The Art & Craft of the Short Story

Rick DeMarinis

• Publisher: Open Road Distribution
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781504037013
• eBook ISBN: 9781504036856
• Topic: Lingue e linguistica
• Subtopic: Scrittura creativa

The Art & Craft of the Short Story explores every key element of short fiction, including story structure and form; creative and believable characters; how to begin and where to end; and the generation of ideas; as well as technical aspects such as point of view; plot; description and imagery; and theme. Examples from the work of a wide variety are used. The author includes five of his own stories to demonstrate these topics.

1

A CAVEAT AND A CONFESSION

You write the short story for love—not for money, fame, or tenure. Love is the only acceptable motive. (Love can sometimes be obsession. In writing, the two are synonymous.) There was a time when you could compromise your love with economic need: Fifty years ago, a professional writer could make a decent living writing nothing but short stories. There was a healthy plethora of magazines in the United States, each paying good money. Fifty years ago, it was possible to be paid several thousand dollars by a major magazine for a single short story. Redbook, in 1949, published six short stories per issue, a continuing serial, as well as a complete novel.

I recently picked up a 1947 Good Housekeeping in a New Mexico thrift store. It has a prize-winning story in it by a writer named Allan Seager. He was paid five thousand dollars for it. (I know this because the amount was announced on the first page of the story.) Five thousand dollars in 1947 is the equivalent of twenty to thirty thousand now. Magazines such as Collier’s, The Saturday Evening Post, Good Housekeeping, The American Mercury, McCall’s, Esquire, Bluebook, and Redbook published from two to eight stories an issue. If you sold three or four stories a year back in that heyday, you might have enough money to pay your rent, keep your larder stocked, make payments on the Studebaker, and have something left over for a Florida vacation. Why? Because magazine fiction, along with the movies and radio, was a major source of entertainment for the general public. Short story writers cranked them out to feed America’s insatiable appetite for diversion. Reader interest was tweaked by blurbs under a story’s title.

There may be a girl who is ready to do almost anything—just to prove to a guy that two can live closer than one

A young girl’s first dance … her first heartbreak … and her father’s dilemma

A ring on her finger … the years slipping by. How safe can a man make the future?… How long can a girl wait?

These were simple, formulaic stories meant only to entertain, and the subscribers loved them.

There were critics who deplored this sort of market-oriented approach to the short story. Kenneth Allan Robinson, back in 1924, complained, “The American short story has been developed into a vast national industry, standardized like all vast industries, and turning out a standardized product. The mechanical elements of story construction have been so over-stressed that story-writing has come to be regarded as a purely mechanical process, something that is perfectly demonstrable. The result has been a product of high and soulless excellence.”

THE SHORT STORY’S RAISON D’ETRE

Market conditions have changed. Magazine fiction has yielded its vast audience to television. The reading public has gradually become a watching public. This is both a disaster and a gift. Freed of needing to satisfy a specific audience with specific expectations, the short story has blossomed beyond the constraints a strong commercial market imposes. Most quality short stories today are published in the literary quarterlies. The high-paying, slick-paper magazines that still print short stories are few in number—you can count them on your fingers—and only rarely do they print more than one story per issue.

But this is demography, an evolution of the modes of entertainment fostered and determined by technology. You, as a writer of short stories, can dismiss it. In the wake of national trends, your love may have become quaint, but the short story is not obsolete. It remains an important art form. Its brief and surgical insights are indispensable to a culture that needs them, perhaps more than ever. The short story—unruly, sharp-eyed, exacting—will not roll over and die under an insipid electronic glow. Anton Chekhov, a progenitor of the modern short story, said, “Man will become better only when you make him see what he is like.” This is a lofty goal, but I believe it is art’s unique and original purpose.

RULE ONE: THERE ARE NO RULES

You must love the short story, but you must also fear it. The ideal story, like a dream lover, is unattainable. I guess that’s the nature of the attraction. And, like a dream lover, it cannot be a tidy and cooperative entity, something that can be made compliant by specific lists of dos and don’ts. Good writers will break every rule that attempts to concretize some aspect of it. Every story makes its own rules. Each time I sit down to compose one, I feel at sea. All my previous experience and knowledge abandons me. I am a novice again, hoping, even praying, for the insights and inspirations that make composition possible.

But shouldn’t a story meet certain obvious and universal requirements? Shouldn’t it be intelligible on some immediate level, the narrative ordering of events sequential, as they appear to be ordered in real life? Shouldn’t it have characters who move the action forward to a resonant conclusion? Shouldn’t dialogue contribute to our understanding of the characters and not just consist of idle vocalizations? Shouldn’t a story be “shown” in scenes and descriptive passages, rather than in a narration that only “tells”? And shouldn’t there be concrete renderings of the environs in which the story takes place so that the reader can visualize and thus inhabit the story?

I can’t object to these basic requirements. They seem reasonable enough. But talented writers will always have occasion to violate one or more of them. “The Yellow Raft” by Evan S. Connell is a story without characters that nonetheless has an emotional punch. Robert Coover’s “The Babysitter” takes sequential narrative and stands it on its head. “A Questionnaire for Rudolph Gordon” by Jack Matthews is an affective piece that has no dialogue, characters, or narrative: The inferences we draw from an apparently impersonal questionnaire suggest the life of a man we never see but who nevertheless attracts our empathy. Raymond Carver wrote a splendid little story called “Mr. Coffee and Mr. Fixit.” This story is told in narrative, its only dialogue coming in its last two lines, an exchange so desperately forlorn you immediately understand that dialogue in any other part of the story would be too much to bear. It’s a story than can only be told in a series of minimalist declaratives that act as a kind of containment shield. If the story had been openly dramatized, presented in scenes—with dialogue, full of descriptive detail, thick with atmosphere—it would go over the top, it would get explosively crazy fast, perhaps impossible to manage.

I promised you a confession. This is it: I don’t know how to write a short story even though I’ve written hundreds of them, published five collections of them, sold them to magazines, both literary and commercial. I have also taught the subject for more than twenty years in various university English departments that hired me for that purpose. But here’s the thing: I don’t have a set of rules, a formula, a system, that tells me how to set about writing a story of literary quality. I don’t have a “how.” If I had such a system, one that would fit every interesting human situation, I’d write a prizewinner every day of the week. I’d make Chekhov look like a backslider. I’d make Cheever look like he was working out laundry lists. I’d make Hemingway look punch-drunk. But the hard truth is that there is no system, no set of rules that guarantee able composition or abundant production. There is no magic formula that will make hard work, commitment, inspiration, taste, and good luck unnecessary. To paraphrase a quip of Somerset Maugham’s: There are three rules for writing a short story. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are. Maugham was talking about the novel, but his words apply to all the arts. On the same subject, Flannery O’Connor said this: “As soon as a writer ‘learns to write,’ as soon as he knows what he is going to find, and discovers a way to say what he knew all along, or worse still, a way to say nothing, he is finished.”

THE ONE AND ONLY TRICK

Back in 1905, the literary critic William Patten wrote this about the nature of the short story.

From the time of Poe and Hawthorne the nature and limitations of the short story have formed a favorite subject of discussion among writers and critics of fiction. And the controversy has been all the more valuable because no definite conclusions have ever been arrived at. Had there been a general agreement as to a definition, the short story might now be as dead as the sonnet.

I think it can be safely said that in 2105 no definite conclusions will have been reached about the nature and limitations of the short story. Every living art form exists in an evolutionary stage; when its evolution stops, it quickly becomes a fossil, interesting only to curators and scholars.

That said, I do know this: I can tell you how a story can go wrong. I can tell you certain things every writer of successful short stories knows. I can suggest some things that may squeeze the trigger of your loaded imagination. It’s even possible that some of the things I’ve learned in the past thirty-odd years may help you. In the following pages, I will do my best to accomplish exactly that. I will tell you what I know. Maybe I can give you some pointers that will save you some wasted effort and time. That’s what I’ve done as a writing teacher in several universities. I keep getting hired and have never been sent packing, so I guess I’ve done something right. Some of my students have published both short stories and novels. I don’t take credit for their success. They were obsessed with the need to write. They worked hard. They were patient with themselves. They had all the qualifications they needed before they stepped into my classroom. I like to think I did something for them. I like to think I at least gave them useful advice at a moment when they could best use it. I hope I can, throughout this book, do the same for you.

But I’m not a cheerleader. I won’t give you a pep talk. The writing life is hard. Too many people who took the vows when I did have wound up in their fifties and sixties collecting aluminum or pumping gas for a living. There were times when I collected aluminum, applied for and received food stamps, depended on the generosity of friends. My dedication to this work became a ticket to poverty. I hated the way some people looked at me when I peeled food stamps out of my wallet in the Safeway checkout line. I’d buy Danish hams and pricey coffee just to annoy them. I was mad at a world that did not reward me for my creative efforts. My daughter wondered why her clothes had to be handmade or taken from the racks of Goodwill Industries. My wife took menial jobs so that we could make the rent. She often came home angry and depressed from having to deal with people who treated her like furniture. We lived in a context of resentment. Sometimes the resentment turned inward, threatening to sour our marriage. It didn’t. I’m thankful for that.

I don’t care for books that light candles for the blind. You know what I mean: “Tap into your God-given creativity after six easy lessons.” Can you imagine a book that suggests you can be a high-wire artist? “Yes, you can do it! You can conquer your fear of heights and your genetic tendency toward vertigo! There is money to be made dancing on a wire forty feet above a circus floor!” As a writing teacher, I begin each class with a caveat: Do this only if you can’t imagine your life not doing it. Do this because you are obsessed. Do this for love.

I expect, however, that you are already committed to this difficult and often thankless work and don’t need cheerleading or caveats. Fine. You are my brother or sister in our mutual dedication to a demanding art form. I expect that you already know you possess this elusive quality called talent. (Remember the ninth grade? Weren’t you the one who could string outrageous sentences together that made your teacher squint suspiciously at you?) And maybe you’ve heard that talent isn’t everything. It isn’t. It’s important—you’ve got to have some mastery of the language, some ability to put words into sequences that charm, chill, and illuminate. But even abundant talent can’t survive a lack of stubborn perseverance. Theodore Dreiser had a relatively modest talent, but that did not stop him from becoming a major American realist.

Gustave Flaubert’s advice is worth remembering: “Talent is long patience.” Writers of modest talent have become great successes because of their patient refusal to buckle under daunting pressures. To continue in spite of rejection and the many hectoring demands on your time and energy, this is the one and only trick.

2

THE SEA OF STORIES: WHERE STORIES COME FROM

Stories come from dreams, waking and sleeping. They come from life, yours and the lives of others.

Human beings can’t live without stories, just as they can’t live without dreaming. Storytelling is how we make sense of the world. Each of us knows instinctively that we live in a context of mystery, that no explanation of existence—what governs our behavior and determines our fates—will completely pacify our restless and solitary selves. We know that the world is made of dazzling opaque surfaces, that we are margined on all sides by oblivion, and that our situation, however secure, is frighteningly vulnerable. Any vagrant wind can blow down your house of cards.

This intuitive grasp of how things are allows the writer to see, compassionately, into the human predicament, the predicament of men and women who find themselves, at particular crossroads in their lives, afflicted by doubts, demoralized by crises, or deluded by false values. And the writer is responsible for the fate of these characters. It’s a responsibility not to be accepted lightly. The writer has to make what happens to them make sense. In the chaos of random events, the writer looks for a meaning.

Out of a kindred impulse, the man in the street will tell you his life story if you give him the chance. He needs little encouragement. It’s the human thing to do. The urge is a reflex triggered by the sympathetic glance, the accepting smile, the unguarded pause; we can’t help ourselves. Give the stranger an opening, and here comes the deluge.

We live in a sea of stories. We are so accustomed to this sea we don’t even notice it except when it irritates us. The man seated next to you on a plane will tell you about his job, his vacation plans, his wife, his kids, the degeneration of national mores, and even his illnesses. He may become alarmingly earnest and confide to you his fears and desires. Sometimes the deeply personal information is given cautiously, disguised by what the teller thinks is humor.

Most of the time such stories are only boring and inconsequential. But even then they have a purpose. The purpose is not to entertain you, the trapped listener, but to let the storyteller make his own life specific and orderly so that he can see how it plays to a disinterested audience. And because this story is always biased, because he slants the story so that it favors himself, it is inevitably a fiction. The man on the plane is lying (though he may not know it), but hidden in his fiction is need, and need is always truthful. He needs your sympathy and approval. He wants to be understood. If he has an ax to grind, he’ll want to see if you are an ally or an enemy. These stories, fascinating or dull, weld you together into a community of two. Great stories written by the masters weld us into a community of millions. Melville, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Kafka, Joyce, Woolf, Hemingway—the list is much longer—have shaped the way we perceive ourselves in this existence.

BOTTOM’S DREAM

I have an aunt who tells stories nonstop without prologue or segues, but they are always interesting. She knows a man, married fifty-four years, who saved a million dollars. He had, in old age, become an invalid. His wife nursed him, washed him, fed him, worked like a slave for him. But when he died, he left his money to his brother, and some even went to a sister in Europe, a sister he’d never seen. His wife got nothing. She had to borrow five thousand dollars to have him buried. My aunt told this story because the pure injustice of it made it interesting. We sat in my mother’s kitchen, shaking our heads over our coffees in disbelief. “Some people,” she finally said, a judgment and coda. “Go figure,” I said, beginning to figure a story based on the old man and his widow. But my aunt had already launched into another story.

These everyday dramas need to be held up to the light again and again, but they remain opaque without an artful structure that catalyzes them into transparency. As told, the light of meaning never shines through them. Providing the catalyzing structure is the fiction writer’s job. My aunt is possessed by the unrelieved injustice of the widow’s story, but after she tells it, she can only shake her head, her anger transformed by time into sad bewilderment. “Some people,” she says.

Such stories cannot go untold. I’m sure my aunt has repeated it dozens of times by now. It’s one of life’s dark little nuggets. I’ve repeated it myself several times to friends, embellished wit...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Foreword: A Writer’s Education
• 1. A Caveat and a Confession
• 2. The Sea of Stories: Where Stories Come From
• 3. Beginnings, Endings, and the Stuff In Between
• 4. Theme vs. “What My Story Is About”
• 5. Characters
• 6. Plot vs. Story
• 7. Form: Passionate Virtuosity
• 8. Spanning the Chasm
• 9. Point of View
• 10. Description and Imagery
• 11. Rewriting: Your Second, Third, and Tenth Chances
• Afterword: Grains of Salt
• About the Author
• Copyright Page