Less is More: Aristotle and Four Simple Steps to Better Short Stories

Since short stories aren’t as popular as they used to be, a lot of writers don’t know how to write them. I know, because I’m one of them.

Way back in high school, before I applied for my first creative writing contest, I gave a copy of my best short story tomy favorite English teacher. After reading it, his first comment was that I had too much going on. The story jumped from a football game, to a bus ride, to a locker room to a classroom. There were seven or eight characters, multiple plots lines, and the story spanned two months.

Did I mention it was a four-page story?

Because there were multiple scenes, none of them stuck in the readers mind. Because there were so many characters, they were names instead of people, and because of the bizarre time span, the story had no story to it. Most importantly, there was no clear beginning or ending.

Then I thought of Aristotle.

Look to the Masters

Aristotle knew that great art was simple.  The great writers understood this about short stories; you just don’t have a lot of time–or words–to develop characters and places. That’s why they call ‘em short stories.

Think of stories like Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.” There are two characters, an anonymous man and a woman named Jig. There is one setting, an unbearably hot train station in Spain. And there is only one plot, a conversation about an abortion. And it is fascinating.

In Steinbeck’s “The Snake” there are two characters: a lab assistant and a mysterious woman; one setting: a laboratory; and there is only plot, the woman buying and feeding a snake. Short, simple, and loaded with meaning.

Poe understood this when he invented the short story. His “Cask of Amontillado” is about two men walking down to a basement to get a fine bottle of sherry wine, and one man entombing the other.

Think of your favorite short story. It is probably very simple.

Wait, How Does Aristotle Fit In?

In his poetics, Aristotle describes three unities, of time, space and action. To him, the ideal play would take place in no more than a day, take place in the same location, and only have one plot. This principle can be applied to the short story.

True there are no hard and fast rules in the modern era of writing. But for new writers, you need to be aware of mistakes you could make. To this end I say limit your characters, locations, the span of time, and the number of plots. The larger your piece, the more you can add, but be careful.

Why do we do add too much? Because it is an easy way out of narrative problems. Need to move the plot along? Add in a new character. Your location too boring? Add another one. Bored with your story? Change it mid-way through. The problem is that these characters and scenes and events build and build until the story is too full to support its own weight. It becomes schizophrenic, or boring.

Some guidelines:

Time: Keep the time span short, usually only a day or so at the most. If you’re really adventurous, try to match the amount of time it takes your reader to read your story. If you do jump forward in time, make sure your story requires it.

Plot: Your short story should only have one plot, and one main event. You only have room for one beginning, middle and end.

Space: No more than two locations. Again, the best choice is to just explore one location, and create it and make it real for your reader.

Characters: With one, it is tough to build conflict. With two, a conflict and relationship can be explored. Anything with over three major characters will just be unwieldy.

In Closing…

I’ll keep it simple: in short stories, sometimes less really is more.

Eric Cummings writes for On Violence, a blog on military and foreign affairs, art, and violence, written by two brothers–one a soldier and the other a pacifist.