Quote:
Originally posted by notcasesensitive
I hear you and I agree to these terms. Let me ask you though, out of idle curiosity, has he at anytime publicly admitted that what he is now doing is Nation Building? Club says it as though that is now an accepted mission and I'm not sure this administration has ever said that is what it is trying to do, but I admit that I would rather watch paint dry than follow Bush admin press conferences (except for excerpts quoted on The Daily Show), so I may have missed this.
Is that the longest run-on sentence ever? Can I get a Faulkner ruling?
|
It's not bad, but you'll need to infuse it with both meandering points and hallucinatory reasoning in order to approach the works of Mr. Chinaski.
__________________
I decline to accept the end of man. It is easy enough to say that man is immortal simply because he will endure: that when the last ding-dong of doom has clanged and faded from the last worthless rock hanging tideless in the last red and dying evening, that even then there will still be one more sound: that of his puny inexhaustible voice, still talking. I refuse to accept this. I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance. The poet's, the writer's, duty is to write about these things. It is his privilege to help man endure by lifting his heart, by reminding him of the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet's voice need not merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help him endure and prevail.
|
