Dialog Quotes

Leaders who do not act dialogically, but insist on imposing their decisions, do not organize the people--they manipulate them. They do not liberate, nor are they liberated: they oppress.

I really feel that we're not giving children enough credit for distinguishing what's right and what's wrong. I, for one, devoured fairy tales as a little girl. I certainly didn't believe that kissing frogs would lead me to a prince, or that eating a mysterious apple would poison me, or that with the magical "Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo" I would get a beautiful dress and a pumpkin carriage. I also don't believe that looking in a mirror and saying "Candyman, Candyman, Candyman" will make some awful serial killer come after me. I believe that many children recognize Harry Potter for what it is, fantasy literature. I'm sure there will always be some that take it too far, but that's the case with everything. I believe it's much better to engage in dialog with children to explain the difference between fantasy and reality. Then they are better equipped to deal with people who might have taken it too far.

...Truth is not born nor is it to be found inside the head of an individual person, it is born between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their dialogic interaction.

And enigmatic smile is worth ten pages of dialog.

What is realized in the novel is the process of coming to know one's own language as it is perceived in someone else's language, coming to know one's own belief system in someone else's system.

Reading is a dialog with oneself; it is self-reflection, which cultivates profound humanity. Reading is therefore essential to our development. It expands and enriches the personality like a seed that germinates after a long time and sends forth many blossom-laden branches. People who can say of a book, 'this changed my life' truly understand the meaning of happiness. Reading that sparks inner revolution is desperately needed to escape drowning in the rapidly advancing information society. Reading is more than intellectual ornamentation; it is a battle for the establishment for the self, a ceaseless challenge that keeps us young and vigorous.

Dialogic is not to be identified with love. But love without dialogic, without real outgoing to the other, reaching to the other, the love remaining with itself - this is called Lucifer.

The Lord of Rags and Tatters.

Kamu bener-bener selalu ngedapetin apa yang kamu mau ya?" | "Nggak semuanya. Karena aku belum memiliki kamu lagi." - Good Fight

The audience may forget a plot, the witty dialog or the special effects but they’ll always remember how a film made them feel.

Dalam sebuah skenario infiltrasi ide jangan pernah peduli dengan latar belakang lawan biacara kalian. Konsep egaliter menemukan tempat sebenar-benarnya. Bahkan termasuk ketika kalian wawancara pekerjaan misalnya. Sekali kalian merasa sebagai "orang yang mencari pekerjaan" sementara mereka yang menyeleksi adalah "orang yang memegang leher masa depan kalian," tidak akan pernah ada dialog yang sejajar, pantas, dan mengesankan.

Herr Kafka, essen Sie keine Eier." (As one and only piece of dialog K recalls from his meeting with Rudolf Steiner - "Mr. Kafka don't eat eggs.

The president of the United States has claimed, on more than one occasion, to be in dialog with God. If he said that he was talking to God through his hairdryer, this would precipitate a national emergency. I fail to see how the addition of a hairdryer makes the claim more ridiculous or offensive.

When you put yourself in the customer’s shoes and begin your dialog from there, an immediate connection develops that stems beyond basic commerce and encourages loyalty.

Das ist die Sehnsucht: wohnen im Gewoge und keine Heimat haben in der Zeit. Und das sind Wünsche: leise Dialoge täglicher Stunden mit der Ewigkeit.

I'm thinking of starting my own talk radio show. I'll spout simplistic opinions for hours on end, ridicule anyone who disagrees with me, and generally foster divisiveness, cynicism, and a lower level of public dialog!

Yang penting adalah percakapan dengan kebebasan. Juga kemerdekaan untuk mencari sendiri apa yang benar dan yang adil - dengan sikap ingin tahu, ragu, juga gigih.

In rhetoric there are the unconditionally right and the unconditionally guilty; there is total victory and the annihilation of the opponent. In dialogue, annihilation of the opponent also annihilates the very dialogic sphere in which discourse lives... This sphere is very fragile and is easily destroyed...

He who would speak of unknown authors, buried beneath the rubble of centuries, inevitably lays himself open, at least to begin with, to the suspicion of being a crotchety sort with very queer tastes.

Histories are like novels in that they set out to provide more or less comprehensive accounts of social systems.

When I'm actually assembling a scene, I assemble it as a silent movie. Even if it's a dialog scene, I lip read what people are saying.

go back to Allah and Rosulnya

Communication is an artificial, intentional, dialogic, collective act of freedom, aiming at creating codes that help us forget our inevitable death and the fundamental senselessness of our absorb existence.

The symptoms of a writer who hasn’t found their way clear of the needs of Self yet are easy to spot. I should say the symptoms are easy for everyone else to spot, that is, and not so easy for the writer themself to see. You’ll see a writer who does not trust the characters to speak and move on their own, but has to puppeteer them; a writer who does not trust the reader to understand what’s written. One who must insert parentheticals in various forms to explain the work to the reader; flashbacks to explain; big black blocks of text on the page to explain; question-and-answer dialog between characters who aren’t in a courtroom; walk-and-talk characters with their mouths full of dialog of what the story is about; too many stage directions that make the script read like a novel…

To a greater or lesser extent, every novel is a dialogized system made up of the images of "languages," styles and consciousnesses that are concrete and inseparable from language. Language in the novel not only represents, but itself serves as the object of representation.

The combination of the Main brain with its central nervous system, and the ancient Animal Brain with its somatic, enteric nervous system in the inner body—in the gut—and the constant dialog between them provides a self-correcting feedback system, which regulates the behavioral qualities of the organism when consciously cultivated—preferably in early youth.

Truth is not born nor is it to be found inside the head of an individual person, it is born between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their dialogic interaction.

There is no such thing as a "general language," a language that is spoken by a general voice, that may be divorced from a specific saying, which is charged with particular overtones. Language, when it means, is somebody talking to somebody else, even when that someone else is one's own inner addressee.

Ce suntem noi doi? Doua puncte unite printr-o linie de dialog ce apoi se frange in numeroase urcusuri si coborasuri. Un binom compust din doi termeni separati de semnul plus sau minus. O segregatie pe care am alcatuit-o impreuna, de la al carei amvon dragostea pledeaza pentru liniste si pace, se inalta deasupra noastra, a lucrurilor marunte.

Operating theaters are not nearly as popular as dramatic theaters, musical theaters, and movie theaters, and it is easy to see why. A dramatic theater is a large, dark room in which actors perform a play, and if you are in the audience, you can enjoy yourself by listening to the dialog and looking at the costumes. A musical theater is a large, dark room in which musicians preform a symphony, and if you are in the audience you can enjoy yourself by listening to the melodies and watching the conductor wave his little stick around. And a movie theater is a large, dark room in which a projectionist shows a film, and if you are in the audience, you can enjoy yourself by eating popcorn and gossiping about movie stars. But an operating theater is a large, dark room in which doctors preform medical procedures, and if you are in the audience, the best thing to do is to leave at once because there is never anything on display in an operating theater but pain, suffering and discomfort, and for this reason most operating theaters have been closed down or have been turned into restaurants.

Dostoevsky’s novel is dialogic. It is constructed not as the whole of a single consciousness, absorbing other consciousnesses as objects into itself, but as a whole formed by the interaction of several consciousnesses, none of which entirely becomes an object for the other; this interaction provides no support for the viewer who would objectify an entire event according to some ordinary monologic category (thematically, lyrically or cognitively)–and this consequently makes the viewer also a participant.

Networking turns to spam when you stop interacting. Networking is a dialog.

Her paintings formed a visual diary, an outward manifestation of her inward dialog that was, all too often, a scream of pain.

Discover everything about your characters that you can before you write your story. If you get stuck at any point, they will write your dialog for you.

inflexible muteness of written words doomed the dialogic process Socrates saw as the heart of education.

My theory was that readers just thought they cared nothing but the action; that really, although they didn't know it, they cared very little about the action. The things they really cared about, and that I cared about, were the creation of emotion through dialog and description. The things they remembered, that haunted them, were not for example that a man got killed, but that in the moment of his death he was trying to pick a paper clip off the polished surface of a desk, and it kept slipping away from him, so that there was a look of strain on his face and his mouth was half open in a kind of tormented grin, and the last thing in the world he thought about was death. He didn't even hear death knock on the door. That damn little paper clip kept slipping away from his fingers.

He has given ample evidence of qualities hardly any other living statesman has demonstrated to the same degree: the courage to look facts in the face and to seek flexible solutions, respect for others, give-and-take in dialog situations, absence of hypocrisy, a complete absence of grandeur in the conduct of his personal life. He has never been driven by blind self-assertion to make absurd decisions.

When an important writer recommends a work to you -- whether by openly naming the title; or by shy=covert use of it (which perhaps is the greater praise) then go right ahead and follow his [sic!, etc] momentous hint ! A man with expertise and taste has done trusty spade-work for you : {pre=reading} and winnowing 1000 volumes of antiquated chaff for you. Not to make grateful use of such a hint would mean my thoughtless=arrogant shoving aside all the precious, irreplaceable hours that a venerable predecessor spent reading for me.

Harper said, "But Snuffleupagus was real." "That is the most wonderful sentence I have ever heard. I want that on my gravestone. Snuffleupagus was real. No more. Just that.

The most spiritual people I’ve ever met were not “givers” they were communicators. You don’t give people crumbs. You give them the whole piece of bread when that is what they are asking for, in order to be healed. Christ was never about hiding behind a Facebook page, an email, a prayer circle, a bible, or a church. He was about talking, listening and healing-- face to face. He walked among sinners and ate with them. He devoted his time to people that were brokenhearted, difficult to like and fake as the religious beliefs they clung to. So, why is it that so many people profess to believe in Christ, yet they have forgotten what real love is----communicating?

Even though we didn’t say anything, we were in dialog: a peregrin dialog, meaning two equals wandering around trying to work something out, as opposed to a suvinian dialog where a fid is being taught by a mentor, or a Periklynian dialog, which is combat.

Analisis sosial adalah cara untuk memulai sebuah penyelesaian masalah. Analisis sosial yang harus diutamakan adalah nalar dalam menganalisis sesuatu melalui data yang akurat, kekuatan argumentasi, pengetahuan, epistemologi, dan hal-hal mendasarnya. Hal itu semua membutuhkan dialog dengan berbagai kalangan yang menjadi pemangku kepentingan masalah tersebut untuk menemukan akar masalahnya.

Popular music is not history, but it can be read historically, dialogically, and symptomatically to produce valuable evidence about change over time. Popular music can mark the present as history, helping us understand where we have been and where we are going.

(1) Blurting may be considered as the reciprocal substitution of semiotic material (dubbing) for a semiotic dialogical product in a dynamic reflexion. The human-written sentences are numbers (1) to 3; they were drawn from the contemporary journal Art-Language and are -- as far as I can tell-- completely serious efforts among literate and sane people to communicate something to each other.

Reflection is nothing more than what it sounds, and pondering one’s own life is about as productive as talking to one’s image in a mirror: both acts are egocentric and neither produces a dialog. People who talk to themselves in public are not self-actualized; they're crazy.

Knjiga je nekaj več kot besedna struktura. Je dialog, ki ga začne s svojim bralcem. Ta dialog je neskončen, književnost je neizčrpna, in to zaradi zelo preprostega razloga - ker je vsaka knjiga taka. Knjiga ni stvar brez komunikacije: je razmerje, je opora neštetih razmerij.

But, you say, there is very little conversation in this book. Why isn't there more dialoge? What we want in a book by this citizen is people talking; that is all he knows how to do and now he doesn't do it. The fellow is no philosopher, no savant, an incompetent zoologist, he drinks too much and cannot punctuate readily and now he has stopped writing dialogue. Some one ought to put a stop to him. He is bull crazy.

– Cum se simte o inimă de piatră? – O inimă de piatră face parte din natură, are rolul ei! Fără să bată, trăiește veșnic. – Da, dar este o inimă rece. – Poate fi încălzită de soare. – Da, dar ea nu încălzește. – Încălzește inima mea, pentru că o admir. – De ce o admiri, Ana? – Pentru că este sinceră și grea. Nu poate fi sfărâmată de nimic. – O inimă de piatră nu poate fi distrusă, dar nici nu poate iubi. – De ce trebuie să fie iubirea reciprocă? Nu pot iubi această piatră, fără a mă simți iubită de ea, la rândul meu?" - dialog din romanul meu "Din octombrie până în martie"; acesta este încadrat la genul ROMANCE și vine astăzi, de ziua îndrăgostiților, cu un cadou. Urmărește site-ul editurii "Berg" și comandă.

This should explain something I've been saying (and writing) for over ten years now: Science fiction is not about the future; it uses the future as a narrative convention to present significant distortions of the present. And both the significance of the distortion and the appropriateness of the convention lie precisely in that what we know of present science does not *deny* the possibility of these distortions eventually coming to pass. Science fiction is about the current world - the given world shared by writer and reader. But it is not a metaphor for the given world, nor does the catch-all term metonymy exhaust the relation between the given and science fiction's distortions of the given. Science fiction poises in a tense, dialogic, agonistic relation to the given, but there is very little critical vocaabulary currently to deal with this relationship of contestatory difference the SF figure establishes, maintains, expects, exploits, subverts and even - occasionally, temporarily - grandly destroys.

The good news is that you are never alone. If you are a man, you are always with your inner feminine side. If you are a woman, you are ways with your inner masculine side. However, we are often disconnected from those inner feminine or masculine qualities. Meditation helps to establish that much needed dialog and connection with your inner self. The more we get in touch with our inner self, the more we experience peace, harmony and bliss.

I ask them, “If the product were free, how many would you actually deploy or use?” The goal is to take pricing away as an issue and see whether the product itself gets customers excited. If it does, I follow up with: “OK, it’s not free. In fact, imagine I charged you $1 million. Would you buy it?” While this may sound like a facetious dialog, I use it all the time. Why? Because more than half the time customers will say something like, “Steve, you’re out of your mind. This product isn’t worth more than $250,000.” I’ve just gotten customers to tell me how much they are willing to pay. Wow.

Laughter has the remarkable power of making an object come up close, of drawing it into a zone of crude contact where one can finger it familiarly on all sides, turn it upside down, inside out, peer at it from above and below, break open its external shell, look into its center, doubt it, take it apart, dismember it, lay it bare and expose it, examine it freely and experiment with it. Laughter demolishes fear and piety before an object, before a world, making of it an object of familiar contact and thus clearing the ground for an absolutely free investigation of it. Laughter is a vital factor in laying down that prerequisite for fearlessness without which it would be impossible to approach the world realistically.

The fabric of human life is woven with relationships. Once we thematize the importance of dialogue, the multiplicity of ongoing and created situations in which dialogical skills can be nurtured abound. As we have seen, this requires us to slow down and turn toward each other, having a clear sense of the relationship between our current footing in dialogue with one another and the future we are trying to create. The nurture of dialogical capacities is essential to human liberation.

Society itself falls apart into class and intraclass groups; individual life-sequences are directly linked with these and together both individual life and subgroups are opposed to the whole. Thus in the early stages of slaveholding society and in feudal society, individual life-sequences are still rather tightly interwoven with the common life of the most immediate social group. But nevertheless they are separate, even here. The course of individual lives, of groups, and of the sociopolitical whole do not fuse together, they are dispersed, there are gaps; they are measured by different scales of value; each of these series has its own logic of development, its own narratives, each makes use of and reinterprets the ancient motifs in its own way. Within the boundaries of individual life-series, an interior aspect makes itself apparent. The process of separating out and detaching individual life-sequences from the whole reaches its highest point when financial relations develop in slaveholding society, and under capitalism. Here the individual sequence takes on its specific private character and what is held in common becomes maximally abstract. The ancient motifs that had passed into the individual life-narratives here undergo a specific kind of degeneration. Food, drink, copulation and so forth lose their ancient "pathos" (their link, their unity with the laboring life of the social whole); they become a petty private matter; they seem to exhaust all their significance within the boundaries of individual life. As a result of this severance from the producing life of the whole and from the collective struggle with nature, their real links with the life of nature are weakened-if not severed altogether.

Konkretne zajęcia zaczęto od dokładnego poinstruowania kursantów o zasadach ubierania się, poruszania w terenie, zagrożeniach i zasadach przetrwania. Pierwszy wyświetlony slajd przedstawiał dialog rodziny pingwinów. Matka mówiła do ojca: „Nasz syn powiedział pierwsze słowo”. „Powiedział tata?” – „Nie”, „Mama?” – Nie, „To co powiedział?” – „K... jak zimno”.

As they’d agreed the night before on their cold balcony, scripting out this dialog, there would be three large lies in this conversation. This was the first.

He hadn’t actually acted since his high school senior play (where he had famously skipped two whole pages of dialog and died fifteen minutes too soon),

He'd tried to talk to you about anarchy yesterday but his English and your French conspired against the dialog.

Când ajungi la limita monologului, la marginile singurătăţii, îl inventezi - în lipsa altui interlocutor - pe Dumnezeu, pretext suprem pentru dialog.

Jung's search for the soul, then, stands at one with the search for appropriately dialogical and differentiated language.

How I go to church - In my mind the conversation must include the stars, the trees and the rocks so, the outer dialog is just as important as the inner silence. (For me) it is like the child in awe, or the way we know when it is time to drop to our knees as the sky changes. It is when the world is painted a different color and gives us a multi-colored background – my gesture is reverence – it has no words. The delivery method is a simple query as the universe complies with prayers. No expectations - just a gentle nudge, a smile, and solace where I am. This is my religion. I am thankful. The end.

Sepenggal dialog dari film Days Of Being Wild… “Kau dan aku telah menghabiskan semenit bersama. Aku takkan melupakan satu menit yang berharga ini. takkan bisa terhapus. Karena satu menit itu telah menjadi masa lalu.

If the passage absolutely demands cursing, be moderate. A little of it goes a long way. I've seen beginning writers pepper curse words through sentence after sentence. 'If you don't -blanking- get your -blanking-blank-blank- in to this house this -blanking- minute, I'm going to -blank- your -blank- and nail it to the -blanking- door.' Two things happen when I read this junk: I get bored and I get angry. I didn't pick up your book to read garbage. If this is as clever as you can be, I don't want to read your prose. In life if you met someone who spoke like this, you'd want to flee. Then why put this stuff on the page? As near as I can determine, this abomination occurs because a writer is corrupted by the awful -blanking- dialog that movies inflict on us these days. It's also a sign of insecurity. The writer wonders if the dialog is strong enough and decides a lot of -blanking-blank- will do the trick. Someone might object that this kind of dialog is realistic in certain situations--intense scenes involving policemen or soldiers for example. I can only reply that in my research I spend considerable time with policemen and soldiers. Few of them curse any more than a normal person would. This garbage isn't realistic. It merely draws attention to itself and holds back the story. Use it sparingly.

we are speaking about cognitive meanings, which cannot be transferred into students as blood is pumped into veins. Learning the meaning of a piece of knowledge requires dialog, exchange, sharing, and sometimes compromise.

The themes of metamorphosis (transformation-particularly human transformation-and identity (particularly human identity) are drawn from the treasury of pre-class world folklore. The folkloric image of man is intimately bound up with transformation and identity. This combination may be seen with particular clarity in the popular folktale )skazkaj. The folktale image of man-throughout the extraordinary variety of folkloric narratives-always orders itself around the motifs of transformation and identity (no matter how varied in its turn the concrete expression of these motifs might be).

I wore only black socks, because I had heard that white ones were the classic sign of the American tourist. Black ones though,- those'll fool 'em. I supposed I hoped the European locals' conversation would go something like this: PIERRE: Ha! Look at that tourist with his camera and guidebook! JACQUES: Wait, but observe his socks! They are...black! PIERRE: Zut alors! You are correct! He is one of us! What a fool I am! Let us go speak to him in English and invite him to lunch!

You may hold as many (literature) degrees as your hands (and pockets) may take, but if you have NOT read the book 'Le Grand Voyage' by Jorge Semprun, preferably in French (Yes we can! and I can't speak that language) then you ain't seen nothing yet...

But histories differ from novels in that they insist on a homology between the sequence of their own telling, the form they impose to create a coherent explanation in the form of a narrative on the one hand, and the sequence of what they tell on the other.

The novel has become the leading hero in the drama of literary development in our time precisely because it best of all reflects the tendencies of a new world still in the making; it is, after all, the only genre born of this new world and in total affinity with it.

Conquergood considered his relationship with the Hmong to be a form of barter, “a productive and mutually invigorating dialog, with neither side dominating or winning out.” In his opinion, the physicians and nurses at Ban Vinai failed to win the cooperation of the camp inhabitants because they considered the relationship one-sided, with the Westerners holding all the knowledge. As long as they persisted in this view, Conquergood believed that what the medical establishment was offering would continue to be rejected, since the Hmong would view it not as a gift but as a form of coercion.

Where there is no passage of time there is also no moment of time, in the full and most essential meaning of the word. If taken outside its relationship to past and future, the present loses its integrity, breaks down into isolated phenomena and objects, making of them a mere abstract conglomeration.

In shaping that variety in the development of the novel, and in shaping that artistic prose which we will provisionally call “dialogic” and which, as we have said, leads to Dostoevsky, two genres from the realm of the serio-comical have definitive significance: the Socratic dialogue and Menippean satire.

Für mich besteht die Photographie im gleichzeitigen blitzschnellen Erkennen der inneren Bedeutung der Tatsache einerseits, und auf der anderen Seite des strengen und rückhaltlosen Aufbaus der optisch erfaßbaren Formenwelt, die jede Tatsache zum Ausdruck bringt. Indem wir leben, entdecken wir uns selbst und gleichzeitig die Außenwelt, die auf uns einwirkt, auf die wir aber auch unsererseits einwirken können. Zwischen dieser inneren und äußeren Welt muß ein Gleichgewicht geschaffen werden, die beiden Welten bilden in einem immerwährenden Dialog ein einziges Ganzes, und den Begriff davon müssen wir mitzuteilen suchen.

To be American is to be part of a dialogical and democratic operation that grapples with the challenge of being human in an open-ended and experimental manner. Although America is a romantic project in which a paradise, a land of dreams, is fanned and fueled with a religion of vast possibility, it is, more fundamentally, a fragile experiment-precious yet precarious-of dialogical and democratic human endeavor that yields forms of modern self-making and self-creating unprecedented in human history. From Thomas Jefferson to Elijah Muhammad, Geronimo to Dorothy Day, Jane Adams to Nathaniel West, it holds out the possibility of self-transformation and self-reliance to New World dwellers willing to start anew and recast themselves for the purpose of deliverance and betterment. This purpose requires only a restlessness, energy and boldness that galvanizes people to organize and mobilize themselves in a way that makes new opportunities and possibilities credible and worth the

I call the right axe Sorrow," she said. "You know what I call the left one?" "Happiness?" "Sorrow. I can't tell them apart.

Prophecy is characteristic for the epic, prediction for the novel.

Breakfast, Noah muttered. Greasy and disgusting, said Matt. You don't want to eat it? I wasn't talking about breakfast. I was talking about you.

Words matter. And the words that matter most are the ones you say to yourself.

Doch ist Sensibilität nicht gleichbedeutend mit Progressivität. Vielmehr kann Sensibilität in Regressivität zurückschlagen, wenn sie verabsolutiert und glorifiziert wird.

Situasi ketidakpastian itulah yang membuat kita gentar. Membuat nyali kita ciut. Bagaimana kita bisa berasa yakin atas segala apa yang telah kita lakukan sebagai sebuah kesementaraan yang kemudian kita jadikan sebagai dasar bagi sesuatu yang sifatnya abadi? Bagaimana kita bisa menilai diri kita sendiri dari apa yang telah kita lakukan di masa lampau demi sesuatu yang sempurna namun berada di luar batas kemanusiaan kita? Bagaimana kita menjadi layak untuk itu? Untuk menggapai kesempurnaan surgawi yang kekal dari ketidak sempurnaan duniawi kita yang banal dan bersifat sementara. Apakah ada hukum untuk meluruskannya? Aturan aturan yang menjadikan hidup manusia menjadi lebih baik. Inikah tangga untuk naik ke atas menuju pada kesempurnaan itu? Sementara dunia ini dipenuhi dengan begitu banyak tipu daya. Kepalsuan dan kemunafikan. Tidak ada satu hal pun yang benar benar murni sebagai sebuah sumber asali yang serba pasti. Selalu ada keragu raguan yang mengganjal di setiap benak. Sementara, kebenaran tidak memberi kita sedikit pun ruang untuk berdebat, beradu argumentasi atau berdialektika. Untuk membuka sebuah dialog atau wacana yang akan mempertemukan kita dengan keelokan dari wajah kesempurnaan itu. Hasrat manusia, pikiran pikiran rendahnya, nafsu dan egoismenya. Semua itu telah menjadi penghalang bagi dirinya sendiri. Sebuah upaya pencarian hanya akan membenturkan pikiran manusia pada kedangkalan hasratnya sendiri. Kebebasan berkehendak yang kemudian justru akan menjadi keterkungkungan. Dan apa yang kita yakini justru akan menjadi jalan yang menjerumuskan kita pada kesesatan. Yang tak lain dan tak bukan hanyalah sebuah kesia siaan. Selama manusia masih tergantung pada akal budinya dia tidak akan mampu menyentuh esensi dari kebenaran itu. Jangankan menyentuh, untuk sampai pada kulit permukaannya sekali pun itu hampir merupakan sebuah kemustahilan. Bisa jadi, ini adalah sebuah pemikiran yang terasa sangat pesimistis. Segala upaya manusia pada kenyataannya tidak mengantarkan dirinya kepada rahasia kehidupan sejati. Ironisnya justru sebaliknya, semua daya upaya manusia pada akhirnya hanya akan berujung pada kematiannya sendiri.

The Devil, dearest daughter, is the instrument of My Justice to torment the souls who have miserably offended Me. And I have set him in this life to tempt and molest My creatures, not for My creatures to be conquered, but that they may conquer, proving their virtue, and receive from Me the glory of victory. And no one should fear any battle or temptation of the Devil that may come to him, because I have made My creatures strong, and have given them strength of will, fortified in the Blood of my Son, which will, neither Devil nor creature can move, because it is yours, given by Me.

Hallaj points out Divine Compassion as another attribute which makes it possible for the personal "I," ana, to enter into a silent and contemplative dialog with God (Tasin 10:24). The unknowability of God is received as Divine Compassion by man. The human cry of isolation is answered by compassion. But the ascending path leading to Divine Compassion begins with man's unconditional yes to the Divine Will.

Other genres are constituted by a set of formal features for fixing language that pre-exist any specific utterance within the genre. Language, in other words, is assimilated to form. The novel by contrast seeks to shape its form to languages; it has a completely different relationship to languages from other genres since it constantly experiments with new shapes in order to display the variety and immediacy of speech diversity.

Apakah sesungguhnya kita benar benar punya pilihan? Apakah pintu takdir akan menuntun kita menemukan jalan hidup kita sendiri? Ataukah jalan itu sudah digariskan bagi kita sebagai sebuah kepastian yang mutlak dan absolut? Seberapa besar kebebasan yang kita punya untuk menentukan arah dan tujuan hidup kita sendiri? Seberapa banyak kita diuji dalam perjalanan menuju hakekat sesungguhnya dari kebenaran kehidupan itu? Berapa banyak kita mesti terbentur dan berapa kali pula kita harus jatuh? Apakah aku akan tetap terkapar dan tak mampu untuk bangkit kembali? Apakah aku harus menyangkal keberadaanku sendiri? Jalan mana yang harus ditempuh oleh orang orang sesat macam diriku ini? Bagaimana aku dapat menemukan jawaban dari pertanyaan yang bahkan aku sendiri tidak mengerti di manakah letak ujung dan pangkalnya? Bagiku ini akan selalu jadi sebuah dialog yang tidak berkesudahan. Seberapa pun banyak buku yang aku baca. Seberapa pun banyak ilmu yang aku gali. Aku masih saja merasa tersesat. Pencarianku selalu berujung pada ketidak pahamanku atas realitas diriku sendiri. Antara tesis dan anti tesis. Antara kebebasan berpikir dan kehendak yang selalu terbentur pada realitas di luar diriku. Pada aturan, norma, agama, tatanan sosial, hukum, dogma dan moralitas. Aku tidak melihat Centhini atau Pariyem sebagai sosok yang berbeda dengan diriku. Tidak juga dalam kisah Paprika, Miranda atau Monella dalam film film besutan sineas Italia Tinto Brass. Mereka tidak terbebani oleh moralitas. Mereka tidak butuh pasemon, mereka bisa jadi diri sendiri. Dalam hal ini aku merasa beruntung, karena aku bisa membaca dan belajar dari kisah mereka. Dari sudut pandang yang lebih kekinian, aku bisa belajar dari kisah kisah Nayla karya Djenar Maesa Ayu. Bagaimana orang bisa menafikan butir butir mutiara pemikiran yang cemerlang dari kisah semacam Fanny Hill karya John Cleland, Lolita milik Vladimir Nabokov atau bahkan mungkin pula dari kisah Tiongkok kuno semacam Jin Ping Mei? Sebagaimana aku menemukan sebuah perenungan yang mendalam justru dalam dialog mesum antara Suster Agnes dan Suster Angelica dalam "Venus in the Cloister" karya penulis Perancis Abbé du Prat, yang dianggap orang sebagai sebuah dialog antar para pelacur. Dalam karya karya itu aku mendapati sebuah realitas, betapa sebuah tindakan yang represif dari sebuah institusi yang dengan ketat menerapkan sebuah aturan justru akan memancing reaksi yang sebaliknya dan menciptakan ekses yang bisa mengumbar dan mengeksplorasi kebebasan itu sebagai sebuah wujud pemberontakan. Batu permata akan tetaplah sebuah batu permata walau keluar dari mulut seekor anjing, kira kira begitulah analoginya.

Kennedy: You mean it’s not a matter of good deeds versus bad deeds, a kind of moral bookkeeping? Lewis: No indeed. Look at the thief on the cross. He made it to paradise even though his life’s red ink certainly outweighed the black. Kennedy:

So whether you're participating in an online conversation or reading a book by yourself, your experience is a readerly one and a responsive one. The most significant difference is that reading a book is dialogically asymmetrical: you learn about the book, about its characters and perhaps its author, but none of them learns anything about you. I'm not convinced that this is necessarily regrettable: many of us should probably spend more time just listening, rather than insisting on being heard.

If the novelist loses touch with this linguistic ground of prose style, if he is unable to attain the heights of a relativized, Galilean linguistic consciousness, if he is deaf to organic double-voicedness and to the internal dialogization of living and evolving discourse, then he will never comprehend, or even realize, the actual possibilities and tasks of the novel as a genre. He may, of course, crete an artistic work that compositionally and thematically will be similar to a novel, will be “made” exactly as a novel is made, but he will not thereby have created a novel. The style will always give him away. We will recognize the naively self-confident or obtusely stubborn unity of a smooth, pure single-voiced language (perhaps accompanied by a primitive, artificial, worked-up double-voicedness). We quickly sense that such an author finds it easy to purge his work of speech diversity: he simply does not listen to the fundamental heteroglossia inherent in actual language; he mistakes social overtones, which create the timbres of words, for irritating noises that it is his task to eliminate. The novel, when torn out of authentic linguistic speech diversity, emerges in most cases as a “closet drama,” with detailed, fully developed and “artistically worked out” stage directions (it is, of course, bad drama). In such a novel, divested of its language diversity, authorial language inevitably ends up in the awkward and absurd position of the language of stage directions in plays [327].

Membaca autobiografi atau memoir seolah-olah terlibat dalam dialog dengan narator yang menjadi jurucakap pengarang: mendengar secara langsung cerita serta pendapat tentang zamannya dengan gaya pengucapan peribadinya. Gaya bahasa dan idiosinkrasi penampilannya menghantar karyanya mirip cereka, tetapi fakta dan kebenaran subjeknya akan menyeretnya menjadi mirip sejarah, dan hakikat inilah yang berkemungkinan melahirkan memoir sebagai wacana intelektual yang artistik; menggugah dan tidak menjemukan.

yet people and things have gone through something, something that did not, indeed, change them but that did (in a manner of speaking) affirm what they, and precisely they, were as individuals, something that did verify and establish their identity, their durability and continuity. The hammer of events shatters nothing and forges nothing-it merely tries the durability of an already finished product. And the product passes the test. Thus is constituted the artistic and ideological meaning of the Greek romance.

As an artist, Dostoevsky did not create his ideas in the same way philosophers or scholars create theirs–he created images of ideas found, heard, sometimes divined by him in reality itself, that is, ideas already living or entering life as idea-forces. Dostoevsky possessed an extraordinary gift for hearing the dialogue of his epoch, or, more precisely, for hearing his epoch as a great dialogue, for detecting in it not only individual voices, but precisely and predominantly the dialogic relationship among voices, their dialogic interaction.

What are the salient features of this novelization of other genres suggested by us above? They become more free and flexible, their language renews itself by incorporating extraliterary heteroglossia and the "novelistic" layers of literary language, they become dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally-this is the most important thing-the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still-evolving contemporary reality (the openended present).

Learning science is not just learning facts, or even procedures. Science is a discourse-a way of conversing-with an epistemological frame:how to we know? Why do we think so?And I tell that that, yes, you can do this by yourself-have a conversation-but you have to learn to do it first. And its' much easier to learn to do it with a peer rather than an instructor. With an instructor you expect them to "know" the answer and, even if they won't give it to you directly, you expect them to be right. In a science dialog none of you "know" what's right. You're all trying to figure it out.

Deaf, signing parents will “babble” to their infants in sign, just as hearing parents do orally; this is how the child learns language, in a dialogic fashion. The infant’s brain is especially attuned to learning language in the first three or four years, whether this is an oral language or a signed one. But if a child learns no language at all during the critical period, language acquisition may be extremely difficult later. Thus a deaf child of deaf parents will grow up “speaking” sign, but a deaf child of hearing parents often grows up with no real language at all, unless he is exposed early to a signing community.

the only thing the hero knows about the girl is that she is beautiful. He shows no interest in her intellect or personality—or even her sexuality. The man is either a ruler or has the magic power to awaken her, and all she can do is hope that her physical appearance fits the specifications better than the other girls. In the original Cinderella story, the stepsisters actually cut off parts of their feet to try to fit into the glass slipper. Maybe this marks the origins of the first cosmetic surgery. Besides romanticizing Cinderella’s misery, the story also gives the message that women’s relationships with each other are full of bitter competition and animosity. The adult voice of womanly wisdom in the story, the stepmother, advises all her girls to frantically do whatever it takes to please the prince. This includes groveling, cutting off parts of themselves, and staying powerless. I was heartsick to watch Disney’s “The Little Mermaid” with my three-year-old daughter. The little mermaid agrees to give up her voice for a chance to go up on the “surface” and convince her nobleman to marry her. She is told by her local matron sea witch that she doesn’t need a voice—she needs only to look cute and get him to kiss her. And in the story, it works. These are the means to her one and only end: to buy a rich and respected guy. Women are taught to only listen to an outside patriarchal authority. No wonder there is so much self-doubt and confusion when faced with the question, “What do you want out of your life?” This question alone can be enough to trigger an episode of depression. It often triggers a game of Ping-Pong in a woman’s head. Her imagination throws up a possibility and then her pessimistic shotgun mind shoots it down. The dialog may look something like this: “Maybe I want to go back to school.... No, that would be selfish of me because the kids need me…. Maybe I’ll start a business.... No I hate all that dogeat-dog competition…. Maybe I’ll look for a love relationship…. No, I am not sure I am healed ye….” and on it goes.

The chain booksellers, like Barnes and Noble, began to dominate the market, and they instituted a “gay and lesbian” section in many of their branch stores. This section was never positioned at the front of the store with the bestsellers. It was usually on the fourth floor hidden behind the potted plants. What this meant in practical terms was that those of us who had the integrity to be out in our work found our books literarily yanked off of the “Fiction” shelves and hidden on the gay shelves, where only “gay” people wanting “gay” books would dare to tread. It was an instant undoing of all the progress we had made to be treated as full citizens and a natural, organic part of American intellectual life. …I felt very strongly, and still do, that authentic lesbian literature should be represented at all levels of publishing, including taking its rightful place as a natural organic part of mainstream American intellectual life. The corporate lockdown went into overdrive just at the moment that this integration was beginning to take place. This positioning is essential for so many reasons, least of which is the right of writers of merit to not be excluded from financial, emotional, and intellectual development simply because they have the integrity to be out in their work. Second is the right of gay people to be in dialogic relationships with straights - where they read and identify with our work as we are asked to with theirs. And finally, that even at the height of the strength of the lesbian subculture, most gay people find out about gay things through the mainstream media.

I find three basic characteristics that fundamentally distinguish the novel in principle from other genres: (i) its stylistic three-dimensionality, which is linked with the multi-languaged consciousness realized in the novel; (2) the radical change it effects in the temporal coordinates of the literary image; (3) the new zone opened by the novel for structuring literary images, namely, the zone of maximal contact with the present (with contemporary reality) in all its openendedness. These three characteristics of the novel are all organically interrelated and have all been powerfully affected by a very specific rupture in the history of European civilization: its emergence from a socially isolated and culturally deaf semipatriarchal society, and its entrance into international and interlingual contacts and relationships.

Cititul îl văd ca pe un dialog sufletesc extrem de personal, un proces de comunicare prin care mintea noastră (de adult sau copil) are posibilitatea de a întâlni și apoi a rumega idei, strategii și soluții la care noi singuri nu ne-am fi gândit. Chiar dacă în majoritatea timpului nu suntem conștienți de prezența acestor informații, puterea momentului prezent poate accesa din memoria noastră de lungă durată o informație citită, în baza căreia poate opera astfel încât să găsim variate răspunsuri comportamentale. Astfel, dacă vrem să ne îmbogățim repertoriul comportamental și suntem conștienți de necesitatea unor modele care să ne întregească existența, parcurgerea căților de dezvoltare personală, dar și a celor de beletristică sau știință, înseamnă mai mult decât o alegere înțeleaptă pentru o minte lucidă și o viață trăită din toată inima.

M-am apucat să citesc Micul Prinţ de Saint Exupéry, un autor francez pe care o lume întreagă îl admiră mai mult decât francezii. A fost prima poveste pe care a ascultat-o cu atâta atenţie, fără să se trezească, încât a fost nevoie să-i citesc fără răgaz două zile, până i-am terminat-o. Am continuat cu Poveştile lui Perrault, cu Biblia, cu O mie şi una de nopţi într-o versiune aseptică pentru copii şi, din pricina diferenţelor din somnul ei, mi-am dat seama că avea mai multe grade de profunzime care depindeau de cât de interesante i se păreau cele citite. Când simţeam că nu mai puteam, stingeam lumina şi mă culcam, ţinând o în braţe până cântau cocoşii. Eram atât de fericit, încât o sărutam pe pleoape, uşurel, şi într-o noapte s-a pogorât parcă o lumină din cer: a zâmbit pentru prima oară. Mai târziu, fără niciun motiv, s-a răsucit în pat, mi-a întors spatele şi a spus supărată: Isabel a făcut melcii să plângă. Exaltat de iluzia unui dialog, am întrebat-o pe acelaşi ton: Ai cui erau? N-a răspuns. Vocea ei avea o nuanţă plebee, ca şi când n-ar fi fost a ei, ci a cuiva străin aflat înlăuntrul său. Orice urmă de îndoială a dispărut atunci din cugetul meu: o preferam adormită.

Sniegam ir piecas pamatpazīmes. Tas ir balts. Tas sastindzina dabu un pasargā to. Tas nemitīgi pārvēršas. Tas ir slidens. Tas pārtop par ūdeni. Kad Juko par to ieminējās tēvam, viņš tajā saskatīja tikai negatīvo, it kā dēla dīvainā kaisle uz sniegu viņa acīs ziemas sezonu padarītu vēl biedējošāku. -Tas ir balts. Tātad neredzams un nav pelnījis būt redzams. Tas sastindzina dabu un pasargā to. Lepnais. Kas viņš tāds ir, lai apgalvotu, ka spēj sastindzināt pasauli? Tas nemitīgi pārvēršas. Tātad tas nav uzticams. Tas ir slidens. Kurš gan gūst baudu, paslīdot sniegā? Tas pārtop par ūdeni. Lai vairāk mūs appludinātu atkušņu laikā. Bet Juko savā sabiedrotajā saskatīja piecas citas īpašības, kas pilnībā apmierināja viņa māksliniecisko talantu. -Tas ir balts. Tātad sniegs ir dzeja. Neizsakāmas tīrības dzeja. Tas sastindzina dabu un pasargā to. Tātad sniegs ir glezna. Vissmalkākā ziemas glezna. Tas nemitīgi pārvēršas. Tātad sniegs ir kaligrāfija. Ir desmittūkstoš veidu, kā uzrakstīt vārdu sniegs. Tas ir slidens. Tātad sniegs ir deja. Uz sniega ikviens var sajusties kā virves dejotājs. Tas pārtop par ūdeni. Tātad sniegs ir mūzika. Pavasarī tas pārvērš upes un strautus baltu nošu simfonijās. -Sniegs Tev nozīmē to visu? - jautāja priesteris. -Vēl vairāk.

Vedem pe marii poeti ai antichitatii - intre ei Homer, cu spada in mana - poeti cu care Dante schimba cuvinte ce nu pot fi reproduse. Insa aici troneaza tacerea, pentru ca totul este dominat de teribila pudoare a celor care nu vor vedea niciodata chipul Domnului. Dar, indata ce ajungem la cantul al cincilea, vedem ca Dante facuse deja marea sa descoperire: posibilitatea unui dialog cu sufletele mortilor, pe care apoi ii va judeca in felul sau. Nu, nu-i va judeca; el stie ca nu este judecator; judecator este altcineva; este cel de-al treilea interlocutor, este divinitatea. Ei bine, aici se afla Homer, aici se afla Platon si alti barbati ilustri. Dante vede insa doi oameni pe care ii cunoaste si care apartin lumii contemporane lui: Paolo si Francesca. El stie cum au murit cei doi adulteri. Ii cheama si ei vin indata. Dante spune: 'Quali colombe dal disio chiamate'. Suntem in fata a doi pacatosi, iar Dante ii compara cu 'doi porumbei chemati de dorinta'. Si asta pentru ca senzualitatea trebuie sa fie, de asemenea, in centrul scenei. Atunci se apropie de el Francesca, singura care vorbeste (Paolo nu poate vorbi), multumindu-i pentru ca i-a chemat, si ii spune aceste cuvinte patetice: 'Se fosse amico il re de l'universo noi preghiremmo lui de la tua pace', 'Daca Regele Universului ne-ar fi prieten l-am ruga pentru pacea ta', adaugand: 'din moment ce pacatele noastre nu-ti inspira mila'. Apoi, ea isi povesteste istoria si o spune de doua ori. Prima data o povesteste intr-o maniera rezervata, dar insista asupra faptului ca ea continua sa fie indragostita de Paolo. Continua sa fie indragostita de Paolo, deoarece sentimentul caintei este imposibil in Infern. Cainta este oprita in Infern, astfel incat, stiind ca a pacatuit, ea continua sa fie credincioasa pacatului sau, iar aceasta ii da o grandoare eroica. Ar fi fost oribil, de pilda, daca s-ar fi lamentat, daca s-ar fi cait, daca s-ar fi plans de cele intamplate. Dar ea accepta aceasta pedeapsa, stie ca pedeapsa a fost dreapta si continua sa-l iubeasca pe Paolo. Vorbind despre dragostea lor, Dante aminteste ca 'Amor condusse noi ad una morte', si, intr-adevar, dragostea i-a dus pe amandoi la moarte; amandoi au fost executati impreuna. Apoi, Dante este curios sa mai afle ceva. Dar pe el nu-l intereseaza adulterul, nu-l intereseaza in ce mod au fost descoperiti si apoi ucisi. Pe el il intereseaza ceva mult mai intim. El ar vrea sa stie cum si-au dat seama ei ca erau indragostiti, cum s-au indragostit si cum a venit timpul dulcelor suspine. [...] Aici este ceva ce nu spune Dante, ceva care se simte de-a lungul acestui intreg episod si care-i subliniaza virtutea. Iata: Dante, cu infinita compatimire, ne infatiseaza destinul celor doi amanti, dar, totodata, se simte ca el invidiaza acest destin. Ei raman in Infern, iar el se va salva. Ei insa s-au iubit, in timp ce el nu a reusit sa fie iubit de femeia pe care el o adora, Beatrice. In schimb, acesti doi infami sunt impreuna, desi nu-si pot vorbi si se rotesc in acea neagra involburare, fara nici o speranta, fara a spera macar, ne spune Dante, ca suferintele lor vor inceta vreodata, dar ei sunt impreuna, si cand ea vorbeste, spune 'noi'. Cu alte cuvinte, ea vorbeste pentru amandoi, ceea ce inseamna ca, intr-un fel, ei sunt impreuna. Sunt impreuna pentru eternitate, impartasesc amandoi Infernul, iar acest lucru ii pare lui Dante un fel de Paradis...