Thank you all for answering my question about Kircheis! I have been in N.Y. for only for three days for a meaningless purpose. I just came back to Tokyo yesterday evening. I happened to visit a shop called "The Anime Crash" in Soho(is it in Soho? I'm not sure). It seemed there were few merchandise to compare with the capasity of the shop. There,I found a "Eatman" video series with English subtitles! My recomendatin is "Berserk" though,it hasn't sold in the states yet(I'm not sure...). It's so cruel and ugly,but it's worth to watch once at least that please watch the series if you could get them with English subtitles. O.K. now I am going to write down the main subject here. I wanted to report this for a long time, but I didn't have the translation. Fortunately, I could find the book at a book shop in 47th street. It is "Les Miserable" by Victor Hugo. I will transcribe some sentences below. I would like to know who in LoGH you imagine. from:[Book Fourth/The Friends of ABC] Enjolras,whom we have named first,the reason why will be seen by-and-by, was an only son and wa rich. Enjolras was a charming young man,who was capable of being rerrible. He was angelically beautiful. He wa Antinous wild. You would have said,to see the thoughtful reflection of his eyes,that he had already, in some preceding existence,passed through the revolutionary apocalypse. He had the tradition of it like an eye-witness. He knew all the little details of the grand thing, a pontifical and warrior nature, strange ina youth. He was officiating and mulitant; from the immediate point of view, a soldier of democracy; above the movement of the time, a priest of the ideal. He had a deep eye, lids a little red, thick under lip,easily becoming desdainful, and a high forehead. Much forehead in a face is like much sky in a horizon. Like certain young men of the beginning of this century and the end of the last century,who becameillustrious in early life, he had an exceedingly youthful look,as fresh as a young girl's, although he hd hours of pallor. He was now a man, but he seemed a child still. His twenty-two years of age appeared seventeen; he was serous, he did not seem to know that there was on the earth a being called woman. He had but one passion, the right; but one thought, to remove all obstacles. Uppon Mount Aventine, he would have been Gracchus; in the Convention, he would have been Saint Just. He hardly saw the roses, he ignored the spring, he did not hear the birds sing; Evadne's bare bosom would have moved him no more than Aristogeiton; to him, as to Harmodius, flowers were good only to hide the sword. He was severe in his pleasures. Before everything but the republic, he chastely dropped his eyes. He was the marble lover of liberty. His speech was roughly inspired and had the tremor of a hymn. He astonished you by his soaring. Woe to the love affair that should venture to intrude upon him! Had any grisette of the Place Cambrai or the Rue Saint Jean de Beauvais, seeing this college boy's face, this form of a page, those long fair lashes,those blue eyes, that hair flying in the wind, those rosy cheeks, those pure lips, those exquisite teeth,felt a desire to taste all this dawn, and tried her beauty upon Enjolras, a surprising and terrible look would have suddenly shown her the great gulf, and taught her not to confound with the gallant cherubim of Beaumarchais the fearful cherubim of Ezekiel. Beside Enjolras who represented the logic of the revolution, Combeferre represented its philosophy. Between the logic of the revolution and its philosophy, there is this difference--that its logic could conclude with war, while its philosophy could only end in peace. Combeferre completed and corrected Enjolras. He was lower and broader. His desire was to instil into all minds the broad principles of general ideas; he said ”Revolution , but civilisation;” and about the steep mountain he spread the vast blue horizon. Hence, in all Combeferre's views, there was something attainable and racticable. Revolution with Combeferre was more respirable than with Emjolras. Enjolras expressed its devine right,and Combeferre its natural right. The first went as far as Robespierre; the second stopped at Condorcet. Combeferre more than Enjolras lived the life of the world generally. Had it been given to these two young men to take a place in history, one would have been the upright man, the other would have been the wise man. Enjolras was more manly. Combeferre was more humane. "Homo" and "Vir" indeed express the exact shade of defference. Combeferre was gentle, as Enjolras was severe, from natural purity. (some lines omitted) He was learned, purist,precise, universal, a hard student, and at the same time given to musing,"even chimerical," said his friends. (some line omitted) Enjolras was a chief; Combeferre was a guide. You would have preferred to fight with the one and march with the other. Not that Combeferre was not capable of fighting; he did not refuse to close with an obstacle, and to attach it by main strength and by explosion, but to put, gradually, by the teaching of axioms and the promulgarion of positive laws, the human race inharmony with itsu destinies, pleased him better; and of the two lights, his inclination was rather for illumination than for conflagration. A fire would cause a dawn, undoubtedly, but why not wait for the break of day? A volcano enlightens, but the morning enlightens still better. Combeferre, perhaps, preferred the pure radiance of the beautiful to the glory of the sublime.(to be continued to the third person) O.K. I stop it once here. The third person is someone whom you do know well but I dare write it in another mail as I'm afrraid it is still included in "spoiler warning". Rikako