John M. Ford Quotes

In the case of good books, the point is not to see how many of them you can get through, but how many can get through to you.

I hate even the idea of a synopsis. When stories are really working, when you're providing subtextual exploration and things that are deeply layered, you're obligated to not say things out loud.

A text may be superbly written, exquisitely subtle, deeply meaningful, but still seem like a luxury extra, something we add to the already well-stocked store of our reading experience.

I'm not over-enamored of complicated books, and wonder if it's more for the author's ego than anything else?

The best novels are those that are important without being like medicine; they have something to say, are expansive and intelligent but never forget to be entertaining and to have character and emotion at their centre.

I like the gray movies. I don't know if audiences always... it makes them work a little harder. And they have to work hard in 'Hoover.'

When someone says to me, 'I love your book - I read it in a day,' I want to tell them to go back and read it again.

I think the films that work the best are the ones that seem to be about one thing but then, under the surface, bubbling away, are lots more important questions that you're not really aware of, and when you leave the cinema, your mind is ablaze with different thoughts!

My favorite reader is one that revisits books and gets something new out of them each time.

An active and creative reader is a re-reader.

What I really mean is that a great book should leave you with many experiences, and slightly exhausted at the end. You live several lives while reading it.

'The State Within' demands a certain intelligence from its audience. It doesn't just wash over you - it asks for commitment. And that's a really good thing.

Usually if I find a film that's challenging, that I'm intrigued by, I want to watch it again knowing what the ending is. I found that with something like 'The Godfather Part II.' I think it took me three watches to fully experience it in the way it was intended.

Every time you revisit a book, you get something else out of it.

There are plenty of movies that you need to chew on a bit. Movies that you return to and see something different in the second time around.

I still think reading something like 'Ulysses' takes a tremendous investment of time, but it repays all of it with so much interest.

I just can't read, the way other people can, these tediously elaborated books.

Many a trivial novel has been written about an important subject, and many a profound one about nothing in particular.

That's the kind of work I like to do: challenging work that has a message.

I didn't sleep the night I finished 'Sister Hills.' It was so unsettling. I felt really wild. I didn't have a clue. It's a very loaded subject, and I did not know what I had. I was interested in watching how choices unfold over time. It's a story that's raising questions.

The more layers a story has, the better it is for the audience.

I worry that the superficial way we read during the day is affecting us when we have to read with more in-depth processing.

Writers want to be reread. They want to think that their words don't just flash by but deserve some reflection.

I think, what's the point of writing a book that you would get in one sitting?

The best kind of television should mess with your head.