I've just always been a reader. My grandmother just expressed the importance of literacy, if I said that correctly. She just always expressed the importance of being able to write and being able to read.
One of the things I love most about second person is that it reminds the reader that they are reading a text. It doesn't allow them to drift into the story and not notice that they are reading a book - a book that has an author.
What I do believe is that there is always a relationship between writing and reading, a constant interplay between the writer on the one hand and the reader on the other
There is all this stuff about how sensitive poets are and how in touch with feelings, etc. they are, but really all we care about is language. At least in the initial stages of the process of writing the poem, though later other things start to come in, and a really good poem usually needs something more than just an interest in the material of language to mean anything to a reader.
If the reader prefers, this book may be regarded as fiction. But there is always the chance that such a book of fiction may throw some light on what has been written as fact.
It is also one of the pleasures of oral biography, in that the reader, rather than editor, is jury.
It is only when you open your veins and bleed onto the page a little that you establish contact with your reader.
I don't have a disregard for my reader in humor pieces.
The writer's object is - or should be - to hold the reader's attention.
In writing, the connection between storyteller and audience is just as important. By using some subtle devices, a narrator can reach out to the reader and say, 'We’re in this together. '
Well, there are more writers of blogs right now than there are readers, so that's clearly a vanity phenomenon.
I am a slow reader. I always loved words, which is a strange thing given that I couldn't actually read them
Authors have established it as a kind of rule, that a man ought to be dull sometimes; as the most severe reader makes allowances for many rests and nodding-places in a voluminous writer.
As I see it, a successful story of any kind should be almost like hypnosis: You fascinate the reader with your first sentence, draw them in further with your second sentence and have them in a mild trance by the third. Then, being careful not to wake them, you carry them away up the back alley of your narrative and when they are hopelessly lost within the story, having surrendered themselves to it, you do them terrible violence with a softball bag and then lead them whimpering to the exit on the last page. Believe me, they'll thank you for it.
A translator is essentially a reader and we all read differently, except that a translator's reading remains in unchanging print
I have a lot of respect for readers because I'm a reader. That's how I got into writing.
As a reader, I tend not to get too much from tales of unrelenting grimness.
The kids I talk to are readers, and the craziest, the most dedicated readers you will ever see.
There is a certain category of fool-the overeducated, the academic, the journalist, the newspaper reader, the mechanistic scientist, the pseudo-empiricist, those endowed with what I call epistemic arrogance, this wonderful ability to discount what they did not see, the unobserved.
The prevailing attitude of the speakers was one of heavy disagreement with a number of things which the reader had not said.