This is an extract from an interview I did with Julian Barnes back in 2008. Barnes has received several awards and honours for his writing, including the 2011 Man Booker Prize for The Sense of an Ending. Three additional novels were shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize (Flaubert's Parrot 1984, England, England 1998, and Arthur & George 2005)

Tell me a bit about yourself.

Six foot two, eyes of blue – will that do? Faulkner said a writer's obituary should consist of the line: 'He wrote books, then he died.' Not a bad anonymity to aim at, but nowadays impossible.

Out of the books you have written, which has been your favourite and why?

It varies. The first because it was the first, the second because it proved I wasn't a one-book author, the third because it was the first to be translated, and so on. If someone mentions a book of mine and says they really didn't like it (not that this happens very often), I instantly think it's the best of all. Writers are a contrary breed.

What does the novel do in today’s culture and do you think it has changed from Renard's day?

It does what it always does: it tells a story which tells the truth. Forms change, social reality changes, but the point and meaning of narrative have changed very little - as has the human animal.

What advice would you give new writers?

Don't do it unless you really want to; don't do it expecting to earn a living from it; don't do it expecting praise, or to solve the problems of your life; don't do it in the belief that you live in a country which is broadly welcoming to culture; don't do it unless you love language and narrative and form. And don't listen too much to advice-giving writers clutching their bus passes. Find your own way.

What do you think about the state of the publishing industry today and has it changed since you started?

It's changed enormously. I spent seven or eight years writing my first novel, hesitantly delivered the manuscript, got £750 (I think) for it, did a single interview to publicise it, watched the book just about scramble into paperback, savoured the moment and the whole process, loved 'being a writer', but still never imagined I would make a living from writing books. Publishers didn't expect to make money from a 'literary novelist', as they were quaintly called, for three, four, five books - a literary career was, characteristically, something that was slowly built. Nowadays a novel may be bought from a first-time writer on the basis of a synopsis, 50 pages, a c.v. and a glamorous photo - and lots of money may be paid. And then the marketing of the book kicks in, and if the book takes off, the young star is suddenly in a world of photographers and multi-city tours. The commercial pressures are much, much greater – the publisher wants their money back, the pressure on a young writer to write that 'break-through' book is more severe. I'm not against young writers making money - on the contrary. But I am in favour of young writers writing the best books they are capable of. And being protected against disappointment. Though maybe disappointment will make them better writers, who knows?