'If you encounter a great book without chapters, I can't believe you
won't read it just because it doesn't meet your preconceived notions
of a book.'
A good point.
But consideration for the needs of a reader is nonetheless
appreciated. I remember reading a book by Samuel Beckett that not only
didn't have chapters, it had no paragraph breaks. Or plot or
distinguishable characters for that matter. I read it. I read it not
so I could say I'd read it. I read it because I enjoyed Beckett's
'Malone Dies'. Am I allowed to say that -- aside from it's success as an experiment -- it was an outright failure in storytelling? Am I allowed to point at the emperor and say he has no chapter breaks?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03 Jul 2008 EDT