REVIEW: “The Kill Registry” by Brian Howlett

Review of Brian Howlett, “The Kill Registry,” After Dinner Conversation 3, no. 12 (December 2022): 67-80 — Subscribe here. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

Content note: Murder, domestic abuse.

This is the sort of spec fic I love: Take an outrageous premise, and see where it leads. In this case, the outrageous premise is “everyone gets one bullet — one free kill that they can use at any point in their life, no questions asked, no consequences.” (The most unrealistic part of it was the story behind how the premise got implemented in the first place — a Louisiana politician took the idea from a Geneva PhD student, and America loved it. When will America ever voluntarily limit the number of people one can shoot with impunity?)

Howlett combined this premise with some decent writing quality, making this one of the most fun stories I read in this issue. The only thing that let me down was how dumb the narrator’s use of his bullet was, in the end. It was just plain old misogyny.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment

REVIEW: “Male Privilege” by Alan Winnikoff

Review of Alan Winnikoff, “Male Privilege,” After Dinner Conversation 3, no. 12 (December 2022): 27-46 — Subscribe here. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

(Note: After Dinner Conversation pairs spec fic stories with philosophical reflection questions. In some reviews, I’ll engage with the questions; in some, I won’t.)

Content note: Sexual assault.

I really did not enjoy this story: Brendon, the main character, has no redeeming qualities. For most of the story, I wasn’t 100% convinced that I was supposed to enjoy it, that Brendon was supposed to generate any sympathy in me or that I should’ve expected any female character in it to be anything other than a foil for a man.

But the opening discussion question asks (paraphrased) “but, really, did he really do anything wrong?” which is a question that can only be asked by someone who thinks there is a possibility that the answer is “no”. So apparently someone must’ve thought there was a shred of acceptability in Brendon.

I try to keep my reviews relatively measured, even for stories that I don’t like. But with this one, I feel compelled to say: Don’t read it.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment

REVIEW: “Lev’s Pawn Shop” by Megan Neary

Review of Megan Neary, “Lev’s Pawn Shop,” After Dinner Conversation 3, no. 12 (December 2022): 83-91 — Subscribe here. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

(Note: After Dinner Conversation pairs spec fic stories with philosophical reflection questions. In some reviews, I’ll engage with the questions; in some, I won’t.)

For a journal that is ostensibly about engaging with philosophy and philosophical questions, I’ve been surprised at how big a role religion (mostly, pretty conservative Christianity) has played in the stories in this issue. This isn’t because I think philosophy and religion are antithetical to each other, but rather because I think they are not the same thing, and when I’m promised one and I get the other, that’s worth noting. I wonder what this story might have been like if instead of Lev being motivated by Bible passages, he’d read Mill on utilitarianism, or Kant on deontology, or Aristotle on virtue, and that had been what changed his behavior.

But, I enjoyed this story of redemption more than I enjoyed some of the others in this issue, so thumbs up for that.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment

REVIEW: “What Should We Do With the Body?” by Amelia Weissman

Review of Amelia Weissman, “What Should We Do With the Body?” Luna Station Quarterly 64 (December 2025): 95-99 — Purchase here. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

Never thought I’d read a story about nuclear fairy beetles — something that sounds a bit like “take a word from this hat, a word from that hat, and another word from that hat, and then write a story about the combination” — but whatever Weissman’s inspiration was, the result is something different and a bit unusual, and fun to read.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment

REVIEW: “Loxley is One Thousand Bats” by Camsyn Clair

Review of Camsyn Clair, “Loxley is One Thousand Bats,” Flash Fiction Online 146 (November 2025): 33-35 — Purchase here. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

Content note: Self-harm.

The thousand bats are a metaphor, and at the start of the story I worried that it might end up being a too-heavy-handed one. That worry was not founded; the story developed to focus on the story, rather than the metaphor, and so ultimately the entire thing worked for me.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment

REVIEW: “Wire Mother” by Isabel J. Kim

Review of Isabel J. Kim, “Wire Mother”, Clarkesworld Issue 229, October (2025): Read Online. Reviewed by Myra Naik.

Dystopian stories set in an indeterminate future are, quite truly, my jam. A great story about perspectives and how societal expectations shape what’s “normal” and what isn’t. I also liked the connection to neurodiverse experiences – there’s nothing wrong about being different. The context for this connection was exceedingly lovely, and makes it one of those stories that become an immediate must-share.

myra naikLeave a comment

REVIEW: “The Tangle” by Rae Mariz

Review of Rae Mariz, “The Tangle,” khōréō 4, no. 4 (2025) — Read online. Reviewed by Sara L. Uckelman.

Content note: Animal harm, references to genocide.

As a reader from the tail end of the blip generation, you’re accustomed to your stories having a very particular shape. A recognizable structure. This narrative is likely to be new terrain.

This quote completely encapsulates the thoughts I’d been having very shortly before this quote — that the story itself was a tangle, structured in an unfamiliar, and hence confusing, way. This quote helped reassure me that persevering would be worth it. I think by the end I’d mostly sorted out the tangle. Was it worth it? I’m not sure. Parts of it were too didactic (and too rhetorical) for my taste. But I suspect this is a story I’ll continue to think about.

Sara L. UckelmanLeave a comment