Part 11

Considering the plot, what should you say are the chief steps in the development? Analyze both the inner story and in its relation to the enveloping action. The initial impulse, for instance, in the whole narrative is, the motivation for the monk’s telling his story. The dénouement, similarly, is the fact that Giovanni and the monk are identical. What are initial impulse and dénouement of the rehearsed narrative?

SETTING. What is the worth of the setting in such a story, both as regards unity and convincingness? Note all the details which are distinctly Italian. What connotation have the cypress trees? Do they intensify the mood? In connection with the immediate scene in the chapel, what value has the sentence, “Beneath it, on a little stand, lay a slim-bladed vicious knife, covered with dust”?

CHARACTERIZATION. What added _theme_ is conveyed in the description, “He was old, the oldest man Blagden had ever seen, etc.”? Does one get it on first reading, or on reflection?

Is Blagden a character, or a reason for telling the story?

DETAILS. Point out the several examples of mysticism.

THE WHALE AND THE GRASSHOPPER

CLASSIFICATION. “You are right,” says Mr. O’Brien, “about ‘The Whale and the Grasshopper.’ It is a sort of fable and like the other sketches in my book it was written for the sake of the philosophy and humor. The starting point of the narrative was the remark of Padna Dan ‘As the Whale said to the Grasshopper,’ which I considered a good title, and accordingly wrote the phantasy.”

Read as a sort of parallel, Emerson’s “The Mountain and the Squirrel.” What is the difference in the mental attitude of the two authors?

SETTING. Why is such a fable particularly well set near Castlegregory on a June morning? Note the intensifying of the setting by means of dialect. Would the place be realized without the Irish speech? Study the selective processes used to make the dialect easy to understand and yet distinctly characteristic of the Green Isle.

CHARACTERS. Standish McNeill and Felix O’Dowd seem to be real people,--at the very beginning, because of their names. The writer who is less careful would have endowed them with Mike or Pat. How are they kept up from start to finish as real? Why, for example, do you know they took that walk? What characteristic (at once Celtic and individual) of Standish enables him to “put across” so vividly a yarn which one _knows_ all along can be only fable?

GENERAL METHODS. Mr. O’Brien states that he does not know how much he believes in or practices technical distinctions. “Writing, I think, is the art that must evolve out of ourselves. I began life as an artist and specialized in sculpture, but finding there were things I could not express through such a medium I took to writing. When I am impressed by some important event, it fashions itself in story or drama form in my mind, without any conscious effort on my part, and when I feel intelligent--which is not often--I write.”

IN BERLIN

“In Berlin” is a _tour de force_ of short-story construction. Miss O’Reilly has followed the well-known principle of beginning near the climax, that the story may gain intensity. The result is excellent for this one principle. But the whole composition of 125 or 150 words in reality plays up a single dramatic moment--not a single Incident.

The advantage to the student in reproducing similar “dramatic moment” stories will be to show the value of material in magnitude and worth, to teach him to appreciate climax, and to feel the advantages--and the disadvantages--of economy.

Read Chapter III in “A Handbook on Story Writing,” describing and illustrating the Anecdote and the Incident.

THE INTERVAL

STARTING POINT. Mr. O’Sullivan states that the story arose primarily from his foreseeing, in 1915, that one result of the War would be a revived interest in the supernatural. This foreknowledge illustrates that the author must be a little ahead of his time, rather than a little behind it.

The clearness of his prevision is illustrated in such stories as Gordon Arthur Smith’s “Jeanne the Maid” (1915), Edith Wharton’s “Kerfol” (1916), Alice Brown’s “The Flying Teuton” (1917), and Frances Wood’s “The White Battalion” (1918). It would be safe to hazard that these authors foresaw a similar demand.

TITLE. Meaning of “The Interval”? Is it apt?

SETTING. Why did the author choose London, rather than an American city? Is it clear from the story alone that Mr. O’Sullivan is thoroughly familiar with English locale and character?

In the first paragraph occurs the sentence, “A dense haze, gray and tinged ruddy, lay between the houses, sometimes blowing with a little wet kiss against the face.” What color effects are in harmony with the atmosphere of the story?

PLOT. The _struggle_ is in the mind of Mrs. Wilton. She wishes to be assured that “it was not all over, that he was somewhere, not too far away,” etc., page 385. The _situation_ is here disclosed, suspense having been used as to Mrs. Wilton’s purpose in the previous pages. “This must be the tenth seer she had consulted since Hugh had been killed,” page 384 is the most revelatory sentence.

Is the struggle successful?

The _initial incident_ is this visit to the clairvoyant who “sees” Hugh.

Which of the incidents constitutes the _dramatic climax_?

“She slipped out of bed hastily ...” (page 390) is the _climax of action_, or as much as is expressed. The reader must finish it for himself.

(The final sentence, with seeming carelessness dropping the information that “after her death the slippers could never be found,” is an incentive to the reader’s fancy. It has no plot value, except by _suggestion_.)

Did Hugh really return, or did Mrs. Wilton see him as a logical result of her brooding? If the former choice is made, the inference is that the reader accepts Hugh as a bona fide ghost; if the latter, then he is only existent through the sick-woman’s mind and the mind of the clairvoyant. (See article, “Representative Ghosts,” _Bookman_, August, 1917.)

DETAILS. Does the author believe the clairvoyant was genuine? If so, why does he say (page 384), “A look of complicity, of cunning, perhaps of irony, passed through the dealer’s cynical and sad eyes”?

Are the visitations of Hugh arranged in climactic order?

Is Mrs. Wilton’s illness adequately motivated? What is the double explanation of it? Do you accept the natural or the supernatural reason?

THE TOAST TO FORTY-FIVE

PLOT.

_Initial Incident_: On August 16, 1866, at Paris, Vermont, was held a banquet in honor of sixty-odd returned heroes. It was called the “Forty-Five” banquet in honor of the boys who had not returned. Captain Jack Fuller proposed to save one bottle of vintage, the seal of which should be broken when in the course of years only two of the sixty heroes remained. On their final reunion they would drink a toast to “Forty-Five.”

_Steps toward Dramatic Climax_: Captain Jack was the first to join Forty-Five. He left a son, who grew up, married, and died, leaving a son, young Jack Fuller.

In 1910, eleven heroes are living; by August 16, 1912, the ranks have dwindled to four old men. On August 17, 1912, Jack Fuller, grandson of Captain Jack of Civil War fame, in a drunken fit accidentally kills his baby. Sobered by the tragedy, he promises reformation. Succeeding months witness his hard struggle. He wishes, as a final safeguard, to join the National Guardsmen, but his wife, Betty, begs him to stay with her--she cannot bear alone the memories. Jack raises a company, becomes their captain, and drills them as Fuller’s Fire-eaters. (The Mexican trouble motivates this step.) In August, 1916, three of the Forty-Five are left: Henry Weston, Uncle Joe Fodder, and Wilber Nieson. In February, 1917, the United States severs relations with Germany. In July, half of Fuller’s Fire-eaters have been called upon to make up the Paris quota. Jack’s name has not been drawn; but he wishes to enlist, the more so as his men will enlist in a body, not waiting for the draft. Betty implores him to remain; as she breaks down physically, he is torn between love and duty. Wilber Nieson and Henry Weston die. Only Uncle Joe is left; the toast cannot be pledged, after all, as planned.

Jack makes up his mind to enlist with his whole Company--Minor Climax. A dinner is proposed for them in place of the old reunion. Hundreds of Parisians gather; the largest assembly hall obtainable is crowded. Sam Hod, editor, is toastmaster by virtue of having three sons in the Fire-eaters. Uncle Joe Fodder sits at his right. Captain Jack Fuller at his left. Hod announces that Uncle Joe has requested that the toast to Forty-Five be given under the present circumstances. Uncle Joe offers a toast to Captain Jack Fuller and his posterity.

_Dramatic Climax_: Jack’s glass is raised; as he hears the words of Uncle Joe, he sees his wife’s face. He pours out the wine and makes his toast with water.

_Climax of Action_: Betty sends Jack away--with a smile--and she goes to work at the box factory.

DETAILS. Is there a constant struggle for one character, or does it shift from Jack to Betty?

Is there, accordingly, a stronger or a weaker effect? Is the action unified?

Did you find the time element confusing or anywhere difficult to follow?

What details mark the action as belonging particularly to Vermont?

How many themes do you find in the narrative? Are they brought into essential harmony? What purpose of the author interests you most? What does the author mean to convey in the recognition of Sam Hod and others that Jack’s toast is almost identical with his grandfather’s?

What do you think of the introduction and the emphasis on the wine? How does the following statement heighten interest?--“that liquor was consumed in the pledging of a toast.”

Why does the author add so long a conclusion after the story action has been completed? Is he wise to give the final place of emphasis to the sentence, “All over America her name is legion”? Why?

THE BIG STRANGER ON DORCHESTER HEIGHTS

THE STARTING POINT. Mr. Pentz states, regarding the story and its inception, “Substantially true in fact, it was told and retold to appreciative friends; then it was written at their suggestion. Probably it gathered moss during its latent existence and probably something was lost....”

Technically, the story is an Incident. It has, however, an underlying significance elevating it above the Incident type. This significance becomes manifest in the dénouement, which reveals the influence of Lincoln.

PRESENTATION. The story is told by the omniscient author, who uses Paul’s “slant.”

SETTING. South Boston, March, 1860. Point out details which keep the locality before the reader from beginning to end. Why 1860, rather than 1861 or 1862?

PLOT. The plot being slight requires only a clear exposition of events in natural order. The author has made use of his one chance to create suspense and utilized it in holding up the name of the Big Stranger. One suspects, but is not sure until the last words.

CHARACTER. The main value of the story lies in its description of Lincoln, both in the words of the author--from Paul’s angle--and by what the great man says and does. Which is more forceful?

* * * * *

Mr. Pentz’s prescription for a story is brief: “Having the material write it out.” He believes, further, in the use of simple language. “The average reader must not be sent to the dictionary; it divides the interest and weakens the effect. A writer should eliminate his personality altogether; what he may know of other languages, or of intricate English, will not interest a reader who is busy with a villain in pursuit of the heroine. ‘The play’s the thing.’”

“A CERTAIN RICH MAN--”

CLASSIFICATION. A perfect specimen of the short-story, even of the extreme type-form since all the unities are beautifully maintained. The setting is a dinner table in a home of wealth and refinement; the time is the present; the length of the action is, perhaps, an hour.

STARTING POINT, AND FIRST STAGES OF CONSTRUCTION. The author was present at a dinner where a young man of wealth, the host, remarked in the course of a discussion of the war that he would willingly give his life if through that sacrifice he could bring an end to the blood glut. The remark impressed every one deeply and was discussed at length. After due thought, Mr. Perry feeling the “story” in the situation, decided that it lay in having the man make good. He mulled the matter over for weeks before finding an answer to his next difficulty “In what way could he make good?” Then there occurred to him the expedient of having present an inventor who had invented an appliance which through its complete death dealing qualities would end the war forthwith. Here, then, was the complete thread of the story. Characters and descriptive background followed in due course. The author has an objection to sad endings and would like to have made it clear that the man came through his test safely. But the whole spirit of the story militated against this. So he left the outcome uncertain, but the inference is that Colcord yielded his life.

CHARACTERIZATION. There are nine persons, each deftly made a living part of the assembly. They are, in approximate order of importance: Nicholas Colcord and his wife Evelyn. (They may be spoken of as untried gold); Professor Simec (the assayer); Jeffery Latham and Sybil his wife (tried gold); Arnold Bates (alloy); Jerry Dane and his wife Bessie (baser metal); Dr. Allison and his wife(?).

In spite of the rather generous number of characters, the part each has is so definite, serving by contrast and comparison to emphasize the main character--Nicholas Colcord--as to seem well-nigh indispensable. Moreover, apart from plot values and unity of effect, the number at the table works for verisimilitude. It is just the right size for a party in a conservative home, and it embraces the variety of types one finds in any similar group.

The dramatic method of characterizing is used to greatest extent: the men and women describe themselves in their remarks and in their behavior, particularly in the matter of measuring up to the test proposed. Go through the story with an eye to the speeches of each. Is any one person given many remarks? Who is the prominent spokesman? Why?

ANALYSIS OF PLOT AS PRESENTED. The _first significant step_ in the action lies in Nick’s remark (page 399) that he would give his life if in so doing he could end the war. (The foil to this remark is in Bates’s, “I’m with Nick.”)

The _dramatic climax_ is sounded on page 403: “Suppose ... that I could make this absurd condition ... exist....” It is emphasized in the clear call on page 404: “I am going to ask you to make your offer good.”

_The climax of action_ lies in Colcord’s words (page 408): “When do you want me?” (This speech is emphasized by contrast in Bates’s, “I withdraw right here.” It is strengthened by Evelyn’s acceptance of her husband’s sacrifice.)

_The dénouement_ is left to the reader.

DETAILS. Carefully study the circumstances preceding the initial impulse of the story action noting the details of preparation. For example, the “national colors merged with those of the allied nations” (page 391); “Rumor credited to him at least one of the deadliest chemical combinations” (page 392); “There’s a sort of grace given, I fancy” (page 396); “Sacrifice, Mrs. Colcord” (page 397) deepening the note of patriotism.

Whose angle of narration is used? Does the author anywhere depart from it, preferring his own angle? Does he anywhere seem to turn from the angle of the chosen one, putting her under the spot-light, instead? If you find these shifts, can you justify them by showing that the author makes a gain greater than the loss he sustains? If he makes no shift, how does he widen the narrow range afforded only one person?

By what preparation does Mr. Perry create the needed impression that the Colcords were fully aware of the sacrifice involved? (Note, especially, the preparation in Evelyn’s response to Latham’s comment, page 393, ... “you make me shiver!”)

Page 405: “He raised a thin forefinger and levelled it along the table.” What image is called up?

By what detailed description and exposition does Mr. Perry make you “believe,” at least momentarily, that Simec had really invented the appliance?

What locale is suggested, outside the immediate setting? Does it matter, in a narrative of this kind?

GENERAL. Mr. Perry’s views should be spread abroad to all who would master the art of story writing. “No art is rarer, or more difficult of attainment.... First there is the plot. I think the good short story demands a plot. Stylistic writing designed to atone for the lack of a definite idea, or to stand in lieu of a definitely worked out plot is not to my way of thinking a pure short story. There must be a plot, a plot peculiar to itself and peculiar to the medium in which it is set forth. Very rarely, I believe, may the perfect short story plot be adapted to any other vehicle. Nine times out of ten it would not serve as the motif of the play, the novel, the film or the sketch. The piece of short fiction, thus, is _sui generis_. Again the scope is limited. There may be no leisurely characterization, no extended dissertation; descriptions are admissible only where they assist in carrying on the action--or at least do not interfere with it--and in the telling of the tale there is no place in the scheme for aught save the ultimate objective.

“Thus carried out and presented in type we have something which we may regard as the polished gem of literature, establishing a mood in the reader out of all proportion to its size--and perhaps its importance. For the short story very largely is designed for entertainment, and rarely bears the moral purpose of the great novel or the didactic intent of the essay.

“I say ‘very largely.’ There are, of course, short stories written with a purpose--some great ones--but that purpose is best realized when the essential characteristics of the story form are observed, when the reader in other words feels whatever emotions, or grasps whatever lesson the writer intended to convey, through the medium of a strong, deeply marked plot carried with precision from situation to clash to dénouement.”--_Lawrence Perry._

THE PATH OF GLORY

STARTING POINT AND FIRST PROCESSES. “It so happens in the case of ‘The Path of Glory’ that I can give you exactly the germinal idea from which the story sprang. Three months before I wrote it a friend put into my hand two letters. The first was written by Piatt Andrew of The American Ambulance at Paris and gave the full details of a wonderful funeral accorded a young American volunteer driver who was killed on an early trip; the second was the last personal letter of the young man to his family--the letter of a young man of education and breeding and in no way similar to the Nat letter of my story save as they both expressed a fundamental human longing. Copies were being made and I was offered some. I carried mine home and laid them by. But they haunted me. ‘There’s a story there,’ I thought. However, I didn’t seem to get a story--at once. Nevertheless my mind played with the letters. That funeral! The story of course lay there, but how to set it off, enhance it properly. One day thinking it over idly--I have a vagabond mind and never attack a problem in any logical fashion--the solution dawned quite suddenly. It would be best set off by contrast, of course, with some unthinkably shabby funeral, and would receive its greatest force by being reconstructed through the minds of a people to whom a funeral is a precious event.”--_Mary Brecht Pulver._

After a statement to the effect that she knows “people to whom the trappings and ceremonials of death take on a sense of privilege,” Mrs. Pulver continues:

“Just here I got some paper and a pencil and wrote the story. Or rather it wrote itself--as my stories usually do. When I began describing the lonely farm in which my people lived I had not the least idea who the people were--how many, what sex, age, race, or previous condition of servitude. There was a family in that house. A family preferably in hard luck. Then at the foot of the hill I saw a lame boy driving a cow. I walked along with him--and recognizing him as Luke, and acquainting myself with his ideas and frame of mind, I knew of course who his people were, how many, their habits, their names--‘all’s to it,’ as Luke would have said.

“And so I told their story--and about how one of them went to France and got killed. And how indirectly he helped them out of their hard luck. That is all there was to ‘The Path of Glory.’”

PLOT. Note, first, that since the presentation is consistently from Luke’s angle, the plot events are given in chronological order _for him_; but that from the point of view of actual occurrence they are presented with some inversion. (For example, the experience of Mrs. Haynes in the town precedes her summary to Luke.) In this respect, the author--perhaps unconsciously--shows ability to mass plot material to best advantage through artistic adherence to one angle of narration. Many short-story writers appear to understand this principle, yet fail to master it.

_Initial Impulse_: The story impulse lies, dormant, in the business of Nat’s funeral. Where does it become active?

_Main Steps in Action_: Nat’s visit home. A direct forecast of the climax lies in the reason for his going to Europe. Another important stage is the death and burial of Father Haynes, “Paw.”

_Dramatic Climax_: The combination of “Paw’s” home-made burial and Nat’s death. The two come near together and constitute the lowest turn of the Haynes wheel of fortune. In Nat’s death lies the possibility for change. (In the presentation of the plot, this climax is _reported_ through the letter, the reception of which is, in itself, a step toward the _climax of action_.)

_Steps toward the Climax of Action_: The letter telling of Nat’s death. Mrs. Haynes’s stony grief. The second letter; Nat’s funeral and the _croix de guerre_. “Maw” awakes; she is “going downtown.” She shows the letter, and soon understands that Nat has given glory to Stony Brook. The letter is to be published. It is to be read aloud at the schoolhouse and Nat’s story retold. There will be a memorial service at the churches. There will be a big public service in the Town Hall. (Other details make the change of fortune explicit and complete.)

_Climax of Action_: “Maw” returns home, rehabilitated, and rehearses the day’s experience to Luke. He recognizes that Nat has done “somethin’ big for us all.”

CHARACTERS. If one test of the “short-story” is that no character should enter who does not assist in the action, will this story stand it? What, for example, is Tom’s part? Would you give him up? Is it permissible to introduce characters to enrich the action? There is no question about the value from a literary consideration.

The part of each main character is well-defined. Luke, self-conscious, lame and sensitive, offers the medium through whom the story is told. “Maw” suffers; it is she to whom the turns of fortune mean most; she is the chief character. “Paw” is the cause of the Haynes status in the community. Nat, the prodigal, is the one through whom rehabilitation comes.