There are days lately when my body feels too small for everything I’m feeling. Maybe you know the sensation. That hot, tight coil of frustration that won’t unwind. The pressure of trying to stay pleasant while the world around you keeps insisting you should be grateful it’s not worse. It’s a strange kind of claustrophobia: emotional, physical, psychic. A sense that your skin has become a jar with the lid screwed on too tight. In those moments, I want stories that blow the lid off. Tales where women reach the point where their human shape can’t contain them anymore and something in them refuses to stay small. Stories where metamorphosis isn’t a curse, but a way out. A widening of the self, an unfurling, a reclamation of the things women are told to suppress: anger, appetite, selfish desires.
When I was working on my own book, The Fox Hunt, I found that my heroine’s leap into fox-form allowed her to escape the clutches of the boys hunting her: a secret society of young men whose wealth, power and privilege would usually secure their every whim. But I also found that this transformation let her slip free from the expectations the world had taught her about herself. Be quiet. Be gentle. Don’t bare your teeth. Don’t take up too much space. Don’t want too much. Her new shape gives her the path to revenge, to freedom, and to justice. Transforming my heroine in was a way of letting her find her power, rewrite her story, and bare her teeth without apology.
In the seven books below, we see that the monstrous woman isn’t a cautionary tale. She’s a reclamation. She’s what happens when we stop asking permission to feel angry or hungry or alive. She is the sum of the wildness, defiance, and power that lives in all of us. When we embrace our wild side, we don’t lose our humanity. We shed everything that strangles it. Because the beast is not the enemy. The beast is the way out.
The Bloody Chamber is the quintessential feminist reimagining of fairy tales. In this collection of short tales, Angela Carter exposes the teeth and passion beneath bedtime stories we know well. “The Tiger’s Bride” is a standout. Carter flips the whole Beauty and the Beast script inside out: Gentleness isn’t rewarded, obedience isn’t the moral. Instead of taming the Beast into becoming human, this Beauty sheds the skin that made her acceptable and chooses the one that lets her finally breathe. And when the Beast licks the human skin from Beauty’s body to reveal the beautiful, rippling, tiger-striped fur beneath, it is a joyful consummation. Becoming an animal is an escape from the roles that hemmed her in: virgin, daughter, object. Her beastly body holds her true self in a way that her fragile human form could not. I love this transformation story because it tells us that the wild versions of ourselves may actually be the most honest.
Clara is a nun, warrior, and unapologetic werebear. Yes, werebear. But her bear-self isn’t a shameful secret: It’s simply a part of her, and one she carries with matter-of-fact pride. Kingfisher’s world treats female strength with affectionate irreverence. Clara is powerful enough to break a man in half and tender enough to worry about rude table manners in between battles. Her transformation doesn’t make her less human, it makes her more wholly herself, refusing every attempt to shrink her. Sometimes the only way to carve out space in a world built to contain you is to become something too large to hold.
Nightbitch captures the feral underside of motherhood with unnerving sharpness. The protagonist, overwhelmed by childcare and isolation, begins noticing changes. She’s finding patches of fur, craving raw meat, and sniffing the air like a hound. Is she transforming into a dog? There’s an ambiguity there. But what matters is how the possibility lets her entertain feelings and thoughts we’re taught women shouldn’t give in to. Her emerging dog-self becomes a counter-spell against the expectation that mothers should be endlessly self-sacrificing and sweet. It makes for a funny, unsettling, and liberating story. When the world demands you be patient, tender, endlessly pleasant, this book hands you permission to growl.
Published in 1922 and still astonishingly modern, Garnett’s novella begins as a domestic oddity and spirals into something far wilder. Silvia Tebrick, once a perfectly respectable English wife, abruptly transforms into a fox and refuses to be forced back into the shape expected of her. Her husband tries to dress her, feed her at the table, keep her in the house. But Silvia’s instincts overwhelm the rigid etiquette of their marriage. She scratches at the door. She bolts into the forest. She chooses foxhood, with its mates, cubs, and danger, over the suffocating politeness of traditional womanhood. The more her husband clings to propriety, the more Silvia slips away. Until it is clear that there is only one loving outcome: He must free her. It is a story where transformation is a vessel of freedom for a woman trapped by the smothering confines of domestic ideals.
Anyanwu, the immortal shapeshifter at the heart of Wild Seed, can analyze a creature’s entire genome by consuming a small fragment of its flesh. This power lets her transform her body down to the smallest detail: paws or fins or wings. More than that, she can alter her own age and sex, and heal others. Butler contrasts Anyanwu’s self-crafted power against Doro, an immortal man who steals bodies for survival, killing those he decides to inhabit. One builds her shape carefully, with minimal destruction; the other consumes bodies without thought. As the two clash in a toxic relationship, the novel shows another facet of transformation: that Anyanwu’s ethical, careful approach to taking other forms can have its own transformative, improving effect on even the most violent elements of the world around her.
In Margo Lanagan’s take on selkie folklore, the women of Rollrock Island are seal-wives. They have been called from the sea and trapped in human skins so that men can claim them as brides. These seal-women are not cheerful wives, but exiles aching for the water. Their marriages are abductions, separating them from their true selves. In prose that stings like wind off the sea, Lanagan paints the domesticity the brides are forced to wear by hopeful husbands, and their unabating longing for the cold, deep water and their true forms. In this story, beast form is a lost dream of freedom: a utopia of female existence, freed from civilization, in which women’s original forms are sleek, powerful, and magical. It is a haunting and beautiful read suggesting that women do not want to turn beastly, so much as to return to their rightful beastly selves.
Moreno-Garcia’s reimagining of The Island of Dr. Moreau centers on Carlota, raised among her father’s hybrid creations. These are human-animal beings, stitched together through cruelty disguised as science. As Carlota uncovers the truth of her origins, her own body becomes a site of revelation and rebellion. Her animal inheritance pushes her toward a freedom her father never intended her to have. This novel understands that monstrousness is often defined by whoever holds the power. It reminds us that embracing the “beastly” parts of yourself might be the only way to survive a world built on exploitation. This is a story for anyone who senses that the thing they’ve been taught to fear in themselves might actually be their own strength.
One of my favorite ways to get to know someone better is to share a spa day with them—but I don’t mean booking forty-five minutes at some chain place where you can get a manicure in a bathrobe. What I have in mind is a Korean spa, a jjimjilbang, where you stash your clothes in a locker and wear nothing but a spiral plastic bracelet while you move from hot tub to cold plunge, wood sauna to steam sauna to salt room to body scrub. The communal nudity of these spaces offers a radical departure from the body-fearing purity culture I grew up in, and the particularity of the setting often draws out unexpected revelations and moments of clarity.
A visit to a bathhouse forcefully separates me from my regular defenses and distractions. If I opt for a traditional body scrub, it even separates me from my skin. The bathhouse is a meditative place, where I am but a body among other naked bodies. These spas are often located in unremarkable strip malls or commercial centers on the edge of town, and their ordinariness restores a kind of blessed banality to the hypersexualized body. When I dump a plastic scoopful of mugwort tea water over my scalp and bare shoulders, I remember that my body exists for so much more than visual consumption. When I sit on a cedar bench and let the dry heat of a wood sauna penetrate every pore, the heat blossoms inside my ribcage and expands my sensory range. I become more permeable to the world, and my receptivity recalibrates. To go back and forth from a cold pool to a steam sauna, only changing rooms or pools when I can pretend that I’ve forgotten what it feels like to feel differently, is to practice enacting those famous lines from Ranier Maria Rilke: “Let everything happen to you: beauty and terror. / Just keep going. No feeling is final.”
For this reason, I always get excited when I encounter a written scene that takes place in a jjimjilbang, a Russian bathhouse, a hammam, or any other kind of specific bathing venue. I set about aggregating some of my favorite bathhouse scenes and discovered that each example, while ostensibly centering on the venue where it happens, expresses the style and priorities of the larger work from which it comes. This internal integrity is one of the signs of a well-constructed book: Whatever the book’s priorities, they are reiterated on every level of scale, from craft choices as small as diction and syntax to sentence structure to scene to overall effect. I loved recognizing how the overarching concerns of each of these works is captured in miniature in their spa scenes.
Set in Korea and Japan between 1910 and 1989, Pachinko chronicles the daily lives of four generations of Koreans in exile. Forty years apart, two different characters—first, Sunja; later, Ayame—visit the public bathhouse, or sento. In each case, the bathhouse is a utilitarian space used for hygiene and relaxation, and each mention underscores the tensions the characters endure in the midst of their quotidian responsibilities. For Sunja—the woman at the center of the novel’s tessellating history—the sento she visits on her first night in Osaka is a reminder of her alienation from her home country, as well as an adumbration of the nationalist prejudice that will intensify over the years to come. This is the work of a skilled novelist: to take a generic personal obligation—something as simple and routine as bathing—and leverage it to convey both context and interiority. For Ayame, her bathhouse visit precedes her discovery of a clandestine sex grove. Her return visits to the sento are infused with a growing curiosity about the secluded thicket and what happens there. In this way, Lee reflects that a bathhouse is not necessarily a sexual space, but neither does it preclude the erotic dimensions of an embodied life.
Zauner’s memoir, which shot onto bestseller lists after its publication in 2022, commemorates her relationship with her Korean mother. In the scene with the Korean spa, Zauner has just introduced her (white) boyfriend, Peter, to her parents for the first time. They bet on whether or not he’ll chicken out on the trip to the spa, and by showing up, he wins her mother’s respect.
Crying in H Mart also includes the most comprehensive description of a Korean spa of any of the books I’ve listed here. Zauner writes: “Jjimjilbangs are typically separated by gender, with a communal area for both sexes to socialize in the loose-fitted, matching pajamas provided on entry. Inside the bathhouse, full nudity is standard.” For Zauner, the visit to the jjimjilbang provides a moment of protected intimacy with her pre-cancer-diagnosis mother, months before Zauner could appreciate how precious such experiences would become. The spa trip in Crying in H Mart commemorates a tender mother-daughter milestone while demystifying elements of Zauner’s Korean heritage for a multicultural readership.
Winner of the Washington State Book Award, this delicate memoir is built around Koh’s teen years and the letters she received from her mother, who returned to South Korea with her father while Koh and her brother remained in California. The spa scene comes during the summer after Koh has graduated high school, when she flies to Seoul to visit her parents. The visit to the jjimjilbang is part of Koh’s immersion in her mother’s Korean life. Koh’s mother professes a devotion and attention to Koh that manifests primarily in saccharine language and overstated acts of generosity, but fails to penetrate Koh’s daily life in the States. Their time at the spa illustrates these insufficient attempts at intimacy, while allowing them to share in a significant ritual. Throughout her memoir, Koh gestures toward the limits of language and the elusiveness of intimacy.
A spa visit is ideal fodder for Jamison: a bespoke, sensory setting that gradually recedes into background to allow for dialogue or interior reflection. In this case, Jamison and her friend Anna spend an evening at the Russian and Turkish Baths on Tenth Street. Jamison’s descriptions are lush and steamy, much more florid than either Zauner’s or Koh’s. The presence of others in the bathhouse is a fact Jamison uses to console herself against her personal disappointments and deprivations, and she gestures toward the communal nature of these spaces and the sense of shared humanity they open up. As elsewhere in Splinters, Jamison is straining for transcendence, and she asserts it via her projections onto and vivid descriptions of others.
Kit, the protagonist of Parsons’ novel, is a young mother unmoored with grief over the death of her sister, so her best friend Pete plans a getaway to Montana for the two of them to unwind. Part of this adventure involves not a trip to the spa, but to nature’s spa: a natural hot springs called “Boiling River.” Kit’s grief keeps her suspended between timelines, mentally leaching into the past at each lapse in stimulation, and the Boiling River provides ample time to lose herself in recollection and to experience a bizarre altercation with a much younger hot-springer. Their interaction dredges painfully into the present a piqued iteration of the same questions that underlie the entire novel, questions of care, connection, and responsibility.
“I met Ian at a bathhouse,” states TJ, one of three narrators in Washington’s second novel. Washington’s fiction centers Black and mixed-race gay men, and he references the bathhouse as casually as if it were a bar or a bakery. The two characters meet in line for a post-fuck vending machine Coke, and Ian offers TJ his quarters. The scene underscores Washington’s preoccupation with excessive generosity and the fuzzy space between transactionalism and emotional intimacy. Ian, the love interest in question, immediately draws attention to the blurred lines and ambiguous boundaries of the bathhouse. Like the rest of the novel, the bathhouse scene normalizes hookup culture while also demonstrating a longing for something more.
Dixon’s essay “Deprivation” is entirely about her session in a sensory deprivation tank, one of those capsules of heavily salinated water in which a person can soak in the dark, completely suspended. The quiet of the tank makes Dixon wish for the familiar external stimulation of her phone. Most of Dixon’s book foregrounds loneliness and the dubious pleasure of digital distraction. The solitude of a sensory deprivation tank is appropriate to Dixon’s creative project even as it illustrates how our contemporary social faith in individualism overshadows long histories of communal spaces and practices. After having soaked in so many different spa scenes, I wonder what essay Dixon might’ve written had she gone to a jjimjilbang, and how spaces devoted to nonperformative, routine human interaction can counter the mythology of being the only one.
This essay, selected by Alexander Chee as the winner of the 2023 Sewanee Review prize, ends with a scene in a Korean spa in Tacoma, Washington. The narrator is, like Michelle Zauner, descended from a Korean mother and a non-Korean father; however, Grey’s mother died in childbirth and effectively severed Grey from whatever Korean heritage they might have accessed from their mother, who was, herself, adopted by white missionaries in the 1970s. Grey’s pilgrimage to the jjimjilbang is a powerful scene of restoration. Grey describes the body scrub they receive in precise detail, describing the routine conscientiousness of the woman performing the body scrub, and noting that their time at the spa is “also the longest I have ever spent around other Korean bodies.” In clear and resonant language, Grey braids together physical experience, an internal instance of racial self-integration, and emotional upheaval. Grey’s essay considers the nuances of racial identity and self-reclamation throughout. Finally, Grey also recognizes the messy entanglement with capitalism: “It felt sacred,” Grey writes, “yet this was her job, and she will probably wash another four women besides me today. Today, for two hours, I got to be fully Korean.”
The first thing Jenny Tinghui Zhang and I bonded over when we met at the Sewanee Writers’ Conference, aside from both being writers, was that we were both devoted Lorde fans. Every time I meet someone who enjoys her music, it’s almost guaranteed that we immediately have a great friendship. A couple hours later, Zhang and I sang karaoke to one of Lorde’s biggest hits before the rest of the conference’s attendees. A couple months after that, I drove over 400 miles to see the pop star in concert—the same show Jenny attended too. Leading up to and following the show, we both couldn’t help ourselves; so many conversations, theorizing who Lorde was behind the music, what she spent her days doing when she wasn’t on stage, and why she made this or that artistic decision. Sometimes, we’d dare to say that we knew the answers. That we knew Lorde.
Jenny Tinghui Zhang’s electrifying sophomore novel, Superfan, asks stans and fans alike to stop and question these impulses. Following college student Minnie, we see her go from listless and lonely to passionate and obsessive once she discovers the American-born, K-pop-trained boy band HOURglass. Every dance move on stage, every lyric in their songs, even intimate livestreams from their hotel—it all feels like they were tailor-made just for her. Is she wrong for believing in their closeness?
Uniquely empathetic for both the fan and the artist, Superfan critiques fandom culture and parasocial relationships during a time when intimacy is manufactured for economic gain. Zhang and I discuss fandom culture’s shift from shame to pride, ownership and authenticity in fan-artist relationships, and Heated Rivalry as proof of our human need for connection.
Jalen Giovanni Jones: It’s so exciting to see Superfan out in the world, especially after the success of your debut. What has the publishing process been like the second time around?
Jenny Tinghui Zhang: When my first book was coming out I didn’t know anything. You’re just happy to be there, getting your book published. I’ve gone through the publication process before, and now that it’s happening again it’s almost like I know too much. I feel more vulnerable as a result. Debuts are inherently exciting, but for follow-ups you’re asking, “Will this measure up? How does this reflect upon me as a writer in my career?”
Now you have the critics, the reviewers, and your publisher, whereas with the first book, most of the time you’re kind of just writing for your own happiness. You’re barely thinking about audience, or the market. I think you just know too much after the first book, and sometimes knowing too much is a bad thing for art.
JGJ:I found that the relationship between the audience and the artist is actually a big part of Superfan. Did having a more formal, defined audience following Four Treasures of the Sky change your process when approaching your second novel?
JTZ: Weirdly with both of my books, audience was one of the last things that I thought about. A lot of the time I am thinking of a hypothetical one person that I would like to be writing to, and whom I would like to be read by. But I don’t approach the writing of the novel like there is this one specific target, in terms of readership. It sounds very narcissistic to say this, but I always feel I am my audience, first and foremost. I think: Is it interesting to me? Is it something that I would want to read? Because if it’s not, then what’s the point in me pursuing it?
Sometimes knowing too much is a bad thing for art.
JGJ:What immediately made Superfan stand out to me was its use of a dual perspective narration, between Minnie’s point of view and that of HOURglass member Eason. What made you realize that that dual perspective was necessary for this story?
JTZ: With Four Treasures, it’s very much a strictly first person novel. With [Superfan], I wanted to challenge myself to do things that were outside of my comfort zone, and writing in the third person was just that. Following two narrators and seeing if I could develop those characters the same way that I would develop just one character was also another way to challenge myself.
I initially thought we could just follow the fan. But as I was writing into Minnie’s story, I just found it so interesting, how so much of being a fan is kind of assuming someone’s life, making up stories about that artist and [the] motivations behind their actions. Because I wanted to play with the inaccuracies of that, I brought in Eason. Having both perspectives was a way to showcase just how wrong, or maybe sometimes right, someone could be when they’re making all these assumptions about someone else that they don’t really know. Superfan is really interested in unpacking what it means to be your authentic self, and asking how much of that authentic self you owe to an audience.
JGJ:Often in popular discourse, fans are treated as this invasive mob, but Superfan very much humanizes Minnie and fans in general. The book shows that Minnie has a reason for acting in her fanatical ways. She’s gone through her own pain, and HOURglass does a lot of good for her.
JTZ: I’m so glad you said that. A lot of how we talk about fan girls today is with a patronizing tone. “Oh, they’re crazy,” and that’s the end of their story. But having been in many fandoms in my life, I’ve seen that there’s also a lot of community to be found in those spaces. And there’s a reason why superfans are drawn to things to the extent with which they are. I wanted to show empathy for that.
JGJ:When it comes to the fan-artist relationship, at what point would you say the fan might be crossing the line?
Many fans feel like they have ownership over this person that they’re a fan of.
JTZ: Usually we as a society cross that line when there’s an aspect of ownership to the fan-artist relationship. Many fans feel like they have ownership over this person that they’re a fan ofand believe they get a say in the choices that this person is making, get to rebuke or celebrate the person that their celebrity is dating, etc. There’s this increasing feeling of ownership, almost like “I’m your fan, and you owe me certain things.” Where we start to cross the line is when that belief system takes over, where you’re no longer seeing the humanity in that artist, are no longer treating them as a human who can make their own decisions and who exists outside of this persona, but instead only seeing them as the object of your fandom and of your ownership.
JGJ:You paint this relationship between artist and fan as a two way street. Most thinking and writing around these types of parasocial relationships show that relationship as one directional. This novel shows that the artist, too, can feel partial to the relationship. Eason is deeply attached to his fans.
JTZ: That’s exactly what I was trying to get at. This is becoming more of a thing in Western music marketing and promotion, and it is for sure a strategy in the K-pop industry—there’s encouragement for K-pop idols to cultivate very close and personal-seeming relationships with their fans. In the book, this is shown through Eason’s live streaming. Live streaming is huge in K-pop. Fans hit the notification that they’re live, and they’re instantly taken to the idol, so close to the camera, and they’re bare faced and without makeup. They’re in a hotel room after a concert. They’re dressed in normal people clothes, just talking to their cameras. It really feels like you’re on FaceTime with your BFF or boyfriend. I’m trying to point out that there is kind of a benefit to establishing this kind of relationship with your fans as well. The companies stand to benefit from it too, because they want for people to buy the albums, buy the merchandise, and establishing this very intimate relationship is one of the ways to guarantee that. But we should also be talking about how celebrities benefit from this relationship as well.
JGJ:I want to question that a bit more. Eason’s live streaming, for example, is an attempt to get closer to his fans—can that come from an authentic place, or is that always a way to make more money? Is it always capitalizing off of that perceived intimacy, or can the artist genuinely want to just hang out and have such intimate moments?
JTZ: I think it could be both. In our world, someone like Lorde or even Taylor Swift, they do love their fans, and they give a lot to their fans. But if we’re talking about the industry, all of these big record companies also know that there is money to be mined from that relationship. That’s always going to loom over.
JGJ:You mentioned that American music is starting to take from K-pop industry practices, and that is the formula that HOURglass follows in the novel. We’re really seeing that now, especially with examples like KATSEYE, who just performed at the Grammys. Why do you think this mix of Western and Eastern popular culture is becoming so prominent today?
JTZ: I would like to believe that the powers that be are seeing a diverse mix of members with diverse backgrounds as what is most interesting and appealing to the audiences that exist today. But in band-making shows, producers and executives discuss the marketability of each person. Part of me wants to believe that the industry is realizing it doesn’t have to be just one type of person that can be a star. At the same time, part of me is skeptical. Is it coming from an authentic place, or is it just that there’s more money to be made by appealing to more groups of people?
In general, my suspicion is around the industry at large that pulls the strings, and that’s reflected in the book. Most artists just want to showcase their talent, their art, to perform, and to connect with the fans. But there’s always this larger schema at play, that maybe they aren’t always in control of.
We’re just inquisitive creatures who want to connect, to know more. We’re like puppies out here.
JGJ:The internet definitely has a strong presence in Superfan, especially through the blog post sections that we’re given throughout. How has the internet changed the way fandom culture operates, compared to how it did in a pre-internet age?
JTZ: Growing up, I was part of many, many fandoms. In middle school I was really into Lord of the Rings. But there weren’t a lot of spaces online for me to vent out my obsession. There was no way for me to be a fan more than simply loving it and writing in my journal about it. Fast forward to when Lost was on air and became super popular, I remember how that was the first time there was a whole community on LiveJournal dedicated to a fandom. Every week, people would discuss the episodes, post their theories, and talk amongst themselves. Today, fan spaces are everywhere—whether it’s on Reddit, Twitter, or wherever, it’s just easier than ever to be a fan. The internet has made it easier to connect with everyone, but also it’s made it easier to kind of create your own little silos and havens in community. Before, it was almost an embarrassing thing to be a huge fan of something. When I was growing up, there was some shame attached to it, and you weren’t out there constantly advertising you were part of a fandom. Now, people are so happy and eager to express their fandom, and to partake in fanning. That shift has been really interesting to witness.
In writing this book, I was thinking about how disingenuous it would be to not include the voice of the internet. I wanted to give a voice to the way that people speak in fandom spaces online. You could call those posts another “voice” or perspective in the novel, in addition to Minnie and Eason. I wanted to give this sense that there is a larger collective, a larger community. We never really know who is behind those posts, or if those are all posts from various people. We are just hearing from a mysterious collective that kind of has a presence over the events of the novel.
JGJ:How do we mediate our relationships with our favorite celebrities, pop stars, artists and the like, and make sure they don’t get out of control like they might in Superfan?
JTZ: Have you seen Heated Rivalry?
JGJ:I haven’t watched it, but I’ve heard and read a lot about it.
JTZ: Like with HOURglass, the actors of that show had a meteoric rise to fame overnight. Their teams are doing so well with pumping out content and making sure they’re going to all the fashion shows, doing all these interviews, there’s always more and more content. That seems to happen for any celebrity that’s hot off the presses. We all just want to know more about them. I actually don’t know what the answer is in terms of mediating our relationships, because I feel like everything right now is geared towards making sure that we have a kind of parasocial relationship with the things that are out there.
Whenever I finish something I have to go on Google and search for the entire cast. I have to know about their lives. I have to see what other projects they’ve been in, or are going to be in. There is this drive to know more. That inquisitiveness and curiosity slowly morphs into a feeling of intimacy that morphs into a deeper parasocial relationship, which can then be taken to the extreme. Ultimately, what it all is is our human need for connection. We’re just inquisitive creatures who want to connect, to know more. We’re like puppies out here.
I am writing to share the news that after 16 years at Electric Literature, 14 as the editor of Recommended Reading, and 10 as Executive Director (EL’s first), I will be stepping down in June.
It’s difficult to leave an organization that I love, but the decision was easier knowing that I’m leaving Electric Lit in capable hands. Editor-in-Chief Denne Michele Norris will assume the reconfigured role of Executive Director and Publisher, Wynter K. Miller will become Director of Operations and Fiction Editor, and Katie Henken Robinson will be Deputy Editor. I am proud of what we have accomplished together so far, and I have full faith in their ability to take Electric Lit to the next level.
Electric Literature’s mission is one I care about deeply. There were times I thought I’d be happy to lead the organization indefinitely—but I find myself ready for a new chapter, both personally and for EL. In addition to publishing my debut novel and writing my next book, I plan to pursue teaching and editing. I will remain close with Electric Lit, and be open to new opportunities.
During my tenure, in close collaboration with the board and many talented staff and writers, I established Electric Lit as a nonprofit, earned the support of the New York State Council on the Arts and the National Endowment for the Arts, created EL’s membership program, won the Whiting Literary Magazine Prize, grew the annual budget from $0 to $500,000, and transformed the staff from a pair of volunteers to a paid staff of ten, with three full-time positions.
I co-founded EL’s weekly fiction magazine, Recommended Reading, and helped start The Commuter, EL’s home for flash, poetry, and graphic narrative. As editor of Recommended Reading, I have overseen 717 issues, over 100 of which I personally edited and wrote introductions for. Electric Literature’s website, electricliterature.com, grew from a literary blog with 225,000 annual visitors to the culture’s preeminent literary website, reaching over 5 million readers. Electric Literature has launched the careers of countless writers, and helped to sustain many more. We have connected readers with life-changing literature, and carefully read tens of thousands of submissions. Work published in EL has been repeatedly recognized by Best American Short Stories, Poetry, and Essays, the O. Henry and Pushcart Prizes, and other anthologies and awards.
Over the years Electric Lit’s work has been more than my vocation; it has formed an essential part of my identity, and I will forever cherish and rely on the lessons I learned in this role. Even as EL has professionalized and become more financially secure, we have made sure to preserve the vital independent spirit we started with. There is no other publication like Electric Literature, and its value in the literary landscape cannot be overstated.
The team will be preparing over the next four months to make this transition as seamless as possible. It’s a big change, but I believe that for thoughtful, creative, and analytical people, the change you choose is almost always for the better. Please consider supporting our work at this watershed moment, either by making a donation or becoming a member.
I am tremendously grateful for your time, attention, and encouragement. Thank you all for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
I am the sort of writer who will put a tree in any piece of writing to improve it. But I am also the sort of writer who ignores houseplants. This contradiction in interests twisted upon itself some years ago when I moved to Panama newly married, following a spouse who worked as a tropical tree scientist. At some point during that first year, my writing projects fell apart. I was unemployed save for bit jobs here and there. In May, I decided, despite everything I knew about myself, to set up a small tropical garden in front of my house, my own plot of curated paradise, full of butterfly-attracting flower bushes, vines and ferns that tumbled in interesting patterns over the lips of their pots, succulents, orchids, club mosses whose leaves shone the oily blue of peacocks, beans, squashes, tomatoes, peppers, and a moringa tree to remind me of home.
We can laugh at my hubris now because I am no longer as sad as I was back then, and sadness is the only condition under which I would resort to gardening. Plants are just not compelling enough. They do not cry out for attention. They do not scratch behind their ears or fold their wings into pleats. They could have been painted onto the walls for all that I cared about them.
In Panama, we lived in a row house on Cerro Ancon, a nature reserve on a hill formerly quarried by the American military to build the Panama Canal, now used as a recreational and biocultural landmark by Panamanians and tourists alike. When I looked out the windows facing east, it was to a view of trees that mounded up the hill up to the summit, from which the flag of Panama fluttered, around which vultures spiraled, over which clouds would gather to rain down. Our west-facing windows were a wall of variegated greens, dense rainforest that made mockery of any sense of categorization—vines and trees and epiphytes and lianas that grew tangled upon and through each other’s limbs and leaves.
There was some landscaping around our house. A shallow trench separated our driveway from our neighbors on the left, and in front we shared a small rectangular plot with our neighbor on the right. All told, this might have been seven square meters of earth hemmed in by concrete, prefilled with plants that looked like swords, plants that looked like bleeding hearts, a short, palm-like tree that my spouse told me was a cycad, a birds-of-paradise hedgerow, and some grass no one had planted, all left to tend to themselves when we moved in.
All this was green enough to suit my passive interests. Not so, my spouse. In January of our first year living together, he stuck toothpicks into a couple of avocado seeds left over from lunch. He intended to germinate them in cups of water on the windowsill. When the seeds split down the middle and put out tap roots and their first pairs of leaves, I condemned the entire project. We intended to leave Panama within a year, I said. Trees lived for decades—we were being irresponsible.
They’re beautiful, he said to me. They might bear fruit. What’s wrong with watching them grow?
They’re sessile organisms, I said. They’re boring. I refused to look after them. This is, in fact, a subclause of our marriage contract, that I would have nothing to do with the tending of plants. I did not participate in the avocados’ transfer into pots, or their move downstairs to catch sun by the front door. I was too busy. I had a novel to write. I told myself that for a few months.
May, and the rain season pulled us under its blankets overnight, as if to make a clean break with summer. Though Panama lies eight degrees north of the Equator, its borrowing of Southern Hemisphere terminology reflects reality—December through April is summer, the dry season, a hot and gusty time for picnics on the beach and lolling about parks in flip flops. Winter is rainfall, cloud cover, wet sneakers, and the smeary softness of mold upon every surface.
There is neither glamor nor financial sense in choosing a profession in the arts.
Initially, I marveled at the sheer weight and clamor of the daily downpours, a superabundance of water unlike anything I had grown up with. I had always wanted to live somewhere that felt so alive, so richly biodiverse. I should have been so thrilled. So grateful.
But the lulls between storms began to haunt me. There was no wind, it seemed. From every window we could see myriad leaf forms from undergrowth into the treetops, from simple lobes to compound clusters, skinny blades to elephant-eared flags, all rain-fed and turgid, and still. Not a breeze to riffle the leaves, not even a whisper to flick a drop of moisture off a leaf tip. Humidity in a rainforest can seem so thick as to be solid, gluing everything in its place. It felt absurd, watching a vine dangling off a branch thirty meters from the ground, free to sway but unable to turn for lack of wind. Between the rains, the forest held its breath, heavy in the throat.
And I, too, was suspended. There is neither glamor nor financial sense in choosing a profession in the arts. You do it because you cannot imagine doing anything else, and in between those sporadic bouts of validation that come from having some ditty published here and there, the work is lonely. I would sit with my internal editor for hours on end, and we went back and forth on the quality of this sentence versus the next, the inadequacies of my daily fruit and fluid consumption, and the worth of my life in general. It was in self-loathing that I woke up in the mornings, with which I sat down to write or argue with myself, with which I chose what to wear and where to go. It was in aimlessness that I cut into a tomato for lunch one day, only to find the flesh around its seeds glowing green.
My mother has been a gardener for as long as I can remember. This is no easy feat, for we lived in Dubai when I was young, where temperatures hit the mid-forties Celsius each summer, and the earth is sand, unable to hold moisture and nutrients. But my mother is a force of nature. Once, she hitched a leg over the bedroom window of our first apartment and disappeared onto a narrow concrete awning over the street below. I was perhaps four years old, and desperately wanted to follow her. I thought I might never see her again, as children sometimes do. She reappeared, as mothers generally do, clutching three small, ripe tomatoes from the plant she had grown from seed in a little pot outside. I do not know how often she had gone out to water it, only that she returned that day, like magic, bearing fruit.
In Dubai, we lived in a series of apartments that my mother filled with a growing collection of house plants. She dusted their leaves, probed the soil around their stems for moisture and airiness, pruned them, and even spoke to them. By the time my parents could afford a house with a garden, my mother had honed the skills she had developed on house plants into a vision of orderly abundance. She selected outdoor plants for their heat tolerance—palms and bougainvillea, succulent ground cover, citrus trees, rosemary, aloe, and a curry tree grown from a sapling procured in India. Among these hardier plants she cultivated fruits and vegetables like eggplants, figs, okra, pomegranates, and tomatoes, taking care to plant the tenderest of these during what passed for winter in Dubai, and watering them judiciously to cope with the heat.
There are photos of our garden taken over ten years that illustrate the fervor of my mother’s caregiving—what started as a sand plot dotted with bare-boned shrubs and spindly trees turned into an oasis, a profusion of color and productivity, dappled shade over the footpaths and veranda, the little lawn meticulously picked clear of leaf litter, every plant trembling with flowers, fruit, and seed pods, a-burr with insects and birds who sought, like us, the solace and sustenance of vegetation.
Perhaps I was reminded of my mother when I cut into the tomato that became the first of my Panama gardening projects. Green is the color of sunlight spit out by cellular machinery that has no use for it. It means that microscopic biochemical processes are converting water and carbon dioxide into sugars. It means cell division, height and girth and inflorescence. More than anything, the vivid green of those tomato seeds signified something I had forgotten. That even if I felt stuck, so much else in this world was yearning for a chance to live that I might as well pay attention, to pass the time.
After the tomatoes came squashes. Chilies, then beans. Onions and garlic I pilfered from groceries. An assortment of seeds from the spice cabinet and some handfuls of lentils from the larder. Not all these germinations were successful, and eventually I began to buy herbs and vegetables from plant nurseries and supermarkets to supplement my efforts. A cluster of cheap pots. Sacks of forest soil. And then, ornamental plants, for the jazziness of their leaves or the promise of their flowers. A silver lace fern, perennial peanut with merry yellow button-blooms, a feathery club moss with leaves that shone blue when the sun caught them. When my in-laws came to visit, they mistook my sudden interest in plants for something sustainable and gifted us three varieties of lantana and a weeping firecracker plant to attract hummingbirds and butterflies to their traffic-light blossoms.
A certain madness can seize a person driven by desperation. I did not know why I was doing it at the time but something had short-circuited inside me and I now lived for these plants. Consider the squashes, for example, all writhing stems and saucer-sized leaves, with flowers bright and floppy as summer skirts. The whip-thin tendrils they put out from each growth node were touch-sensitive and would catch and curl upon anything. I would come out to water the pots and note how they winched themselves into corkscrews around bamboo stakes, a rope trellis, twigs of neighboring shrubs, even each other. By the next morning, their spiral grips would have tightened into green fists, pulling the plant further up and out of its root bed, a creature heaving itself out of the mud to seize the landscape around it.
For every failed starter pot, the squashes put out new growth, and that verve began to replace my emptiness. No, I was not talking to my plants, but I did anthropomorphize them. That is to say, I projected upon them my sense of self. I had become a sessile organism since moving to Panama. I was an uprooted transplant, far from family, disconnected by time and distance from my closest friends. I missed my friends so much that I had resolved not to make any more for fear of the wrenching separation that I knew would come when my spouse and I eventually moved countries again.
So much else in this world was yearning for a chance to live that I might as well pay attention, to pass the time.
The great myth of my generation is that technology connects us even though we no longer stay in our hometowns, because we must seek an education and a living, and the specifics of what we wanted were never guaranteed in the places we were born or raised. But I have yet to have a satisfying cup of tea with a friend over Skype. I have yet to know, let alone alleviate, in the long time between text messages, the ache of a friend’s spiraling dissatisfaction with her life, because I was not there to read her body language. I have yet to write an email to my mother that feels like it does when we speak in person, in a crude alloy of our mixed languages—English and Tamil, inflected with Hindi, punctuated with an emotional register beyond the scope of an emoji panel.
There are people I have not spoken with or written to in years because every time I try to do so online, I am overwhelmed. In a meeting face-to-face we would fill up the time with things of no consequence—the pettiness of a neighbor, the food strikes our cats were on, the snazziness of a new pair of shoes. But what takes precedence now is the desire to say, I miss you, without collapsing into heartbreak. Because there is nothing mundane left to fill the space between us. Instead, we are all just throbbing bundles of nerves who may just be doing alright, but are so often not, and where are the words to explain that state of being without devolving into the most vulnerable versions of ourselves, pixelated and jittery, our voices shot through with static. Where is the nuance in that?
One day, I came out to my squash pot to find the leaves on some of the vines wilted and yellow. I did not think much of it at the time—lack of nutrients, perhaps, or localized shock to one of the stems. But the next day, the yellow leaves were shriveling, and the day after that, they had turned brown. My squashes were dying from their extremities inward and I could not figure out what was causing it. I did some Googling. It might have been stem-boring beetle grubs. It could have been a fungal pathogen. There are kinds of sap-sucking bugs that can inject viruses into plants the same way mosquitoes do, had I considered that?
It became a moot point to try and figure out what was happening to my squashes because a couple of weeks later, they had been weed-whacked out of existence: a miscommunication from our landlord to the handyman who subcontracted the guy with the gas-powered whacker to trim the hedgerow in the front of the house. He had not considered that I had wanted my vines to wander aimlessly, that I had wanted to follow after them.
I did not weep, though I did mourn. But the thing is, I also felt a strange relief. I had never wanted to look after plants in the first place and it had taken me a long time to admit to myself that I was doing so only because I was depressed. I was attempting to keep something under control, and now I could be released from that illusion. I watched the nubbins of my squash stems desiccate and noted what grew up in their stead. I wasn’t expecting much, but the pots went wild, now that I wasn’t supervising them.
The biggest problem I see with maintaining a garden in the tropics—even a few humble plant pots outside the front door—is that it is only through force that one might maintain a boundary between the natural world and the built one. So long as there is sun enough, and rain enough, and life, everywhere ecstatic moving life tucking tendrils and dropping seed-laden droppings into fresh soil, gnawing through roots and cutting windows into leaves and turning corpses into nurseries and nurseries into graveyards, it is entirely possible for a fountain of squash vines to be replaced by a den of ferns blown in by spores. My tomatoes became entangled with a legume I didn’t recognize, its seed dormant in soil I had failed to weed. My orchids died and mosses grew in their stead. My club moss died and grasses colonized its pot.
I ceded command to natural forces. What would come would come, I thought. Within a year of my experiment in tropical gardening, almost nothing remained of what I had planted, and yet every pot overflowed with something that had come from elsewhere. How fabulous, I thought, this displacement. I do not have to tend to either myself or the plants around me, they shall just do what they will and I shall live, vicariously, through their efforts.
I am not sure which came first—sadness or the inability to write. My spouse’s job was renewed, and it became apparent we would live here indefinitely. So, a couple of years after moving to Panama, I adopted two kittens from my neighbors because I felt tired of living as if ready to blow away. I needed to commit to something alive that I would promise to take with me no matter where I went next. My spouse had legs and a passport, a sense of agency. But there, I thought to myself, following my kittens, those are my helpless little roots to tend. When they were old enough, I put harnesses and bright blue leashes on my cats and took them outside on walks. A single cat does not walk very far, and two cats will never walk in the same direction together, so I never left the perimeter of the row house on these excursions, and that suited me just fine. The cats took turns to press through the hedgerow of birds-of-paradise to nibble on unmown grasses. I stood between them, tugged gently on this leash or that to make sure they were always in my line of sight, never able to pounce on wildlife.
My plant pots thrived. My internal editor said I was growing and worshipping weeds but I preferred to call them volunteers because they had chosen these pots, these little neglects I left lying around my house. I took up plant identification, a feebler attempt at control that involved minimal effort, and a lot of reverse-image searching on Google. It was in Panama that I finally learned that globally, most house plants are tropical species, chosen because they would never drop their leaves in controlled indoor climates, even if outside it was blizzarding, or outside, it had not rained for eleven months. Half my mother’s house plants, and nearly half the food plants we ate, could trace their roots to Central or South America. Meanwhile, nearly half the ornamental outdoor plants I had grown and killed through negligence in Panama came from elsewhere in the tropics—Asian or African species chosen for aesthetics or, ironically, ease of growth.
The great myth of my generation is that technology connects us even though we no longer stay in our hometowns.
What does it mean to love plants—gardening, greenery, farming, parks, nature hikes, bouquets, pickling, tabletop hydroponics—when so much of what we do with plants is a pastiche of wild and untended nature? Everywhere I have lived, I’ve been surrounded by disturbance, amalgamations of the natural world in the form of planted, cultivated abundance. All plants are adapted for certain parts of the world—the particular challenges of their climate, the naturally occurring pests and pathogens in their ecosystems. Now, released from these origins, plants show up everywhere simply because someone loves them enough to let them be, regardless of whether they fit. In Dubai, a miniature fig tree at the dentist’s front desk, leaves glossy and ending in drip tips to let rain roll off as quickly as possible, so the plant could breathe—it will never rain in this office, but the fig’s leaves waterfall off the plant in emulation of a downpour. In Mumbai, tomatoes in everything—when my family once tried to cut back on how much we used to cook with, we fell into a funk, so deeply unheartened were we by food that did not run red and sour across our tongues. When I lived in the United States, Kentucky bluegrass painted across lawns in Michigan, Florida, Iowa, peppered with dandelions—one was a weed and the other a status symbol, and neither were eradicable now that they had put down their roots so extensively, now that their seeds were always in the wind.
And when I moved to Panama City—mangoes everywhere. I am not much of a fruit eater by nature but in Panama I wrote execrable poetry about what it meant to eat fresh mangoes so far from home. I picked them off street trees when they were still immature, green and tart as limes, with a resinous undertone that reminded me of pickles and also of the lengths that plants will go to, just to protect their tenderest parts from herbivory. Green mangoes fight your tongue—bitter, acidic, astringent sap that says, We are not for you.
Too bad, I thought, chewing them, You have become me now.
I didn’t belong here, this much I knew. The first inhabitants of this place we call Panama had other names for this region, other ideas of borders. Their descendants include the Naso, Emberá, Wounaan, Guna, Ngäbe, Buglé, and Bribri people. Spaniards claimed their lands. English pirates and Scottish mercenaries. The land became part of Colombia, before Americans helped it secede, only to then bisect the country to control the Canal, an artery of seafaring commerce. Panamanians today include descendants of Afro-Caribbeans who built the Canal and Chinese immigrants who built the railroad that flanked it.
I lived in a house that had been built, at first, as an American army barracks in the Canal Zone—its very rentability a function of that history, for how else does a newly married foreign couple find a home so centrally located in the city, where Panamanians commute two hours each way to work? Socioeconomics determined my ease of travel, my ability to choose a profession that paid sporadically, if at all. To watch, to wonder, to write, to edit, these were unearned privileges I squandered if I did not acknowledge their artifice. This is a painful realization to come to if you grow up loving words and how they sound off the page in your head. Was it any wonder, then, that I found it hard to write?
My only real success in tropical gardening was a moringa sapling my spouse brought home some time in our fourth year of living together, because I had told him so often that this was the source of my favorite food in the world. It was a tender thing, no more than a few delicate compound leaves on the end of a green stem. It could grow into a tree if I’d just let it. If I’d transplant it out of its pot. It could produce drumsticks—long, green, three-sided pods I could stew in tamarind broth, eat over rice, take me back home. I watched it grow in its pot with increasing fascination. Where all my other plants had failed, this one held on.
I am not sure which came first—sadness or the inability to write.
As with every other plant I had invested in, I began to project upon this spindly thing my entire identity. Moringa oleifera was a tree native to India, just like I was. Like me, it was unfussy about its living circumstances. Like me, it didn’t take itself too seriously, putting out copious branches from a slender, not-entirely upright stem. Unlike me, it grew tall—in fact, moringa trees grown for harvest are typically pruned short to reach their fruit. Like me, moringas were soft-wooded, easy to chop down. Like me, they would re-root wherever their broken stems touched ground.
It is unwise to plant non-native plants in a nature reserve, but when my moringa risked toppling over its pot, I gave in, found a shovel, forded my shapeless hedge of birds-of-paradise, and started to dig. The ground here was clay-rich and gummy, studded with rocks. Not a place for orchard trees, but the moringa, once planted in earth, flourished like no other plant I’d ever grown in a pot. Within a year its trunk was wide enough that my hands could not encircle it. It was a shaggy champion—unruly branches sprouting this way and that, reaching higher than the first-floor kitchen. It produced white flowers in little sprays. One year, at long last, it produced fruit. I picked them green. I made vatthalkozhumbu with them. I photo-documented the entire cooking process, astonished that such a thing could occur in a kitchen so far from Chennai, where this recipe was honed and taught to my grandmother, who could never have conceived of how far she would pass it on.
And yet I felt wracked with guilt whenever I looked at my moringa, ebullient in front of the house. I knew enough biology to understand that moringa possessed traits that lent themselves to weediness. It thrived despite nutrient-poor soils or low water availability. If its seed pods dried and snapped open, they could scatter oil-rich seeds to flutter, float, and root who knew where else. It regenerated from cuttings effortlessly.
When a large branch broke off our moringa in a rain storm, my spouse and I heaved it into the carport because I feared we would lose control of it if it resprouted. We took turns to saw the branch into armlength logs. The tree’s bark was thin-skinned and green underneath—meaning it could photosynthesize even without leaves. The logs sat in our carport, turgid as green beans. They put out shoot after desperate shoot from their sawn-off ends, from the nodes where we had snapped off their smaller branches. They tapped every inner reserve the tree had packed them with to give themselves another chance at life. We let the logs desiccate all the way through. It took months before they were truly dead.
Halfway up Cerro Ancon, this verdant forest island in the middle of Panama City, is an open, rocky cliff face. Not much can grow on bare rock exposed to sunlight, where the rain washes straight down. For the first years of my life in Panama, I took this to be just another feature of the landscape, no matter its discordance with the surrounding rainforest. It was only later that I realized that this was a scar—no, a gouging disfiguration—left over from American quarrying activities in the 1900s. Panamanians protested fervently to reclaim the Canal Zone from Americans. Memorial plaques on the summit of Cerro Ancon commemorate their fight for independence. Above my moringa, on the hill crest, the Panamanian flag waved. Below my moringa, I walked my cats on leashes because they were invasive species, and I would not have them killing native lizards or birds. And I was an Indian writer living in Panama off my Dutch spouse’s American income, stockpiling disenchantment with stories on my laptop that felt like lies. Was I not, as well, just a fucking weed?
I gave birth to a child, and a month later we moved from our home of five years to one further up the hill because its walls were built of brick, which the termites could not reclaim. In my final act of gardening, I chopped down the moringa tree to a stump, and dug up the root ball for good measure. My spouse borrowed a pick-up truck and we moved every gnarly root and hacked-down limb to the carport of our new house, to watch over them while they dried out. We froze some leaves for soup. We ate the last of the moringa pods.
At nine months, our child learned to walk, and we took her down the road to show her the old house. Our friends had moved in—Panamanian sisters with proper green thumbs. They had plant pots everywhere, growing herbs, flowering bushes, shrubs that produced fruits. Their cat and dog wandered among the pots and the birds-of-paradise hedge.
We had done a good job too, though. The moringa had not grown back. This is all I really wanted for myself, as well. To flourish for a while before I died. To nourish someone. To leave no greater trace.
Electric Literature is pleased to reveal the cover ofIntrovert Pervertby Jendi Reiter, which will be published March 10, 2026 by Word Works Books. You can pre-order your copyhere!
As witty as it is honest, as dark as it is blindingly bright, Jendi Reiter’s poetry collection Introvert Pervert weaves pop culture, personal experience, and lightning intellect to explore our American trauma, our “reptilian sludge,” and our absolute and complete need for love—and to love.
Here is the cover, designed by Susan Pearce with art by Jendi Reiter:
Jendi Reiter: When planning this collage, I was envisioning an image that would combine flamboyance and concealment. Sources that inspired me include Nick Cave’s “Soundsuits” sculptures and the queer collage anthology Cock, Paper, Scissors. My collages often juxtapose homoerotic magazine photos with “wholesome” and “feminine” scrapbooking materials as a way of integrating my past girlhood with my present as a trans man—both rebelling against good-girl repression, and reclaiming those colors and textures that have always given me sensory joy regardless of gender assignment.
Susan Pearce: Working with this bold image, I felt the lettering should be supportive but not overwhelming. I chose the magenta color to anchor the image at the bottom. Matching the color in the headdresses, I chose cyan to pull the eye upward towards the title.
Sometimes when I lie down, I feel sad and lonely. I think how my momma must have hollered when they were beating her with the pinta broom. I can’t use pinta broom no more. I stop sweep my yard. When I go feed the chickens wallowing in their own mess out there, I can’t look at them. There was a time when chickens were my passion. I groomed them and took them to compete in fairs all over this country. That was before things started going downhill around here. It’s January and things are still going downhill.
It started last month when the men arrived in the evening. I was standing on the veranda, playing the game I’ve been at since I was small, willing the sun not to go down. If the sun goes down, it means tomorrow is here and tomorrow means more work. When you live in the country, all you do is work. Even chickens are a kind of work. The men were doing their work riding in on donkeys to tell me my momma dead. They drove me to the next village over, and sure enough she dead out like they said, but I could only tell it was her from the collared shirt, soaked red in places. She didn’t have a face left. All our old women wear collared shirts tucked into oversized skirts, but I used to make her pin a kerchief to her blouse, just like the girls in primary do. We had to take those kinds of precautions with her. That’s how I was able to say to the men what they wanted to hear, so they could get her off their hands, you know?
That’s from the beating, the man carrying a bag of groceries said. His wife was going to make pumpkin curry and roti with tea for dinner. It was a popular dish in our village. He showed me the brooms they’d used. They asked if I wanted to take she home and I thought about how much work it would be to heist her and walk for both myself and her in that heat. I couldn’t wait to crawl underneath the mosquito netting and catch a five. We were already in the season for mosquito netting. Half of the night already gone.
I took her back for Dadi’s sake and mumbled an apology to the strangers. Many of them, excepting the mothers and babies, had come outside and made a big fuss over me. I hadn’t made it into town to get a haircut yet. I could tell my long hair disturbed them. Plus, I had feathers sticking out of everywhere. They wondered if I was an accomplice, but my English put them at ease. Cut-up English means advancement. The truth was I’d gotten no further in school than any of them. I shook my head like I’d seen Dadi do whenever his shirt wasn’t ironed properly or his rice was cooked too hard. The man with the groceries called for his wife to bring me a glass of lime water for my troubles. She emerged from a house that looked like mine. I could see how my momma got confused. His wife was too pretty to live in the country.
I asked Dadi if he wanted me to run out to buy oil. Everywhere was closed but the family of one of my school friends owned a shop. I could knock at any hour and he would give me what I want. He slept in the back of the shop because of thief-man. The smell will wake the whole village, Dadi said. He didn’t want people to know it finally happen. He wanted them to know on their own time. He was the kind of man to see things through, in his own way. He didn’t want to leave her on the veranda overnight because of the strays, and nowadays you have to watch out for people.
But no one was going to miss her. That’s why I think the two of us made such a show of things. Dadi dug and I lifted the sack and tossed it in and we sat right there, in our backyard by the rotting dungs tree, looking into the abyss that the body had fallen into, a body now indiscernible in the darkness. He cried and I cried, and then we cried more. Starting was hard, but once we started, it was easy to keep going, too easy, and we had to keep looking sideways at each other to make sure the other wasn’t taking it too far, hadn’t toppled over into despair. For good measure I threw in my watch. Dadi gave me that watch when I started primary school. My wrists were too small, so he bore extra holes in the band with his pocketknife and while he was cutting he said, Whatever they teach you, don’t take on, because taking on is how people trip out. My momma didn’t always stay so. She take on and then she was only good for cooking doubles and selling them by the roadside, but then she couldn’t do that either and Dadi said one day she was going to walk into the wrong village and they was going to—my wrist felt naked and strange. I had to keep touching my hand to make sure it was still mine, keep looking sideways to make sure Dadi was still there.
As the saying goes, the opposite of love isn’t hate—it’s indifference. And it’s not uncommon to sometimes hate the ones we love the most.
One of the hallmarks of a good thriller is when the reader is made to doubt a character’s true intentions. Is he really a devoted friend? Or does he have an ulterior motive? Does she really care about her and have her best interests at heart, or is she manipulating her to get what she really wants?
In my debut thriller novel, The Better Mother, Savannah discovers she’s pregnant after a short and casual fling with the handsome Max, whom she met at a bar. But several weeks later, when she gets back in touch to tell him, she learns he has reunited with his ex, the rich and beautiful Madison. Though it would be perfectly normal for Madison to be upset and jealous that another woman is having her partner’s baby, Madison says she understands—they were broken up at the time, after all—and that she just wants to help support the two as they form a friendly co-parenting relationship. But is Madison really just trying to get close to Savannah and her baby so she can pull off her own sinister plan?
In these eight thriller novels, friendships are questioned and pushed to their limits. Even if you’ve been friends for decades, can you ever really know someone’s true intentions? At the end of the day, aren’t we all just looking out for number one—ourselves?
Anna grew up without ever having a real friend after a tragic incident in her childhood left her scarred emotionally and at odds with her parents. So when she finally spreads her wings and heads to art school in New York City, it’s no wonder she falls for the first girl that shows her any attention—the mysterious and alluring Willow. It’s obvious Willow is favored as the program’s darling, the one who will undoubtedly succeed in her artist career. Her talent, and her beauty, earn her attention everywhere she goes. The two girls form a tight-knit, codependent best friendship, but Willow can be selfish, manipulative, and cruel. When Anna decides that Willow needs to be reminded why she should cherish their friendship instead of take it for granted, things get deadly—and it all goes down in Manhattan on the pivotal date of September 11th, 2001. This read is dark and unputdownable, with a reveal at the end you’ll never see coming.
Once a prominent chef, Lee now finds herself living on the streets after the Covid pandemic shut down her successful restaurant. Each night, she parks her car in a wealthy, oceanfront neighborhood and sleeps clutching her belongings, with all the doors locked. One morning, she witnesses the beautiful and privileged Hazel trying to drown herself in the ocean and saves her. At first, Hazel is furious that Lee foiled her suicide attempt, but soon, the two become fast friends. Lee depends on Hazel for companionship and the basic human comforts she can’t afford that Hazel takes for granted. For Hazel, Lee becomes a true friend she confides a secret to—her husband is abusive. She envies Lee’s freedom. It’s not long before Lee sees Hazel as the cash cow that can help her get back on her feet, and Hazel sees her new friend as her ticket to freedom. What happens when Hazel decides to put Lee’s life on the line to get what she wants, and Lee goes along with it for a promised payday?
Successful TV news journalist Anna Andrews fought hard to get where she is. From a modest upbringing, Anna was mostly raised by her mother, the neighborhood maid, when her abusive father checked out. Anna was shy and awkward as a teen until the most popular girl at school, Rachel Hopkins, adopted her into her twisted little friend circle. Anna was captivated by her confidence, allure, and expensive clothes. In the present, things start to unravel when a dead body is found in the woods of her small hometown and Anna is sent to cover the story. But the body turns out to be Rachel’s—and the killer may be targeting all members of that former high school friend circle, one by one. Could Anna be one of the next victims? Or is she the killer? Or is the killer her ex-husband, whom Rachel introduced her to all those years ago? In this book, all characters are suspects, and all narrators are unreliable.
Alix Summer is the creator of a popular podcast that highlights powerful women, but after many episodes, she feels the show has run its course. She is desperately trying to think of the topic for her next show when she meets Josie at a pub. They’re both celebrating their 45th birthday, and it turns out they were even born in the same hospital, making them “birthday twins.” Josie suggests an intriguing idea for Alix’s next podcast—her. She’s had a difficult life, but claims she’s on the precipice of reinvention and invites Alix to chronicle the journey. Josie becomes obsessed with Alix’s seemingly perfect life. Though Alix is wary, she can’t help but think the frightening story Josie weaves will make for excellent podcast material. But as Alix digs deeper into Josie’s past, she starts to question the truth of everything Josie has told her and begins to suspect that Josie targeted her out of jealousy. How far will Josie go to reinvent herself and make Alix, the object of her obsession, her best friend?
New motherhood, and all the insecurities that come with it, can make for gripping thriller fodder. In this novel, Daphne and Laurel—two mothers who meet by chance at a parenting class and both have daughters named Chloe—seem fated to become best friends and support each other through the emotional minefield that is postpartum life. But their friendship soon moves into dysfunctional territory. Laurel starts dressing like Daphne, telling others Daphne’s stories as if they’re her own. Meanwhile, Daphne starts to think that masquerading as Laurel could be her answer to escaping her husband, whom she is afraid thinks she’s an unfit mother and might try to take her daughter away. Posing as Laurel, Daphne takes a job in an eerie, atmospheric mansion archiving materials for an aging author—and she starts to learn that nothing is as it seems.
Kristen has been helping her best friend Emily keep the secret of what happened on their backpacking trip in Cambodia years ago buried deep, just like the body of the male traveler Emily killed. She said it was in self-defense after he attacked her when they were alone, and Kristen believed her and helped her hide the evidence. But years later, they’re on another backpacking trip in Chile when it’s Kristen who kills a male backpacker, also claiming self-defense. Emily pays her back by helping her cover it up. Now, each friend has dirt on the other, and they are bound to each other by these secrets, begging the eerie question—when is “best friends forever” a deadly concept?
Lucy was trying to escape an abusive partner when she fled the city for a small cabin in Woodstock, New York. Having been isolated for so long, she is thrilled when neighbors John and Vera take a liking to her, and the three become instant best friends. She soon discovers this is because John and Vera have been shunned by the neighborhood thanks to accusations against John. The couple finally confesses that they want to fake John’s death and leave to start over fresh with clean reputations (and, as an added bonus, the value of John’s original artwork will soar). Afraid she is losing the only friends she can really count on, Lucy reluctantly agrees to help them fake John’s death—but things go horribly awry when John ends up dead for real. Who is manipulating whom?
This book tells the ultimate tale of two “frenemies.” White author June Heyward has always been jealous of Asian author Athena Liu. They have both published books, but June’s sales barely stay above water, while Athena’s soar to amazing heights. Is it because Athena is a marginalized writer of color, as June suspects? Though they’ve never been close, they’ve known each other since they were in the same writing program back at school and catch up every once in a while. When Athena dies in a tragic accident right after showing June her latest manuscript, which no one else has yet seen, June realizes this could be her chance to pass it off as her own. Before long, she is the next big thing in the publishing world, all thanks to the fruits of her theft. But what happens when some people start to suspect the truth? And could Athena’s ghost really be haunting her from the afterworld, having seen what she did?
I first read Jenny Offil’s Dept. of Speculation when it was published in 2014. Reading it again after the birth of my first child, nearly a decade later, I was newly struck by her concept of the art monster: “My plan was to never get married. I was going to be an art monster instead. Women almost never become art monsters because art monsters only concern themselves with art, never mundane things. Nabokov didn’t even fold his umbrella. Véra licked his stamps for him.”
Offil’s protagonist goes on to become not only a wife but a mother. But her concept of the art monster provoked questions, inside the novel and out, of what is required to dedicate oneself to art. Parenthood, especially the role of the mother and/or primary caretaker, has long been popularly understood as antithetical to art-making. English art critic Cyril Connolly’s damning quote, “There is no more somber enemy of good art than the pram in the hall,” has held sway over the minds and career prospects of artist-parents for nearly 100 years (though of course the attitude he was describing was centuries old). Moms are boring, the culture seems to agree, mothering is a niche subject, and anyway, aren’t you too busy raising kids to make art?
What, I wondered, did all this portend for me, as an artist-now-mother? I say “wondered,” but I’m understating it by a mile. I became obsessed with how caring for a baby was changing my entire sense of self, while trying to figure out how to reshape my arts practice (which had previously involved performing live onstage 25 weekends a year) into this new role and schedule.
Happily, I am far from the only person asking these questions, as is made clear by a recent shower of books exploring the tensions, possibilities, and challenges of the dual roles of the artist/mother. Ranging widely across genres (memoirs, novels, personal essays, landscape surveys, and biographies), the works below re-examine and resist conventional motherhood narratives, while never shying away from complexity and difficulty.
In this slim, powerfully argued book, British art critic Hettie Judah makes a well-researched case that barriers to participation for artist-parents are systemic, not personal. Focusing on visual arts, Judah analyzes the challenges artist mothers face, from career-limiting assumptions to a lack of childcare provisions at residencies and exhibition openings that conflict with bedtime. She shares interventions and provocations, such as Berlin’s gallerie asterisk* which allows any artist who gives birth or cares for children to apply for an exhibition (even retroactively) to fill in the blank space on their resume. Judah is adamant and convincing that the current state of affairs is a dual injury: to artist mothers who need to be able to participate in the art world, and to an art world that, by excluding them, is inherently lacking and incomplete.
In this essay collection, award-winning poet Camille T. Dungy is refreshingly direct in confronting the economic realities of parenthood, particularly as a non-tenured professor whose work requires travel multiple times a month. As she flies back and forth across the country with her baby daughter, Dungy offers a nuanced exploration of the ways their Blackness is perceived. In her essay “Inherent Risk, or What I know about investment,” Dungy uses collage-like juxtaposition to contrast her personal dilemmas, trade-offs, and choices, with historical inserts about property and land-use in the Bay Area (her home at the time of writing), creating a complex look at concepts of value and worth. While the book is suffused with love for her daughter, Dungy is clear-eyed about the impossibility of “having it all” as a mother and author, at least under current societal conditions, writing, “I can count seven women writers who told me that having a family cost them at least one book because of the ways they had to reorganize their lives to accommodate having children.”
This lyric essay, composed in fragments and elegantly translated from Spanish by Christina MacSweeney, follows the author from pregnancy through early motherhood in Mexico City. Interrupted by literal earthquakes and the profound disruption of becoming a parent, Barrera attempts to write her contracted book but instead writes this one, a book that travels through her experiences and reflections of the stages of pregnancy, her own relationship with her painter mother, cultural stigma around breastfeeding in public, other artists’ perspective on motherhood, and the unfolding wonder and exhaustion of her new baby. Overhearing a man at a bookstore wondering why motherhood has become a popular topic in literature, she asserts “there will be more of us. Many more. In my opinion, there will never be enough of us.”
Like Barrera, Leslie Jamison’s memoir is composed of fragments (“splinters of prose”). While her separation, divorce, and subsequent romantic encounters are major storylines, for me this book was most magnetic in the many sections offering an under-the-microscope look at the kaleidoscopic swirl of emotions generated by caring for a baby while attempting to continue your art practice. She writes, she teaches, she goes on book tour, she wonders at her baby and despairs at how her focus has been shattered. A professor, Jamison describes a photo of a party she held at her house for her students, with her eleven-month-old baby in a bouncer, “and I do look like both a mother and a teacher. But I never felt doubled. I felt more like half a mother and half a teacher, constantly reaching for each identity as if it were a dangling toy—mother, teacher, mother, teacher—until the elastic tether of the other self snapped me away again.”
Playwright and poet Sarah Ruhl didn’t have time to write this book, as the title, introduction, and every essay makes clear. These micro-essays are sometimes as short as one paragraph, often barely two pages. (The shortest: “#60. Is there an objective standard of taste? No.”) Even in the author’s introduction to the book, interruptions from her children catch her mid-sentence, perfectly setting the reader up for the brief snatches of thought and theory that follow.
“In any case, please forgive the shortness of these essays; do imagine the silences that came between—the bodily fluids, the tears, the various shades of—
In the middle of that sentence my son came in and sat at my elbow and said tenderly, ‘Mom, can I poop here?’”
The short form may be the native genre of writing for parents of young children, and Ruhl’s book surprises and delights with its brief but keenly observed insights into everything from aspects of playwriting to heart-twisting conversations with her young children.
“I have been called monstrous. In my own mythology, I am like Medusa, Lady Blood, La Llorona [but]…What is monstrous is behind the mirror, the people holding it up, the mirror itself tainted with blood and violence.” In these brief, impressionistic essays, poet Leslie Contreras Schwartz explores intricacies and overlaps between motherhood, abusive relationships, friendship, becoming a writer, intergenerational trauma, medicalized racism, and post-partum depression. While unflinching in her presentation of personal and institutional violence, this book offers far more than a story of survival. It’s an assertion of narrative control: In keeping an awareness of her own past while raising her children, Contreras Schwartz argues that to tell a story is to inscribe the future: “Though my mind wants to shift between stories that exist in me, they are stories that I can’t let be passed on.”
Kate Briggs’s novel, The Long Form, opens with Helen, a translator, navigating the “co-project” of caring for her baby. With its patient attention to the minutiae of playmats, of watching a baby’s eyes open and close as they drift off, Briggs’ prose reproduces for the reader the way the gravitational pull of caring for a new baby bends time into new shapes. Helen is a translator, and, as she tends to her infant, turns words over and over and inside out. The outside world intrudes into Helen’s intimate, domestic setting when a copy of Henry Fielding’s The History of Tom Jones arrives. As Helen shifts her attention between the baby and the novel—which itself begins with a baby’s arrival—Briggs uses this juxtaposition to explore how the “long form” of literature and the specific novel Tom Jones illuminate the inherently experimental nature of forming a relationship (or executing a “co-project”) with a brand-new human.
Julie Phillips takes a biographic approach to exploring the tensions and possibilities that present themselves to the artist-mother, while interweaving her active thinking and theory-making. With a focus on now-cannonical British and North American visual artists and writers from the 20th century such as Alice Neel, Doris Lessing, and Audre Lorde, Phillips probes their lives and work to examine how they carved a way to make their art despite (often formidable) social and cultural obstacles. But this is no look-at-how-good-we-have-it-by-comparison argument; this is a smart and ambitious book, looking at structures and psychologies that are very much alive today. Phillips never underestimates the challenge and complexity of what she dubs “the Mind-Baby Problem,” offering in the acknowledgements that “I think everyone who tries to shift the motherhood discussion discovers how much that thing weighs and ends up moving it about two inches.” In its keen attention to how motherhood shaped these artists’ work and vice versa, I think this book moved it at least three.
While Catherine Ricketts’s book also structures itself around profiles of artist-parents, she interweaves memoir of her own experience of adjusting to motherhood. Though Ricketts discusses established writers and artists such Joan Didion, Toni Morrison, Madeleine L’Engle, and Ruth Asawa, I was particularly compelled by her interviews with mid-career living artists, many of whom have received acclaim, but none of whom are at the retrospective-at-the-MoMA stage. In conversation with Lauren Gloans, half of the folk music duo Loland Hum, Ricketts learns how, after the birth of their baby, the couple re-envisioned their approach to performance to de-emphasize their exhausting touring schedule. In these and other interviews, Ricketts is able to highlight the real and highly varied approaches that contemporary, working artists are applying in order to engage in both childcare and art-making. But this book doesn’t offer any easy answers. “First off,” artist LaToya Hobbs advises her, “don’t try to model your practice around what you see other people doing. Be OK with your journey, and give yourself time and grace.”
Clocking in at over 280 alphabetically organized pages, this wide-ranging, international, and wonderfully intersectional book takes an encyclopedic approach to cataloguing work and thought around artist motherhood via black-and-white print entries as well as gorgeous, full-color spreads. With entries ranging from “decolonizing the womb” to “drag mothering values,” and from “shit mom” to “trad wife,” Mothering Myths contains essays, excerpts and quotations from contributors including Alexis Pauline Gumbs, Angela Davis, Camille Henrot, bell hooks, Silvia Federici, Maggie Nelson, Linda Nochlin, Sheila Heti, Taka Taka, and many, many, many others. This is not a book to sit down and read cover-to-cover, but to dip into during moments of curiosity, despair, and delight. Is this the be-all, end-all of art mom books? I asked myself, before realizing, No, even better—it’s launching an amazing new chapter.
For decades, in a series of unsettling cases that have fascinated people around the country for their eerie similarities, young men who fit a certain “all-American” profile have been found dead in frozen bodies of water. White, college-aged, traditionally attractive, and presumably cishet, they tend to be good at school and sports and are often last seen out drinking before their disappearances. Their physical resemblance to one another is also uncanny. “We could have been cousins, if not brothers,” says Caleb Aldrich, one of four such boys who form a chorus of beyond-the-grave narrators in Christopher Castellani’s latest novel Last Seen, which draws its inspiration from these real-life cases.
Other details that the real cases have in common—a smiley face graffito is usually painted nearby, the guys are discovered with their arms crossed over their chests, as if hugging themselves warm—led two retired detectives to posit the “Smiley Face Theory,” that a shadowy network of serial killers is targeting young men of this description nationwide. Castellani finds this theory, which has been widely debunked, decidedly unconvincing, but remains intrigued by the question of what, if anything, connects all these deaths.
In Last Seen, he investigates by plunging us deep into the consciousnesses of Caleb, Leo, Steven, and Matthew, four young men who are able to talk to each other, and others like them, in death. They hunt for patterns, posture, tell self-serving stories to one another and themselves, and look for evidence that they are being adequately mourned by the single loved one each can still see. They struggle to work out what, if anything, their brief lives meant. Time in the book moves as it does in Castellani’s imagined afterlife: meaningful memories are captured in bright bursts of lucid narrative, mixed with murky, half-remembered fragments; past, present, and future are all constantly colliding. What emerges is a detailed topography of the boys’ obsessions, a result of the pressures to perform certain kinds of masculinity colliding with their even deeper desires to love and be loved.
Castellani and I met over Zoom to discuss the dangers of patriarchy and love, the allure of age gap relationships like the ones lost to his generation of gay men as a result of the AIDS crisis, and our fundamental unknowability to our beloveds and ourselves. Electric Lit readers in the Providence and Boston areas are invited to join us as we continue the conversation in person at An Unlikely Story on Friday, February 20, 2026.
Preety Sidhu: In some ways, this book is a big tonal shift from your previous novel Leading Men, yet about half of that book takes place fifty years after the protagonist’s death as a friend honors his memory. Last Seen is also about four young men, watching from beyond the grave to see how their loved ones do and do not mourn them. Can you speak to your career-spanning interest in love that, specifically, transcends death? Why is it important how the people we love most remember us after we’re gone?
Christopher Castellani: I’ve always been drawn to retrospective narration because it allows a character to assess the whole breadth of their life. Looking back adds weight to the story. In some ways that’s good, and it can be overwhelming to the writer to have to deal with an entire life. To me, that’s what makes it most interesting, for people to evaluate what their lives meant to them and to the people who love them and who they love and who they hurt and who they want to do right by. It has always felt more compelling, narratively, than the decisions we make in the moment, where the reader doesn’t know what the aftershocks are.
Doing it from beyond the grave gives it even more weight, because all your choices are now over. In this book, they do try to make choices after death. They have some degree of power, but that is fairly limited and ineffectual. You don’t know how long your life is going to be, so you don’t know what you’re going to leave to people in terms of their feelings and the unfinished business that you had.
PS: These guys are obsessing over whether the actions of the people they love most are sufficiently distraught. The actions of the living, the way their lives have been changed by the dead or by the sudden deaths—why the fascination with that particular measure of a life?
CC: It’s about who’s telling the story. Who knows these people best? Do the guys know themselves best? Or do the people they consider their most beloved, or the most intense relationship that they had? The answer is neither. Nobody knows themselves and nobody knows each other, and nobody is reliable in what they say about themselves or each other. The answer to how do you define or know a person is: you can’t.
I kept feeling these guys were lying to me as they were telling me their stories, and lying to themselves. The people they left behind construct them into something they wanted or needed them to be. The boys, now that they’re gone, have no way to counter that. That has always been my obsession: how we construct ourselves, how others construct us, and how both are incomplete.
PS: The power of love is tethering people to each other across death, and even that’s not enough.
That has always been my obsession: how we construct ourselves, how others construct us, and how both are incomplete.
CC: Exactly, and love obscures things. Love transforms things and creates things that aren’t even there. That’s both a cynical and a romantic view. Both sides in this book, the living and the dead, are guilty of doing both. I chose one person that the dead could look in on and interact with—with whom they had the most intense love relationship—because love both blurs and shapes the way that we see each other, and our relationships. We see it through that particular lens.
While I don’t have some grand theory about it, I—maybe childishly or romantically—believe that love is the thing that breaks through whatever dividing line there is between this life and the next. I have a line about how the dead are busy, the dead are doing their thing and not really thinking about us. But there are times when we feel deeply connected, or our love for someone that we miss is so powerful that it has the effect of summoning them. I wanted to dramatize that. I’m almost embarrassed to say that because it is so borderline cheesy, but I do on some level believe that.
PS: You open the book with an epigraph from Anne Carson about the dead walking behind us, which ends with: “they are victims of love, many of them.” What does the phrase “victims of love” mean to you, and how were you thinking about it as you wrote Last Seen?
CC: That poem completely unlocked this book. It wasn’t that I wrote the book, then went searching for an epigraph. It was with me from the beginning. I love Anne Carson, she’s a genius.
I was exploring how deeply feeling people—when one of those emotions is love—can’t help but be victimized. It is more powerful than almost any other force. You can’t help but be under its thumb, serving love more than love is serving you. That’s what I was getting at with all the characters, in various ways. They’re still under love’s thumb, even in the afterlife. They’re never free, even after they’re gone. That’s how powerful love is for these four guys.
PS: How did you first encounter the unsolved deaths this novel is based on?
CC: There was a case in Boston in 2017 of a young man named Michael Kelleher. He was missing for weeks, then ultimately found. I was drawn to the mystery of this disappearance. In one of the comments, somebody said, “this seems like a Smiley Face thing.” I was like, “what’s that?” I went down the rabbit hole.
It’s completely absurd to think that over the past thirty years there’s been this network of people preying on these guys. I’m more interested in why we think that these guys are somehow endangered. What about our psyche, particularly the American psyche, gets more excited that it’s these types of guys who are being preyed upon or vulnerable? Obviously, we think about this type of person, in our American mindset, as leaders of America. Golden boys. The future. There’s something particularly upsetting or fascinating to people, and also probably thrilling in a schadenfreude way, to seeing these strong, healthy, attractive men being taken down.
PS: What’s your “theory” on how they are connected as victims?
CC: In that very way of being the “golden boy”: that identity, that pressure, that set of expectations to be a certain way. They do have a kinship with each other—young, ostensibly straight American men. Patriarchy has a lot of terms they may or may not have signed up for, but are born into. Most of them, not to generalize, perpetuate them, and fall easily into that role without questioning it. But I wanted to give these guys the dignity of an inner life, to treat them as three-dimensional people. Especially now, we have put all these guys into a box: this is who and what they are. I wanted to explore what made them and connected them psychically. That’s why I have them able to communicate only with each other in this afterlife. Not because they’re all victims of the Smiley Face Killer, but because they’re all victims, in some way, of patriarchy. And of love.
PS: The real serial killers.
CC: Right, the real killers are patriarchy and love! Spoiler alert.
PS: Each of the dead young men can look in on the person they love most who’s still alive. In all four cases, the relationships are intergenerational. What drew you to writing about age gap relationships?
CC: I did not set out to write about age gap relationships. It weirdly just happened, it was subconscious. I did want to write about different types of love, both romantic and family relationships. I realized halfway through writing that all these relationships did have that commonality. The book doesn’t have some grand theory about age gaps in general. It’s only interested in each particular relationship.
Throughout history, there have been famous age gap relationships between men. When I was growing up, that was completely cut off.
The one between James and Caleb—a young gay man who is attracted almost exclusively to older men—is a dynamic that comes up a lot in the gay male community. It’s interesting in the age of social media and hookup apps, because when I was growing up I never remotely thought of a person older than 25 as an option. Not because of attraction, but because they were usually dying or dead or diseased. That was the mentality, that anyone over a certain age was a victim of AIDS, or potentially that. Throughout history, there have been famous age gap relationships between men, both mentor and romantic relationships. When I was growing up, that was completely cut off. Now we’re seeing so many of these relationships, that are interesting for what attracts both sides. Other than the basic sexual chemistry, what do they get from each other? What do they need from each other? That was the thing I was exploring with James and Caleb, through the lens of Derrick, who is a survivor of that AIDS era.
I also wanted to show the connection between these young men disappearing and the young men who were disappearing all through the AIDS crisis. I wanted to draw some link between those two kinds of disappearances of young, usually attractive, often-but-of-course-not-always white, men. These are who became the face of the AIDS epidemic: young, pretty, white men. Not that they were remotely the only people affected.
PS: Matthew is obsessed with his college girlfriend Tessa—some might even say stalking her—but the person is able to see after death is his mother. What did you want to explore in the contrast between this obsessive love for a partner and the more enduring bond between mother and son?
CC: The relationship between mothers and sons has been my most consistent writing obsession. He’s half Italian, I’m full Italian. I was thinking of the really strong relationships between mothers and sons in Italian families. This mother is not Italian, but she’s in this Italian world of deeply passionate love among family members.
She’s relatively cold, she’s almost like a “stage mother.” There’s the trope of mothers that have this kind of romance with their sons, like the “hockey mom,” the “soccer mom,” the “swim mom.” They’re with their son almost like their partner. There’s this pride and a weird almost sexual vibe that I’ve always found interesting. I wanted to explore that. She’s never had a love relationship with her own husband. Her most “romantic” relationship, in a way, is with her son, which is why the enduring image she wants to have of him is with his head held high and his fists raised—the strong, all-American scholar-athlete, the perfect son. That myth-making between mother and son is what I was interested in, from her side.
From him, it’s recognition. He’s always wanted her to be a more nurturing mother, not putting him on a pedestal. To see him as more flawed, human, vulnerable. By dying, he’s achieved that, and wants to know that she sees him. He’s so upset when she walks by his picture and doesn’t notice him anymore. Because he also has this stalker, “extra” tendency, he almost wants his mom to stalk him. That’s the way he understands love, that kind of obsessiveness. Because she doesn’t have that for him, he keeps trying to “win” her, even from the afterlife.
PS: For Caleb and Steven, the people they love most, James and Monica, are older and married. What were you hoping to explore with these two affairs?
CC: I think of James and Caleb as a legitimate love affair. James is trapped in his bisexual identity, not able to have that fully recognized and integrated into his life. I wanted to explore that trap, closeted life. It’s narratively interesting to have a character who is leading a secret life—the stories he tells himself to justify his behavior. Using love as a pretext for dishonest, bad behavior. He’s cruising, he’s lying to his wife, but with Caleb he’s in love.
What is love if not seeing the messiness?
With Monica and Steven, from her side, I think of her as a trifler, a destructive force who doesn’t understand the extent of her own power and privilege. She procures him, basically prostitutes him for herself. While she had tender and certainly sexual feelings for him, I do not think of that as a love relationship.
He does love her, and sees her as a more wounded person than she sees herself. He wanted to be Arthur [her husband], because as a young, white American man, he felt like he should take over the world and saw Arthur as someone who had. He felt he should be in that position. All that was entangled in that obsession.
PS: How much is it about love enabling bad behavior versus expressions of love being impeded by unfair societal restrictions?
CC: I wonder whether the excuse for bad behavior is intrinsic to the love itself, part of the thrill. You can’t discount the thrill that James, Caleb, Steven, Monica, and to some extent Matthew feel. The charge, the illicitness that goes into these relationships is what makes them so exciting. Like a lot of people in the queer community say, once we get too mainstream, it’s not fun to be gay anymore. You almost need the constraints, the negative societal forces, to convince yourself and each other that you really do love each other, because you’re working against all those forces.
I don’t think that makes it any less legitimate. It’s just part of the unique “love package” every relationship has. Some relationships don’t have that, but they’re all legitimate relationships in terms of the emotion and passion.
They have different calibrations of things like, “how much of this is transactional?” and “obsession?” and “egocentric?” and “fulfilling a need from childhood trauma?” That is wrapped up in all of the relationships. No relationship is free of those. We all have things that draw us to each other in love, that could be considered negative or not healthy. All successful relationships have these dynamics that might be technically considered unhealthy but work for that relationship. We’re all victims of love in a relationship that is sustained and passionate.
PS: In describing his affair with James, Caleb says, “Seeing is a weird word to describe what we were doing, but it was also the perfect word.” Obviously, “seeing” is important in Last Seen. The sections have headings like “Crime Seen,” “First Seen,” “Last Seen,” and “Love Seen.” Why is “seeing” such an important theme?
CC: Seeing goes through every single relationship. What is love if not seeing the messiness? You see them in all their messiness and they see you in all your messiness, and you still stick with each other. That’s not a groundbreaking way to think about love, but to me it’s the most true.
It also means a recognition: even if I see all your messiness, there’s other messiness I will never see. You have your own life and parts of your life I don’t see, and I accept that too. Everything you’ve seen, you accept, but you also accept there’s a lot you won’t see. That’s part of the love.
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.