A Quote by Heywood Broun

I have always held to the theory that too much chalk may be just as bad for a novel as for a knee joint. — © Heywood Broun
I have always held to the theory that too much chalk may be just as bad for a novel as for a knee joint.
The novel may stimulate you to think. It may satisfy your aesthetic sense. It may arouse your moral emotions. But if it does not entertain you it is a bad novel.
For strictly scientific or technological purposes all this is irrelevant. On a pragmatic view, as on a religious view, theory and concepts are held in faith. On the pragmatic view the only thing that matters is that the theory is efficacious, that it 'works' and that the necessary preliminaries and side issues do not cost too much in time and effort. Beyond that, theory and concepts go to constitute a language in which the scientistic matters at issue can be formulated and discussed.
In chess so much depends on opening theory, so the champions before the last century did not know as much as I do and other players do about opening theory. So if you just brought them back from the dead they wouldn't do well. They'd get bad openings.
A good novel cannot be too long or a bad novel too short.
I would like to suggest that our minds are swamped by too much study and by too much matter just as plants are swamped by too much water or lamps by too much oil; that our minds, held fast and encumbered by so many diverse preoccupations, may well lose the means of struggling free, remaining bowed and bent under the load; except that it is quite otherwise: the more our souls are filled, the more they expand; examples drawn from far-off times show, on the contrary, that great soldiers ad statesmen were also great scholars.
The short story, free from the longuers of the novel is also exempt from the novel's conclusiveness--too often forced and false: it may thus more nearly than the novel approach aesthetic and moral truth.
Creationists have long held that evolutionary theory is atheistic; defenders of the theory do the theory no favor when they agree.
In general, I think every novel is a political novel, in that every novel is an argument about how the world works, who has power, who has a voice, what we should care about. But political novels can be boringly polemical if they end up being too black and white, too one dimensional, like war is bad, killing people is wrong.
While it may be tempting to bask fully in the glory of success, remember: When a CEO takes too much credit for the good, they will receive far too much criticism for the bad.
It's very bad to write a novel by act of will. I can do a book of nonfiction work that way - just sign the contract and do the book because, provided the topic has some meaning for me, I know I can do it. But a novel is different. A novel is more like falling in love. You don't say, 'I'm going to fall in love next Tuesday, I'm going to begin my novel.' The novel has to come to you. It has to feel just like love.
When a bad experience happens, you just chalk it up to the great fact that you just got five more jokes in the show.
We have had too much of the Clintons, too much of the establishment, too much of Bushes. We have had too much of the old names and the old theories. It`s time for a new theory.
It is clear that a novel cannot be too bad to be worth publishing. . . . It certainly is possible for a novel to be too good to be worth publishing.
Fiftey years isn't too bad. With luck you might see it happen when your a sweet,old granny,dandling big fat babies on your knee. Actully"-he held up a hand,interrupting Kitty's cry of protest-"no,that's wrong. My projection is incorrect." "Good." "You'll never be a sweet old granny. Let's say,'sad,lonely old biddy' instead.
Manipulating situations is one thing, but lying is another. My theory (especially with girls) is that if you don't lie, you can't be held responsible for anything bad that goes down.
I'm just online too much. I drink too much. A lot of bad things.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!