| = Thank you Eugenia...|
|Thank you very much Nia, for recommending my text:-)|
Have an unsnowy day!
| = Borders of life...|
Dely Cristian Marian
I encounter some sort of blocks when it comes to speaking, but what you've said here has been alive in my feelings, in my thoughts, deep into my cells. (I'm not sure about what's got in and what's got out) The fact is I understand well what you're transmitting through this essay.
“All is vanity”, indeed – but, how can one take its glory without making it part of himself (in case it wasn't already there)? You see, I think the effects of yin and yang applies to vanity as well. I may add “...and business” to the epigraph.
I happen to believe the evolution theory holds a lot of truth about us, even though I haven't read Darwin and many other celebrities. I think physical mutations were possible as we now are able to change our senses. Yes, I've been crazy enough to imagine the “utopia” of the first species of chordata, somewhere after a storm – the metamorphosis of time. A vision I somehow interwoven with those three metaphors of time that Blaga wrote about in “Horizon and style”, at different levels of course. Apparently, along the way, homo sapiens became content with their physical fitness. The land of promises was at their feet.
Having said that, I fear some readers might think I have something to do with a “movement” that makes no sense to me, which is why I don't want to talk about.
Vanity is weak to me, but it gets fed around the “big picture”:)
I should mention that people have beliefs their are happy with, and you and I know they also speak with their hearts to propagate or to defend them. Hence, who's to tell there is something more true than the metamorphosis of our spirit.
Well, my friend, in this light I see: time is wasting me.
Nevertheless, I experience bright passages of life whenever I listen to someone as open-minded and open-hearted like yourself.
On the other hand, hope I'll read “His Dark Materials” soon enough.
Have a nice weekend,
| = bright passengers....|
First of all let me thank you for this truly honouring dialog, which is in my opinion the "bread" of meaningful literature. Most great authors (and I do not consider ourselves of being less, at all) have left a substantial part of their talents in their correspondence, which made up for the "unspoken" realm of their genius. And again, I do not consider ourselves of being less than that... As I said in a previous post, I despise modesty when it has to do with he act of creation! Modesty is a must when doing charitable works, but useless and harmful when it comes to art... I could write volumes (I know, I should keep my promises:-)) about what does modesty truly covers when coming from artists; and it's rather pathetic...
Back to our sheep, my problem with mutational evolution is the same as that of many evolutionists themselves, i.e. genetical mutations are always degenerative, and never progenerative; what is seen as adaptations is not exactly mutations, but development within the existent pool of genes... This is why Stephen Jay Gould came with his rather lunatic "punctuated equilibrium" which basically says one day a dino egg hatched a bird:-))))) Well, that' not exactly science...
Oh, come on, why do we have to believe that 1 plus 1 equals tooth-ferries? Evolutionism is more hilarious than creationism; trust me, I'm a graduate expert in the field...
And as a final thought, thanking you for your very kind observation, those bright passages always require two ends...