this will probably sound like sour grapes, but it's not. it's anything but. it's just plain and simple curiousity. i'm trying to understand what makes one story better than another.



i've been reading through some of the stories on the mwa notables list and i confess, i just don't get it.



granted, i haven't read all of them. i probably read about five yesterday (or attempted to read). what i found striking, and maybe it's merely that i've had my head buried in mostly flash fiction for the last several years, but what i found interesting is most of those stories i read would have been just as good, if not better, by slicing, at the very least, (AT THE VERY LEAST) 100 words. there was no imagery or lovely lyrical phrases to push the reader on, just long, boring narrative. when i read a very good story, i can't wait to see how it will end and i enjoy the journey of getting there. these stories i simply just wanted to end. period.



i'd like to know the process, or thinking of the judges. why was one story better than another? i'm half tempted to write and ask that some light be shed on this subject. if the mission of this "contest" is to bring attention to the best online fiction, then exploring (and sharing) the reasons one story was chosen over another makes sense. we should know the thought process and reasons. wouldn't this benefit all writers in the end? after all, we often wonder why our stories are rejected. wouldn't this help all of us be better writers?



i do plan to read more, but from what i've read so far, my impressions are... 1. mainstream is important, 2. twists are practically non-existent, 3. the judges (as i suspected) didn't want or like to feel uncomfortable by a story.



i think it's important for writers to remember the bottom line. writing (or reading, as the case may be) is extremely subjective. that's why finding the right market for the right story is so important. however, it seems to me that if you want to be successful or profitable with your writing, you'd better not write anything "out of the loop"



one story i did enjoy was "Wedad's Cavalry" by Mohja Kahf




i enjoyed it not for the writing, for the writing was laborous and rambling in places, and there were too many words that non-arab, non-muslims don't understand, but because of the subject matter. it shows that we are really all the same. it's just our skin color and culture that separate us, but deep down in side, we think alike and want the same things in life. and the other thing it shows is that who are we (america) to tell another culture that their way of life is wrong? while they have definite disadvantages (and would freely admit this), in many ways, they're much better off than we suspect. moreover, they like their way of life, and even though they might change some things, most things they wouldn't change at all. one might argue that, because of their culture, they just don't know any better. but i argue that we should look at all the stupidity and backward thinking that goes on in THIS country where we supposedly DO know better.



as albert einstein might say, "It's all relative, my dear"