Emma Caulfield Quotes

Controversial means somebody who makes people think. And if you are afraid of people who will be against you, you might as well stay home and do nothing.

In all of my work I'm trying to create a dialogue, in which I want to provoke the recipients, stimulate them to use their own imaginations. I don't just say things recipients want to hear, flatter their egos or comfort them by agreeing with them. I have to provoke them, to take them as seriously as I take myself.

Usually if nobody hates a piece, nobody loves it, either; and a magazine which sets itself the goal of provoking thought is not doing its job if everybody agrees with what it does.

If your library is not 'unsafe', it probably isn't doing its job.

Every real thought on every real subject knocks the wind out of somebody or other.

I like the idea that I'm making things that people might think and argue about.

I think good books have to make a few people angry.

There's so much to argue about. That was the goal with 'Really Really.' Somebody asked me once, 'How should I feel when I leave?' and I said, 'Hopefully, you're talkative.' I don't really care if you're happy or sad or loved it or hated it or hate me. The goal is that you have something to say, that you have a response.

I don't think I ever intend to provoke outrage, but I don't mind being provocative in content.

I like to challenge the audience. I want people to feel discomfort.

Poking fun at other people's beliefs, while it may seem frivolous and offensive, is a non-negotiable right. It is a principle that underpins free speech, the basis for progress.

I don't feel that an atmosphere of debate and total disagreement and argument is such a bad thing. It makes for a vital and alive field.

And as a writer, one of the things that I've always been interested in doing is actually invading your comfort space. Because that's what we're supposed to do. Get under your skin, and make you react.

I've learned that I have to be happy with creating discussion and debate and that I shouldn't be trying to write a book that appeals to the consensus.

I feel like great TED Talks are ones that are a little bit subject to interpretation, that do provoke further conversation - and potentially controversy.

I want to create situations that give people something to think about.

A powerful idea communicates some of its strength to him who challenges it.

I am not afraid that the book will be controversial, I'm afraid it will not be controversial.

I don't just want to upset people and shock people by saying something really outrageous.

Editorial cartoons should be smart and substantive, provocative and informative. They should stir passions and deep emotions. Editorial cartoons should be the catalyst for thought, and frankly speaking, if you can make politicians think, that is an accomplishment itself.

Some of my books sort of have a provocative take. Sometimes you find interesting things about characters that show they weren't necessarily the way people usually see them. It can make for lively conversations, but that's great. Spark a little controversy, get people to think about it. That's what it's all about.

My challenge as a satirical artist is how to present ideas to people to enable them to question and reexamine their beliefs. My hope is, that my work provokes people to look at things in a new way.

I'm about challenging people. Like, properly challenging them and their assumptions.

Writers should provoke disagreement.

The culture is just so coarse that you have to take it to that level and people will be like, 'Whoa!' And then you can make people think about stuff. It's kind of like shock therapy.