Day in the Life of an Idiot

I'm quite definitely fine with themed anthologies - I own quite a few (and once Many Bloody Returns is available in paperback, I'll have one more than whatever number I'll have before it comes out - when you live in a household that buys in excess of 300 books a year, and you're not rich, you have to economise somewhere).

I also enjoy anthoglogies that aren't so strongly themed, although when you come down to it, there is some kind of connection in all anthologies, it's just not necessarily one that's obviously imposing a framework of interpretation on the reader - even a "Year's Best" anthology has the unacknowledged context of being written in a similar time, so the reader can suppose a common context of historical events for the writers.

Even though I do have a preference for themed anthologies, what really makes or breaks an anthology, when you come right down to it, is the skill and judgement of the editor(s). A really great editor will ensure that there is a kind of flow, a sense of congruence, even if the authors, sujbect matters, themes and styles of the writers are very diverse and there is no apparent theme. A really great editor generally is able to put together a collection of stories in which the reader to whom the anthology is marketed is not going to find that there's really only one or two stories that really speak to her in the anthology, but rather, that there are likely only one or two that don't.

Not too long ago I wrote a little post about anthologies in my book journal. The essence of my observations about my relationship with short stories would be that while I sometimes read so many novels that I forget about the existence of short stories, there are very special delights to be found in the short form, and I need to remember not to deny myself those pleasures, becasue they are worth the having.