Print (PDF) - On this page / på denna sida - January 26
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has been proofread at least once.
(diff)
(history)
Denna sida har korrekturlästs minst en gång.
(skillnad)
(historik)
than those of Plato for the same purpose. But who
will deny that it would be better for the world if
they who cause human beings to be born into it did
it with a higher consciousness, with a deeper sense
of responsibility? Marriage, regarded from this
angle, occupies in general a pretty low plane. A
man and woman marry to be happy, selfishly happy,
and beyond that the thought seldom extends; it does
not elevate itself to the higher thought, "We shall
give life to immortal beings!" And yet this is the
highest purport of marriage. Married couples who
do not have offspring of their own may fulfill its
duties by adopting orphan children.
When Alcott was gone, Emerson came and remained a
good hour with me. He is iron, even as the other
is water. And yet his world floats in an element of
disintegration and has no firm, unwavering forms. It
is mysterious how such a powerful and concrete nature
as his can be satisfied with such disintegrated
views. I can find fault with Emerson’s mode of
thought, but I must bow before his spirit and his
nature....
The other evening I attended a large party of Boston
fashionables. The company seemed to me showy and
aristocratic rather than pleasant. I saw there a
couple of figures such as I had not looked for in
the drawing-rooms of the New
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
