| |
|
Personally, I find myself hopeless at writing short stories, for the exact same reasons as Sax has mentioned, and use them only as a form of notetaking so I don't forget the idea when I get around to using it in a novel. That said, I don't really consider myself to be a 'proper' writer because I prefer to concentrate on novels, and neither do I think that short story writers are novellist wannabes; as Cholister said, it's just about doing what comes naturally.
do you think someone who only ever writes short stories will be seen as a 'proper' writer, or just practising for when they're 'able' to do a novel?
Unfortunately, the publishing world (agents particularly, in my experience) seem to labour under this dellusion. If you are intending to become published, then writing novels really seems to be the way to go - at least initally (unless, of course, you are able to have a collection of your short stories published in one go). When I first wrote off to the agent dealing with my current book, I mentioned having had short stories published before - albeit in small, local, publications. Their response was that I'd "obviously had plenty of practice" and was ready to tackle "serious writing". That attitude seems to be fairly common throughout my, admittedly small, experience of the publishing world.
Let's be honest here. The important thing for us - as writers - is to tell a story to the best of our ability. The length really shouldn't matter. |
|
|
