In Which I And Others Become Un-STRIPPED

So remember last year me telling you about this anthology I was in called Stripped, A Collection of Anonymous Flash, edited by Nicole Monaghan, where all the stories were printed without bylines? Well, a full year has passed with all the authors remaining mum on which stories were theirs, and now finally Nicole has posted the full table of contents. My story? It's called "The Ballad of This and That." It's actually one of my favorite recent flash fiction pieces. It's also one of the last flash fiction pieces I've written. I've sort of "retired" from writing flash fiction. For a while I was writing it all the time, and having quite some fun, but in the past few years I've been concentrating more on novels. That isn't to say I won't write more flash or even hint fiction in the future, but right now don't expect any from me. Which means you should definitely check out Stripped, both for my story and all the rest of the great stories. And hey, I'll be down in Philadelphia next Saturday at Fergie's Pub, from 2 to 4 pm. PS Books is hosting an event for PS authors and the Philadelphia Stories Winter Issue authors to read, and they've asked Nicole to invite local contributors to read as well. So I'll be there, reading my story. If you're in the area, stop by and check it out.

,

For Sale, Baby Shoes, Never Written By Hemingway

,

So the big news yesterday was this story how, believe it or not, the famous six-word story was not, in fact, written by Ernest Hemingway. This comes a day after George Saunders, on The Colbert Report, talked about this famous bit of tiny literature. Am I surprised that Hemingway has been outed as not being the true author? Not at all. I mean, I basically said the same thing in my introduction to the Hint Fiction anthology two years ago:

Although Ernest Hemingway is credited for creating the first "six-word story," some believe the story of its creation is a myth. The truth is there is no written account of those six words anywhere. They are, as one Hemingway scholar puts it, apocryphal.

What surprises me, really, is that it took this long for someone to do the research to put this mystery to rest. From what my editor at Norton had told me, who heard it from a Hemingway scholar, the question of whether or not Hemingway truly wrote the story is one of the most frequently asked questions about the author. So it's a bit odd that, after all this time, someone just finally figured it out. Also, based on the article -- really, it's a good read, check it out -- it seems that a similar phrase regarding a baby carriage had been circulating for quite some time. From 1906, an advertisement in the newspaper:

For sale, baby carriage; never been used. Apply at this office.

So there's the chance that Hemingway happened to see this ad, then decided to turn it into a story. If that's the case, he basically plagiarized. Then again, there's a chance he never actually "told" the six-word story upon which he's been credited all this time. It is still, and probably will forever be, a myth.

I will say, though, as I've said before, I believe what has made this six-word story endure as long as it has is not only its simplistic greatness, but its association with Hemingway. If it had been written by Joe Schmo, maybe it would have faded away and made people care less about it. But Hemingway, being the master storyteller that he was, gave the six-word story much more credibility. Could I be wrong? Perhaps. But in some literary circles, what matters more is the name of the author, rather than the actual story.

Anyway, regardless who actually authored the story, those six words have inspired writers for many, many years, and in the end, I think that's what matters most.

On Revision

I'm not sure if I tackled this issue before, but even if I have, I think it bears repeating. Not too long ago I saw a writer talking about how it was important, every couple of years, to revise your books. Someone left a comment asking if this writer meant updating new covers, and the writer said yes, definitely updating new covers, but also keeping up with technology, like if your book features a pay phone, to nix it because it's so outdated.

That, folks, is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Keep in mind, I don't think any book or story is ever truly perfect, at least in its writer's eyes. There's always something that can be changed, tweaked, made better. Even if a writer claims their story is as perfect as it is going to be, show it to them in a few years, see what they say then. Some authors have revised old work -- Dean Koontz comes to mind -- while others are content to leave things as they are.

And with today's digital age, revision can become quite tempting. After all, just like initially publishing the book or story, it's so easy. That doesn't mean, of course, a writer should do it.

Well, some might argue, what about typos and stuff like that?

Sure, I don't see anything wrong with fixing typos. Why wouldn't you?

What I think isn't a good idea is going back and changing whole passages, or -- gasp! -- entire chapters, just because maybe someone mentioned something in a review, or something's been bugging you. This is an issue of writers worried too much with past works, when they should be concentrating on present and future works.

Worried about a pay phone making your work seem outdated?

Tell me, do you read books? Do you watch movies? Have you seen Die Hard recently? I have, and you better believe they's some outdated stuff in there. Like when John McClane gets picked up at the airport by the limo, the driver makes a big deal about there being a car phone. Or when John McClane gets to the Nakatomi Plaza building, in the lobby, there's this thing where he types in his wife's name and it shows a map of the building, and it looks so old.

Well you know what? That's just how things are. Things get old. Things stay old.

That isn't to say it's not okay to revise works that haven't been published yet. Take my novella The Silver Ring for instance. When I wrote it back in high school, cell phones existed, but they weren't as common as they are today. Every teenager didn't own one. But when I decided to publish it a few years ago, I realized that it would be strange for my character not to carry a cell phone, so I addressed it it in the text. If the story had been published years and years ago, I wouldn't just go back and address the cell phone issue, because that would be silly.

Another example: when I originally wrote Man of Wax, the cell phone Ben used to communicate with Simon was a Nokia, as, at the time, Nokias were a common cell phone. But when I went to publish it back in 2011, Nokias weren't nearly as popular. In fact, I can't even remember the last time I saw a Nokia. So I changed it to an iPhone.

Will the iPhone fade away in the next ten years? Possibly. Will I then go back and change all the iPhones in the book to something more current? Absolutely not.

When something's published, it's published. That means, for better or worse, it's done. If something is really wrong with the text, okay, fine, go and change it. But ask yourself why the story suffered so much before being published.

As for updating the cover every couple of years? I think that's a great idea, if you can afford to do so. Major publishers rebrand the books of major authors all the time. It keeps things fresh and current and not, you know, boring.

Are We Hanging Out Tonight?

Remember, tonight at 9 pm EST I'm hosting a Google Plus Hangout. If you’re interested, leave your G+ profile address in the comments section so I can add you to a circle. Otherwise I'm not sure how you'll be able to participate, since the last time I did this it seemed people couldn't access the hangout unless I had them in a circle. Again, here’s my G+ profile. See you then!