David Means Quotes

Sometimes, a writer 'character' is just a projection of a person who is writing the story, but not necessarily 'me.'

I loved the idea of dramatic art of storytelling as a way to make sense of things. It's really what I love and what I care about.

I think all writing is necessarily autobiographical to a greater or lesser extent, and the less it tries to be confessional, the more likely it is that you're somehow sneaking the things you need to say in there.

Every script I've written and every series I've produced have expressed the things I most deeply believe.

All writing is an act of self-exploration. Even a grocery list says something about you; how much more does a novel say?

I think the only way you can become a writer is through honing your voice, creating your own voice.

You can sometimes get your own feelings across more strongly if you pretend that you're singing it from someone else's angle. But it's always from me. It's just a new way of framing it.

I just knew there were stories I wanted to tell.

I never sit down to write anything personal unless I know the subject is going to go beyond my own experience and address something larger and more universal.

I'm only interested in fiction that in some way or other voices the very imagination which is conceiving it.

You can't deduce the personality of the potter from the pots. It's a thingy you've made and offered to somebody else for their use, and, believe me, a novel is like that. It's a made thing and ought not to contain a direct self-expression of the writer.

I write what I write.

Isn't that what writing is about? The constant attempt to understand the world?

I couldn't have known 'Crank' was going to be published, let alone become a big hit. That book was very personal for me: I had to tell the story for myself.

You don't write a book to show off.

My writing is a very authentic journey of discovery. I'm going out there to learn who I am. My readers, consequently, take the same journey as my protagonist.

In the past I have declined to comment on my own work: because, it seems to me, a poem is what it is; because a poem is itself a definition, and to try to redefine it is to be apt to falsify it; and because the author is the person least able to consider his work objectively.

Writing is much more satisfying on a certain level than acting ever was. Because you're not interpreting someone else's original idea, you can come up with your own.

But I love to entertain. My vocation is to accrue all these experiences, to write about them, to get them out of my system, to not get sick, and then to share them publicly.

I don't write for a particular audience. I work as an artist, and I think the audience of one, which is the self, and I have to satisfy myself as an artist. So I always say that I write for the same people that Picasso painted for. I think he painted for himself.

I work as an artist, and I think the audience of one, which is the self, and I have to satisfy myself as an artist. So I always say that I write for the same people that Picasso painted for. I think he painted for himself.

You are the plays you write. How on earth could you write them otherwise? They're projections of your own predilections.

I think other people's interpretations of what I've written are a lot better than what I have, because I don't understand a lot of what I write.

I wanted to be as invisible as possible as an artist. I wanted to differentiate between myself and who I'm writing about.

I read a quote to the effect that we are always writing about ourselves no matter what we're doing. That may be so.