Culture
Mpetshi Perricard's serve aced Wimbledon. His best friend – and one opponent – knew how to stop it
Follow live coverage of the ninth day of Wimbledon 2024 today
WIMBLEDON — Over the course of seven stunning days, it has become the most lethal shot in tennis.
It’s a serve which comes off the racket of a French 21-year-old named Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard, and the player waiting for it needs to hit it back over the net.
Or, get, cajole, persuade, will, pray it back over.
It’s a rocket blast that can be hard to see, much less get a racket on, let alone return over a piece of mesh 3ft high from 39ft away.
As for making a quality return to take control of a point, or doing it enough times to win a game when Mpetshi Perricard is serving? For seven days, that looked like an impossibility for everyone in the draw.
Except, maybe, for the one player left in the draw who already knows how to pick the Mpetshi Perricard service lock. He’s another Frenchman, a year younger than Mpetshi Perricard, who is having the breakout Grand Slam run that so many have been expecting of him for more than a year.
That would be Arthur Fils, Mpetshi Perricard’s best friend since the two were 10-year-old standouts palling around in France’s national tennis training program. But Fils isn’t about to share any of the secrets he has picked up over all those years with the rest of the field.
Some numbers. Mpetshi Perricard, who is 6 ft 8 (203cm), has hit 105 aces in three matches, including 51 in his first-round win over Sebastian Korda, No. 20 seed here at the All England Club and one of the world’s better grass court players.
Mpetshi Perricard starting his motion (Ben Stansall/AFP via Getty Images)
He’s winning 85 per cent of his first-serve points. He’s lost three sets but only one that hasn’t gone to a tiebreaker. He’s tied with Ben Shelton for the fastest serve in the tournament at 140mph but even Shelton puts Mpetshi Perricard’s serve in a different class than his, in part because the Frenchman’s second serve can come across the net at 128mph sometimes.
“Ridiculous,” is how Shelton describes the Mpetshi Perricard offering.
“He basically hits two first serves.”
The status of the big serve, or flat bomb, or boom boom if you’re Boris Becker, has declined in the last two decades. These are not the days of Pete Sampras and so many like him, who sailed to Grand Slam titles on a diet of unreturned serves and tiebreaks won when they needed to, but more often just got one game on the opponent’s serve and considered their work done until the scoreboard told them that they had to start a new set.
GO DEEPER
‘They slow things down in their minds’: How tennis players return 130mph serves
Four men called Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray are mostly responsible for that decline. If you serve a ball faster than 135mph and your first sight when you come out of the motion is the ball you just hit arriving very hard and fast at your ankles, seemingly harder and faster, your days of winning tennis matches are likely on the way out.
In contemporary tennis, the word on people’s lips is “servebot”: an at least mildly derogatory and definitely apathetic term for a player who is essentially unbreakable because their serve is so good, but who is also essentially unlikeable because a hypereffective trebuchet for tennis balls is basically all they have.
Mpetshi Perricard is not that guy. He can move. His volley stings. He has studied videos of the biggest servers, especially John Isner, but watching Ivo Karlovic, who was about seven feet tall, is “a little boring,” he said.
Mpetshi Perricard’s net game, touch and volleying are well-suited to grass (Clive Brunskill/Getty Images)
For those seven days at Wimbledon, Fils and Mpetshi Perricard were living out a dream together while trying very hard to not dream; to not think past the next match, even the next set, or game or point that each of them will play.
They are constantly texting each other, and they eat dinner together at tournaments just about every night if their schedules allow. Mpetshi Perricard quickly received Fils’ text after the latter beat Roman Safiullin to make the second week of the a Grand Slam for the first time.
Mpetshi Perricard’s coach, Emmanuel Planque, said no one on the planet has spent more time with Mpetshi Perricard on a tennis court than Fils has.
Fils said Planque was 100 per cent right, which means he has seen and returned more of Mpetshi Perricard’s serves than anyone on the planet.
“He teaches me how to return,” Fils said of Mpetshi Perricard, after a freak knee injury forced No.7 seed Hubert Hurkacz to retire from their second-round match, with Fils holding match point in the fourth set.
“It’s good practice.”
On the eighth day, the reality of professional tennis forced them to wake up. Fils succumbed to Alex de Minaur in the fourth round, a player he beat at the Barcelona Open in April, but on clay, which is the Australian’s least-favorite surface.
De Minaur, the No. 9 seed, loves grass because it allows him to capitalize on his speed and sublime movement while keeping his hard, flat shots nice and low. He used that to full effect on Fils, despite an admirable rally from the Frenchman in the fourth set, winning 6-2, 6-4, 3-6, 6-3.
Fils’ incredibly impressive performance against Hurkacz got him to the third round (Rob Newell/Camerasport via Getty Images)
Mpetshi Perricard faced Lorenzo Musetti, the rising Italian who has quietly put together a solid grass season.
Musetti was a semifinalist in Stuttgart and a finalist at Queen’s, and this is his first Wimbledon second week. Despite saying he felt lost on the stuff a year ago, Musetti has a higher win-rate on grass and clay than on hard courts, and he has a game that suits the surface too. Not just a knifing backhand slice and a good serve, but an economy of movement when returning serve that takes his complicated forehand and one-handed backhand out of the equation. He chips and carves and blocks the ball back, ready to put his tools to good use in rallies, where they will actually be effective.
“I don’t know, I’m just focused on the next one,” Mpetshi Perricard said when asked how far he could go after beating Emil Ruusuvuori of Finland in four sets on Saturday.
“I already lost to Musetti, so I don’t know.”
Sure, but Mpetshi Perricard already lost at Wimbledon, too. He lost his final match in qualifying to Maxime Janvier, another Frenchman, in four sets — three of which went to a tiebreak. Then, Mpetshi Perricard ended up with one of the “lucky loser” spots that arise when a player withdraws at the last minute. He was in the locker room after a practice session last Saturday when a tournament official called him to ask if he’d like to play in the Wimbledon main draw for the first time.
Was he nervous? Not at all, he said. A good opportunity, no pressure, a great experience.
Since then, Mpetshi Perricard and his serve have become unstoppable forces with no immovable objects in sight. He hits that first serve like he is smacking a rock with a frying pan, then watches it slash to the corners of the service box. Opponents just let their eyes drop to the grass and move to the other side of the court.
Mpetshi Perricard’s serve was similarly effective at Queen’s, the Wimbledon warm-up event (James Fearn/Getty Images)
Fils doesn’t have a bad serve himself but their bodies and their games are completely different.
Fils, who grew up near Paris, is an all-court player with a build in in the goldilocks zone of the all-time greats. A little over six-feet tall, a perfectly crafted athlete who desperately wanted to play striker and score goals for Paris Saint-Germain, but wasn’t quite good enough.
Fils is into a Grand Slam second week for the first time (Mike Hewitt / Getty Images)
Mpetshi Perricard, who is from Lyon, is in the mould of the new generation of tennis humans like Alexander Zverev and Daniil Medvedev. Closer to seven feet tall than six, they look a bit out of place on a tennis court, until they start serving, their long arms and spines giving them extra leverage to snap balls down from on high.
Mpetshi Perricard also played a little soccer, dabbling in basketball and swimming before focusing on tennis, mostly because he was better at it than the other sports and believed he could exploit his strength and size while learning the movement.
That part of the game is still a work in progress for Mpetshi Perricard, Planque said. His serve has been his biggest weapon since he and Fils were pre-teens working with Planque and other national coaches at France’s Tennis Federation, along with a few other top players their age, including Arthur Cazaux and Luca Van Assche. They are a bit like the young and coming Italians, led by Jannik Sinner, who pushed each other through their junior years and at regional tournaments on the lower rungs of the sport.
Planque knows that Mpetshi Perricard is always going ride on his serve.
“He doesn’t want to play long rallies,” he said. “The goal is to be aggressive from the first shot.”
He also wants him coming to the net at every chance, even serving and volleying, a dying art that most players only use as a surprise tactic.
“I’m an old-style coach,” Planque said.
Old-style too is one of Mpetshi Perricard’s groundstrokes. Like Musetti, he is the rare young player who uses a one-handed backhand — even though he now wishes he didn’t, looking enviously at Isner’s two-hander on those videos. As Musetti learned, making service returns with one hand is a struggle.
Mpetshi Perricard’s booming serve, one-handed backhand and soft net game feel like a throwback (Glyn Kirk/AFP via Getty Images)
And while his first serve is the star, improving his second was one of his main goals coming into this season. He crushes the first ball and if he misses, he tries to do something a little different with the second one, which is averaging 117 mph. Maybe he’ll put a little spin on it or go down the middle or into the body, rather than going out wide, which he so often does with his first ball.
“It works for now,” he said last week after the win over Ruusuvuori. “We’ll see if, against the top player, it’s going to work.”
He did see, and he didn’t like what was in front of his eyes. Musetti won the serve battle, taking 79 per cent of first-serve points to Mpetshi Perricard’s 67, amd 84 per cent of second-serve points to Mpetshi Perricard’s 53.
He won the return battle too. 32 per cent of first-serve return points to Mpetshi Perricard’s 20 per cent; 33 per cent of second-serve return points to Mpetshi Perricard’s 16 per cent.
After the match, Musetti agreed that facing the serve is like being a goalkeeper in a penalty shootout, and said that his coach had explained that to break, he would need to have the cushion of 0-40, not relying on 30-40 or even 15-40 as a chance, because it could so easily be snatched away. Musetti had to pick his moment of comfort, before the discomfort began again in the next game.
That’s not just for now. Mpetshi Perricard’s serve looks set to be discomfiting top returners for many years to come.
As for Fils, he might be getting some texts from other players soon.
(Top photo: John Walton / PA Images via Getty Images)
Culture
Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden
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.
Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:
The More Loving One
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
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.
Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:
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.
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.
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:
Admirer as I think I am
Of stars that do not give a damn,
I cannot, now I see them, say
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.
The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well That, for all they care, I can go to hell,
Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.
Your first task: Learn the first four lines!
Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.
Monday
Love, the cosmos and everything in between, all in 16 lines.
Tuesday (Available tomorrow)
What’s love got to do with it?
Wednesday (Available April 22)
How to write about love? Be a little heartsick (and the best poet of your time).
Thursday (Available April 23)
Are we alone in the universe? Does it matter?
Friday (Available April 24)
You did it! You’re a star.
Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.
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.
Culture
Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books
Literature
‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot
Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?
“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.
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.
‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips
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.
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.”
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
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.
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.
‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders
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.
We’d all have read it by now — right?
‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf
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.
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.
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.
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.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
Culture
6 Poems You Should Know by Heart
Literature
‘Prayer’ (1985) by Galway Kinnell
Whatever happens. Whatever
what is is is what
I want. Only that. But that.
“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.”
“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?’”
‘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.
“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.
These interviews have been edited and condensed.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
-
Texas1 second ago
Texas A&M Forward Transfer Seemingly on Visit to See Lady Vols Basketball | Rocky Top Insider
-
Utah6 minutes agoGolden Knights vs. Mammoth Game 1 prediction: NHL odds, picks, best bets for Stanley Cup Playoffs
-
Vermont12 minutes agoVermont lawmakers reject digital lottery initiative – Valley News
-
Virginia18 minutes agoVirginia’s special election redistricting battle is next week and has national impacts
-
Washington24 minutes ago
The Church of Jesus Christ has announced its 384th temple
-
Wisconsin30 minutes agoWisconsin authorities put total arrests from clashes at beagle breeding facility at about 25
-
West Virginia36 minutes agoThis week in West Virginia history: April 19-25
-
Wyoming42 minutes agoIdaho semitruck driver involved in fatal accident at Wyoming FlyingJ – East Idaho News