ellauri048.html on line 1431: Our home-bred fancies. O to us, Kotitekoisia kuvitelmia. Meillehän,
ellauri048.html on line 1517: My fancies time to rise on wing, Mun kuvitelmilla aikaa nousta siiville,
ellauri048.html on line 1559: And but for fancies, which aver Ilman kuvitelmia, jotka inttävät
ellauri051.html on line 1412: 812 The white-topt mountains show in the distance, I fling out my fancies toward them, 812 Valkohuippuiset vuoret näkyvät etäisyydellä, heitän mielikuvitukseni niitä kohti,
ellauri140.html on line 790: Is tost with troubled sights and fancies weake, oli vielä unessa, ja nukkui silmät avoinna,
ellauri143.html on line 556: In fancies infinite beguile the hours away.
ellauri321.html on line 103: Among other books there fell into a guy named Hazlitt's hands a little volume of double interest to him by reason of his own early sojourn in America, and in a fitting connection he gave it a word of praise. In the Edinburgh Review for October, 1829, he speaks of it as giving one an idea “how American scenery and manners may be treated with a lively poetic interest. The pictures are sometimes highly colored, but they are vivid and strikingly characteristic.” “The author,” he continues, “gives not only the objects, but the feelings of a new country.” Hazlitt had read the book and had been delighted with it nearly a quarter of a century before he wrote of it, and in the earliest years of the century he had commended it warmly to his friends. In November, 1805, Lamb wrote: “Oh, tell Hazlitt not to forget the American Farmer. I dare say it is not so good as he fancies; but a book's a book.”* And it is this book, which not only gained the sympathies of Hazlitt and Charles Lamb, but also by its idealized treatment of American country life may possibly have stirred, as Professor Moses Coit Tyler thought, the imaginations of Byron and Coleridge.
ellauri386.html on line 379: Dead is the root whence all these fancies grew.
xxx/ellauri086.html on line 900: Poe dismissed the notion of artistic intuition and argued that writing is methodical and analytical, not spontaneous. He writes that no other author has yet admitted this because most writers would "positively shudder at letting the public take a peep behind the scenes... at the fully matured fancies discarded in despair... at the cautious selections and rejections"
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 639: So Novick is deprived of the happy romance he wanted to chronicle at Posilipo. He consoles himself by a detailed account of Zhukovski’s adoption into Bayreuth, his painting the sets for Parsifal and being considered a kind of son by the Wagners. Novick seems to be trying to walk down two streets at once–the street of the refinements of literary biography and the more rigid roadway of the prosecutorial argument. He attempts to turn certain of his fancies into fact–but his data is simply too vague for him to get away with it.
xxx/ellauri235.html on line 308: Mutt'ring his wayward fancies he would rove, Mutt kuvittelee, että hän vaeltaa,
xxx/ellauri304.html on line 610: Dialogue is the easiest, fastest and best way to involve your readers with your subject, your story, your characters, your writing. The fanciest long description of the snow storm slowly cresting the nearby mountain may indeed be beautiful writing but meh, who cares? My advice: leave out the nature shit and get back to the real world; give us this instead:
xxx/ellauri385.html on line 373: But these are fancies of a few: the rest, Mutta näitä haaveilee vaan Lamb Bulletinin lukijat;
13