No subscription or hidden extras
Read through the most famous quotes by topic #literature
En el muro de Facebook hay una opción que te permite añadir "Me gusta" al comentario o la foto de otro internauta. El pictograma es una mano cerrada con el pulgar hacia arriba. También ofrece la posibilidad, en caso de arrepentimiento, de sustituirlo por un "Ya no me gusta". Eso es todo. La red social de Zuckerberg no admite la alternativa de matizar esa adhesión o ese arrepentimiento con algún estado intermedio, quizá titubeante o más gaseoso. Sólo acepta la rotundidad de un sí o un no, del blanco o el negro, con el pulgar hacia arriba o hacia abajo, sin medias tintas. La duda ha sido expulsada de esta arcadia digital y condenada a vagar por el desierto de territorios más lejanos y lentos, es decir, más literarios [...] Ahora bien, pensar consiste justamente en lo contrario. Pensar implica el compromiso radical de ir un paso más allá del "Me gusta" o "No me gusta", de suspender la fase infantil de la imposición caprichosa de nuestros antojos. Aquí no sirve eso tan socorrido del "Porque lo digo yo" y el puñetazo en la mesa. Hay que razonar, justificar, argumentar con palabras de peso nuestro amor, nuestro rechazo, lo cual es complicado e incómodo, ya que puedes equivocarte o quedar en ridículo. O puedes caer en la paradoja de aquel personaje de Monterroso, un escritor cuya esposa, tras desvelar los hábitos de trabajo de él, concluía: «Cuando no se le ocurre nada escribe pensamientos». ↗
It can also be useful to politics, enabling that science to discover how much of it is no more than verbal construction, myth, literary tops. Politics, like literature, must above all know itself and distrust itself. As a final observation, I should like to add that it is impossible today for anyone to feel innocent, if in whatever we do or say we can discover a hidden motive - that of a white man, or a male, or the possessor of a certain income, or a member of a given economic system, or a sufferer from a certain neurosis - this should not induce in us either a universal sense of guilt or an attitude of universal accusation. When we become aware of our disease or of our hidden motives, we have already begun to get the better of them. What matters is the way in which we accept our motives and live through the ensuing crisis. This is the only chance we have of becoming different from the way we are - that is, the only way of starting to invent a new way of being. ↗
In learning a language, when from mere words we reach the laws of words, we have gained a great deal. But if we stop at that point and concern ourselves only with the marvels of the formation of a language, seeking the hidden reason of all its apparent caprices, we do not reach that end, for grammar is not literature… When we come to literature, we find that, though it conforms to the rules of grammar, it is yet a thing of joy; it is freedom itself. The beauty of a poem is bound by strict laws, yet it transcends them. The laws are its wings. They do not keep it weighed down. They carry it to freedom. Its form is in law, but its spirit is in beauty. Law is the first step toward freedom, and beauty is the complete liberation which stands on the pedestal of law. Beauty harmonizes in itself the limit and the beyond – the law and the liberty. ↗
The truth is, everyone likes to look down on someone. If your favorites are all avant-garde writers who throw in Sanskrit and German, you can look down on everyone. If your favorites are all Oprah Book Club books, you can at least look down on mystery readers. Mystery readers have sci-fi readers. Sci-fi can look down on fantasy. And yes, fantasy readers have their own snobbishness. I’ll bet this, though: in a hundred years, people will be writing a lot more dissertations on Harry Potter than on John Updike. Look, Charles Dickens wrote popular fiction. Shakespeare wrote popular fiction—until he wrote his sonnets, desperate to show the literati of his day that he was real artist. Edgar Allan Poe tied himself in knots because no one realized he was a genius. The core of the problem is how we want to define “literature”. The Latin root simply means “letters”. Those letters are either delivered—they connect with an audience—or they don’t. For some, that audience is a few thousand college professors and some critics. For others, its twenty million women desperate for romance in their lives. Those connections happen because the books successfully communicate something real about the human experience. Sure, there are trashy books that do really well, but that’s because there are trashy facets of humanity. What people value in their books—and thus what they count as literature—really tells you more about them than it does about the book. ↗
To make someone an icon is to make him an abstraction, and abstractions are incapable of vital communication with living people.10 10 One has only to spend a term trying to teach college literature to realize that the quickest way to kill an author's vitality for potential readers is to present that author ahead of his time as "great" or "classic." Because then the author becomes for the students like medicine or vegetables, something the authorities have declared "good for them" that they "ought to like," at which point the students' nictitating membranes come down, and everyone just goes through the requisite motions of criticism and paper-writing without feeling one real or relevant thing. It's like removing all oxygen from the room before trying to start a fire. ↗
I needed out. The Jeep wasn’t fast enough. I shut it down, grabbed the keys and started running like a bear was at my heels. I couldn’t even see Henry anymore through my tears so it surprised me when he caught me in his arms halfway. The first thing I did was pound on his chest and ask him why he hadn’t called. The second thing I did was kiss him so hard he couldn’t answer me. ↗
#glass-girl #henry-whitmire #high-school #laura-anderson-kurk #long-distance-relationship
I believe that children in this country need a more robust literary diet than they are getting. …It does not hurt them to read about good and evil, love and hate, life and death. Nor do I think they should read only about things that they understand. '…a man’s reach should exceed his grasp.' So should a child’s. For myself, I will never talk down to, or draw down to, children. (from the author's acceptance speech for the Caldecott award) ↗
Dixon was alive again. Consciousness was upon him before he could get out of the way; not for him the slow, gracious wandering from the halls of sleep, but a summary, forcible ejection. He lay sprawled, too wicked to move, spewed up like a broken spider-crab on the tarry shingle of morning. The light did him harm, but not as much as looking at things did; he resolved, having done it once, never to move his eyeballs again. A dusty thudding in his head made the scene before him beat like a pulse. His mouth had been used as a latrine by some small creature of the night, and then as its mausoleum. During the night, too, he'd somehow been on a cross-country run and then been expertly beaten up by secret police. He felt bad. ↗
#hangover #humor #literature #humor
Resta-nos esclarecer a parte que nesse golfo fantástico cabe ao imaginário indireto, ou seja, o conjunto de imagens que a cultura nos fornece, seja ela cultura de massa ou outra forma de tradição. Esta questão suscita de imediato uma outra: que futuro estará reservado à imaginação individual nessa que se convencionou chamar a "civilização da imagem"? O poder de evocar imagens [i]in absentia[/i] continuará a desenvolver-se numa humanidade cada vez mais inundada pelo dilúvio das imagens pré-fabricadas? Antigamente a memória visiva de um individuo estava limitada ao patrimônio de suas experiências diretas e a um reduzido repertório de imagens refletidas pela cultura; a possibilidade de dar forma a mitos pessoais nascia do modo pelo qual os fragmentos dessa memória se combinavam entre si em abordagens inesperadas e sugestivas. Hoje somos bombardeados por uma tal quantidade de imagens a ponto de não podermos distinguir mais a experiência direta daquilo que vimos há poucos segundos na televisão. Em nossa memória se depositam, por estratos sucessivos, mil estilhaços de imagens, semelhantes a um depósito de lixo, onde é cada vez menos provável que uma delas adquira relevo ↗
Margarita was never short of money. She could buy whatever she liked. Her husband had plenty of interesting friends. Margarita never had to cook. Margarita knew nothing of the horrors of living in a shared flat. In short... was she happy? Not for a moment. ↗
