Tuesday, December 2, 2025

Dec 02, 2025: Lily Herman, Run the Train


 *

Run the Train

Lily Herman

*

Content warning: violence, sexual abuse, genocide, infant mortality, substance use disorder.

I felt the man’s hand closing around my throat, not just closing but throttling, my whole skull rocking up and down against the pillow. He asked things like why couldn’t I come, why wouldn’t I stop coughing, what was wrong with me, until finally the crescendo—
     “Why won’t you just fucking die?”
     In response, I said nothing. I laid perfectly, obediently still, and thought—if I don’t move, maybe he’ll come.
     When I tell a friend about this night or others like it—where I was strangled nearly to the point of unconsciousness, kicked in the ribs, had fingers shoved so forcefully into my throat that I threw up, was hit in the face with enough impact for a black eye to cover my skin, like a napkin blotting up blood, and when I tell that friend that I had learned to accept these things, to believe they somehow fell under the heading of sex—I don’t know how to account for it. I no longer know how to inhabit the body I nearly destroyed, nor defend its choices.
     But at the time, it felt like each expression of private violence was an intimacy. A secret garden where most people wouldn’t tread, and so even when it hurt me, even when it became clear that all of the impulses moved toward hurting me, I wanted these men to express them. I believed it meant that we were speaking a language which few people understood, but which I was daring enough—special enough—to speak.
     The intoxication of being special, and being chosen for that specialness, has always been the strongest one I know. There is nothing like the heady rush of singularity, of someone recognizing me as an answer to their prayers. The men who most devastated me always led with the certainty that I would be an eternal, extraordinary presence in their lives—with their certainty that they were choosing me for good. Remaining endlessly susceptible to this bullshit was, admittedly, my own weakness, and it’s been long, slow work to place a more discerning guard at the gates. But for their part, the ones who knocked with such urgency weren’t usually neutral forces. Their conviction contained and concealed a desperate need—they weren’t coming in to find me, they were coming in to escape a bitter, unlivable cold. And compared to that, how could I not appear to be (at least briefly) a warm and welcoming paradise?
     So no matter what, there was always a moment of reckoning when they discovered that I was not, that we were not, the answer to all of their problems. For the most part, at this point, they just left—tactfully or not, kindly or not—or lingered, out of some cocktail of affection & fear. Neither of these responses was preferable, but both are understandable. Both worked recognizable, human-sized wounds into my ever-attaching heart.
     But every once in a while, I encountered someone who—faced with the realization that I wasn’t as transcendent as he thought I was—was filled with the urge to punish me. For still wanting him, for my inability to make him still want me. Above all for my failure to make him a new man. If I trusted him with a tenderness, and he failed to wield it tenderly, it was easier for him to hate my heart than his own hands.
     Instead of refuting or even responding to any of this, my friend says, “You have a beautiful body.” At first, I’m unclear on why they think I need to hear this. They hug me tightly. “You have a beautiful heart.” This inexplicably makes me cry, and through tears, I explain that it’s not because I’m frightened, nor because there is some phantom lurking, still threatening to harm me. I’m crying at how different my life is now. The relief of being free, the pain of having been trapped, or having trapped myself, all of it adds up sometimes, suddenly, at moments I don’t expect, and causes something in me to spill over.

*

I don’t know how, in a way that is not disrespectful to survivors and to the dead, in a way that doesn’t minimize their suffering, to name how it is that this all began. But around the same time in my life—at the end of elementary and the beginning of middle school—two events took place, one rapidly after the other. First, I was introduced to Holocaust witness literature—the memoirs and fictionalized accounts which emerged from that genocide and carried its unfathomable stories to a new generation. And second, immediately thereafter, I discovered internet pornography—images, chat rooms, and videos.
     There are guidelines, I now know, for teaching children about the Holocaust. I know that most experts don’t recommend it until 6th grade at the earliest, and that there are entire pedagogical systems devoted to handling such delicate material, such delicate minds, responsibly. But the world was less wrangled, less regulated, at the moment when I came up into it. From the moment that I read the first book, a hole had been ripped in the fabric of my reality—and because I couldn’t patch it, because I realized that it was a hole around which the future world, the world as I’d found it, had been built—I wanted to study it, to learn everything about it that I could.
     The descriptions of torture that I read in those first survivor stories meld in my memory, melded even then, with the images I found across media in late 90s/early-aughts porn. Like the world at large, the internet in those days was much less sophisticated, but also less sanitized. It was so novel that the average person did not seem to understand that the tool could be used for anything sinister. Parental controls had not yet been conceived of, much less exerted in meaningful ways. I remember when the computer’s box—spotted like a Holstein cow—entered our house, and with it a mousepad, decorated with an eye in the center of it. Even then I felt like this eye was watching me, as I typed—curiously and then wantonly—into the abyss.
     From the Holocaust books and the porn websites, I remember this blurred reel of film: women squatting outside, pissing into piles of hay, people who hid by diving into pools of outhouse excrement, underwear packed purposefully with filth, naked grandmothers cowering in fear, naked grandmothers oozing wideward on a bed, people hung by their thumbs as the playthings of their captors, penises forced down women’s throats in parking garages while men stood over them and grunted, in tongues I did not need to speak in order to understand.
     Most of all, I remember men from chat rooms. My parents were going through a protracted, messy separation, and in contrast to this distraction, I loved the attention I got from men in the rooms. I had initially discovered them as a place to discuss hobbies and interests, but they quickly revealed themselves as grooming grounds for nascent sexuality. The men—who were almost always fully aware that I was underage—told me that I was right to crave attention, that I deserved it, and exactly what I needed to do to keep getting it. They liked to talk about controlling and hurting me, so I learned to beg for humiliation. They were consistent. They wanted the same things from me over and over again, and it was easy to deliver. I had always loved words and very quickly, I acquired the vocabulary that they wanted to hear.
     I later confessed to my therapist a tiny percentage of the things I said in these exchanges, how ashamed I am at the concepts and ideas, each more colorful than the last, extending far past the initial forays and deep into the years of my adulthood. She responded by encouraging me to see that this was not something that I did, but something that was done to me.
     Somewhere, between the chat rooms I frequented and the books I read, I got the message that life was something given to you, a privilege, revocable, and held often by merciless hands. When I began to search for men in my real life, I was drawn to the ones who had explored the same worlds, in much the same unsupervised ways. It pained them like it pained me, but it also shaped them, like it shaped me. Before I had learned how to be touched, I had learned to be hurt, and before they had learned how to touch, they learned to hurt what they held. In our earliest exploratory phases, we were alone in that world, and there was nothing controlled about it. Just a wall of fire with no self left on the other side. So when all of this came to a head in my 20s, when someone asked, as he had sex with me, why I wouldn’t just die, the memories began to pop up inside the frozen world of my body. 

*

My brother and I are talking around instead of about this, as we walk past the burl that looks like an elephant. Past the old grist mill whose decommissioned wheel bleeds iron into deep, stagnant water. He knows the gist, but I spare him the gory details. Defunct railroad ties are at our feet, and we skip across the rotted-out boards which connect them. He keeps calling everything mighty. The mighty Susquehanna River. The mighty Conowingo Dam. I haven’t seen him sober in 14 years, and it’s mighty.
     He started taking drugs at the same turbulent family time that I started to experiment with sex, and except for a few months more than ten years ago, he has never stopped until now. I didn’t know that it would take getting used to. I didn’t know there would be pain in realizing just how long I’d been holding my breath, pain in letting it go. The relief of being free is once again surprising and sharp.

*

Throughout all the years of his active addiction, and even now, into the early days of his recovery, my brother has maintained a staunch disinterest—bordering very nearly on disdain—for 1996’s much-lauded Trainspotting. Never mind the fact that the movie is widely regarded as having set a thrilling cinematic precedent—with its taut, acrid humor, bright colors contrasting sallow faces, unforgettable cast of characters, soundtrack so iconic that it became impossible to parse from the identity of the film. Never mind the fact that these components, along with the characters’ fragile fates, are held masterfully aloft before our eyes, like a set of juggler’s balls suspended in a majestic arc—inviting us to roam and examine and admire them before they come, exquisitely and fatally, crashing down around us.
     The crash, whether in film or real life, looks like this: pupils as small as pin pricks, so small that if the eyes are windows to the soul, then the sashes are coming down, the hope for escape is growing smaller and smaller. The boundless soul is trapped inside the poisoned body. Sweat soaks through shirts, skin is visibly acrawl with imagined pests, movements alter. Swaying, jagged sideways gesture, a sharp lean, a position which mimics the fetal curl even when standing. The voice becomes duller, rounder, forming words which are meant to placate us with the idea that our ears and eyes deceive us, that everything is fine, but we don't hear them, because the sudden realization that we’re speaking with someone high fills us with rage. We hoard that rage like our own drug, because it assuages our pain if we can avoid acknowledging the pain so clearly outsprawled before us.
     There’s no denying that Trainspotting depicts a fairly decent approximation of this—the most gnarly, incalculable consequences of substance abuse. But it does so with a sociopathically detached hand, one which would make Italo Calvino—who once admonished writers to approach all grave subjects with an equal and opposite lightness of tone—endlessly proud. To this point, the most horrifying moment of Trainspotting is not when Baby Dawn dies in the shooting gallery of neglect or SIDS or malnourishment. The most horrifying moment, the moment which clarifies the exact magnitude of the beast of addiction, as it pursues all of these characters, is when they peer into the crib—still containing the baby’s fresh corpse—and Mark Renton (Mark, Rents, Rent Boy, played by Ewan McGregor) responds only, “I’m cookin’ up.” This normalcy, this continuity in the face of hell, is what Calvino was advocating for: we don’t shiver when a writer holds forth on how bloodthirsty the wolf is. We shiver when the writer throws someone to that wolf and then tells us to keep walking, that the tour continues this way.

*


*

So if the complex, integrated tapestry of this movie didn’t appeal to my brother, then no unit of measure has yet been invented to record how little interest he has in its anemic sequel, T2 Trainspotting—released in 2017 to an utter lack of fanfare. (“First of all,” he says—a 1980s child speaking to the audacious title choice—“let’s be clear. T2 is Terminator 2.”)
     Setting this offense aside, his distaste largely has to do with accountability. So much media, in his view, romanticized drug abuse, made this life seem like a rip-roaring and natural choice. They posited desolation and hopelessness as such foregone conclusions that one could almost sickeningly admire how some people threw themselves whole-heartedly into the cause of their own destruction. Once a friend told me that drug addiction was a state approaching priesthood—because the people in the throes of addiction understood giving yourself over to something so totally that it became your god.
     My brother, for his part, allows that he was arcing toward addiction no matter what other influences acted upon his life. Drugs were coming for him from the first taste, and he’s nowhere near alone in that predisposition. If living in addiction is akin to being a monk, then some people are definitely predestined to pick up their crosses. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a certain amount of residual vitriol reserved for the forces which served, intentionally or not, as ancillary recruiters.
     It’s not that the movies made drugs themselves come off as picturesque—I think even casual movie-goers of a certain era can picture, with a sinking heart or stomach, the cry of “Ass to ass!” or the abscessed arm from Requiem for a Dream, the decimated minds and equally decimated hotel rooms of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, or baby Dawn’s corpse and Tommy’s funeral in Trainspotting. The trouble isn't that these details make drug use seem glamorous—it’s that the distinct anti-glamour somehow possesses its own potency, and therefore, presents its own danger.
     The problem is the way that addiction itself comes off as compelling—the otherworldliness of debasement, like a high fantasy realm in which the characters are privy to a different (dare I say, deeper?) understanding of things like suffering, drowning, disappearance, and death. They are willing to risk and lose things to which the rest of us cling, vestiges of our daily lives to which we are more materially attached. “When you’re on junk,” Mark explains, “you only have one worry: scoring. When you’re off it you are suddenly obliged to worry about all sorts of other shite.”
     Addiction is often mistaken for exciting. Perhaps the truest, most useful thing Trainspotting has to say on the subject, is that it is not. It is in fact, routine, and montages of endless theft and minor crime and drug purchases do a lot of the work of nailing this point home. Addiction is oppressive in the way that all routines are oppressive, with the added measure that this particular routine, by its very nature, represents a total and sometimes permanent surrender of freedom. Not to mention the fact that it constantly threatens to annihilate beloved people, people loved from birth, people who we have learned to love as they fight the machine that is constantly gunning for them, to love while holding the knowledge that there is nothing we can do to stop that machine ourselves, that we can only run alongside as it hunts them, screaming I love you I love you over the sound of its fearsome and thrashing jaws, and praying they veer in time out of its lethal path. 

*

I believe that through a labyrinth of absurdist and avoidant twists, Trainspotting ultimately delivers us back to something like this—to an honest, if interpretive, portrait of addiction. We see the failure of the state to protect, support, or even meaningfully feign concern for its most vulnerable members, we see just some of the impact of the AIDS epidemic in 1980s Edinburgh, we see the almost preternatural ability humans have to act in direct opposition to their own best interests. We see, ultimately, the chokehold that drugs have on the people who abuse them, how these people are held in dungeons, shining a light on a solid wall and desperately searching for the weaknesses in it, beating their way out with bloody hands or dying in the process, throwing their bodies helplessly against it. We do not see any different choices available to the people living in such dire straits, in spite of the phantom cheer tolling under the entire plot. “Choose life,” Mark says, like one of Ophelia’s unhinged chants, the nonsense prayers of the doomed, recited not to alter their destiny but to comfort them as it arrives.
     It’s easy to mistake his tone for strictly facetious—but there’s something ambitious to it, too, a state that he desperately wants to attain. “I’m gonna be just like you,” Renton concludes in the original movie’s final scene. For a time, in T2 Trainspotting, he seems to have cracked the code—which is that, of course, you do not get to simply choose life. You have to choose life over and over again—redundantly, cartoonishly, with every breath—and the moment that your defenses waver, something else is always waiting to choose you. Mark has assimilated to ordinary life over the course of twenty years, but the recent scare of a heart attack, and unfinished business with all of his friends, suddenly burst the carefully-built bubble of his new world, all by asking the question—what is this life you’re choosing? And why is there so much death in it, too?

*

But I see my brother’s point as well—all of this suffering, neatly jarred for a theater audience, belies the camera’s preferred claim to amorality. The point of view, embodied by the film rolling silently inside the camera, slips out of an affected ambivalence as it acts as the bridge between plot and viewer: no matter how many overdoses and deaths are depicted, and no matter how painful these confrontations are, the viewer is never really forced to contend with their finality.
     Because just as the audience rises from their seats and walks out of the theater when the movie has ended, the actors Ewan McGregor and Kevin McKidd are resurrected from their respective bouts with overdose and toxoplasmosis. We know this. The overdose, even, is reversed in real time, Renton brought gaspingly back to life onscreen mere minutes after he has begun the Lou-Reed-scored roll into his open grave. And just as this is not the end for Mark, Kevin McKidd likewise returns to remind us that he is not lost—we see them both later in Trainspotting, in T2, in flashback sequences, and even when the actors go on to star in other projects. Perhaps this is what my brother means when he criticizes the dabble that these movies offer into a world which does not, in reality, issue any tourist visas. McGregor and McKidd’s future lives as Obi-Wan Kenobi and Dr. Owen Hunt somehow imply—in spite of hundreds of thousands of global overdose deaths every year—that Tommy and Rents can never really die.
     And say none of that confuses you, my brother adds with disgust. Say you understand the weight of each loss, and you understand there is nothing triumphant in dying young, and say you are lucky enough to have not been born inclined toward addiction. Say you are only a spectator. How dare you, he asks, get off on touring this depraved landscape, which some of us would give anything to escape? He thinks of films like Trainspotting as tour buses, guiding shuddering civilians through a war zone where they don’t have to live.

*

To his cry of voyeurism, I can only point out that some people are voyeurs. I understand this critique. As someone who likewise spent most of my teens and twenties living out a series of self-destructive, compulsive behaviors, I have sometimes been guilty of overlooking their bedrock state of utter indignity in order to idealize their exciting, exotic surface. There’s an angle from which it can appear to be fun, like just being a particularly prolific lover girl: a storied past of straight sex, queer sex, one night stands, threesomes, throuples, and a few meaningful, real relationships scattered in there for good measure. It’s easy to think being a sex addict is, well, sexy.
     In reality, sex addiction can look like many things. Just some of them are: rubbing layers of skin off of your genitals. Needing more niche and more extreme types of pornography or sexual encounters to feel even a hint of pleasure, which forge ever-deeper and ever-more-destructive neural pathways in your brain. Reconfiguring your standards so that anyone can meet them, because you can’t face the prospect of no one. Maxing out ten credit cards at strip clubs and driving your (oblivious) family into total bankruptcy before anyone is the wiser. A hunger for love so potent that it births other, lesser hungers. A fear of aging, a fear of dying, a disembodied hand that has been mashed into its own body, because you can’t bring yourself to let anyone else touch you. A series of gimmicks, postures, and toys, designed to keep you from authentically reaching for another person, in the unbearable hour of the night when all of your dead have returned—instead, a dilettante parade of esoteric bodily distortions. Tricks, treats, the kind of pain you can cause each other with a little bit of creativity. Or if you’re alone, a sticky keyboard from one hand dipping back and forth, from body to machine, one coloring the other with its inhuman glow.
     So I feel a similar disquiet as the one my brother experiences around Trainspotting, when I hear songs or see movies which glamorize sadomasochistic sex, the kind of sex that primed the pump for so much of this to flow through me. This is particularly true when the media depict dynamics where the man is in charge (as he almost always seems to be). This is not subversive, I want to shout, this is just how the world works. How dare we celebrate this.

*

After the man wanted to know why I wouldn’t die, I was finally sufficiently afraid, as afraid as I should have been all along. It persuaded me to give up most of my destructive behaviors. Around the same time, the sleep paralysis I had experienced sporadically throughout my life came back in full force, my nightmares increased, and my extremities started to go numb at totally unpredictable times of the day. There were certain triggers I noticed, more likely to bring these symptoms on: my body seized toward coldness and nonfeeling when anyone raised their voice to me or had sex with me (which I couldn’t yet see as a participatory act, but, in the words of my therapist, as something being done to me). My brain could still tolerate violence—I am not sure it has a threshold for how bad it will allow others to make it feel—but blessedly, my body couldn’t. It had been so long since someone reached for me gently, that piece by piece I was fading away, becoming not my own. I was becoming a voyeur in my own body, watching it as it went.
     After some months of this, the thought began to bubble up that no one had touched me for the better part of a year, and that I usually went at least a month between touching myself or even consciously looking at my body—if not longer, much longer, often as long as I could manage. Whenever it occurred to me to touch, I just watched, I sat and watched the feeling until it passed me by. This is sometimes referred to as sexual anorexia, and viewed, in its own way, as a symptom of addiction. Addiction thrives on isolation. Recovery is reaching out, in a gesture of connection and authenticity—with one hand toward who you want, and with the other, who you want to be. 

*

The first iteration of Trainspotting—the Irvine Welsh novel on which the film was based—is written from the perspectives of multiple characters. Couplings and uncouplings, illnesses and deaths, imprisonments and employment opportunities—all of these events are described by the many characters who feel their impact. The subsequent movie adaptation departs from this multivocality. It’s narrated instead entirely in Mark Renton’s voice. Sometimes his elocution is spunky, sometimes loquacious, sometimes pale and detoxed, but it’s always all Mark.
     An example of how this influences our interpretation arises when Mark comes off of heroin for the first time. The film chronicles this event through Mark’s perspective, and he notes most importantly how his best-frenemy Sick Boy (AKA Simon, played by Jonny Lee Miller) detoxed at the same time. “Not because he wanted to, you understand, but just to annoy me. Just to show me how easily he could do it, thereby downgrading my own struggle.”
     Even so, the camaraderie is obvious between Simon and Mark, the closeness of petty criminals, occasionally reformed, always aching for the chance to revert back to rascalry and revelry. We travel such powerful crucibles to remain ourselves. The bond between them is as seductive to watch as it has been essential to their survival. Abbreviated language, gruffness disguising love, love disguising loathing, the kind of friendship which flirts with siblinghood by its lack of adornment. The longevity is hinted at with flashback photos of them as small children, buzzcutted or blonde. Their connection is always palmed but never counted, the treasure most valuable and most likely to be taken for granted.
     When I think about people like Simon, or Renton, or my brother, and certainly when I think of people who exist in far less protected positions in relationship to the three-headed hydra of monetized sickness, profiteering incarceration, and extortionist recovery—it’s entirely logical that Sick Boy & Mark have milked this brotherhood, as well any other resource available to them, for all it can offer. Why not manipulate a system which hinges your freedom on it? Especially because whatever you try is still never enough, not nearly enough, to set you free.

*


*

What’s clear in the text, however, is that hearing from Simon himself makes all the difference in how we view this competitive drug withdrawal. Whereas the film makes him seem basically superhuman, completely impervious to the agony of opiate withdrawal, the book offers methodology, tells us how exactly Sick Boy manages this coup of self-control.
     In fact, this passage demonstrates how much Simon shares the single-mindedness which plagues Mark during detox. The difference is that we see Mark in his initial, acute struggle to come off of drugs. We see him in the clammy and pallid night of the soul, in the hours wracked with such convulsions that once my brother rolled from a top bunk to the floor. Sick Boy, on the other hand, only appears in the days after physical sickness—and by the time this flu fades into the past, he has seamlessly transferred the fixation usually reserved for drugs onto another pursuit: women. He was desperate to score in one way, now he’s just desperate to score in another. His newfound teetotalling is transfigured, through this substitute compulsion, from Herculean feat into basic white-knuckling.
     This trajectory is common in recovery groups. Many’s the sex addict who has been in recovery from drugs or alcohol for years, before eventually realizing that now that they have that urgent, life-threatening condition under control, they’ve transferred its spiritual core into another shell.
     The first few paragraphs of Sick Boy’s early sobriety are a drooling account of a panty line he observes through a woman’s outfit. Off of drugs for a few days, there is an immediate need to find and stow dopamine in as many places as possible, like a squirrel preparing for a brutal winter only he can smell. It’s not enough to have just one hit. Simon exerts his calculated, considerable charm on two tourists who agree to get a drink with him later in the evening—he flexes all of his wooing muscles, while internally debating if he’ll even bother to show up and meet the women later that night. He breezes, in his mind, through all of the sexually gratifying scenarios he could engineer for himself. Seducing the two out-of-towners. A dalliance with the woman whose visible underwear so excited him. A night at a club where, Sick Boy purports, nobody gets laid (except him).
     It’s hard to articulate exactly how accurate a portrayal this is of an addiction left unchecked. Why have none or one when we can have three? Each there to relieve us, should we need it. It’s not enough to take the edge off, we need to know that the edge has been permanently decommissioned, dismantled piece by piece in a way which ensures it will never return.

*

Toward the end of this soliloquy, Simon pauses to ask himself, “which lucky ride will ah stick it intae the night? Who’s the best fuck?” Readers likely prepare themselves for a particular woman’s name to follow here—or at the very least, for a description of a type. In the next sentence, however, in the very next breath, Sick Boy renegotiates the terms under which the question is being entertained.
     “Who’s the best fuck?,” he asks himself.
     “Why me, of course,” he answers.
     The ego of this aside, the pursuit of the best fuck points us toward the very impulse Simon is attempting to control, by substituting it out—OK so not heroin, but if he can’t chase dragons, how about the thrill-seeker’s need to provoke them, champion them, even possess them. He wants the most dangerous, purest, and highest high, and he knows it’s him. Nothing else, no one else exists, who could ever satisfy him.
     This neatly directs us to the close of the passage, which is one of the more succinct treatises ever penned on the addict’s condition: “[T]here’s an opportunity,” Sick Boy says, “tae get off wi a woman…and that’s it, that is it, ah’ve found fuck all else, ZERO, tae fill this big, BLACK HOLE like a clenched fist in the centre ay my fucking chest…” 

*

Like any reader who has felt the clench of that fist, I am forced to remember what it is to wish equally to either succumb to it or be saved from it. I have prayed out of both sides of my mouth, for the abeyance or the swift arrival of the thing, the one thing—“that’s it, that is it,” Simon says—which will bring peace to this gnawing need, which will wrest each finger of the clenched fist loose. This approach to seduction—in spite of the riotous language Simon uses to describe it, and never mind the fact that it involves the body of another human—is a supremely lonely state of being. Nothing which forces you is fun.
     This is true even when the habits are swapped out and the stakes are low. As my brother tells me, it was always tempting to make fun of the kids who were sent to treatment for, ahem, weed addiction, but he regretted this afterward. Beyond the lack of immediate physical danger wrought by hard drugs, he explains, what we’re talking about is the same. Any kind of compulsion represents a soul-death. The same fist is squeezing us all. He refutes my whimpering at imposter syndrome on these grounds. If anything, he tells me, he’s glad that we’ve got addiction of some form in common. “It makes you more relatable.”
     I am coming to recognize this as valid, though the extremity of our struggles is so different that it remains challenging for me to accept that they are iterations of the same root. Maybe this is becoming more believable, though. In an age where we understand the severity of tech addiction and online sports gambling, perhaps it’s easier to focus on the shared source, rather than the specific substance.
     As my brother and I commiserate, I see that there is more similarity than I could have ever known. We reminisce about the combined sweet relief and apprehension we’d felt all the times when we gave up the struggle and ran toward relapse. We shared the same desensitized pleasure receptors, impervious to anything but the most tailored molecule. We’d felt, thousands of times, an identical sensation—a rush which could not be had any other way but was pregnant with bile, like a poisoned sword tip stabbing us out of our misery.

*

As I think about Simon, I try to trace this thread back to the beginning, to figure out what it is I find so appealing about him. Part of it is the same thing that attracted me at age 11, in chat rooms. It was men’s disregard for women, and the way some women learn to covet it.
     “Which lucky ride will ah stick it intae,” I hear, in a voice unmistakably belonging to myself. I’m imitating Simon’s accent, briefly inhabiting his body. Even though we pose the question comically, I know that shame lives in the chasm between its ask and its answer. Simon and I are poised above a pit: on one side there is the hunger which hounds us, on the other side the disgust we feel when we’re finally sated. It’s a lose-lose cycle unless we can rise above it. This is why Simon keeps pursuing all of his amorous options instead of committing to one. If the two states never intersect, then the circuit remains blissfully incomplete, and the pangs never ground back home. He can go on pretending that his pursuit is one of happiness and not survival, that there is something out there which could fill the hole. The liminality must be prolonged in order for us to effectively lie to ourselves.
     My brother once said, about these bargaining times, “So me, I reach for tin foil and a lighter, and you—well, this is what you do.” We all find things to transcend ourselves, but the transcendence is fraught, ever-failing, a series of solutions which only marginally stick even if we strain majestically to implement them. We are like planes with one propeller constantly threatening to sputter out and spiral us down.
     Similarly, it’s obvious that any relationship attempting to compete with Simon’s clenched fist will fail. Burgeoning affection—the bashfulness with which we should approach courtship when it could lead to real, delicate human connection—could never hope to survive that squeeze, let alone alleviate it. Nothing, therefore, is allowed this chance. In T2, Veronika is, in her words, “[Simon]’s girlfriend, but it’s business really." In Trainspotting, we see a strung-out Simon still charismatic and flirting with Allison, but they don’t claim each other, don't lean on this relationship to fight the atomization of addiction. We don’t know he is the father of Allison’s baby until the baby is already dead. Mark says, “Baby Dawn, she wasn’t mine. Spud’s. Swanney’s. Sick Boy’s. I dunno,” and it is, famously, only Simon’s scream which asserts his part in this lineage. He opens his throat and the hole inside of him takes shape in sound. He watches, they all watch, as it swallows not only him, but the woman and baby who—in another life—could have been his family. 

*

So if fatherhood and some loose facsimile of romance didn’t save him, the kinds of one-night stands he narrates don’t stand a chance. How can any single person passing through the filter of the all-encompassing Sick self find a way to loosen the grip of the fist? And if, as Sick Boy reports, the fist is in the center of his chest—how could anyone hope to navigate around it and get at his heart?
    This posited my wish to be Simon’s lucky ride in a strange place. Viewed by the light of wanting to be special or chosen, it was twofold. It contained the desire to be with him, sure, the desire for him to look at his bounty of options, and determine that none of them could have competed with me—but this wish was paired with an awareness that regardless of how special I was, this man had no system for endurance. No matter what, I’d wind up being disposable to him. Because this knowledge didn’t diminish my initial attraction, what emerged, perversely, was the desire to be disposed of.
     If I extrapolate further, it was the desire not to matter, for nothing to matter, for nothing to sink in or stick, for everyone to go around grazing each other and never making an impact. If I let Sick Boy stand not just for himself, but for a wave of men I have known, then I’m awed at their collective ability to exist casually—in the world, in their bodies, in their charm. All three are settings in which they take comfort in their sovereignty, to such an extent that reality actually yields to accommodate their desires.
     I, on the other hand, have never been casual. I have spent years of my life weeping and wishing for reality to yield to my singular hope to find love. In the past, I counted myself lucky to be among the desires of men like Simon, never considering what I wanted myself. I cowered and quieted myself, hoping that if I wasn’t too demanding, I’d go unnoticed and be permitted to stay. This is hardly a recipe for self-esteem or reciprocal love.
     So when I finally started to fight back against this paradigm, when I told a man that anyone who didn’t love me was banished from my bed, I was, in some ways, fundamentally altering the landscape I once sought. The magic was stanched at its poisonous source. Asking Sick Boy to be more considerate, to be more caring, to be anything besides the almost comic brutality of a hard and heat-seeking cock, meant he would cease to matter to me in the hour of my urgent need. It meant he could not be the untouchable Adonis who chose me and made everything right in the choosing.
     It was the returning legacy of those early years, when my parents were divorcing and the men online stepped in to raise me. If it was their world, if it was Sick Boy’s world, if I was three holes and a heart which occasionally got in their way, then there was never any need to struggle for something better. I could be the hand on his chest and the tongue scooping ecstasy from his mouth to mine, the stranger over which he momentarily obsesses, I could stay anonymous and unlovable forever. I could just lie to one side and let the tide roll me back on myself, toward a new becoming.

*


*

So that was the sickness. If the concept of healing is a sham, which it is (the writer Adrian Shirk asks, what’s the unpolluted state to which we imagine ourselves returning??), then the good news is that it can begin anywhere. I did a lot of things. I joined a support group. I made lists of the behaviors which were safe for me, and wouldn’t catapult me into compulsion’s trademark feeding frenzy. Then I made lists of the behaviors or people or habits I must avoid at all costs, because my sanity lies on their line. I cut myself off from the usual vices. I didn’t allow myself to read or watch anything which posited an overt power dynamic in sex. No men towering over women, no name calling if the names weren’t kind, no bad-faith actors with advanced vocabularies in degradation.
     Instead, I started to pick up different things, to see what might have once attracted me. What would my desires have been, if I’d been able to explore before my brain was calibrated to accommodate the obscene specificity of a too-adult world? I resented the ways that this world taught me to draw a line falsely linking sex with increasingly rarefied kinks. Even without the help of porn sites, it’s very likely that some people would have derived satisfaction from seeing fluids leave their body and land on their partner’s—but, absent the internet, it’s doubtful that so many would have independently discovered a taste for brainwashing GIFs or feeding fetishes or financial domination, or for the frightfully esoteric lexicon accompanying these and countless other interests.
     I wanted to come back to claim the life I would have had, before the proto-sites which I encountered in the late nineties launched themselves and their attendant 1,000 ships. What would my body have wanted if I was alone with it while it was still forming? I laid back and tried to tap into the thrum far below the buzzing surface, like straining from a basement to hear rain fall on the roof.
     It started simply, requiring so much effort to become instinct: there was a drummer who I liked to watch play. I liked how it wasn’t just his arms but his whole body pressing him forward into the song. It seemed like he was altering time, traveling through it at a different rate than the rest of us, and offering—through his sticks—to bring us with him. I liked how boxers moved—not the brutality of a real fight, but the wrapped hands, discipline, the way they punched when they were not facing an opponent but knocking out every shadow self who came to spar. I liked when footballers kissed each other on the cheek or leapt into each other’s arms. I liked songs about devotion. I began reversing, through the embrace of these gentle giant archetypes, every instinct my body had to imperil itself. I no longer wanted the strong man unless he had proven he could be trusted with that strength.

*

T2 Trainspotting was a big part of the compass turning inside me to require kindness. Every wrongdoing and scrape committed amongst these friends in their younger years calcified, and left a con-trail in the tapestry. Pain turned out to be a more everlasting substance than our heroes presupposed. There were things they believed they had left behind—that we, as an audience, were asked to leave behind, in the vague repository of two lost decades. Otherwise, how does the plot ever inch forward? But as every addict knows, pain is a force not actually diminished by avoidance. It’s merely postponed. And in many cases, pain not dealt with returns vengefully, with a mind to collect interest for time-not-served.
     For anyone who’s seen it, I don’t need to clarify that Trainspotting is not a sexy movie—even though the characters are compelling, they arouse a maternal instinct more than anything else. I was drawn to the characters in the second installment for a number of reasons, chiefly because by the time I encountered it, Sick Boy and Renton were wrinkled and had been wounded in love, just like me. The men in the second movie were also closer to my age than the boys in the first. And crucially, their relative sobriety meant they had shed the 10,000-mile stares of their youths.

*

Given all that, I lean back and feel into my body, to the place where sound stops. This is not a metaphor. I have been touching myself to a few standout moments in this actual film since it was released in 2017, and riffing an entire universe of imagined moments with Sick Boy and Renton besides what actually happens onscreen.
     To start the ritual, I subtract Simon’s inner self from the equation—I don’t want to think about his negligence as a father, stint as a pimp, or wandering tongue. I just fantasize about his face, his body, and about Mark’s too, the beautiful faces and bodies, toward which I could prove myself near-idolatrous. Their cruel indifference toward others or their unblushing self-abuse—qualities which should be dealbreakers—would not be things I could overlook if they were real people. They’d be hideous by that equitable light, the way shining light in a covert place is always grotesque and enlightening: the worms crawl there. So I fantasize about the two actors who play these characters. I superimpose approximations of good and decent people onto the bodies that I can’t help but yearn for.
     I fantasize in the present tense, thinking of them both elegantly arrived in their forties. I think of our lines matching lines, the gentle but insistent quality of lovemaking that unseats both the savagery of youth and the compensatory timidity which sometimes follows. Steady as rain. I can hear it on the roof after all.
     I think of Sick Boy lying behind me, holding me, while Mark carefully gives himself to me, telling me what a good place it is where we’ve both arrived. The important thing is that I am able to fantasize about this, about a quality of awe in a lover’s voice. In spite of having thought for so long that I knew how all affairs began—and much more importantly, ended—there are people who have also experienced loss and still choose to be overwhelmed by beauty and kinesis. This is the hot heap in which we might survive winter: like a den of mixed snakes welcoming one more into their midst. There is beauty beyond our own which matters to the moment. Simon kisses me and holds my face, asks me to stay in the present. Their hands climb me from behind like ivy, not creeping and imperial, but drifting and greening. 

*

All of this may not sound like treatment for the malady—but the greatest dilemma of the fist squeezing the center of my chest, or the hand squeezing my neck, was that on some level, I believed I deserved the squeezing. I shouldn’t get air. I should actually fucking die. That has to be one of the loneliest feelings in the world, and one of the most convincing. If I had never risked getting close to anyone else again, never reached out to see that not all hands are fists, then I might never have learned that feeling is a lie. And in those early days of recuperation, when reaching out to real hands, real people, felt like an impossibility, something else had to pave the way.
     So when you take into account these other, older fantasies—the pain and pinking, slap, spitcrawl, and unconsciousness which can be craved and crawled to and also dealt unsolicited from hands (real and imagined), from whose inscrutable grasp I had spent my entire life trying to beg love or break free—it’s no insignificant thing to imagine two sets of hands which are gentle when they reach for me. To imagine them elevating me is a small revolution.
     This isn't about the characters from any movie. It’s not even really about sex, although that should be bountifully clear by now. It’s about the good witches we invent, to give us power when we are powerless. The proximity of all three bodies is as intimate as birth. Hold me while it happens. 

*

As with all addictions, the flare-ups and relapses and regressions occurred around moments of stress. Whenever I struggled to inhabit intimacy, the temptation to close myself off was strong—it was easier than explaining why I suddenly needed someone to stop touching me, or to start rubbing my legs to bring the feeling back into them, or to justify the lines in my face and my sudden sprays of grey hair with the notion that sleep paralysis is, tragicomically, also known as “Old Hag Syndrome.”
     But I knew that if I was going to be close with someone ever again, it meant I had to get nearer to myself. Toward this objective, I brought Mark and Simon close and apprenticed myself to them. And now it’s just instinct: when I can tell I need it, I let them guide me.
     In this case I’m on top of Simon, and we’re facing the same direction, which is toward Mark, we’re looking at Mark. For my part, when it comes to this position of summit, surmount, atopness, I don’t often like it and I never much have. I don’t like to control how deeply I feel things. No matter what has ever happened to me, I’ve adjusted, but don’t ask me to be the one at the helm.
     But in the fantasy, there’s something for me to learn from this. It’s suddenly possible for me to modulate my own experience, for me to say when. Looking toward Mark helps, like picking a spot on the horizon to keep from getting dizzy, and the arc of my body is long and levitating, and Simon’s hand is on my hip, not to control my movements, because we’ve agreed that’s not how power will work between us—but to hang on, to stay with me through the waves, and I feel grateful because it means I don’t have to be vigilant. I’ve spent my whole adult life trying to find a man, and now that I’ve found two, I’m glad that I don’t have to keep looking for them. 

*

*

Once, before he went away, a man who I loved taught me to float in water, and in spite of his going, in spite of me believing that if he left it meant I would drown, Sick Boy is right here, his hand under the small of my back. He’s saying, She’s OK, she’s fine, she’s beautiful, you’re beautiful, and Mark says, Sure she is, we are.
     This we is everything. It's the imperishable fellowship present between us, between any people wherever we are gathered. Even when we’ve broken each others’ hearts, squandered each others’ friendships, left each other floating in the Mediterranean, or just plain stolen each others’ wallets, the we endures. It’s who we can’t help but be. 
     Friendship is different over time. If we must age, T2 seems to suggest, it will age with us. Its strength is not withered but winnowed—the force of friendship between the major characters is stunning, almost violent. They insist on each other. Ever-present is the blood-lust which Mark inspired in his friends at the end of the original movie, by stealing £60,000 from them, just before curtain fell on their little fates. They don’t mince words or forgive him for this, even after twenty years. It’s not about forgiveness. They hate Mark and want to kick his ass—in the crude, inviolate methods available to them. (As another film about drug addiction, The Panic in Needle Park, points out, “You can only betray someone you need. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter.”)
     As Mark rips his friends off, he clarifies that Simon “would have done the same if he’d only thought of it first.” And in the sequel, he has no misgivings about seducing Simon’s girlfriend, Veronika. But in a scene when the three of them are blowing coke and watching old football matches, Veronika says “You are so clearly in love with each other that I feel awkward in your company.”
     Their bond is singular. It’s not tacit approval or watery support—it’s just sticking around. If their connection cannot be snorted, shot, beaten, or betrayed away, if the true test of a relationship is not kindness but continuity, the propensity to just keep showing up, whether you feel like it or not, whether you’re welcome or not, then T2 offers a unique picture of friendship. It offers a group of patchily-bald men, stunted in a prolonged adolescence which some of their brethren unfortunately did not live to see. Men brimful with the desperation and gratitude of having escaped the would-be henchman of untimely demise. This is friendship between men who thought they’d be dead long before they’d ever meet again.
     The twenty year bridge between the Trainspotting films is a convoluted love song between two best friends. It’s about how countless the betrayals they commit can be, without ever disturbing the essence of something between them.
     As for me, I wanted to get in the middle of that miracle and magnetism, to bottle up some of their unshakeable bond by getting close enough to touch it. I need to know this is real. Because in a backwards way, the more they cheat and cuck each other, the more I’m allowed to believe in unconditionality. I am reminded, through their mistreatment of each other, that we love the people we love because we love them—and not for any other reason.
     This thought sustains me until it’s supplanted by Mark reaching out. He’s right, I’ve thought enough about this. Bring me back now. He feels my breasts, my waist, all of my body in its crackles of exertion. The light warms each new place he finds, we’re set to a continual simmer, flushed and sheenful. Each man is glowing to know that just on the other side of me is his best friend, his friend could not be closer, none of us can come closer than this.

*

I feel Mark’s hand on my chin, see the look that Simon gives me when he kisses me for the first time. They have taken me to some other movie’s house, and the set pieces are all obscured, but the sound of a creek outside is too familiar to forget.
     Sometimes I still struggle—to find my body in all this loss, or find my loss in a natural avoidance, or to avoid the corners of furniture. I’ve always been clumsy, I keep bumping into everything and counting the bruises without touching. I find photographs of bruises similarly covering me—my ass black and blue, the outline of a hand slapped into the skin of my cheek, bites on my thighs which bloomed into a sickly, guava-grey.
     For the next segment of the fantasy, I put Renton above me, and it’s easy to picture, because there’s a scene in T2 where he’s on top of Veronika, and if I squint, I can pretend I am her—exchanging her litheness for my soft thighs, her eastern European accent for my east coast. In this scene, we see the way that some sex is divided into output and intake, we see him straining into her, across the years that divide their ages, across the borders that divide their upbringings, we see the reasons she will rob him and the reasons he deserves to be robbed. When I’m close to coming, I feel the energy push out of my body and toward him, toward the Deco quality of his arms, angled over her.
     It isn’t time yet. I need something else. Mark and Simon aren’t characters anymore but hands for hire, ghost writers toiling with me toward something. My brain still tosses up blocks to protect my body from what was done to it, each limb numb and tingling, and they’re helping me recover the memory from my feet up. Starting with each sole in their hands, they rub until the nerves wake back up—my legs, arms, chest, it’s all coming back to me now, how violently each of these places has been handled in the past and how desperately I want to trust these men with them now. It’s clear that they’ll help me tell this story as I remember it, from all the places flooding inside me.
     I lean back onto Simon, the tendrils of a vine rifling down from above. Mark reaches forward for me, and I breathe as the plant grows into my open mouth, craning not toward the sun but where the water runs. I come with my eyes wide open, looking into Mark’s eyes and feeling Simon’s on me, my breath expanding inside of my ribs, so that I am both ways closer to their touch. The music swells into credits, each of our names exploding from the screen.

*

It’s hard to say in these moments if I am talking myself into or out of intimacy—the feelings of closeness I’m experiencing are, notably, not attached to real people. And if even they were, I’m looking for a life partner, not two bedfellows (no matter how charming). But I appreciate the ways they’re preparing me again to face an actual man. Fantasy allows us to engage with elements of reality and unreality on equal ground. Without unreality, we have only our lives as we have lived them. Without reality, we have no hook to hang desire on.
     When I close my eyes, I remember the house where a boy took me at eighteen and we undressed together. I fell in love for the first time in that room. This moment is no longer real and yet it lives forever.  It was private, and I won’t say anything else about it, and if Mark and Sick Boy were here right now, I wouldn't tell them, either. But I feel thankful to them, for helping me remember enough of myself to find it again.

*

The scene most likely to draw criticism in T2 is when Mark and Sick Boy excoriate each other for the two major blemishes in their respective pasts.
     “You’re a tourist in your own youth,” Sick Boy says. “Just because you had a near-death experience and now you’re feeling all fuzzy and warm. What other moments will you be revisiting? Here’s a good one: How about the time you sold Tommy his very first hit? Leading him on to heroin addiction, HIV infection, and ultimately his death at the age of—what was it, twenty-two, twenty-three?”
     “Aye,” Mark says, “that’s mine. How’s yours?”
     “Don’t know what you’re talking about.”
     “She’d be a woman by now. Maybe kids of her own. But she never got that far, did she? Never got to lead her life. Because her father, someone who should have been lookin’ after her, protecting his own infant, was too busy filling his own veins with heroin to check that she was breathing properly. Aye. How d’you keep a lid on that one?”
     This exchange doesn’t reveal any new information—it’s a reference to everything that went seismically wrong in the first film, everything that has remained immoveable since the two characters last saw each other. It could be accused of over-explicating two of the most poignant moments of the original movie, a favoritism shown wrongfully to Telling Not Showing, a siphoning of the excruciating magic from its nonrenewable source.
     But it’s important—it’s essential to the state of sequelhood, and to the truth of this movie, that this conversation immediately precedes both characters’ sole heroin relapses in T2. The thesis of the entire Trainspotting saga—the unspoken truth which set the stage for a return in the first place—is that both characters, to different degrees and in very different ways, felt partially responsible for the loss of a single life. The only way either of them has managed to deal with this has been to pretend, for twenty years, that they were over it, the way I have likewise pretended to be over things which finally refused to be forgotten. All three of us heard the siren call imploring us to “keep going and fuck everything,” as Mark says, but eventually, there was nowhere left to go, and everything was already fucked.
     Simon and Mark make ample room for self-delusion, but they will not suffer it in each other. Implicit in the way they each force one another to face the music, is avoidance of their own shameful song. So now, instead of placating each other, reassuring each other that they did the best they could under the circumstances, providing each other with the strength or tools necessary to keep a lid on that one, they are there to tilt each other’s lids glaringly ajar. To blow the lids clean off.
     Without fail or hesitation, each knows where the other has buried his unforgivable skeletons. They navigate to these most sensitive locations as deftly as if they’d been returning to the secret, shared site of boyhood treasure. I needed them to do this for me, too. By guiding my hand to all of the places I thought had become graves, they insisted I look at which parts of myself I kept hidden there. Only then could I live.
     And in the face of unbearable pain, of the “big, black hole in the centre ay their fucking chests”—they’d only ever known one reaction. One needle in two arms—the same needle which was ultimately responsible for the deaths plaguing both of them. Just when our heroes think that they’ve grown too old to be desperate, too settled for squalor, too grey to live at the superhuman pace of active addiction—the pain reaches out and finds them, and announces that there is no such thing as a sequel, that the first movie never really ended.

*

But importantly, they don’t stay here. This relapse is a singular episode for both Sick Boy and Renton, because they have found other ways to stay afloat in this life. We see Mark coming home to hug his father, where once he sat sullenly or stole money or was locked into his room. Simon goes back to the hunt for grandiosity haunting his ordinary life. We get by. Every time one addict tells his story to another, he is cracking open these unspeakable burial sites and learning to live, gracefully and gradually, with what is unearthed there.
     What if T2 Trainspotting—in its willingness to irrigate its wounds and track their long-term reverberations—is actually free from the sins, as my brother saw them, of its father? It helped me look at an unexamined injury, determine that the problem was trying to live with my heart separate from my body, and assisted me in putting one back inside of the other. It helped to determine which wispy threads of the self can or should be preserved in the endless throttle & assault of this world’s late hour. It helped me feel my own body in ways I had believed to be extinguished.
     When I think of putting this essay out into the world, I am sedated by total terror, but—in part because of T2—I no longer let the terror dictate how I live. I don't have to bury it to put it down and walk away. In fact, I’ve just witnessed, courtesy of Mark and Simon, how little burying it works. My brother, who was lucky to live, unearthed so much of his story and told it to a group of people who had walked, like him, through the valley of death. It was this talking which gave us our lives back. 

*

It’s entirely possible that T2 should be condemned as a pathetic, nepo-runt, but then, maybe it's not alone and we could just allow it—like my brother, like me—to live, allow it to thrive, entirely on its own merits and on its shaky, post-recovery legs. Maybe it helps us to see beyond how ill-formed we are, helps to free us, and points out that for heaven’s sake, we should free ourselves in the direction of other people. Our salvation is there: past lust and loss we belong with our boyhood friends, our circle of post-sobriety brothers, our families and enemies, we belong to all of them and this belonging is the opposite of death. If I wasn’t ready to let new people in for a while, if I had to imagine them, Simon and Mark offered a safe, lush place to temporarily land. 

The point is not that Tommy and Dawn must die in order that we may live, or that I needed to be slapped toward my own happiness. We all must go through a certain amount of pain, but exceptional pain is not the prerequisite of exceptional jubilance, and it’s a fool’s errand to keep chasing one’s tail in that frightful cycle. The point is that since we’ve outlived that pain, we might as well be happy. There is dignity in surviving what must be survived,  but no glory to be found along long and needlessly sacrificial roads, so anything we can do to collapse the distance between where we stand now, and a world of possible joy, is not only our right—it’s our sacred responsibility. 

In a past life, it was the bond of friendship which enjoined Mark and Sick Boy to take the train to Corrour station, breathe the fresh air, appreciate their identities and where they were—and it is their dead friend, twenty years gone, whose ghost brings them back. As they confront each other about who they are, who they have always been, the past is with them. Urging them out into the world with each other, to do battle or to pay tribute—then to go home, to never stop struggling together toward the light.

*

I don’t need the boys anymore, but sometimes I still want them. I'm taking my time, using my index finger to outline their absent forms on my own skin. Some nights I'm afraid if I touch myself, I will open a portal through which I can't return. I pray while I do it, because what I want is to give up control, and some echo of a prayer reminds me that there are things I don’t have to see to trust. Simon can tell that I’m leaning back on him because I’m afraid to drop overboard, and he’s saying, Spill, spill, til finally the alarm sounds, and the river rises, and I fall forward, but Mark is on the other side. He catches me, he kisses his own best friend, and there are hands on the fronts and backs of my shoulders, assuring me that I don’t need to be afraid to go forward. There is life on the other side of this veil, they tell me, the kind of life that cannot be revoked by any unfeeling force in this world. I’m lucky that it’s there, and I’m lucky that it’s still a mystery. If I knew everything about it, what would I have left to dream about in the dark?


*


Lily Herman is a writer from Maryland. She has two chapbooks available: Spree, through BRUISER, and Each Day There is a Little Love in a Book for You, through Dryad Press. Her website is lilyjherman.com and she is writing about grief, like everyone else.


Monday, December 1, 2025

Dec 01, 2025: Jodie Noel Vinson, Sick and Tired

*

Sick and Tired

Jodie Noel Vinson

*

Like many during the pandemic lockdown, my husband Marc and I watched and re-watched shows from our couch. Unlike most, our quarantine stretched well beyond March 2020. We had what is now known as Long Covid, a post-viral response we would struggle with for the next four years. After months of symptoms, we began taking cautious walks around the block, but each venture landed us back on the couch. Fatigue blanketed us like a weighted duvet; we could barely stand long enough to take a shower. My lungs ached, and my heart raced even when I was sitting calmly, watching the next episode of The Golden Girls.
     
We’d turned to the lighthearted series to distract ourselves from the dark thoughts that threatened in the evening, when the interminable illness was at its worst. I remembered the sitcom, and its catchy theme song, from commercials that aired on NBC throughout my childhood: And if you threw a party, invited everyone you knew, you would see the biggest gift would be from me. I had vague memories of the four women co-stars: Rue McClanahan (Blanche), Betty White (Rose), Estelle Getty (Sophia), and Beatrice Arthur (Dorothy), outfitted in long, brightly colored dresses so shapeless they sometimes looked like bathrobes, and often were bathrobes.
     At the time, I’d been wearing my bathrobe a lot, and the show’s simple repetitions seemed to fit with my recurring lifestyle, which was increasingly confined to the couch. The sitcom, which ran for seven seasons (1985-1992), follows three single women in their fifties who begin a new stage of life together in Miami, along with Sophia, Dorothy’s mother. Several episodes in, we were able to predict the show’s rhythms and one-liners: Sophia’s zingers as she exited stage left, Dorothy’s dry wit, Rose’s rambling stories, Blanche’s innuendos. But as season four ran into season five, we noticed a shift in tone. The show began to take on social issues, episodes dedicated to topics like addiction and artificial insemination. 

*

*

One evening, a special double feature: Dorothy, we learned, had been sick—some sort of flu—and, just as she began to recover, got sick again. She begins wearing her bathrobe more often than usual, even when the other three are fully clothed in monochrome dress suits of magenta, teal, and mustard yellow, in dusters that flow off shoulder pads like capes, in bulky costume jewelry and earrings that dangle from perfectly coifed hair. In the opening scene, Dorothy, who rarely slouches, sits slumped among them at the kitchen table. She complains of overwhelming fatigue, heart palpitations, of being too tired to talk, or lift her arms in the shower.
     My eyes pricked with sympathy. I glanced at Marc. We’d both cried when Josh Lyman got shot in The West Wing, and during Gilmore Girls, when Luke and Lorelei finally kiss. Neither of us had ever cried at The Golden Girls.
     
In the next scene, Dorothy sits on an exam table, clutching a blue hospital gown closed at her neck. Even when seated, she retains some of her five-foot-ten elegance, and she’s doing her best to hold on to dignity. Every now and then she uses her free hand to gesture at the doctor, to make a point, to make up the imbalance in the power dynamic. The doctor stands over her in his lab coat, hands tucked noncommittally into the pockets of his khaki pants. Dorothy’s tests were all normal; he refuses to believe she is sick. From stage right, spritely Sophia bustles in to the exam room to testify to her daughter’s illness, ever-present handbag at her elbow. The physician doesn’t listen.
     Dorothy sees a lot of doctors through the first episode of the two-part plot, each more dismissive than the last. Even worse is the way they explain her symptoms to Dorothy—as something she has imagined, or as a consequence of some personal failure. “I get tired too,” one says, “It’s called getting old.” And another: “How’s your social life; do you see men?”
     “There’s nothing wrong with you, Dorothy,” Dr. Budd, the specialist she travels to New York to see, chastises. He leans towards her over the desk in suit and tie, a faux leather chair creaking beneath his weight. The city beyond the windows of the his skyrise office seems to dwarf his patient, who appears to shrink in stature after each encounter with a medical professional. “Have you ever thought about seeing a psychiatrist?”
     “That’s what happened to me!” I turned to Marc as To Be Continued… flashed across the screen. He’d seen me come home from each appointment, crumpled in despair after being told by one specialist after another that my symptoms were all in my head. Because of safety restrictions during the health crisis, I couldn’t have a Sophia by my side in the exam rooms where doctors wrote me off with prescriptions for anxiety meds. Now, to have someone witness on screen the humiliation I’d experienced under their withering stares felt almost healing.
     The show takes its time in resolving the issue. For Dorothy, usually so strong and sure, there is self-doubt; she begins to feel she is going mad. For once, Rose’s tendency to take things at face value is a virtue: she never doubts her friend is sick. For Sophia, there is fear: her daughter might have an unknown disease that could cause real harm.
     “We’ve seen a perfectly healthy energetic woman waste away,” she tells Blanche and Rose over salad in the kitchen, where they often share a late-night cheesecake. Behind them, the polished wood cupboards glow against butter-colored wallpaper. “So what difference does it make that they don’t have a name for it yet…You think they had a name for the Black Plague when one guy had it? Thousands had to die before they knew what it was.”
     These were fears I’d lived with for months. We were in a pandemic. The long-term effects of the coronavirus were as yet unknown. Each time pain fired in my chest, my stomach dropped the way it does when you slip on ice, letting me know something was wrong. But whenever I explained my symptoms to a physician, I was disbelieved, because the pain couldn’t be seen. I was assigned therapists who assumed, like the doctors, that my symptoms were psychosomatic, that my elevated pulse was caused by anxiety, and that if I’d only think positively, I would get better. Even with my husband’s condition mirroring my own, I began to doubt myself. Through those months, Marc became my Rose, assuring me what we felt was real. 

*

*

As the theme song fades into the opening scene of episode two—your heart is true, you’re a pal and a confidant—the camera pans over shelves of children’s toys before centering Dorothy. Her frame is hunched at a knee-high blue table in a pediatrician’s office, where she is pounding a fistful of Play-do in frustration. She’s come to see the doctor there, a long-time friend, who, owing to their prior relationship, believes she is sick. The pediatrician recommends a specialist who is finally able to diagnose Dorothy’s mysterious ailment as chronic fatigue syndrome. “It has a name! I am thrilled,” Dorothy rejoices, and the four friends go out to dinner to celebrate.
     The restaurant’s dining room is filled with formal round tables covered in white cloth overlaid with pink. Beneath the chandeliers, the women are dressed in their finest: Blanche in baby blue, Sophia and Rose in a light mauve that matches the tablecloth, and Dorothy wears a stylish white jacket with a high, quilted collar and heavy gold earrings. She suggests champagne to celebrate, and Sophia cheers: “My daughter found out she has a debilitating disease!” The irony was not lost on me, but neither was the jubilation. 

*

*

Across the restaurant, Dorothy spies one of her doctors. “Don’t make a scene!” Blanche warns, laying on her Southern accent. “Order without me,” Dorothy replies, rising. As I watched the sick woman march past the other diners to the doctor’s table, I felt apprehensive. I’d never been able to express what I wanted to say to my doctors: the power had always been in their hands as the experts, and I’d cowered in the face of their skepticism.
     When a cardiologist insinuated I was imagining nine months of pain and fatigue, all I could do was cry, written off again by someone I’d gone to for help. “Even my husband comes home with a headache and thinks it’s the virus—everyone’s paranoid,” that doctor told me, dismissing my racing heart rate as “dehydration.” The tears she provoked became her proof that my emotions caused my symptoms. Her supervisor came in to mediate, promising more tests to placate me. But his charge couldn’t let it go. “See a psychiatrist,” she hissed, insistent on the last word.
     Golden Girls lets Dorothy have the final word. In the restaurant, towering over the man and his half-eaten meal, she tells off the doctor in what scriptwriter Susan Harris—who had been ill-treated by doctors when suffering from an adrenal issue—has called her “revenge script.” “I don’t know where you doctors lose your humanity, but you lose it,” Dorothy berates Dr. Budd, as his wife looks on with seeming relish. Pulling a seat up to his table, Dorothy goes on to fulfill the invisibly sick patient’s fantasy: “If all of you at the beginning of your careers could get very sick and very scared for a while, you’d probably learn more from that than anything else.”
     At some point during those harrowing months with no answers, I’d come across an article by a doctor who contracted the virus himself, and experienced its long-lasting effects, none of which showed up on tests. “The Lack of Objective Data Does Not Preclude Illness,” one of his headers declared. Because Covid-19 did not discriminate, infecting medical professionals like everyone else, more attention has been called to the lasting post-viral response the infection can cause, legitimizing the experience of those with invisible, ongoing symptoms.
     The Golden Girls Season Five, Episodes One and Two, “Sick and Tired,” aired in 1989. Back then, Dorothy’s condition was only beginning to be studied. Yet three decades later, patients still encounter the same dismissal portrayed by Bea Arthur in her bathrobe. “I can’t tell you what a relief it is to just be sick, not sick and crazy,” Dorothy tells her friends as she rejoins them at their table for a triumphant toast. I often thought, through my own illness, that I could have borne its long consequence on my body if only I’d had the succor of being believed. Instead, I derived this comfort from a rare reflection of chronic illness in eighties pop culture, when the Golden Girls became my pals and my confidants, and it felt like the biggest gift.

*



*


Jodie Noel Vinson holds an MFA in nonfiction from Emerson College. Her work has been published in The New York Times, New England Review, Literary Hub, The Iowa Review, and Ploughshares, among other places. She is the recipient of the Ninth Letter Literary Award in Creative Nonfiction, the Arts & Letters Susan Atefat Prize for Creative Nonfiction, the New Ohio Review Literary Award in Nonfiction, the Maureen Egen Writers Exchange Award from Poets & Writers, and a residency from Jentel Foundation. Jodie lives in Providence, where she is writing a book about the intersections of chronic illness and creative expression.


Monday, October 27, 2025

Rethinking Pornhub’s Role in the Literary Zeitgeist by Andrew Maynard



Rethinking Pornhub’s Role in the Literary Zeitgeist 

*

Andrew Maynard

*

“Is it like the old Playboy magazine; you have essays there by the modern-day equivalent of Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley Jr.?” —Justice Alito

*

When the internet told me what Justice Alito had said, my first response was What’s a Gore Vidal? This inquiry pinballed into a New York Times in-memoriam article where a Mr. Epstein was quoted: “I always thought about Gore that he was not really a novelist.” A hyper-specific, postmortem drubbing from which new questions emerged. Like why was Jeffrey Epstein being a total dick to a dead writer? And what kind of writer provoked a child sexual abuser to question his aptitude for longform fiction in an obituary? A few more clicks to discover the quote was from Jason Epstein, Vidal’s former editor at Random House. This was not a smutty jab but rather a deferential reverence for Vidal’s capacity for the literary essay.
     I digress to mourn the life that Jason Epstein used to live. A life where he could be quoted by last name only without the combustible risk of being noxiously misidentified. Maybe I’m just sensitive because I have an Aunt Karen who has never fussed about anything trivial, and I know a gentle man named Phil whose grandkids have called him P Diddy for over a decade. Phil is not the victim I should be centering, but he is the one I know, unlike Gore Vidal, whose works I have still not read. But I did Google Gore Vidal again and it turns out he had a public feud with Truman Capote, whom I have read and who I once learned from an episode of Radiolab is at least partially responsible for the mass proliferation of a false narrative about Stockholm syndrome, where women’s narratives were manipulated to make the senseless make sense. But this is not new. And I learned Gore Vidal was a public intellectual who took serious exception to the ideas of William F. Buckley, a political commentator I only know because I used to show my students a debate between him and the public intellectual and essayist James Baldwin.
     Who in this day and age do we consider a public intellectual? Anyone? Roxane Gay? Ta-nehisi Coates? Joe Rogan? Elon fucking Musk? Or has the title eroded into official defunctness? Are there any essayists we care enough about to follow their feuds with one another? I don’t mean the habitual sexual misconduct allegations that command our attention and news cycle for a half hour at a time but rather ordinary people caring enough about modern writers to feel invested in their banal friendships and quarrels. Maybe I’m just dull, or simply farsighted, but it can feel quite grim living in this future that would be assumed to have progressed from a past where a bunch of men who slept with other men expressed bold, complex ideas that were essential threads in the cultural tapestry of America, where pictures of naked women were once sandwiched between nuanced ideological discourse. Can we go back? Not to all of it, of course, but to the part where our ideas and bodies could reveal something new on the page for a mass audience?
     What if Alito’s question was actually meant to chart a path forward? What if the question that tickled the full spectrum of the literary and the I-have-a-special-VPN-for-Pornhub types was actually a solution masked in political irony? Because I imagine that in all sincerity a Buckley essay in Playboy was a draw to men like Alito. I’m not going to pretend Alito skipped the titties on his way to the essay, because I bet he appreciated both, and I think that’s beautiful. And there is an obvious connection that can be artfully traced with a charcoal pencil between the vulnerability of the essay and literal nakedness for anyone who has read Philip Lopate’s “Portrait of My Body.” What if we morphed Alito’s smart-assery into actionable policy? What if we took him seriously? What if porn was paired with a curated essay? What if everyone who watched videos of faux step siblings banging was also asked to read Tony Earley’s “Somehow Form a Family.” What if the people who seek whips and ball gags had to mull over “Pain Scale” by Eula Biss. Do we not think this would make the world a better place? Do we not think the marriage of literature and pornography might be more effective in the internet age than six-inch regulatory hurdles? Because kids are not going to stop watching porn, but they certainly might stop caring about the power of human-generated ideas, the thrill of deducing your experience and world until all that’s left connects in a way that enables a stranger to see a reflection of their world in the waters of yours. Because ideas and language are like rocks that, when flung at the proper trajectory and velocity, can skip from an Alito joke to my sweet Aunt Karen to the death of the public intellectual, and the circles of each jump do not become one another but instead overlap forming the slightest of venn diagrams that insist there are connections in even the most disparate of places while blurring the rest of the world. And I’ll go ahead and say it: I support Phil’s decision to be called whatever he pleases and I would like to recognize the name of the co-founder of The New York Review of Books instead of the creep who hanged in prison. And again I have not read Gore Vidal. And we’ll give Alito the benefit of the doubt and say he probably has a rudimentary working knowledge of Pornhub. And in this age of access and internet and opportunity there is time for us to transform all of this. Perhaps on the same site.  

*

Andrew Maynard has still not read Gore Vidal. His stories and essays have appeared or are forthcoming in Flash Frog, Complete Sentence, HAD, DIAGRAM, Mud Season Review, Bayou Magazine, and elsewhere. He has completed a novel that is hiding in plain sight in the inboxes of playing-hard-to-get literary agents. If you’re looking for another Essay Daily piece to read, consider this one. If you’re looking to represent or publish a gripping, full-bodied narrative about moving slowly in the desert, press reply to my query and I’ll send you the manuscript!

Wednesday, October 15, 2025

Advent Approaches

Howdy Essay Comrades,

We're nearing the end of 2025, which means it is time for the annual Essay Daily Advent Calendar (the only time of year we actually post daily). This year's Advent Calendar has a theme: the Essay Daily Media Club. We're taking a visit over to the land of visual media and publishing pieces which essay, explore, feel out, marvel at, interrogate, talk back to, reflect on, or hybridize films, TV, video games, or visual art (we're keeping a little distance from traditional music videos for this one, since that's more the terrain of March Xness, but we welcome other types of video art and animation).


Reach out to Will or Ander (emails over to the right) if you're interested in pitching us an essay for Advent this year. Otherwise we'll see you on December 1st for the start of the calendar!


-Ander & Will

Friday, September 12, 2025

The Deer Out Here: Matt Morris in Conversation with Hea-Ream Lee


*


The writer Matthew Morris was sitting at my kitchen table in Tucson, Arizona. He was in town to promote his new book of essays, The Tilling, winner of Seneca Review Books’ 2024 Deborah Tall Lyric Essay Book Prize. Earlier that week he had read from his book in front of a packed crowd beneath twinkling lights for the Distinguished Visitor Series in Creative Writing sponsored by the University of Arizona MFA in Creative Writing. Matt and I were graduate students in that program together, and as I listened to him read, I remembered sitting in workshop together discussing some of the essays in his new book in their earlier forms. It was strange and wonderful to be in Tucson together again, feeling time collapse, sitting at my kitchen table, with his book in front of me. 

We talked about The Tilling, which is a lyrical exploration of mixed-race identity, Blackness, and love. The book is searing and tender, and full of the kind of lines that beg to be read aloud. It was a pleasure to talk to Matt about how his book took shape, about riffing, and his thoughts on rhythm and sound. Our conversation made me feel the way his writing has always made me feel–a little less alone. —Hea-Ream Lee

*

Hea-Ream Lee: This is very exciting. I'm so excited to talk about this book. How cool that you made this. When I read anyone's work, it feels kind of like walking around inside their brain a little bit. And I felt that while reading this book. Maybe it's because I know you, and I know your literal speaking voice well, but I felt like I was just kind of hanging out with you for the duration of the book. So that was a cool experience for me.

Matthew Morris: Hopefully my speaking voice sounds a little like my writing voice, yeah. There has to be some correspondence there. I think there definitely is.

HRL: Well, maybe we can start by talking about your journey towards the book, or the journey of the book. We were in workshops together, so I recognized some of the pieces. I was also remembering pieces that you had written for workshop that aren’t in the book. Could you talk a little bit about that process of getting to the published object, whether that's writing or rewriting, collecting, drafting?

MM: I think some of those essays that maybe we both remember from our time and workshop together were the pieces where I was trying to explore my family history. I remember writing a couple of pieces for Alison Deming’s class where I was trying to dig into my father's ancestry. And I bring that up because this project originally had a middle section that was called Lost Rivers. It was in three parts, and the first part was supposed to introduce the tragic mulatto trope, kind of orient readers in that way. And that was called Fucked Fable. And then there was this middle section, Lost Rivers, that had this family history stuff going on, which I later cut because it was just too much to take on in this book. I couldn't wrap my head around all of it, and there are too many silences in the historical record. And then there was this third section called Ghost Hand that was meant to sort of break out of the trope and just sort of be me living in my body as a human being apart from race. Not that you can ever completely escape that. It ended up being the case that the middle section went away, and so the book as it is is just that first section and that third section.

Only a couple of these pieces were written prior to our thesis year in the program. I'd written the first piece, Tragic Mulatto, and I think I workshopped Pardo/Ghost Hand in a class we took together. The summer before our third year I wrote Fucked Fable. So that's kind of this nucleus that I had to write around when I was working with Chris Cokinos in our last year in the program.

Having the lens of the tragic mulatto trope to write through gave direction and a trajectory to the book. Because as you probably remember, when I first got to the program, I was still writing about mixed race identity, but in a kind of looser way. I think you said at one point when we were in the program together that one of the essays I'd written was kind of doing auto theory.

So I feel like writing into the trope, the stereotype, and trying to break out of that box gave the project some momentum that it didn't have before. 

HRL: That's super interesting. To go back to the thing you said about cutting that middle section out, was there a moment when you realized that it didn't belong in this book?

MM: It was definitely a realization I had as I tried to shape the project. Maybe when I showed it to Chris for the first time. It still had some of the family history work in it. But, yeah, I think when I realized that I couldn't get my head around that stuff in the time of the MFA program, which is a very brief period in the writer’s life, right? It goes super fast. You don't even really know what you're doing for the first year and a half or two years, unless you know what you're doing coming in, which I didn't. Maybe Margo did. But I think at the start of our second year, we were in Ander’s workshop, and I turned in this long piece about a family history trip to North Carolina.

I think writing that piece was what showed me that I wasn't ready to write about that stuff yet, because that piece actually probably needed to be a lot longer, and I still don't really know how to write about family history in the context of African American history. There's just so much stuff that I don't know, and Ancestry.com can't tell me. I can only trace my predecessors on my dad's side so far back. 

You know, we were talking before we started the recording here about how nonfiction writers sometimes lean towards poetry or fiction. And I think if I had more of that fiction writer in me, which maybe you do more than I do, I’d feel more comfortable speculating on the page, and that would be a way into the family history. But it's not really my toolkit.

I'm in a PhD program now, as you know, and I've been writing a little bit about my mom's side and Mormonism, which is much more present in the genealogical record. So that's an interesting tension. You know, the Mormons keep crazy records, and there's like nothing for Black people at a certain point.

HRL: Yeah, that's super interesting. Do you think that project will someday come to be? 

MM: Yeah, I have this thought of writing a literary biography about my mom's aunt, who was this Mormon novelist named Virginia Sorensen. Some of her books are at the UA library. She was married and had a family and was living in Provo for most of her life, writing novels and children's books. But then near the end of her life, she left her family and married–you know the writer Evelyn Waugh? Yeah, she married his brother in Gibraltar, off of Spain. So anyway, she's really interesting to me, how she went away from this domestic life. But I think she didn't write after she left Utah, which is also interesting. Anyway, I kind of heard about her and my grandfather's grandfather on my dad's side, about whom I do know a decent amount, because he was a professor at an HBCU after the Civil War. So I feel like hearing about those two people's lives–that might be an interesting way to approach mixed race identity. 

HRL: Whoa yes, I can definitely see that. This makes me think about research, which I really wanted to talk to you about. 

MM: Oh, cool, yeah. 

HRL: Because this is an extremely researched book. There's so many types of research in here too. You're citing books and films and songs and poems, and you also travel to certain sites. I know from your other work that you've done a lot of archival research as well. You've also mentioned Ancestry.com. So, yeah, I wanted to know about the role of research in this book. What that looked like, how it plays into your process. Where in the writing process does research come in for you? How do you think about research generally?

MM: That's funny that you say that, because I don't think of myself as being someone who does a lot of research, but maybe I'm not thinking about research broadly enough, right? Because yeah, it is research to watch that film Imitation of Life. But I guess I think of it more like, I want to watch a movie that's about the subject matter I'm thinking about. And maybe that'll give me an entry point that I haven't found yet. The Rothko painting feels like another entry point. 

So this is probably a bad thing to say, but a lot of the research I do, like the part of Ghost Hand around the sterilization laws in Virginia—that's all from Wikipedia.

HRL: Oh yeah I love Wikipedia.

MM: To your question about, where does research enter the process, sometimes research is the beginning. It's the thing that sparks my curiosity or imagination. Like that Dallas essay really started when I looked up the difference between a bull and a steer. And then I started thinking about being on Wikipedia earlier in the day, reading about these laws. But I wasn't reading about those laws to write about them. I think I was just really interested in that stuff at that time.

Like you probably do, I have a lot of tabs open on my computer and my phone at all times. And you know, as nonfiction writers, maybe all creative writers, we kind of just throw a bunch of stuff into the mix and see what the alchemy produces. 

There's something Maddie Norris said to me when I asked her about research in her book, that it was the stuff she was already thinking about. And I think that's true for me too.

HRL: I can see that in the prose. It's so clear that we're following your train of thought or where your curiosity is taking you. It doesn't feel like these are the references that we need to have because we need to have them in the book, but rather that they come from your curiosity, or they're driving your curiosity in some way. I feel like that's really coming through in the writing itself, too.

MM: Thanks. That's a good thing, that it doesn't feel imposed on the book.

HRL: Sometimes when I’m adding in research, it's like I have to cover my ass or something like that. It does not feel interesting. It's almost out of fear, to back up what I'm saying.

MM: You're offering evidence.

HRL: Yeah, it's my comp teacher brain.

You read a newer piece at your reading, and I believe it was in that piece where you wrote about riffing. I was thinking about that as I was looking back through your book for this conversation, which led me to look up what riffing means. According to the internet, there's two meanings: a refrain or repeated phrase in music, and also, an improvised monologue. I feel like I see so many examples of both those things in this book. The motifs and repeating phrases of fucked fable, American you, or the idea of love, the cliche of the tragic mulatto. There's so many of these repeating phrases and motifs. 

There's also a lot of examples, and this maybe crosses over into the research realm too, where you're taking an Audre Lorde poem or the Rothko and you riff on that. You're taking that apart and making it your own. 

That's a huge, long intro. How do you see riffing? How do you feel like it fits in with this book, or your writing process in general?

MM: Yeah, cool. That's an awesome question. I love that question, and it's neat that you looked up what it means to riff, because that's something that I think I associate with jazz musicians and the improvisational definition more so than the repeated structure. But I can see how those two things actually go together, because within improvisation, there's still gonna be structures that you're like, calling back on, and that's part of the improvisational play. Pulling on these different elements that appeared earlier, but maybe they’re cast in a slightly new light the second or third time you do it. Yeah, it's just a creative thing that happens. 

I feel like the longer I write, the more interested I am in riffing and being kind of spontaneous. And the mind in motion, to use one of Ander's phrases about what an essay is and does, how it moves. I'm much less interested in carefully shaping thoughts, and I'm more interested in the way my mind moves over subject matter and moves through language and works with sound and rhythm. And that's not to say that in revision I would not try to sculpt the riffing that's already happened. I remember Brandon Shimoda talking about how poetry is, for him, just what comes out. That's something that I am feeling drawn to more and more. It's just like, what comes out when I sit down and I'm thinking about something, and I have this line that I want to start with. 

A couple weeks ago, I was in upstate New York, where Seneca Review is. I was with my editor, and we were driving past this state park, and he told me that there are deer in the park that are stark white. I'd never heard of that before—stark white deer.

HRL: Terrifying. 

MM: Yeah, like, what would that feel like? I wanted to see one. We didn't see any. But, yeah, I've been wanting to start something with a line about that. "The deer out here, he said, are stark white." That could be the starting point of some kind of riff on, I don't know what. On deer and whiteness and I have no clue where else that would go. But that's part of the interest for me, is that I don't know where it would go.

I don't really want to know where I'm going right now. Maybe I never really did. I feel like the second I can feel my mind mapping out what the thing is going to look like, I don't really want to write it anymore. 

HRL: Yeah, that makes total sense. That's so interesting. I love how you're saying that the riffing happens on the level of the line or even the sound or the word, as well as on a larger scale, around the subject you're writing. Some writers are very image driven. Like, their way into a piece is an image. And for you, it sounds like it is sound or rhythm.

MM: I think that's true. I don't know if you would say you're a writer who's drawn to image, but one characteristic of your writing I think about is the richness of the imagery and the carefully wrought images. And it's not that I don't want there to be nice images when I write, but I do think that I am mostly interested in the syntactical play. I'm more interested in the way that clauses are, like, accumulating and bouncing off of one another, and the ways that my voice can, like, modulate through the syntax.

HRL: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense given what's in this book. I definitely want to talk more about rhythm or sound. That feels like one of the hallmarks of your writing. To me, that's how I know I'm in a Matt Morris piece. I picked out so many examples of amazing sentences and phrases where we have this careful attention to sound, rhythm and breath. I can't read them all for time’s sake, but there's this part in the last essay. Could you read that short paragraph for me?

MM: "I’m pretty sure some of her ancestors were slaves. That some of them were enslavers. Light-skinned, mixed; white, just white. (No, not white, just white: I simplify, I do. Same cruelty dealt to Black bodies. The joining at the hip. You’s all a conglomeration. Can’t sit/drink/live here. Know your pigment, they said, and so know you. No. No, more like: Euro-white; white, once of England, Ireland.)"

HRL: Thank you. I think this paragraph is an example of something I see your writing do often. It's not rhythmic simply for the sake of rhythm. You're also using rhythm to add complexity and layers of meaning, and take apart some phrases and add in interjections, and you're kind of interrupting yourself. 

I have so many questions about rhythm. How do you think about sound during the writing process and the revising process? How do you know when to stop polishing? Or differentiate between moments to lean into musicality and when to lean out? 

MM: Well, maybe I'm getting worse at that, because I feel like I'm leaning in more and more towards musicality, maybe at the expense of the careful arrangement of thought. I don't know, or maybe that's just not how I want to think on the page right now.

One thing I do is when I'm revising something, I'm reading it out loud to myself, like every time. Then I can hear the rhythms, and I can hear the sounds, and I can feel the places where maybe I want to let the line get stretched out a little more, or make the language more compact. Or maybe I do want to do a little bit of that interjecting. Yeah, I've become obsessed with parenthetical structures in the last few years, and so I do think that there's a lot of, like, interruption that helps to produce some kind of, I don't want it to be, like, choppy, but some kind of start and stop, herky jerky rhythms in the prose. I want to sound like me on the page. I want to sound like, basically the way I sound when I'm talking to you, or someone I know and trust enough to sound like myself. Not so buttoned-up. I want there to be a level of eloquence, if I can achieve that. But I also want there to be a plain-spokenness. I remember one of my first professors saying that this piece I'd written about my family's first dog sounded like I was having a drink on the porch with a friend. And I really liked that idea, that the voice can be conversational and can be approachable in that way.

HRL: Do you listen to music while you're writing? 

MM: I don't. I'm trying to create my own rhythms on the page, and if I'm listening to something, then that makes it really hard for me to find my way into my own rhythms and cadences in my language. It’s like this pianist is developing his lines in my ear as I'm trying to write my own lines of language. At times I have written to instrumental jazz. I definitely can't write with someone singing; like, that's a non-starter for me. I can't even hear myself think at that point. But yeah, a couple of years ago, I went through this period where I was having a really hard time with my writing. It's like after we had graduated, and it was for a lot of reasons, but at that time, I did start listening to music a little bit as I wrote, and that allowed me to relax a little bit. So at that time in my life, it actually did prove useful to get me out of a mental state.

But generally, I'm a total-silence person. I share a house with a woman who teaches yoga classes. Sometimes I can hear her voice coming up through the floor. I live on the top floor. And even that is enough to make it hard for me to like, feel out the sentences. You know what I mean?

HRL: I know some people who don't like to even read much when they're writing, especially if it's something similar to the subject that they're writing about, because they feel like their thinking can be shaped by that other person's voice. 

MM: I definitely believe in reading while I'm writing, for what it's worth. I think that helps me with sentence fluency on a very basic level, breaking you out of your own sentence patterns.

HRL: I want to talk about place, because this feels like a book that's very deeply grounded in place. It’s also interested in place as a way of conveying meaning. The idea of bone home, and what home means, and where your ancestors come from, and what that means about you as a person. I was also thinking about how some of these essays are taking place during the pandemic, and so there's this longing to go places. I was wanting you to talk a little bit about how you see the importance of place in this book and maybe in your writing more generally.

MM: I used the word cadences just now too. It's a cool way to think about the play between different places. In terms of the places in here, I feel like the book is mostly bouncing between Virginia and Tucson. But North Carolina is kind of looming, and South Carolina as a shadow or a place that my father's family left and that I've gone back to. But maybe I don't really understand it in the ways that I feel like I understand Virginia just by virtue of having lived there for the first 24 years of my life. And having gone to undergrad down in Charlottesville made me understand Virginia a lot better. Central Virginia is really different than the DC area. I was just there a couple days ago with my oldest friend and we were walking around Monticello. Yeah, what a crazy place. We were reading all about Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson. I used to think that I needed to live in Virginia to write about it because it has this complicated history around race and Blackness and whiteness, specifically with things like Sally Hemings and TJ. Yeah, good old TJ… 

And also Mildred and Richard Loving. We were in Virginia, where the Supreme Court case that legalized interracial marriage or protected interracial marriage happened. Virginia, yeah, there's just a lot of stuff in Virginia. It's also in the middle of the east coast and it doesn't quite feel like the South. Sometimes it does–Charlottesville feels like the South. Arlington, where I grew up, does not but it doesn't quite feel like the North, either. You have Arlington National Cemetery where I grew up. I think Robert E. Lee is buried there, and my sister's high school was named after Robert E. Lee, although it was recently renamed Washington Liberty High School. It was supposed to be Washington Loving, but I think there's some resistance to naming the school after the Lovings. 

And then, sorry, this is all things that are actually in the book now that I think about it. But yeah, there's also ‘Virginia is for lovers,’ which is the state's motto. And that's so interesting–yeah, I need to get a bumper sticker for that. It's a really interesting idea for me. I feel like this is a book about race, but maybe what I didn't realize until I was really writing it was that it's also a book that's asking questions about what it means to love, and different kinds of love. There's an essay about my parents’ relationship—

HRL: I love that essay.

MM: Oh, thanks. That was actually a really nice essay to be able to write because it sort of took the pressure off my own story. And Tucson, well, I guess Arizona as a whole shows up in the book to the extent that obviously I'm living there partially during the pandemic, but also my dad's mom was in Phoenix at the time that I was writing the book. I really think that she became one of the most important figures in this book, like she kind of became a main character in a way. I just remember going up to visit her and she was such a complicated woman. I had a really different relationship with her than my dad did. Like I had a much easier relationship with her, which I'm grateful for. I was getting to know her as I was writing these essays. Because as I said, I was raised on the East Coast, so we wouldn't get out to Arizona very often. 

When we did, it was for a few days at Christmas, probably. And yeah, she could be a little unpredictable emotionally. So I didn't really feel like I got to know her until I was in grad school and driving up to see her and spending one-on-one time with her. 

Anyway, yeah, I do think place is important and yeah, I think I told you earlier that I'm writing about Utah right now a little bit. And also Missouri. I feel like this is a place where I could go with research, knowing that I want to write about something like the Missouri Compromise, like, an important piece of legislation that helped for a little while to maintain the balance between slave and free states. 

That's pretty interesting in the context of mixed race identity, I think. Columbia, Missouri, where I live now, is also in the middle of Missouri, which is in the middle of the country, so I feel like I'm in the middle of the middle of everything right now. So, yeah. Yeah, place, place, place. 

HRL: It sounds to me like place is so tied to history. That's the immediate jump that you made there. And I think not every writer does that, not every writer makes that move, but it feels really ingrained in this book as well. These places that have different histories and the people who have left, or stayed, or whose ancestors have been there and what that means about them.

I love that part where you're talking about how so many of your friends have lived in North Carolina. And like that is a thing that ties them together and that something of the place kind of remains on you even after you leave. 

MM: Yeah, the North Carolina thing is weird. I still feel like that's true–I get along with people who have a North Carolina connection. What is it? It's got to be history in some way, maybe. 

HRL: I love that, yeah. Maybe we'll just end with this question. This is a book that's attuned to the writing of others. You bring in lots of other voices and I wanted to ask about books or writers that you connect to, whether it's for the ideas or even their voice or their vibe. Who were your literary North stars as you were writing this book?

MM: I like that question because I've been thinking a lot about Emilio Carrero, who read here with me, and was a really important friend for me in the MFA program. He's really interested in intertextuality right now, and I've been thinking about intertextuality as a result of talking to him. Fucked Fable is obviously very intertextual. Like it's mostly other people's voices. Maybe not mostly, but there's a lot of other people's voices in there. 

I do think that other folks' voices are really important to me in the writing of these essays. I think that James Baldwin is definitely always a literary North star for me, both because his sentences are so beautiful and because he was so bracingly honest and brave on the page, no matter what he was writing about. I feel like he never shied away from saying the hard things or going to the heart of his subject matter, which is something that I find deeply moving and courageous in a writer. To not skirt the center of things, which it's surprisingly easy to do if you ask me. Yeah, so I definitely highlight him. 

When I think about prose style, I always think about Virginia Woolf. Just the play of her lines and the closeness of the looking in her work. I don't think she gets any shoutouts in here, but she's one of my favorite writers too. 

I think that part of the reason I wrote this is that I hadn't encountered that many mixed-race writers, even at the time that I was writing the book. And that might just partly be because I hadn't done a great job of seeking them out, but it's also because we don't always get assigned books by writers of color in school. I think I first got assigned a mixed-race writer when I was in my junior year of college, Danzy Senna’s Caucasia. I didn't even finish that book because I was in like four English classes and couldn't read everything. 

I wanted to put myself in conversation with other Black writers in this book. Writing is a way for me to feel more a part of the Black community, which is a community that I'm a part of, but people don't always see that. 

So there are other ways that I can still exist as a Black person that are not tied to skin tone, and writing has become probably the best way I know how to go about asserting a Black identity and a mixed-race identity. 

HRL:  I feel like we should end on that. Well said. Thank you so much for this conversation. 

MM: Yeah, thank you, Hea-Ream. It's very special to talk with you because you were always such a great reader of my work. Your stuff and the pages that other people were turning in when we were all in workshop together really spurred me as a writer to do my best because I didn't want to embarrass myself. 

HRL: The best motivator. Thank you so much.


*


Matthew Morris is a writer from Virginia and author of The Tilling (Seneca Review Books), picked by Wendy S. Walters for the Deborah Tall Lyric Essay Book Prize. He is a graduate of the Arizona MFA program and lives in Columbia, Missouri, where he is a Ph.D. student at Mizzou.

Hea-Ream Lee’s essays have appeared in Ecotone, Shenandoah, Terrain.org, and others, and her work has been anthologized in The Lyric Essay as Resistance (2023). Hea-Ream has taught writing at the University of Arizona, where she earned her MFA. She lives in Greenville, South Carolina, where she teaches creative nonfiction at the Governor’s School for Arts and Humanities. 



Monday, August 18, 2025

Bea Troxel, Song of Return


Song of Return

Bea Troxel

Holding a tiny wine cup inside of a drab, gray conference room inside of a convention center in the middle of Los Angeles, I told an old coworker about my college boyfriend. He had prompted me after sharing his own college romance story. I told him my ex and I had incredible chemistry, but it didn’t feel right, and so I left him, after much consternation.  The coworker, a forty-year-old man I worked with every summer at a writing conference, looked back at me through his reddish curls and a voice dripping Louisiana and said, “Bea, you’re gonna die alone.” 

I was twenty-five, young; he looked at me with dark intensity. I stared back at him and I must have laughed or looked away to distract from the sharpness of his comment burrowing. The shame it brought up. Here was another moment of being told my leaving would end with me totally alone. His college girlfriend broke up with him, so it’s easy to now assume, eight years later, that he was projecting, but at the time I couldn't get there in my mind. Shortly before this a friend had told me, “Bea, at some point you’re going to have to commit.” Also, after dating for one month and ending things, the woman handed me a little dinner conversation card that asked, “What does it feel like to get close?” She thought I might be afraid of commitment. 

I’ve left nearly every person I’ve dated.

I’m not just someone who leaves, but I am someone who feels compelled to leave. I feel it deep in my body. Before I am conscious that it’s time, I get itchy ears, a sore throat, distant eyes. I attend to these symptoms as if they are God. As soon as they emerge, I think, “Seriously? Again?” There is a split between body and mind. I feel that the ending must happen. I can’t stop thinking about it until I leave, wishing the ending away. Because my body feels awful until I split, I’m walking around in a half daze, disoriented and sick. And once I leave, the symptoms stop. I’m done. 


*


Six months into my grad program at the U of Arizona, at the ripe age of 32, I took a Collections Class with my professor, Ander. We examined collections of stories, essays, poems. We read essays about collectors, some towards the hoarding end of the spectrum, others whose collections did not destroy their relationships. We also maintained our own physical collections. At the beginning of the semester, Ander had promised us that our collections would reveal something about our writing process and I was like, yeah, yeah, okay, I know myself already. After first thinking I might collect a series of bits (longstanding jokes) throughout the semester (such as: wearing paper watches taped to my wrist in my first week of teaching college freshmen)—this felt too laborious—I chose to collect from my favorite spot in Tucson: The Free Table. 

I’d open my sliding door, step onto the porch, hear the scrape scrape scrape of the neighbor tanning hides: I’d been observing her for months. Some days a bison, some days a sheep. I’d wave to her as she wiped sweat from her forehead and continued to scrape scrape scrape. I was headed to the Free Table. 

While first discovering the Free Table right when I moved to Tucson, I dated someone so kind, so patient, so lovely with a toothy grin and long hair. I’d liked him for so long, but as soon as we first kissed I felt my eyes slink back in my head, the fogginess emerged. I couldn’t believe my body wanted me to leave! Thrown back to choosing grad schools the previous year and feeling achy and sick when I finally got into a program I’d been long excited about, barely able to open my eyes fully. Feeling like I had to say no. Thrown back to my previous relationship when my scratchy throat emerged in the midst of feeling wildly happy, wildly attracted to my partner. Thrown back to the first time, a decade ago, when I knew I wasn’t attracted to my girlfriend, but I didn’t want to leave. The sore throat, the ache, telling me I had to leave.


*


The Free Table, started by an older couple in my neighborhood during the pandemic, is a long wooden table of constantly shifting items. Some days I’ll stroll by and just see a few frayed shirts and a box of hair dye. It rarely rains in Tucson, so the table needs no cover. Heading there, I jog through four lanes of traffic, walk one block past a Mesquite tree, turn left so I can see it at the end of the block. As I approach, I can tell if it’s full of goodies or sparsely laid baby clothes and fraying particle board. Lucky days are when there are piles of clothes, pirate-like white pants hand stitched, or boxes full of tiny objects, like the shiny white ball that opened and held miniature cassettes and film rolls. Or the day I journaled about wanting a drying rack and walked up to find one sitting at the table’s edge.

At the free table, I’ve found tomatoes, lunch, a thermos, a suitcase, first landing of the moon newspaper articles from 1969, and Sensodyne toothpaste. I met someone who runs community bike rides, a retired astronomy professor, a man dying of cancer who only had a few weeks left and told me so and as I walked home I asked myself, “What do you do with that?” 


*


I decided that I would take home one item from the free table each week for my collection. 

The first week: a mixtape titled “American Badass.” I thought, “Everybody is gonna love this.” But instead, I ridiculously found it was a scratchy version of“Cowboy” by Kid Rock recorded over and over. Wisps of outside noises cluttered the song as I listened. How disappointing.

The second week: a Chubby Checker record. Also the second week: I left my relationship. The body signals were too strong.

Grief and loneliness marked the following visits to the Free Table. I’d walk up at dusk, the sky pink and streaked with blue clouds. The moon rising behind me. I could hear my roommates calling out to each other “Moon I win!” as I left the house. I’d walk there thinking about my ex and his long hair and his toothy grin. His calm: wondering if I’d made some huge mistake. 

The third week: animal figurines. I positioned them around my room, the brown horse on my speaker, the blue dinosaur next to my reading chair, feeling them reflect back my sadness. 

The fourth week: Dvorak tape in D minor. The offerings did not feel too exciting. I would grab an item haphazardly to bring back. When choosing my collection I wanted something exciting and unique, worried a dull collection reflected on my ordinariness, but the collection felt dull even while the table felt exciting.

The fifth week: I needed a rain jacket for a trip and walked up and bam! A raincoat. The sixth week: I needed a suitcase. Bam! A suitcase. The seventh week: I hoped that goggles might appear. And all of a sudden a tinted pair was waiting there. (I didn’t even dare ask for tinted goggles.) Finally, some magic was returning to me. I was not just heaviness wandering to and from the table.

I told my class of the serendipity of the table, how it continually gave over what I hoped for. Ander jokingly said, “Now, Bea, are you also leaving stuff at the table, or do you just take, take, take.” The words “take, take, take,” echoed through my head like the words a villain hears from his childhood in an action movie. The words that form the wound that motivates the villain to live a life of crime. I just took, took, took. I just left, left, left. Before the words could cement themselves to my brain, I said, “No! I leave stuff all the time! I even rescued one-hundred books from an alleyway and left them at the table.”  When I shared this in class, my voice was so hurried, the hundreds of books numerous, that everyone looked at me like I was nuts. But I needed to make sure I wasn’t just take, take, taking. Or I needed everyone to know it. I needed to make sure I wasn’t leave, leave, leaving. 


*


At the end of the semester I had a pile of items that I did not care for as a collection: linen shirt, fanny pack, soda stream, stereo holder. The official collection did not interest me, which felt disappointing. I wanted a collection like The Last Supper Museum in Douglas, AZ that has a room full of odd versions of the Last Supper painting or the aesthetic of hundreds of aluminum can tabs. I wanted something beautiful, but as I reflected, I realized the walk to the table, the surprise of what I’d find, who I’d find was what compelled me. But as I sat down to write the manifesto of my collection, I slowly realized a theme throughout all of my writing and my life: my writing is about staying. My writing is about place. My writing is about return. 

On my wall hangs the “Immaculate Heart College Art Department Rules,” by Sister Corita Kent and the first rule is: “Find a place you trust and then try trusting it for a while.” This is my writing process. I find a place and then return time and time again. I visited a family of beavers every week for two years and wrote; I handed friends a fake phone over and over for years and wrote; I watched Magic Mike XXL with friend after friend and wrote; I’ve written about the same field over and over and over. It’s not about the collection, the writing, the piece, the idea: it’s the process. It’s returning time and again to the place, and staying, hoping to see something new. When you keep the ritual, you learn about the changes within yourself and the place. When you see the same spot over and over again, you see the strange collection of watches, the coffee maker, the same shirt never getting snatched. You gain a knowledge of the rhythms of that place, or yourself. 

The evening after writing my manifesto, I went to a going away dinner. It was the perfect air temperature: stars overhead. We sat at a long, wooden table made by one of the dinner guests. We ate chicken with lemon, rare steak, fat asparagus. And Trace, my classmate, leaned across the table unprompted and told me that it’s my sticking with a place that seems to be important. They said I sit with things. They said my obsessions are not brief but long lasting, and that I’m willing to bear situations long past the comfort level. The discomfort I had framed as leaving, and yes, I’ve left a lot, is also a feeling I’ve sat with. Even when the Free Table felt boring, I showed up. Even though staying with my ex felt uncomfortable, I sat through it to see what was really going on. Even when a topic feels exhausted, that’s usually when I find something totally new. I want to be consistent in showing up. It’s how you build trust—or at least that’s how I do it.

And then, as I write this, I think about how with the many jobs, many loves, many places, I have stayed longer than I wanted to. This is not just about staying or leaving, but it’s more about the story I tell about staying or leaving. 

I stayed with the toothy grin month after month because he was kind, loyal, loving. I stayed because I wanted to know if my urge to leave came from fear—the body, the sore throat, the tight chest. Or was my wanting to leave the true thing, and did the fear arise when I didn’t follow it? Unfortunately, it’s both. 

When I tell myself I always leave, I stay longer than I should just to prove my story wrong. When I tell myself I’m always someone who stays, I’ll try to leave so that I don’t become a stuck lady. But if I just attend, knowing that new things might arise. Or that new feelings emerge every day, then there might be some freedom. Maybe I won’t have to rely on my body to urge me to go. Maybe my body isn’t always telling me one thing. Maybe my body isn’t God. Maybe I’ll hear for myself what is going on. Maybe I can listen.

I imagine this: a field. A meadow. A bog. All in the same physical location but during different parts of the year. Imagine this, walking up to a pond’s edge and waiting, not knowing if anything will show up. But imagine. Waiting, and something does. Or something doesn’t. All of it, the collection for someone who can stay, who returns.


*


Bea Troxel is an essayist and musician from Nashville, TN and a second year MFA candidate at The University of Arizona. She writes about beavers and wave pools, but really she's just writing about longing and intimacy and connection. Her most recent record, Gettin' Where, came out in 2021, and you can catch her playing an occasional show around Tucson or spending hours on end at the Free Table. 

Tuesday, June 17, 2025

Sarah Fawn Montgomery, Though She be but Little, She is Fierce: Flash Nonfiction as Feminist Reclamation

 The essay is expansive. The essay meanders. To essay is to reflect, to wander, to search. The essay demands room to stretch and grow, the genre deriving power and purpose from broadening.

But some stories leave us frozen to a fixed position. Some stories tether us to trauma. Some stories are simply too big to expand any further. What do we do with what is already all-encompassing? Where do we go when painful memories already take up too much space in our imagination?

My latest essay collection, Abbreviate, is a book that examines themes that seemed “too big” to tackle in longform prose. I wanted to write about the trauma, violence, and misogyny I experienced as a child, teenage girl, and young woman, all of which marked me indefinitely, some of which left me unable to make my way freely in life. I wanted to write about how my uncle ran over his ex-wife when I was a young girl and how my middle school principal ran off with a student. I wanted to write about how my high school friend openly dated a teacher and how my first boyfriend counted my calories on a slip of paper he kept inside his pocket. I wanted to write about being sexually assaulted in college and sexually harassed in the workplace as an adult. Each of these stories was so big it became overwhelming. So I made them small.

A small collection of small essays, Abbreviate examines how the injustice and violence of girlhood leads women to accept—and even claim—small spaces and stories. Through flash, I share a girlhood shaped by neglect and abuse from adults and saved through the communal care of fierce female friends. The essays in this collection probe the girlhood play of Polly Pocket and planetariums, strobe with a sleepover blacklight illuminating teenage magic, and ricochet with the regret and rage of adult women whose lives have been constellated by harm. 

Through writing this collection, I was reminded that an essay does not have to be big in order to be expansive. An essay does not have to take up many pages in order to broaden. Many times, we equate size with intellectual rigor, but it is a feminist act of reclamation to resist male-dominated trends in literature and the world. It is an act of resistance to claim forms that others deem insignificant.

The flash essay, which can range from as little as a few hundred words to around a thousand words, is a form derived from necessity. Flash is a form that revises the traditional essay in favor of another kind of exploration and expansion. By embracing brevity, writers reflect not only on their subject matter, but on the genre of creative nonfiction itself. Often used by those for whom traditional forms are inaccessible and insufficient, flash is a stark rejection of elitist literature, a bold rebranding of the essay to create a home for those the canon has long sought to exclude. Many writers of flash are those unable to spend long hours laboring over longform prose, those whose daily lives are filled with navigating sexism, racism, homophobia, and ableism, for the innovative form creates safe space unafforded by a cruel world, while also critiquing this power dynamic through an overt play on size. As such, flash is a reclamation for writers who have been told their stories—and by extension, their lives—are insignificant. 

Flash essays are particularly useful for serving as entry point to difficult subject matter. It is challenging enough to write about painful experiences in our lives, more so when we are expected to do so over many pages. The thought of tackling complex material over many hours writing can leave us feeling exposed and raw, overwhelmed by our painful pasts and sometimes unwilling to write about the subjects as a result. But flash reduces this burden considerably by distilling distressing memories into a shorter space. This does not mean that writing these essays is any easier, but rather that writers do not need to relive trauma as extensively as they would in longform prose. Instead, they can mine their memories for the strongest sets of images, the most important details, using reflection to succinctly render the experience for readers. Much like the use of second person, which puts a barrier between writers and the experiences they describe, flash can serve as a protective measure, encouraging writers to tackle subjects they might ordinarily avoid. The flash essay acts as a small container for a big story, providing the shelter and safety a writer might need to tell their story at all.

Because it subverts expectations about the essay, flash also offers writers unique ways to illustrate themes through form. Writers might use the essay size to mirror their content, calling attention to the significance of brief moments in their lives. Mirroring form and content allows writers to unify their attention, readers engaging with themes in several ways, thereby reinforcing them. In contrast, writers might juxtapose content with essay size, compressing many years into the span of a few paragraphs or tackling a weighty subject typically reserved for many pages. By juxtaposing form and content, writers create narrative tension, amplifying the stakes. Readers who engage with the form, surprised or relieved by the brevity, will undoubtedly turn their attention to the ways size signifies meaning, a deliberate command of their attention that speaks not only to the careful craft of the writer, but also to thematic weight of the work.

One example of the power of the flash essay to offer access into complex material is Jamaica Kincaid’s 1978 “Girl.” A mere 690 words, this essay examines a young girl’s relationship with her mother, community, and culture, as well as her burgeoning sense of self. It is also an essay that tackles complex subject matter, including the increasing demands of domestic labor, the subservient roles women are expected to keep for their community standing, romance and domestic violence, menstruation and abortion. “Wash the white clothes on Monday,” the essay begins, but quickly turns to advice like “Try to walk like a lady and not like the slut you are so bent on becoming” and “This is how to make a good medicine to throw away a child before it even becomes a child.” Written as a litany of instructions from a mother to her child about how to be a good group that’s a good woman, all occasionally interspersed with uncertain questions from the young girl meant to be absorbing this careful instruction, Kincaid’s essay derives power from its diminutive size. A single paragraph comprised of a single sentence, the essay falsely sets readers up for a quick, easy read, but what follows is an in-depth reflection on the ways we raise young girls and how this rewards silence and compliance but does not always guarantee safety. 

Yet while this essay is slim, it is not without substance. While it certainly details the supposed mundanity of the domestic, the essay expands just as readers have come to expect from the genre, reflecting on larger universal truths like obedience, sexuality, gender performance, and power structures. Kincaid takes readers on a meandering journey through the constructs and confines of girlhood, until both the child in question and readers themselves are left wondering what it means to be a good girl, who these many requirements reward, and if success is even possible. These complex themes are carefully threaded, layered with image and characterization, readers compelled by a clear, resonant voice. Both mother and girl are represented in this essay, dual visions of life, the mother a representation of who the girl must eventually become, similarly expected to pass on this set of burdensome guidelines for the next generation. “This is how to bully a man,” she instructs the girl who cannot yet understand, quickly followed by, “This is how a man bullies you.” While the mother is seemingly at odds with her daughter, she seeks to provide her with the things she needs to keep herself safe through both compliance and deviance, and perhaps it is the mother’s own trauma that leads to the litany, desperate to save her daughter from her own struggles through a rigid dedication to rules. Ultimately, however, it is the juxtaposition of these broader themes with the small size of the work that makes this essay successful. 

Kincaid’s work also deftly demonstrates the power of flash to unify form with content. Readers are offered Kincaid’s essay in the same fashion as adults offer advice to young girls—as a series of instructions, a list of rules girls are expected to follow without explanation or questioning, the list growing longer and longer until a child learns to live a good life, though the essay is clear to end with the girl’s failure. After reminding her daughter repeatedly to be a good girl in order to become a good woman, the mother asks in the final line, “You mean to say that after all you are really going to be the kind of woman who the baker won’t let near the bread?” implying that all their work will be in vain. By presenting the essay in this form, Kincaid puts readers directly into the position of the child, overwhelmed by the litany, the increasing demands, the relentless syntax, readers desperate for relief, but finding none, growing tired and restless, burdened and breathless, as they search for a momentary pause, for a place to make sense of the guidance, which the child questions in the essay, the reader even more so, their adult perspective offering clarity on the confusing expectations adults placed on young girls. The size of the essay makes us all small children in need of instruction and constant correction, trying our best to understand the many complexities of a cruel world. 

“Girl” firmly rejects the traditional confines of the essay yet still claims space in the canon. Her use of flash reinvents the essay, commanding readers pay attention to the often overlooked subject of the domestic space, woman and girl, mother and child, firmly at the forefront. Kincaid’s work also places Caribbean culture at the center, creating a new form to reflect this experience, rather than trying to fit this experience into traditional forms that have long sought to exclude marginalized writers. It is Kincaid’s deliberate use of flash to claim space for stories and writers traditionally silenced and erased, that places this piece in textbooks alongside the lengthy works of straight white male writers. Originally published as a prose poem, but also often categorized as essay or fiction, “Girl” is a work whose hybridity resists easy definition. It is precisely this blurring of boundaries that make space for fluid lives that not easily fit into the prescriptive ways of living or writing.

Encountering “Girl” as a student years ago is what gave me permission not only to write about the small stories of my girlhood, but also to embrace the power of flash. This work was one of the few pieces I encountered that spoke of the confusing expectations society demands of girls, and the ways women are expected to dole out these instructions even as they harm their daughters and themselves. It was one of the only pieces that blurred genre in a way that felt familiar to me as a queer, disabled writer. And Kincaid’s use of flash deviated so starkly from what I encountered in textbooks and anthologies that I was immediately intrigued by the ways a writer could subvert expectation while still fulfilling the expansive exploration of the essay.

Writing Abbreviate as a very short collection of very short essays allowed me to access the large struggles of my life. Without the flash form, I might not have written about these experiences at all, so overwhelmed by the task that it overshadowed me entirely. But the flash form shrunk the burden of sharing these stories while also expanding the possibility of what they might represent for me and for readers. No longer was I consumed by the challenges of writing about the painful realities of being a woman in America—growing up pressured to conceal my queer identity, expected to tolerate being belittled by a friend’s husband, and being physically assaulted by a man in a red trucker hat just after the 2016 election. Instead, flash offered a tidy container for sprawling stories, an endpoint to the telling, which was a relief from the relentlessness of trauma. 

The flash essay also allowed me to write the stories of my life that others deemed too small to be important but that were nonetheless essential for me. Growing up, I was told girls should be seen and not heard, which made me feel small and encouraged my silence about not only my pain, but also my joy. I believed the things that were important to me did not matter, when really these were things girls are taught to ignore or conceal in favor of following adult convention and demonstrating obedience. But these were the stories that were essential to my girlhood—childhood games and school projects, teenage sleepovers and the first love of female friendships. These domestic tales were stories society deems too small, but they were able to claim metaphorical space and expand due to the genre fluidity of flash. 

If I had believed about flash what I believed about myself, I would have thought it incapable of being expansive, of searching, stretching, growing. I would have believed it incapable of taking up space in the imagination and commanding attention. But there is purpose and power in subverting expectation, in resisting conventional modes in favor of forging new ways of knowing and being. If the essay is about reflecting the reality of our lives, flash is fitting for those of us who have been made to feel small, for those of us looking to resist the traditional ways others who sought to write stories of our lives in favor of the fluid forms we might write for ourselves. 

*

Sarah Fawn Montgomery is the author of the flash essay collection Abbreviate. She is also the author of Nerve: Unlearning Workshop Ableism to Develop Your Disabled Writing Practice, Halfway from Home, Quite Mad: An American Pharma Memoir, and three poetry chapbooks. She is an Associate Professor at Bridgewater State University.