This topic has been archived. It cannot be replied.
-
枫下沙龙 / 梦想天空 / Shall we follow SCHOLARS or our very own hearts, coming down to literary observation and/or analyses? Sounds like De Merteuil was a MAN fortunately and/or unfortunately living in a woman's body? Yet, Wu Zetian a WOMAN in a woman's body?Is that what you're trying to convey to me and yourself?
"De Merteuil. Scholars from various ages have considered De Merteuil a Machiavellian figure for good reasons. Yet her frailty, as in Hamlet's "frailty, thy name is women", or weakness, or piteousness is certainly not one of them. -the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);"
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-15
{322}
(#10740721@0)
+1
-
If indeed, the universe is the fabulous extension of the bedroom, what would be the extension of the fascinating being, say, man and woman?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-15
(#10740727@0)
-
a vicious cycle of creation, destruction, love, death and life. or should we say this cycle is actually a benevolent one?
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-15
(#10740800@0)
-
Why in your default mind, IS this cycle nothing but benevolent ?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-15
(#10740863@0)
-
If we listen to Nietzsche carefully enough we probably could say the world and it's happening is amoral, simply for being beyond good and evil.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-15
(#10740919@0)
-
Are you still one of the admirers of De Merteuil ? To you, she was not tragic or comedic, and she was beyond tragic and comedic?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741127@0)
-
She is a villain with dignity, although the author did everything to prevent her from becoming tragic.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741144@0)
-
How do you define the word "dignity"? I agree that De Valmont was indeed one with dignity, yet I cannot even remotely come to conclusion that De Merteuil was a possible or potential one as well. How did you get to this point? How and why?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741164@0)
+1
-
Her dignity originates from her wisdom, her shrewdness, her sharp observation, and most importantly, herpragmatic as well as philosophical understanding of the nature of men and women. and her desire to go to war war with her enemy's arsenal, a war that doomed to lose.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
{165}
(#10741456@0)
-
Are we on the SAME page or not? Why I so strongly feel that you might be on the last page, yet I might be still hanging around on the first one? However "glorious" her motive could be, to me, she was nothing but a victim of her own destiny.Revenge upon an EX-lover, an EX-lover, NOT even a current one or a potential future one, yet an EX-LOVER. How "noble" her war could be that derived from a revenge upon an EX-LOVER, if there was indeed a WAR?
Any difference between WAR and REVENGE in your loving and adoring eyes upon De Merteuil?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
{300}
(#10741540@0)
-
actually, we all are the victim or plaything of our own destiny. that is inevitable, if there is ever something that can be inevitable.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741619@0)
-
I truly and honestly have an enormous amount of difficulty in understanding your glorification of De Merteuil. Why? Why do you have to glorify her one way or the other? Convince me, if you could.
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741658@0)
-
I did not glorify De Merteuil. I just related the author's appreciation of her.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741721@0)
-
Does that mean when love is gone with the wind in Sicily, the ONE involved in that LOVE is supposed to desperately follow the wind, however the WIND wanna get rid of the ONE? And you interprete that as DIGNITY?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741168@0)
-
figuratively speaking, wind can only blow away the one with lighter/lesser substance. as unfortunately as it sounds, the "one" often belongs to the fair sex.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741495@0)
-
For that matter, your beloved De Merteuil was in true love? So true and so desperate that she could not let herself be gone with the wind of SEX, fair or not? Why couldn't I just get it as you did or DID NOT?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741550@0)
-
she is in love with her self. as all true love is supposed to be.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741620@0)
-
True love means being in love with oneself? Hey, where you got this one? Which principle in which school of thought, if there is one?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741654@0)
-
true love is always love of oneself. even when we give up our life for the loved one we are simply living up to the beloved image of ourselves, just like Valmont.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741720@0)
-
Was the statement insourced by Nietzsche under the circumstances that true love had no choice but to be outsourced where insourcing price was sky high?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-17
(#10742806@0)
-
I could not determine in which context you are using the Nietzsche reference.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-17
(#10742843@0)
-
Pretended you could not, or you could not could not?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-17
(#10742930@0)
-
I am not pretending. I mentioned Nietzsche earlier in the thread because I agree with his saying that our universe is fundamentally amoral, and hence beyond good and evil.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-17
(#10742964@0)
-
I've been keeping an eye on you guys' "discussion" for 3 days. Please,now, turn back to the field of literature you are familiar with. The universe is not the universe you think you know. Let's give a rough definition to the 'universe' --- the spiritual world that may only be created by human beings. Other than that, it is science which is nothing but cold-blooded facts and laws.
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-17
{312}
(#10743110@0)
-
who made the laws? and who interpreted the facts?
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-17
(#10743205@0)
-
By what do you think the laws were made by "who"？ And by what do think the facts can and should be interpreted by "who"?
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-19
(#10748391@0)
-
I was responding to your claim above about "there is nothing but cold-blooded facts and laws." we made the laws and we interpreted the facts.our universe is meaningful to us only because we see it and we feel it. it would have been pure "nothingness" without our interaction.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-20
{134}
(#10748579@0)
-
The "laws" in my post refers to "规律“。
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-20
(#10750744@0)
-
I fully understood the "laws" in your post refers to "规律“, like in Newton's Law of Gravity. however, the "law" is made by human intelligence, in this case through the specific human agent Newton.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-20
(#10750771@0)
-
If so, we're all “Gods".
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-20
(#10751980@0)
-
to echo your thought, God did not create us in his own image for nothing.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-20
(#10752088@0)
-
prove your claim, pls?
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-20
(#10752095@0)
-
to demand proof for our faith is profoundly a fundamental logic fallacy.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-20
(#10752245@0)
-
Q: Prove that you can echo my thoughts. (0 points)
-hhyang(带砖侍卫);
2017-4-20
(#10752482@0)
-
for that proof I may need to borrow a sound meter, or rent it from RadioShack, and I may also have to take a cram course in sound engineering. that is really too close to too "Much Ado about Nothing". cost of doing business outweighs any benefit.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-21
(#10752662@0)
-
we have been reminded time and again of "there is nothing new under the sun" by the holy as well as the wise ones. it is customary to respect the study done by previous scholars. De Merteuil is a woman,just like Wu is one for sure. Yet as women they have tried to beat men at their own game with no mercy.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-15
{103}
(#10740787@0)
+1
-
Black Lives Matter, so do the holy as well as the wise ones, YET the ones of yours and mine? ^_^ From my point of view, Wu made it, yet I fully doubt that De Merteuil achieved it, and you?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-15
(#10740857@0)
+1
-
De Merteuil failed because the author's conscience as a man won't allow otherwise.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-15
(#10740923@0)
-
Are you blaming the creator of the work of art or what? How could you? How dare you, if I may say so?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741126@0)
+1
-
not really. it is just my reading. Being the counterpart of Valmont, De Merteuil lacks the magic touch of a tragic hero that is conveniently granted to Valmont.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741142@0)
-
How convenient could that be? De Valmont sacrificed his own life, yet De Merteuil lived, didn't she?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741169@0)
-
The author appreciates De Merteuil as much as he does Valmont. Yet his male perspective led him to the brutal ending of De Merteuil. she does live, but in a horrible way.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741453@0)
-
Give you two choices, and make your choice wisely, cause you only could make one out of two. ^_^ Be a glorified dead, or be a horribly alive. Which one would you like to be or NOT to be?
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741558@0)
-
I will choose "a glorified dead" in a heart beat. I don't even need to think about it.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741621@0)
-
Actually you could choose something in between, that is, a glorified prisoner, which is my definition for De Merteuil. She was a prisoner, a GLORIFIED one.
-wantbaby(：）);
2017-4-16
(#10741656@0)
-
that is another reading. it could even be a better one.
-the_dumb_one(dumb_and_dumber);
2017-4-16
(#10741718@0)