With short stories, you can always see the whole, but it's just so hard to get everything you want into that small form.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I do truly believe that the smallest stories can wind up being the biggest because it's through the specific that a writer can best access the universal.
I think it's much more natural as a writer to want to tell one story rather than lots of small stories that are half an hour long.
My stories are very compact. I want them to say the most complex things in the simplest way.
I would say that all short stories have mystery naturally built into them.
Short stories are tiny windows into other worlds and other minds and dreams. They are journeys you can make to the far side of the universe and still be back in time for dinner.
Bigger stories are made out of longer acquaintance with fact and character, but I also love the tiny stories in which almost everything has to be inferred and imagined.
I don't have a great eye for detail. I leave blanks in all of my stories. I leave out all detail, which leaves the reader to fill in something better.
Big stories have lots of angles, and you have to decide what part of that story you want to address.
Short stories are often strong meat. Reading them, even listening to them, can be challenging, by which I do not mean hard work, simply that a certain amount of nerve and maturity is required.
The way to tell a really big story, I think, is to tell a really small story.