Subject: Re: What distinguishes short fiction from very short fiction, besides length?
From: J. Thomas Hummer (jthummer@jps.net)
Date: Wed May 10 2000 - 21:12:58 GMT
on 5/10/2000 16:34, Bloomyberg at bloomyberg@usa.net wrote:
> I suspect that the distinguishing mark of very short fiction is its absolute
> concentration on a single event or theme, but I also suspect that such a
> description could just as easily apply to many novels. Besides, even very
> short stories can be multithematic.
>
> Any ideas?
A good place to start might be what the master, Edgar Allan Poe, wrote about
the short story in his review of Hawthorne's _Twice Told Tales_. Your first
suspcicion is consistent with what Poe called the "single effect," but he
would disagree with your second suspicion and, I believe, the suggestion
that a short story can be multithematic.
Poe writes: "A skilful artist has constructed a tale. He has not fashioned
his thoughts to accomodate his incidents, but having deliberately conceived
a certain *single effect* to be wrought [e.g., "terror, or passion, or
horror, or a multitude of such other points"], he then invents such
incidents, he then combines such events, and discusses them in such tone as
may best serve him in establishing this preconveived effect. If his very
first sentence tend not to the outbringing of this effect, then in his very
first step has he committed a blunder. In the whole composition there should
be no word written of which the tendency, direct or indirect, is not to the
one pre-established design. And by such means, with such care and skill, a
picture is at length painted which leaves in the mind of him who
contemplates it with a kindred art [I love this description of the reader on
whom the intended effect is wrought as one who "contemplates it with a
kindred art"], a sense of the fullest satisfaction. The idea of the tale,
its thesis, has been presented unblemished, because undisturbed--an end
absolutely demanded, yet, in the novel, altogether unattainable."
On why this is unattainable in the novel, Poe writes: "The ordinary novel is
objectionable, from its length, for reasons analogous to those which render
length objectionable in the poem. As the novel cannot be read at one
sitting, it cannot avail itself of the immense benefit of *totality*.
Worldly interests, intervening during the pauses of perusal, modify,
counteract and annul the impressions intended. But simple cessation in
reading would, of itself, be sufficient to destroy the true unity. In the
brief tale, however, the author is enabled to carry out his full design
without interruption. During the hour of perusal, the soul of the reader is
at the writer's control."
In that light, I would think there really is very little, besides length, to
distinguish short fiction from very short fiction, as the key to its
character is whether it can be read at one sitting.
But then, again, I could be all washed up. :) In any event, I long for
another Poe to make an appearance.
Tom Hummer
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Jun 01 2000 - 09:45:25 GMT