Two Questions for Pamela Painter

We recently published Pamela Painter’s powerful “The Warning.”

Here, we ask her two questions about her story:

1) I love the brilliant characterization of Hank, how you reveal piece by piece what kind of person he really is. His justifications and rationalizations are so perfectly displayed! While we — the readers, the writer — know who he is, do you think Hank will ever admit to himself that he knows it too?
Thank you for those words “brilliant characterization of Hank.”  Well, first off you say that we– the readers and the writer (me)– know what kind of person Hank is, and I agree that his character is on display.  But I leave it up to the reader to decide if his warnings are harmless– the musings of a man who finds Chrissy attractive–or are they sinister.  If they are sinister, then they might foretell how the story really ends.  

2) And poor Chrissie! Is there a part of her that understands what kind of a threat Hank is, or do you think she sees him exactly the way he wants to be seen? The way, it seems, her father sees him?
Sadly, both Chrissie and her parents are unaware of the threat that Hank could potentially be.  So, yes, she does see him as her father sees him.  He is “Mr. D” to her.  Just as everyone is “Honey” at the diner where she works

THE WARNING ~ by Pamela Painter

Hank Drummond comes home from a fucked-up day at Link’s Hardware to find Chrissie’s father nailing a 2 by 3 foot sign to the fence at the top of their lane, just off the main county road.  Sure as shit Fred’s using the wrong nails, so Hank goes and grabs six 8ds from his basement workshop.  The sign reads “Well Done, Graduate” above what must be Chrissie’s senior photo.  She’s wearing a blue dress, no straps.  Blonde hair, bare shoulders.  Hank tells Fred maybe his kid’s photograph shouldn’t be on the sign.  “She’s too pretty,” he jokes, “someone might carry her off.  My ex-wife was always jealous of her blonde hair.”  Her father laughs, tells Hank, “Thanks for the nails, and don’t forget the party this weekend” as he hammers the last nail home.  Hank resists the urge to pull out the nails and hammer them in right. 

 Saturday evening, Hank stuffs three hundred-dollar bills in an envelope and drops by the party next door.  He gives Chrissie a fatherly hug and she peeks inside, says “Oooooo, Mr. D.” Her mother hands Hank a beer, and Fred waves from the smoking grill, where a neighbor corners Hank for advice about air-conditioners.  After two beers, a burned hot dog, guys beating up on the Red Sox, Hank returns home to his porch swing, also tired of the thumping noise his twins call techno.  He watches the Fred’s grill lose its glow.  Soon kids will be making out in the bushes or down by the pond.  Sure as hell, next day on his morning walk, Hank will gather up crumpled beer cans, a couple condom wrappers and their limp soldiers, maybe a pair of panties that from a distance look like a flower.  

Two weeks later the sign is sagging from a recent rain. Hank thinks maybe he’ll photograph the sign and send it to the twins. If only it didn’t look like a “Missing Persons” pic.   The twins adored Chrissie who used to baby-sit them before Hank’s wife sued for divorce and left, taking the twins with her.  Chrissie played kid’s games and taught them their first swear words.  “You don’t have to walk Chrissie home. She only lives next door,” his wife would complain after their evening at the movies or the Elks. But he wanted Chrissie safe. 

A month later he’s annoyed the sign is still up though he likes seeing Chrissie’s smile on his way to work.  Two dimples.  She used to sell girl scout cookies once a year.   Cookies his wife used to throw away.  Before he placed an order, he’d ask Chrissie to recite all the flavors—peppermint, peanut butter, pumpkin– her dimples dipping in and out. “Again,” he’d say, “I can’t decide.” 

By summer’s end he figures Chrissie is probably packing to leave for college and thinks about tearing down the sign himself.  Maybe keeping it. Even faded, it’s the same Chrissie who still wheels her bike to his garage to use the twins’ old bicycle pump. Her hair in a messy ponytail, she pumps and pumps, but the valve always pops out.  Finally she wails “Mr. D” and Hank comes to her rescue.  “Thanks again, Mr. D,” she calls, riding off to meet friends, or clock into her job at the town diner where she calls everyone honey.  It’s near Link’s, so two or three times a week Hank stops in for a burger and burned coffee.  Leaves a big tip.

Next weekend, Hank waits for her father at their mailboxes.  He tells Fred surely it’s time for the sign to come down.  Hank wiggles a loose nail as he conjures up a story about some guy obsessed with Chrissie’s photograph.  He says maybe some night the man follows her to the diner.  And maybe he sits slouched in his car and watches her through the diner window.  Her shift over, the man watches as she unties her apron, calls goodbye to the kid on the grill.  The man, still watching, as she unlocks her bike for the short ride home, then leaving his car, doors open, waving to her, calling “Chrissie. Chrissie.” 

Her father laughs, whacks a loose nail, says “Nah.  I’ll give it another week.”

Hank couldn’t do more.  He warned them. They were warned. 

***

PAMELA PAINTER is the award-winning author of five story collections. Her stories have appeared in numerous journals and in the recent anthologies Flash Fiction America, Best Small Fictions 2025, Best Microfictions 2025 and the Wigleaf Top 50 List, 2025. She has received four Pushcart Prizes and her work has been staged by Word Theatre in New York, and LA. 

Two Questions for Chris Scott

We recently published Chris Scott’s devastating “Go Bag.”

Here, we ask him two questions about his story:

1) The go bag’s contents go from the mundane and realistic (water, first-aid kit) to the unexpected and impossible (“ideas of a new world, a better world than this one”). In a situation like this, the unexpected items seem more useful than the mundane items — something to hold onto in the face of (at best) uncertainty. What will the protagonist cling most tightly to out of this go bag?
I briefly researched go bags about a year ago after reading Annie Jacobsen’s excellent Nuclear War: A Scenario, one of the most sobering and viscerally horrifying works of nonfiction I’ve ever read. I was surprised at how much that book upset me and infected my thoughts. Even though I’ve lived in Washington, DC for a couple decades now, that was really the first time I started kind of watching the skies and truly contemplating that level of catastrophe. This story is in part a dramatization of my experience thinking through the contents of my own go bag, realizing the futility of this (at least in the face of nuclear annihilation), and making my peace with what would hypothetically be actually important to me, or to anyone confronting a definitive end: your thoughts, memories, feelings, the present moment stripped of any pretense of security theater, planning, or fear of what’s around the corner. I don’t know that the protagonist is clinging to this so much as discovering that’s all there is.

2) Okay, but that ending: “call it a sunrise because there’s no one left to say otherwise”! The power here! The heartbreaking, stunning beauty. What if it really were only the sunrise? What then?
I don’t want to undermine the ambiguity of this ending, but after spending so much time dwelling on this topic, I will say I was attracted to the idea that there’s catharsis in considering something as inconceivable as total cataclysm, actual oblivion, and consciously, defiantly choosing to find peace anyway. This idea that an ending can be a beginning simply because you want it to be, because you choose that. That really moved me. Whether that’s resilience or resignation, wisdom or naivety, is up to the reader.

Go Bag ~ by Chris Scott

One gallon of water, one first-aid kit, one pocket knife, two boxes of granola bars, three pouches of pre-cooked rice and beans, two hundred dollars in cash, toothbrush, toothpaste, soap, hand sanitizer, toilet paper, one flash light, eight double-a batteries, one map, no bridges, no tunnels, your phone, your phone charger (almost forgot your phone charger), one missed call from mom, one text, two texts, dropped signal, four vivid memories (the last truly excellent dinner you ate, the last movie you watched that you could honestly describe as perfect, your last great fuck, and for whatever reason a sunset, in college, from your dorm room, the night your roommate had a breakdown and moved back home), three instincts that would feasibly help a person survive something like this, two net-neutral instincts, one genuinely detrimental instinct, an image of his hands on your body, an image of your hands on his body, two shadows merging and separating against the wall, just panicked neurons firing at random now, distant sounds of gunfire (maybe?), a windshield shattering (maybe?), one flat week-old half-full bottle of cherry coke rolling on the floorboard, trying to remember how it got there, an image of that bottle against someone’s lips, imagination running wild now, ideas of a new world, a better world than this one, starting over, where you can go, what it would take, things you could do, people you could be, a sunrise, the sun rising from the highway (even though it’s still the middle of the night you’re pretty sure), but call it a sunrise because there’s no one left to say otherwise, repeating it like a prayer, the sunrise, the sunrise, the sunrise, the most beautiful goddamn sunrise you’ve ever seen.

***

Chris Scott’s work has appeared or is forthcoming in The New Yorker, Okay Donkey, HAD, Flash Frog, ergot., MoonPark Review, New Flash Fiction Review, scaffold, Gone Lawn, Maudlin House, and elsewhere. Scott a regular contributor for ClickHole and an elementary school teacher in DC.

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.