"Bien plus tard, Marcel Proust propose un texte édifiant dans son livre Sur la lecture (1905). Le passage décrit l’état des individus en proie à ce que nous nommerions aujourd’hui un épisode dépressif majeur ou modéré, et en quoi la lecture peut représenter un soin psychothérapeutique. Proust fait le constat que les esprits fragilisés sont dans une sorte d’inertie intérieure, s’enlisent dans un déni de soi, incapables de vouloir. Pour retrouver ce goût de la volonté, et notamment celle de guérir, l’écrivain estime que ces individus doivent trouver de l’aide dans l’impulsion d’un esprit extérieur, qui leur permettrait d’opérer une inspection intérieure nécessairement solitaire. On reconnait là le mécanisme de la lecture et a fortiori de la lecture thérapeutique."
"LAST Thursday, a 13-year-old boy won the Scripps National Spelling Bee by spelling “knaidel,” Yiddish for matzo ball. But the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, which created the standard Yiddish transliteration now used in libraries around the world, holds that the correct spelling is “kneydl.”
In the spelling-bee debate, aging American Yiddish speakers — the vast majority of whom cannot read Yiddish — have largely dismissed YIVO’s “kneydl” spelling as irrelevant. For them, it is not meaningful, and that’s part of this story’s profound sadness. YIVO’s transliteration system, finalized after World War II, assumes you can read Yiddish. It assumes you understand how Hebrew characters are being replaced; it assumes you appreciate the choices and losses that accompany each letter. The spelling bee’s Webster’s, by contrast, assumes you don’t care about the life and death of a nation. It assumes you care only how an English reader might pronounce a word.
A famous Yiddish song, “Oyfn Pripetshik” (“On the Hearth”), describes children sitting in a schoolroom learning how to spell. Toward the end, the lyrics say: “When you become older, children / You yourselves will understand / How many tears lie in the letters / And how much weeping."
Arvind Mahankali, the winner of the 2013 Scripps National Spelling Bee, and the definition of swag.
Awwww this is great he’s so cool words are cool and what’s even cooler is the flakes falling on his head and he looks so placid ! Also I would never had won this because seriously, who decided how to transliterate yiddish words into english ?
In the usual imagery of love, we think of a woman being held by a strong man, and like to imagine her feeling safe. But it is a problem to only think about women’s need to feel safe in heteronormalised relationships.
Because let’s be honest, you don’t love someone because you need a bodyguard, right ? You don’t pick the person you love depending on whether they can physically protect you, right ? This feeling of safeness is of being safe emotionally, a feeling of mutual trust, and it really does work both ways.
That is why in a loving relationship men need to feel safe as much as women. If “true love” is loving someone just the way they are, for who they are, and making sure the other knows that, why would gender be a factor ? Why would it be related to the very human need to have someone you can trust, someone who will let you be, who will want the best for you and out of you, someone who would simply love you ? Why would having, in this both magnificent and harsh world we live in, someone you can confide into, someone with whom you can share your most intimate joys and fears, your most profound desires, ever be related to sex or gender ? Why would this feeling of safeness only be found in heterosexual relationships and as a “service” from a man to a woman ?