Xanthippe Quotes

Nor have the lives of great men been exciting except at a few great moments. Socrates could enjoy a banquet now and again, and must have derived considerable satisfaction from his conversations while the hemlock was taking effect, but most of his life he lived quietly with Xanthippe, taking a constitutional in the afternoon, and perhaps meeting a few friends by the way. Kant is said never to have been more than ten miles from from konigsberg in all his life. Darwin, after going round the world, spent the whole of the rest of his life in his own house. Marx, after stirring up a few revolutions, decided to spend the remainder of his days in the British Museum. Altogether it will be found that a quiet life is characteristic of great men, and that their pleasures have not been of the sort that would look exciting to the outward eye.

Sokrates' wife, Xanthippe, had in antiquity a reputation as a shrew - but being married to such a man would have tried anyone's patience, and the evidence is not conclusive.

Molecule Trustees: The sun and all of us are molecule trustees, administering the molecules entrusted to us until they are passed on. Like any trustee, we do not own the property, nor do we decide who will receive what we stewarded. It might be somebody grumpy like Xanthippe.

I'm an apple, tossed here by someone who loves you, Xanthippe. But you should nod assent: after all, you and I will both waste away.

I am an apple, and one who loves you tossed me before you. O yield to him, dear Xanthippe! Both you and I decay.

His heart thudded rapidly behind its thick-boned prison, the pulse in his neck throbbing with anxiety. He almost smiled at that. If he weren’t a vampyre his parents, Phaedrus and Xanthippe, would consider him an impossibly delicious meal with that vein pulsing them into temptation. Instead they looked up at him in bewilderment, their mouths and chin smeared thick with the blood and skin of the unconscious man in their arms. They sat crowded together on one of the pillowed kline’s in the andron where his father held Symposia in their home. The man’s feet dragged to the floor, the light chiton he wore coming undone from the obvious struggle he had undergone at the hands of Kirios’ parents. Blood stained the fabric and ran in rivulets from his masticated neck to puddle on the mosaic floor. Kirios watched as it spread into the expensive tiling, wondering how on earth they would explain the stain.

Socrates could enjoy a banquet now and again, and must have derived considerable satisfaction from his conversations while the hemlock was taking effect, but most of his life he lived quietly with Xanthippe, taking a constitutional in the afternoon, and perhaps meeting with a few friends by the way. Kant is said never to have been more than ten miles from Konigsberg in all his life. Darwin, after going round the world, spent the whole rest of his life in his own house. Marx, after stirring up a few revolutions, decided to spend the remainder of his days in the British Museum. Altogether it will be found that a quiet life is characteristic of great men, and that their pleasures have not been of the sort that would look exciting to the outward eye. No great achievement is possible without persistent work, so absorbing and so difficult that little energy is left over for the more strenuous kinds of amusement, except such as serve to recuperate physical energy during holidays, of which Alpine climbing may serve as the best example.

Xanthippe recognized it.” “She would,” his mother said. “She once called for its destruction.” “And you didn’t think she’d wonder why I was in possession of it?” She shrugged. “Xan was my backup plan if you were too slow.” His mother had basically planned to set a half-mad dragon on him. She didn’t care if it would have made him look like an idiot: What do you mean Tempus? I’ve made no Tempus. I’m wearing my mother’s diamond chain. Why? She told me to. If it weren’t for the bitter smell of fire surrounding them, he might’ve laughed at the absurdity of it. Lady Voclain was more devious and ruthless than the rest of the Bloodkin put together. Her own son!

Depuis la naissance de l'amour courtois, c'est un lieu commun que le mariage tue l'amour. Trop méprisée ou trop respectée, trop quotidienne, l'épouse n'est plus un objet érotique. Les rites du mariage sont primitivement destinés à défendre l'homme contre la femme ; elle devient sa propriété : mais tout ce que nous possédons en retour nous possède ; le mariage est pour l'homme aussi une servitude ; c'est alors qu'il est pris au piège tendu par la nature : pour avoir désiré une fraîche jeune fille, le mâle doit pendant toute sa vie nourrir une épaisse matrone, une vieillarde desséchée ; le délicat joyau destiné à embellir son existence devient un odieux fardeau : Xanthippe est un des types féminins dont les hommes ont toujours parlé avec le plus d'horreur. Mais lors même que la femme est jeune il y a dans le mariage une mystification puisque prétendant socialiser l'érotisme, il n'a réussi qu'à le tuer. C'est que l'érotisme implique une revendication de l'instant contre le temps, de l'individu contre la collectivité ; il affirme la séparation contre la communication ; il est rebelle à toute réglementation ; il contient un principe hostile à la société. Jamais les mœurs ne sont pliées à la rigueur des institutions et des lois : c'est contre elles que l'amour s'est de tout temps affirmé. Sous sa figure sensuelle, il s'adresse en Grèce et à Rome à des jeunes gens ou à des courtisanes ; charnel et platonique à la fois, l'amour courtois est toujours destiné à l'épouse d'un autre.

When Xanthippe was chiding Socrates for making scanty preparation for entertaining his friends, he answered:—“If they are friends of ours, they will not care for that; if they are not, we shall care nothing for them!” CLXXXII

For those who lack the classical education of New York’s early butchers and bakers, Xanthippe was Socrates’ wife, and has gone down in history as an atrocious nag. Socrates’ equanimity in enduring (ignoring) her is regularly held out as a proof of his nobility of character. Graves begins by pointing out: why is it that for two thousand years, no one seems to have asked what it might have actually been like to be married to Socrates? Imagine you were saddled with a husband who did next to nothing to support a family, spent all his time trying to prove everyone he met was wrong about everything, and felt true love was only possible between men and underage boys? You wouldn’t express some opinions about this? Socrates has been held out ever since as the paragon of a certain unrelenting notions of pure consistency, an unflinching determination to follow arguments to their logical conclusions, which is surely useful in its way--but he was not a very reasonable person, and those who celebrate him have ended up producing a "mechanized, insensate, inhumane, abstract rationality" that has done the world enormous harm. Graves writes that as a poet, he feels no choice but to identify himself more with those frozen out of the "rational" space of Greek city, starting with women like Xanthippe, for whom reasonableness doesn’t exclude logic (no one is actually *against* logic) but combines it with a sense of humor, practicality, and simple human decency. With that in mind, it only makes sense that so much of the initiative for creating new forms of democratic process--like consensus--has emerged from the tradition of feminism, which means (among other things) the intellectual tradition of those who have, historically, tended not to be vested with the power of command. Consensus is an attempt to create a politics founded on the principle of reasonableness--one that, as feminist philosopher Deborah Heikes has pointed out, requires not only logical consistency, but "a measure of good judgment, self-criticism, a capacity for social interaction, and a willingness to give and consider reasons." Genuine deliberation, in short. As a facilitation trainer would likely put it, it requires the ability to listen well enough to understand perspectives that are fundamentally different from one’s own, and then try to find pragmatic common ground without attempting to convert one’s interlocutors completely to one’s won perspective. It means viewing democracy as common problem solving among those who respect the fact they will always have, like all humans, somewhat incommensurable points of view. (p. 201-203)