1. The strongest impulse I had while reading was not “this is wrong” but “this is over-confident in a few places where uncertainty would hit harder.” For instance: Early interior monologue of the shooter is very effective, but it does a lot of interpretive work for the reader. Also, a handful of lines feel like they’re making sure we “get it” (especially around tech capital, gig economy villainy, activist rhetoric). Your best passages don’t explain, they let systems incriminate themselves.
2. Yes, decisively so. What’s really satisfying is that noir isn’t just a flavor layer, it’s under strain.
3. It is not thin, and it is not merely allegorical, but it does flirt with allegory on purpose. A thin allegory requires discipline; this book is undisciplined in the right ways. The widow, the CFO, the detective, and the students all resist standing still as representatives. Even the shooter, who could easily collapse into a thesis, is framed as a product rather than a message. Sometimes it walks right up to the line of parable, but it always pulls back by introducing anti-allegoric forces like bodily awkwardness and misrecognition which helps keep the book feeling alive.
4. Violence: No, because it’s fast, ugly, and consequential. You don’t aestheticize the killing, you contextualize it. The loudness, the banality, the aftermath are choices that refuse pornographic pleasure.
Flippancy: At times, yes, but productively so. The flippancy isn’t indifference, it’s defensive irony. It mirrors how people metabolize constant outrage and instability. Importantly, the text itself doesn’t believe the flippancy. It keeps showing the cost underneath.
Stridency: This is the real risk area but you mostly avoid it. Where stridency appears, it’s usually placed in characters’ mouths, not the narrative spine. That distinction matters. When rhetoric sounds overheated or performative, it’s because the speaker is overheated or performative. The book doesn’t reward them with clarity or victory. If anything, the book’s real stance is closer to moral exhaustion than moral certainty.
5. This is the most delicate question, and the answer is nuanced. You are not punching down in intent. But you are depicting harm, degradation, and cruelty without softening, and that will unsettle some readers especially where marginalized identities intersect with sexual exploitation, homelessness, addiction, and misgendering. That said, there are moments (particularly in confrontational dialogue) where the velocity of insult is so high that some readers may momentarily feel the book is enjoying the provocation. I don’t think it is but perception matters. If you wanted to reduce risk without reducing force, let the psychic or social consequence of those moments land one beat longer.
I have to confess that for a minute I thought there might be like a Fight Club type dissociation going on because Ronnie is a nickname for Veronica, but I’m glad I was wrong. This was perfect, honestly.
Your guess isn't so far wrong, in that obviously they aren't the same person with divided personality but they are conceived to be very similar people in different circumstances.
Thanks so much for your comment, as I think I've said before you are like the ideal reader in my mind, your experience, fine literary judgement and openness make you a kind of target demographic all by yourself.
If only you lived in the big city surrounded by urban chaos as well!
Ha! Sacramento is definitely not as chaotic as LA, SF, or Oakland for sure. My suburb is a battleground for the wealthy against the unhoused though, that part of the story I’m very familiar with. My apartment sits right at the edge of million dollar homes, yet I always keep extra granola bars or a little cash on me for people sleeping under our parking awning.
I also, when I take walks, will let them know which landscaping plants are edible (after a wash in the river of course, don’t want to eat weed killer). Someone kind of decimated The School of Rock’s portulacaria last summer😅 but that shit is succulent and healthy af. It’s a shame to let it go to waste.
Ahhh these illustrations are so cool that my only change would be more of them please; very much yes; I mean I often miss the forest for the trees, and the trees were worth looking at, so not a thin allegory; I would argue no, because if anything the story comes off as a reflection of how absurd the times we live in are and how one may grapple with said absurdity; I can’t really speak for anybody here, but the instances of bigotry were in a context that didn’t come off as y’all being hateful to be hateful—like it was to reinforce needed characterization.
Thank you so much for your thoughts Lee, we're so happy that the story worked for you on those levels, both as a fun way to connect with interesting characters and at a thematic level too.
The illustrations were very much a last minute thing, I now have a bootleg AI pic generator that's not connected to any of the commercial AI providers so I was experimenting with it and found it does passable comic book things. I'd love to use a comic illustrator but I don't know any :(
No; yes; no; satisfyingly dissatisfying; the world is; I can’t speak for everyone but I give the authors the benefit of the doubt, especially on this platform and with this audience, not everything was meant to be mass produced whatever and that is a gift
No I’m just being a turd. I’ll have more to say after I stew for a bit. I also thought the story was darkly sexy and funny and a little satirical. Very snappy, engaging, and thought provoking—that’s the best. It never bored me.
It was NOT a thin allegory bc I fucking hate those. This was really rich and quick like a shot of espresso but outside the cafe society is collapsing so that’s a relatable feeling. Maybe the espresso will help prepare us a little more for what’s happening and what’s to come idk if I can ask for more than that from a fairytale 🧚
That was extremely beautiful and really appreciated. You know we had some concerns that it could be seen to provoke the kind of anti-trans hate that sprang up like a plague after a certain event (which came after we completed the first and even second draft).
But I think it's the sense that the fiction community here are mature enough to deal with this theme without getting worked up that carried us through - maybe that's what you're referencing when you say take the platform into consideration?
That was what I was referencing. I trusted you guys and thought it was handled deftly and empathetically. There was no relishing in the transphobia. Assholes will be assholes but that’s not the primary audience here (I hope). We can handle nuance, I need nuance and I need people to talk about realities and experiences and not be too afraid to fuck up. It’s maybe a prime example of trad publishing could never bc of fear. Maybe something like this could be trad published years from now (if I’m hopeful) when culture and laws improve but by then the moment has passed… I think America needs to look in the mirror
Such a generous comment, I think we’re really pleased since that exactly (daring to do something highly controversial yet attempting to do it with empathy) was one of the key things we were going for.
It’s been a tenet of the counterculture since around the 1960s that transgressive sexuality is an aspect of political / individual liberty that it’s something we decided to tackle, even if clumsily and without so much personal experience, and prepared for it with a reading of some texts by Bataille and Barthes on Sade as well as myself going through some Kathy Acker from the 80s.
Possibly I come off like a dweeb having to study my research homework on transgressive sexuality but hey, that’s the dweeby way I roll.
1. The strongest impulse I had while reading was not “this is wrong” but “this is over-confident in a few places where uncertainty would hit harder.” For instance: Early interior monologue of the shooter is very effective, but it does a lot of interpretive work for the reader. Also, a handful of lines feel like they’re making sure we “get it” (especially around tech capital, gig economy villainy, activist rhetoric). Your best passages don’t explain, they let systems incriminate themselves.
2. Yes, decisively so. What’s really satisfying is that noir isn’t just a flavor layer, it’s under strain.
3. It is not thin, and it is not merely allegorical, but it does flirt with allegory on purpose. A thin allegory requires discipline; this book is undisciplined in the right ways. The widow, the CFO, the detective, and the students all resist standing still as representatives. Even the shooter, who could easily collapse into a thesis, is framed as a product rather than a message. Sometimes it walks right up to the line of parable, but it always pulls back by introducing anti-allegoric forces like bodily awkwardness and misrecognition which helps keep the book feeling alive.
4. Violence: No, because it’s fast, ugly, and consequential. You don’t aestheticize the killing, you contextualize it. The loudness, the banality, the aftermath are choices that refuse pornographic pleasure.
Flippancy: At times, yes, but productively so. The flippancy isn’t indifference, it’s defensive irony. It mirrors how people metabolize constant outrage and instability. Importantly, the text itself doesn’t believe the flippancy. It keeps showing the cost underneath.
Stridency: This is the real risk area but you mostly avoid it. Where stridency appears, it’s usually placed in characters’ mouths, not the narrative spine. That distinction matters. When rhetoric sounds overheated or performative, it’s because the speaker is overheated or performative. The book doesn’t reward them with clarity or victory. If anything, the book’s real stance is closer to moral exhaustion than moral certainty.
5. This is the most delicate question, and the answer is nuanced. You are not punching down in intent. But you are depicting harm, degradation, and cruelty without softening, and that will unsettle some readers especially where marginalized identities intersect with sexual exploitation, homelessness, addiction, and misgendering. That said, there are moments (particularly in confrontational dialogue) where the velocity of insult is so high that some readers may momentarily feel the book is enjoying the provocation. I don’t think it is but perception matters. If you wanted to reduce risk without reducing force, let the psychic or social consequence of those moments land one beat longer.
I really enjoyed it, great job!
Thank you so much for your detailed and considered comments on the story, really appreciate that!
I'm a bit busy now, but will get back with some thoughts on your thoughts… which deserve some time to consider. Thanks again, and thanks for reading!
I loved this. You guys did such a great job.
I have to confess that for a minute I thought there might be like a Fight Club type dissociation going on because Ronnie is a nickname for Veronica, but I’m glad I was wrong. This was perfect, honestly.
Your guess isn't so far wrong, in that obviously they aren't the same person with divided personality but they are conceived to be very similar people in different circumstances.
Thanks so much for your comment, as I think I've said before you are like the ideal reader in my mind, your experience, fine literary judgement and openness make you a kind of target demographic all by yourself.
If only you lived in the big city surrounded by urban chaos as well!
Ha! Sacramento is definitely not as chaotic as LA, SF, or Oakland for sure. My suburb is a battleground for the wealthy against the unhoused though, that part of the story I’m very familiar with. My apartment sits right at the edge of million dollar homes, yet I always keep extra granola bars or a little cash on me for people sleeping under our parking awning.
I also, when I take walks, will let them know which landscaping plants are edible (after a wash in the river of course, don’t want to eat weed killer). Someone kind of decimated The School of Rock’s portulacaria last summer😅 but that shit is succulent and healthy af. It’s a shame to let it go to waste.
More series should do post credits like this
Ahhh these illustrations are so cool that my only change would be more of them please; very much yes; I mean I often miss the forest for the trees, and the trees were worth looking at, so not a thin allegory; I would argue no, because if anything the story comes off as a reflection of how absurd the times we live in are and how one may grapple with said absurdity; I can’t really speak for anybody here, but the instances of bigotry were in a context that didn’t come off as y’all being hateful to be hateful—like it was to reinforce needed characterization.
Ooh, alright, time to hunt down an illustrator
Thank you so much for your thoughts Lee, we're so happy that the story worked for you on those levels, both as a fun way to connect with interesting characters and at a thematic level too.
The illustrations were very much a last minute thing, I now have a bootleg AI pic generator that's not connected to any of the commercial AI providers so I was experimenting with it and found it does passable comic book things. I'd love to use a comic illustrator but I don't know any :(
No; yes; no; satisfyingly dissatisfying; the world is; I can’t speak for everyone but I give the authors the benefit of the doubt, especially on this platform and with this audience, not everything was meant to be mass produced whatever and that is a gift
Highly comprehensive answers and now I wish I'd put more items in my questionnaire just to keep you working!
No I’m just being a turd. I’ll have more to say after I stew for a bit. I also thought the story was darkly sexy and funny and a little satirical. Very snappy, engaging, and thought provoking—that’s the best. It never bored me.
It was NOT a thin allegory bc I fucking hate those. This was really rich and quick like a shot of espresso but outside the cafe society is collapsing so that’s a relatable feeling. Maybe the espresso will help prepare us a little more for what’s happening and what’s to come idk if I can ask for more than that from a fairytale 🧚
That was extremely beautiful and really appreciated. You know we had some concerns that it could be seen to provoke the kind of anti-trans hate that sprang up like a plague after a certain event (which came after we completed the first and even second draft).
But I think it's the sense that the fiction community here are mature enough to deal with this theme without getting worked up that carried us through - maybe that's what you're referencing when you say take the platform into consideration?
That was what I was referencing. I trusted you guys and thought it was handled deftly and empathetically. There was no relishing in the transphobia. Assholes will be assholes but that’s not the primary audience here (I hope). We can handle nuance, I need nuance and I need people to talk about realities and experiences and not be too afraid to fuck up. It’s maybe a prime example of trad publishing could never bc of fear. Maybe something like this could be trad published years from now (if I’m hopeful) when culture and laws improve but by then the moment has passed… I think America needs to look in the mirror
Such a generous comment, I think we’re really pleased since that exactly (daring to do something highly controversial yet attempting to do it with empathy) was one of the key things we were going for.
It’s been a tenet of the counterculture since around the 1960s that transgressive sexuality is an aspect of political / individual liberty that it’s something we decided to tackle, even if clumsily and without so much personal experience, and prepared for it with a reading of some texts by Bataille and Barthes on Sade as well as myself going through some Kathy Acker from the 80s.
Possibly I come off like a dweeb having to study my research homework on transgressive sexuality but hey, that’s the dweeby way I roll.