At its best, an analysis of this kind would be expected to offer more insight into a writer's stories than can be gained from reading the stories themselves. Such an analysis might explore the stories' origins, underlying themes, and writing style; it could consider the use of literary devices and narrative technique; it might reveal the events and experiences behind any stories with autobiographical elements; it might trace development of the writer's career and corresponding growth in maturity of the writings; it would surely view the stories in the context of their time and the decades afterwards; and it could consider the lasting influence of the writer and his place the literary pantheon.

As someone who loves Somerset Maugham's short stories, and considers him among the foremost writers of the genre, I found Stanley Archer's analysis a disappointment. It is far more descriptive than analytical, since most of the text is given over to repetition of the plots of the various stories themselves. I found his analysis to be superficial, and sometimes misinformed, and many of his observations to be obvious, trivial, and lacking in insight. Indeed, they read like an undergraduate term paper in an English course.

This book also includes four brief (previously published) essays that critique Maugham's stories; their authors are Graham Greene, Angus Wilson, H.E. Bates, and Archie K. Loss. At least three of these individuals hold Mr. Maugham's writing in low regard, and one can see why Mr. Archer chose them. In Archer's assessment, Mr. Maugham cannot be viewed as a writer of the first rank because he cannot be said to have altered the form of the short story. As H.E. Bates puts it, "neither Conrad nor Maugham, for all their popularity and excellence, contributed any lasting momentum to the short story's progress." In this view, it is simply not enough for a writer of short stories to have brought immense enjoyment to generations of readers, nor to have provided readers with an appreciation of far flung places around the world, or even to have given them insight into the human condition. No -- the Short Story is A Project that must be Advanced, it must be led to Progress, whatever that is... presumably to provide sufficient material to keep literary critics in business doing what they do.

Ironically, the best parts of this book are the excerpts of Maugham's own writing -- Maugham's Preface to a volume of his collected short stories East and West, and two brief essays that he wrote for a collection of other author's stories (The Traveler's Library.). However, Maugham's writings on the nature of the short story genre are abundant, and easily obtained elsewhere.

Overall, Archer's "study" is dispensible. Time would better be spent rereading Maugham's stories themselves, for therein lies the treasure to be gained. ( )