The Suitcase of Lost Belongings ~ by Rosaleen Lynch

She can’t take her children in the suitcase. They would fit if she emptied it. They could top and tail in the folds of the quilt she made of their clothes, but there’s not even enough room for their hands holding tight to the hem of her skirt, not even for their overtired tears, not even for the sound of the word ‘Mama.’

She can’t take her children in the suitcase. The suitcase is full of passports and travel papers, the borders and patrols of Northern Ireland, the watchtowers of the Berlin Wall, footprints across desert miles, train tracks escaping genocides, taking tunnels underground, underwater, and through the mountains and across bridges linking land masses across the times, with the wake of boats and ships that meet the ferry to Ellis Island, and the plane contrails crossing Lady Liberties skies, and all the spaces between these places in the suitcase, are full of maps with imaginary lines.

She can’t take her children in the suitcase. Not the day the suitcase is full of forest fire, screeching firehawks, and trapped animals, hiding their young. Not the day the suitcase is full of an exploding mine and a petrol tank in flames, an air raid siren, and three unexploded bombs. Not the day the suitcase is full of shrapnel and the smell of burning skin.

She can’t take her children in the suitcase. They fill the suitcase full of fire. All the sunshine and starlight. All the birthday, advent and power-cut candlelight. The campfire songs, the toasting fork fireplace, the smell of the turf fuelled range baking scones, and the chip pan flames and smoke with the scream of the fire alarm, that everything has to be left behind for. 

She can’t take her children in the suitcase. She leaves the suitcase behind. She lets it burn in the fire, so all that’s left is a metal cage outline and fastenings, like a charcoal-line drawing on a page, and from the ashes of lost belongings, she will rise and start again.

***

Rosaleen is an Irish community worker/teacher/writer with work selected for the Wigleaf Top 50 2023, Best Small Fictions 2024 and Best of the Net 2024.

Two Questions for Katerina Tsasis

We recently published Katerina Tsasis’s singular “Helen of Troy Was My Best Friend.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) This is a classic tale of girlhood friendship, made weightier by the fact that one of the friends involved is Helen of Troy. But the narrator seems to be — simply! — a normal girl. Would the dynamic be different if she were one of Helen’s mythological peers?
Not necessarily—when we look at ancient myths or biblical narratives, we find plenty of petty squabbles and popularity contests and interpersonal feuds. I also think Helen walks among us every day; she’s that person who is so charming or talented or beautiful or intelligent that people are inevitably drawn to her. This flash story came out of a prompt about bringing mythological figures into the real world, and I was wondering how her life might unfold under different circumstances (would she end up in Hollywood? would she become a soccer mom?), as well as what it might be like to be in her orbit.

2) By the end, the girls grow apart. There’s no dramatic fight or breakup — the friendship merely ends, as some friendships do. Do you think the narrator, if she learned about Helen’s later life, regrets not trying harder to remain friends?
The narrator would be around 18-20 years old while recounting this story. I imagine at that point in life she’d be struggling with the idea that long-standing friendships can fade and puzzled that Helen isn’t eager to re-engage. The regrets would come later, when she realizes that Helen was the one setting the pace of their relationship, and that she could have taken a more active role in either fostering the connection or getting clarity from her former best friend after Helen pulled away.

Helen of Troy Was My Best Friend ~ by Katerina Tsasis

Helen and I were best friends growing up because she was the only other girl my age on the block, and we went to the same school, so her mom drove us in the morning and my dad brought us back in the afternoon. Helen had reddish curls and big brown eyes and grown-ups were always telling her how pretty she was. 

When we got to middle school boys would pass her notes, like “Will you be my girlfriend? Yes or No” and she always checked “No” because she believed having a boyfriend meant being in love and she hadn’t been hit by Cupid’s arrow yet. It’s hard when your best friend gets all the attention even when she’s nice about it. 

Helen liked making snow angels in the winter and suntanning on the grass in the summer while reading romance novels. She believed in love at first sight but her favorite stories were enemies-to-lovers. When she finished a book she’d pass it to me with all the sex stuff underlined and we’d laugh about words like shaft, rod, and tumescence and how “making the beast with two backs” didn’t sound anything like what we learned about in Phys Ed. 

By the time we got to high school she still liked reading but hated English class because of too many old dead British guys. I suggested giving Jane Austen a try–I don’t know if she ever did. Helen’s favorite foods were pizza and red licorice, but she could only eat them at my house because her mom was afraid she’d ruin her figure and lose the Miss Troy, NY contest and there goes her chance at a scholarship. When she didn’t have pageant practice, she’d stay over on weeknights when her mom worked late and we’d do homework together. 

Helen was tall and graceful like a giraffe. Her mom corrected me when I said that because giraffes were ungainly so I should call my best friend something more elegant like a gazelle or a swan but I could never call Helen something so basic, so we settled on ‘impala.’

When we got to senior year Helen started smoking during lunch and kissing boys during free period and working at the grocery store after school twice a week because that whole scholarship thing wasn’t working out. Even though we rode the bus home together most days it was like she was there less and less, like she was herself less and less, like the Helen I knew was vanishing and being replaced by some lesser Helen, less nice, less friendly, less fun, but she didn’t want to talk about it, not with me anyway. She would still pass me her books when she was done with them, but there were no more underlines and the sex stuff wasn’t funny anymore. 

The last time I saw Helen was two years after we graduated, when I was home for spring break and my dad sent me out for ice cream. I ran smack into her stocking curry packets on the shelves–she was a department manager by then and had a little belly bump like she’d either eaten too much curry or was four months pregnant; I didn’t ask. “Come by later,” I told her, “I’ll order pizza.” “Yeah, no, totally, I’d love to,” she said and never showed up. 

***

Katerina Tsasis lives in Austin, Texas. Her writing has appeared in The New York Times, Bright Flash Literary Review, and Spillwords.

Two Questions for Kim Magowan

We recently published Kim Magowan’s brilliant “Subject: We Are All Appalled.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love the voice here — it’s the exact right amount of slithery and manipulative, alongside
defensive and faux-concerned! Was it hard to get this voice just so?

Cathy, ha, I love the word “slithery”! Perfect descriptor! Ditto with “faux-concerned.” Perhaps
because I’m a parent and have witnessed a few finger-pointing brouhahas, this unreliable
narrator voice was easy to inhabit. I love using first-person plural point of view, “we” narrators.
It’s a great POV for exploring complicity, avoidance of accountability. Megan Pillow’s “We All
Know About Margo” is a brilliant example of how choral narration works to deflect (or at least
to diffuse and dilute) blame. Before writing this story, I’d been reading about the Bystander
Effect. The more people there are witnessing a harm, the less likely it is that any individual will
step up and intervene on behalf of the victim. These parents are hiding behind the communal
“we,” and trying to align themselves with the larger “we”: “We, like all members of our parent
community, are appalled.” But in order to pull that move off, and shift blame away from their
own children, they require a scapegoat: Sebastian LeComte.

2) Only Ryan Gottfried (the victim) and Sebastian LeComte (the “perpetrator”) are named by the
parents writing this letter — clearly a conscious choice to hide their children’s identities! But do
you think the authors of this letter might turn on each other and start naming other names as
things progress? Do you think this “united” front will stand?

I love this question! And it’s a good spot, that they name (first-and-last name) both the victim
and the “perpetrator.” In fact, Ryan Gottfried, the victim, gets subtly condemned himself a few
times: “It shocks us to see that kid with his big, sloppy smile inhaling that beer bong,” they say, and later they call him “a willing and cooperative victim.” They stipulate that Ryan consents (to
drink, and to be filmed). Furthermore, they emphasize their own children “did not give Sebastian
permission to record them,” implying that their children are not only “victims” like Ryan
Gottfried, but even more victimized, since Ryan’s “smile” or “smirk” indicate his awareness and
complicity. Why they have it out for Sebastian LeComte is obvious. First, they need a scapegoat,
so spotlighting Sebastian is convenient and pragmatic. Second, they’re angry at him for
supplying evidence of their children’s involvement, by filming Ryan and then sharing the video.
They also name Ryan’s parents, but only, intimately, their first names: “our thoughts and prayers
go out to Linda and Gary.” I wanted that sentence to read as insincere, “faux concern” as you put
it earlier. (The “thoughts and prayers” evokes that knee-jerk, hypocritical response politicians
who take money from the NRA have to every school shooting. Screw them!). I deliberately did
not have parents sign the email with their names. For obvious reasons, they prefer anonymity.
But of course the mass email has to come from somebody. My mental picture is it gets sent out
by a lawyer parent, a partner in her firm, who is cutthroat enough and arrogant enough to agree
to be the “face” on the email. And probably her kid’s voice (or green sleeve) is most identifiable.
But if the parents turn on anyone next, it would be her kid; she’s made herself vulnerable. Next
in line would be the parent of a kid who has a particularly distinctive voice—a nasal squeak
maybe, or an accent—or the parent of the green-sleeved child, because everyone knows who he
is. These author parents have no loyalty. Their alliance is purely one of convenience. They’ll
throw any weak link under the bus, so long as their own child escapes punishment.

Subject: We Are All Appalled ~ by Kim Magowan

We are all appalled.

That’s the crucial thing we want to convey here. We, like all members of our parent community, are appalled by what happened on Saturday night, and furthermore, that our children, far from being perpetrators, are victims, too. Perhaps victims in a different sense than Ryan Gottfried, who we are relieved to hear has regained consciousness and is communicating coherently with his doctors and parents (our thoughts and prayers go out to Linda and Gary). But victims nonetheless.

When we look at that video that has been making its endless loops on Instagram and the other socials, round and round, we, like all of you, are appalled. Appalled for poor Ryan Gottfried—it shocks us to see that kid with his big, sloppy smile inhaling that beer bong, though there is no doubt he is doing so willingly, as the video incontestably proves. Nonetheless, knowing what awaits Ryan, we are appalled at the chorus of voices chanting “Drink! Drink! Drink!”

But we would like to point out, first, that it is impossible among this chorus of voices to verify without doubt who is saying, “Drink! Drink!” You might think you can identify specific voices, but we all know how video distorts sound. There is no telling exactly to whom those background voices and laughter belong.

Second, we would like to remind all our fellow parents of the concept of “peer pressure.” Undoubtedly Ryan is a victim of peer pressure (again, we must point out, a willing and cooperative victim). But so are all the off-screen young people in the room; so is whoever’s green sleeve is visible in the frame. “Peer pressure” implies that there is one particular peer who exerts the pressure (note the phrase is not “Peers pressure,” the subject is singular). The obvious dominant influence in this disturbing, but (we are grateful) ultimately not tragic scene is the boy filming the video, Sebastian LeComte. Ergo, Sebastian is the “peer” exerting the “pressure.” Our boys, just like Ryan, were the objects, not the perpetrators, of this pressure. Even if they were indeed the voices encouraging Ryan to drink—and again, we maintain it is impossible to identify with certainty individual voices in the video—they would have done so incited by Sebastian filming them.

In this context, we wonder if our fellow parents are familiar with the “Observer Effect,” which postulates that there is no neutral way to “see” a scene. The mere presence of an observer influences the experiment being conducted. This phenomenon feels doubly true when the scene is being conspicuously and visibly filmed, illegally filmed moreover, without the consent of people in the room. Ryan may have been aware that Sebastian was videotaping him—his goofy smile, nearly a smirk, before he imbibes the beer bong is indicative. But we can promise you that if our boys were indeed present, they did not give Sebastian permission to record them, or to forward his video to so many of their peers.

I know some of you may feel that Sebastian was performing a service for our community, similar to bystanders who videotape a police officer beating a citizen, film which then goes viral. We have heard such arguments. But we respectfully find the analogy absurd. In fact, our recent experience has made us wonder whether such bystanders were indeed doing the community a service, or, through their videotaping, provoking police into inflicting grievous harm (see our thoughts above, on the Observer Effect).

 In conclusion, we join the parents of our community in expressing outrage and horror. We join your calls for expulsion from school. We respectfully suggest that our distress be appropriately directed upon the young man responsible: Sebastian LeComte.

***

Kim Magowan lives in San Francisco and teaches in the English Department of Mills College at Northeastern University. She is the author of the short story collection Don’t Take This the Wrong Way (2025), co-authored with Michelle Ross, published by EastOver Press; the short story collection How Far I’ve Come (2022), published by Gold Wake Press; the novel The Light Source (2019), published by 7.13 Books; and the short story collection Undoing (2018), which won the 2017 Moon City Press Fiction Award. Her fiction has been published in Colorado Review, The Gettysburg Review, Smokelong Quarterly, Wigleaf, and many other journals. Her stories have been selected for Best Small Fictions and Wigleaf’s Top 50. She is the Editor-in-Chief and Fiction Editor of Pithead Chapel. www.kimmagowan.com

Two Questions for Anna Mantzaris

We recently published Anna Mantzaris’s delicious “Application to Eat the Sweetest Peach in the World.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) Of course, this story brings to mind that famous line from Eliot: “Do I dare to eat a peach?” In
this case … well … does the character dare? It feels, at times, almost like the peach is too good to
be eaten!

The backstory of the peach and I why I chose one that just may be “too good to be eaten” is that it
seemed like the complete opposite of anything that could be obtained through an application. We
apply for jobs, housing and funds—our basic needs and wants—but not something like the
sweetest fruit in the world. I’ve always had a lot of anxiety about filling out forms! On paper,
there’s limited room and electronic forms often have a set number of characters. There’s no place
for storytelling, which is why I dislike them so much. I decided to write a series of applications
for things that use the structure of a form to place stories. I handwrote this story (which I almost
never do because I have trouble reading my handwriting) and read it at an in-person series
(which I also rarely do) and the analog origins and in-person reading seemed fitting for
something that’s impermeant, like a peach. I hoped to capture a feeling of nostalgia for
something—even before it’s gone—that seems “too good,” fated not to last.

2) That said, this peach isn’t a peach — is it. Or not merely a peach. It is a gift, laden with
meaning. There seems to be the implication that the former lover is doing the gifting — what do
you think they expect from the “you” of the story when (if!) this peach is eaten?

The former lover mysteriously appeared for me at the end. Aside from the speaker there aren’t
any characters here, and it’s probably debatable if the speaker is even a character! We just have
them and this ghost-like ex at the end. I really like stories where a character is gossamer, off the
page in a way, like in Rivka Galchen’s “The Lost Order.” There’s a woman in her apartment and
a caller misdials and wants to place an order for Chinese food. The caller is the closest thing to
another character and even though we don’t see them—they’re just a voice on the line—they propel the story forward. I love that you ask about the ex-lover and give them expectations. It
would be nice to think that nostalgia is a two-way street here, with the ex-lover’s memory of
“you” being the “sweetest in the world,” even if it’s filtered as a memory through the other
person.

Application To Eat The Sweetest Peach In the World ~ by Anna Mantzaris

How will you eat the peach? Will you cut it in even halves? Or slippery, thin moon slices? How will you feel when you take a sharp knife and pierce the supple, almost rose-color skin?

Or will you hold it heavy in your preferred hand, bringing it to your greedy mouth for a large bite and let the juice trickle down your chin? Or will you tentatively balance it in two hands like a hungry squirrel and nibble into the flesh?

But first, will you take the peach out of the small gold box I will send it to you in, and gently rub the fuzzy skin against your lips as you inhale its scent?

Will you eat it at your kitchen table? In your bed? Or take it outside?

What time of day will you consume the peach? Will you wake to eat before the sun rises? Will you have it as the midday shines in? Or will you keep until midnight, and bite as the moon glows on a quiet night?

Are you considering sharing the peach? Who in your life is worthy?

Do you have a good palette? Do apples sometimes taste like potatoes and potatoes taste like rice? Can you tell a hint of rosemary from a smidge of mint on a thick slice of roasted lamb? Does the taste of black licorice affect your whole body?

Will you give the peach your undivided attention? Or will the music of Miles Davis float around you as you eat and take you back to a hot summer night with someone no longer in your life? Or might you attempt to have the peach in place of a madeleine while reading Proust? Dare I ask if you would consider hastily consuming the fruit while watching an adrenaline-inducing crime drama?

Will you savor and appreciate the peach?

Will you always remember it?

Will you regret it when it’s gone?

How often will you think of the peach? Will it consume your daily thoughts? Will it give you a feeling of unbearable longing as you look up at the ceiling begging for the tranquility of sleep?

What makes you worthy of the peach? Will others think you are the correct recipient? Will they applaud the decision?

What will you wear to eat the peach? A reckless crisp white shirt that may be stained by the juice? A black sweater that can dampen your mood for consumption? Your respectful Sunday Best?

Will you try and preserve the peach as a whole on a windowsill? Watching it surpass its natural lifespan, as it shrinks and molds and disintegrates and fills you with a hoarder’s regret? Or might you divide it into thick wedges and immerse in a cloudy, viscous syrup housed in a jar like a science experiment?

Will you compare the peach to ones in your past? Will you accurately remember their flavor or inflate the sweetness that never was?

Will you try and document with a photograph, or a recording of your slow and quiet bite? Or will you eat it with no evidence that it once existed?

Will the peach evoke feelings of jubilation? Will it be a cure for your loneliness?

What will you do with the pit? Will you place it in your mouth and let it dangerously roll around, gasping in a brief yet exhilarating fear each time it gets too close to the back of your throat? Or will you plant it in your garden, hoping it will come to fruition even in a snowy landscape? Or will you simply dispose of it with no regret like a former lover who loved you more and thought you were the sweetest in the world?

***

Anna Mantzaris is a San Francisco-based writer. Her work has appeared in BlazeVOX, The Cortland Review, Five on the Fifth, McSweeney’s Internet Tendency, Necessary Fiction, New World Writing Quarterly, Sonora Review, and elsewhere. She is the author of Occupations (Galileo Press). She teaches writing in the M.F.A. program at Bay Path University.

Two Questions for Lauren Kardos

We recently published Lauren Kardos’s biting “What we talk about when we want to talk about Fight Club.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love the voice(s) here. I love their rage, their pain, their sensitivity. And yes! They ask: “What did nineties-era white men have to be so mad about?” What did they have, indeed? What do they have to be so mad about now?
I admit I am a Palahniuk fangirl. Fight Club was the first Palahniuk novel I read. It rocked my 16-year-old brain in the early aughts. It’s a rare case where the movie does great justice to the book, in my opinion, and I’ve returned to both often over the years. I wanted to imagine the girls encountering this story the same age I did, but with the layer of contemporary events in the United States: the Me Too movement, the overturn of Roe v. Wade, the Epstein Files. etc. The girls’ question is both reductionist and not, just like Fight Club. The 90s era men, in the novel, hated their jobs, hated feeling stuck in the cycle of overconsumption and overdrawn bank accounts, hated the systems which killed their health, hopes, and perceived freedom. Hated their mothers (Chapter 6) for teaching them non-violence, so in grasping for adulthood control, they latch onto Fight Club and Project Mayhem as a way to enact change. I hated how Marla was the only female character in Fight Club, a character we’re set up to dislike. Many of the men’s anger was valid! The systems did suck in the 90s. But to ignore or disdain a giant chunk of the population, girls and women, experiencing the brunt of violence from these systems already? Tyler Durden’s ideology is ignorant of reality (to say the least of a dissociative personality). The systems are shit on a massive, global scale now. Go check the headlines to see what white men in power say they are so angry about today, the ideology that trickles down into voters of a certain persuasion. They’re enacting violence to expand control in ways different than in Fight Club, not just against women, but also communities of color, immigrants and asylum-seekers, trans and queer communities, and more. It’s way scarier. We can’t let these men horde all the anger, something the girls in my story react to, try to remedy.  

2) The reasons for what the girls do here — oh, damn, the reasons. Every broken little bit of their worlds sneak their ways into this. But unlike the men of Fight Club with their white-men madness, these girls are practicing for their future. For a world that will try to knock them down, that won’t “pull her punches.” Maybe this isn’t the best way to go about it, but … do you think this will make them stronger? Safer?
This question reminds me of podcast host banter at the start of an early My Favorite Murder episode. Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark were attempting to explain why they learn about and recount grisly true crime stories, many of which feature the violent death of women. Both said something along the lines of: if I can learn about and imagine every worst case scenario that could happen, then when something similar happens to me, I have a higher chance of survival. It was the when not if of their reasoning that shook me, stayed with me for its truth. My heart breaks for American young women coming of age now, for girls born with fewer rights than Gen X and Millennials and our Boomer mothers had. I don’t know if the girls’ cemetery Fight Club will make them stronger or safer. What they have to respond to is so outside of their immediate control. But I hope it makes them angry, makes them persistent, makes them ready for the fight.  

What we talk about when we want to talk about Fight Club ~ by Lauren Kardos

How you shouldn’t sneak out flashlight-less, since it’s easy to get lost near the mausoleum and that one girl twisted an ankle tripping down the riverbank. How the gravestones of town settlers bite chunks from our black crayons though we lay our alibi tracing paper flat. How the popular girls didn’t invite us to their pool party, and how we’ll get them back when they inevitably tiptoe into our weekly gatherings. How the groundskeeper’s forgotten this oldest quadrant of the cemetery where we circle up, so the new girl whines about deer ticks, invents rabid skunks skittering around the knee-high grasses, imagines shadows in our smuggled camping lantern. How we roll the dice to see who pairs first.

How one girl’s stepmom won’t quit pinching her “muffin top” or serving her half portions. How the creep outside the Gas-N-Go followed a girl to her car, and the auto-lock on her shitty hand-me-down Honda wouldn’t work. How another’s father uses his belt. How another’s parents are checking her college dropout brother into a “retreat,” and how stupid do her parents think she is when she knows mosquito bites from the marks that dot her brother’s arms.

How us original four found the scratched DVD in the thrift store dollar bin. How lucky it was that the rehab-destined brother hadn’t sold his Xbox for drugs yet because no one has a DVD player. How bang-able Brad Pitt once was. How smoking Helena Bonham Carter used to be. How maybe it’s a generational thing, but cult classic our asses. What did nineties-era white men have to be so mad about? How good it felt that first time when the credits were rolling, our pillows exploding sweat-smelling feathers all over the basement, and we continued with fists. We were Jacqueline’s scream-shredded throats. We were Jacqueline’s bilious rage.

How acrylic nails disqualify until filed down to stubs. How everything below the neck is fair game, but faces are for open-handed slaps only. How if you have braces, you’re allowed to wear a mouth guard stolen from the football storage shed. How all combat must occur in the ring of leaning headstones, cleared of twigs and rocks. How we stash cell phones under the mausoleum’s withered topiary. How the originals can invite a fresh face, but newbies can’t bring another until the dice turns up their number.

How the cemetery became a refuge one month after our classmate’s death. How the police called it accidental. How her quarterback ex came to school with scratches on his cheeks the day after her drowning. How his father is the sheriff. How we kneel at her headstone at the end of each gathering. How her name was Casey McCutcheon. Her name was Casey McCutcheon. Her name was Casey McCutcheon.

How the late summer raindrops perfectly numb the bruises. How we’ll ward off the Gas-n-Go stalker with bear spray hooked on our keychains. How we’ll horde getaway cash in a place our fathers will never look. How we’ll go for the eyes, the balls, the throat, the knees. How any parting gifts from gatherings in the coming cold weather can more easily hide under sweaters. How we’ll tell teachers we tripped, we fell, we were looking at TikTok.

How it’ll be impossible to find a mutual night when school picks up, between homework and band camp and cheer meets and musical rehearsals and basketball practice. How we’ll add more meet-ups, more nights, so every girl gets a turn. How we’ll stay even if the groundskeeper squeals. How we’re practicing now for when we’ll be on our own in just a few years. How this bitch of a world won’t pull her punches.  

***

Lauren Kardos (she/her) writes from Washington, DC, but she’s still breaking up with her hometown in Western Pennsylvania. The Molotov Cocktail, hex, Cold Signal, Bending Genres, Lost Balloon, Best Microfiction 2022, and The Lumiere Review are just a few of the fine publications that feature her stories and poems. You can find more of her work at www.laurenkardos.co.

Two Questions for Shira Musicant

We recently published Shira Musicant’s devastating “Boy Cries Out.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love how “Boy” and “Mother,” “She” and “He” become such perfect descriptions of the characters as the story progresses. Lacking any agency outside of what the writer gives them, they are defined by their roles! Do you think the impression would be the same if you (or their writer) had given them names?
If the writer would have given them names, say James and Sally, they might have begun to have personalities and required some development. Without names, Boy and Mother are stand-ins for the roles they might play in a story: a mother, whether good or bad or indifferent; a child, mischievous or playful or deprived. Their specificity might have made their demise tragic for the characters.
But not naming the characters, and later erasing the roles these characters might have inhabited, the writer narrows his story and clarifies his theme. So, I also read into this that the loss of those roles in a story, as in life, has tragic elements.
Sitting with your question, I think of characters I have had to delete from stories for various reasons, often because they do not contribute or move the story forward. I am always a little sad about deleting them and I love the idea of writing a piece featuring some of those discarded characters. Imagine the dialogue! Thank you for sparking that idea with your question.

2) Though your story is about Boy, the writer’s story is about Mother, then Woman. Except, of course, it’s not — it’s about martinis and climbing into cars and “toppling” heels. Do you think the writer has any understanding of the characters he has created? Or is he simply propelling them through a plot/desire of his own?
I think propelling the plot forward is a good way to describe the reason for this writer’s decisions. He takes a minute to find the narrative he wants to write, and, in the process, he creates Boy and Mother. When he does find his story, the writer decides it is inconvenient for the woman to have a child, to be a mother, so he must delete both Mother and Boy.
The deletion itself could have been a story, and there are many about these kinds of erasures: divorce stories, abandonments, murders even. But this writer has a different vision and wants to tell a more prurient story. 
So my story is about Boy, as you note in this question, and about the children who are erased for whatever reason.