“Is it not odd that the only truly generous person I ever knew who had money enough to be generous with should be a stockbroker? He writes poetry and pastoral dramas and yet knows how to make money, and does make it, and is still generous.”

Source: Father and Child Reunion (2001), p. 121.

Source: (1776), Book IV, Chapter I, p. 470.

Source: In Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action, (2013), p. 301

From an interview with the "Tennesseean" newspaper reporter Robert K. Oermann in 1991.

Hemingway's famous iceberg theory of writing.
Source: Death in the Afternoon (1932), Ch. 16

Source: Art Worlds (1982), p.x.

(29 November 2001)
Unfit for Mass Consumption (blog entries), 2001
Context: I was thinking, earlier, how there's this stigma attached to "writing for money" and how odd that is, as though writing is akin to sex (another "creative" act?) and writing for money is akin to prostitution in the minds of so many people. Whoring with adjectives, so to speak. Do I give good prose? Look up the definition of "hack." So, there must be the perception that writing, like the priesthood, comes with some higher purpose in tow. Getting paid well somehow sullies the purer cause. I've heard writers dismiss something or another that they've written by explaining, "Oh, yes, I know that sucked, but I only wrote it because they paid me so much money." And then we might even forgive them a piece of crap, because we have a sensible explanation. That wasn't a real orgasm. I was only faking the plot. Dorothy Parker and F. Scott Fitzgerald and William Faulkner in Hollywood.

Source: Flash Boys (2014), p. 55