I've just published a hub with a collection of microstories, and it got me thinking...what makes a good microstory? I'm interested to hear from hubbers who have written microstories or enjoy reading them.
I like both suggestions here and agree with them. Another thing I try to do in my "vignettes," which I believe I use the same way you use the term "microstory" after reading your hub, is to leave a striking image.
In other words, I paint a picture and, like Wixor said, allow the reader to fill in the blanks.
Since words are a commodity in short pieces, I also concentrate on diction and sentence length. I save the short sentence(s) for my most provocative image or powerfully emotive/symbolic language.
I try to use as many elements of tone/diction/syntax/imagery/and symbolism in conjunction with one another as I can to strengthen/reinforce what is essential.
I like the different ideas being batted around here. .. my short stories/vignettes/microstories are good if they are inventive...and they're great if they are bursting out at the seams - dynamic. It seams in some ways the shorter the story, as long as it retains some sense of cohesion, the more potent the anecdote. Too short is too short but I enjoy these "stabs" at creativity.
Here's an idea to show a different way this can work than Wixor's excellent example, I purposefully avoid (as much as possible) all the things Wixor listed as important for this to work: plot, dialog, interaction, or ending with a twist:
The head dwarfs the living trees of the forest that surround it, and upon it's blackened ancient brow the word devil has been carved backwards.
The question driving this sentence isn't what must be included to make something work, but rather, the question is how to think about the traditional rules of what to include so as to make them tools for your muse, not limitations. Microstories/Vignettes are a great place to explore this type of thing as well.