posted
With all of the talk about Writers of the Future I decided to pick up a volume to see what type of stories win this contest. I am halfway through and what I notice so far is that concept seems to be more important than emotion. I admit that I may discover different as I continue reading.
But then one story, The Candy Store by Heather McDougal, has quite baffled me. It breaks many of the 'rules' that we discuss repeatedly here at Hatrack. And to me at least, the story wasn't terribly innovative or interesting.
The gist of the story: An old gold rush town gets visited by an ill wind that brings with it a candy store that sells allegedly magic candy that of course creates mayhem among the residents. The candy store owner is an evil magic person of some sort. The sheriff has some undefined powers as does his wife and the town loony. Ultimately, the bad guy is defeated but the town is fading. Whether that is from the events surrounding the candy store or the drying up of the gold isn't entirely clear.
The problems I saw:
1) The author goes into flashback within a few paragraphs of the beginning of the story and never comes back to the present. The flashback isn't immediately clear but maybe there was supposed to be a space between paragraphs and it got lost on the page break.
2) None of the magic for any of the characters gets defined. The main character, the sheriff, keeps hinting about his wife's connection with nature but we don't really learn anything about what she can do until she suddenly shows up at the end to save the day. Or at least she helps to save the day. When she shows up, she is a tree and there are a mountain lion and a bear at her side. The animals never actually do anything.
3) The town loony seems to be the only person who really knows what's going on. The candy store owner marks him and the loony man tells the sheriff that he knows he's doomed and will end up dead. The next day, when the loony guy turns up dead the sheriff shows no emotion at all. He has a moment of realization that the loon was also helping to protect the town and that now he was all alone but he doesn't care one wit that the man is dead.
4) The source of the candy store owner's power lies in a little string and nail doll (we find this out at the end but have suspected it all along). The loony guy had it for awhile. After he died the candy store owner had it. He buried it in a shallow hole in front of his store. The sheriff finds it with the help of a little girl that has 'finding' powers and digs it up. How in the world does it make sense for the candy store owner to leave his power source, his very being, out where it could be found? Why not lock it in a safe? Or at least bury it in the back, better hidden. Since no explanation is given as to the rules of the magic I can't discern if there was a decent reason for this action.
5) In the end, the main character doesn't solve his own problem. In fact, the sheriff barely does anything. The candy store owner gets the better of him and he is helpless. The sheriff's wife shows up and distracts candy man and starts bringing down the magic wall that he has placed around her husband. There is a guy that has started figuring things out along with everyone else who is standing behind the sheriff. He tells the sheriff to throw the doll in the air and then he uses the sheriff's rifle that's filled with rock salt to shoot the doll. The doll is destroyed and the candy man disappears.
This is a thirty-seven page story and it took me three sittings to get through it. If I wasn't committed to reading this for research I would have stopped reading in the first couple of pages.
My question is: Why did this story win? It seems to have deep, fundamental flaws that aren't overcome by some incredibly great conceptual element to allow their forgiveness. Out of all the entries they get I can't believe this was one of the best.
I'll also leave this possibility: Am I missing something? If someone thought this was a great story I'd love to hear why. Is there a reason the flaws above should be ignored? Or did these things bother other people too?
posted
Any rule of storytelling you care to name, you can usually find some story that violates it.
Probably in this case, the guys who decide what gets picked, decided that the merits and emotional impact of the story outweigh any flaws in its construction.
(At least for them...if not for you. Me, I've read a lot of classic stories that I thought were awful...I remember reading one in a collection, and thinking the writer stuck it there 'cause he couldn't sell it...then hearing a couple days later that the story won the Hugo. It didn't seen any less awful because of that...)
posted
I've also come to the philosophical conclusion that if somebody finds merit in something, I must take them at their word...no matter what I might think about it.
Posts: 8809 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not one for needing strict adherence to the rules. I guess it was just that I didn't see other merits in the story and it broke a lot of rules. Those things combined are what puzzle me.
Part of this is that I'm trying to figure out if I should spend the energy on a WotF entry. I don't know if my style is remotely close to something that would stand a chance. So I'm trying to understand what it is they're looking for.
I will give the story one good point. It did a good job of creating atmosphere.
posted
I've read that story, and I also was not overly impressed with it for many of the reasons that have already been brought up. It certainly didn't reach the standards of some of the other stories in the anthology (my favorite was "After the Sunset, Again"). However, "The Candy Store" had, IMO, well-developed characters and strong world building. The writing was pretty good, too, despite the issues I had with the structure and plot.
I've read three of the anthologies now, and I haven't been able to pinpoint any tried-and-true formula that is going to impress K.D. or the other judges. Most stories have a strong speculative element right at the top, although there are always exceptions.
I think it's still worth entering. I write the best story I can, send it off and hope for the best.
posted
If you're wondering what the judges look for: At the WOTF forum awhile back, K.D. answered a question of what separates the HMs from the semifinalists and finalists. Really, her answer addressed what NOT to do if you want to win:
HMs are stories with one or more excellent elements but that are not going to win for some obvious reason. Sometimes it's that the premise is too familiar and not original enough. Often, it's that the protagonist is too passive or the pace is really slow. Sometimes the story is too long for the amount of plot it contains or, though well written, the protagonist is a jerk. Sometimes the author is deliberately vague about what is going on and the reader (me) loses interest. Sometimes the ending is off, with the story stopping too soon or not resolving the central conflict.
I agree, both with your best pick and your thougths on this one. Here is what I wrote in my annual review for Diabolical Plots
quote:The Candy Store by Heather McDougal. Second place fourth quarter
John is the sheriff of a gold rush town that is slowly dying from dwindling strikes. Over night, a candy store opens in the abandon hardware store. Shaky Jay knows something ain’t right about it. Mrs. Limerick wants John to send the new owners away. The townspeople and miners can’t get enough of the candy, though. For it is filled with something far more sweeter than sugar. John’s wife, Maddy, has an idea what makes the candy special. Protecting the people is the role of a sheriff, but how can an honest working candy merchant be a threat to anyone?
The Candy Store is slow developing. It took me a good while to realize that it wasn’t an alternate history I was reading but a fantasy. The characters are rich and John makes a swell MC. The magic in the story I found intriguing. But, I thought the story got thinner and predictable as it went along. I wasn’t quite sure what happened at the end.
Many of the characters in The Candy Store were written like old western support characters, moseying along about their day. The story flowed the same way for me. Consistent, just not very exciting.
Grade C+[quote]
Characters are what they stress for in the contest and characters is what got this one a seat at the table. I have looked up other reviews and comments about this contest, although others are not so willing to say anything to negative, they do share their thoughts.
This is from John Rogers and was posted in the Asimov forum on 9/4
[quote]THE CANDY STORE by Heather McDougal (Illustrated by Jamie Luhn)
Hmmm. Okay. Here it is. If we asked Orson Scott Card to write a confection-based short story version of Stephen King's Needful Things, and set it in the Old West-analog of his (Card's) Alvin Maker universe, this would be that story. Has the same our-time-line-but-with-magic sensibility - though Maddy comes across as much more of an Alice Hoffman "pastless, elemental heroine" [go read her novel The Probable Future to see what I mean], than a character Card himself would create. Some truly outstanding imagery here. I particularly liked Shaky Jay's hutch and how it changed with the old coot's untimely (and suspicious) death. And the sheriff's house. Simply but effectively described. The Limericks were an inspired collection; and, a warm and genuine-feeling family. Very Cardian as well.
Of course, in the updated Twilight Zone TV episode of this story, scripted by Shaun Cassidy and produced by Sam Raimi, Ed Harris would have to play the Sheriff John Adams (but -- is he weak enough?), Max Von Sydow would play Mr. Bright (but - is he too strong?), Harry Dean Stanton (assuming the guy's still alive) would take on the role of Shaky Jay, and Madeline Stowe (because I like her and she's got the right first name) would be Maddy.
My only gripes here are: 1) there really isn't much suspense at the end [not, I suppose, that there really needs to be], and 2) Maddy's just a bit too perfect. But these are minor things.
Bottom line? A fine story. Professionally paced. Solid dialogue. Exceptional work with Shaky Jay. Bang-up ending.
Jamie Luhn's illustration - on p. 199 - depicting the sheriff's meeting with Shaky Jay on the morning of the candy store's sudden appearance, perfectly suits the tone of the story, which is not dark, but, rather, light and old-timey - with shafts of darkness cutting in here and there.
Of course, John either really liked or loved every submission (but he did think Jordan Lapp's was exceptional)
This is Dr Phil Kardon's review. He also doesn't say an ill word on any of the stories. Added note, his story, although it didn't win a prize, did make it into last years anthology to fill up the book.
quote:"The Candy Store" by Heather McDougal illustrated by Jamie Luhn This reminded me a lot of last year's Gold Prize story, "Bitter Dreams" by Ian McHugh, except we're in an alternate Old West instead of the Outback. Nice fantasy with a lot of tension. Would have been very predictable and maybe even boring in less capable hands. Well done. I really liked Jamie Luhn's illustration for "The Candy Store". It's whimsical, but there is an undercurrent of something going on.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
