Dear Writer:
      Although it must be a thousand years ago
that I sat in a class in story writing at Stanford, I remember the
experience very clearly. I was bright-eyes and bushy-brained and prepared
to absorb the secret formula for writing good short stories, even great
short stories. This illusion was canceled very quickly. The only way
to write a good short story, we were told, is to write a good short
story. Only after it is written can it be taken apart to see how it
was done. It is a most difficult form, as we were told, and the proof
lies in how very few great short stories there are in the world.
      The basic rule given us was simple and
heartbreaking. A story to be effective had to convey something from
the writer to the reader, and the power of its offering was the measure
of its excellence. Outside of that, there were no rules. A story could
be about anything and could use any means and any technique at all
- so long as it was effective. As a subhead to this rule, it seemed
to be necessary for the writer to know what he wanted to say, in short,
what he was talking about. As an exercise we were to try reducing the
meat of our story to one sentence, for only then could we know it well
enough to enlarge it to three- or six- or ten-thousand words.
      So there went the magic formula, the secret
ingredient. With no more than that, we were set on the desolate, lonely
path of the writer. And we must have turned in some abysmally bad stories.
If I had expected to be discovered in a full bloom of excellence, the
grades given my efforts quickly disillusioned me. And if I felt unjustly
criticized, the judgments of editors for many years afterward upheld
my teacher's side, not mine. The low grades on my college stories were
echoed in the rejection slips, in the hundreds of rejection slips.
      It seemed unfair. I could read a fine story
and could even know how it was done. Why could I not then do it myself?
Well, I couldn't, and maybe it's because no two stories dare be alike.
Over the years I have written a great many stories and I still don't
know how to go about it except to write it and take my chances.
      If there is a magic in story writing, and
I am convinced there is, no one has ever been able to reduce it to
a recipe that can be passed from one person to another. The formula
seems to lie solely in the aching urge of the writer to convey something
he feels important to the reader. If the writer has that urge, he may
sometimes, but by no means always, find the way to do it. You must
perceive the excellence that makes a good story good or the errors
that makes a bad story. For a bad story is only an ineffective story.
      It is not so very hard to judge a story
after it is written, but, after many years, to start a story still
scares me to death. I will go so far as to say that the writer who
not scared is happily unaware of the remote and tantalizing majesty
of the medium.
      I remember one last piece of advice given
me. It was during the exuberance of the rich and frantic '20s, and
I was going out into that world to try and to be a writer.
      I was told, "It's going to take a long
time, and you haven't got any money. Maybe it would be better if you
could go to Europe."
      "Why?" I asked.
      "Because in Europe poverty is a misfortune,
but in America it is shameful. I wonder whether or not you can stand
the shame of being poor."
      It wasn't too long afterward that the depression
came. Then everyone was poor and it was no shame anymore. And so I
will never know whether or not I could have stood it. But surely my
teacher was right about one thing. It took a long time - a very long
time. And it is still going on, and it has never got easier.
      She told me it wouldn't.