Blog

  • The Stall Wars: A Faculty Restroom Horror Story

    The Stall Wars: A Faculty Restroom Horror Story


    There I was—distinguished professor of literature, credentialed purveyor of syntax and suffering—perched atop the porcelain throne in the sacred stillness of the faculty restroom, savoring the last vestiges of a sugarless lemon-honey lozenge and the sweet, unbroken silence that comes only from locking the world out, one stall door at a time. Beside me: Erich Fromm’s Escape from Freedom. Above me: fluorescent lighting dimmer than the future of American democracy. Around me: peace, solitude, and the faint illusion of control.

    Then came the talcum fog.

    That distinct olfactory offense, paired with the telltale wheeze of a Marlboro-ravaged trachea, shattered the silence. I didn’t have to peek between the stall doors. I knew. It was her. Scary Mary. The tenured temp. The mythological grievance machine. The student who had, for over a decade, haunted our campus like a poltergeist with an administrative appeal form.

    “Mary,” I barked from my vulnerable perch, “this is the men’s room. Leave now, or campus police will be called.”

    “But Professor,” came the whine, pitched somewhere between a toddler’s tantrum and a chainsmoker’s aria, “I need to talk to you about my grade.”

    I tried reason. I tried logic. But Mary had the persistence of a nicotine-stained Terminator. “Not until you explain why I got a C.”

    “I read your essay,” I sighed. “Your catering hustle was impressive. One hundred smoked salmon crostini in thirty minutes? Brava. But yes, it was larded with grammatical errors.”

    “You used the word larded,” she moaned. “Do you know how that hurts my self-esteem?”

    Self-esteem? I was pants-down in a toilet stall having a mid-thesis debate with a woman violating Title IX, and she wanted to discuss feelings?

    But Mary was just revving up. Her stubby fingers suddenly curled over the stall partition like something out of The Ring, and soon, her jaundiced head and magnified, frantic eyes emerged over the top. She looked like an unhinged librarian perched in a crow’s nest.

    “I can’t afford to flunk this class again!” she gasped, dangling from her makeshift luggage tower like a cirque-de-sociopath act.

    I stood up—pants restored, dignity in tatters—and let it rip: “You want honesty? Your essay reads like it was written by a sleep-deprived raccoon using predictive text. It made me reconsider the entire purpose of education. It gave me a migraine and a minor crisis of faith.”

    Mary recoiled. “You’re a monster!” she shrieked. “The worst professor in higher education!”

    Then physics intervened.

    Mary, all 250 pounds of her, teetered from her wobbly platform and hit the floor with the grace of a collapsing filing cabinet. She screamed. Something about her shoulder.

    I emerged, washed my hands, and surveyed the carnage.

    “You’ll be fine,” I said flatly. “Ice it.”

    “Aren’t you going to help me?”

    Something cracked open in me—some cocktail of guilt, absurdism, and overcaffeinated bravado. “I can fix it,” I said. “My brother dislocated his shoulder in high school. I saw the coach pop it back in.”

    Before she could object, I grabbed her wrist and yanked like a man possessed. There was a meaty clunk and then—a miracle—relief.

    “You’re amazing,” she whispered.

    “I know.”

    She stood up, rubbing her newly aligned limb. “Now that I’m not your student… can we be friends?”

    “Absolutely not,” I said, “but I can offer career counseling.”

    “No hard feelings?”

    “None. Now kindly exit the men’s room.”

    I returned home expecting a hero’s welcome, only to find my family gathered around a platter of French Dip, their eyes glued to gravy-soaked baguettes.

    “Sit down and eat,” my wife ordered, shoveling horseradish onto a sandwich with military precision.

    And so I did.

    And let me tell you, that sandwich could have ended wars. The beef was so tender it practically recited poetry on your tongue. The bread straddled that holy line between crisp and pillowy. And the au jus? It was less of a sauce and more of a religious experience. As I dipped, the day’s trauma melted like Swiss cheese under a broiler.

    In that moment, I understood: some stories deserve to be told. Others should be swallowed with gravy.

  • The Monster with a Tail: A Southern Gothic Confession

    The Monster with a Tail: A Southern Gothic Confession

    I’ve never forgotten the story one of my students told me in the fall of 1998. She was a re-entry student, a nurse in her early forties juggling UCLA coursework with night shifts at the hospital, and the kind of woman you remember: short, sturdy, bespectacled, with tired eyes that had seen too much and lips that knew how to tell a good story. Most afternoons after class, she’d linger and share dispatches from her Louisiana backwoods childhood or from the VIP wing of her hospital job—tales that ping-ponged between the hilarious and the horrifying.

    But one story chilled me to the marrow and stuck in my head like a burr under the skin. It wasn’t about celebrity patients or ER gore. It was about a monster.

    She and her cousin Carmen were unsupervised children raised in the heat-choked, school-optional outskirts of rural Louisiana. Left to their own devices, the two girls played what she called “mean games”—tormenting frogs and bugs, and doing other things she refused to describe. They were feral, wild, borderline Lord of the Flies with hair ribbons.

    And then came the visitor.

    It was an average swampy afternoon when he arrived. The girls were inside an old ramshackle house, probably scheming new atrocities, when the porch door creaked open and in walked a man. Except he wasn’t a man. He had a tail—thick, heavy, and grotesquely alive. It coiled behind him like a muscular question mark, flicking as he made his way into the living room. His body was matted with bristly fur. His voice was low, scratchy, and deeply wrong. He didn’t yell. He didn’t threaten. He spoke, calmly and with dreadful precision, cataloging every evil thing the girls had done to the frogs and insects. Every cruelty committed under the sweltering sun. He ended with a promise: Keep going, and I’ll recruit you.

    The thing sat in their house for three hours, its tail twitching as it detailed their future in hell’s internship program. The girls were petrified. When it finally left, slinking back into the thick air and cicada scream of Louisiana summer, they sat in silence. Eventually, Carmen whispered, “Did you see that?” My student nodded, mute.

    From that day on, they reformed. Sunday School. Prayer. Fear-based virtue. They never spoke of it again. But the thing had done its job.

    My student wasn’t a flake or a mystic. She was a veteran nurse—sharp, sane, and not prone to flights of fantasy. That’s what made it worse. She wasn’t selling me a ghost story. She was delivering testimony.

    To this day, I can’t shake the image: two children, alone in a creaky house, visited by a thing with a tail and an agenda. Whether it was a literal demon, a shared hallucination, or a supernatural PSA sent by the universe, I’ll never know. But I do know this: after that story, I never looked at childhood mischief—or Louisiana—in quite the same way again.

  • Teaching College Writing in the Pre-Canvas Days

    Teaching College Writing in the Pre-Canvas Days

    I’m glad academia has gone digital. No more heavy boxes of printed essays to lug home. No more gradebooks with smeared records.

    I remember we used to have to bring our grade and attendance records to campus during the semester break and get our records approved before we were truly free to enjoy our vacation.

    Like a beleaguered instructor sent on a doomed mission, I had to drag myself to the campus, lugging a mountain of paper that looked like it had survived the apocalypse.

    My stack of grades and attendance records—yellowed, dog-eared, and adorned with enough coffee stains and White-Out smudges to pass as a Jackson Pollock reject—was a bureaucratic nightmare in physical form. I found myself in line with a hundred other sleep-deprived, caffeine-fueled professors, each clutching their own messy masterpieces like they were carrying the Dead Sea Scrolls. The line outside the Office of Records was so long it could have served as an endurance test for Navy SEALs. To stave off starvation and existential dread, I had packed a comically oversized sack of protein bars and apples, as if I were preparing for a month-long siege rather than a simple bureaucratic ritual.

    There I was, supposed to be basking in the sweet, sweet nothingness of semester break, but instead, I was condemned to a gauntlet of waiting that made Dante’s Inferno look like a walk in the park. For what felt like hours, waited for the privilege of sitting at a table and enduring the laser-like glare of humorless bureaucrats who would scrutinize my records as if they were forensic experts analyzing evidence from a high-profile murder case.

    Once I finally managed to wade through the outdoor line, I advanced to the foyer for the second, even more soul-crushing phase of The Great Wait. Inside, rows of desks manned by expressionless drones awaited, each one peering over piles of grading records that seemed to stretch back to the dawn of civilization. Behind the staff of functionaries who examined the professors’ gradebooks were towers of file boxes stacked so precariously that a single sneeze could have transformed them into a cataclysmic eruption of dust and possibly asbestos.

    Eventually, I was summoned to one of the desks where an eagle-eyed Attendance Priestess scrutinized my records with the intensity of a customs officer suspecting I had smuggled contraband. She licked her fingertips with the solemnity of a high priestess preparing for a sacred ritual, only to cast me a look of such disdain you’d think I’d just handed her a wad of toilet paper instead of my gradebook.

    Finally, when the pinch-faced administrator deemed my records sufficiently unblemished and granted me the bureaucratic blessing to leave, it felt like I had just been handed the keys to the Pearly Gates. I didn’t walk to my car. I windsprinted because I feared the Attendance Priestess may have found fault with my records and would call me back to start the whole process all over again.

  • I Need to Talk to You About Neighborplexity

    I Need to Talk to You About Neighborplexity

    Sumatra coffee is my bad boy of the coffee world—dark, mysterious, and utterly unapologetic. It doesn’t just wake me up; it smacks me across the face, throws me out of bed, and chases me down the street while I’m still in my pajamas. Imagine if a tropical thunderstorm decided to moonlight as a barista, bottling up its fury in a cup. That’s Sumatra—every sip as intense as being caught in a downpour while you’re half-asleep and regretting every life choice that led you to this point.

    Sure, I’m probably guzzling more Sumatra dark roast than is recommended by anyone with a functioning heart, but let’s be real: I’m an overworked college writing professor, buried under an Everest of student assignments that multiply like rabbits on caffeine. Add to that the never-ending demands of being an author of coffee table humor books—books that, according to my editors, need constant revision and expansion to “stay relevant” and “generate a healthy revenue stream.” Translation: “Jeff, we need you to keep churning out content until your fingers bleed and your soul shrivels up like a raisin.”

    But let’s not get ahead of ourselves with the self-pity party. I could give you a long-winded lecture about how the digital age was supposed to bring us more convenience and free time, only to morph into a merciless sociopath that steals our time faster than you can say “work-life balance.” But instead, let me start my story before the Sumatra kicks in too hard, and I start ranting like a madman on a caffeine bender. Buckle up, because this ride is about to get bumpy.

    My tale begins with the Pattersons, my dear, respectable neighbors. For years, I lived in blissful harmony with these upstanding citizens—the kind of people who proudly displayed their New Yorker subscriptions and NPR tote bags like badges of intellectual honor. We had an unspoken pact, a mutual understanding that we were members of the Smart People’s Society, where the TV was reserved for documentaries, award-winning dramas, and the occasional indie film that required subtitles and a dictionary to understand.

    But then, one evening, as I casually glanced out my window—just a harmless peek, really—I saw something so grotesque, so utterly incomprehensible, that it shook me to my core. There, through the open window of my once-revered neighbors, I saw them glued to the screen—not just any screen, but one streaming a TV show so mind-numbingly lowbrow it made reality itself seem like a parody. My brain went into full-blown meltdown. Could it be? Were they actually watching Love Island?

    I blinked, hoping I’d misinterpreted the scene, but no—the horror was all too real. My neighbors, those paragons of taste and intellect, were indulging in what could only be described as televised garbage. I was struck down by a case of Neighborplexity: that gut-wrenching, mind-twisting moment when you realize you might not know the people next door at all. Suddenly, my world was flipped upside down. Had they always been this way? Were those book club meetings just a ruse, a clever cover-up for their secret love affair with trash TV? I felt like I’d just discovered that the Michelin-starred chef who lived down the block actually preferred dining on Spam straight out of the can.

    I thought we were united in our disdain for anything that wasn’t at least 95% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. But now? Now, I wasn’t so sure. How could they betray me like this? Was every dinner party, every casual chat about the latest literary masterpiece, just a well-orchestrated charade? My mind spun as I tried to reconcile the image of these seemingly cultured, well-spoken people with the reality of them willingly watching—gasp—that show.

    What do I do now? How do I move forward? Can I ever look them in the eye again, or will I be forever haunted by this dark revelation, this unraveling of the fabric of my once-idyllic neighborhood? All because of one dreadful, unforgivable act of poor taste on TV. Love Island, of all things. The horror! The betrayal! The absolute audacity! I might need more Sumatra just to get through this.

  • Return to Purgatory: A Packing Dream from Hell

    Return to Purgatory: A Packing Dream from Hell

    Last night, I found myself trapped in a sprawling compound of crumbling houses that looked like they were built during the Carter administration and never cleaned since. A communal frenzy was underway: the packing of thousands—yes, thousands—of food items and random clothing for a temporary exodus. Why the mass exodus? Unclear. Fumigation? Apocalypse? A reboot of The Grapes of Wrath? Whatever the reason, it was purgatorial.

    The mood? Moronic cheer. My fellow inmates—let’s not flatter them by calling them neighbors—were sipping drinks, cackling, and treating this Herculean labor like a godforsaken block party. Meanwhile, I hovered at the edge of the scene, paralyzed by the Sisyphean logistics of it all. Every cabinet I opened unleashed another avalanche of expired beans and mismatched Tupperware lids. The collective merriment felt obscene, as if they were toasting the Titanic’s elegant descent into the sea.

    And just when I thought salvation had arrived—in the form of a 2 a.m. bathroom break—I awoke, staggered to the toilet, and stumbled back to bed hoping to reset my brain. No such luck. The dream resumed exactly where I left off, like I’d hit pause on Netflix and walked back into my own streaming nightmare. There I was again, back in the compound, surrounded by half-drunk revelers blissfully ignoring the sheer futility of their packing, while I stood, a one-man FEMA unit, dreading every box and can like they were symbols of existential despair.

    I suppose, in some Jungian corner of my subconscious, this was meant to be cathartic. Maybe a soul purge. Maybe a late-night psychological CrossFit session designed to wring out my nervous system like a filthy sponge. All I know is, I woke up feeling like I’d done emotional burpees for eight hours straight—but to my surprise, I was eager to get out of bed, made a pot of coffee like it was a holy sacrament, and gleefully planned a one-hour kettlebell workout. 

  • Breaking Up with the Big Apple: Lena Dunham’s Urban Exorcism

    Breaking Up with the Big Apple: Lena Dunham’s Urban Exorcism

    Lena Dunham once burst onto the pop culture scene like a glitter bomb in a library—loud, impossible to ignore, and slightly out of place. As the wunderkind creator and star of Girls, she personified a certain species of early-2010s Brooklynite: neurotic, navel-gazing, and armed with a liberal arts degree and a vape pen. Her character, Hannah Horvath, declared herself the voice of her generation—or at least a voice of a generation—and we believed her, for better or worse. Adam Driver rode shotgun to stardom on the back of that HBO juggernaut, but Dunham, after a brief and blazing ascent, seemed to evaporate into a fog of personal crises, health issues, and public backlash.

    And then—poof—she was gone.

    Now, Dunham reappears in the pages of The New Yorker with a lyrical breakup letter to New York City, a place that once ran through her veins like overcaffeinated blood. Titled “Why I Broke Up With New York,” the essay chronicles her disillusionment with the urban cathedral she once helped mythologize. Born to an artsy Manhattan clan, she was baptized in brownstones and indie bookstore readings. But the signs of incompatibility showed early: by fourth grade, she needed therapy and anti-anxiety meds. The city wasn’t just fast—it was feral. The subway was a sensory mugging. Noise, chaos, and crowds ganged up on her nervous system. Her sanctuary was a loft bed, stacked high with books and lined with silence.

    That Dunham became the face of NYC hipsterdom is an irony she doesn’t miss. Girls was a love letter to New York in the same way a therapy session is a love letter to your absentee father. After the show ended, so did her patience. She fled to Los Angeles, then Wales—yes, Wales—and finally landed in London, which offered just enough cosmopolitan energy without the aggressive swagger of Manhattan. London was like New York after a long exhale.

    What Dunham’s essay ultimately embraces is self-acceptance. Breaking up with New York doesn’t mean she failed. It just means she outgrew a place that never really fit. And for those who see New York as a mythic proving ground for artists, she offers a bracing rebuttal: it’s also a place that can grind your soul into subway soot. There’s no shame in walking away from an abusive relationship—even if that relationship is with a city that other people treat like a religion.

  • There Is No Digital Kaffeeklatsch: The Lie of Social Media

    There Is No Digital Kaffeeklatsch: The Lie of Social Media

    For the last fifteen years, we’ve let the term social media slip into our lexicon like a charming grifter. It sounds benign, even wholesome—like we’re all gathered around a digital café table, sipping lattes and chatting about our lives in a warm, buzzing kaffeeklatsch. But that illusion is precisely the problem. The phrase “social media” is branding sleight-of-hand, a euphemism designed to lull us into thinking we’re having meaningful interactions when, in reality, we’re being drained like emotional batteries in a rigged arcade.

    This is not a friendly coffeehouse. It’s a dopamine-spewing Digital Skinner Box where you tap and scroll like a lab rat hoping for one more pellet of validation. What we’re calling “social” is, in fact, algorithmic manipulation dressed in a hoodie. We are not exchanging ideas—we are bartering our attention for scraps of engagement while surrendering personal data to tech oligarchs who harvest our behavior like bloodless farmers fattening up their cattle.

    Richard Seymour calls this hellscape The Twittering Machine, and he’s not exaggerating. Byung-Chul Han calls it gamification capitalism, a regime in which we perform our curated selves for likes while the real self, the vulnerable human beneath the filter, slowly atrophies. Anna Lembke describes our overstimulated descent in Dopamine Nation, while the concept of Algorithmic Capture suggests we no longer shape technology—technology shapes us.

    So let’s drop the charade. This isn’t “social media.” It’s addiction media, engineered to flatten nuance, hollow out identity, and leave us twitching in the glow of our screens like the last souls left in a flickering casino. Whatever this is, it’s not convivial, it’s not coffeehouse chatter, and it’s certainly not social. It’s the end of human discourse masquerading as connection.

  • The Great Rebrand: Why “Addiction Media” Tells the Truth

    The Great Rebrand: Why “Addiction Media” Tells the Truth

    Reading Richard Seymour’s The Twittering Machine is like discovering that Black Mirror isn’t speculative fiction—it’s documentary. Seymour paints our current digital reality as a propaganda-laced fever swamp, one where we aren’t just participants but livestock—bred for data, addicted to outrage, and stripped of self-agency. Watching tech-fueled sociopaths ascend to power begins to make sense once you realize that mass digital degradation is the new civic norm. We’re not on the cusp of dystopia; we’re marinating in it.

    Most of us are trapped in Seymour’s titular machine, flapping like digital pigeons in a Skinner Box, pecking for likes, retweets, or just one more dopamine hit. We scroll ourselves into a stupor, zombies hypnotized by grotesque clickbait and influencer gaucherie. And yet, a flicker of awareness remains. Some of us know our brains are rotting. We feel it in our foggy thoughts, our shortened attention spans, our craving to be “seen” by strangers.

    But Seymour offers no comfort. He cites a 2015 study where people tried to quit Facebook for 99 days. Most folded within 72 hours. Some switched to Instagram, TikTok, or Twitter—addiction by another name. Only a rare few truly escaped, and they reported something wild: clarity, peace, a sudden freedom from the exhausting treadmill of performance. They had unplugged from what philosopher Byung-Chul Han calls “gamification capitalism,” a system where every social interaction is a metric and every self is a brand.

    Seymour’s takeaway? Let’s retire the quaint euphemism “social media.” It’s not social. It’s not media in the traditional sense. It’s engineered compulsion. It’s addiction media—and we’re the lab rats with no exit key.

  • From Gutenberg to Doomscroll: A Brief History of Our Narrative Decline

    From Gutenberg to Doomscroll: A Brief History of Our Narrative Decline

    Richard Seymour, in The Twittering Machine, reminds us that writing was once a sacred act—a cerebral pilgrimage and a cultural compass. It charted the peaks of human enlightenment and the valleys of our collective idiocy. But ever since Gutenberg’s movable type cranked out the first printed tantrum, writing has also been big business. Seymour calls this “print capitalism”—a factory of words that forged what Benedict Anderson dubbed “imagined communities,” and what Yuval Noah Harari might call humanity’s favorite pastime: building civilizations on beautifully told lies.

    But that was then. Enter the computer—a Pandora’s box with a backspace key. We haven’t just changed how we write; we’ve scrambled the very code of our narrative DNA. Seymour scoffs at the term “social media.” He prefers something more honest and unflinching: “shorthand propaganda.” After all, writing was always social—scrolls, letters, manifestos scrawled in exile. The novelty isn’t the connection; it’s the industrialization of thought. Now, we produce a firehose of content—sloppy, vapid, weaponized by ideology, and monetized by tech lords playing dopamine dealers.

    The term “social media” flatters what is more accurately a “social industry”—a Leviathan of data-harvesting, behavioral conditioning, and emotional slot machines dressed in UX sugar-coating. The so-called “friends” we collect are nothing more than pawns in a gamified economy of clout, their every click tracked, sold, and repurposed to make us addicts. Sherry Turkle wasn’t being cute when she warned that our connections were making us lonelier: she was diagnosing a slow psychological implosion.

    We aren’t writing anymore. We’re twitching. We’re chirping. We’re flapping like those emaciated birds in Paul Klee’s the Twittering Machine, spinning an axle we no longer control, bait for the next poor soul. This isn’t communication. It’s entrapment, dressed up in hashtags and dopamine hits.

  • The Twittering Machine Never Sleeps

    The Twittering Machine Never Sleeps

    Richard Seymour, in his searing dissection of our digital descent, The Twittering Machine, argues that our compulsive scribbling across social media isn’t a charming side effect of modern communication—it’s a horror story. He calls our affliction “scripturient,” which sounds like a medieval disease and feels like one too: the raging, unquenchable urge to write, tweet, post, blog, caption, and meme ourselves into validation. According to Seymour, we’re not sharing—we’re hemorrhaging content, possessed by the hope that someone, somewhere, will finally pay attention. The platforms lap it up, feeding on our existential howl like pigs at a trough.

    But here’s the twist: these platforms don’t just amplify our words—they mutate us. We contort into parodies of ourselves, honed for likes, sharpened for outrage. Seymour’s reference to Paul Klee’s painting the Twittering Machine isn’t just arty window dressing—it’s prophecy. In it, skeletal birds crank a machine with the desperate chirps of bait, luring the next batch of fools into the algorithmic abyss. Once captured, these chirpers become part of the machine: chirp, crank, scroll, repeat. It’s not connection—it’s servitude with emojis.

    And yet, here I am. Writing this blog. Voluntarily. On WordPress, that semi-respectable cul-de-sac just outside the main drag of Social Media Hell. It’s not Facebook, which is a digital Thunderdome of outrage, memes, and unsolicited opinions from high school classmates you forgot existed. No, WordPress lets me stretch out. I can write without worrying that my paragraph won’t survive the swipe-happy thumbs of the attention-deficient. It feels almost…literary.

    But let’s not get smug. The moment I promote my posts on Twitter or check my analytics like a rat pressing a pellet bar, I’m caught in the same trap. I tell myself it’s different. That I’m writing for meaning, not metrics. But the line between writer and performer, between expression and spectacle, gets blurrier by the day. I’ve escaped the Twittering Machine before—unplugged, deleted, detoxed—but it still hums in the background, always ready to pull me back in with the promise of just one more click, one more like, one more little chirp of relevance.