeling we see in students, a sense of surprise. It’s work to undo the things that we have spent so long learning. It’s very privileged to say that I’m trying to enjoy reading—it is a privilege. I remember people outside the academy saying, “You’re so lucky, you must love just reading all day, teaching your favorite books,” and I was like no, I’m always working, always trying to make something. I felt very reluctant to admit how much fun it should be to teach and do all that we are allowed to do in the profession. It should be really fun. Those people should be right. I’m trying to embrace that it is a different kind of privilege to just have my own thoughts. I’m working on reading for only one person, for myself, rather than for everyone. 

This Coworking Space Runs on Sisterhood and Toxic Conformity

The Parlor

Every cell of the building’s interior oozes with pink. Shades of bubblegum. Rouge. Peach so ripe, you can feel its sun-beamed juice roll sloppily down your cheek. Millennial reminiscent of every Y2K-style skirt in your hometown H&M that you couldn’t afford to buy in high school.

You enter the lobby. Scents of jasmine, honeysuckle, and white generational wealth gust towards you in a perfumed bubble. Your Doc Martens make a muted thump as you traipse across the marble floors. You know they’re itching for the clacks of pumps and heeled booties and are sighing disappointedly at your rubber soles.

“May I help you?” A young woman greets you with a confused smile. Her badge reads “Ashleigh.”

“I would like to learn about your coworking membership.”

She looks even more confused.

“Here’s our pamphlet.” A crisp booklet skids across the counter. She retracts her fingers with such speed, you almost miss them completely.

The sharp folds of the pamphlet prick your skin. Your first thought is teeth. Teeth are everywhere. On smiling women reading. Smiling women lecturing. Smiling women cheersing, their manicured nails clutching champagne flutes. The background fades away, and you are left with teeth glowing in the dark.

“Excuse me? The rates aren’t listed.”

The woman no longer looks confused. “The prices are listed on the back.” So they are. In letters almost too small to see. Prices so obscene that your eyes can’t help but bulge. You remind yourself that the few friends you’ve made have all moved away, and you don’t really know anyone in this city.

“I’d like to become a member.”

The woman’s face shifts into a toothless smile. “You can’t just become a member. You need to do an intake. And then we review your application.”

“Fine,” you say, your jaw set.

She sighs and turns her back to you, walking behind the flamingo pink curtains. Your fingers drum intricate patterns on the counter. 

Finally, she returns with a stack of papers, unwieldy and as high as her shoulders. “Just a bit of paperwork.” She drops it onto the counter with a loud thud and places a pastel pink pen on top with, “The Parlor” displayed in white cursive. She gestures to a seating area in the center of the room.

You make your way back across the marble. You place the papers on the pearly white coffee table and settle into a chair patterned with bows and sailboats. You are displeased to discover that it’s comfortable. Really comfortable.

The pages are as thin as tissue-paper, so you lick your fingers to pluck the one on top. It’s a questionnaire.

First Name

Last Name

Pronouns

Email Address

Phone Number

Emergency Contact

What is your profession?

Your pen scratches gently across the paper until it settles on the next question.

What is your net worth?

Your pen freezes. You look up from the paper. The woman is gone. You look back down.

What is your deepest insecurity?

What is your clothing size?

What is your body mass index?

How old are you? Explain.

How long have you been a member of Equinox?

What did you do the evening of the 2016 election?

“Excuse me?” You rise out of your chair, striding across the floor to the empty counter. You ring the bell on the desk.

A different woman, who looks eerily like the first one, appears. Her badge reads “Baileigh.” 

“May I help you?”

“Uh, yeah, I was filling out this intake form and noticed these questions.”

“Yes?”

“I don’t believe I’ve ever been asked about my net worth, BMI, and political affiliation in an intake form before.”

“They’re our standard questions. I suppose if you want to leave a few answers blank, that’s fine, but it will impact your final score.”

“Score?”

“Yes, your compatibility score.” She also looks visibly annoyed. “We screen and only admit the finest women. Perhaps you would be more comfortable with the WeWork across the street?”

You grumble something about WeWork’s cold brew and find your seat again. The next pages have multiple choice questions.

You work in an office. A coworker brings her son’s leftover birthday cake and leaves it in the kitchen. She messages the staff that it is available. Do you . . . 

  1. Bolt into the kitchen. You are disgusting and have no self-control.
  2. Say no. It doesn’t fit into your calorie tracker app.
  3. Sneak in there at 3pm, and while “cleaning the coffee maker,” you stuff a piece into your big, dumb mouth.
  4. Transfer to the Wichita office at the first chance you get.

Your mouth hangs open.

You and your Parlor sisters are having a friendly game night competition. What weapon do you use?

  1. Words and insults, duh. They’re always the sharpest knives.
  2. Broken shards of your sisters’ sauv blanc bottles. It’s their fault they brought the wine.
  3. You yell, “That cheese is regular fat, Tina!” over and over until Tina crumples into a ball on the floor.
  4. You transfer to the Wichita office.

You’re back at the counter. You ring the bell once, and then a second and third and fourth time. “Hello? Hello?!”

A third woman finally appears, eerily similar to the first two women. Her badge reads “Kaileigh.”

“I can’t fill out this form. I’m sorry, but this place just isn’t for me.” You start to retreat, your feet resolute in their decision.

“Are you sure? You’ve reached the final part of your intake.”

“I have?”

“Yes, the mental and physical exam.”

You hesitate. You just can’t stomach one more glass of sticky wine at a speed dating event, another debt-inducing pottery class, or god help you, a pickleball match. “What does the exam entail?” 

“The first challenge is called Human Rolodex. Please list everyone you have ever met in your life in chronological order.”

Your mouth dries. Your mind goes blank.

“Um, I believe I have a mother—”

“Name?” Kaileigh looks up expectantly, her hand poised with a pen over what looks like an oversized guest book.

“Elizabeth.” She writes.

“Title?”

“Associate Professor of English.” She crosses out the name. 

“Next.”

You rattle off every single person you can think of from your small town. Your father, your sister, your childhood best friend who moved away in the third grade, your rabbi (can you tell them you had a rabbi?), your first crush, your favorite history teacher, your math teacher who gave you a complex about your math abilities throughout high school. With every name, Kaileigh’s eyebrows lift ever so slightly, but then fall as she crosses the name off the list.

You’re trying to recollect all your previous specialists and dental hygienists when Kaileigh’s pen halts.

“Dr. Porter is a high-level donor for women in STEM.”

Your breath quickens. “Huh, I didn’t know.”

“We’ve been trying to get her to speak at our center for quite some time. Shall you invite her for a space tour?”

“I think I have an appointment with her on the 28th—”

“Perfect.” She places a smooth hand on top of yours and gives it a squeeze. Your throat warms. “Please ask her if she has any dietary restrictions for egg salad sandwiches.” She removes her hand. “Now, we move onto part two.”

Kaileigh exits behind the curtains. She returns with a plate piled high with miniature frosted cakes and French pastries, and a glass of champagne between her chrome nails. She places them in your hands.

“For this next challenge, we will be sourcing volunteers from some of our most valued members. For the Buffet Social, please speak with each sister for exactly four minutes, and tell them about yourself. You may not offer support, connection, or mentorship to any of them. Similarly, you are prohibited to accept any help, no matter how sincere they may sound. Do you understand?”

Your mouth moves before you realize. “Yes.”

“Come on out, girls!”

The ballet slipper pink wall next to the reception desk rolls open to reveal smiling women standing with their hands pressed together. Their mouths are open wide, their teeth starch-white. Their eyes are the only part of their faces not smiling. They stare at you expectantly, their jet-black pupils taking you in as your Doc Martens inch closer and closer.

Harris Lahti on Ripping From the Headlines of His Life

Foreclosure Gothic, Harris Lahti’s debut novel, is a chilling, absorbing, searingly memorable work of gothic fiction. Portents loom around every corner—vultures, scythes, unattributable screams—and nature is a “witch’s brew of mistrust” where hulking garbagemen roam alongside necrophiliac raccoons. While such spooky surrealism may occasionally skew the picture, don’t be fooled—Foreclosure Gothic is a deeply human, and deeply personal, story about intergenerational cycles and the financial reality of creative ambition. Read it once for the sinewy poetry and evocative imagery. Read it twice to unveil the sly plotting and subtly intricate architecture. Like a foreclosed property, there is a “house behind the house.” Lahti’s debut rewards repeat readings.

The novel centers on Vic Greener, an aspiring actor who abandons Hollywood with zero film credits to his name—just a guest spot as a coke-addicted doctor on a daytime soap. He follows the enchanting Heather, pregnant with their child, to her hometown in New York’s Hudson Valley, a few highway exits from where Vic’s own father continues to make his living restoring foreclosed homes. Vic always believed himself fated to follow his father’s career path, and the birth of Junior Greener expedites the process: Hollywood dreams don’t pay bills, especially when LA’s a few thousand miles away. Decades later, in this simultaneously sweeping and compact family saga, Junior may be sucked up by the Greener fate as well.

Harris Lahti is an editor at Fence, a co-founder of the indie press Cash 4 Gold Books, a prolific short story writer, and a painter/house renovator. I spoke with him over Zoom about his haunting debut. In this wide-ranging conversation, we touch on gothic fiction, alternative literature, and some of the real stories behind his fictional creations.


Michael Knapp: Parts of your novel appeared previously as short stories. Did you always have a larger project in mind for the Greener characters, or did you stumble into a novel?

Harris Lahti: I stumbled into a novel. The undertaking of a novel is so immense that sometimes you have to trick yourself into writing one. I wrote “Sugar Bath,” one of the earlier chapters, and then I wrote “House Ceremony,” one of the later chapters, and then I space docked them together. It’s an interesting way to write, because once you have those two elements you can synthesize them. You’re using raw materials that exist instead of constantly inventing.

Those two sections generated a lot of curiosity for me, and it proliferated until the book felt fully formed. There are more chapters I wish I could write now; the book’s characters live on in their own way. But once I started adding pictures I knew it was done.

MK: Foreclosure Gothic spans 50 years and three generations of Greener men. It’s a compact book with a sprawling scope—a new chapter might mean another decade gone. What were the challenges with scaffolding such an expansive novel?

HL: I initially wrote each chapter outside of time, then I inserted little timestamps about, say, Venice Beach in the eighties to ground it on a timeline. But to tell you the truth, what I really focused on was sentence level tension. Readers will give you slack if you’re entertaining them—they’ll glance past questions the idle mind might ponder.

I wrote a third person novel, but I think of it as first because the psychic distance is about as close as you can get, and then it’s also written in present tense. It’s all working to hold the reader’s attention; it insulates itself from the problems of tackling such a vast swath of time.

The undertaking of a novel is so immense that sometimes you have to trick yourself into writing one.

MK: I appreciate the timestamps—whether it’s a cell phone or the financial crisis. But I also like how you respect the reader’s ability to catch up to the present without bogging things down in exposition.

HL: People are a lot more intelligent than we give them credit for. I think big publishers often condescend to the reader. Anytime you’re supplying space for the reader to mull something over you’re engaging them; you’re allowing the words to fall away, and the reader enters the dream of fiction. It’s something I’m very aware of with both the fiction I publish and the fiction I write.

MK: As the title suggests, your novel belongs somewhere in the gothic tradition. It’s filled with haunted homes, necrophiliac raccoons, gargantuan garbagemen. That said, it never slips fully into genre, and I think protagonist Vic would endorse the novel’s real-world grounding: he turns “his nose up at genre,” believing the real world to be “strange enough.” Are you consciously playing with, or against, horror tropes? Do you agree with Vic’s thoughts on genre?

HL: I find portents much more interesting than horror itself—it’s a “why show the shark” kind of thinking. The horror I’m more interested in is grounded in the uncanny, in a Lynchian or Bolaño-esque sense. It’s a feeling of uncertainty—a psychological fear charged by ambiguity.

I have my father-in-law’s HBO Max account, and I’ll watch the first twenty minutes of horror movies endlessly. I always wonder what he thinks I’m doing: “Why are you watching the first twenty minutes of Microwave Massacre and Blood Hook on repeat?” I love the beginnings of horror movies—they’re ripe with portents. Once the horror starts to reveal itself, it’s rarely as interesting, because you have to fall back on tropes.

I like the metaphor of deer after a thunderstorm. They come out into the meadow and dance, because the storm has put something inside of them. Each chapter in my novel is trying to do something similar: I’m getting right up to the point where the horror will be introduced, and then, by taking an unexpected exit, it continues to accrete.

MK: A lot of the horror is also alleviated by a jump in time, which feels true to life. In the moment you might feel tortured by some terrifying, life-altering force. Then ten years later you don’t remember it.

HL: A hundred percent. That’s how memory works. It’s a big deal in the moment, and then you move along. You’re eating brunch somewhere and you’re not thinking about the seven-foot-tall garbage man; the next new horror you’ll live through approaches.

MK: I actually am still thinking about the seven-foot-tall garbageman. But in addition to gothic fiction, your novel might belong to a more contemporary tradition: alternative literature (alt-lit). You’ve published in a lot of the movement’s preeminent journals—New York Tyrant, X-R-A-Y, Hobart, Forever—and you edit fiction at Fence, another alt-lit stalwart. I know this kind of question dominates literary discourse these days, but what does alt-lit represent to you? Do you consider your work—Foreclosure Gothic in particular—part of it?

HL: I think Foreclosure Gothic is more stylized, but I do often file myself in the alt-lit world. I like that it’s scrappier, and there’s less gatekeeping than at larger college-run journals.

The best thing about alt-lit is that it’s run by tyrants, like Giancarlo [DiTrapano], Tao [Lin], Madeline [Cash] and Anika [Levy], Derek White, Elizabeth Ellen. They’re tastemakers; they put the work out there and say, “This is what I like.” I think the auteur theory of directing applies to editing here; these people have their own vision.

I’m a skateboarder, and everybody who does it or watches it gets along and encourages each other. Why isn’t writing like that?

MK: Speaking of editorial vision, you and Jon Lindsey just co-founded an indie press: Cash for Gold Books (C4G). You released your first two books last year: Sillyboy by Peter Vack and The Champ is Here by Nathan Dragon. What are your goals for the press, beyond “finding the freaks,” which I’ve seen you talk about in other interviews? What’s C4G up to now?

HL: I said that? I like that.

We just had the launch party for Elizabeth Hall’s Season of the Rat. The crowd was so good—it was getting a lot of support. Then we have another book coming, a collection of short stories by David Ryan.

Basically, we’re putting out books that need to be put out. The path to publication is so difficult, and people who deserve books often don’t get the opportunity. Like, I’m a skateboarder, and everybody who does it or watches it gets along and encourages each other. Nobody’s trying to get anything out of skating except the enjoyment of the act. Why isn’t writing like that?

Jon and Nathan and I want to make the scene better; we want to improve the culture. Our way of doing that is to not take ourselves too seriously, but to take the work deathly seriously. We want to make it fun and interesting and flip the finger at those people that said no to the writers we’re publishing. Maybe we’ll change some hearts and minds along the way.

MK: I notice a kind of editorial sensibility in your novel, in terms of both the events you choose to include and, more so, the ones you choose not to include. The intentionality of your choices clarifies as the novel progresses, but why, for example, feature a farmer’s market and skip the birth of a child?

HL: You have to be curious about what you’re writing, and a lot of conventional stuff just didn’t interest me. If you’re not creating narrative friction that is uncanny or unexpected just do away with it. Don’t bother. That’s why it’s exciting to write a compact novel that’s so expansive. I can pick and choose my points. Otherwise, you get bogged down in the furniture moving of narrative fiction.

I’ve been an editor for a long time, and I’ve always felt the mark of a mature writer is what they choose to leave out more than what they put in.

MK: In the book, Junior himself is a writer. His father, Vic, is an actor, and Heather’s a serial storyteller. Later in their marriage, Vic feels the well of conversation running dry. He worries they’ve run out of stories to share. A lot of these characters try to make a living as storytellers, but I’m interested in how storytelling is so integral to these characters even divorced from moneymaking. What is it about stories that’s so important to them?

HL: My knee-jerk impulse is to relate it to evolution, and how we build myths around ourselves to maintain a sense of self. In a way, it’s counterintuitive. We construct imaginary worlds to help understand reality. That’s what I think religion is, and that’s what literature has become for me.

I was talking to a writer working on a historical novel. He said he needs to do all this research because people will kick the tires on the real thing he’s fictionalizing. I want nothing to do with that; I’m more interested in the world that’s strained through fiction because, in a weird way, the more you understand about the reality of the world, the more confusing it becomes.

For me personally, my father was an actor. He walked away from it after he had kids because it wasn’t paying the bills. Now I’m a writer, and I’m trying to justify it. Not many make the cut solely as a writer. I’m always thinking about that and working through it, and writing these stories is me trying to understand that. It’s something I struggled with subconsciously, and I didn’t fully understand it until showing my dad the novel.

You’re making sense of uncertainty through fiction. I think you do it more truthfully with a novel as opposed to something like a memoir.

MK: A young Junior wants to be a novelist, and he contemplates a disconnect between his writing and the work his dad does restoring homes: “Creativity is the residue of rest,” he says. Later on, his attitude changes: he works “piece by piece, sentence by sentence”; an “idle itchiness” descends if he’s “not painting a house or working on a novel.” You yourself renovate houses, and I wonder what you make of this connection between physical work and a writing practice?

HL: Writing is work. You have to show up and make it happen. There is this other element where you have to live in order to write, but then at some point you need to step outside the world of the living and make space to create.

One feeds the other, and it’s why I’ll never run out of stories. Every house I do, I meet new people; I see new things. Just the other day I was on a roof, and this guy starts talking to me. He’s wobbling, I can tell he’s drunk, and when I come down this dog wanders up the road. When it gets closer, I see it’s hairless, and it’s blue. It’s a blue dog, only it doesn’t really look like a dog. Not exactly. Then I see a pointy nose and come to realize it’s a mangy fox. Possibly rabid. The drunk guy starts walking up to it, clapping his hands, saying, “Here, doggy doggy! Here, doggy doggy!”

It’s the kind of moment that’s endlessly interesting to me, and I try to understand it and contextualize it with fiction. Whether you work in a kitchen or a school, the stories propagate through your experiences. 

But maybe most aren’t as strange as that.

MK: The opening chapter’s titled “This Only Ends One Way,” and there’s a feeling of preordainment pervading the book; The Greeners’ past pulls them forward into an eerily familiar, and seemingly inevitable, future, restoring foreclosed homes in the Hudson Valley. Did you ever envision Foreclosure Gothic wandering off in a different direction? Can these characters—can anyone—escape their past?

HL: Especially if you’re doing what your parents do, it’s hard to extricate yourself. I could get some shitty job, but this is the way I make money, and when you have two kids and a wife you can’t really justify something other than the best option. Or maybe I’m not inventive enough to think of another path forward.

I think we’re all stuck. Free will is a funny thing. Maybe this is too lofty, but…

MK: Let’s get lofty.

HL: Let’s do it. Personally, I never really surprise myself. It’s hard to free yourself from patterns. Those neural pathways get ground down and you become complacent.

I’ve always respected people who burn their lives down and start again. A lot of us try to make that leap, and then we keep adjusting our expectations until we’re right back where in our heart of hearts we thought we’d end up all along.

MK: This feeling of predestination is amplified by a sense of foreboding: vultures portend doom, janky ceiling fans evoke our cyclical lives, and the scythe Junior wields to trim overgrown grass speaks to foreclosure as the grim reaper—financial death for one family, and the endless chain of renovations linking the Greeners to their end. How deliberate are the various symbols here—do they connote something specific? Or are they more ornamentation?

HL: Both, I guess, but to tell you the truth, so much is ripped from the headlines of my life. My earliest memories are playing in old houses that really freaked me out.

The scythe, for example. That’s something that happened. I was taming an unruly lawn full of shotgun shells and beer cans, and the lawnmower broke. What do you do? You go into one of the barns and, lo and behold, there’s a scythe.

It’s true and it’s real. And there were vultures, and the house was full of belongings from a family that seemed to have disappeared, and I couldn’t figure out why that would happen to a family. I was sixteen; I grew up in a loving home—a nice house, a big property—and it was confusing to me. Where’d they go?

So your mind jumps to death. The vultures are there suggesting what vultures suggest, and you have a scythe in your hand. It all coheres in a way that seems intentional, but I’m not inventing it.

MK: To close, I’m curious about creative influences. You mentioned Bolaño, David Lynch, and the first twenty minutes of horror movies; who or what else has influenced your work?

HL: The first 20 minutes of all horror movies. That’s definitely up there.

There’s also Fleur Jaeggy—her clipped sentences and sinister tone. I would put Elfriede Jelinek in that category. The Piano Teacher was a big novel for me when I was writing Foreclosure Gothic. I think the filmmaker Lars Von Trier struggles with his subject matter in very personal ways I’ve tried to adopt. Then I love the collected works of Breece D’J Pancake. Cormac McCarthy is a big one. I’ve read everything he’s written a bunch of times. Oh and William Gay wrote this fucked up story called “The Paperhanger” that I reread about a thousand times. If you’ve never read it you have to read it. It’s completely insane. Graves will be robbed.

7 New Sci-Fi Comedies You Don’t Want to Miss

Science fiction has always been a genre of escape, one that especially speaks to those of us eagerly waiting to be abducted by aliens or dreaming of robot armies battling on undiscovered planets. We want adventure, some intrigue, and the novelty of the never before seen.

While some readers may prefer a more dignified or even meticulous sci-fi, I tend to enjoy stories that have just as much a sense of humor as they do a sense of adventure. Comedy and science fiction go hand in hand—just ask Douglas Adams or William Shatner—because the absurd loves a partner in crime. The excitement of imagining aliens fits right in with the silliness of those aliens reciting bad poetry or being incredibly and conveniently attractive. Lucky for me, 2025 is a great year for novels that can offer some genuine laughs while planet hopping or robot building. Below are 7 new and upcoming sci-fi novels with particularly comedic twists to help you giggle your way through the rest of the year. 

Blob: A Love Story by Maggie Su

In classic rom-com fashion our female protagonist is a bit of a mess, a bit lonely, and could use a bit of adventure—except she wasn’t expecting the adventure to be with a sentient glob of hair gel. We meet the titular blob right away, tucked between dumpsters on a sidewalk in the rain, while our protagonist Vi suffers through having drinks with friends she doesn’t like. Things get sticky quickly when she takes the blob home where it begins blinking, smiling, and growing limbs. Su delivers exactly what readers and Vi need in a plot full of character development ups and downs, decisions good and bad, and figuring out what it means to be alive but only technically living. A silly, romantic plot involving a disturbingly relatable fail-ennial (aka a millennial who is a failure, like all of us millennials), Blob checks all the boxes of a rom-com and asks questions only safely answered in your diary or with a therapist.

I Got Abducted by Aliens and Now I’m Trapped in a Rom-Com by Kimberly Lemming 

Lemming gained notoriety for their fantasy series, Mead Mishaps, but their latest spin on wet and wild science fiction will leave readers begging for more. In this book we meet Dory, a PhD student who dies by lion attack a split second before she is abducted by aliens (they heal her up, don’t worry), who then escapes her captures alongside her killer-turned-side-kick lion named Toto. From there the plot only escalates further, involving two horned aliens with surprisingly sexy tails, a bureaucracy involved in alien science experiments the size of planets, and more abducted women to be saved. As is on brand for Lemmings’ protagonists, Dory doesn’t want to deal with any of this and provides a lot of wit, trope awareness, and impatience with the absurdity of it all. The sex scenes may surprise newcomers to the romance and erotica genre, but are pleasantly as expected for dedicated Lemmings fans. 

When the Moon Hits Your Eye by John Scalzi

Scalzi is well known to sci-fi readers. He has a deep back catalog and his own brand of absurd humor, but his latest stand alone is funnier than meets the eye. When the moon suddenly turns to cheese, things on earth get funky fast: NASA has a lot of explaining to do, Reddit has a lot of questions, and the rest of us humans have a lot of problems that don’t feel very important anymore. To physics fans and Scalzi fans alike, the moon turning to cheese creates a cascade of problems to be dealt with, like: What about the other celestial bodies bumping around in space? What about the planned moon landings? Or worse yet, what about the billionaires with something to prove and access to spaceships? In polyphonic prose, we jump from the old guys at the diner planning the end of the world to NASA astronauts trying to answer questions in press conferences and interviews, though they can’t answer the one thing everyone is wondering: How did this happen and what kind of cheese is it exactly? Balancing the kind of existential crises the end of the world brings on, Scalzi does a fun job anticipating readers’ questions and answering them upside down and inside out while absolutely reeking of the cheesiest plot I’ve read in a long time.

The Potency of Ungovernable Impulses by Malka Older

For a cozier read, Malka Older’s The Investigations of Mossa and Pleiti series is a delight of creative science fiction world building and Sherlockian detective work. In this latest installment, our two sapphic neurodivergent protagonists are split up: Plieti is the one going on a mission to help a friend in the midst of some academic espionage, and Mossa is stuck at home with a serious case of the blues. In this post-earth society, they live on space platforms and wear atmoscarves to breathe, and Plieti’s friend may have developed the most impressive breathing device this society has ever seen. The only problem is they have to defend their dissertation with a saboteur on the loose. Someone keeps disturbing their lab, spreading rumors of plagiarism, and possibly threatening their life. Readers will enjoy the science references and relatable academia woes, especially the profound impulse to make a good impression on your friends’ friends, making this overall an extremely relatable and beautiful breeze to read.

Metallic Realms by Lincoln Michel

The only thing worse than watching someone else live your dreams might be watching them also make friends, get a girlfriend, and just be cool along the way. Our poor protagonist Michael is stuck watching his amazing, brilliant, awe-inspiring best friend Taras struggle through a science-fiction writing group Michael is obsessed with; and now Michael must watch as the group falls apart before their big break. An exceptional version of the classic “it’s a story about the story within the story”, Michel does a good job of not getting lost within the meta-plot. Instead, he helps readers focus on what’s important: This guy sucks. The writing group, Orb 4, may be onto something with a genre bending joy ride inspired by 1950s scientific fiction pulp classics, but their friend Michael isn’t doing them any favors by making fake fan accounts, harassing the indie publisher he’s an intern for, and hiding microphones in a plant under the guise of ‘archiving’ on their behalf . This one will leave you cringing, asking your friends if you’re the Annoying One, and laughing out loud at the outrageously bad life decisions only a guy with rich parents would ever make. 

Automatic Noodle by Annalee Newitz

I first fell in love with Newitz brand of comedic character building by falling for a flying talking moose, and am thrilled to see their latest take on the topic du jour: robots and artificial intelligence. In a brisk 163 pages, Newitz creates a gang of five robots who come to accept the rest of the world has left them behind. Even though technically speaking robots can’t own businesses, through some clever chatting with a sentient lease agreement, they come to own and operate a noodle shop. There’s Hands, the robot chef who is a stump with arms and no legs, adores biang biang noodles, and like all aspiring culinary geniuses is deeply worried about the freshness of the ingredients and 1 star reviews; Sweetie, a gorgeous femme on her top half with only a skeletal metal spider figure for her bottom half; Staybehind, the signature “I’m not interested but I’m tagging along anyway” friend; Cayenne, their ideas-bot; and Robels, their token human. With a cozy and savory plot, the store slowly opens, the noodles boil, and the fragrant hot oil fills the pages with comfort and questions on sentience: Can robots feel pride in their work even if they can’t taste the fruits of their labor? Can the fruits of our labor be the love, camaraderie, and community we created along the way? 

Lucky Day by Chuck Tingle

On a beautiful day, we follow Vera, a buttoned up math-loving bisexual as she has the worst day of her life: things get awkward quick when she comes out to her mom—and then a bunch of fish fall from the sky, logic goes out the window, and her mom dies a gruesome death before her very eyes. After some time of unfathomable grief, a man barges into Vera’s home. He’s part of an elite and exclusive wing of the military: the Low Probability Event Task Force. Readers will get swept up by the adrenaline of it all, the endearing but guarded agent Agent Layne, and the unavoidable question at the center of all this nonsense: If the universe is just random and nothing matters, what’s the point in any of it? Having one bad day lead you down a path of questioning every life decision you’ve ever made is unfortunately extremely relatable, even if finding tears in the fabric of space time floating in an abandoned suburb isn’t. Tingle doesn’t hold anything back: The horror is horrifying, the comedy is side splitting and the heartfelt ending is earned. 

Maris Kreizman Finds Hope in Radicalization

We are past the point of overwhelm. The knot in my stomach has achieved bodily tenure. Every day arrives as a fresh hell before the last one’s even had time to ripen. And yet, somehow, we’re all still clocking in, sorting our recycling, and trying to drink eight glasses of water a day—as if hydration alone might shield us from the collapse of every institution intended to keep society from unraveling.

It’s easy to get paralyzed by fear, but culture critic Maris Kreizman channels that fear into a reckoning that begins with herself. In I Want to Burn This Place Down, she revisits the myth of individual grit—the idea that determination and hard work alone guarantee success—only to realize that hard work was never compatible with a system rigged like an obstacle course. Now, with healthcare collapsing, the climate in peril, and capitalism devouring itself, getting more conservative with age isn’t just unlikely for her—it’s unthinkable. 

From living with chronic illness to watching workers continue to demand basic fairness and confronting the selective protections of power, Kreizman grows more radical. Conservatism, she argues, serves no one—not even those who embrace it. It’s a luxury we can’t afford. In that radicalization, she finds hope—and reminds us that no one is coming to save us. 

It’s not deliverance that ensures survival, but solidarity. 


Greg Mania: What was the match that sparked the idea for this book?

Maris Kreizman: Over and over I’d see the media pushing this narrative that all of us grow increasingly conservative as we age. I wanted to speak for the rest of us who’ve moved further to the left than ever, and are dreaming bigger now than we did when we were younger. I’ve been so thoroughly disappointed by many of the ideals and institutions I once strove for, and I want to illustrate how that happened. And I want to see better aims and goalposts emerge in their place.

GM: It feels like you’re writing both to other disillusioned progressives and to a past version of yourself—someone who still believed in certain systems or ideals. What was it like holding those two readers in mind?

MK: When I think of that past version of myself, my first impulse is to want to shake her. And then I try to give her some grace—not too much, but some. I think so much of the ideology of that past self had been informed by the information I was given before the internet allowed us to seek out information for ourselves. I was nearly devoid of critical thinking skills as a kid. I trusted whatever was in the newspapers and on TV and assigned at school. We hear a lot about how the internet has radicalized people on the right, but I earnestly believe that Twitter, at least back in the day, was a place where I learned to think more broadly and to question received wisdom. 

No one is coming to save us; we have to save ourselves.

GM: Was there a particular moment or piece of information that felt like a turning point for you?

MK: It really hit home when I realized, back in 2017 or 2018, that Type 1 diabetics in the United States were dying because insulin costs were too high. The patent for insulin was sold 100 years ago for a dollar, but between 1999 and 2019, the price of insulin increased more than 1000 percent. Managing diabetes is hard enough under the best of circumstances; I could not imagine what it’s like to wonder if you’re gonna have enough insulin to make it through the week on top of everything else. I always thought we’d be working for a cure, not trying to save people because pharmaceutical companies got too greedy.

GM: The world has never been designed to accommodate disability, visible or invisible. And, like you, I have more faith in mutual aid than government support. Do you feel hopeful that community efforts can lead the way in making life more livable for those of us with chronic illness?


MK: I think I have to have hope in community efforts because I can’t envision a time in this country when our government will have the tools or the wherewithal to make sure those of us with disabilities are adequately cared for. Especially when Democratic leadership seems more likely to tweet about the things they supposedly value rather than acting and fighting for them. No one is coming to save us; we have to save ourselves. 

GM: I have fibromyalgia, so much of what you wrote really hit home—especially how our crumbling, unsustainable systems keep failing us. Over the last decade, with extreme weather and economic instability, has writing about these challenges shifted how you think about your body and your needs within the current political landscape?

MK: One of the main reasons I wanted to write this book is because I know exactly how lucky I am. When I saw a few years ago that GoFundMe was filled with other Type 1 diabetics who were desperate for money because they could not afford the insulin that all of us need to survive each and every day, I began to save insulin in my fridge even long past its expiration date. I started donating it to people in need, via a mutual aid organization. I wanted to do something more. I was hoping that writing about my own body—remember, I’m the lucky one!—in relation to all of this instability might shine a light on how other less fortunate people might be struggling.

GM: In what ways do you hope this book will keep the conversations you’re having going even further?

MK: I hope other people will read the book and maybe see themselves in it. And maybe that glimpse of recognition will make them feel compelled to act as a result. 

There are plenty of people out there who are dissatisfied with the status quo and who want to envision a future that’s more equitable.

GM: For the sake of our delicate mental health, let’s get a bit unserious: You mention that most people get more conservative as they age, but you’re going the other way politically. That said, are there any parts of life where you are becoming more conservative? (For me, it’s developing strong opinions on grocery store layouts.)

MK: I am so deeply ashamed to admit this, but it’s true: I see photos of the food served at Mar-a-Lago and every person I know with good taste is like, “That’s so gross, imagine being filthy rich and wanting to eat that,” but the steak, no matter how well-done, and the potatoes, look pretty tasty to me. I would eat it, and happily. How will I ever live this down?

GM: The feeling of wanting to ‘burn it all down’ has become more common, especially in these troubled times. I sometimes wrestle with that impulse—wanting change but also worrying about what comes after. I also understand that fear can hold people back from invoking change. Still, I’m not sure destruction should be the goal without a clear vision for rebuilding. How do you imagine a world beyond this current hellscape?

MK: I’m not a policy expert. I don’t know what the post-hellscape world looks like, exactly. I just know that there are plenty of people out there who are dissatisfied with the status quo and who want to envision a future that’s more equitable, a future in which caring about the welfare of other people is a primary concern. There are other writers who’ve really envisioned what a better world might look like, like Mariame Kaba and adrienne marie brown and Naomi Klein, to name a few. I include a list of recommended reading at the end of the book both because I love to recommend a book, but also because there are so many better thinkers than I am when it comes to envisioning a more just world. 

Learning to accept help might be a new lifelong goal.

GM: These are all such powerful writers—but you also wrote this book, which is doing its own visionary work. Was there a moment while writing when you surprised yourself with a hope or possibility you didn’t know you believed in?

MK: I think it was when I realized that I had changed my goals for myself. I was gonna make peace with being neither a parent nor a careerist and yet still consider myself to have a happy, full life. I was going to give up on fantasizing about that one day when diabetes would ultimately be cured and instead stick to making sure other diabetics have access to drugs and testing tools.  And maybe most importantly, I was going to stop trying to control every single aspect of my life and instead learn to accept help. Learning to accept help might be a new lifelong goal. 

My Obscenity Deserves to Be Seen

“The Cat Sitter” by Genevieve Plunkett

The couple showed up behind my apartment building on the hottest day of summer. I hadn’t heard their truck drive onto the lawn, hadn’t seen the blue and red of their tent going up outside my first-floor window. I never felt a sense of intrusion combing the back of my neck. 

They were just there, and they seemed perfectly unembarrassed and casual, like people sitting around a yard sale with Diet Cokes. Squatters was the first word that came to mind but, as unsettling as they would become, the word squatter never held any bitterness for me. In fact, I appreciated the drama that it implied. 

My brunch friends, I knew, would be appalled. They never truly believed me when I said I was broke, even though they’d all, at some point, hired me to pet-sit, and saw firsthand how much I made per gig. They thought that I declined dinners out and wore their hand-me-downs because I was cheap, or worse: self-pitying. But if I told them that there were squatters in my yard, that the wife’s stretched-out bras were hanging on a line from the truck’s side-view mirror, that the husband had laid out a set of hand tools and three repotted begonia cuttings on the sidewalk with a SALE sign, then my brunch girlies might finally understand that my situation was different than theirs. Not that I was looking for sympathy from a bunch of Disney-obsessed adults on their third MLM. But a little validation can go a long way. 

There was one problem: this month’s gossip at the brunch table was absurd to such an unusual degree that it would have absolutely overshadowed my squatter situation. I decided that I would have to wait to share the news, so that we could all properly revel in the shock value of each separate incident. It was a gift, really—this abundance of drama—because my brunch ladies didn’t have a lot of excitement in their lives, besides weaponized-incompetent husbands and labradoodles that sometimes faced bowel obstructions.

Chelsea had brought the gossip to the table. She was the wrong person for it but she gave it her best shot, including halting innuendos and an endearing hand gesture that would have been effective if she had fully committed to it. Thankfully, Robyn jumped in with her own, more forceful hand gesture, and made sure that none of the information was lost on us. 

“What Chelsea is trying to say is that Mr. Lloyd was arrested last week for vigorously masturbating in public.”

There were grimaces.

“How public?” Cilla wanted to know. She was our helicopter mom, her mind a ready lather for this kind of stuff. She could probably spot a pedophile from a mile away and had one of those spring-loaded jaws that I could see biting off a pervy wiener. She’d once hired me to feed her kids’ guinea pigs while she and the family were out of town, and she had texted me the minute I walked through the door. Hi Becky! Thanks again for feeding us! Love, Squeakers and Cookie Dough. I couldn’t decide whether I was more creeped out by the rodent impersonation, or the fact that she’d been watching me.

Chelsea reclaimed her story: “Well, no one actually saw it, except for the one person who happened to be driving by when it happened.”

Elmer Lloyd was a man that we all knew for different reasons, although to me and Cilla, he’d always be our dorky JV field hockey coach from ninth grade. Plastic whistle around his neck. Socks pulled up high. Sunblock never quite rubbed in. Chelsea knew him from the library, where he had volunteered for a spat, and where she used to work part-time before the birth of her second child. Robyn sat on the school board with Mrs. Lloyd, and knew the couple through church. 

Recently, I had done some cat sitting for the Lloyds. I was just at his house! I almost said to the group, wanting to ride the wave of notoriety. But there was really nothing more to it, nothing about the house that had indicated or forewarned of Mr. Lloyd’s level of perversion. Inside, it was heavily curtained with low ceilings and high pile carpeting. I felt sedated whenever I was there, like a child under a mother’s skirt. 

It had been Mr. Lloyd who showed me the correct way of mixing Fancy Feast into dry kibble, and how to mold a scrap of foil over the open can to refrigerate the leftovers. The water bowl was not a bowl at all, but a pint glass filled to the brim. It was how the cat “liked things done.” These small acts of his felt confessional to me. Mr. Lloyd, once an impenetrable stereotype of a hockey coach, was now, in his home, a softened old man, yielding to the demands of a cat named Prune. It embarrassed me, and not for what it was (devoted pet ownership), but for what it wasn’t: a choice to share. Mr. Lloyd had no choice but to include me in these things, because otherwise he could not go on vacation with his wife. 

I followed him to the bathroom, where they kept the litter box, and he showed me, with some meekness, how he scooped the cat poop directly into the toilet. He looked up at me, dirty scooper in one hand, the other grasping the toilet lid.

“I close it before flushing,” he whispered conspiratorially, and I felt an understanding pass between us, as if we both knew that there was no way of dealing with cat feces that wasn’t somehow problematic or embarrassing. I wanted to say to him: Don’t worry, I’m a full-time cat sitter. I see this all the time. I wanted to comfort him in this matter, but didn’t dare, because whatever vulnerability I was picking up on didn’t have a name. It was probably all in my head. 

“Maybe there was some misunderstanding,” Cilla said, cooling her jets now that no children had been present. “Maybe he was sleepwalking and thought he was in the bathroom.”

“He was completely naked,” Robyn said. “And it was three o’clock in the afternoon.”

I imagined Mr. Lloyd standing on the side of the road, his sixty-five-year-old body caught between decline and stubborn virility, his face turned upward into the sun. I had so many questions. Like: had Mr. Lloyd kept his eyes open, or were they closed? And, when Robyn had said “vigorously masturbating,” did she know that for a fact? Was vigorous in the police report? And if so, who was to judge when uninspired masturbation turned vigorous? But I didn’t ask, because I did not know how to mask my sudden curiosity, to temper my voice so that it matched the others’. They sounded horrified, as if discussing a spontaneous combustion, and not just a guy with his hand around his dick.


There was talk around my building about who the squatters might be. Who they “belonged to,” was how most of us were framing it, as in, which resident’s weird extended family had overflowed so unbecomingly onto the lawn? 

Marion and I talked about it by the mailboxes, choosing our words carefully, calling the squatters “guests” or “the situation,” all the while raising our eyebrows to convey our intolerance, because the fact that we had a shared skepticism and impatience for the subdivided Victorian’s many quirks meant that we were on the same team. Marion didn’t need to know that I was also on the same team as Patty and Fronia, and that I sometimes joined Vincent behind the maintenance shed for a cigarette, even though he had pink mouth spittle and kept his TV on too loud. Keeping up with the neighbors, and making sure that everyone knew that I was not in any way responsible for our new visitors, seemed to take precedence over actually figuring out who these people were. 

It was only after I walked in on the husband squatter in the laundry room that I realized how young he was. Younger than me. He had been waist-deep in the dryer and shot upright when he heard the door open, his body language not so much guilty as nervous, like a servant. Coy hands sliding into his jean pockets. A polite nod. Still, my first thought was that he had snuck into the laundry room to root through the clothes and steal my dirty underwear. This was a ridiculous and purely intrusive notion because my dirty underwear wasn’t in the dryer, it was in the basket in my hands.

“Hi,” he said to me. “That fro-yo lady wanted me to check out the sounds in the dryer.” 

“You mean Fronia?” I said, bewildered. I was still thinking about the underwear scenario, wondering why I felt a little disappointed that it wasn’t real.

“That swamp woman, yeah,” he said, seriously.

I laughed in sheer surprise; at his ease and audacity, and at the accuracy of his depiction of Fronia. She wore long black skirts with about twenty hand-sewn pockets on the outside, and I’d once seen her smoking a Gandalf pipe. She was incredibly bog witch.

I said, “It’s always sounded like that—’like there are bones inside.’” A direct Fronia quote. At this, the husband squatter’s eyes widened in a show of pretend fear that seemed for my sake entirely. We stood for a moment in silence. I was overcome with the uneasiness of having no idea what was happening, as well as the realization that I would probably ask everyone except the guy in front of me, who had the answers.

“That’s kind of a joke,” I said, and then turned to dump my clothes into the washing machine, to escape the awkwardness that I wasn’t even responsible for. As I was doing this, I had an impulse, one that I’ve never had before. I reached into the now-full washer and plucked out the black cotton thong that I’d worn yesterday in the eighty-five degree heat—and balled it into my pocket.

“Nice to meet you,” I said to the husband squatter, like he hadn’t just watched me do the thing with the underwear. Like he wasn’t a stranger living outside my window, which could have been kindness or avoidance on my part. Honestly, I’ve never known the difference. 


Saturday was beer night, so I drove to the bar to meet my boyfriend Daryl. I enjoyed beer night, because it was predictable; the bar we frequented attracted people that we knew, but didn’t particularly like, and somehow this dynamic was extremely relaxing. 

Not tonight. I could already feel that tonight would be different. I had the sweaty underwear in my hand, clutched against the steering wheel, my foot heavy on the pedal. I was in a rage, an anticipatory rage, even though Daryl and I weren’t currently fighting. 

We’d been together for two years. I was the only brunch girlie who wasn’t married or mid-divorce. The only one who had always lived alone. My excuse was that neither Daryl nor I were in a position to break our leases, but the truth was that my lease was up in September and I had already made up my mind to cruise aimlessly through, committing to another year of single-income solitude. The arrival of the squatters had done nothing to alter this plan, which probably meant that I really didn’t want to move in with Daryl. 

Daryl was at our usual table, looking at his phone, which was good because I was so wound up, I was almost smiling—the twitchy, involuntary smile of a woman who was about to cause a scene and could not help it. I put the underwear on the table next to his beer and watched his eyes slide away from the screen. They narrowed in mild confusion then flicked back so he could swipe up from whatever he was doing. It was most likely that exasperating, yet stubbornly wholesome, text thread with his buddies in which they expressed all their feelings through memes about Taco Bell diarrhea, or small dignified outbursts of Love you, man.

“Hey, babe,” he said, and brushed his hand against my hip, looking at me expectantly. What I wanted to do was sit across from him and have a normal conversation that did not reveal what I was feeling. I wanted to listen to him talk about the weekend’s wiffle ball tournament, or that one client who never tipped. Daryl’s side hustles were arguably more respectable than mine. He was a fly fishing guide who made up the difference repairing houses and doing minor construction projects. Last year, Chelsea and her husband had hired him to fix a rotting porch step. Everyone loved Daryl. But I couldn’t stomach the small talk tonight. It seemed that our validity as a couple was suddenly and inexplicably on trial. I sat. 

“I brought you a pair of my sweaty underwear,” I said. I could tell that he could tell that I was acting differently, and I was not going to allow him any time to raise his guard. “Do you want to sniff them?”

“What, here?” He did that head in a spiderweb shake, hoping to make light of whatever this was going to be. He didn’t touch the underwear. 

“I asked if you wanted to sniff them,” I said. “Like, if I left them with you, would you go home and—I dunno—rub your nose in them?” I made a gesture with my hand against my face, like a rooting pig. I was being unhinged without warning. Had this question been inside me all along, like a spitball on the ceiling waiting to fall? 

Daryl made an “eh” face. “It’s not my particular fetish,” he said, and slid the underwear back toward me. I was momentarily horrified to see that they left a slug trail of moisture, but it turned out to be the condensation from Daryl’s pint glass. I grabbed them.  

“Your fetish?” My voice was too loud. “That’s not what I was asking.”

“What then? Wait—are you actually mad about this?” He picked up his phone, thumbed it three times and then put it face down, like he couldn’t even focus on the fight that I was trying to have. People liked Daryl because he was level-headed, reliable—the kind of guy you’d pay to go fishing with—but sometimes it drove me insane. I left the bar burning. 


It was dusk when I got home. I could see a figure in the tent, shifting around its light source. I stood on the lawn watching, wondering if the couple’s houselessness meant that they were any less deserving of privacy. Of course it didn’t, but that didn’t make it easier to look away. The shadow inside the tent dilated and shrunk, like a moth in a paper lamp. There were footsteps behind me—not really footsteps, but rather the sense of weight compressing the ground—and I turned and saw the squatter husband coming toward me from the direction of the building. He pulled a cigarette from behind his ear and put it between his lips. Your wife is living in a tent, I thought, and you are spending money on cigarettes? But he might have bummed it off Vincent, and if so, he was no worse than I was. I wondered if he cared that I had been so obviously spying on his wife’s tent shadow. 

“You were gone a while, so I put your clothes in the dryer for you,” he said. I did not like his air of ingratiating deference. It seemed exhausting, like trying to keep up a fake accent would be exhausting. He cupped his lighter and I watched his eyes linger on my left hand, tight around the dirty thong.

“What you got there?” he asked, which no one would ever ask, except for maybe someone like him. In my mind, I handed him the warm bunch of fabric, pressed it into his palm and asked, “Would you know what to do with these?”

Instead I said: “Just trash from my car.”


I woke up the next morning sweltering under my top sheet, dreams dissolving. No memory of them, except for a kind of mental brine. I—and the brine—needed coffee. Daryl had beaten me to an apology but, even over text message, I could sense his bewilderment. 

I’m sorry if I didn’t handle that right. Let me know yr ok 

Daryl wasn’t terrible, he was just stunted, lacking a certain dank bottom floor to his imagination. He wouldn’t do the weird things, would never surprise me with whims, animalistic or otherwise. 

No I’m sorry, I texted back with a single tear emoji. Let me make it up to you. I didn’t hint at how I would make it up, which might have been a little underhanded of me; let his interpretation speak for itself.

I put the water on for coffee and went to the window to look for signs of life. My impulse to check on the squatters’ camp was like the desire to inspect an ant farm: I didn’t know what I wanted to see, except for the satisfaction of seeing that something—anything—had continued through the night. I got more than that: the husband was asleep just beyond my first-story window, starfished on the lawn, like a child who had fallen out of bed without waking. Could he have spent the whole night like that? Practically next to me? My kettle began to whistle and I hurried to remove it from the burner, afraid of disturbing the sleeping husband, as if I were the intruder in his life and not the other way around. It was a trait of mine, to give my space away at the slightest discomfort, ready to deny my own basic needs before they were even under review.

When I went back to the window later, the squatter husband was gone. There was no indent from his sleeping body. The tent was also empty (I could just tell) and the truck was missing. Maybe they had gone to the rec center for a shower, or maybe the library was open and they were using the computers, enjoying the AC. 

I wondered if I was supposed to complain to the landlady and have them kicked off the property. Marion told me that no one else dared to say anything because they were all guilty of something they didn’t want to draw attention to. Fronia had her weed plants. Jesse, in apartment five, was a hoarder, and lately he had taken to collecting rainwater in big, mosquito-breeding barrels around the building. Marion herself had already asked for two rent extensions, and she had an illicit cat. Patty was just plain volatile. That left me, and what was I hiding, besides my body apparently not making my boyfriend hungry enough? I found my phone where I’d left it on the windowsill, and unlocked it. If I was going to call the landlady, it was going to take me at least a full day to build up the nerve, a ritual of picking up my phone and putting it down again, until I annoyed myself into taking action. 

I fought the urge to call Daryl, ask him something like, “If you could shrink and ride around in any part of my body, which part would you choose?” Or: “How come you wash your face immediately after it has been between my legs?” If I could grow a beard and eat pussy, I’d rub the evidence in like conditioner. 

I undressed, right there in the kitchen. As an experiment, I held my hot coffee cup to my bare stomach to see if I could make myself flinch, then pushed it further in, pretending that I was branding myself. I’ve always been privately overdramatic. 

In the shower, I wondered if I would break up with Daryl if he jerked off on the side of a public highway. I found that the act itself—that is, a man masturbating while standing—was appealing. It would require a certain tightening of the buttocks, a squaring of the legs. Tendons in the neck would show up unannounced. There would be an overall stance that I found wildly intriguing. However, the question was not whether I had discovered a new sick fantasy. The question was, would I be pissed? 

Yes.

“But why would I be pissed?” I asked the shower curtain earwig. It didn’t know, so I explained to it that I would be pissed because Daryl had never stood in front of me, naked and uninhibited, with various tendons flexing. 

I was about to exit the shower. The curtain was open, the water still running. I caught my reflection in the patch of the mirror where the fog never sticks, the swift cutout of my torso dancing in and out of frame as I tried to examine it. 

“What’s the highway got that I don’t got?” I asked the mirror. As if in answer, the mirror began to shake. My bathroom shared a wall with the laundry room, which had once been an elegant foyer with a black and white tile floor, and was now grimy with lint. Whenever someone used the coin-operated dryer, the force of it rattled the light fixtures above my bathroom sink so badly their swan necks swung upside down. I had to tighten the screws every few weeks. The laundry room’s great cherrywood door opened to an ornate front porch, which would have been a lovely addition to our lives if it hadn’t been crowded railing-to-railing with yard equipment and the overflow of Jesse’s hoard. If I didn’t keep my bathroom window covered, I’d be staring at a nest of rusted mattress springs and splintered scrap wood every time I sat on the toilet. In theory, if I didn’t keep the window covered, anyone on the porch who wanted to brave the fortress of junk could peer directly into my life. 

I turned off the shower and stepped out, then went naked to the window. I brushed aside the curtain. With my finger, I made a vertical line down the fogged pane, then another and another, imagining that I was exposing myself to the outside world tally by tally. 


It was Sunday and I had my shopping to do. I was on a store-brand fig newton kick and I needed half-and-half because I had stopped trusting the carton I already had. This was another reason why I couldn’t move in with Daryl: I lived like a child. I opened cereal boxes from the bottom. I owned one pan. My response to finding mouse turds in a bottom cabinet was to duct tape it shut.

I was in the breakfast aisle looking at the wall of cereals and feeling depressed (because honestly, who asked for any of this?), when I was struck by an unexpected wave of guilt. I thought, there are real people living outside my apartment, and here I am bitterly disappointed by Fruity Pebbles. I wondered if I should buy the squatters food or toiletries and, if so, would it be kinder to offer them something practical or something fun? Practical implied that I knew what was best for them. Fun implied that I had no clue whatsoever what it meant to be in need. I was so engrossed in this dilemma that I did not see the woman wheeling her cart toward me. It would have been fine if I’d had a half-second to compose myself, but there she was—Mrs. Lloyd herself—and I gasped.

“Oh, hi, Becky,” she said and I could see that, were it not for my look of horror, we might have politely avoided the silent exchange that was now occurring between us: she was realizing that I knew about her husband. That I had heard everything. What’s more, I felt that my position as cat sitter put me in a strangely intimate, yet detached, category, one that was possibly more humiliating for her than if I had been a close friend or a distant relative. I was a mistress of sorts. To the cat.

“How’s Prune?” I asked.

“Prune is Prune,” she said and I thought that would be it, but Mrs. Lloyd was self-possessed to a fault. “How has your summer been?” she asked me. I watched the corners of her mouth set, as if by invisible push pins. It struck me that some faces were more defined than others, by markers far more interesting than nose shape or eyebrow thickness. The thing about the squatter husband’s face was that it always looked as wiped clean as a plate. Eyes straight, jaw relaxed and earnest. He was friendly, like any new neighbor would be. 

“I have people living in my yard,” I said. “Strangers.”

It was Mrs. Lloyd’s turn to look horror-struck. It made me wonder: if this was her response to my squatters, then where was she stowing her feelings about her husband’s actions? Had she, before she left that morning, asked Mr. Lloyd what brand of toothpaste he wanted from the store? Did she still fold his socks? Did the image of his flexing tendons play out in her mind? 

“Oh, how sad,” she said. “Tell them to come by the church this afternoon for a hot meal.” 

I wanted to tell her that it wasn’t as sad as it sounded. The husband squatter was young and handy. The wife took naps in the truck bed and wore her hair in pigtails. They were just a nuisance that no one knew how to deal with. 

“I caught the man spying on me,” I said in a low voice. “He was peeking through my bathroom window when I was getting out of the shower.” It wasn’t true, of course, although technically it was possible, junk heap notwithstanding. For all I knew, the squatter husband had been walking across the lawn and caught me drawing my stupid fog lines, which would have been a hundred times more humiliating than if he’d just spotted me naked. Still, I don’t know why I said it, only that I wanted information from Mrs. Lloyd that I knew I would never get otherwise. And for an instant, I saw it flash across her face: disgust and a sense of inevitability, as if we should have known that this would happen, eventually. That it was the way of men. I felt sure now that she would stay with her husband forever, slowly folding his wrongdoings into herself until they became her own.


Later, I texted Robyn.

Any more info about Mr. Roadside Attraction? 

I was afraid to type his name into Google, as if that would somehow expose my interest in him (maybe no one would know, but the ether would know). Asking Robyn directly seemed safer, more casual, like I was just making conversation. Plus, I knew that Google wouldn’t answer my most burning questions. 

It was evening and I hadn’t told the squatters about Mrs. Lloyd’s hot meal. The husband had been picking around under the truck’s hood all afternoon, his movements like someone shifting food around with chopsticks. Was he just trying to look busy? And for whose sake? Bringing up a church dinner felt obscene to me. As if, as long as we never addressed the obvious, we could exist in a limbo of polite denial. My phone buzzed on the counter. Robyn had texted back.

What’s this about a man peeking through your window??

This was not good. I hadn’t considered the possibility that Mrs. Lloyd would talk to Robyn about me. But they were at the church dinner together and maybe the church dinner had gotten boring. Maybe Mrs. Lloyd was trying to throw the scent off her husband by spreading rumors about me. Could it be that I had underestimated her cunningness? How many people had she told? 

I backed away from the phone and looked out the window, as if to make sure that the husband was still under the hood, suddenly terrified that he would find out what I had fabricated about him. I imagined Daryl catching wind of it, driving his car onto the lawn, stumbling out swinging his fists. Not that Daryl was that kind of guy, only that it felt good to catastrophize, like pouring ice water over my head. No, Daryl was more likely to interrogate me: why hadn’t I told him about it? Was my silence cowardice or proof of something more deviant. You liked it, didn’t you? the imagined Daryl sneered at me. Although this was also unlikely. So why did I feel as though I’d already been called out, persecuted, publicly shamed? 

It was getting dark and the husband squatter wasn’t under the hood anymore. From my window, I could see the glow of the tent, the small licks of light reflected off the parked cars. And then I was seeing something that at first did not strike me as odd. Maybe it was the hazy weather, the feeling that everything was separated by heat and curtains of gnats and pollen, that reality was swollen into a fever dream. Whatever the reason, I felt as though I was hidden behind a fourth wall, watching a scene from a movie. I felt lucky, in fact, to have spotted them, that same sense of ant farm interest taking over. 

Through the open window of the truck, I could see the wife squatter at the wheel, gripping it and leaning forward, while her husband sat in the driver’s seat behind her. He was doing all the work of thrusting, holding onto her and working so hard, it looked like she was some obstruction that had fallen onto him, and he was trying with all his might to push her off. Like her flesh was this beautiful and frightening problem presented to him and he was going to meet it with every drop of vigor he had. There were many things going through my mind in that moment: the shame of having lied to Mrs. Lloyd; the fascination with what I was witnessing; and between those two emotions, a dark impulse emerging, like a strong weed growing through two stones.


When I was a little girl, my mother and father brought me to a county fair in upstate New York.  We spent hours walking through the agricultural exhibits, the 4H craft tables, the stiff cakes and pies pinned with blue and red ribbons. This was a world that I could not comprehend: where children cared enough to bake competitively or to raise a prize-winning calf then slaughter it. Caring maybe wasn’t the right word. Seeing themselves as functioning members of society is probably closer to what I mean. These kids knew how to follow a recipe. They had a completely businesslike approach to matters of reproduction—semen was something that could be purchased from a catalogue. It was delivered in vials. These peers of mine seemed to come out of the womb understanding that A led to B. 

When the sun set, the fairgrounds became more crowded. People were walking noisily, as if they had somewhere to be. The carnival part of the fair had come to life, flashing and barking with a kind of devilish promise. My father suggested that we all go on a ride that looked like a carousel adorned with a hundred swings. You were strapped into the swing and then spun around so fast, your body was thrown parallel to the ground. I rode the thing with a delayed sense of horror, and when my swing was vertical again, I staggered away to reconnect with my parents. We did not talk about the experience of being on the swings, and I wondered if that was because I had felt the surge of gravity inside my vagina, and so had everyone else, in their respective areas, and perhaps it was an unspoken rule of the fair to not acknowledge this. 

My father did however have much to say about the ride operators. He said that many of them did not have trailers to sleep in but camped beneath the rides at night—rides like the carousel, the fun house, and even the great vagina stirring mechanism that we had just been on. This concept fascinated me. It gave me the same feeling of invention as when I used to turn my Little Tykes pedal car on its side, nestle into the hole that the window made, and stare out across the backyard, the sensation that the world, too, had been flipped. It irritated my mother that I never used my toys in the way that they were intended. My art easel was flattened into a sled in the winter or became the central tower of a fort. Barbie heads were popped off and used to hold beads, coins, and Nerd candies. 

This, I believe, is why part of me envied the squatters: they were out on the lawn, living reality askew, like me in my upended pedal car, while the rest of us drove around upright, if not quite convinced of anything.


In bed, I touched myself under the blankets and thought about the husband squatter. I imagined that he had looked up from his thrusting, caught me watching from my window, and then finished explosively without breaking eye contact. It was a promising start, but something was missing, a main ingredient to the whole thing. I kicked the covers away and tore off my pajamas, so I was lying naked on my back. I tried again, and again I got nowhere. The water stain above me was not impressed. I’ve seen it all, it said to me. Its face was bulbous and layered, like the cross-section of a cabbage. A bored cabbage. 

Often, if I wanted to finish when Daryl was going down on me, I’d have to think about Val. Val was a guy who I’d made up, a carnival ride operator who slept every night beneath the merry-go-round alongside his crew. It had been a long summer for Val. He was tired, and sunburnt, and horny. In my fantasy, Val tries to rub himself sneakily through his pants but knows already that it’s not going to work. So, he lets out his cock and, turning on his side, beats it into the dirt, not caring in the end who hears him.

I guess you can say Val was my tried and true, my sexual equivalent of pulling the fire alarm when the meeting had gone on for too long. But Val had been around for years and he was losing his edge. Lately, he’d emerged from beneath the carousel like a fish that had grown legs, to perform godforsaken acts in the freak show tent. It was time for him to retire. It was probably time for me to reel it in with the weird fantasies, get a vibrator like everyone else I knew. 

The water stain leered at me, like it knew that this plan would never work. I squirmed. I pulled the sheet over myself and then kicked it away. I shut my eyes so tightly, I saw Pop Rocks in my brain. And when I opened them again, I felt very much alone. Terribly alone. Even with the muffled racket of Vincent’s television above me. It was as if what I’d thought was loneliness my whole life was in fact just a rolling die, and that die had finally landed. “Fine,” I said to the stain. I got up and wrapped the sheet around me like a towel. “I’ll go somewhere where I’m appreciated.”


The night still had that fourth wall feel to it, and the inside of my car was snug and warm, like clothes just out of the dryer. When I turned the key, my headlights eyeballed the squatters’ tent. The husband and wife had since left the truck and gone to bed, and I imagined them flinching in their sleep at the lights and the engine sound. I still felt awkward for living my life noisily in front of them. It didn’t matter that I paid rent, or that I had been there first. 

The sheet—I was still wrapped in it—fell away from my shoulders, and I wondered if it was going to be painful to drive a car without clothes on. Would my boobs bounce? Would the air blowing in through the windows sting my nipples? There was only one way to find out. 

Did he finish? I had texted Robyn, ignoring her earlier question. Robyn’s husband was a cop. Cops knew about the details that didn’t make it into the paper. They saw the bruises and the messy bedrooms. They heard the slurred voices and the insults, smelled odors that most people don’t have to think about. But they didn’t seem to have the heart for them—details in general, I mean. While a poet might obsess over one drop of blood, a stray inflection, the dark shifting of guilty eyes, I had only ever heard cops speak of these things with weariness. Robyn tagged my text with a question mark. 

Mr. Lloyd, I wrote. 

Another question mark. 

So I texted, in all caps: DID MR LLOYD CUM YES OR NO? 


As I drove away, my phone on the passenger seat flashed a text banner: Ew Becky, followed by two barfing emojis. Robyn probably wasn’t the type of woman who asked her cop husband about the details of his job. I wondered if she even said the word cum around him, if it was a thing that she thought about when she wasn’t trying to get pregnant. Daryl only said the word as a polite warning, but I preferred to interpret it as more of a sports commentary. Oh, what I would do for a good play-by-play these days! For a man to tell me he’s about to cum, like it’s the most important thing he’s ever accomplished.

The night feels different when you’re in it sideways, the car like an animal ready to buck you through the windshield. My nipples were two raspberries on a bush, assaulted by the wind. My labia stuck to the seat like wet leaves on a dock. I drove through familiar intersections, traffic lights seeping into the haze, like markers pressed onto paper too hard. I drove past the bar where, just nights ago, I’d picked a fight with Daryl over a problem that I’d created. That problem now felt like a pebble tossed high into the air: maybe it would hit me when it fell back to earth, but who cared? I had a bigger, better problem to chase. 


What none of my brunchies want to say out loud is that I had been an afterthought. A sub-in. I wasn’t supposed to be part of the original group. Originally, they wanted it to be a weekly mommy club, but it turned out that no one could commit to meeting that frequently, plus Robyn was having fertility issues. The consensus was that they needed one more childless member, so that it didn’t seem like they were waiting for her to catch up. Someone who was never going to have a baby. Someone fucked up enough that she would never catch up to them in any category. I had been suspicious from the start, wondering when they were going to start pummeling me with sales pitches for Tupperware or sex toys, but they gained my trust, tamed me like a lanky backyard deer.

“Becky, how do you stay so thin?” Cilla asked me one day, as I was destroying a brown sugar cinnamon Pop Tart. 

“Visualization,” I said, and they all leaned in, ready to learn about some new-agey diet hack. “I imagine that I’m a toddler and, whenever I get the urge to snack, I lick a doorknob instead.” They laughed. And just like that, I became the comic relief. Suddenly, they all had memories of me saying hilarious things in high school, as if we could so easily trade my own version of the past for theirs. And there was gratification in maintaining this act, although I don’t know why. It felt safe, I suppose, to be the rumpled outcast, wide-eyed in the face of their husbands’ 401(k)s, the fancy preschool waitlists. I was never going to impress them anyway.


I turned into a development of little sloped lawns and freshly tarred driveways. I knew the road well but I was still worried that I would miss the house and have to turn around, and by then my courage would have fizzled out. If you can call any of this courage. 

The house was marked by a lamppost and a kidney-shaped flowerbed. I knew that if I were to keep driving past it, the road would end in a cul-de-sac. But I also knew that there was a footpath just beyond the cul-de-sac that led into the woods, that followed a deep creek bed, then turned sharply, narrowing to nothing more than a bicycle skid in the dirt. From there it shot steeply upwards, where it ended at a weedy guardrail at the edge of a state highway. If one wanted to be naked by the time they reached the highway, they would have plenty of time to shed their clothes along the way. 

I wondered if he had been erect the whole time he was walking, or if he’d had to pump it up when he arrived at his destination. If I were a cop, I would make sure to know all the details. If I were a man, I would make sure that I was always erect. Not just for the obvious reasons, but for the whole world. I would be hard for the sunlight and the winding creek bed, and for the dense sticky weeds. I would be hard for the look of determination on the squatter husband’s smooth face, for his frantic thrusting, like someone pinned under a felled tree. I’d be so hard, my tendons would explode out of my neck, and the whites of my eyes would cloud with red. I would be hard for Jesus. I would stroke it for God. I would flay the air with seven to eight inches of throbbing devoutness. 

I pulled the car over, parallel to the kidney-shaped flower bed, and got out. Around me, houses flickered with late-night TV. Cars were sealed in their ports. Garden hoses were reeled in. Everything was tight and gleaming darkly. I pulled the sheet around myself and stepped barefoot onto the lawn, then walked up to the door. 

The bricks of the front stoop were still warm from the hot day. There was a rectangular button with a half-glowing light shining inside it. I held the sheet together at my collarbone with one hand and pressed the button with the other and heard, as if inside the skull of the house itself, a faint chiming. I waited, the night breeze blowing up through my sheet. A tremor growing in my legs. 

I had left my phone on the passenger seat, Robyn’s text banners washing the screen with worry: Becky, are you okay?? The brunchies seemed to think concern was the best response to anything that they didn’t understand. Anything that anger couldn’t cover. I once told them about the time I accidentally drank bleach solution that I’d left overnight in a water bottle, and how the doctors at the emergency room wouldn’t let me leave, because they thought I was suicidal. Because who would be stupid enough to drink bleach? I’d told the story as a funny anecdote. But Cilla had looked distraught, putting her hand on my knee.

“I’m so sorry that happened to you,” she said. She looked as though she’d rather not have heard the story. I couldn’t relate. I always wanted to know everything. 

A light switched on inside, illuminating the perfectly flat top to a hedge below the window. I could see the funny outline of a man, distorted through the decorative glass of the door. Shuffling. Tightening his robe.

There was the sound of a June bug in a dark lamp. Then the clunking of a latch. His familiar gravelly voice.

“Who’s there?” 

He stood in the doorway, unable, it seemed, to make sense of what he was seeing. I watched the alarm on his face turn to confusion, confusion to recognition. He tilted his head, as if that would shift it all into place. 

Here was his cat sitter, in the middle of the night, clutching a sheet around her like a toga. His cat sitter throwing open the sheet and standing naked on his doorstep, her body pinched tight from the shock of the night air. When I spoke the first time, he couldn’t hear me. His eyes widening, he stepped across the threshold. He looked like a man about to be crushed by a train.  

“Please,” I said. “Teach me how.” 

Hanif Abdurraqib and Anthony Thomas Lombardi on the Importance of Artistic Community

I was thrilled to get some time to talk to Anthony Thomas Lombardi about murmurations, mostly because I see things in this book that I’m so incredibly drawn to within my own work. Namely, there’s a comfort with obsession, a comfort with staying in one place and not seeking answers, or seeking a way out. I felt like I was both looking into a sort of warped mirror of my own excitements and obsessions and also still learning from what the reflection was telling me. 

It was exciting for me to sit and pick the brain of this writer who, like me, has working class origins, who came up in a way that many would call, quote, “untraditional,” but I think that’s foolish. The tradition that we both came up in is one of self-made community, a tradition of open mics and poetry slams, and passing printouts of poems across a room to someone who liked them. And I think that tradition is more useful than any. 

I love this book, too, for how richly it is populated. It’s bursting not only with brilliance, and formal inventiveness, but also with a real sense of care for everyone who has a voice, or a body in the work. To write in this way suggests a real tender relationship with a world that often does not deserve it, and I think that is worth learning from, too.


Hanif Abdurraqib: It’s been so long since I put out my first book, I’m wondering what the process has been like and what it’s felt like and how long you feel like you’ve been working on the book. 

Anthony Thomas Lombardi: I feel like I’ve been working on the book my entire life. I consider when I got sober, ten years ago, as the true embryonic stage of the book. I wouldn’t have been able to write the book if I wasn’t processing all of that. I remember telling my analyst, who I’ve been working with for a decade now, I’m ready to tell my story!  Before that, I was white knuckling life. I was working in a bar the day after I got out of detox, I was in an abusive relationship. But writing isn’t only putting fingers to the keyboard or pen to paper. We’re always writing—we’re writing right now.  

The first poem I wrote for the book was the closing “self-portrait as murmuration” in 2019. At that point, I was being taken under the wing of Hala Alyan. Pretty much this whole book was written in her backyard at Kan Yama Kan’s open mics, her reading series, alongside my generation of poets, my community, [where] we’re all reading at these open mics and cutting our teeth and writing our poems. Now we all have books out or coming out, and they’re books that we all wrote at that open mic, in Hala’s backyard. 

I got my book deal with YesYes in 2023, and it’s been such a drawn out process. KMA Sullivan is such a loving, tender editor, and first round draft edits took six months—they refer to my book as “the brick” there, it’s such a big book. I’m navigating all of this now as a debut author at the age of thirty-six.

HA: It’s funny, I was maybe thirty-two. Everyone has all these platitudes about writers who began their careers “late” and that’s meant to placate folks, but sometimes you’re there already and the work’s just arriving to you. My first book came much later [than other people’s], and I spent a lot of time in poetry slams not really wanting to write a book. I think it’s interesting to live that long and know when you have a book or know when it’s ready. 

You say the work of the book began when you got sober. I’m wondering if there’s any part in the book where you see a line of demarcation between the themes that you were interested in or excited about. Maybe not now, but in the drafting process was there a point where you were like, oh, I’m approaching the work differently or my interests or segments have changed

Some of my favorite poems in the world are poems that people just emailed to me because I heard them in a slam.

ATL: All these musicians in the book who are no longer with us, they’re that throughline. Most of them are jazz musicians, which is a headspace I find myself in often, for whatever reason. They became this chorus of dead folks that I love and revere. How could they not come out in my work? From the beginning, it all feels like it was such a storm, I had all these poems and didn’t know what to do with them. All I had was the rough idea of the stepwork poems, structurally, but that was it. In 2021, I won a fellowship with the Poetry Project based on a sample of my manuscript and Celina Su was my mentor. She came up with ideas about what poems go where, which poems go with which step. It was Celina who pushed me to put together the steps as more of an emotional compass in recovery, the messiness of it all. That was the big breakthrough. I give all credit to her for that. After that, it didn’t really change much.

How did you come around to writing a book of poetry if you didn’t wanna write a book?

HA: I got asked to submit some poems to Button Poetry’s chapbook competition in 2014, and I had maybe twelve poems that were orbiting a theme. I think Button saw something in [them] and asked if I’d be interested in making a full length book out of it. 

One thing that’s a shame is that there aren’t a lot of ways for young poets specifically to stumble into books in that same way. I talk to young poets often who want to get their books in front of people, but they can’t do it without paying exorbitant fees for multiple contests or sending poems out and waiting for them to reach someone. One thing about the immediacy of slam that I really loved was that your work was getting heard, and if it moved someone, they would ask you for more of it. Some of my favorite poems in the world are poems that people just emailed to me because I heard them in a slam and wanted to see the poem on the page.

ATL: Some of my closest friendships started that way. Like, will you email that poem to me? I need it.  My friend, Malik Crumpler, I met him in Paris at an open mic he was MCing. His energy was intoxicating, so I decided to read. One of the poems I read was “self-portrait as murmuration” and Malik slipped me a tiny piece of paper that said, I want them poems. He’s an editor on top of everything else he does, and although the poems were already getting published, it opened that door. We just started talking like maniacs, you couldn’t pry us apart. He was really interested in what I was doing, we knew all the same people, we’re both vocal in our work about being sober. These kinds of relationships start with the poems but go past them.

That’s the kind of communal thing I think is not happening, or happening less. After quarantines and the messes that we’ve dealt with all over the place, whether it’s the George Floyd uprisings or the Palestinian resistance against genocide, people are tired. It’s a deliberate outcome of deliberate measures by the state. And it’s working. It breaks my heart because those kinds of connections are life-saving. They’ve saved my life. I’m sure they’ve saved yours. Malik, in a lot of ways, helped and continues to help me get through so many hard periods in my life, and that never would have happened if he didn’t slip me that piece of paper.

HA: I think about this in my organizing work often. Community is being built through radical resistance, that’s always been the case, but I think it’s even more so in the past five years. People are building artistic community in a reactionary way, in response to the harms of the state, and there’s a point that that’s necessary, but it also does not feel entirely sustainable to me because state violence endures and shifts. Those of us who make art need to make art in response to those shifts while also building space for art-making practices that welcome in and invite people across the spectrum.

I work with a lot of young writers who are politically active but might not be as tapped into everything that I’m tapped into. Art is kind of a bridge we build. If I bring in a June Jordan poem, if I bring in a poem about police violence, we can talk about police abolition more effectively, and that’s actually letting art guide the way instead of allowing responses to state violence to guide the way, or even having a conversation about how our art can be informed by recalculating our position as artists in the core—at the core—of empire working, but also benefiting from all of empire’s violences. That’s a big June Jordan thing: I paid these taxes and these taxes are going to kill others, and yet I am here.

ATL: Using art as a bridge, that’s in everything I try to do, not just in the classroom but on the subway or at a crosswalk waiting for the light to change. I’ve taught editorial apprenticeship programs with students and, in our one-on-ones, we end up talking about folks like June Jordan or Angela Davis or Fannie Lou Hamer. I ended up like, We’ve talked enough about your editorial assignments, what do you want to discuss? What interests you? At that age especially, they’re so eager, so hungry to learn more.

It’s part of redirecting our own resources to those who are young enough to make an impact within their own generations and communities, our future, and underserved and targeted communities.  I teach a workshop at Brooklyn Poets entirely based on June Jordan essays. June was a target her whole life. Her essay, “Waking Up in the Middle of Some American Dreams,” changed my world, sharpened my way of thinking, gave me avenues to travel and pursue that kind of redirectorial justice. So much of this was going on while I was writing the book, the community of the birds throughout, the dead musicians, the hunted—it’s all very much a storm of someone coming into themselves, with all this knowledge, guidance, inspiration, all at once. The dead people that I know, or knew, were forming a murmuration. That came from June Jordan, almost single-handedly. There’s real hope in art, even when everything feels devastating because you’re connecting with another human being. Nothing is more important.

HA: There’s a real rage in June’s work too, a vessel of care and tenderness. It’s very much an understanding of the world as unsettling and unsatisfying, but how much better could we love people in it if we did not have to place ourselves into the gears of empire to some degree. Anyone of conscience right now, I hope, questions the rumbling underneath: how much better and more effective a person who loves the world could I be if I did not have to love the world not only bearing witness to a genocide, but trying to put ourselves between empire and the furthering of the genocide.

Using art as a bridge, that’s in everything I try to do.

The book is so richly populated with musicians and pop culture artifacts. It can be hard to know what the tipping point is in any book when you come to, I’ve maybe written too many people into this or I’ve maybe built too many worlds. How did you edit your way to a tipping point that felt manageable?

ATL: At the time, I was living alone in a studio apartment, and I would go weeks without hearing another human being’s voice directed at me. I just listened to records every day—Miles Davis, Sonny Rollins, Dexter Gordon—that Gordon album, Our Man in Paris? There’s such warmth to those records and we’re always writing and engaging with the things that we love or that we’re probing or exploring, but it wasn’t just records—I would watch documentaries about these people constantly. Music is one thing, but I needed to hear a human being’s voice talking to another human being—docs about Nina Simone, Eric Dolphy, Jaco Pastorius, Lisa “Left Eye” Lopes, they’re all in the book. They made me cry so hard. I feel like I needed them to tap my tenderness, to let out that kind of grief, and then those kinds of things started orbiting the Amy Winehouse poems. I wrote the poems in the book five years ago, and I recently wrote something like thirteen new poems [that are] all really lucid, fairly long. I’m never going to stop writing Amy poems.  I’m learning I might go years without writing them, but I’m always going to come back to them. 

I started writing them because I had a dream that I was quarantining with her, during early COVID lockdowns, and I wrote a persona poem about it. I took it into a workshop I was taking with Shira Ehrlichman, and we kinda butted heads about who we’re able to give voice to, when it’s uplifting, when it isn’t, and me being a male and Amy obviously not. She was also like, this doesn’t sound like her, this sounds like you, and she was absolutely right, so I rewrote it in second person, which is what shows up in so much of the book. 

HA: I love that Dexter Gordon record. One of my favorite players in history, Bud Powell, plays keys on it. It ends with “Night in Tunisia,” and I think about the closure of that record all the time, which feels like they’ve wrung everything they can out of it. There’s a category of done that exists in your book which feels that way too, but we’re not quite done. Keeping people engaged in a poem where it feels like you’re trying to work out some things with yourself, that’s a real skill, because so often it does feel like we are in our own brains, but people have to come along and bear with us through that. You do an incredible job of that in this book. I’m wondering if there’s some jazz influence in that process of having to listen to people fight to keep something going.

ATL: I always think of that James Baldwin quote—how he helplessly models himself after jazz musicians, trying to write the way they sound. Jazz is my bread and butter. Part of it is that excitability. That’s what jazz is to me, no matter how balladic it gets. 

You were the one who taught me that not everything needs to go in one poem. That was such an important piece of advice for me. Now I always listen for the severance on the page, the seams, and as I’m writing new poems, different rhythms emerge. Jazz is slithery, in a way, and supple, you can’t get your hands all the way around it. That’s how I used syntax in murmurations, or at least I can hear myself trying to on the page. 

I started listening to jazz when I was pretty young, but I was listening to rap even before that. Where I grew up, you would hang out your window and hear the new Jay-Z single or deep cuts from the new Nas. I cannot say this enough: Illmatic by Nas taught me how to write, almost single-handedly. I worship Frank O’Hara, Rimbaud, Sylvia Plath, Anne Sexton, Louise Glück—but they didn’t teach me how to write. It was Nas. Nas’s flow was the flow that I wrote to when I was younger, that I’ve come back to recently. I bounce around different records and types of music as I’m writing, but there will always be those I return to.

HA: I can hear that. You learned to write from Nas, but have you found that your writing style has changed or become more adventurous depending on what artist you’re setting your ears on? I’m always interested in how the rhythms of my writing shift depending on how I’m hearing the world, which is why I think I seek out new music so vigorously. Do you feel like your writing style is locked into what it was when you first heard the thing that made you wanna write, or does it evolve alongside your constant listening?

ATL: That’s a good question. I like to think I’m aware of where my writing is going, but you can never look back, not directly. For the last year or so, I’ve been writing extremely detailed and lucid narrative poems. There’s not a lot of linear narrative in murmurations. It’s mostly surreal, dreamscapes, whereas these poems that I’m writing now are visceral, concrete, and rooted in the present. 

I’m always interested and excited to be like, I wonder what comes after this? I went from here to there. What next? That question has ruled not only my music and writing, it’s run my life—relationships, where I live, jobs. It’s one thing—you hear one line, and you just start writing. I do that every day.

HA: Yeah, the thing with a debut book is that you spend your whole lifetime up to that point writing it, and the second one ends up coming out so much differently. How are you finding your abilities to maybe write or be a writer, or make the things you wanna make, as you are also trying to bring this book into the world well?

I cannot say this enough: Illmatic by Nas taught me how to write, almost single-handedly.

ATL: I often take on too much and run myself into the ground. I’m always working on a lot of different projects, and I get excited about a lot of different stuff. Even the memoir that you helped me get started back in late 2023? I hadn’t even started it yet, but once I did, in a month and a half, I wrote 130,000 words. I fixate, and it’s a blessing and a curse. I was like, oh, I think I’m done with poetry! and my friends were just like, uh huh, okay Toney, you couldn’t be done with poetry if you tried. And they were right. I need other things to break it all up, or else I’m just gonna run my tank down to fumes. My whole life I’ve said that I have a novel in me but had sort of given up that idea. Then recently I had a breakthrough, out in Montauk, on the beach on a rainy day, and somewhere in that mist and cold I just said, I’m gonna write a novel. It was so cliche I found myself cackling. I have enough for two new poetry books, over 600 pages of a memoir, and now I’m scoping out a novel. I need to be doing all those things.

But I don’t think about where it’s going to go. I just have to trust that it’s gonna get somewhere, right?

HA: Yeah. I do the same thing.

ATL: Right, we just trust that it’s gonna work out. I’m running around, doing all this work for this book right now, and I’m tired, man, but I trust that when it comes out and I’m able to share it with my community, that it’s gonna work out, it’s going to get into the right hands. I’ve had so many folks in recovery tell me they need my work, that they teach my work to addicts, and folks at AWP telling me they needed this book, that our whole community needs it. One of them put a broadside of “relapse dream” on her wall and said it kept her from relapsing. That, right there, is it. That’s everything. Nothing else matters.

HA: That’s the real thing, you know, how you can only take the work so far on your own. If you believe that you’re someone who is writing alongside your ancestors, then you have to keep the faith that they’ll keep being able to find them and find you.

ATL: People who are new to spaces ask me all the time, especially at Brooklyn Poets, about how to find community, and I’m just like, look around you. Lift your head. When people want to force something or put their nose to the grind, they don’t look at what’s right in front of their faces. They don’t see what’s beautiful between me and you.

The 10 Most Extreme Experiments Known to Literature

Experimental fiction is more popular than you might expect. An impressive 37.6% of Americans prefer it to more traditional forms—that’s nearly 100 million people if you scale it to the current adult population. And of those who prefer their fiction to be formally adventurous, the experiments they most enjoy are abstract language and nonlinear plots. They do not want encyclopedic novels or prose that, like this introduction, comments on the art of writing.

I know this because a few years ago I conducted a national literary public opinion poll with a Johns Hopkins survey design expert—a poll that also measured everything from preferred genre to setting to verb tense. After surveying a representative sample of the U.S. population and studying the data, I took the poll results and wrote two very different stories: one with everything Americans prefer, The Most Wanted Novel (a James Patterson-esque technothriller), and another with everything that no one in their right mind would enjoy, The Most Unwanted Novel (an experimental blend of romance, horror, historical fiction, and classic literature set on a billionaire-colonized 22nd century Mars). Amazingly, most early readers prefer the latter.

Despite the above data, very few works of experimental fiction are published in the U.S. each year—especially by the five conglomerate publishers, often called “The Big Five,” who are responsible for 80% of all new books. Experimental literature—truly weird and formally inventive fiction—is much more likely to appear as a work in translation published by a small, independent press.

This is not by accident. Dan Sinykin’s groundbreaking book, Big Fiction, showed how a hundred years of publishing consolidation has honed readerly taste and writerly style in this country. Sinykin found one of the greatest culprits to be “comp titles,” or the list of 3-5 similar books that an agent sends to editors to try to convince them to publish a new novel. On top of contorting literature into the equivalent of real estate (this is how houses are sold—by comparing a property to the homes around it), this trend ensures the books that get published do not veer far from what has already been proven in the market. There is little room for surprise and adventure; in this climate, these things are simply “risk.”

What if the publishers are wrong? What if this poll data is right—or even close to right—and there are leagues of readers eager for new forms, stories, politics, and imaginative worlds? The below list collects “extreme fiction,” or novels that push at the limits of what we often see as possible in literature. It’s not exhaustive, rather it’s a personal collection of books I’ve enjoyed and that have changed my view of storytelling. These are also brilliant works of art that, if written today, would struggle to find homes in the current comp-title regime.

Extreme Form:

Blood and Guts in High School by Kathy Acker

When I started out as a fiction writer, this was the first novel that blew my mind. The book follows Janey Smith from Mexico City to an autofictional-yet-cartoonish portrait of Acker’s own life in New York City and beyond. But it’s how it’s told that sets Blood and Guts apart: What begins as a story in the form of a film script soon morphs into dream maps drawn from Acker’s real life before dropping into a fairy tale pastiche of Aesop and the Brothers Grimm. The more you get into it, the more you’re not sure where one genre or narrative thread ends and the other begins. Blood and Guts is lewd and offensive. It’s a collage and a beautiful, broken mess. 

Extreme Language Play:

The Mundus by N. H. Pritchard

Most fiction that plays with language incorporates puns or palindromes or invents new dialects, but Pritchard’s The Mundus goes far beyond the usual line-based games. His visual novel explodes the traditional paragraph—and even the sentence—into constellations of words, syllables and letters, creating a verbi-voco-visual language of his own. Inspired by Pritchard’s theosophical inquiries, The Mundus is composed of shifting voices and naturalistic imagery that resist clear, cohesive storytelling. Words and text-sound-images slip into one another and make reading—and meaning itself—a puzzle to be pieced together by each reader upon each reading. Once you’ve experienced The Mundus, you’ll never see novels—or language—or the world—quite the same.

Extreme Horror:

Off Season by Jack Ketchum

Our poll found that horror was the second-least-wanted genre after romance, so The Most Unwanted Novel contains an unabridged 100-page collection of horror stories. While writing this collection, I was curious what others thought the most extreme horror could be, and several websites pointed me to Off Season. Ketchum’s infamous debut follows the ill-fated travails of six city slickers vacationing in coastal Maine. In typical 80s horror-flick fashion, one-by-one they find themselves overwhelmed by a band of cannibals that locals thought were only a legend… To a scholar of extremes, it did not disappoint: this is doubtless the most gut-churning horror story I’ve ever read. Reader discretion is highly advised. 

Extreme Surrealism:

What To Do by Pablo Katchajian, translated by Pricilla Posada

This novel completely destabilized me when I first read it. Sparked by a giant’s koanic question about the nature of philosophy, the narrative follows a nameless narrator and his friend Alberto through a series of rapidly changing scenes and situations, from a lecture hall to a plaza to a nightclub restroom—and this is only in the first page. From chapter to chapter, location, perspective, logic, physics, everything keeps slipping away. Nothing is solid. Everything moves. After finishing it, I was reminded of parts of Dambudzo Marechera’s House of Hunger, which similarly contorted my brain, heart, and soul. Read these books and say bye bye to “reality” as you know it.

Extreme Braininess:

Glyph by Percival Everett

Glyph is a postmodern heist thriller told from the perspective of a mute baby genius named Ralph. We follow the polymath infant through a series of increasingly absurd kidnappings—from a psychiatrist seeking to exploit Ralph’s smarts to G-men recruiting him for espionage. Glyph pairs these pulpy scenes with a generous helping of Wittgensteinian meditations on poststructuralist language theory that will twist your brain into five-dimensional pretzels (no one will be surprised to learn that Everett started out as a philosopher). If you read Glyph—and you must—you’ll also want to check out Dr. No, its James Bond-esque sequel that shows, when placed beside Everett’s dozens of other books (see the westerns, the detective novels, the historical fictions), that his stylistic range is unparalleled in American literature.

Extreme Humor:

Castle Faggot by Derek McCormack

Extreme humor requires laugh-out-loud laughter and real cringe. Castle Faggot delivers both and more: it’s a scatological tour of a demented, Disneyland-esque theme park, run by Count Choc-o-log and his demented children’s cereal mascot friends. We move from the Arse de Triumphe to the Rue de Doo, meeting the disco-dancing Franken-Fudge and Boo-Brownie along the way—even Bataille shows up as a vampire bat. The language is bouncy and harsh and yet somehow addictive, its comedy laced with a stinging subtext of despair—there’s the slur of course, and the constant reappearance of death and suicide. At times the story reads like a visual poem, complete with empty line drawings, and a final chapter shaped like an inverted castle. This is a text that breaks and rebuilds you before breaking you again, all while wrapping you up in its tender, drippy Choc-o-log-ic embrace.

Extreme Prolificness:

Conversations by César Aira (and the rest of his oeuvre)

César Aira is in a class of his own, having published over 100 novels, each of them about 100 pages long. He does this through a process he calls the “flight forward” method, wherein he writes without editing, launching out from the first page with a general idea of where he might go and improvising all the way until the end. Conversations is his most flamboyant—and fun—use of this method, turning the idea of a frame narrative into a hall of mirrors. The rambling thoughts of a sleeping dreamer slip into a conversation the dreamer had the previous day about a continuity error in a Hollywood movie, which telegraphs into actual scenes of this movie, featuring mutant algae, flying goats, and feral beauty queens. And that’s just the start because once you’ve finished Conversations, the rest of Aira’s ever-expanding literary universe will be beckoning you forth.

Extreme Constraint:

The Sphinx by Anne Garréta, translated by Emma Ramadan

The Sphinx is a love story that follows a nameless narrator, a DJ, and their lover, A***, a dancer, through the Parisian underground nightclub scene. The story is genderless. Or rather, the gender of the protagonist and the lover are absent throughout. This is a hard feat in English and an even harder one in the original French, a language ruled by gendered nouns, articles, and verbs. As a member of Oulipo, the Paris-based avant garde group who put literary constraint on the map, Garéta’s book channels George Perec, who similarly went to extreme lengths in La Disparation by writing a novel without the most common letter in French (or English): “e.” Here Garétta queers the often-male-dominated work of Oulipo, contorting the confines of gendered language and our desire for easy and fixed identities.

Extreme Minimalism:

Reader’s Block by David Markson

When I first read what’s commonly called “minimalist fiction,” i.e. Ernest Hemingway, I was confused. Why so many words? Why so little repetition? Prior to Markson publishing his spare, final quartet of novels, it seems to me Gertrude Stein, Samuel Beckett, and a handful of others were the only prose writers to truly realize what literary minimalism can be. Markson joins them with his late novels that combine simple stories with thousands of interspersed facts about the lives and deaths of canonical writers and artists. In Reader’s Block, we follow the nonlinear, almost ambient internal monologue of an aging writer struggling to write a novel—supposedly the very one we are reading. Malcolm Gladwell says that good writing includes “candy,” or scrumptious little factoids that a reader can chew on and even share at dinner parties. If most books offer a generous helping of sweets, Reader’s Block gives you the whole candy factory.

Extreme Improvisation:

TOAF: To After That by Renee Gladman

I haven’t taught creative writing in years, but the next time I do, Renee Gladman’s TOAF: To After That is the first book we’ll read. To my mind, there is no more honest text about the writing process and the writer’s life. TOAF is an homage to Gladman’s—in her own words—failed novel called After That, a book she loved and whose problems she mourned enough to do the seemingly impossible task of turning its “failure” into an original work about said failure. Part memoir, part philosophical mediation on the incomplete book and the cities and spaces that shaped it, TOAF is also a “report,” as Gladman calls it, preserving the only fragments of After That we’ll ever get to see. It’s one of the most beautiful books on writing you’ll find and an extraordinary literary improvisation in the face of creative struggle. 

“Sour Cherry” Reinvents a Classic Tale to Interrogate Cycles of Abuse

Sour Cherry, the debut novel from Natalia Theodoridou, is an immersive reinvention of Bluebeard, the French fairytale wherein a repugnant aristocrat murders his wives, one after another. In Sour Cherry, the chronology of a man’s life is narrated to the reader, from motherless childhood through blighted adulthood. Theodoridou explores the Bluebeard figure’s lethal touch through the kaleidoscopic experiences of those caught in his orbit, including his wet nurse-cum-cook, wives, lovers, and children, revealing how harm envelopes both its perpetrators and victims. With every step, the man leads with destruction, leaving behind him a trail of tragedy: entire towns run dry, livestock poisoned from within, vegetation turned black, children and women left dead. 

Throughout Sour Cherry, Theodoridou seamlessly shifts focus from the man to his wives to his children and back to build a gothic fairytale that speaks to the innateness of evil under a system of patriarchal capitalism and the power we have—as individuals and a collective—to excuse it, and what it takes to intervene against it. Part fairytale, part ghost story, Sour Cherry is a classic tale with a modern infusion. Theodoridou writes not so much across time and place, but in spite of it, showing that abuse of power is a forgone conclusion within the systems that create it. In doing so, he offers a future evolved beyond these cycles and systems, one characterized by understanding, empathy, and accountability.

Following the release of Sour Cherry, I connected with Theodoridou via email to discuss fairytales’ capacity to shed light on modern life, the humanity of survivors and those who harm(ed) them, and capturing the specificity of abusive dynamics and the systems that enable them.


Christ: The idea of “belief” is woven through the novel’s various themes and genres such as abuse, ghost stories, and fairytales. Can you talk about how the power of believing shades the stories being told in Sour Cherry?

Natalia Theodoridou: That’s such an interesting and unexpected question. Unexpected because I don’t tend to think in terms of belief, and I find people who have faith (religious or otherwise) deeply fascinating. Belief, faith, and conviction all translate as the same word (or words that are very closely related etymologically) in Greek. You are right that “belief” is woven through the novel’s themes; masculinity is not toxic inherently but as a result of people’s beliefs (and stories) about it. In a way, the patriarchy is a kind of religion. 

I was recently describing the novel to someone and they asked if I believe in ghosts. I don’t. The question caught me by surprise because it had never crossed my mind that my belief in the existence of ghosts had anything to do with the centrality of their role in the novel. I believe victims (believe in victims?); victims and victimization are what haunts me. That’s how “belief” is important in Sour Cherry

C: At its core, Sour Cherry is about power and masculinity. How do you see those themes intersecting with class, environment and community throughout the story?

NT: Sour Cherry is built around the themes of toxic masculinity, domestic violence, and cycles of abuse, and the Bluebeard tale was particularly well suited to talk about them not only because of the main plot of the story but also because of the supernatural element that is never explained: the man is not simply a serial killer; he also has an inexplicable blue beard. What is that about? It went straight to the core of my questions about violence and violent people: is it natural? Is it unnatural? Is it a choice? Can they escape it? Can Bluebeard be anything other than a guy with a blue beard? 

Victims and victimization are what haunts me.

In Sour Cherry, he is literally toxic, he rots the world around him and makes people sick. Can he help it? Does he have agency? That’s the crux of the story for me, and it’s what allowed me to ask further, more complex questions: Whose fault is it—is it just him? How culpable are the rest of us, the society that enables him, the patriarchy that affords him his power, the class system that created him? The class aspect is crucial; it’s not an accident that Bluebeard is someone who controls wealth. He drains resources because that’s what his class does; he feels entitled to the land and the houses and the people that inhabit them because that entitlement is built into the virus that is capitalism, destroying one place and then moving on to the next to destroy that, too. The rot is structural; the ghosts turning that rot—slowly and deliberately decaying the furniture, peeling the wallpaper, dulling the spoons—into a means of storytelling, of speaking their truth, is a kind of class warfare. That is what makes them a community. 

C: How does initially obfuscating the narrator’s identity speak to the novel’s themes?

NT: I’m curious which part you see as obfuscating the narrator’s identity: her insertion into the fairytale as Cherry Girl or her revealing herself as his latest victim in the contemporary narrative? 

In a sense, her taking on a role in the fairytale narrative functions as both obfuscation and revelation. The speculative element allows her a degree of separation from the story she’s telling. It protects both the narrator and her addressee by introducing a level of unbelievability. This is a choice I make myself every time I write a story that is rooted in reality but also strange or magical in some way; I feel it allows me to speak more freely and, paradoxically, more directly about things that would otherwise be very hard, and possibly even cruel, to articulate. Saying “a true thing by a false name,” as the narrator says at one point. That obfuscation is the mercy of the fairytale. 

C: There are multiple instances in Sour Cherry where the past comes up to and spills into the present in ways that were both thrilling and satisfying for the reader. What opportunities does the collapsing and subsequent revelation of time offer stories of abuse? 

NT: This is the thing I love the most about ghosts: They are the present past. They force us to confront what happened, to measure ourselves against the consequences of our actions, the legacies of our natural and unnatural disasters. Cherry Girl at some point says that, with stories of abuse, “the people are us, the time is always.” The flattening of time in this way enables us to speak to the commonalities in stories of abuse without erasing the singularity of each one. Isn’t this what allows us to see ourselves in stories in general? I’ll probably never see myself reflected in a story exactly, but with enough commonality, and if I squint a little, the right kind of spillage can happen that will allow me to say, “I’ve felt this, too.” I have found comfort this way, and maybe the darkness wasn’t exactly lightened, but at least I knew I wasn’t alone. If I can do that for even one other person with this story, my work is done. 

C: In multiple instances, Sour Cherry emphasizes the impossibility of knowing another person entirely, in its narration, the character study of the central male figure, and in partnership. In doing so, the book does a razor sharp job of making observations without judgements of its characters. What’s to be found when people are positioned in this grey area between “good” and “bad”? 

NT: I don’t think people are “good” or “bad.” I think the same person can do good things and bad things in different circumstances (and let’s not even get started on how the same action can be good or bad relative to different value systems—let’s just assume we’re talking about something as black and white as killing your wife, a very bad thing). What I’m interested in is understanding what motivates people to behave in the ways they do: what leads someone to act in ways that are harmful, to be complicit in the harming of others or themselves, to not be able to even see that there are different ways they could behave, or to see all the other options available to them and still choose pain and destruction. 

What would be the point of judgement? Maybe in court, but in a book? It wouldn’t make it easier for anyone to spot or understand abuse; worse, I think the easy judgements lead to uncomplicated stories that misrepresent the power dynamics that make escaping abuse so difficult. Monstrous, simply bad characters are easy to condemn, punish, and escape. Any good person in their right mind would just leave. Right? 

C: How did the forest become so inextricable in the formation of the man in the story? Is it a coincidence that he is seen at his happiest in the city, removed from it?

NT: I love that question; I had not considered the man’s happiness in the city in these terms, but of course you’re right. It’s not a coincidence. The forest is this man’s fairytale setting; the storytelling tradition that endows him with his mythical power, the harmfulness he fails to escape. The story doesn’t really allow him much, and the little it does he finds too difficult to embrace, so in the end he accepts the forest as an aspect of himself. He’s not just a man who is meant to do bad things in the forest; he is the forest. He is evil itself. That’s what the story tells him.  

Removed from this fairytale setting, it’s the first time he glimpses a different existence for himself, freed from the shackles of his story (his narrative-inherited villainy). I think Cherry Girl taking that from him is the cruelest thing she can do, and the thing closest to punishment (albeit ineffective) that the man experiences in the story. She forces him to face up to who he’s always been, not because the story left him no choice, but because he never found it in himself to choose otherwise. 

C: Can you speak on the feminine loss of identity in the forest of toxic masculinity as represented by the narrator, the ghost wives and Agnes/Cook?

NT: Many of the characters remain unnamed or start off with names and eventually shed that part of them. Agnes and Eunice have names and later lose them. They are the only ones who know the man as a boy, before he abandons the realm of names entirely and everyone in his life becomes a means to an end. It’s not just women, either. The Shopkeeper is a function, as is Cook; these people have taken on the roles assigned to them by the primary force of this fairytale. However, it’s not the absence of a name that seals that power dynamic. Kate Bernheimer in her essay “Fairy Tale Is Form, Form Is Fairy Tale” argued that the “flatness” of characters in fairytales “functions beautifully; it allows depth of response in the reader.” I think the absence of names functions in a similar way. So I think the loss of identity is not specific to feminine characters. In fact, the Bluebeard man doesn’t have one either. In letting go of proper names and retaining only their functions, the people in this story do two things: one, they expose the utilitarian way in which Bluebeard relates to them. And two, they relate in a less context-bound way. This is precisely what the fairytale style of naming (a King, a Hunter, a Woodcutter) does, and it is part of what makes fairytales resonant in a wider variety of contexts. This story could be anywhere, any time. 

I don’t think people are ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ I think the same person can do good things and bad things in different circumstances.

Is there something uniquely feminine about the loss of identity in this story though? I think so. But I also wonder if there’s an aspect of freedom to it, too, something gained, not only something lost. The loss of a name or an identity can create a vacuum to be filled by something new, and anything at all; perhaps it can be the beginning of radical self-determination. The characters in this story don’t quite get there. The ghosts use their identity emptiness to make their demands; the narrator goes as far as fantasizing about becoming a King of her own making—I think that’s the closest I came to a trans/gender feels moment in this book. I guess loss of identity can either make you a non-person or more yourself, which is no loss at all.

C: I loved how the beats of the story were so shaped by its surroundings. How do experiences and stories of isolation, blight and abuse shift when it moves between city and country settings?

NT: What a beautiful way to ask this question. It takes me to lyrical places: loneliness in the forest is texturally different to isolation in the city, isn’t it? Not least because are we ever truly alone in the country where so much is alive around us? Unless, of course, the land is blighted; unless our very existence is the thing that blots out life and renders the forest a bleak, decaying place. Isolation feels to me different in the city because it seems so much easier to be lost in it, be one among many, lose name and identity in the preoccupied crowd, the grey anonymity. Abuse in the rural settings of the novel happens under cover of darkness and distance and a culture of silence and deference to power; in the city it simply fades from view because it’s so common, red on red or grey on grey, it just doesn’t stand out. 

C: The phrase “If you leave you die. But if you die, you stay” comes up multiple times throughout the story. What does that mean to you beyond the context of this particular story? 

NT: I wanted to capture how abuse can feel like an inescapable trap. It’s a fact that in domestic violence and abuse, the victim is most at risk of being killed when they try to leave the abuser. So, “if you leave, you die” can be literally true. And if you die, well, you haven’t left, have you? 

But beyond that, I think this sense of being trapped, the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”-ness of it is what makes a lot of experiences of power imbalance both unbearable and difficult to describe in a way that will be intelligible to someone who hasn’t had that experience, or who is structurally unlikely to have it because their identity shields them. It just sounds so implausible, you know? 

C: In many stories, accepting ourselves or others as we/they are is contextualized to be positive. In Sour Cherry, it appears as resignation. Is there a version of this story where the baby could grow up to become a different kind of man? 

NT: I think there’s a difference between accepting ourselves as we are, with all our flaws and shortcomings, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for the harm we cause to ourselves and others as a result of how we respond to these flaws and shortcomings. Self-acceptance and self-love, extending ourselves empathy and understanding, are definitely positive things because they allow us, theoretically, to own our choices and take responsibility for our actions. This is incredibly hard to do. And, unfortunately, in my experience, what most people call self-acceptance is actually resignation; an attitude of “well, this is who I am,” and an acceptance of the impossibility of change. This is certainly what the Bluebeard figure in Sour Cherry is guilty of. People tried to show him how to be vulnerable, how to allow himself to be loved; the Shopkeeper even modeled for him a masculinity that is both tender and strong. He chose not to listen; chose what was familiar. He embodied the myths he had been handed and that he had a hand in shaping. I understand why he chose the way he did, and I find it sad; but that doesn’t mean he’s not responsible for making that choice. So yes, of course the baby could grow up to be a different kind of man. People do it all the time! People with much harder starts in life than him, even, and in much more challenging circumstances. 

C: In ways that are compelling, confounding and frustrating, Sour Cherry’s characters and their choices and stories defy a completely discrete victim/villain dichotomy that is at times fatalistic from its characters’ perspectives. What is to be made of a world where pain is everywhere and accountability is rarely seen? 

NT: I think you are right to spot the fatalism in the characters’ perspectives, but I see that fatalism not as a position (certainly not my position, or my belief, to come full circle in this conversation) but as a symptom, a reaction to a wound, a trauma response; I understand why a victim might find it less painful to resign and accept their “fate.” It’s not unusual for traumatized people (and animals) to prefer the familiarity of the trauma to the terror of the unknown because it’s easy to mistake what is familiar for what is safe. Being treated differently is unthinkable. It can even be a sense of optimism, hoping to do things differently next time, hoping the abusive other will change, or that they’ll finally get to have a reparative experience if they persevere long enough.    

Unfortunately, what most people call self-acceptance is actually resignation.

I hope that what’s to be made is a greater understanding of how cycles of abuse are perpetuated; more compassion for survivors; a greater willingness to hold people accountable without losing sight of their humanity; and, maybe, because we understand things in context and not just in isolation, tackling the larger structures that enable harm: the forest that the man in the novel is. 

In a way the book has two distinct addressees: the people who’ve been there, on the receiving end of this kind of harm, and the people who haven’t. To the first it says: I know. I get it. There’s no judgement here for you; only solidarity. To the rest it says: This is what it’s like for some of us. Now what will you do?

Being a Writer Shouldn’t Require Me to Exist Without My Children

Seven Words About Lemons by Megan Leonard

Girl.

The day my daughter decides to make a lemonade stand with her friends, her best friend announces loudly, casually, in the grocery store in front of the one-pound bags of sugar, that the tooth fairy isn’t real. She knows it’s just her mom. My daughter is nine. Her listening younger brothers are six, four, and one. The four-year-old has never even lost a tooth, never yet had the joy and thrill of finding the cool coin, flat and waiting under the pillow. My daughter does not speak for a moment. She has just told her best friend that the tooth fairy corresponds with her, in tiny little letters. I am hosting the friends for the day, trying to be a good mom, trying to make space for my daughter to have friends over even though the house feels chaotic with four kids as it is. The girls spent the morning making a list: Lemons. Sugar. Poster materials. Quarters to make change. When we go to the bank to get the quarters, I ask for $15 in ones and quarters. There is only $9.14 in my account. This is the account we pay the mortgage out of; this is the only account with any money in it. I settle for $9 in quarters. It feels wrong to take the $0.14 too. 

The day my daughter decides to make a lemonade stand with her friends, I am supposed to be doing a self-paced writing retreat from home. It is summer, and my four young children are also home, every day, all day. Summer childcare for four children is a financial absurdity that was never even on the table for consideration. I also work for pay from home. And I also maintain my writing life, including this self-paced writing retreat. 

Twice a year I try to do this, this self-paced writing retreat at home, with children, while also working for an income. The entire month of April, poetry month, I try to do this. Random days when my writer friends without children say do you want to write a poem a day with me, I always say yes. When I gave birth to my daughter I promised myself motherhood would not scrape away at my writing life. Like many writer-mothers before me, I write books in the dark while my children sleep. I am sure if I say yes to every invitation to write I will keep my writing life full, flourishing, not-scraped. Even if some of those invitations feel absurd. 

This time the self-paced writing retreat from home is with other mothers—other mothers who are far away, not physically with me, also writing in their own homes while their babies nap. We are encouraging each other by text, by email, sometimes by voicemail message. I think to myself, I will write some poems today while the baby naps

Back at home with their supplies, my daughter and her friends work hard on their lemonade stand. Nothing more is said about the tooth fairy. When the girls cut the lemons, boldly using the real knives, the sharp knives, the long knives, the glorious sharp tart smell of lemons fills the kitchen. I cannot remember the last time I sliced a real lemon. They scream a girl-shriek scream when the knife slips against a wet peel, shooting a round, yellow lemon across the counter. They laugh. They pick it up off the floor. 


Glow.

I remember the moment my mother brought me to summer camp for the first time with such clarity, like a single, sun-filled globe in my mind’s eye: the smell of sunbaked pine needles, the swept wood of the cabin floors, the way she shook a sheet into the air like a golden scarf that billowed down, perfectly tucked and clean, a tuck and clean I would never again achieve in the remaining two weeks of my stay. Then it was time to change into my swimsuit and say goodbye and go take a deep-water swim test. There was no changing room—it was just a cabin full of bunks. The earnest, conscientious counselor sweetly stepped outside so I could change in privacy. All the girls are just going to be changing in the cabin, my mother said as she helped me struggle into my swimsuit as swiftly and as discreetly as possible. You’ll have to get used to it. 

My own daughter still sometimes runs around the house stark naked just to be silly. She’ll have a conversation with her younger brother with her clothes half on. My own daughter is going to summer camp, the same sleepaway camp I went to, at the end of the summer. She will not think twice about changing in a cabin with other people, other girls—she is eager for the girlness, the girlhood, the freedom of being together in that we’re all girls here kind of way. She craves that from the universe that gave her three little brothers. I wonder how long that sense of freedom and delight will last, how long that comfort in her body will last. I have not yet told my daughter her life will always be valued less in the world than her brothers’ lives, and she is young enough that she doesn’t know it yet. 

When I gave birth to my daughter I promised myself motherhood would not scrape away at my writing life.

The day my daughter makes a lemonade stand with her friends, I do not write poems when the baby naps. The girls are running in and out of the screen door, calling out We need to refill the pitcher! and We need more cookies! They taste their own creation and pucker their faces in disgust. They need more sugar, more water, more ice. I teach them that the acid will dissolve the sugar if they mix the sugar directly into the lemon juice before adding water. They slop lemonade on my kitchen floor, they drop ice, they shriek when the little brothers steal another cup, another cookie. They stand at the end of my driveway and shout, their voices loud enough to carry to the houses in the far part of the neighborhood. When the neighbors come with their quarters, the girls run into the house again to tell me: We got another sale! They gave us two whole dollars!


Sour.

To pay for those two weeks of summer camp, we apply for scholarships. We apply for scholarships through the state and through the camp’s financial aid office. We ask my parents for help. We set aside a whole pandemic stimulus check, though the setting-aside hurts, though I have to say to my husband, eat at work, I don’t have anything to feed you for dinner. Though I stop eating dinner altogether. 

When women say to me that they are better mothers because of childcare, it makes my heart pucker, my throat pucker. I think I know what they mean: they mean that having help, having someone else watch their kids, allows them to have a more self-fulfilled life, a life with room for career or exercise or maintaining a beautiful home or engaging in friendships or any of the myriad other pursuits of joy and authenticity that we all took for granted before having a mewling baby who needs constant holding. I know that part of what they mean is that as a woman, as a mother, it is hard for them to not feel guilty taking time for something other than directly caring for their children. 

But I hate it because to my ears it sounds like a door slamming. That option of being a “better mother” feels like a choice that isn’t mine. I tell myself other choices were choices I made that made that door slam: having four children, being a writer and not something more lucrative, marrying for love and not money. Choices I wouldn’t change even if I could. Then there were other choices that weren’t choices: illness, medical costs, disability, pandemic unemployment. I tell myself that we are extremely privileged and it is absurd to get upset about what other people say about what makes a mother “better,” that the people who say this to me don’t know how it sounds to someone who can’t afford childcare. As a woman who cannot afford childcare and who cannot afford to not work for pay, I work opposite my husband’s regular weekday shift; I work at night, while the children sleep. On weekends. In the early morning hours before they wake up. And often, in desperation, I work while I watch my children: a baby strapped in a carrier on my chest, a toddler watching Daniel Tiger, me trying to hold on to the continuity of thought while pausing to wipe a bottom and pour a drink and mop a spill and redirect a squabble. In the pandemic, a whole chorus of parents sing a siren song decrying what has always been our household’s necessary normal—watching one’s own children full-time and also working is deemed impossible, soul-crushing, rage-inducing. I wonder if I am crushed. I wonder if I seem enraged.

At night, after my children are asleep, I send off a beautifully edited manuscript to one of my clients. She is also a mother. I’ve taken a pile of her poems, written haphazardly across years, and pulled the threads to make them sing a story together. I’ve helped my client let her best lines rise and shown her how to let the parts that were just spinning gears fall away. I am so goddamn good at what I do. I know I am not supposed to say that out loud. As I close my computer and brush my teeth, my husband asleep hours ago, my children breathing the peaceful sounds of deep sleep, I feel fulfilled and powerful and happy: satisfied with work, satisfied with what I put out into the world as my offering. I tell myself that that feeling is all the other mothers really mean when they say paying for childcare makes them “better mothers.” I try to tell myself it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t bother me, when friends with grandparents who watch their children for free or whose incomes are very different from ours say I don’t know how you do it, I need my sleep. As if I do not also need sleep.

I also hate it when writers, mothers, say they need time alone to write. I also need time alone to write. If I admit I need time alone to write, I might then be forced to admit I can’t write, because I am hardly ever alone—certainly not in the long, deep silence, room-for-leisurely-concentration sort of way. If I let myself entertain these thoughts, if I let myself believe that writers need time and mothers need time, I will despair. Instead, I tell myself I can live a both/and existence, one in which a “self-paced writing residency at home” while working for pay and caring for four children (and their friends) while supervising a lemonade stand makes sense. 

When mothers say they need time alone to write I know what they mean is that even mothers deserve some space, some physical and mental space, to themselves. That what every non-mother creative person takes as their artistic right should be allowed for us, too. Before I gave birth to my daughter, I told myself I will go away one weekend a month to write—an inexpensive hotel, a cute little AirB&B, I told myself I will leave the baby with my husband for 24 or 48 or 72 hours and write for all of those hours. My husband nodded, solemnly, when I told him this plan. But then, the reality: with four babies spaced two years apart each, someone was always nursing, or I was always pregnant. There was always a newborn, there was always a surprise medical bill, there was always a prescription that wasn’t covered. There were always preschool fees we didn’t know would be so expensive, prenatal yoga or toddler music class that seemed more important, a heating bill or a new winter coat that was a more necessary or urgent use of the money. Instead of saving for a writing retreat, we claw pennies out of the grocery budget for a full year to save for two weeks of sleepaway summer camp. I don’t want to feel like my children are automatically at odds with my writing; I don’t want to believe I must have space or time away from them to feel fully like myself. I don’t want to believe I get to be part of the conversation—a citizen of the world of writing—only if I have the ability to temporarily exist as a woman without children. Lucille Clifton had six children, I tell myself, propping my laptop on a cereal box next to the stove while I stir the sauce for dinner. She kept her typewriter on the middle of the kitchen counter. I want, for my children, the favorite parts of my own childhood, and this often feels like a sharp piece of shale stuck in my shoe. The wanting flints against other needs, at night especially, when the baby wakes to nurse and I can’t get back to sleep. 

When women say to me that they are better mothers because of childcare, it makes my heart pucker.

People love the idea of mothers writing a whole novel in fifteen-minute increments during their lunch breaks, or a whole collection of poems pecked into the notes on their smartphone while they simultaneously rub backs and rock babies and sing lullabies. It’s so sweet. It’s so non-disruptive. No one must be bothered by the woman’s writing this way. No one must do without her care for 24 or 48 or 72 hours. No one must do without a winter coat or a music class, no one has to say no to summer camp. There doesn’t have to be a pause, a choice, a loss, an absence. 


Pour.

All I want to do is write to my daughter. A week after the day she made a lemonade stand with her friends, we finally bring her to the long-awaited sleepaway camp drop off. I am not allowed to make her bed for her. These are the post-covid protocol rules. We say goodbye outside the cabin, standing under the pine trees. I was worried my daughter would be cold at night, so I packed her the wool blanket off my and my husband’s bed, but I worry she will not know how to fold it twice over her twin bunk. I am not sad, not until nighttime, when, back home again, I do not get to kiss her goodnight. I buy special stationery for these two weeks. I buy stamps. I pay for the stationery and the stamps out of the money set aside for her little brother’s preschool in the fall, and I worry about how I will put it back again before school starts. 

I want desperately to fill pages and pages and pages of letters to my daughter. I do not want to edit poems for other people. I do not want to help a friend revise her resume. I do not want to call my health insurance for the fifth time this week to try to get my life-necessary medication covered, I do not want to modulate my patience and my voice to the cheerful pharmacist who chirps that I always have the option of paying for the $660 medication out of pocket. I just want to write to my daughter. I just want to ask my daughter how her swim test went—she was so nervous about it, so worried she would be terrible, after practicing hard in her lessons all summer. Her body is long, like a bolt of lightning, like a fawn, like a teenager. She is not a teenager. She is nine. She has the muscle control and limb control and strength of a nine-year-old, but she has to wield that strength in a body that is already taller than some of my fully-grown adult friends. Was she able to windmill her way twenty-five feet through the lake water without touching a toe to the sandy bottom? I ache to know what swim class she is in. I don’t actually care what swim class she is in. I don’t even know what the swim levels are. But I know she cares, and it crushes me to know there is something in the world she cares about and she can’t talk to me about it. Instead, she is talking to friends or counselors about it, or maybe she is not talking about it at all. It is a swim class. I tell myself over and over again. It’s just a swim class.

When my daughter was a baby, I resented everything that took my attention away from her. I hated my work. I did not want to think about anything except whether or not she liked the black and white book about the cat, or did she maybe seem stronger already, and was that a real smile? It was physically painful if someone else held her, even for just a few minutes. I only wanted to talk about her. I dreaded talking to friends because I had to pretend to care about things other than my baby: their breakups and new relationships, their work, their arguments with their mothers, their trips. All I wanted to say was Her toes are so peely and I don’t know why, or In the morning, she is happiest. She loves to be on her changing table and coo at me. Or, The baby massage I learned in prenatal yoga is perfect, she especially likes it when I touch her face as if I am smoothing the pages of a book. I did not care about any part of the universe that wasn’t her.

And the universe came in anyway, of course it would. It could never be just her and me forever in our own orbit, I know that, I knew that, I know it is good for her to have a swim test and not tell me anything about it. I know it is good for her to eat dinner with her cabinmates and talk to them and chatter away with her counselors and for me to not even know if she ate her fruit or if she wanted extra milk or if she didn’t like the pudding. The morning we bring our daughter to camp, my husband buys a jar of Country Time Lemonade powdered mix. It would have been so much easier to make that for the lemonade stand instead of making the lemonade fresh. It would have been cheaper, too, even if we did buy the lemons in bulk from Aldi, just slightly overripe, making them even better for juicing. On the morning of camp drop-off, my husband stirs himself a huge glass of the sweet, powdered drink before we carry the trunk to the car, the spoon tinkling the glass and the ice, his big, satisfied slurp annoying me. 

When she is at camp, I can’t speak to my daughter for two weeks. I write her a letter every day and in my letters I ask her if they serve lemonade at lunch, remembering the big vats of it from my own girlhood. It is not what I want to ask—but I cannot put this chasm into words and I wouldn’t want to, because it is not for childhood. It is her job to miss me a little bit at bedtime, and it is my job to ache. I feel annoyed when her brothers interrupt my letter-writing. Her dear, sweet little brothers, who are right here with me, talking to me, sharing every tiny thought with me, and instead of holding their faces in my hands and drinking up every utterance, I am aching for my daughter’s absent voice. It is the first time there will be whole days, whole thoughts, whole adventures, whole worries she will sort through herself, which I will never even hear about. 


Pucker.

The night of the day my daughter decides to make a lemonade stand with her friends, I tuck all my kids in bed late. The excitement, the cleanup, the sugar from the lemonade and cookies means the sun has already set by the time everyone is dreaming deeply. I am supposed to work. This time after bedtime is my paid work time. I am too tired to work. I text one of the other moms doing the at-home self-paced writing retreat. I didn’t write anything, I text. Not even one poem

It’s ok, she writes back. 

I am already lying down in my bed with my head on my pillow. I open the notes on my phone. The light from my phone makes the baby stir next to me, makes him roll into a little ball, bum in the air. Maybe I will write one poem before I close my eyes, I write.

I don’t want to feel like my children are automatically at odds with my writing.

Yes! the other mother texts. It’s rolling with what is and sipping things and carving out even the tiniest slices. 

Maybe I will just try to type ten words about lemons, I write. 

Then: No. Maybe seven. 


Pitcher.

On the day of the lemonade stand, my daughter’s friends fight. I come outside after changing the baby’s diaper, barefoot to the driveway, and my daughter is alone sitting behind the table. They’re disappointed we’re not making that much money, she says. It’s all my fault. I let them down. They said it’s not enough. The friends and my daughter made all the signs themselves. They debated about their prices, settled on $0.50 for a cup of lemonade, $0.25 for a cookie. Whenever a customer shows up, they run around like the playing cards in Alice in Wonderland, all pouring from pitchers and placing cookies on napkins and taking money and making change all at the same time. I have no idea if they are making the right change or not. The baby cries all afternoon, an angry, ragged wail every time I try to put him down. My boys keep stealing cookies. I was supposed to try to write a poem today. I am not sure if I am doing a fantastic job of letting the girls have their independence, or if I am being negligent. 

I want to say something to my daughter that will help her through this small moment with her friends. Behind me, her friends pass in shadow behind the screen door, talking to each other and not her. I tell myself, be a good listener, but I don’t really know if that’s what I’m supposed to do in this moment. My daughter crouches her shoulders, and her yellow hair drops in front of her face when she puts her head down, yellow from July sunshine, yellow from all the days in full sun at the beach and the pool, in swim lessons, in open swim. My daughter has never had an allowance; we’ve never had enough extra every week to commit to one. Any money at all to her is a treasure, a delight, something to be proud of. She saves her tooth fairy coins, the coins she finds on sidewalks, all delightful, all magic. I don’t know how to explain the idea of “not enough” to her. I don’t want her to take on the mantle of her friends’ disappointment, I want her to be proud of the clink of her earned quarters. My daughter and her friends make $8.00 each from the lemonade stand. An undreamed of sum to my child, money of her very own.

Later in the week I will have to borrow my daughter’s share so I can take my kids to the municipal pool, which is free for kids but charges a small fee for adults. I promise my daughter it’s still her $8.00, and when I pay her back, I will pay her in paper bills, not the quarters she earned it in. It’s ok mom, she says. You can keep it. I insist, insist that I will not keep it. 


Sun.

On the day of the lemonade stand, I don’t find anything wonderfully wise or smart or just right to say to my daughter when she sits alone, believing she is responsible for her friends’ disappointment. But the girls somehow make things right even without my wisdom—something is said, or perhaps nothing is said, and suddenly the friends pour out of the house again, my daughter sits up, they yell, just a little less vivaciously now, GET YOUR FRESH LEMONADE! I stand in the driveway with the toddler on my hip while the big kids and little kids draw huge chalk letters declaring FRESH LEMONADE together. The maple tree that grows over the driveway throws a dappled sunlight, and the red and white checked tablecloth looks perfect under a huge, antique glass urn filled with the lemonade the girls squeezed and measured and stirred themselves. I am struck by how perfect this moment looks, how happy and beautiful everything looks at this one single moment. The girls laugh when someone lifts the painted rock holding down the paper napkins and the napkins blow across the street. They chase them, catching every single one, faster than I could catch them; they run faster than I could these days, it seems like. The girls show the younger brothers how to make big bubble letters in bright colors. 

I know there will be whole stories I will not get to hear. It is right, of course, for my daughter to have a whole life, all her own stories, all her own experiences and adventures, and I am not entitled to them. I think of all the things I never told my mother—not deep, dark secrets, just angles of myself, stories, anecdotes, points of view. My whole life, the rest of my whole life, might be craving my daughter. After she was born, I thought, what if I want something different now, for the rest of my entire life? As if wanting made me who I am, as if wanting something different from what I wanted before made me unrecognizable to myself.

When I was a girl I cried every time on the last day of camp, my arms thrown over the shoulders of the girls I had only known for two weeks. We sat on our trunks—the trunks our mothers packed for us to go, but we packed ourselves to return—and promised to write to each other, promised to never forget, swore loyalty and love and allegiance, and cried that we would miss each other more than anything. I tell myself I will have to remember to let my daughter have her time when I pick her up: her time in the arms of the girls she has befriended, when what I will want to do is run right at her, drink her up, squeeze her, hold her all for myself again. I can’t remember what my mother looked like when I was young. I just remember her waiting, peripherally, while my friends and I sobbed on our trunks. 

Now it is my turn to be someone’s periphery. While my daughter is gone, we sleep with all the windows open. I imagine her in her bunk—I imagine her tucked under our blanket every night, the lake making peaceful sounds when she wakes in the morning. I imagine the loons waking her at dawn with their haunting calls, and I wake early too, with the dawn light pouring in the open window like lake water, the damp morning chill curling over my skin where the wool blanket would normally be. When we go to pick her up, we will drive half the morning down rural highways and dirt roads under the dome of deep summer, the sunlight infusing every green leaf in the thick canopy stretching over the road, light like a glowing globe, like an ocean, and I will want to drink it all in one luscious gulp. 

I will tell myself not to even try to think about poems, I will tell myself I will think only of seeing her again, I will only worry about the sandwiches for her little brothers and the snacks and the water bottles—but words about summer and sunlight and wanting and love will steep my thoughts anyway as we drive, and I will have lines or images to murmur to myself, to peck into my phone while the road curves, gets closer and closer to her. Each word will taste like a sundrop. When we arrive at her cabin, I will tell myself to wait, I will remember to be the periphery. I will take the wool blanket, stuck all over with pine needles, from a heap on top of her trunk and fold it quietly in my arms while she hugs her new friends. I will wait at the edges of their joy and sorrow. 

How foolish I’ve been. Of course we can never go back. I cannot go back to wanting something different, to wanting less, to being more contained. I cannot catch every fluttering napkin taken by the wind, every shadow or dappled moment, or every word. Instead I stand at the periphery, and I spread like light or liquid spilled. Like a memory of the sun, I run toward it. I run toward all of it.