I stayed in New York for five years, a long time to stay somewhere where I never intended to live permanently. There is certainly more than one truth about why this was so, but one controlling reason was that I wanted to be able to set stories there. A place so soaked in art, so packed with people from everywhere doing everything imaginable, and so rife with the issues, and the possibilities, of urbanization seems ideal for a writer. Something about a big city, with all its grit and glamour, is just more exciting and more worthy.

Two years ago, my school participated in a program called “Writing the City,” which was a partnership between the NYC Department of Education and New York University. Writers from the university came into our classrooms to do activities with students to get them to use the city they know–their city–to generate original, authentic writing. One thing students did was draw a map of a part of the city they thought was important as a pre-writing exercise to getting them thinking about community as a physical place. At first, several students wanted to map places like Times Sq, Central Park, and the financial district around Wall St. When I saw that they were having a hard time getting started, I intervened. 

Quickly, the source of the trouble became clear. They couldn’t draw a map of a Manhattan neighborhood from memory because they had no memories. By subway, you can get from Bushwick to Manhattan in under fifteen minutes, but your life has to take you there. Once they started mapping places they knew, labeling favorite hangouts, restaurants, friends’ houses, churches–personal landmarks that were directly connected to their lives–they became engaged and finished the assignment easily, full of things to write about.

I wasn’t asked to create a map myself, but I thought about how I would and realized that it wouldn’t be easy. I could certainly have recreated the streets around my apartment with accuracy––the grocery store, the subway station, the pizzeria––but it wouldn’t have meant what my students’ maps did at all. I cared about my neighborhood, and had many fond memories of people and places, but it was still a far cry from being home, literally or spiritually. 

That lack of home showed in my writing, too. Amid many points that could stand improvement, one aspect of my fiction writing that I think is consistently good is that it reads easily and doesn’t feel contrived. When I tried to set stories in New York, I struggled to find that ease, and never really did. I was too focused on the geography, exactly where characters were going and how they were going to get there, and logistical issues, like (I wish I were making this up) recycling rules and how to avoid parking tickets. I could write dialogue that sounded like the people around me, but it didn’t feel genuine. I had looked at and listened to New York as a writer, but I could only write about my New York experience as “I,” I couldn’t generalize, couldn’t become someone else and see life in New York from a different perspective. I couldn’t make it literature.

“Write what you know” is a truism every writer has heard, and it is true as far as it goes. I thought I could know New York just by knowing a lot about it, that there was some point at which the things I knew about it would reach critical mass. It doesn’t work that way though, any more than knowing biographical facts about someone means you understand him as a friend does. 

My writing mentor from college, by way of encouragement, suggested that maybe just living in a place like New York is so much work that you can’t pull back enough to write it while it’s happening around you. Over time, he said, those details of survival will be cast into softer focus, and what is literary and universal about the place will emerge. Maybe, but this wisdom is coming from an author who only sets his novels in Worcester, his hometown, so this theory hasn’t been tested.

My memories of New York are still sharp, and if they become fiction at some point, it will be gratifying. If they don’t, well, that’s okay, too. I know what place my map shows. And it just so happens that it’s the epicenter of the universe.

I’ve always known she was wrong. And this semester, the tenth anniversary of my first as an undergrad, I think I know how to say why. 

There is always a lot of talk in pedagogical circles about the importance of giving students the experience of writing their own poetry in order to understand the way the craft operates from the inside. Anyone who has ever tried to write a sonnet, or even a haiku, knows that it’s a lot more complicated than writing an email. In the case of fiction, though, that point may be more elusive. Most people would not bring The Oxford Book of Verse to the beach, but many would bring a novel. Poets are cloaked in mystery and romance, but writers of fiction prose are perhaps often seen simply as people who have the time to observe reality and write it down. Writing a poem takes magic; writing a novel takes discipline. Oh, please.

In terms of student engagement, my most successful units have been novel studies. My students tended to be very reluctant readers, nonreaders independently, and so there was a certain sweetness about one of them swooping up to me at the beginning of a period, asking breathlessly, “Miss, can we read the book today? Pleeeease.” In general, they hadn’t been read to, hadn’t been allowed to sink into a good story without the passive shock and awe of movies and television, into a story that required more than 90 minutes of their lives. Part of my job was to do what I could to give them the experiences with reading I had had that made me love it. 

If students are reading and enjoying it, it’s tempting (especially with rowdy, easily bored teenagers) to take the path of least resistance. But teachers fall short of their goals if they don’t get students to think critically about what they read, which can be difficult when the reading is pleasurable and more accessible. Untrained readers can “get into” a book, but when it’s time to talk or write about it, it sounds like the class is catching up on a soap opera. They blow past any implications of form and discuss the characters and their lives as if they were real. The key, then, is to get students to go beyond caring just about what the author is doing and begin to probe and appreciate how and why he or she is doing it.

First, one small confession: I am a massive Harry Potter fan. My interest in mythology, medieval literature, and teenagers, alongside my taste for British wit and flights of fancy, make it impossible for me to turn away. The first time through the series, I read as fast as I could, hundreds of pages flying by in a single day. Especially in the case of the seventh and last book, I was resolute that no one would spoil it for me, but popular media was so saturated with it that I knew I had to get to the end as quickly as possible. That kind of emotional investment is, I think, an important experience to have as a reader, but it is not literary studies. The second time through, when I was not so bound by suspense, I began to appreciate how clever Rowling is. Having done some writing myself, I noticed things like a device to get certain characters at the same place at the same time, speculated on why characters had certain names, and saw symbols and motifs emerge. (One example: Voldemort, as a half-blood who is obsessed with establishing a new order of only pure blood wizards, no matter what he has to do to rid the world of muggles, mudbloods, and blood traitors, must be an allegory for Hitler and Nazi eugenics movement. That’s deep!)

Writing fiction, that “beautiful lie,” is a series of decisions. As an author, you are trying to present something essentially true about the human experience, but it is a craft in which raw material is shaped into a story. Reality must be observed, considered, and finally cut down to size and packaged. Every author must contend with certain narrative conventions, even (perhaps especially) modern and postmodern authors who want to expose and explode them. People learn by doing, and there is no better way to demonstrate how fiction writers’ craft operates than to make students fiction writers themselves. Having written a short story, or even just a scene, students would understand the decisions authors have to make, like which conversations to have the reader listen in on, and which of the characters’ activities are part of the plot and which are not important or relevant enough. They would, as all fiction writers do, have been forced to create systems that operate as analogues to reality. 

The creation of literature is not a mystery, and neither is literary analysis. So let’s be democratic about it. Making students into authors themselves makes them more likely to care about another author’s craft and gives them a way to talk about the hows and whys because they have asked themselves those questions from the inside looking out. And once people, of any age, have a way to talk about something, they usually can’t be stopped. This post proves that.

So, Professor X, you might have a Ph.D. from Yale, but you got this one wrong.

Well, that surgery was today. In pre-op, she was absolutely amazing. She had the whole team of doctors and nurses laughing. I have never seen anyone so brave. She was in the OR for almost 7 hours while a team of surgeons removed something like 40 tumors (one the size of a coconut), did a full hysterectomy, and took out her appendix, spleen, and a portion of her colon. When the gynecologic oncologist met Dad and I in the waiting room afterward, he was almost grinning and called her post-surgery condition “optimal.”

Now, in this new world of cancer, good news is all relative. In this case, news can be good while Mom is still not cancer-free. Here, “optimal” means that the docto met his goal of removing every tumor with a diameter of 1 cm or larger. He feels confident that the smaller ones will respond to chemo. In this world, good news means it’s still a long, scary haul.

When the doctor left, Dad and I collapsed into tears. We were grateful, relieved, and exhausted. And I know we were thinking the same thing: Thank God I don’t have to figure out how to live without my best friend.

I think that “the T” refers only to the subway system. People don’t “get on the T” and head for the bus. But as I haven’t found a name that encompasses the whole Boston area transit system (besides MBTA, which I know is uncool), T will have to do.

When you use public transportation all the time, when it is, in fact, your connection to the world, you begin to notice patterns. For example, in Brooklyn, I never once saw a lone B38 bus. The drivers have never quite figured out how to stagger themselves throughout the route, so instead of one bus coming every five minutes, you have to wait 15 minutes for three buses. Mind you, not all three buses will stop. How do the other two buses not get ahead, thus spreading out? I don’t know, but they don’t.

Below ground in New York, there is also plenty to go amiss and delay you for reasons you are unlikely to ever understand. It’s hard not to take it personally when service on your train to work or home is interrupted or changed. It’s bad enough when you are informed of such a change on the platform by one of those irritating chirpy signs, or by a lately probationed MTA employee, who tells you, as though you could possibly have known, that you wait in vain. It’s far worse though, when you are already on the train and a crackly voice comes from nowhere, telling you with far more relish than regret, that he or she is sorry, but this train is going express, and your stop didn’t make the cut.

It’s easy enough to complain about NYC transit, but it’s like a good friend who sometimes takes a while to call you back but always eventually does. You need to get from Washington Heights to Sheepshead Bay at 3:45 on Christmas morning? Bring something to read, but you’ll get there. 

The Boston T is a different kind of friend. This is the friend who sometimes doesn’t call back, but when you run into her a week later at happy hour, she is so happy to see you, full of apologies which seem sincere, and simply insists on buying you a drink. The fact of the matter is that there are lots of times in Boston when public transportation is simply not available. When it is running, you can’t always be sure which track your train is going to come on or if you will mysteriously have to come back above ground and take a shuttle for part of your route. Still, that platform, whether or not it’s the one you want, is sure to be expansive and clean, and when you do get on the train, you can settle into a padded seat which is almost sure to be available. I waited for the bus for more than 15 minutes today, but when I finally got on, the bus driver told me she liked my necklace. 

The NYC transit system is technically always there for you, but it doesn’t care much if you are inconvenienced. It’s doing what it said it would do, and wonders disinterestedly what you are complaining about. The Boston transit system won’t take you from Malden to Mattapan at 3:45 on Christmas morning, but it feels bad about it and got you a gift.

I suppose I may get tired of this slower pace of life, but, for now, I’ll accept the apology and the gift.

My intention here is not complain. After all, summer is perhaps the one real privilege society is still willing to grant to teachers, and like all teachers, I’m enjoying it. Nearly ten months of our year is spent defending ourselves against administrators with clipboards, and parents who don’t see why they should be responsible for their own children, and colleagues who steal staplers and markers, and that daily look of surprise, mild disgust but mostly surprise, from students when you ask them to produce a pencil at the beginning of class. As a teacher, it’s forgivable and even necessary to squander July and August. 

The question, though, is whether or not it is forgivable, or necessary, if one is not returning to a world of close supervision, apathy, deceit, and boredom. The truth is that I can’t imagine not returning to IS 162. I know that I won’t be, but I don’t really believe it. Whatever it is that happens inside you when you stop believing one thing and start believing something else, it hasn’t happened yet. 

It takes a few years of teaching before you are really able to believe that any lesson you plan will come off more or less the way you planned it, and that, even in darkest March, the school year really will end and there will be summer and then another. Like all cycles, the cycles of teaching have to repeat themselves a few times before they become recognizable as such. Like all cycles, they come to seem normal, organic, and permanent. On a swing, after a little work pumping with your legs to get off the ground, it takes much less effort and you feel like you could swing, back and forth, up and down, forever. 

I suppose I’ve stumbled upon a cliche. Forgive me. That image is certainly what is meant by “getting into the swing of things,” but it’s a good image, even if I didn’t think of it.

Here’s where that image breaks down, at least for my purposes. That feeling that you could swing for hours, days, possibly the rest of your life, is really quite fleeting. After a while, your legs stop pumping and you get closer and closer to the ground, maybe even dragging your feet through the gravel to stop yourself faster. When the swing stops, you stand up and walk away. In the literal sense, that is how you get “out of the swing.” But when you decide, for whatever reason, that you aren’t going to teach forever, you have to walk away when the swing is at its highest point: that moment when the last bell on the last day rings and it’s summer vacation. In swinging terms, that means you have to work your legs and get as high as you can go, then jump.

I jumped. And in the meantime, I’m not complaining about the weightlessness, or the blue sky, or the warmth of the air. I’m just a little nervous about landing.

No pause. “That’s what I use for artichoke dip. I need that.”

Blink. “Oh.”

I leave New York today, my 28th birthday, having moved here just before my 23rd. A lot of the stuff I’ve been packing up this past week came down with me, but somewhere along the way, things found purposes. The artichoke dip dish is just the beginning. There’s the electric mixer. The preferred corkscrew.

Somewhere along the way, I became someone with tastes and preferences and specialities. This stuff became my stuff, the things necessary to live the way I have chosen to. 

Closing up and taping and lugging and loading endless boxes doesn’t seem like the best way to spend your birthday. But all these boxes of all these things remind me that this adventure has been worth it. It’s been a good way to grow up. 

So, happy birthday to me.

It seems significant that this year is the 10th anniversary of my high school graduation, since that means it is also the 10th anniversary of that long, weird summer between high school and college. And tonight, I feel very aware that my eighteen year-old self lives inside of me.

At eighteen, I unfortunately had bangs and had tampered with my hair color such that pictures reveal it was kind of yellow. My clothes were sort of deliberately unfashionable. I was prone to viewing any conflict or transition as an identity crisis, and certainly saw myself as a tortured soul. A lot of the time, though, I was quite cheerful. I found that people laughed easily around me, which I liked from the time I was very young. My greatest comforts were in writing, pleasing adults, and expanding my encyclopedic knowledge of the two most important four-piece bands ever: the Beatles and U2.

That summer, I remember walking around Portland, passing by high school haunts like Bagel Works, Java Joe’s and One City Center. I sat in Monument Square and watched people and seagulls go about their business, somewhat disbelieving that the city—my city—would go on without me. I specifically remember being astonished that the Portland Public School system was done with me, that I had completed everything it had to offer, everything it was supposed to offer. At home, I know I bickered with my mother a lot, a lot more than ever before or since. Now I suspect it was because neither of us wanted me held back, but neither of us really wanted me to go, either.

I recognize that girl, and I confess that a few of the small hurts she carried I have not completely put down. At the risk of being writerly: She is me, but I am not her. Not only her, anyway.

I also recognize that this summer will have some things in common with the summer of ‘98. I was an ill fit for high school, but, to paraphrase Orwell, I can’t say that I was altogether unhappy. Now, the most important reason I am moving is because I am an ill fit for New York, though that doesn’t mean it will be easy to drive away from that curb and wait for the unknown. As in high school, I made the most lasting friend with under a year to go. Again, I am forced to deal with the reality that a school system can, and must, function without me. Again, I feel like I’ve been unlucky in love, but part of being me is an openness and optimism that that XY set won’t always disappoint. I’m grateful for that hope, even if I can’t explain it.

One thing I know will be different is my relationship with my mother. We have the same bond we have always had, but it has already been tested. We have already come out the other side. She ceases to really care about the status of my laundry (I hope) and I cease to expect her to tell me I can’t wear ripped jeans or have to be home by midnight.

Basically, I have the rare chance to do something again, as an adult. I will spend the summer waiting, and then it will be time to pack up the car and head for another new life, again in Massachusetts. But I can’t swear I won’t sit in Monument Square a little first. And, quite possibly, brood over seagulls.

In the brutal heat a couple weeks ago, the principal of my decidedly unair-conditioned school was forced to amend the usual no drinks in class policy and allow students to have water bottles. It is much cooler now, but the water is one more thing to ask for, another concern to be addressed, so they are still on a Death Valley-level hydration regimen. Just the idea that they can have water apparently engenders a bottomless thirst.

So, this morning then, I was not surprised to see a water bottle on nearly every desk. Except one. Karen had pushed hers so far away from her that it was balancing on the crack between her desk and the next one. If she moved it any further, it would technically be on someone else’s desk, and five years of teaching is long enough to know that that would be a scene. “Miiiiissss! I can’t do my work…Karen put something in my area!” Not good.

“Karen,” I asked gently, “what’s up with your water bottle?” One doesn’t expect water drinking to be a hot button issue, so I was surprised when she turned crimson and wouldn’t even look up.

“I know what happened!” a neighboring student said with more glee than was sympathetic, strictly speaking.

“And?” I queried, tilting my head to listen.

“Miss, one of the boys, he rubbed it on his, you know, the male part.” She blushed and added quickly, “You know what I mean, miss.”

Indeed, I did.

Confident that I understood, the glee returned and Yuleisy pressed on. “And she’s been drinking out of it! That’s like giving a blow job!”

Well, in the real world, no, it isn’t. But in the real world, people don’t go to third base with water bottles, either. Seventh grade is its own jungle, and teaching is a bit like going on a safari (except much, much less of a vacation). It’s interesting to observe the animals in their natural habitat, but it’s comforting to know you can get back in the Jeep (isn’t that the official vehicle of safariing?) and go home.

I’m still not sure which side I’m on in the good-for-democracy argument that has been all over this particularly close, particularly contentious (by contemporary standards, anyway) Clinton/Obama contest. The high voter turnout that has characterized the season is a good symptom. It indicates energy, initiative, and, most importantly, a belief that things can change, can get better if people will it to be so. Those things are enemies of cynicism, and cynicism is the enemy of a functioning democracy. If people won’t say what they want, be it because they don’t know, or don’t think it’s possible, or don’t care if they get it or not, it’s hard for the government to deliver. I’m not sure that we have said, conclusively, what it is we want, but we’ve at least pledged that we will. That, as Democrats, we care about figuring it out. In that pledge, the organism of democracy stirs, breathes, and lives.

This all sounds pretty high-minded, and it is, but I have a confession to make. My hesitation in the good-for-democracy argument is basically because what is good for democracy is not necessarily good for Democrats, electorally speaking. Of course I want the democratic process to thrive, but I want it to do so in a way that will deliver a Democrat to the White House. At the bottom of it all, I’m a partisan. I would be able to express purer ideas perhaps, and more original ones definitely, if I weren’t. But I am, and partisanship, in my case, means that I believe that we are all basically better off when a Democrat—any Democrat, nearly—is elected, and that how much better off we are is roughly proportional to the scope of the office he or she (!) assumes.

I have forfeited my right, and thankfully, my obligation, to have any specific ideas about the strategy involved in getting someone elected. After having a fairly marginal role in a single campaign, I left professional politics for the armchair. I had the heart for it, but not the stomach. So I’ll speak from the former.

We are the party of the educated middle class, but we are also the party of new arrivals, of people trapped in the closing walls of generational poverty, of laborers and single parents and people who always get their own seat on the subway because they smell. Not every single one of these people will vote in November, but if we say that our party is big enough to hold the weak, the radical, and the marginalized, we have to mean it. Some things are too important.

So, to the Obama people: Congratulations on a fair and square win. Have a drink and toast yourselves and your hero. But just one. The smugness and the pumping fists are just annoying to people like me, and absolutely alienating to people like the ones in the paragraph above. You can afford to annoy people like me who will vote Democrat no matter what, but you can’t afford to alienate people who have nowhere to turn. And furthermore, you shouldn’t want to. In short, less audacity, more hope, please.

To the Clinton people: I have loved the idea of shaking up good-ole-boy Washington as much as anyone. You are still as much a part of this historical moment as you were yesterday, before Obama got his magic number. You still get credit for half of it. It’s time now, though, for the stiff upper lip. You, too, should have a drink and toast what could have been. But, for you too, just one. If you are going to say that Clinton’s campaign has been about the “other” Democrats, you have have to mean it. Because they still need a president.

To my party: Among the things that makes us the party of the angels is that we perseverate on an ideal of fairness. It is also part of our difficulty in getting our people to Washington. It’s tempting for us all to continue to squabble and gloat and lament about who is on the top of the ticket and why and how and by how many votes and by which bylaws. But if we do, we risk losing sight of the enormous historical possibility which has been offered to us. In the end, it’s us or the tired old men. Which will it be?

Yes. But.

In his iconic all-synthesizer classic “Cars,” Gary Newman sang, “Here in my car, I feel safest of all.” I had never given it much thought, until I headed home yesterday and wanted to cry but couldn’t because I don’t have a car. If you cry on the subway, especially at rush hour, you have to do it standing up, your own face very close to the those of people you don’t know. People who will either try very hard not to notice that you are crying or will stare at you curiously. In either case, there is no sympathy and no comfort.

I didn’t want sympathy or comfort though. I wanted privacy. I wanted to be in a space that was mine enough so that I could have a few moments to grieve the loss of a beginning, an experience, an experiment that is about to be over and continued by someone else.

As I sat on that train, I was filled with images, mostly faces. And names, so many names. Names from every year, every class. Armando. Natalia. William. Said. Diana. Joana. Melissa. Karina. Jairo. Ilina, oh Ilina. Jose. Kasandra. Wanderlin. Damian. Abner. Sebastien. Lyze. Edwin. Jenill. Koralina, my birthday twin. Graciela. Stephanie. Stefania. Estefanny. Don’t cry, don’t cry.

New York fills you up with sights and sounds, with passion and mission. The place bulges with humanity. But, central to all its smaller cruelties is the inescapable fact there is no space and no time to react with any humanity at all. But, tired as I am, it is a little hard not to keep trying.