'In the Cut' was not what readers expected of me. Before it was published, I was seen as a women's writer, which meant that I wrote movingly about flowers and children.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It's funny with fiction - once you cut something, it hasn't happened anymore.
It's always the paragraphs I loved most, the ones I tenderly polished and re-read with pride, that my editor will suggest cutting.
If a novelist has created vivid characters, interesting relationships, settings the reader can easily imagine, and intriguing stories, a screenwriter has loads to work with. The challenge comes with deciding what to cut and what to keep.
'The Cut' is going to give someone the opportunity of a lifetime and help that person achieve his or her dreams.
So, I was always frustrated having to write and having to cut things. Why should you have to cut anything?
The novel, for me, was an accident. I really don't consider myself a novelist.
Almost all novels are improved by cutting from the top. On their first pages, authors parade those favourite effects which disgust the impartial reader.
Cut quarrels out of literature, and you will have very little history or drama or fiction or epic poetry left.
I don't really consider myself a novelist, it just came out purely by accident.
For a writer, published works are like fallen flowers, but the expected new work is like a calyx waiting to blossom.
No opposing quotes found.