The Short of It

The short story is not dead. So say such sources as The Paris Review's Lorin Stein and Americanliterature.com. I would have thought otherwise, even though I love reading short fiction--the kinds of stories that run from about 1,000 to 20,000 words (according to these writers' definition; magazines that I've researched prefer not to run over 10,000). It's not that my ADHD makes me impatient with longer works, because I do enjoy novels, but there's something special about a good short story, and, as a writer, I find them particularly appealing to produce.

Short stories became popular with the improvement of printing presses in the early nineteenth century, which gave more and more people access to periodicals and newspapers. Entire novels couldn't realistically be published in these formats except in installments, but short fiction fit perfectly, as they were designed to be read in a single sitting. Let's remember that ready available entertainment was limited, especially in the home. There were no computers, televisions, radios, or even record players yet. So, reading filled the desire for escape from the workaday world, and short stories, despite their brevity, were complete works of fiction that could be just as complex and fulfilling and fulfilling as novels, since they usually were required to include the literary devices of theme, character, setting, plot, and conflict.

Indeed, some of the world's best fiction has been in the short form. Just going by my personal experience, there are the excellent, often ironic and sometimes humorous, works of O. Henry, such as "The Gift of the Magi," "After Twenty Years," and "The Ransom of Red Chief"; the powerfully haunting stories of Edgar Allan Poe, including "The Tell-Tale Heart," "The Masque of the Red Death," and "The Fall of the House of Usher"; and the eclectic classics of Washington Irving, the most famous of which would be "Rip Van Winkle" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow." Jack London, best known for his novels, also turned out superb pieces like "To Build a Fire," and the cynical humorist Ambrose Bierce produced serious works such as "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge." Other stories I've adored have been Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," Anton Chekov's "The Bet," W. W. Jacobs' "The Monkey's Paw," and Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game." I've also enjoyed the short fiction of Vladimir Nabokov, Edith Wharton, and Arthur Conan Doyle (besides the adventures of Sherlock Holmes).

But my favorite of all time is a writer who came out of the pulps and chiefly made his living from the short form: Ray Bradbury. There are, of course, the really renowned pieces like "All Summer in a Day" and "Dark They Were, and Golden-Eyed," as well as themed collections such as The Illustrated Man and The Martian Chronicles. But there are also dozens upon dozens of others produced over more than fifty years, only ending with Bradbury's death at age 91. This was a guy who could pound out a story in a day, though he sometimes took time off to produce plays and poems. But those stories were also poetic, written in a style really unequaled until the works of Stephen King. And the imagination! The flights of fancy! And the variety--most astonishing! He turned out so much of the stuff, I'll likely be reading him for the rest of my life.

Speaking of Bradbury's style, I must mention another who tended to work in the same genre. But this man did his thing not (usually) in prose but in drama, specifically television. I'm talking about Rod Serling, who created one of the finest series ever, The Twilight Zone. The episodes crafted for that show--many masterpieces of the form--played just like the best short stories, complete with memorable characters and settings, solid plots, universal themes, concise dialogue, and generally O. Henry-type twist endings. Who could forget "Time Enough at Last," "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet," "Eye of the Beholder," or "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street"? And who could argue that they're not among the finest tales TV viewers ever saw? Serling was, first and foremost, a storyteller, and he preferred to tell his stories in the short form.

So, why did this incredible type of reading material seem to go away? Lorin Stein blames the media (doesn't everyone?)--in this case radio, movies, and then TV. When the market for short fiction weakened, slick magazines decided it was easier and more lucrative to fill up on advertising. He also explains that readers replaced short stories with nonfiction in their "diet."

But, according to Americanliterature.com, modern folks are rediscovering an interest in short stories, even classics. They seem to fit well in the Age of the Internet because they can be consumed in a few minutes. So, even in a time where entertainment is available in a staggering variety of forms, people still want an old-fashioned escape.

The attractions of short fiction for me as a writer are the challenge of producing a complete work in a limited space and the ability to demonstrate my storytelling skills without having to spend an extended period on the writing, as I would with a novel. Short stories can be a lot of fun because they usually concentrate on one arc and a few characters, they can feature my beloved twist endings (something that's generally impractical in the longer form), and--in my opinion--they require more thought and skill to keep the word count down. I only lament that it's nearly impossible to make a living from short stories, as many of the authors I named above did. But, who knows? If they continue to get more popular again....

Note: Some readers may consider it in bad taste to reference Lorin Stein, who resigned from The Paris Review because of accusations of sexual misconduct. However, I wasn't aware of that until I was well into this post, and I didn't feel like starting over.

#writers #fiction