Normally I would call this style postmodern. You're constantly breaking the fourth wall: interrupting the story to talk about it as a story, placing it in a literary tradition, (correctly) positing that the reader hasn't read a little O. Henry but not much (you know us too well, lol).
But it doesn't feel postmodern. I'm reminded of the moment in Money Matters where you just drop the narrative and talk about why you're writing the way you're writing. If anything, it feels like an older way of storytelling rather than a weird new experimental way of storytelling. Again, you mention Henry Fielding in Money Matters.
I don't think anyone but you is writing this way. I've read enough of your stuff to know a bit about your journey, and I think it took exactly that journey to lead you to this style. And it is so good! Just compulsively readable and absurdly entertaining. I would read a thousand of these stories.
I loved this story but I also love the perspective that allows you to see the dynamics you depict with such clarity. That part is probably not teachable, you have to have ideas about how the world works!
This also reminded me a lot of how a friend (who's a successful writer) talks about story construction, though he says "begin with a conflict" rather than a desire. But it's equally formulaic and IMO equally persuasive.
Yes that's the tough part--you need to know something. But most people know something. I think that's why there can be such an endless variety of these very simple stories--because everyone knows things that are slightly different.
"It’s about clear, recognizable conflicts—it’s firmly anchored in a time and place—and it tries to say something true, but in an entertaining way."
This is my biggest struggle when writing short fiction. I become so interested in making a story complex and nuanced, that I end up muddying the conflict and making it too complicated to solve within a few thousand words.
This story is great on its own merits (even without the Penn & Teller "let's explain the techniques we're using as we use them" meta bit), but I also love the further evidence for my theory that the next Great American Novel will come from trawling r/Vindicta.
I read, "She lived in SF" and while I understood that means San Francisco, my brain also went "what if it means Science Fiction" and this is a story about a lady who works in the SF department of a bookstore or publishing house, & meets someone. 😆 Which sounds fun to me.
I love the way you often combine literary criticism or theory about fiction with actual fiction itself... readers come for the essay and stay for the story and learn something about fiction-writing in the best possible way!
Normally I would call this style postmodern. You're constantly breaking the fourth wall: interrupting the story to talk about it as a story, placing it in a literary tradition, (correctly) positing that the reader hasn't read a little O. Henry but not much (you know us too well, lol).
But it doesn't feel postmodern. I'm reminded of the moment in Money Matters where you just drop the narrative and talk about why you're writing the way you're writing. If anything, it feels like an older way of storytelling rather than a weird new experimental way of storytelling. Again, you mention Henry Fielding in Money Matters.
I don't think anyone but you is writing this way. I've read enough of your stuff to know a bit about your journey, and I think it took exactly that journey to lead you to this style. And it is so good! Just compulsively readable and absurdly entertaining. I would read a thousand of these stories.
Damn robots taking all our jobs...
That last line!
I loved this story but I also love the perspective that allows you to see the dynamics you depict with such clarity. That part is probably not teachable, you have to have ideas about how the world works!
This also reminded me a lot of how a friend (who's a successful writer) talks about story construction, though he says "begin with a conflict" rather than a desire. But it's equally formulaic and IMO equally persuasive.
Yes that's the tough part--you need to know something. But most people know something. I think that's why there can be such an endless variety of these very simple stories--because everyone knows things that are slightly different.
Loved the story and the way you walked us through it.
The fake discord account coup is ingenius
I love how you walked us through your short story with this! Brilliantly helpful!
"It’s about clear, recognizable conflicts—it’s firmly anchored in a time and place—and it tries to say something true, but in an entertaining way."
This is my biggest struggle when writing short fiction. I become so interested in making a story complex and nuanced, that I end up muddying the conflict and making it too complicated to solve within a few thousand words.
This story is great on its own merits (even without the Penn & Teller "let's explain the techniques we're using as we use them" meta bit), but I also love the further evidence for my theory that the next Great American Novel will come from trawling r/Vindicta.
"job taken by AI" is the icing on the cake
wisdom
I enjoyed your story.
I read, "She lived in SF" and while I understood that means San Francisco, my brain also went "what if it means Science Fiction" and this is a story about a lady who works in the SF department of a bookstore or publishing house, & meets someone. 😆 Which sounds fun to me.
very generous of you to craft & share this resource - thank you
I love the way you often combine literary criticism or theory about fiction with actual fiction itself... readers come for the essay and stay for the story and learn something about fiction-writing in the best possible way!
You’re a good writer and storyteller; that much is clear. Bravo!