profiles in linguistics: Selah Saterstrom (II)

How clearly and explicitly interwoven is shame into the grit of trauma, erasure, and oppression? How does one honor the intensified humiliation of rape personally, publicly, and in shared spaces? How does society participate in the bondage? How does isolation from similar experience lead to shame and learned helplessness? Who must do the healing; their feet unbound? And how can community instead be a leading illumination of experience, the recognition of ignorance, and the witness of it?

Today is delightedly the exact 13th year anniversary of my first interview with Selah Saterstrom in ’12. And in the power of this transformational number and this second interview, we are encouraged to committedly sing into this lamenting space. We reflect on her novel, Rancher out from Burrow Press, ’21, where she confronts the ricocheting illumination of erasure, humiliation, and violence asking first of her own rape as a child: ‘what is an essay of rape supposed to do?’.

Selah’s essay-excerpts traverse back and forth, in form and interrogation; resisting the linearity of the essay form in dream, memoir, research, and reflection. As she describes, this ‘call and response’ jazz funeral embodiment, beholds the breakdown of ideals and exposes the uprising of the accountable. She expounds the necessity to bear witness and hold space to sexual violence and to unify the self between what we do and what we feel. This is a space that confronts illusions of mass shame, where survivors instead are visible and supported in affirming their truth and dismantling saturations of power and violence. As a writer who has recently moved to the striking beauty of the Vashon Islands with wife and daughter, she says she is ‘forever unfolding into new constellations of possibility’.

Selah Saterstrom is the author of the innovative novels SlabThe Meat and Spirit Plan, and The Pink Institution, as well as two nonfiction collections, Rancher and the award-winning Ideal Suggestions: Essays in Divinatory Poetics. She is the co-founder of Four Queens Divination, a platform dedicated to the intersection of divinatory arts and creative writing. With over twenty-five years of teaching experience in graduate programs and diverse settings worldwide, Selah now lives on Vashon Island with her wife and daughter. Long version HERE

– excerpt from Rancher

What were the first inspirations that made you desire to become a writer? How has your work changed over time and why?

Thirteen years ago—to the dayI first answered this question on your lovely questionnaire! Can you believe it? I can. #13 is my lucky number. I returned to my notebooks from that time and found myself caught in the architecture of an earlier self. What I couldn’t have known then was how profoundly life would reconfigure me—that both of my parents would soon die, that I would fall in love, marry, become a mother, that I would write three more books, that I would walk away from a Full Professorship to build a life where writing was not a pursuit woven around the edges of living, but its very center.

And yet, the original summons to writing remains unchanged—to cross the threshold where articulation meets erasure, to stake one’s life in language, that volatile, fugitive medium that both composes and exceeds the self. It is a continual reckoning with meaning’s emergence—unstable, recursive, forever unfolding into new constellations of possibility.

Your latest project, Rancher, addresses the question: What happens to the sexual assault victim? We read, “The sucky paradox about any kind of abuse is the way the traumatic event absolutely isn’t the victim’s fault even as she is ultimately responsible for her own healing process.” Can you comment on this?

When I set out to write an essay “about rape,” I put out a call to close friends and asked: What is an essay about rape supposed to do? The first quote you share comes from my friend Teresa Carmody’s response.

Call and response is one of the oldest structures—a rhythm of being met, a recognition that meaning is forged not only in words but in the space between them. It is an act shaped as much by listening as by speech, a testament to the necessity of witness. Growing up in the South, I first understood this through the Blues and the great lamentation-celebration of the Jazz funeral and second line traditions, where a voice calls out in grief and praise and is answered—not to solve, but to witness.

Witnessing is an act of defiance against erasure. Recognition affirms. Without it, suffering risks slipping into invisibility, and what is unseen is too easily dismissed. To witness is to engage, to take responsibility—to insist that no voice should exist in a vacuum. Healing requires resonance—pain left unrecognized remains closed, looping inward. But witnessing creates an opening, an echo of connection that reminds us suffering does not have to be a private exile but can be part of a shared human condition.

Enter: friendship. Trauma isolates, pulling a person out of the shared world. But the sacred call and response of friendship insists that even the hardest truths can be spoken, received, held. It affirms that healing, like harm, happens between us.

In Rancher, you also write, “another aspect of life after rape: the unforgiving public.”  Can you unpack this sentiment?

The hero Gisèle Pelicot’s ordeal (at least 51 rapes) inspired rare solidarity, yet the very exceptionality of her acceptance illuminates a deeper, systemic mistrust of survivor’s truths. Even now, from the highest corridors of power—the White House itself—comes public support for formally accused rapists (Andrew Tate, Tristan Tate, Conor McGregor), a stark reminder that truth remains captive to those whose power depends on doubt.

Eric Aldrich’s review of Rancher meant a great deal to me in part because it articulated something fundamental about the structures that enable violence. He wrote:

“Saterstrom offers glimpses of…the community that harboured her rapist… As a person who grew up in a rural community, I recognized the types of dumbness and awfulness endemic to…the victims of sexual violence in my own hometown. Rancher clarified the connections between humiliation and sexual violence that I’d only sensed before.”

His review recognizes a world where insularity breeds impunity and where cruelty, left unchecked, becomes culture. Rancher was, in part, an attempt to make these forces legible.

Violence does not often arise in isolation, nor is it merely the sum of individual acts. Rather, it is embedded within a culture—normalized through its failures to intervene and its tacit permissions. Humiliation and sexual violence are not separate forces, they are interwoven, reinforcing each other in ways both insidious and overt. This is also very much about the mechanisms of shame that ensure suffering remains private, unseen, and unchallenged. 

In 2023 – 2024 (according to RAINN), out of every 1,000 sexual assaults, approximately six of these resulted in the actual incarceration of the perpetrator.​ These numbers lay bare the staggering gap between the prevalence of sexual violence and accountability.

Communities uphold these injustices when they protect perpetrators over survivors and when accountability is framed as an individual burden rather than a collective responsibility. 

The question, then, is not just how the community sustains this reality—but how it might dismantle it. And it is this question that I was interested in exploring in Rancher.

Who are promising women writers to look at in the future?

I may not be answering your lovely question directly, but if you’ll indulge me . . .

So many extraordinary writers working beyond the mode of the straight male author are shaping this moment—not as emerging voices (a term that often obscures how long they’ve been making essential work) but as forces sharpening our capacities for thought. My attention isn’t on career arcs—visibility is a strange currency, and what we call “new” is often only newly recognized by the machinery of big publishing.

Recently, I’ve been very excited by Chanté Reid’s Thot and Jade Lascelles’s Violence Beside. Gabrielle Civil’s work continues to be astonishing—Experiments in Joy should have a wider readership. Queer Southern writer Justin Wymer’s essay, Love in the Time of Hillbilly Elegy: On JD Vance’s Appalachian Grift, is incredible – it cuts through political erasures with razor-sharp knowing. And Chris Marmolejo’s Red Tarot—from a queer Indigenous and trans perspective—is one of the most significant contributions to divination studies in decades as far as I’m concerned. 

What are your plans for the future?

I’m about to send my new novel, The Delirium of Negation, to my agent—it is a mystery set in the underworld that revolves around missing women. Alongside that, I’m wrapping up a collection of essays on queer rurality and writing, work that feels especially alive to me right now. And if fortune favors me (and I don’t disappear entirely into the labyrinth of my footnotes), my very long book on the theory of divination should see completion by 2026.

Recently, my family moved to a small rural island. Life is contemplative, the Salish Sea dramatic! In the days ahead: more writing and spending as much time as possible with the people I love and of course, resisting autocracy.

BNI

profiles in poetics: Erika Lutzner (II)

How does grief transpose from the personal to the private? How do we process the grief of a nation and at the same envelop the deepest private sorrow of our intimate life? How is the political interwoven in this narrative? Does the public and private share glasses or merely hold hands with their eyes turned downwards. Are we perhaps so much more intimately connected than we care to realize, picking out our fresh vegetables, looking for dimples. How is our grief connected and separate and how do we negotiate and process these necessary steps? 

In this second interview, Erika Lutzner shares her book, While Everything Slipped Away, published by Calypso Editions, 2016. The book straddles the public private spheres of bereavement in the experience of losing her husband in the 911 rescue attempts. In Erika’s words, these poems which began out of the surrealist necessity of grief, love, and elegies, “told her what to do”. And furthermore, in this transformation, she says, “I let go of so much to write the poems and when they formed a book, I felt a huge release. They became part of the world.” 

These poems are filled with political insight, beauty and horror, mind body juxtaposition, and a deep yearning that is cut with honest gratitude and reflection. There is a music in all of her lines that leaves the carved space of a loved one. And at the same time this is a space filled with memories of saturated wholeness. An attempt to share the intimate love that although all at once lost, also became shared.

Erika Lutzner has written one book, While Everything Slipped Away From Me (Calypso Editions) and five chapbooks; four with dancing girl press and one with Kattywompus Press. Her work can also be found in journals such as Jet Fuel Review and Harpy Hybrid.  She is the publisher of Scapegoat Review, an online journal. She grew up in Garrett Park MD, next to Porcupine Woods and behind the train tracks. She is a former violinist and chef and loves cats.

https://www.scapegoatreview.org/

  • What were the first inspirations that made you desire to become a writer?

When my husband died, I started keeping a journal. I thought I was journaling, but my mother said that I was writing poems. I stopped, took a look and realized I could write poems. And it helped me so much with my grief to write about what was happening to me. I feel tongue tied much of the time and writing helps me to ‘speak’. I was told I was inarticulate as a child and writing made me coherent.  I could say the things I needed to say. 

  • Who have been mentor writers in your career?

Ilya Kaminsky, Paul Celan, Yusef Komunyakaa, Nin Andrews, Shel Silverstein, Carson McCullers, Anne Sexton, Maurice Sendak and so so many others. For me, whether I meet a writer or if he/she is alive doesn’t matter. I take so much from their writing. The exception being Ilya Kaminsky. I learned an immense amount from working with him. He taught me a different way of thinking about writing, thinking, and poetry.

  • How has your own work changed over time and why?

I have started writing centos and that is a whole new genre for me. I started writing them because I had so many lines of poems I loved saved up and I was having trouble being creative. It gave me a new outlet for creativity. I am a musical writer but over time, I have learned not to rhyme, although I throw them in from time to time. I am writing more surreal poetry and also writing about new subjects but always with a dark edge.

  • Have you been influenced by different genres, and if so how?

I would say that tragedy and horror have influenced me quite a bit. I like to write things that are full of horror at the same time as being haunting and have beauty in them. Music is a huge influence on me. When I wrote this book, I listened to jazz, especially Miles Davis while I wrote so that has also impacted my writing. I love humor but I can only get it into my writing infrequently. I wish I could more.  I’ve been asked to write love poems but except for the book on Jon, which I consider a love story, I have a lot of trouble writing them.

  • What are your plans for the future?

I would love to write more political poetry. And definitely more centos. I don’t know if I have another book in me, but definitely a few chapbooks.

  • What are your views on writing by women as it has occurred in the past twenty years?

Everyday women writers are becoming more prolific. Their voices are growing. There are so many strong women writers. So many more than in the past. Their voices are finally being heard.

  • Who are promising women writers to look at in the future?

Dianne Seuss and Diannely Antigua are two brilliant women writers.

  • If you were asked to create a flexible label of yourself as a writer, what would it be?

I write juxtaposing beauty and horror. I write about what I know; death and evocative imaging; bitter truth. 

  • In While Everything Slipped Away, we are faced with the destitute field and aftermath of 911 both literally and psychologically. Your husband was a computer programmer killed in the rescue attempts. For you then, 911 was both public and private. In this question I would like for you to focus on the private and how this was negotiated, one of which is detachment. We read, “Regret is the color of blood – the color of blood splattered.” (16) And “my left eye is / somewhere on Main Street or maybe it’s / still in the mulberry stained cup.” (29) Spiraling into, “They amputated your thighs from my hips.” (36) Was there a difference between writing it all down on the page and later constructing, editing, and crafting each poem? What was your writing process and did you experience any enlightenment through these acts of radical examination and self-discovery?

I was so raw when I wrote these poems that I didn’t think about public vs private. A lot of the poems are surreal. That was a form of detachment. I had to do it in order to keep sane. I don’t know that I really had a process other than spewing out all that was in my cluttered mind. I definitely had some form of enlightenment. Writing the worst things you possibly can, it brings truth forward. I was faced with my worst fears, and I survived. I discovered I was a lot stronger than I knew. I didn’t know any other way than to write what was in my mind. It was therapeutic.

In my process, I just wrote without thinking about the outcome. I couldn’t think about it considering the topic. I wrote about grief as a way to get it out of my system as a way to grieve. It ended up being very public but that wasn’t my intention. If I had thought about the very public aspect, I probably could not have written it at all. After he died, I kept to myself and only talked to a couple of people about his death. I was extremely private in my grief until I wasn’t.

  • It is impossible not to address the political as well as the personal in your book. As well as the micro and at the same time macro all-encompassing entrapment of this occasion. At one point we read, “This country is run by a man who sends men and women to war over oil // America needs more sugar in her diet. / my husband dies in 2001 // The President says: “The Middle East is responsible” (23). How were you able to address the political messaging? What was the function by including it in your work? Did you learn anything from these actions of resistance in the visibility and sharing of your experience? Has the self-reflection of these issues changed over time and how do you feel about poetry being political?

I wasn’t thinking about private vs public at the time. I was vomiting out thoughts. I was writing love letters to Jon. Later, it became more difficult when everyone ‘celebrated’ 9/11. I had and still do have a difficult time with that. Because it is such a private thing for me. But at the time when I was writing, I just kept writing everything that was in my mind. Some people really related to my poems which made the visibility worth it to me.

I don’t believe in war. I used to believe in capital punishment until Jon died. Then I stopped believing because it would never bring him back and would just be more murder. I wanted horrible things to happen to Bin Laden though. Didn’t make sense in my mind. I put a lot of blame on him. I didn’t believe in God when Jon died. Now I have become spiritual because I feel there must be something more, something else. There definitely was a bigger picture in terms of what happens to us when we die. I thought all politicians were horrible people. That the WTC could be bombed before and we did nothing to catch the criminals and then 3000 people died. It was overwhelming to me. As for Trump, like I said he didn’t have anything to do with it but I would say today he reminds me of Hitler and we are letting this happen with him. It astounds me and saddens me and creates a lot of fear in me.

  • In While Everything Slipped Away, intimacy and death hold an interchangeable exchange in the 911 movements of sorrow. Grocery Shopping, is “More intimate than sex / I do it with everyone / Harder to choose the perfect peach / Then to give a good blow job.” (48) This gives insight into how you were forced to face the public and private sphere of the towers and your love sacrificed in its destruction. All the while in an attempt to protect the public. You remind us that the emotional and innovative value we feel in our lives must be centered in physical reality. And, that intimacy and grief is indeed a public as much as private act. You write, “tell me how to capture sadness.” (51) How were you able to revolutionize your own will, without allowing it to dissolve your healing and spirit in such a public and private way? Can you speak more to this idea of your private grief and the public grief around you? Did your personal and public grief collide in any way? Were there different stages of writing and relating?

I actually felt better the more I wrote. I did not think of the private/public aspects very much when I was writing. I found writing to be cathartic. It allowed me to heal because I got out the horror of what was in my mind at the same time as writing about my love for Jon. I am actually a super private person but I don’t think I could have survived without writing this book. I just didn’t think about the public too much as I wrote. And in general, when I write, I tend not to think about the public. If I did, I would be stuck. I could not write. I had a really rough childhood, and I do write about it some. But because my parents are still alive, I do think about the effect it will have on them. It doesn’t stop me from writing, but it gives me cause. With this book, because I thought of it as a love letter, I didn’t have problems writing about Jon. I was so angry and sad and full of grief when I wrote it that I just said what was in my mind. And I wrote honestly because that is all I know how to do. When people ask me about poems at readings, I tend to get very tight lipped. I want the work to speak for itself. I don’t want to share my private self with the audience except through my writing. There, I will bare it all.

The editing was very intentional. It was very different than the writing of the poems. Some poems I wrote in forms while others were free verse. The poem told me what to do. I wanted to have well rounded poems. I started out writing poems of grief and Ilya Kaminsky told me I was writing a book. Then he said that the poems were actually one long poem so I worked with that and cut up the poems. It was all intentional. There was a lot of musicality involved in the writing and splitting up of the poems.

When Ilya told me I was writing a book, the work went from private to public. I realized all the poems were interconnected and could become something more. I wrote a book of grief, love and elegies. Once they were part of the book, I felt they could enter the public and I could still maintain my privacy. I didn’t have to share more of myself than I wanted to. I let go of so much to write the poems and when they formed a book, I felt a huge release. They became part of the world.

BNI