Tag: bible

  • Gimpel in the Age of Clout

    Gimpel in the Age of Clout

    During the last several months, I have found myself thinking about a word that appears everywhere in the manosphere and influencer culture: clout. The word carries the scent of raw power and money. It implies that deception, manipulation, and cleverness are not merely acceptable but admirable, provided they produce influence. The idea depresses me because the merchants of clout often succeed. They accumulate followers by the millions, preaching a form of practical nihilism in which visibility becomes the highest good. Every religion has its devil, and the devil of clout has an opposite: obscurity. In the attention economy, we possess endless metrics for measuring who matters and who does not. Once we accept those metrics, we become captives of a grotesque vision of optimization. As I contemplate this folly, I find myself haunted by Isaac Bashevis Singer’s short story Gimpel the Fool.

    Gimpel is an orphan, a misfit, and a lovable man-child wandering the streets of Frampol. He possesses a sweetness so genuine that it appears almost supernatural. The townspeople, by contrast, pride themselves on their irony, cynicism, and cleverness. Because Gimpel is trusting, they become addicted to deceiving him. They lie to him, mock him, trick him, and turn him into a public spectacle whenever the opportunity presents itself. His innocence functions like catnip for the town’s cruelty.

    Gimpel’s only true ally is the rabbi, who insists that Gimpel is no fool at all. The real fools are those who delight in evil and humiliation. They mistake malice for intelligence. Gimpel, on the other hand, radiates goodness. Singer’s story repeatedly suggests that goodness and foolishness are not the same thing, even if the world often confuses them.

    When Gimpel expresses a desire to leave town, he is persuaded to marry Elka, who turns out to be the exact opposite of the pure and virtuous maiden he has been promised. Elka openly admits she is no innocent, yet demands that she be treated with dignity. Gimpel agrees, and they marry. Before long, Elka gives birth to a child that is plainly not his.

    Yet Gimpel loves the boy anyway. He devotes himself to the child and gradually comes to love Elka as well. His devotion is not rewarded. Elka treats him with contempt. While he works, she entertains other men and continually rejects his attempts at affection. The rabbi urges Gimpel to divorce her, but he cannot bring himself to do it. Instead, he continues supporting Elka and her children with money, food, and patience.

    For twenty years he remains loyal to a woman who repeatedly betrays him. Elka eventually bears six children, none of whom appear to be his. Then she falls ill and dies. Her final request is simple: that Gimpel forgive her. Reflecting on her life, he imagines her summing it up with a bleak confession: “I deceived Gimpel. That was the meaning of my brief life.”

    After her death, the Spirit of Evil visits Gimpel and offers him a tempting form of revenge. The townspeople have mocked him his entire life. Why not repay them? Why not urinate in the bakery’s bread dough and feed them corruption disguised as nourishment? When Gimpel hesitates, the spirit mocks his faith. There is no God, it says. There is no judgment. There is no meaning. The world is nothing but a swamp of lies. Seduced by resentment, Gimpel finally gives in and contaminates the dough.

    The act immediately wounds his conscience. Soon afterward, Elka appears to him in a dream. Wrapped in a burial shroud, she asks a single question: “What have you done, Gimpel?” He tries to blame her for his anger and bitterness, but she rejects the excuse. Her life may have been false, she tells him, but that does not mean all of life is false. She reveals that her deceptions have led her into profound suffering after death. When Gimpel looks at her face, he sees it consumed by darkness. The vision shocks him awake.

    Terrified by what he has done, Gimpel gathers the loaves and buries them in a chasm before anyone can eat them.

    Then he leaves Frampol.

    He gives provisions to his children and becomes a wanderer, drifting from place to place. Along the way he discovers that the world is overflowing with lies, yet no lie remains hidden forever. Every deception eventually reveals a truth. Every fraud leaves a trail. Even dreams become witnesses against those who seek to escape reality.

    As he travels, Gimpel accumulates stories. He learns that humanity is capable of every vice imaginable and that today’s absurdity often becomes tomorrow’s reality. Yet he also discovers that people hunger for meaning. They crave stories because stories impose order on a world that frequently resembles chaos. Gimpel becomes a storyteller, and audiences gather around him because his tales help them navigate a universe that often seems abandoned to cynicism and nihilism.

    In old age, he still dreams of Elka. He remembers her betrayals, but he remembers her with tenderness rather than bitterness. It is as though the generosity of his own heart gradually redeems her memory. The woman who spent her life deceiving him becomes, in recollection, the woman she might have been.

    The story ends with Gimpel reflecting that the world itself may be a kind of illusion. We may be little more than shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave. Yet Singer’s point is not that truth is unattainable. It is that truth exists beyond our distortions. We are always one breath away from a more real world. The response to deception is not greater deception. The response to nihilism is not surrender. We must live with goodness, integrity, and faith. Otherwise, in our pursuit of clout, cleverness, and self-interest, we become the fools we imagined ourselves too sophisticated to be.

  • The Sin of Outsourcing Humanity

    The Sin of Outsourcing Humanity

    For Tyler Austin Harper, there is only one word that captures the gravity of dehumanization: sin. And to be clear, dehumanization is rampant—in the form of robot companions, digital girlfriends, and AI therapists. To call these developments merely wrong is an understatement. He writes, “They feel to me like something deeper and darker.” In his essay “There Is Already a Word for the Deep Moral Failures of AI: It’s Sin,” Harper argues that to understand the depths of what is happening to us, we need Christian guides because Christianity provides a framework for understanding dehumanization. You cannot understand dehumanization unless you first understand what it means to be fully human. Harper turns to Christian critics of AI to trace this trajectory from human to subhuman through the misuse of technology.

    These misuses emerge when people overemphasize the business, pragmatic, and utilitarian uses of AI at the expense of humanity, a Faustian bargain as old as sin itself. To champion technology and “outsource the most interesting aspects of our life and labor to machines” without considering the effects on the human soul is to threaten human dignity and meaning.

    Christianity frames us as fallen creatures who long to return to our Maker. The burden of being human is struggling with our fallen nature and seeking grace through God. When we look to machines for salvation, we outsource the burden of what it means to be human. In doing so, we forget that this burden entails suffering and that suffering itself can be a gift from God, pointing us toward humility and the true path. In Harper’s words, “Christianity has a clear ‘anthropological vision,’ asserting that the purpose of the human species is to exist in the image of its creator, to love God and one another, and to spread life on Earth and steward its creatures.” To move toward this purpose is to become fully human. We conform to God and fulfill our humanity. Conforming ourselves to machines, by contrast, becomes a desecration of what it means to be human.

    Harper argues that outside the Christian framework, we become confused about what it means to be human in the first place. He writes, “Many secular thinkers can struggle to articulate a clear definition of what humanity is.” He points to Christian writer Carl Trueman, who observes that the term dehumanization loses its force if the secular definition of humanization remains an “empty cipher.” Secularists and techno-believers have reduced humanization to a narrow set of superficial behaviors that fail to capture what it truly means to carry the burden of having a soul.

    Harper describes himself as “a not especially observant Presbyterian” and is not arguing that we must embrace religious orthodoxy to “fully appreciate the challenge posed by the rise of AI.” However, he insists that we “must start from the premise that humans have some kind of universal nature or essence that must be safeguarded from technological encroachment.”

    Harper’s article reminds me of the dangers of Liquid Modernity, a concept developed by Zygmunt Bauman. Bauman describes a social condition in which stable institutions, identities, relationships, careers, moral frameworks, and communities dissolve into constant flux, instability, and adaptation. In the context of dehumanization and the rise of AI, Liquid Modernity refers to the transformation of human beings from rooted persons with durable social bonds into endlessly flexible, data-driven consumers and performers who must continuously reinvent themselves to survive technological and economic disruption.

    Societies that lack a tradition defining humanization may ultimately surrender to the doctrine that Liquid Modernity is both desirable and inevitable—a condition in which human beings outsource the burden of being human to machines.

  • The Lost Men of Hobcallow

    The Lost Men of Hobcallow

    At first, my colleagues in the small town generously excused my increasingly bizarre wardrobe as “youthful exuberance.” I was a young Bay Area transplant trying to assert some “big city” flair in a desert outpost where fashion trends arrived three decades late. But one fateful day, I pushed the boundaries beyond reason. I strutted into the campus like a peacock ready for a ballroom dance-off, dressed in tight navy blue Girbaud slacks that practically screamed, “I’m here to give a lecture, but I might also break into interpretive dance.” My feet were clad in velveteen Italian loafers, complete with tassels and tiny bells—yes, bells. Who needs socks when you’ve got bells? 

    But the crown jewel of this sartorial disaster—was the sage-whisper green pirate shirt. And when I say “pirate shirt,” I’m not talking about a whimsical Halloween costume. I’m talking about a translucent, billowing monstrosity that looked like it was plucked from the wardrobe of Captain Jack Sparrow after a particularly wild night of plundering. My bulging pecs were practically hosting their own TED Talk through the sheer fabric, and the effect was more Moulin Rouge than Macbeth.

    By the time the English Department Chair, Moses Okoro, finally called me into his office, his patience had clearly evaporated. He looked at me not as one looks at a colleague, but as one studies a raccoon that has somehow wandered into a faculty meeting wearing cologne.

    I walked in, and there was Moses sitting behind his desk. His feet were ensconced in some sort of luxurious foot-warmer device, a necessary accessory for his gout. He flashed me a grin that was half-amused, half-pitying like a man witnessing someone try to cook a steak with a hairdryer.

    “Jeff,” he began, in a tone that suggested he was both fond of me and horrified by me. “You’re a striking figure, I’ll give you that. But this—” he gestured vaguely at the shimmering diaphanous green pirate shirt draped over my torso—“is taking things too far. I can see more than I care to.” 

    I glanced down at my exposed chest and, for the first time, realized that my pecs were starring in their own soap opera under that filmy fabric. Moses continued, “I get it—a man with your bodybuilding prowess wants to flaunt it. But, Jeff, this is an academic setting, not Studio Fifty-Four. Be more of a professor and less of a Desert Peacock.”

    He then instructed me to march straight home, ditch the pirate couture, and return dressed in something befitting a person who isn’t auditioning for a Vegas show. Before I could slink away in shame, Moses added with a smile, “Jeff, I like you. You’ve got potential. But let me remind you, this town is a fishbowl. Whatever you do in the morning, the whole town knows by lunchtime.”

    That was the Hobcallow way—a place where the smallest fashion faux pas became a full-blown scandal before the sun hit noon. As I left his office, I knew that my pirate shirt days were over, along with my delusions of dressing like the love child of Captain Morgan and Don Juan.

    With a sigh, I trudged home to swap my dreams of high fashion for something a bit more… professorial.

    I was grateful I wasn’t fired. I drove back to my apartment and resolved to calibrate myself to the customs of this small desert town. Fresh off the bus from the bustling Bay Area, I found that being marooned in this sun-bleached corner of California had affected my judgment. Without any real friends and even fewer social obligations, I lived in more solitude than was good for my mental health. My one-bedroom apartment became my sanctuary—no roommates, no forced small talk, just me and the sweet luxury of never having to negotiate over chores or TV channels. My companions? A stack of CDs featuring Morrissey, The Smiths, Prefab Sprout, Dead Can Dance, The Cocteau Twins, and other bands that sounded like a group therapy session for depressives. The soundtrack was perfect for a guy laboring over Hercu-Dome, my dystopian novel in which society punishes the overweight with Orwellian fervor for failing to meet state-mandated body standards.

    When I wasn’t writing, I’d plink away on my Yamaha ebony upright, conjuring up self-indulgent sonatas that only the most pretentious of muses could appreciate. I didn’t read music so much as I let it ooze out of me—luscious chords here, shameless glissandos there—while imagining some ethereal goddess materializing in my living room to stroke my ego as I struck a soulful pose.

    Next to my piano sat a small side table stacked with International Male and Urban Gear catalogs, glossy monuments to the theology of misguided masculinity. Their pages overflowed with men wearing mesh tank tops, leather pants, silk pirate shirts, and enough gold accessories to alarm a minor dictator. The models did not look like ordinary humans. They looked like nightclub mercenaries preparing to either seduce someone’s wife or overthrow a Caribbean government.

    To my twenty-seven-year-old mind, those catalogs were not merely selling clothes. They were sacred manuscripts revealing the hidden essence of manhood itself. Every page seemed to whisper the same intoxicating lie: You are only one aggressively unbuttoned shirt away from becoming irresistible.

    So I obeyed the catalogs with religious devotion.

    Month by month my wardrobe drifted further into the outer reaches of fashion psychosis until I eventually found myself teaching composition in semi-transparent pirate shirts that shimmered under fluorescent classroom lighting like the wardrobe of a disco-era vampire. At some point, my clothing ceased being “eccentric” and became an administrative concern. My boss had finally noticed that one of his English instructors appeared to be dressing for a yacht-rock cabaret.

    The message was clear: either the catalogs disappeared or my career might.

    And I needed that career desperately. Returning to the Bay Area was unthinkable. The cost of living there, combined with the savagery of the academic job market, had reduced me during graduate school to the economic status of a lost sailor surviving behind a seafood restaurant.

    Compared to the grim survivalism of my Bay Area college years, my Hobcallow apartment felt less like faculty housing and more like a reward package for a minor petrochemical monarch. The place had vaulted ceilings, sliding-glass shower doors, two swimming pools shimmering beneath the desert sun, a bubbling hot tub, and a laundry room so spotless and functional it felt imported from a Scandinavian utopia. Every afternoon the complex glowed with the tranquil confidence of a place where people drank white wine by the pool and casually discussed mutual funds.

    I would stand there in disbelief wondering whether I was a low-ranking composition instructor teaching comma splices to freshmen or an oil tycoon hiding from federal investigators.

    So settled in this desert hideaway, I now enjoyed a hint of the luxury I’d always been denied. On weekends, I tanned my lean, 195-pound frame by The Springs’ apartment pool. No real friendships blossomed at that pool—friendships are messy and overrated—but I did collect some acquaintances, a bizarre cast of lost souls who could only exist in this sun-scorched limbo.

    Chief among my apartment acquaintances was Leonard Skeazy, an attorney from Santa Monica who was lured out here by a fat signing bonus and a monogrammed office, yet couldn’t shake the resentment of having been exiled to this cultural wasteland. He was the sort of guy who treated “style” like a religion. He sported custom-made Speedos that were purchased at a specialty boutique in Santa Monica—yes, he would actually drive back to the city to replace them whenever the chlorinated pool water faded the jewel tones of his spandex. His long, curly hair and eerie blue eyes made him look like a lounge singer who never quite made it out of the Holiday Inn circuit.

    Leonard was a man of eccentric habits and questionable hygiene. Despite being well into his 30s, he clung to the bachelor dream of finding “the right girl,” although his standards seemed laughably out of place in a town where having a high school diploma was considered highbrow. This was a guy who’d lounge poolside for hours, skin glistening like a buttered croissant, all while blasting Kenny G from his boombox as if smooth jazz were somehow his secret weapon. His breath, tinged with the distinct aroma of last night’s Chardonnay, matched his penchant for sneaking sips from boxes of white wine he kept stashed in his fridge.

    Curiosity (and a lack of better options) led me to visit Leonard at his apartment one day. It was a bachelor pad in the most tragic sense. Despite the fact that he was swimming in cash, his apartment was as bare as a prison cell. The living room housed only a lone couch, a TV balanced on cinder blocks, and—wait for it—an ironing board. Apparently, ironing his endless supply of gaudy silk ties was the only domestic task he took seriously. The walls were completely devoid of art or decor, just barren expanses of beige that made the flickering TV light cast ghostly shadows over the snake-like drape of his ties.

    His bedroom was even more pitiful: no dresser, no closet system—just three open suitcases serving as makeshift storage. It was as if he refused to fully unpack, a subconscious protest against ever settling into this armpit of a town. The fridge, naturally, was a barren tundra except for—what else—more boxes of white wine. Here was a man who had chased the scent of money into the middle of nowhere, only to refuse to acknowledge he’d actually arrived. Leonard was a ghost of himself, haunting his own life, clinging to the notion that he was just “visiting” until he could escape back to the big city. 

    What kind of man, I wondered, gets seduced by a fat paycheck only to spend his days living in a self-imposed purgatory, where the only things thriving are his excuses and his growing collection of faded Speedos? I suppose it was easier for Leonard to pretend he was just passing through than to face the fact that he’d become a permanent fixture in this desolate corner of nowhere, a relic clinging to the fading glamour of a life he never truly had.

    My second poolside companion was Roland Beavers. He was the type of poolside companion that nightmares are made of. Imagine, if you will, a pudgy man in his early thirties with dishwasher-blond hair clinging lifelessly to a scalp that seemed perpetually annoyed at its presence. His physique was more doughy than daring, his chin seemingly having taken an early retirement. And yet, this fine specimen insisted on strutting around the pool in a pair of lava-red terry cloth trunks so undersized that they clung to his hips for dear life, revealing a set of stretchmarks that looked like they’d been painted on by a vengeful graffiti artist. Roland, of course, had an explanation ready for anyone who dared make eye contact long enough to hear it. Those stretch marks? Oh, they weren’t the result of his love affair with powdered donuts. They were the battle scars from his days as a world-class daredevil, hurling himself off the cliffs of Acapulco. You could practically hear the collective eye-roll from the pool regulars every time he regaled them with his tales of high-flying heroics. 

    But Roland’s true calling wasn’t acrobatics; it was unsolicited public broadcasting. Armed with a crumpled newspaper, he’d park himself by the pool and provide live commentary on every “news bit” that caught his eye, apparently under the delusion that everyone within a 20-foot radius was breathlessly awaiting his next headline. His audience, meanwhile, mumbled curses under their breath, desperately wishing he’d take up a hobby that didn’t involve public speaking. Maybe knitting—somewhere indoors. Roland’s social cluelessness reached its peak when playful couples would toss a football or frisbee in the water. For Roland, this wasn’t a game he could just watch; it was an invitation. He’d leap into the pool with all the grace of a boulder, wading into their game like an uninvited ghost at a family reunion. The couples, now robbed of their carefree fun, would give him the kind of look reserved for people who talk during movies before stomping off in search of a Roland-free zone. 

    And heaven help the women trying to sunbathe in peace. Roland, ever the gentleman, took it upon himself to offer his “services” to any woman within spraying distance. Whether it was spritzing their backs with a pump bottle of water or offering to rub sunscreen on their shoulders, Roland never missed an opportunity to “help,” oblivious to the fact that his mere presence was enough to ruin their entire tanning experience.

    Of course, these endless days at the pool weren’t just for Roland’s entertainment; they were an extension of his bizarre domestic life. His mother, Nadine, a woman who looked like she could bench-press a Buick, frequently leaned over the balcony of their apartment—muu-muu billowing in the desert wind—barking orders at Roland to “slather on more sunscreen.” With her hair twisted into tight curls that looked like they might pop loose at any moment and neck veins throbbing like they were signaling an SOS, Nadine’s concern for her son was a constant, vocal presence. “Get inside and eat something, Roland! You’re wasting away!” she’d holler, seemingly unaware that Roland had about 40 extra pounds he could “waste away” without anyone noticing.

    You’d think with all this doting and nagging, Roland might be motivated to get a job, maybe contribute something to society—anything to give the rest of us a break. But alas, Roland and Nadine were comfortably cushioned by the settlement from a lawsuit stemming from Roland’s failed attempt at flight school in San Diego. Apparently, the other students in the dorm took one look at Roland’s face and decided it needed to be rearranged, leaving him with a fractured skull and a big fat check to sit around and bother the rest of us for the rest of his natural life.

    And so there he was—our unwanted poolside companion—who, thanks to his mother’s coddling and that lawsuit cash, was free to spend his days lounging in his ridiculous red trunks, delivering headlines no one asked for, and making our lives just a little more unbearable, one stretch mark at a time.

    My third pool acquaintance was Julian French, a man whose very existence seemed to be a tribute act to Paul McCartney. He was one of those poolside characters you couldn’t make up if you tried. In his late thirties, Julian’s resemblance to the legendary Beatle was so uncanny that you’d swear he moonlighted as a Paul McCartney impersonator in some dingy Las Vegas lounge, crooning “Hey Jude” to half-asleep tourists. He had it all: the same nose, mouth, chin, and those forlorn, droopy eyes that looked like they’d seen every heartbreak in the world. He even rocked the signature McCartney hair—a feathered mullet straight out of 1978, perfectly coiffed and well-maintained, despite the sweltering desert heat.

    However, Julian was no rock god. No, he was a tad shorter, pudgier, and carried a complexion that looked like a battlefield of acne scars. Despite his flaws, Julian clung to his resemblance to McCartney like a man hanging off a cliff by his fingernails. His routine was as stale as a week-old scone: he’d slink into clubs in his black “Beatles jacket,” leaning against the bar with a half-grin that screamed, Yes, I know I look like Paul McCartney—please, someone, state the obvious. And sure enough, some tipsy woman would eventually stumble over, eyes wide with wonder, to ask, “Has anyone ever told you…?”

    For Julian, the club scene was nothing more than a factory line. The pick-up process was practically automated. His biggest challenge was pretending that he wasn’t bored out of his skull by the whole charade. He had to feign surprise when the 397th woman in the last year commented on his uncanny resemblance, as if she were the first brilliant soul to make this connection. In truth, Julian’s brain had checked out a long time ago, letting his face and “brand” do all the heavy lifting.

    As I got to know him better at the pool, Julian dropped a bombshell that was as ridiculous as it was tragic. His real name was Michael Barley. “Julian French” was the result of a rebranding, like he was a faded lounge act looking to stage a comeback. And, of course, this wasn’t enough for our wannabe rock star. With his newly minted name and delusional dreams of fame, he’d taken off for London, where he could really “sell” his phony British accent and Paul McCartney shtick. Unfortunately, London wasn’t buying what he was selling, and after job rejections galore, he skulked back to Hobcallow, tail between his legs.

    He couldn’t move back with his parents. They lived in a trailer home connected to an elementary school, where his father was the janitor by day and a roving locksmith by night. Understandably ashamed, Julian decided he needed to put some distance between himself and his parents’ modest living conditions. 

    But what really terrified him wasn’t the trailer—it was the slow, creeping realization that time was catching up with him. As his face got puffier and rounder, the once-proud resemblance to Paul McCartney was fading fast. Panic-stricken, Julian moved out, took a job at a local car dealership, and tried desperately to cling to the last remnants of his “Beatles glory.”

    When I met him, “Julian French” was an aging caricature, still clinging to his faux-British accent, still hoping that someone, anyone, would recognize the rock star lurking beneath his diminishing resemblance. But deep down, he knew the truth: every year, he looked less and less like McCartney and more like a guy who spends his days bumming around a used car lot and his nights reminiscing about the days when he could walk into a club and have women flock to him. Time, like the receding hairline of a rock legend, is a cruel thief.

    With my three poolside companions, my downgraded wardrobe of intentionally boring clothing, and the illusion of stable employment, I gradually settled into a manageable rhythm at that tiny desert outpost. Hobcallow had begun to feel survivable. I imagined myself lingering there indefinitely, teaching freshman composition beneath the brown haze of desert sunsets while slowly calcifying into one more eccentric faculty fossil.

    Then came the bathroom incident.

    I was seated upon the porcelain throne in the sacred solitude of the faculty restroom, pants resting around my ankles in the universal posture of human vulnerability. In my hands sat a copy of Escape from Freedom, whose pages I was reading with the serene concentration of a monk seeking enlightenment through bowel regularity. For one glorious moment, I believed myself alone.

    Then the atmosphere shifted.

    First came the smell: an aggressive cloud of talcum powder battling unsuccessfully against decades of cigarette smoke. Then came the sound—that unmistakable emphysemic wheeze like an accordion being crushed beneath a pickup truck. Even before I saw her, I knew.

    Scary Mary.

    Mary was one of Hobcallow’s permanent academic phantoms, a forty-year-old perpetual student who had wandered the campus for over a decade accumulating grievances, dropped classes, and nicotine residue. She moved through the college like a bureaucratic poltergeist, dragging behind her a neon-pink luggage cart overloaded with tote bags, paperwork, and unresolved hostility toward authority.

    “Mary,” I said from inside the stall, already exhausted by her existence, “I know it’s you. You need to leave immediately.”

    “Professor McMahon,” came her gravelly chain-smoker rasp, “I need to talk to you about my grade.”

    There are few sentences in the English language less welcome than those words spoken through the door of a men’s restroom stall.

    “Mary,” I replied, “this is the men’s room. I could have campus police arrest you. Leave now.”

    But Mary possessed the survival instincts of a cockroach crawling through radioactive fallout. “Not until you explain why I got a C.”

    As though we were calmly discussing educational philosophy over herbal tea rather than conducting a hostage negotiation through a bathroom partition.

    “We can discuss your grade in my office.”

    But reason had no jurisdiction over Scary Mary.

    A moment later, her long nicotine-yellowed fingers appeared over the top of the stall divider, clutching the partition like a low-budget horror villain scaling castle walls. I stared upward in disbelief as she climbed atop her ridiculous tower of pink luggage until her skeletal, sweating face slowly emerged above the divider like an exhausted demon materializing from a nicotine-scented dimension.

    “You need to help me, Professor,” she wheezed between labored breaths. “I can’t fail this class again.”

    At that point I rose, fully dressed now, vibrating with the fury of a man whose sacred bathroom ritual had been catastrophically violated.

    “You want to know why you got a C, Mary?” I snapped. “Fine. Your incoherent fifth-grade chicken scratch is so catastrophically unreadable it makes me question the entire mission of higher education.”

    Mary recoiled as though slapped. Her cavernous eyes locked onto mine with reptilian stillness.

    “You’re a terrible person,” she hissed. “This isn’t over.”

    Then physics intervened.

    Attempting to descend from her unstable luggage-cart fortress, Mary lost her footing and toppled forward in spectacular slow motion, collapsing onto the restroom floor like a sack of broomsticks hurled from a second-story window. She immediately began writhing and shrieking about a dislocated shoulder. Whether she was genuinely injured or merely auditioning for another campus grievance remained unclear.

    I exited the stall, washed my hands with the eerie calmness of a man nearing psychological collapse, and stared down at the wreckage sprawled across the tile floor.

    “Aren’t you going to help me?” she whimpered.

    Something strange overtook me then. Perhaps it was pity. Perhaps heatstroke. Perhaps prolonged exposure to Hobcallow had finally dissolved the last functioning portions of my judgment.

    “I can do better than help you up,” I announced. “I can fix your shoulder.”

    Her eyes widened with desperate hope.

    “You can?”

    “Absolutely. My brother dislocated his shoulder during a soccer championship. I watched the coach pop it back in.”

    This was technically true in the same way watching a documentary qualifies someone to perform open-heart surgery.

    I grabbed her wrist with both hands and yanked with the reckless confidence of a man operating entirely outside the boundaries of professional liability. Mary screamed loud enough to alarm neighboring departments.

    Then suddenly she blinked in astonishment.

    “Oh my God,” she gasped. “You fixed it.”

    “I know,” I replied, with the casual arrogance of a frontier doctor amputating limbs beside a whiskey barrel.

    Mary slowly rose to her feet, rubbing her shoulder with renewed determination.

    “Mr. McMahon?”

    “Yes, Mary?”

    “I have to pass your class whether you like it or not.”

    I stared at her, too exhausted to fully process the sentence.

    “Yes,” I sighed. “That does remain a theoretical possibility.”

    Relieved that I had somehow escaped arrest, litigation, or exorcism, I headed toward class assuming the nightmare had finally ended.

    The next morning, however, I was summoned to Moses’s office for what the message described as “an urgent matter,” a phrase that in academic life usually means someone has either filed a complaint, discovered a budget shortfall, or decided that your continued employment is an unnecessary luxury.

    Moses was slumped in his leather chair, wearing the grave expression of a man preparing to deliver bad news while also protecting himself from liability.

    “Have you heard?” he asked.

    I shook my head.

    “I received a call from Charlene Johnson, editor of The Hobcallow Chronicle. Her boyfriend is Mary’s brother. He’s not happy.”

    “Mary barged into the men’s room,” I said.

    Moses raised both hands, palms out, as if calming a hostage negotiator. “I’m sure she did. And believe me, you are not the first instructor she has pursued into inappropriate architectural spaces.”

    He paused, letting the institutional fog thicken.

    “But you didn’t handle it in the most ideal way.”

    “She climbed over a bathroom stall.”

    “Yes,” Moses said, with the weary diplomacy of a man who had long ago surrendered to absurdity. “And that was unfortunate. But her brother is a captain in the Hobcallow Police Department, and according to Charlene, he feels your remarks were unusually insulting. Unprecedented, even. Cruel.”

    “She invaded my personal space while I was half-naked and reading Erich Fromm.”

    Moses extended one arm to silence me, the way a priest might halt a drunk parishioner before a wedding toast. “Cruelty has no place in this department.”

    I stared at him. This was academia at its purest: a woman could scale a restroom stall like a nicotine-stained gargoyle, but my tone had apparently violated community standards.

    “If that weren’t enough,” Moses continued, “this morning I received a memo about budget cuts.”

    He stopped and gazed at a framed photograph from the previous year’s department picnic, where several instructors stood around a folding table of potato salad, unaware they were being documented for future elegies.

    “Lecturer positions,” he said, “will be the first to go.”

    “So I’m out,” I said. “Because Scary Mary launched a bathroom assault and I failed to respond with sufficient pastoral tenderness.”

    “Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We may have a solution.”

    He picked up a copy of The Hobcallow Chronicle, cleared his throat, and leaned back in his chair with the solemn theatricality of a frontier judge about to sentence a horse thief.

    “One of my primary responsibilities,” he said, “is keeping lecturers employed in good times and bad. In bad times, we must become innovative. We must demonstrate our value to the community.”

    I nodded, performing the expression of a man who understood the moral urgency of public relations.

    “I’ve been working with Charlene,” Moses said, “to generate positive visibility for the university.”

    “You mean Charlene, the newspaper editor who is dating Mary’s brother, the police captain.”

    “Yes,” he said, as if this were merely an interesting footnote and not a cartel of small-town leverage forming around my throat.

    “Charlene and I have developed a way for you to preserve your job. In addition to your teaching duties, you will intervene with local citizens and help them find their true path.”

    “Their true path?”

    “Yes. And I already have someone in mind.”

    I felt the room tilt.

    “The good news,” Moses said, “is that you know him.”

    “Please don’t say Roland Beavers.”

    “Roland Beavers.”

    My stomach dropped through the floor and continued downward toward the earth’s molten core. Roland Beavers was a local cautionary tale wrapped in too-small swim trunks, a man-child whose existence seemed designed to test the outer limits of civic compassion.

    Moses brightened, mistaking my horror for engagement.

    “Roland has certain learning deficits that have prevented him from advancing here at the university. You, my friend, are going to help him.”

    “Does Roland even know how to read?”

    “I would assume nothing,” Moses said, his patience thinning. “But you will teach him grammar, sentence structure, paragraph development—the works. Think of it as mechanical repair. You open the hood, remove the corroded parts, and install something functional.”

    “I’m not known for remediation.”

    “No one is known for remediation,” Moses snapped. “Remediation is tedious, dirty work. It’s like scrubbing mildew off a shower curtain. But someone has to do it, and since you already know Roland, you are the ideal candidate.”

    “Oh, I know him.”

    Moses leaned forward, his eyes narrowing with administrative intensity.

    “You tutor this poor fellow—the sad sack who washed out of aviation school—and turn him into something passable. Then Charlene can run a human-interest feature: ‘Local Professor Helps Troubled Man Rise Above.’ You become not merely a lecturer but an asset. A community figure. An educator with a heart.”

    “A heart that apparently must beat inside a hostage situation.”

    “It might save your job.”

    The room went quiet.

    “Can I at least think it over?” I asked.

    “You have until lunch,” Moses said. “After that, I have a budget meeting where we decide which lecturers get renewed and which ones get released into the desert. Rumor is the cuts may be brutal.”

    And just like that, the full weight of Hobcallow’s budget crisis landed on my shoulders, where it sat beside an even stranger burden: my professional survival now depended on whether I could teach Roland Beavers to assemble a coherent sentence without injuring either of us.

    After being strong-armed by Moses into an unwanted mentorship arrangement that sounded less like education and more like court-ordered rehabilitation, I stormed home fueled by equal parts resentment, panic, and wounded pride. My academic career now appeared to hinge on whether I could somehow transform Roland Beavers—a human caution sign in swim trunks—into a functioning college student.

    I collapsed into my apartment trying to process the catastrophe while contemplating dinner, which at that moment consisted of opening yet another can of tuna and chewing on a raw green pepper with the grim enthusiasm of a prisoner preserving muscle mass in solitary confinement. The whole meal radiated culinary despair. It was not food so much as nutritional surrender.

    Then came the knock at the door.

    I opened it to find Nadine Beavers herself standing in the hallway like a floral-print apparition from the Church of Aggressive Hospitality. She wore her trademark muu-muu exploding with tropical flowers so loud and oversized it looked less like clothing and more like upholstery liberated from a Hawaiian casino lounge. In her arms she carried two steaming casserole dishes with the solemnity of a woman delivering diplomatic aid to a war-torn nation.

    “I heard my son might have the privilege of having you as his personal mentor and tutor,” she said with a sheepish grin.

    Then she gave a strange little snort, as though we were about to enter a backroom gambling arrangement involving counterfeit casino chips and emotional dependency.

    “Figured it’d be nice to get to know what we’re getting into.”

    Before I could respond, she swept past me and deposited the dishes onto my kitchen table with a heavy thud that shook the silverware drawer. One contained a taco casserole radiating molten cheese, cumin, and enough grease to lubricate industrial machinery. The other was a strawberry pie glistening beneath fluorescent lights like a sacred object worshipped by Midwestern church communities.

    The smell alone nearly brought me to tears. Moments earlier I had been preparing to gnaw through dry tuna and uncooked peppers like a survivalist trapped in a nuclear bunker. Now my apartment smelled like human warmth, butter, melted cheese, and the kind of reckless carbohydrate optimism capable of derailing entire diet plans.

    Nadine looked around my apartment with the relaxed confidence of a woman who had already decided she belonged there.

    “Well,” she said, placing both hands on her hips, “if you’re gonna save Roland’s future, you sure as hell aren’t doing it on canned fish.”

    I stood there, transfixed, as she lifted the lid off the taco casserole. The scent alone hit me like a punch—layers of melted cheese, crisped to perfection, with seasoned meat, beans, and salsa bubbling underneath. My stomach growled so loudly it could’ve been mistaken for a Harley-Davidson revving up. Each bubble of cheese seemed to mock my restraint, daring me to dive in. As she unveiled the casserole, I could almost hear the crunch of tortilla chips mingling with that gooey, cheesy goodness. This wasn’t just dinner—it was an emotional rollercoaster masquerading as comfort food.

    But Nadine wasn’t done yet. With the precision of someone handling a priceless artifact, she slowly peeled back the foil from the strawberry pie. The crinkling foil built up anticipation like a suspenseful thriller. Underneath was a glossy, vibrant pie that looked more like a work of art than a dessert. The strawberries were arranged like they’d been hand-placed by a food stylist—gleaming, ruby-red slices sitting in a pool of sweet glaze, nestled within a buttery, golden crust. The smell was an olfactory hug, a heady mix of fresh fruit and pastry that all but made my knees buckle. I could practically taste the sweet-tangy perfection before even lifting a fork. Nadine caught me eyeing the pie with the kind of longing usually reserved for forbidden love and nudged me with a knowing smirk. “Don’t be afraid of it—dig in.”

    With a fork now in hand and no semblance of dignity left, I heaped a mountain of casserole onto my plate and pretended to listen to Nadine recount her son’s tragic life story. I’d already heard every miserable detail directly from Roland himself, who repeated the narrative so often it was like he was auditioning for a reality show nobody wanted to watch. But I knew the price of good food—feigned interest and patience. So I nodded along, punctuating her monologue with sympathetic “hmm”s and “ah”s while internally counting down to dessert.

    That’s when she dropped the real bombshell: Roland was currently sprawled out on their couch nursing a black eye, the result of getting “fresh” with some guy’s girlfriend at the pool. According to Nadine, Roland’s brilliant strategy involved spraying her with water and then trying to join in on a playful water fight—clearly a move that went over about as well as a lead balloon. The girlfriend’s boyfriend solved the problem with his fist, and now Roland was sidelined with a bag of ice and bruised ego.

    “He has no common sense,” Nadine lamented. “I don’t know what to do with him. The psychologist at the university said he needs a mentor, and your boss thinks that could be you.”

    I choked a little on my casserole. “To be truthful, I’ve never mentored anyone before.”

    Nadine’s expression turned serious. “But you’re a teacher—an educator. And you live right here. Do you know how convenient that is? My boy doesn’t like to venture far from home.”

    I tried to explain that this was more of a job for a trained psychologist, but she waved me off like I was suggesting something as outlandish as skydiving lessons. “Forget that. You mentor him, and you’ll be doing some fine eating around here. Am I clear?”

    At that point, I took a bite of the strawberry pie, and whatever resolve I’d clung to dissolved faster than the buttery, flaky crust. The explosion of sweet, tart berries wrapped in velvety smoothness was nothing short of divine intervention. “It’s outstanding,” I said, my voice laced with an awe that was embarrassing for a grown man. “Honestly, it’s the best meal I’ve had in longer than I care to admit.”

    Nadine leaned back in her chair, crossing her arms with the satisfaction of a mafia boss whose offer you can’t refuse. “There’s a reason I’ve been the chair of the Crust and Crumble Club for the last twenty years. People respect excellence in a leader, and pie-making is no different.” She allowed herself a self-satisfied smirk, the kind that made it clear she knew she had me wrapped around her flour-dusted finger.

    “There’s more where that came from if you agree to help my boy,” she continued, her voice silky with unspoken promises. “You’ll love mentoring Roland. The two of you will become great friends. And you could do a lot worse than enjoying homemade taco casserole, extra-cheesy, and an endless stream of pies in your corner. Stability, comfort, and good eats—what else do you need in this God-forsaken desert?”

    I surveyed the spread before me—a smorgasbord of all-American excess, the kind of food that made you forget your troubles until the heartburn kicked in. There was no denying it—I had been bought out by casseroles and confectionery. 

    Seduced by comforting casseroles and fruit pies and terrified of unemployment, I began my tutorials with Roland Beavers. Roland would roll up to my apartment like some kind of culinary Santa Claus, lugging casseroles, chili, cornbread, or a spaghetti feast—all meant to bribe me into pretending we were engaging in serious academic work. These sessions were a farce, a charade we both went along with because, honestly, who says no to free food?

    Moses, in his infinite wisdom (read: desperation), had armed me with a stack of sixth-grade workbooks to use with Roland, presumably to inch him toward literacy. But Roland’s visits were less about learning and more about napping on my couch. He’d complain of headaches after writing half of a paragraph and declare himself “famished” just as he was about to grasp the complexities of a compound sentence. The guy had a black belt in avoidance. Before I knew it, he’d polished off the very dinner his mother had cooked for me, slumped into a food coma, and settled in to watch the Angels game from first pitch to final out. Or he’d watch with fascination the diet guru Suan Powter with her buzzcut shout the merits of lentils on her infomercial where her call to “stop the insanity” seemed to be encouraging her own maniacal demon to flourish. The set was a minimalist nightmare: harsh lighting, white walls, and an audience of desperate souls hanging on her every word. And then there were the graphics—big, bold letters flashing “CUT THE FAT!” and “EAT RIGHT NOW!”—just in case her voice alone wasn’t enough to drill the message into your brain. Every so often, she’d grab a cardboard cutout of the food pyramid and tear it apart like she was dismantling a corrupt regime. By then, I was grading essays and wondering how I’d ended up in this ridiculous parody of a mentorship program.

    It didn’t take long to see that trying to whip Roland into academic shape was like trying to sculpt marble out of a melting ice cream cone. The guy simply didn’t have the drive—or, frankly, the capacity—for discipline. I wasn’t about to carry him up the mountain of success while he sat back and asked for snack breaks. My philosophy was simple: everyone climbs their own mountains. If Roland wanted to remain at base camp eating cornbread, that was his prerogative. My job was to reach the summit of my own ambitions, not drag dead weight up a hill.

    For reasons I never fully understood, Roland regarded my apartment less as a place of study and more as a federally protected sleep sanctuary. He’d lumber through the front door, collapse onto my couch with the tragic relief of a Civil War soldier returning from battle, and within thirty seconds begin snoring with the industrial fury of malfunctioning logging equipment.

    Fortunately, this arrangement worked beautifully for me.

    Officially, I was tutoring Roland Beavers. In reality, I was grading freshman essays while a California Angels game murmured in the background and Roland—Hobcallow’s reigning emperor of arrested development—vibrated my couch cushions with nasal acoustics powerful enough to register on seismographs in neighboring counties.

    The whole situation evolved into a kind of desert academic farce. Roland got a climate-controlled nap chamber safely removed from the watchful eye of his mother, Nadine. I received home-cooked meals from Nadine so enormous and buttery they could’ve qualified as agricultural subsidies. And Moses, architect of Hobcallow’s endless bureaucratic theater, got the appearance of community outreach and educational uplift.

    Nobody seemed particularly concerned that the actual tutoring had died months earlier. The remedial workbooks sat untouched on the coffee table like archaeological artifacts from a failed civilization. In Hobcallow, “tutoring” was less about literacy than optics. As long as someone could point toward two men occupying the same room with a pencil nearby, the program was considered a triumph of social progress.

    During one of our so-called tutorial sessions—which by that point consisted primarily of me grading freshman essays while Roland Beavers used my couch as a federally protected sleep sanctuary—I heard Leonard Skeazy downstairs engaged in yet another operatic confrontation with one of his ex-girlfriends. Leonard had cycled through so many public breakups that the apartment complex treated them like recurring holiday events, but this one possessed a darker voltage.

    The shouting escalated rapidly.

    I set down a stack of essays and walked to the window just in time to witness the spectacle unfolding beside the pool. Leonard and his ex stood nose-to-nose beneath the blistering Hobcallow sun, gesturing wildly like two failed Shakespearean actors performing divorce proceedings in a chlorine-scented amphitheater.

    Then she shoved him.

    Not hard enough to qualify as attempted murder, but with enough force to send Leonard stumbling sideways into the community newspaper rack. His body twisted awkwardly on impact, and he collapsed onto the pavement with a heavy, meaty thud that echoed across the courtyard. He immediately clutched his knee and began howling with such theatrical agony that it sounded less like physical pain and more like a wounded banshee auditioning for daytime television.

    The scream jolted Roland awake.

    He sprang from the couch in a panic, hair disheveled, eyes half-open, moving with the startled confusion of a tranquilized zoo animal suddenly hearing gunfire. By the time I reached the window again, Roland was already barreling down the stairs toward the growing crowd.

    Nadine Beavers had somehow arrived even faster.

    She stood over Leonard in her ever-present floral apron, which fluttered in the desert wind like the battle flag of aggressive maternal intervention. Her expression carried that uniquely Nadine combination of genuine compassion and total exasperation.

    “Oh, for heaven’s sake, Leonard!” she barked. “You’re making a spectacle of yourself.”

    Yet beneath the irritation there was unmistakable concern. Nadine treated wounded narcissists the way battlefield nurses treat delirious soldiers: harshly, efficiently, and with just enough tenderness to keep them alive.

    Roland crouched beside Leonard and helped prop him upright while Nadine examined the swollen knee with surprising gentleness.

    “Serves you right for acting like a fool,” she muttered, though her hands moved carefully across the injury.

    Leonard blinked back tears, gasping dramatically like a fish dragged onto a dock.

    “They’re all against me,” he wheezed. “I’m the victim of character assassination.”

    “Character assassination, my foot,” Nadine snapped. “You’re the victim of your own stupidity. Now stop whining so we can get you standing before the whole complex starts charging admission.”

    By then a small crowd had gathered around the pool, drawn not by concern but by the ancient human instinct to witness public humiliation. Apartment complexes like ours functioned as low-budget Roman coliseums where everyone secretly hoped for spectacle as long as they themselves were not the ones bleeding beside the vending machines.

    With considerable effort—and enough groaning from Leonard to suggest emergency battlefield surgery—they managed to hoist him upright. Roland handled most of the lifting while Nadine hovered nearby like an overbearing but strangely competent vulture overseeing roadside trauma care.

    The crowd slowly dispersed, disappointed the entertainment had concluded without handcuffs, nudity, or visible bloodshed.

    And so Leonard Skeazy limped away between Roland and Nadine like a fallen dictator being evacuated after a failed coup. Behind him floated scattered laughter, muttered insults, and the faint echo of ridicule from the poolside audience. It was the perfect Hobcallow ending: in his endless quest to defend his reputation, Leonard had once again managed only to deepen the legend of his own ridiculousness.

    Watching the three of them disappear toward the Beavers’ apartment, I realized the entire scene possessed the surreal emotional texture of small-town desert mythology. Roland and Nadine, those unlikely knights in polyester armor, had waddled into action to rescue Hobcallow’s most shameless self-saboteur and carry him off for “first aid,” as though this were not merely another chapter in Leonard Skeazy’s endless cycle of vanity, collapse, and public humiliation.

    A few days after Leonard’s poolside collapse, I was standing at my apartment window one afternoon drinking burnt coffee while Roland Beavers snored on my couch with the unwavering commitment of a professional hibernating mammal. That was when I witnessed one of the strangest sights Hobcallow had yet produced—and this was a town with an alarmingly high tolerance for absurdity.

    Parked beneath one of the apartment carports sat an ancient Chevy truck overflowing with wooden crates of apricots, peaches, and nectarines. Emerging from the vehicle were Leonard Skeazy and Julian French.

    At first I didn’t recognize them.

    Both men were dressed in dirt-stained blue work jumpsuits, the kind worn by sanitation crews, orchard laborers, and minimum-security prison workers assigned roadside cleanup duty. Their expensive sunglasses and poolside vanity had vanished. Their faces were sun-darkened and strangely peaceful. Leonard no longer looked like a failed attorney clinging desperately to status. Julian no longer resembled a bankrupt salesman auditioning for yacht-club membership. Together they looked like two men who had wandered off a fruit collective somewhere outside Bakersfield.

    “Roland,” I said, staring through the blinds, “you need to wake up and explain to me why Leonard and Julian are dressed like migrant mechanics hauling peaches into your mother’s apartment.”

    Roland opened one eye with the tragic exhaustion of a man being interrupted during a medically necessary nap.

    “Oh,” he mumbled. “They work for my mom now.”

    I turned slowly toward him.

    “What happened to Leonard’s law career?”

    “He got fired,” Roland said calmly. “Work-code violations. Sexual harassment, I think.”

    “And Julian?”

    “Hadn’t made a commission in almost a year.”

    Roland closed his eyes again, clearly hoping this concluded the conversation so he could return to unconsciousness.

    “No, no, no,” I said. “You don’t get to fall back asleep after dropping information like that. What exactly do they do for your mother?”

    Roland shrugged.

    “Whatever she tells them to do. They’re basically her assistants.”

    Outside the window, Leonard and Julian continued unloading crates of fruit with serene concentration while Nadine directed operations from the apartment doorway like a floral-print field marshal overseeing wartime agricultural logistics.

    “How does she pay them?”

    “She has a budget,” Roland replied.

    “A budget for what?”

    “The Crust and Crumble Club.”

    He said this with such confidence that I nodded reflexively, pretending it made perfect sense when in reality my brain had begun short-circuiting. Somehow my two poolside acquaintances—once obsessed with image, status, and masculine prestige—had been absorbed into Nadine Beavers’s domestic empire and transformed into fruit-hauling assistants dressed like auto-body repairmen.

    Before I could process the full horror of the situation, the phone rang.

    It was Moses.

    And for once, the news was good.

    Apparently The Hobcallow Chronicle had run a glowing human-interest profile about my mentorship of Roland Beavers, portraying me as a compassionate educational savior guiding a local misfit toward literacy and redemption. The article had generated such favorable publicity—and coincided with a miraculous budgetary windfall—that Moses had successfully secured my tenure.

    There would, he informed me, be a celebration in my honor at the campus ale house.

    The following Friday, the Crust & Crumble Club transformed the ale house into a strange hybrid of retirement banquet, church social, and tropical nervous breakdown. Crepe-paper streamers sagged from the ceiling. Dollar-store balloons floated weakly above folding tables. Somewhere in the corner, a battered boombox crooned bossa nova music with the melancholy sophistication of a 1963 cocktail lounge slowly sinking into the sea.

    The dessert tables looked catastrophic in the best possible way. Berry pies, cream pies, cobblers, and pastries stretched across the room in such abundance they resembled offerings to a Midwestern fertility deity. Each pie sat there with glossy perfection, as though auditioning for the cover of Better Homes & Gardens.

    Naturally, Roland arrived in khaki shorts and a Hawaiian shirt already smeared with pie filling. By the time I entered the room, he was elbow-deep in boysenberry pie, grinning blissfully with purple crumbs glued to his face like evidence from a carbohydrate crime scene.

    Nadine spotted me immediately.

    “There he is!” she cried, waving me toward a throne-like chair draped in a crocheted blanket that looked one upholstery stain away from hospice care.

    “Special seat for the man of the hour!”

    Before I could protest, she shoved a paper plate into my hands carrying a mountain of boysenberry pie drowning beneath an avalanche of whipped cream.

    Standing beside her were Roberta Hunter and Felice Orozco, Nadine’s two closest confidantes and Hobcallow’s reigning queens of floral-print judgment. Together they resembled a triumvirate of dessert-loving desert oracles silently evaluating everyone’s moral worth, pie technique, and cholesterol levels.

    Then I noticed Leonard and Julian.

    The two men were hauling cases of champagne and bags of ice into the ale house with astonishing cheerfulness. Their faces glowed with purpose. They congratulated me warmly, slapping my back like loyal campaign staffers celebrating an election victory. Strangest of all, they appeared genuinely happy.

    Happier, perhaps, than when they were pretending to be successful.

    “So how exactly,” I asked Nadine carefully, “did you manage to rein in Leonard and Julian?”

    Nadine exchanged a knowing grin with Roberta.

    “I have my ways,” she said.

    Then she leaned closer, lowering her voice conspiratorially.

    “There’s a certain kind of man who needs my intervention. It’s simply a matter of finding him and helping him discover his proper place in the world.”

    Something about the sentence chilled me.

    The evening dissolved into the predictable rituals of Hobcallow celebration: speeches, applause, cake, cheap champagne, and finally Moses announcing that my tenure entitled me to a new executive desk engraved with my initials so I could feel, in his words, “permanently rooted within the intellectual future of Hobcallow.”

    As though an engraved desk could cure existential confusion.

    Later that night, after the party ended, I remained alone inside the darkened ale house surrounded by popped balloons, empty pie tins, wilted streamers, and the sticky residue of forced merriment. I was in no hurry to return to my apartment where Roland was almost certainly already asleep on my couch.

    Outside, Leonard and Julian loaded leftover pies and party supplies into the Chevy truck while soft bossa nova music drifted from a boombox sitting in the truck bed. The two men laughed together warmly beneath the desert night air. I overheard one of them mention they still needed to meet Nadine afterward to “help her with something.”

    I sat there listening to them and felt something cold settle inside me.

    What had happened to these men?

    What had happened to me?

    We were the lost men of Hobcallow, and Nadine Beavers had not merely rescued us. In her own strange maternal empire of pies, casseroles, errands, and emotional dependency, she had quietly absorbed us completely.

    I tried to suppress the thought by reminding myself that Monday morning I would arrive at work to find a brand-new executive desk engraved with my initials—as though polished wood and bureaucratic recognition might finally convince me I belonged somewhere.

  • Professor of Nothing in Particular

    Professor of Nothing in Particular

    In Michel Houellebecq’s novel Submission, François is a man who has already filed his best years under “returned goods.” A writing professor in his early forties, he surveys his life with the cool detachment of a critic reviewing a book he didn’t enjoy but can’t quite put down. He blames, with some justice and more convenience, the moral economy of Western social democracies—systems that canonize money and status while leaving meaning to fend for itself. In this world, desire has been simplified to a shopping list. The only sanctioned faith is consumption; the only liturgy is acquisition. You study, you specialize, you exit the university with a résumé and a pulse, and then you prove your seriousness by acquiring things—objects, experiences, signals—until the performance of satisfaction becomes indistinguishable from satisfaction itself. François finds the spectacle tedious, but tedium does not grant immunity. He is as lonely, as unmoored, as anyone else—another citizen of an Ennui Infrastructure that delivers comfort with the enthusiasm of a sedative.

    His chosen saint is Joris-Karl Huysmans, the Catholic convert who traded decadence for doctrine and found, in surrender, a structure strong enough to hold a life. François studies him the way a starving man studies a menu. He recognizes the appeal—order, ritual, a metaphysical address where one might finally receive mail—but recognition is not conversion. He remains stalled in Agnostic Paralysis, admiring belief as a piece of architecture he cannot inhabit. Literature becomes his compromise: books as companions, authors as lanterns. Yet even a luminous guide cannot substitute for a destination. Huysmans can light the road; he cannot make François walk it.

    The job does not save him. Teaching, for François, is a cleanly run sham—a system that reproduces diluted versions of itself with industrial patience. A handful of students catch fire; the rest learn to approximate. He participates in Replicant Pedagogy with professional competence and private contempt, earning a salary in exchange for maintaining a machine that produces echoes and calls them voices. He is good at it. He is paid for it. He is not sustained by it.

    His relationships are equally provisional—brief alliances with pleasure that end as soon as the lights come on. Women are not partners so much as intervals, pauses between bouts of the same familiar boredom. Bitterness seeps in, not as a dramatic outburst but as a steady, low-grade leak. The pattern is reliable: a spike of sensation, a trough of meaning. François lives on Dopamine Subsistence Living, a diet of small thrills that keep the organism moving while starving the person.

    He envies the faithful with a precision that hurts. They possess what he lacks: structure that does not dissolve, families that do not negotiate their own existence, communities that do not expire at closing time. They are, in the most irritating sense, steadier. This steadiness reads to him as advantage, and advantage breeds resentment. He knows, in a way that knowledge cannot help, that they have found a grammar for living that he cannot conjugate.

    Nothing in his life bends toward change. There is no arc, only duration. He suffers the quiet violence of Spiritual Disinheritance—cut off from inherited meanings without the courage or capacity to invent replacements. The days proceed; the man does not.

    In this, François is less a character than a diagnosis. He is a cautionary specimen of Liquid Modernity—a life conducted without anchors in a culture that mistakes motion for progress. He has choices but no commitments, roles but no center, pleasures that evaporate on contact. He sees the hollowness of the system and lacks the will to exit it; even his longing for faith stalls at the threshold like a guest who won’t knock. What remains is not catastrophe but drift: a consciousness fully aware of its own directionlessness, proceeding anyway. It is the most modern tragedy—nothing collapses, and therefore nothing changes.

  • The Sovereign Appetite: How Wealth Devours the Soul

    The Sovereign Appetite: How Wealth Devours the Soul

    In “What I Learned About Billionaires at Jeff Bezos’s Private Retreat,” filmmaker Noah Hawley dissects the moral corrosion that accompanies extreme wealth—a corrosion fueled not by scarcity but by excess. The old adage comes to mind: the more you feed the demon, the hungrier it gets. Only now the demon eats without consequence, outside the jurisdiction of any moral law. The rules that bind ordinary people—limits, restraint, accountability—simply dissolve. In their place emerges what can only be called the Sovereign Appetite Doctrine: an unspoken creed in which desire, once backed by sufficient capital, becomes its own justification, rendering restraint unnecessary and morality negotiable.

    Hawley’s invitation to a 2018 Bezos retreat in Santa Barbara offered a front-row seat to this phenomenon. What he encountered was not insight but spectacle: a carousel of TED Talk-style presentations untethered from any coherent theme, a parade of ideas without consequence or urgency. These talks did not enlighten so much as signal—a kind of intellectual flex, as obligatory to the setting as Wagyu skewers and caviar. Surrounded by this polished emptiness, Hawley found himself asking the only honest question available: “Why am I here?”

    The retreat itself bordered on the absurd. His wife slipped on wet grass and broke her wrist; he and his children contracted hand, foot, and mouth disease, their faces erupting in red blisters. It was less a summit of visionaries than a fever dream of excess, where discomfort and decadence coexisted without irony.

    Bezos, at the time, still seemed to believe in performance. Clad in a tight T-shirt, laughing a little too hard, projecting a curated affability, he appeared invested in being seen as morally intact. There was effort in the act—a sense that the audience still mattered. He had not yet fully surrendered to the Sovereign Appetite Doctrine.

    But, as Hawley notes, that restraint has since evaporated. Today, figures like Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk no longer perform for approval. They have crossed into something colder and more insulated. In Hawley’s words, “They float in a sensory-deprivation tank the size of the planet, in which their actions are only ever judged by themselves.”

    Here lies the true seduction of wealth. It is not the acquisition of luxury goods but the eerie power of living in a world where everything is “effectively free.” Loss—the very mechanism that gives life weight—disappears. When nothing can be meaningfully lost, nothing can be meaningfully gained. Stakes vanish. Experience flattens. Life becomes curiously hollow, a theater without tension. This is the Infinite Buffer Effect: wealth so vast it absorbs every setback, neutralizing consequence and draining life of narrative shape.

    And yet, this emotional flattening coincides with a grotesque expansion of power. The wealthy, insulated from consequence, begin to experience a counterfeit omnipotence. They act without friction and, in doing so, lose the ability to perceive others as real. As Hawley writes, “If everything is free and nothing matters, then the world and other people exist only to be acted upon, if they are acknowledged at all.”

    At this point, they no longer inhabit the same moral universe as the rest of us. Cause and effect no longer apply in any meaningful way. They have become full converts to the Sovereign Appetite Doctrine.

    The word that clarifies this condition is solipsism—not as an abstract philosophy but as a lived reality. The world contracts until only the self remains vivid. Everything else fades into backdrop. Hawley shows how extreme wealth accelerates this contraction. When “everything is free and nothing matters,” the presence of other people—their inner lives, their suffering—loses its immediacy. Power without resistance breeds a dangerous illusion: that one’s actions carry no moral weight. Others become instruments, props, scenery. Empathy atrophies. Reality itself begins to feel negotiable. The self expands to fill the entire field of meaning, mistaking insulation for sovereignty.

    Hawley closes by contrasting today’s ultra-wealthy with the robber barons of the Gilded Age. However ruthless, those earlier figures “engaged with the world around them.” Today’s elite, by contrast, drift above it, severed from consequence, history, and meaning. They suffer from what Hawley calls “a disassociation from the reality of cause and effect, from meaning, and history.”

    This is not freedom but its grotesque parody—a form of plutocratic dissociation in which the individual floats outside shared reality, unbound not only from constraint but from significance itself.

    It is no accident that Hawley, the creator behind Fargo, can render this psychological landscape with such precision. He has long been fascinated by characters who drift beyond moral gravity. Here, he turns that same lens on the most powerful figures in our world—and what he reveals is not triumph, but a slow and chilling disappearance of the human.

  • Frank Sinatra Sings the Epistles

    Frank Sinatra Sings the Epistles

    Adam Gopnik, in “St. Paul Remade Human History. How Did He Do It?”, answers a parlor question—who matters most?—with a man who never met Jesus in the flesh and still managed to run the table. Paul, Gopnik says, is “the Most Unforgettable Character It Ever Met,” which is one way of saying he took a minor Jewish sect and scaled it into a two-millennia franchise. Not bad for a writer whose archive could fit in a carry-on.

    The record is thin and, at points, suspicious. Of thirteen letters, only seven pass the authenticity test; the rest look like fan fiction with good handwriting. The Acts of the Apostles reads less like sober history than like a travelogue pitched to Roman investors—Romans good, Jews troublesome, Christians reassuringly adjacent to Rome. It also airbrushes the argument between Paul and James, Jesus’s brother, into a polite agreement, because nothing ruins a new religion like founders who won’t share a table.

    Then comes the Roman catastrophe—the Jewish War, the Temple reduced to memory—and the scramble among sects to survive. Paul does more than survive; he pivots. He takes a local messianic movement and repackages it for export: portable, universal, and politically legible. The man who pulls off this trick also carries the best origin story in religious literature—a blinding encounter on the road to Damascus that converts a persecutor into a salesman with divine backing. If you were storyboarding a faith, you’d keep that scene.

    The letters themselves are a mood swing with footnotes. Paul boasts like a prizefighter and then calls himself “the least of the apostles.” He commands, cajoles, contradicts, confesses. He is competitive enough to crown himself and humble enough to kneel in the same paragraph. He admits a “thorn in the flesh”—a chronic deficit he can’t shake—and then turns it into a credential. He advises missionary pragmatism with the line that could double as a consulting slogan: be all things to all people. The man can pivot.

    Gopnik’s most useful correction is cinematic. Don’t picture Paul as a monk scratching doctrine by candlelight. Picture him as an action lead—shipwrecks, jailbreaks, debates that feel like bar fights in Greek. He travels, argues, survives. He makes the faith mobile—“almost single-handedly,” Gopnik writes—while the original disciples eye him like a franchisee who’s rewriting the menu. It’s the kind of role that once tempted Frank Capra to imagine a film starring Frank Sinatra—Old Blue Eyes as the apostle who sang a religion into the world.

    What Paul omits is as telling as what he proclaims. He is strangely quiet about Jesus’s earthly biography—the family, the miracles, the Nativity tableau that later Christianity will frame and hang in every living room. Gopnik suggests the omission is a feature, not a bug. Keep the myth foregrounded and the particulars backstage, and your message travels better. If you doubt it, look at how newer movements grow: the story glows brighter when the details stay conveniently out of focus.

    Then there’s the thornier matter of Paul’s rhetoric about Jews. After the Holocaust, readers have worked hard to domesticate him into a universalist who welcomes everyone to the table. Gopnik reminds us that some passages resist that makeover, cursing the old covenant with language that doesn’t sit politely at interfaith dinners. The effort to sanitize Paul tells you as much about us as it does about him.

    Scholars, understandably, keep trying on different Pauls. There’s the Roman Paul, smoothing edges for empire; the Hellenistic Paul, speaking in a philosophical key; the Jewish Paul, wrestling with a tradition he both extends and overturns. You can find these costumes neatly hung in Paul Within Paganism, edited by Chantziantoniou, Frederiksen, and Young. Try them all on; none quite fits.

    One thread, however, doesn’t fray: Paul’s apocalyptic urgency. The end is near—soon enough to matter, soon enough to act. Whether he believed it literally or deployed it rhetorically is the kind of question historians love and time refuses to answer. Urgency, after all, is useful even when it’s wrong.

    Gopnik’s final warning is against turning Paul into a greeting card. Yes, he writes the line about love that weddings can’t resist. He also draws hard boundaries with a zeal that would make a modern brand manager blush. Christianity spreads not just on the strength of its compassion but on the clarity of its lines. Inclusion, it turns out, travels well when it knows exactly what it excludes.

    Paul refuses to settle into a single portrait. He is the contradiction that works—the salesman who believes, the believer who markets, the penitent who boasts. If Capra had made that Sinatra film, it might have been the truest version: a man with a voice big enough to carry a room, and a restlessness big enough to carry a religion. Love, sung loud enough, can sound like doctrine. And doctrine, delivered with enough conviction, can change the world.

  • Cherry-Picking Does Not Make a Persuasive Book

    Cherry-Picking Does Not Make a Persuasive Book

    Kathryn Paige Harden left the evangelical church of her childhood and is now a behavioral geneticist at the University of Texas at Austin. She is also the author of the insightful, compelling Original Sin: On the Genetics of Vice, the Problem of Blame, and the Future of Forgiveness. After enjoying her long conversation with Andrew Sullivan, I picked up her book on Audible.

    In it, Harden distinguishes between two kinds of sin. Sin with a small “s” refers to individual acts that violate one’s moral code. Sin with a capital “S,” however, describes our enduring tendency to make a mess of things over time—what might be called the arc of human fallibility. To clarify this idea, she quotes Francis Spufford from his book Unapologetic: Why, Despite Everything, Christianity Can Still Make Surprising Emotional Sense, where he famously defines sin as the “Human Propensity to Fuck Things Up,” or HPtFTU.

    I was surprised that Harden, an ex-evangelical, would draw on a self-described Christian apologist, so I decided to read Spufford’s book myself. It quickly became clear that he is an exceptional writer with sharp insights into the Christian faith. He captures what he sees as the core message of Jesus: that one must give of oneself freely and without limit, loving and serving others with a pure heart. Intention, in his view, is everything.

    Still, something triggered my skepticism. Spufford repeatedly claims that Judaism and Islam, unlike Christianity, emphasize rule-following over inner intention. He uses the term orthopraxy—right action—as opposed to orthodoxy, or right belief. But this struck me as a reductive and biased claim, especially given the abundance of Jewish and Islamic teachings that stress sincerity, purity of heart, and the dangers of hypocrisy. The more he pressed this point, the harder it became to see him as merely insightful; he began to seem like a brilliant writer with a credibility problem.

    That problem deepened as I read on. Spufford appears willing to sidestep or reinterpret scripture when it conflicts with his more liberal views, particularly on issues like gay marriage and eternal damnation. There is a certain irony here. He praises Christianity for its emphasis on inner transformation and intention, yet he cherry-picks the Bible and reshapes Jesus to align with his own sensibilities. That project—recasting a religious tradition in one’s own image—strikes me as a task that calls for more self-scrutiny, especially before critiquing other religions for lacking moral depth.

    I say this as an agnostic. I’m not troubled by Spufford’s liberal commitments. In fact, I wish the Augustinian notion of eternal damnation were not true. But Spufford seems to want both the moral authority of traditional Christianity and the freedom to revise it at will. He presents the demanding ethical vision of Jesus—love without limits—while setting aside inconvenient passages that might complicate that vision.

    Harden, for her part, had the clarity and courage to leave the faith of her upbringing. Spufford also left his childhood religion, but his return to it—on his own carefully edited terms—would benefit from a bit more humility.

  • The Theology of Winter: Genius, Power, and the Will to Prevail

    The Theology of Winter: Genius, Power, and the Will to Prevail

    I can admire the intellect of Augustine of Hippo and John Calvin without signing on to their theology. Their vision—infants consigned to damnation, humanity stamped at birth with moral rot—feels less like illumination and more like a spiritual winter that never thaws. It is rigorous, yes. It is also airless.

    Set against that severity, Pelagius reads like a man arguing for oxygen. He offered a more generous account of human possibility, one that trusted effort and moral agency. History did not reward him for it. Augustine prevailed, sanctified and institutionalized, while Pelagius was exiled to the margins, labeled a heretic for his trouble. The verdict tells you as much about power as it does about truth.

    I don’t doubt the sincerity of Augustine or Calvin. But sincerity is not the same as innocence. The unconscious has its own ambitions, and theirs often read like combat. These were not only theologians; they were fighters—relentless, articulate, and unwilling to yield an inch of doctrinal territory. They argued to persuade, but also to dominate. They didn’t just defend a vision of faith; they enforced it.

    You can see the lineage in Paul the Apostle himself. At his best—Philippians, luminous and humane—he sounds like a poet of grace. At his worst, he is a man sharpening his pen against rivals, guarding authority with the ferocity of someone who feels it slipping. The contrast is jarring, but revealing.

    Augustine, Calvin, Paul—each too large to be reduced to a single impulse, each capable of brilliance and depth. But running through their work, like a low electrical current, is something harder: the instinct of the embattled mind, the need to be right, to prevail, to settle accounts. It is the scent of the theological pugilist—the man who doesn’t just seek truth, but victory.

  • The Day the G-Shock Frogman Hired Security

    The Day the G-Shock Frogman Hired Security

    Owning a single G-Shock—the mighty Frogman GWF-1000, no less—has taught me several humbling lessons about the realities of atomic timekeeping and solar-powered heroism.

    Lesson one: one Multiband-6 watch, even a legendary one, is not enough.

    I learned this during the night of Daylight Saving Time, when my Frogman—strapped proudly to my wrist—failed to synchronize with the atomic signal from Colorado. The problem, as I later realized, was strategic error. The watch should have been resting nobly on the windowsill, antenna pointed toward the Rocky Mountains, quietly listening for the midnight radio whisper from the WWVB tower. Instead, it was trapped on my wrist like a submarine trying to receive satellite signals from inside a cave.

    Lesson two: the Frogman occasionally deserves a night off.

    The solar battery is hardy, but I have a habit of activating the backlight like a man signaling aircraft during a blackout. Letting the watch rest on the windowsill overnight gives it two gifts: sunlight recharge during the day and atomic calibration during the night.

    Lesson three: there are places where wearing the Frogman is unnecessarily risky. Airports. Crowded cities. Questionable neighborhoods. Situations where theft, damage, or simple bad luck might separate a man from his amphibious masterpiece.

    These revelations led to an unavoidable conclusion: the Frogman needed protection.

    Enter the G-Shock GW-7900, acquired for the almost suspiciously reasonable price of $110. A watch this loyal and hardworking cannot remain nameless, so I have given it a title worthy of its mission: The Protector.

    Now the system is simple. Frogman and Protector—a tag team.

    The Protector belongs to a broader category I call Bodyguard Watches: rugged backup watches deployed when the owner wishes to preserve the dignity, resale value, or physical safety of a more expensive timepiece. The bodyguard absorbs scratches, suspicion, and general abuse while the principal remains comfortably out of harm’s way.

    I briefly considered naming the GW-7900 “The Bodyguard,” but that sounded less like a watch and more like a brand of anti-perspirant.

    So the name stands.

    The Frogman commands.
    The Protector takes the hits.

  • The Frogman Fidelity Oath

    The Frogman Fidelity Oath

    Dear God, hear the humble prayer of a watch addict who is trying—heroically, if imperfectly—to stay faithful to his G-Shock Frogman. Grant me the strength to appreciate the magnificent amphibious creature already on my wrist and to resist coveting other G-Shocks, especially the cheaper ones that whisper seductive promises of practicality and convenience. Protect me from the restless itch that sends me wandering through YouTube at midnight, where cheerful reviewers with macro lenses and enthusiastic voices assure me that the next watch will transform my life, my character, and possibly my posture.

    Please quiet the anxious machinery in my brain that insists on researching watches I do not need. Help me understand that the Frogman already fulfills every rational requirement a man could have for a digital timepiece: it is solar, atomic, indestructible, and built like a submarine designed by an engineer with trust issues. Remind me that my obsessive excursions into the G-Shock ecosystem are not noble acts of research but rather neurotic pilgrimages through a desert of comparison charts and unboxing videos.

    And please, dear God, intervene quickly, because the temptation is growing stronger by the hour. I can feel myself drifting toward the purchase of a GW-7900—not because I need it, but because my mind has begun whispering the most dangerous phrase in the collector’s vocabulary: “backup watch.” I tell myself the 7900 would merely protect my Frogman from harsh conditions, as though the Frogman were a delicate orchid rather than an armored amphibian designed to survive the Mariana Trench.

    If this prayer sounds familiar, you already understand the Frogman Fidelity Oath: the solemn pledge made by the watch enthusiast who believes he has finally found the perfect G-Shock and now begs for the strength not to betray it. The oath is heartfelt, sincere, and deeply moving—and it usually lasts right up until the moment the addict watches two enthusiastic YouTube reviews and convinces himself that buying a second watch is not an act of infidelity but an act of responsible stewardship.