We are no longer discussing the story in and of itself. But then we fall into the vote-taking aesthetic (basically Goodreads and the aggregate rating system) where we care about how many people liked the story, how much they liked the story, and how qualified they were as readers.

If the relevant question is the effect of fiction on the appreciator, then we are looking at fiction as a communication. I like Hills’ contribution to this discussion (I will be paraphrasing a small chunk of his text). Loved the discussion of foreshadowing, technique, and point of view.Īs always, I’m an absolute sucker for discussions of what makes art “good” – what scale do we use to measure whether something is a masterpiece or just pulp. It introduces key elements of the short story and fiction while keeping it relatively agenda free. However, despite all of that, this remains a gem of a book for the basics of storytelling, specifically within the format of the short story. The vestiges of the period are apparent, which include what Hills considers “modern”, his long, rambling paragraphs on personality and what “the latest research” on psychology show about the character within fiction, and gendered writing (which was getting on my nerves more than I thought it ever could – really goes to show how this is not commonplace in our writing anymore). First published in the late 70s, and it’s apparent to a large extent.

Best types of short stories to write