And now we come to that interesting life passage where you spot an interesting, well-funded theme anthology helmed by someone who was once your friend, but whom you haven’t seen for more than twenty years — and who abused your relationship so badly at the time that mutual friends reacted with open relief when you kicked him to the curb.
The word, which you did not know at the time, is “gaslighting.”
You were sufficiently insecure at the time to greet the dissolution of your friendship with mixed feelings and more than a little guilt, but as the years have turned into decades, and you have become more assured and self-confident and self-aware, more complete in your being, you have come to the conclusion that there’s no doubt: you were well rid of the guy. On the other hand, it has been more than twenty years, closing in on twenty-five, and this does look like an interesting project. What do you do?
Assume that you did swallow your pride and submit a story.
On the one hand, he probably wouldn’t reject it on sight, just based on the byline.
On the other hand, he might.
In all truth, you likely don’t even want to give him the satisfaction of seeing your name on a manuscript, as that puts you in the position of petitioner, crawling back to him after a silence that you have been comfortable with since Clinton’s first term. There’s also the very real truth that, this blip aside, your career has advanced faster and further than his; if you sent him something, you might well turn out to be the most distinguished contributor to his project, and it’s hard to work out whether that would be satisfying or galling, for you and for him.
Even if it all worked out with absolute chilly professionalism, down to the signing of contracts and the exchange of story notes, do you really want this person back in your life for a high word rate? Probably not.
Now, you could be a total asshole and not just refrain from sending him a story, but identify him by name while posting these thoughts. You could really hurt him, and enjoy some fine belated revenge, by doing so.
But you don’t actually wish him ill. You have indeed taken a little, guarded pleasure over distant reminders that he is still alive, and around, and enjoying a few little successes and some major ones, though not as many as yours. Honestly, you wish him well, even if in this case that means well, but far away from you. So you post these musings blind, just to illustrate your thought processes, and you close with the specific message to any uninvolved professionals who might, beating the odds, connect these words to the personality you’re talking about, that there’s no reason for anyone to join your personal boycott out of misplaced solidarity. The break was personal, not professional. Nobody else should have a problem.
It sounds like an interesting project. Someday, you confess, you might even bring yourself to read it.
Comment By: Alex Jay Berman
December 21st, 2015 at 12:19 pm
My thought is, “Eh. A market is a market.”
That being thought and now said, I’m just some schmuck, and you’re the award-winning and very good writer.
Comment By: Morgan Smith
December 21st, 2015 at 12:19 pm
Of course, as you have changed – they might have changed as well. Maybe they look back on what they did with real regret. Maybe they are aware that they screwed up, and wish that they could make amends, but hesitate to take that first step.
It isn’t *super* likely (because abusers very seldom find reasons to change the pattern) but it IS possible.
Comment By: John Beaty
December 21st, 2015 at 12:19 pm
I heard some who was doing the “lovingkindness” meditation say, “I wish him well, so he stays the hell away from me.” Seems apropos.
Comment By: Adam-Troy Castro
December 21st, 2015 at 1:20 pm
Morgan,
I mean it when I say that I donât wish him ill, and therefore will not name him; on a professional level, I am sure heâs an honorable guy. I genuinely smile at news of his accomplishments, and indeed envy a couple of them, though I am also honest when I say that I have gone much further than he has.
Itâs just that â and circumstances do force me to be vague â I count as among the key moments that mark the difference between being a technical adult and actually growing up, a process that actually still continues, as the sudden epiphany on a day when heâd pretty much left me in a pit of bottomless self-loathing that I did not have to trust his perception of things, and could indeed reject it in favor of my own. Not long afterward, my immediate reaction upon his uttering of a single sentence that I did not need his insanity in my life, and that if I had to jettison an entire social group we shared in order to amputate his influence, I would. (It proved not necessary.) Thatâs how serious it was.
So, yeah, the thought of willingly placing myself back in his orbit is an unpleasant one. But there are other people in publishing I want nothing to do with, people who I erected barriers against, some pre-emptively, some this year, who I bear much greater animus.
I want this guy to prosper. But theyâre the Anatevkan blessing for the Czar.
Comment By: Queenie Chiasitiwe
December 22nd, 2015 at 5:35 pm
“In all truth, you likely don’t even want to give him the satisfaction of seeing your name on a manuscript, as that puts you in the position of petitioner, crawling back to him after a silence that you have been comfortable with since Clinton’s first term.”
Humans being what they are: I suspect a trap. Not that it’s necessarily a trap by premeditated design, but if you stick your foot in it and it chops you off at the ankle, who cares if it was put there in purpose? I say you should pass, ATC! Unless the possible upside outweighs the probably downside by a head-spinning ratio…