The genius of the Bechdel test is that it doesn’t sound like a challenge. How difficult can it be to write a movie with two named female characters who talk to each other, just once, about something that isn’t a man? Clearly, though, it’s more rare than it sounds. You really have to think to come up with examples of movies that pass the test — and it’s only when we’re forced to provide them that we realize it shouldn’t be this hard.
Such was my experience brainstorming novels without romantic subplots. In January, “Tired Asexual” wrote to Slate advice columnist Dear Prudence, looking for suggestions of books that didn’t include the pursuit of romance. Helpful readers responded with a short list, many from young-adult fiction, but, surely, the list of eligible novels had to be much longer.
For my own test, I developed the following criteria:
The novel is not young adult fiction or science-fiction/fantasy. (There are plenty of YA books without romantic subplots, both because intended readers are younger and because recent YA authors are more likely to incorporate characters along the sexuality spectrum.)
The novel is not “about” romance, and romance — or yearning for romance — isn’t a major plot point even if it’s there. So, maybe there’s a couple, but their relationship is taken for granted and the book doesn’t focus on its evolution. Maybe someone goes on a date, but dating doesn’t move the story forward.
The novel has no explicit sex scenes or sexual themes (including sexual assault, even if it’s not described).
The novel doesn’t present romantic love as necessary and central to flourishing. This last requirement is crucial. Even if there are no sex scenes and nobody goes on a date, if the main character is constantly thinking about how he should be dating or what a loser he is without a romantic partner, the novel is disqualified.
Go ahead, see what you come up with.
I, like the reader who wrote to Dear Prudence, identify as asexual, often abbreviated as “ace.” (I’m also writing a book about asexuality). Aces often split sexual and romantic attraction — so you can be ace and still be romantically attracted to, and desire romance and relationships with, people of various genders. Those who don’t experience romantic attraction to any gender identify as aromantic. (To be clear, not all aces are aromantic, and not all aromantics are ace.)
It’s easy to understand why it would be frustrating for someone who is aromantic to constantly read books implying that life is pathetic without romance. But in fact, this state of affairs is harmful no matter how you identify. If we believe that cultural representation matters when it comes to class and race and gender and sexual minorities, we must believe that representation also matters when it comes to storylines — the narratives we tell about what matters, what we want and should want, and what is necessary for a flourishing life.
Representation matters when it comes to storylines — the narratives we tell about what matters, what we want and should want, and what is necessary for a flourishing life.
Even for those who long for romance and enjoy love stories, being steeped in this culture narrows our lives. The scholar Elizabeth Brake calls this privileging of romantic love “amatonormativity”; in her book Minimizing Marriage, she investigates the ways we prioritize romantic relationships over friendship even though friendship can be more nourishing, and infantilize those who fail to achieve coupledom.
Take, for instance, Hunter (not his real name), an asexual man I interviewed for my book. At age 35, Hunter has been married for 11 years, yet only realized that he was ace six months ago. He grew up in a very conservative, evangelical Christian environment, where casual sex wasn’t considered “cool” or liberating. But even as he followed the religious narrative that emphasized chastity, he found himself believing in a parallel narrative, a secular one that taught that losing your virginity marks you as a true adult.
When Hunter came out to a close friend, the friend asked how he could be asexual when once, years ago, he had discussed wanting to have sex. “That comment stumped me, until I realized that — and it’s embarrassing to admit — this comment he referred to was me talking about the movie American Pie,” he says. “When I first saw it years and years ago, it made me want to have sex on this intellectual level. The kid was a loser and then he became the hero of the story, and that’s what I wanted: to be a hero.”
When we remain unaware of how deeply steeped we are in romantic plots, we don’t realize how much of our desires come from social scripts.
Culture may not necessarily create desires for the things it valorizes — sex, romance, money, status — but having a single story about what these desires signify and bring can amplify them and make them seem necessary. If the vast majority of stories posit sexually active people as heroes, love as the ultimate goal, and unpartnered people as losers, you’re less likely to think outside those narrow lanes — or even notice how you’re being corralled. When we remain unaware of how deeply steeped we are in romantic plots, we don’t realize how much of our desires come from social scripts, how we’re limiting ourselves without knowing it.
I am not aromantic; in fact, I crave romantic drama, the more dramatic the better. Recently, I confided to my friend Betsy my fear that this craving would ruin my life. Either I would give in to the desire and complicate my relationship for no good reason, I told her, or, more likely, I would not give in and eventually feel bored and miss the intensity of romantic intrigue. That intensity was exactly why I sought love stories, and believed that a novel that lacked them was boring. Love stories are thrilling; they almost always invoke the big emotions that I have long believed give life its meaning.
This framing, said Betsy, was simply a failure of imagination. Yes, I wanted romantic drama, but I wanted it because I wanted emotion and intensity and purpose and desire. Was romantic drama the only way to get that? she asked.
It’s a shortcut and a template, that’s for sure. It may even be the easiest way, both in fiction and in life. But the lack of dramatic stories without romance had taught me that it was the only way to access intensity. Hunter wanted to feel like a hero, and he was told that the easiest way to become one would be to have sex. I want to feel deeply, and the story I see all around is that the way to do so is to stir up romantic drama by creating a crucible for my own mixed emotions.
The lack of dramatic stories without romance had taught me that it was the only way to access intensity.
“I hate that friendship is so devalued in this culture,” says Lauren Jankowski, a Chicago-based fantasy writer who identifies as both asexual and aromantic. Jankowski is the founder of Asexual Artists and her stories, even when they don’t have ace protagonists, rarely focus on romance. “Why can’t we just have more narratives where you find two best friends fighting for each other and to protect each other, or a group of friends going off on adventures?” she asks. “People think, unless you’re attracted to somebody, why would that be a story? Well, because it’s fucking interesting.”
The ubiquity of romantic subplots — even in books that aren’t romance novels — suggest that the only stories that can involve big emotions are romantic, that romance is automatically more interesting than almost all of the other strands of human experience. What if books focused more on the emotions that you could get from friendship, ambition, family, self?
There are, of course, books that meet the criteria of my test. Philosophical novels like Albert Camus’ The Stranger and The Plague and many works of Knut Hamsun fit within the parameters, as do surrealist novels from Borges, Calvino, Markson. Other tricks are to think about novels without women, or religious novels.
Historical and family stories are also a good bet: Per Petterson’s Out Stealing Horses and Harry Mulisch’s The Assault deal with complicated family dynamics during World War II. More contemporary selections include Marilynne Robinson’s Housekeeping; Catherine Chung’s Forgotten Country, about family secrets, the Koreas, and immigrant experience; Chaim Potok’s My Name is Asher Lev about individual desire versus community expectation. The story that has moved me most in recent months — Duncan Macmillan’s play “People, Places, and Things” — chronicles an actress’ repeated attempts at rehab. Cormac McCarthy’s The Road is bleak and dystopian; in that universe, the most important love is between a father and a son.
The catch is that almost all these selections fit into a secondary genre. All are acclaimed and considered “literary,” but they’re also usually described as philosophical novels, or Holocaust novels, or immigrant novels; they’re always pegged to something else. You need always to be looking for something that makes the novel “other.” At the core, as one friend pointed out, the nuclear family and romantic love are key parts of the genre that we declare “serious literary fiction” without needing to add another descriptor.
Romance is so taken for granted we often don’t register it, the way we rarely register if all the characters in a novel are white.
In fact, some of the books I mentioned may still feature romance; because I lack the time to re-read them, I fully expect to discover that some include a romantic subplot or fail my criteria in some way. Others who helped me brainstorm encountered the same problem. Again and again, friends would respond with a suggestion, only to see someone else chime in and point out that, actually, Watership Down and East of Eden do have romantic and sexual themes, you just forgot. Romance is so taken for granted we often don’t register it, the way we rarely register if all the characters in a novel are white. The hegemony of this message affects our values and our hopes, all while fading so cleanly into the background that it’s barely even evident.
It is so easy to go this route. Romantic plotlines are so automatic a source of tension, and to look elsewhere takes deliberate choice. My longing for stories about cruel betrayals or sudden reunions remains, but I now try to turn away as much as possible. It is time to retrain myself, to investigate all the other ways of leading a rich, intense life, to use my choice of literature as a lesson in endless stories and endless possibilities.
The act of coming out is an unveiling. Since queer people live in a straight, cis-gendered dominant culture, we have the burden of proclaiming our sexual orientation or our gender identity. As a narrative, the coming-out story is one we’re familiar with, and one we’ve embraced. Crime stories have a similar structure, which perhaps is why they resonate with queer readers and writers: the tension of withheld secrets, the satisfying snap of the puzzle pieces fitting together, the wonder of the reveal. We’re drawn to a narrative where the unknown becomes known. Where motives are made clear. Where identity is made evident.
Purchase the novel.
The best crime books are inquiries into character. While plot plays a vital role in the mechanics of storytelling, it’s the richness of character that makes a crime story memorable. We may read to know whodunit, but what lingers in our minds is what we’ve discovered about the characters and what those discoveries tell us about ourselves. When writing my novel, Dodging and Burning, I designed the plot to unfold around a crime scene photo, but the mystery I wanted to solve was essentially psychological: Why would WWII photographer Jay Greenwood show this photo to the debutant with a crush on him and the kid sister of his dead lover? It’s a question about motivation, which of course, is a question about character.
The list of books and authors below is a selection of my favorite crime stories. Some of these writers are dead, some are living, some are well known, others should be well known, all of them are queer authors, and all emphasize character in their work. I’ve also included several true crime books because they, like their fictional counterparts, explore motivation and human psychology.
In the struggling post-WWI British economy, to make ends meet Frances Wray and her mother are forced to rent rooms to a married couple, Lillian and Leonard Barber. Frances and Lillian fall in love, and when Leonard finds out, the covert love affair turns ugly — and bloody. Waters’s ear for period dialog and attention to detail evoke 1922 London beautifully, making us feel how confining it was to be a woman and a lesbian during this era. The novel takes a violent turn when the oppressive British legal system threatens not only to separate Frances and Lillian, but also to destroy their love. For these women, the injustice is that criminal behavior is determined by conservative social norms, not a sign of inherent moral corruption.
Renee James’s Bobbi Logan is a 43-year-old transgender woman, who juggles the responsibility of being a small business owner, a friend to a distressed ex-wife, and the primary suspect in a renewed investigation into a cold case murder. Although not a flawless novel — the plot has a few rough edges — James’ triumph here, and it’s an important one, is writing a detailed, positive, and mature transgender character into the pages of a crime novel. James not only gives Bobbi many layers, but also, in a gesture of empathy, she provides the transphobic counterpoint to Bobbi, Detective Allan Wilkins, with a textured and multifaceted existence, making the conclusion of the novel human and poignant.
Insurance investigator Dave Brandstretter is unapologetically gay, tough, and masculine, but also tender. In this first installment of the series, he investigates a death claim on a local radio personality’s car accident. There’s no body, so he’s suspicious the accident was faked. Hanson’s lean prose drives the story forward with great energy, and although Brandstretter gains greater emotional texture through the twelve subsequent mysteries, he emerges as nuanced and complex early on. While mourning his dead lover Rod, he quotes Ginsberg’s “Song”: “The weight of the world is love. Under the burden of solitude, under the burden of dissatisfaction, the weight, the weight we carry is love.” Published in 1970, the book launched a groundbreaking series, the gold standard for serious gay crime fiction.
Gay and Latino, Nava’s defense attorney Henry Rios echoes Brandstretter’s mixture of vulnerability and hardboiled edginess. Although The Death of Friends is the fourth in the original six book Rios series, it — as well as the books that precede and follow it, The Hidden Law and The Burning Plain respectively — are my favorites, because they explore the various facets of Rios’s relationship with Josh Mandel, who is dying of AIDS. Friends, in particular, follows Rios as he cares for his friend and ex-lover, and solves the murder of another old friend, who after many years and many lies has recently emerged from the closet. The specter of the AIDS epidemic hovers over Rios’s personal and professional life, and Friends brings them together in an unsettling conclusion, the aftermath of which permeates The Burning Plain.
Often heralded as the first non-fiction novel, In Cold Blood began as an article for TheNew Yorker about the 1959 murders of four members of the Herbert Clutter family in Holcomb, Kansas. It quickly evolved into a book-length exposé about the perpetrators Dick Hickock and Perry Smith. Its brilliance lies in the marriage of Capote’s refined instincts as novelist and the compassion he develops for the victims and the murderers. As he was writing it, he developed a close emotional bond with Perry Smith in whom he saw a fellow outsider, a dark reflection of himself. When Perry was executed, something broke in him, and he never completed another book. The personalities he investigates fascinate, but it’s the complex emotional subtext that continues to resonate.
Scottish crime writer Val McDermid’s Place of Execution is a master class in structure and pacing. In 1963, a girl goes missing on a cold December night in Derbyshire and newly promoted Detective Inspector George Bennett becomes obsessed with solving her disappearance and possible murder; the case defines his career. In the late 90s, journalist Catherine Heathcote sets out to write a book about it. When the truth finally emerges, the twist doesn’t disappoint and yet it feels wholly plausible; for both these reasons, George forbids her from publishing it. The characters (and the readers) are thrown into a moral quandary: Is publishing the truth, no matter how compelling, always the right thing to do? That question lingers long after its final pages.
Forrest’s detective Kate Delafield has a complex relationship with the closet. She’s a dedicated, sensitive, and skilled detective, but she remains closeted in order to navigate the homophobic LAPD. Through Forrest’s sharply written nine-book series, the first to feature a lesbian police detective, Delafield struggles with the isolation of the closet and its effects on her personal and professional life. Although it’s difficult to choose a favorite of Forrest’s novels, Apparition Alley, which centers on an internal affairs investigation of Delafield’s conduct during a deadly arrest, is particularly compelling. In Alley, the door to her closet is knocked open, causing her to question the faith she’s placed in her police department.
In a drug-addled mania, King of the hedonistic 90s NYC club-kid scene, Michael Alig and his friend Freeze bludgeoned, injected with Drano, and smothered fellow club-kid and drug-dealer Angel Melendez. Later, they attempted a cover-up by dismembering the body and dumping it in the river. James St. James, a close confident of Alig’s, writes his account of the period leading up to the murder, a blend of affection for the freedom of the 90s party scene, and criticism of its debauched denizens, including himself. Between his wry and exuberant characterizations of the club kids, he cringes at his younger self, at times playfully, at times with a somber appraisal. The combination is charming, hilarious, and disturbing. By the end, you understand the allure of this manic and creative party scene — and why it had to end.
Highsmith’s detached, keenly observant prose is the perfect vehicle to explore a complicated man like Tom Ripley. Ripley stands in the shadows just outside the sun-drenched world of Dickie Greenleaf, the son of a wealthy industrialist, and wants in. What begins as fascination with Dickie’s lavish and carefree lifestyle turns into murderous obsession. Through cracks in Highsmith’s beautifully controlled prose, Ripley implicates us. We are invited into his vulnerabilities, his anxiety about his social position and his desire to live well. We appreciate his artistic sensitivities, his cleverness. Soon this carefully constructed charisma falls away to reveal a cool, remorseless rage. But it’s too late, we’ve already been seduced.
In Bollen’s third novel, we luxuriate in the beauty of the Greek island of Patmos, its whitewashed mansions, its glassy water, its looming Monastery of Saint John. We peer voyeuristically over the shoulders of its inhabitants, both its native islanders and its wealthy vacationers. We enter a richly imagined world, a lush backdrop for a story about the collision of the colonizing American elite and the island’s indigenous community. Like Highsmith’s brilliant Talented Mr. Ripley, we delve deep in an exotic Mediterranean milieu and its moral murkiness. Bollen is a superb writer of scenes, a quality he shares with the great Highsmith. As characters dine, chit-chat, and drape themselves across the bows of yachts, the underlying tensions surface gradually, a slow boil, until they satisfyingly crescendo in violence.
Are you suffering from Wakanda withdrawal? Don’t worry. You’re not alone; we’re all homesick for the fictive world of Marvel’s historic Black Panther. Whether viewed once, twice, or weekly, the movie’s ability to envelop its audience in a visually arresting re-imagining of Africa never gets old. It’s difficult to witness T’Challa’s determination, Princess Shuri’s brilliance, and Killmonger’s passion without yearning for more and wishing that all of it was real. After the first five minutes of Black Panther it’s clear that Ryan Coogler has created an Afrofuturist masterpiece well-deserving of acclaim. So, if you find yourself daydreaming about booking a flight to Wakanda, head to your local bookseller instead and pick up one (or all) of these books.
The first of Octavia Butler’s Patternist series to be published, Patternmaster places readers to a distant future where the world is ruled by oppressive telepaths. The result of generations of selective breeding, the clairvoyant tyrants use their power to enslave those who lack psychic abilities. Throughout the pages of Butler’s narrative, the telepaths simultaneously make the lives of “mutes” and “clayarks” (those who lack telepathy) difficult and cause dissension amongst the Housemasters, the government officials who rule the world with greedy hearts and iron fists. A tale of political and familial division, human cruelty, and resilience, Patternmaster is a haunting critique of capitalism, colonization, and exploitation.
The poetry of Afrofuturist and jazz legend Sun Ra is undeniably cosmic. Comprised of galactic visions and futuristic musings, the luminescence of each stanza is infused with stardust and an ancient wisdom that examines the complexity of the cosmos and humanity. Much like his musical compositions, Sun Ra’s poems thread together mythology, mysticism, and sci-fi, offering his audience a unique glimpse into the mind of a visionary. This Planet is Doomed volleys between retrospection, humor, and joy. The prophetic urgency of his work transcends time. The worlds that his poems conjure will leave you in awe.
The third novel in Tananarive Due’s African Immortals series is set in the wake of the AIDS/HIV pandemic and centers around Fana Wolde, a teen immortal whose blood gives her the power to heal miraculously and read minds. When her close friend — who is a mortal — is captured by Fana’s family, Fana makes attempt to right her family’s wrong and risks her own safety in order to rescue her friend. Once the two escape, they become a part of the underground network of smugglers who are being strategically slaughtered by an ancient sect of immortals bent on destroying the sale of a life sustaining drug called “glow.” Determined to uncover the murderous sect’s obsession with an archaic prophecy and the motivation for their violence, Fana fights tooth and nail to determine her own destiny and protect those she loves. Blood Colony is a story about sacrifice and the cost of survival.
Penned by Black Panther: Long Live the King’s Nnedi Okorafor, Zahrah the Windseeker takes place in the Ooni Kingdom, a region where children born with vines growing in their hair are considered magical. The novel’s heroine Zahrah Tasmi is one of these children, despite how ordinary she considers herself to be. As time passes and the plants in Zahrah’s hair grow, so do her abilities, which makes her an outsider amongst her peers—save for her best friend Dari. When the two embark on an adventure in the Forbidden Greeny Jungle, Dari is bitten by a deadly snake, forcing Zahrah to embrace what makes her different: her magic. Though aimed at younger readers, Zahrah the Windseeker is an immersive and heartwarming story for people of all ages, celebrating the power of friendship and self-acceptance.
River Solomon’s deservedly buzzworthy debut unfolds on a massive ship in outer space. Aboard the H.S.S. Matilda, the novel’s protagonist Aster struggles to uncover the truth about her mother’s death while grappling with demons of her own. Coupled with the horrors of the racially segregated hierarchy of the H.S.S. Matilda and its sovereign’s ailing health, Aster’s quest for truth becomes intertwined with the fate of the entire ship. This dystopian tale examines how confronting the past can lead to revolution. Like Octavia E. Butler’s Kindred, the pages of An Unkindness of Ghosts will transport you to another time and world.
Daughters of a demigod and a human mother, formerly conjoined twins Makeda and Abby grow apart when one sister develops magical abilities and the other does not. Without the powers that her sister possesses, Makeda decides to leave the childhood home that she shares with Abby in order to find her place in the world of those without magic. By doing so, Makeda discovers a new sense of independence and fulfillment until her father disappears and she and her sister are forced to work together in hopes of finding him. From start to finish, Nalo Hopkinson’s Sister Mine is as much about family as it is about autonomy and courage.
In her noteworthy debut, Eve L. Ewing writes, “I am magic. Life / and all its good and bad and ugly things, / scary things which I would like to forget, / beautiful things which I would like to remember / — the whole messy lovey true story of myself / pulses within me.” Seamlessly teasing the lines between poetry, memoir, and fiction, Electric Arches’ pages prove that words are magic too. Whether conjured through “Affirmation” or the “The Device,” Ewing’s way of looking at the world feels ancestral, futuristic, and intimate all at once. Each line pulsates with truth.
Dark Matter: A Century of Speculative Fiction from the African Diaspora is a touchstone text. Edited by Sheree R. Thomas, Dark Matter features quintessential voices like Octavia E. Butler, Samuel R. Delany, Tananarive Due, Jewelle Gomez, and Steven Barnes. Through stories, essays, and novel excerpts, Thomas’ anthology gives readers an mesmerizing survey of the wealth of talent, vision, and craft that can be found in the stories by Black speculative fiction and sci-fi writers. This necessary collection reminds the world that writing about the future has been and will always be inextricably linked to the Black literary canon.
André M. Carrington’s Speculative Blackness surveys the way race is depicted in fantasy, sci-fi, and dystopian narratives and how fictive imaginings of Black identity impact contemporary culture and communities. Throughout this inarguably timely book, Carrington grapples with what these genres mean to Black Americans and their ability to shape the future in an empowering way. Whether analyzing the way race is handled in Marvel comics or the implications of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine’s Benjamin Sisko, Speculative Blackness is an accessible and academic meditation on the limitless potential of Black storytelling.
Among the most unsettling stories in Laird Barron’s body of work is a novella called “—30—”, which magnificently blends a rigorous attention to detail with a haunting sense of ambiguity. Now, writer/director Philip Gelatt (The Bleeding House, Europa Report) has adapted Barron’s novella into an unsettling film, They Remain. William Jackson Harper (The Good Place) and Rebecca Henderson (Mistress America) star as Keith and Jessica, two scientists working for an unnamed corporation assigned the task of surveying a plot of land that a sinister cult once called home.
To say that things don’t go according to plan would be an understatement. Keith and Jessica have a complex and prickly relationship from the outset which intensifies as they try to reason with the surreal landscape around them. This landscape disorientates by challenging the characters’ understanding of their environment and the forms present—or absent —within. Triangles are a visual motif throughout the film, and, as a place that once was home to death and atrocities, the residue of past traumas emerge in physical and abstract ways. There’s a menacing dog, some bizarre behavior from insects, and — most unnervingly of all — a massive horn that shows up midway through the film that looms over the personal and sexual dynamics.
I talked with Gelatt about the challenges of adapting Barron’s novella and how he went about finding a visual translation of the story’s precise pacing and carefully woven ambiguities.
Tobias Carroll: Where did you first encounter Laird Barron’s fiction? What first drew you to the novella “—30—” out of his body of work as something you might adapt?
Philip Gelatt: The first Laird Barron story I read was “Old Virginia.” It was recommended to me sometime in 2008 or 2009. I remember reading it and loving it. It was pulpy and profound and delightfully dark. But then, for reasons I can’t remember, I didn’t read any deeper into his work at that time.
Purchase the collection with “—30—”
I got back into him around the time The Croning came out. I went back and read everything he had published up to that point. Occultation, the whole collection, just wrecked me. It’s such an artistic statement, as a piece. Everything in there is daring and gripping and you can feel the way Barron is pushing at the genre and exploring styles and voices.
And “— 30 —” is, of course, in that collection. I quickly became obsessed with the idea of making it into a film.
When I try to explain what drew me to that story, I think I might sound a little bit crazy. But reading it for the first time, I found it aggravating. I was frustrated by it BUT productively frustrated. The kind of frustration that makes you want to go back and figure something out. Like, “how dare this story do this to me!”
I found myself re-reading the story, parsing its details, exploring its shadows, and trying to figure out just what the hell was really happening there.
I loved that it was, on its surface, such a simple story: “two scientists go into the woods, they go crazy and try to kill each other.” But underneath there seemed to lurk an almost bottomless depth of implication, meaning, and subtext. Everything was just slightly out of frame, just a hidden enough that you couldn’t tell what was really there and what wasn’t.
And that felt to me like a great cinematic challenge: how do you make a horror movie where almost everything is off screen? How would that turn out? How would it make the audience feel?
Underneath there seemed to lurk a bottomless depth of implication, meaning, and subtext.
There was one other aspect to it, as well. After writing Europa Report I felt the urge to do something that I could consider its dark twin. Europa is very hopeful about science, about mankind’s ability to learn and to know. It’s basically saying, “if you can give your life to make a discovery, it’s worth it.”
I read “ — 30 — ” to be a nightmare reflection of that. It’s skeptical of our ability to ever know anything. Its scientists are perhaps noble, but they’re also driven by flawed, hidden motives. Europa was a hopeful film for a hopeful time; this is an uncertain film for an uncertain time.
And, in the end, it posits a death that is filled with unanswerable questions. In a sense, it’s the abyss’s answer to the hopeful deaths of Europa.
TC: What was the process of adapting the novella like?
PG: So much fun! If I could only adapt literature for the rest of my career, I’d be happy. Such an interesting process to enter the work of another writer and attempt to figure out why certain decisions were made, why scenes were put in that order and what other things can be done with the work. It’s like borrowing someone else’s toys.
I started by printing the story out and cutting it up into scenes and pieces. Like an arts and crafts project. Just a huge mess of paper and words and scraps. I then spent maybe a month re-arranging those pieces and then rubber cementing them into a notebook. Then I filled that in with notes and sketches and ideas and used that as my outline for the first draft of the screenplay.
Because the story is so dreamlike and odd, that process really helped me get into the right headspace. I found all kinds of strange details and odd descriptions in the story that gave me a strong footing for the script.
TC: The repartee between the two central characters, and how each of them reacts to their environment, is central to both the film and the novella. How was the process of casting the two leads?
PG: A little arduous. I didn’t want to do traditional auditions. My thinking was that this whole movie was going to be just these two people and because of that I wanted to find actors who had, in their own personalities, something that felt true to these characters.
So instead, we brought prospective actors in and I had a conversation with them about the script, the story, and the characters. I’m a big believer in finding strong collaborators so I was looking for people who had engaged with the material, who had intense opinions about it and who felt right for the roles.
Rebecca came in and just was her role. Smart and sly and inquisitive with just the right amount of aggression. And Will came with a great emotional rawness about him. Though he copped to not having much woodsman-like experience, he felt ready for it. Ready to immerse himself in it and see how it would change him.
I can’t say enough good things about both of them. Neither role was easy at all. The whole movie is on their backs and they both gave it everything.
TC: Was there any aspect of “— 30—” that was particularly challenging to translate onto the screen?
PG: The single hardest thing was getting the tone right. The more I work in film, the more I’ve come to believe that tone is the single most important part of any project. It’s foundational and informs everything from character to plot to the style of lighting you use for a scene. And yet it is always so hard to pinpoint, so hard to codify. And if you get it wrong… then nothing coheres.
Finding the tone of this story in particular was tricky because it isn’t really a traditional horror story, or science-fiction story, or doomed romance, or whatever. It’s an ambiguous, frustrating, strange, weird, dream-like investigation. What the hell is that tone?
Then there were certain physical aspects of the story that were difficult. Like filming the giant sex horn. Not quite as easy as it sounds.
So much of this story is about the things you’re not seeing. Capturing the lack of something, making a viewer realize they’re supposed to be thinking about what’s not there as much as what it is… that was not easy.
Then there were certain physical aspects of the story that were difficult. Like filming the giant sex horn.
TC: The region in which They Remain is set has seen a fair amount of history before Keith and Jessica’s story begins, including the presence of the cult alluded to numerous times. How did you find the right balance between history and ambiguity?
PG: It was a constant balancing act. Early versions of the script had way more exposition, which we cut out to lean into the ambiguity, and then went back and sprinkled in history.
There were many, many cuts of the movie before we settled on a final version. I think my first cut was 2 hours and 20 minutes maybe? And a lot of the changes from that cut forward were working on the issue of ambiguity and how much to give the audience. If anyone is curious, a lot of the deleted footage will be available when the film comes to disc and video on demand.
But yeah, this question relates back to the things that attracted me to the story in the first place. That it is opaque. That it’s about trying to see things that you just can’t see and never could. I think that applies as much to the history of the land, as it does to the cult, as it does to the interior lives of our lead character, as it does to the mysterious company who brought them there. It’s all loaded with meaning but it’s on the viewer to parse that ambiguity using the bits of history they are given.
The story and the movie both work by loaded insinuation and accumulation of detail. For a certain kind of viewer, I think that kind of story is catnip. It’s a mystery and it’s there for you to solve but you have to work at it. For another kind of viewer, well… they’ll probably just hate the hell out of it for all the reasons I think it’s interesting.
TC: In both the film and the novella, the characters move between waking states, dreams, and conditions somewhere between the two. As writer/director, how did you attempt to convey these shifts in perspective and state?
PG: I knew that I never wanted there to be a clear, definitive way to say, “well it was all a dream!” or even “that’s where reality ended and the dream began!”
I wanted to sink the viewer into that “dream or reality” ambiguity. I wanted people to, at different points, wonder if we were in a dream sequence or not in a dream sequence and actively engage with the film to try to sort that out.
Ultimately, a lot of this film is designed to try to get viewers lean forward and engage with the story’s ambiguities and mysteries. It’s not a movie that’s going to tell you a story — it’s going to give you some pieces and ask you to tell yourself the story.
TC: Some of the film’s editing uses jarring transitions between disparate scenes to illustrate a feeling of disorientation, and there’s an extraordinary triple (or is it quadruple?) exposure shot at one point. How did you arrive on that as a visual equivalent to the hallucinatory states of the characters?
PG: For that scene with the quadruple exposure, I knew I needed something to… break the spell of the film? Or maybe elevate the spell of the film? Basically, I need an upping of the stylistic ante. The horn is there, the characters are having sex, Keith’s mind is starting to slip and so is reality.
Originally, the idea was to digitally alter that shot. Change the sky to red and otherwise mess with the image.
Then in the edit room, I started playing with the pieces of music our composer Tom Keohane wrote for the film, and I landed on that frantic piece. That piece of music plus that scene just felt propulsive. Like it was hurling us to some place new.
But I was still having a hard time figuring out what take of the shot to use. So, in a fit of frustration, I layered them all together to create that effect, mostly as an experiment.
And it felt immediately correct — the right kind of way push the characters and the viewers into a new liminal headspace where they’re both in the scene but separated from the scene and just completely, aggravatingly, and yet productively, unsure of what is going on.
TC: Cinematic references abound in “ — 30 — ,” from an early scene in which the two characters discuss who would play them in a film, to a later reference to the work of Dario Argento. Did the allusions to movies found within the story have any impact on how you adapted it for the screen?
PG: Only a little bit, to be honest. Recently, I’ve found myself exhausted by the ongoing trend of movies referencing other movies in either style or plot or soundtrack. A lot of pop culture has become a kind of hall of nostalgic mirrors. So, I tried very hard not to do “a John Carpenter scene” or an “Argento scene” or even a “Phase IV scene.”
Don’t get me wrong, I love the horror genre deeply and madly. But when I set out to make this I tried to slip the genre wherever I could. I wanted to make a thing that felt different… that felt sort of inescapably itself. If that makes any sense, at all.
That being said there are a few stylistic reference points in the film, though they might be so slight as to not really be noticeable. I’ll leave that nice and mysterious for viewers who might want to dig around and see if they can figure out what they are.
Celebrity can get you a lot of things — like your own publishing imprint, for instance. In the past few years, celebs like Johnny Depp, Sarah Jessica Parker, Oprah Winfrey, and Lena Dunham have all made forays into the business of books. Now, there’s a new celebrity publisher in town, and this one we’re actually excited about. On Tuesday, Amazon announced that writer and producer Jill Soloway will launch their own publishing imprint, TOPPLE Books—as in “topple the patriarchy”—which “will spotlight the voices of women of color, gender non-conforming, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer writers.”
In a statement from Amazon, Jill Soloway said, “We live in a complicated, messy world where every day we have to proactively re-center our own experiences by challenging privilege. With TOPPLE Books we’re looking for those undeniably compelling essential voices so often not heard.” The imprint shares its name with Soloway’s production company, which, according to their website, also aims to help “women, people of color, queer people and their allies…use the power of story and voice to change the world.”
Jill Soloway is the Editor-at-Large, and will be partnering with Little A, Amazon’s literary fiction and nonfiction imprint at Amazon Publishing to bring TOPPLE Books to life. Amazon Publishing, which launched in 2009, is still pretty new to the traditional publishing game. The company’s early emphasis on self-publishing and heavily-discounted book prices was met with serious criticism by those in the traditional publishing world (which had, in some cases, already clashed with Amazon), and the tension hasn’t really gone away. But Soloway is a familiar name for the folks at Amazon, the place where their Emmy and Golden Globe award-winning Transparent and I Love Dick have both found a home. Jeff Bezos seems to get the mission of the imprint, too. In a moment at the Golden Globes last year, as reported by Recode, Soloway told Amazon’s founder Jeff Bezos about their goal to combine their vision for an intersectional power movement with their TV and film career. Bezos told Soloway the jobs were one in the same: “The way that a story can make change is so much faster than the way that politics can make change…You create culture that has a story in it that says something as radical as ‘trans people are people’ and then laws follow,” Soloway recounted. Now, Amazon’s giving Soloway another shot at creating something radical.
If we’re going to let celebrities have their own publishing imprints, Jill Soloway is the kind of celebrity we want for the job. Soloway is an activist for LGBTQ rights in the arts, and one of the founders of the #5050by2020 campaign for gender equality and the #TimesUp campaign to end sexual misconduct in the industry. Not to mention Soloway has written their own books, too: an erotic novella, Jodi K., and a memoir, Tiny Ladies in Shiny Pants.
Annihilation, Jeff VanderMeer’s 2014 novel, is short, clocking in at just over 200 pages in paperback. There’s not an ounce of fat on it; VanderMeer avoids the all-too-common speculative fiction trap of overindulging in world-building by focusing strictly on his protagonist’s inner life. We know her only as the biologist, and the story unfolds as an entry in her journal, which serves the neat double purpose of making the biologist the only character with interiority, and holding the reader at an extra degree of remove — we’re not reading the events of the narrative as they happen, but rather as the biologist relates them to us after the fact. It’s a cerebral story, with sparse dialogue, no names, little action, and a healthy dose of ambiguity.
The concept is gripping from jump — a team of scientists ventures into a mysterious and abandoned area of coastline, called Area X, that’s thwarted all previous research attempts. Though Area X appears tranquil, there is an eeriness to its flora, fauna, climate, and remnants of civilization that builds over the course of the novel. In the climactic scene, the biologist encounters the Crawler, an amorphous ectoplasmic entity and the catalyst for the biologist’s ultimate transformation. The Crawler, understood in the text to be the evolution or mutation of what used to be the lighthouse-keeper, moves up and down the stairs of the Tower (a living structure descending into the depths of the earth), writing a mysterious text over and over on the walls. The biologist, having found herself beginning to change from the spores she inhaled in the Tower at the beginning of the novel, finds herself undergoing a trial by fire as she encounters the Crawler on the stairs. It passes over her, cataloging her, recognizing her. Afterwards, she’s not the same.
The movie adaptation, written and directed by Alex Garland, translates much of the book’s weirdness into a language that works on-screen: the mutated flora and fauna of Area X, fairly understated in the book, are punched up, artifice raised to the level of transcendent natural beauty, which makes perfect sense in a visual medium. The characters are given names — the biologist becomes Lena, her husband becomes Kane, the expedition leader (a psychologist) becomes Ventress — which helps the audience keep the characters straight and keeps the dialogue from feeling too stilted. There’s added action and gore and interpersonal conflict to appeal to a broader commercial audience.
Despite the common refrain of “it wasn’t like that in the book,” deviance from the source material is not inherently a bad thing in an adaptation. The language of film is fundamentally different than the language of literature, and there are certain literary devices that don’t translate from text to screen. But what the best adaptations do is update the trappings while keeping the bones of a story the same — and that’s not what happened with Annihilation. Instead, Garland has effected a total transformation of the novel into something that shares its name but few of its defining qualities — a process that mirrors the biologist’s evolution in the novel — and that raises some of the same questions. How much of a thing’s DNA can you change before it becomes something utterly new?
Garland has effected a total transformation of the novel into something that shares its name but few of its defining qualities — a process that mirrors the biologist’s evolution in the novel.
For one, Garland makes Area X itself into the enemy, rather than staying close to the biologist’s conflicted inner life and the interpersonal dynamics of the expedition. In traditional terms, this is now a “man vs. nature” story instead of “man vs. man.” The film removes the element of human monstrosity that underlies the book’s narrative — the psychologist’s insidious conditioning of her teammates, the creeping realization of the extent to which the researchers have been manipulated by the government agency that sent them, the black boxes supposedly monitoring for danger (revealed ultimately to be placebos, useless pieces of plastic), and the revelation that there have been far, far more previous expeditions than they were told. Narratively, replacing the psychologist with Area X as the primary antagonist changes Lena’s ultimate relationship with Area X; the film becomes a story of her triumph over the space, rather than her adaptation to it.
Garland also disambiguates a lot of the questions posed and then deliberately unanswered by the book. In Annihilation, VanderMeer is distinctly uninterested in telling us what Area X is, where it came from, because, frankly, that’s not the point. (He does address some of these same questions in later books, but those weren’t yet published when Garland wrote his treatment.). Garland, on the other hand, is much more interested in explanations. The opening scenes show some kind of projectile hitting the lighthouse from above, and the characters seem to settle on an extraterrestrial origin for the whole phenomenon. Josie (Tessa Thompson) theorizes that Area X (or the Shimmer, as the movie calls it) refracts DNA the way a prism refracts light, accounting for the endless iterative mutations around and within them.
It’s the omission of the Crawler, though, that most seismically alters the story. Garland includes a version of the Tower under the lighthouse, and Lena and Ventress certainly encounter something down there, but it’s an adversary, where the Crawler is both catalyst and a glimpse of the biologist’s future, a distillation of Area X itself. The Crawler is both creator and adapter, writing an endless living tract, disassembling and reconstructing to fit its own worldview.
The characters in the Southern Reach Trilogy enter Area X as one thing and exit (if they do at all) as something different. Suspended in the medium of the unknown, they’re irreversibly altered by it in a way that’s informed by everything else Area X has ever encountered or absorbed. The adaptation process moves in parallel: a director or screenwriter digests a source text through the lens of their own personal cultural patina — the stories they’ve consumed, their life, their views — and recombines the pieces into something new.
But where’s the line? At a certain point, the biologist is no longer the same person as she was at the beginning of the novel. Where in the narrative that change takes place may be a matter of opinion — was it the moment she inhaled the spores from the wall of the tower, or was it when she finally passed through the Crawler? — but that it takes place is indisputable.
Pose that same question to Alex Garland: at what point have you changed your source material so drastically that you’re telling a completely different story? At what point do you yourself become the Crawler?
At what point have you changed your source material so drastically that you’re telling a completely different story? At what point do you yourself become the Crawler?
At the end of the novel, the biologist leaves her journal in the lighthouse and journeys off along the coast, deciding to stay in Area X indefinitely. She feels close to her late husband there, and has come to believe that the inevitable encroachment of Area X on the rest of the world isn’t such a bad thing — would it be so terrible, after all, if this eldritch Eden engulfed the whole planet, given how humans have exploited and squandered the natural world? As readers, we’re inclined to agree. VanderMeer gives us little to love in the human world, and while Area X is strange and frightening, it’s honest. There’s a distinct desire to wander up the coast with her and explore.
But on-screen, in a bravura piece of filmmaking, Lena has a showdown in the lighthouse with an entity that doubles her, attempting to take her form. She kills it, and in doing so seems to defeat Area X, before returning triumphant (yet altered in some tantalizingly vague way) to the copy of her husband, still living. She’s a hero, of sorts, and in her debrief at the Southern Reach we learn that Area X has collapsed and the lighthouse is reduced to ashes. The threat is eliminated, though some part of Area X lives on in her husband’s double, and in the shimmer in her eyes. There’s a sense of loss here, since there was so much more of Area X to explore. It feels conservative in a way the book never did, to choose the violent rejection of change instead of embracing it.
It feels conservative in a way the book never did, to choose the violent rejection of change instead of embracing it.
You can’t see the full shape of a story until it’s over, which is why endings have such weight. The ending of the movie throws into sharp relief just how differently VanderMeer and Garland see this story — where Vandermeer conceived of a loner becoming one with a strange land, Garland saw a woman driven to solve the mystery that wounded her husband. Neither view is wrong; one story is not objectively better than the other. But when a filmmaker strays this far from his source text, it ceases to be an adaptation and becomes something else.
Or, to quote Lena, “It’s not destroying… it’s making something new.”
Mark Sarvas’s new novel Memento Park is a moving and compulsively readable story about the journey of a piece of stolen art, and an account of one man coming to terms with a past he barely knows.
I tore through it, caught in its spell the entire time. I was particularly struck by how Sarvas managed to gracefully navigate a six-way intersection of the political, the personal, the historical, the contemporary, the inherited, and the improvised. We sat down together to talk about how history — both the personal and the global — has a way of reemerging in the present, perhaps despite our best efforts.
Antoine Wilson: Memento Park comes a decade after your debut novel Harry, Revised. Can you talk about the origins of this book, and what took you so long to follow up your first?
Purchase the novel.
Mark Sarvas: I’d been thinking about the subject in some form or another since the late 90s, since well before my first novel. I knew I wanted to write about looted art but I also knew I didn’t have the chops to pull it off as a first novel, so I stuck the idea in a drawer and wrote Harry, Revised.
I had greater ambitions for this novel, and I was also excavating some personal stuff that I wasn’t in a hurry to delve into. I wanted something deeper and (dare I say it) more lasting. For my first book, I was in a hurry, and I’d felt like I’d allowed “good enough” to be good enough. I was determined not to settle this time.
As for the actual writing time, a few things intervened, major life changes like the birth of my daughter, moving, collapsing marriages, and so on. From my start in January 2009 to the sale to FSG in May 2014 ate up six years. But as I always tell my students, each book takes as long as it needs.
AW: Memento Park is in first person, narrated by an American of Hungarian descent who shares your initials. Is it safe to say that this novel and its protagonist are close to you?
MS: That was super subtle, the initials thing, huh? The plot of Memento Park is wholly fictionalized; there’s no valuable art in my family, sadly. My stories tend to start out as “what if” questions: Here it was, “What if a guy became aware of a painting that might belong to his family, how would he be able to reach back into the past to prove it?”
The stuff that’s closer to home is around the relationship between my narrator Matt and his dad. I had a pretty complicated relationship with my dad, a tough, demanding immigrant of the old school. I think I felt in some ways a bit of a perpetual disappointment to him. He was remote and not particularly warm or easy to know, though I did love him (and fear him). So a lot of him went into Gabor’s characterization, and a lot of the anxieties and conflicts between Matt and his father are, shall we say, inspired by life. That said, I should add that Gabor still is a fiction, a heightened and more monstrous (for dramatic effect) version of my father. (My sister would insist I tell everyone that; and it’s largely true.)
Similarly, Matt isn’t me, though we share a good deal more than just initials. Early on, I made a big break between the two of us, and made Matt an actor. It’s a profession I couldn’t in a million years undertake, but I know actors, so I could write about the work knowledgeably. The moment I opened up this gulf, Matt stopped being “me” and became “him.”
AW: One of the fascinating things about Memento Park is how alienated Matt Santos is from his religious heritage, his family history, even his given name. An actor living in Los Angeles, he’s practically an exemplar of the American affinity for self-reinvention. The novel can be read as a study of his reluctant emergence from the daydream of an identity unfettered by the past. What motivated you to write about this journey?
MS: My parents are both survivors of the war in Europe, and in my 30s, I would badger my mother to tell me her stories. (My father wasn’t really the story-telling type, though he opened up a bit toward the end of his life.) She tried once or twice but couldn’t finish a sentence without crying. I even bought her a microcassette recorder, thought it might be easier if I wasn’t in the room. No dice. And so I think there was a little bit of frustration at a story closed off. I resist overly neat readings of any work of fiction (as, I know, do you), but I think a central idea that preoccupied me and is expressed throughout the novel is: What happens when the past is permanently out of reach? When you wait too long to ask important questions? As the last generation of Holocaust survivors begins to die, that felt more pressing than ever.
AW: It’s a fascinating take on the legacy of trauma, where the ordeal of the past shuts off not only painful stories but also interrupts intergenerational transmission of religion and culture.
MS: That seems a very common phenomenon, this generation of postwar Jewish immigrants who lived a secular, American life. (Yes, we had a Christmas tree!) The more I researched Memento Park, the more resentful I became about losing my Jewish heritage. I actually had to take a 12-week Introduction to Judaism course at the American Jewish University because I knew so little about being Jewish.
I think there was also a little bit of self-indictment, honestly, a reckoning with my own disengagement and lack of curiosity for so long. Ours was a secular house where certain things just weren’t talked about, but I’ve come to see I accepted that silence a little too easily. Maybe it was easier for me not to have to deal with my parents’ pain and loss. I don’t know.
You’re also very astute to pick up on the self-reinvention theme — I re-read The GreatGatsby every year, it’s my favorite for a reason. Memento Park surely casts at least a sidelong glance at the ways in which I’ve run from myself, a feeling that can be especially acute in Los Angeles. The choice of making Matt an actor, one who freely and easily assumes and discards personae, isn’t an accident.
AW: While reading Memento Park I found myself googling the artist Ervin Kálmán and his “Budapest Street Scene,” only to discover that you’d invented them. How did you go about creating the artist and his work? Did you go through many different ideas for paintings before settling on “Budapest Street Scene”?
MS: Ha! I never thought anyone might google him. I didn’t invent them so much as more or less steal them. He is modeled very closely on Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (again with the initials), one of my favorite German expressionists, who painted an iconic series of Berlin Street Scenes. I thought at first of simply using the real art and artist but I didn’t want to be bound by his history, and I wanted the painter to be Hungarian. But Kálmán’s biography leans very heavily on Kirchner’s, including the fact of his suicide, and all of the paintings I attribute to my painter are Kirchner’s.
I’ve long wanted to write about art and painting, and it’s a real writerly challenge, isn’t it? Trying to bring a picture to life, to make people see what you’re seeing. Some of the most fun I had writing the novel (which wasn’t often much fun) was writing about the art.
AW: Writing novels isn’t very much fun, is it? And yet we persist. What is it that keeps you writing, or, at least, kept you going while writing Memento Park?
MS: I think, for me, there’s always a nugget at the center of each novel, a question, that draws me in and keeps me working. With Harry, Revised, the question was small and personal — what does it really mean for a person to change, and is change even possible? But for the long haul of Memento Park, it felt like I was dealing with something a little more important, a little deeper — what happens when the past is lost beyond our ability to retrieve it? And so, through those days when you wrestle with scenes that don’t add up, or characters who don’t come to life, you can always return to that animating question as a touchstone. I need those big, important questions to push me forward. To make me feel like this is something worth writing down, because it’s tackling something that matters.
AW: What was the greatest discovery you made in the process of writing the book?
MS: There were many discoveries, as befits a book that you spend seven years on. But the one I’ll share here is something I’ve told my students ever since. If your work doesn’t surprise you, it won’t surprise your readers. I’d always known that as an intellectual fact, but in Memento Park, a story twist (which neither of us shall reveal here) came to me when I was well into the writing and caught me totally off-guard. And it works the same way in the book, because it doesn’t feel like there’s a long, conscious set up, it just unfolds organically. And I felt the truth of that advice.
I also wrote without an outline, which I hadn’t done before. That unnerved me, but I trusted the world and the characters to show me the way, and although it took time, I believe it paid off.
AW: You mentioned Gatsby, but are there any other books or authors you return to again and again? Stories that are, as you wrote Memento to be, lasting?
MS: Sort of. There’s always so much to be read that I try very hard to keep moving forward, give new work its due. At the same time, some works just never quite exhaust their demand on your attention, and other works seem to magically unstick you when your writing gets mired in mush. My main influences these days are the two Johns, Berger and Banville. The first for his luminous humanity (his death last year was a deep blow), the latter for his unparalleled style.
There are other writers I love very much, who inspire me but who don’t necessarily influence my style, though I like to think they press on my thinking. Those include writers like Zadie Smith, W.G. Sebald, Marilynne Robinson, and J.M. Coetzee.
Sometimes, I will go back to a book to answer the question “How on earth did she/he pull that off?” A recent example was Max Porter’s brilliant and moving Grief is the Thing With Feathers, which breaks every single rule as it soars.
As Mildred Hayes approaches her abusive ex-husband in a crowded restaurant, the camera closes in on her fingers wrapped around the neck of the wine bottle she’s carrying. The viewer waits with apprehension and glee for Mildred to smash it over his head.
This is, after all, the woman who drilled a hole in the thumb of her dentist; the woman whose daughter was raped and murdered, a crime which seemed to generate only slight consternation on the part of the local police department; the woman who’s just learned of a fresh act of betrayal by her physically abusive ex, dating a woman half his age.
By this point in Martin McDonagh’s film Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017), Mildred has already tormented a dying police chief and Molotov cocktailed the police station, inadvertently setting fire to one of its most objectionable officers. Frances McDormand’s Mildred — a role for which she recently took home a Golden Globe — is by turns fierce and broken, a woman past her sexual prime, hell-bent on stirring up unnecessary trouble for some hard-working police officers who’d much prefer to be left to their racist devices.
But instead of whacking her ex (John Hawkes) with the bottle of wine, Mildred sets it onto the table. “Be nice to her, Charlie,” she tells her former husband, his stunned expression giving form to how the audience feels. “You got that?”
Writer/director McDonagh relies heavily on Mildred’s status as a (white) woman and grieving mother to guarantee that she’ll be established as a deserving target of our empathy.
The moment is a turning point for Mildred’s character, as well as a subversion of the viewer’s expectations. Throughout most of Three Billboards, Mildred’s fury over her daughter’s unsolved murder — and her conviction that the police department has neglected its duty in advancing the case — is the point on which the narrative turns. From the first moments of the film, which also won the Golden Globe for Best Picture, Mildred’s swearing, priest-confronting, dentist-drilling character flies in the face of traditional expectations regarding femininity and motherhood. Rendered feral by her grief, Mildred directs her quest for revenge not against the unknown perpetrator but against the police department, shaming the police chief (Woody Harrelson) via a set of billboards.
Mildred may rub many of the small town’s inhabitants the wrong way, but for the film to have the emotional heft it intends, the viewer’s sympathies must remain aligned with her, no matter how irrational or violent her actions might be. Writer/director McDonagh (netting a third Golden Globe, for Best Screenplay) relies heavily on Mildred’s status as a (white) woman and grieving mother to guarantee that she’ll be established as a deserving target of our empathy. The film operates off the assumption that within Mildred’s character, and thus within her quest for retribution, is an inherent righteousness. It’s only from setting up an unquestionable sense of her integrity that McDonagh is able to use displays of stoicism, anger, and violence as opportunities for catharsis and humor, without worrying that the audience will turn against his protagonist.
The setting of Three Billboards plays an indispensable part in establishing this narrative, that of an uncouth woman who operates like a Wild West vigilante. And why shouldn’t it work? It’s a trope that’s been successfully deployed before. In its various iterations, starting with the 1968 novel by Charles Portis, True Grit tells a similar story of a grieving female protagonist bucking traditional notions of femininity in pursuit of revenge. In 1873, a century and a half before Mildred rented space on a stretch of billboards, fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross hires a hard-drinking, eye-patched U.S. Marshall to track down her father’s killer. Insisting on accompanying him in his journey through “Indian Territory,” she subverts the expectations of Marshall Rooster Cogburn and of LaBoeuf, the cowlicked Texas Ranger looking for the same guy — not to mention those of the audience. The reader expects grief and fragility from Mattie, but instead gets a girl who dismembers a man’s corpse in order to escape a pit that’s filled with rattlesnakes (a fitting and presumably unintended metaphor for the dismantling of the patriarchy).
The reader expects grief and fragility from Mattie, but instead gets a girl who dismembers a man’s corpse in order to escape a pit that’s filled with rattlesnakes.
Rather than a female role model or positive supporting character from which Mattie and Mildred might draw inspiration and strength, True Grit and Three Billboards each present two deeply flawed men, ultimately redeemed despite their questionable behavior. In both narratives the protagonist and their two male foils are allowed narrative arcs of their own, and an opportunity for redemption, while the rest of the characters, particularly those of color, remain flat and one-dimensional (see Gene Demby’s incisive Twitter thread on Three Billboards’ failures in the framing of race). True Grit, which relies on a number of cameos by such caricatures, features three leading men — Cogburn, LaBoeuf, and Mattie’s father — who fought as Confederate soldiers in the Civil War, a fact that gets treated as an irrelevant footnote in their moral track records, if not meant to serve as actual evidence of their valor.
In Three Billboards, Officer Dixon (Sam Rockwell), who admits to torturing a black man and later throws another man out a second-story window, is portrayed as being redeemed through his participation in Mildred’s revenge quest. Though the storyline has been pointed out as problematic by a number of critics, the performance nevertheless won Rockwell a Golden Globe. Police Chief Willoughby — who excuses, if not outright condones, the racist behavior of his officers — is presented in a sympathetic light, thanks in large part to the reveal of his terminal cancer, his efforts to mentor Dixon, and his photogenic family.
Sam Rockwell and Frances McDormand in ‘Three Billboards’ | Image courtesy of Fox Searchlight
Mildred’s violent acts are also largely devoid of consequence (at least for her; at one point a black coworker of Mildred’s is arrested, something we’re meant to believe is intended merely to rattle Mildred herself), a fact inseparable from her whiteness. In the film’s final scene, in which Mildred confesses to Dixon that she was the one who set fire to the police station (and, by extension, to him), he expresses neither surprise nor anger. Mildred reacts by laughing for the first time in the film, caught off guard by a forgiveness that echoes the forgiveness Dixon himself received earlier, from the man he previously threw out of a window.
In his National Book Award-winning novel The Good Lord Bird, James McBride utilizes some aspects of the grieving-woman-as-Wild-West-vigilante trope, though he deploys it in a more nuanced and complicated way. Set in 1856, the book follows ten-year-old Henry Shackleford, who witnesses his father’s somewhat accidental killing and afterwards is kidnapped by the infamous John Brown, the abolitionist declaring Henry free and mistaking him for a girl, as well as a good luck charm. Henry — whose name Brown thinks is Henrietta — is henceforth nicknamed Onion, after the good luck onion he eats as he struggles to adjust to his new life as the free-ish companion of the holy roller abolitionist. Primarily concerned with survival, Onion doesn’t have the luxury of wallowing in grief over his father’s death, or seeking revenge for it, but is rather swept along by the current of Brown’s quest to dismantle the “infernal institution.” Being a boy masquerading as a girl offers Onion a unique vantage from which to compare and contrast his expectations with his actual experiences, constantly questioning and unsure of his footing, with gender roles never far from his mind.
Being a boy masquerading as a girl offers Onion a unique vantage to compare his expectations with his actual experiences, with gender roles never far from his mind.
The residents of the fictional town of Ebbing, Missouri, meanwhile, never fail to center Mildred’s gender and her sexuality, or lack thereof, in their approximation of her character. While Mattie and Onion are often told that they’re too young — to join a fight, to ride with outlaws, to know what they’re talking about — Mildred is viewed by her community as failing in her dual roles as sex object and mother. She struggles to connect with her teenage son (Lucas Hedges); Chief Willoughby teases her about her ex-husband’s younger girlfriend; the physical abuse she’s experienced at the hands of her ex is called into question by multiple characters, one using the words that every woman innately knows: “it’s your word against his.” A heavy-handed flashback, the only one in which Mildred’s daughter (Kathryn Newton) appears, suggests why Mildred might feel guilt about her daughter’s murder — a guilt further compounded when she learns that her daughter had asked to live with dad shortly before her death. In stark contrast to Mildred’s deficient parenting and lack of sex appeal, the viewer is presented with Exhibit A, Chief Willoughby, who has great sex with his young attractive wife (Abbie Cornish), after spending an afternoon fishing for stuffed animals with his two adoring daughters.
In True Grit Rooster Cogburn initially dismisses Mattie on the basis of her age and her gender. He repeatedly calls Mattie “baby sister” in the 1969 film, and both “a baby” and “sister” (as well as the more imaginative “harpy in trousers”) in the Coen brothers’ 2010 remake. Yet despite his hardscrabble ways and contempt for social norms, Cogburn is never cast as a potential predator. Texas Ranger LaBoeuf, on the other hand, initially sees Mattie as both a meddling child and a sex object. “Earlier tonight I gave some thought to stealing a kiss from you,” he tells her, “though you are very young, and sick and unattractive to boot, but now I am of a mind to give you five or six good licks with my belt.” As a pickup line it belongs in a class of its own, managing to simultaneously claim, threaten, and diminish her. Mattie grudgingly wins the respect of Cogburn and LaBoeuf (“she has won her spurs, so to speak”), but only after they repeatedly try to exclude her from their expedition, and after LaBoeuf lashes Mattie with a switch for her disobedience (when she cries out to Cogburn, asking him to save her, he obliges).
Onion also comes under threat from a man seeking to take advantage of his age and perceived gender, a slave named Darg, who is forced to live in a pen outside the brothel where Onion resides, in between time spent with Brown. After Onion faints out of genuine fear (“fainted dead out right in the mud, just like I seen the white ladies do,”), he notes Darg’s solicitous reaction to his fragility, exploiting it to distract and flatter his pursuer. “It it possible for a gallant gentleman like you to get a girl a glass of water?” asks Onion. “I’m ever so shook now with gratefulness, have been jooped and jaloped by your kind protection.” At times Onion fulfills the expectations other characters already have of a young girl — that despite her tough exterior, she will at some point require the protection or assistance of men — in order to survive.
Frances McDormand in ‘Three Billboards’ | Image courtesy of Fox Searchlight
Before any of these three protagonists receive assistance from men, the author first establishes that they merit help, repeatedly reminding us of the good heart that exists under their veneer of toughness. Gender and grief and, in Mildred and Mattie’s cases, whiteness, are essential to this construction, though the authors seek to communicate their virtuousness in other ways as well. In an early scene in Three Billboards, Mildred flips over a beetle struggling on its back. Elsewhere she tells off a self-righteous priest for his hypocrisy, and calls out the police department for its racism, thus establishing in the minds of the audience that she’s a principled hard-ass — never mind that the audience hasn’t actually seen any behavior to meaningfully demonstrate those principles, only an assurance that they exist.
Mattie’s virtue is inextricably intertwined with the ways in which she rejects many — though significantly not all — of the conventions of 19th-century girlhood. She remains prim and proper at all times, Mildred’s opposite in almost every way. She disapproves of Rooster Cogburn’s drinking habits and frequently quotes the Bible: “The wicked flee when none pursueth,” Mattie reminds the reader. Her grief on the page is muted — partly because of the dialogue-heavy and interiority-light nature of Portis’s novel, and partly due to the matter-of-fact nature of her character. “What a waste!” she says of her father’s murder, almost as though she’d witnessed someone throw away a perfectly good apple. Her desire for revenge is rooted in a biblical eye-for-an-eye sensibility: “You must pay for everything in the world one way or another,” Mattie says. Never shying away from a conflict or a firefight, Mattie is single-minded in her pursuit of retribution — seeking it as the righting of a wrong — and also unflinching in the face of danger.
Before these protagonists receive assistance from men, the author first establishes that they merit help, repeatedly reminding us of the good heart that exists under their veneer of toughness.
John Brown relies upon the perception of Onion’s innocence and weakness to shame his men for their lack of bravery, calling attention to Onion’s sacrifices when they worry about being able to recruit enough troops for the raid on Harpers Ferry, noting that “this little girl [who] has risked life and limb to join us and lived out on the plains and braved battle like a man…If a little girl will do it, a man certainly will.” Onion mostly uses his disguise as a girl to avoid violence and fighting, rather than seeking it out. But because he is a recently freed slave, and (is thought to be) a young girl, even that limited involvement is read as heroic. “There were certain advantages,” Onion says of the bonnets and dresses, “like not having to lift nothing heavy, and not having to carry a pistol or rifle, and fellers admiring you for being tough as a boy, and figuring you is tired when you is not, and just general niceness in the way folks render you.” But even when Onion leans into his new identity as a girl, he retains habits that are accepted in some settings (“a damsel out west on the trail could spit, chaw tobacco, holler, grunt, and fart, and gather no more attention to herself than a bird would snatching crumbs off the ground,”) though not in polite company.
These rebellions against convention are meant to shock not only the other characters in these worlds, but also the audience. Mattie’s persistence and matter-of-fact stoicism, and Mildred’s unflinching anger, are sensationalized and occasionally played for laughs. Despite every obstacle thrown at her Mattie refuses to yield, and she follows her pair of questionable role models without complaint, sleeping on the unforgiving dirt and subsisting on the 19th-century version of hush puppies. She doesn’t hesitate to shoot her father’s murderer, Chaney, when she encounters him along a ravine. ”I didn’t think you’d do it!” he exclaims, despite the fact that he just walked her through the steps of firing the gun. Nor does Mattie despair when trapped in a pit alongside a coil of rattlesnakes nestled inside a corpse — instead, she yanks the skeleton’s arm out of its socket with the most blasé of justifications to the reader: “A terrible thing to do, you say, but you will see that I now had something to work with.”
Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross in ‘True Grit’ (2010)
Even more so than Mattie’s scrappiness, Mildred’s violent subversion of convention often creates opportunities for humor. In one such scene, Mildred kicks a teenage boy and girl in their crotches after they throw a soda at her car. It’s hard to imagine the scene would have elicited similar shocked laughter from the audience had an adult man done this. A moment in which Mildred’s ex-husband starts to choke her in front of their teenage son is quickly deflated and even played for laughs once ditzy girlfriend Penelope enters the house, making an inane comment. The impossibly quick pivot functions to minimize Mildred’s experience of domestic violence, and to suggest that she wasn’t in any real danger (a bizarre insinuation for the film to make, not least for how Mildred’s daughter died).
Earlier in the film Mildred’s admission, that she knew Chief Willoughby was dying of cancer and decided to rent billboards critical of him anyway, are meant to catch the audience off guard. The billboards “wouldn’t be as effective after you croak,” she tells a stunned Willoughby. Surely, he thinks, and so the audience is meant to think, Mildred couldn’t be this devoid of empathy. And she isn’t — viewers see her cry multiple times, apologize to Chief Willoughby’s widow, pour her soul out to both a terribly rendered CGI deer and to her pair of bunny slippers, and look remorseful when she realizes the racist policeman she burned to a crisp had saved her daughter’s case file from being consumed in the flames. But these moments of vulnerability are presented as notable exceptions, strategically deployed to prevent the audience’s sympathy to Mildred from wavering.
These moments of vulnerability are presented as notable exceptions, strategically deployed to prevent the audience’s sympathy to Mildred from wavering.
It’s difficult to determine what Mildred is thinking at any given moment, as the viewer isn’t granted the extensive access to her consciousness that a reader has in a first-person novel like The Good Lord Bird. True Grit is also written in first person, but Portis eschews lengthy passages of interiority and relies instead on rapid-fire dialogue, much of which makes it verbatim into the films. One could argue that what the reader is left with of Mattie’s character constitutes a façade: that her lack of deeply felt emotion is merely a mask, put on not only for the tough men around her, but for the reader as well. Portis may have felt that the emotions driving Mattie were less important than the actions she took to avenge her father’s death, and that her inherent grit — the quality she seeks out in Rooster Cogburn — needed to be unquestionable.
Mattie doesn’t kiss her father’s corpse, even when the undertaker encourages her to do so. In both films she tears up when given her father’s possessions; she doesn’t in the original novel, though she does admit to being in tears at the triple hanging at the outset of the novel, an event she insisted on witnessing (“I would see it all”). Her moments of vulnerability are few and far between; she cries out “more from anger and embarrassment than pain” when LaBoeuf beats her with a switch, and fears for her life “for the first time” towards the end of the novel, when she believes Cogburn and LaBoeuf have abandoned her with her father’s murderer.
Mildred, Mattie, and Onion are all, to some extent, strategic about when they cry and who they allow to witness it. The association of crying with feminine weakness is not only ancient and persistent, but creates a double bind. To cry is to let emotion overcome you; to not cry enough, if you’re a woman, is to be an unfeeling automaton (though any female presidential candidate could have told you that). Onion, working within the triple limitations placed on him by his race, adopted gender, and age, learns to exploit this as a survival tactic: “I was in a quandary, and my tears busted forth again, which worked out perfect, for it moved them all to my favor, and I seen right off that crying and squalling was part of the game of being a girl.”
Whether crying or not crying, prim and proper or violent and antagonistic, these three protagonists ultimately end up turning to men for their protection or assistance. Onion and Mattie do so most overtly, additionally hampered by their youth, but even Mildred falls into this pattern. Frustrated by the lack of progress in her daughter’s case, her instinct is not to try to solve it herself — however irrational or improbable that may be — but to spur the men of the police department to take action. There are no prominent female police officers in Ebbing, and the other female characters in the film largely act as plot devices (Mildred’s daughter; her coworker Denise), or foils to Mildred’s sexlessness and fierceness (Charlie’s new girlfriend, Penelope; the equally ditzy Pamela, at the office where Mildred rents out the billboards). The other two remotely significant female characters are Chief Willoughby’s wife-turned-widow, whose sex appeal and husband-worship are treated with a kind of reverence in the film, and Officer Dixon’s mother, whose gruff exterior belies an unwavering support for her highly objectionable son. In both cases these women are defined by, and exist solely in relation to, their affiliation and devotion to a husband or a son.
Left: Abbie Cornish and Wood Harrelson; Right: Sam Rockwell and Sandy Martin, in ‘Three Billboards’ | Images courtesy of Fox Searchlight
Other women are almost entirely absent from True Grit; only passing reference is made to Mattie’s mother, for instance. Mattie herself hardly seems interested in female role models or companionship, nor is she interested in romantic relationships. “She must have been silly,” Mattie remarks about Ophelia’s death from a broken heart in Hamlet. As an older woman her ultimate allegiances are to her church and her bank, and she rejects the societal assumption that true happiness can be derived only from belonging to another person: “They think everybody is dying to get married…I never had the time to get married but it is nobody’s business if I am married or not married. I care nothing for what they say. I could marry an ugly baboon if I wanted to and make him cashier.”
The association of crying with feminine weakness creates a double bind. To cry is to let emotion overcome you; to not cry enough, if you’re a woman, is to be an unfeeling automaton.
Of these three narratives, The Good Lord Bird is most interested in looking at other female “profiles in courage.” Through much of the novel, as Onion is swept along in the turbulent wake of John Brown, he observes and compares himself to other models of womanhood. There’s Pie, who like him places more importance on survival than revolution; there’s Sibonia and Libby, who do precisely the opposite; and then there’s Harriet Tubman, who like John Brown possesses a conviction and fortitude that leads people to follow her (Brown refers to her as “General Tubman”), at great personal cost. When Tubman exhorts the members of a crowd to “be a man” Onion thinks, “well, it hurt my heart to hear her talk that way, for I was wanting to be a man myself, but afraid of it, truth be told, ’cause I didn’t want to die.” Moments later, reflecting on the courage of Tubman and Sibonia, Onion yells out that he’s ready to join the cause, leading others to follow suit.
Early on in The Good Lord Bird, Brown refers to his quest as “exacting the Lord’s revenge,” but later disavows the idea of riding for revenge. Revenge implies an almost petty vindictiveness, a narrowing of scope rendered meaningless by the vast and systemic evil of slavery. The death of Onion’s father becomes almost irrelevant to him and to the narrative, save that it catalyzes the meeting of Onion and Brown. Despite the efforts undertaken by Portis and McDonagh to invest us in the revenge quests of their female protagonists, attempting to imbue them with sympathetic and unquestionable intentions, neither narrative presents an airtight case for revenge — not when those quests simultaneously include men whom the authors absolve for their abhorrent beliefs and actions.
The trouble started when I went to see the doctor. I wasn’t sick but I had changed jobs, relocating from one city to another, and I was told I had to see the doctor for a screening.
“A screening for what?” I asked during the question and answer session that followed the medical module of the orientation video.
We, the new hires, were assembled in a large windowless classroom in a prefabricated building. We watched the videos on monitors at our desks. After each video one of the women from Human Resources asked us if we had any questions. We had lots of questions, but the women only answered those that pertained to the video we had just seen. Some of my new colleagues asked questions just to ask them, to make their voices heard, or so it seemed to me, but I wanted to know the purpose of the screening and if it had anything to do with the paper masks that all the women from Human Resources wore. The new hires had not been given masks.
“We need to assemble a baseline,” the woman replied.
That was no kind of answer, but I didn’t want to antagonize her. The contract I’d signed was very lucrative and there was no need to jeopardize that on account of my surliness, which had gotten me in trouble in the past. The truth of the matter was I had made a mess of things at my last job. Things had started out well enough but then everyone turned against me and I was eager to start fresh.
But the idea of a doctor visit troubled me. I was raised to believe that seeing a doctor when you weren’t sick was inviting illness into the body.
Eventually, I forgot about the screening and turned my attention to the other videos, which weren’t half-bad, but I must have looked concerned because when it was time to sign out for the day one of the women — I couldn’t see her face because of the paper mask she wore, but her nametag read “Diane” — said to me, “It’s nothing to worry about. Everybody gets sick during the first month. You’ll see.”
On the second day of orientation, my concern turned to annoyance when I learned I would have to see the doctor immediately. The women from Human Resources were adamant about this: “Employment is contingent upon completion of the screening.”
Fine. During the lunch break I got in line to sign up for an appointment with one of the company doctors. The woman’s nametag read “Gayle” and like the others she wore a paper mask with the company’s logo on it.
Gayle seemed pleasant enough as she keyed in my particulars and scheduled an appointment later that afternoon with a Dr. Lee.
“He’s one of the good ones!” Gayle exclaimed before hastily adding, “They’re all good, of course. You’ll like Dr. Lee. Everyone does. Can I confirm your appointment this afternoon?”
After a moment’s hesitation, I told her she could.
“Good luck!” she said.
It didn’t occur to me until much later that this was an odd thing to say to a healthy person before a doctor visit.
After we finished orientation for the morning I took a walk and had a look at the building where I’d be working. I’d learned that it had been used as a mental health facility and then as an institution of rehabilitation — meaning it had been an insane asylum and a penitentiary. The massive structure had stood empty for over a decade before my new employer purchased the facility (that’s what everyone called it, the facility) and was having it renovated for an unknown purpose. The building was barnacled with scaffolding.
I’d been hired on to the HVAC crew. I’d intended to walk around the facility, but the work sites were walled off with plywood so I gave up and studied the entrance instead. The front of the building looked as if it hadn’t changed in a hundred years. It was made of dark stone and was anything but cheerful. The air was cold and damp and before I knew it I was walking away from the facility without having made up my mind to do so, like something was pushing me away. I wanted to turn and have one last look if only to assert my will over the place, but I didn’t look back. I hunkered down into my coat and went straight to the clinic and my appointment with Dr. Lee.
The doctor was exactly as I had imagined him. Youthful but not young. Thin but not frail. His hands were slender but you wouldn’t call them dainty. He wore a paper mask, as did everyone else in the clinic, but what little I could see of his features did not suggest a man who was lovable or warm. In fact, he struck me as quite cold.
He asked me in a perfunctory tone if I had been ill or if I was on any medication. He checked my eyes, examined my ears, and peered down my throat. Other than a few keystrokes he made on his computer at the beginning of the appointment, he didn’t take any notes.
He was a serious man, and I got the sense that this screening was as annoying to him as it was to me, an attitude that contributed to a sense of pointlessness. In fact, I’d only been in the room with him for about five minutes when he thanked me and told me we were done.
As I stood up and put my jacket on, Dr. Lee did a curious thing: he opened the bottom drawer of his desk and lifted out an enormous white cat that he cradled in his arms. I couldn’t have been more surprised if he’d pulled out a bottle of whiskey and a pack of cigarettes.
“So you will be working in the facility?” he asked.
I nodded but Dr. Lee did not return the gesture. He just stood there, stroking the cat with his slender hands. Both he and the cat wore the same watchful expression, the same look of penetrating intelligence. I got the sense that I was intruding and left the examination room.
A shuttle approached as I exited the clinic and after displaying my new employee badge I boarded the bus. Everyone but me was wearing a paper mask.
Orientation continued. There were fewer new hires in the room. The empty seats were as obvious as missing teeth.
During the lunch hour the women from Human Resources escorted a few more new hires away from their workstations. The guy next to me, a young man who pounced on every opportunity to take a smoke break and returned to the classroom smelling of tobacco and, strangely, apples, leaned over and whispered, “They refused to go see the doc.”
I nodded that I understood though in fact I did not.
“Not that it matters. Just a rubber stamp to cover their asses. If you get it, you get it,” he said with a chuckle.
Get what? I wanted to ask, but Diane announced the start of the next module and I turned my gaze toward the video screen.
At the conclusion of orientation, certificates of completion were passed around as if we’d achieved something of our own doing rather than sitting quietly while that something was done to us. The certificate that was handed to me had someone else’s name on it, but I didn’t correct the error.
The women from Human Resources were huddled at the exit, two on each side, passing out plastic-wrapped bundles to each of the new hires as they passed through the doors and on to the facility. When it was my turn I knew what was inside the package as soon as it was placed in my hands: paper masks, nested inside each other like cups. The package was surprisingly stiff and light, like a bouquet of dried flowers.
I didn’t sleep well that night. The housing block was noisier than usual. There seemed to be an unusual amount of activity in the rooms on my floor, and although the units were quiet the people passing back and forth between them were not. Eventually, I fell asleep but woke early, anxious about what the day might bring.
On the shuttle to the facility, I sat across the aisle from the man I’d gotten to know during orientation. He was eating an apple and I was relieved to have solved this minor mystery. His name was Dustin and he wasn’t wearing a paper mask, which brought both confusion and relief because I had spent several anxious moments that morning trying to decide if I should wear a mask to the facility or not, and if not should I bring them with me and if so how many? Everyone else on the shuttle wore a mask. None were as clean or as new as the three I had in my pocket.
“Those things won’t help,” Dustin shook his head and laughed. He was a man who didn’t appear to take much of anything seriously.
“They’re not required?” I asked.
Dustin snorted with the derision of the workingman who viewed all employers through the same cynical lens. There were men like Dustin at every site I’d ever worked.
“Probably gonna sell mine,” he said.
The job site was a job site. The work was work. There was plenty to do and not enough resources to do it, which was reassuring and discomfiting in equal measure. Time was a resource. I was another. This arrangement was familiar to me and the familiarity brought comfort.
My supervisor, Julio, did not wear a mask. Neither did Dustin nor Manuel, but Hector did. He was the oldest member of the four-man crew to which I’d been assigned and his mask was shockingly discolored. At first I thought it was a black bandana. I couldn’t fathom how a mask made of paper could get so dirty and still hold its shape or what would make a man want to strap something so filthy to his face. Hector’s eyes were red and watery and I avoided looking at him.
I was assigned to the HVAC harmonization unit. Our job was to bring three different heating and ventilation systems installed in three different centuries into accord. We worked in three three-hour shifts: three hours inside the facility, three hours outside, and then another three hours back in. When we were outside we were encouraged to eat or smoke or do whatever we liked as long as we were close by and available for muster. Many played cards. Some slept inside the shuttle bus and others went to the clinic. We all came to resent this long break because we got double pay inside the facility and half-pay outside of it. When I asked Julio about it he said something about limiting our exposure to the facility, but if he knew more, and I don’t think he did, he didn’t tell me.
On the second day, Dustin told me he’d sold his masks for some pills. Apparently, if someone in your crew gets sick, the whole crew has to go see the doctor. He’d gotten the pills from someone in another crew.
“Sick how?” I asked.
“Coughing. Congestion. Dizziness. They call it the crud.”
Dustin stuck out his hand: three bright red capsules rested in his palm like pomegranate seeds. Before I could ask him what they were supposed to do he popped all three into his mouth and swallowed them down. I was so stunned I didn’t know what to say. Dustin laughed the laugh of the doomed and walked away.
That afternoon I looked at the other members of my crew in a new light. I focused on Hector and his filthy mask and wondered if he was okay. At the end of the shift I took him aside and offered him one of my new masks. He took the mask with a look of wonder I’d not seen a grown man’s face since my father died in the weeds beside the house, a heart attack so fierce and strong it knocked him down and he never got back up.
A few days later Dustin showed up for work coughing up wads up flesh-colored phlegm.
“You’ve got the crud,” Julio said to Dustin. “You’re all outside today.”
“The whole day?” I asked.
“That depends on the doctor,” Julio said, not without sympathy.
We each had to return to the doctor who’d performed our initial screening. Hector went to his doctor, Manuel went to another, and Dustin and I went to see Dr. Lee. Since Dustin was the one who was sick, he went first. The nurse gave us paper masks to wear, which Dustin wasn’t too happy about.
I leaned back in the cool plastic seat and closed my eyes. I must have drifted off because I was jolted awake by a nurse whose masked face was frighteningly close. I composed myself and followed her down the hall to the examination room where I sat down in a chair not unlike the one in the lobby and felt myself succumb to a lethargy so powerful I feared I’d fall asleep again. The door opened and in walked Dr. Lee.
The name on the tag was the same, the man’s hair was black, and his features were identical to Dr. Lee’s, but he seemed much more relaxed and at ease. He greeted me warmly and shook my hand with great feeling. When he asked me “How are you adjusting to things here?” I felt he really wanted to know, that he truly cared about me. I was filled with a sudden desire to tell him that I wasn’t adjusting well, that the work was fine but the nights were lonely. I’d kept to myself so as not to repeat the mistake I’d made at my last job of quarrelling with the crew.
“So how are we feeling today?”
“I’m feeling fine,” I admitted. “I’m not the one who’s sick.”
“Probably nothing serious,” Dr. Lee said. “The new hires all get sick.”
I found myself nodding my head in agreement, as if I knew what he was saying to be true. “Is Dustin going to be okay?” I felt moved to ask.
“Don’t you worry about that,” Dr. Lee put his hand on my arm and in that moment I felt that everything would be okay. Whatever measures were being taken to protect the workers were succeeding. We were all fine.
I left the clinic feeling better than I’d felt since arriving at the facility, but as I crossed the wind-swept lot that feeling began to dissipate. Each step I took toward the facility brought me closer to the way I’d felt on my first day, and now that it was back I recognized it for what it was. That feeling was dread.
That night, there was a knock at the door to my room in the housing unit. I’d opted for the extra deduction so that I wouldn’t have to share sleeping quarters. I’m not an old man or a young man but I know things about myself and I’ve learned not to put myself in a position where those things are on view for others to criticize and judge. So when someone knocked, it caught me off guard. My first visitor.
I got up out of bed and opened the door. There was no one there. I peered out into the hall and looked up and down the corridor but it was empty. Then I looked down.
On the doormat sat a small paper bag. I opened it up and saw a meat pie, fragrant and warm. It didn’t come from the canteen or one of the machines in the lobby. It smelled delicious. Tucked in the foil was a card that read, “Thank you! H.”
At my last job, I caused one of my co-workers to be injured. Kyle was an undependable man who was liked by the others but made no effort to get along with me. Like Dustin he was preoccupied with getting high as soon as his shift was over, but that isn’t a fair comparison. While Dustin is a rebel in spirit I have never heard a complaint about his performance at the facility. Kyle seemed all right at first, but over time he revealed his true self to me. His heart was filled with contempt, which he took out on me every chance he got. We shared a room and I knew his secrets.
One morning he showed up at the site looking ragged and mean. He had spent the previous night making a spectacle of himself at the company bar trying to acquire more of the substance he could not do without, and he was surlier than usual the next day. A problem arose in the boiler room: a high-pressure leak had been detected and Kyle and I were tasked with finding it. These leaks can be dangerous things. You can’t see them or hear them and they have a way of finding you if you’re not careful. Kyle was unfamiliar with such perils. I had located the leak but when Kyle swaggered in and waved his hands in front of the pipes as if he were warming them before a fire, I left the compartment, and I didn’t come back until he started screaming.
When I returned he had his injured hand wedged into his armpit to stop the bleeding. His face was as white as new milk. He’d found the leak, and the job of collecting his fingers fell to me. No one blamed me for what happened, but I knew, and every time I heard a siren or a teakettle’s whistle, I thought of Kyle, and probably always would.
I felt if I could share this story with Dr. Lee, he’d help me move on and start over.
I dreamt I was the ocean. A wilderness of raging waves and bottomless depths. But I wasn’t the ocean: the ocean was inside me and its awful, urgent wildness wanted to get out. I lurched out of bed and made it to the bathroom just in time to spew into the toilet, a surge of savage intensity that left me breathless but not empty. I got the seat down and positioned myself as the ocean roared through my lower hemisphere.
The meat pie. Hector’s gift had spoiled. He’d poisoned me.
When the rotten stew was through with me, I slumped to the bathroom floor and passed out. When I came to Julio was lifting me to my feet, leading me back to my bed. Hector and Manuel were there, too, but not Dustin. They helped me into my jacket and shoes and then down the stairs to the shuttle that ferried us to the clinic. The sun was out and the shuttle was warm, a tube of radiant heat. I felt much better. After a little water, maybe some food, I’d be back to my old self, but Julio shook his head. He was wearing a paper mask now. They all were. My crew, the driver, the nurses. Everyone but me.
They took me to the examining room, a place that had become as familiar to me as my own room. I closed my eyes and thought of the things I would say to Dr. Lee. After examining dozens, even hundreds of people who weren’t sick, I was looking forward to giving him an actual illness, albeit a simple case of food poisoning, to which he could apply his skill, training and talent.
But when Dr. Lee entered the examining room, there was no spark of recognition in his eyes, no warmth in his greeting as he sat down at his computer.
“What seems to be the problem?” he asked without bothering to look away from the screen.
I suddenly felt very foolish as I told him what had happened. He glared at me as he asked me to explain why I thought I was suffering from food poisoning. I recounted my discovery of the meat pie on my doorstep but in my nervousness and, yes, shame, I forgot to mention that it was a gift from a friend.
Dr. Lee nodded as if to say that he understood but he obviously thought I was a fool who ate food left in the hallway of my apartment complex like some kind of scavenging animal. Speaking about my past with this man was out of the question.
I told Dr. Lee I was ready to go back to work, that my crew was counting on me, and I didn’t want to let them down. The doctor scribbled something down on a scrap of paper and handed it to me.
“Give that to the nurse,” he said as he got up from his chair and left the examining room.
I looked at the paper but couldn’t make out the words. No matter how much I studied the letters I was unable to deduce their meaning. I don’t know how long I sat there staring at the note, but a noise brought me out of my reverie. The sound, I realized, had come from the desk.
I woke up in my quarters, drenched in sweat. I gathered some time had passed. Hector and Manuel stood at my bedside, looking down at me. Although they looked sad, I was happy to see them and said as much, but they didn’t seem to hear me. Something was muffling my words, interfering with my intentions.
“He looks pretty bad,” I thought I heard Hector say, but it was hard to tell who was speaking because of the masks.
“We better tell Julio,” Manuel said.
They thought I was still sick! I assured them that Hector’s meat pie had done a number on me — no hard feelings Hector — but while it was true I felt a little dizzy my illness was over and I was well on my way to recovery.
“Screw Julio,” Manuel said. “He needs the doctor.”
“I think you’re right,” Hector agreed.
I made an effort to sit up in bed a little so that my friends could hear me. It was so good to see them. I insisted I had it in me to be a better person, that things would be different now. Hello Hector! Hello Manuel! I see you behind your masks. But where was Dustin?
“Calm down,” Hector shouted through the mask I’d given him. “Stop kicking.”
“Shit, I think he knows,” Manuel said.
“How would he know?” Hector asked.
“He definitely said ‘Dustin.’”
I asked them why they were wearing the paper masks. Didn’t they know the masks were a scam? They were nothing more than props to advertise one’s gullibility. I spent a long time trying to convince Hector and Manuel that the masks gave us something to fixate on while our bodies were inundated with mysterious toxins inside the facility, hour after hour, day after day, and there was nothing a flimsy little paper mask could do to stop them from invading our bodies. But they wouldn’t listen to me. It was exhausting explaining this to them over and over again, and I became very tired.
When I came to Dr. Lee was sitting on the edge of my bed, stroking his big white cat. He smiled down at me with his eyes and told me that everything was going to be okay. I thanked him, but I was so overwhelmed I could barely get the words out. He shushed me and said I was in the final stage of my awakening, which confused me, as I had just awoken, but the curtains were pulled tight around my bed and I had no idea where they had come from or where I was or even if it was night or day. The cat meowed and the sound reached my ears as if from a great distance. There was something wrong with its face. I realized the cat was wearing a feline-sized paper mask. Dr. Lee told me my contract had been terminated and I no longer had to worry about going back to work inside that terrible place. I told him I wanted to stay but my voice was muffled as if there was something between us that words could not penetrate. Dr. Lee bent over me, slid an elastic band around my skull, and lowered the mask onto my face.
When I was growing up, my mother’s worrying was a bit of a shared joke between the rest of the family. If, in the car on the way to the store, my mother turned and asked my father if he had turned the stove off, he would sigh and say, “Of course, dear,” before turning and smiling conspiratorially at me in the backseat. If my brother used a chair as a stepstool, I would joke that I was going to tell mom.
As I got older, her worrying got worse, and it stopped being funny. If she thought the stove was left on, we might turn around; if she caught us using a chair as a stepstool, she would shriek as though she had found us juggling knives. Her worrying was turning into fear, and her fear into panic. It made dealing with her more and more difficult. Still, she remained undiagnosed until I was nearly 18.
I clung to established routines and rituals out of fear that to do otherwise was to invite terrible consequences.
My own anxiety didn’t take form until my mid-twenties. As I got older, I started to see more and more of my mom in my thoughts and behavior. It became normal to triple-check the stove, stave off panic attacks at hibachi restaurants, and avoid crowds. I clung to established routines and rituals out of fear that to do otherwise was to invite terrible consequences.
In January 2015, I fought past my fear of change and started my first semester in graduate school as an MLS candidate. It was a big step. It up-ended my life in many ways, and — as happened throughout my four years of undergrad almost a decade earlier — I couldn’t help but feel overwhelmed by both the upheaval of my routine, and the pressure to succeed.
By May 2015, my anxiety had spiraled out of control, manifesting as an uncontrollable fixation on bugs. Bed bugs, carpet beetles, termites, lice — in my mind, I was surrounded by insects. I spent my nights crawling on all fours with a lighted magnifying glass, examining carpet fibers and every nook and cranny of my bedroom. I poured over Internet forums and websites for information about the identification and eradication of my imagined enemies. I couldn’t sleep because I imagined my skin crawling with bugs. During the day, I was a zombie — exhausted, consumed with my fears, and sure that everybody who looked at me could sense that I was contaminated, and that I was a failure.
By July, I had been diagnosed and begun treatment for a combination of General Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. My prescribed medications quickly tempered my condition, and with the combined help of these medications and cognitive behavioral therapy, I’ve been steadily recovering since.
But this essay isn’t really about the diagnosis of my illness, nor its treatment.
It’s about books.
In the interminable weeks between my initial spiral and the medications kicking in, reading saved me. Though I’ve always used books to help me deal with negative emotions, I had used them to escape into worlds that felt better and brighter than my own. They were fantasies of a life full of agency and joy, both of which seemed to elude me.
But at the peak of my anxiety and obsession, I didn’t reach for those fantasies. They would only make my life seem worse by comparison. I needed a different escape. And I found it in a genre I’d had little interest in through most of my life — horror.
As someone who was terrified of the dark till my mid-twenties, and who still sleeps with the TV on most nights, horror was something I’d avoided. But as my anxiety grew, it became a safe haven. It gave me something else — something besides my own obsessions — to channel my fear into. The generalized fear of an anxiety disorder creates a fight-or-flight response to an intangible threat, a threat that can’t be fought nor fled from. Reading horror allowed me to take all that adrenaline and pour it into something outside of myself, something that I could see resolved at the end of the story. It gave me the gift of catharsis.
It also gave me the gift of perspective. The characters in horror stories suffered from circumstances far worse than my own. I could tell myself that no matter how anxious I felt — or even if my anxieties proved to be true — it still wasn’t as bad as contracting a deadly virus, getting lost in a hostile wilderness, or having to choose between my own life and that of someone I love.
It allowed me to take all that adrenaline and pour it into something that I could see resolved at the end of the story.
That particular story, “Snow,” by Dale Bailey, was published in the June 2015 issue of the horror e-zine Nightmare. Nightmare became my core reading material during that period of crisis. I devoured stories of ghosts, monsters, and existential dread. The terror they inspired was more manageable than my own anxieties. The more nihilistic a story was, the more comforting I found it — after all, what were my own meaningless problems against the meaninglessness of human existence? If nothing really mattered, then what use was it to cling to my fears of failure and worthlessness?
With medication and therapy, my obsessive-compulsive behavior faded, and my anxiety became more controllable. But I still turn to horror. As I approached graduation, the stress once again triggered my anxiety. In addition to the pressure of completing large final projects in each of my classes, I felt unable to rise to the challenge of taking my next steps into adulthood, of beginning a career and all the new responsibilities that entailed — especially since I hoped to relocate, adding an extra layer of uncertainty to a future I was already apprehensive about. I combated these fears with book after book. I shivered through the familial terror of A Head Full of Ghostsand Disappearance at Devil’s Rock by Paul Tremblay, comforted that as a child-free couple, my husband and I would never have to endure the pain of a child lost, to threats supernatural or otherwise. I reveled in the cosmic horror of M.R. Carey’s The Girl With All the Gifts, consoled by how small and unimportant it made life feel in the grand scheme of things. And I confronted true evil in Hex by Thomas Olde Heuvelt, assuaged that, if nothing else, I had escaped the existential horror of never being able to leave your home town.
Using books to cope with mental illness is nothing new. Officially, bibliotherapy has been around since the first half of the 20th century, but the healing power of books has been recognized for millennia; according to historians, Ramses II had the phrase “healing-place of the soul” inscribed over the entrance to the library in his tomb complex at Thebes. In modern times, reading has been used (often in conjunction with other treatments) to help sufferers of depression, addiction, PTSD, and dementia. Although much of the modern practice of bibliotherapy revolves around the use of non-fiction books read in a cognitive behavioral therapy setting, the therapeutic usefulness of fiction (also known as creative or affective bibliotherapy) has also been demonstrated. A recent study published in School Psychology International found that children in foster care who had experienced significant parental absence showed less signs of anxiety, aggression, and violent tendencies when exposed to superhero stories in a group bibliotherapy setting than those who weren’t; the bibliotherapy group also showed an increase in hopes and goals for the future. Another study, published in 2016 by the journal Sexual & Relationship Therapy, compared the effects of self-help books versus erotic fiction to treat low sexual desire in women; it found that both types of reading increased sexual desire and pleasure.
Although affective bibliotherapy has been shown to be useful, the research on what works, how it works, and why it works is still limited. Many believe that identification is key, and that the story must have clear parallels to the reader’s own life; certainly, those who feel confused or isolated due to their circumstances may find clarity in reading about a character facing the same circumstances. For example, a teen grappling with their sexuality might find insight in reading how the gay teenage protagonist of Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agendadeals with coming out. Similarly, a reader adapting to a disability may feel empowered by reading a book where a character saves the day despite or even because of their disability, such as Millie, a double-amputee with borderline personality disorder who is tasked with stopping an inter-realm war in Borderline, the first book in the contemporary fantasy series The Arcadia Project. Others attribute the healing power of books to the nature of the story itself, rather than its characters. Readers can distract themselves from their problems by engaging their minds in an exciting or intellectually stimulating book that redirects their mental energy, or find tranquility in the calming beauty of poetry and lyrical prose.
Although people may differ wildly in their approaches to bibliotherapy, it’s undoubtedly true that reading is good for your mental health. Not only has the act of reading itself been proven to relieve stress in as little as six minutes, but it has also been shown that reading fiction improves brain function by strengthening neural connectivity, and increases empathy by engaging the parts of the brain responsible for language, sensations, and movement, enhancing embodied cognition, or the ability to feel an experience without actually living it. It has even been suggested to improve your sleep. So while horror might stave off everyone’s fears, you’re likely to improve your mental health in some way if you read . Regardless of which method works best for you, Ramses II had it right: books are definitely good for the soul.
DON’T MISS OUT
Sign up for our newsletter to get submission announcements and stay on top of our best work.
YOUR INBOX IS LIT
Enjoy strange, diverting work from The Commuter on Mondays, absorbing fiction from Recommended Reading on Wednesdays, and a roundup of our best work of the week on Fridays. Personalize your subscription preferences here.