1986 ~ by Sarah Freligh

The little neighbor girl went missing on the same day the space shuttle Challenger exploded. There was smoke and then nothing. We watched it all at school, on a TV that our teacher wheeled into the classroom. We walked home from school the long way, imagining how it would feel to fall from the sky and slam into the ocean.

The week after the little girl went missing, our mothers began to watch from the porch whenever we rode our bikes in the street. Sometimes we tucked ourselves into small places and pretended we were astronauts rocketing toward a strew of stars. When our mothers called for us, we could hear the frantic in their voices rising like sirens.

A month after the little girl went missing, a poster with her picture—HAVE YOU SEEN ME?—showed up on phone poles and in the store on the corner where we stole strings of licorice and Tootsie Rolls. Police released a sketch of the suspect, a dad-aged man who could have been Mr. Marks from the blue house or Mr. Stephenson with his garage full of tools. Our mothers insisted that we play in the back yard where they could keep an eye out. We yearned to blast off and out of there.

Months after the little girl went missing, the remains of the Challenger astronauts were fished from the bottom of the ocean. The hedges hemming our yard grew up unruly, shrouding our view of the night sky and the neighbors, though sometimes on steamy evenings, when the windows were open, we could hear shouting and gunshots and screams from what might have been a television turned up too loud.

***

Sarah Freligh is the author of five books, including Sad Math, winner of the 2014 Moon City
Press Poetry Prize and the 2015 Whirling Prize from the University of Indianapolis, and the
recently-released A Brief Natural History of Women, from Harbor Editions. Sarah’s work has
appeared in the Cincinnati Review miCRo series, SmokeLong Quarterly, the Wigleaf 50, and in the anthologies New Micro: Exceptionally Short Fiction (Norton 2018), and Best Microfiction (2019-22). Among her awards are poetry fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Saltonstall Foundation.

Two Questions for Matt Barrett

We recently publish Matt Barret’s spectral “The Ghosts We Love.”

Here, we ask him two questions about his story:

1) The haunting here is so poignant — I love that the grandparents come back (even in this tragic form!) to spend this time with their loved ones. Do you think the grandchildren appreciate this visitation more than they regret it?
Thank you for these two great questions! I do think the children appreciate the visitation more than they regret it. One thing I’ve wondered is if the ghosts of the grandparents will ever return – they come on a hot June day, but that’s the only time we see them as ghosts. So, if that’s their only visit, I think the memory of it will stay with the kids forever. It will be something they cherish in a lot of ways, having had this bonus time with their grandparents. And as time goes on, I think they’ll appreciate it more and more. All the things that annoyed them from the visit will be a distant memory, and what they’ll picture more than anything else is the way their grandparents looked at each other when they all went back to the creek. Death feels so final at times, and I think a visit from a ghost—especially a loved one’s ghost—would be refreshing in a lot of ways, that not everything has to end so suddenly, that there still can be these brief moments of interaction.

2) Are there only six things we don’t know about ghosts? Or do you think, as these ghosts linger, the grandchildren will learn more and more?
I wonder about this – my initial thought is yes, there must be a thousand things the children could still learn about ghosts. But in a lot of ways, these ghosts are simplified versions of themselves. They keep thinking about the same things, they only wear one outfit, they can only feel a single temperature. So their identities may not be as varied and diverse as they were when they were alive. At the same time, however, they don’t fit perfectly into all six of these categories. They take a break from their final thought to hold each other’s hands, to feel something they haven’t felt in years. It’s possible that even within these six categories, there are variations. To make sense of this moment, the kids may have to rely on simplified categories – seeing ghosts could be too mind-boggling otherwise. But I hope that underneath the surface, there are so many things about these ghosts that no one, including the children, will ever fully understand.  

The Ghosts We Love ~ by Matt Barrett

The first thing we didn’t know about ghosts, until we met our granddaddy six months after his funeral, was they feel whatever temperature it was the day they died. And since our granddaddy died in a blizzard, he stood there shivering, despite visiting us on a 90-degree day in June. The second thing we didn’t know about ghosts was they wear the same clothes they had on when they died, and not the ones they were buried in. Which was a shame because our grandmother died wearing nothing but a thin hospital gown that didn’t quite close all the way when she walked. And the third thing we didn’t know about ghosts until they showed up at our house one day was they fixate on whatever final thought they had, no matter how many times you try to steer the conversation in another direction.

Our granddaddy’s final thought, as he stood there shivering in big leather boots and big leather gloves and denim on the rest of him, was whether he still should have rolled the trash bin to the end of his driveway despite how much it was snowing.

“Probably should have,” he said.

“But the roads were closed.”

“That truck still would have come.”

And our grandmother, in her hospital gown and sweat beads on her forehead, repeated her final thought as a question we were supposed to answer: “Is any of this real?”

“Any of what?”

“Any of…this?

Our grandparents came to see us on that hot June day mostly to complain about how little they saw eye-to-eye now that they were ghosts. Our granddaddy couldn’t keep up with our grandmother’s depth of thought, she claimed. And our grandmother couldn’t answer a simple goddamned question about the trash, our granddaddy said.

But if there were a fourth thing we didn’t know about ghosts, it was that they miss being a child. If you asked a ghost—or at least these two—what they’d do to come back as themselves, they’d say, “Nothing.” To return as an eighty-year-old? “Hell no.” Sixty, fifty, twenty-five? “Nuh-uh.” But if you took them to the creek behind your house, a few miles from where they both grew up as neighbors, they’d stop worrying about the trash and how one defines reality, and tell you about the time they ran from home and found each other digging for crayfish beneath the dirt and stones. And if you gave them time to look at each other, you’d think they were seeing the ghosts of themselves from all those years ago, how they were suddenly shy, a little timid to hold each other’s hands. And you’d feel like you were seeing something you shouldn’t, a part of themselves they’d buried while still alive, which led us to the fifth thing we didn’t know about ghosts. That they aren’t afraid to be seen, if you’re willing to stand there and look.

We looked. And a part of us was disappointed to learn these things. That the ghosts we love can’t feel the heat of a summer day, that their minds get stuck in loops, that they don’t even get to dress well. But the sixth thing about ghosts is they won’t tell you to feel sorry for them. They’ll run your hands through the same water they ran through. They’ll show you all the places the crayfish hide. They’ll annoy the hell out of you half the time. But then they’ll pinch your cheeks and you won’t quite feel it. And damn, you’ll wish you did.

***

Matt Barrett holds an MFA in Fiction from UNC-Greensboro, and his stories have appeared or are forthcoming in The Sun Magazine, The Threepenny Review, The Baltimore Review, SmokeLong Quarterly, Wigleaf, The Journal of Compressed Creative Arts, River Teeth, the minnesota review, Best Microfiction (’22 & ’23), Best Small Fictions (’23), and elsewhere.

Two Questions for Avitus B. Carle

We recently published Avitus B. Carle’s zesty “Salt.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love the transmutations of “salt” in this piece — from “the opposite of sugar” to “real mothers” and “real fathers,” to sand and stories. Though it burns the girls’ noses, it’s a necessary substance. Do you think they realize how necessary it is?

The older orphans at the end realize the necessity because we see them licking the tears from the younger orphans, not wasting a drop. The younger orphans, before some separate themselves to become the older orphans, do not. Salt is one of the only things they have in abundance – that they can find anywhere – and they take advantage of the fact that they can even produce it. This is why they experiment freely with salt or mimic the adults they’ve seen interacting with white substances, not fully understanding what they are doing.

2) The imagery here is so amazing! You give us all this emotion and character through its power. What is your favorite image from this story? Or, more specifically, what is your most necessary (going back to necessary!) image?

My favorite and most necessary image is the orphans creating an ocean in the girl’s bathroom. Not only do we get a lot of small moments in this scene, but it’s the first time the orphans really look at one another. The first time they notice their bare-boned bodies. This is also where the shift in the story occurs, pulling away from playtime as imaginary to playtime as a necessity. After their toilet ocean and after the abundance of salt betrays them, readers learn that there are some orphans who can read, some who play at being mothers and fathers even though they are older orphans. The decision to create an ocean in the bathroom creates this necessary shift that triggers some of these orphans to change, that divides them and shows readers that this once collective group is now broken, the older orphans now knowing better than the younger.

Salt ~ by Avitus B. Carle

The opposite of sugar. The taste on the tongues of orphans. What remains on their plates. What burns their noses when they lean over the table, inhale through straws. Like their real mothers. Like their real fathers. Like the only people they remember. Orphans who ground it between their fingers. Flick it from beneath their fingernails at each other. At the walls stained from years of rainstorms. At the peeling wallpaper no one can afford to replace. At the rusty nail that’s claimed five of their feet. Orphans who let it run through their spread fingers like sand. Like the beach. Like they think beach sand would. Like the ocean. Like they dream the ocean would. One of the orphans has an idea. All of the orphans have an idea. They flood the girl’s bathroom, shed their borrowed clothes. Barely recognize themselves, their bodies. Their bare-boned bodies covered in white, their palms filled with it until it leaves them for the waves of the fountain, sink, and their toilet ocean. They swim and they laugh and they swallow it, their stomachs swelling, their throats and noses and eyes burn. Some will retreat while others stay and learn of the infections it causes. What leaves their bodies as they writhe in bed, dreaming of white whales and the sea, the only story they know. The one story hardly any of them can read. What those who retreated are able collect with rags stained with gasoline or cloth from broken toys. A teddy bear’s head. Sheets from one of the five. An article about unwanted children, where they gather, where they’re kept. The reason why some of the orphans are named mother or father. Depending on their floor, mothers will promise things will get better, that someone is always coming (they aren’t). Fathers will tell the little orphans to be strong, keep fighting, stop crying. The orphans who the little orphans call mothers and fathers will always lap up the tears of their orphans, their tongues tracing the way home. Their tastebuds drowning in seasoning and preservation and crystal and their lips crack when trying to form the word but, now, they will always remember how it sounds.

***

Avitus B. Carle (she/her) lives and writes outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Formerly known as K.B. Carle, her flash has been published in a variety of places including Five South, F(r)iction, Okay Donkey Magazine, Lost Balloon, CHEAP POP, and elsewhere. Avitus’s stories have been nominated for The Pushcart Prize, and her experimental flash, “Abernathy_Resume.docx,” was included in the 2022 Best of the Net anthology. Her story, “A Lethal Woman,” will be included in the 2022 Best Small Fictions anthology. She can be found online at avitusbcarle.com or on Twitter @avitusbcarle.

Two Questions for Emma Burnett

We recently published Emma Burnett’s delicious “A surely incomplete history of Imperiala Genevieve Beatrice Vinistasia Schitz.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) Despite the compressed nature of our hero’s biography in this story, I really feel like we come to know her deeply. Did you ever consider making her story longer, or more detailed? Or was this flash its perfect form all along?

I love writing flash. There’s something about telling readers exactly what they need to know, and no more, that’s really appealing. Maybe I could have written something longer, but do you really need to know the details of her home, the places she’s lived, the details of her husband’s beard, or her kids’ names? Or would Imperiala have just gotten lost in the bigger story? In such a short piece, I think she stands out as the main character, even when she maybe isn’t for other people.

2) “The promise of cherries.” Such a beautiful ending line. “The promise of cherries”! I love that she has chosen, at the end, finally, to live her life on her own terms rather than anyone else’s. Even
though there will still be bitter days ahead, there is still that hopefulness of a sweeter next. Do you think she is satisfied with her choice?

Thank you!!! I loved that, too.
You know, I’ve been thinking a lot about the choices women make, even the ones we think are
conscious. How hard it is to say ‘no’ to things that we’re told are normal; and how hard it can be to
live with the outcomes when you don’t say no.
The cherries thing was inspired by my grandmother, who probably would have been capable of
doing a bit of murder to get to a tree of ripe cherries, but who so often, well… didn’t. So many of
her choices were about other people. Having babies, moving for her husband, giving up jobs, being the perfect housewife. Now that I’m saying this, a lot of the story seems like it’s based on her. But she never got that freedom at the end, and it makes me really sad.
I’ve also been thinking a lot about the threat of single women, especially older ones. That idea of
solo, untethered woman, someone who just doesn’t need you. So many of the witches in stories are those women – sassy, dangerous, filled with knowledge and power. They’ve been written to make us scared to become those women. But that’s not how I feel. I love them. They give me hope.
So, yes, I think Imperiala will be satisfied with her choice. I think she’ll find strength in herself, and I think others will begin to see it. I think the air will smell like home, and the language will carry emotion she never could convey in English, and she will find a family that she had almost forgotten.
That is has been there the whole time, and she can slot in, be herself and be with them, all at the
same time.
I think she’ll eat so many cherries that she’ll give herself the shits, and she and her cousins – all
women – will laugh about it for days, and then she’ll be more careful. But not too careful because,
after all, life is for living and the tree is bearing fruit now.

A surely incomplete history of Imperiala Genevieve Beatrice Vinistasia Schitz ~ by Emma Burnett

This is a surely incomplete history of Imperiala Genevieve Beatrice Vinistasia Schitz.

Whose parents made up for her terrible surname with a truly superfluous quantity of first and middle names.

Whose father doted on her, the only living child after fourteen miscarriages and nearly giving up hope.

Whose mother had to fetch her out of the cherry tree at the bottom of the garden on the day of her wedding because the cherries were ripe and she loved cherries more than anything, even her intended.

Whose husband promised they would stay close to her parents but took a job in Austria then Tunisia then Ireland, where her shoes were never dry, and her parents refused to visit after that first trip.

Whose womb was home to so many babies, but unlike her mother she carried them to term, carried them even when she didn’t want to anymore, until she was fed up with babies and milk and crying and shit and crying and milk and more babies with no one around to help her and only her mama on the phone who told her she should feel lucky because at least they weren’t in the ground like all her brothers and sisters.

Whose soul shrivelled when the children refused to speak anything but English and she was the only one who dreamt in the language of heat and elsewhereness and, after her mama died and her papa followed shortly after, she had no one to talk to in the old tongue and it slowly died away except in her dreams.

Whose pocketbook only sometimes stretched to buying cherries, expensive, sad little things that tasted like water and the plastic they came in, but which she ate one after another hoping the next would be sweeter.

Whose guts yearned for the learning her children had, some so booksmart they were like whips of knowledge and they left one by one, even the girls, so free and flighty and powerful.

Whose house was an empty shell defined by broken promises and indenture, words she learned from the books she borrowed from the library now that she had time to herself, and which left her enough time to manage the problem that had plagued her for years.

Whose husband lay in a box carefully chosen by weeping children while she stood silent and sombre and everyone around her commented how brave she was, how foreigners always seemed to have to wail about everything, but she was so calm, so different from those others.

Whose travel back home brought her closer to her history and future, to where she would finish her days against the wishes of everyone except for herself, each step of the way carrying the promise of cherries.

***

Emma Burnett is a researcher and writer. She has had stories in MetaStellar, Elegant Literature, The Stygian Lepus, Roi Fainéant, The Sunlight Press, Fairfield Scribes, Five Minute Lit, Microfiction Monday, and Rejection Letters. You can find her @slashnburnett, @slashnburnett.bsky.social, or emmaburnett.uk.

Two Questions for Laila Amado

We recently published Laila Amadao’s devastating “Ophelia Goes Swimming.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love this reimagining of Ophelia — giving her more agency, more personality than she was allowed through Hamlet’s eyes. At the end, it says ” Hamlet … is looking at Ophelia as if he sees her, properly sees her, for the first time.” But do you think he really does see her, even now?
I don’t think so. The use of “as if” here was entirely purposeful. What happens when someone who was seen by a (narcissistic) “main character” as an object, a sidenote, a part of stage decoration suddenly acts out of character and demonstrates agency? They cause a startle reflex, a reaction to something unusual happening, but does it mean that they’re seen for what they are? I doubt it. The “main character”, in this case Hamlet, is more likely to construct some sort of explanatory narrative that fits their own agenda, but, luckily, Ophelia doesn’t stick around long enough to find out what this narrative is going to be.

2) And I love (so much to love about this story!) how Ophelia chooses her own fate. She is offered (revealed?) several options and finds none of them “appealing,” choosing to go with something outside the expected, outside the script. What do you think gives her that power to go outside of her obvious fate(s)?
I’d say that it is the power of liminal spaces. When Ophelia falls into the river, she finds herself suspended (quite literally, on the cupola of her yet unsoaked garments) between life and death. The liminality of this transitional state allows her to break out of the trajectory reserved for her in the story of Hamlet, to find herself in a space where multiple outcomes are possible at the same time, and to step out of it into a new existence, which is her own.

Ophelia Goes Swimming ~ by Laila Amado

When the branches of the willow, rutted and gnarled, break under the layers of brocade, chiffon, and lace that is Ophelia’s dress, she is neither surprised, nor unhappy. She tumbles down into the stream below in a flurry of delicate cream ruffles.

Some minutes pass but she remains afloat, buoyed by the billowing fabric. The ribbons and satin cords unfurl in the currents of the river like the tentacles of a jellyfish. The sky above is the blue and white of a perfect summer day and she stares up unblinking. From here on onwards she has four possible pathways.

She can drown. Eventually, the soaked textile cupola gives way and she is pulled down into the alluring deep. The water closes over her head with the softest whoosh. Caught in the cocoon of silk descending towards the dark benthic currents, she can no longer see the way up. There is a moment of intense fear as her mind wakes from slumber, and then the water rushes into her lungs putting an end to everything.

She can thrash and scream, hitting the water with tight white fists in a way she has never hit anything in her entire life. A farmer, passing by on his way to the market or some such mundane affair, fishes her out of the stream. He takes Ophelia back to the Elsinore castle where he gets a generous reward and she is locked up forever in the tallest tower like that unfortunate cousin of hers that spoke up too much during family dinners.

Since thrashing and screaming appears to be a viable strategy of survival, she can stick with that a bit longer, leaving the farmer behind to reach a bend in the river where a handsome knight comes to her rescue. In this version of events, she can feign shock and memory loss and pretend she has never set foot in that grand castle up on the coast. The knight gets to take her back to his own, somewhat smaller estate, where she whispers the words of the marriage vows before a small domestic altar. Then she is locked up—yet again—this time in the boudoir, to remain there forever, bearing children and completing endless embroidery patterns.

Ophelia finds none of these appealing, and as the water of the river reaches for her, pulling her down into the dark, she reaches back, daring to grasp and embrace the power hidden in its flow and ebb.

The river laughs with a thousand voices. One playful current tugs at the end of Ophelia’s sash and it unwinds, setting her free, the tasseled ends wavering with newly found joy. Bubbles pour from her mouth in an endless stream, and as she walks across the riverbed paying no mind to the undertow, there is a definite spring in her step.

She makes it back to the Elsinore castle just before the dramatic finale. Takes the swords away from the boys, turns poison into so much benthic gunk. Tumbles the cheap theater decorations down from the battlements.

Hamlet is pale, his lips a dark ruby red, and he is looking at Ophelia as if he sees her, properly sees her, for the first time. “I love you like forty thousand brothers could not,” he says, and his words carry an echo of a thousand different voices booming against proscenium arches in the theatres of past and future.

Ophelia sighs. Leaning forward, she kisses Hamlet lightly on the tip of the nose, and says, “It has never been about you, silly.” She turns on her heel and walks away, carmine and gold carps playing in the air around her head.

***

Laila Amado writes in her second language and has recently exchanged her fourth country of residence for the fifth. Instead of the Mediterranean, she now stares at the North Sea. The sea still, occasionally, stares back. Her stories have been published or are forthcoming in Best Small Fictions 2022, Cheap Pop, Cotton Xenomorph, Flash Frog, and other publications. Follow her on Twitter @onbonbon7.

Two Questions for Steven Hage

We recently published Steven Hage’s haunting “Ladybugs in Stasis Chambers.”

Here, we ask him two questions about his story:

1) This story is called “Ladybugs in Stasis Chambers” (and, oh! Can I tell you how devastating that imagery is, those trapped ladybugs in the inverted glasses, all over the house!!), but the ladybugs aren’t the only ones who are trapped in stasis. Do you think the mother will be able to move on or forward or at all (no matter what the outcome is)?

Thank you, that is so kind!

Yes, I do think that the mother will be able to move on and experience momentum again, though I don’t know if her son will get well. When dire situations beyond our control resolve – usually without regard for our patience or lack of it – metamorphosis often seems to be a part of that process. We can’t simply resume our lives; we are changed. Whether she appreciates her son all the more after his recovery, or learns how to live again without him, the mother will probably be a new version of herself. Perhaps not unlike the dandelion flowers becoming white puff balls, or adult ladybugs having experienced larval and pupal stages. In any case, I find her faithfulness inspiring.

2) I love that the mother focuses on the ladybugs and this year-old promise made to her child. The tit-for-tat nature of it is so powerful — “I have kept my promise, so you keep yours too.” Why do you think the mother has focused so fervently on this one detail?

I think she has decided which duties are essential while she awaits her son’s fate, and chooses to define her purpose through the remaining things she can control. By staying behind to support her family and keeping her promise not to kill the ladybugs she is modeling the dedication that the situation requires, but also that she wants her son to mirror. Perhaps her resolve will inspire some small response within him and his desire to complete his unfulfilled promise will tip the scales toward recovery. Also, though I don’t think the mother is superstitious, there are many myths about ladybugs around the world and many share the idea that ladybugs are good luck but that to kill one invites tragedy. I hope the son and bugs live, but in my experience some ladybugs just don’t.