$ vaguely remembers what the building looked like after passing by on a walk to _ _ with ^ some time ago, when ^ mentioned that they were in the area recently to see %.

% was who $ was now on their way to see. And this conversation with ^ might have been what made $ think of % as someone who would be good to interview for their project on +.

$ was under the impression that they were on the right side of the right street.

The street looked vaguely like #, but $ was unsure of how far or in what direction it went, or how that matched their memory of the place.

After all, they were some distance from !.

There was a stiffness to the houses that was unfamiliar. It wasn’t that the houses were cold, there was something homely to them.

If anything, it was that it seemed too much like a perfect picture of a home that made it feel out of place for $ and $ started to realize that was what had caught them off guard.

Trying to position themselves, $ looks for the numbers to see which way is up or down, realizing that they can’t rely on their memory any more from their passing conversation with ^ and, after walking for some time, that all of the buildings don’t look so different from each other despite $ remembering how distinct the buildings seemed to be before.

Each of the houses had their own color choices. The trimming around the windows, that was a different material from the facade, painted in a combination considered to the color of the trimming or for what was next to it.

The amount of space between their lawn and the sidewalk showed $ how much they might want to bring their neighbors in or over to get to know each other, or to keep those passing by at various levels of separation, a way to see how much distance to maintain.

Each decision seemed to show the character of the person or people living there. Whereas in ! everything was so familiar that it all looked the same to $.

After finally figuring out the number system

(the numbers of the buildings were going up, while the street was slanting down),

$ unlocked some kind of logic:

$ had been aware of % before becoming aware of their involvement in +, but through @.

It was only recently, on this walk to _ _ with ^, when they realized that % had worked on both + and @. A surprising overlap to $, but one that followed the logic of where they were; it seemed to make sense to $. They didn’t doubt it and realized also that they were on the odd side of the street and needed to get even.

Waiting to cross the street to get to the other side, and letting the ~s pass by, $ pulled out the list of questions they’d written down to direct the conversation.

$ had been thinking about =. That was what made $ so surprised that % had been a part of both + and @. Their thinking seemed to be similar; they were drawn towards similar things that could seem so separate and far away from each other, + and @. That was surprising to $ and almost proved the point on its own.

Reading through the questions that $ thought could touch on +’s influence on @, $ noticed that they had written down a question that might have been meant more for ^.

They scribbled it out quickly before taking a photo of the list in case they could later recall why they had mixed the two up, or if it was still somehow relevant.

$’s phone was at 15 percent but still died slowly somehow, so they weren’t worried about recording. Knowing themselves and that this could happen, they had thought to bring a tape-recorder just in case. In their consideration of how this interview might happen, $ hoped they had remembered to bring the tape recorder with them in the rush to get to %’s place to record the interview. $ wasn’t worried about that, but was worried about figuring out if % would follow how they understood = , and how = relates to both + and -.

$ thought about -. The stakes felt high. The tension made them pull out the notes that they had just stuffed back into their pocket. They unwrapped the wrinkled note.

They were trying to get at how - could be why _+- happens. The example of how these things added up and the logic of where they were made them laugh.

$ thought about how the reasoning of where $ was related to what they were familiar with ! would mean.

It was good for $ to laugh at themselves.

$ pushed the buzzer, remembering that they had previously reversed the numbers in their head and switched the building with the apartment number.

Expecting to hear % inviting them in, they instead heard not a voice but air passing through the speakers.

$ heard the lock on the door unclick.

As they stepped in the building the lights turned themselves on.

% looked down the hallway, searching for the numbers on the door, half knowing that 28 would be on the 2nd floor.

The two’s were a give-a-away, but you never know.

At the top of the steps was a series of doors.

$ noticed that one of them was cracked open, 28.

They wondered if they should knock first before walking in or open slightly more and suggest a “hello?”

Before $ could decide, the door swung open further,

(into the hallway, not the apartment, almost hitting $ in the head)

% must have been able to hear their footsteps up the stairway.

% greeted $ with a nod but quickly warmed up by offering some (*&’ or {}’ to $.

% wondered where it would be better to sit for the interview, at the small kitchen table in the center of the room or on the couch near the sliding door that led to the narrow balcony overlooking the courtyard.

% made the decision for $, set a ___ down on the table on the chair facing the window. $ wondered if the tape-recorder would put too much pressure on the conversation rather than letting it happen naturally — but maybe a more formal gesture would be good, to make it clear that $ thought that the conversation would be worthwhile.

Before $ could ask if it would be ok to record, % jumped into it immediately, talking about = before either of them could sit down.

Instead of deciding to ask whether or not % would be ok with recording the conversation, $ reached into their pocket and grabbed the recorder, pushing the record button before placing it on the table, after briefly considering leaving it in the bag but deciding against it and placing it in the open.

( % Walked back in the room without noticing the tape recorder now on the table and setting a () down near it. )

Getting distracted in the details, $ started to wonder if the conversation was getting further from the script stuffed in their pocket, now crumpled and hardly legible.

$ wondered if the more formal prepared questions might do the opposite of creating a sense of formality at this point if they unfolded the list they’d written.

Despite the paper being crumpled, they opened it up in their hand and thought to guide the conversation back to where they initially intended it to go.

It would be rude to interrupt so abruptly, so $ figured they’d entertain where the conversation was wandering to a little bit longer.

(Caught up again in their own experiences and thoughts, the conversation drifts a little bit further.)

But %, who had started to notice how $ was finding a way to redirect and pull-out the A - sides, and uncertain of whether to let the conversation continue on as it was going or to regain some sense of direction, remembers “+” again:

Repositioning themselves with the directness of $’s response, % readjusts themselves in their seat — the one they’d picked for themselves and by default chosen the other option for $ — stirring slightly until finding themselves and their thoughts comfortable.

(...)