It's too bad for us 'literary' enthusiasts, but it's the truth nevertheless - pictures tell any story more effectively than words.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
As writers, we do our best to conjure a world so vivid that the reader can practically walk through it - but we're still only using words and relying on readers to do a lot of work of imagining. Providing pictures as well as words offers a whole new dimension to the experience of consuming a story.
Words have great cumulative power, but in the 21st century, a single image is much stronger. An image suggests the unvarnished truth. That is its power and its fiction.
Literature is the stringing together of pictures in words.
I'm not as good a writer as I'd like to be; therefore, I like to use images to tell stories.
If anybody reads a story in a magazine or book, different pictures compete in their minds.
The picture alone, without the written word, leaves half the story untold.
The vast majority of English folk cannot and will not consider a picture as a picture, apart from any story which it may be supposed to tell.
As a visual storyteller, a lot is learning what to include so you're not being redundant between images and text.
There is no more reason why the features belonging to a picture should be distorted for the purpose of such imaginative suggestion than that the poet's metaphors should spoil his words for the ordinary uses of man.
A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth.
No opposing quotes found.