Connect with us

Culture

NFL coaches pick the Super Bowl winner: Why they think Kansas City has the edge

Published

on

NFL coaches pick the Super Bowl winner: Why they think Kansas City has the edge

For the second consecutive season, the Kansas City Chiefs enter the Super Bowl as an underdog. They defeated the favored Philadelphia Eagles last season and will try to knock off the favored San Francisco 49ers on Sunday.

Will it feel like an upset if Kansas City makes it happen? The Chiefs possess the ultimate edge in quarterback Patrick Mahomes, who is healthier this season than last and has played brilliantly through most of the playoffs.

Each year at this time, I ask a collection of NFL coaches which team they are picking to win the Super Bowl and why. Our panel fared pretty well last season, with the first coach correctly picking the Chiefs to win by three.

Four coaches weighed in with predictions this year. We pick up the conversation with a defensive coach’s insights into what bothers 49ers quarterback Brock Purdy, and whether the Chiefs are well-equipped to exploit this specific vulnerability.

GO DEEPER

Advertisement

Super Bowl 2024 betting guide: Expert picks, props, analysis, and all the info you need

Defensive coach

The Fighting Taylor Swifts are playing better defense than the Niners right now, and that could be the difference. San Francisco has to play better on defense to win. The 49ers are still dangerous and violent, but they are giving up more yards and plays. I think they will play pretty good, but if you ask in my gut, I’d still think Kansas City pulls it out.

Affecting Brock Purdy is one of the biggest keys to this game. The teams that give Purdy problems are the ones that are able to affect him in the pocket. Cleveland was able to do that. Detroit could not affect him that way, but the Chiefs can. They do a really good job of getting their hands up. That’s a big deal against Brock. They can do a really good job of affecting not only the longer throws but the quicker throws at all the different launch angles.

Purdy’s strength is how strong his lower body is. George Kittle’s quote was really funny when he said Purdy looks like one of those little water dragons running across the water. That is exactly what Purdy looks like. His legs are strong as hell. But when you can push the pocket to his front foot, he struggles. It is hard to get there because sometimes they throw it fast, but I think the Chiefs have an ability to do that.

When people get to Purdy’s front foot, the ball will tail and drag or drift. Like the one he threw into the Packer guy’s belly. He couldn’t get full twist out of his hips and it floated. It is easier said than done to affect Purdy in this way. The 49ers know what they are doing, and Purdy is really good, and Kyle is good at calling it, but I think the Chiefs with four (rushers) can do that some of the time.

Advertisement

(Chiefs defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo) is going to pressure and also play his two-high combination coverages. It is hard to play combination coverages when the 49ers get everybody out. They have positionless players. (Christian) McCaffrey is going to be a wideout, Deebo (Samuel) is going to be in the backfield and 44 (Kyle Juszczyk) is going to be everywhere. When you play them in split-safety defense and they can see it and get it out, the matchups can be really good.

The Chiefs do not always tackle well when you get them in space. Steve has done such a good job this year of not letting that happen. In other years, you could isolate their guys. All of Kyle’s guys are 6 feet or 6-1, 215 and can run after contact with great hands and anger. That would be their advantage if they can find ways to get around the D-line and then get those guys going.

I also think San Francisco will attack the edges in the run game, like Kyle did with Atlanta versus New England in the Super Bowl. If you can get around Kansas City’s interior and force guys other than (Justin) Reid to tackle, you can do some things. But you gotta get around their big guys. I think Kyle will find a way to do that, but I trust the Chiefs a little more.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Inside 49ers-Chiefs Super Bowl matchup: What to watch when the Niners have the ball

Defensive coordinator No. 1

This is going to be a really interesting game because Spags has that defense rolling, and I think it’s going to create problems. They’ll be able to get after Brock Purdy. Spags will come with some good schemes to at least make Purdy think, throw his rhythm off.

Advertisement

The 49ers, that whole team is built off a front-running mentality. When they play with a lead, they just pounce and they’re better, they’re more athletic, their talent shines. When they play from behind, it is usually different. Against Detroit, they came back. I’ll give them credit there, but Detroit royally screwed that up. What happened was not repeatable.

What you have to do with the 49ers is match them early. I would take the ball and try to score. Green Bay did that. I know it is only 7-0 early and doesn’t matter, but if you score early, you are not in response to them.

Mahomes will make the right plays when they need to. He’s been protecting the ball, which he hadn’t been doing the first half of the season as much. People have to honor Rashee Rice now. He has developed. MVS (Marquez Valdes-Scantling) has become more consistent.

The 49ers’ defense has shown throughout the playoffs they’ll get the ball moved on them. They don’t have many answers. You hit their soft spots and don’t let their rushers get going and they don’t get takeaways, you are fine. The coverage system isn’t elaborate. They’ve got one good corner, one safety playing really well.

When you have a guy like Andy Reid over there with Patrick Mahomes, they’re going to find those soft spots. Andy is OK taking 5 (yards) from Travis Kelce on a catch-and-run. It’s just hard to go against Reid and Mahomes.

Advertisement
go-deeper

GO DEEPER

What makes the Andy Reid-Patrick Mahomes partnership as special as any great coach-QB combo?

Defensive coordinator No. 2

The better team is probably San Francisco, but the Eagles were probably a better team last year, and it came down to Patrick Mahomes.

For San Francisco, so much of it is game flow. It’s not to say that Brock Purdy can’t come from behind. I’m not trying to say that. But I think they are a team that has a much better chance of winning when they play their game, whereas the Chiefs might find a way to win in any type of game a little bit better.

That is what happened in 2019 when those teams played. Kansas City was down two scores, and then all of a sudden, they are up two scores in the fourth quarter. It was unbelievable.

San Francisco came back to beat Green Bay and Detroit, but they were drastically better than those teams, especially Detroit. Detroit is not a team, in my opinion, that can hang with San Francisco. Detroit not being able to put that game away shows how much better of a team San Francisco was.

Advertisement

I could see San Fran’s defense not being dominant against the Chiefs. I don’t know if they are a dominant defense like they were with DeMeco Ryans and Robert Saleh. It doesn’t feel like they are all that. Deep down, I’m saying Chiefs.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Inside 49ers-Chiefs Super Bowl matchup: What to watch when KC has the ball

The 49ers’ offense is hard to defend because they have skill guys that can create yards after the catch and they have a quarterback who can read defenses very fast and put the ball in a spot accurately. Their dropback game is very timing-based, whereas Kansas City is not that.

Mahomes’ ability to play on or off schedule could be the difference. What makes Mahomes good is that he’s a great off-schedule quarterback who does not have to play off-schedule to be great. I always felt that was the thing with Russell Wilson. When everyone said he was great, I felt that to be a high-level quarterback, you still have to be able to throw it on time. Mahomes can do that.

Purdy’s not bad off-schedule because he’s got some slipperiness to him. He just doesn’t play as much off-time. Mahomes is elite off-time, and I think that’s Kansas City’s edge.

Advertisement

Offensive coach

Kansas City surprisingly with (Isiah) Pacheco runs the ball pretty well, and they’ve been more willing to run it, and I think that does take some pressure off Mahomes. It has served their defense well. That has probably made them a more complete team.

San Francisco gave up 280 yards against Detroit in the first half. Maybe they were surprised by Detroit, but they still haven’t figured out how to slow down the perimeter runs. Pacheco is a slasher, and if you got him on the edge, I think he would be good, despite being more of an inside runner.

Detroit just kept pinning the ends and tossing the ball, and the 49ers’ secondary was late in supporting. I’m sure San Francisco is going to make an adjustment for the crack toss plays. They just have to get someone up in faster support. That is not a major adjustment, but they probably will be reluctant to do it because of Mahomes.

I like Kansas City. I want to like San Francisco, but I think in these games, the quarterback matchup is pretty big, and this is a big separation between these guys.

Christian McCaffrey and Deebo Samuel, those two guys could be enough to overcome that, but I don’t think so in this game.

Advertisement

Final thoughts

If the 49ers win, surely someone associated with their team will claim no one gave them a chance. It won’t be a huge stretch, despite oddsmakers favoring the 49ers, because so many people in and around the game are picking the Chiefs. I took Kansas City by a 24-20 margin in our staff picks. It wasn’t a pick against the 49ers as much as it was a fear of picking against Mahomes. I’ve sided with him in every week of the playoffs. Why stop now?

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

With latest Super Bowl run, Chiefs’ would-be dynasty echoes ‘Patriot Way’

(Top photos of Patrick Mahomes and Brock Purdy: Patrick Smith, Kevin Sabitus / Getty Images)

Advertisement

Culture

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Published

on

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Advertisement

Let’s memorize a poem! Not because it’s good for us or because we think we should, but because it’s fun, a mental challenge with a solid aesthetic reward. You can amuse yourself, impress your friends and maybe discover that your way of thinking about the world — or even, as you’ll see, the universe — has shifted a bit.

Over the next five days, we’ll look closely at a great poem by one of our favorite poets, and we’ll have games, readings and lots of encouragement to help you learn it by heart. Some of you know how this works: Last year more Times readers than we could count memorized a jaunty 18-line recap of an all-night ferry ride. (If you missed that adventure, it’s not too late to embark. The ticket is still valid.)

This time, we’re training our telescopes on W.H. Auden’s “The More Loving One” — a clever, compact meditation on love, disappointment and the night sky.

Advertisement

Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:

Advertisement

The More Loving One by W.H. Auden 

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

But on earth indifference is the least 

Advertisement

We have to dread from man or beast. 

Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet

In four short lines we get a brisk, cynical tour of the universe: hell and the heavens, people and animals, coldness and cruelty. Commonplace observations — that the stars are distant; that life can be dangerous — are wound into a charming, provocative insight. The tone is conversational, mixing decorum and mild profanity in a manner that makes it a pleasure to keep reading.

Advertisement

Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:

Advertisement

How should we like it were stars to burn 

With a passion for us we could not return? 

If equal affection cannot be, 

Let the more loving one be me. 

Advertisement

Tracy K. Smith, poet

These lines abruptly shift the focus from astronomy to love, from the universal to the personal. Imagine how it would feel if the stars had massive, unrequited crushes on us! The speaker, couching his skepticism in a coy, hypothetical question, seems certain that we wouldn’t like this at all.

This certainty leads him to a remarkable confession, a moment of startling vulnerability. The poem’s title, “The More Loving One,” is restated with sweet, disarming frankness. Our friend is wearing his heart on his well-tailored sleeve.

Advertisement

The poem could end right there: two stanzas, point and counterpoint, about how we appreciate the stars in spite of their indifference because we would rather love than be loved.

But the third stanza takes it all back. Here’s Alison Bechdel reading it:

Advertisement

Admirer as I think I am 

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

I cannot, now I see them, say 

Advertisement

I missed one terribly all day. 

Alison Bechdel, graphic novelist

The speaker downgrades his foolish devotion to qualified admiration. No sooner has he established himself as “the more loving one” than he gives us — and perhaps himself — reason to doubt his ardor. He likes the stars fine, he guesses, but not so much as to think about them when they aren’t around.

Advertisement

The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

And feel its total dark sublime, 

Though this might take me a little time. 

Advertisement

Yiyun Li, author

Wounded defiance gives way to a more rueful, resigned state of mind. If the universe were to snuff out its lights entirely, the speaker reckons he would find beauty in the void. A starless sky would make him just as happy.

Though perhaps, like so many spurned lovers before and after, he protests a little too much. Every fan of popular music knows that a song about how you don’t care that your baby left you is usually saying the opposite.

Advertisement

The last line puts a brave face on heartbreak.

So there you have it. In just 16 lines, this poem manages to be somber and funny, transparent and elusive. But there’s more to it than that. There is, for one thing, a voice — a thinking, feeling person behind those lines.

Advertisement

W.H. Auden in 1962. Sam Falk/The New York Times

When he wrote “The More Loving One,” in the 1950s, Wystan Hugh Auden was among the most beloved writers in the English-speaking world. Before this week is over there will be more to say about Auden, but like most poets he would have preferred that we give our primary attention to the poem.

Advertisement

Its structure is straightforward and ingenious. Each of the four stanzas is virtually a poem unto itself — a complete thought expressed in one or two sentences tied up in a neat pair of couplets. Every quatrain is a concise, witty observation: what literary scholars call an epigram.

This makes the work of memorization seem less daunting. We can take “The More Loving One” one epigram at a time, marvelling at how the four add up to something stranger, deeper and more complex than might first appear.

Advertisement

So let’s go back to the beginning and try to memorize that insouciant, knowing first stanza. Below you’ll find a game we made to get you started. Give it a shot, and come back tomorrow for more!

Your first task: Learn the first four lines!

Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.

Question 1/6

Advertisement

Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

Advertisement

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.

Advertisement

Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.

Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.

Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Published

on

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Literature

‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?

Advertisement

“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.

“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.

Advertisement

It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)

Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.

All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.

Advertisement

‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.

Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.

Advertisement

Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:

“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”

Advertisement

The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.

‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.

Advertisement

It’s science fiction. All right?

I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.

“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.

Advertisement

‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”

Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.

Advertisement

We’d all have read it by now — right?

‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.

Advertisement

Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.

Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.

Advertisement

I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.

As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.

It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.

Advertisement

It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).

As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.

Advertisement

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading

Culture

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Published

on

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Literature

‘Prayer’ (1985) by Galway Kinnell

Advertisement

Whatever happens. Whatever
what is is is what
I want. Only that. But that.

Galway Kinnell in 1970. Photo by LaVerne Harrell Clark, © 1970 Arizona Board of Regents. Courtesy of the University of Arizona Poetry Center

Advertisement

“I typically say Kinnell’s words at the start of my day, as I’m pedaling a traffic-laden path to my office,” says Major Jackson, 57, the author of six books of poetry, including “Razzle Dazzle” (2023). “The poem encourages a calm acceptance of the day’s events but also wants us to embrace the misapprehension and oblivion of life, to avoid probing too deeply for answers to inscrutable questions. I admire what Kinnell does with only 14 words; the repetition of ‘what,’ ‘that’ and ‘is’ would seem to limit the poem’s sentiment but, paradoxically, the poem opens widely to contain all manner of human experience. The three ‘is’es in the middle line give it a symmetry that makes its message feel part of a natural order, and even more convincing. Thanks to the skillful punctuation, pauses and staccato rhythm, a tonal quality of interior reflection emerges. Much like a haiku, it continues after its last words, lingering like the last note played on a piano that slowly fades.”

“Just as I was entering young adulthood, probably slow to claim romantic feelings, a girlfriend copied out a poem by Pablo Neruda and slipped it into an envelope with red lipstick kisses all over it. In turn, I recited this poem. It took me the remainder of that winter to memorize its lines,” says Jackson. “The poem captures the pitch of longing that defines love at its most intense. The speaker in Shakespeare’s most famous sonnet believes the poem creates the beloved, ‘So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, / So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.’ (Sonnet 18). In Rilke’s expressive declarations of yearning, the beloved remains elusive. Wherever the speaker looks or travels, she marks his world by her absence. I find this deeply moving.”

Advertisement

Lucille Clifton in 1995. Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images

“Clifton faced many obstacles, including cancer, a kidney transplant and the loss of her husband and two of her children. Through it all, she crafted a long career as a pre-eminent American poet,” says Jackson. “Her poem ‘won’t you celebrate with me’ is a war cry, an invitation to share in her victories against life’s persistent challenges. The poem is meaningful to all who have had to stare down death in a hospital or had to bereave the passing of close relations. But, even for those who have yet to mourn life’s vicissitudes, the poem is instructive in cultivating resilience and a persevering attitude. I keep coming back to the image of the speaker’s hands and the spirit of steadying oneself in the face of unspeakable storms. She asks in a perfectly attuned gorgeously metrical line, ‘what did i see to be except myself?’”

Advertisement

‘Sonnet 94’ (1609) by William Shakespeare

They that have power to hurt and will do none,
That do not do the thing they most do show,
Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
Unmovèd, cold, and to temptation slow,
They rightly do inherit heaven’s graces
And husband nature’s riches from expense;
They are the lords and owners of their faces,
Others but stewards of their excellence.
The summer’s flower is to the summer sweet,
Though to itself it only live and die;
But if that flower with base infection meet,
The basest weed outbraves his dignity.
For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.

Advertisement

“It’s one of the moments of Western consciousness,” says Frederick Seidel, 90, the author of more than a dozen collections of poetry, including “So What” (2024). “Shakespeare knows and says what he knows.”

“It trombones magnificent, unbearable sorrow,” says Seidel.

“It’s smartass and bitter and bright,” says Seidel.

Advertisement

These interviews have been edited and condensed.

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending