L. M. Montgomery: I feel that its value is great up to a certain point. But when you become conscious of a writer's technique that writer has reached the point of danger. When you find yourself getting more pleasure from the way a writer says a thing than from the thing itself, that writer has committed a grave error and one that lessens greatly the value of his story. Carried too far, technique becomes as annoying as mannerisms.
Frederick Moore: There isn't any authorship without technique. It may be natural, that is, unconscious—but it must be there. The title of a story is part of the technique.
Talbot Mundy: Its importance can hardly be exaggerated, although I have ignored it consistently and without excuse. Technique is as important to the writer as it is to a swordsman or a boxer or a diplomat, but it is rarely to be found in hand-books. It varies limitlessly with the individual.
Certainly the knowledge of how other men achieved particular effects can do no harm.
But to make technique anything more than a means to an end would be fatal.
Kathleen Norris: That technique is merely interpreted personality, and personality is the most fascinating thing in the world.
Anne O'Hagan: I feel that the value of technique is enormous.
Grant Overton: I do not think the value of technique can be exaggerated, but I know of no method of directly acquiring it.
Sir Gilbert Parker: Vastly important, but the story is everything.
Hugh Pendexter: This query is blind (for me).