Queue on 5/11/2010 at 14:38
The recent thread about the NaNoWriMo sparking interest in, and drawing greater attention to, novel writing has me wondering: What do you prefer to read? Do you prefer diving into novels? Or, would you rather sink your teeth into short stories?
I've always been of the opinion that most novels are nothing more than really good short stories with too many words. That concise ideas become polluted and diluted by too much information. For me, a short story is the epitome of one's craft. A writer can capture a moment, explore it, give it meaning, and deliver a message. In the short story, metaphor shines and characters are given fuller life by what's not being told. For the writer, one's words have to be chosen and delivered carefully to achieve the greatest, and most desired, effect on the reader. And sometimes what isn't said can be the words that are most effective.
Now to say that novels can't, or don't, achieve these same points or conjure up the same emotions without delving into tangents and filler simply isn't true. But I wonder if there is too much of a focus on achieving a word count instead of paying meticulous attention to craft. Most new writers I talk with are plunging into novel writing instead of cutting their teeth on short stories. Their reason: There's no market for short stories. So, even though collections and anthologies of short stories are being published, there is this perception of a lacking market.
In many ways this is true. Long gone are the days of magazine racks stuffed with tomes offering one delight after another--finding adventure, murder, mayhem, joy, tenderness, realizations, good scares, good laughs, and good cries. The current short story "market" is more-or-less relegated to the pages of the world wide web, offering no to very little pay, where sites can be flash-point hot, and just as fleeting. Writers can no longer make a living practicing such a true form of art.
Which is a strange, since people always say they don't read because they don't have the time to become involved in a novel. For that, it seems short stories would be ideal for brief escapes from our day-to-day lives. I mean, who doesn't read on the toilet, right?
So what do you say?
steo on 5/11/2010 at 15:16
I presume you're talking about cock.
demagogue on 5/11/2010 at 15:34
Short stories (good ones) often are more memorable in the details because they're written so that, sentence for sentence, there's more bang for the words. Since your space is limited, it forces you to not waste words and get them straight to the ore without a bunch of dirt to dig through. But you have to have that discipline. The worst thing is a short story of wasted words.
The master of this IMO was Borges, whose short stories, almost vignettes, are so tight and awesome, like little mathematical proofs in language, that he can create an entire world that stays with you in 5 pages or so.
Stitch on 5/11/2010 at 15:38
I think that short stories are generally underrated--why do established novelists often stop writing them, anyway?--but novels also fulfill a different and valuable place. Short stories are passionate but all-consuming sex affairs whereas long novels are akin to falling in love with someone's hidden strengths over an extended and enriching courtship.
Poems, of course, are entwined bodies in Paris colliding with the moment her eyes betray that she no longer loves you.
kabatta on 5/11/2010 at 16:33
Quote Posted by steo
I presume you're talking about cock.
I enforce your belief and raise you a centimeter.
Hewer on 5/11/2010 at 16:56
My very favorite short story is (
http://www.archipelago.org/vol3-1/holst.htm) The Zebra StoryTeller.
A good short story is harder to write and less profitable. It also leaves a writer with nowhere to hide. I'm certainly not bagging on novels or novelists, but they leave a lot more room for a bad or mediocre writer to mask their shortcomings with lots of words and fluff.
I certainly like to dive in and get immersed in big novels, and I'm usually somewhere in the middle of one, but overall, I think I appreciate a good, punchy short story more. They generally mean a lot more to me in the long run.
Fingernail on 5/11/2010 at 17:23
Personally, I value conciseness, in nearly any form. That doesn't necessarily mean short (although it certainly means not bloated). Longer forms like novels, though, offer a much more extended relationship, as Stitch says, and over the days, weeks or even months that I'm reading something, can have a profound effect on the way I think and feel during that period - and even after.
Shorter works, short stories, poems, song lyrics, what have you, offer more of a direct hit in much less time, but it may take some time to truly appreciate all the detail, and I find myself constantly revisting and admiring the construction and beauty of shorter pieces.
But I particularly admire poems and in my own lyrics, attempt to reduce the words to the barely essential.
God, I love the written word.
reizak on 5/11/2010 at 17:26
I've never been a big fan of short stories. Apart from the output of a few writers skilled in the form (Chekhov and Borges spring to mind and that's about it), a lot of short stories just feel forced and ham-handed. I get the feeling that the writer was only concerned with presenting an idea that they might as well have said in one sentence instead of being forced to come up with a story, any story, to deliver it with. Vonnegut is a good example. I love his novels, but his short stories just feel juvenile and formulaic. In fact I think that the biggest difference between the majority of short stories and children's stories is that short stories don't put a "moral: don't trust your stepmom" at the end.
Although I pretty much only read poetry and nonfiction these days; maybe my prejudices need updating.
Kolya on 5/11/2010 at 18:43
Much as I love short stories (esp. by F. Scott Fitzgerald) it's just not an appropriate form if you want to describe a whole life (Bildungsroman) for example, or historic/epic events that stretch over long periods of time. There are probably more such examples that cannot be fit into a short story so you shouldn't sell novels short. (I MADE A JOKE!) They're not easier to write at all, you've just been reading shitty novels then.
Aja on 5/11/2010 at 18:47
Not that I've ever really written either, but I always thought that writing a short story would be easier than a novel. Either way, I'm going to obsess over every sentence.
Anyway, there's a place for each. Joyce's Dubliners does exceptionally well expressing itself as a series of vignettes but in terms of depth of characterization it can't match Portrait of the Artist. Like Koyla says, it's difficult to detail a life in thirty minutes or so.