This is a correct mail as the one I have sent had too many miss-spellings. I'm sorry for it. ---------- >差出人 : "スズキユミ">宛先 : logh@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU >件名 : [LoGH] Guess who.....part 2 (spoiler warning+3&4) >送信日時 : 2000年 10月 20日 (金) 1:14 AM > > spoiler warning! > > Though I'm really not sure if this should be a spoiler or not, > I just put this in case this might disturb some people. > > > > > > > s > > p > > o > > i > > l > > e > > r > > > w > > a > > r > > n > > i > > n > > > > > > > This must be enough space for it....(sigh) > Please read below but forget the sentences that this guy was ugly and > alcoholic. His name actually start with "R". > > (many lines omitted) > Among all these passionate hearts and all these undoubting minds > there was on sceptic. How did he happen to be there? from juxtaposition. > The name of this septic was Grantaire, and he usually signed with the > rebus:R[grand R,great R]. Grantaire was a man who took good care not to > believe anything. (some lines omitted.His ugliness and alcoholic sentences > was included here.Good!) > All these words: rights of the people, rights of man, social contract, > French Revolution, republic, democracy, humanity, civilisation, religion, > progress,were, to Grantaire, very nearly meaningless. He smiled at them. > Scepticism,that cries of the intellect, had not left one entire idea in his > mind. He lived in irony. This was his axiom: There is only one certainty, my > full glass. He ridiculed all devotion, under all circumstances,in the > brother as well as the father, in Robespierre the younger as well as > Loizerolles. "They were very forward to be dead," he exclaimed. > He said of the cross:"There is a gibbet which has made a success." > A rover, a gambler, a libertine, and often drunk,he displeased these young > thinkers by singing incessantly:"I loves the girls and I loves good Wine." > Air:Vive Henri IV.(for some reason, it's written [loves]---Rikako). > Still, this sceptic had a fanaticism. This fanaticism was neither an idea, > nor a dogma, nor an art, nor a science; it was a man: Enjolras. Grantaire > admired, loved, and venerated Enjolras. To whom did this anarchical doubter > ally himself in this phalanx of absolute minds? To the most absolute. > In what way did Enjolras subjugate him? By ideas? No. By a character. > A phenomenon often seen. A sceptic adhering to a believer; that is as simple > as the law of the complementary colours. What we lack attracts us. > Nobody loves the light like the blind man. The dwarf adores the drummajor. > The toad is always looking up at the sky; why? To see the bird fly. > Grantaire, in whom doubt was creeping,loved to see faith soaring in > Enjolras. He had need of Enjolras. Without understanding it himself clearly, > and without trying to explain it, that chaste, healthy, firm, direct, hard, > candid nature charmed him. He admired, by instinct, his opposite. His soft, > wavering, disjointed,deseased, deformed ideas, attached themselves to > Enjolras as to a backbone. His moral spine leaned upon that firmness. > Grantaire, by the side of Enjolras, became somebody again. He was himself, > moreover, composed of two apparetly incompatible elements. He was ironical > and cordial. His indifference was loving. His mind dispensed with belief, > yet his heart could not dispense with friendship. A thorough > contradiction;for an affection is a conviction. His nature was so. > There are men who seem born to be the opposite, the reverse, the > counterpart. They are Pollux, Patroclus, Nisus, Eudamidas, Hephaestion, > Pechmeja. They live only upon condition of leaning on another; their names > are continuarions, and are only written preceded by the conjunction and; > their existence is not their own; it s the other side of a destiny which > is not theirs. Grantaire was one of those men. He was the reverse of > Enjolras. > > > > O.K. I finish here. Additionally, Enjolras was a blond-haired. > > > Rikako > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >