Sara doesn’t like to think of herself as a ghoulish person, a person who reads obituaries, although she does, every morning at breakfast, the way some people read sports. She is less interested in the stories about the famous people who die, the people who rate two columns, with photos, their small contributions polished to shiny significance, certainly greater than anything she could do herself– the woman who walked across the United States to raise money for Leukemia after her son died of Leukemia, the first such gesture (according to the obituary) of its kind in the country, or the man who patented Velcro. She finds photographs of young people, and then scans the paragraphs looking for clues—cancer? suicide? Did they leave anybody (wife? husband? children?) behind? If the writing is vague—died at home, or just “on Saturday morning”—she imagines, frustrated by lack of confirm-able details, a bottle of pills, a car skidding off the road, co2 poisoning.

“Why do you do that?” Teddy says, coming into the kitchen from the hall outside the apartment, sweaty from running, wiping his armpits with his terrycloth headband. Same headband, not washed, not even rinsed, left hanging to dry on a hook by the door, and pulled over his curly blonde hair tomorrow morning, as yesterday, and the day before.

She says it’s interesting, like walking through graveyards, studying headstones, trying to get a sense of the lives that have come before her, other peoples’ struggles, it makes her own life seem less baffling and punishing. If Edna St. Claire had a daughter who died at two, and she died three years later at 34, how can she, Sara, complain about the fact that she works at a coffee shop, steals tips from the cup to pay for parking, because she hasn’t had a raise in the two years she worked there? If Vince Marlowe got cancer at 19, after being accepted at Harvard, and didn’t even get to go to his first year, leaving behind a loving mother and father (still married) three sisters and five nieces and nephews, how can she mind the fact that she flunked the take home English exam from the shitty community college she goes to, even though the correct answers were written on the study packet, which she was allowed to refer to, if she needed to jog her memory?

Teddy says there must be a better way to make your life feel meaningful, like volunteering in a homeless shelter, or learning how to Salsa. He’s standing at the refrigerator now, drinking pomegranate juice from the bottle, which should be fine, since she never drinks it, but drives her crazy, because what if she did? What makes him so entitled that he doesn’t even worry about whether or not she would?

Teddy is her brother, and they live together, with his sometimes boyfriend Leo, the first of Teddy’s boyfriends she has ever wanted for herself, he’s that hot. Not smart, but as long as you don’t talk to him much, you can imagine anything.

She reads the obituaries because you never know what you’ll find there. In New York City, obituaries are a perfectly acceptable way to find rent controlled apartments, and how else are people who work in coffee shops, with no raises, and no tips, supposed to pay the rent? She wonders if she might shock herself awake one day, seeing the death of her second grade best friend, or the high school English teacher who used to tell her that he wanted to be acknowledged when she won the Pulitzer prize. And then, when the news hits her, like a good slap brings a panicking person back to her senses, she will wake up from this stupor of indifference that has held her for the past year, since Panil disappeared.

That would be the thin line that divides her life, before and after, before, when she was purposeful, and focused, some might have said driven, and now, when rinsing a dirty cup in the sink so she can microwave some of yesterday’s coffee for breakfast seems like a PhD defense.

Who, you want to know, was Panil. Was he the love of her life, met at the baggage claim belt the way her best friend met her South Asian husband? Was he her mentor, the professor who read her short stories with such ruthless scrutiny? You might, given his impact on the shape of her life, assume that he was impactful all along. When in fact, he was almost nothing, the son of the woman who cleaned her building, lived in its basement, whose husband was the super, a boy she had known for only two years, from the time she arrived, when he was three, until this past November, when his mother woke the whole building with her screaming, screaming that he was missing from his bed.

Yesterday Jesse and I watched 1408, a horror flick based on a Stephen King short story. It was really good. So good I looked it up, wondering why it hadn’t gotten better reviews. It turns out it got pretty good reviews from critics, but not audiences. I concluded that the audiences wanted to see “Saw” or “Tales from the Crypt” and got an Edgar Allen Poe story, which disappointed. I, on the other hand, after seeing many movies based on Stephen King short stories, am beginning to think he’s a genius. All of his stories are seeds, not ordinary seeds, but seeds that yield strong, flourishing, complex, nuanced plots. Like a person who sniffs coffee beans, I feel like I can tell the difference, between the commonplace, over-used idea and the dark, layered kernels he comes up with. And yet he, like Spielberg, gets little credit for what he has done. Even I am inclined to dismiss it, “just horror,” until I watch the movie and see all its layers.

Jesse and I paused the movie in the middle to look up Dante’s Inferno, coming to understand that this story is based on his nine circles of hell, each level characterized by a different and increasingly personal torment. The evil room sends guests not into a world of impersonal demons, but into the world of demons that belongs uniquely to them, saving the most vicious, difficult demon for last. Hell, which seems at first random, located outside of the self, turns out to have roots in the deepest secrets of your own private suffering. And so the story morphed from one of spooks and things that go bump in the night into one of a man forced to confront, and finally overcome, his greatest loss, the moment when he gave up on God and his own life.

The whole second act pushes the protagonist to confront that moment. He is given a choice, right before the beginning of the final act: a noose. Express Checkout. And that’s when he gets his resolve: no, I am not going to give up. I’m going to fight back. I’m going to fight until it’s over. His decision: it’s better to fight, even if it kills you, than to let despair win.

It’s a beautiful, deliberate structure, a beautiful performance, a beautiful, sad story, and one that went largely unnoticed, some critics allowing that it was a very good movie, but a big chunk of the audience not liking it very much.

People like to be scared. They also like their demons to be simple and external, not painful and private. They like happy endings. They like to be shocked. They like to think, but not too much. These are the entertainments we seek, the way we are drawn to MacDonald’s hamburgers, things that go down easy, fast and cheap.

What’s my point? Realizing, I guess, that some strong, worthy stories don’t succeed, not because they don’t deserve it, but because of their genre, or the tolerance of the audience for the material, or the message. Because of bad luck, or bad timing. In the end, it’s not just how well you tell your story, but also what kind of story people want. All we can do, really, is keep our head down and do the work.

Julia Cameron says you have to write with a pen. Eric Maisel says you should write on a computer, why waste time doing longhand. Julia Cameron says you should write three pages of bla bla bla. Eric Maisel says never write bla bla bla. Is your goal to be a perpetual therapy client or a writer? If you want to be a writer, stop talking about the writing you want to do, the writing you will do when you write, the writing you didn’t do, or you are avoiding. Just write.

I point out these differences because they are both creativity coaches I trust, with some reservations, and they take entirely opposite positions on most matters. They share an idea of commitment– that you must keep the contract, make the commitment to write sacred. Beyond that, they have differences. She talks about God, and spiritual aphorisms title her essays: Easy Does It. One Day At A Time. His philosophy as dry and comfortless as Camus: life is hard and then you die.

I’m very rule based. So when Julia says you need to write with a pen I panic a little bit, even after I remind myself that Eric doesn’t care, even after I make a strong case for typing. In the end, I have to decide for myself. The only important question must be: what is important to me?

I learned something again yesterday, something I have learned before, lots of times. I pushed and pushed against the story, thinking there was no story, thinking I had no way of telling it, writing ugh, and shit, and yuck, day after day, ready to give up, and then yesterday, with a sudden click, the door swung wide open, and I had the structure I was looking for. What did I learn? This is how it goes, you think you don’t have it, and then you do. The trick is staying with the story when you don’t have it, tolerating the frustration and uncertainty. It was funny to look back over my notes, as I pulled the important parts out to make my draft—how many completely wrong starts I had, how much testing, mistakes. The parts I needed were clear, bright on the page like a secret message, revealed by the magic light.