Short Stories

[shortstoryfan]

Lately, I've been reading short stories from The Best American Short Stories Anthologies and the O. Henry Award Anthologies. I have managed to buy random volumes, and I was wondering if maybe someone wanted to discuss short stories in either Best American Short Stories 2008, edited by Salman Rushdie, or The Best Short Stories of the Century edited by John Updike.

I really have had no interest in literature up until lately, and was hoping other members could help me start thinking about literature in new ways, and decide what some of these stories mean.

Anyway, right now I just started the third story in The Best Short Stories of the Century, A Jury of Her Peers by Susan Glaspell.

[Schokokeks]

Hi shortstoryfan, and welcome to the forum! :wave:

Maybe you'd like to pick a specific short story you would like to discuss, since not everyone might have the anthologies you named right at hand. If the author is among those who have their own subforum here, you could then post your thread in that subforum, and since all the experts are normally gathered there, you might increase your chances of finding someone for a discussion! :)

Have fun around here! :)

[JBI]

Try looking outside of American short stories - the form is more central to other traditions than it is to the American one.

For instance, the short story is probably the most major genre of Canadian literature. You could try looking into the Penguin Anthology of Canadian short stories, or poking through some select authors. Or better yet, you could get Anthologies of foreign literature, such as Italian, or French, and go from there.

In truth, the form seems more central to the French and German traditions than to the American one.

But even then, what sort of broadening are you looking for? There are short story authors from everywhere, and most novelists write at least a couple in their lives. Chekhov is considered the master, but, for instance, Balzac wrote many excellent ones. There are countless great short stories, in many, many languages. You need to be more specific, or pick up a general anthology of a particular country, or language.

[Virgil]

Try looking outside of American short stories - the form is more central to other traditions than it is to the American one.

For instance, the short story is probably the most major genre of Canadian literature. You could try looking into the Penguin Anthology of Canadian short stories, or poking through some select authors. Or better yet, you could get Anthologies of foreign literature, such as Italian, or French, and go from there.

In truth, the form seems more central to the French and German traditions than to the American one.

But even then, what sort of broadening are you looking for? There are short story authors from everywhere, and most novelists write at least a couple in their lives. Chekhov is considered the master, but, for instance, Balzac wrote many excellent ones. There are countless great short stories, in many, many languages. You need to be more specific, or pick up a general anthology of a particular country, or language.

How is it not as central to American literature? Washington Irving, Nathanial Hawthorne, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, Henry James, Ambrose Bierce, Louisa May Alcott, Kate Chopin, William Dean Howells, Bret Harte, Stephan Crane, and that's just the 19th century and that's just a sampling. I'm not saying the other countries don't have the short story as central to their tradition, but certainly it's central to the American tradition. In fact I was just reading something by Salman Rushdie on his praising of the American short story. Read his introduction to The Best American Short Stories 2008.

[Logos]

Lately, I've been reading short stories from The Best American Short Stories Anthologies and the O. Henry Award Anthologies. I have managed to buy random volumes, and I was wondering if maybe someone wanted to discuss short stories in either Best American Short Stories 2008, edited by Salman Rushdie, or The Best Short Stories of the Century edited by John Updike.

I really have had no interest in literature up until lately, and was hoping other members could help me start thinking about literature in new ways, and decide what some of these stories mean.

Anyway, right now I just started the third story in The Best Short Stories of the Century, A Jury of Her Peers by Susan Glaspell.

Could we get back to the OP please? they asked some pretty specific questions about some specific books and stories; try not to scare them away! ;) :)

[JBI]

How is it not as central to American literature? Washington Irving, Nathanial Hawthorne, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, Henry James, Ambrose Bierce, Louisa May Alcott, Kate Chopin, William Dean Howells, Bret Harte, Stephan Crane, and that's just the 19th century and that's just a sampling. I'm not saying the other countries don't have the short story as central to their tradition, but certainly it's central to the American tradition. In fact I was just reading something by Salman Rushdie on his praising of the American short story. Read his introduction to The Best American Short Stories 2008.

I didn't mean that they weren't written, simply that they were generally a less important form relative to other traditions. Crane is remembered for the Red Badge of Courage, James mostly for his novels, Melville mostly for Moby Dick, and Billy Budd, Hawthorne for The Scarlet Letter, etc. There are of course, great short story writers, but generally, the U.S. bends more towards the novel side, than the short story side.

Even greats of short stories, like Faulkner are remembered more for novels than for their short stories. I just wanted to point out, that the American tradition itself is bent more towards longer works.

As for the OP, you would need to name the stories.

[Virgil]

I didn't mean that they weren't written, simply that they were generally a less important form relative to other traditions. Crane is remembered for the Red Badge of Courage, James mostly for his novels, Melville mostly for Moby Dick, and Billy Budd, Hawthorne for The Scarlet Letter, etc. There are of course, great short story writers, but generally, the U.S. bends more towards the novel side, than the short story side.


I think that may be an after fact of today's academia that focuses on the novel. But these writers made more money from their short stories than their novels. I personally think the short story is very central to American literature.

[JBI]

Only during the Modernist period really, today for instance, good luck selling short stories and ending up rich - I don't know if it is possible - Stephen King, the bookselling giant I know, has written about the lack of market and the "Death of the short story". Still, I cannot come up with one author who made their living only on short stories, besides a very rare few, and fewer that I can think of in the mainstream American tradition.

But either way, we are off topic, perhaps the OP can jump in now, to end this.

[Virgil]

Only during the Modernist period really, today for instance, good luck selling short stories and ending up rich - I don't know if it is possible - Stephen King, the bookselling giant I know, has written about the lack of market and the "Death of the short story". Still, I cannot come up with one author who made their living only on short stories, besides a very rare few, and fewer that I can think of in the mainstream American tradition.


I have to take this opportunity, because it seems rare lately, that we finally found something to agree on. :lol: I agree. Most writers teach now, which was probably rare prior to 1950.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I really have had no interest in literature up until lately, and was hoping other members could help me start thinking about literature in new ways, and decide what some of these stories mean.



As for thinking about literature in new ways there is a world of theory and stuff out there that is sure to get you running away, but for now maybe it would be interesting to consider a few things first:

1 How reliable is the narrator? Look again at some of the short stories, do you trust what it is they are saying? I know that automatically people tend to take for granted what is said, but are they lying? why? what complications does that bring to the text?

2 You could consider the social setting, when was the story written? what background was the writer or narrator from? what does this (if anything) add to the story?

3 What do you as a reader bring to the text? You speak about what the stories mean the only thing that really matters is what does the story mean to you? How and why do you arrive at the conclusions that you have? where are they located in the text?

Hope that is a starting point in some small way, welcome to the forum. :thumbs_up

[JCamilo]

The list of americans is good enough, but what is exactly the definition of short stories ? 20 pages or just what is not a novela yet?:P
Anyways, Check out the names on Calvino's XIX Century selection or Borges and Bioy Casares selections (those are fantastic settings).
You have here 3 names to check (Borges is pretty much fundamental while talking about Short Stories), you can add his mentor/pupile Bioy Casares and Julio Cortazar. Because of them South America hispanic literature focus strongly on short stories. You can add Horacio Quiroga, Juan Rulfo and Felisberto Hernandez and Brazilians like Machado de Assis and Guimaraes Rosa.
Europe have their share of short stories writers that are also famous for other form of text, you can pick James Joyce, Robert Louis Stevenson, G.K.Chesterton, Merimée, Puchkin, Tolstoi, Virginia Woolf, Karen Blixen, Hans Christian Andersen, Maupassant, H.G.Wells, Kipling and before I forget someone important, Kafka.

[shortstoryfan]

I think that this was not the best website for this line of discussion. I'm sorry.

[Virgil]

I think that this was not the best website for this line of discussion. I'm sorry.

Not true ShortStory. This is a great site for this discussion. We just got off track. ;)

If there is a story you wish to discuss, please let us know. I'll be happy to discuss a famous short story. Stories published prior to 1925 are mostly on the internet and free. Otherwise I have a pretty good collection. Which story would you like to discuss?

[PabloQ]

ssf, I hope you come back to check on this thread one last time before you give up. My recommendation is that you go back to your original entry and read the first response you received and think about it. If it's modern short stories you wish to discuss, you are probably correct to leave this site. Most of the discussions are rooted in the 1000s of works published here and they are predominantly works in the public domain or without copyright restrictions.
But there are many short stories posted to this site. If you search around by author, you may find some threads already exist on particular works that you enjoy. I encourage you to do that before you abandon our forum completely, but if you do I understand.

[Virgil]

Why do you say we don't discuss modern stories Pablo? Sure they are not in the public domain but we are still free to discuss them. We discuss contemporary novels.

[shortstoryfan]

Thanks, Virgil. You seem nice.

I really think this site is maybe more exclusively geared to earlier literature than I first thought, and I am really more interested in contemporary stuff. I understand the importance of all those Russian guys, and the French dudes, and all that stuff, but I really think that later work is just as important, if not more important.

I finished "A Jury of Her Peers" today, and it was amazing. It had great social commentaries on the roles of women at an earlier time in history, and was very psychologically driven for its time (1917). It is filled with subtle nuances between the two female characters. There is also some great symbolism used. I just want to know what people FEEL about different stories. I'm totally willing to read other stories and discuss those if people would like. I just don't want to waste my time here if everyone is just reading literature that I'm really not reading right now.

[PabloQ]

My point was that contemporary short stories are less likely to be published on the site because they would still be under copyright. They certainly can be discussed.

[Virgil]

My point was that contemporary short stories are less likely to be published on the site because they would still be under copyright. They certainly can be discussed.

Oh yes, they would not be part of the library here. That is true.

[Virgil]

Thanks, Virgil. You seem nice.

I really think this site is maybe more exclusively geared to earlier literature than I first thought, and I am really more interested in contemporary stuff. I understand the importance of all those Russian guys, and the French dudes, and all that stuff, but I really think that later work is just as important, if not more important.

I finished "A Jury of Her Peers" today, and it was amazing. It had great social commentaries on the roles of women at an earlier time in history, and was very psychologically driven for its time (1917). It is filled with subtle nuances between the two female characters. There is also some great symbolism used. I just want to know what people FEEL about different stories. I'm totally willing to read other stories and discuss those if people would like. I just don't want to waste my time here if everyone is just reading literature that I'm really not reading right now.

First thank you on your compliment. I try to be nice, though some may question it. ;)

Now I had never heard of that story, but I did find it electronically, here: http://www.learner.org/interactives/literature/story/fulltext.html.

If you give me a few days I will read it and we can discuss it. The way you describe the story has caught my interest. How about you give me by Monday night and I will be ready to discuss it? Will you come back for the discussion?

[shortstoryfan]

Sure, that would be great. I really don't know why the short story isn't here...it's very famous. I had heard about it sometime in high school, or maybe even before, and I'm not very well read at all. And I went to a horrible school...so, I don't know. Anyway, it's great, I hope you enjoy it, and thank you very much.

[mayneverhave]

The one contemporary anthology I own is "The Vintage Book of Contemporary American Short Stories" edited by Tobias Wolff, which, aside from a handful of stories, is relatively blah.

There appears to be a tendency to veer to the sensational, or at least to go out of your way to be controversial. There are at least 5 stories that involve either bank robberies, stalkers, or drug abuse. Very little attention seems to be paid to the actual writing.

[Emil Miller]

Welcome shortstoryfan,

Don't worry about the high-flown rhetoric by students and academics, there are plenty of communications from people such as myself who also went to a horrible school and had to educate himself. Stay with us and you will soon see that scholastic students of literature can be pretty short on grammar when it comes to presenting their views. Even allowing for a natural tendency to make typing errors and the difference between English and its American variant, there is some pretty dire spelling on the forum.
Please don't think yourself an idiot with nothing to say, the very fact that you have taken an interest in this forum shows it isn't true.
You work in a restaurant, so what? The kind of work you do has nothing to do with improving your mind and you can learn quite a lot from joining in discussions on this web site; apart from which, there is also a General Chat Forum which discusses all sorts things other than literature and is a lot of fun in its own right.

[Virgil]

Hey ShortStory. I've read half the story and I'm enjoying it very much. Perhaps I can finish tomorrow and get back here. I haven't forgotten, just been busy. ;)

[JBI]

Some of you may be interested in this: http://www.amazon.com/Art-Short-Story-Dana-Gioia/dp/0321363639/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229474752&sr=8-1

It has a good selection of short stories, by many of the major players, and has essays to give different perspectives on the writing and nature of short stories.

[Joreads]

I only just saw this I will read the story also and I am happy to discuss it. Stick around SSF I am sure you will enjoy it

[shortstoryfan]

Great, Virgil. I'm really excited to hear everyone's thoughts on the story.

Thanks for the suggestion for reading, JBI. Since I know so little about literature, I'm not sure how much I'll be able to gleam from the essays, but the book seems to have many of those authors I've already tried so hard to avoid, so maybe it will be a good thing to purchase, so you know, I can be enlightened.

And to Joreads, I'm glad that you found this thread. I'm excited that more people are finding the subject interesting, and hope many others will do the same and discuss this story, and hopefully others (provided we all don't disagree so much that we stop talking to each other).

I must admit that this entire thread is rather egocentric and self-servicing, so I appreciate everyone trying to appease the desires of such a brat.

[Joreads]

Great, Virgil. I'm really excited to hear everyone's thoughts on the story.

Thanks for the suggestion for reading, JBI. Since I know so little about literature, I'm not sure how much I'll be able to gleam from the essays, but the book seems to have many of those authors I've already tried so hard to avoid, so maybe it will be a good thing to purchase, so you know, I can be enlightened.

And to Joreads, I'm glad that you found this thread. I'm excited that more people are finding the subject interesting, and hope many others will do the same and discuss this story, and hopefully others (provided we all don't disagree so much that we stop talking to each other).

I must admit that this entire thread is rather egocentric and self-servicing, so I appreciate everyone trying to appease the desires of such a brat.

I started to read it today at lunch so I will try and finish it tonight.



Jo is fine by the way.

[Joreads]

I have to say I loved this story. I have never thought of myself as a short story person I am not sure why. Spoilers below if you want to read on.





The first thing that struck me about this story is that Mrs Hale and Mrs Peters taken along by the men to collect things for Minnie Foster. The men never considered for one second that the strange things that the women noticed might actually have a bearing on the case. While the men were busy going over the crime scene the women took the time to look through Minnies eyes at the life that she must have lead. They noticed the queer stitching and even the broken bird cage and the dead bird, which as it happens is the evidence that is needed to prove Minnie’s guilt.
It is there understanding of the type of colorless life that Minnie must have, and the simple joy that having a singing bird would have brought here. The run down kitchen and the difficult husband all ultimately lead both women to hide what they know from the police and helping Minnies case.

I guess the question is do you think that if the women would have explained what they suspected the men would have listened or would they have dismissed it? Also at the time the story was written women were not allowed to sit on jury’s would the dead singing bird have made an impact with an all male jury any way? What do you guys think. (I have to say I am not sure I would convict on a dead bird!)

I love the idea of this how about we do a short story once a month?


Jo

[Virgil]

I have to say I loved this story. I have never thought of myself as a short story person I am not sure why. Spoilers below if you want to read on.

I finished it last night and I really enjoyed it too.


The first thing that struck me about this story is that Mrs Hale and Mrs Peters taken along by the men to collect things for Minnie Foster. The men never considered for one second that the strange things that the women noticed might actually have a bearing on the case. While the men were busy going over the crime scene the women took the time to look through Minnies eyes at the life that she must have lead. They noticed the queer stitching and even the broken bird cage and the dead bird, which as it happens is the evidence that is needed to prove Minnie’s guilt.
Yes it's definitely a story of a men's versus woman's perspective. Are we absolutely sure that Minnie actually committed the murder? I would say i'm 80% sure, but I do have a doubt. But I think the story would fall flat if Minnie had not committed the murder, so i would have to say she did.


It is there understanding of the type of colorless life that Minnie must have, and the simple joy that having a singing bird would have brought here. The run down kitchen and the difficult husband all ultimately lead both women to hide what they know from the police and helping Minnies case.
Yes Minnie must have had a hard and "colorless" life as you say. It is the life of people on the outskirts of civilization. These are farmers on the frontier. Farming was a hard life and it must have been hard on a woman who was without children. That bird was the color of her life.


I guess the question is do you think that if the women would have explained what they suspected the men would have listened or would they have dismissed it? Also at the time the story was written women were not allowed to sit on jury’s would the dead singing bird have made an impact with an all male jury any way? What do you guys think. (I have to say I am not sure I would convict on a dead bird!)
I think if the women explained about the bird, the men would have understood. The women hide the dead bird because it would convict Minnie. By the end of the story the women are in complete sympathy with Minnie and understand her predicament. They hide the motive for the murder.


I love the idea of this how about we do a short story once a month?
I have advocated this in the past. But I'm already involved in too many threads and not sure if I could participate every month. But I wold love to do it on a ongoing basis. Actually Jo I participate in the DH Lawrence short story thread where we do a Lawrence story every month or two.

[Joreads]

I have advocated this in the past. But I'm already involved in too many threads and not sure if I could participate every month. But I wold love to do it on a ongoing basis. Actually Jo I participate in the DH Lawrence short story thread where we do a Lawrence story every month or two.

You are right of course Virgil. I am not at uni for a few months and I tend to forget how busy I get when I am there as well as working. I will check out the Lawrenece thread maybe I can get involved in that?

[Virgil]

You are right of course Virgil. I am not at uni for a few months and I tend to forget how busy I get when I am there as well as working. I will check out the Lawrenece thread maybe I can get involved in that?

Oh we would love to have you. We are in the middle of one right now.

[Joreads]

Guys I did a little more research in this and it seems that the story may actually have been based on a real case it seems that Glaspell claimed that the story was based on an actual court case. On December 2, 1900, sixty-year-old farmer John Hossack was murdered in Indianola, Iowa. His skull was crushed by an ax while he and his wife were asleep in bed. His wife, Margaret, was tried for the crime and eventually released due to inconclusive evidence.

Wow interesting.

[shortstoryfan]

I would like to get involved in other threads too, but I feel like I have a lot of catching up to do and a lot of reading to do before I start reading some of the things that are being selected for various reading groups here.

I really like stories with a social agenda, I know some people think they are too manipulated, or something, I don't know what they think, but apparently many people look down on this kind of fiction which has some sort of social message. That is one of the things I like about this story.

The nonverbal communication between the two women is also very well written--I think you really get a sense of what is being said between them, and all the nuances in their communication.

I really like symbolism in literature, which I find many modern writers and critics seem to think this is kind of old fashioned, but I don't know, I like it very much. The symbol of the caged bird representing the accused women is very good, and by itself shows the kind of life led by Minnie Foster. Really it is priceless symbolism because of how much it conveys so easily.

Another thing I enjoy is how poetic the language is in many places, with some alliteration and rhyme. A teacher once told me that this kind of thing should be avoided in prose writing, but maybe she only meant business writing and pieces of that nature. I enjoy "scandalized sweep" and "she took another look" (a few examples from the beginning) and these sort of word plays.

One thing that I have decided varies from my original post is the need to find meaning of the short story. Because of how well the silent communication and symbolism are used, the meaning is rather obvious. Many times I find fiction hard to understand, because it is so vague (there is another word for what I mean, but I can't think of it right now) and I really am not sure of the meaning. I can appreciate this as a device, but I think this is used in a different kind of story, and gives a different impressions, and free interpretations, which is hard for me. Maybe I just want a right answer (even if there isn't one).

[Virgil]

Oh don't worry Shortstory. Symbolism helps us understand and appreciate a story. But a story has to hold up on the story itself or it's a waste of time.

[Virgil]

Guys I did a little more research in this and it seems that the story may actually have been based on a real case it seems that Glaspell claimed that the story was based on an actual court case. On December 2, 1900, sixty-year-old farmer John Hossack was murdered in Indianola, Iowa. His skull was crushed by an ax while he and his wife were asleep in bed. His wife, Margaret, was tried for the crime and eventually released due to inconclusive evidence.

Wow interesting.

That is interesting. You wouldn't have the link that explained that? I would like to read it.

[Mopey Droney]

With regards to The Best American Short Stories of the Century, one of my favorites, and one of the ones that got me into Roth, was his "Defender of the Faith". I think it's a really spectacular story, though in retrospect I think it was wrong for Updike to go against the grain and include it over "The Conversion of the Jews" which I find to be Roth's strongest early work, and one of my favorite American short stories of all time.

[shortstoryfan]

I am just starting the collection really, and I haven't reached Roth's story. I must admit, I am sort of afraid of Philip Roth, for some unexplainable reason. I actually dread reading his work, but I feel I must do it.

[Mopey Droney]

I've read all of Roth's books. Don't know quite how that happened. I find him very readable, writing some of the finest sentences in contemporary literature, though his early short stories were just good stories and not chock-full of great sentences that don't really add up to too much of a meaningful whole (which characterizes most of his novels, I feel). He's a great stylist, though his characters are often repulsive. Why do you fear reading him?

[Joreads]

That is interesting. You wouldn't have the link that explained that? I would like to read it.


Virgil this is the link


http://www.enotes.com/jury-her

I hope that works.

There is actullay a lot out there on this story it has also been made into a play.

[shortstoryfan]

Probably cause he wrote American Pastoral, which is set during the 60s...I think. I just find nothing interesting about that period of time. Ugh, I'm just waiting for a moderator to come yell at me for straying from my own original post...I'm very scared of THAT too.

[Joreads]

Probably cause he wrote American Pastoral, which is set during the 60s...I think. I just find nothing interesting about that period of time. Ugh, I'm just waiting for a moderator to come yell at me for straying from my own original post...I'm very scared of THAT too.

:lol::lol:you should be:lol::lol:

[shortstoryfan]

Yeah, I've already decided I'm terrified of Logos...but, you know, in the best way possible...a good way really...don't hurt me, please. HAHA.

[Mopey Droney]

Probably cause he wrote American Pastoral, which is set during the 60s...I think. I just find nothing interesting about that period of time. Ugh, I'm just waiting for a moderator to come yell at me for straying from my own original post...I'm very scared of THAT too.Ignore the back cover. American Pastoral is set over many periods of time and it's more about how we reconcile conflicting values, how we take responsibility of ourselves and our children, and basically live in a world fractured by radicals on the left and on the right. It's a very nuanced, very human book, certainly not a "60s book", just as Philip Roth is not a "60s writer".

[Emil Miller]

Yeah, I've already decided I'm terrified of Logos...but, you know, in the best way possible...a good way really...don't hurt me, please. HAHA.

Relax shortstoryfan, Logos is a sweetie really but she won't put up with the kind of nonsense that occurred recently when two grown men started trading verbal blows over (can you believe it ?) HARRY POTTER.

[Joreads]

Relax shortstoryfan, Logos is a sweetie

Have to agree with this 100%