I think you can make the same argument with flash fiction. I went back to writing flash fiction again (while revisiting those I've stored away in my hard drive) and it's amazing how crisp your writing can be when you are forced to keep it under 1,000 words.
Agreed. I'm having fun writing flash fiction. I need to do a better job publishing them consistently in the newsletter, but the exercise is certainly rewarding. Thanks for reading, Michael!
Good post, Frank. I couldn't agree more that short fiction is a great form. That said, in long fiction the writer should also make use of every bit of space. Writing a longer, more complicated story is no excuse for writing loosely or sloppily. I've found the only major difference between the short story and the novel is the focus. The short story is about One Event, whereas the novel is about more than one event that are interconnected. Everything else—hooks, grounding the reader in setting, pacing, cliffhangers, etc.—remains the same.
1000% agree. I admit I've had poor experience with some novels in the 90-100k range simply for reading three chapters dedicated to the history of a particular object or activity that shows little weight to the overall plot of the story. Yes, focus is the key and I appreciate authors who maximize every bit of space they have, whether it be 500 or 50,000 words.
Thanks for reading, Harvey. Always appreciate your thoughts on the craft.
Same attitude here, Philip. Love short stories and want to master the form. I think my creative voice is just wired to tell Twilight Zone-style stories. Looking forward to seeing what you come out with!
I think you can make the same argument with flash fiction. I went back to writing flash fiction again (while revisiting those I've stored away in my hard drive) and it's amazing how crisp your writing can be when you are forced to keep it under 1,000 words.
Agreed. I'm having fun writing flash fiction. I need to do a better job publishing them consistently in the newsletter, but the exercise is certainly rewarding. Thanks for reading, Michael!
Oh yes, we've probably all seen novels that were padded out. Disgusting.
Good post, Frank. I couldn't agree more that short fiction is a great form. That said, in long fiction the writer should also make use of every bit of space. Writing a longer, more complicated story is no excuse for writing loosely or sloppily. I've found the only major difference between the short story and the novel is the focus. The short story is about One Event, whereas the novel is about more than one event that are interconnected. Everything else—hooks, grounding the reader in setting, pacing, cliffhangers, etc.—remains the same.
1000% agree. I admit I've had poor experience with some novels in the 90-100k range simply for reading three chapters dedicated to the history of a particular object or activity that shows little weight to the overall plot of the story. Yes, focus is the key and I appreciate authors who maximize every bit of space they have, whether it be 500 or 50,000 words.
Thanks for reading, Harvey. Always appreciate your thoughts on the craft.
Great post. Short fiction can be lucrative, too!
Thanks Vince. Yes, my thoughts exactly. Add that to the list of reasons I want to master it.
Same attitude here, Philip. Love short stories and want to master the form. I think my creative voice is just wired to tell Twilight Zone-style stories. Looking forward to seeing what you come out with!
I'm definitely a sucker for a good TV anthology. Twilight Zone is tops, but I'm still discovering new ones. Roald Dahl's being the recent discovery.