object-directed desire) and proceeds from this to characterize and relate the objects desired” (8). R. A. Marcus asserts that “the dialogue as a whole . . . presents in a dramatic way Plato’s view of love” (133-34). In a bit more descriptive manner, F. A. Cornford contends that the purpose of the “Symposium is to explain the significance of Eros to the lover of wisdom” (120). Thomas Gould’s view of the Symposium is also a bit more philosophical. He writes: “The subject of the Symposium is just that: the
about was me. I had scraggly, unwashed long hair, and I’d recently started smoking marijuana, and I believed rock and roll would change the world. And now...this guy Fouratt had called me up when he read about me and Crawdaddy! in the Village Voice’s Scenes column and had invited me to a meeting at which Richard Alpert would describe the recent (1/1/ 67) San Francisco “Be-In,” and representatives of the NYC Parks Dept and the rest of us (representatives of “the community”) would discuss the possibility
as they often do, in response to my innocent suggestion that Mr. Lindner is the devil. The Youngers, an African American family in Chicago, have made a down payment on a house in an all-white neighborhood. Mr. Lindner, a meekly apologetic little man, has been dispatched from the neighborhood association, check in hand, to buy out the family’s claim on the house. At first,
Jacques Pothier ABSTRACT The American planter has mostly been presented as the epitome of the romantic cavalier legend that could be found in the fiction of John Pendleton Kennedy to Thomas Nelson Page: a man of chivalric manners and good breeding; a man of good social position; a man of wealth and leisure (Concise Oxford Dictionary).1 A closer scrutiny of the cavalier and genteel ethos of the time, however, reveals the inherent ideological inconsistencies with the idea of the gentleman itself