CONTRIBUTOR SPOTLIGHT:
Interview with Lucas Selby

Rappahannock Review Fiction Editors: The idea of a time loop in “Dead in the Water” is very intriguing; how did you develop the concept?

Lucas Selby: 

Time loops have become more popular in fiction since the release of Groundhog Day in 1993. It was my first introduction to the concept, and I only saw it expanded upon in films like Edge of Tomorrow (2014) and Palm Springs (2020). Time loops exist to explore our conceptions of consequentialism, so shorting the time frame from a day, as seen in the three films, to a few minutes forces the protagonist to take on a single-minded goal, focusing on the consequences of solving just one thing. I wanted to explore the frustration of pursuing a single-minded goal and failing repeatedly, as well as the effects such failures can have on our mental health, our actions, and the consequences of those actions.

RR: We love the way the narrative creates suspense and conveys the protagonist’s confusion; how did those techniques unfold for you as you wrote the story?

LS: Jacob Geller wrote a wonderful essay called “Time Loop Nihilism” where he explores how time loops affect our morality over, well, time. Our natural reaction to such an extraordinary event would begin with confusion, but as we loop, the confusion would melt away as we adapt to our new circumstances. The way we adapt is what informs us about our morality, but we only get to hold on to that morality if the loop ends after we learn and before we break. The protagonist in “Dead in the Water” quickly shows their good moral standing in trying to save the murder victim, but it is only after they break and act selfishly that the loop ends, trapping them anew.

RR: We’re interested in how the surreal events reflect the narrator’s state of mind and personality. How do you think about the connection between plot and character?   

LS: When I first wrote “Dead in the Water,” one of my editors proposed the theory that the events of the story were all happening inside the protagonist’s head prior to the canonical event that “breaks the loop.” It’s an interesting take, but it’s one that I ultimately disagree with. It implies that a person can go from having a solid moral compass in one moment to a murderer in the next. I prefer a more consequentialist read. Trauma, especially trauma that we feel we can’t escape and are incapable of sharing with others, is ultimately what causes people to hurt others. 

RR: What are some of the biggest challenges you have faced in your writing and how did you overcome them?

LS: I wrote the first draft of this story in the late 2010s when time loop narratives were coming back into vogue. Readers told me that the concept was overplayed and couldn’t be explored further. I, of course, disagree. Time loops are a genre of fiction, and just because something is popular doesn’t mean it’s cliche to write about it. They are, in fact, one of my favorite genres, and I would prefer to see more people exploring consequentialism and the effects of trauma through them.

RR: If you had to live in a time loop, what moment would you pick and why?

LS: If I’m going to be stuck in a time loop and have no conception of when it could end, I’d take it as the perfect opportunity to explore, be it traveling, mastering new skills, or maximizing happiness around the world. Time is the only thing holding us back from becoming our perfect selves, but trying every day, even if it’s the same day over and over, is still a worthwhile endeavor.