ellauri051.html on line 1072: 482 That mystic baffling wonder alone completes all. 482 Tuo mystinen hämmentävä ihme yksin tekee kaiken.
ellauri073.html on line 275: Quickly on your attacks on Wallace's writing style, I will mention that -- contrary to your rather baffling notions -- people did enjoy Infinite Jest and other works of his. They will continue to do so for decades. Listen Fartey: his work will live on. People recognize great writing wherever it materializes. Forget your distaste of footnotes, or your struggle in understanding the themes and ideals his work encompasses. His audience is clearly beyond you, so try to see that not everyone feels the same as you. You don't have to like his writing, but when you detract from it it makes it even more apparent that you are the lesser man. Your comments on Foster's writing ability led me to some of your other articles, and to be completely honest, it wasn't all bad. I genuinely enjoyed your "Fucking vs. Making Love" poetry bit, although it did seem like a cheap knockoff of Black Coffee Blues. Regardless, I can still acknowledge that the piece had its moments. However (and this is where I want you to pay attention you tub of lard), the piece can also be slammed in several areas. This is highly important, as we can see the parallels between this aspect of "Fucking vs. Making Love" and anything David Foster Wallace wrote. When it comes down to it, your writing can be criticized stylistically and formatically just like his can; the only difference is that there are few that actually give a shit about your writing, whereas Wallace's work is meaningful to the point where people have legitimate incentive to think critically about it. So defile it with your petty blog posts all you want, but at the end of the day you're the one who's only making yourself look bad, and as a heavily obese man based in Europe you are surely having few problems achieving this in the status quo, since Europeans are notably fatist.
ellauri097.html on line 296: He became a literary icon, but White knew that people rarely actually read his work. He professed not to care what people thought, but he would sometimes check for copies of his novels in local libraries. He would search for dog-ears and stains, to gauge how far in the book they had read. Most people, he deduced, never finished. The Australian reading public never quite warmed to White, and nothing much has changed. My grandmother “couldn’t stand him.” I have seen my mother take up one of his novels—The Solid Mandala—and after a few moments quite literally toss it aside. White’s books are metaphysical, lyrical, high modernist, full of baroque descriptions of landscapes, and unsparing in his examination of the people who live in them. For a country besotted with kitchen-sink realism and plain-speaking larrikins, Patrick White was baffling.
ellauri147.html on line 251: Sarah Moroz, of Vulture.com, opined "the most egregious oversight ... is Emily herself, who shows zero personal growth over a ten-episode arc. ... Emily’s vapidity is baffling to anyone who has moved from their native country."
ellauri147.html on line 253: Sonia Rao, of Washington Post compares Emily to the heroines of the Amy Sherman-The show received two nominations at the Golden Globe Awards, but prior to the ceremony it was reported that 30 members of the voting body had been flown to Paris, where they spent two nights at The Peninsula Paris and were treated to a private lunch at the Musée des Arts Forains, with the bill reportedly paid by the show´s developer, Paramount Network. This led some critics to question the impartiality of the voting body, as Emily in Paris is considered to have been a critical flop, and even its nomination was a surprise. In contrast, critically-acclaimed shows, notably I May Destroy You, were not nominated. Midge Maisel, her actions can be quite rash, but she still wins over her fictional acquaintances while utterly baffling viewers."
5