[ QUOTE ]
Rushmore, I don't disagree with what you're saying entirely or anything. I will remind you of one simple fact, in addition to my defensive response above (
). I am not Carver, nor am I flat-out brilliant with language. So, of course, I may fall victim to needing to rely on some sleight of hand (even though I still contend it is the reader's doing mostly).
Multiple entries allowed, yes. There is no way I would scrap this one after what has gone into it. The workshop forum has been incredibly useful (and much better than the one I had in creative writing class). For everything called into question, I realize that either (a) I can improve on it and make it better or (b) I am forced to consider the reason that I chose to do what I chose to do and then I gain a better understanding of my writing and what I am trying to accomplish.
Additionally, Rushmore, I just wanted to add in one quick snippet. Some of the best short fiction I have read makes the reader want to reread the story to get something they didn't get the time before. That is what I was going for, and in this case, I relied on that "a-ha moment" to try and get the reader to want to read again. So in some ways, it might be difference in what type of short story you and I find appealing that we see the "trick" idea differently.
Obbbbbbviously, we can't get it to work all the time, but ah well. Haha.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, all quite true.
To be fair, I'd say you executed your small device pretty well, actually. Also, your contention that it is a matter of taste rather than a matter of quality seems reasonably accurate.
All of this is much easier to say based upon the fact that you did not feel the need to point out my misspelling of the word
poignancy.
That was kind.