If you're a writer of literary fiction and all you're bringing to the party is a poetic turn of phrase or a deep thought, that's not enough. But it does mean that even a work of smart, thoughtful fiction should strive to engage and entertain.

That doesn't mean pandering to the lowest common denominator. Why do so many people talk about the number of times they've lost interest in a book after a couple of chapters, or only 'toughed it out' to the end out of a sense of obligation? I'd say it's because too many writers have forgotten that the writer's job isn't merely to express himself, it's to reach a reader. To live, fiction must be read, and to be read it must be enjoyed. Only in Rococo - elegant yet in bad taste, extravagant yet defiant and lawless - can I discover the meaning of life. Rococo, therefore, embodies the spirit of punk rock and anarchism more than any philosophy. Other people's opinions and labor do not figure into your assessment choosing things with your own personal sense of 'I like this, I don't like that' is the ultimate individualism that sustains the very foundation of Rococo. And even if something is made just for laughs, if you find it pleasing, it has value. No matter how much deep thought, hard work, and agonizing effort went into coaxing out some insight, if that insight is boring, or not beautiful, it doesn't matter. Prizing elegance, sweet emotions, and fantasy more than morals and truth wallowing in fleeting romance rather than trying to give meaning to life, when who knows what's going to happen to you anyway ignoring virtue and conventions to cherish only the pleasures you are definitely experiencing now: this is the Cocoro of Rococo.

Anne rice castrati