Discussion → Very Short Fiction

  • Darryl_falling_water.thumb
    Darryl Price
    Sep 18, 06:54am

    Obviously the elephant has many sides. A different story can be created from any other new or old angle you choose but it doesn't invalidate the perspective from the other side of the beast. As we circle the thing we are still trying to look within ourselves for the truth that will make sense of the whole picture. It's a lifelong search, unless we find the center everywhere.That's difficult under the best of circumstances. And since that's nearly always impossible to keep up in the air I think it's okay to get stung on the nose by the metaphorical bee so you will remember this life is here with us now. We provide the stingers for each other but the reactions are all our own.

  • Headshot.thumb
    Heather Fowler
    Oct 16, 11:22am

    What a great discussion! I agree with Barry and Roxane--actually find all of the contributors to the thread to have valid points. I started writing short short fiction (for me, about 500 words) so I could go read at a three-minute, recorded, local reading series and get audio bytes for my soundpage on MySpace. I tend to love the 2500 word range, but remember years back on Zoetrope when I felt I was almost unable to write a story (100 stories in) under 5500 words, which all here know is notoriously bad for fitting many journal's guidelines--but after I started the story a day marathons I've done the last two Novembers, I've found my stride again at 1500-3000 words. I think it's true some writers just nail the very short form and personally I've never found it very satisfying to read, to be honest, until the last year. I envy their ability to pull it off with such grace, but also think my work in short shorts verges toward a prose poem format, otherwise I want more scenes and feel left wanting (as yet! I'm still working on gaining mastery in the form and a year from now could feel it's the only thing I want to write). Still, for me, a story is as long as it needs to be until I can conclude it and feel satisfied.

    It's the sweet spot or conclusion wrap that determines the length of my pieces, not necessarily a conscious choice.

    Some could say flash is better for online readers with limited attention spans and many sites do say that--that their "online" version takes shorter work. Some could say flash is a poem/longer narrative fusion. Some could say flash is the minimalist's cup of tea. I think it's all good. :) Personally, I like to genre bend anyway--so love to do multi-genre fusions--and I don't think flash is a "trend" so much as a sort of fiction that is coming into greater visibility and is enjoyable for modern readers, which I don't think will change.

    Do I think writers of flash make conscious choices about their work: ABSOLUTELY. I would complicate that point by saying some flash writers have a stylistic presence that each flash feels affiliated with. Others experiment. But when it comes right down to it--I think literary art is all literary art. Do I use flash to "pad" my CV? Never.

    (I'm just as proud of short pieces picked up as I am with longer ones. Moreso, maybe, because the genre is newer to me.) Really loved that book on flash that came out recently with essays on the topic--Rose Metal Press?
    :) Anyway, great thread!

  • 273.thumb
    Randall Brown
    Oct 27, 08:31am

    For me, there's something of a microscope effect at work in reading and writing really short fiction. I've always thought that's why flash is for the fearless. It's kind of like (but not exactly) putting your writing under a metaphoric microscope on a symbolic slide for a figurative reader. That's why I tend to write with fewer & fewer words. Less chance to get it all wrong.


    • You must be logged in to reply.