A writer is supposed to have anonymity.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Anonymous sources are a practice of American journalism in the 20th and 21st century, a relatively recent practice. The literary tradition of anonymity goes back to the Bible.
A writer never reads his work. For him, it is the unreadable, a secret, and he cannot remain face to face with it. A secret, because he is separated from it.
Preserving that privacy between a writer and the work is important. You have to shut out all those voices that have reacted to your work.
You lose your anonymity just like a helium balloon with a string. Therefore people are going to have their own opinion and they're going to write in whatever clever manner they desire.
Anonymity is a universal convention of the blogosphere, and the wicked expedience is that you can speak without consequences.
A writer who isn't writing is asking for trouble.
Every writer, to some extent, writes about himself.
Sure, some journalists use anonymous sources just because they're lazy and I think editors ought to insist on more precise identification even if they remain anonymous.
A writer's job is to tell the truth.
I think with every writer there are two people there.
No opposing quotes found.