Re: imitation
This is a false dichotomy. There's nothing stopping people from doing both, and no reason a story aimed at an editor should be anything less than beautiful.
No dichotomy at all. Of course it would help if we were talking about the same things.
You are talking about writing short stories.
I did not say,
... pursuit of the beautiful short story rather than the formulaic "aimed at the editor" short story...
What I said was,
But I would say that in pursuit of the beautiful short story rather than the formulaic "aimed at the editor" short story one should read great short stories, not magazines. Most great and enduring short stories are found in books: anthologies and collections.
I was talking about reading short stories. It was in answer to Jamesaritchie's post,
Thise who are successsful in magazine writing are those who read a LOT of magazines, just as those who are successful at novel writing are those who read a LOT of novels.
The reason being of course that while,
There's nothing stopping people from doing both, and no reason a story aimed at an editor should be anything less than beautiful.
Most stories you will find in magazines are not great, they are strictly adhering to the "get sold here" formula. Reading them will help you get published, but will not help you understand what makes a great or beautiful short story.
You might note that most of the really wonderful, great, beautiful, short stories that appear in anthologies and collections were written and sold to an editor and met their specifications.
This is something I meant to ask about before. Why? Why is there any "should be" when you're talking about a creative process.
Well now if you haven't any goal there should not be any shoulds at all, now should there? Just dabble some dots around on a paper, that is fine.
But if you have a goal, then you have shoulds. In fact in many cases you have "have tos" things you absolutely have to do.
For instance if your goal is to sell short stories consistently then you should take this advice to heart.
Writer who are routinely published are always readers. Reading is a prerequsite to good writing, and to getting published. Thise who are successsful in magazine writing are those who read a LOT of magazines, just as those who are successful at novel writing are those who read a LOT of novels.
If you are going to write within a genre then you should become aware of the elements that make up that genre -- If you do not -- Then there is a good chance you will not be writing within that genre. Why? Because you absolutely have to include the elements of that genre for it to be within it.
Like if it is a mystery story it should at least have something to do with a crime.
But once again you managed to reply to something I did not say. You are replying as though I am telling other people how they should write. What I said was,
Actually Gala's way is the way I think it should be. Write a beautiful story -- Find a market. It is what I would do were I writing short stories now.
Which is saying I prefer, not exalt, Gala's method, which is to write the story first then find a market for it: And I further clarify by saying it is what I would do were I writing short stories now.
Actually what I mean by, "The way I think it should be" is that I think more editors should be open to stories for the quality of the stories. There used to be a lot of magazines around like that. The Saturday Evening Post used to be the top market, but there were a lot around like that.
The only way you could misinterpret the paragraph to mean that I was telling other people what they should do was to cut off most of the paragraph and only leave the first sentence:
Actually Gala's way is the way I think it should be.
Interestingly enough when I was giving suggestions on how to market your short story in a business like manner you did not point out that I was "telling people what should be done and how it should be done," which is exactly what I was doing. Of course I was doing it with a specific goal in mind.
So why is it OK for me to tell people how to market a story like a business, but I am over stepping the line when I tell the same people how to go about writing less commercially?
EDIT -> This isn't really saying how to do less commercially as it can be done right alongside the commercial method. But I think that reading great short stories that endure will help to improve one's ability to write better short stories. It certainly cannot hurt.
