Poll

Even with my notes, I don't have much memory of Dead as They Come, whereas Michael's Wife comes back. I've voted for Michael's Wife.

"Michael's Wife" - If I had to pick two words to describe this story, I would go with "dull" until it becomes "absurd". There is the potential for something with this awkward visit between her and Michael's parents develops, but it goes nowhere. We also get all these hints to things that might be interesting - her scar, that she was born in Ireland and grew up in the US, that Michael cannot visit for two years - but the story loses interest in all of them and so I did too. It all seemed very pointless until the end when *something* happened, but I had no idea what. I had to google secondary sources to find out that this was supposed to be a revelatory moment, because the story sure doesn't explain itself. The end is absurd for several reasons. First, we are supposed to assume that Tom has magical ESP and can understand that Michael is dead just from the wife's expression. But why isn't she just as easily communicating that she can't have children after all (an issue raised earlier), so no grandchildren? Also, we have to accept that Tom would not be furious that the information that his son is dead was kept from him and it seemed like she was never planning on telling him. Which is itself the final absurdity - we are supposed to believe that Michael dies, so his wife lies to his parents, then visits them, and maybe plans on never telling them? WTF? This is a ridiculous story.

"Dead As They Come" - The first Ian McEwan I read was "On Chesil Beach". I liked how it started, but then began to be less and less impressed with it. So I have not read him since. But this story makes me think he deserves another chance. I loved the way he created a unique and interesting voice for the character right from the start before we know what the story is all about. But then we get this great tale that both works as a simple comic story, but also as a satire on wealth and power. I was even briefly reminded of "The Handmaid's Tale", and how Fred teats his handmaids as property to own and have sex with only to be "betrayed" by his driver. This story was delightful to read start to finish. It makes voting in this battle easy for me.

I hope people can convince me I missed something profound with "Michael's Wife", but I worry that any explanation will involve a lot of "assume this" and "ignore that" to make it the story it could have been rather than the one it was.

Don't know how to copy an image here, but this link contains O'Connor's lovely description of the origin of this true story

https://books.google.com/books?id=cI1...

Oh, now that I've finished reading, I agree with you about the ending, David. I kept scrolling looking for missing pages. I thought she would visit her family and the story would end with the arrival of the devastating letter at the neighbors some months later, just nonchalant happenstance that the Shea's learn of Michael's death.

I love the rhythms of Frank O'Connor's prose. Lulled me right into a vote.

I've read only the first paragraph of Dead As They Come, and if he's describing a mannequin and this is a story about some lonely guy falling in love with an object, I'll be disappointed, and worse, if some Latin twist (dance) brings the mannequin to life.

Okay it is mostly that, but far better than I expected; an egotistical, prideful, self-aggrandizing, misogynistic man who idolizes expensive objects as manifestations of his own value and triumphs but cares naught for people except that they silently and obsequiously service him or his reputation gets both exactly what he wants and his comeuppance. It's funny enough: "I came as she died. That much I can say with pride."

Vote wavering.... voting for DATC, which is against my grain.

Ctb, thanks for the link. The irony here is that was the source I used to read the story, but skipped over the opening because it looked like an editor's introduction. By the time I got to the end of the story I didn't care enough about the introduction to think to read it.

I think that gives a great cautionary tale about authors writing from real life. The bits that he left out of the story or changed make it far less effective or interesting than the real story. The wife's Irish heritage and having grown up in the US are facts of the real case, but not clearly made relevant to the story he wanted to tell. The father who told the story of this really happening could not understand why the wife acted as she did. O'Connor should have taken that as a clue that readers might share that reaction. Leaving it as he did, he made us as confused as the father (assuming the reader guessed that Michael had died, which is not an assumption I make at all).

Ian McEwan probably doesn't belong in this competition. He's primarily a novelist and has few short stories to his name. How did he get here? I am asking that honestly: I don't remember the thought process that led to his being here.

And here he is up against Frank O'Connor who wrote dozens of short stories (hundreds?). He wrote a great book on the short story, called The Lonely Voice: A Study of the Short Story , which is very good. For heaven's sake, until 2016, when the prize went away, the man has a short story prize named after him!

I like each of these stories, and I find them very different. In the McEwan we get, as Ctb so nicely puts it, "an egotistical, prideful, self-aggrandizing, misogynistic man," and McEwan does these men so well. In "My Purple-Scented Novel," a recent story of his published in The New Yorker, McEwan shows that this skill has been with him for nearly forty years. He writes with such ease and it's so easy to see his characters.

O'Connor's story is quite touching and ambiguous. Why does Michael's wife do what she does? How is Michael a presence in this story with his name on it, even though he is absent. And there's something touching in the relationship that grows between these left behind: "Ah, God help you, I never saw a lonelier creature than you were the night you came. But that's how we grow."

I am not actually sure which I like more. So, because I think Frank O'Connor's story is striking and gives more with each re-read, I'll go with it. But I won't feel bad if McEwan's comedy wins the day here.

McEwan started off with two (excellent) collections of stories and established his early reputation thus, just to answer your query, Trevor!

I wonder how many more he has in his pocket. We know of the one from The New Yorker, but since it's been forty years since his last collection I suppose he's gone almost completely away from it. Well, On Chesil Beach isn't much more than a short story (and one I liked, David!), and I haven't liked much since other than "My Purple-Scented Novel." Go back to the story, Ian!

I wish he would, for sure!

Trevor wrote: "I wonder how many more he has in his pocket. We know of the one from The New Yorker, but since it's been forty years since his last collection I suppose he's gone almost completely away from it. We..."

Yes, Chesil Beach should have been short story! I hadn't thought of that as a solution to its major problem. I was really into OCB until the last fourth, or so, when it seemed McEwan lost interest and just appended his draft outlining the plot summary.

Ctb wrote: "I was really into OCB until the last fourth, or so, when it seemed McEwan lost interest and just appended his draft outlining the plot summary."

Hahahaha!!! I think the short story version would have been better as well.

David wrote: "The bits that he left out of the story or changed make it far less effective or interesting than the real story.

I agree. The quote from O'Connor was the story - panoramic, floating, sunny, then nostalgic and warm, suddenly devastating.