A few questions about short fiction

Short stories are different from novels, that's true. But there are things that work for shorts, and things that don't. Reading a lot of good short fiction will help you (and her) see what works.

Flashbacks are ok (and you typically change tense for a flashback scene) but it needs to be clear and logical. I often use scene breaks to denote a flashback (yes, you can use scene breaks in short fiction).

I agree that shorts need to be very focused when it comes to scene, word choice, and character. You can't have a lot of useless words floating around, and you don't want 10 characters because the reader won't have time to know or care about any of them.

It all depends on the story and what the author is trying to do. If you want to critique short stories in a useful way, as I said, all I can suggest is you read some great short fiction to get a feel for what works.

Well, a writer can do pretty much whatever works for the story, but if her method left you confused, then I'd have to say (without reading the story) that it didn't work.

She should have simply thanked you for your time and consideration, and kept her arguement to herself. I can't stand it when someone asks for a crit and then comes off all-knowing, "Well, you're just wrong!" Ya know, edit your own stuff, then! Sheesh!

Critiques are a funny phenomenon.

If you are kind enough to give-up your time to do one, you have to be prepared for writers who post their work, genuinely expecting people to be amazed by the quality... it's a reality check when they actually get some pointers and as with your 'friend', they go on the defensive. These people should steer clear of writing groups.

On the other side of the coin, should you post-up work for critque, you have to be ready for the people who simply find fault with everything. Their critique is more about their own ego and claiming brownie points by picking apart others' work in a public forum.

There are of course, people who genuinely want guidance and take it gracefully, and people who give guidance with equal grace.

Pointing out where other's have used POV choices is a weak argument, if you read that collection I am sure they did not grate on the reader or mix tenses. Head hopping is fine if done well, but over use of flashbacks and confusing the reader is not regardless of the length of the work.

I would say if you confuse your reader with 2000 words, I would hate to read 100,000 words.

JustinThorne said:

I would say if you confuse your reader with 2000 words, I would hate to read 100,000 words.

Click to expand...

LOL! Yes, I agree!

It sounds to me as if the recipient of the crit just responded unprofessionally. And I don't know how you can "cramp" anything into a short space.

I write short all the time - the rules of clarity, freshness, completeness and sense govern novels and all writing, incuding shorts. Yes, writing short is much different from writing novel-length. But in over 60 published shorts, I don't think I have *ever* used a flashback. Not because I don't like them, just because it wasn't necessary. (I did make use of flashbacks in a novel-length ms, though - all the way back to the 1600's...)

My point is that I think the recipient of the crit not only didn't like the honest criticism, but then dug up a book of short stories by well-known authors who know how to use the language and various devices available to tell a compelling story. It doesn't mean she knows how to use those devices!

Well said, Kate.

I've been temporarily turned off of Critters because of two snarky comments in a row from writers who didn't like my comments. It can be frustrating, especially when you go out of your way to read a 7,000 word short story and write a critique when they out of hand discount your help because it's not what they want to hear.

That's why I gave up doing critiques. After I'd pointed out (very gently) a few spelling/grammar mistakes and getting a faceful abuse for my pains, I decided I wasn't wasting my time in future.

As far as using more adventuresome techniques in a short story-- it takes A LOT of practice. If one is attempting to emulate a widely published, popular writer-- that's great, but once one tries these techniques (such as flashbacks) one realizes quickly just how toilsome it is to do it right.

Critiquing something that someone gives you expressly for that purpose is a can of worms no matter how you open it; even if they say, "I want your honest opinion," they usually really DON'T want to hear anything but glowing praise.

What I try to do is offer more advice than criticism with my criticism. Instead of saying, "This is confusing," (for example) I would be more likely to say, "Here in this paragraph, I can't figure out who is talking. Is it this guy or this guy? Maybe we could figure out how to re-do that part if you REALLY WANT that sequence in there." If I take on the task of critiquing something, I do it prepared to sit there and answer a million questions, and offer help, all without becoming annoyed. Which is nearly impossible for me-- and that's why I seldom critique someone else's work. (There's one guy I who is currently sending me his poetry to pick apart, but I only critique it for him because he is in fact pretty good and I enjoy reading his stuff. Other people ask me to do this sometimes and I just about always refuse.)

Writing for public consumption is not an easy thing. It's not supposed to be. Just like with a painting-- you're not supposed to see the amount of effort that went into making your creation look JUST SO. The sleepless nights, frustration, and anger are not going to show in a great work of art. It's supposed to look easy, but the thing is: It's not.

People with reactions like that only want to hear: "I loved every single word of that story you wrote." In other words, they don't want critques, they want to be praised. Ignore them, I guess.

She’s right about that only in this way: those other writers made it work. She didn’t. Claiming their success as justification for her bad writing still doesn’t fix her bad writing. Intelligent readers are confused by bad writing. Intelligent writers fix their own bad writing.

Jumping from head to head in a story is okay when it is clear and when it is justified.

Changing tenses in a story is okay when it is clear and when it is justified.

Sounds like she has not been clear, which is rarely justified.

You don't HAVE to stuff a lot of information into a short story, you don't HAVE to "cramp" it in (stupiduseofthatword) and you don't HAVE to do flashbacks. You don't HAVE to jump from head to head.

You can if you want to.

I have never found that I have to tell a story where I have to do flashbacks and jump around and drop a pound of backstory and information down the reader's throat. Good gawd. I'm writing a short story, not a thesis.

LIke most "This is how YOU should write" theories, this one is also mostly solved by this simple adage....shut up and tell a good story.

Honest. Just tell a story. Hell, you barely need to say what your character looks like.

I have a horror story in Share Your Work and it's really my first story, and I definitely encountered these problems about "head hopping". Of course I appreciate critique and don't yell at people after asking for it lol.
Give me a minute while I laugh about that.
I guess the lesson there is that many writers are actually asking for encouragement, assurance that they aren't chasing a red herring and may have something to submit when all is said and done.

Anyway, in my story I have all these death scenes that I want to include because I simply like them, and I had to take out a POV, but for it seems I don't have a choice.

It reminds me of speech class in school, making a speech that is not only decent and of the correct kind, but also making sure it is not one minute under or over the time limit.

As much as I want to elongate my story, it just isn't what the short story market accepts.

Most short stories I've read seem to be from a solitary first-person POV, and that makes alot of sense. I want to have more than one POV so I can add background and details to my story, but that may be too confusing.

I have little breaks in my short story, I guess you could call them chapters, and I try to make each chapter a different POV so the reader is prepared for the change.

All of which are perfectly acceptable ways to write a short story. I bounce POVs sometimes, I'll break into little chapters, I'll elongate the story if I need to (to hell with the market; there is always another market, and if there isn't, then go buy an editor you know a beer and THEN give 'em the story!)

Just remember, don't leave death scenes in because you like them. Look at 'em and make sure you need them in the story. If you don't, they die. Of course you like them. The phrase isn't "kill your darlings" because you don't like them.

I agree with the thread starter that shorts should be all about build up. Build up asap and then get to the big bang before you use up all your words.

I also like to write more fleshed out stuff, and I console myself with the thought that, even though it needs to be less than 5001 words, if it ever gets published it might be good enough to be included in a book of short stories, right after I become a popular author.
By then the rights will have reverted back to me and not only can I make the stories as long as I think they should be, it will also help make the collection novel length, and people who liked the shorts before will get a lot of background information (and an improved story overall), so they have a good reason to read the same stories again.

PeeDee, In the story I was talking about I had to have the enviroment populated with at least some people, just to be realistic, but then I pretty much had to get rid of all of them so it made sense. I just had to take out the details.

Description is best when it is vague.

She sauntered up to the stranger in from the rain. She touched his wet lapel while her eyes played him like a violin.

This short extract summons a lot of questions but you inserted your own idea of what SHE looked like and HIM and even the room they were in.

I can direct you if I want to lay more of my own idea of who and where they are.

The blond sauntered through the dark pub to the stranger from the rain. She touched the wet lapel of his trench-coat while her eyes played him like a red headed violin.

One of my beta readers was disappointed with my MC because she had gotten an idea of her in the first pages. I introed some characteristics a few pages later. My MC was supposed to be small framed, straight black hair, fair pale skin. The reader had seen someone like Linda Hamilton as in Terminator 2.

If I want you to see specifics I can direct you but you should see who you expect to see. I should keep detailed descriptions out of it. It just bogs it down anyway.

That leaves a lot more room for story.

I agree with PeeDee, you should write it the way you see it. Word count is second. But don’t rob your reader of THEIR character. Or scenery.

Like a war torn French village. Enough said.
Sexy brunette in a tight dress. Enough said.
A motorcycle that reached out long to a fenderless front wheel. Enough said.

Do you need more? Several characters? Maybe it doesn’t want to be a short story. Maybe it wants to be a novella.

That's interesting Delarege. I think your right. I feel the same way about pictures of writers: if I don't know what they look like, I always think of them as their work, which is ideal.

SMG said:

I also like to write more fleshed out stuff, and I console myself with the thought that, even though it needs to be less than 5001 words,

Click to expand...

Uh, why does it have to be less than 5001 words?

Delarege said:

Description is best when it is vague.

Click to expand...

Eh?

Description is best when it isn't overdone, but vague? I don't think so. Anything that's necessary to describe should be described with precision and vividly.

caw.

Jamesaritchie said:

Uh, why does it have to be less than 5001 words?

Click to expand...

I mean for short stories in magazines. I guess people have short attention spans or something.
It seems like established writers get to have larger works published.

GUD accepts work up to 15k words.

blacbird said:

Eh?

Description is best when it isn't overdone, but vague? I don't think so. Anything that's necessary to describe should be described with precision and vividly.

caw.

Click to expand...

Vague is a relative term. I meant if you've given enough to build an image in the reader's mind then anything more would be distracting.

Though, if we thought alike, Bird, then we would be writing the same book.

SMG said:

I mean for short stories in magazines. I guess people have short attention spans or something.
It seems like established writers get to have larger works published.

Click to expand...

That's generally true. Short stories are anything from 2,000--7,500 words, but by and large, the longer lengths get handed to established writers with recognizable names. But the right long story will make an editor forget who you are.

Delarege said:

Description is best when it is vague.

She sauntered up to the stranger in from the rain. She touched his wet lapel while her eyes played him like a violin.

This short extract summons a lot of questions but you inserted your own idea of what SHE looked like and HIM and even the room they were in.

I can direct you if I want to lay more of my own idea of who and where they are.

The blond sauntered through the dark pub to the stranger from the rain. She touched the wet lapel of his trench-coat while her eyes played him like a red headed violin.

One of my beta readers was disappointed with my MC because she had gotten an idea of her in the first pages. I introed some characteristics a few pages later. My MC was supposed to be small framed, straight black hair, fair pale skin. The reader had seen someone like Linda Hamilton as in Terminator 2.

If I want you to see specifics I can direct you but you should see who you expect to see. I should keep detailed descriptions out of it. It just bogs it down anyway.

That leaves a lot more room for story.

I agree with PeeDee, you should write it the way you see it. Word count is second. But don’t rob your reader of THEIR character. Or scenery.

Like a war torn French village. Enough said.
Sexy brunette in a tight dress. Enough said.
A motorcycle that reached out long to a fenderless front wheel. Enough said.

Do you need more? Several characters? Maybe it doesn’t want to be a short story. Maybe it wants to be a novella.

Click to expand...

I don't think description should ever be vague. And it certainly shouldn't involve cliches.

She sauntered up to the stranger in from the rain. She touched his wet lapel while her eyes played him like a violin.

Honestly, this isn't description at all. It's narrative, a very different thing, and "played him like a violin" would land this piece on my rejection stack the moment I read it.