| The first excerpt represents the past or something you must release, and is drawn from Padre Ignacio by Owen Wister: will not be able to spare you any longer. And then we are sure to meet.
But you shall hear from me soon, at any rate."
Again, as upon the first evening, the two exchanged a few courtesies,
more graceful and particular than we, who have not time, and fight no
duels, find worth a man's while at the present day. For duels are gone,
which is a very good thing, and with them a certain careful politeness,
which is a pity; but that is the way in the eternal profit and loss. So
young Gaston rode northward out of the mission, back to the world and his
fortune; and the Padre stood watching the dust after the rider had passed
from sight. Then he went into his room with a drawn face. But appearances
at least had been kept up to the end; the youth would never know of the
|
The second excerpt represents the present or the deciding factor of the moment, and is drawn from Sons and Lovers by D. H. Lawrence: in my grandmother's house--nay last month even?"
"Yes," he said; "I do! And I meant them! I can't help
that it's failed."
"It has failed because you want something else."
"It would have failed whether or not. YOU never believed
in me."
She laughed strangely.
He sat in silence. He was full of a feeling that she had
deceived him. She had despised him when he thought she worshipped him.
She had let him say wrong things, and had not contradicted him.
She had let him fight alone. But it stuck in his throat that she had
Sons and Lovers |
The third excerpt represents the future or something you must embrace, and is drawn from Phaedrus by Plato: better cause;' and do not 'both parties sometimes agree to tell lies'? Is
not pleading 'an art of speaking unconnected with the truth'? There is
another text of Socrates which must not be forgotten in relation to this
subject. In the endless maze of English law is there any 'dividing the
whole into parts or reuniting the parts into a whole'--any semblance of an
organized being 'having hands and feet and other members'? Instead of a
system there is the Chaos of Anaxagoras (omou panta chremata) and no Mind
or Order. Then again in the noble art of politics, who thinks of first
principles and of true ideas? We avowedly follow not the truth but the
will of the many (compare Republic). Is not legislation too a sort of
literary effort, and might not statesmanship be described as the 'art of
|
