we can’t simply say to the public: hey, this is harder so you should enjoy it more. we’d be lying to ourselves that they even gave a damn. it’s like conceptual art: the process was hard, adore us. truth be told, unless you’re a writer, nobody cares.

so many theories abound: that since americans are all about speed and timeliness that they should enjoy stories more due to their brevity. that they can’t get “lost” in the world due to the space constraint of a short story, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

obviously people read less literary fiction and less short stories. why? and how can we solve it? i believe it has to do with active reading vs. passive reading. everything does count so much more and to that extent the reader has to be that much more aware of what’s going on in a short story. we’ve all read incredibly engrossing novels and at some point, whilst reading, thought to ourselves about the grocery list, whether or not a light switch was on, etc. because you can do that with a novel and still pick up what’s going on to an extent. with a story every scene and nuanced movement is so specific to the nature of the character that you can’t miss a single thing or you’ll be, in essence, assed-out.

it sounds simplistic but people don’t want to concentrate that hard. everything in today’s society is about making things as easy as possible.

there isn’t a real solution. not a quick fix anyway. the short story isn’t dead. literary journals aren’t dead. they had their heyday with fitzgerald pulling in $20,000 and financing his career thanks to the saturday evening post and various other mags. they lulled. then they had another resurgence in the 80s with cheever, carver, hempel, wolff, robison, moore, ford and the like. there’ll be another one. it’s all cyclic and anybody who wants to point to a ‘form’ as being dead is simply out of ideas of what to write about and trying to get attention for themselves.

p.s. there are a slew of short story writers who write “longer” short stories that are incredibly dense and give you more than enough to get “lost” in their worlds. first on that list is alice munro. if everyone wrote like alice munro, we wouldn’t need novels.

p.p.s. how many short stories i’ve read in the last 2 months: re-read both story collections of James Salter, Charles D’Ambrosio, the recently released collection of Ben Percy, an older collection of Ron Hansen, Barry Hannah, Lee K. Abbott, Amy Hempel, BASS and Best New American Voices, Julie Orringer, David Bezmogis, and a whole shitton of literary journals.

But so what? Though it’s often hard to find, really really good short fiction is being produced every day, and those of us who like it can get our fixes (I read short fiction constantly, have done so for twenty years). Why this marketing model that insists on foisting a “product” on an uninterested populace?

Now, really good, really funny novels: that’s what this world has a shortage of.

It’s true–web culture is primed for the short story form, but the ‘un-ghettoize’ reference is my point: why AREN’T your friends and neighbors talking about the last story that kicked their ass? Take the ‘quiz’ out into the streets– speechify about what you love about stories– perhaps the ‘un-ghettoization’ begins with civilized discussion with those near us…

Panda & Steven: ‘quality work’ is a slippery slope to make a stand on. ..Find out what *psychologically* is not working with most readers regarding the format– Diaz said that the short story allows for no dead chapters, let alone dead paragraphs or sentences– it’s a tightrope act; the reader is so much more unforgiving if a writer slips– is that true for you all? Is the tautness of the structure what appeals to you?

Oh, and I’ve been listening to the New Yorker short story podcast this week while doing laundry.

On a related note, there’s a new blogzine out there that reviews that reviews literary magazines. It’s called Luna Park Review which is a Bolaño reference. Though the editor’s belief that Bolaño made up the magazine Luna Park and it’s second issue appears to be mistaken.

JeffV

They’re already working.

People are more likely to log on every day than to pick up an issue of Prairie Schooner, and they’re more likely to forward a story to their friends and colleagues with one click than lending out journals.

Now the trick is to un-ghettoize them and to get more writers to submit quality work.”

Right on the money.

They’re already working.

People are more likely to log on every day than to pick up an issue of Prairie Schooner, and they’re more likely to forward a story to their friends and colleagues with one click than lending out journals.

Now the trick is to un-ghettoize them and to get more writers to submit quality work.

I’m happy authors that like Junot Diaz stand up at readings and announce (paraphrasing), “I hope I never write another short story, they’re just too damn fucking hard.” More people need to be aware of the artistry involved, and of the joy of not having minutae spelled out for them in a plot.

Let’s take a quiz: How many Edrant readers have read a) a short story or b) a short story collection or anthology in the past TWO MONTHS? And if not, why not?