Which one's more primal an art between novel-writing (detailed prose) & story-writing (brief fictional prose)?

Question

Which one's more primal an art between novel-writing (detailed fictional prose) & story-writing (brief fictional prose)?

Are (shorter) stories condensed forms of longer works of fictional prose for the fast-forward younger generations?
OR
Are novels extended and detailed forms of stories which could have been told with the help of fewer words?

I think the art of writing novels was popular before the short stories took over... but, at the same time, I feel that brevity should have been involved in a more primal form of literature.

So in short, what came first? The novel or the story book?

I hope you like the question.

Answer 1

The story book. From that--launched millions of novels.

In a sense, short stories ARE condensed novels--each with its own beginning, middle, and end. But not a lot of information; kinda like a teaser trailer.

If you can take a short story and turn what you've written into a novel, then you're actually adding MORE to what's been already told.

But some people don't have that capability quite yet. It takes years to develope your craft and your skills. Nothing happens overnight.

Extensive novels (like my 312,000 word STARCHILD novel) are a work of art in itself and wholly literary. While it is true that I could've told the whole thing from start to finish (which I did--using 100K), I found that exploring the world I created would essentially afford me the mantle of a master storyteller--and thus I had every right to enrich the whole experience by giving the finished piece more flavor and body. (Kinda like this post for instance.)

Authors like me don't bother with making "shorties" (short stories or novels), when we want to write our hearts out and go for broke. But the process takes at least a decade to finally get the finished product up and running. (A lot of bugs to work out in the final draft.)

So in all finality, lengthy novels are simply an "extension" of whatever story it was born from, while adding more and more complex layers on top of it. (Instead of 4 subplots and 2 possible endings in a story, you have at least 40 subplots and just at LEAST 5 different ways you could end the book.)

The art of literary writing in itself died out--to some degree--in 2001; when literary prose-based works were popular.

But some of us--including myself--still keep it alive by weaving complex and interactive character conflicts into whatever story plot we've just dreamed up.

It irritates the big guns in the publishing industry when they come across a book which doesn't fit their definition of "fast-food"-style reading.

However, if you're worried, don't be. This is cyclic. In about 10 or 15 years, we'll be back to writing literary works. So just keep plugging away at what you're doing.

Answer 2

Generally a story starts off with a one off idea or concept around which a cast of characters, the environment, the reactions are built.

The end result could be a condensed or short story which could then be expanded to a big novel. A novel is generally many stories happening to the same set of people. I think initially when writing started, humans must have been quite new at this form of communication, so may be they started small and then slowly as confidence grew, build great stories such as Iliad or the Indian Ramayana or the Purana's-the Indian holy texts are a compilation of smaller stories, with the epic Ramayana being a part of the Mahabharata, which is the main theme of the Bhagwat Purana.

Same is the case with the Bible, the Buddhist Jataka Tales.

It could work both ways now, what with publications such as Readers Digest bringing in condensed versions of novels.

st

Answer 3

I like the question.

I'd say the story book came first. In the history of mankind, there have always been stories. Before writing became easy, they were told by word of mouth. As writing developed, I doubt they had tons of paper and pens and stuff to use. In fact, it was hard to keep things written safely for long periods of time. Due to that fact, I bet that short stories were written first.

Answer 4

I am thinking that the story book. Early religions all had the short stories to teach morals and later on as countries and cultural grew they all develop fables or myths to help their people understand what they are to believe. I believe also because many did not know how to read or write( until about the was it the 1800's, correct me if I am wrong.) because that was something only the upper class and noble were taught. Most learned about religion and culture through stories they were told.

Answer 5

I like the question but I am not sure which one came first. IMO long prose could have come first since people had more time and patience to read in the past than at present when everything is so pressing.

Answer 6

Ideas are not wholly hatched. The grow and develop.

Some stories are short ones. Better to leave them short as to not 'go into all of the gory details' ...

... others take longer to fully explain.

There is room for both, one is not better than the other.

"Of Mice and Men" would have made for a terrible short story since everyone would be wondering, "Why?"

Answer 7

Short story was first. It is the basis and the root for the novels that came after it.