The Perfect Short Story

[dustinzgirl]

Allrighty, Ladies, Knights and Troubadors (I just love that word, say it outloud 3 times fast. And no, I can't spell it right. Deal. )

So the more I try to write short stories, and the more help I get from my darling friends here, the more I realise that this is WAY WAY harder than writing 50 thousand words. Way harder. Why is it harder? Because of SCOPE. I have little problem with point of view, characterisation, and I do suffer from technical errors, but the SCOPE of the story (in less than 6000 words) confounds me. How much should I introduce? What social nuances and character conflicts should I add or omit? How do I draw the line of when?

So...in an effort to help me keep my short stories tight, I was thinking we should all collarborate and write a GENERIC short story outline. Maybe this will help you too, and I am sure it will help me. So far, this is what I have come up with:

1. Introduction -- No more than 1/5 the story, or so I have been told.
Things to introduce --- Thesis --- why this story exists, without actually saying why this story exist.
2. Characters and Mileiu --- Who, When and Where
3. Crescendo --- How and Why
4. Climax --- The Obstacle
5. Resolution --- The overcoming --- How, why, who
6. Decrease --- The Ending.


Of course, these can be inverted, subverted and interchanged depending on how the story should go.

But, how much detail to give, and what to leave off?

 

[PenDragon]

Good post and I think you're right short story writing is a very different beast to it's distant cousin the novel and is very hard to master. It's a much more focused art form and every word really counts, it's quite an unforgiving format.

Ideally a short story is one life changing moment in the life of one character. The character should be very vivid, the moment very important and at the end of it the character makes does something that changes his life for ever or refuses his last chance to change.

Theme is another important element, every word in a short should work for your theme.

In another forum a writer friend of mine wrote about the nine elements he'd expect to find in the perfect short story he later expanded it into an article that can be found here...http://www.eclectica.org/v8n1/keegan_dish.html ...hint, the article is good but read the nine numbered points on there own first, that was the orginal forum post and still the best part of the what later became the article.

I think the nine points hold true for all short stories, but in genre I think plot takes over from theme in importance/focus.

Here are some notes on short story plotting I've collected over the years (I think I might have posted them here before but couldn't find anything with the search).

Short Story Plotting

The Beginning - Five essentials

1 Introduce the main character
2 Hint at the problem
3 set the scene
4 Establish the mood
5 Cast the narrative hook

A good opener should

1 Set the story tone

2 Set the story voice

3 Give us a sense of time and place

4 Foreshadow or mirror the theme, or hint at theme

5 Begin to indicate character or characters (gender helps)

6 Create the reader's "mode of acceptance"

7 Suggest what kind of story, sad, comic etc


Dialogue

The functions of Dialogue

1 To provide information
2 To advance story
3 To Characterise
4 To Convey emotions
Character

Methods of character presentation

1 Direct description
2 Dominant traits
3 Appearance
4 Dialogue
5 Actions- movements and gestures
6 Thoughts and emotions
7 Surroundings

Three laws

1 All stories must tell of a struggle or conflict
2 All conflict must be of vital importance to the characters
3 The consequences of failure must be disastrous


Three Types of Conflict

1 Man against man
2 Man against circumstance, or nature.
3 Man against self

Three Steps to Story ideas

1 A word (opening line or title)
2 A character
3 One of the three basic conflicts

A Plot Skeleton

Situation
In which a character is in conflict with another character, with self, or with circumstances.

Incident One
Something occurs, which increases or intensifies the characters problems, and heightens the tension.

Incident Two
There is a second incident perhaps arising from the first, which makes the characters predicament much worse.

Reaction
The character attempts to overcome the problems.

Frustration
The characters attempts are thwarted by the introduction of yet another complication, 'Which must be entirely different from the first two', and which further intensifies the situation.

Reaction/Resolution
The character again attempts to overcome the problems and either succeeds - in which case the story comes to its conclusion - or is again thwarted, and there are second Reaction and Frustration stages leading to a final Resolution

Scenes

Each individual incident, reaction, frustration, and resolution is a Scene

The purpose of a scene is to

1 Paint a vivid picture
2 Create an air of anticipation (story hook)
3 Have emotional reversal
4 Generate the urge to know what will happen next

Emotional Reversal
The scene should start with the character in one state and end with in a different state. If they start the scene happy they should be sad by the end of the scene. If things start bad , they should build until they finish good.


I'm always up for talking about short stories, btw.

 

[dustinzgirl]

Wow. Great stuff! Thank you!

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

There are some very good things there. But I have to disagree with a couple of points.

While emotional reversal is one very good way to end a scene, it isn't (as it sounds, but may not be what is meant) a necessary part of every scene. In fact, if it occurred in every single scene, the main character would be swinging back and forth from one emotion to the next with so much regularity that it would be, on the one hand predictable, and on the other likely to give the readers whiplash. A scene can be equally dramatic if, for instance, the dominant emotion intensifies rather than reverses.

I'd also say that the consequences of failure need not be so devastating -- depending on the kind of story you are writing. In murder mysteries, for instance, when the perpetrator isn't actively trying to lead the detective astray, there may not even be any real conflict, because it has already been resolved in advance (with the murder) and the main character (the detective) may have little investment in the final outcome. The thing that fuels these stories is not conflict but revelation.

And take the Sherlock Holmes stories, which are classics. Sometimes Holmes and Watson are in danger, and sometimes the villain turns up the challenge them, but in a large number of the stories neither Watson, who narrates, nor Holmes, who is the focus of the story, would face any real consequences if the mystery went unresolved. Watson might be slightly disillusioned, and Holmes slightly embarrassed, but neither of those outcomes would be disastrous.

 

[PenDragon]

There are some very good things there. But I have to disagree with a couple of points.

While emotional reversal is one very good way to end a scene, it isn't (as it sounds, but may not be what is meant) a necessary part of every scene. In fact, if it occurred in every single scene, the main character would be swinging back and forth from one emotion to the next with so much regularity that it would be, on the one hand predictable, and on the other likely to give the readers whiplash. A scene can be equally dramatic if, for instance, the dominant emotion intensifies rather than reverses.

Your right, but I didn't really consider it to be a rule set in stone. I don't even actually use this outline. I've used this plot skeleton once and came up with a reasonable 14,000 comedy fantasy story. Generally though, I don't plot my shorts, but find a character/voice, situation or sometimes even an image and just go with that. I tend to with theme and character over plot.

I included the plot skeleton cos it looked like the list dustinzgirl had in her first post.

I'd also say that the consequences of failure need not be so devastating -- depending on the kind of story you are writing. In murder mysteries, for instance, when the perpetrator isn't actively trying to lead the detective astray, there may not even be any real conflict, because it has already been resolved in advance (with the murder) and the main character (the detective) may have little investment in the final outcome. The thing that fuels these stories is not conflict but revelation.

And take the Sherlock Holmes stories, which are classics. Sometimes Holmes and Watson are in danger, and sometimes the villain turns up the challenge them, but in a large number of the stories neither Watson, who narrates, nor Holmes, who is the focus of the story, would face any real consequences if the mystery went unresolved. Watson might be slightly disillusioned, and Holmes slightly embarrassed, but neither of those outcomes would be disastrous.

You're right again but I think it's a question I think it's of scale,

The consequences of failure must be disastrous

makes it sound more melodramyic than it needs to be f'rex there is a world of difference between a disastrous battle and a disastrous dinner party, but both could mean the world to a character in any given short story and be the basis for tension and conflict.

I should have added that like any of this "writing rules stuff." it isn't to be taken at face value but I'm lazy so I just cut and pasted it from the file where it lives on my hard drive.

I have to disagree with the Homes example though I think the damage to his ego from a failed case would be in effect disatrous to the character, not so much a disaster for Watson (but he's a daft old bugger anyway).

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think the damage to his ego from a failed case would be in effect disatrous to the character, not so much a disaster for Watson (but he's a daft old bugger anyway).

Really? But Holmes failed in "A Scandal in Bohemia," and he took that rather well. Besides, I think his ego is up to about anything.

(And which Watson are you talking about? It sounds like the movie Watson, not that solid citizen and former army surgeon, John H. Watson M. D., who appears in the stories.)

 

[PenDragon]

Really? But Holmes failed in "A Scandal in Bohemia," and he took that rather well. Besides, I think his ego is up to about anything.

(And which Watson are you talking about? It sounds like the movie Watson, not that solid citizen and former army surgeon, John H. Watson M. D., who appears in the stories.)

I've only seen Basil Rathbone's Holmes, so I bow to your greater knowledge of the characters.

How do you approach short story writing Teresa?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I've had some pieces of short fiction published, but I'm not so sure that any of them qualify as short stories in the way the term is generally meant. One of them is a ghost story, one a fable, another a mystery ... I'm not sure what the others are.

And back when I was writing most of them, I hadn't really given much thought to how these things ought to be written. Though reviewers seemed to like the last two much more than I did, I probably could do a better job of it now.


Poor Watson -- the movies don't begin to do him justice, although Rathbone is a superb Holmes. The doctor is not stupid or eccentric at all; he simply looks a little dense in comparison to the remarkable mental powers of his friend.

 

[dustinzgirl]

I have never read or watched Sherlock Holmes. How wierd is that? LOL.

 

[PenDragon]

I'm not so sure that any of them qualify as short stories in the way the term is generally meant. One of them is a ghost story, one a fable, another a mystery.

Well I think all those could be defined as short stories, ghost, fable and mystery being the genres (kind of) the fact that they were published as short stories kinda helps, at least the editors thought they were shorts. Can you remeber if they focused on mainly one character and one event in that charcater's life by the way? Just out of interest.

Another question if you don't mind Terasa, do you consider yourself as a novelist or a writer that writes novels, what I mean is are full length books your calling above and beyond other formats?

Going back to the orginal Post and Dustingirls question...

But, how much detail to give, and what to leave off?

I'd say (and this is a genrealisation, but a decent one) everything in a short story should serve you theme.

Of course you need scene setting, and character is important, in genre so is plot, but the writing for all of these should also add to your theme/premise.

The tricky thing is knowing what you want to do with the story, what you want to acheive, you might not focus on this subconsiously when you sit down to write, but chances are as a writer you have your own themes/premise that you keep returning to.

Here's an example, you write a first draft about revenge with four scenes, SC1 the hero's loved one is killed. Sc2. he finds out who did it. Sc3 the hero vists his mother SC4 he takes revenge on the killer.

In second draft you'd take out scene three, as you write more short stories you'd prolly not write sc3 in the first place becasue you instictively know it doesn't fit your theme.

Of course these are dumb examples and there are always exceptions and no hard and fast rules, but basically what detail goes in is only the detail important to your story/theme what's left out is anything that doesn't add to it. It's different in longer formats, you have time and space to add colour with more description, world building, more charctersiation, more characters, readers are expecting it (I'd be dissapointed in a fantasy novel that at didn't at least hint at an interestering and different world and culture) but in shorts it all needs to be tightly focused.

Usual caveat, I'm no expert, the above isn't 100% but I hope it helps.

Are you working on a short story at the moment dustinzgirl?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Can you remember if they focused on mainly one character and one event in that charcater's life by the way? Just out of interest.

In most of them I did. The fable has no real protagonist, and a couple of the stories have two protagonists, but I'd say the rest focus on one person, and revolve around one event, although there may be early scenes that build up to that event.

But it's interesting that you use a revenge story as an example, because one of my most recent stories is about a character who sets out to take revenge. The story begins with her being released from prison, determined to take revenge on the unknown party who put her there and destroyed her family. The next scene brings the revelation of the person who is responsible. Then there is some exposition as she sets things in motion to achieve her revenge. Then a scene in which she reacts to what she has done. And in the last scene she explains herself to a friend and basically sums up the theme of the story.

Another question if you don't mind Teresa, do you consider yourself as a novelist or a writer that writes novels, what I mean is are full length books your calling above and beyond other formats?

At this point in time I definitely consider myself a novelist who sometimes writes other things. I don't feel that I have the same affinity or aptitude for writing short fiction, or the skill.

But that could change someday. By the time you've completed one novel, you've probably learned a lot about novel writing (and writing in general, of course); a hundred thousand words or so will do that for you. If you write one short story, you've just begun to explore the form. Some people start out by writing short story after short story before (if ever) they get around to writing a novel. Their minds just generate those kinds of ideas -- and I do think the central premise of a short story needs to be very strong and at the same time capable of being effectively compressed into a few scenes -- so they eventually become very good at the form.

I'd say (and this is a genrealisation, but a decent one) everything in a short story should serve you theme.

Of course you need scene setting, and character is important, in genre so is plot, but the writing for all of these should also add to your theme/premise.

I think you are right. Generally speaking, this is all true. But the amount of background, etc. that a story needs to be effective and serve the theme can vary a lot. Some stories are basically a straight forward series of events; others take a moment in time that crystalizes something important for the protagonist. Other stories need to establish a mood or tone in order to be effective. But in some stories, particularly in some horror or gothic tales, the mood or the tone is practically the whole point; the story is all about evoking some emotion or some particular reaction in the reader. What actually happens in terms of the plot may be less important.

 

[flynx]

But, how much detail to give, and what to leave off?

I'll give roughly what I can remember of the 'perfect' short story at the end of this.

It seems to me, and I've had this arguement many times, that conflict, and its partner resolution, are, if not overrated then at least overstated in discussion about story writing. When conflict is mentioned writers tend to go for the grand vision: murder, death, divorce, rape, revenge. If it's the softer cousin of conflict; tension there is still the grand theme envisaged: moving home, girl/boyfriend dilemma, deadlines, schedules, a race, an affray.

This is not my own theory by the way, merely one I subscribe to and it comes out something like the Seinfeld Equation. A show about nothing.

"What did you have for breakfast?"

"Toast, coffee, some cereal..."

"There's your show"

The point being that it's not the theme of what you write, it's how you write it.

There is tension in meeting someone for the first time, in buying a new mobile, in handing in an essay, in waking up in the morning and in making breakfast.

This is not to say that you can't have grand themes in a short story, just that the form can contain more detail than would be wise in a novel.

Ok maybe it's not the perfect short story, but it contains everything and by the same token actually leaves out everything too. A whole and complete story in just six words:




For Sale: Baby shoes. Never worn.

Ernest Hemingway

 

[PenDragon]

Hi flynx, in short I'll just say I strongly disagree with you.

Which is not a negative thing, just wanted to make that clear before entering into debate with you. Usual caveat, I'm a newb writer who so far has only been paid a few times for work and that was either peanuts or worse hackwork for peanuts, the rest of my (few) pubs are at non-paying ezines of questionable merit.

It seems to me, and I've had this arguement many times, that conflict, and its partner resolution, are, if not overrated then at least overstated in discussion about story writing.

I don't think conflict in Short stories is overated I think it's essential. Without conflcit you literally have no story, no meaningful story anyway. If the need for conflcit is overstated I think that's because so many new writers fail to understand the need for conflict in stories that editors and teachers have been forcerd to repeat addage story=conflcit.

When conflict is mentioned writers tend to go for the grand vision: murder, death, divorce, rape, revenge.

Again I think this is a problem with new writers. They often go for the biggies thinking it will add weight to their stories.

If it's the softer cousin of conflict; tension there is still the grand theme envisaged: moving home, girl/boyfriend dilemma, deadlines, schedules, a race, an affray.

Here' we're having a discontect on the meaning of theme. None of the things you've listed above constitute theme in the way that I understand it and its usage in short stories. In the same way that war, love and death are not themes.

The problem is theme in short stories is a complex issue that I'm still grappling with myself. I know it's vital to fiction (more so in literary fiction than genre) and I know it when I see, but can I explain it? Can I bugger.

Some writers use premise and the definition that is (almost) interchangeable with theme. I find James N Frey's definition very useful. A premise in a story is like an argument you prove by the end of the story. Premise also needs to avoid the vague. Poverty is bad is not a premise, ubridled greed (casused by growing up poor) leads to alienation is a premise. Of course what your premise proves is up to you you could just as easlily use unbridled Greed (caused by growing up poor) leads to fulfilment it all depends on your worldview.

An example from published fiction might be...

Courage leads to redemption - The Old Man and the Sea - Hemingway

or

Even the most ruthless establishment cannot crush the human spirit - One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest - Ken Kasey.

Frey also says writing a story without a premise is like rowing a boat without oars. Which I like.

There is some argument about whether a writer should consiously approach a a story with a premise/theme in mind. Some feel you can't write your story if you don't know your premise/theme others say you always know your themes/premise subconsously but if you head in to a story with one In mind the results are forced and false. Like a lot of stuff in writing it's down to what works for you or what you can make work.

This is not my own theory by the way, merely one I subscribe to and it comes out something like the Seinfeld Equation. A show about nothing.

"What did you have for breakfast?"

"Toast, coffee, some cereal..."

"There's your show"

Again I disagree, Seinfield is a show that is ostensibly about nothing, but really is packed full of theme and conflcit. The everyday nothing is just the springboard to cover the other stuff.

The point being that it's not the theme of what you write, it's how you write it.

This I wholeheartedly disagree with you on. It doesn't matter how good your prose is if you have nothing to say.

There is tension in meeting someone for the first time, in buying a new mobile, in handing in an essay, in waking up in the morning and in making breakfast.

Not sure about brekkie. Yes there is (given the right context) tension in all these things in real life but in a short story you need resolution and a point, otherwise you're writing Vignettes not short stories.

...the form can contain more detail than would be wise in a novel.

Not quite getting that you'll have to elaborate.

For Sale: Baby shoes. Never worn.

Ernest Hemingway

Not a bad, bit oversentimental for Hemmers. It's a good example of everyword in a story working towards it's theme. Off the top of my head, if I was critiquing this (or being flippant ) and wanted to pin down and discuss the premise I'd say it was even a child death is subordinate to the the practicalities of life.

I suppose I could have made that shorter by saying if there's no conflcit and theme it's a vignette not a short story, but where's the fun in that.

 

[flynx]

No fun in one sentence arguements at all

I've had 2,500 word stories called vignettes before now. I've come to hate the word. I've also become dispassionate about the ability of certain readers to actually read what I've written. (and what's wrong with pointless stories anyway? Lots of stories [and lots more films] have nothing essential to say about the human condition, which is what I'm inferring from the necessity of conflict.)


I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you on the value of prose without story. This is where the dictionary definition of vignette comes in: "A short, usually descriptive literary sketch." (dictionary dot com)
It has its own distinct value and, if done well, beauty.

It seems to me that you're defining a story as something with a beginning, middle and end which ties up neatly when you reach the The End.
This is patently untrue simply because 'life goes on'. In a 'whole' story you are of necessity describing an event or series of events which change or mould your protag.
In other words writing "A [short]scene or incident, as from a movie." (Dic.dot.com)

Themes. Themes are subjects. I understand that you believe conflict to be the main motive force of a story. Conflict is a subject and therefore a theme.

The short story containing more detail than the average novel. (elaboration)

The more micro a tension, the smaller the deviant or opposing forces. In the short story of tension and conflict of 'the first date', cutting yourself whilst shaving is a large point compared with its inclusion in a story about defending the universe.

Question: Is the following a short story or vignette?

Kresmire pulled on his old boots when he heard about his friend and without informing his wife, made his way to the shed in the yard. Another flake of sun worn green paint fell from the door when he screaked it open. In the gloom amongst the spiders he lifted the saddle of the bike to raise the rear wheel and gave the pedal a push to confirm its mechanical fortuity.

About half way down the rutted track that led through the dappled copse at the very edge of his land he became weary. He had finally outlived his bicycle's usefulness and was welcoming of the downward gradient towards the bushes and the fearns, the saplings and hedgerows.

After some time he arrived at his friend's house and immediately made him a present of the bicycle denying oaths and curses, promises and platitudes by way of polite refusal of his generosity.

"It is a gift." He told his friend. "You have no bicycle and much need, I have no need and am loath to let it rust."

His friend thanked him and enquired what he might give in return.

"What you may give," explained Kresmire "is usage. It is a fine machine and deserves to be ridden. I know that you will ride it."

Later that evening Kresmire was pleased that his friend offered to walk home with him through the gathering shade. "It is not a problem. I shall bring with me my new bicycle and be home before first twinkle of the goddess."

Kresmire smiled at his friend's happiness and knew that his wife would berate him for his foolishness in taking a smile as payment.


It contains almost all the requirements (as listed previously), albeit hinted at or hidden and as such has a beginning, middle and end.
The fine detail is in the 'old boots' the 'flaking paint' and the 'downhill gradient'.

(Hoping we haven't 'jacked the thread too much)

 

[dustinzgirl]

See, I think my life would be so much easier if writing fiction worked like writing research papers...Intro, Literature Review, Methodology, Data, Data Analysis, Conclusions, Recommendation for Future Research---I can write those in oodles of pages. But no. You guys have to give me all this different stuff and its all so very confusing! I suppose I could write a short story like I write research, but that would read like a science fiction tale....hmm....

LOL

Maybe short stories just aren't my thing?

 

[PenDragon]

I've had 2,500 word stories called vignettes before now.

I don't think word length defines something as a vignette.

I've come to hate the word. I've also become dispassionate about the ability of certain readers to actually read what I've written.

The readers don't get me is not in my opinion a healthy stance. Who is it telling you this? If it's just random retards on the net fair enough, but if it's your peers or editors and more experienced writers don't you think there might be a case to consider?

(and what's wrong with pointless stories anyway? Lots of stories [and lots more films] have nothing essential to say about the human condition, which is what I'm inferring from the necessity of conflict.)

Nothing is wrong with pointless and I loves me plenty of films that don't really have much to say - plus it seems they do have point which is usually generating lots of cash - but not having much to say and being just a bit of fun doesn't mean something lacks conflcit. I'm betting the majority published examples or examples in other media would be exceptions not the rule. I can't remember a film or short story that I've seen or read this year that didn't contain conflcit no matter how facile or pointless the work was.

I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you on the value of prose without story.

If you're coming at from a viewpoint of art for arts sake, perhaps, though it's a bit masturbatory.

This is where the dictionary definition of vignette comes in: "A short, usually descriptive literary sketch." (dictionary dot com)
It has its own distinct value and, if done well, beauty.

I know what the word means and I agree on the value and beauty of the form, in fact my first ezine publication was a vignette...

....warning adult content...

http://www.thievesjargon.com/workview.php?work=478

...but this thread is called The Perfect Short Story.

It seems to me that you're defining a story as something with a beginning, middle and end which ties up neatly when you reach the The End.

Not quite, a vignette will have a begining middle and end, everything written has. The resolution is part of it, but "ties up neatly." is not it either, stories can have finish with questions unanswered or more questions asked than are answered, or the main characters life can unravel into chaos, or it can be all tied up neatly (but that can be a tad twee unless handled well) but an ending is a resolution, not a trickling off or fading out.

This is patently untrue simply because 'life goes on'.

Life goes on (until it ends) but fiction does not and cannot, fiction must end. Life is random and unpredictable, fiction strives to put this randomness in order, even if it does that by by creating a false randomness of it's own. Fiction is lies, but when done well the lie of fiction tell a truth as real as any found in life.

In a 'whole' story you are of necessity describing an event or series of events which change or mould your protag.

Yes. That is a good definition of a short story.

In other words writing "A [short]scene or incident, as from a movie." (Dic.dot.com)

No a scene is a very small unit of fiction. A scene in TV/Film would be 3 mins on average, in fiction harder to say and much more vairable but a scene in prose would show part of the story then move on unless the whole story is told in one long continous scene, which is more doable in prose than TV.

You could show the life changing event in a scene yes, but that isn't a whole story without the other scenes before that lead to the moment. A Bristish sitcom for instance will tell it's stories in 16-24 scenes (50-60 pgs) half an hour

Themes. Themes are subjects.

That's a definition, but not as theme as applied to short fiction as I understand it. Theme as I understand in short fiction acts the way I explained premise. Fiction has it's own taxonomy of theory that doesn't always tally with other definitions.

I understand that you believe conflict to be the main motive force of a story.

No, I believe story should have conflict. Character is the main motive force I try for in a story.

Conflict is a subject and therefore a theme.

In a very tautalogical and unhelpful way perhaps, but in short fiction conflcit and theme are two seperate elements although there is obviously overlap.

The more micro a tension, the smaller the deviant or opposing forces. In the short story of tension and conflict of 'the first date', cutting yourself whilst shaving is a large point compared with its inclusion in a story about defending the universe.

Ok, I get you now, and agree, that would be my viewpoint too.

Question: Is the following a short story or vignette?

I would say neither. It's an incomplete excerpt. Though it leans nearer to Vignette by way of default.

It falls flat as a story, you open with the promise of a story...Kresmire pulled on his old boots when he heard about his friend and without informing his wife, made his way to the shed in the yard...but fail to deliver. We never find out what he heard about his friend, or why it matters that he didn't inform his wife -although the final line is a good enough payoff on the wife's character.

Now you may protest that I don't get it or that life isn't straightforward, and we never no everything, but when you start with a line like that you're making a contract with your reader that you will by the end of the stroy explain these and other things, if you make the promsie but don't deliver, you're breaking the contract with your reader and that leave them dissapointed. Even the most out there existentialists kept there promise and with the really out there surrealists the reader knows that all bets are off so isn't dissapointed, that's part of the contract in that case.

As a vignette it doesn't quite work either perhaps a bit too brief and not focused enough, plus the promise of story confuses things.

Take out the...heard about his friend...false promise and it works better but still doesn't sing to me.

It contains almost all the requirements (as listed previously), albeit hinted at or hidden and as such has a beginning, middle and end.
The fine detail is in the 'old boots' the 'flaking paint' and the 'downhill gradient'.

Hinted at or hidden is neither here nor there (and can be a self-indulgent literary game). All I get is that the MC might have given his bike to his friend becasue he's old and close to death and therefore has no need for a bike. Possibly a nice metaphor, but it's SFW, so effin what, who cares, just like a beginner writing a story about someone getting cancer and dying SFW, who cares happens all the time, make me care writer, make me care.

What it is though is good solid prose. Very nice, controlled, some great imagery, I loved...Another flake of sun worn green paint fell from the door when he screaked it open.

I'd hyphenate sun-worn (but then I loves me some hyphenating). Screaked is brill. You write good prose. No question about that.

(Hoping we haven't 'jacked the thread too much)

Same here, but I think a discusion on what is and isn't a short story is a good starting point to finding out what makes the perfect short story.

EDIT:If it is a prob we could always start another thread on the topic of what is a short story.

Cheers,

Lee.

 

[PenDragon]

See, I think my life would be so much easier if writing fiction worked like writing research papers...Intro, Literature Review, Methodology, Data, Data Analysis, Conclusions, Recommendation for Future Research---I can write those in oodles of pages. But no. You guys have to give me all this different stuff and its all so very confusing! I suppose I could write a short story like I write research, but that would read like a science fiction tale....hmm....

LOL

Perhaps what you need is a formal structure, you can work to. Maybe you're one of those logical left brain types.

You've asked what is the perfect short story, you obviosuly have some goal in mind, something that prompted the question. What is it you want to achieve with short fiction? What type of stories? What genre? Are you looking to publish? Also what are you specifically finding problematic? The more you tell us the more help we can throw in your direction.

If I answerd those questions, I'd say, what I want to acheive is internalizing the form through practise, hone my writing and make sure I'm producing regular work while I settle down to work on a novel and keep working on sitcom writing (with my co-writer). So for me I want to learn as I go and keep a steady flow of work coming to sub while I work on longterm projects.

I want to write Sword & Sorcerery, even though it's not a popular genre. Other types of fantasy too, but mainly S&S.

Yes I'm looking to publish, print or ezine but only at paying markets.

I'm finding it problematic to get an actual self contained short story in under 3,000-6,000 words. I managed that no probs in literary shorts, but swapping to my prefered genre has proved dificult with my first two efferts reading like the opening of a novel or first part of a serial. Grammar and punctuation are bugbears too, but we won't go there.

Maybe short stories just aren't my thing?

You can't give up before you start and if you don't try you wont know.

 

[flynx]

I wrote a long and thoughtful reply yesterday Pen but forgot to hit 'post reply' before backclicking. Ah well. (and thanks for the 'solid prose')

All the dictionary definitions and arguement (above) were me being on my soapbox, the word 'vignette' just pushes my buttons. However.

I'm not defending my work nor denying your criticism here, just trying to be objective about the piece, which is a bit difficult given my innate knowledge of it and knowing exactly what I left out.

Whether you or other readers 'get' what I write or not is by-the-way as long as what I write is entertaining, otherwise I wouldn't show it to anyone. The 'writerly' part of me includes references, images, motifs etc that I hope are seen by the readers even if they are not actually visible, which is both a good and bad thing. To be noted but 'ignored', it makes me as the 'author' invisible, which is as it should be.

But back to Kresmire's story.

The premise or promise of the story is there merely to illustrate the conflict or tension of the man's marriage. What happened to his friend is merely the catalyst that causes him to 'do the right thing' in the face of his wife's disaproval. Whatever has happened to his friend is solved by Kresmire's action and in so doing he has 'stood up' to authority and deepened his friendship.

Conflict, climax, resolution and change.

It may not be exciting or world shattering, but then, neither is life in general. Now whether we want or desire to read about everyday things is a different matter entirely. Personally I always thought Coronation Street in the sixties was much better than Brookside, Eastenders, Dallas and Dynasty all rolled together. Because the focus was on people, not events.

(I like self-indulgent literary games, as long as they're not focal)

and you write very decent prose yourself, even though I hated the protag., his actions and his apparent lifestyle.

So, what was my point?

Maybe it was; if you look hard enough you can find anything you want. Perhaps; if it's entertaining it doesn't have to be critiqued. or, more likely; I'm nit-picking.

The question in short stories will always be: what do I leave out? Or if it's not there: what should I include? Which brings us back to Dustinz.

In my own (amateur, as in never-paid but variously published) opinion. If it doesn't tell us something about either the character or the story then leave it out. If it's essential to plot or motive then include it.

 

[PenDragon]

I'm not defending my work nor denying your criticism here, just trying to be objective about the piece, which is a bit difficult given my innate knowledge of it and knowing exactly what I left out.

Yes but a reader/editor will always come to a peice with none of your innate knowledge and no idea what you left out (or why).

But back to Kresmire's story.

The premise or promise of the story is there merely to illustrate the conflict or tension of the man's marriage. What happened to his friend is merely the catalyst that causes him to 'do the right thing' in the face of his wife's disaproval. Whatever has happened to his friend is solved by Kresmire's action and in so doing he has 'stood up' to authority and deepened his friendship.

Ok, so he stood up to his wife, that's ok, that's good, that's what the peice is about not about what happened to his friend but why open with the idea that 'something' did happen when you don't deliver on that idea and it's not what it's about? Don't you think this weakens your piece? Detracts from the theme? Do you get where I'm coming from about breaking your 'contract' with the reader?

It may not be exciting or world shattering, but then, neither is life in general. Now whether we want or desire to read about everyday things is a different matter entirely.

I never said that short stories should be world shattering or that I wasn't aware what real life is like. Neither did I state a prefernce one way or the other about everyday things (whic I like fine by the way). However, a short story needs conflcit and resolution, even if it tells of samll things, happening to small people in an everyday way, Hemingway's "Hill's Like White Elephants." springs to mind. Ordinary people doing something totally mundane but wow, what a great short story.

When I said your prose was solid, that was in no way a backhanded compliment by the way, in truth it's better than solid (didn't want to pump yer ego too much old bean) and I like to see it used in a good STORY!

and you write very decent prose yourself, even though I hated the protag., his actions and his apparent lifestyle.

Yeah, he wouldn't be top of my list to invite to dinner. That's an old peice (pubbed last year but written 10+ years ago) it's the only vignette(ish) peice I've had published (they're tough to get rid of) I found this unpublished bit though, this is more what I'd call a vignette and more recently written...

Grimble

Standing in the high street Grimble mutters, he mumbles, sometimes he talks.
No one listens. No one hears him or wants to. They just keep on waddling past, laden down with fat bags of fat shopping.

Grimble sits on the pavement.

Not on the side, not in a shop doorway, on a kerb, out of the way, he will not be conveniently invisible. No. Grimble sits in the middle of the pavement. The busy, busy pavement.

People walk around him.

He cries. He sobs and shakes. Hunched on the pavement a shaggy island of human shamble. He is waste. Grimble the waste man. He does not think he has wasted his life. There were moments; all the way through there were moments. Isolated, but there none the less. Times when he shone, times when he was alive, really alive. Times when he was the moment, the cause, the catalyst, the reason.

Bright times.

Someone almost trips over him, a man, a young man, a young man in the full strength of his own bright times.

" 'effin A-hole."

Grimble does not care, that does not hurt, he has been punched and punched and punched, body, head, body, jab, jab, uppercut, hook. He has been stabbed, shot, mortared, and near murdered. Ran over, bitten by dogs, once even by a man, he has fallen from trees, been pushed from moving cars, and jumped from a burning building. All these things hurt, to be called names is a small thing. Most of all he has lost. To lose, to have lost, that hurts the most.

Grimble stops crying and starts to laugh. There is little difference, not for him. People still walk around him.

Names. He wasn’t always Grimble. Once he was Mr Person Somebody. He lived with Mrs Wife Somebody and the two little Somebodies. Now they are just bodies and he is Grimble on the pavement. Lost.

Once he was good with his hands. Very good. Once he was a boxer, with fast hands, then a soldier with calm hands, then a carpenter with strong, carving, steady hands, and all the time he was a lover and good with his hands, and all the time he was a father and gentle with his hands.

Now his hands are dirty, dirty hands. Black like charred things. Twisted, crooked, ragged, broken like their owner. But they do not shake. No, they do not shake, for Grimble will not, has not, does not take a drink. Not now, not anymore. Not ever. Not again. Not today. No.

Someone walks past and looks at Grimble. This man is not young, this man is not strong in his bright times, but paunched and waning, a man in his dimmer, dimming, near dark times and his eyes are full of fear. Full of it.

Grimble cackles and pats the pavement beside him.

The dim man’s eyes widen he rushes on, stumble-skips, nearly falls before turning away forever. He is heading for a darkness of his own. Grimble knows it. Can see it.

Grimble sighs, looks around. The pavement is dark and slick with hours ago rain, and all around him shoes, ankles, trouser legs, clacking heels. It’s all he can see, for he will not look up. He does not have it in him to look up. These people are not worth looking up to.

Someone touches Grimble. A hand on his shoulder, he cringes away with a whimpered curse, but the hand follows and rests on his shoulder.
Deep, feel for the world eyes, edged with care-line crow's feet, fill Grimble’s world.

"It’s okay." the voice melodious and warm, has a tilting, lean to, lilt that oozes assurance, "I won’t hurt you."

A liar then.

"Here take this…" a crisp clean note is pressed into Grimble’s hand, "get something to eat or, well, whatever you want."

Yes a liar.

A dazzle goodbye smile, then the do-gooder is turn and gone happy. Contented, back into the flow of passing humanty.

Grimble looks at the note in his palm, rocks back and forth on the still wet pavement, cries, laughs, and screams.

People walk by.

Grimble stands up, lets the river of pavement people carry him downstream, the note clasped firm in a hand that now, and only now starts to shake.

<Ends>

Thanks for the discourse, much appreciated. Look forward to reading more of your stuff if you stick any in the crits section. I have a few pieces in there on various pages, if you want to hunt it down and kick it in its soft bits.

cheers,

Lee.

Prods Dustizgirl to see if she's still writing short stories.

 

[flynx]

Thanks Lee, When I saw your piece I took 'solid' as it was given. I hesitated on commenting on yours because standing here and slapping each other's backs isn't going to get us anywhere except abashed.
I do see what you mean by the contract but (defensive now) it was a short and the development of that part wouldn't ride on the limit I'd set myself.

So come on Dustinzgirl. Using the parameters of the first few posts, give us what ya got. around about the 100 or 150 mark, 200 at a push. OK then 250. A conflict an action and a resolution in 250 words.

Bearing in mind that:

these can be inverted, subverted and interchanged depending on how the story should go.

I'll add that 'an introduction' can happen throughout the entire story, as can the characters and milieu.

Have a go. It's fun.