“I am we, we are a year, we year, we are rest, we rest.” 

In winter 2024, Sop had a severe relapse of myalgic encephalomyelitis, also called chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), leaving them housebound in South East London.

That summer, in the days leading up to a friend’s birthday celebration, the artist rested carefully so they would be able to attend. The night before, they started taking what was touted as a “magic” pill for insomnia. They didn’t sleep at all and had to miss the party. But in a sleep-deprived haze, they wrote, as they described in a recent interview [1], “a solidarity rant, a kind of letter to other disabled people stuck indoors.” 

When Shape Arts, a UK disability arts organization, approached Sop with a commission, they decided to adapt the essay into a script for We Year, a mixed-media love letter to others living with energy-limiting conditions. The short film premieres at RestFest—a film festival and virtual space by and for the disability community—as part of a program co-organized by The Remote Body, Resting Up Collective, and Ort Gallery. 

With a poetic voiceover and ethereal soundscape, We Year immerses viewers in a chronic illness flare during a sweltering summer, blending decades-old archival footage from when Sop was well enough to move outside freely with recent phone footage shot at home. Shifting between past and present and between interior and exterior, the experience is at once isolating and unifying, claustrophobic and liberating. 

We Year also features 16mm direct animation, a technique that involves drawing and scratching moving images directly onto film stock rather than recording with a camera. Here, Sop used ink to overlay the orange stress bars from their Garmin watch across the entire film—a constant representation of their body that acts as a symbolic barrier between them and the audience. 

The following interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

When did you begin to think of yourself as an artist? 

I always wanted to be an artist. Even as a kid, when I was asked, “What do you want to be?”, I was like, “An artist!” I honestly have never thought about doing anything else. I grew up in the deep countryside, and there wasn’t much access to contemporary culture, although I was obsessed with music and music magazines. There was this teen music magazine called Smash Hits that I loved, and I made collages and scrapbooks of pop stars. When I was 13, I went to a big retrospective of the massive British artist David Hockney, who just died, and it was the first time that I’d seen contemporary art. It blew my mind, and that’s the first time I remember thinking, “Oh, this is something serious that I want to do.” 

What questions or themes does your art usually explore? 

I find it hard to make work that isn’t about my life and the things that I’m dealing with. What I do always ends up being ultra-personal. That’s not something that a lot of people do, necessarily. The act of living as a chronically ill person means that you have to live in the world in a very different way from people who are not chronically ill. Chronic illness is a fertile area for ideas. You’re living the life and thinking about the life at the same time. If you’re an artist or someone who thinks about things in conceptual ways, you can’t help but try and interpret your life into art-making, projects, or ideas. Everything’s interesting. It’s like living life wonky.

As a chronically ill person,  I can’t do a 9 to 5. I can’t necessarily keep to plans, and I can’t always do basic things, like sometimes even look after myself in a normal  way. The agency that I have is to interrogate what this life means and the challenges that it poses and what is interesting about that. What can I say that’s beyond how I would perhaps describe being sick to a stranger? Like, what’s within that? All of the work that I make—even if it looks not about that—is going to be about that.   

And then the other part of it is that I grew up in the field and was a tomboy covered in mud. My understanding of the world was through nature, and now I’m in a flat without a garden. I can see some trees in the park just over there, but quite often, I’m not well enough to go and hang out in the park. I am pretty obsessed with nature and the fact that I can’t get to it. I can’t really have that life currently.  

In your bio, you describe yourself as “a torn and crooked leaf, a root embedded in the dirt, a shoot reaching to the sky.” Would you please elaborate on what this means? 

When I wrote that bio, I was making work about my body being the same as the microbiome in the soil. “A torn and crooked leaf” is being chronically ill. “A root embedded in the dirt” is really what it sounds like, within the context of that specific work. And the “shoot reaching to the sky”—my work deals with pretty hefty emotions, but there’s always hope. My life is not a miserable life; it is hopeful, and I do believe there’s something so crucial in being chronically ill that you absolutely have to keep hope alive. It takes a lot of work to do that and to get there. It’s not easy, but it’s super important. If you have this restricted life, you absolutely have to shoot for the sky. Because time just goes on.  

What does working in crip time [2] look like for you? What are your long-term goals as an artist? 

If you’re truly working in crip time, it’s fairly impossible to have long-term goals. You haven’t really got a choice when you work. You can do your very best to carve out time or space. Currently, I have about a couple of hours in the early morning when I can manage to do something. My afternoons and evenings—I simply can’t make work then. If you have such a limited time to make work, the amount of work you make is going to be low. It will have to meet your capacity, and that doesn’t fit well with current art market production timelines or expectations. Sometimes, you can’t make something for a year because the thing that you should be working on—and the thing that is your work—is your health. That’s your full-time job.  

I deeply believe that making in crip time actually is truthful to the world. We would probably all be better off if we did. Really, it means making work to your capacity, and that can mean a lot of things. You don’t need to be ill to make to your capacity. 

It’s a more authentic timeline of meeting yourself where you’re at, rather than forcing yourself to meet arbitrary or toxic timelines. 

You haven’t chosen to have chronic illness—you’re forced into doing that. And I don’t think that’s a bad thing necessarily. Asking what would I like to do for my long-term goals—I find it very hard to answer because, first of all, I live, like, day to day and, second, when I think about what my long-term goals would be, it’s from the perspective of someone without a disability because I currently cannot see how I would be able to do more than what I’m doing unless I had an enormous amount of more support. 

How did you decide which media to work with for this project? 

Films and writing have always been the two mediums I mostly turn to, and actually they’re the most accessible things for me to do now, being housebound. When I was asked to make the film, I just didn’t have it at all in my means to film new work or leave the house, so I had to kind of figure out how to make a new work out of what I had, which was this personal essay I wrote about being stuck inside in the summer. I made the film throughout another summer of being stuck inside. A lot of chronically ill people turn their camera or phone or whatever onto their surroundings, so I had bits and bobs that I filmed. When I started making films, I would just film tons of different stuff. I had my little Hi8 video camera around the whole time, so I had lots of little clips that I hadn’t used, and I didn’t actually think that I was ever going to use them for anything. But that obviously wasn’t enough, and I didn’t really want to make a film which was just a film inside my house—there’s plenty of films like that. I had a whole bunch of old footage from the 90s. I digitized all of these tapes a few years ago, and they looked so great. A lot of that stuff was filmed out of the house, and then there were funny effects that I filmed which made it into the films. There’s a lot of blobs of color, which are actually motorway lights and ended up being this really nice kind of texture, which floated over and broke up some of the images.  

Hi8 and MiniDVs are the two cameras I was using in the past, so I have footage from both of those. And then there was 16mm direct animation. Each section of the film has a different animation running over it, but the animation is quite transparent, so it’s always there. It’s textural and has multiple meanings. And then I commissioned my friend to make the soundtrack. 

Would you elaborate on the meaning of the title of the film? 

The thing that’s turned me on most about this film is the fact that I can try and get “to year” and “yearing” adopted as a new way of describing spending all this time being sick. I think the word “year” is long enough for people to imagine, “Whoa, you are sick for a whole year. That’s a really long, unbearable time.” But then you make it into “yearing,” and then it could be even less than a year, but it’s probably closer to a year or multiple years. Then I was interested in what would happen if the years were then broken up with periods of being well, with relapses included as well.  

I find it really tiresome to have to explain the last five years of my life. So to not have to say, “Well, I was sick for a couple of years, housebound and bedbound, and then I got well again, and then I had a relapse”—it’s just like, “I was yearing.” I would love for it to become part of the lexicon of chronic illness.  

What does it mean to have “We Year” screened at RestFest? 

There’s this informal network of crip friends who work with each other. Not everyone works together, but we all know each other and there’s really close friendships within this group. They’re all small, crip-led organizations that have been made pretty much for the same purpose, which is remote events, screenings, and workshops. I was just really keen to connect and uplift all of these organizations. We created this program together, and I’m really proud of it. It’s been a lot of work, but it’s really nice making things with your friends. The access intimacy side of it all is real. Creating or programming with your friends is a very accessible way of making because we all understand each other and our capacities. I’ve said capacities a million times. 

You need to coin a new term for that as well. 

Okay, I’ll get on that for next time. 

We Year, through July 12 (if you start watching on June 28); RestFest Film Festival. “I am we, we are a year, we year, we are rest, we rest.” 

[1] “Interview with artist-filmmaker Sop + a Special Screening of their New Film.” RestFest, 2026,
https://restfest.substack.com/p/interview-with-artist-filmmaker-sop. 
[2] In her 2013 book Feminist, Queer, Crip, disability scholar Alison Kafer writes, “Rather than bend disabled bodies and minds to meet the clock, crip time bends the clock to meet disabled bodies and minds.” 

John O’Connor, whom I happened to interview on May 5, explores a similar dynamic unfolding amid today’s psychedelic renaissance—a movement rife with magical thinking that he sees as something of a religious revival—in his delightful and enlightening new book A Short, Strange Trip: An Untold Story of Magic Mushrooms, Madness, and a Search for the Meaning of Life in the Amazon. 

Some Westerners are appropriating sacred plants while divorcing them from the traditions that gave them meaning—“colonizing them in reverse,” as American ethnobotanist Glenn Shepard puts it (p. 211). For example, ayahuasca use, despite widespread belief, may not date back thousands of years. Instead, O’Connor argues that the practice “rarely existed where Indians remained isolated from Western meddling” (p. 222). Its expansion beyond the Río Napo began relatively recently with Jesuit missions in the early 17th century and later accelerated through 19th-century rubber camps along the major river systems of the Amazon Basin. Through Western tourism, ayahuasca has come to be portrayed as “an ancient ritual for slaking our insatiable thirst for Indigenous salvation and/or for increasingly extravagant highs” (p. 223). 

During our meeting, O’Connor told me he does not “think there’s ultimately harm in appropriating a plant if you find it therapeutic, useful, or even life-saving—which a lot of people are reporting these drugs can be.” 

At the same time, he said, “we need to have an honest, good-faith conversation about where these drugs come from, what their actual Indigenous uses are, and what they are.” 

To write the book, which explores humanity’s broader relationship with psychedelics, from ancient religion to modern medicine, O’Connor worked with the Uitoto people to retrace an expedition undertaken some 50 years ago. Into the Colombian rainforest—home to begonias as red as blood and butterflies as wide as hubcaps—ventured scientific researcher Dennis McKenna and his older brother Terence, the visionary whose “tangled beard hung like an oriole’s nest past his chin” (p. xix). Weary of the war on drugs and fueled by utopian fantasies, Terence’s army of psychonauts sought a legendary hallucinogen that would turbocharge their DNA and “hasten a return to our preindustrial and preliterate past” (p. 284). 

In reality, Terence and his disciples did not transform into “eternal hyperdimensional beings” or travel via “flying saucers of the mind… ‘into the plenum of being’” (pp. 94, 30). Nor did they propel “human evolution forward to its next stage” by connecting to “the mind of nature itself” (pp. 284, 11). But they did experience auditory and visual hallucinations that led them, in a manner not unlike schizophrenia, “to adopt a new narrative interpretation of the world” (p. 95). 

Armed with the spore prints they’d brought back from La Chorrera, the McKenna brothers were “among the first, if not the very first, to successfully cultivate magic mushrooms at home, sparking a major leap forward in psychedelic history” (p. 202). In 1976, they published Psilocybin: Magic Mushroom Grower’s Guide; this April, half a century later, President Donald Trump signed an executive order expediting research into the therapeutic benefits of psilocybin and other substances of its ilk. 

O’Connor mentioned that one such mind-altering drug, ibogaine—made from the root of a Central African shrub—has shown promise in treating post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorders. 

“That’s great,” he told me, “but it also has a habit of slowing people’s heart rates considerably,” among other life-threatening side effects.  

“People are diving into these treatments as if there are no potential risks,” O’Connor, who teaches journalism at Boston College, added. “They don’t work for everyone—they’re not a magic bullet.” 

The remainder of the interview, which follows, has been edited for length and clarity.  

Why did you choose Terence as the focal point of the book? 

I hadn’t heard of him, and I pride myself on knowing about eccentric, overlooked weirdos from the psychedelic ’60s and ’70s. I was doing a lot of retail therapy online during the pandemic, as were many folks, and I came across his book, True Hallucinations (1989), totally by happenstance. I hadn’t known anything about it, bought it, and put it on the shelf for two years.  

I finally opened it one day and started reading. I had some preconceived ideas without really knowing anything about Terence or his subject. I thought it was probably some hippie-dippy thing about machine elves, and it sort of is that, but that’s not all it is. It’s a great narrative and just fascinating—it just captured me. 

Terence postulated that psilocybin mushrooms “played a crucial role in human evolution, giving our remote ancestors a jolt in language and cognition” and “turning Homo erectus into Homo sapiens.” While there’s nothing in the fossil record to support Terence’s “stoned ape theory,” according to anthropologist Laura Weyrich, advances in proteomics and DNA-sequencing technology could potentially indicate whether ancient hominids at least ate psychedelic mushrooms.  

How plausible do you think stoned ape theory is? 

When I first began looking into it, I was like, “Oh, this is so ridiculous.” I was embarrassed to ask these various paleoanthropologists, archaeologists, and researchers about it. I was like, “Oh my God, I can’t ask this, but I have to.” But it turns out that, as a thought experiment, many of them also found it interesting. It’s not something that I think is ultimately really provable. You could find some tangential scientific evidence, but you’re probably never going to get a smoking gun. 

Terence had a lot of theories—some relatively sane-seeming, like the stoned ape theory, and some completely batshit theories that have no basis in science or reason. But I sometimes liken him to Sigmund Freud, or maybe some of the kookier analytic philosophers, where you read it, it sounds kind of good, and then you get to the end and think, “Well, that’s probably 95 percent bullshit, but it still enriches my worldview.” I feel more enriched for having read it. That doesn’t mean it’s true, and I don’t put much credence in it, but it’s fun to entertain, and I do think it enriches the way I think about the human mind and human possibility. 

You also mention how “what drove [you] to write this book was in part a procession of deaths and their aftermaths” you and your wife endured starting in 2019. Would you elaborate on that? 

About a year into writing the book, my son, who was four at the time, fell ill unexpectedly, out of nowhere. He was in and out of the hospital during those days. It really brought us face to face, for the first time as parents, with real suffering and grief, and with being totally out of control when it came to finding a remedy for him. There was just no help to be found anywhere. I started thinking about grief and suffering, and how much of it was around us.  

Then there was this kind of cascade of deaths—just a lot coming at once over the span of a couple of years. It made me wonder what psychedelics, at least on a therapeutic level, potentially have to offer people: some relief.  

Another thing: My father was, weirdly, at the same time, starting to consider psychedelic-assisted therapy to treat his depression and longstanding addiction to alcohol. Maybe a year before, I’d given him Michael Pollan’s book, How to Change Your Mind: What the New Science Teaches Us About Consciousness, Dying, Addiction, Depression, and Transcendence (2018). Because my dad had been in and out of therapy, rehab, and 12-step programs for many years, I was like, “I don’t know if you’ve heard of this, but I’ve been reading about non-traditional approaches to treating alcohol addiction, including psychedelics.” I don’t think he ever read it, but it did start a conversation between us. 

What surprised you most while researching the book? 

Reading Terence, I hadn’t realized that psilocybin mushrooms were not indigenous to La Chorrera—that they were essentially a foreign import [1], and not something used by the people there, certainly not by shamans. 

Another revelation was what “shamanism” actually looks like in the Colombian Putumayo. Terence talked a lot about this sort of psychedelic shamanism. A lot of people do today, too. But it’s just not at all what it seems to be. The Indigenous perspective on and use of things like ayahuasca, or yagé, and other psychedelic plants—at least in the Putumayo, where Terence and Dennis spent much of their time—is vastly different from how I think they’re generally understood or used in the U.S. These substances were generally not used for healing. Until European contact with Indigenous peoples throughout the Amazon Basin, ayahuasca was mostly used in the hunt—to have luck in finding animals—or sometimes to find lost objects or communicate with family members or other tribe members over long distances. But it was definitely not a therapeutic application. That’s starting to shift a little bit now, though, because of this strange sort of cross-pollination that happens so often in history where it’s now being fed back into an Indigenous context. 

I think I went into the book as something of a Terence fanboy. I cooled on him a bit once I spoke with Colombian anthropologists and ethnobotanists and realized how taken out of context many of his proclamations were on psychedelics and the “shamanic” experience. But, by the end, I sort of warmed to him again because I realized that his ultimate project, I think, was really about human wellness and flourishing. I think that’s what he wanted ultimately, even if he went about it in a strange, myopic way focused almost exclusively on the psychedelic experience through psilocybin mushrooms. That’s where I part ways with him. I think the best place from which to grapple with grief, loss, and suffering is through love, tenderness, and compassion—not through machine elves at the end of history, which was, more or less, Terence’s take. 

I was also interested in your discussion of “diagonalism”—what scholars William Callison and Quinn Slobodian characterize as the social-distress-born alliances between the far left and the far right uniting wellness gurus, anti-vaxxers, and conspiracy theorists. 

I was just reading an article by the American political scientist Francis Fukuyama; he calls it this horseshoe meeting of the minds—this ideological vortex where people with otherwise totally divergent political opinions are meeting in the middle on certain issues. The far left, the Make America Healthy Again movement, the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies—even just the friendship between [MAPS founder] Rick Doblin and former Texas Governor Rick Perry [co-founder of the nonprofit Americans for Ibogaine], who had one of the most conservative legislative agendas in recent memory. That friendship seems genuine—and maybe even necessary to advance these drugs beyond their current legal status. 

In 2023, MAPS hosted the world’s largest psychedelic conference, which you describe as laden with snake oil pseudoscience and lacking in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Almost a year later, an FDA advisory panel rejected MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD, citing safety concerns and questions about data validity. Critics alleged that MAPS’ drug development arm failed to disclose data showing sexual misconduct by therapists and increased suicidality among trial participants. A former MAPS volunteer called MAPS an exploitative and abusive cult that functions “more like a religious movement than a scientific organization.” Similar concerns emerged at The Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research. An ethics complaint accused founding director Roland Griffiths of “acting as a ‘spiritual leader’ rather than a scientist” and influencing participant outcomes through religious symbolism. 

Additionally, a Columbia psychiatrist reviewing the field noted a relatively high rate of  irritability, anxiety, insomnia, and other adverse events, and called for more “rigorous assessment” of psilocybin-assisted therapy.  

How do we balance the potential of psychedelics to promote empathy and well-being with the risks? 

Terence said a lot of completely bullshit things about psychedelics—even dangerous things at times. You see that in the movement today, where a lot of these wild, unsubstantiated claims are being made about drugs that, yes, have real healing potential for many people, but for others, such as my father, don’t work at all—and arguably cause more harm than good. 

We should be sane and sober about this. We can champion these drugs while still having a lucid conversation about their efficacy, limitations, and safety concerns. 

[1] One of my favorite passages from the book is “Darkly gilled, with distinctive golden halos and pink veils around slender stems the color of bruised flesh, they were easily identifiable as Psilocybe cubensis… Likely brought to the Americas by Spanish missionaries via the dung of zebu cattle—rangy saltwhite beasts with enormous, scythe-like horns—Psilocybe did especially well in the humid pastures of La Chorrera. Amazonian shamans, who knew more about psychoactive plants than anyone on earth, had no use for these foreign imports. To Terence, however, they were living manifestations of the divine” (p. xx). 

A Short, Strange Trip: An Untold Story of Magic Mushrooms, Madness, and a Search for the Meaning of Life in the Amazon 
John O’Connor 
New York: Sourcebooks 
2026 

First published in 1892, “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman depicts a postpartum woman whose husband, a physician, prescribes a rest cure for her so-called “nervous depression,” confining her to a nursery. The narrator’s increasing fixation on the room’s titular wallpaper reflects her descent into psychosis, culminating in her belief that a woman is trapped behind the wallpaper—and, ultimately, that she herself is that woman. 

What if the short story were told from the man’s point of view? Obsession—the micro-budget horror film that has quickly become one of the year’s biggest box-office successes—feels, in some ways, like an answer to that question. 

Directed by Curry Barker, Obsession follows Bear (played by Michael Johnston), who acquires a supernatural toy that grants his wish for his co-worker and childhood friend, Nikki (Inde Navarrette), to love him more than anyone else in the world. Nikki’s mind and body are thereby effectively hijacked, echoing the woman’s loss of agency in “The Yellow Wallpaper.” Unlike Gilman’s short story, however, Obsession places us in the perspective of the controlling figure, forcing us to confront not only the horror of victimization but that of possessive desire itself. 

Bear is initially presented sympathetically: as a lonely, shy, awkward music store employee with an unrequited crush. We might relate to his desperation for connection; after all, he seems as gentle as, well, a teddy bear. While bears are also predators, the character does not see himself as a villain—and because we spend time inside his mindset, neither do we. Even as Nikki begins to behave erratically, we believe that Bear deserves a chance at romance and that he can control the situation. More troubling, we believe that he can control Nikki. 

Unlike “The Yellow Wallpaper,” in which we inhabit the woman’s mental breakdown, Obsession mostly foregrounds Bear’s fear and guilt, obscuring Nikki’s pain and suffering—at first. Hoping to alter his wish, he calls the toy’s customer support line and hears Nikki screaming in agony on the other end. He returns home to find her frozen in place, covered in excrement and vomit; later, she mutilates her own face with a broken bottle. Eventually, while she sleeps, the voice of her former self briefly resurfaces and begs him to kill her. But Bear refuses, asking, “What’s so bad about being with me?” His desire to be loved has become inseparable from his willingness to erase Nikki’s freedom. (Her surname, “Freeman,” feels heavy-handed.) The realization that we have centered Bear’s distress over the damage he has inflicted is powerfully uncomfortable.  

Gilman’s short story concludes with the protagonist rubbing against the wallpaper and declaring, “I’ve got out at last… in spite of you,” causing her husband to faint as she continues circling the room, liberated through madness. By the end of Obsession, Bear is similarly inert, but Nikki is lucid and seemingly still trapped—that is, left to grapple with the carnage unleashed by the obsessive version of herself that Bear created. 

Medicine is no longer the locus of patriarchal control it was when Gilman wrote “The Yellow Wallpaper,” but it still carries traces of gendered authority. Barker’s Obsession critiques the insidious logic of modern “nice guy” entitlement; believing he deserves Nikki’s love, Bear prescribes not a rest cure but a “love cure” that reveals how ordinary longing and self-pity can become coercive.  

By aligning our sympathies with the perpetrator before exposing the full cost of his desire, the film tests our complicity and highlights the peril of love that demands possession. 

Web image from Capstone Pictures.

According to actor and dramaturg Anne Gridley’s neurologist, humans can only consciously attend to walking for about eight seconds before the act slips into muscle memory. Yet Watch Me Walk, written by Gridley, challenges us to spend nearly two hours thinking about walking. 

The autobiographical play begins with the veteran experimental performer pacing the stage in rose-adorned combat boots—more useful, she later notes, than $7,000 custom orthotics—and near silence. The sense that something might happen eventually ebbs into boredom. Why turn foot drop, the dragging of the front foot, into a spectacle? 

Before long, Gridley deliberately falls and then asks the audience to offer help—and to accept her refusal. Later, she presents a slideshow on her 20 colorful walking sticks; some of their names are Dorothy Parker, Tonya Harding, and Gabagool. At one point, wearing a ballgown made of caution tape reading “fall risk,” she ascends a ladder. She sings, “I’m climbing on a ladder, and it’s making you feel nervous—and yes, that is the point.”  

Directed by Eric Ting, Watch Me Walk educates non-disabled viewers and invites them to confront their discomfort. “Maybe don’t say ‘spaz’ anymore; that word describes the way I walk,” Gridley told Culturebot. “So every time you just casually say, ‘I was spazzing out,’ I want you to think of me walking back and forth stiffly across the stage.” 

Gridley is having fun, too, even as she, at other times, fights back tears. Full of tonal turns, the production is at once cringey, candid, wacky, and whimsical. Through a series of loosely connected but ultimately moving vignettes, Gridley chronicles her life with hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP), probing tragic family narratives, ableist encounters (“It was a woman, so I didn’t punch her in the face”), and health insurance struggles (“Viva Luigi!”). 

She dramatizes her neurodegenerative condition—shared by her mother and grandmother—by dressing as a gigantic purple nerve cell and as Little Orphan Annie, wryly highlighting the chronic disregard for so-called “orphan diseases,” whose rarity limits research and pharmaceutical attention. 

Observed annually on the last day of February, Rare Disease Day is an international effort to expand access to healthcare, diagnosis, and therapies for people with rare diseases. Although Watch Me Walk closed its in-person run on February 15, a recording of the play will stream for one week starting on February 28. The same day at 3:00 p.m. EST, the Spastic Paraplegia Foundation (SPF) will host a Rare Disease Day online forum on HSP and Primary Lateral Sclerosis, featuring patients, families, researchers, and advocates. 

Soho Rep, where Watch Me Walk was staged, hopes that streaming the play alongside SPF’s virtual event “will create a coordinated awareness moment,” showing how “storytelling, dialogue, and science together help humanize rare neurological diseases while advancing the pursuit of effective treatments and a cure.” 

Photos by Maria Baranova

WNYC: Under The Radar’s “Watch Me Walk”

Carrie Coon, Letts’ wife, plays Agnes White, a lonely server living in an Oklahoma motel who falls in love with Peter Evans (Namir Smallwood), an AWOL Gulf veteran. Peter becomes increasingly convinced that he is the subject of clandestine experiments, and that he is infested with government-planted bugs. These bugs are, of course, invisible, yet he drags Agnes with him into a seeming folie à deux—a bedlam of flypaper, aluminum foil, and bug zappers.  

Peter’s delusions (and, in turn, Agnes’s) eventually cross a line into a realm in which logic no longer applies. By spilling so far into excess, even occasionally veering into bizarre spoofiness, Bug risks trivializing Peter’s paranoia—a risk especially fraught now that the part is played for the first time by a Black actor.  

Initially, Peter cites a real case of government experimentation: the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, in which poor Black sharecroppers were never told they had syphilis. The experiment ran from 1932 until 1972—long after penicillin became the standard treatment in the mid-1940s. To observe how the disease naturally progressed, researchers deliberately withheld the antibiotic, ending the study only after a press leak. 

This gross violation of ethics is widely believed to have damaged Black Americans’ trust in the medical establishment. But according to medical ethicist Harriet A. Washington [1], “that narrative is flawed and untrue.” While Tuskegee certainly contributes to that distrust, the larger impetus is “four centuries of abuse in the medical arena,” which Washington chronicles in her 2007 book Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present. “In fact, one study indicated that African Americans who had never heard of Tuskegee were more likely to fear vaccine administration and medication design.” 

What if Bug had dialed down Peter’s paranoia and explored it within this broader historical context instead of reinforcing the singularity of Tuskegee? Overemphasizing Tuskegee because of its infamy (or because of one’s ignorance) serves to obscure other historical ethics violations as well as systemic racial inequities that persist today. For instance, what if Peter struggled to access mental healthcare because of structural barriers? 

In her 2021 book Carte Blanche: The Erosion of Medical Consent, Washington mentions an experimental anthrax vaccine that soldiers were required to receive beginning in 1998. “Soldiers of all races were affected,” she writes, “but Blacks were overrepresented because they constituted 12.3 percent of Americans, but were 24.5 percent of the 1.7 million ground troops deployed to the Gulf in 1990 and 26.2 percent of Army reservists in 2001—twice their representation in the population at large, and so at twice the risk of being forced into military research.” 

Many service members reported autoimmune conditions after getting the jab, but the Pentagon attributed their symptoms to “emotional issues,” Washington continues. “The military subsumed vaccine-related illnesses under the nebulous symptomatology of ‘Gulf War Syndrome.’” What if Bug had dramatized that ‘nebulous symptomatology’? 

Peter also references another example of government research: the Edgewood Arsenal experiments. After World War II, the U.S. Army Chemical Corps tested chemical weapons on American soldiers at a secluded research facility on the Chesapeake Bay, exposing volunteers to more than 250 different chemicals, including LSD, mustard gas, and sarin. The studies ended after researchers were accused of ethical transgressions, including issues with informed consent and recruitment. Archival footage, unearthed in a 2022 documentary, shows men “going temporarily blind, reduced to babbling or completely dysfunctional logs, or worse, ready to commit violence upon themselves.” [2] 

Washington argues in Carte Blanche that “the medical crimes that were denounced and punished at Nuremberg have American analogues.” 

“Although not perfect parallels,” she notes, “they share a violent, nonconsensual, and largely racial disparate nature, as well as the frequent invocation of military expedience.” 

In this light, Peter’s condemnation of his doctors as neo-Nazis feels less outlandish than the play permits. Letts may hint that Peter is not entirely psychotic—that his madness holds some truth. But that seed never grows.  

The play ultimately bubbles over (spoiler alert: self-harm, violence, and fire). A future iteration of the three-decades-old play, if there is one, might benefit from taking Peter’s delusions more seriously—and leaving open the possibility that they are, in fact, real. 

Bug will get under your skin, but to what end? 

Bug, through March 8th at the Samuel J. Friedman Theatre in New York; manhattantheatreclub.com/shows/2025-26-season/bug/.  

[1] “Harriet A. Washington on the Narrative Around Vaccine Hesitancy in the African American Community: In Conversation with Andrew Keen.” Keen On from Literary Hub, 19 Mar. 2021, lithub.com/harriet-a-washington-on-the-narrative-around-vaccine-hesitancy-in-the-african-american-community/. 
[2] Simonpillai, Radheyan. “‘It Affected a Great Number of People’: Inside the World of Shocking Military Drug Experiments.” The Guardian, 9 June 2022, theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/jun/09/dr-delirium-and-the-edgewood-experiments-documentary. 

Web image by Matthew Murphy.

“That was a barrier I wanted to address because I know I’m not alone in that experience,” says Miriam, who lives in California. 

And so, in the spring of 2023, they founded RestFest, described on its website as an online “gathering space and virtual film & video art festival created by/for the Disabled, Deaf, Chronically ill, Neurodivergent, and/or Mad arts community worldwide.” 

This year’s festival is available to stream anytime in February—and viewers are invited to watch from bed. RestFest operates on “crip time,” recognizing the different pace at which disabled people may go through life due to their sensory, physical, or cognitive needs. Crip time rejects ableist productivity norms and offers inclusivity and comfort instead. 

“This Werewolf Complex,” one of the 27 short films and video artworks, adroitly dramatizes an epileptic aura through hallucinations of SpongeBob SquarePants and Rorschachian patterns that morph into human silhouettes. Another work—shifting the meaning of aura from a focal seizure’s onset to aural gestalts—deftly considers how Deaf people access sound in their minds through sight, touch, and imagination. 

While all of the works screened are made by disabled or chronically ill artists, not all of them are about disability or illness. Nor are they intended to educate non-disabled viewers (though RestFest is open to everyone).  

Rather, RestFest taps into an “inherent mutual understanding between community members,” Miriam says. “I’ve had filmmakers who showed films reach out to me and say that they could tell the audience understood their work in a way they hadn’t seen before, which is really special.” 

Similarly, Sammy Holden says that if they were to submit their work “Night Holding Still”—which dreams a path through the shame of their chronic illness—to an experimental film festival, “it might be fine.” 

“But reaching audiences who will potentially understand it more directly is just something that I think can only happen at a festival like RestFest.” 

Beyond Words 

The realities of disability are often ineffable. Reflecting this, many of the festival’s works are experimental, which “leaves space,” Miriam says, “for sitting in the uncertain and the unknowable.” 

“Verbal language isn’t accessible for everyone,” adds Georgia Kumari Bradburn, a British filmmaker whose “A Brief History of Circles” uses sounds and objects to capture how she processes sensory information as an autistic person. A voiceover narrates the history of circles as flowers, logos, and other structures in that shape appear onscreen.  

Eventually, hyperfixation escalates into meltdown. Objects blur and merge as the voiceover reverberates and multiplies, mirroring how euphoria can turn into overload for Bradburn. 

And then a new, calmer obsession takes hold. It is a mathematical law that two perpendicular sine waves, moving in step, form a circle; the voiceover repeats the word “sine,” followed by shots of a shoreline. Bradburn’s fingers trace the water’s surface—a subtle yet powerful act of self-stimulatory behavior, or stimming. “That’s me transferring my sensory experience to the audience through something as intimate and simple as touch,” she says.  

As part of the festival, Bradburn will lead a workshop on the “autistic camera,” which proposes the camera as a tool for autistic expression. A camera might stim, for instance, by circling a scene. 

Not Explaining—Exploring 

Troels Steenholdt Heiredal, an architect and artist, didn’t discover he was autistic until his 30s. “It was the best thing that had ever happened to me,” he says, “because it gave me a language with which to write myself back into my own life.” 

His relief exemplifies the phenomenon of metagnosis, whereby “one becomes newly aware, in adulthood, of a lifelong ‘condition,’” writes narrative medicine scholar Danielle Spencer [1]. This recognition catalyzed a profound exploration of urban space, perception, and accessibility—an inquiry rooted in his lived experience and often overlooked in conventional architectural discourse. 

Heiredal’s documentary short “Not Included—Embedded” explores his “Autistic architectural approach,” a framework that posits disability as a generative force rather than a limitation. 

Raised in a small town in Denmark, Heiredal currently lives in Taipei. “The way that public space is being used is beautiful,” he says. Through mimetically arranged clips, some of shopfronts doubling as dance studios, his film presents a disabled reading of the Taiwanese capital’s traditional informal architecture—buildings and structures designed by residents, not as high-profile projects, but emerging organically. Heiredal depicts the metropolis as a symphony of its residents’ spatial voices. 

Drawing on theorists like Erin Manning, who frames neurotypicality as a system that decides whose lives matter and whose do not [2], Heiredal challenges inclusion that ends with ADA-compliant ramps, arguing that disabled knowledge should more broadly shape how we build the world. For example, he suggests in a recent essay [3] that hosts create spaces where guests can retreat from overstimulation and craft environments that foster shared-interest interactions. To those ends, a host might furnish a quiet corner with cozy chairs, or intentionally spark a conversation between two guests who don’t know each other but both love, say, experimental films. 

“I’m not interested in dictating what an Autistic architectural approach is… it must be co-created,” continues Heiredal, who will expand on these ideas in a talk at the festival. 

Even before he developed this concept, he had been guided by intuition in his work. “The teachers around me encouraged me to just explore what is there without always needing to explain it, and I feel very lucky in that,” he says. “It’s allowed me to do a lot of things that I didn’t necessarily know how to explain.”  

RestFest embodies this sentiment. And, in that spirit, when he found his grandfather’s old 35mm film camera, he started photographing Taipei. “It felt right to do it this way.”  

Access and Care 

The films and video artworks are grouped into categories defined by the sensations they may evoke: “rumbling,” “inside/outside,” “spaces/routes,” “reverberation/held,” and “mid-air/suspended.” All provide closed captioning and audio description, written or recorded, in many cases, by the artists themselves. One vivid example: In her short film “Song Without Words,” deaf visual artist Olivia Ting plays with typeface and lettering to echo the partial inaccessibility of hearing devices and sign language, and to portray listening as a bodily, interpretive act. 

The festival also features 17 virtual events—among them Bradburn’s and Heiredal’s aforementioned programming, as well as a discussion with Holden and another U.K.-based artist on transgressing genre and gender in film. These events incorporate captioning, transcription, and audio description, along with low-sensory breakout rooms, live access support, and permission to stay comfortable—whether that means lying down, staying off-camera, communicating via chat only, leaving early, or something else. RestFest’s film and readings clubs and arts gatherings, held year round, also offer these accommodations. As disability scholar May Chazan writes, “In our care-filled, artful practices, we slowly make our next world.” [4] 

The first event is a workshop on processing pandemic grief, and the final event will be a screening of a collective film created during the workshop. Facilitator Kit Blamire, a self-identified “anarcho-sicko” artist living in Berlin, organized the same event last year. Participants made one-minute films, which were later assembled together. 

“Folks were talking about how, since they became very ill, they hadn’t been able to make films anymore—and then, coming into this space, they were inspired to make films again,” recalls Miriam, the RestFest founder. 

“I’m disabled,” these attendees said, “but all these other disabled people are making films in these creative ways that are comfortable for their minds and bodies.” 

RestFest Film Festival, through Feb. 28; restfestfilmfestival.org. “No need to get out of bed or off the couch. No worries if you’re half-asleep. You are always welcome here.” 

[1] Spencer, Danielle. Metagnosis: Revelatory Narratives of Health and Identity. Oxford University Press, 2020. 
[2] Manning, Erin. The Minor Gesture. Duke University Press, 2016. 
[3] Heiredal, Troels Steenholdt. “Autistic Architectural Approach.” PLAT, vol. 13, “Alchemy,” 2025. static1.squarespace.com/static/611838bd3f0e670d00f832f5/t/6796f49bc98eac6ba1880af5/1737946272880/Heiredal-Troels+Autistic+Architectural+Approach.pdf.  
[4] Chazan, May. “Crip Time and Radical Care in/as Artful Politics.” Social Sciences, vol. 12, no. 2, 2023, pp. 59-75. MPDI, doi.org/10.3390/socsci12020099. 

Web image from RestFest Trailer.

Through playful videos hashtagged #LiveLaughLexapro and #LexaproGirly, Tiktok and Instagram creators have transformed the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor into a selective, if relatable, lifestyle for the enlightened and empowered—stigma be damned. Our society is preoccupied with chemical selfhood[1], with mental illness arguably normalized to the point of sun-kissed romanticization. 

Psychopharmaceuticals receive a different treatment in the snow-blanketed mansion of The Housemaid, based on Freida McFadden’s same-named novel and directed by Paul Feig. (Spoilers ahead for the campy thriller!) 

Millie Calloway (a mostly lackluster Sydney Sweeney), who is on parole, becomes the titular live-in maid for a wealthy family. She finds Haldol, an antipsychotic, in the medicine cabinet of her erratic boss, Nina Winchester (a delightfully unhinged Amanda Seyfried). This discovery leads Millie to believe that Nina is mentally ill, confirming the story that the latter’s husband Andrew (an initially charming Brandon Sklenar) and gossipy so-called friends have been building: that Nina is deceitful and dangerous. 

In reality, Nina’s outbursts and mood swings are in part a reaction to Andrew’s abuse. But she also uses the perception that she is unstable to her advantage, exaggerating her behavior in an attempt to engineer her escape. 

By locking both of its female leads, at one point or another, in an attic room, The Housemaid alludes to the “madwoman in the attic” trope, theorized in 1979 feminist literary criticism by Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar. In their seminal work, they explore how 19th-century women writers used their texts to resist the patriarchy.  

The quintessential example is Bertha Mason, the first wife of the eventual husband of the eponymous narrator of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre. Another example: the postpartum protagonist of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper,” whose physician husband prescribes her a rest cure and confines her to an upstairs nursery. Her resulting insanity is an embodiment of, and protest against, the subjugation of women. As literary critic Elaine Showalter[2] writes, the madwoman “refuses to speak the language of patriarchal order.”  

Albeit to a lesser extent than Nina, Millie is also cast as a madwoman. Toward the beginning of the film, she seems anxious and hyper-vigilant, and her specific crime is kept secret, leaving her reliability ambiguous. And, at first, Nina’s freedom—her rebellion against the patriarchy—comes at the expense of Millie’s, hardly an example of women supporting women. 

But Nina’s 7-year-old daughter Cece (Indiana Elle) encourages her mother to rescue Millie, who ultimately defeats Andrew. The police officer (Alexandra Seal) notices inconsistencies in Nina’s account but, owing to a plot contrivance, investigates no further. The Housemaid ends with Millie accepting a new job, once more as a knife-savvy housemaid for an abused woman. 

Rebecca Sonnenshine’s twist-filled screenplay is highly entertaining, but it is no masterpiece. That said, we can examine The Housemaid through the lens of mad studies, a field of scholarship that places mental distress within broader social and political contexts. This approach extends the notion, often attributed to psychiatrist R.D. Laing, that insanity is a “perfectly rational adjustment to an insane world.” Bradley Lewis[3], another psychiatrist, maintains that “psychic difference from the norm” can, in some cases, be something “to celebrate.”  

Mille’s vengeance-driven crimes are ethically understandable; however, they are legally questionable, and most mad-studies scholars would likely not exalt them. But instead of pathologizing her and Nina’s actions, we can read them as efforts to combat Andrew’s patriarchal control. 

Additionally, as Lewis underscores, healthcare professionals must seek to understand how social and political forces shape the lives of their patients and center their perspectives and narratives. Had Nina’s clinicians taken her seriously, she, Cece, Millie, and even Andrew would have been spared much pain. 

Millie finds an unflushed pill in a toilet, suggesting that Nina doesn’t take her Haldol. Unlike #LexaproGang members, she has been prescribed medication against her will. Admittedly, medication can play an important role in managing mental illness, but The Housemaid emphasizes that it cannot substitute for structural change. Even if mental illness has in part been commodified by social media, the film reminds us that what is labeled madness may, in fact, be an attunement to a world that too often denies women credibility and agency—a problem that demands not merely treatment, but transformation. 

The Housemaid. Directed by Paul Feig, performances by Sydney Sweeney, Amanda Seyfried, Brandon Sklenar, and Indiana Elle, Lionsgate, 2025. 

[1]Metzl, Jonathan M. The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease, Beacon Press, 2010. 
[2]Showalter, Elaine. “Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness, and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism.” Shakespeare and the Question of Theory, edited by Geoffrey H. Hartman and Patricia Parker, Routledge, 1985, pp. 77-94. 
[3]Lewis, Bradley. “Rethinking Psychiatry with Mad Studies.” Mad Studies Reader: Interdisciplinary Innovations in Mental Health, edited by Bradley Lewis, Alisha Ali, and Jazmine Russell, Routledge, 2024, pp. 435-455. 

Web image by Medhum.org

Modern medicine’s emphasis on extending the human lifespan has, in some cases, transformed dying, once a communal and spiritual event, into a cascade of arduous procedures. Deftly synthesizing the wisdom of many experts with his own insights and experiences, Palmer offers compelling, accessible, and refreshingly honest advice on how to shape our lives and legacies so that we are better prepared to die as we see fit—highlighting agency in aging in the face of ageist norms. 

Just last week, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced that the state will join 11 others and Washington, D.C., in legalizing medical aid in dying (MAID), or when physicians prescribe a lethal dose of medications to patients with fewer than six months to live. 

“New York has long been a beacon of freedom,” Hochul said, “and now it is time we extend that freedom to terminally ill New Yorkers who want the right to die comfortably and on their own terms.” 

The governor’s rhetoric emphasizes a collective cognitive dissonance: As physician (and fellow politician) Dan Morhaim observes, “our culture celebrates personal autonomy,” but when it comes to death and dying, “we collectively abdicate” that value. 

Citing Morhaim and others, Palmer provides valuable context for our relationship with mortality (along with additional information about MAID). During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the average death was relatively quick and happened at home, with little involvement from healthcare providers and medical technology. Today, dying is protracted and tends to take place in hospitals or nursing homes; healthcare providers and medical technology are highly involved; and life can be prolonged with organ transplants, chemotherapy, and more. 

“There is a significant difference between dying peacefully in your bed at home and dying yoked to tubes and machines in an ICU,” Palmer writes, “receiving futile care that only prolongs the dying process for perhaps a few days while providing a horrendous quality of life.” 

Drawing on surgeon Atul Gawande’s [1] work, Palmer argues that, at best, physicians are uneducated about aging and dying and what might matter to patients approaching the end of their lives. At worst, they are financially motivated to perform aggressive interventions that may do more harm than good.  

According to numerous studies, frail patients do poorly in hospitals, and Palmer points out that doctors nearing death tend to eschew the very treatments they give to their older patients, such as surgeries and radiation. 

“I don’t want my last conscious thought to be of doctors stabbing needles into my veins, my ribs breaking from chest compressions, and a large-bore tube thrust into my throat and lungs,” the end-of-life activist writes. “When a patient is young and robust, such curative measures may make good sense despite their violence, but not for an old, debilitated, frail patient.” 

But we have choices: “where to die, how much treatment to have, and how to spend the limited time we have left.” 

“While, in a real sense, no death is ever ‘good,’” Palmer underscores, “planning and preparation can make death less awful and painful.” 

Legislation to make MAID available to the terminally ill is one step in that direction. However, critics argue that MAID may endanger the elderly and disabled, who might feel pressured to end their lives out of fear of causing hardship to their families. Opponents also contend that such policies reinforce the toxic notion that a life with a disability or chronic illness is not worth living. Also, some individuals may seek MAID due to high treatment costs, but MAID should not substitute for accessible care and support. 

Racial inequities in healthcare are also relevant; Black people might opt for MAID because they are more likely to receive inadequate pain management due to stereotypes that they are drug-seeking or pain-tolerant.[2] Palmer could have engaged more fully with these valid concerns. Fortunately, the Medical Aid in Dying Act in New York has a number of guardrails meant to ensure the patient’s decision is informed and voluntary, including a conflict-of-interest prohibition and a mandatory mental health evaluation. 

Well before we are terminally ill, we need to be having routine conversations about dying with our loved ones and physicians. To that end, Palmer endorses The Conversation Project. He also suggests creating an advance directive, or a legal document outlining your healthcare wishes, and choosing a healthcare proxy—not necessarily your closest relative—when you’re young or in good health. One way to think about your healthcare wishes is to complete the sentence “I would want to live as long as I could still…”, as recommended by physician Eleanor Tanno. Another is to consider an “exit strategy,” or an illness for which you would decline treatment.[3] 

Some other tips from Palmer for a “good” death: 

• Write a personal mission statement; letters of gratitude to loved ones; and legacy letters, also known as ethical wills, that capture your essence, beliefs, and stories to pass on to future generations. 

• Make a folder containing everything your children must handle when you die. 

• Join a “village,” or “virtual retirement community.” 

The author also illuminates the benefits and limitations of palliative and hospice care, delineates various eco-friendly alternatives to embalming (reader: as of writing this, I’d like to be affordably composted), and presents ideas for making funeral and memorial services more substantive—and even fun. 

Achieving a Good Death is a touch dogmatic, but Palmer demonstrates in the book’s rich appendices that he practices what he preaches. In a letter to his family about his own end-of-life wishes, he shares the pain of witnessing his mother’s final years in a nursing home: “I want to prevent what happened to her from happening to me.” 

“If my mental function is seriously compromised with little chance for full recovery, please seek opportunities to encourage death’s approach… Are my kidneys faltering? Let them,” he writes, giving new meaning to author Mel Robbins’ self-help concept. 

The book’s main flaw—one the author himself acknowledges—is that it is primarily aimed at those with friends and families. Readers without such connections may feel less comforted than grimly recognized by Palmer’s planned memorial service playlist featuring the Beatles’ “Eleanor Rigby.” 

Ultimately, Achieving a Good Death is a stimulating must-read for mortals that will leave you equipped for a more peaceful, dignified, and meaningful end. 

Achieving a Good Death: A Practical Guide to the End of Life
Chris Palmer
Rowman & Littlefield, 2024

[1] Gawande, Atul. Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End. Metropolitan Books, 2014. 
[2] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The Opioid Crisis and the Black/African American Population: An Urgent Issue. Publication No. PEP20-05-02-001, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Behavioral Health Equity, 17 Mar. 2020, samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/meeting/documents/csap-nac-presentation-03172020.pdf.  
[3] Harrington, Samuel. At Peace: Choosing a Good Death After a Long Life. Hatchette, 2018. 

Web image by Medhum.org.

Directed by Anne Kauffman, the play features “Primes,” or holographic simulations of the dead intended for therapeutic use by the living. June Squibb—who, at 96, is making history as the oldest performer to open a Broadway show—astonishes as Marjorie, an impish 85-year-old with dementia using a much younger version of her husband Walter (an uncanny yet tender Christopher Lowell) to regain and retain her memory. Marjorie’s daughter Tess (the incredible Cynthia Nixon) is skeptical and fearful of the technology, whereas Tess’s husband Jon, played by a standout Danny Burstein, is a fan—until an on-the-nose change of heart in the penultimate scene. 

Marjorie Prime’s central flaw is that it favors concepts over dramatic depth. The characters are well-acted but underdeveloped, and almost all they do is talk; the biggest event may be Marjorie urinating herself. Yet, despite its slow pace and formulaic structure, Marjorie Prime is intelligent and poignant. 

Marjorie’s memories are embellished and sanitized for her comfort and convenience. The fallibility of memory is hardly a novel concept, but the Primes enable this reconstructive process and also become a stand-in for genuine connection in the wake of grief, preventing the family from confronting painful realities and repairing their relationships.  

By the time the truth fully surfaces in the unsettling final scene, which makes adroit use of a stage turntable (props to scenic designer Lee Jellinek), there are no humans left to heal. When storytelling is delegated to AI, truth becomes archival rather than relational; however, truth must be witnessed between living people in order to be ethically and therapeutically meaningful.  

Playwright Jordan Harrison’s Primes, like flesh-and-blood clinicians, absorb and co-construct patients’ accounts of self, yet they are disembodied, unfeeling, and ultimately unable to act with compassion, turning dynamic stories into datasets.   

Marjorie Prime, through Feb. 15 at the Helen Hayes Theater in New York; 2st.com/shows/marjorie-prime.  

“Much of healthcare happens in interpersonal moments,” write Maura Spiegel and Danielle Spencer in the first chapter of The Principles and Practice of Narrative Medicine—and machines are good at many things, but participating in a truly interpersonal moment is likely not one of them. Several studies have suggested that models perform worse for underrepresented groups because they are trained on datasets that lack racial, cultural, and linguistic diversity. Additionally, AI may miss subtle emotional cues and fail to interpret tone, context, and metaphors, which, one bioethicist [1] predicts, could “fundamentally alter” how trust is practiced in healthcare. Others [2] have underscored that “AI should be viewed not as a replacement for the physician, but as a partner in delivering empathetic, patient-centered care.” 

However, AI is not wholly bad. For example, a recent systematic review [3] found that applying natural language processing (NLP) to unstructured text in electronic health records (EHRs) can detect signs of cognitive impairment. Some [4] have found solace in text-based simulations with lost loved ones. And perhaps technology should be viewed as a vehicle for strengthening partnerships between clinicians and patients. Designed by Gabriela Gomes, the video game Healing Spaces aims to help those with neurodegenerative diseases connect with their caregivers. It is a multisensory experience: an app with beach and forest scenes, and a box with aromatherapy that smells like pine trees. Healing Spaces may evoke memories or even create new ones between caregiver and patient, unlike the Primes’ hollow curation. 

Healing Spaces also includes sunscreen-scented lotion that caregivers can use to massage the hands of those in their care. Needless to say, holograms and lotion don’t pair well. “You can’t touch a hologram. So there’s something about them looking so much like your loved ones, but not being able to quite achieve intimacy with them,” said Harrison during Marjorie Prime’s Off-Broadway run about a decade ago. “The loneliness can never be quite extinguished, never satisfied, because they’re just pixels.”  

[1] Kerasidou, Angeliki. “Artificial Intelligence and the Ongoing Need for Empathy,  Compassion and Trust in Healthcare.” Bulletin of the World Health Organization, vol. 98, no. 4, 2020, pp. 245-250. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7133472/. 

[2] Ghenimi, Nadirah, et al. “Integrating AI with Narrative-Based Medicine: Enhancing Patient-Centered Care in Primary Practice.” Perspectives in Primary Care, 5 Dec. 2024, info.primarycare.hms.harvard.edu/perspectives/articles/integrating-ai-with-narrative-based-medicine.  

[3] Shankar, Ravi et al. “Natural Language Processing of Electronic Health Records for Early Detection of Cognitive Decline: A Systematic Review.”npj Digital Medicine, vol. 8, no. 1, 2025, p. 133. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40025194/. 

[4] Fagone, Jason. “The Jessica Simulation: Love and Loss in the Age of A.I.” The San Francisco Chronicle, 23 July 2021, sfchronicle.com/projects/2021/jessica-simulation-artificial-intelligence/. 

Web image from 2nd Street Theater.

In Sophocles’s Oedipus Rex, a plague ravages Thebes as divine punishment for an unpunished crime—the murder of the eponymous king’s predecessor.

Two and a half millennia later, illness remains a metaphor in Robert Icke’s buzzy retelling of the Freud-genic tragedy, now on Broadway after a West End run last fall. Susan Sontag, who cautioned that portraying disease as a symbol of social decay can stigmatize patients, would likely disapprove. (Perhaps, apotheosized on Mount Olympus, she cursed Lesley Manville, who plays Oedipus’s wife and—spoiler alert—mother Jocasta, with an illness; Denise Cormier filled in when I saw the production.)

At curtain rise, on a stage-wide video screen, Oedipus (a charismatic and commanding Mark Strong)—reimagined as a politician on the cusp of electoral victory—tells a throng of eager reporters and supporters: “The civic body is ill. And that isn’t… chemicals in lakes—it’s us; we’re sick… The water got poisoned, and we got used to the taste.”

Economic inequality and xenophobia abound, as do rumors surrounding the death of Laius, the former ruler and Jocasta’s former husband. And so Oedipus promises to open an investigation. This off-script announcement exasperates his campaign manager and brother-in-law Creon (John Carroll Lynch), but Oedipus is steadfast in determining what happened. In Icke’s adaptation, probing the metaphorical plague is less a divine mandate and more a political act of narrative control. And, as Oedipus doubles down on transparency, what he uncovers about a fateful crossroads unravels his sense of self.

The truth of Oedipus’s identity is old news for most viewers, and we know that he is going to win. Yet Hildegard Bechtler’s set—an office with a hodgepodge of furniture, TV screens, and a clock counting down until the release of the election results—cultivates a palpable sense of uncertainty.

The successful set embodies Mikhail Bakhtin’s notion of the chronotope, or the inextricable fusion of time and space in literature. The literary theorist cites the road as one example of a chronotope. Social divisions such as class, nationality, and religion collapse, and time unfolds unpredictably through chance encounters rather than routine.

In Oedipus, as election night comes to a close, movers strip the campaign headquarters bare, transforming the space into a chronotope that mirrors how our hero is stripped of everything he once believed about himself. The ticking clock heightens the temporal pressure, heralding the landslide victory while portending the inexorable revelation that Oedipus did what every little boy dreams: killed Dad and married Mom.

Bakhtin also argues that chronotopes allow abstract ideas about philosophy, society, and cause and effect—say, the limits of free will and the illusion of power—to “take on flesh and blood.” Oedipus highlights the vital role chronotopes play in narratives, even if the coda transports us to the start of the campaign, undoing everything.

And even if much of the script doesn’t sparkle. For instance, Jocasta telling Oedipus “You’ll be the death of me” and calling him “baby boy” feels heavy-handed. Modern updates to Oedipus’s family dynamic have mixed success. The parts of adoptive mother Merope (Anne Reid) and daughter Antigone (Olivia Reis) are a welcome addition and expansion, respectively, bringing understated humor and wisdom. On the other hand, Icke casts one of Oedipus’s sons, Polyneices (James Wilbraham), as gay and the other, Eteocles (Jordan Scowen), as unfaithful. This framing raises an uneasy question: Are we meant to read queerness as a moral transgression on par with infidelity or incest? (Sontag, who was bisexual, probably wouldn’t be thrilled by this either.)

Icke’s greatest writing, however, is Jocasta’s hesitatingly revealed, harrowing backstory: She was only 13 when Laius raped her and forced her to abandon the resulting child. Jocasta recalls the delivery in visceral detail: the fluorescent lights of the hospital, the newborn Oedipus’s mucus-slick body. But she is denied the opportunity to share her traumatic account on her own terms; in his relentless quest for answers, Oedipus forces her long-hidden narrative, precipitating the discovery of their true relationship.

Narrative medicine emphasizes that this kind of listening can be destructive to both patient and listener. Indeed, Jocasta kills herself, and Oedipus gouges out his eyes with her heels. (Not very healing.)

Some narrative humility would have served Oedipus well. As Sayantani DasGupta writes, “narrative humility acknowledges that our patients’ stories are not objects that we can comprehend or master, but rather dynamic entities that we can approach and engage with, while simultaneously… engaging in constant self-evaluation and self-critique about issues such as our own role in the story.” With greater narrative humility, Oedipus might have better seen Jocasta—and himself.

Icke’s Oedipus teaches us that listening must be humble, ethical, and emotionally attuned; had it been so, perhaps the drama’s seemingly inevitable ending could have been averted.

Oedipus, through Feb. 8 at Studio 54 in New York; oedipustheplay.com.

Bakhtin, Mikhail. “Forms of Time and of the Chronotope in the Novel: Notes toward a Historical Poetics.” The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin, edited by Michael Holquist, translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, University of Texas Press, 1981, pp. 84-258.

DasGupta, Sayantani. “Narrative Humility.” The Lancet, vol. 371, no. 9617, 2008, pp. 980-981. thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2808%2960440-7/fulltext

Web image from Sonia Friedman Productions Limited.