Heidi Pitlor, editor of Best American Short Stories, who reads
hundreds of short stories each year to pick the 120 she considers the
"Best," says she has moments when it seems there are more people in
the U.S. who want to write stories
than there who want to read them. She
acknowledges what I have noted in this blog before—that many of the people who
buy the annual Best American Short
Stories (and the same is true for The
O. Henry Prize Stories) are
"writers in training," figuring that if they read the best fiction in
the country, they will learn how to write better fiction. But Pitlor ponders
"What happens when writing becomes more attractive than reading? Will we become—or are we already—a nation of
performers with no audience?"
Pitlor urges that editors, writers,
teachers, publishers do whatever possible to enliven readers, to create
communities for them, and by this, I don't think she means "book
clubs." I share Pitlor's concern. But quite frankly I don't know what to
do about it. Good short stories are not always "easy" to read; you
certainly can't skim them or read them only for plot. The fact of the matter is,
short stories are more appreciated by other writers than they are by non-writers.
My experience last month when the Wall
Street Journal made Alice Munro's The
Love of a Good Woman their book club selection reminded me that most
readers have no patience with, and therefore little appreciation for, short
stories, even those by Nobel Laureate Alice Munro.
The reason that writers are the most
appreciative readers of short stories can be seen in Francine Prose's 2006
book, Reading Like A Writer. Prose
says, "I read closely, word by word, sentence by sentence, pondering each
deceptively minor decision that the writer had made." She says her high school English teacher had
recently graduated from a college where his own English professors taught the
New Criticism, adding, "Luckily for me, that approach to literature was
still in fashion when I graduated and went on to college."
However when she went to graduate school,
Prose says she realized that her love of books was not shared by her classmates
and professors; in fact, she found it hard to understand what they did love, for the warring camps of
deconstructionists, Marxists, feminism, etc. were all teaching students they
were reading "texts" in which ideas and politics, not the work
itself, were what was important. Prose believes that a close-reading course
should be a companion, if not an alternative, to the writing workshop., I
suspect that most writers agree with her. However, most readers are just not
the close readers that writers are; and in my opinion, to appreciate good short
stories, you must be a close reader..
I attended undergraduate school from 1960
to 1963 and graduate school from 1963 to 1966, so I too was schooled in the
"New Criticism" that valued "close reading." After I began
teaching in 1966, I schooled myself on structuralism and deconstruction during
the 1970's and 1980's. Indeed, I created
the first theory of literature course in my department, but I never
relinquished close reading. In the
1990's, when "theory" became associated with cultural criticism,
postcolonial criticism, and political correctness, moving even further away
from attending to the work of fiction itself, I was glad I was near retirement.
In the last year I taught, my graduate students actually resented my insistence
that they pay close attention to the work they were reading; they preferred to
talk about social issues and politics. The only students who paid any attention
to style, language, metaphor, structure, and craft were those interested in
becoming fiction writers themselves.
I have just finished reading this year's O. Henry Award Stories and am now
reading the 2014 Best American Short
Story volume. Over the years the two books have adopted two quite different
selection conventions. After Heidi Pitlor, editor of Best, has chosen 120 stories she thinks best, she sends them to a
guest author/editor to pick the top 20 that will appear in the book. However,
Lucy Furman, editor of the O. Henry volume
is solely responsible for choosing the 20 stories that appear in that
book. She then sends those 20 (with no
identification of author or place of publication) to three guest author/readers,
who pick their single favorite story and then write a brief essay on their
choice. This year the three
"jurors" are:
Tash Aw, a Malaysian author whose
first novel The Harmony Silk Factory
won the Whitbread and the Commonwealth Writers prizes for best first novel. He
had a short story in last year's O. Henry
Prize Stories.
James Lasdun, a transplanted British
writer now living in America, author of three collections of short stories, the
most recent It's Beginning to Hurt. I have posted blog essays on Lasdun's stories
in the past.
Joan Silber, an American writer
whose collection of story Ideas of Heaven
was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Story Prize. She has
had three stories in past O. Henry Prize
Stories.
Although these three authors are called
"jurors," as far as I can tell, they have nothing to do with choosing
the 20 stories; they just pick out and write a short piece on their favorite
one.
This year, the single guest judge who chose
the final 20 in Best American, is
Jennifer Egan, whose collection of linked stories, loosely parading as a novel,
won the 2011 Pulitzer Prize, the National Book Critics Circle Award for
fiction, and the Los Angeles Times
Book prize.
In her brief introduction, Eagan argues
that Best
American Short Stories "generates excitement around the practice of
writing fiction, celebrates the short story form, and energizes the fragile ecosystem
of magazines that sustain it."
In her longer and more detailed
introduction, Lucy Furman says that the mission of the O. Henry Prize Stories since its beginning in 1919 has been to
"encourage the art of the short story.
By calling attention to their gifts, we encourage short-story
writers. When we put a story between
book covers, we give it a longer life and a wider readership." Furman
talks a bit about what Eagan calls the "fragile ecosystem" of
magazines that sustain the short story form, lamenting that those magazines
funded by public and private academic intuitions are always in peril from
shrinking budgets, for those in charge of
campus money doubt that a small magazine can be as much benefit to a
university as a winning football team.
Eagan says one of the primary reasons she
agreed to serve as guest editor this year is that she wanted to explore
"systematically" what makes a short story great—"to identify my
own aesthetic standards in a more rigorous way than I've done
before." Eagan says she wants to
put her biases on the table at the outset, noting first of all that she does
not care very much about "genre," either as a reader of a writer. She
says he does not think about short stories any differently than she does about
novels or novellas or even memoirs. However, she does admit that the
distillation process, which she says must take place in any narrative, has to
be more extreme than in a novel. "It also must be purer; there is almost
no room for mistakes."
Eagan says she is biased toward writers who
take risks—formally, structurally, even in terms of subject matter—over those
who do the familiar thing even exquisitely. If there is a single factor that
governed her choice of stories to include, she says, it was "the basic
power to make me lose my bearings, to envelop me in a fictional world" by
means of vivid specific language. After a compelling premise and distinctive
language, she says the next factor is the story's pushing past obvious
possibilities into something that felt "mysterious" or
"extreme."
A few more general observations about the
selections in the two books before focusing on specific stories in subsequent
blog posts over the next few weeks: If
you follow the short story at all, you will see more familiar names on the
table of contents of Best than the O. Henry: e.g. Charles Baxter, Ann
Beattie, T.C. Boyle, Peter Cameron, Joshua Ferris, Nell Freudenberger, David
Gates, Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, Joyce Carol Oates, and Karen Russell. It is no
surprise then that more stories in the Best
collection were originally published in the more successful periodicals:
five from the New Yorker, ten from McSweeney's, Granta, Paris Review, Iowa
Review, Virginia Quarterly Review, Conjunctions, Zoetrope, and Glimmer Train.
The O.
Henry collection has three New Yorker stories—by the three
best-known writers in the collection: Louise Erdrich, William Trevor, and Tessa
Hadley (who is always in the New Yorker).
Most of the O. Henry stories are
from such places as The American Reader,
Ecotone, New Orleans Review, Cincinnati Review, Threepenny Review, Subtropics,
Southwest Review, New England Review, and Southern Review—all prestigious places that any MFA student would
love to appear in—even if the readership is less and the money negligible or
nil.
Unless you read a great deal in small press
periodicals, you may not know many of the writers in the O. Henry collection, e.g. Allison Alsup, Chanelle Benz, Olivia
Clare, Halina Duraj, Rebecca Hirsch Garcia, Kristen Iskandrian, Dylan Landis,
Colleen Morrissey, Robert Anthony Siegel, Kristen Valdez Quade, and Maura
Stanton. No one story appears in both collections, although Laura van den Berg,
a relative beginner, has stories in both.
I will finish reading all the stories—more than
once--in both volumes before I begin posting essays on particular stories. If you have not purchased your own copies of Best American Short Stories 2014 and O. Henry Prize Stories: 2014, you
can pick up both either in paperback or eBook versions for around twenty bucks. That's about 50 cents per story--the best bargain in publishing for those who
love good fiction (And you have a much better chance of finding good writing in
short stories than in novels; ask any writer.).
It's too damn bad that practically nobody
reviews these two books—just another example of the short shrift the short story
gets from the publishing industry.
2 comments:
I'm eager to see what you have to say about BASS since I'm reading it now. Just used some of the themes you mention in your book in discussion of the Beattie story: "it’s the anti-story to 'Dancing After Hours'"… what happens when the magic fails.
Karen Carlson
The observation that writers make the best readers is spot on. Short story as an art form still remains under appreciated by the mainstream reading population.
H.S. Bajwa @ Short Stories
Post a Comment