Cinemorphosis

Tag: books

  • Self-Interest with Sauce: Why Your Finger Isn’t Worth a Million Lives

    Self-Interest with Sauce: Why Your Finger Isn’t Worth a Million Lives

    In How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life, Russ Roberts quotes the Talmudic sage Hillel: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, who am I?” Roberts riffs on this by pointing out Smith’s hard edge: if you would sacrifice millions of lives to save a single finger, you are “a monster of inhuman proportions.”

    Which, of course, made me think of chicken tenders. A few nights ago I had the Sweet Thai Glazed chicken at Starbird—fast food so transcendent it felt like a religious conversion, crispy shallots and herb aioli included. I wanted to go back the next day. And the next. My self-interest is crystal clear: eat more Starbird. The problem? My pursuit of gustatory bliss comes at the expense of chickens. Just as my hunt for bioavailable whey protein powders comes at the expense of cows.

    So—am I a monster? If I turned vegan, would that absolve me, or would I just uncover a longer list of moral failings still clinging to my name tag? Because the world isn’t eating less meat. It’s eating more, mostly factory-farmed, while pretending not to notice the conveyor-belt cruelty behind the menu. Ignore it long enough and moral numbness sets in, the kind that doesn’t just ruin animals but corrodes us too, spreading in ripples like bird flu, mad cow, or the next “mystery wet market disease.”

    And cruelty isn’t the only place where “self-interest” mutates into its evil twin. Consider America’s sacred cow: gun freedom. Other nations see mass shootings, change laws, and reduce tragedies. America, however, doubles down—choosing an idea of freedom that keeps killing us. Here, “self-interest” looks less like wisdom and more like suicide with better branding.

    That’s the trouble with self-interest. It’s a slippery little devil with at least two sharp horns. First: it lets us rationalize immoral behavior until we become monsters congratulating ourselves for our appetites. Second: it convinces us that policies which maim us—like endless guns, endless meat—are somehow in our “best interest.”

    In reality, self-interest is a hornet’s nest: buzzing passions, compulsive hungers, warped myths, and counterfeit happiness. To live in true self-interest means sorting out the destructive impulses from the behaviors that actually make us moral and happy. But most people never attempt the sorting, because the road to ruin is wide, comfortable, and paved with chicken tenders, while the road to virtue is narrow, steep, and has terrible Yelp reviews.

  • How Selfishness Accidentally Invented Kindness

    How Selfishness Accidentally Invented Kindness

    Morality is one of those words that makes people recoil. It has the stale odor of an HR training video, the medicinal burn of cod liver oil, the joyless bulk of broccoli shoveled onto your plate, or the dead-eyed banality of inspirational refrigerator magnets. Nothing about the word screams adventure—it screams paperwork.

    The topic itself feels penitential and airless, full of clichés, and as lively as a Soviet staff meeting in the Kremlin basement. Take Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments. The title alone could euthanize a graduate seminar.

    And yet economist Russ Roberts opened this dusty tome and found himself not nodding off, but utterly hooked. So hooked that he wrote How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life: An Unexpected Guide to Human Nature and Happiness. Roberts argues that Smith’s insight—that even our selfishness requires us to make others happy—isn’t boring at all. On the contrary, it’s deliciously counterintuitive: the truly selfish person learns that generosity is the best form of selfishness. The helper outpaces the sloth.

    This paradox gives Smith’s argument fizz. What looks like a grim penal code of moral duty turns out to be startlingly original and surprisingly human. For Roberts, the book became a companion, a talisman. He lugged it everywhere, scribbled notes in the margins, and evangelized to anyone who would listen. The book stopped being just a book and became, as Kafka once demanded, an axe for the frozen ocean of the soul.

    I admit, I almost left Roberts’ book untouched. The title had the whiff of self-help, and I vowed long ago to steer clear of the genre’s swamp of clichés. But Nabokov was right: it’s not the what but the how. A book brimming with insight and originality can transcend its category. Roberts’ take on Smith is philosophy dressed as self-help, but in the best sense: witty, sharp, and unafraid to wrestle with misery, selfishness, and the false idol of money.

    Good philosophers, like good teachers, are also salesmen. Roberts sells Smith not as piety in a powdered wig, but as a guide for how to live with honesty, courage, and—yes—even happiness. Against all odds, I’m sold.

  • The Warm Bath Illusion: Why Pleasure Culture Kills Relationships

    The Warm Bath Illusion: Why Pleasure Culture Kills Relationships

    When you’re married, you’ve closed the deal. You’ve made your public and private commitment to another person. Yet, as Phil Stutz points out in Lessons for Living, this loyalty oath collides with a culture that insists there’s always a better deal waiting. It’s our supposed “divine right” to find that deal, to “look outside ourselves for more.” In other words, FOMO infects the way we relate to our spouses. Stutz writes: “The result is a frenzy of activity, powered by the fear of missing something, which exhausts us emotionally and leaves us spiritually empty.”

    As a therapist to Hollywood’s wealthy actors and producers, Stutz sees people in perpetual pursuit of “bigger and better”—newer houses, flashier careers, younger spouses once they’ve “made it.” They want to “trade up,” convinced they deserve it. But what they crave isn’t a flesh-and-blood partner. It’s a “fantasy companion,” a frozen image of perfection that bears no resemblance to real life. As Stutz notes of one patient, a successful actor: “What he was really looking for was someone with the magical ability to change the nature of reality.”

    Why do so many of us want to change reality? Because reality is messy, uncertain, painful, and demands labor of mind and spirit. Consumer culture promises to scrub away that mess and deliver a “frictionless” existence. It sells us the Warm Bath: a world of perpetual pleasure and no conflict. But the Warm Bath is an adolescent fantasy—an illusion that reality will mold itself to our most immature notions of happiness.

    This fantasy always collapses. No “fantasy companion” exists, and even if one did, the Warm Bath curdles into hell. Experiences flatten, pleasures dull, the hedonic treadmill spins us into numbness, and from numbness we fall into rage—blaming the fantasy companion for failing to save us.

    Stutz argues we must abandon the fantasy of love—a stagnant “perfect” photograph—for the messier, real version: alive, unpredictable, and demanding effort. “To put it simply,” he writes, “love is a process. All processes require endless work because perfection is never achieved. Accepting this fact is not thrilling, but it is the first step to happiness. You can work on finding satisfaction in your relationship the same way you’d work on your piano playing or your garden.”

    So if you spend your days marinating in salacious fantasies and stoking your FOMO with consumer culture, you’re killing reality while feeding fantasy. And because you’re putting no work into your relationship, entropy sets in. Bonds fray, affection curdles, and instead of taking responsibility, you blame your partner and draft your exit strategy.

    To keep his patients from falling into this trap, Stutz prescribes three tools.

    The first is Fantasy Control. Fantasies, he warns, can grow “long and involved” until they compete with real relationships. Steely Dan’s “Deacon Blues” comes to mind. Its narrator is a suburban mediocrity who dreams himself into an edgy artist and seducer of women. Fans saw themselves in him, but the song is ironic: a portrait of a fallen man propping up a drab life with self-mythology. Such fantasies, Stutz says, “hold a tremendous amount of emotional energy.” The more energy you pour into a phantom partner, the less you have for your real one. When fantasies become sexual, the drain is worse. Stutz insists that when fantasies consume you, you must learn to interrupt them. “You’ll resent this at first,” he writes, “but each time you come down to earth you’re telling yourself that you are a committed adult who is strong enough to face reality. This will make you more satisfied with yourself, a precondition to becoming satisfied with any partner.”

    If you’re a boomer like me, this may sound like heresy. Raised in the 60s and 70s, we were taught to unleash the Id, to celebrate fantasies as expressions of the “true self.” The musical Hair didn’t just glorify wild locks but turned them into a metaphor of rebellion against authority. Hugh Hefner and Xaviera Hollander gave us ribald lifestyles to envy. Thomas Harris’s I’m Okay, You’re Okay blessed us with permission to indulge. And the cultural mantra was simple: “Let it all hang out!”

    But Stutz, a boomer himself, has watched fantasies devour his patients. His conclusion is blunt: curbing sexual fantasy is a crucial step toward adulthood and a stronger bond with one’s partner.

    The second tool is Judgment. Fixate on a fantasy partner and you suspend critical thought, surrendering to false perfection. You also sharpen your critique of your real partner until both fantasy and reality are grotesquely warped. To break free, Stutz says, you must recognize this distortion and choose a loving path over a fantasy path. “The process of loving requires that you catch yourself having these negative thoughts and dissolve them from your mind, replacing them with positive ones. You must actively construct thoughts about their good attributes, and let these thoughts renew feelings of attraction toward them.” This habit builds gratitude, restores attraction, and replaces helplessness with control.

    Reflecting on this, I recall Tim Parks’s essay “Adultery,” in which he describes a friend’s affair that destroyed his marriage. Parks likens sexual passion to a raging river that demolishes everything in its path, while domestic life is the quieter work of nest-building. The two impulses are locked in eternal conflict. Some people cannot resist hurling themselves into the river, even knowing it will consume them.

    To pull people out of that river, Stutz prescribes his third tool: Emotional Expression. Here self-expression works in reverse. Just as smiling can make you happier, acts of tenderness can make you feel tender. Stutz advises: when you’re alone with your partner, speak and touch them as if they are desirable. Do this consistently and not only will you find them more attractive, they’ll begin to find you more attractive too.

    It may sound counterintuitive. Who “works” for attraction? But that is Stutz’s point: love is work. Excessive fantasy, meanwhile, is infidelity—not only to your spouse, but to your adult self. Stay shackled to your adolescent hedonist, and like Lot’s wife, you’ll turn into a pillar of salt.

  • The Paradise Hangover

    The Paradise Hangover

    Yesterday I posted a 24-minute video on my YouTube channel about my family’s trip to Oahu—about slipping into what I call Sacred Time—and about the sullen resentment that comes when you’re yanked back into Profane Time. In Sacred Time, there are no utility bills, no kitchen repairs, no inbox choked with memos. In Profane Time, there’s nothing but.

    There’s a lag between the two realms. The body may be back at the desk, moving through the motions of Profane Time, but the mind and heart are still on an island, half-convinced they’ve found a loophole in the laws of mortality.

    In that sacred dimension, we become a mythic version of ourselves—effortless raconteurs, irresistible charmers. The hotel bartender laughs at your jokes. The maître d’ nods in worldly agreement when you talk about sunsets and seared ahi. Their warmth feels real, not transactional. And you start believing the PR you’ve written for yourself. Then you fly home, and the whiplash from god-king to bill-payer is too much to bear.

    It reminded me of a woman I met nearly twenty years ago in a frozen-yogurt shop in Torrance. My wife and I were waiting in line when she appeared: tall, angular, maybe in her sixties, the ghost of a former beauty. Short blonde hair with a whiff of style still clinging to it, smeared red lipstick, tight leopard-print pants, and high heels that had seen better decades. She carried her currency—hundreds of pennies—in a crumpled paper bag.

    She spilled them, along with her dessert, across the tile floor. I bent to help her, feeling the full weight of her story without knowing any details. I imagined her as a former starlet who once walked red carpets, who’d been adored, flattered, invited everywhere—until one day she wasn’t. She’d never made the identity shift from somebody to nobody, and that inability had swallowed her whole.

    Self-mythologizing is dangerous. Whether you’re a faded Hollywood beauty or a sun-dazed tourist just off the plane from paradise, you have to face the comedown. Adult life demands it. The mythical and the mundane need each other—without the grind, the magic loses its shine.

    So yes, I’m sulking about my return from Hawaii. Yes, I’d rather be sipping mai tais than buying new blinds and a desk for my daughter. But that’s the deal. Profane Time pays for Sacred Time. You can’t live in one without surviving the other.

  • Trees Bent by the Wind

    Trees Bent by the Wind

    In An Abbreviated Life, Ariel Leve recounts the shadow her mother cast across her existence—a narcissistic, volatile presence who trailed her daughter across continents. Her mother blurred boundaries, confiding adult affairs, romantic escapades, and private fantasies to her child, then lacing those disclosures with guilt trips and psychological sabotage.

    At eleven, Ariel was told she was going blind—a lie without evidence, a mix of cruelty and madness. This was not an isolated cruelty but the common cadence of her mother’s speech. At six, Ariel’s caretaker, Kiki, died of a stroke mid-flight, with Ariel in the cabin. Ariel stopped speaking for six months; a psychiatrist prescribed Valium.

    Her mother, often wearing a nightgown even to school functions, could deliver barbed declarations without breaking her routine. “When I’m dead, you’ll be all alone because your father doesn’t want you,” she told her young daughter, pausing only to reapply makeup. “Just remember that and treat me nicely.”

    Her father, in Bangkok, refused to take her in. Ariel lived in grief that he wouldn’t rescue her from the chaos. Decades later, a therapist told her that growing up with such a mother caused neurological damage—her brain, shaped by constant stress, had developed like a tree twisted by relentless wind. Trauma was not a lightning strike; it was climate. The result: a life stripped of adventure, self-acceptance, and trust. Ariel’s default mode became hypervigilance and retreat.

    Her partner, Mario, an Italian with no literary ambitions, no awareness of New York publishing, and no taste for bagels, embodies the opposite—balanced, unselfconscious, open to life. He steadies her, if only temporarily.

    In one conversation, her father asked if she could let go of the past. Could she destroy her demons? Ariel was unsure. A novelist told her discipline could harden one’s “emotional arteries,” making childhood wounds less decisive. Ariel countered: some are “front-loaded with trauma,” not victims but soldiers—scarred, but still standing.

    Neuroscientist Martin Teicher affirmed her point: childhood abuse alters brain wiring. Adaptive coping mechanisms in childhood turn maladaptive in adulthood, creating an adult mismatched to their world. The traumatized blunt emotion not with a scalpel, but a sledgehammer—shielding themselves from joy as well as pain.

    For Ariel, this explains a life “within brackets.” She sees herself in the patterns Janet Woititz described in Adult Children of Alcoholics: mistrust, emotional volatility, self-loathing, and a skewed sense of normalcy.

    Her chosen remedy: EMDR therapy for PTSD. Nine months of “the light saber”—eyes tracking a green light, headphones delivering sound, memories replayed until they lose their grip. Sessions leave her exhausted. There is progress, measured in patience with Mario’s daughters, in small openings toward joy. But she does not present herself as cured—only as a permanent convalescent.

    Her memoir probes the ethics of trauma. How accountable are the wounded for maladaptive behavior? Can faith or philosophy save them, or does failure deepen self-blame? Are they sinners, soldiers, or something in between?

    Leve’s life raises a tension between two extremes: the nihilist’s surrender—“nothing can be done, so I’ll live recklessly”—and the motivational credo—“discipline and positivity conquer all.” The truth lies somewhere in the messy middle.

  • This Is the Life You Have Chosen

    This Is the Life You Have Chosen

    I’ve never forgotten a story one of my college students told me back in the fall of 1998. She was a re-entry student—a nurse in her early forties—juggling coursework at UCLA with overnight hospital shifts. The kind of woman who sticks in your memory: short, sturdy, glasses perched low on her nose, with the weary, perceptive eyes of someone who’d seen too much and lips that knew how to pace a punchline.

    Most afternoons, after class let out, she’d linger by my desk and recount episodes from her Louisiana backwoods childhood or from the fluorescent netherworld of her hospital’s VIP wing. Her stories ricocheted between absurdity and horror—tales told with the calm authority of someone who could handle arterial spray with one hand and chart notes with the other.

    But one story gripped me by the spine and never let go. It wasn’t about dying celebrities or ER gore. It was about something far worse. A visitation. A monster.

    She and her cousin Carmen were feral children, raised in the lawless heat of rural Louisiana, where school attendance was optional and adult supervision was more myth than fact. Left to their own devices, the two girls invented what she called “mean games”—they tortured frogs, pulled wings off insects, and hinted at darker cruelties she refused to name. Lord of the Flies in sundresses.

    And then one afternoon, the visitor arrived.

    They were holed up in a decaying house, conspiring over their next cruelty, when the porch door creaked open and something stepped inside. It looked like a man. But it wasn’t. It had a tail—thick, muscled, and disturbingly animate. It moved with a will of its own, curling and flicking behind him like a fleshy metronome. His body was bristled with wiry hair. His voice? Low, hoarse, and calm in the most terrifying way. He didn’t threaten. He simply listed.

    Sitting in a rocking chair, the creature described, in brutal detail, everything the girls had done—every frog mutilated, every insect dissected. Nothing vague. He named the acts like he had them on file. And then he made his offer: Keep going, he said, and I’ll recruit you.

    He stayed for three hours. Just sat there. Breathing. Flicking that tail. Describing their path toward damnation with the steady tone of a bureaucrat explaining retirement benefits. When he finally left, dissolving into the heat shimmer of the Louisiana dusk, the girls were too stunned to move. Carmen whispered, “Did you see that?” My student just nodded.

    They never spoke of it again. But they changed. Overnight. Sunday school. Prayer. Kindness, enforced not by conscience but by fear. The kind that settles in your bones and never leaves. Whatever that thing was, it did its job.

    And this is the part that haunts me: she wasn’t a kook. She wasn’t mystical, manic, or given to exaggeration. She was a nurse—clear-eyed, grounded, more familiar with death than most people are with taxes. She wasn’t telling a ghost story. She was giving a deposition.

    To this day, I see those two girls, wide-eyed and paralyzed, staring down a thing that knew them intimately and promised them a future in hell’s apprenticeship program. Whether it was a demon, a shared psychotic break, or some mythological construct formed by childhood guilt and Southern humidity, I don’t know. But I do know what it meant.

    The creature’s message was brutal in its simplicity: Keep practicing cruelty, and you’ll lose the ability to stop. You’ll become it.

    That’s not just folklore. That’s biblical. The idea that if you repeat your wickedness long enough, God—or whatever you believe in—stops interrupting you. He doesn’t smite you. He simply steps aside and says, Go ahead. This is the life you’ve chosen.

    No wonder Kierkegaard was obsessed with working out your salvation with fear and trembling. There’s nothing more terrifying than the idea that damnation is self-inflicted, not by a thunderbolt, but by repetition. That the road to hell is paved with muscle memory.

  • Resurrecting the Narrative: Why Some Stories Won’t Die

    Resurrecting the Narrative: Why Some Stories Won’t Die

    In The Kingdom, Emmanuel Carrère’s sly, genre-mutating novel, the narrator—an aging screenwriter with a history in French television and a grudge against his own irrelevance—ponders the cultural staying power of zombie stories. Zombies, after all, are the walking dead: viral, contagious, unsettlingly lifelike in their mindless hunger. While consulting on a TV show saturated with post-apocalyptic gore, Carrère’s narrator growls at younger writers, quits in a fog of midlife disdain, and watches from the sidelines as the series becomes a global phenomenon. Bitter and brooding, he studies the success with the sulky fascination of someone who just broke up with their ex and can’t stop checking their Instagram. “I stopped writing fiction long ago,” he mutters, “but I can recognize a powerful fictional device when I see it.”

    Carrère then executes a narrative judo move, flipping from zombie melodrama to the Apostle Paul in 50 A.D., an itinerant zealot-turned-mutation vector. Paul, in Carrère’s retelling, doesn’t just preach the resurrection of a crucified prophet—he unleashes a viral narrative that spreads through Corinth like spiritual malware. Paul doesn’t need a production team or a streaming platform. He has a loom, a message, and an uncanny ability to hijack human consciousness. As Carrère writes, belief in the resurrection becomes “the portent of something enormous, a mutation of humanity, both radical and invisible.” Early Christians, in this telling, are infected—mutants hidden in plain sight, walking among neighbors with a secret that rewires their sense of reality.

    Carrère’s language—mutation, contagion, infection—is no accident. He draws a direct line from Paul’s religious storytelling to the psychological mechanics behind marketing, ideology, and modern myth-making. Yuval Noah Harari makes a similar argument in Sapiens: civilization is held together not by laws or gods, but by collective fictions powerful enough to convince strangers to cooperate. Religion, like branding, spreads through the bloodstream of the culture until it feels like fact. Carrère takes this one step further: religion doesn’t just organize civilization—it haunts it, like a beautiful, persistent hallucination that refuses to die.

    Consider Madison Avenue’s version of salvation. I recall a 1990s Mercedes-Benz commercial where a man, lost and panicked in a shadowy forest, emerges onto a mountaintop. Above him, the stars align into the Mercedes logo. Transcendence is achieved. No need for Damascus Road—just a lease and decent credit. The brand has become a kind of secular gospel. No one cares that Mercedes flunks reliability scores; the emblem still gleams like a divine seal. In this light, Carrère’s Paul isn’t just a religious visionary—he’s the original brand strategist. His resurrection story had better legs than the competition. It caught on. It mutated. It endured. And Carrère, the self-professed unbeliever, is too entranced—and too honest—to dismiss it. Carrere’s novel The Kingdom is the story of a narrator marveling at how the world got infected by a story so powerful, it continues to raise the dead.

  • Influencer or Inmate? Life Inside the Fitness Content Machine

    Influencer or Inmate? Life Inside the Fitness Content Machine

    There’s a fitness influencer I’ve followed on YouTube for a while—a guy who blends science-based insights with bro-tier charisma, serving up advice on hypertrophy, fat loss, and the alchemy of supplements with the confidence of a man who knows his macros better than his mother’s birthday.

    He’s shredded, of course—because on YouTube, being credible in fitness means having the torso of a Greek statue and the face of someone who hasn’t eaten a donut since the Obama administration. As another influencer once confessed, the price of entry into fitness fame isn’t just knowledge. It’s abs sharp enough to julienne zucchini.

    But lately, something’s changed. The man looks wrecked. Gaunt. Like he’s been sleeping in a protein tub and bathing his eyes in pool chemicals. His cheekbones could slice paper. His eyes are red and sunken, with the haunted look of someone who’s either seen a ghost or hasn’t blinked since hitting “record.”

    I don’t think this is just lighting or a bad filter. I think this guy is overworked, underfed, and teetering on the edge of burnout. He probably wakes up at 4 a.m. to research clinical studies on mitochondrial function, spends six hours editing thumbnails and B-roll, then crushes a fasted two-hour workout before filming five segments in a single dry-scooped breath. If he’s eating more than 2,000 calories a day, I’ll eat my creatine scoop straight from the tub.

    The irony is hard to miss: he’s the poster boy for health and vitality, yet he looks like a prisoner in the content mines. At nearly four million subscribers, maybe it’s time he hires an editor, gets a co-host, and reclaims his circadian rhythm. Right now, he looks less like a beacon of wellness and more like an exhausted monk, punishing himself in service to the Algorithmic God.

  • Heaven, Apparently, Has a Library

    Heaven, Apparently, Has a Library

    A month ago, I dreamed I was already in heaven—which is to say, I was somewhere astonishing and didn’t realize it, because apparently that’s the human condition.

    It started in a classroom, naturally. I was teaching at a college that felt familiar but off—like a liberal arts Hogwarts or a Wes Anderson remake of Dead Poets Society. The students were unnervingly sharp. Not freshmen. These were postgrads of the soul—opinionated, caffeinated, and engaged with the material in ways that implied they’d actually done the reading.

    We were knee-deep in discussion when I glanced out the window and saw the rain falling—not pelting, but gliding, like silk scarves from the sky. I drifted for one moment. That was all Tim Miller needed.

    Tim, a student and part-time podcast prophet, seized the room like a man born to lecture. He told everyone to open the expensive blue textbook. The one I assigned. The one I had never read. I stared at the cover like it was an unfamiliar casserole I’d brought to a potluck. “What did you think?” I asked, bluffing. “It’s okay,” they said. The academic equivalent of a shrug at your own funeral. I nodded, defeated, and dismissed them early—a mercy for us all.

    Outside the door, a nearsighted colleague half my age pushed a convoy of book carts like a noble foot soldier. I offered help. He smiled, already finished. I was obsolete, politely.

    I wandered the campus like a ghost who hadn’t been told he was dead. Then I saw it: a green coffee mug I’d left behind earlier, now glowing like a sacred artifact on a forgotten table. I snatched it and jogged through the rain to the library. I placed it on a windowsill with reverence, and two librarians appeared—silent, reverent, stunned. I’d returned the Holy Mug. They smiled as if I’d cured blindness.

    Still raining. Still warm. Still beautiful. I pulled out my phone—also green, because apparently I was living inside an emerald dream. It was dusted with beach sand, and I wiped it down like it was a relic I wasn’t worthy to hold.

    I wasn’t driving. I never drove. Why ruin the moment? I walked. Five miles, barefoot, maybe. The rain was gentle, more sacrament than storm.

    Then, through the mist, I saw my home.

    Three pyramids, each one the size of a small mountain, woven from stone in purple and gold. They spiraled into the sky like something the gods forgot to take with them. I’ve always loved purple. It makes sense now. But the gold—that was new. I’ve spent a lifetime disliking gold. Too gaudy. Too Trump Tower. Too cheap. But this gold wasn’t decoration—it was divine. It pulsed. It whispered. It glowed like it remembered being forged in the heart of stars.

    And it hit me.

    I lived there. In that zigzagged trio of pyramids, tucked in the mist. It was mine. I’d always been there. Somehow, until that moment, I’d failed to see it.

    Then I woke up.

    No rain. No pyramids. Just me, blinking in the early gray, stunned by the feeling that I’d glimpsed something holy and managed to mistake it for Tuesday.

    And I wondered: How much of life am I sleepwalking through? What miracles have I mislabeled as mundane? What if heaven isn’t a reward but a frequency we forget to tune in?

  • Calories in a Dream Don’t Count: A Glutton’s Redemption Story

    Calories in a Dream Don’t Count: A Glutton’s Redemption Story

    Last night I dreamed myself into a surreal mashup of The Great British Bake Off, Yellowstone, and a calorie-induced nervous breakdown.

    It began at a retirement party for D, a former colleague who had apparently left academia behind to study gourmet pastry arts in Europe. Now reborn as a culinary goddess, she presided over a dining room that looked like it had been styled by a Michelin-starred fever dream: trays of deconstructed brownies arranged like abstract sculpture, sourdough donuts with the texture of warm clouds, cinnamon rolls coiled with existential menace, and a chocolate cake so dense it might have had its own gravitational field.

    In the corner sat a magical grand piano, humming with faint luminescence. I was meant to play it—perhaps to provide ambiance for the pastry rapture—but I never made it past the donuts. They called to me. I answered with both hands and minimal dignity.

    Mid-binge, I was struck with a bolt of dietary guilt. I remembered I had a dinner date with my wife at her best friend C’s house. Worse, it wasn’t just any dinner—it was a social obligation. I arrived in C’s oversized dining room to find the ghost of a party long gone. Tables were abandoned like an upscale Pompeii, the air buzzing with lazy flies circling over still-warm piles of food: chicken pot pies glowing under golden crusts, French dips bleeding delicious regret, carne asada tacos wafting guilt into the air, and blueberry pie with a lattice crust so precise it looked like it had been braided by angels.

    I ate. With one hand I fed myself; with the other, I held my phone to my ear, explaining the situation to my wife. She responded with calm detachment: “When you’re done, meet us in Montana.”

    Of course. Montana.

    I was then transported—no explanation needed, dream logic intact—to a bustling Montana restaurant. I wandered from table to table in search of my wife, passing clusters of archetypes: the Trust Fund Cowboy, the Patagonia-clad Nutrition Mystic, the Ex-Brooklyn Homesteader. They were deep in conversation about the social fault lines of modern Montana. At one table, a blonde woman lectured an enraptured audience. “There are only two kinds of people in Montana,” she declared. “Old-comers and New-comers. And the old-comers don’t want anyone else coming.”

    Enter my friend Mike—ex-Navy SEAL, tropical city-builder, and walking rebuttal to provincial snobbery. He appeared like the Deus ex Machina he is, still radiating heat from his last humanitarian war-zone operation.

    I turned to the blonde know-it-all. “Mike’s a new-comer,” I said, “but he built an entire city in the tropics in under forty-eight hours. Not only could he settle in Montana—he could govern the state.”

    Silence fell. Victory was mine.

    But before I could savor the moment, I was ambushed by a different horror: the specter of calories consumed. The desserts at D’s party, the savory gluttony at C’s—how much damage had I done? Had I ruined months of progress? Was I now one sourdough donut away from emotional collapse?

    And then I woke up. The sweat was real. The calories were not.

    Relief washed over me like cold Montana spring water. My body was intact. My diet undisturbed. I had survived the sugar apocalypse, and all of it—Mike, Montana, the magical brownies—had happened in the safe, consequence-free realm of REM sleep.