Reading is a majority skill but a minority art. Yet nothing can replace the exact, complicated, subtle communion between absent author and entranced, present reader.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The reader has to be creative when he's reading. He has to try to make the thing alive. A good reader has to do a certain amount of work when he is reading.
The relationship between reader and writer is reciprocal in a way. We co-create each other. We are constantly emerging out of the relationship we have with others.
My perfect reader doesn't just read - he or she devours books.
Reading is an activity subsequent to writing: more resigned, more civil, more intellectual.
There is an art of reading, as well as an art of thinking, and an art of writing.
A writer without a reader doesn't exist.
I think that reading is always active. As a writer, you can only go so far; the reader meets you halfway, bringing his or her own experience to bear on everything you've written. What I mean is that it is not only the writer's memory that filters experience, but the reader's as well.
Reading is a free practice. I think the readers are free to begin by the books where they want to. They don't have to be led in their reading.
I'm an avid reader myself, and what any one reader accesses at any one time is very powerful and personal to them. Clearly you can't even begin to touch that. A novel is a singular vision, and then a myriad of readers have their own experience of that.
There isn't any distinction between a reader and a writer - reading is so much a part of it.