I'm having one of those days when I feel like I don't know anything.  It'll pass but while I'm feeling bewildered, I thought I should pay attention to what's confusing me.  I've noticed something about my short stories.  My shorter works seem to get a better response from editors and Wordslingers.  They tend to be full of specific details, emotion, all good stuff.  But they feel shallow to me.  Like a little burst of flavor from a pillow mint.  My longer stories, where I can develop characters more, build worlds and create plot or story arcs, satisfy me more but they haven't gotten the kind of rejection letters (or acceptance letters) I'd like. 

I'm trying to figure out why that is.  I could be that I can focus more on details in shorter works.  I'm terribly afraid that I'm a lazy, sloppy writer and maintaining focus like that over a longer work would burn me out.  I don't know. I almost feel like that level of immersion in a character's thoughts, emotions and point of view in a longer work would be exhausting to a reader as well.  Maybe I should try it.

I've been thinking more about story structure in short stories, as well.  Thinking that if I have a length in mind and I write to that length, it might make it easier to create plot arcs...

To tell a story.

That's what I want to do, like to do.  Are my shorter works really stories?  They seem to be about an event.  There are lots of short stories that are like that, at least if my books by Hemingway, O. Henry and Hammett are any indications (the H section of my library is pretty choice when it comes to short story writers).  Are event stories really stories at all?  What is a story?  It should be a series of events, shouldn't it?  One event linked to another as a result of the actions taken by characters, that's a story, isn't it?  So what am I writing when I write shorter works (1-2k words)?

See, this is what kept me from writing short stories while I was trying to focus on novels. I'm concerned that I'm thinking too small.  For novels, you need to think big.  You need to set up things that pay off fifty pages away, while with short stories, the payoff always has to come sooner.

I like short stories, as a break, and they're a good way to experiment, to practice. If some get sold, all the better.  But Novels are where my heart is. Stories.

I don't know, I'll see if I can write larger, intentionally, in my next short story.  My first attempt at a structured short story, all the way back in April, seemed to work but it felt stilted and artificial to me. It felt like I was writing to plot points, reversals, inciting incident on page 2, reversal on page 10, yada yada.  It didn't feel like telling a story, it felt like constructing one.  Maybe that's the way professional writers do it, or some of them, at least.  I tend to fall closer to the 'exploratory' side of the spectrum, at least as far as writing enjoyment goes.  Like in the last novel chapter I wrote, I had one or two pieces on plot information to expose, the rest of it...I just winged it and things happened in it that surprised me. The characters felt alive, free.  They don't feel free or alive when I'm writing to a structure, to a form.

So. There's my challenge. To write a longer story, a series of connected scenes but with characters that feel alive and like robots marching towards a structure.

Sigh.

I wish I'd never read those damn Larry Brooks books. I feel like I'm having to unlearn things to get back to what works for me.

 


Comments

Steph

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 8:48:09 am

Maybe it isn't any of those nasty, negative things that make the difference. For me, voice will sweep me away where other things don't. And that's something I can say with certainty - of all your work, most of the short stories (and the Mageborn Mechanic, when do I see that???) have VERY strong voices.

As a reader, when I'm deciding if I like something or not, I don't look at events, I don't look at mood, I don't even look at structure. All those things can vary, and can work well in those variances. I look at the writing to see if it grabs me. I'll put up with all sorts of crap if I like spending time with the narrative.

You are right, it is hard to tell a big story in short form. But that's OK, because we don't expect the experience of a novel when we're reading a short story. In a short story, you are forced to FOCUS on what is important, because what isn't important doesn't make it in. Words are precious, you have to use them well. I like focused pieces; they move, they are pithy, they are interesting. I don't mind that they don't address everything, because they actually shine a brighter light on the few things they do address.

I think this is what makes some of your pieces more successful than others. (I encourage you to think of them as successes, rather than any of the other stuff as failing - that'll wear you down quick, I know it does me. Besides, stuff that doesn't work yet isn't stuck like that, the road is always open through revision). Anyway, of the things I've read from you, the things that work best have voice and focus.

And speaking as another discovery writer, you don't HAVE to tie yourself to a structure before you write. When I try to do that I churn out some really mundane pieces of work (not that you will, I liked the story you wrote with a structure in mind).

What works for me is to discovery write, and then step back and look at structure during revision. That way I get the best of both worlds - I get to write it like I want, all exciting and weird and disorganized. Then I take a hard look at what I wrote and see if I can articulate the character arcs, the story arc, the inciting incident, the climactic scene, etc. Then I go back and revise with an eye to that structure; adding things I missed but are needed, taking out things that are tangents, focusing scenes and chapters on the proper arc & events.

I still don't have King's Mark where I want it, but I feel like it gets closer each time I articulate what the structure is and focus on it. Compared with revising a short story, a novel is horrendous (especially when you idiotically chose to use 4 POVs, 3 major settings, and 6 characters with deep backstories and/or full arcs for your first novel. I'm a moron...). Wrangling each little story strand and making sure scenes are properly focused is like trying to get my hair to lie flat on a high-humidity day. It's freakishly hard. But in the end, it'll be worth it.

Once you find a revision style that works, it'll be worth it for you too. I mean, try lots of things, including planning a structure. But if you are really that much of a discovery writer, don't try to change what you enjoy when you're writing. Just be aware that it will go all over the place and won't have a solid structure, and realize that you're going to have to strengthen it up after the fact. It's time consuming and hard, like trying to put Jenga blocks back into the tower. But you are a very fast writer, you don't agonize over every word like some of us. In the end, you can't avoid putting in the same amount of time and work as those who plan it out ahead of time - you just do it at a different part of the process.

Anyway, don't get all discouraged! Write what you want to write, how you want to write it. Worry about the rest later. Enjoy your writing time - or else, what is the point?

 

Tiyana

Thu, 26 Jan 2012 5:25:10 pm

Thanks a lot, Larry! *shakes fist* :P

To me, all "stories" have a beginning (conflict), a middle (building tension) and an end (resolution). The major/most developed plot thread(s) gets resolved, but not *everything* else has to. And it doesn't matter so much how you get there structurally so long as the story continuously builds up to a climax and resolves in some fashion.

I haven't written short stories so much as I have flash and micro fiction, but even from that I understand the desire to add more detail than a particular story can/should hold and learning how to keep a narrower focus. (It's hard to write "rich" stories in so few words.) Even with my most "complete" stories (with clear beginnings, middles and ends) I still wanted to explore so much more. They were fun and I learned a lot from them, but ultimately those are not the kind of stories I want to write long term--because I, like you, enjoy delving into detailed worlds.

In any case, I think we all have our own "inherent", natural story lengths we prefer to revert to, depending on the kind of ideas we come up with and what we'd like to get out of our stories.

Also, I *totally* know what you mean about a story feeling artificial when trying to focus on "plot points" and what not. Eventually I learned that for my particular project that kind of strategy was just not going to work for me because my focus was on characters and their relationships more so than the plot of their journey/adventure. I needed to write in a way that fostered the freedom to explore more "impromptu" character interactions and developments, though of course, *some* structure is still necessary 'else you get stories without direction.

Maybe some people can do that within a strict outline, but I can't, lol.

"I'm terribly afraid that I'm a lazy, sloppy writer and maintaining focus like that over a longer work would burn me out."

Yeah, me too. The more words you add to a story, the easier it becomes to lose focus--whether or not you planned out the entire plot or discovered it then went back to tweak it. Maybe sometimes the answer is just to include less, though I think it really depends on the nature of the story. In any case, it is certainly *not* easy to consistently churn out quality work over the course of an entire novel. It gets tiring!

Though, I think if we really believe in our stories, then they deserve our best and we can't give up on 'em--and it sure seems your beta readers believe in yours, so that must mean something! :)

 

Mark Andrew Edwards

Fri, 27 Jan 2012 5:58:22 am

Hey Tiyana,
Thanks for the comments. I'm going to keep experimenting to see what length works best for me. That's the good thing about short stories, they let you experiment faster than novels do.
Yeah, all stories need some structure ( climax and an ending for sure) but I think there's got to be some flexibility on how to get there. Keep writing your story your way!
I think I'm going to go back and read some of my favorite novels, just picking a section at random and see if it has a consistent level of detail. Or if it starts out very detailed and then moves on to focus on story, plot or emotion. I have a sneaking suspicion but we'll see what I find.

 

Tiyana

Fri, 27 Jan 2012 6:39:54 am

Oh, that's a good idea!

I've really been wanting to try something similar with one of Cat Valente's books (I've got Palimpsest up high on my "to read" list now) because I know she has such a beautifully whimsical style of writing and a really unique voice--and also that keen attention to detail you're talking about. It's *so* good it makes me wonder if it's even possible to maintain that same level of quality for an entire novel, or, like you said, if it's necessary to change things up every so often.

You should write a blog post about the answer to your question if/when you find it! I'd certainly be interested to read your observations about your favorite novels. :)

 



Leave a Reply