Mitch Albom Quotes

The purpose of a writer is to be read, and the criticism which would destroy the power of pleasing must be blown aside

Certainly one of the surprising truths of having a book published is realizing that your book is as open to interpretation as an abstract painting. People bring their own beliefs and attitudes to your work, which is thrilling and surprising at the same time.

My relationship with my readers is somewhat theatrical. One of the main things I try to do in my work is delight my readers.

People never read my books for the quality of the documentary value.

I don't consciously try to take my readers on a journey as I don't really think about my readers when I'm writing. I just try to write what I feel passionately about, to tell a story down onto the page.

I like to be read. That's most of what any writer could want.

That's the thing: once it's in their hands, it's not my book anymore, it's theirs. I have no idea what happens when they start to digest it. So when someone writes me to explain how they read it, what it was like, what they enjoyed, there's a thrill. Writers who don't make their email addresses public are missing out on something wonderful.

Nobody's favorite movie is some dark, dysfunctional slasher story. Everybody's favorite song is a sentimental song. So why all of a sudden is it bad to be sentimental in books?

I'm not sure the risks I take are any different from what other writers take, since we all serve at the pleasure of the reader.

What I do find enormously gratifying is the reviews my books get from the American press. They are so on the ball compared to anywhere else. It's so satisfying to get a review that conveys the reader understood precisely what I was trying to get at.

I think that whenever a book is not a challenge, I'm telling the wrong story.

Literature, of course, is not a contest.

Whatever the reviewers feel about 'The Casual Vacancy', it is what I wanted it to be, and you can't say fairer than that as a writer.

My conception of my ideal reader has expanded quite a lot as I've matured: Ultimately when I think of my ideal reader, it's someone who's not sitting down with the intention of automatically arguing with the book: somebody who's going to give me enough slack to tell my story.

I think, above all, the characters in my novels feel universal to the readers.

I'm not going to get into the writer's skills or what he was trying to portray because that's not fair. I can only say what I felt was trying to be portrayed there.

Readers are what it's all about, aren't they? If not, why am I writing?

I love it when my books cause controversy, when people argue violently about the ending.

I write what I'd like to read and just hope that, along the way, others might like to read them, too.

Whenever I write, I'm always thinking of the reader.

Books, I don't know what you see in them. I can understand a person reading them, but I can't for the life of me see why people have to write them.

I don't really read reviews... That's not where my attention goes.

A very wise author once said that a writer writes for himself, and then publishes for money. I write for myself and publish just for the reader.

One thing we never did with 'Bad Company' was talk down to our reader. And we certainly don't do that with the new story, 'Bad Company, First Casualties.'

But I care about the reader, and I'm trying to keep the reader's attention for as long as I can.