Once again, I started replying to a post, and then Netscape decided it didn't feel like playing nice anymore and seized up my system. So here we go with try number two...

>
> Well, now I've read "The Master's Hand," and
>liked it. The grittiness of the setting came
>across very well, and the dialogue was also
>handled well. I think that the story could (and
>possibly should) be lengthened into a novella,

It's funny you should say that, because Sam and I have been having an email conversation about "natural" writing lengths. Most writers have a certain length that they are most comfortable with and that (probably most importantly) most of their ideas comfortably fit into. Sam decided that his natural length was the novel, and I decided that I had two lengths that could be considered my "natural" length-- the "short-short" (usually defined as a short story under 1500 words long) and the novella. The problem is that my short-shorts usually aren't actually stories (see "Symmetries") and I've never actually written a novella. Not intentionally, anyway. The two times I set out to write a novel, what I actually wrote was a long novella. My first novel was barely long enough to fit into the "novel" publishing category (usually defined in "mainstream" fiction as 40,000+ words, but increasingly defined in SF/F fiction as 60,000+ words). It was "Epic" in nature, in the fact that the plot had something to do with a bunch of people saving the world. However, it's scope wasn't very epic, as it took place in only about three different places and was over fairly quickly. My second novel was slightly longer, but even *less* epic. I set out *trying* not to write an "epic" novel, so that part was at least intentional. But because of its narrow focus and lack of that certain epic flair, it almost doesn't feel like a novel to me.

Sam, on the other hand, has written one complete novel and is in the middle of a second. And his one complete novel is longer than *both* of my novels combined. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Sam, but I believe that your novel is about 120,000 words--my two novels together are a little over 110,000.) Also, his novel is the first in a trilogy, so even though the book tells a complete story, he still has *more* to say, and has plans for the other two books in the series.

And that right there is where the difference is. When I set out to write a novel, I actually have about enough material for a good-sized novella. And once I'm through with that, I have a rough time with it, because I didn't *want* to write a novella, I *wanted* to write a novel. I just don't feel like I have enough to say, so I keep things small and tight, and focus on what I *do* have to say. And that's usually just enough to make a novella, but not enough to really call it a novel.

In this case ("The Master's Hand") you might say I set out to write a novella, but found out I only really had enough to say for a short story (although it is on the long end of the short story category.)

>since it raises many questions that remain
>unanswered about the characters and the society
>in which they live. What is the whole licensing
>system for master artists, and why would such a
>system come to be? What are grunts like, and
>which people are made into grunts? Where did Jim
>get his (frustrated) appreciation for making
>music? And of course, what happens next? -- for
>a story titled "The Master's Hand," it seems to
>end abruptly just as said Hand begins to figure
>prominently in the plot.

The problem with a lot of these questions is that I think a lot of them are *better* left unanswered, at least in *this* story. First of all, *I'm* not even sure what the grunts are and how they are made. Obviously they're genetically engineered somehow from human stock, but how? What are the limits of their abilities? Are they completely organic, or are they part machine? They seem to be lacking in many qualities that we would define as "human", and the way they are treated and refered to is distinctly sub-human, but is there perhaps a glimmer of humanity underneath somewhere? These are all questions I don't have answers to, and more importantly, I didn't think *needed* answers for this story. The same goes for the licensing of artists. I *did* think about that one a bit, just to make sure it didn't seem totally absurd, but I don't have much beyond the basics built up in my mind. You see, I decided early on in this story that it sort of tied in with an earlier story I had written (that isn't posted on the page) that really set-up this bleak and dreary world (and that's about all it did, really.) So I used that as my baseline.

But I think that answering a lot of these questions would ruin the story. The problem is, the story isn't really *about* any of these questions. It's not *about* the world or the surroundings at all, really. It's about one man, and his struggles. One of the few criticisms I personally have about this story is that it's not really much of an SF story--it's just the story of a guy in an SF world. That's not really a *bad* thing, unless you're trying to submit to Analog, but it is one thing that bugs me a little bit.

That's not to say that I won't write other stories set in this same world that will answer some of these questions. I've thought about that a lot, and I think that I have quite a lot left to say about this world and its inhabitants. But this story in particular is complete, as far as I'm concerned.