The Plane Crash that Blew Up an Empire

I n Hannah Pittard’s newest novel, Visible Empire, a plane crashes in 1962 in Paris, but it is the city of Atlanta, Georgia that is blown up. Atlanta residents from all socioeconomic and racial backgrounds suffer the effects of this crash, a true-to-life accident that killed 121 white Atlanteans in one fell swoop. There are bombshells and destruction. Not actual bombs, but the aftermath of devastation and what such an extreme and unannounced change grief can incite. Personal, political, racial, and social fires ignite throughout the city, revealing the brutal bones buried beneath America’s Southern gentry and opulence. These bombshells force either ruin or an opportunity for rebuilding.

Purchase the novel

Pittard is a winner of the 2006 Amanda Davis Highwire Fiction Award, a MacDowell Colony Fellow, and a consulting editor for Narrative Magazine. Her writing has appeared in the New York Times, American Scholar, Oxford American, McSweeney’s, TriQuarterly, BOMB, and many other publications. She directs the MFA program in creative writing at the University of Kentucky. Visible Empire is her fourth novel.

The author and I spoke over the phone about the aftermath of a plane crash that blew up an empire, the grandeur and brutality of the South, and negotiating the new reality of today’s America.

Tyrese L. Coleman: What made you want to write about the Air France 007 crash?

Hannah Pittard: I was born in Atlanta and grew up there. My father was born there and grew up there. My mother moved there when she was very young. Obviously, I was not alive when the plane crashed. My mom was 13. My dad was 20. It’s been a story and an incident that has loomed large in my life, first as a little girl living in Atlanta, and then as I got older and became a professional storyteller. I’ve always been fascinated by the incident. It seemed, for me, a platform for talking about the things I wanted to talk about: money, class, race, love, the way that communities are divided, the way that communities can sometimes reunite. It seemed like a really interesting and provocative way to talk about those things that I think are relevant today but using the podium of 1962.

At the end of the day, I write to make sense of the world — to make sense of the things that terrify and confuse me.

TLC: We see the crash in the book but it also feels symbolic, more surreal and less of an actual event, as if it is something that happened to these people yet not actually concrete.

HP: I love that word symbolic. Obviously, this was a very real incident, but I think that’s the right way to look at it because this is not a book about the crash. This is a book about the aftermath of the crash. In many ways, the crash is just the incident that allows the story to be told. Symbolic is not the wrong way to be thinking of it. One of the characters who we visit a few times is Ivan Allen’s wife. She’s a fictitious character but she’s struggling to believe this, to make sense of this incident, and her husband keeps saying, “It’s real. It’s real,” and she’s saying, “Prove it.” The way that I’ve personally responded to loss and to tragedy is disbelief and a desire for evidence. And I don’t want the evidence because I want it to be real. I want the evidence because I don’t want it to be real. My brain is working against learning the new normal, adapting to this new way of life that includes a loss I’m unprepared for.

TLC: I find the title Visible Empire symbolic as well. I think of this crash as a blowing up of an empire that existed prior to this event and 1962 being a catalyst for the blowing up of what feels like an empire within this country.

HP: The full name of the KKK is the Invisible Empire of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. That whole name nods at power that is not seen, power that is deadly because of its invisibility. Visible Empire as a title begs the question of our responsibility in regards to power we can see but that we choose to ignore or choose not to examine because it’s so ingrained in our way of thinking.

There are four epigraphs at the beginning of the book. The first recounts the fact that this is the biggest and deadliest accident involving a single airplane. The second one is mayor Ivan Allen saying this is Atlanta’s greatest tragedy. The third is Malcolm X essentially praising the crash as the work of God, and the fourth is an unnamed man quoted in the New York Times who lost two loved ones, and he says this thing is so overwhelming, maybe “I’ll feel it tomorrow.”

For me, Visible Empire really captures the tension between the two middle epigraphs: Ivan Allen juxtaposed next to Malcolm X. Suddenly, the world was paying attention to Atlanta because of an incident involving 121 White Americans, and the world was paying attention in a way that it hadn’t been previously paying attention to the South’s legalized racism or the city’s incipient civil rights movement. I thought it was a provocative title and, in my mind, good fiction invites the reader to ask questions. I hope that this title invites questions about what we allow on a daily basis, what we accept on a daily basis, what we choose not to accept on a daily basis. I hope that this book starts some good conversations and engenders some good questions out of readers.

“Visible Empire” as a title begs the question of our responsibility in regards to power we can see but that we choose to ignore or choose not to examine because it’s so ingrained in our way of thinking.

TLC: When I think of the term “empire” and the settings in the book, the Pink Chateau is the epitome of what I imagine and of someone being part of and controlling an empire. I think it was Piedmont who pointed out that they were partying on the Fourth of July at a place where a whole family was lynched, setting off firecrackers and celebrating freedom. I cannot imagine that level of hypocrisy, entitlement, and privilege happening anywhere else in this county other than Atlanta.

HP: There’s this coming together of intense privilege. I think the book needed a moment of hypocrisy at this scale. Whether or not this level of hypocrisy could only happen in Atlanta, I don’t know. In fact, the more I read the newspaper, the more I see that this sort of hypocrisy is available just about anywhere at any time. But the South certainly lends and loans itself, especially in the 60’s, as a study to showcase that level of hypocrisy. Ivan Allen is really an interesting character in real life. He became increasingly progressive throughout his career. But later in 1962, he actually allowed a wall to be built between a black community and a white community. He thought he was doing the right thing. Fortunately the wall was found to be unconstitutional and it was torn down.

TLC: Maybe I’m conflating Atlanta as a representation of all of those cities in the South where you see the grandeur of the South that relates specificity to a certain gentry. It’s a fairy tale, obviously, but fairy tales are really brutal and have underbellies. I felt the dichotomy of being in this really opulent place and knowing that that brutality is always ever present and lurking.

HP: That was part of the question I was asking myself as I was writing. In the novel, the Pink Chateau is a place where a mass lynching once occurred but the tree has been torn down and now there’s this home in its place, and there’s this opulent pool where the tree once stood.

The question that I’m asking is how much time is ever enough time to pass. When is it ok to forget? It’s never ok, right? Just the idea of a place like that existing makes me feel profoundly uncomfortable yet we know there are these landmarks all over our country and all over the South in particular. These places that have been torn down and built up upon. It makes sense to me why Atlanta seemed like the stand in for all of the opulence of the south.

I hope that what I’ve done with Visible Empire is write a book that actively invites people to talk about how individuals from different backgrounds can learn and connect during moments of extreme change.

TLC: It also makes me think of our current moment in history. If you look at the Pink Chateau as a monument to the grandeur and brutality of the South and the argument for pulling down confederate monuments. How does this book resonate with our current moment in history?

I’ve been wanting to write this book for as long as I’ve been a professional writer but I was just never ready. I’m really glad that I was never ready to write it before because I don’t think it would have been as relevant as it is now.

Just read the paper, right? What we see everyday are different forms of privilege that are no longer being taken for granted. Black Lives Matter. #MeToo. The world around us is changing. I hope that what I’ve done with Visible Empire is write a book that actively invites people to talk about how individuals from different backgrounds can learn and connect during moments of extreme change.

Perhaps part of me is being optimistic in this moment, hoping for extreme change, but it does seem like the world that we are living in right now — the America we are living in right now — is blowing up everything, all of what we’ve gotten used to is just changing radically and changing quickly. I woke up this morning and looked at the paper and there is a letter from the President on the front page of the New York Times and it’s like reading the Onion. This isn’t real and yet it is real, and something that we’re going to have to figure out as a community is how to negotiate this new reality.

All of my books have been about loss either on a small scale or on a large scale, and this is the book that most tackles a large scale loss. I’ve been reading the news, watching the news. These school shootings, these church shootings, it feels like these last four or so years have showcased community after community after community losing people. As a writer and as an empathetic human being, on the one hand, I’ve been really lucky not to have been personally affected by any of these large scale losses around the country, on the other hand I think about it all the time. My sleep is affected by it. How I think about writing is affected by it. When I was working on this book, I was very much aware of the America we are living in today and the communities across the country that have been dealing with large scale losses. At the end of the day, I write to make sense of the world — to make sense of the things that terrify and confuse me. All this loss — it terrifies and confuses me.

Reading True Crime Memoir Helped Me Lay Claim to My Own Traumatic Story

I have never been a person who actively sought out crime dramas, much less true crime. I grew up with a mother who watched episode after episode of Law and Order: SVU, and I remember remarking to her once, “Why would any woman want to watch a show entirely devoted to rape?” My friends watched shows like CSI and Investigation Discovery, or nurtured childhood serial killer obsessions. The concept baffled me. They were entertaining themselves with tragedies that could have happened, or did happen, and could have happened to them.

I’ve shied away from true crime because, personally, I’m absolutely terrified of just about everything. I collect phobias the way many people collect books or figurines — just picking them up every place I go. I’ve always been anxious, but a brush with death as a teenager only made it worse. When I was 16, I was stuck inside my high school as a record-breaking tornado struck the building, killing eight of my classmates and injuring countless others. It’s been over 10 years now, and much of me still feels like I’m living inside the 4 minutes it took for the tornado to touch down and destroy the part of being a child we are all entitled to: the complete and utter ignorance of death, and of the ways in which my body was out of my control. I spent the rest of my adolescence hyper-aware of all the ways I could die; the idea of reading true crime felt like poking a wound.

I spent my adolescence hyper-aware of all the ways I could die; the idea of reading true crime felt like poking a wound.

But then one day I was depressed and unmotivated, lying on the couch flipping through Hulu, and I unexpectedly found myself scrolling back to SVU over and over again, my thumb lingering over the button. When I decided to play the pilot, I was thinking of my mom, who I missed so desperately, and I was thinking about a story I had just read, by Carmen Maria Machado in her collection Her Body and Other Parties, which I had been given to review before it was released. Machado’s story “Especially Heinous” rewrote the episode synopses for all 270 episodes of SVU. She’s said since then that the story is one of the most polarizing moments in the collection, but I loved it. I read it, and the next day I found myself watching the show.

After that, crime dramas and true crime became something I sought out, though I would be hard-pressed, even now, to explain why. Suddenly, a genre I long avoided pulled at me. In the beginning, I thought I was filling the hole that SVU left behind — I enjoyed the mystery of it, the twists revealed in the last few moments, and, as much as I hate to admit it, I found myself enthralled by the horrible, gruesome crimes. It was good storytelling, I told myself. But when I moved from fictional police procedurals loosely based on actual crimes and moved onto true crime, I realized it was less about the storytelling and more about confrontation. I felt addicted to confronting things that terrified me, like it was a thrill. I would read longform investigative journalism about unhinged roommates and power-drunk lawyers; I watched true crime documentaries on Netflix. I had nightmares, I became jumpy, and I walked quickly from my car to the apartment when it was dark, but I couldn’t stop. The wound was open, and I was poking and prodding like it was a compulsion.

Finally engaging with true crime changed the way I think about the genre; it still makes me anxious, but I feel like that anxiety has a purpose. But more than that, it changed the way I think about writing. Even before I became a true crime convert, I’d begun to slowly build my writing career on the foundation of my own trauma: telling the exact same story over and over again. I’ve written about my near-death experience through the lens of Harry Potter; I recalled a time when my master’s thesis, about Flannery O’Connor and female Medieval mystics, was a way for me to root myself in my own traumatic experiences; and I’ve written strange narrative nonfiction essays that I was too afraid to turn into a proper memoir. I knew the idea of confronting my trauma head-on made me anxious; I knew this was why I kept approaching it sidelong. But watching and reading true crime helped me understand what, exactly, I was frightened of. I’m afraid that I’ll misremember this terrible thing that happened to me, and I’m afraid that, in my retelling, I’ll offend the hundred other people who shared the same experience. Reading true crime stories, which are, at their core, true reports of trauma, I realized that I’ve been writing around something, that I’ve been too afraid to face it, because I worry that I can’t do it justice — or worse, that I have no business writing about my own trauma at all. Rather than reporting on my experience, retelling it scene by scene, I’ve only gestured toward it. Is it my story to tell? It happened to me, it changed me, but I didn’t die. I didn’t lose best friends or lovers or siblings. Why am I the one who gets to speak? And what if I do it wrong?

Is it my story to tell? It happened to me, it changed me, but I didn’t die. I didn’t lose best friends or lovers or siblings. Why am I the one who gets to speak?

In this respect, Piper Weiss’ You All Grow Up and Leave Me, billed as a true crime memoir about Weiss’ experience as a student of the tennis coach-turned-stalker Gary Wilensky, was a revelation. I went looking for it because the fusion of genre intrigued me: it seemed to answer so many questions I had about how I might begin to tell my own story. It reinforced my suspicions that simply retelling what had happened to me wasn’t going to be possible for me, I wasn’t going to be reporting on my own trauma while removing myself from it. That’s not possible. But I also hoped it would ease fears I had about getting too close to the story and owning collective trauma that might not necessarily belong to me.

Knowing only vaguely what it was about, I looked up reviews. A particular trend piqued my interest: reviewers complained that Weiss, who studied with Wilensky but was not abused by him, had no standing to write her story. One complained: “85% of this book was boring stories about the vapid author and her completely average teen life and friends. Most of it had nothing to do with Gary Wilensky and his crimes.” Another: “Entirely too much detail about the author’s uninteresting life as a teenager…I mean, where is the story here? Cut to the chase!” And another: “This is a deeply self-indulgent book.” It was as if the reviewers were channeling my worst fears. I bought it immediately.

You All Grow Up and Leave Me is a fusion of reportage and memory, a retelling of a horrific event told in a brazenly emotional way by a woman who witnessed it peripherally. Weiss defiantly uses the backdrop of a crime to revisit her own teenagehood, her trauma and the fraught feelings of jealousy and guilt that can only come from escaping a life-changing event that happened to everyone but you. That so many had disliked this book on the basis of those things, because Weiss dared to write a book about an experience that happened to her, but didn’t happen to her enough, sold me on it immediately. The phrase “true crime memoir” ensnared me, the very idea of it so rich with possibilities. It seemed to me that the goal of true crime-memoir is to maintain a safe enough distance that you can be objective, while simultaneously blending in the most subjective of devices: your own memory.

In the Venn diagram of truth and trauma, true crime memoir sits in the middle overlap, unrepentant. It says, “This is a thing that happened to me, and facts alone are not enough to tell this story.”

Piper Weiss and I had entirely different adolescent experiences. She grew up a wealthy Jewish teenager on New York’s Upper East Side, attending private schools and taking tennis lessons. I grew up a middle-class half-Arab teenager in the suburbs of Alabama, in public school classes with the same kids for all 12 grades. But we share a peculiar experience: the life-altering force of trauma on top of the already traumatizing nature of being a teenager. This is the crux of Weiss’ memoir — the confusion, guilt, and fear that’s inextricably tied with being a teenage girl, magnified by her proximity to the incomprehensible crimes of an abuser she once considered a friend. Reading You All Grow Up and Leave Me, I was left with thoughts about my own writing, my own navel-gazing. Could I be as brave as she was? To write a confessional book about something that ruined people’s lives, but left me relatively unscathed? I found the answers in the same pages I found the questions — Weiss isn’t being self-indulgent, as one reviewer put it. Or rather, she is, but why shouldn’t she be? The thing about collective trauma is that it’s almost never an equalizing force: someone always had it worst. But trauma ripples outward; tremors are felt by everyone in its proximity. My entire life was completely changed inside those four minutes when I was 16, sitting in my high school and waiting to die, and I get to own that.

The thing about collective trauma is that it’s almost never an equalizing force: someone always had it worst. But trauma ripples outward; tremors are felt by everyone in its proximity.

My current true crime read is Michelle McNamara’s I’ll Be Gone in the Dark, a book wait-listed in libraries across the country after the Golden State Killer, the subject of the book, was identified. There’s a line early on where McNamara turns the lens inward, to try and decipher why she has always been obsessed with cold cases and serial killers. It started with a crime near her childhood home, an unsolved murder of a young female jogger. She remembers being asked why she felt compelled to solve it, and she writes, “I need to see his face. He loses power when we know his face.”

There’s no crime to be solved in Weiss’ memoir. Gary Wilensky committed suicide before he could be caught, and he left detailed sketches and notebooks about his intended crime: the rape and torture of a teenage girl he’d been stalking for years. There were no clues to follow, no linear structure of questions leading to an answer at the end — but the method is the same. It’s still an uncovering. This is a different way to look at memoir, but it’s not that different at all. We write memoirs and confessional essays because we’re trying to see a face — even if sometimes, the face is our own. The writing of a memoir sometimes feels like the telling of a crime.

Telling Queer Love Stories with Happy Endings Is a Form of Resistance

When people ask me what my new novel is about, I usually answer that it’s a romantic comedy about gender and sexuality — and specifically that it’s a love story between two women, one who’s more on the feminine side, and one who’s more on the masculine side. I generally don’t get into the nitty-gritty of why, exactly, I set out to write a novel like this. I don’t, for example, pull up a soapbox, stand on top, and pontificate about how even with all the progress we’ve seen over the years in relation to the LGBTQ community, so much of that culture remains invisible to America at large. And normally, I also don’t yell and scream about how frustratingly rare it is to engage with a story about LGBTQ characters that doesn’t involve death or illness or some identity-based misfortune. But as publication day approaches, and my book is still one of the few queer love stories that doesn’t end in disaster, I think it might be worth talking about why I did this — and why I hope I’m not the last.

During my lifetime, we’ve seen huge leaps in the quantity of LGBTQ stories that make it into mainstream representation — but the quality still leaves something to be desired. We see so many stories about the strife of coming out, the devastation it can wreak on relationships with family and community, the pain of living in the margins. But while those are important narratives to engage with — to peel apart so we can better understand the way the world works — the struggle shouldn’t always be the story.

We see so many stories about the strife of coming out. But the struggle shouldn’t always be the story.

I came of age on the LGBTQ stories available to me, which arose in the form of books I could get from the library: The Well of Loneliness by Radclyffe Hall; Rubyfruit Jungle by Rita Mae Brown; Stone Butch Blues by Leslie Feinberg. All of these hold a special place in my heart, but all of them feature main characters who suffer phenomenally on account of their gender and sexuality. Has there ever been a more self-explanatory title than The Well of Loneliness? Rubyfruit’s Molly Bolt, groundbreaking as she was for her time, still portrays a difficult to ignore hatred of masculine women. Feinberg’s Jess becomes a “stone butch” as a direct result of severe trauma.

For years I searched out movies starring women who fall in love: Foxfire; Bound; All Over Me. None of these films by any stretch of the imagination could be described as cheerful stories. Collectively they depict queer drug addiction and homelessness, excessive violence, and a prejudice-motivated death by stabbing. Even the satirical romantic comedy But I’m A Cheerleader, my favorite of the bunch and the closest any of the queer movies I discovered come to a happy ending, is centered on a conversion therapy camp to cure gay teenagers.

The recent movie Carol, based on Patricia Highsmith’s brilliant novel The Price of Salt, was a thrill to watch on a big screen and it sort of ends triumphantly, I guess, but still, one of the protagonists pretty much loses everything.

It just doesn’t feel like enough.

Where are the books and movies that convey the empowerment and joy that I feel attending the Pride parade each year, dancing in the streets to Lady Gaga or Madonna or Beyoncé, waving a rainbow flag like I just don’t care? In spite of what much LGBTQ media would have us believe, being queer doesn’t have to be a burden; it can be awesome. I highly recommend it.

When Katie Met Cassidy by Camille Perri

My intention is to spread some of that around. I want to add value to the conversation and leave my mark by contributing in a positive way, with a happy story. That’s my wheelhouse. And I don’t care who doesn’t like it. (Straight white men, not everything is for you.)

LGBTQ people are people. We have the same ups and downs, highs and lows, as anybody else. So why should the stories about us always be about the bad stuff? We deserve the romantic comedy, the late night barfly scene, the silly, light-hearted stuff of life reflected back at us. Because the reality is, that’s as much a part of our lives as the sad stuff. So why wouldn’t that be reflected in fiction?

I’m hopeful we as a culture are on the brink of a new normal when it comes to depictions of diverse characters in situations beyond the tragic and gloomy. The recent romantic comedy The Big Sick, written by Kumail Nanjiani and Emily V. Gordon, is a notable example. The movie is about an interracial couple, but it was Nanjiani’s comment from the Oscar night red carpet that drove home what I consider to be their truly groundbreaking accomplishment. He said, “Emily, my wife, had this idea where she wanted to start a website called ‘Muslims having fun,’ which is just, like, Muslims eating ice cream and riding roller coasters and laughing and having fun. Because she gets to see that, and most of America doesn’t.”

I’d rather readers of my book get swept up in the fun of the story than take home any sort of political message. I want them to be too busy rooting for these characters, who may or may not be like anyone they’ve met in real life, to be aware of the underlying machinations of the novel. But the fact of the matter is, in the current social and political climate of our country, queer visibility is more imperative than ever. Our current administration can’t even be depended on to provide us with equal rights, never mind a sense of belonging. This was very much on my mind while composing this novel.

Happy gay art or entertainment, or art and entertainment about happy gay people, may not be about politics — but the fact of its existence is political. Just because a story is entertaining and funny doesn’t mean it necessarily backs away from serious issues. A celebratory queer love story in the midst of all the hatred and bigotry present in our daily collective conscious is, as far as I’m concerned, a form of resistance. An accessible, romantic comedy about two women that’s free from tragedy is in its own way radical.

A celebratory queer love story in the midst of all the hatred and bigotry present in our daily collective conscious is a form of resistance.

What has struck me over the course of this past year is that positive images are just as powerful as negative ones — if not more so. Conquering inequality doesn’t have to be achieved solely through struggle and suffering, and art and entertainment doesn’t have to be overtly oppositional to be subversive. Whether we’re conscious of it or not, positive images of people who are different from us are nourishing. I wish we lived in a world where depictions of Muslims eating ice cream and riding roller coasters and laughing and having fun weren’t so foreign to an American audience, but I’m glad as a culture that we are — at last — visibly moving in the right direction.

I don’t expect my queer romantic comedy to do much on its own to change the way the world at large views LGBTQ people. It’s more of a cumulative effect I hope to play a part in — a paradigm shift toward inclusivity that future generations will look back on as inevitable. Discrimination and bigotry won’t be defeated quickly or easily, but in the meantime we all deserve a happy ending every once in a while.

Ralph Ellison’s Unfinished Magnum Opus “Juneteenth” Was 40 Years in the Making

Each month “Unfinished Business” examines an unfinished work left behind by one of our greatest authors.

“The novel has got my attention now,” Ralph Ellison told The New Yorker’s David Remnick in early 1994, “I work every day, so there should be something very soon.” Two months later, Ellison would pass away of pancreatic cancer, and the novel he had been referring to, a long-awaited follow-up to 1953’s Invisible Man was at last uncovered by his executor, John Callahan.

In the introduction to Juneteenth, the version of that novel published in 1999, Callahan described the scene in Ellison’s office on his first day. “Mrs. Ellison walked me into his study […] still wreathed in a slight haze of cigar and pipe smoke. As if to protest [Ellison’s] absence, the teeming bookshelves had erupted in over his desk, chair, computer table, and copying machine, finally covering the floor like a blizzard of ash.” There were over 2,000 pages, some handwritten, some typewritten. Some had been collected in binders and filing cabinets since the 1970s, “painstakingly labelled according to character or episode.” There were mimeographs and there were floppy disks. There were notes scribbled onto newspaper clippings and magazine subscription cards. There were print-outs, first dot-matrix and then laser. The project had survived four decades of advances in word processing technology: Ellison’s typewriter had been replaced by the Osborne Executive computer bought in 1983, which was then replaced by an IBM in 1988. Between them all, Callahan would find a range of overlapping narratives, some long enough to be novels unto themselves — but no finished book.

“‘Beginning, middle, and end,’ Mrs. Ellison mused,” to Callahan. “‘Does it have a beginning, middle, and end?’”

The project had survived four decades of advances in word processing technology.

Ralph and his wife, Fanny Ellison, had chosen John Callahan, a scholar of African-American literature and a close friend, to be the executor of Ralph’s literary estate. Callahan would ultimately publish the 366-page Juneteenth in 1999, and then in 2010, a new, fuller assemblage of excerpts and notes called Three Days Before the Shooting…, clocking in at around 1,100 pages — still just half of what Ellison had left behind. But neither of these books is really the book that Ellison first began envisioning back in 1951 when he, perhaps a little optimistically, wrote to his lifelong friend, Albert Murray, “I probably have enough stuff left over from the other [Invisible Man] if I can just find the form.”


Ellison left all his papers to the Library of Congress, where he had frequently worked. On a C-SPAN BookTV special in 1999, Alice Burney, of the Library’s manuscript division, described how the novel was first brought to them in “reams of chaotic scribbled papers […] hundreds of cartons” and that over “the good deal of 1996 and 1997” these were carefully sorted into “seventy-six acid-free banker’s boxes” and “thirty-two additional flat containers.” Deteriorating pages had to be specially preserved by conservators. It took another six months to then identify separate essays, stories, and various overlapping drafts of his second novel’s many sections. Ellison had never settled on a title for the project, she explained, but the project was referred to as “The Hickman Novel,” the name he had used most frequently.

According to Callahan, Ellison “dreamed of a fiction whose theme was the indivisibility of American experience and the American language as tested by two protagonists.” These are, in Juneteenth, an African-American jazz musician turned con-man named Reverend Alonzo Hickman and the orphaned boy he’s raising, Adam Bliss, of “indeterminate race who looks white.” Bliss becomes part of Hickman’s ministry, following him around as he preaches to and occasionally scams (in the name of God) his fellow men. Bliss finally leaves Hickman, during an evening celebration of “Juneteenth,” the holiday commemorating the end of slavery. He then “reinvents himself in the guise of a moviemaker and flimflam man” and finally becomes a “race-baiting” senator known as Adam Sunraider.

Juneteenth follows this fraught father-son relationship through the first half of the 20th century in the segregated American South, up and down the Mississippi river and the East Coast over the course of 50 years, exploring the “intellectual depths” of both two men, their “values and purposes.”

Through Hickman and Sunraider, Ellison sought to characterize both American and African-American culture, music, religion, politics, values, and desires. Ellison described the novel as a dialogue between himself and Mark Twain and William Faulkner — with some Ernest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald in there as well. “In conception and execution,” Callahan writes, “Juneteenth is multifarious, multifaceted, multifocused, multivoiced, multitoned.”

Excerpts of it were published, over the years, to eagerly-awaiting fans. Saul Bellow, with whom Ralph Ellison lived in Tivoli, New York, recalled that he had read “a considerable portion of it” and that “all of it was marvelous stuff, easily on a level with Invisible Man.” And James Alan McPherson, after hearing an excerpt of the book in 1969, concluded that “in his novel Ellison was trying to solve the central problem of American literature … I think he was trying to Negro-Americanize the novel form, at the same time he was attempting to move beyond it.” At one point Ellison and McPherson discussed the possibility that truly this was a novel in three volumes, which would each have to be published separately.

The finished novel was originally contracted to be delivered to Random House in 1965, which was then extended to the fall of 1967. Ellison told people that year that he was feeling good about finishing it, working hard on revisions at a summer house that he had bought in the Berkshires. Allegedly the novel was almost finished in November of that year, when a great tragedy occurred.

Allegedly the novel was almost finished in November of 1967, when a great tragedy occurred.

Ellison and his wife returned from shopping to find their house on fire. It would be completely destroyed, with all the furniture and personal possessions inside lost — including the manuscript to Ellison’s novel. Fanny would later lament that she had not been able to break into the burning house to save the book, and sometimes this story involved firemen restraining her from entering the house to do so. “I knew right where it was,” she would tell Callahan, years later.

But a few weeks later, Ellison wrote that while had lost most of the revision work from the summer, he had it all very fresh in his mind and thought it could be redone by early the following year. Friend and critic Nathan Scott Jr., stated in an interview that Ellison had written to him with reassurances about the novel’s state. “Fortunately,” Scott Jr. recalled, “he had a full copy of all that he had done prior to that summer.”

But Ellison would not turn in the manuscript the following year, or the year after that. His story about the damage done by the fire began to change, possibly as a justification for his delays. Ellison’s biographer, Arnold Rampersad, noted that a year after the fire he told one reporter that sadly he had lost 365 pages in the fire, and that this number later grew to be 500 or more. Perhaps on some level this was true, but the larger problem was that, as he wrote privately to critic Richard Kostelanetz, the book had “become inordinately long — perhaps over one thousand pages — and complicated.”

And there may have been deeper layers to the tragedy. Rampersad speculated that while the fire might not have physically consumed his manuscript in progress, the experience had created a trauma that then became a deep wound for Ellison in the years that followed.

By then Ellison had won the National Book Award (he was the first black author to win the prize) and two Presidential Medals. He had joined the American Academy of Arts and Letters and worked at the American Academy in Rome. He’d helped to found the National Endowment for the Humanities, and dined at the White House with President and Mrs. Johnson. Invisible Man had already become a crucial book in the American 20th century canon.

But according to Rampersad, “owning a home in New England” held a private and special meaning to Ellison, in terms of his place in American literature. Ellison felt that living and working there, in that community “placed him in what once had been the center of American artistic and moral glory, to Emerson and Melville and abolitionism.”

Officially, the cause of the fire had been faulty electrical wiring, but years after Ellison’s death, Fanny wrote that he ‘knew, I’m sure, that it was arson, but he made no complaint to the town.’

The destruction of this home by that mysterious fire would afterwards loom “as a cruel symbol” in his mind. Fanny described that they were both “very much traumatized” by this “nightmare image we will long, long see.” Officially, the cause of the fire had been faulty electrical wiring, but years after Ellison’s death, Fanny wrote that he “knew, I’m sure, that it was arson, but he made no complaint to the town.”

Their neighbors sent letters to the Ellisons, expressing their deep sympathy, and a hat was passed around to collect “$205 ‘to get something for your new home.’” Reportedly, the Ellisons would drive up to inspect the ruined house, and then leave again, in melancholy. It would take them more than six years to rebuild their New England home.

Meanwhile, the deadline for the second novel was moved to 1975. Then 1980. And then fourteen more years would pass with Ellison still hard at work, until his death in 1994, just after his 80th birthday.


Juneteenth climaxes in the shooting of the racist Senator Sunraider by a young black man. Over the course of several days in a hospital bed, Sunraider tries to reconcile with Hickman and his memories of his childhood as Adam Bliss, a member of the black Baptist community. Sunraider comes back to the Juneteenth night that he left. He dismisses the holiday initially as “the celebration of a gaudy illusion.” Ninety years later, were the black men and women of America really free?

In his introduction to Juneteenth, Callahan reminds us why the holiday is celebrated on the anniversary of June 19th, 1865, and not September 22nd, 1863, the day the Emancipation Proclamation was delivered by President Lincoln. The reason is that it would take two and a half more years for Union troops to march through the defeated South and reach the thousand men, women, and children enslaved in Galveston, Texas, to relay the news that they were now free. Callahan notes that the delay “is a symbolic acknowledgement that liberation is the never-ending task of self, group, and nation, and that, to endure, liberation must be self-achieved and self-achieving.”

In the end, the dying Senator Sunraider reconsiders. He sees that leaving the black community to present himself as white was an “evasion” of his identity. That night he believed that he had escaped, but ultimately feels that he was cast out from “his true American self,” and that his true kinship is to the people he has betrayed, both in his words and with his political power — he is kin, even, to the young man that shot him. Hickman and the community celebrating Juneteenth had been his family, and whatever his own unknown racial make-up might be, Sunraider ultimately realizes that he is also “somehow black.”


According to Callahan, Ralph Ellison saw a meaningful parallel between his never-ending work-in-progress and the “‘crazy country’ he loved and contended with.” If, at the start of “the Hickman novel,” in the America of 1951, Ellison saw his chance to argue for “the indivisibility of American experience and the American language” and to contend with “race and identity, language and kinship in the American experience,” then how must that story have evolved itself as the next 40 years occurred?

He was working on it when Emmett Till was murdered. And as the Los Angeles riots raged in 1992, Ellison was still working on it.

Two days after the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown vs. Board of Education, Ellison wrote that he had “the whole road [of post-segregationist America] stretched out at it got all mixed up with this book I’m trying to write and it left me twisted with joy and a sense of inadequacy.” He was working on it when Emmett Till was murdered. Working on it during the boycott of the Montgomery bus service and the arrest of Rosa Parks. Working on it when Martin Luther King, Jr. led the march to Selma, and when he was assassinated. Working on it during the summer of 1967, when Loving v. Virginia was decided — working on it at the proud New England home that was soon destroyed. And, 25 years later, as the Los Angeles riots raged in 1992, Ellison was still working on it, by then with his IBM computer and his laser printer — trying to finish a novel that might somehow encompass, and answer, the ongoing struggle of black Americans in the 20th century.

Two thousand pages begins to feel like it could hardly scratch the surface.

The Torturer’s Horse

At some point last summer, or last fall, or last spring, I was walking home from work and thinking about whatever new barbarity the Trump administration had recently unleashed onto the world. (This is why I can’t remember what season it was: “a recent new barbarity” isn’t a unique enough marker anymore. It was still light at 6:00 and something horrible was happening; it could have been any one of 200 days.) My route takes me through Fort Greene Park, where there were children and dogs playing heedless of whatever dark works were occupying my mind, and all of a sudden the phrase “the torturer’s horse / Scratches its innocent behind on a tree” bubbled up out of my subconscious and slammed into my sternum so hard I had to sit down to catch my breath.

This is a line from W.H. Auden’s poem “Musée des Beaux Arts,” which you can read here. It’s a poem about a painting, Peter Bruegel the Elder’s “Landscape with the Fall of Icarus,” but it’s also and primarily a poem about how every tragedy takes place amid a maelstrom of indifference. “Even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course / Anyhow in a corner,” Auden writes; “some untidy spot / Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer’s horse / Scratches its innocent behind on a tree.” The worst things that happen in the world still happen in the world, and the world is distracted. In 1938, when Auden published his poem, what it was distracted from was the rise of Hitler.

The poem felt painfully, vertiginously significant last fall or summer or spring, as I watched the dogs go on with their doggy life irrespective of whatever I was worrying about—xenophobia, gun fetishism, nuclear threat. It feels even more so now, as we reckon with the fact that children are being separated from their asylum-seeking parents at the border and put into what can only be called internment camps. The rest of the poem concerns Bruegel’s painting, which shows a serene seaside scene with a little boy’s legs thrashing almost imperceptibly in the lower right corner. In terms of how much space he takes up on the canvas, the drowning boy is comparable to a far-off sheep, a nearby man’s hat. This is Icarus, whose father tried to free them both from prison by flying out on homemade wings. They were fleeing from peril, and Icarus, excited, went too high—his name has become synonymous with hubris, flying too close to the sun. His wax wings melted in the unexpected heat, and he fell and was snatched by the waves. Boys disappear so easily.

“The ploughman may / Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,” Auden writes. “But for him it was not an important failure.” What we face now, plowmen all, is the inhumane treatment of people we are encouraged, exhorted, ordered, even begged to disregard. Parents fleeing mistreatment with their children are having those children torn away by the hubris of uniformed petty thugs and a tyrant who stencils his face on the wall of the jail. But we are given so many excuses not to care: these are criminals, they are animals, they are actors. For many in this country, that’s more pretext than we need to ignore a tragedy like this—a tragedy that happens outside our line of sight, to people not our own. We are experts at ignoring such unimportant failures. It is a disaster that, as Auden puts it, “everything turns away quite leisurely from.”

It’s important to think about this poem, and this painting, in our current moment.

It’s important to think about this poem, and this painting, in our current moment: to look at those legs disappearing into the water, but also to look at the plowman—and the shepherd, and the fisherman—turning away. We need to see the parts of ourselves that are the plowman, and the shepherd, and the fisherman, the part of us that is the torturer’s horse. The part of us, most importantly, that is the “expensive delicate ship,” which Auden says “must have seen / Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky,” but “had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.” So many of us want so desperately to ignore the boy falling out of the sky, to turn towards the sheep and the plow, towards the mundane joys and frustrations that always, always keep on churning even as his legs disappear into the deep.

The gift that Auden and Bruegel can give us right now is the ability to recognize, and thus resist, that instinct for apathy. What the Old Masters knew about suffering is not only that it goes on amidst indifference, but that people will naturally work to preserve that indifference, to bar suffering from their consciousness. The torture can’t be so bad, we tell ourselves—after all, there’s the horse, just scratching away! Whatever happens in this untidy spot can’t really be a martyrdom; that’s too big and cruel to happen next to dogs and their doggy lives. But of course, the truly evil can coexist with the truly mundane—can, in fact, slot into the mundane as tightly and seamlessly as clasped hands.


What Auden doesn’t mention about the Bruegel painting is how close, how painfully close the ship is to those little legs disappearing into the sea. It would barely have to turn back to save him. It could have stopped, and backtracked, and picked him up, and still gotten to where it was going. But it didn’t, because “somewhere else to get to” isn’t really about getting there. It’s about getting away—from the legs scything into the water, from the awareness that maybe something should be done.

“About suffering, they were never wrong,” Auden says. This may be true of the Old Masters; it’s certainly not true of visual art in general, which has often been guilty of making suffering into something glittering and glamorous and impossible to ignore. Nor is it true of poets, or novelists. Writers, even great writers, have been wrong about suffering, in the history of the world. But as its close observers and connoisseurs, they tend to be less wrong than its architects. Artists and poets and writers may not always show us a way forward, but they can show us where we stand: a counterweight to the politicians and functionaries and mouthpieces offering fertilizer for indifference, encouraging us to turn away. I have heard people say, more than once since 2016, that in our current climate it is irresponsible to care about things like novels and poems and art. I think it’s irresponsible to forget them.

Here is what Auden can tell us, from his desk in 1938, right before whatever may be about to happen again happened the first time: Don’t let yourself believe that because the dogs go on with their doggy lives, a boy has not fallen out of the sky. A boy has fallen. Turn this ship around.

Reading My Childhood Diary to My Kids Made Me Realize How Hard it Is to Be Honest

Last summer, I embarked on a 1,200-mile drive with my three sons and my new boyfriend to view the total solar eclipse. The trip — from Oakland, California to Redmond, Oregon — felt daunting. Facebook was awash with Eclipse-Ageddon predictions: gas stations with no fuel, water shortages, overburdened sewer systems, and roads gridlocked with the crush of road-trippers headed towards the path of totality.

Yet the threat of being parched, stranded, or lacking a place to poop paled in comparison to the risks the trip posed for my relationship. This was the first time my boyfriend of four months had ever travelled with my kids. When I reluctantly invited him to come, he accepted without hesitation, offering to drive us in his brand new car with blithe enthusiasm; this 38-year old guy (who couldn’t recall ever riding in a car with kids in his adult life) had no idea what he was getting into.

I packed every screen and device we possessed, along with all the movies and video games their paltry memory and data plans could handle. I bought miniature versions of Battleship and checkers; crosswords, comic books, and Mad Libs; and an arsenal of refined sugar in all forms to use as bribes. It still didn’t seem like enough.

I bought miniature versions of Battleship and checkers; crosswords, comic books, and Mad Libs; and an arsenal of refined sugar in all forms to use as bribes. It still didn’t seem like enough.

I called my little sister, who has four kids, to ask her for ideas. She suggested everything from drugging the kids with Benadryl so they would nap (“I think it’s okay if it seems like they might have a cold?”) to bringing my ukulele and a collection of sing-along campfire songs to play in the car.

“I’m looking for ways to spare my boyfriend from being traumatized. Not to reveal how insane I truly am,” I told her.

“Bring something to read aloud. Like your childhood diary!” she suggested.

I unearthed my diary from a tattered box that had somehow survived the Marie Kondo-inspired scorched-earth decluttering campaign I had been waging since 2014. I hadn’t seen its blue cover, fastened shut from prying eyes with a cheap tin lock, since packing up to move out of my parents’ house as a teenager almost 25 years earlier. I threw it in my bag thinking it would take a truly desperate moment for anyone to want to listen to what must be in there: A list of all the names of my stuffed animals? What I got for Christmas in 1985? I didn’t have a single memory of writing in it. For all I knew, it might be blank.

It would take a truly desperate moment for anyone to want to listen to what must be in there: a list of my stuffed animals? What I got for Christmas in 1985? For all I knew, it might be blank.

The desperate moment came all too soon. After only a few hours in the car, things got real: the one movie everyone agreed on hadn’t fully downloaded before we left; Mad Libs turned into a contest of who could most creatively use the words “dick” and “balls” and “snot” as nouns, verbs, and adjectives; and while walking back from the bathroom, one of the kids stepped in a pile of what was either dog or human feces, and inadvertently spread it all over the leather interior of the backseat of the truck. After cleaning everything up, we pulled back onto the highway as my boyfriend doled out a package of sour gummy worms, and I opened the diary.

Only six of the 400 pages contained writing; the dozen or so entries spanned two years — 1983 to 1984 — my girlhood from nine to ten years old. No wonder I had no memory of writing in it. But as I started reading, my kids halted their argument about who got the bigger gummy worm.

The author’s diary from age 9–10. Image: Allison Stockman

The first line, “I’m so glad I have this diary because now I can write about private stuff…like which boy I like at church,” elicited roars of laughter from the backseat. At 9, 11, and 13, my boys are simultaneously allergic to and electrified by anything mushy or romantic. They begged to hear more. I proceeded to read about an intense crush on a boy named Tadd Clelland:

“He looked at me through the church pews. I think he likes me. He said I could kiss him if he went under the ‘missile’ toe. I love him he is my boyfriend. It felt good to say that. Sometimes I lie awake in bed thinking about him.”

The kids were screaming. “What does that even mean?” and “You were flirting in church?” and “Mom, he was not your boyfriend!”

There was so much to explain.

As a Mormon, I had spent so much of my childhood at church; though it seemed crazy to them, it made sense that this would be the place where I fell in love for the first time. I explained my comic misspelling of the homophone “missile toe,” I admitted to being mystified as to why I called this kid my boyfriend though we’d never kissed or held hands. I couldn’t quite believe what I was reading — at age nine, romantic love was just bursting out of me with an idealistic abandon that I had forgotten I’d felt for anyone, ever.

I couldn’t quite believe what I was reading — at age nine, romantic love was just bursting out of me with an idealistic abandon that I had forgotten I’d felt for anyone, ever.

I read the remaining pages in fits of laughter and wonder. In one passage, I admitted to falling for Tad’s best friend, Craig. In the next, an account of my first love letter from this new crush, consisting of just one sentence: “You are my dreamboat.” Then admitting in the next breath, “I don’t like Craig that much,” and going right back to dreaming about holding Tad’s hand a picking him for the Ladies Choice song at our local roller skating rink.

The kids begged me to read it, again and again, then took the diary into the backseat and howled at the bubble letters, overwrought exclamation points, and the initials, A.S + T.C. encased in hearts decorating the margins. “Mom, I can’t believe this is you!” my 13-year-old gasped.

It was hard for me to believe, too. This was me. Before I knew what was coming; before the rollercoaster of debilitating crushes, obsessive loves, and tragic leavings that marked my high school and college years. Before the naïve union, secret agony, and terrible heartbreak of divorcing their dad. This was me before dating as a single mom in her 40s, reluctant to name anyone that I’d kissed, much less slept with several times or even for several years, my boyfriend. This was me before I knew that love was as elusive and fantastical as thinking I could keep three kids from fighting or grinding gummy worm sugar and actual shit into the backseat of my boyfriend’s new truck.

We made it to Redmond and watched the 90 seconds of totality, mouths agape. I couldn’t quite believe the enchantment I felt as the moon’s dark orb floated towards the sun; the brilliance of the solar corona during totality; and the velvety twilight that bathed the trash-strewn BLM land (on which we’d managed to camp, cook, and use as our own personal latrine) with a beautiful, purple tinge for a breathtaking minute and a half. Nothing I’d ever witnessed had ever felt so otherworldly, so significant.

The author’s sons and two friends, watching the eclipse through glasses. Image: Allison Stockman

And then we turned around and drove home.

The gaming, fighting, swearing, singing, napping, messy eating, and movie watching resumed as we made our way down the endless stretch of I-5 toward the Bay area. Yet the diary — “Read it again, Mom. Please?” — was requested as much as candy or stops to pee. They had so many questions: Did people like me really use the word “dreamboat” in the olden days? And what is that anyway? Isn’t it bad to fall in love with someone’s best friend? Did you ever end up kissing Tadd?

Like the sun that’s there every day in the sky, yet most of the time impossible to truly see, so much of my life had been hidden from my kids. The highs and lows of finding and losing love, the wreckage and nagging regret of divorce. The awfulness of internet dating. Even on the road trip, I tried to disguise the glimmer of hope I was trying to keep alive about my new man — whose countenance and car were looking much worse for the wear than when we’d left Oakland three days prior. Before surrendering my phone to stop the insanity in the backseat, I made my kids swear on their Halloween candy not to read my messages: my diary of texted heart emojis and XXOOs between me and my boyfriend, and messages about him to my sister: I like him soooo much. But what if the kids don’t? What if he doesn’t like them?

I’m not sure how much of the real me I should let anyone see. Especially the people I selfishly brought into this heartbreaking world. Those six pages let my kids glimpse their mother — the other planetary force that is the reason they exist, that makes their days, dependably, go round and round — from a new perspective. They reminded me that though I try to tell myself I’m above it all, and so much wiser than when I was nine, I’m not. Love makes me feel the same way now as it did then. Clueless and lost. At sea on a dreamboat, throwing myself overboard once again.

Though I try to tell myself I’m above it all, and so much wiser than when I was nine, I’m not. Love makes me feel the same way now as it did then. Clueless and lost. At sea on a dreamboat, throwing myself overboard once again.

The next total solar eclipse to transverse the United States will be in 2024. Six years from now. I will be 50 years old. There’s a good chance the relationship I’m in now won’t last that long; I wonder how many more times I’ll drown in those waters. And how many more kinds of sadness I’ll have to hide from my sons. In six years, they will have started down that terrifying road of finding and losing the people who will leave a mark on their lives forever. Though I wish I could, I know there’s little I can do to stop the things that will happen to them, the things that will crack them right through, and maybe break them altogether. I can only hope to build on those six pages of honesty when the time comes.

7 Books About the Interplay of Technology and Humanity

Since Frankenstein first gave his creature the jolt — and the creature gave the scientist an existential jolt right back — novelists have been asking, “Will science save us or destroy us?” Ponder for a moment and you’ll find compelling evidence for each side of the question. Nuclear power on one hand, and nuclear warheads on the other. Antibiotics and superviruses. The Internet and…the Internet. What is certain is that science and technology are a part of our everyday lives and, therefore, a part of us. Take, as an example, yourself right here and right now: You are reading this article on a piece of technology, an item you fondle hundreds (thousands?) of times a day and gaze at for hours. Oh that your lover garnered such attentions!

Purchase the novel

In my novel Tell the Machine Goodnight, my protagonist, Pearl, works as a contentment technician for the Apricity Corporation, wielding a technology that promises to answer that most central yet elusive of human questions: How can I be happy? As Pearl sees the effect of this “happiness machine” on both her clients and her family, she questions what happiness is and if a device can deliver us to it.

Technology is by humans and it is also of humans. It is an expression of who we are, right down to the silliest app. Literature, too, is an expression of who we are. Here are seven books that explore the interplay of technology and humanity:

Feed by M.T. Anderson

In Anderson’s Feed, we’ve plucked our devices from our laps and selfie-sticks and planted them directly into our heads. This National Book Award finalist centers on teenage Titus and his school friends whose relationship with their Internet implants is, by turns, comic, chilling, and prescient. For example, the friends eagerly engage with a Coke promo that promises free soda if they work the brand name into their conversation as many times as possible. The kids feed on the feed; the feed feeds on them.

The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi

Emiko, the titular windup girl in Bacigalupi’s Hugo and Nebula Award winner, has been designed to move with a twitch, a legal requirement to visually mark her as a New Person, engineered, grown, and sold to wealthy customers. The novel follows Emiko, left behind in a brothel by the businessman who bought her, and Anderson Lake, a calorie man in search of heirloom seeds resistant to genetic blight, both of them trying to survive in a future Bangkok where the oceans rise and the crops wither. Emiko’s twitch is emblematic of the scientists’ fingers twitch-twitch-twitching in food, in people, and in nature with cascading effects.

A Closed and Common Orbit by Becky Chambers

Lovelace has been transplanted from her previous “body” as a spaceship’s artificial intelligence into human form in this Hugo Award finalist. Now, with the help of her guardian Pepper, she must cobble together a life planet-side. Working a day job, getting a tattoo, and dancing in a club might seem like small stuff, unless you used to be a spaceship. The acuity with which Chambers imagines Lovelace’s perspective shows a deep interest in not just how technology functions but how it feels. Note: A Closed and Common Orbit is the stand-alone sequel to the equally vivacious The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet.

The Summer Prince by Alaya Dawn Johnson

In matriarchal tech-hub Palmares Tres, Brazil, artist June Costa and her best friend Gil both fall in love with Enki, the Summer King, chosen to rule for a year and be sacrificed at its end. Enki wants to use his fleeting reign to agitate for political change, and June applies her artistic talents to the cause. Johnson’s National Book Award finalist shows young people using technology as a tool for artistic and political expression, a tricked-out megaphone for their real, raw voices.

Warcross by Marie Lu

Part World of Warcraft, part Quidditch, part Super Bowl, the virtual-reality sport Warcross is a national sensation, and bounty-hunter Emika Chen uses her hacking skills to catch people making illegal bets on the games. When Emika accidentally hacks herself onto the playing field of the Warcross Championships she catches, not her bounty, but a spot on the team and a target on her back. Fans of Ender’s Game and Ready Player One will want to hit “play” on Lu’s novel, the first in a planned trilogy.

The Binti Trilogy by Nnedi Okorafor

Binti can “tree”; that is, she can do complex mathematics in her head until they become a meditation, a pattern, and a power. This ability has earned her both the position of master harmonizer for her Himba community and an invitation to attend school at the intergalactic Oomza Uni; however these paths diverge and she can only choose one. The technology in Okorafor’s trilogy reveals itself slowly, causing the reader to re-examine what they thought they knew, and that process of re-examining one’s beliefs and biases is what these powerful Hugo and Nebula Award-winning novellas are about.

Love, Robot by Margaret Rhee

In storytelling, robots are used both as the image of humans and the negative image; what a robot isn’t allows us to define what a person is. In this captivating and playful book of robot love poems, Rhee takes this idea and turns it about, suggesting that to recognize another’s personhood is one of the most human things we can do.

Two Debut Poems by Bennet Bergman

THE WEATHER

Today it arrived in an unapologetic parcel.
I had decided to wait for it in bed

because it was taking so long,
it was February already.

Because I slept through the rain,
I didn’t know it had rained.

Meanwhile winter has gotten so big we need
special mirrors to see around it.

I don’t need to do things over and over again
before I know that I don’t need to do them anymore.

Didn’t need many nights to understand for example
the boredom of having sex with strange men.

There is a card game to teach you that,
how to deduce a pattern from any set.

But the weather does
subject us to repetition.

It arrives obliviously, as if we have
not already had some of that.

When I open it up —
what has come for me —

it is as anyone would have expected a cool bit
of iron ore, a sad anniversary.

I am going to loiter in the shower while it gets
dark out. Run my head through my hands.

BARRICADES

Each time he rose from bed before me in the morning to rinse
his face with cold water I wondered what he had done it for:
whether it was vanity, whether

this was unattractive to me. He would come back to bed
with water in his beard, mouth tasting like toothpaste,
eyes not so stopped with sleep.

He once said to someone else at a party that when he was
younger he had wanted to be in porn movies,
but Tel Aviv was such a small city. This

killed me. He had such a way of bringing exteriors
into the room with us, even when we had
lived together for many months

he would play these little shadow scenes of betrayal
across my imagination and always they were
painterly and robust:

how in the checkout aisle with our groceries he, looking
out the window at a man on the street, says brightly
but not to me, “I know him,”

and I know what he means. A unique feature of our life
together was that all its walls could be rolled down
like windows or thought of as not to exist.

As if you were just sitting in the kitchen when
the siding of your house was made
suddenly to face in;

you might think, How strange, that I am not outside
but somehow the outside
has come here.

About the Author

Bennet Bergman lives in New York and will soon be an MFA student in poetry at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop. These are his first published poems.

“The Weather” and “Barricades” are published here by permission of the author, Bennet Bergman. Copyright © Bennet Bergman 2018. All rights reserved.

Winter Has Gotten So Big We Need Special Mirrors To See Around It

Issue №17

THE WEATHER

Today it arrived in an unapologetic parcel.
I had decided to wait for it in bed

because it was taking so long,
it was February already.

Because I slept through the rain,
I didn’t know it had rained.

Meanwhile winter has gotten so big we need
special mirrors to see around it.

I don’t need to do things over and over again
before I know that I don’t need to do them anymore.

Didn’t need many nights to understand for example
the boredom of having sex with strange men.

There is a card game to teach you that,
how to deduce a pattern from any set.

But the weather does
subject us to repetition.

It arrives obliviously, as if we have
not already had some of that.

When I open it up —
what has come for me —

it is as anyone would have expected a cool bit
of iron ore, a sad anniversary.

I am going to loiter in the shower while it gets
dark out. Run my head through my hands.

BARRICADES

Each time he rose from bed before me in the morning to rinse
his face with cold water I wondered what he had done it for:
whether it was vanity, whether

this was unattractive to me. He would come back to bed
with water in his beard, mouth tasting like toothpaste,
eyes not so stopped with sleep.

He once said to someone else at a party that when he was
younger he had wanted to be in porn movies,
but Tel Aviv was such a small city. This

killed me. He had such a way of bringing exteriors
into the room with us, even when we had
lived together for many months

he would play these little shadow scenes of betrayal
across my imagination and always they were
painterly and robust:

how in the checkout aisle with our groceries he, looking
out the window at a man on the street, says brightly
but not to me, “I know him,”

and I know what he means. A unique feature of our life
together was that all its walls could be rolled down
like windows or thought of as not to exist.

As if you were just sitting in the kitchen when
the siding of your house was made
suddenly to face in;

you might think, How strange, that I am not outside
but somehow the outside
has come here.

About the Author

Bennet Bergman lives in New York and will soon be an MFA student in poetry at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop. These are his first published poems.

About the Recommended Reading and the Commuter

The Commuter publishes here every other Monday, and is our home for flash and graphic narrative, and poetry. Recommended Reading is the weekly fiction magazine of Electric Literature, publishing every Wednesday morning. In addition to featuring our own recommendations of original, previously unpublished fiction, we invite established authors, indie presses, and literary magazines to recommend great work from their pages, past and present. For access to year-round submissions, join our membership program on Drip, and follow Recommended Reading on Medium to get every issue straight to your feed. Recommended Reading is supported by the Amazon Literary Partnership, the New York State Council on the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Arts. For other links from Electric Literature, follow us, or sign up for our eNewsletter.

“The Weather” and “Barricades” are published here by permission of the author, Bennet Bergman. Copyright © Bennet Bergman 2018. All rights reserved.

The Main Character of ‘Ulysses’ Is Jewish, and That’s No Accident

The winter I was 23, two things happened to change my relationship with a country I had long privately (wistfully, romantically, perhaps childishly) thought of as my homeland.

The first occurred as two of my male Irish — that is, non-Jewish — relatives were discussing English football in a pub in Dublin around Christmastime; I and my sister were visiting for a couple of weeks, and at the time of this conversation the two of us were sitting within earshot.

“Who do you support?”

“The Spurs.”

A smirk. “You like Jews?”

“Love ’em.”

Laughter.

The second happening was unambiguous, and unlike the previous scene I was an active interlocutor: it took place as I was telling two of my Irish relatives about Taglit, a non-profit that funds young members of the Jewish diaspora to visit Israel.

“Who pays for the trips they organize?” the wife of the couple asked.

“They do.”

“That’s unlike them.”

To my deep eternal shame I did not react; I continued on as though I had not heard her remark. In Ireland, after all, that is how one deals with troubles.


The Annals of Innisfallen, an Irish medieval chronicle, reports that in 1079 “five Jews came from over sea with gifts to Tairdelbach [the king of Munster]” before being sent back. The earliest known record of Jews in Ireland, then, is also a record of expulsion. If the history of Irish Jews is long, the size of the community has always been vanishingly small: the 2016 census reported that a little over 2,500 people (over half of whom lived in Dublin) identified Judaism as their religion. One could challenge the choice to restrict Jewishness, as the census did, to a religious designation; nevertheless, it says something about a group that its most famous member is a fictional character.

James Joyce probably based Leopold Bloom on Aron Ettore Schmitz, better known as Italo Svevo, the pioneering modernist who was born in Trieste to a German Jewish father and an Italian mother. The two met when Svevo was posted to London for work and needed to improve his English. After inquiring about tutors at the Berlitz language school, he was paired with the Irish writer, and friendship between the two quickly extended past vocabulary lists and conjugation tables. Svevo and his wife, Livia Veneziana, were among the first to hear the story “The Dead”; after Joyce had read the breathtaking closing lines, Veneziana presented him with a fistful of flowers plucked from her garden.

Like Svevo (and like me), Bloom is half Jewish, born to an Irish mother and a Jewish father: his surname is the Anglicized version of the Hungarian Virág, meaning “flower.” But Bloom was not brought up a Jew: as Ulysses relates, he has been baptized three separate times. His efforts to understand the rigidly Christian society around him are deeply moving, an example of the open-hearted spirit of inquiry that animates him as a character. Early on in his portion of the novel, Bloom enters a quiet church and sits looking around the empty space: seeing a crucifix with the Latin abbreviation INRI (Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum, or Jesus Christ, King of the Jews), he muses that it must stand for “Iron Nails Ran In.”

Bloom is never accepted: throughout Ulysses, numerous instances of antisemitism occur, from offhand comments to aggressive confrontations.

But Bloom is never accepted: throughout the monumentally unremarkable day during which the plot of Ulysses unfolds, numerous instances of antisemitism occur, ranging from offhand comments to aggressive confrontations. In the book’s first chapter, no one reacts when the Englishman Haines remarks that German Jews are becoming Britain’s “national problem”; towards its midpoint, in the chapter that represents the nadir of Bloom’s day, Bloom is chased out of a pub by a drunk (tellingly identified only as “the citizen”) who threatens to brain him for uttering Jesus’ name. Collectively, these incidents make clear that many of those around him view Bloom as a fundamental outsider, incapable of integrating no matter what he tries.

If the “overvisibility” of Bloom’s Jewishness is what courts antisemitic comments from other Dubliners, the undervisibility of my Jewishness was what permitted others to make such remarks in my presence. With the exception of a few cowlicks, I am the image of my mother when she was my age: several times when meeting her childhood friends or neighbors, I have known them to stare at me as though I were a ghost, a vision of the past stepped forth from a sun-faded photograph. My family in Dublin think of me as half-Irish, half-American, a description that is both accurate and incomplete. If I am permitted insider status, it is both because of and at the cost of this unperceived other side of who I am.


Because Ulysses transposes the epic hero’s journey into the quotidian mode, Bloom is often referred to as an everyman protagonist. Chapter Ten (or “Wandering Rocks”), with its polyphonic chorus of voice upon voice, seems to raise this matter directly: Could anyone be the protagonist of Ulysses? Could the Catholic priest be the focal character as well as the shop assistant, the daydreaming secretary as well as the gentleman placing bets on the horse races? The answer, I think, is no. Bloom is not a ho-hum man without qualities, and he is not the average Dubliner. Joyce’s choice to cast his main character as a member of a minority group about which Dublin society seems at best largely ill at ease charts the course for the entire novel.

Joyce’s choice to cast his main character as a member of a minority group charts the course for the entire novel.

In the same chapter that sees Bloom violently threatened by “the citizen,” another of the pub-goers contemptuously dubs him as a “mixed middling.” In context, this epithet refers to the perceived feminine qualities Bloom has, resulting in a “mix” of gender attributes that the speaker finds laughable. Yet it can also, I think, be stretched to include his ethnically mixed background. And the key mark of Bloom’s status as a “mixed middling” is his capacity for empathy, an idea expressed most forcefully in the final chapter, “Penelope,” which also constitutes a recapitulation of stream-of-consciousness narration. Structured as eight breathless sentences narrated by Bloom’s wife Molly before she falls asleep, much of the soliloquy’s attitude towards Bloom is anger, yet at one point, casting her mind back to her engagement, Molly softens, remembering that she chose him because he “understood or felt what a woman is.” This same wish to “understand and feel” is present everywhere, from when Bloom idly muses about how a cat must see the world to when, thinking about a female acquaintance who is in the hospital after delivering a baby, he considers the pain of childbirth and what social reforms might be enacted to ensure proper care for all expectant mothers. The quest to meet the other on equal footing is one that sets Bloom apart from so many of his interlocutors, and it is one that is engendered by his status as an outsider — the same spirit that sees him puzzling out Latin inscriptions in a church early on in the novel. Because immediate understanding is not granted to him freely, Bloom has learned the habit of imagining the world through other eyes. Those belonging to the majority — whether in Joyce’s fictional Dublin of the past or my real Dublin of the present — have the freedom not to have to imagine, a freedom which metastasizes into a desire not to understand others for whom their easy insider knowledge is not a given. To cast Bloom as an everyman, in other words, is to give short shrift to the crucial trait that distinguishes Bloom from the crowds through which he walks.


Joyce does not allow Bloom the triumphant return of Homer’s Odyssey. Odysseus defeats the suitors who have swarmed around Penelope in his absence; Bloom, by contrast, knowingly allows Molly’s lover to visit her, justifying his decision not to act with the words “Prevent useless.” Not every homecoming can be a happy one.

The winter I turned 23, the winter I encountered antisemitism in Ireland for the first time, was not so much a homecoming as a realization that perhaps I was not home at all. It was not that I had thought antisemitism did not exist in Ireland (though up until that point the dooryard of my life had been swept mercifully clear of it). But in both instances mentioned above the speakers were my family, flesh of my flesh, people whom I loved. They knew me, knew what I was, what my father was. And still they spoke as they did. Though I had been raised in America, Ireland was where we spent our summers, where I celebrated most of my childhood birthdays; it was the place I had long imagined I would move to when I grew up. But the realization that the people I cared about most understood neither Jewishness nor, seemingly, the fact of my Jewishness forced me to rethink how truly I could belong there.

Belonging, curiously, never seems to be a question that Bloom contemplates directly in the novel; any possibility of self-pity seems defeated by his own curiosity. His mind flits ravenlike from thing to thing to thing; he imagines metempsychosis, the transmigration of souls, and what if everyone were someone else, and if our spirits might all flow together over the bridges and through the streets, beneath the roofs of the city and the apathy of the stars in heaven.