I was reflecting yesterday about the differences between novels and short stories. I am a short story writer who is trying to write a novel, and those differences are important to me.
One of the biggest things is the chance to revise. With a novel, you get the chance to revise to editorial direction in most cases. Sure, you have to get it good enough to get accepted, which is plenty hard to do, but it does not have to be absolutely perfect in all regards. An editor or agent will have some input into the final product. Potential and professionalism in presentation matter most. The editor and/or agent will help get the final high sheen of polish on it.
With short stories, I don’t have that luxury. One chance is all I get, and editorial direction is virtually nonexistent. I have to be my own editor. That is the nature of the product, of course. A short story is, by nature, somewhat ephmeral, and editors just do not have time to invest in working with writers to get it right, especially since so many magazine, e-zine, and anthology editors are either volunteers or get paid a pittance for their time. It’s their job to get the work out the door efficiently and on time.
This is one of the things that makes writing short stories so difficult. I won’t say more difficult than novels, because I know better than that. Both are difficult, just in different ways. It is also neither fair nor unfair, and I am not complaining, just contemplating.
It’s not my choice to write short stories; it’s the way my mind works. I think in small ways, in details — succinct thoughts instead of grand, sweeping visions. It’s the way I’m wired. Is that a gift or a curse? Maybe both at once.
Back to polishing. I have two stories I want to get out the door over the long weekend: “The Dying of the Light” and “What Dreams May Come”. Both good ones. I hope they are good enough.


