When people talk about the death of the novel, they are speaking of the need for the birth of something different.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The death of what's dead is the birth of what's living.
The timing of death, like the ending of a story, gives a changed meaning to what preceded it.
But novels are never about what they are about; that is, there is always deeper, or more general, significance. The author may not be aware of this till she is pretty far along with it.
A writer's definitive death is when no one reads his books anymore. That's the final death.
I always think that good writers should be growing up on the brink of death - it really lets them see mortality very clearly.
Fundamentally, all writing is about the same thing; it's about dying, about the brief flicker of time we have here, and the frustration that it creates.
Death is either an incredible ending to a story or, more often than not if you ask the right questions, it's the beginning of a story.
The only reason for the existence of a novel is that it does attempt to represent life.
Novels give you the opportunity to create a whole world. Because you create people, you make them talk... You decide who they are, whether they live or die. It's the closest thing to feeling like a god that you can come to.
I simply don't understand authors that know everything before they write it; it seems so cold blooded. I think it's lovely when the story takes over and goes somewhere else.
No opposing quotes found.