| The first excerpt represents the past or something you must release, and is drawn from The Jolly Corner by Henry James: absolutely professed. Yet he importantly qualified. "HE isn't
myself. He's the just so totally other person. But I do want to
see him," he added. "And I can. And I shall."
Their eyes met for a minute while he guessed from something in hers
that she divined his strange sense. But neither of them otherwise
expressed it, and her apparent understanding, with no protesting
shock, no easy derision, touched him more deeply than anything yet,
constituting for his stifled perversity, on the spot, an element
that was like breatheable air. What she said however was
unexpected. "Well, I'VE seen him."
"You -?"
|
The second excerpt represents the present or the deciding factor of the moment, and is drawn from Peter Pan by James M. Barrie: "Not of crocodiles," Hook corrected him, "but of that one
crocodile." He lowered his voice. "It liked my arm so much,
Smee, that it has followed me ever since, from sea to sea and
from land to land, licking its lips for the rest of me."
"In a way," said Smee, "it's sort of a compliment."
"I want no such compliments," Hook barked petulantly. "I want
Peter Pan, who first gave the brute its taste for me."
He sat down on a large mushroom, and now there was a quiver in
his voice. "Smee," he said huskily, "that crocodile would have
had me before this, but by a lucky chance it swallowed a clock
which goes tick tick inside it, and so before it can reach me I
Peter Pan |
The third excerpt represents the future or something you must embrace, and is drawn from Sophist by Plato: ages and countries, seems to have provoked a reaction towards Materialism.
The maintainers of this doctrine are described in the Theaetetus as
obstinate persons who will believe in nothing which they cannot hold in
their hands, and in the Sophist as incapable of argument. They are
probably the same who are said in the Tenth Book of the Laws to attribute
the course of events to nature, art, and chance. Who they were, we have no
means of determining except from Plato's description of them. His silence
respecting the Atomists might lead us to suppose that here we have a trace
of them. But the Atomists were not Materialists in the grosser sense of
the term, nor were they incapable of reasoning; and Plato would hardly have
described a great genius like Democritus in the disdainful terms which he
|
