cleaning up so well (jones_casey) wrote,
cleaning up so well

  • Music:


the problem, how to convey five people to elveston, with a carriage that would only hold four, must somehow be solved.

'dick,' she cried suddenly,
'perhaps i might - perhaps in time - perhaps - '
'there is no perhaps about the matter,' interrupted dick.
'i must go and bring the phaeton.'
and with that he strode from the station, all in a glow of passion and virtue.
esther, whose eyes had come alive and her cheeks flushed during these last words,
relapsed in a second into a state of petrifaction.
she remained without motion during his absence,
and when he returned suffered herself to be put back into the phaeton,
and driven off on the return journey like an idiot or a tired child.

the old siberian, although energetic enough when her own safety was in question, was frightfully pale. she expected some terrible scene.

now in character-studies the pleasure that we take is critical; we watch, we approve, we smile at incongruities, we are moved to sudden heats of sympathy with courage, suffering or virtue. but the characters are still themselves, they are not us; the more clearly they are depicted, the more widely so they stand away from us, the more imperiously do they thrust us back into our place as a spectator. i cannot identify myself with rawdon crawley or with eugene de rastignac, for i have scarce a hope or fear in common with them.

after a period of well- doing several of these have become backsliders and reverted again to lying and swindling. very few appear to have been cured, but yet some of the facts of betterment are most convincing. this author states that, at the most, one dares to ponder over the point as to whether there are not cases which recover, particularly when the pathological lying is a phenomenon of adolescence.

our own material is, in part, too recently studied to form anything like a generalization concerning prognosis. many years have to elapse before one can be sure there is not going to be a recurrence.

plato finds what to us appears to be the answer of common sense--that Not-being is the relative or other of Being, the defining and distinguishing principle, and that some ideas combine with others, but not all with all. it is remarkable however that he offers this obvious reply only as the result of a long and tedious enquiry; by a great effort he is able to look down as 'from a height' on the 'friends of the ideas' as well as on the pre-socratic philosophies. yet he is merely asserting principles which no one who could be made to understand them would deny.

thursday cxxiii

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded