The Death of the Short Story

[Chester]

So I’m reading my Sunday paper over breakfast (home fries, sausages, and eggs, scrambled) when I come across a (positive) review of a short story collection of Tobias Wolff and the review starts out with this statement: "For those concerned about the demise of the short story..."

Is this true? Should we be concerned? The short story has very recently become my second favorite art form (next to cinema) and I’m in the midst of discovering great short stories from all the masters past. As you might guess, I’ve got a lot of ground to cover. But I know very little about the state of this art form today.

Is it, in fact, in demise? Naturally this idea’s not sitting well with my breakfast. Anybody have any thoughts on the matter?

[johann cruyff]

Yes,I'd say it is in danger of becoming extinct.I guess short stories just don't fit with certain postmodern rules of writing,i.e. today's literature can be divided into two main categories: either the book is fantasy(in which case it comes in volumes that not even Proust could've imagined),or it does have certain artistic aspirations,but then it's either a poem or an attempt that usually loses its way in many attempts to be fresh and original and ends up being a not-so-good novel with loads of intertextuality or something like that.I know many will not agree with me on this,but that's how I see postmodern literature.

And yes,it has ruined many great things,including the short story,as one of the prime examples of great talent.Probably because 99 % of today's authors aren't very gifted writers anyway.

[Drkshadow03]

Yes,I'd say it is in danger of becoming extinct.I guess short stories just don't fit with certain postmodern rules of writing,i.e. today's literature can be divided into two main categories: either the book is fantasy(in which case it comes in volumes that not even Proust could've imagined),or it does have certain artistic aspirations,but then it's either a poem or an attempt that usually loses its way in many attempts to be fresh and original and ends up being a not-so-good novel with loads of intertextuality or something like that.I know many will not agree with me on this,but that's how I see postmodern literature.

And yes,it has ruined many great things,including the short story,as one of the prime examples of great talent.Probably because 99 % of today's authors aren't very gifted writers anyway.

I don't entirely agree with that statement. Postmodernism (particularly of the fictional variety) cannot be blamed for the demise of the short story.

I personally think there is more historical-social-cultural reasons for it. Postmodernism didn't just spawn in a vacuum. There is a long history behind it.

Television and the computer are probably more to blame. I suspect people who are looking to entertain themselves for an hour more likely turn to that instead of the short stories of the past. On a long train ride instead of a short story or magazine, you have your video IPOD or your Nintendo DS or whatever electronic device you'd like to substitute.

The short story isn't literally dead. People still write them, they still get published. But it is a dying art form from what I hear.

I hate to ruin your day further, but the novel is in trouble as well. For many of the same reasons. A great deal of novel sales, particularly the classics are inflated by school reading list requirements.

[JBI]

Old news. They were never as popular as people pretend. People just want more money now. If anything it is easier to become known on shorts than ever now, since there is a large devout market, and you no longer, with the advancement of technology, have to rely on local support entirely before going big. They just don't pay Dan Brown size royalties. Who cares.

Shorts sell better than poems, but why isn't the critic complaining about that? I guess he isn't qualified to read poetry, so he needs to rant about short stories. If anything, the form that is going extinct the fastest is the essay.

Seriously, this theory is just propagated by semi-knowledgeable writers like Stephen King, whose short stories don't sell as well as his novels. I clearly see more short story writers than ever writing today, and I know that major magazines are still running them. Even novellas still run to some extent (though they usually just go straight to paperback). To say that the short is dead is idiocy, and to say that it doesn't fit with post-modernism is also idiocy. The most famous short story writer of the past 50 years is Borges, and he is every inch post-modern.

Lets be honest, short stories are only dead in genre literature, but they were never alive to begin with. It is hard to write a formulaic short story the same was a novel, and it is harder for a reader to escape into a short story the same was as a 7000 page fantasy saga. I think we should just talk about "reading for the sake of reading." as in, people read and try to be distracted for as long as possible. Short stories cannot do that the same way dragged out hero journeys can.

As for this critic, I wonder if he has even heard of Borges.

[Drkshadow03]

Lets be honest, short stories are only dead in genre literature, but they were never alive to begin with. It is hard to write a formulaic short story the same was a novel, and it is harder for a reader to escape into a short story the same was as a 7000 page fantasy saga. I think we should just talk about "reading for the sake of reading." as in, people read and try to be distracted for as long as possible. Short stories cannot do that the same way dragged out hero journeys can.

That could be true. I happen to write genre fiction, particularly short fiction. From what I've heard the genre short fiction mags are losing subscriptions each year.


As for this critic, I wonder if he has even heard of Borges.

I think the critic was speaking about writers writing now. There is no denying that the short story doesn't have the popularity it once had.

People say that poetry is dead too. It doesn't mean that people do not read older poems. It just means it generally isn't considered a viable way to produce an effective career as a writer.

[JBI]

Where is the proof? show it to me, I'm curious to see it. If you mean the F. Scott Fitzgerald type, he is quite an anomaly in the history of the genre. There are still many writers who work only in short story, the one that comes to my mind first is Alice Munro, who is very well off, and has enjoyed wide exposure.

[ben.!]

I write lots of short stories, and I must say that when I talk to school friends on MSN, as much as they love my writing (I've created a bit of a cult following of my stories at school), they just can't find the time to read them. They have school, or some just say they don't want to spend their time reading short stories.

But there are still three or four that are die hard fans, and will read any short story I send to them.

I believe the short story may be dying out, yes. People just don't have the time these days. There's computers, work, travel, sleep, friends to see. Unless you have the spare time and the will to read a short story, why bother?

I think that is the mentality of people these days. It's all school, work, sleep, play on the Xbox, see friends on weekends. That doesn't leave much time for a reading of a short story.

It's sad, and may be true...but I don't know about the whole big adult world scale of things, I'm just speaking from school friend experiences.

[Drkshadow03]

Where is the proof? show it to me, I'm curious to see it. If you mean the F. Scott Fitzgerald type, he is quite an anomaly in the history of the genre. There are still many writers who work only in short story, the one that comes to my mind first is Alice Munro, who is very well off, and has enjoyed wide exposure.

Honestly I wish I had some proof. Normally I'm a huge skeptic on things like this until I see numbers. I have heard this within the Speculative fiction writing community for awhile. I've also heard vague murmurings such as the one discussed above that began this entire conversation of the short stories demise for awhile while shooting the breeze with my Grad student peers in English.

I wish had something more substantial than that. However, some of the conversations come from editors who have an inside look at the publishing industry. All I've ever heard from that direction is that short stories are dying and short story collections in particular are hard sales because they don't sell as well as novels.

I possibly could find hard numbers and statistics when I have a little more time. Perhaps I'll do some more research on this topic when I get the semester is over and I'll report back my findings here.

[JBI]

It isn't the short that is dying out, I would argue, but rather, traditional means of publication. Shorts used to run in papers, and many mainstream magazines. They no longer do. That is what has changed, nothing else really. They were never more popular than novels, and shouldn't be. Like I mentioned before, poetry and essays seem to be in worse shape than short stories. I can't find any real evidence online (I don't want to run to Robarts Library to do research), but it seems to me that it is just a bunch of complainers.

If anything the short is more alive than ever with the emergence of the Internet as a means of publishing. The only problem it is having is mediocre novelists trying to write short stories, which 99/100 times tend to suck. They wonder why they don't sell then, I guess they should stick to what they know.

[johann cruyff]

...I hate to ruin your day further, but the novel is in trouble as well. For many of the same reasons. A great deal of novel sales, particularly the classics are inflated by school reading list requirements.

I may not have made my post clear enough: I think entire literature is in trouble - mostly because,again,it's either written with the purpose of making money(Stephen King,Rowling,Brown etc.) or the authors try too hard to write something original that they end up publishing crap - now,I'm not a big fan of Orhan Pamuk,but I have to admit he's one of the few decent writers left out there,simply because he writes in a way,at least to me,reminiscent of modern literature.However,each Pamuk is countered by at least one Houellebecq or Beigbedere today and yes,the novel does get into trouble.

Also,to JBI - yes,Borges was every inch postmodern,and yes,he did write amazing short stories.Note the tense.That was,what,25 years ago?The word postmodern has changed its meaning significantly over the course of these 20 years,unfortunately.Real,talented,old-fashioned(and I mean this in the best way possible) writers like Borges are becoming extinct themselves,and of course that leads to disappearance of quality writing.So,shorts may not be dead,but they sure are slowly suffocating in the world of thrones,swords and dragons.And unless someone gives them a helping hand,soon we will be talking about the demise of real literature.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I don't think so, no. More and more novel writers are writing collections of short stories as well. In the publishing world, it's become almost de riguer for novelists to write collections of short stories as well. I don't think all of them are bad, either. I think many are quite good.

I used to hate short stories. I don't know why. I think I liked a more complex plot. Now, however, I love short stories. Read them all the time.

In which case might I recommend to you the best of both worlds, i.e. Later, at the Bar, by Rebecca Barry, a novel in chapters each of which is a self-contained short story. I'd hate to debate whether it's "great" literature being more like a spirited gossip told by a highly intelligent, humorous, non-judgmental girl-friend!

[JCamilo]

I have to disagree. If anything is not in danger, but died and was buried with nice tombstone was the romance or novel, this happened when Joyce wrote Finnegans Wake and Borges wrote their elegy with Pierre Menard. Of course, like all deaths in art, it is just a rumor and take time until people notice it.
Neither Post-Modernistm or Modernism did anything with Short Stories because we had Kafka and Borges who showed how a short stories can aswer the need for an aethetic experience as powerful as those used in long texts.
Also, I do not see the new technologies damaging short texts - Most of devices ask for a quick reading, small texts - and yes, sometimes people mix the change of media (books) to death of text.

[PeterL]

It is true, the short story has died. No one reads any prose fiction that is of less than 20,000 words. Readers have no desire to read tightly plotted stories. No one has the skill to create tone, mood, characters, or anything in fewer than 20,000 words. Yes, the short story has died. A funeral was held, no one attended, because the short story was so unloved.

[JBI]

Depends what you consider reading. I don't consider the person who guzzles cheap paperback romance novels a reader, nor do I consider the kid who burns through large fantasy books a reader.
This is who wikipedia considers post-modern authors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_postmodern_authors
flip through them, most have written, and are writing short stories.

There are really two distinct camps of readers. If you say the mainstream short story is dying, I may agree, but the literary short story has never been flourishing as much.

[Drkshadow03]

Depends what you consider reading. I don't consider the person who guzzles cheap paperback romance novels a reader, nor do I consider the kid who burns through large fantasy books a reader.

JBI, I see no reason to be snobbish about reading. As a library student I consider it important to get children reading no matter what. Period.

I don't think there is anything wrong with reading romance novels or fantasy books. Plus it's a great way to spring board readers into Great Literature.

I know this from experience. A fat epic fantasy series transformed me into a serious reader. I started with Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series in high school, which eventually led me towards more genre-oriented literary fiction (Lord of the Flies, 1984, Brave New World), which then opened up the wider world of realist literary fiction for me. But of course it was never such a linear process. In between that I was still reading speculative fiction. In fact I still do read science fiction, fantasy, and horror to this day as well as Great Literature. My love and enjoyment of each do NOT have to come at the expense of one another. I also do NOT believe that fantasy/sci-fi need only be entertainment. There is a lot of interesting perspectives and deep themes that can be found in genre fiction.

Not to mention there is more going on in these genres than just the stereotypical images of them, particularly within fantasy. A lot of the more recent genre writers have definitely moved closer to the literary spectrum and take their cues from Borges more than they do Isaac Asimov. I am thinking of authors like China Mieville, Jeff Vandermeer, and Jeff Ford to name a few.




There are really two distinct camps of readers. If you say the mainstream short story is dying, I may agree, but the literary short story has never been flourishing as much.

Interestingly enough, genre circles refer to literary short stories as "mainstream" fiction, which is in fact technically truer based off circulation and sales of both books and their short story magazines. Other than Romance, other genres like sci-fi, horror, and fantasy appeal only to a very small audience. You may be speaking of the Dan Brown, James Patterson, thriller flavor of the week phenomena. The problem is you're conflating genres.

I'd point out first that those novels are better categorized as thrillers. Real Sci-fi/Fantasy/Horror readers mostly won't find those books particularly appealing from my experience, and vice-versa, most readers of thrillers won't be able to understand those other genres.

I think there is a delusion among many literati and readers of literature that people only write genre fiction (particularly Sci-Fi, Fantasy, and Horror) for the money, that it's some sort of cash cow. Most of the writers in those specific genres make thirty thousand or less per a novel, especially if they are new writers. Do the math how that works out if one writes a single novel per a year or one novel every two years (far more realistic). In other words, don't quit your day job if you become a genre novelist.

Dan Brown, Stephen King, and J. K. Rowling are the exception to this rule, not the general example.

Science Fiction and Fantasy novels make up 10% of all books sales (I know I've actually seen these statistics).

Romance, however, makes close to 50%. That and thrillers are the one genre that does sell extremely well.

[JBI]

"chick lit" as it is called is the genre which has the most sales (far more than any other genre). I did not say all novels that were romances are bad, I just said that a vast majority of them are.

I did not nitpick authors, I went with what I believe to be averages. I admit to having read a fair share of fantasy fiction in my day, but I also acknowledge the fact that I have read an even greater amount of what is now known as literary fiction.

Within each genre you seem to have the existence of both camps as well. Stephen King may write sci-fi, but so does the great author Ursula K. LeGuin. The point is, within genres it seems the vast majority of literature falls into the lower camps.

The reason for this I would assume, is because most literature, for instance, with fantastical themes, it being of high quality, and beyond the standard of the genre, seems automatically to be pushed into the title of post-modern, or magical realist, or even fantasy-realist. The genre itself is making distinctions, to the point where even its own writers don't wish to be labeled fantasy authors.

But back on topic, the most common form of fiction prose being read seems to vastly be novels. It has always been like this, since there has always been the sort of stereotype we acknowledge with novel readers. Look at for instance Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey, or better yet just look at this painting by Antoine Wiertz, painted in 1853.:

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/1296/wiertzsmdf8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Not a new phenomenon.


The point though is, that short stories never seem to factor into the standard mix. Poetry and short stories seem to be a very specific genre, not generally read by mainstream society today. Novel readers have though, always been more common.

The only real exception I can find to this in history is the early 20th century in West, where short stories seem to have been quite a hit. other than that, they have always seemed to be a less popular genre. There are still, anyway, enough short writers to make it quite clear the genre is hardly dead.

[Drkshadow03]

Ah okay. Not much I disagree with then now that you elaborated a bit.

[Chester]

...the genre is hardly dead.
Yes, this is what I’m coming to believe.

For the record, the critic who I quoted in the OP went on to give a glowing review to the book in her article and used that as a kind of proof to show the genre is, in fact, not a dead one. But when she started with "For those concerned about the demise..." it had me wondering who those "concerned" ones are and if they represent a generally agreed-upon idea of the state of the short story.

My hunch is that those taking that position probably suffer from the common malady of "back-in-the-good-ole’-days" syndrome. Things are always getting worse and nothing is as good as it was. There's that line I like from the movie Atlantic City with Burt Lancaster saying, "The Atlantic Ocean was something then. Yeah, you should have seen the Atlantic Ocean in those days..."

[RJbibliophil]

I would guess that the short story, like most classic literature genres, and really, the book in general, is declining in popularity due to uninterested people, the internet, and busy lives.

[PeterL]

William Trevor is still writing literary short stories that equal or surpass those of Chekhov, Ivan Bunin, and Lawrence. Have you read Trevor's short stories? While I don't agree that the short story is dead, I do agree that it's not what it once was (Chekhov, Hardy, Lawrence, Mansfield, etc.)

I tried to write that in such extreme terms that everyone would realize that I was being sarcastic. There are many good short stories being written and there still are people who read short stories in preference to longer forms, and older short stories are often read for pleasure. I have several collections of short stories in which there is just a single, sparkling gem.

[PeterL]

I would guess that the short story, like most classic literature genres, and really, the book in general, is declining in popularity due to uninterested people, the internet, and busy lives.

That wouldn't be my guess.

[JBI]

That wouldn't be my guess.

I would think, actually, the internet brought new popularity to the genre.

[kasie]

It isn't the short that is dying out, I would argue, but rather, traditional means of publication. Shorts used to run in papers, and many mainstream magazines. They no longer do. That is what has changed, nothing else really. They were never more popular than novels.....


I think this is the key to the matter - there are fewer outlets for short stories. Established authors can publish a book of short stories and the book sell because of the author's name. Unknown writers are less able to find a publisher for a volume of shorts.

I don't know about other readers but I've never known what to do with short stories - when they appeared in magazines, they were a welcome interlude among the news items, reviews, articles, etc but what do you do with a book of them? Read one and go on to something else? Read them all, one after another and end up feeling sated rather than satisfied, like eating your way through a box of chocolates?

As for 'readers', I've long since given up on distinguishing between kinds of readers - readers are people who read and I don't think anyone should decry or deplore what anyone chooses to read. What matters is that they read and continue to read. I don't get on with ChickLit but then I'm not a Chick any more! I'd rather my step-daughter read Shopaholic and Sister than not read anything because once the reading habit is established, it's hard to break, like any habit. Come to that I'm not a child but I still enjoy the occasional children's book. I enjoy all sorts of books in turn, fantasy, thrillers, romance and, yes, Great Literature, but I feel I can't afford to deny myself the possible pleasure of a good read by being precious about genre. My greatest theatrical delight is a Shakespeare play but I would not want an undiluted diet of the Bard. I need a varied literary diet as much as I need a varied diet of food - bran is good for you but imagine living on wholesome bran biscuits and never indulging in a chocolate biscuit from time to time!

[PeterL]

I would think, actually, the internet brought new popularity to the genre.

I tend to agree. The internet spawned a huge number of ezines, many of which have been around for more than a couple of years, so they probably aren't losing money.


I thought you were being sarcastic, especially in retrospect, as you were so extreme, but sarcasm is something I'm not good at, and don't always "get." I apologize.

If anything, I should apologize.

[mickitaz]

William Trevor is still writing literary short stories that equal or surpass those of Chekhov, Ivan Bunin, and Lawrence. Have you read Trevor's short stories? While I don't agree that the short story is dead, I do agree that it's not what it once was (Chekhov, Hardy, Lawrence, Mansfield, etc.)

I would tend to agree along the lines of your thought. If you look at histories general short stories, whether in a collection or solitary; they are just that---short stories. They have/had a beginning; plot development; brief character development and an ending. You knew what the story was about, and how it ended. Sort of like having a brief conversation or thought with the author.

Now, mind you, the last short story collection I read was Faery Reel: Tales from the Twilight Realm I very rarely read them for one main reason. Unless I know that an author has the intention of continuing the story, I am sort of okay with not having a definative ending. I don't like loop holes.

My problem with contemporary short story writers are that they seem to have lost the meaning of a "true short story". Most, in my opinion leave you feeling there is a whole novel that you missed out on somewhere. That the short story is actually and excert (spelled wrong :() from a larger picture.

True Short Stories don't really exist any more because most authors don't understand the concept. They leave the ending of the stories open, hoping that they can elaborate on the plot in the event that receive good reviews. Which is fine. But not what I am used to and what would satisfy me as a reader.

And yes, I am of the modern technology world with the electronic gaming devices, the zune/ipod, and the computers. I don't think that this has effected the popularity or lack thereof short stories. I still find time in my day/week for reading. I just find that short stories don't give me the substance I am looking for when I read.

[kasie]

My problem with contemporary short story writers are that they seem to have lost the meaning of a "true short story". Most, in my opinion leave you feeling there is a whole novel that you missed out on somewhere. That the short story is actually and excert (spelled wrong :() from a larger picture.

True Short Stories don't really exist any more because most authors don't understand the concept. They leave the ending of the stories open, hoping that they can elaborate on the plot in the event that receive good reviews. Which is fine. But not what I am used to and what would satisfy me as a reader. ....

When I was doing a creative writing course a few years ago, I was told the short story should be a 'snap shot', a single incident, one or two characters in focus, a hint of a background. It's not a bad rule of thumb for the genre.

(We must stop meeting like this, mickitaz....)

[AuntShecky]

Critics have been lamenting about "the death of the Novel" for fifty years, perhaps more so for the short story. I would like to think there is a place for finely-crafted fiction, and JBI was correct in stating that the markets for possible publication are shrinking. The print media are
suffering in general; everyday newspapers are transferring over to online editions, if not folding altogether. Magazines such as The Atlantic and Harper's which used to print literary fiction have cutback on it drastically; I don't think Esquire prints any fiction at all any more.
The genre would flourish if there were a market for it. Additionally, perhaps there has been such a drop in quality that Gresham's Law might be rearing its ugly head: the bad having driven out the good.

[Seabird111]

So I’m reading my Sunday paper over breakfast (home fries, sausages, and eggs, scrambled) when I come across a (positive) review of a short story collection of Tobias Wolff and the review starts out with this statement: "For those concerned about the demise of the short story..."

Is this true? Should we be concerned? The short story has very recently become my second favorite art form (next to cinema) and I’m in the midst of discovering great short stories from all the masters past. As you might guess, I’ve got a lot of ground to cover. But I know very little about the state of this art form today.

Is it, in fact, in demise? Naturally this idea’s not sitting well with my breakfast. Anybody have any thoughts on the matter?


Well, a lot of modern short stories are pretty horrible. I mean just terrible. It makes me sad :bawling:.

So, I guess you could say, Short Stories are in more of a recession. There's still some great stuff out there.

[JBI]

A lot of short stories were terrible 100 years ago. You just don't know about them since they are gone.

[PeterL]

90% or everything is crap, so one would expect that short stories are so afflicted.

[Seabird111]

True, Peter, very true.

[waryan]

what if one does not like Trevor? I enjoy Chekhov and Mansfield particularly but I feel bad to say that what I've read of Trevor bores me. Can anyone recommend a few? I can't remember which ones I've read but I think they were in the O.Henry Prize Winners collections for the past couple of years.

[mickitaz]

(We must stop meeting like this, mickitaz....)[/QUOTE]

hmm.. have we met elsewhere?

I agree.. a short story can be a snapshot... but completion from beginning to end. A segment of something that can exist all on its own.

[mickitaz]

So I’m reading my Sunday paper over breakfast

k.. that right there are two endagered species... reading the paper and eating breakfast ;) Seriously, breakfast for me is a rarity... I haven't truly read the paper in ages....I will read the online paper.. but the actual paper? I often get lost going from article to article!

no offense Chester... :D

[Chester]

that right there are two endagered species... reading the paper and eating breakfast Seriously, breakfast for me is a rarity... I haven't truly read the paper in ages....I will read the online paper.. but the actual paper? I often get lost going from article to article!
A routine, I am sad to report, that time only permits for me on Sundays.

[JCamilo]

Critics have been lamenting about "the death of the Novel" for fifty years, perhaps more so for the short story.

The difference is that for Novel, it was not a critic, but an artist that "killed" when exploring the possibilities of novel to a maximun. This hardly can be said about short stories, the last great inovator, Borges opened possibilities, didn't wrote the final short story.
Technology changes are favorable to short stories (while the middle will modify the texts, until the new format is born, it is the old format that will dictate the rules, and they are favorable to short texts). This does not mean we have great short stories (or that we haven't).
But, Death in Art is not a true End. Centuries ago, Chesterton said the age of Epic poetry was gone and it would be pointless to write an epic poem. True. But if one could write a poem using homeric verses, with 3838484 verses, telling the birth of a nation/culture, a hero epic story with quality, it would be fine. Death in art usually only means the aesthetic exploration of the genre just went as far as possible and it is very hard to add anything new. Not that it was no longer produced - aka, the age of epic poetry was gone for centuries, but in XIX they tried to write epic poetry as well.