“We’re sorry you couldn’t have been down there with us, Bill. You would have enjoyed it.”
“Yeah, we kind of felt bad leaving you here.”
Bill laughed. “It’s okay, guys. We all do what we have to do. We get the job done. Whatever it is. Whatever it is. We do what we’ve got to do, and we don’t let our teammates down.”
Dave and Wally stared at him for a moment.
“Come on,” said Bill, his smile even warmer. “Let’s take this tin can home.”
INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
Strictly speaking, “Interdepartmental Memorandum” is not a story at all. There are no characters to speak of and no character development. There is no real plot; all the action has already taken place before the tale begins.
In length, this is what the publishing industry terms a short-short. Short-short stories are almost always under two thousand words, often under fifteen hundred. They are like a boxer’s left jab, intended to jar you, snap your head back. They are not knockout punches.
Often the short-short story depends on a “twist” at its very end, a surprise that often comes on the very last line. The entire story is written precisely to hit you with that final shock ending.
Which brings me to O. Henry. Of all the pernicious influences that afflict young writers, O. Henry has caused the most damage. The man’s stories should be banned from school classes altogether. Don’t get me wrong: William Sydney Porter was a damned good writer; his short stories will be read for many generations to come. But because so many of his stories are memorable for their ironic surprise endings, young writers often fall into the trap of trying to write their first stories with surprise endings.
The trouble is, most young writers don’t have the experience or observational talents that O. Henry had. The youngsters’ surprises almost always fall flat. They are predictable or silly or both. Take some heartfelt advice: If you are just starting to write, avoid the surprise ending. Make your stories flow to a logical ending, a conclusion that is in keeping with your characters and the conflicts they encounter. Remember, the editor you send your story to has probably read a thousand times more fiction than you have. It will be almost impossible to surprise a veteran editor.
“Interdepartmental Memorandum’’ was not written to surprise anyone. It is merely a fictionalized picture of a social trend that I find disturbing. As I have pointed out earlier, science fiction is an ideal vehicle for examining a social trend by stretching it far beyond its present dimensions. I kept the story to a short-short length precisely because I did not feel that an extrapolation of this kind would stand a longer treatment.
Left jab. Or maybe the prick of a needle. That’s what a short-short story is.
To: All Cabinet Secretaries and Administrators of Independent Agencies
From: M. DeLay, secretary to the President
Subject: Minutes of Cabinet meeting, 24 December 2013
1. There was only one item on the agenda for the cabinet to consider: the President’s decision to ask Congress for a Declaration of War against Mexico, citing Mexico’s conquest of Central America and seizure of the Panama Canal, as well as the Gonzalez government’s massing of troops along the Rio Grande River border with Texas.
2. In accordance with the Cabinet Act of 2012, the President was required to ask for a vote on his motion to ask for a declaration of war.
3. The Departments and Independent Agencies voted on the motion as follows:
Department of State: Opposed. Declaring war on Mexico would be a de facto recognition of the Gonzalez government, which government we have in fact refused to recognize since it came to power in an unauthorized coup d’etat.
Department of the Treasury: Opposed. A war with Mexico would force us into deficit financing and thereby violate the Balanced-Budget Act of 1999.
Department of Defense: Opposed. The Joint Chiefs have requested three more years for planning and training before they feel confident in launching a successful war against Mexico.
Department of Justice: Opposed. The Attorney General pointed out that since the war would undoubtedly be popular with the people of the U.S. (at least at the outset) the war would have an adverse effect on national gun-control efforts.
Department of the Interior: In favor. The Secretary of the Interior made an impassioned speech to his fellow Cabinet members about the danger Mexico presents to his home state of Texas.
Department of Agriculture: Opposed. Troops returning from Mexico and/or Central America could introduce many foreign pests to the U.S. (i.e., nonhuman pests such as insects, plant seeds and spores, various parasites, disease microbes, etc.).
Department of Commerce: Opposed. War with Mexico would adversely affect trade with all of Latin America, as well as tourism.
Department of Labor: Opposed. If the Army finds it necessary to call up the Reserves and/or the National Guard, this will result in labor shortages, especially in low-skill and non-skill service areas of the economy such as fast-food outlets and retail bookstores.
Department of Health and Human Services: Opposed. Battle casualties will adversely affect national health statistics. Also, increased need for psychological counseling of troops and their dependents and families will strain existing social-worker systems.
Department of Housing and Urban Development: Abstained, except to ask how and where expected Prisoners of War will be housed.
Department of Transportation: In favor, especially if suggested San Francisco-to-Panama City railroad line can be completed after war’s end.
Department of Energy: Opposed, since no use of nuclear weapons is proposed.
Department of Education: Unsure.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Opposed. Mexico has missiles that could destroy civilian satellites, including the manned space station Freedom.
