On Writing a Short Story with Anton Chekhov

On writing and money (part two). On blessings and miles and miracles.

On Writing a Short Story with Anton Chekhov

Anton Chekhov

Two summers back, I read Reading Like a Writer by Francine Prose and despite the overall tone of the writing, I found it useful in my writing — and reading — life. The book reinforced the importance of editing and came with a reading list, which I’ve been slowly but surely making my way through. To that end, I finally finished a collection of short stories by Anton Chekhov.

Prose was basically obsessed with Chekhov and referenced him constantly. She said, “It’s a good idea to have a designated section of your bookshelf (perhaps the one nearest your desk) for books by writers who have obviously worked on their sentences, revising and polishing them into gems that continue to dazzle us” (Prose 47). And Chekhov must be one of those writers because he’s still considered a major influence by many writers, including Virginia Woolf and Raymond Carver, who actually called Chekhov the “greatest short story writer who ever lived.”

So if I’m being completely honest, it was a STRUGGLE for me to get through the collection — 18 months of struggle, to be exact. In my humble opinion, some of his stories were overwritten with meandering plots. I’m not alone in such criticism; Ernest Hemingway and Vladimir Nabokov both were unimpressed with Chekhov.

However, Chekhov is considered the master of the short story, so I read the collection to possibly improve my own writing in the genre. I struggled to maintain interest, but that could simply be because my life feels very removed from Russia in the 1880s. There were undoubtedly beautiful lines and I did thoroughly enjoy a few selections, which I’ll list at the end of this post.

So What Did I Learn From Chekhov?

According to the introduction to the collection, written by Richard Pevear, Chekhov had six principles for a good short story:

Absence of lengthy verbiage of a political-social-economic nature
Though it’s dangerous to deal in absolutes, I do feel it’s safe to say no reader wants a lecture. We’re living in some of the most divisive times in recent memory, so it’s better to tap into what’s common: love, loss, jealousy, grief, joy, etc. Plots can be as fantastical or as mundane as the author wants as long they’re grounded in a very real emotional experience. Total objectivity
Objectivity is defined as: “the quality or character of being objective : lack of favoritism toward one side or another : freedom from bias.” I think the most important part of that definition is the last part: freedom from bias. Again, readers don’t want to be lectured. They are looking for an experience so there needs to be space for the reader to bring their subjectivity to the story.Truthful descriptions of persons and objects
And that aforementioned objectivity can only be successfully achieved if the writing is honest.Extreme brevity
Though I feel like the collection contained MANY examples of Chekhov disregarding this principle, it’s important for a writer to be skilled in compression. There’s a delicate line between getting lost in the prose because it’s stunning and getting lost in the prose because there’s just too much. It’s important to remember that what is not written is just as important as what is.Audacity and originality — flee the stereotype!
This, for me, is the most challenging of Chekhov’s six principles. Trying to become a successful, established writer in 2024 after centuries of beautifully crafted novels and stories is a tall order in and of itself without the added pressure of coming up with something *new*. Compassion
This isn’t only true for writing; everything should be done with compassion.

Did I really learn anything, though? In two weeks, I’ll post a short story and you can let me know how I did