AURELIA Magazine — Second Interview Feature
“Tides Between Worlds: A Conversation with Rafayel”
Interviewer: Welcome back, Rafayel. It’s been a while since your last interview with us. Has anything changed in your life beneath the waves?
Rafayel: (laughs softly) The ocean is never still, so… everything changes, and nothing does. The currents shift, territories blur, old ruins collapse while new ones reveal themselves. Personally? I’ve been spending a bit more time closer to the surface. Dangerous, yes, but interesting.
Interviewer: Dangerous in what way?
Rafayel: Humans are unpredictable. One moment they’re dropping offerings into the sea… the next, they’re dragging nets through entire ecosystems. It keeps things… exciting.
Interviewer: Speaking of humans, you seem more comfortable interacting with them now compared to before.
Rafayel: “Comfortable” might be generous. Curious is more accurate. There are… certain individuals who make the surface world harder to ignore.
Interviewer: That sounds suspiciously personal.
Rafayel: (smirks) You asked about my life, didn’t you?
Interviewer: Fair enough. Let’s shift a bit, our readers are fascinated by merman culture. What does a typical day look like for you?
Rafayel: There’s no such thing as “typical” underwater. But if I had to describe it… I patrol my territory, check on the reef structures, make sure nothing is… out of place. I paint, when the mood strikes. And sometimes, I just drift. Let the currents decide where I go.
Interviewer: You paint underwater?
Rafayel: Of course. Pigments behave differently in saltwater, more fluid, more alive. It’s less about control and more about surrender. The ocean finishes the piece with me.
Interviewer: That’s beautiful. Now, a question we have to ask, what do you eat?
Rafayel: (grins) Ah, the question humans always circle back to.
Interviewer: We’re very food-motivated creatures.
Rafayel: Clearly. Well… fresh fish, obviously. But not in the way you might think. It’s not mindless hunting. There’s a balance we maintain. I also eat sea fruits, certain kelp pods, saltberries, coral blossoms.
Interviewer: Coral… blossoms?
Rafayel: Rare, and seasonal. Slightly sweet, with a sharp mineral finish. You wouldn’t survive eating one, though.
Interviewer: Good to know. I’ll cross that off my list.
Rafayel: (laughs) Please do.
Interviewer: Do you ever eat human food?
Rafayel: Occasionally. It’s… fascinating. Overly processed, but creative. I’ve developed a liking for sweets. Mochi, especially.
Interviewer: Mochi? That’s unexpectedly adorable.
Rafayel: Don’t make it sound like a weakness.
Interviewer: It absolutely is.
Rafayel: …Fine. It is.
Interviewer: Last time we spoke, you mentioned your connection to the ocean feels almost… sentient. Do you still feel that way?
Rafayel: More than ever. The ocean remembers things. It holds echoes, voices, emotions, histories long forgotten by land. Sometimes I think… it watches us back.
Interviewer: Does that comfort you or unsettle you?
Rafayel: Both. It means I’m never truly alone… but it also means I’m never truly unseen.
Interviewer: That’s a haunting thought. One last question, if you could send a message to humans reading this, what would it be?
Rafayel: (pauses, gaze distant) The ocean is not yours. It never was. But it will remember how you treat it.
…And if you’re kind to it, you might find it kinder to you.
Interviewer: That’s a powerful note to end on. Thank you, Rafayel.
Rafayel: Always a pleasure. Try not to fall in, hm? I might not be the one who finds you.
[As the interview wraps up, the recorder clicks off, but the silence that follows isn’t empty, it’s heavy. The kind that lingers too long.
The interviewer thanks him again, gathering their notes, trying to shake off that strange, almost magnetic pull he has. When they glance up to say one last goodbye...
He’s already gone.
Not in a dramatic splash. Not even a ripple.
Just… gone.]
—
Later, when the issue of AURELIA is finally published, everything appears normal. The interview prints beautifully. The photos are stunning. Rafayel half-submerged, light bending around him like he belongs to something deeper than the lens can capture.
But readers start to notice small things.
A line that doesn’t quite match what they remember reading the first time.
A sentence that wasn’t there before: “Some of you have already heard me.”
And then there’s the final page. It isn’t part of the official interview. It’s not credited, not formatted like the rest.
What is nature? “I automatically think of the trees and the sky and the birds and the animals and the ocean...fire...those natural elements of the world”
Huomenta, sweethearts. It is bright and early and I have half an hour until my first, and hopefully only, interview of today. We’ll see, though. I’m hoping today will go better, but it’s a whole different interview with different tutors, so we’ll see. Either way, I should be done by 10 and be able to go for a spot of Christmas Shopping. I think the Oxford Christmas Markets have opened today.
Interview 2: The Lawyer and Bio Major. (2 different people)
I learned that you should never interview a lawyer, they’ll give you as little information as possible.
Key Points
*Both
-Agreed it was needed to find your own sense of community, Some people find this through campus ministries and others find it through the various organizations around campus.
-Time commitment conflicted with both of their schedules, which made them unable to be active in BSM.
*Lawyer
-”Time commitment conflicted with my schedule as far as being a big part of BSM and I know that there’s plenty of black people in BSM or greek life, but I reserve no negative connotations on BSM. Plus, I have no idea what they stand for.”
-”I would pay the $15 and be a member, but that’s all I would be. It’s very low-key, or you can become very involved.”
-There is a group called Silent Sam, they get into “good trouble”
*Biology Major
-”Anytime something negative happens in the black community, BSM gets tied for to it, even if it’s not their fault.”
-Agreed that it was a large group and there’s a lot of false information.
Tunke: ‘Wat wist u al over de sensibiliseringscampagne Go For Zero?’
Van Thielen: ‘Ik ken Go For Zero als een overheidsorganisatie die het aantal verkeersdoden tot op nul probeert terug te brengen en dus een beter gedrag in het verkeer stimuleert.’
Tunke: ‘Kende u dit reclamefilmpje al?’
Van Thielen: ‘Ik zelf had het filmpje tot hier toe nog niet gezien op tv maar mijn vrouw dacht van wel.’
Tunke: ‘Wat vindt u van deze campagne?’
Van Thielen: ‘Het is een droevige, confronterende, rakende spot.’
Tunke: ‘Vindt u het een geslaagde campagne?’
Van Thielen: ‘Ja, ik vind het een sterkte spot. De doelgroep voor deze spot zijn duidelijk de jongere en ik denk dan een afgeleide duidelijke doelgroep meer resultaat geeft dan een spot voor een algemene doelgroep. Toch mis ik een beetje dat men het gewenst gedrag, wat betreft verkeersveiligheid, ook positief moet benaderen. In de spot is enkel te zien dat verkeersonveiligheid heel ingrijpende gevolgen kan hebben.
Tunke: ‘Vindt u de spot dan geschikt om op televisie te vertonen?’
Van Thielen: ‘Ik denk zeker dat deze spot geschikt is om op tv te tonen. De spot is hard maar niet luguber.’
Tunke: ‘Wat zou u aan de spot veranderd hebben?’
Van Thielen: ‘Men zou misschien in de spot kunnen laten zien dat mensen met een gewenst gedrag, die verkeersveiligheid wel toepassen, wel met hun geliefde en kinderen samen de begrafenis binnen of buiten stappen.’
Tunke: ‘Vindt u dit een goede clip op mensen op de gevaren van te snel rijden te wijzen?’
Van Thielen: ‘Ik denk dat dit zeker beter werkt dan een spot met humor.’
Tunke: ‘Tenslotte, vind u deze spot controversieel?’
Van Thielen: ‘Met de actuele heisa over Go For zero denk ik dat deze spot zeker uitgezonden mag worden.’
