SHORT STORY...wrapped in an enigma

According to Gilbert K. Chesterton who is a journalist, novelist and short-story writer himself, "there is no such thing on earth as an uninteresting subject; the only thing that can exist is an uninterested person". The same is true when it comes to short stories or any literary works, there is no uninteresting story; only an uninterested reader. It was evident in the article of William Boyd that it was the interested people, not the uninterested ones, who brought short stories into being. It seemed that interest breeds invention or development, so to speak. It was because of the readers' demands that triggered the writers to unconsciously derive a new form. It was those writers who pioneered the establishment of a literary development and brought it to the exaltation of its genre, giving rise to its distinct types and varied categories.

William Boyd had revealed how the short story undergone arduous evolution and persistent revolution until it was finally been recognized as a new literary form and became a tiny, perfect narrative. This narrative, as what Edgar Allan Poe pointed out, gives a sense of full satisfaction and there is something about their unique frisson escapes or defies analysis. We should understand that the shortness of the short story does not indicate its lack of essence nor infer its deficient content, but this just denotes its length of construct. Though it may be lesser in details compared to other discourses, still, it has the power to entice and convey its underlying message to the readers and we are even "given the rare chance to see in them more “than in real life”.

However, most people cannot appreciate the essence of a story. They merely watched it from afar, admire in dull silence without even attempting to travel into the world of the story and feel the emotions, savor the happiness, share the sorrow and partake in the actions. I admit, I'm one of them. When I first read the "Cathedral" of Raymond Carver, I find it inarticulate maybe because I did not read between the lines. But on the second time around, I did felt its awesome effect, didn't you?

The character of the blind man gave a very relevant appeal to me. Upholding the exact meaning of the word, what if I am in fact blind? I could possibly be as "blind" as the husband or even worse. I have realized how I was blinded by the sparkling glamour of what I see which shattered my view of reality and failed to experience its underlying meaning. The story had shown me how life could be that dramatically ironic. I think, it's time for us draw the line between living for the sake of merely living and living for the sake of life, per se.