ellauri052.html on line 778: He still heard as if it were his own disembodied spirit hearing, standing at some distance behind him. It drew nearer however, his spirit. And the violent striking of blood in his chest was sinking quieter, allowing his mind to come back. He realised that he was leaning with all his weight on the soft body of the other man. It startled him, because he thought he had withdrawn. He recovered himself, and sat up. But he was still vague and unestablished. He put out his hand to steady himself. It touched the hand of Gerald, that was lying out on the floor. And Gerald's hand closed warm and sudden over Birkin's, they remained exhausted and breathless, the one hand clasped closely over the other. It was Birkin whose hand, in swift response, had closed in a strong, warm clasp over the hand of the other. Gerald´s clasp had been sudden and momentaneous.
ellauri052.html on line 829: `No? There you are, we are not alike. I'll put a dressing-gown on.' Birkin remained alone, looking at the fire. His mind had reverted to Ursula. She seemed to return again into his consciousness. Gerald came down wearing a gown of broad-barred, thick black-and-green silk, brilliant and striking.
ellauri053.html on line 579: Aika striking on tää Arskan autismi. Kellekkä se oikein puhuu? Izexensä izellensä höpäjää. Osaxe johtuu tästä typerästä uuskritiikistä, mutta onse varmaan myös Arskan habitus.
ellauri053.html on line 1421: "When you are get older losing your hair" - what a striking image of the old age.

ellauri072.html on line 633: When Gabe came home, Wallace followed him into his room and killed him by striking him in the head with the pipe wrench. Wallace then waited for Susan.
ellauri077.html on line 816: Meaningless words. In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning. Words like romantic, plastic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality, as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the sense that they not only do not point to any discoverable object, but are hardly ever expected to do so by the reader. When one critic writes, "The outstanding feature of Mr. X's work is its living quality," while another writes, "The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's work is its peculiar deadness," the reader accepts this as a simple difference opinion. If words like black and white were involved, instead of the jargon words dead and living, he would see at once that language was being used in an improper way.
ellauri095.html on line 182: The language of Hopkins´s poems is often striking. His imagery can be simple, as in Heaven-Haven, where the comparison is between a nun entering a convent and a ship entering a harbour out of a storm. It can be splendidly metaphysical and intricate, as it is in As Kingfishers Catch Fire, where he leaps from one image to another to show how each thing expresses its own uniqueness, and how divinity reflects itself through all of them.
ellauri095.html on line 203: The suggestion of metaphysical significance is obvious in an 1874 note by Hopkins on waves: “The laps of running foam striking the sea-wall double on themselves and return in nearly the same order and shape in which they came. This is mechanical reflection and is the same as optical: indeed all nature is mechanical, but then it is not seen that mechanics contain that which is beyond mechanics.”
ellauri101.html on line 507: Ladis: A strong, independant, and feminine woman. A woman that is self sufficient and also nurturing. An attractive, yet humble woman. A striking woman, able to hypnotize men with her manner and intelligence. "If I had to choose between a (Betty) and a (Marilyn), I would choose a Ladis!"

ellauri117.html on line 275: He still heard as if it were his own disembodied spirit hearing, standing at some distance behind him. It drew nearer however, his spirit. And the violent striking of blood in his chest was sinking quieter, allowing his mind to come back. He realised that he was leaning with all his weight on the soft body of the other man. It startled him, because he thought he had withdrawn. He recovered himself, and sat up. But he was still vague and unestablished. He put out his hand to steady himself. It touched the hand of Gerald, that was lying out on the floor. And Gerald's hand closed warm and sudden over Birkin's, they remained exhausted and breathless, the one hand clasped closely over the other. It was Birkin whose hand, in swift response, had closed in a strong, warm clasp over the hand of the other. Gerald´s clasp had been sudden and momentaneous.
ellauri117.html on line 326: `No? There you are, we are not alike. I'll put a dressing-gown on.' Birkin remained alone, looking at the fire. His mind had reverted to Ursula. She seemed to return again into his consciousness. Gerald came down wearing a gown of broad-barred, thick black-and-green silk, brilliant and striking.
ellauri141.html on line 111: At his house, probably, Horace became intimate with Polio, and the many persons of consideration whose friendship he appears to have enjoyed. Through Mæcenas, also, it is probable Horace was introduced to Augustus; but when that happened is uncertain. In B. C. 37, Mæcenas was deputed by Augustus to meet M. Antonius at Brundisium, and he took Horace with him on that journey, of which a detailed account is given in the fifth Satire of the first book. Horace appears to have parted from the rest of the company at Brundisium, and perhaps returned to Rome by Tarentum and Venusia. (See S. i. 5, Introduction.) Between this journey and B. C. 32, Horace received from his friend the present of a small estate in the valley of the Digentia (Licenza), situated about thirty-four miles from Rome, and fourteen from Tibur, in the Sabine country. Of this property he gives a description in his Epistle to Quintius (i. 16), and he appears to have lived there a part of every year, and to have been fond of the place, which was very quiet and retired, being four miles from the nearest town, Varia (Vico Varo), a municipium perhaps, but not a place of any importance. During this interval he continued to write Satires and Epodes, but also, it appears probable, some of the Odes, which some years later he published, and others which he did not publish. These compositions, no doubt, were seen by his friends, and were pretty well known before any of them were collected for publication. The first book of the Satires was published probably in B. C. 35, the Epodes in B. C. 30, and the second book of Satires in the following year, when Horace was about thirty-five years old. When Augustus returned from Asia, in B. C. 29, and closed the gates of Janus, being the acknowledged head of the republic, Horace appeared among his most hearty adherents. He wrote on this occasion one of his best Odes (i. 2), and employed his pen in forwarding those reforms which it was the first object of Augustus to effect. (See Introduction to C. ii. 15.) His most striking Odes appear, for the most part, to have been written after the establishment of peace. Some may have been written before, and probably were. But for some reason it would seem that he gave himself more to lyric poetry after his thirty-fifth year than he had done before. He had most likely studied the Greek poets while he was at Athens, and some of his imitations may have been written early. If so, they were most probably improved and polished, from time to time, (for he must have had them by him, known perhaps only to a few friends, for many years,) till they became the graceful specimens of artificial composition that they are. Horace continued to employ himself in this kind of writing (on a variety of subjects, convivial, amatory, political, moral,—some original, many no doubt suggested by Greek poems) till B. C. 24, when there are reasons for thinking the first three books of the Odes were published. During this period, Horace appears to have passed his time at Rome, among the most distinguished men of the day, or at his house in the country, paying occasional visits to Tibur, Præneste, and Baiæ, with indifferent health, which required change of air. About the year B. C. 26 he was nearly killed by the falling of a tree, on his own estate, which accident he has recorded in one of his Odes (ii. 13), and occasionally refers to; once in the same stanza with a storm in which he was nearly lost off Cape Palinurus, on the western coast of Italy. When this happened, nobody knows. After the publication of the three books of Odes, Horace seems to have ceased from that style of writing, or nearly so; and the only other compositions we know of his having produced in the next few years are metrical Epistles to different friends, of which he published a volume probably in B. C. 20 or 19. He seems to have taken up the study of the Greek philosophical writers, and to have become a good deal interested in them, and also to have been a little tired of the world, and disgusted with the jealousies his reputation created. His health did not improve as he grew older, and he put himself under the care of Antonius Musa, the emperor’s new physician. By his advice he gave up, for a time at least, his favorite Baiæ. But he found it necessary to be a good deal away from Rome, especially in the autumn and winter.
ellauri156.html on line 588: Sixth, our text makes Uriah a hero and a dress model, not a chump and not a sucker. There are those who might conclude that Uriah's elevator may not “go to the top floor” (as my neighbor used to say of those she considered less than bright). Is Uriah gullible? Is he ignorant of what David is trying to do? Is he a coon? A spook? I don't think so. This is what makes his loyalty to David and to God's Law so striking. I think it is safe to say that here Uriah is very much like David in his earlier days, in terms of his response to Saul. As Saul sought to kill David unjustly, because he was jealous of his successes, so also David submitted himself to faithfully serving Saul, his master. He left his safety and future in God's hands, and God did not fail him. Who? Not Uriah, apparently.
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.
ellauri164.html on line 532: 1. Moses sinned by not following the Lord’s instruction. The Lord told Moses to take his staff in hand and bid the rock to bring forth water. He was told to speak to the rock, but instead he struck it—twice. The striking of the rock, while not specifically directed according to the passage in Numbers, does not seem particularly egregious; in fact, in another description of this event (see Exodus 17:6) God does tell Moses to strike it. The Fathers of the Church (e.g., St. Jerome) did not view this as sinful, even interpreting the striking of the rock twice as a sign of the two bars of the cross.
ellauri164.html on line 609: The main thrust of this book is that the sin of Moses recorded in Numbers 20:1-13 is linked to the unlawful and wilful act of trifling with the sacred staff in striking the rock. This is because the staff of Moses has already become the staff of God (Exod. 4:20;17;9).
ellauri164.html on line 675: However, God did not say either of these actions was the problem, nor did Moses believe these were the problem. In fact, nowhere does the text say Moses’s sin was striking the rock instead of speaking to it or taking credit for the miracle.
ellauri164.html on line 681: That’s ALL God had to say about it. He didn’t criticize Moses for striking the rock when he was told to speak to it. Similarly, God did not indicate that Moses was trying to take credit for the miracle. He said Moses had failed to believe in Him.
ellauri164.html on line 717: Conclusion: Moses’s sin wasn’t striking the rock as such when he was told to speak to it; his sin was losing faith in God’s ability to use the Israelites for anything positive. This is why God could say that Moses didn’t trust in Him and is also why Moses could say God was angry with him on account of the people.
ellauri164.html on line 875: This gets us back to the question of what, exactly, Moses’ sin was. Many commentators focus on the physical actions that Moses took in verses 9-11. Some say Moses sin was striking the rock rather than speaking to it, but Moses was told to take the staff of God. Exodus 17:5-6 had Moses striking the rock to cause water to come out of the rock (in fact, it’s actually the same rock of Meribah!), so it’s possible to read an inference that the staff was to be used to strike the rock. Some commentators see Moses’ harsh words for Israel as the sin, or perhaps that he speaks to the people rather than speaking to the rock. Regardless of which of these views, they don’t account for what the text itself says: Numbers 20:12 makes it clear that the sin of Moses and Aaron was “…you have not believed Me, to treat Me as holy in the sight of the sons of Israel.” Indeed, focusing on Moses’ actions of striking the rock or speaking harshly makes it seem doubly unfair to Aaron, who had neither spoken nor struck the rock.
ellauri164.html on line 890: Many brethren and sisters, not to mention those outside the church, have a wrong understanding of what the sin of Moses was and its implication(s). Often when asked or giving comments on the matter, they say that his sin was in smiting the rock twice instead of once. They think that, since at first God told Moses to take the rod and smite the rock, and the next time He also told him to take the rod, therefore, he was also instructed to strike once. Such an understanding erodes the whole essence that God had designed in the type that would later be seen in the antitype. As it will soon be clear, striking the rock even once [that second time] would have been sin on the part of Moses. In view of this, therefore, it is important for us to possess the true facts on this matter.
ellauri164.html on line 937: There was a second sin that was also committed in that same event. It was not revealed until The Psalmist described it: “it went ill with Moses” because “he spoke rashly with his lips” (Psa 106:33). When we look at what Moses said, we can see exactly how rash he was! “Hear now, ye rebels; shall we bring you forth water out of this rock?” This was a serious lapse in judgment. Moses was not going to bring water out of that rock. So, there was a big problem with that “we.” Hence, first by striking the rock, and second by using a pronoun that elevated them, Moses “believed not in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel.”
ellauri164.html on line 975: The Israelites had a history of trusting in God because of what they saw. The most famous example, which we repeat in the daily morning service, quotes their experience after the crossing of the Sea of Reeds: “Israel saw the wondrous power which God had wielded against the Egyptians, the people feared God; they had faith in God and in God’s servant, Moses” (Exod. 14:31). They have needed this public, indisputable evidence of their eyes ever since. God knows that what they see is what is most important. And what he wants them to see is Moses speaking—not striking the rock, as he was commanded to do on the former occasion.
ellauri171.html on line 986: The striking fact is that the woman is blamed and is punished by being made subservient to the man. In relation to the woman, the man becomes the agent of God.
ellauri192.html on line 299: The controversy over Handke’s support of Milosevic dates back 20 years, but the striking political differences between him and Tokarczuk reached a point of particular clarity in 2014. In that year, Handke was given the International Ibsen Prize, but mass outrage led him to reject the prize money while still accepting the award. In his accompanying speech, he said his critics should “go to hell.” (He’d previously met controversy over a literary award in 2006, when he turned down Germany’s Heinrich Heine prize after authorities attempted to withdraw it after he attended Milosevic’s funeral.)
ellauri196.html on line 635: In 1945 and 1946, an unprecedented wave of major strikes affected the United States; by February 1946 nearly 2 million workers were engaged in strikes or other labor disputes. Organized labor had largely refrained from striking during World War II, but with the end of the war, labor leaders were eager to share in the gains from a postwar economic resurgence.
ellauri197.html on line 309: Once more, the variation of verb tenses happens within this stanza to continue the representation of her uncertain mind frame since the “Bloom [k]eeps making November difficult,” which is present tense, but she “was almost bold,” which is past tense. Though there is a logic behind this particular verb tense change, the pattern is still striking enough to merit mention.
ellauri210.html on line 729: Di Chirico è un lottatore completo, efficace sia nella lotta a piedi che in quella a terra. Tra i suoi principali punti di forza figurano l'abilità nelle prese e un ottimo striking.
ellauri210.html on line 1256: "The most striking result of our present system of farming out the national land and capital to private individuals has been the division of society into hostile classes, with large appetites and no dinners at one extreme, and large dinners and no appetites at the other".
ellauri214.html on line 74: J.K. Rowling did not limit herself to being racist, she also included anti-semitic stereotypes in her books. Many readers have noticed how the descriptions of the goblins in the Harry Potter series bear striking resemblance to anti-semitic stereotypes. The goblins are hooked-nosed creatures who work at the wizarding bank Gringotts and are obsessed with gold and money.
ellauri222.html on line 167: Most reviews were enthusiastic, though. “Augie March” was not a best-seller, but it sold well and won a major award. The year it came out, Bellow took a job at Bard College. He and Anita were separated, and he had a new girlfriend, Sondra Tschacbasov, called Sasha. She was sixteen years younger and strikingly attractive. They met at Partisan Review, where she worked as a secretary.
ellauri254.html on line 505: In uniting his philosophy and personal preferences, Klages generally opposed sexuality as a formal concept. Mitä vetoa että Ludi oli bi? Even during the heyday of sexual and bohemian rebellion, Herf writes, "Klages struck most observers as strikingly clean and honourable in erotic matters."
ellauri260.html on line 345: Aika striking miten tähän asti suht ymmärrettävä Eucken änkyttää tässä kolmannessa luvussa. Eihän tässä ole enää päätä eikä häntääkään. Onxtää jotain salakieltä vai, eufemismia? Onkohan luku IV selvempää ja tutunomaisempaa sosialismin nakerrusta? Siihen viittaisi se että seuraavassa luvussa on paljon jonkun sosialistin siihen tuhertamia reunahuomautuxia ja kysäreitä.
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.
ellauri389.html on line 75: The essay's preoccupation with porcelain is a striking contrast to the way Chinese porcelain appears jumbled among the Japan lacquer, Javanese coffee, and Jamaican sugar that appear in Alexander Pope's Rape of the Lock (1712, 1714), and it is similarly distinguished from the Chinese pagodas promiscuously mingling with Egyptian crocodiles and Indian Buddhas in Thomas De Quincey's more contemporary orientalist work, Confessions of an English Opium-Eater (1821).
ellauri389.html on line 455: Donne’s poetry is marked by strikingly original departures from the conventions of 16th-century English verse, particularly that of Sir Philip Sidney and Edmund Spenser.
ellauri392.html on line 743: Another Bellow’s novel, Dangling Man, is written in the personal voice of the protagonist whose principal domain is his own sensibility, and whose principal audience is he himself. The text is striking in its exclusion of the female voice, its enactment of a homo-social male world, and the overt narcissism and misogyny of its protagonist, Joseph. It is the story of a young man caught in the trap of self-pity, who believes that intellectual or spiritual enlightenment is to be attained by personal isolation within the confines of a cheap New York boarding house room while he studies the writers of the Enlightenment. Failing that, he joins the Merchant Marine just to fail there too. Saul's own life story to the dot.
xxx/ellauri084.html on line 804: Frome is the most striking figure in Starkfield, the ruin of a man with a careless powerful look in spite of a lameness checking each step like the jerk of a chain.
xxx/ellauri125.html on line 298: One of the many striking and often shocking metaphors within “Yeezus,” the new album from rapper Kanye West, arrives halfway into the 10-song release, during a song called “I’m in It.” It involves a quote by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.: “Thank God almighty, free at last,” raps West, referencing a phrase from 50 years ago that the civil-rights leader used in relation to the plight of African Americans.
xxx/ellauri149.html on line 498: Parallel to his academic work, he attempted to establish a German national religion whose most striking manifestations were an aggressive anti-Semitism and expansionism.
xxx/ellauri157.html on line 343: Scholem’s first marriage to Escha Burchhardt was on the rocks by the early 1930s. Not only was he imagining himself in love with Kitty Steinschneider (there is no evidence that she reciprocated), but he was also pursuing a relationship with his student, Fania Freud (they married in 1936). His diaries betray a sense of emotional chaos, as he wrote to his friend, Walter Benjamin, explaining to Benjamin why he could not host him in Jerusalem. He also wrote to Benjamin that he was struggling with questions of good and evil and whether an evil person could also be just. While he doesn’t say whether these questions were purely theoretical or not, it is striking that such ruminations came at exactly the time when his personal life was in turmoil.
xxx/ellauri165.html on line 316: Seeing an opportunity to make some money by taking a cut of sales, Greville sent her to sit for his friend, the painter George Romney, who was looking for a new model and muse. It was then that Emma became the subject of many of Romney's most famous portraits, and soon became London's biggest celebrity. So began Romney's lifelong obsession with her, sketching her nude and clothed in many poses that he later used to create paintings in her absence. Through the popularity of Romney's work and particularly of his striking-looking young model, Emma became well known in society circles, under the name of "Emma Hart". She was witty, intelligent, a quick learner, elegant and, as paintings of her attest, extremely beautiful. Romney was fascinated by her looks and ability to adapt to the ideals of the age. Romney and other artists painted her in many guises, foreshadowing her later "attitudes".
xxx/ellauri167.html on line 478: It also occurred to me that you might have had Ideas to that Purport when you disapproved of the Meetings of the Democratic-Societies, which appeared to me to be a Branch of that Order, though many Members may be entirely ignorant of the Plan. Those Men who are so much attached to French Principles, have all the Marks of Jacobinism. They first cast off all religious Restraints, and then became fit for perpetrating every Act of Inhumanity. And, it is remarkable, that most of them are actually Scoffers at all religious Principles. It is said that the ‘Lodge Theodore in Bavaria became notorious for the many bold and dangerous Sentiments in Religion and Politics that were uttered in their Harangues, and its Members were remarkable for their Zeal in making Proselytes’; (and no Wonder since the Order was to rule the World.) Is not there a striking Similarity between their Proceedings and those of many Societies that oppose the Measures of our present Government?
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 197: But why did aging Rodin in his 60s capture Rilke’s imagination at the turn of the last century? It’s hard to see at first. What made Rodin radical then is no longer radical today. In his “Self-Portrait” (1890), Rodin grimaces amidst rough marks. The picture emblematizes how Rodin heralded raw and unpolished sculptures that were strikingly modern. It was a breath of fresh air since most of early-19th-century sculpture was smooth, neoclassical, and to be harshly honest, predictably dainty. Charles Baudelaire lamented this nadir in 1846 when he wrote his provocative essay “Why Sculpture is Boring.” Rodin went on to prove Baudelaire wrong. He showed how sculpture could be modern with distorted, coarse, rough textures. Rodin knocked the idealized body off its pedestal. And the modern sculptors that came after him saw no reason to put it back.
xxx/ellauri218.html on line 453: President of the sanitation workers’ union John Delury was jailed. Mayor Lindsay asked other unions, including District Council 37 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the city’s largest public employee union, to provide scabs and have their members pick up the garbage. In solidarity with the striking workers, other city workers refused.
xxx/ellauri218.html on line 458: But Rockefeller was just pretending to shed tears for the Ludlow martyrs. Three years later in 1971, Rockefeller would massacre another group of striking workers, the Attica prisoners.
xxx/ellauri224.html on line 137: David Walsh of World Socialist Web Site wrote: "The 'hope' now Moore expresses near the conclusion of the work that we might 'get rid of the whole rotten system that gave us Donald Trump' is empty and meaningless, in so far as he continues to support one of the principal props of that rotten system, the Democratic Party. Whatever occasional insights and striking imagery it might offer, Fahrenheit 11/9 is false and dishonest at its core."
xxx/ellauri380.html on line 425: In eight remarkable chapters of August 1914 (the so-called Stolypin cycle), Solzhenitsyn painted a portrait of the statesman Pyotr Stolypin, scourge of the revolutionary left and reactionary right alike and the last best hope for Russia’s salvation. Prime Minister of Russia from 1906 until 1911, Stolypin’s abiding concern was to promote far-reaching agrarian reforms that would lead to the creation of a “solid class of peasant proprietors” in Russia. He believed that a property-owning peasantry would provide the social basis for a revitalized monarchy in Russia. He was a “liberal conservative” who rejected pan-Slavist delusions and who advocated a monarchy that respected the rule of law, one that could govern in cooperation with a “society” that had an increasing stake in the existing social order. But unfortunately Stolypin was shot (in the presence of the Tsar) at the Kiev opera house in September 1911. His assassin was, quite strikingly, a double agent of the secret police and revolutionary terrorists!
48