clear:both" />
ellauri062.html on line 926: chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu stated, "it is important to make one thing clear – the life of one yeshiva boy is worth more than the lives of 1,000 Arabs".
ellauri066.html on line 364: Even without substituting the remaining parameters d and c1, it is clear that Pynchon’s Second Equation resembles – and in fact is – the equation of moments that the Peenemünde physicists and engineers used to calculate and control the angular motion (yaw) of the V-2 rocket.
ellauri066.html on line 446: Rights-of-way lie clear and cold: Vaihteet seisoo valjuna:
ellauri066.html on line 894: Yet Tegnell remained unsatisfied. Tegnell also shirked masks. In April, 2020, he wrote a letter to the European Center for Disease Control urging against a mask recommendation, saying, “The argument for and evidence for an effect of face covering to limit the spread from asymptomatic persons is not clear. . . . The arguments against are at least as convincing.”
ellauri069.html on line 472: The book's pivot, the transition from Book III to Book IV, takes place on August 6, 1945, the day Hiroshima was bombed. The V2 rocket is now the precursor to the nuclear ICBM, and the final sections of the book -- the only parts set in contemporary times -- ask the same question of the contemporary reader, including quite directly on the last page: what do you think, what do you do, in those last moments before everything ends?
ellauri069.html on line 479: Imagine a story that combines Ulysses, Catch-22, The Canterbury tales, Under the Volcano, On the Road and many others. First, there is a huge cast of characters and most times, it is unclear who’s speaking and to whom. A second challenge is getting into the context of the book. The novel demands a vast knowledge of history, geography, music, literature, science, mathematics and occult. Apart from this the book also explicitly deals with profanity, racism, violence, pedophilia, coprophilia and seemingly infinite number of sex scenes. That being said, Pynchon doesn’t throw them arbitrarily and each one of them have a purpose. The main plot itself is set at the end of World War 2 and Europe is in chaos. As new countries and alliances are being formed, so too are new perspectives within the characters. Mental state being broken down, people making poor choices and actions being justified and helps us see how people tend to live destructively. As if there complexities weren’t enough, Pynchon includes a “postmodern” aspect of the book that leaves the first-time reader confused. Pynchon’s voice is seen through this aspect and a sense of paranoia creeps throughout the book and everything is questioned.
ellauri070.html on line 384: "A penny saved is a penny earned" is a quote often attributed to Benjamin Franklin, however, he didn’t coin it. In his 1737 Poor Richard’s Almanac, Franklin delivered the line: “A penny saved is two pence clear.” And later, in the 1758 almanac, he wrote a version closer to the saying we know: "A penny saved is a penny got." He never used the word "earned."
ellauri072.html on line 204: The problems of Dante's treatment of the punishment of homosexuals in Hell and of his more surprising salvation of still other (unnamed) homosexuals in Purgatory have had two recent responses that restore a central fact: cantos 15 and 16 of Inferno and canto 26 of Purgatorio are in fact concerned with this issue. Boswell's pages insisting on the identity of the sexual sin punished in Inf. 15-16 and the lust repented on the seventh terrace {"Dante and the Sodomites," 65-67} are convincing. "Soddoma" is used clearly to identify homosexual activity in Purg. 26 (vv. 40 and 79) and thus makes clear its meaning in Inf. 11.50 and therefore the nature of the sin encountered in Inf. 15 and 16.
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.
ellauri074.html on line 483: MKUltra's use of mescaline on unwitting subjects was a practice that Nazi doctors had begun in the Dachau concentration camp. Kinzer proposes evidence of the continuation of a Nazi agenda, citing the CIA's secret recruitment of Nazi torturers and vivisectionists to continue the experimentation on thousands of subjects, and Nazis brought to Fort Detrick, Maryland, to instruct CIA officers on the lethal uses of sarin gas. The project began during a period of "paranoia" at the CIA, when the U.S. had lost its nuclear monopoly and fear of communism was at its height.
ellauri078.html on line 134:

clear:both" />

ellauri078.html on line 143: In an early poem, she chastised science for its prying interests. Its system interfered with the observer’s preferences; its study took the life out of living things. In “‘Arcturus’ is his other name” she writes, “I pull a flower from the woods - / A monster with a glass / Computes the stamens in a breath - / And has her in a ‘class!’” At the same time, Dickinson’s study of botany was clearly a source of delight. She encouraged her friend Abiah Root to join her in a school assignment: “Have you made an herbarium yet? I hope you will, if you have not, it would be such a treasure to you.” She herself took that assignment seriously, keeping the herbarium generated by her botany textbook for the rest of her life.
ellauri080.html on line 488: “Behind all logic and its seeming sovereignty of movement, too, there stand valuations or, more clearly, physiological demands for the preservation of a certain type of life.” — Friedrich Nietzsche (INTJ). Nietsche oli näät tenacious visionaries, oriented towards action. Vaikkei se koskaan tehnyt paljon paskaakaan.
ellauri080.html on line 537: Keynes's intellect was the sharpest and clearest that I have ever known. When I argued with him, I felt that I took my life in my hands, and I seldom emerged without feeling something of a fool.
ellauri080.html on line 542: This axis is also apparent in my own videos: you’ll notice there are quite a few of them, partly because I keep on redoing the same topics whenever I feel I’ve hit on a new perspective that I then can’t help but explain as though it were my new ‘doctrine’ because it suddenly seems so much more clear and beautiful and compelling than any previous perspectives, and I just want to get that pure idea out. Literally, after I do a video on a compelling subject, if I did it well, I’ll feel like I’ve emptied myself out, and I’ll very easily forget what it was that I just explained in that video. The idea dulls, I start finding some problems with it, and over time I mull it around with other material and then become bedazzled by the next rich synthesis.
ellauri082.html on line 54: When David Foster Wallace committed suicide in 2008, it was clear he had been profoundly depressed. But the first major biography of the writer, D.T. Max’s Every Love Story Is a Ghost Story, out on August 30th, reveals an even more troubled mind than anyone realized. From the time he was in college, the brilliant author of Infinite Jest was in and out of institutions as he struggled with depression and addictions to alcohol and marijuana. But the book is also full of all kinds of other strange surprises, painting the most complete, and warmest, portrait of Wallace yet.
ellauri082.html on line 103: More than anything the biography is a testament to something even DFW himself would have said: do not build monuments to individuals. His genius is in his work, and in his case his work was both in writing and in acting; the DFW one sees and hears in interviews is DFW as spinner of fiction, not DFW as himself. One need not pretend David Foster Wallace was a god of sincerity and morality and self-awareness; his work clearly shows he was not.
ellauri082.html on line 129: Described as coming from a kind of mold that “grows on other molds,” DMZ is an incredibly powerful and mysterious hallucinogen. It can have many different effects but often seems to transform a person’s ability to communicate. It is also nicknamed “Madame Psychosis,” after Joelle’s radio persona. Michael Pemulis manages to acquire some, but it is stolen before he and Hal can take it. It’s suggested that Hal has been affected by DMZ by the time of the Year of Glad, but it’s unclear how—whether from eating a piece of mold as a child and then withdrawing from marijuana, or having his toothbrush laced with Pemulis’s drugs (possibly by James’s wraith). As a result of this presumed DMZ consumption, Hal is able to feel strong emotions (which was impossible for him before) but unable to communicate.
ellauri082.html on line 159: Accusations that DFW is “talking down to” or “intentionally alienating” with his vocabulary I can understand somewhat–I don’t believe he was actually intending to make people feel stupid, but he’s clearly excessive and self-indulgent on occasion.
ellauri082.html on line 498: The reader who found himself swamped with too much metaphysics in the last chapter will have a still worse time of it in this one, which is exclusively metaphysical. Metaphysics means nothing but an unusually obstinate effort to avoid thinking clearly.
ellauri082.html on line 499: The fundamental conceptions of psychology are practically very clear to us, but theoretically they are very confused, meaning how can we fit in soul and god and all that good old mind numbing religion.
ellauri082.html on line 715:

clear:both" />

ellauri083.html on line 124: It can never be said of the Swedish Academy that they don't know what they like. Between Independent People, The Growth of the Soil, The Good Earth, and probably several others I haven't read yet it seems clear that the path to a Nobel Prize in literature is the one trod by struggling farmers out in the countryside.
ellauri083.html on line 336: For all their profusion, these paled in comparison with Sachs's newest display pieces: The Cabinet, 2014, and The Rockeths, 2017. The former was a folding case fashioned from orange-and-white striped barricades and festooned with hundreds of tools, hung in groups and inscribed with the names of individuals who have "inspired, influenced, or frightened" the artist--from Le Corbusier and Louis Kahn to the members of the Wu-Tang Clan--while the latter was less a cabinet than a kind of portable workbench and shelving unit, similarly jam-packed with the tools of the artist's trade, as well as a collection of model rockets, all again labeled to namecheck various figures of personal importance--scientists, musicians, artists; Apollo, Dionysus, Stringer Bell. The fetishistic frisson the assembled materials (pens, pliers, drill bits, tape measures) clearly provoke in Sachs was made even more explicit in McMasterbation, 2016, one of a trio of scale-model space modules arrayed on plinths. Featuring a copy of the legendarily comprehensive McMaster-Carr hardware catalogue spread open like a porn mag centerfold designed for lonely gearheads--alongside a ready supply of Vaseline and a handy tissue dispenser--it was part cathectic confession of objectophilia and part self-derogating indictment of his own work's tendencies toward sometimes masturbatory excess. Smart and stupid, funny and somehow a bit sad, it was classic Sachs: too much information, in every sense of the phrase.
ellauri089.html on line 96: When Robert A. Heinlein opened his Colorado Springs newspaper on April 5, 1958, he read a full-page ad demanding that the Eisenhower Administration stop testing nuclear weapons. The science fiction author was flabbergasted. He called for the formation of the Patrick Henry League and spent the next several weeks writing and publishing his own polemic that lambasted "Communist-line goals concealed in idealistic-sounding nonsense" and urged Americans not to become "soft-headed".
ellauri089.html on line 98: It started with the famous Henry quotation: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!!". It then went on to admit that there was some risk to nuclear testing (albeit less than the "willfully distorted" claims of the test ban advocates), and risk of nuclear war, but that "The alternative is surrender. We accept the risks." Heinlein was among those who in 1968 signed a pro-Vietnam War ad in Galaxy Science Fiction. Että semmonen libertiini.
ellauri089.html on line 151: Certainly his best-known and most successful books came after the decision to write entirely for an adult audience, with Stranger in a Strange Land in 1961 and The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress in 1966. And in such books as Farnham's Freehold (1964), he clearly felt freer to express the libertinism that had been implicit in all his earlier published work.
ellauri089.html on line 157: He is a great fan of nuclear power. He certainly fails to challenge the reader to think critically about what the future climate might be like. In addition, Heinlein presents specific scientific, technological, sociological, moral or ethical, and humanistic situations which will not only intrigue but challenge the reader’s attitudes—about space travel, illegal alien societies, the over-populated future, the nature of time, and so on.
ellauri089.html on line 200: Whenever they manage to make some stake, an inconveniently timed change into a new alternate reality throws them off their stride (once, the money they earned is left behind in another reality; in another case, the paper money earned in a Mexico which is an empire is worthless in another Mexico which is a republic). These repeated misfortunes, clearly effected by some malevolent entity, make the hero identify with the Biblical Job.
ellauri089.html on line 497: § 45. We must now proceed to consider the principle of Hedonism as an "Intuition", as which it has been clearly recognised by Prof. Sidgwick alone. That it should be thus incapable of proof is not, in itself, any reason for dissatisfaction. …
ellauri089.html on line 517: § 55. and in his first, the appeal to reflective intuition, he fails to put the question clearly (1) in that he does not recognize the principle of organic unities; …
ellauri089.html on line 587: § 86. The question to be discussed in this chapter must be clearly distinguished from the two questions hitherto discussed, namely (1) What is the nature of the proposition: "This is good in itself"? …
ellauri090.html on line 116: Rubião misinterprets as a love offering a box of strawberries Sophia had sent him. At the Palhas’s house in Santa Thereza, he clutches her hand and makes his affection clear to her. Distressed by Rubião’s advances, Sophia suggests to her husband that they end their relationship with Rubião. Having borrowed money from Rubião, however, Palha is reluctant to break with him.
ellauri092.html on line 326: The common thread with all of the people above (and others not listed), is the emphasis on mystical experiences that allegedly begin within as we quiet ourselves and wait upon God. Unfortunately, this is clearly not Scriptural because we are not to focus on our “innerspace” as New Agers do. We are to put our hand to the plow and look forward, not backward. This can only occur as we submit ourselves to Him (Romans 12:1-2). It really doesn’t matter if our emotions catch up with us, nor should they be used to “verify” that we are growing in the Lord. If the heart is deceitfully wicked and cannot be understood (Jeremiah 17:9), what makes us think that once we are saved, our hearts are all of a sudden able to be known?
ellauri093.html on line 207: Another less clear difference between assemblies lies in their approaches to collaborating with other Christians. Many Open Brethren will hold gospel meetings, youth events, or other activities in partnership with non-Brethren Evangelical Christian churches. More conservative Brethren tend to not support activities outside their own meetings.
ellauri094.html on line 219: Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian forces returned in 588/586 BCE and rampaged through Judah, leaving clear archaeological evidence of destruction in many towns and settlements there. Clay ostraca from this period, referred to as the Lachish letters, were discovered during excavations; one, which was probably written to the commander at Lachish from an outlying base, describes how the signal fires from nearby towns were disappearing: "And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah." Archaeological finds from Jerusalem testify that virtually the whole city within the walls was burnt to rubble in 587 BCE and utterly destroyed.
ellauri094.html on line 654: The body of Algernon Charles Swinburne’s poetry is so vast and varied that it is difficult to generalize about it. Swinburne wrote poetry for more than sixty years, and in that time he treated an enormous variety of subjects and employed many poetic forms and meters. He wrote English and Italian sonnets, elegies, odes, lyrics, dramatic monologues, ballads, and romances; and he experimented with the rondeau, the ballade, and the sestina. Much of this poetry is marked by a strong lyricism and a self-conscious, formal use of such rhetorical devices as alliteration, assonance, repetition, personification, and synecdoche. Swinburne’s brilliant self-parody, “Nephilidia,” hardly exaggerates the excessive rhetoric of some of his earlier poems. The early A Song of Italy would have more effectively conveyed its extreme republican sentiments had it been more restrained. As it is, content is too often lost in verbiage, leading a reviewer for The Athenaeum to remark that “hardly any literary bantling has been shrouded in a thicker veil of indefinite phrases.” A favorite technique of Swinburne is to reiterate a poem’s theme in a profusion of changing images until a clear line of development is lost. “The Triumph of Time” is an example. Here the stanzas can be rearranged without loss of effect. This poem does not so much develop as accrete. Clearly a large part of its greatness rests in its music. As much as any other poet, Swinburne needs to be read aloud. The diffuse lyricism of Swinburne is the opposite of the closely knit structures of John Donne and is akin to the poetry of Walt Whitman.
ellauri095.html on line 199: No no, he usually sought the distinctively unifying design, the “returning” or recurrent pattern, the internal “network” of structural relationships which clearly and unmistakably integrates or scapes an object or set of objects and thus reveals the presence of integrating laws throughout nature and a divine unifying force or “stress” in this world.
ellauri095.html on line 455: Their rivalry began with Hopkins’s response to her poem “The Convent Threshold.” Geoffrey Hartman was clearly on the right track when he suggested in the introduction to Hopkins: A Collection of Critical Essays (1966) that “Hopkins seems to develop his lyric structures out of the Pre-Raphaelite dream vision. In his early ‘A Vision of the Mermaids’; and ‘St. Dorothea’; he may be struggling with such poems as Christina Rossetti’s ‘Convent Threshold’; and Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s ‘The Blessed Damozel,’ poems in which the poet stands at a lower level than the vision, or is irrevocably, pathetically distanced.” Such poems were the essence of medievalism in poetry according to William Morris, who felt that Keats’s “La Belle Dame Sans Merci” was the germ from which all Pre-Raphaelite poetry sprang. Standing beyond Keats, however, the primary source was Dante. Christina Rossetti clearly alludes to Beatrice’s appeal to Dante in “The Convent Threshold”:
ellauri095.html on line 483: The sequence of events is clear. On 18 January 1866 Hopkins composed his most ascetic poem, “The Habit of Perfection” (Täydellinen asukokonaisuus). On 23 January he included poetry in the list of things to be given up for Lent. In July he decided to become a Catholic, and he traveled to Birmingham in September to consult the leader of the Oxford converts, John Henry Newman. Newman received him into the Church in October. On 5 May 1868 Hopkins firmly “resolved to be a religious.” Less than a week later, apparently still inspired by Savonarola, he made a bonfire of his poems and gave up poetry almost entirely for seven years. Finally, in the fall of 1868 Hopkins joined a “serged fellowship” like Savonarola’s and like the one he admired in “Eastern Communion”(1865), a commitment foreshadowed by the emphasis on vows of silence and poverty in “The Habit of Perfection.”
ellauri095.html on line 512: The Wreck of the Deutschland became the occasion for Hopkins’s incarnation as a poet in his own right. He broke with the Keatsian wordpainting style with which he began, replacing his initial prolixity, stasis, and lack of construction with a concise, dramatic unity. He rejected his original attraction to Keats’s sensual aestheticism for a clearly moral, indeed a didactic, rhetoric. He saw nature not only as a pleasant spectacle as Keats had; he also confronted its seemingly infinite destructiveness as few before or after him have done. In this shipwreck he perceived the possibility of a theodicy, a vindication of God’s justice which would counter the growing sense of the disappearance of God among the Victorians. For Hopkins, therefore, seeing more clearly than ever before the proselytic possibilities of art, his rector’s suggestion that someone write a poem about the wreck became the theological sanction he needed to begin reconciling his religious and poetic vocations.
ellauri096.html on line 100: It is true that some borderline cases of a qualitative term are not borderline cases for the corresponding comparative. But the reverse holds as well. A tall man who stoops may stand less high than another tall man who is not as lengthy but better postured. Both men are clearly tall. It is unclear that ‘The lengthier man is taller’. Qualitative terms can be applied when a vague quota is satisfied without the need to sort out the details. Only comparative terms are bedeviled by tie-breaking issues.
ellauri096.html on line 682: The associated policy implications were clear: There is no need for any form of government intervention since, ostensibly, government policies aimed at stabilizing the business cycle are welfare-reducing. Since microfoundations are based on the preferences of decision-makers in the model, DSGE models feature a natural benchmark for evaluating the welfare effects of policy changes. The Kydland/Prescott 1982 paper is often considered the starting point of RBC theory and of DSGE modeling in general and its authors were awarded the 2004 Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel.
ellauri096.html on line 808: The term seriation [mise en série] was proposed for use in semiotics by Jean Molino and derived from classical philology. Seriation "invokes the idea that any investigator, in order to assign some plausible meaning to a given phenomenon, must interpret it within a series of comparable phenomena." One cannot interpret what philology calls a hapax; that is, an isolated phenomenon. Art historian Erwin Panofsky has explained the situation in very clear terms:
ellauri096.html on line 818: clear:both;float:right" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/fi/thumb/9/96/Rakkaus_vainoaikaan.jpg/200px-Rakkaus_vainoaikaan.jpg" width="10%" />

ellauri097.html on line 113: In the summer of 1926, Mencken followed with great interest the Los Angeles grand jury inquiry into the famous Canadian-American evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson. She was accused of faking her reported kidnapping and the case attracted national attention. There was every expectation that Mencken would continue his previous pattern of anti-fundamentalist articles, this time with a searing critique of McPherson. Unexpectedly, he came to her defense by identifying various local religious and civic groups that were using the case as an opportunity to pursue their respective ideological agendas against the embattled Pentecostal minister. He spent several weeks in Hollywood, California, and wrote many scathing and satirical columns on the movie industry and Southern California culture. After all charges had been dropped against McPherson, Mencken revisited the case in 1930 with a sarcastic and observant article. He wrote that since many of that town´s residents had acquired their ideas "of the true, the good and the beautiful" from the movies and newspapers, "Los Angeles will remember the testimony against her long after it forgets the testimony that cleared her."
ellauri098.html on line 441: Their intellectually combative nature means that ENTPs can be difficult to work with, and they can bruise others’ feelings because they never shy away from conflict. But ENTPs are unflinchingly honest, even about themselves, and they hold up a clear mirror to the world around them.

ellauri098.html on line 515: ISTJs are clear-sighted, logical, and efficient. They are planners rather than spontaneous, and prefer order and routine in their work and home lives. They value tradition, hierarchy, and clarity of purpose.
ellauri098.html on line 516: ISTJs are clear-sighted, logical, and efficient. They value tradition, hierarchy, and clarity of purpose.
ellauri098.html on line 549: ISTJ (introverted sensing thinking judging) is one of the sixteen personality types of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test. ISTJs are one of the most common types, making up an estimated 13% of the population. ISTJs are clear-sighted, logical, and efficient. They are planners rather than spontaneous, and prefer order and routine in their work and home lives. They value tradition, hierarchy, and clarity of purpose. To some of the more creative types, ISTJs can seem dull and unimaginative, unwilling to break the rules and unable to respond flexibly to changing situations.

ellauri099.html on line 182: A faint but clearly perceptible smell of urine hung in the air of the palaestra.
ellauri099.html on line 211: Whatever the truth of the matter, Aristotle’s endowment allowed him to build a huge research and teaching facility and amass the largest and most important library in the world. During the time of Theophrastus, Aristotle’s successor as scholarch and clearly a very effective college president, there were as many as 2,000 pupils at the Lyceum, some of them sleeping in dormitories. The Lyceum was clearly the place to be, the educational destination of choice for the elites.
ellauri099.html on line 213: It leads one to ponder the awkward proximity between philosophy and political power. It is unclear whether the school charged fees but, given its vast wealth, it probably didn’t need to. It sounds a little like Harvard, doesn’t it?
ellauri099.html on line 215: The Lyceum was clearly the intellectual projection of Macedonian political and military hegemony. In 323 B.C.E., when news of Alexander the Great’s death in Babylon at the age of 32 reached Athens, simmering anti-Macedonian sentiment spilled over, and the popular Athenian leader Demosthenes was recalled. Aristotle left the city for the last time, in fear of his life, after a little more than a decade in charge of the Lyceum. Seeing himself justly or unjustly in the mirror of Socrates and fearing charges of impiety, Aristotle reportedly said, “I will not allow the Athenians to sin twice against philosophy.” Aristotle withdrew to his late mother’s estate at Chalcis on the island of Euboea and died there shortly after of an unspecified illness, at age 63.
ellauri100.html on line 371: My Moral Profile: Loquor alternativam veritatem. Politics and prosperity: Seeing the world clearly.
ellauri102.html on line 495: The Problem: The controversy caused by the advert is as clear as day. Not only is the advert racist, but it’s also insulting to viewers.
ellauri102.html on line 672:

Ms. is a history-making brand with a clear mission.

ellauri106.html on line 126: A committed atheist, Philip Roth feared only one form of posthumous punishment: being trapped for all eternity in a hostile biography. In 2007, Roth, echoing a similar quip from Oscar Wilde, said, “Biography gives a new dimension of terror to dying.” Roth’s had already been the subject of a harsh and unforgiving portrait in Leaving a Doll’s House (1996), the memoirs of his former wife, the actor Claire Bloom. As John Updike noted in The New York Review of Books, “Claire Bloom, as the wronged ex-wife of Philip Roth, shows him to have been, as their marriage rapidly unraveled, neurasthenic to the point of hospitalization, adulterous, callously selfish, and financially vindictive.” This crisp summary ended Roth’s friendship with Updike, even after Updike made clear he was recapping Bloom’s book and not affirming its accuracy.
ellauri106.html on line 386: A committed atheist, Philip Roth feared only one form of posthumous punishment: being trapped for all eternity in a hostile biography. In 2007, Roth, echoing a similar quip from Oscar Wilde, said, “Biography gives a new dimension of terror to dying.” Roth’s had already been the subject of a harsh and unforgiving portrait in Leaving a Doll’s House (1996), the memoirs of his former wife, the actor Claire Bloom. As John Updike noted in The New York Review of Books, “Claire Bloom, as the wronged ex-wife of Philip Roth, shows him to have been, as their marriage rapidly unraveled, neurasthenic to the point of hospitalization, adulterous, callously selfish, and financially vindictive.” This crisp summary ended Roth’s friendship with Updike, even after Updike made clear he was recapping Bloom’s book and not affirming its accuracy.
ellauri106.html on line 624: Roth’s ex-wife, Claire Bloom, wrote about their relationship in her memoir, Leaving A Doll’s House, 25 years ago. You could also read Roth’s not-exactly-contrite reaction to Bloom’s complaints, his 1998 novel, I Married A Communist, in which the protagonist’s vicious wife was clearly based on Bloom.
ellauri107.html on line 236: Melville alludes to a guy named Billy Budd to Hawthorne’s short story “The Birthmark” and draws parallelograms between the two authors in regard to their interests in the relative good and evil sides of the front and back. Here is the portion that relates most clearly to the two authors’ relationship:
ellauri107.html on line 242: In surveying Billy, “sometimes [Claggart’s] melancholy expression would have in it a touch of soft yearning, as if [he] could even have loved Billy but for fate and ban.” Evidently, Claggart has not fully disguised his private appreciation of Billy; but, because he believes something forbids any future for such feelings, he hardens his heart more and more fiercely toward the object of his desire. What “fate” and what “ban” does his misguided imagination perceive? Do their roles on the ship or elsewhere in society somehow doom any intimacy between them? Or does Claggart just presume Billy could never reciprocate his feelings? Might the Master at Arms simply despise sexuality in general and homosexuality in particular and, as a result, find himself driven all the more mad by his uncontrollable “yearning”? Whatever the accurate diagnosis, it is clear that Claggart distorts any positive feelings he possesses for Billy into negative ones with terrible consequences.
ellauri107.html on line 244: Claggart’s repressed, closeted attraction to Billy finds parallels with some interpretations of Hawthorne’s evident spurning of Melville’s too intimate attentions and Hawthorne’s character in The Blithedale Romance Coverdale’s similar rejection of the invitation from Holingsworth to be his “friend of friends, forever.” For Melville, Hawthorne’s Arthur Dimmesdale’s agonizing acknowledgement of adultery must have seemed a stunning parallel with what later generations would term “coming out of the closet.” Whether Hawthorne himself were a closeted gay man, it is clear that Melville was relatively open in his affections for the senior author and that those affections were somehow turned away and seem to have left a wound that never fully healed. The evils of the closet constitute a subtext in Billy Budd that may well have brought to its author’s mind the sad sundering of his closeness with Nathaniel Hawthorne.
ellauri107.html on line 501: “Look here, Stan; let's get this clear. You've got an idea somehow that it's you that do all the selling. Where d' you get that stuff? Where d' you think you'd be if it wasn't for our capital behind you, and our lists of properties, and all the prospects we find for you? All you got to do is follow up our tips and close the deal. The hall-porter could sell Babbitt-Thompson listings! You say you're engaged to a girl, but have to put in your evenings chasing after buyers. Well, why the devil shouldn't you? What do you want to do? Sit around holding her hand? Let me tell you, Stan, if your girl is worth her salt, she'll be glad to know you're out hustling, making some money to furnish the home-nest, instead of doing the lovey-dovey. The kind of fellow that kicks about working overtime, that wants to spend his evenings reading trashy novels or spooning and exchanging a lot of nonsense and foolishness with some girl, he ain't the kind of upstanding, energetic young man, with a future—and with Vision!—that we want here. How about it? What's your Ideal, anyway? Do you want to make money and be a responsible member of the community, or do you want to be a loafer, with no Inspiration or Pep?”
ellauri108.html on line 106: During his life, Selassie described himself as a devout Christian. In a 1967 interview, Selassie was asked about the Rasta belief that he was the Second Coming of Jesus, to which he responded: "I have heard of this idea. I also met certain Rastafarians. I told them clearly that I am a man, that I am mortal, and that I will be replaced by the oncoming generation, and that they should never make a mistake in assuming or pretending that a human being is emanated from a deity." His grandson Ermias Sahle Selassie has said that there is "no doubt that Haile Selassie did not encourage the Rastafari movement". Critics of Rastafari have used this as evidence that Rasta theological beliefs are incorrect, although some Rastas take Selassie's denials as evidence that he was indeed the incarnation of God, based on their reading of the Gospel of Luke.
ellauri108.html on line 125: Rastafari is a millenarian movement, espousing the idea that the present age will come to an apocalyptic end. Many practitioners believe that on this Day of Judgement, Babylon will be overthrown, with Rastas being the chosen few who survive the upheaval. With Babylon destroyed, Rastas believe that humanity will be ushered into a "new age". This is conceived as being a millennium of peace, justice, and happiness in which the righteous shall live in Africa, now a paradise. In the 1980s, many Rastas believed that the Day of Judgment would happen around the year 2000. A view then common in the Rasta community was that the world's white people would wipe themselves out through nuclear war, with black Africans then ruling the world, something that they argued was prophesied in the Book of Daniel.
ellauri108.html on line 487: In the 1980s, many Rastas believed that the Day of Judgment would happen around the year 2000. A view then common in the Rasta community was that the world's white people would wipe themselves out through nuclear war, with black Africans then ruling the world, something that they argued was prophesied in the Book of Daniel.
ellauri109.html on line 330: What the fuck just open up the corpse and retrieve the papers. The plot simply sucks. Kleist was clearly not the sharpest pencil in the box.
ellauri109.html on line 757: Though deep yet clear, though gentle yet not dull; Vaikka syvä silti kirkas, herkkä muttei hempeä;
ellauri110.html on line 302: The first mention of the story dates back to 26 November 1895 when Chekhov, writing from Melikhovo, informed his correspondent Elena Shavrova: "I am writing now a small story called 'My Bride'." [Моя невеста, Moya nevesta]." He went on: "Once I had a bride... That is what they'd called her: Missyuss. My love for her was strong. That is what I am writing about." Whom did he mean exactly, remained unclear.
ellauri111.html on line 263: As Fyodor Mikhailovich spoke, he became quite agitated. His face narrowed and his eyes flashed. At first he had just tapped his fingers intermittently on the arms of his chair but as he went on he started to wave his hands around with increasing energy. Whatever he had seen in the world he now inhabited, it was clear that he was still unreconciled to the outrages that adult human beings inflict on children, who, as he had said in The Brothers Karamazov, hadn’t eaten that fatal apple. I didn’t know the details of the cases he was talking about, but I couldn’t help thinking about a particularly horrifying case that had recently happened here in Scotland. I’ll spare you the details.
ellauri111.html on line 267: “But I repeat,” he continued after a moment, raising his hands dramatically, “I am not demanding the maximum penalty of the law, not even for these torturers. I do not want them imprisoned, beaten, or executed, though I understand the outrage of people who do. Remember, when Ivan asked Alyosha what to do about the general who’d had the little boy torn to pieces by his dogs, even mild, sweet-tempered Alyosha said ‘Shoot him’. But that doesn’t help either. Just because I wrote a novel called Crime and Punishment, people imagine I’m obsessed with punishing. Not at all. All I want is that the guilty are not acquitted. That their guilt is clearly stated. And that they accept it—that’s the most important of all. Let them be found guilty—and let them go free.”
ellauri111.html on line 271: “Not ‘just’ like that. No. If you’d read my Diary” (not said reproachfully, but matter of factly) “you’d have read how I imagined the judge speaking to such a person. He makes it clear that it’s not a matter of going home and forgetting about it, going back to the way things were before. No. There has to be change. In my time, the father was the authority figure in the family, but, as I—or my imaginary judge—pointed out, even fathers sometimes need to be re-educated by their children until they learn to listen to their children’s needs. I know that families are very different in your time, but, yes, parents, whoever they are, must learn to be parents to their children. I disagree with much that the prosecutor said about the Karamazov family, but he was right on one point: parents can’t just be parents by virtue of procreation, they have to become parents. And when they abuse their position and their power, they cannot hide behind their rights as parents—they have to own up. The guilty have to know that they are guilty.”
ellauri111.html on line 303: “Exactly! It’s a performance. It’s not the heart speaking. The heart would say something very different. In fact, the heart wouldn’t need to say very much at all: it has only one thing to say, to love and to ask for love, to forgive and to ask forgiveness. We’ve been talking about people who commit crimes but won’t own up to what they’ve done, people who want to say to anyone who’ll listen: ‘Not guilty! My conscience is clear! Don’t blame me!’ But the real problem is not the evidence of the facts—did he or didn’t he do this or say that. The real problem is that this is completely back to front. The person who loves, even if they haven’t committed any crimes, is the person who wants to be guilty, who doesn’t just want to forgive but wants to be forgiven; the person who thinks of themselves not only as guilty but infinitely guilty, guilty of everything, before everyone, in fact the guiltiest one of all.”
ellauri112.html on line 684: Marlo, already a mother of two, begins the film heavily, outrageously pregnant: we learn, in rapid succession, that this third pregnancy was unwanted, that her husband does little of the domestic labour, and that her “shitty” upbringing is the reason she’s so committed to her nuclear family unit. Postnatal depression, never named, haunts the narrative: her wealthy brother offers to pay for a night nanny to avoid, in his words, the advent of another “bad time” like the one that followed the birth of her son, Jonah. When the nanny arrives – described by more than one reviewer as a “millennial Mary Poppins” – the panacea seems to be working. Not only does she look after the baby at night but she also operates as a kind of empathy machine, listening to Marlo’s problems, sharing sangria in the garden, and baking the Minions cupcakes that Marlo herself never has the time to make. The postnatal depression, it seems, disperses; Jonah – who has “emotional problems” – finds a place at a school more suited to his needs, family dinners get increasingly wholesome, and Marlo does a passable Stevie Nicks impression at a child’s birthday party. And then comes the twist: after a bender in Brooklyn with Tully, a sleep-deprived Marlo, drunk at the wheel, drives her car off a bridge and ends up in hospital, and we realise there was nobody else in the car. Her maiden name, we learn, was Tully.
ellauri112.html on line 730: The revelation that Tully is a version of Marlo’s former self removes the possibility of a different life she represented. “I love us,” Marlo’s husband says to her, as she lies in her hospital bed. “I love us too,” she replies. This collective noun is the acceptance of the status quo, just as Tully’s last speech, in which she tells Marlo she should embrace her dull life – “being boring means you’re doing it right” – is an endorsement of the sacrifices society requires of her. The final scene, in which Marlo’s husband helps her make the packed lunches, is bathed in a saccharine glow: learn to love your claustrophobia, it tells women. The nuclear family is the only one worth having.
ellauri112.html on line 820: “God himself provides ‘wine which makes man’s heart glad’ just as He gives ‘food which sustains man’s heart’ (Ps. 104:14.15). He promises His people that, if they will obey Him, He will bless them with an abundance of wine (Deut 7:13, 11:14, Prov. 3:10. etc.). He threatens to withdraw this blessing from them if they disobey His law (Deut. 28:39, 51; Isa. 62:8). The Scriptures clearly teach that God permits His people to enjoy wine and strong drink as a gift from Him. ‘You may spend the money for whatever your heart desires, for oxen, or sheep, or wine, or strong drink, or whatever your heart desires; and there you shall eat in the presence of the Lord your God and rejoice, you and your household’ (Deut. 14:26).
ellauri112.html on line 865: Most do not know what is biblical wine. Most assume that all “wine” in the Bible is highly alcoholic and intoxicating like today’s wine. There are passages that clearly imply that wine can intoxicate (Eph 5:18, 1 Tim 3:8, Titus 2:3). Still, “wine” is often simply grape juice.
ellauri115.html on line 412: Rousseau was already seized with the glimmerings of a plot; he warned his Swiss friends that his letters were being intercepted and his papers in danger. By June, the plot was starkly clear to him in all its ramifications - and at its centre was Hume. On June 23, he rounded on his saviour: "You have badly concealed yourself. I understand you, Sir, and you well know it." And he spelled out the essence of the plot: "You brought me to England, apparently to procure a refuge for me, and in reality to dishonour me. You applied yourself to this noble endeavour with a zeal worthy of your heart and with an art worthy of your talents." Hume was mortified, furious, scared. He appealed to Davenport for support against "the monstrous ingratitude, ferocity, and frenzy of the man".
ellauri117.html on line 249: So the two men entwined and wrestled with each other, working nearer and nearer. Both were white and clear, but Gerald flushed smart red where he was touched, and Birkin remained white and tense. He seemed to penetrate into Gerald´s more solid, more diffuse bulk, to interfuse his body through the body of the other, as if to bring it subtly into subjection, always seizing with some rapid necromantic fore-knowledge every motion of the other flesh, converting and counteracting it, playing upon the limbs and trunk of Gerald like some hard wind. It was as if Birkin´s whole physical intelligence interpenetrated into Gerald´s body, as if his fine, sublimated energy entered into the flesh of the fuller man, like some potency, casting a fine net, a prison, through the muscles into the very depths of Gerald´s physical being.
ellauri117.html on line 661: There are always things that might suggest Mr. Locke was gay, such as his being a lifetime bachelor, having no children, and having a life that was surrounded by philosophical men, there is nothing that would give substance to said rumor. You might want to read Locke’s Fundamental Constitution of the Carolinas (1669) which was co-authored by The First Earl of Shaftesbury. It is rather draconian and clearly deviates from the principles of Locke’s more famous two Treatises. It is a matter of scholarly debate just how much Locke contributed to the positions on slavery in this document. Locke was also a good counter-voice to Rousseau in terms of perhaps a more individualistic bent, whereas Rousseau’s philosophy was more collectivist. I think if you look to the Preamble to the US Constitution you can see the influence of both, although the Bill of Rights has a much more individualist orientation.
ellauri118.html on line 1006: The book never makes it clear whether Offred actually gets pregnant.
ellauri118.html on line 1131: In 1683, when Mary Webster was approximately 60 years old, she was accused and brought to trial before a jury in Boston "for suspicion of witchcraft" but cleared of charges and found not guilty.
ellauri119.html on line 464: As the fat and ugly French novelist Honoré de Balzac stated, eroticism is dependent not just upon an individual's sexual morality, but also the culture and time in which an individual resides. Because eroticism is wholly dependent on the viewer's culture and personal tastes pertaining to what, exactly, defines the erotic, critics have often[how often?] confused eroticism with pornography, with the anti-pornography activist Andrea Dworkin saying, "Erotica is simply high-class pornography; better produced, better conceived, better executed, better packaged, designed for a better class of consumer." This confusion, as Lynn Hunt writes, "demonstrate the difficulty of drawing… a clear generic demarcation between the erotic and the pornographic": indeed arguably "the history of the separation of pornography from eroticism… remains to be written". In the eighteenth century, eroticism was the result of the intrusion into the public sphere of something that was at base private.
ellauri119.html on line 690: I remember in 1959, my creative writing teacher, in high school was infatuated with Ayn Rand. Sitting at a local restaurant, Ronnie´s Restauarant - which no longer exists, with a group of friends and her, we had a discussion about Ayn and I made a gesture that clearly expressed a thought and asked her what the words were for that. She suddenly realized the flaw in Ayn´s argument and was speechless.
ellauri119.html on line 758:

Alisa is right that an existential sentence is in principle easier to prove than its negative. Just produce a specimen. I bet she filched it from Karl Popper. The negation takes another universal premise to prove it from. But God is a harder nut. If God supporters could produce the specimen, they'd still need to prove uniqueness and the requisite universal properties. God opposers try to argue they do not need that hypothesis. Thing is the supporters clearly feel that need. It's not logic, it's a eusocial insect's builtin circuit. Less stupid egomaniacs are aware of its usefulness as a mind numbing anesthesiac, opium for the masses. Fiction or fact, its a great hypothesis. It would deserve inventing if it did not come pre-installed. Alisa was a silly hag.
ellauri131.html on line 960: And what of the true cynic's view, that the lesson of history is that bastards often prevail? That markets are in and of themselves rational, and sometimes emotional, but rarely ever moral? That an appropriate model for business is not an extended family but a poker game? The late genius John von Neumann was fascinated by poker, and his study of the choice making involved in the game led him to develop the foundations of game theory. Von Neumann was a peerless student of the principles of rational self-interest, and he was also an adviser to Presidents Truman and Eisenhower. When the Soviets showed signs of developing nuclear weapons, he recommended bombing them into oblivion. Game theory, he said, dictated it.
ellauri132.html on line 138: The widespread take on E T. is - as one commentator points out - E.T. offers a "contemporary synthesis of Eastern spiritual teachings" and another reviewer wrote, "Tolle's clear writing and the obvious depth of his experience and insight set it apart" (what, WHAT?!).
ellauri132.html on line 853:

ellauri133.html on line 845: I had the idea fairly clearly in my mind when I put my daughter in her playpen and the vegetables in the refrigerator, and, writing the story, I found that it went quickly and easily, moving from beginning to end without pause. As a matter of fact, when I read it over later I decided that except for one or two minor corrections, it needed no changes, and the story I finally typed up and sent off to my agent the next day was almost word for word the original draft.
ellauri141.html on line 573: This, though now ascribed to a pedant rather than a boy, is clearly what Kipling had mentioned to Fletcher earlier:
ellauri142.html on line 264: Humboldtin veljexiä oli 2, Alexander oli maantieteilijä, Wilhelm kielentutkija. Mulla on joku sen kielitieteen kirja hyllyssä. Joo Linguistic Variability & Intellectual Development. Pokkari. Onkohan se lyhennetty painos, Ei ole, vaikka lukuja on yhdistelty. Originally published in 1836 in the Royal Academy of Sciences of Berlin under the title Ueber die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechz. Esipuheen on kirjoittanut Alexander-veli. Von Humboldt´s style is not a simple one for modern ears nor is his thought always clear. Despair was my constant companion, sanoi kääntäjä vuonna 1970.
ellauri143.html on line 821: A work of which the issue is not clear,

ellauri144.html on line 725: "In a pristine region where nature and animals have thrived for centuries, wildlife biologist Lana Fedorova is devoting her life to protecting species that have been hunted nearly to extinction, including a rare white deer. Ominously, in a nuclear plant nearby, the arrival of a new director, the ruthless and power-hungry Allura, rattles the staff and sets the stage for internecine strife between the zealous bureaucrat Borys Slykovitch and ambitious engineer Maksym (Max) Smirnov.
ellauri146.html on line 764: And I saw in the turning so clearly a child's Ja näin käännöxessä selvästi lapsen
ellauri147.html on line 217: At Café de Flore, Emily meets Thomas, a French philosophy professor. They hit it off and she invites him back to her apartment to have sex. Emily and Thomas encounter Gabriel and Camille, and Camille invites them to join them at a tapas restaurant. Thomas and Gabriel do not get along. The next day, Gabriel tells Emily he thinks Thomas is a snob, and not worthy of her. She is clearly more of the tattooed-arm master chef type. Fair enough.
ellauri147.html on line 339: He later on, he cleared out that it was not the truth. It harmed both his career and public persona.
ellauri147.html on line 357: After his divorce to Orianne, and struggling to play the drums for health reasons, Phil Collins developed a drinking problem, which spiraled out of control. According to him, he required a “medically enforced drying-out process.” Kuivatelakalle niinkuin isä Mefodi. However, his low self-esteem also got in the way of seeing things clearly. No wonder. Paul McCartney´s net worth is 1.2 gigadollars! He could buy Phil 5 times over!
ellauri147.html on line 426: Yes, many Jewish women have felt the curse of the eyebrow. Must be in the genes. That being said, perhaps you should embrace them? Look at Lily Collins! (Yes, we know, she is only a quarter Jewish: dad Phil clearly isn´t.) She OWNS those eyebrows. Those eyebrows are her calling card. You think she is getting Hollywood roles without those eyebrows? (Alright, dad Phil clearly helps.)
ellauri147.html on line 876: Some authors define paedomorphism as the retention of larval traits, as seen in salamanders. Paedophiliacs do not restrict attention to fellow salamanders, but dig young chicks clearly more.
ellauri150.html on line 476: The film's final onscreen writing credits created controversy when, in October 1959, the Writers Guild of America (WGA) awarded Tunberg sole screenplay credit, despite the objections of the film's director, William Wyler, who, in the film's commemorative booklet and elsewhere, claimed that Christopher Fry was more responsible than any other writer for the final screenplay. In response to Wyler's public outcries against their ruling, the WGA took out trade paper ads on November 20, 1959 in which they issued a statement reading, in part, "the unanimous decision of the three judges was that the sole screenplay credit was awarded to Karl Tunberg...The record shows the following: 1. Karl Tunberg is the only writer who has ever written a complete screenplay on Ben-Hur; 2. Karl Tunberg continued to contribute materials throughout the actual filming, and this material is incorporated in the final picture; and 3. Karl Tunberg alone did the necessary rewriting during the four months of retakes and added scenes. Mr. Christopher Fry himself was fully informed of the proceedings of the Guild. He has made it absolutely clear that he did not want to protest the decision of the Guild."
ellauri150.html on line 488: What the f---!? Based on a 1880 novel after all!? Whose novel? Fuck you screenwriters! Taking all the glory! “I said,’ Well, I’ll never use the "g" word,'” Vidal says. “‘There’ll be nothing overt. But it will be perfectly clear that Messiah is in love with Ben-Hur.”
ellauri150.html on line 584: Simonides lived to be a very old man. In the tenth year of Nero's reign, he gave up the business so long centred in the warehouse at Antioch. To the last he kept a clear head and a good heart, and was successful, got lots and lots of money, became filthy rich.
ellauri150.html on line 612: Messala comes over for dinner. Judah and Messala go out back to meet privately. Judah gives Messala a white horse. Messala asks Judah for his progress in pacifying the Jews; on learning that it isn't 100% successful, he wants to know who's refusing. Messala makes clear that he wants names. Judah, while protesting that he's nonviolent himself, doesn't think that the Jews resisting Roman rule are doing anything wrong, and so he doesn't provide them. Messala begs for cooperation, but in doing so makes clear that he considers the Roman Emperor a god; not only doesn't Judah believe that, but he's personally against the occupation. They leave as enemies, and Judah Ben-Hur is left to explain why Messala isn't staying for dinner.
ellauri150.html on line 625: More than three years later, we see Ben-Hur working one of many oars. He is going by "41" (or is that XLI?), his seat number, and he is full of hate. A Roman consul, Quintus Arrius, has boarded the ship, and it goes to war almost immediately. The consul wants Ben-Hur for a charioteer, and doesn't understand why Ben-Hur has any other hopes of life after the galleys; if they succeed in battle, he'll keep rowing, and if they don't, he'll die chained to the oar. Ben-Hur makes clear that he believes God will help him, also that he dislikes the idea of dying chained to the oar; this has a delayed effect; at the time, "back to your oar," but the consul orders him unchained after all the galley slaves had been chained.
ellauri150.html on line 629: Ben-Hur saves the consul and gets him on a raft of debris. Then he has to knock out the consul to prevent the fella from committing suicide, and chains the mercenary to him. After the consul wakes, still wanting to die, he reminds him that staying alive is the motivation he gives his slaves... Quintus wanted to commit suicide because he thought he'd lost overall. He hadn't, as it turns out he's hailed as a hero, and so there is a triumphant return to Rome. Ben-Hur gets to see the Emperor and then lives with Quintus learning to drive a chariot in races with Arrius' prized horses. Quintus actually tried to get him cleared of wanting to kill that Judean governor, but didn't pull it off...
ellauri150.html on line 689: But the Pope's letter is actually a warning of the dangers inherent in too much freedom. It is the old story of the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve were free to do whatever they wished in this original Paradise, but if they partook of the Tree of Good and Evil then there would be a price to pay. (Yes, as Milton made it clear, they were completely free to have sex anytime and anywhere, but not while munching on the apple!) And as it turned out the temptation was too great to resist.
ellauri150.html on line 766: I've actually begun to treasure silence, and the space it provides to be able to think clearly and to turn my thoughts to listening to the Holy Spirit. But you know the Church teaches us to love our bodies as well, so I hope at some point I will regain my passion for sex and related music.
ellauri151.html on line 654: Luther puts this clearly: “The spirit consists in the use, not the object”. Luther reached his theological breakthrough when he realized that theological language consists fundamentally of speech acts and linguistic action. Augustinuxen show-and-tell semantiikka ei kata mysteerien pragmatiikkaa: ei kuivassa näkkärissä ole sielua, vaan se pujahtaa siihen joteskin kun näkki pannaan kielelle ja sanotaan oikeat taikasanat. Hizi empä arvannut poikasena kielitieteen kurssilla miten läheltä Luther siinä liippasi, hyvä ettei tukka heilahtanut.
ellauri152.html on line 585: Yeshiva Boy moves fluidly between referring to the main character as Yentl or Anshel depending on context, which is a great detail. There are times when she’s referred to as Anshel for long stretches of time, and the same for Yentl. The movie, not having third person narration, is a different beast. I take my cue from the story and use both names, depending on the context of what I’m talking about—for example, if Yentl is definitely seen as Yentl by the story in that moment, or as Anshel, or ambiguously as both. That’s a very subjective choice to make each time you write her name! But that question, the fact that you have to ask it of yourself and the fact that it’s not always clear, is to me a crucial part of Yentl’s character.
ellauri152.html on line 751: After World War I, Zeitlin gradually returned to tradition and began leading an Orthodox lifestyle. The reason(s) for this drastic change in his life is not completely clear but may have had something to do with the suffering of Jews during the war. In any case, he shifted from a tragic philosophical outlook to a mystical and spiritual viewpoint.
ellauri153.html on line 554: Now that the problem of evil has been exposed as a conceptual confusion, the way is clear for a Jamesian science of religions and worldviews. The methods of grammatical description can be extended to the practices and ways of sense-making in different worldviews: how they give meaning to moral practices and how do they approach the intelligibility of the world? What practical responses do they have for coping with evil? For example, the grammar of seeing-as for models and metaphors can be applied to the metaphors in the Hebrew Bible for God’s activity to understand what it is to see the world as God’s creation. The grammar of virtues can be used to describe Buddhist practices and explore, how these approaches contribute to the human good. Similar approaches can be taken to secular worldviews as well. These descriptions can then be used to assess the worldviews through dialogical encounters between them. However, one thing should be clear. There is no point in devaluing the world by arguing for the meaninglessness of life or atheism on the basis of evil, or in giving justifications for evils that can stand in the way of divine or human meliorist projects of fighting for justice. To paraphrase the judgment of the Divine Judge in the Book of Job, such approaches are not even wrong. They are as meaningless as life itself.

ellauri153.html on line 827: Nowhere does the Bible approve of David’s state of affairs—just the opposite! God had warned Israel through Moses that any future king “must not take many wives” (Deuteronomy 17:17). Scripture does not say that Abishag’s presence in David’s bed was a good thing, nor does it present David as a good father. His many children by multiple mothers were a cause of great trouble for him and the whole kingdom (2 Samuel 13; 2 Samuel 15; 1 Kings 12:23–25). His own son and successor, Solomon, ignoring God’s clear warning, took his father’s excesses to a shocking extreme with 700 wives and 300 concubines who led him astray and turned his heart after other gods (1 Kings 11:2–4). The kingdom itself was divided and lost by Solomon’s son shortly after his coronation, barely one generation after the glory of King David (1 Kings 12).
ellauri153.html on line 864: After submitting it as his doctoral dissertation Arttu was awarded a PhD from the University of Jena in absentia. Private publication soon followed. "There were three reviews of it, commending it condescendingly. Scarcely more than one hundred copies were sold, the rest was remaindered and, a few years later, pulped."[1] Among the reasons for the cold reception of this original version are that it lacked the author´s later authoritative style and appeared decidedly unclear in its implications. A copy was sent to Goethe who responded by inviting the author to his home on a regular basis, ostensibly to discuss philosophy but in reality to recruit the young philosopher into work on his Theory of Colors.
ellauri155.html on line 763: And what pray, does this mean? It is just a clear declaration by the Lord that he finds nothing in men themselves to induce him to show kindness, that it is owing entirely to his own mercy, and, accordingly, that their salvation is his own work. Since God places your salvation in himself alone, why should you descend to yourself?
ellauri155.html on line 888: Santayana never married. His romantic life, if any, is not well understood. Some evidence, including a comment Santayana made late in life comparing himself to A. E. Housman, and his friendships with people who were openly homosexual and bisexual, has led scholars to speculate that Santayana was perhaps homosexual or bisexual, but it remains unclear whether he had any actual heterosexual or homosexual relationships.
ellauri156.html on line 76: Israel is at war with none other than the Ammonites (verse 1), which may come as a surprise to you as it did to me. (Well, to be honest, I thought they were the cretacean mollusks by the same name.) I thought the Ammonites had been defeated in chapter 10. I was wrong. The author is very clear on this matter. In chapter 8, the author tells how David began to engage his enemies in battle, ending the strangle-hold these surrounding nations had on Israel. David subjected the Philistines (8:1), then the Moabites (8:2), and then he took on the king of Zobah (8:3ff.). In the process, other nations became involved and found Israel too formidable an enemy to oppose again. (Notice the similarity of the situation here to the Yom Kippur War.)
ellauri156.html on line 112: The Israelites were wrong in demanding a king, but they were not too far off in expecting that their “king” would lead them in war. The judges God had raised up for them earlier were usually men like Barak or Gideon, who would lead the nation in battle against their enemies. When God designated Saul as Israel's first king, this military role was clearly indicated:
ellauri156.html on line 116: Saul shrunk back from pursuing the enemies of Israel at times, and it was sometimes David who stood in Saul's shoes, leading the nation in battle. This was the case, for example, when David fought Goliath, a battle that should have been fought by Saul, Israel's giant (see 1 Samuel 9:2). Up until now, David has been leading his men in battle, but in chapter 11, David suddenly steps back, sending others to fight for him. In 2 Samuel 12:26-31, the author makes it clear that David may not have been planning to be present for the formal surrender of Rabbah. Joab sends David a message, urging him to come and at least give the appearance of leading his army. If David does not come, Joab warns, David will not receive the glory, and it may go to Joab. Joab knows that David knows this is not the way it was meant to be. And so it is that David makes a formal appearance to be the “official” leader at the time of the surrender of the city of Rabbah.
ellauri156.html on line 269: I am not suggesting that David purposed to see something he should not. (I bet he did, peeping Tom. You actually come round to the same conclusion below, Bob.) More than likely he is walking about, almost absent-mindedly, when suddenly his eyes fix on something that rivets his attention on a woman bathing herself. The text does not really tell us where this woman is bathing, and why at this time of the night? We only know that she is within sight of David's penthouse (rooftop). David notes her beauty. He does not know who she is or whether she is married. We cannot be certain how much David sees, and thus we do not know for certain whether he has yet sinned. (What the fuck? How much do you need to see to sin? Are boobs enough, or do you need to see the pudendum or the fanny?) If David saw more of this woman than he should (a fact still in question), then he surely should have diverted his eyes. It was not necessarily evil for him to discretely inquire about her. If she were unmarried and eligible, he could have taken her for his wife. His inquiry would make this clear.
ellauri156.html on line 283: The information David receives should be sufficient for him to end the matter, or more appropriately, to start it. If this woman is married, he has no business going any further. No matter how great his position and power, nothing gives him the right to take another man's wife. The pattern for David's actions is clearly outlined by Joseph, who was hotly pursued by his master's wife (but the shoe was on the other foot that time, a puma hunting for a young rattlesnake. And Joseph was a bachelor, so what was the sin in that?).
ellauri156.html on line 301: It is clear from the words of our text that David sinned. It is clear from the actions of David which follow that he sinned. It is clear from the words of God through Nathan that David sinned in a grievous manner. The problem is that many wish to view the text in a way that forces Bathsheba to share David's guilt by assuming that she somehow seduced him. I would like to pursue this matter, because I believe there is absolutely no evidence to support such a conclusion. (Wow! That's a refreshing point of view! Like Ballsack's novel Comment la belle Fille de Portillon quinaulda son iuge.)
ellauri156.html on line 303: The inference is often drawn that Bathsheba should not have been exposing herself as she did, and that it was her indiscretion which started this whole sequence of events. Some think her actions may have been deliberate (She knew David was there and could see. . . .), while others would be more gracious and assume it was simply poor judgment. Let me point out several things from the text. First and foremost, when Nathan pronounces divine judgment upon David for his sin, Bathsheba and Uriah are depicted as the victims, not the villains. When Adam and Eve sinned, God specifically indicted Adam, Eve, and the serpent, and each received their just curse. This is simply not the case with Bathsheba. Nowhere in the Bible is she indicted for this sin. It may be that the author did not choose to focus upon Bathsheba, but even in this case, the Law would clearly require us to consider her innocent until proven guilty. (Which law? Not biblical law for sure, take for instance Susan's case, where Daniel had to called upon to prove her innocence.)
ellauri156.html on line 305: It is very clear in Samuel that the tragedies which take place in David's household are the consequence of his sin, just as Nathan indicates (12:10-12). Thus, when Amnon rapes Tamar, the sister of Absalom, it is a case of the “chickens coming home to roost.” Or is it a case of "Rooster coming into the chicks?" Note that it is at David's command or summons that Tamar is called to the palace, and then to Amnon's bedside. There is not so much as a hint that when Tamar is raped, it is all of Amnon's doing. Should this not strongly indicate that the same is true in Bathsheba's case, of which this second incident is a kind of mirror image? (Fucking crooky noses, raping and ravaging their kinky haired ladies right and left.)
ellauri156.html on line 367: There are two fascinating questions, which the text does not clearly seem to answer: (1) From what was Bathsheba purifying herself -- from her menstrual uncleanness, or from her uncleanness due to sexual intercourse? Both are dealt with in Leviticus 15.
ellauri156.html on line 398: (2) It seems unlikely that Uriah is ignorant of what David has done and of what he is trying to accomplish by calling him home to Jerusalem. Rumors must have been circulating around Jerusalem about David and Bathsheba, and could easily have reached the Israelite army which had besieged Rabbah. Uriah not only refuses to go to his house and sleep with his wife, he sleeps at the doorway of the king's house, in the midst of his servants. He has many witnesses to testify that any child borne by his wife during this time is not his child. It is clear that Uriah understands exactly what David wants him to do (to have sex with his wife), and that he refuses, even when the king virtually orders him to do so. One finds this difficult to explain if Uriah is ignorant of what happened between David and Bathsheba. At least Uriah knows what David is trying to get him to do on this stay in Jerusalem. The implications of all this we will explore later.
ellauri156.html on line 457: One notable TV airing of the movie was on the American network NBC during The NBC Monday Movie on September 7, 1964 (which was Labor day that year). During one of the commercial breaks was the one and only official airing of the Daisy political advertisement by the Lyndon B. Johnson presidential campaign in the run-up to the 1964 United States presidential election. The commercial aired at 9:50 p.m. EST. It was a family film though most children living in the EST time-zone were gone to bed by then, leaving the children's parents to watch the commercial. The commercial stars a little girl (played by Monique Luiz) who is shown counting petals of a daisy which was then followed by an ominous male voice counting down to zero. During the countdown, the screen zoomed up the girl's eye in such a way whereby the parents would imagine their children there instead of the girl. The next scene was a nuclear explosion with the voice of Johnson asking for peace.
ellauri156.html on line 459: The commercial ended with a message for viewers to vote for Johnson in the election. The commercial implied that if Johnson's opponent, Barry Goldwater won the election, Goldwater would recklessly start a nuclear war that would kill the girl (and by extension, the viewer's own children) although Goldwater's name was not mentioned, his voice in not heard and his image was not shown during any point of the commercial. This commercial and its airing was a major factor in Johnson's landslide victory over Goldwater, with Johnson receiving 486 electoral votes to Goldwater's 52.
ellauri156.html on line 481: And explain he does; Uriah's words to his commander-in-chief are as stinging a rebuke as David receives from Nathan in the next chapter. Uriah clearly understands that what David once encouraged him to do (i.e. go to be with his wife) he is now strongly urging -- even commanding -- him to do. Uriah humbly but steadfastly refuses to do this:
ellauri156.html on line 509: It must be an agonizing night for David, seeing that even drunk Uriah is a better man than he. But not a better pecker! And so in the morning, David acts. He writes a letter to Joab, which will serve as Uriah's death warrant. In this letter David clearly orders Joab to murder Uriah for him. He even tells him how to do so in a way that might conceal the truth of the matter. In so doing, David can honor Uriah as a war hero, and magnanimously take on the duty of being a husband to Uriah's wife, also taking care of the child she is soon to bear. Joab is to put Uriah on the front lines of battle, at the fiercest place of battle, no surprise for a man of his military skills and courage. Joab is to attack and then retreat in such a way as to make Uriah an easy target for the Ammonites, thus assuring his death. There is no mistaking David's orders to Uriah: he wants Uriah killed in a way which makes it look like a simple casualty of war. Joab complies completely with David's orders (why? Is Uriah a creep?), and Uriah is eliminated, no longer an obstacle to David's plans. In giving this order to Joab, David makes him a part of this conspiracy, making him share the guilt for the spilled blood of Uriah. David's sin continues to encompass more and more people, leading to greater and greater sin.
ellauri156.html on line 613: 13 All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. 15 And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them. 32 And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, 33 who by faith conquered kingdoms, performed acts of righteousness, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received back their dead by resurrection; and others were tortured, not accepting their release, so that they might obtain a better resurrection; 36 and others experienced mockings and scourgings, yes, also chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were tempted, they were put to death with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins, in foreskins, being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated 38 (men of whom the world was not worthy), wandering in deserts and mountains and caves and holes in the ground. 39 And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 because God had provided something even better for us, to make up for the wait, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect (Hebrews 11:13-16, 32-40).
ellauri156.html on line 660: In these verses, David makes it clear that God is at work even when it does not appear to be so. During the time David tries to cover up his sin, God is at work exposing it in his heart. These are not times of pleasure and joy, as Satan would like us to conclude; they are days of misery. David is plagued with guilt. He cannot sleep, and it seems he cannot eat. Worst of all, he cannot fuck. He is not sleeping nights, and he is losing weight. Whether or not David recognizes it as God who is at work in him, he does know he is miserable. It is this misery which tenderizes David, preparing him for the rebuke Nathan Zuckermann is to bring, preparing him for repentance. David's repentance is not the result of David's assessment of his situation; it is the result of divine intervention. Hey wait? If that is the case, where is the much-advertised free will? He has gone so far in sin that he cannot think straight. God is at work in David's life to break him, so that he will once again cast himself upon God for grace. He has good experience in casting himself upon folk, from Saul thru Jonathan to Bathsheba.
ellauri156.html on line 709: I hope I am not guilty of attempting to make this story “walk on all fours” when I stress the same thing the story does -- that there is a very warm and loving relationship between the rich man and the poor man's “pet lamb.” It really tasted great! Considered along with everything else we read about Uriah and Bathsheba and David, I must conclude that the author is making it very clear that Uriah and Bathsheba dearly loved each other. Anyway, who cares this way or that, it was his lamb. When David “took” this woman to his bedroom that fateful night, and then as his wife after the murder of Uriah, he took her from the man she loved. Bathsheba and Uriah were devoted to each other, which adds further weight to the arguments for her not being a willing participant in David's sins. It also emphasizes the character of Uriah, who is so near to his wife, who is being urged by the king to go to her, and yet who refuses to do so out of principle.
ellauri156.html on line 766: The evil David commits against others is clear disobedience to the revealed Word of God. David is a “man after God's own heart,” and yet in this instance, David “despised the Word of the Lord.” While David does repent and the guilt of his sin is forgiven, these consequences will not be reversed. These consequences are just; they fit the crime David committed. He used the sword of the Ammonites to kill Uriah, and so the sword will not depart from his house. He took the wife of another man, and so his own wives will be taken by another, another from his own house.
ellauri158.html on line 495: It is unclear whether Newton read any of Spinoza´s works. However, two people with whom he was in close contact made substantial efforts to repudiate Spinozism directly: Henry More in The Confutation of Spinoza (More 1991) and Samuel Clarke in A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God: More Particularly in Answer to Mr. Hobbs, Spinoza and Their Followers. Sit oli vielä "Ralph" Cudworth ja joku "Colin" McLaughlin, kaikki Cambridgen platonisteja, siis jotain täys idiootteja, presumably, ja kaiken lisäxi varmaan vielä homoja. In the arguments on which I focus, More, Clarke, and Maclaurin aim to establish the existence of an immaterial and intelligent God precisely by showing that Spinoza does not have the resources to adequately explain the origin of motion. Sen jumala ei ollut kunnon priimuskaasulla toimiva käynnistysmoottori, pikemminkin joku auton alusta.
ellauri159.html on line 675: Perhaps the clearest way to define loyalty is unswerving in allegiance to the latest boss. We are all on different paths in life; when you choose to not swerve from the path the latest lord has for you, that’s loyalty. When you have the opportunity to veer from it for friendship or marriage but choose not to, you are acting out of loyalty. When you spit on your parents to join a sect, that is loyalty. This is the new law, fuck the ten commandments.
ellauri159.html on line 689: Webster’s definition of purity is, "Free from anything that taints, impairs; clear, unmixed, 100% the real thing".
ellauri159.html on line 703: Hospitality simply means going out of your way to cater for putative angels, e.g by hosting meals, etc.). While not as seemingly glorious as other knightly traits like strength, honor, and gallantry, hospitality ranks as one of the key traits of knighthood. We need to do the same for others, particularly for those in the family of believers (Galatians 6:10). LOL this was clearly written by a family member.
ellauri159.html on line 900: ESTJs are industrious traditionalists whose extroversion often leads them to take charge of situations. They are generally pragmatic and like things to be organized and clear. They are driven by a need to analyze and bring order to the world. ESTJ writers include Amy Chua, E.L. James, Dr. Phil McGraw, Tom Clancy, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Bill O’Reilly, Billy Graham, and Sonia Sotomayor. Learn more about how ESTJs write here.
ellauri159.html on line 1025: You are adept at writing technical materials, such as procedures, that require them to be clear and matter-of-fact. Since you’re unlikely to view writing as a means of self-expression, you should be efficient at writing corporate documents like annual reports, which can be draining for most other types.
ellauri159.html on line 1041: Write for an audience, seeing you want to hear how people were affected by your work. With sufficient encouragement and clear instructions, you might even be able adapt the piece to the expectations of a teacher, boss, or editor. A lack of feedback is likely to demotivate you. To avoid this, seek out an environment where people appreciate hearing your stuff over and over.
ellauri159.html on line 1057: Be self-motivated and self-directed. However, when writing for a teacher, editor, or boss, you may want explicit instructions. If you don’t have a clear understanding of other people’s expectations, you may struggle in silence. Instead, try asking to see a model of what to work toward (for example, last year’s annual report or a term paper that earned an A). A concrete example will help alleviate confusion.
ellauri159.html on line 1075: When starting a project, you want clear instructions or a model to work from. It is helpful to know what approach has succeeded in the past so you can use it as a framework. If instructions aren’t specific, you may be at a loss, so it’s best to ask for clarification, or just copy from a reliable model.
ellauri159.html on line 1113: You may have difficulty starting a project if you don’t have a clear sense of direction. Identify the goals of the piece and develop an organizing framework (aka a bullet list). This will help you generate ideas and avoid tangents. Your safe bet is to focus on how the topic affects people and on the immediate actions they can take in response.
ellauri159.html on line 1123: You need clear instructions and a personal connection with your audience. You may find it helpful to see an example of what your editor, instructor, or project sponsor expects. Even if you can’t copy this model as such, it will give you a concrete starting point.
ellauri159.html on line 1131: Make sure you don´t gather too much information in the exploration stage or you don’t have a clear sense of direction left. If you feel overwhelmed, ask for help or talk to a trusted friend. Connect the topic to your values, like the value of money. Write without inhibition and let your voice shine. Remember, your drafts are for your eyes only. They’re the rough stone from which you sculpt the finished product. Your teacher will be happy to cross out the stuff that can´t be printed.
ellauri159.html on line 1195: You prefer writing about personal topics. You may encounter difficulty if the topic isn’t meaningful to you. If so, try different angles until you find one that engages you. If you’re a technical writer, for example, you can take pride in knowing that when you write clear instructions, you help your customers perform their tasks quickly and effectively. This sense of meddling with people’s lives is important to writers.
ellauri159.html on line 1230: You like to start projects first. You often map out their ideas to everyone to visualize the big picture before you begin writing. You sense how your various opinions flow together logically and build on one another. Because you develop a clear picture early on, you might reach a conclusion and skip writing completely before finishing your research. To ensure a balanced product, stay open to new information that may change your perspective. Don´t listen to idiots, however.
ellauri159.html on line 1232: You want to master the subject everyone´s whining about. You enjoy the challenge of technical topics, and you focus on crafting clear, concise instructions. However, if you don’t see the perks of the writing project, your interest may wane. Discuss the project with friends or colleagues to help you find a way to increase your reward.
ellauri159.html on line 1238: Enjoy making decisions! No need to respond to new data once you’ve got a clear, big-picture view of the topic. Others may seek feedback from you but do not give it, nor act on other people´s feedback, rely instead on your own judgment. This strategy can cause you to miss unimportant information — a drawback no real Marshal finds mortifying. Be aware of this tendency before you start unconsciously fighting it.
ellauri159.html on line 1281: You like complex, theoretical subjects, and you use your wide vocabulary in your writing. To enhance readability, choose the simplest word that communicates an idea accurately. You may sometimes make intuitive leaps that are unclear to your audience. Illustrate connections even if they seem obvious to you. To ensure that your message is clear, ask for feedback from someone you trust.
ellauri159.html on line 1295: If they write anything but checks, their writing can have a sense of inevitability, presenting an orderly progression of facts and ideas that can lead to only one possible conclusion. Their authoritative voice can instill a sense of comfort and trust in readers. Make sure that trust is warranted—use your natural skepticism to seek out possible flaws in your reasoning and research. Steer clear of the anti-trust laws, they can cut your earnings.
ellauri160.html on line 65: Hidden under moss too deep to sweep away. Too deep to clear them away!
ellauri160.html on line 145: At a literary salon in 1909, Pound met the novelist Olivia Shakespear and later at the Shakespears' home at 12 Brunswick Gardens, Kensington, was introduced to her daughter, Dorothy, who became Pound's wife in 1914. The critic Iris Barry described her as "carrying herself delicately with the air, always, of a young Victorian lady out skating, and a profile as clear and lovely as that of a porcelain Kuan-yin".
ellauri160.html on line 171: Poetry published Pound's "A Few Don'ts by an Imagist" in March 1913. Superfluous words, particularly adjectives, should be avoided (Ahha! This is where Stephen King comes in) as well as expressions like "dim lands of peace". He wrote: "It dulls the image. It mixes an abstraction with the concrete. It comes from the writer's not realizing that the natural object is always the adequate symbol. Just say 'lands'." Poets should "go in fear of abstractions". He wanted Imagisme "to stand for hard light, clear edges", he wrote later to Amy Lowell.
ellauri161.html on line 491: Annoyingly, in these days movies from the U. S. are becoming more and more of "a color". They are not telling a story, but are taking a side. They are either democrat or republican, conservative or liberal, blue or red, flyover or coast. Don't Look Up is not a big offender, but the language and presentation was clearly on the "coast" side. Thus, it will be probably appreciated by people who already saw the world this way and ignored or at best maligned by the people on the other side. And it's a pity, because this film is meant to bring us together as a civilization and not keep us divided. I feel like it could have done a better job in that direction.
ellauri161.html on line 618: A voice from Vagina.com: Informative, funny, well written, well acted, and crystal clear in its message are words I emphatically cannot use.
ellauri161.html on line 1085: Ruysbroeck (Or Rusbroek), Jean De, the most noted of mystics in the Netherlands, was born in A.D. 1293 at Ruysbroeck no less, near Brussels, and was educated in the latter city under the direction of an Augustinian prebendary who was his relative. His fondness for solitude and day dreams prevented him from making solid progress, however. His Latin was imperfect, though it is clear that he became acquainted with the earlier mystical writings. He probably did not read the writings of Neo-Platonists, but was certainly not unacquainted with those of the Areopagite.
ellauri161.html on line 1112: Few mystics have ascended to the empyrean where Ruysbroeck so constantly dwelt; and the endeavor to compress into forms of speech the visions seen in a state where all clear and real apprehension is at an end occasioned the fault of indefiniteness with which his writings must be charged. His influence over theological and philosophical thought was not so great as that exercised by Eckart and Tauler, and was chiefly limited to his immediate surroundings. The Brotherhood of the Common Life (q.v.) was founded by Gerhard Groot, one of Ruysbroeck´s pupils, and its first inception may perhaps be traced back to Ruysbroeck himself — a proof that he was not wholly indifferent to the conditions of practical life.
ellauri163.html on line 402: All of the Jewish translations (and commentaries) deal with a future time, the messianic era, during which there will be a king, a direct descendant from King David, sitting on the Davidic throne. The closing phrase of the blessing given to Judah defines the role of the expected future Jewish king, Messiah, in the world. Ultimately, his job will be to gather the nations under the banner of the One G-d of peace. If a gathering of the nations for the sake of peace is the first explicit description of the messianic era, it clearly suggests something that is natural, recognizable, and human.
ellauri163.html on line 748: People with higher scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (items included "I am fascinated by numbers," and "I find social situations difficult") had weaker belief in a personal God than those with lower IQ score ("I am fascinated by skirts", and "I find zippers difficult"). Second, reduced ability to mentalize mediated this correlation. (Mentalizing was measured with the Empathy Quotient, which assesses self-reported ability to recognize and react to others' emotions, and with a task that requires identifying what's being expressed in pictures of eyes. Systematizing -- interest in and aptitude for mechanical and abstract systems -- was correlated with autism but was not a mediator.) Third, men were much less likely than women to say they strongly believed in a personal God (even controlling for autism), and this correlation was also mediated by reduced mentalizing. They were also clearly more interested in skirts and puzzled by zippers.
ellauri163.html on line 817: That said, the reason the film does succeed, and rises to greatness, rests primarily on the shoulders of the lead actress, Nadine Nortier, who, despite little dialogue, conveys great depths within her character, despite being a non-professional actress at the time. On the other hand, Jean-Claude Guilbert (a professional actor who also appeared in Au Hasard Balthazar, as another drunkard, Arnold) is also very good. The rest of the cast is solid. Yet, critical missteps abound, especially when some claim Mouchette is filled with anger. Yes, there may be acts of seeming anger (tossing dirt at her female rivals), but clearly the character of Mouchette is a walking mass of desensitisation. This would explain why she reacts the way she does to sex with Arsene, rather than seeing it as her ‘striking back’ at the world.
ellauri163.html on line 829: There is also a scene where Mouchette is wet, working in the bar, and then gets some coins as payment. Later, in his hut, she is wet, and Arsene pays her some coins to go along with his story regarding Mathieu’s presumed death. What this does is not only link divergent scenes in a strictly visual and cinematic way, but it emphasises the elliptical and cyclical nature of the film, where recurring images and motifs abound. Yet, all of them are slightly askew, and the camera always seems to look at its lead character’s life slightly askance, as if it was somehow recapitulating the clearly warped view of life Mouchette owns.
ellauri164.html on line 47: