scholarly journals The Great Happiness Moderation

Author(s):  
Andrew Eric Clark ◽  
Sarah Flèche ◽  
Claudia Senik
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Laurence Sterne
Keyword(s):  

IT was undoubtedly, said my uncle Toby, a great happiness for myself and the corporal, that we had all along a burning fever, attended with a most raging thirst, during the whole five and twenty days the flux was upon us in the...


1973 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
Emily Blanchard Hope

“Casa Guidi,” as Robert and Elizabeth Barrett Browning affectionately called their apartment in the fifteenth-century Palazzo Guidi, was their home for nearly all of their married life, from 9 May 1848 until Elizabeth's death on 29 June 1861. They took the apartment furnished for three months in the summer of 1847 and found life there so pleasant that when in the following year it became available, they established themselves in Casa Guidi on a permanent basis and furnished the apartment themselves. Their only child, Pen, was born in Casa Guidi. Elizabeth wrote Casa Guidi Windows and Aurora Leigh there and Robert, many of the poems in Men and Women. It was to Casa Guidi that Robert brought home “the square old yellow Book” which, metamorphosed by him, became The Ring and the Book. These were years of great happiness for the poets, and it is appropriate that Casa Guidi should be preserved as their memorial.


Between February and August 1912, Humphrey Owen Jones, Fellow of Clare College and Jacksonian Demonstrator in Chemistry at Cambridge, received public recognition of his scientific work and great happiness in his private life. He was 34 years of age and in February 1912 was elected as the youngest F.R.S. of the time. At the end of July he was appointed to the Royal Commission on the use of oil-fuel by the Navy. On 1 August he was married in Bangor Cathedral to Muriel Gwendolen Edwards, Fellow of the University of Wales, who had done research with him. She was 26 years of age. In the middle of August, Dr and Mrs H. O. Jones were on their honeymoon in the Alps. Jones was an experienced mountaineer and his wife was also keen on climbing. On 15 August 1912 they set out with a guide (J. Truffer) to climb the Mont Rouge de Peuteret, a minor peak (2941 m.) on the south side of Mont Blanc. In an exposed position, the guide slipped, Jones was unable to arrest him with the rope, and all three fell to their deaths on the Fresnay Glacier, 300 m. below. Their grave is in Courmayeur. The tragedy was referred to briefly by Sir Archibald Geikie, P.R.S., in his Anniversary Address on 30 November 1912, but no extended obituary notice appeared under the auspices of the Royal Society. There were obituary notices in several journals and it was probably felt that these were sufficient, particularly since Jones had been an F.R.S. for only about six months. The centenary of his birth seems an appropriate occasion to remedy this omission, and to examine some of his contributions to chemistry, so prematurely terminated sixty-six years ago.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 413-426
Author(s):  
Philippe Sands

It is a great happiness to be with you today, and I am deeply honoured to be delivering the Lionel Cohen Lecture. That we should come together at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, which I have had the great pleasure to visit on several occasions, stretching back many years, adds to the sense of personal significance.


2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Bourrier

Scholars have had a difficult time assessing the significance of Dinah Mulock Craik (1824–1887), best remembered as the author of John Halifax, Gentleman (1856). The critical verdict on her life and letters has swung toward extremes. Some critics have seen her, to quote Henry James, as “kindly, somewhat dull, pious, and very sentimental” (172); her novels embody the Victorian values of self-help, moral earnestness, and hard work, and it is assumed that her life did too. Elaine Showalter's and Sally Mitchell's feminist recoveries of Craik's work in the 1970s and early 1980s found that just the opposite was true, and that Victorian sentimentality allowed Craik to voice the subversive desires of her female readers covertly, in a form that was acceptable to the general public (Showalter 5–7, Mitchell 31). This critical tradition tended to overemphasize the melodramatic aspects of Craik's life and career as a means of dramatizing the struggles of women in a patriarchal society. The most recent scholarship eschews Craik's life altogether for the most part, focusing on her novelistic representations of disability, of Irish and Scottish nationality, and of class and enfranchisement. This criticism engages Craik's writing as an interesting cultural artifact rather than as an aesthetic object: her work is once again seen as embodying normative Victorian values, but to what extent the author was the cognizant promoter of these values, and to what extent she was their unwitting filter, and whether it matters, is unclear. But new archival work shows the importance of her life in understanding her career. The Mulock Family Papers, held at the University of California at Los Angeles, underscore Craik's challenges in managing an abusive father, who suffered from periods of dejection followed by periods of great happiness, and who was frequently absent and incarcerated. Craik was intensely private when it came to her personal life, and scholars like Showalter have read her reserve as a bow to womanly decorum in a life otherwise dominated by literary celebrity. But the archive suggests that Craik's taciturnity was instead a strategy for managing the threat of violence and scandal.


2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1727-1732
Author(s):  
Somchai Saenphumi, Worachet Tho-un

This article on the debate about who should rule? It discusses the diverse answers of influential political philosophers and political scientists. The study found that Plato argues that philosopher king should be the ruler. In contrast, people cannot take part in the Government. Rousseau supports the rule by the people who must be able to legislate. Furthermore, try to enforce it on yourself before leading to a majority vote. Aristotle believed that no one or any other group was a ruler but ruling it for the public good. While Mill believed that the representative system could create great happiness for the people, and it can be recalled. Finally, Sylvan argues that there was no need for a ruler. Because rulers bring war and exploitation, people can rely on themselves without their ruler to aim for utopia or an ideal society that should be inhabited. As a result, the representative system of the authors' view is the most appropriate form today. Because when a ruler is a tyrant, we can always recall power and choose a new ruler and create great happiness for people as well as possible.


Author(s):  
Andrew E. Clark ◽  
Sarah Flèche ◽  
Claudia Senik
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document