No subscription or hidden extras
Read through the most famous quotes by topic #les
1. Lesen ist ein bloßes Surrogat des eigenen Denkens. Man läßt dabei seine Gedanken von dem Andern am Gängelbande führen. [...] Lesen soll man nur dann, wann auch die Quelle der eigenen Gedanken stockt; was auch beim besten Kopfe oft genug der Fall seyn wird. Hingegen die eigenen, urkräftigen Gedanken verscheuchen, um ein Buch zur Hand zu nehmen, ist Sünde wider den heiligen Geist. Man gleicht alsdann Dem, der aus der freien Natur flieht, um ein Herbarium zu besehn, oder um schöne Gegenden im Kupferstiche zu betrachten. 2. Wann wir lesen, denkt ein Anderer für uns: wir wiederholen bloß den mentalen Prozeß. Es ist damit, wie wenn beim Schreibenlernen der Schüler die vom Lehrer mit Bleistift geschriebenen Züge mit der Feder nachzieht. Demnach ist beim Lesen die Arbeit des Denkens un zum großen Theile abgenommen. Daher die fühlbare Erleichterung, wenn wir von der Beschäftigung mit unseren eigenen Gedanken zum Lesen übergehn. Eben daher kommt es auch, daß wer sehr viel und fast den ganzen Tag liest, dazwischen aber sich in gedankenlosem Zeitvertreibe erholt, die Fähigkeit, selbst zu denken, allmälig verliert, - wie Einer, der immer reitet, zuletzt das Gehn verlernt. Solches aber ist der Fall sehr vieler Gelehrten: sie haben sich dumm gelesen. Denn beständiges, in jedem freien Augenblicke sogleich wieder aufgenommenes Lesen ist noch geisteslähmender, als beständige Handarbeit; da man bei dieser doch den eigenen Gedanken nachhängen kann. Aber wie eine Springfeder durch den anhaltenden Druck eines fremden Körpers ihre Elasticität endlich einbüßt; so der Geist die seine, durch fortwährendes Aufdringen fremder Gedanken. Und wie man durch zu viele Nahrung den Magen verdirbt und dadurch dem ganzen Leibe schadet; so kann man auch durch zu viele Geistesnahrung den Geist überfüllen und ersticken. Denn selbst das Gelesene eignet man sich erst durch späteres Nachdenken darüber an, durch Rumination. Liest man hingegen immerfort, ohne späterhin weiter daran zu denken; so faßt es nichtWurzel und geht meistens verloren: Ueberhaupt aber geht es mit der geistigen Nahrung nicht anders, als mit der leibichen: kaum der funfzigste Theil von dem, was man zu sich nimmt, wird assimilirt: das Uebrige geht durch Evaporation, Respiration, oder sonst ab. ↗
I was to grow used to hearing, around New York, the annoying way in which people would say: 'Edward Said, such a suave and articulate and witty man,' with the unspoken suffix 'for a Palestinian.' It irritated him, too, naturally enough, but in my private opinion it strengthened him in his determination to be an ambassador or spokesman for those who lived in camps or under occupation (or both). He almost overdid the ambassadorial aspect if you ask me, being always just too faultlessly dressed and spiffily turned out. Fools often contrasted this attention to his tenue with his membership of the Palestine National Council, the then-parliament-in-exile of the people without a land. In fact, his taking part in this rather shambolic assembly was a kind of noblesse oblige: an assurance to his landsmen (and also to himself) that he had not allowed and never would allow himself to forget their plight. The downside of this noblesse was only to strike me much later on. ↗
#bigotry #dress #edward-said #new-york #palestinian-national-council
...you make it sound like this is work. I’m having a hard time thinking about sex as a project to manage.” He barely touched the cheeks of her ass, just a little tickle on her flesh, and her muscles clenched. “Only because you don’t take it seriously.” “I take it very seriously,” she shot back. “No, you take the choice of your partner seriously, but not the sex itself. The sex itself you view as something you have to give up to get to what you really want, and that’s companionship and affection. You can’t buy those with sex, Avery. Those will come or not, and it doesn’t mean a damn thing to any man. Not really. He’ll take sex from you even if he doesn’t particularly like you. He’ll take it because you offer it up so easily. Again—not the relationship, but the sex. You’re offering me easy sex. Sex where I don’t have to work, but I want to work because I do like you and I do feel affection for you. Do you understand?” “You think I should ask for more.” “No, I think you should demand more.” “That doesn’t sound very submissive... ↗
#bdsm #demanding-more #erotica-romance #rules-on-sex #submissive
Though he never actually joined it, he was close to some civilian elements of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which was the most Communist (and in the rather orthodox sense) of the Palestinian formations. I remember Edward once surprising me by saying, and apropos of nothing: 'Do you know something I have never done in my political career? I have never publicly criticized the Soviet Union. It’s not that I terribly sympathize with them or anything—it's just that the Soviets have never done anything to harm me, or us.' At the time I thought this a rather naïve statement, even perhaps a slightly contemptible one, but by then I had been in parts of the Middle East where it could come as a blessed relief to meet a consecrated Moscow-line atheist-dogmatist, if only for the comparatively rational humanism that he evinced amid so much religious barking and mania. It was only later to occur to me that Edward's pronounced dislike of George Orwell was something to which I ought to have paid more attention. ↗
I am not one of those who believes—as Obama is said to believe—that a solution to the Palestinian statehood question would bring an end to Muslim resentment against the United States. (Incidentally, if he really does believe this, his lethargy and impotence in the face of Netanyahu's consistent double-dealing is even more culpable.) The Islamist fanatics have their own agenda, and, as in the case of Hamas and its Iranian backers, they have already demonstrated that nothing but the destruction of Israel and the removal of American influence from the region will possibly satisfy them. No, it is more the case that justice—and a homeland for the Palestinians—is a good and necessary cause in its own right. It is also a special legal and moral responsibility of the United States, which has several times declared a dual-statehood outcome to be its objective. ↗
#barack-obama #benjamin-netanyahu #foreign-policy #hamas #iran
A smaller rocket cut across the sky, trailing smoke. It exploded in a red heart. "Awwwww!" said the crowd. "Upside down," said Sean. The heart was, indeed, upside down. It grew and grew, upside down, until it's lights trailed and faded. A bigger rocket exploded in bright golden sparks, and then came another red heart. "Upside down," said all the boys. Three explosions layered on top of one another, gold, blue, pink. Then still another red heart exploded, growing and growing before it faded. "Upside down," said everyone in the boat but me. My own heart expanded for Adam. I whispered, "I know what he meant. ↗
He sighed, then said, "So basically, you're stalking her." "I am NOT stalking her." I insisted. "That's where you come in. If I followed her by myself, someone who did not understand the situation and did not realize that I am so responsible-" McGillicuddy snorted. "- might mistake what I am doing for stalking. However, her big brother is with me. Therefore we are protecting her. ↗
[Israel's military occupation is] in gross violation of international law and has been from the outset. And that much, at least, is fully recognized, even by the United States, which has overwhelming and, as I said, unilateral responsibility for these crimes. So George Bush No. 1, when he was the U.N. ambassador, back in 1971, he officially reiterated Washington's condemnation of Israel's actions in the occupied territories. He happened to be referring specifically to occupied Jerusalem. In his words, actions in violation of the provisions of international law governing the obligations of an occupying power, namely Israel. He criticized Israel's failure "to acknowledge its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention as well as its actions which are contrary to the letter and spirit of this Convention." [...] However, by that time, late 1971, a divergence was developing, between official policy and practice. The fact of the matter is that by then, by late 1971, the United States was already providing the means to implement the violations that Ambassador Bush deplored. [...] on December 5th [2001], there had been an important international conference, called in Switzerland, on the 4th Geneva Convention. Switzerland is the state that's responsible for monitoring and controlling the implementation of them. The European Union all attended, even Britain, which is virtually a U.S. attack dog these days. They attended. A hundred and fourteen countries all together, the parties to the Geneva Convention. They had an official declaration, which condemned the settlements in the occupied territories as illegal, urged Israel to end its breaches of the Geneva Convention, some "grave breaches," including willful killing, torture, unlawful deportation, unlawful depriving of the rights of fair and regular trial, extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly. Grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, that's a serious term, that means serious war crimes. The United States is one of the high contracting parties to the Geneva Convention, therefore it is obligated, by its domestic law and highest commitments, to prosecute the perpetrators of grave breaches of the conventions. That includes its own leaders. Until the United States prosecutes its own leaders, it is guilty of grave breaches of the Geneva Convention, that means war crimes. And it's worth remembering the context. It is not any old convention. These are the conventions established to criminalize the practices of the Nazis, right after the Second World War. What was the U.S. reaction to the meeting in Geneva? The U.S. boycotted the meeting [..] and that has the usual consequence, it means the meeting is null and void, silence in the media. ↗
