What does the skeleton of a short story look like? SHOULD it look like?
Obviously a human's femur isn't attached to the shoulder... there is a set structure to a human skeleton.
How are we expected to arrange the skeleton of a short story before we flesh it out?
Right now I am running under the assumption that a short story has less to work with than a novel. I assume that because a short story has significantly fewer words than a novel, this would be a fair enough assumption.
But then I remember that a short story can do things that a novel cannot. Namely, it can tell a story that a novel can't do justice to.
So, I find that a short story can do without much exposition. Is this a fair assumption (as long as the lack of exposition works within the story)?
I am nearly finished a short story that doesn't necessarily follow the typical standards I have found out there. Most shorts seem to set up an action sequence through as much exposition as possible. They just seem to take too much time.
Too many short stories I have read seem to abuse the thesaurus and impress me with new words rather than a fresh new story.
So what if my short starts with some tension from the first few sentences...
“More people are dying,” he whispered, leaning into the grey table. “Their bodies are drained of blood.”
So what if my story ends with a mystery to be solved by the reader. Is that a recipe for disaster?
How do you build your short story from the ground up?
Obviously a human's femur isn't attached to the shoulder... there is a set structure to a human skeleton.
How are we expected to arrange the skeleton of a short story before we flesh it out?
Right now I am running under the assumption that a short story has less to work with than a novel. I assume that because a short story has significantly fewer words than a novel, this would be a fair enough assumption.
But then I remember that a short story can do things that a novel cannot. Namely, it can tell a story that a novel can't do justice to.
So, I find that a short story can do without much exposition. Is this a fair assumption (as long as the lack of exposition works within the story)?
I am nearly finished a short story that doesn't necessarily follow the typical standards I have found out there. Most shorts seem to set up an action sequence through as much exposition as possible. They just seem to take too much time.
Too many short stories I have read seem to abuse the thesaurus and impress me with new words rather than a fresh new story.
So what if my short starts with some tension from the first few sentences...
“More people are dying,” he whispered, leaning into the grey table. “Their bodies are drained of blood.”
So what if my story ends with a mystery to be solved by the reader. Is that a recipe for disaster?
How do you build your short story from the ground up?