Wednesday, March 30, 2011
I have high expectations for short stories. There are so many that are amazing. It's such an awesome medium and can be done with such complexity and depth, while still being, well, short. I didn't find any of these stories to be a good representation of the complexity that can be present in short stories. Characters, tone, plot, etc were just so one-dimensional. The writing was also nothing special. I feel like an author can get away with having a great story and mediocre writing in a novel maybe, but when your writing is mediocre in a short story it really stands out. Nothing awful, no typos, no gaping plot holes, but none of the striking language or significant meaning that I think really characterizes a well-done short story.
I liked it ok while I was reading it. It wasn't not-enjoyable, but it wasn't really enjoyable either. It wouldn't say brain candy. It was just something that occupied time, a diversion. Like watching a TV you don't really like, but you're too lazy to get up and go do something you'll like more. Also, I was really really disappointed that what was described as "dark fantasy" and "eerie" turned out to be more along the lines of childhood ghost stories with a vampire/unicorn/werewolf/fairy twist. Not that I was expecting Stephen King. And as I mentioned earlier, I am pleased to report that not a single spiritual evil exists in the book. But I was not scared, creeped out, anything. I was hoping for Pennywise and got Killer Klowns From Outer Space.
If you want to read actually eerie short stories, may I recommend Flannery O'Connor instead? Or maybe some Alice Walker?
Posted by Julie G at 8:18 PM