Very short stories

[BellaBestia]

I’ve tried to follow the advice for writing: “strong verbs, short sentences”. Superfluous words are a luxury sometimes, unnecessary other times (wot? In this economy?) and while each is lovingly crafted if it doesn’t move the story forward can be downright useless. More often than not extra words only serve the writer’s ego in showcasing their talent, but the economy of words should serve the story.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

My longest story here is seven LE pages.

Generally though, my stories average two to four LE pages.

Call them stories, vignettes, whatever, its what I write.

That's between 7.5k and 15k words. Those are all regular stories.

And yeah, the reason many are so short is because frankly, I'm not really a WRITER so much as a guy who tries to write.

Most of us here are, in my opinion. A writer, in my mind, is someone who both writes professionally and with a certain level of competence. This is a hobby for many of us.

Id love to write a novel. Or at the very least longer, more complex tales on a regular basis.

But I know my skill set, and my limitations. And so I write what works for me, ya know? And just hope people like them.

(BTW for clarity, I didn't take your comments as a negative attack or anything. Just pointing out another reason some of us write shorter stories.)

I don't know, it's hard to judge, but you might be selling yourself short.

I know I'm capable of writing novels. I already wrote them practically - my fantasy stories are novels. It's just a question of how well they would fare in the open market. I've had thoughts of reworking them into a mainstream read, or even starting something entirely new and trying my hand out there, but laziness and very rational and founded doubts of being good enough are reigning them in. I know at least one non-erotica genre where I believe I'd do well, but that genre is not exactly mainstream writing, even if it's popular now.

On the other hand, Lit is a world of its own, and the average competition here isn't much, to put it mildly. In general, we let our heads grow too big, based mostly on the reception among Lit's readership. I don't think that's a reasonable gauge of our writing skills. I've seen too many poorly written stories being popular and praised on Lit.

But once you go mainstream and compete with professional writers, I suspect it would be a whole different story. Which doesn't mean that there aren't authors here who are capable of succeeding even out there. And to be clear, I don't mean Amazon erotica, Smashwords, and such. I mean mainstream writing, regardless of the genre.

 

[Djmac1031]

That's between 7.5k and 15k words. Those are all regular stories.

I suppose that depends on one's definition; I've had readers/ writers tell me anything under 15K is "too short" to fully develop a story. Not that i agree with that, because i don't. Just saying there's different opinions on it.

I don't know, it's hard to judge, but you might be selling yourself short.

Maybe. But I've always considered myself a realist. I write stories, but I'm never gonna be a professional author, just like I play drums but will never be a professional drummer.

I do these things for fun and do them at my own skill set. Not that I do not strive to improve, I'm always doing that. But again I know myself and understand my limitations and can accept that.

 

[alohadave]

I’ve tried to follow the advice for writing: “strong verbs, short sentences”. Superfluous words are a luxury sometimes, unnecessary other times (wot? In this economy?) and while each is lovingly crafted if it doesn’t move the story forward can be downright useless. More often than not extra words only serve the writer’s ego in showcasing their talent, but the economy of words should serve the story.

That's because minimalism is the style now.

There are many different ways to write.

 

[BellaBestia]

That's because minimalism is the style now.

There are many different ways to write.

Yes. Of course.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

750-1000 words is a reasonable length for a single event, not a full story. I might write one for the 750 contest. Sometime I want to write a fictionalized version of an encounter with a lesbian friend when we were a bit drunk and had both been without a woman too long. I offered to do her woman-style. On her agreement, I set to work with my tongue. She stopped my after getting off nine times. She liked my version of woman-style so well that she let me finish man-style. Then named me an honorary lesbian.

I'll remember that after the day I die.

 

[IWroteThis]

Plenty of thoughts.

There is no consensus about the number of words required for something to be considered a "short story" here. So, I'll just use what people commonly call a short story here, let's say, anywhere between 750 and 2k words, even if I disagree with such a classification. I'd call such stories scenes or vignettes, not stories.

Anyway, this is what I see as common reasons for authors to publish such stories:


1. Padding their story file. It's always flattering when you have more stories filed under your pen name, right? And the easiest way to achieve that is to publish the shortest stories allowed. It gets you there faster. Personally, I couldn't be farther from this kind of thinking.

I'd rather see people pad their story count than the word count in their stories. There are a lot of stories on this site that are maybe two pages long, but they're padded out to 5 or more pages. I'd rather read 5, 1000 word stories than a single 1000 word story hidden amongst 4000 other words.

Now, when it comes to quality, yeah, the situation isn't great. You'll likely find some good, even fantastic, short stories, but my impression is that the overall quality of those stories is really bad, considerably below the quality of the average regular story. Lit could definitely do without such stories, in my opinion.

Of course that's your conclusion, as you already told us that you have a preset belief that longer stories are better. That bias prevents you from truly enjoying a wider spectrum of stories.

Luckily, there are a lot of people who aren't so pedantic about what they read. Personally, I'll read any length of work, but I bail out of long works that are more padding than plot.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

2 - 3 K is reasonable.

It takes some creativity to cut to 750 exactly without eliminating too much.

 

[AG31]

I’ve tried to follow the advice for writing: “strong verbs, short sentences”. Superfluous words are a luxury sometimes, unnecessary other times (wot? In this economy?) and while each is lovingly crafted if it doesn’t move the story forward can be downright useless. More often than not extra words only serve the writer’s ego in showcasing their talent, but the economy of words should serve the story.

I'd be curious to know if anything in this thread might cause you to re-think.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Self promoting one's own thread to redirect traffic.

Check.

 

[IWroteThis]

I was curious if anyone reads those very short stories here on Lit? If so, are any of them good?

I both read and write them. Quality is hit or miss, with lots of good ones, and lots of bad ones. Luckily, they're quick to read. They're also a good measuring stick for deciding if you want to invest the time to read their longer works.

When I look through the new stories that are published here, I would see some that are between 1000 and 2000 words long, and some that are much less. I used try reading them, but never enjoyed it because the stories seemed rushed and ended too fast. It got me wondering if anyone here actually reads stories this short and do they enjoy it.

Some people prefer a "Just the facts, ma'am" approach to stories. Others want to know every little detail that is completely irrelevant to the story being told. If you're amongst the latter, you probably are wise to skip the short ones.

Also, why write such short stories?
It seems like some of these authors could spend some more time at least trying to make it longer to add more to the story.
I've have a few short stories published here, but not this short.

Well, speaking for myself, the honest answer is: Because that's the story that came to me.

I write to tell the stories in my head. Sometimes those stories are long, and sometimes those stories are short, but my goal is always to use the number of words that is right for the story. I currently have a 46K story in my editing queue and a 750-word story scheduled for release tomorrow. Neither one would really work at the other's length.

Time is a precious resource. A lot of writers here do so as a hobby or escape. They have jobs, families, and a desire to sleep. It's more efficient to just write the story and move on to the next one. Personally, I have around 50 WiPs and more story ideas than I'll ever have a chance to write (and I keep adding more). It's hard to justify taking the time to pad a story when I have other stories waiting for me to tell them.

Anyone have there own thoughts on this topic?

This is not completely my own thoughts, but my interpretation/recollection of something I read some time ago.

There are two approaches to writing. There's the TV approach and the imagination approach. With the TV approach, everything little detail is spelled out, so everybody sees exactly the same thing. With the imagination approach, important details are presented, but everything else is left to the imagination of the reader.

As an example, let's take a character with a scar. The imagination approach might go something like this: "The stranger had a long scar across his cheek, pulling his lip up into a sneer." Now, you and I might envision the scar having a different length and orientation but, as long as those details are not relevant to the actual plot, who cares? We both know enough.

Now, here's how the TV approach might go: "The 6'2" stranger had clearly been in a battle some time back. There was a three inch scar running from the corner of his left eye and curving a bit as it went down to the corner of his lip. It had pulled the skins into wrinkles as it scarred, and it pulled his lip up into a permanent sneer."

So, on one hand we spent 16 words to impart that he had a permanent sneer on his face. On the other hand, we spent 60 to do the same thing. In reality, it would use even more, as I'm sure the stranger's description would have included more than his face, even though the sneer is the only important detail.

TL;DR-> The TV approach results in higher word counts by adding in unimportant details. The imagination approach results in lower word counts by letting the reader's imagination fill in those unimportant details.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I was curious if anyone reads those very short stories here on Lit? If so, are any of them good?

Like all stories on an amateur website, most are fairly ordinary, but you will get flashes of brilliance.

When I look through the new stories that are published here, I would see some that are between 1000 and 2000 words long, and some that are much less. I used try reading them, but never enjoyed it because the stories seemed rushed and ended too fast. It got me wondering if anyone here actually reads stories this short and do they enjoy it.

Yes they do. That's why we've got an annual 750 Word Anthology, which is admittedly more a writers' exercise than anything else, but writers are readers too.

Also, why write such short stories?
It seems like some of these authors could spend some more time at least trying to make it longer to add more to the story.
I've have a few short stories published here, but not this short.

A lot of the content submitted to Lit is from first time authors who may only write a few pieces, and never write more. A lot of new content is short, because the writer hasn't learned yet how to write something with more substance.

Short pieces serve their purpose. You can learn your technical chops, the basic things like grammar and punctuation, how to handle dialogue. You can learn your fundamental style, what works for you, how you write, what you write.

Doing an apprenticeship first, before you tackle your first longer, more elaborate piece, will probably make you a better writer in the long run.

 

[AG31]

Self promoting one's own thread to redirect traffic.

Check.

???? What's wrong with pointing out a related thread? My intent is certainly not to divert traffic from here, just to take a side peek. What is it with people that always take the worst read on things?

 

[StillStunned]

A lot of the content submitted to Lit is from first time authors who may only write a few pieces, and never write more. A lot of new content is short, because the writer hasn't learned yet how to write something with more substance.

Short pieces serve their purpose. You can learn your technical chops, the basic things like grammar and punctuation, how to handle dialogue. You can learn your fundamental style, what works for you, how you write, what you write.

Doing an apprenticeship first, before you tackle your first longer, more elaborate piece, will probably make you a better writer in the long run.

I think a lot of would-be writers strand because they think they have to write novels. They begin with an idea, start writing, and run out of steam after a few thousand words. And then they give up, think they've failed, and never write again because this unfinished novel is looming over them like a fart in a lift.

But if you start small, particularly if you can get your first efforts published somewhere like here on Lit, you instantly get views, votes and perhaps a couple of comments. You can ride that high onto the next short piece, and the one after, and learn the craft as you go along.

And even if your first story isn't an immediate hit, at least you're not as invested as with a novel you spent three years writing. It's easy to pick yourself up and try harder, or try something different. And before you know it you've got dozens of stories, and you've written a million words, and you're a much better writer than you'd ever be just plugging away in solitude on a full-length novel.

 

[Djmac1031]

I both read and write them. Quality is hit or miss, with lots of good ones, and lots of bad ones. Luckily, they're quick to read. They're also a good measuring stick for deciding if you want to invest the time to read their longer works.


Some people prefer a "Just the facts, ma'am" approach to stories. Others want to know every little detail that is completely irrelevant to the story being told. If you're amongst the latter, you probably are wise to skip the short ones.


Well, speaking for myself, the honest answer is: Because that's the story that came to me.

I write to tell the stories in my head. Sometimes those stories are long, and sometimes those stories are short, but my goal is always to use the number of words that is right for the story. I currently have a 46K story in my editing queue and a 750-word story scheduled for release tomorrow. Neither one would really work at the other's length.

Time is a precious resource. A lot of writers here do so as a hobby or escape. They have jobs, families, and a desire to sleep. It's more efficient to just write the story and move on to the next one. Personally, I have around 50 WiPs and more story ideas than I'll ever have a chance to write (and I keep adding more). It's hard to justify taking the time to pad a story when I have other stories waiting for me to tell them.

This is not completely my own thoughts, but my interpretation/recollection of something I read some time ago.

There are two approaches to writing. There's the TV approach and the imagination approach. With the TV approach, everything little detail is spelled out, so everybody sees exactly the same thing. With the imagination approach, important details are presented, but everything else is left to the imagination of the reader.

As an example, let's take a character with a scar. The imagination approach might go something like this: "The stranger had a long scar across his cheek, pulling his lip up into a sneer." Now, you and I might envision the scar having a different length and orientation but, as long as those details are not relevant to the actual plot, who cares? We both know enough.

Now, here's how the TV approach might go: "The 6'2" stranger had clearly been in a battle some time back. There was a three inch scar running from the corner of his left eye and curving a bit as it went down to the corner of his lip. It had pulled the skins into wrinkles as it scarred, and it pulled his lip up into a permanent sneer."

So, on one hand we spent 16 words to impart that he had a permanent sneer on his face. On the other hand, we spent 60 to do the same thing. In reality, it would use even more, as I'm sure the stranger's description would have included more than his face, even though the sneer is the only important detail.

TL;DR-> The TV approach results in higher word counts by adding in unimportant details. The imagination approach results in lower word counts by letting the reader's imagination fill in those unimportant details.

Thats actually a really great example.

I think both approaches have merit, depending on the story you're trying to tell.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I was curious if anyone reads those very short stories here on Lit? If so, are any of them good?

When I look through the new stories that are published here, I would see some that are between 1000 and 2000 words long, and some that are much less. I used try reading them, but never enjoyed it because the stories seemed rushed and ended too fast. It got me wondering if anyone here actually reads stories this short and do they enjoy it.

Also, why write such short stories?
It seems like some of these authors could spend some more time at least trying to make it longer to add more to the story.
I've have a few short stories published here, but not this short.

Anyone have there own thoughts on this topic?

Normally, I enjoy flash fiction. On this site, not so much. Primarily because it tends to be shorthand for skeletal, half-baked, rushed, or poorly executed stories. That's not to invalidate flash fiction generally, but sub 1k stories can be tricky to pull off satisfactorily.

I started off writing short stories, usually sub 2k. They weren't very good, precisely because of the things I mentioned above. Most were too sparse, not fleshed out (which seems weird, but I'll get to that in a second), or lacked compelling characters due to the inability to properly develop stakes or interest.

But you can absolutely have a fully fleshed out story in under 1k. The story tends to be fairly focused on a singular event, but it's certainly possible to have a full narrative arc with compelling, multi-dimensional characters. The key is primarily word choice and a heavy focus on having non-explicit actions/cues do a lot of the character work for you. Flash fiction stories is an exercise in moderation, conciseness, and layering, piling meaning and weight so a sentence or action is doing several things at the same time.

As was mentioned, you need to do a bit of a mental reframe when reading flash fiction. But that's true of stories of any length. You wouldn't want to judge a short story's complexity at the same levels as a 10k page series, nor expect to explore the depths of the MC's psyche in a flash fiction work. You can, but it leads to discontent a lot of the time. You can certainly have those elements in short stories or flash fiction, but you won't get the same level of fidelity that you would if you have 100 pages to go into why the MC likes the color red.

Also, why write such short stories?
It seems like some of these authors could spend some more time at least trying to make it longer to add more to the story.
I've have a few short stories published here, but not this short.

Anyone have there own thoughts on this topic?

You write them for the same reason you write anything: because you want to. Whether it's because you want to challenge yourself, work on techniques around word economy and choice, because you simply like the idea, or any myriad of reasons, it's all valid.

Certainly, some authors tend to be skimpy on details, but you don't necessarily need to have a longer story or words to have the same level of impact. Stories should be as long as they need to be, trying to compress or pad them out tends to dilute the impact. I've certainly run into cases where I thought a story was too short and I wasn't adequately capturing the feeling I intended, only to discover that the issue wasn't the number of words, it was how I was using them. Likewise, I've run into situations where I thought I was going on too long, only to find out that cutting out large chunks decreased the connection to the character. That doesn't mean you should never try to expand or contract, but the reasons for doing so should be based on the needs of the story, not perceptions around too many or too few words.

I’ve tried to follow the advice for writing: “strong verbs, short sentences”. Superfluous words are a luxury sometimes, unnecessary other times (wot? In this economy?) and while each is lovingly crafted if it doesn’t move the story forward can be downright useless. More often than not extra words only serve the writer’s ego in showcasing their talent, but the economy of words should serve the story.

I would both agree and disagree with this. Overall, economy of words is a good rule of thumb (as Peter from my writing group would tell us nearly every week). In some cases, having long, windy sentences with big words is more of a "look, I'm edamacated" than anything else.

But there are cases where you might actually want big words and windy sentences, depending on the character voice. If you have a highly educated MC POV, someone who normally talks professorial, you would want the narrative to reflect that for consistency. And if you had a child POV, you would want to use shorter sentences with diminished vocabulary (unless the kid absorbed a dictionary and is incredibly gifted). Likewise, sometimes those big words are helpful, because they can more accurately convey meaning than using a lot of smaller words.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I think a lot of would-be writers strand because they think they have to write novels. They begin with an idea, start writing, and run out of steam after a few thousand words. And then they give up, think they've failed, and never write again because this unfinished novel is looming over them like a fart in a lift.

But if you start small, particularly if you can get your first efforts published somewhere like here on Lit, you instantly get views, votes and perhaps a couple of comments. You can ride that high onto the next short piece, and the one after, and learn the craft as you go along.

And even if your first story isn't an immediate hit, at least you're not as invested as with a novel you spent three years writing. It's easy to pick yourself up and try harder, or try something different. And before you know it you've got dozens of stories, and you've written a million words, and you're a much better writer than you'd ever be just plugging away in solitude on a full-length novel.

^^^ 100000000%

I've had several people over the years ask me what's the best way to start writing (not on Lit, just generally), and this is the route I tell them to take. You don't have to do anything with those first few shorts you do, it's primarily an exercise in getting you used to storytelling on a smaller, less intimidating scale. I've had several friends who wanted to write, but like you mentioned, they had some grand space opera or Tolkein-esque quest and the scale and complexity were so overwhelming they imploded. Which was a shame, because some of them were genuinely interesting.

In that sense, flash fiction is a great starting place. It allows you to focus more on the story than on the details. You can have all the details in the world, but that doesn't matter a whit if your story isn't good. For beginning writers, short stories give them implicit permission to skimp on details and technique to focus on storytelling. It's the most important element to learn, as it serves as a launchpad for everything else. Craft and technique can be honed over time, but what really matters is the story. It's a key lesson to learn early on, because it's so easy to get bogged down in details and perfection that it overwhelms a newer writer and they give up.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Craft and technique can be honed over time, but what really matters is the story. It's a key lesson to learn early on, because it's so easy to get bogged down in details and perfection that it overwhelms a newer writer and they give up.

To be fair, it's all a filter that, over time, separates those willing to put in the effort and those who aren't. Some say writing can be a gift, but even a well wrapped box looks better with a good ribbon.

 

[RocketGrunt]

For Literotica specifically, the preferred length by most fans appears to be Novelette. Novellas and Short Stories can do well, but in general more readers on the site would prefer a Novella to be split up into two or three Novelettes rather than go on for a longer chunk.

But works shorter than Novelettes get lots of demands for bigger word counts.

 

[IWroteThis]

To be fair, it's all a filter that, over time, separates those willing to put in the effort and those who aren't.

One of the challenges of the 750 Word Project is that your words have to be important to the story, not just there. I would say that requires more effort than adding unimportant words to reach an arbitrary word count.

Some say writing can be a gift, but even a well wrapped box looks better with a good ribbon.

True, but there's two major flaws with your philosophy I'd like to point out.

First, that same box looks tacky with 27 ribbons and bows stuck on it.

Second, a woman wearing a padded bra might look good on the surface, but you're going to be disappointed when you see what's actually inside.

 

[Britva415]

I'd be curious to know if anything in this thread might cause you to re-think.

I remember that thread, and my immediate reaction to the above was "Re-think!? More like reinforce!"

 

[KittyOfSteele]

I was curious if anyone reads those very short stories here on Lit? If so, are any of them good?

Some of what I've read are, but this can be subjective.

When I look through the new stories that are published here, I would see some that are between 1000 and 2000 words long, and some that are much less. I used try reading them, but never enjoyed it because the stories seemed rushed and ended too fast. It got me wondering if anyone here actually reads stories this short and do they enjoy it.

I have an anthology where the longest story is no longer than 5K, and the majority of the stories don't get beyond 1K to 1.5K. These aren't erotica, they are crime. If only one story I didn't feel was solid, but that's because it was more of a snapshot the author wrote as a tribute to George Romero, while the rest of the stories are well developed. This is a traditionally published book that I'm talking about.

You can bet your ass I'm one of those readers!

If you're into longer stuff... Again, that's subjective, and sounds like a you thing. However, I do see where you're coming from with this. I don't think the issue is the length, but the source.

Also, why write such short stories?
It seems like some of these authors could spend some more time at least trying to make it longer to add more to the story.
I've have a few short stories published here, but not this short.

There are many reasons. First of all, trying to make it longer to add to the story is the perfectionist way. In art, the best way to improve the quality of your work is by making quantity. A lot of quantity. If you have to write 100K in a week, but you can do so through making 50 to 100 stories that are between 1K to 2K instead of going for novellas. You'll have a much better improvement because you will focus on getting the quantity right, and each story will get better instead of putting all your energy into little stories. Already saw that by myself in a year. My first story requires a lot of editing, but my 365th story requires less; both written under the same condition: fit a whole story in a A4 sheet. But I digress.

Stories sometimes are just short. Maybe you aren't meant to see the whole landscape, but only the cropped piece of the photo that shows the naked photo bombers behind the tree fucking in public.

Sometimes you just don't have time. People are using their mobile devices to read, and they do that in commutes or taking a shit on the toilet before going back to their spreadsheets. Try putting a bookmark on your device.