This post ties in well with some comments we’ve been batting around about the grain of a particular combinatoric form, mentioned briefly
here. Remember, those discussions on how a small a bit gets combined. Can these literary Legos be recombined or just added onto? Can you also talk a little more about 160 Characters?

Thanks for dropping by.

It is interesting that you say you want ‘present the single ficlets as prominently as possible’. This may be an example of your community having a different impression of your project than you. For me, it is the relationships between them, how a narrative is continued that makes it clever. I agree that the Ur-ficlet should be highlighted, and so too the anterior and posterior narratives distinguished. But the Ur-ficlet has status (in my mind) according to how many narrative extensions it inspires, not by its mere presence. So, rather than being about telling a story between 64-1,024 characters (projects like 160 Characters have already trail-blazed this area), ficlets is about how these stories connect. You do call them “Literary Lego”. A single Lego peice is no good on its own. So, if my view is shared by others, perhaps your design should priviledge connections and the radial development of stories, rather than a ficlet?

Thanks for creating a project that is interesting to talk about! :)

Also, I’m interested in how many people are behind this and what their names are so I can pat everyone on the back.

Thanks for the post!