The Grey: Tackling depression, masculinity, suicide, survival, and magical wolves.

Most people go into The Grey with spoilers in mind. I didn't. I got lucky. Somehow, I managed to avoid any and all trailers for this film. I only knew Liam Neeson Fights Wolves. I had also heard the film "sucked" and that the wolves didn't look realistic. I knew nothing else.

This is a good way to go into a film, especially this film. If you haven't seen it before, and your taste resembles my taste even remotely (do you enjoy, say, Gears of War and An American Werewolf in London?), and that paragraph of info was all that you had, go watch The Grey. Stop reading here. Or, alternately, don't watch the film and keep reading, but assume you'll be spoiled and that you may not enjoy the film as much because of it if you do decide to watch it.

About ten minutes before The Grey ended, my SO turned to me and our two friends on the couch and said, "Wait, we haven't even gotten to the bottles yet."

"Damn it," I hollered. "No spoilers!"

"Okay, okay," he countered, "I won't say what the bottles are!"

Everyone else knew about "the bottles" because everyone else had seen the trailer. Thank goodness, I hadn't -- I could enjoy the film's final scene as the intense climax that it deserved to be.

For reasons unknown to me, the final scene of The Grey made it into the trailer. In that final scene, Liam Neeson breaks three airplane-sized mini-bottles, straps them between his knuckles, and prepares to fist-fight a wolf. He never gets to the fist fight, or at least, we in the audience don't get to see it. The film cuts to black right after we see Neeson's determined grimace. It's the final scene of the film and they put that in the trailer.

This bizarre PR choice seems a fitting representation of the extent to which The Grey doomed itself right out of the gate. I thought, and I'm guessing many other people thought, that The Grey would be a campy action romp.

All four of us on the couch exclaimed in shock throughout this film about the extent to which it countered our expectations. In the past, we've enjoyed lampooning Captain America, Hellboy, the Tintin animated series, and similar Netflix streaming campy delights. Liam Neeson Fights Wolves was next in the queue. We thought it'd fit our usual movie night theme.

The four of us fancy ourselves a regular MST3K foursome, during these movie nights. We talk frequently during movies, with the intent to make the rest of the group laugh as much as possible. We unabashedly talk over dialogue; we ignore the plot; we can't keep up with character names and we don't even care.

This time? We watched almost the entirety of The Grey in hushed, terrified silence. Near the end, one of my friends pointed out how quiet we had been. We all agreed. Then, we continued watching in silence.

The Grey is not a funny movie. It is not even an action movie. It is, in spite of its bizarre fake-looking wolves, a terrifying, suspenseful, gut-shaking ride. No -- it's not even a ride, it's not a roller coaster. It's a crawl. An aching, gasping crawl.

The Grey does not bill itself as science fiction or fantasy, but it ought to. The fictive portrayal of wolves in the film could only be classed as magical realism. These are not real wolves. They do not behave as real wolves would. They behave, more or less, like human beings who just so happen to look like wolves.

The wolves represent a handful of themes within the structure of the film; at the beginning, they serve as a thin explanation for Neeson's presence. The Grey begins with Liam Neeson moving to Alaska to join a drilling team. Neeson's job? To kill any wolves that may pose a threat to the town. The wolves thus provide an excuse for Neeson to have a gun, which he uses almost immediately. His first action with the gun is to put it in his own mouth.

Liam Neeson is suicidal, but we don't know much more about him or his life before this moment. We don't know why he chose to move to this place, which he distinguishes in voice-over as having "no women." We also don't yet know why he keeps having flashbacks to a beautiful woman's face illuminated by crisp white bed-sheets. Our hero has started at the bottom. He can go nowhere but up from here. Right?

And up he goes, into a plane.

The plane crashes.

As soon as the plane in the film started shaking, I said aloud, "Whoa, what if it really does crash?" Cue my friends staring at me in disbelief. It's almost impossible, nowadays, to engage with media without having heard a recap of the entire first act beforehand.

I felt glued to every moment of this film. My friends didn't get to feel quite the same stomach-dropping, nail-biting apprehension that I did, although they did get some. After all, none of us knew going in that absolutely everyone in this film would die. Everyone. Everyone.

By the end, we thought at least Liam Neeson would live to tell his tale. He doesn't. I've seen other interpretations of the end of the film that suggest that Neeson's character survives the final fight. Given what the movie's shown us up to that point, with regard to what the magical-realism-wolves are capable of, I don't see how that's possible. I believe with complete certainty that The Grey ends in his death.

It's fitting, then, that the film's consistent themes are masculinity, homosocial power dynamics, atheism, fear, anxiety, survival, and suicide. Near the end of the film, Liam Neeson's character cites a poem written by his alcoholic father (who, from what little we know of him, seems to have suffered from depression, just as Liam Neeson's character does):

Once more into the fray

Into the last good fight I'll ever know

Live and die on this day

Live and die on this day.

The poem (and by extension, the film) equates "living" and "dying". For Neeson's character, these two may as well be the same. Living takes the same amount of courage as dying, for him. Both feel impossible. It's an apt summary of depression. Neeson takes the gun out of his mouth at the beginning of the film because he sees a wolf running towards camp; he shoots the wolf instead of himself. But the end result of the film remains the same. He has only delayed the inevitable.

I've seen enough films (and games, and books) that portray action, power, and masculinity to know that portraying your central hero as a suicidal and depressed man right out of the gate, and then refusing to back down from that portrayal throughout the film, while also determinedly portraying him as a bad-ass ... well, that's something different, let's put it that way. In writing about Samus Aran recently, I've been thinking a lot about the concept of a "strong character" who also deals with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, high-stress military situations or survival situations, or all of the above. Samus being a woman makes the portrayal of emotions feel "safer" for most writers, since we're socialized to see women having feelings as more acceptable. In Liam Neeson's case, it's a risk to portray him as living in fear while also being a bad-ass; it's a risk because it's hard to sell an American audience on this idea. America's portrayals of masculinity could use a shake-up when it comes to portraying "strong" men.

In The Grey, suicide and depression are not necessarily presented as states of weakness so much as states of continual, frenzied fighting. You fight your own worst enemy every day: yourself. You only stop when you need to protect others; protecting others provides a distraction from the true fight with your own self, which never ends, until death. Liam Neeson is portrayed here as a bad-ass not only because he knows a lot about the magical-realism-wolves that exist within this universe, but also because he fights against himself every damn day.

He also isn't ashamed of his own psyche. Although he gets cagey about admitting to his attempted suicide, he does unabashedly admit to being "afraid". One of the other men in the surviving party makes a big show of saying he is "not afraid" of the wolves, but Liam Neeson calls him out, asserting instead that admitting your fear does not necessarily mean admitting weakness or conceding to no longer survive. You must instead use your own fear. You re-purpose your fear into power.

The film continues to play with this concept, never seeming to settle on a lesson, instead allowing the audience to take away what pieces they want. The machismo-obsessed character in question dies from a voluntary wolf attack; he collapses on the ground from exhaustion and waits, for an unknown amount of time, for the wolves to find him. His last line? "I'm not afraid."

Meanwhile, Liam Neeson's character continues trekking unabated. Eventually, Neeson begins to shout at the sky, at God, to give him a sign. We know from earlier in the film that Neeson's character does not believe in God, although some of his late companions did. Believing in God or not does not seem to have altered anyone's fate. Meanwhile, Neeson's character has a history with suicide attempts, as we also have seen. But there's a difference between killing yourself on your own terms and being killed by a wolf in the middle of nowhere.

The "middle of nowhere" aspect, particularly with regard to identity, also distinguishes Neeson's character from the rest of the men present. Shortly after the plane crash, Neeson stops another man from taking money from dead people's wallets. For whatever reason, Neeson sees this as immoral; it's not clear to me why that would be. Money -- that is to say, ownership of material objects -- has no significance here beyond "honor". In fact, all structures of power have become meaningless; the rest of the men eventually grow to honor Neeson as a de facto leader simply because he's the most charming and he knows the most about how to kill wolves (the former, frankly, seems to be more the reason than the latter).

Neeson's reprimand against "taking billfolds" becomes ironic moments later, as Neeson soon begins to collect every man's billfold nigh-obsessively upon their death. He's not taking the wallets for the cash, though; he just wants the men's identification. At first, my friends as I mocked Neeson's billford hoarding. One of my friends hypothesized that the film would end with Neeson returning each of the billfolds to all of the off-screen female characters tangentially referred to by the dead men in the film. The film's actual end, however, is far more chilling.

In his final moments, Neeson takes out all of the billfolds he has collected, looks at each of the pictures within them, and creates a small cairn. Given how hikers typically use cairns (a hiker makes a stack of stones as a landmark, and future hikers add a stone if they see it), Neeson's creation of a cairn of dead men's wallets at the site of a wolf den seems ominous. The only people who can add to this cairn are people who are about to die, because this is a cairn at a magical wolf den.

For whatever reason, the circle of wolves -- in particular, the Alpha Wolf -- wait patiently for Liam Neeson to finish creating this cairn and put bottles between his fingers before attacking. Magical realism wolves, see. They have honor.

In this moment, the audience also learns some further detail about Neeson's flashbacks to the woman's face and the white sheets. We have seen Liam Neeson composing a letter to someone earlier in the film; presumably the letter was meant for this woman. Before the film ends, he looks at this letter once more. We see a flashback to her again; we see that she is in a hospital bed; she says "don't be afraid." We in the audience can assume that she has died, which explains Liam Neeson's relocation to Alaska.

As for whether Liam Neeson manages to not be afraid in his final moments, or instead uses his fear to keep fighting the wolf with bottles until he dies ... well, that we don't know. But the film makes an interesting choice by re-positioning "don't be afraid" as a line said, finally, by a woman. At first, I had interpreted the line as a representation of traditional toxic machismo: deny your feelings and suffer for it. By the film's end, we get a more nuanced portrayal of humans' innate fear of death. It's a less explicitly gendered portrayal, as well.

Each of the other male characters in the film has a woman that they remember. For Machismo-Obsessed Guy, it's a prostitute who gave him an STD; he still remembers her fondly regardless. For another man, it's his sister, who died long ago. For another, it's a young daughter. (Both the dead sister and the daughter show up in hallucinations, one of which the audience gets to see as well.)

Neeson's character has this estranged lover who, until the end of the film, we assume to be alive, because why wouldn't she be? Once we know she likely isn't alive, however, we might assume he has nothing to live for. But, some of these men had other people in their lives who were alive, as Liam Neeson's flip through the billfolds reveals. Some men believed in God; some didn't. Some had families and friends; some didn't. Some faced death with fear; some didn't. But everyone still died.

At first, I felt discomfited by the portrayal of women in the film as distant feminine nurturers, but by the film's end, I felt differently, mostly because I was impressed by the film's nuanced portrayal of masculinity and homosocial power dynamics. The rest of the men look up to Liam Neeson and follow him in their attempt to escape the wolves. The wolves want to protect their den, but the humans have no idea where the den is. The humans don't want to go to the den, let alone attack it. The humans just want to go home. The wolves have no way of knowing this, however. Due to impressively bad luck, the humans venture closer and closer to the den. By the end of the film, Neeson reaches the den -- again, completely by accident.

It almost sounds like a situation comedy. The men want nothing more than to get away from the wolf den, which houses the "women and children" of the wolf pack. The wolves also want this. Everyone wants the same thing. But no one can communicate. Also, in this film, the wolves are so much more powerful than the humans that it's laughable. Ordinarily, human beings end up winning the day against mysterious creatures, especially in masculine power fantasy films. The Grey lets the wolves win in a landslide.

What's more -- although the film does not do a good job of making this point clear -- the wolves are very clearly in the right. The humans arrive in a terrifying metal bird that crashes onto the wolves' land and explodes into fire. The humans manage to kill one wolf and they eat it. The humans then continue to venture closer and closer to the wolves' den. Why, exactly, do the humans deserve to live, according to the wolves' perspective?

Of course, the portrayal of wolves here makes no sense according to what we actually know about wolves, which is why I describe these wolves as fictional, magical realist representations. The wolves could represent the inevitability of death, but they also represent a sort of parallel-universe example of how homosocial groupings normally work in a traditional action film. We see Liam Neeson becoming the Alpha in his group; eventually, he must fight the Alpha of the other group. And, as in most action movies, the Wolf Alpha fights for his family, for his women and children. It's just that in this movie, the Wolf Alpha is positioned as the bad guy, and the ragtag group of terrified human men? Our heroes.

But, "good guys" and "bad guys" don't get strictly codified here. No one is "bad"; everyone just has rotten luck, wolves and humans both. It seems a dismal summary of how life and death work in the real world, as well as an unusual commentary on how narratives work in other action films where some of (or at least one of) the heroes survive. 

Although the film makes some unusual missteps -- re-using shots beyond what's strictly necessary to make a point, lingering on repetitive dialogue, over-using Liam Neeson's voice-over to provide exposition rather than finding other ways to show us what's gone on, and taking a long time to get going during the first act -- I still got what I wanted out of The Grey. I like to think, and The Grey made me think a lot.

That said, I'm not sure I fully understand the direction behind The Grey. Not only did the film's director Joe Carnahan use actual wolf carcasses in the film, he also told the cast to eat the wolf's meat (the characters also do this in the film). Carnahan similarly instructed Liam Neeson to use his feelings about his real wife's death to fuel his performance. Although I enjoyed the acting in this film, I'm not sure that this extensive insisting on Method Acting benefited anyone here.

Also, although it seems laughable that anyone would watch this movie and think that wolves are as intelligent and organized and revenge-driven as this film claims, I guarantee that some people wondered. I don't agree with the director's decision to use real wolf carcasses (although considering how bad the fake [CGI? puppet?] wolves look in the film, I can understand his motivation). I think the film also made a mistake in not specifying via a preliminary title card that the wolves' behavior in the film does not reflect reality, but the filmmakers did make efforts after the fact to clarify this.

Even though I have reservations about the film's direction behind the scenes, the result on screen has a lot more going for it than other films of what I'll call the Anxious Masculinity Genre (compare this to, say, Neeson's Taken).

I'd like to see more stories that navigate portraying depression and suicide and "being a bad-ass" without romanticizing, oversimplifying, or rose-coloring. These are the stories that I tend to connect with the most, and even though this story is about a bunch of men, I still could find myself in it. As I said, its themes tie in a bit to my recent Samus Aran essay. I like to see stories like this with women at the center of them, but in general I like it when films acknowledge that these problems lack gender and instead embody any human's (and, perhaps, any animal's) experience. We need to redefine how we see "bad-ass," how we see "strong characters," and also how we see gender. I'm not sure The Grey goes far enough, but it does subvert expectations of male emotions and personal power in ways that I didn't expect, and for that, I commend it.

Playing at war.

I wrote this post after filing this story for Paste about playing Bioshock: Infinite during the week after the bombings here in Boston. This stream-of-consciousness blog post about violence, role-playing, and human nature might make more sense if you read it in the context of the Paste column.

I've been thinking a lot lately about killing people in video games. More specifically, about role-playing as the kind of person who kills people.

Tomb Raider and Bioshock: Infinite both made killing feel awful. The sheer volume of enemies in both games makes clearing each area feel like a gruesome, repetitive chore, but also the presence of bodies throughout -- often, bodies of people who I haven't killed, just ... bodies -- casts a depressing pallor of death over the story. I felt guilty while I played these games. I often didn't feel like I needed to kill everyone in an area, but I always ended up having to do so. Couldn't some of them run away? No. No, apparently not. Once enemies begin attacking me, they are doomed to forever continue until I put them to their final rest.

So why is it, then, that I don't feel guilty when I play Call of Duty or Gears of War or Counter-Strike ... ? At first, I wondered whether the military settings of those games made battles seem more justified; in both Tomb Raider and Infinite, I play as a civilian character defending themselves from an onslaught of well-armed enemies. I don't have a license to kill. I kill in self-defense, and I just so happen to need to "self-defend" hundreds and hundreds of times. "But your honor, every single one of those men shot at me first!" Even though that's true, I doubt a jury of my peers would buy my story. So I feel guilty.

When I play as a solider killing other soldiers, I don't feel guilty anymore. I can finally relax and have some fun! Fun with, uh, killing. Hmm.

Counter-Strike and its ilk feel fun to me because they don't feel real. CS in particular feels like a game of tag with guns. It feels like paintball. It feels like laser tag. Death is meaningless; danger is meaningless. Unlike real war, which usually involves a lot of silence and waiting and boredom, video games about war run on adrenaline and set-pieces and shooting from the back of a jeep and oh my god a helicopter crashing right in front of us and reload reload reload blam blam blam.

Yet, it's nonsense for me to say that I'm more comfortable with killing in military shooters because I'm role-playing as a soldier and that role-play makes me feel like I'm "allowed" to kill. I'm not behaving the way a soldier does when I play these games. Video games are about shooting as many people as you can. Real military combatants do not behave the way in-game soldiers do, though. This synopsis of Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman's book On Killing explains,

    "In World War Two, it is a fact that only 15-20 percent of the soldiers fired at the enemy ... In WW2 only one percent of the pilots accounted for thirty to forty percent of enemy fighters shot down in the air. Some pilots didn't shoot down a single enemy plane. In Korea, the rate of soldiers unwilling to fire on the enemy decreased and fifty five percent of the soldiers fired at the enemy. In Vietnam, this rate increased to about ninety five percent but this doesn't mean they were trying to hit the target. In fact it usually took around fifty-two thousand bullets to score one kill in regular infantry units ...

    "Posturing is very evident in combat tactics... Bullets slamming into the ground or wall near a trooper can be frightening and when they are put there by some screaming 'maniac' it is much more terrifying.

    "This may be why so many rounds were fired in Vietnam without any real hits. (52,000 shots to score 1 hit? Our troops weren't that bad at shooting!)."

Only a small percentage of people have the ability to actually aim at other people with the intent to kill them. Even in a battle scenario where they are "allowed" to kill! Even when they're afraid and desperate and hungry and covered in mud and sleep-deprived and terrified that someone else is going to kill them first. And that's after weeks of brain-washing -- err, convincing -- in boot camp and training and target practice. Humans would much rather make loud noises or shoot at a nearby bush or run away.

That's sort of comforting, isn't it? We aren't inherently evil after all.

But what does that have to do with video games? Not much, actually. Your protagonist in Call of Duty or Gears of War does not act like a real person. Yes, you're a real person playing the game, but the way you behave in that game doesn't match up with how you'd behave in the same situation in real life. In the same situation in real life, we'd all probably be dead. And not just because we don't have the skills in real life to make 62 head shots in a row. We don't have the willpower to do it. And thank goodness for that.

A more realistic military shooter would be bizarre, experimental, and more stealth-based than shooting-based. There may well be a market for such a game, but I doubt that it would earn the big bucks that Call of Duty has. So, instead of true-to-life recreations of military scenarios, military shooters give us action movie tropes chained together into a towering scaffold of carnage. These video games are what war would feel like if death did not exist, if humans could re-spawn at check-points, if magical health packs lay waiting on every corner.

Military shooters belong in the same place in my head that paintball and laser tag occupy. The irony here is that paintball and laser tag both stressed me out beyond measure the first time I played them.

My first experience with laser tag as an elementary school student brought on a full-fledged panic attack, perhaps the worst one of my life. My first experience with paintball as a high school student brought on a similar episode, albeit of lesser severity. In both cases, I froze, huddled behind cover, shaking and gasping for air like a beached fish. The game felt ... too real. I felt afraid of something I couldn't articulate to anyone at the time. Not afraid of getting hit, not afraid of losing -- I felt afraid of dying. Something about holding a gun and hiding behind cover reminded me of death, death, death. And that "you are going to die" fear hammered in my head until I couldn't breathe. 

In the elementary school laser tag game, I cried for the whole match like a baby and had to endure teasing for the rest of the day. In the high school paintball match, I managed to bite back the panic as the first match came to a close. I lied to my friends and said, "Yeah, this rocks." It wasn't until my second match that I could finally say that sentence and mean it. The shock wore off. The fog in my head cleared. I could see the playing field for what it was: just a game, just flags and children and conveniently placed wooden bunkers. Not a real war. I could do this.

I think I have an overactive imagination. Or perhaps just an acute awareness of my own mortality. When it's not sending me into a panic spiral, I think that imagination lets me enjoy games more -- whether it's Tomb Raider or paintball or just a game of freeze tag. Over the course of my lifetime, I've gone from panicking and crying over laser tag to begging my friends to go with me again and again. Sometimes I call my proclivities being "too competitive"; sometimes I say "I just like role-playing." Or I chalk it up to anxiety, or depression, or "being a theater kid." But it's more than that, and I know that. When I play a game, the game is real. My heart rate rises. It's win or die. Sometimes that's a liability for me. Sometimes it means I love the game more than anyone else. Sometimes it's all of that whirled together.

I don't think I want or need games to be "more realistic" per se; I want games to feel more real. I want the stakes to feel high; I want tightly-paced sequences to seem almost accidental and natural, somehow. I've got that imagination of mine to fill in most of the gaps, but I do need some help from the game to keep my brain's juices flowing. I don't want the game to trip over itself to tell me a story or to slug me over the head with a new upgrade; I want to trip over these elements myself, somehow. Like real life! If real life were any good.

The games I've played lately that have been lauded for being artistic and ground-breaking and mind-bending have all been games that made me play as a Guilty Murderer, in some fashion or other. Each of the games to which I refer -- Hotline Miami, Spec Ops, Tomb Raider, Bioshock: Infinite, add your own to the list -- puts a gun in my hand and makes killing into my only option. I must kill or be killed, everywhere I go. Yet, gruesome death scenes, bodies, blood, and reminders of mortality lurk in every corner of these games.

Meanwhile, games that don't make me feel guilty -- Gears, CoD, CS, and so on -- do not get lauded for being "high art," of course. They are fun and forgettable. If they wanted to be high art, they'd need to sit me down and tell me to feel bad about myself for all this killing I've been doing.

But, but, if this were real life, I wouldn't be doing any of this killing anyway! It's all just a game! Yes, it's a game that I'm emotionally invested in, yes, I am choosing to play it, yes, I am behaving like a psychopath in it, but ... this isn't really me, you know. This isn't really anyone. No one would do this. No one is Lara Croft. No one is Booker DeWitt or Nathan Drake or Marcus Fenix. No one ever could be. We all just like pretending. And apparently when humans play pretend, we like to pretend to be a demi-god for whom death and time are meaningless. Can you really blame us?

I keep thinking back to Lara Croft's tears in Tomb Raider, to Elizabeth's horror at seeing Booker kill someone for the first time in Bioshock: Infinite. And then I imagine a grizzled old soldier sitting on my couch next to me, reminding me that I don't know what it's like to really kill someone. The two concepts don't fit together in my brain. I feel guilty for the virtual murders I've done, and then I feel guilty for feeling guilty about my virtual murders because, yikes, real murders are happening out there every day, why would anyone care about my inconsequential virtual ones?

Death waits for us all. Shit. Play more video games. Pass the time. Don't think about it too hard.

News! Judging Gears of War: Judgment, more on Tomb Raider, and podcasts (again)

Some long overdue updates on work I've published about the ol' internet lately:

Two weeks ago, I wrote a review of Gears of War: Judgment for Paste magazine. I also wrote an editorial about Sofia for Gameranx. Tom Bissell, one of the game's two lead writers, responded in a comment on the post. We live in a magical world of accessibility now, where game creators can talk directly with critics and vice versa. Too bad I couldn't use that accessibility to tell Bissell how much I loved his game, because I did not.

This week, I began a new column at Paste mag called Hyper Mode. My first column is about role-playing as protagonists in games; for now, you must subscribe to Paste to read that article. You should do this if you can afford to. If you cannot, wait a while and the article will, I think, become accessible for free at a future date.

I used Tomb Raider as my example in that piece, but I cited Gears of War as well, because I use Gears of War as an example for anything whenever I can. I can't help that Marcus Fenix is relevant to all arguments!

Lastly, I recently guested on the GaymeBar podcast. We talked about Tomb Raider, StarCraft, Zeno Clash, Saints Row 2-4, the Wii U, the Citadel DLC for Mass Effect 3, Ridiculous Fishing, and goodness knows what all else. Dick jokes, I think. I've been very ill for most of the past month, so I was in a bit of a haze during most of that recording. Who even knows what I said? It was probably hilarious! Check it out.

Freelance life. La vie boheme. The impossible dream.

It's easier to give up on your dreams, right?

I could just stop insisting on this "writing" nonsense and pursue a career in administrative work at the local massage parlor. Or so I shouted at my significant other last night after explaining to him how much difficulty I'm having getting my pieces accepted by outlets that respond promptly and offer to pay me a reasonable wage for the hours that the given pitch will take me to write.

"We love this, but we can't take it right now. Yeeeah, we don't know when we can take it, actually. Huh. Give us a month or longer to chew on this dilemma."

"I need pitches for my new project! I don't know when it's launching. Or when I can pay you. If ever. But I need your pitches!"

"Okay, we're willing to pay you an eighth of what your previous writing gigs paid you. What? Are you sure? Okay, a sixth. What? Are you SURE? You know, a lot of people are willing to take those wages because they write out of passion!"

Each of those quotes refers to 3+ people, so 9+ people total. Are you one of them? Probably, but don't feel bad, because you're not alone. You're all suffering from the same troubles, folks. Some of you have no money. Some of you have truckloads of it. You're all uncertain.

It's okay. So am I.

I need a full-time job in order to take on any one of these "passion" assignments. Okay, fair enough. It is quite naive of me to assume I can keep living in an expensive urban area, subsisting solely off of freelance writing. I know some people do it -- people who are better at this than I am. The rest move to the boonies. And even those people are better at this than I am. Know more people. Have better cocaine. Ha ha ha. Ha.

They're just. Better.

I'm not sleeping normally; I'm not waking normally. I still dream about going back to work at my old workplace like nothing changed. I don't have a schedule, I don't have a "real" "job" (what is real? what is job?), and I don't know which of the job listings I see will match up to an opportunity that will quiet the scream in my stomach. But I'm looking. And I'm applying, even though every time I see a long-term job prospect that looks even remotely do-able, I feel like I'm cheating on my dead spouse.

I worry that I am not useful to anyone. I want to be useful. I want to help people in some way via the work that I do. I don't know how to do that. I am afraid I am not doing it now, have never done it. I am afraid that no one, the journos and artists and colleagues and friends that I respect and love, likes me. I am afraid that I care too much about the fact that no one likes me. I am afraid that it is NOT a fact that no one likes me but that I cannot tell fact from fiction. I am afraid because I am the only person who can convince myself otherwise on any of these points, but I'm in no position to do that kind of self-persuading right now. I am afraid that I will never sleep well again, that this is it, that eventually I will collapse or explode or just ... fade ... away.

But even that would be too easy.

And yet, it would also be too hard. Impossible, even.

----

I founded a theater company shortly after college, and it failed. I wasted thousands of dollars on it. I knew on some level at the time that I'd never see a cent of that investment again, that the project would only waste money rather than make more, that each of us was pouring our money into a black hole. None of us knew what we were doing, and theater companies tend to hemorrhage money even when they're run by experienced professionals.

I only burned about $2K of my own savings before getting angry enough to quit, but $2K was and still is an absurd amount of money to me. Back then, it was all I had, saved up after a lifetime of part-time and summer jobs, supplemented only slightly by the low-paying entry-level job at the Phoenix that I got post-graduation.

I suppose I should look back on this memory as worthwhile, as a good project that I'm glad to have done, but I don't. I remember the wasted money first, every time, for some reason. I don't think about the fact that I lost about thirty friends after the entire company went under. We just can't talk to each other anymore, and so we don't. We tried to wrestle our hope into a beautiful thing together and that thing died, slowly and painfully. So instead of thinking about all of my old friends and our optimism and our dream, I think about the money. What an idiot I was, I think, to spend all that money on a project that failed.

But it wasn't the money that failed. It was me, it was us. We failed one another.

We gossiped. We back-bit. We threw sand in one another's faces. We didn't agree on how the project should be led or should be organized or should be advertised. The three people in charge of the group, of which I was one, did not get along with one another. The rest of the group discerned this and attempted to stage a coup. I quit in a fit of anger at the group's other two leaders before that coup gained traction, which meant I unintentionally ensured its eventual success.

The group fizzled out in a slow burn of energy and money after my resignation, the new leaders blaming the group's problems on me as much as they could since I no longer stood in the room to defend myself. But making me into a back-turned enemy did not save the group; after leaving, I secretly hoped it would, out of some strange sense of martyrdom ("they're better off without me, the group will turn it back around now"). But the group had failed with me and without me. It was all just rotten.

The love had gone. The sails were still. The ship lay dormant in the middle of the ocean, with a variety of rotating captains insisting the wind would return, all while the crew visibly starved to death around them. We burned out.

Why does any of this matter now?

It doesn't, except that it's hard not to see some parallels to projects that I see around me again now. Inexperienced and optimistic folks pointing fingers at one another, claiming they're all here for "the art" and "the passion" but secretly being very, very angry about how much money and time and emotional energy they have also sunk into the ordeal, whatever it may be. And, not even just the money, but the I-thought-you-were-my-friend undercurrent that runs through it all.

We are like children at Disneyland, angry to find our perfect dream looks unreal and plastic and involves a whole lot of walking. We don't know how to explain our disappointment at la vie boheme, at the dream that failed us, so we point fingers at one another instead.

You didn't tell me this would be so hard, so much work.

I wasted all of my money on this bullshit. And for WHAT!?

And so on.

----

Last night, I lectured my significant other about online media. I told him about ad revenue and subscriber models and click-bait and gave him all sorts of very, very good reasons why media was doomed.

He lectured me back about how I was good at what I did and should keep trying and stop looking for excuses for why my chosen profession would fail. Why can't I make my own blog? Self-publish? Get donations?

Like Ben Wyatt of Parks and Recreation, I am haunted by my past failures -- but also by my current, ongoing ones. I created a company for the sake of art in my youth, and it failed. I worked at a liberal alt-weekly for six years, and it failed. I dreamed my whole life for the chance to write full-time, and now that I have been thrust into unemployment and thus the "opportunity" to try freelance writing full-time, I find that selling pieces requires more luck than I seem to have gotten so far, more connections than I've ever had nor know how to make, and less anxiety than my brain contains by default. I could conquer any one of these three on their own, but for now, I drown in the trio.

I can't create my own company, I explained to my SO, because I know several other journalists who've recently done so or whose new websites/magazines/alt-journo-heroisms are already in the works. I told those journos I'd pitch to their publications and do my best to help them succeed. And I will. Even though I have no idea how their plans will work in the long term.

I don't have a better idea than any of those people, either. I didn't have a better idea for the longevity of my theater company, and I don't have a better idea now for how to make a video game website succeed. Ad revenue, subscriber models, free or pay-walled content, underpaid writers -- I know all the problems. I list them all the time, mostly to my dear SO, who gamely listens. I don't have solutions, besides "have a ton of money in the first place and be willing to burn it for as long as you can." Art!!

I am not even 27 yet, and already I feel pessimistic and bitter, with more than one spectacular, beautiful, chilling failure behind me. I hear about the new projects that my friends want to do, the new web series production companies or podcasts or books or games, and rather than feel hopeful, I feel my teeth grit in anger. You know you're not going to make any money, right?

That's usually a sign that I need to take a break and have a cup of tea until the hope comes back.

----

I still believe in the impossible dream, in spite of myself.

I still have a half-finished novel that I return to, from time to time, and poke around in, amused at my old prose (it's a vampire romance novel about two women loosely inspired by Holmes and Watson, and I started it years and years and years ago -- imagine how rich I'd be if I'd finished and sold that shit earlier, right?). I still edit my best friend's indie web series TV show scripts and assure him that, yeah, totally, we'll find the time and money to film all of these somehow, some way. I practice music with my nerd-core rock band twice a week; we've been working on an album we can't afford to finish for over six months now. I have a half-finished Twine game called Daughter; it's about Mommy issues. I have a half-finished concept album about Metroid. I still pitch articles about video games to places that can't pay me, or barely can, because I STILL BELIEVE.

I don't even, can't even disrespect writers who work for free. Those of us who don't may as well be, most of the time. What's the difference between 1 cent an hour and free, anyway? And it's not like I'm making any money off of any other art I do -- and I believe, believed?, believe in all of that other art just as much.

I know what it's like, to want to create with no compromises. Not no editors, per se -- not creation without help! But creation without compromises. Working with people who think what you do matters, who don't want to change your work, who believe in you and what you have to say and just want to make sure you can say it your best way.

It would be nice, also, to work with people who can pay you. But I tend to end up working for people who would pay me more, or pay me at all, if they only could  ...

You can't eat dreams, though.

And I am very, very hungry.

----

It would be easier to give up on the dream. But I don't think I can. When I quit the theater company, I almost immediately did some other performances elsewhere and started a rock band. If it's not a novel, it's a column, or a Twine game, or a blog. I'll rally and get the hope back again and do it whether anyone wants to hear from me or not. My own brain tells me to stop, doubts me, shouts at me. But I don't stop. I can't stop. Even when it's hard, even when I hate it and everything about it.

Creation isn't even about talent. It's about whether or not you have that inner, jerky, inconvenient drive that makes you keep on creating whether you want to or not. I guess I have it. Because I keep. Making. Stuff.

It would be much easier if I could stop and become a secretary at the local massage parlor, wouldn't it? It would be much easier if I could only be happy with that. It would be much easier if I could only be happy at all.

But that's not my lot. I'm stuck with this.

Ashes of the Phoenix.

I didn't always like the Phoenix. But I did always love it.

Like any long-term relationship, there weren't good days and bad days. There were good years and bad years. 

I dated one guy for five years, from age 16 to age 21. We managed to get through high school and most of college together before he dumped me and moved out of our apartment. He left while I was midway through a year-long internship at the Phoenix, which took up most of my free time and mental energy during my last year of college.

I felt so depressed after that break-up that I plunged myself into work. I came in more days than they had asked and sat at my crappy intern computer. I wrote, without having been assigned anything. I learned how to write better, over time. I asked if they needed help with any website work every hour or so. Often times, they did. I think I was the only intern that year who got published in the actual print newspaper (and paid for it, to boot!) -- for a video game review.

They had given me a free copy of the game: Pokemon Battle Revolution. I didn't have time to play it that weekend, but I lied and said that I did. I had to go to Georgia to visit my grandmother. I spent the entire weekend in the hotel conference room playing that game because my console wouldn't work on the hotel room's television set. I'm not sure if my parents paid for that conference room reservation; they might have. They understood, and so did my Grandma. I told them this was my big chance. (In some ways, it was; I got hired full-time at the Phoenix on the same day as my last final exam for college.)

The review came out terrible, but Ryan Stewart and Nina Mclaughlin (two of the web editors, back then) helped me rewrite it and rewrite it until it passed muster. I had never felt prouder of anything I'd ever done before in my life, by the end. Of course, I find that review unreadable now, and the lengths that I went to in order to play the game in spite of my weekend plans with my Grandma ... laughable, adorable even. I still go to absurd lengths now, to play games for a review. I haven't changed so much.

Grandma died last December. I don't think she read a single piece I wrote for the Phoenix; she didn't much understand what a video game was. I also managed the Phoenix's websites, and she only barely understood what that entailed. But she understood that I was happy. She knew I worked a lot of hours, but she knew that it was important to me to do it.

She was a feminist in her day, and she only grew more radical with age. In our final visit, we watched Fox News together and she made me repeat everything the newscasters said (her hearing was going) so that she could properly scoff in response. Legitimate rape? Nonsense, she would say. She may not have read the Phoenix, but she would have, should have, could have in her younger days. She understood me. She understood us.

I've thought about her many times since December. I spent all of Christmas Day stranded and delayed in an airport while my parents planned her memorial service, which I missed, because I had to go back to the Phoenix. Somebody has to update that website, I told myself. Nobody else can do it. I managed to get on a plane and get back to my apartment around midnight, that night, and I went to work early the next day and plugged away at my tasks all day long. Alone in the office, late that night.

On some level, I wanted to go back to work. I didn't want to think about my Grandma. I had work to do. I knew that she would understand. I knew that she was proud of me.

I called it "procrastinating worry." Someone else might call it "denial."

+++

Like I said, I didn't always like the Phoenix. I even wrote a song about how much the ups and downs of working there frustrated me (it's called "500 Hour Day," and you can listen to it here). I wanted to change the world and to do work that mattered. I wanted to write a book, compose and stage a musical, make a piece of art that changed minds. I didn't want to do data entry all the time, and in my early Phoenix days ... even in my late Phoenix days ... I got stuck with piles of it.

It took me a while to figure out how to negotiate ways to both do content management work and also find time to write, and even then, changing the world often had to go on the back burner in favor of website-related emergencies. My time management struggles never ended.  I managed to write a few world-changers when I wasn't laying out a slideshow or a surprise supplement page. I skipped the office's belated Christmas party in January to write this story; it eventually made it onto a Phoenix cover, so no regrets there.

Sometimes I resented our website for other reasons, though. Our content management systems weren't user-friendly, most of our hardware needed an update (our server - sigh), and I hated that no one I talked to seemed willing to agree to invest any more money in making anything about the website better. The back end, the front end, the advertising structure -- you name it, and I got push-back for making a suggestion about it.

Speaking of money, or lack thereof, my new job search has taught me that I will make double, if not triple, doing the same work anywhere else. I never cared; I still don't. The Phoenix couldn't afford any of us. We were all just hoping for more time and more chances.

The only battle I fought and won was for Ariel Shearer, who we couldn't afford to hire, but who we hired anyway because we needed someone to save our social media presence ... well, that, and I was tired of working packed 10-hour days that didn't include any time for writing.

But the real battle: my fight for a redesign ... I lost that one. I understand why I lost it. By the time I started fighting it, we had already begun to scramble for resources. And so had every other publication.

The transition from print to online has been a sordid one for most. Many online-only publications barely pay their writers, either, so it's not like they've figured it out. As far as I can tell, no one has figured out how to make a media website profitable for its employees and writers in the same way that, say, the printed version of the New York Times (or even the Boston Phoenix!) was in its glory days. I sure hope someone figures it out. I'd like to be paid to do the work I love. And, heck, I'll even manage your website.

Even though I resented the Phoenix's website, I also loved it. It felt consistent, and it kept me busy when I needed something to keep me busy. When inspiration had run dry, when depression hit, I had a purpose. I could always tell myself that even if I couldn't change the world this week, one of my coworkers would ... and I was helping them get the word out.

It was a habit, a pattern, a routine. I didn't take vacations -- I don't even like vacations. I spent hours of my last (and only) vacation with a now-ex-boyfriend moderating comments on the Phoenix's website ... which I didn't have to do, but wanted to do. In my defense, he spent his vacation with Guild Wars. (We were doomed already, by then.)

I loved my work. I never wanted to leave, and even when I physically left, I never stopped reading work emails on my phone and fixing typos from my home computer. I joked to my friends that I was a website surgeon, always on-call. Always online.

++++

I often compare my relationship to the Phoenix to my real-life relationships with family, with significant others. The end of the Phoenix feels like a marriage ending due to the death of a spouse. For now, it feels like the Phoenix is on life support, and I'm convincing myself to pull the plug.

I went to the office and put up some more stories on the website today. You can read our last issue here. It's not our last print issue, which we put out last Friday; it's yet another issue that we did this week, a web-only issue. I put up all of those stories by myself, this week, in a nigh-empty office. The stories had been paid for and filed. Carly Carioli stuck around to edit them. We're still on the payroll, for now, although very few other people are, and that won't last.

This morning I walked in on John Nunziato watering the plants in our empty newsroom. He turned to me and admitted, "I don't know why I'm still doing this." Then, he said, "I don't even know what day it is anymore."

But we keep watering the plants. And I keep updating the website.

It has to end sometime. In fact, it has -- it did. I've applied to some jobs. I've even got an interview tomorrow, and more than a couple of promising emails from folks who'd like me to write freelance about video games for their publications. I'm going to be all right. I'm going to find someplace new to devote my hours, perhaps more than one someplace.

That place will be lucky to have me, if I should fall in love with it ... and I do think I will love again, if I find the right publication. But I also feel like I'm coming off of a long relationship.

I've done my best to sink my unhappiness and panic into my job search. It's worked well enough. But I can't "procrastinate worry" forever. Today, the panic started to settle into chest pains and depression instead of manic energy. I haven't eaten lunch or dinner today; I forced myself through a piece of chocolate and a cup of applesauce. They tasted like paste. I feel like a zombie.

The worry that the Phoenix is really, truly gone ... that nothing will ever feel like it felt again, that nothing will ever mean as much? That worry has been creeping up behind me, these past few months. We were struggling. We were clinging.

Because it won't be the same, nothing will be the same. I already know that, on an intellectual level. But on an emotional level, I haven't absorbed the whole truth. It comes in stabs, sometimes. I'll remember a project we did, a piece I still had planned, or ... today, I came home from work and lay in my bed staring at my ceiling and I thought, there is no better title for a blog than Laser Orgy. And now? Now, even that will go into an eternal stasis.

The stabs of pain will keep coming. They might never stop.

+++++

My parents have planned another memorial service for my Grandma this summer. I'm going to it, this time around.

The Phoenix has planned a funeral, too.

By the time those events happen, hopefully I'll be ready to feel present at them. Not be present -- feel present.

I wish I could promise the Phoenix would rise again. But first, we have to let it die. We have to stop watering the plants, as it were. The ashes must get swept. We will put them in an urn and look on them with fondness.

The future is uncertain.

The need for places like the Phoenix has not died, even though the Phoenix has. That need will never disappear, so long as beings that communicate with one another exist. We will find ways to do that, to value that work, to change each others' minds and, in so doing, change the world.

We haven't figured all of that out yet.

But we will.

I'll do it myself, if I have to.