I say that glorious prose is a fine and laudable thing, but without an enthralling story, it's just so much verbal tapioca. Simply put, the best books have both, and the best writers disparage neither.
My experience is that prose usually equals duty - last minute, overdue-deadline stuff or a panic lecture to be written.
I started writing prose before I started writing television. Then 'Breaking Bad' came around, and to me, writing 'Breaking Bad' is like writing a novel each season. So it's been very creatively satisfying writing for the show.
They've got him - credible witnesses, documents, heaven knows what else. In all my years as a prosecutor I have never seen such an open-and-shut case.
A risk for a poet-novelist is imbalance: The poems can flatten into prose or lose their intensity of focus; the novels can stall amid lofty writing or literary preciousness and ignore the engine of plot and character.
We have a prosecutor related to three victims, a judge related to a brother who was an interested person. I don't think I've ever seen this happen before.
I think the work of the special prosecutor losses some significance when most of the cases are cases that have links to organized crime and drug trafficking.
It is a sad, sad situation to be in this courtroom in this country hearing a prosecutor saying to a jury that one of the things he relies upon is that Mr. Thomas thought about something.
I can manage a prose format as long as I keep closer to Laurence Sterne than to Henry James.
The special prosecutor has done very little in terms of developing a strategy of how to address (impunity).