"Story"

Michael Blowhard shares his ideas about narrative in this long andwonderful post. I am inclined to agree with him, especially as I start work on two (!) for- lack- of- a - better- word- thrillers. "Narrative" has always been hard for me, at least beyond the level of anecdote, while "writing"-- images, wordplay-- has been easy. Structure is harder, which is why memoirs like Querencia, or travel books like Eagle Dreams, where the "plot" is already there, have been easier for me to write.

But story gets no respect. Michael:

"Before the conversation rockets off in one predictable direction: I'm fond of a lot of fancy nonnarrative (and semi-narrative) fiction, theater, and movies. I was throughly marinated in modernism, I have a grad degree in this point of view, and I have many years' experience behind me as an appreciator of this kind of work. So puh-leeze: no lectures on my closed mind, or on my ignorance, or on how awful it is that I'm trying to be a dictator. Writers can (and will) do as they please. Of course, readers can (and will) read to please themselves too.

"At the same time, I am asserting two things:

"The ability to invent, construct, and tell a galvanizing, moving, suspenseful, or amusing story is much undervalued by the litchat class.[Emphasis mine-- SB] And

(Snip)

"The trimmings artists pile on top of the main fictional course might fascinate and delight. But these are still, for most people and in the long run, trimmings."

Read the whole thing; and by the way, Matt, I stole that phrase from Glenn Reynolds--can't take credit!