Commonplace 38 George & His Tendency to Tyranny.
Like many of those caught between two social classes, George had difficulty in expressing his true feelings to equals and those by whom he strove to be accepted. But he was, by nature, secretive and his need to control others' perceptions of him and his doings made the class thing so much worse. Caught between a variety of worlds both internal and external, he struggled with personality and character flaws (aloofness, lack of empathy, pride, arrogance) and set himself almost unwinnable goals - such as a happy marriage to an ordinary working class woman.
Many converts become zealots and George was lured into the frenzy of middle class aspirational dogma - but embraced it wholeheartedly. There are no other words for it: he was a snob. The very worst snobs are those so ashamed of their roots they have to prove they are, despite financial elevation, not still mired with their origins
I qualify it as middle class because there are also working class snobs and presumably, all cultures and all peoples have snobs, too. Snobbism, like the creation of the Universe, is not a steady state. Like the Universe, it is expanding relative to place and time click ;) It's essence is about classifying selected others as inferiors but it requires a constant evaluation of everyone who is U and Non-U, as they say.
An example of George's snobbery is his criticism of Edith's accent. How hard he must have worked to rid himself of his Yorkshire one! This, I believe might go some small way to explain why Edith's accent offended him so. Neither of George's parents were from Yorkshire, so his 'mother tongue' was not infected with a Wakefield twang - for info on the varieties of Yorkshire accent click. There is in England a north-south social divide, between the more affluent south and the poorer north. In George's time, this would have been a significant marker of social class, despite the money being made by northern industrialists, many would have been looked down upon for their native accent. Then there is the regional difference in accent between Yorkshire and Lancashire - the county where George went to school and college. These two counties have their own internecine conflicts based on historic claims to the English crown, but accent is a sign of which camp you are in. Both are united in their mistrust for and hatred of, southerners. Again, accent comes into play. Generally, southerners think northerners are oiks; northerners think southerners are snobs. Southerners have variations in accent with layers of inbuilt snobbery which will quickly mark out the rich from the poor - and the U from the Non-U - hence, the fear of being mistaken for a cockney. Edith's north London accent would have sounded 'cockney' to George. As a southerner with excellent RP (Received Pronunciation), myself, I have no idea why it matters haha. click for examples and more info.
Born in Exile - of which George said the hero Godwin Peak 'is myself... one phase of myself' (in a letter to Eduard Bertz, May 20th 1892) is the epitome of this torment of enforced social mobility at a time when there were few ways for a lower middle class boy to rise. Godwin is eventually crippled by his self-loathing and disgust at having to become someone else in order to win the limp tiny hand of Sidwell Warricombe, who didn't give a hoot about his class, but did care about his lying, scheming ways.
Is it possible to say how George became first the over-achieving scholar and then the bullying weak and vacillating creature he was post-Owens? Perhaps the trauma and shame of imprisonment discombobulated his mojo and turned him into a passive-aggressive with deep undercurrents of resentment and frustrated rage. People who don't feel powerful often bully those they believe to be powerless beneath them. Amongst what he saw as the 'inferiors' - such as working class people, servants, children, wives - he could be quite the martinet. Sadly, he seems to have lacked leadership qualities of charisma and dynamism which might have inspired others to willingly follow; generally, 'might was right' to our man, and this was exacerbated by his point of view that the deference of others was his birthright.
For example, take his holiday in Paris and Italy with his German Friend Plitt. George invited himself along and then spent the trip telling his Diary what a rubbish travel companion Plitt was turning out to be. He moaned about all sorts of trivial things - see Commonplaces 20 and 21 for more. George could not bring himself to say what he thought and so he had to stew in his own juices. Plitt seems to have been a much more authentic communicator, which George wrongly attributes to vulgarity and stupidity.
And, then there is his bullying treatment of Marianne aka Nell; when she failed to comply with his house arrest orders he locked her up. This was for his good, not hers. And when she became an invalid he dictated she must live apart in a separate dwelling when her epilepsy confounded him once too often. Not because she wanted to live alone or with totally inappropriate strangers, but because George wanted to have her out of the way. Of course, he no doubt dressed it up as 'wanting the best for her' - to her face.
Edith was also a victim of his Darwinian need to dominate. I suspect in the late 1890s George carefully redacted the Diaries to reduce future censure when posterity read of his increasing unreasonable and obsessional rage at Edith's failure to come up to his snobby standards. With Gabrielle in France, when he was reviewing his Life's achievements, did he read the picky, spiteful, hate-fuelled entries and decide to edit out the worst of it? He claims he didn't make thorough entries because they would all be the same, but that's nonsensical as he was such a moaner, and needed a sympathetic listening board, and the Diary was the one friend on tap who wouldn't talk back. HG Wells had once told him not to be so hard on Edith and to treat her better; Marianne's friends had made a similar plea in response to his neglect of her. After George's death, a darker side to our man began to come into focus - more of that another time! No wonder George thought maybe he needed a better version of his life for posterity to absorb. Was Ryecroft supposed to balance the yin/yang thing and show the old bully was a softie inside? If so, it didn't work - well, not on me. And not on HG Wells.
Before redaction, was this a typical entry circa Summer 1892:
'Very trying day. Had to address two incorrect uses of the possessive apostrophe on Edith's shopping list. She refuses point blank to comply with standard usage. I said to her, 'If in doubt, leave it out, because to leave it in - and it be wrong - you prove to the world you are an ignoramus'. Made her do one hundred lines: 'I am an ignoramus'. She made four spelling mistakes with that simple task! Had to resort to a fair whack of Heine and several bowls of Cavendish Old Black Shag packed hard into my pipe to regain equilibrium. How I bless the Fates for making me a smoker. Thought about how the Romans in the Colosseum dealt with female dissenters and wondered if Edith would have arm-wrestled a tiger to the ground, or just make a lunge for its windpipe. Made me wish we lived in those days and could settle things once and for all with the jab of a trident. Noticed a smear on the hall mirror and cursed Edith (silently) for not managing the servants to a higher standard. Put my unused postage stamps in order of value, which took much longer than planned, then in colours of the spectrum, from red to black. Noticed I am very short of the 2d. How I rail against the Fates that omitted to remind me to buy more when I slipped out this morning to purchase tobacco. Fretted for a bit over why no-one wants to read my books - just because I think they are shit doesn't mean everyone else should. The monstrous cheek of it! Wondered at the number of turnips we are using - three since last Tuesday fortnight, which is a disgrace. The cost of turnips is astronomical; advised Edith to be more economical with them as they don't grow on trees. Noticed a pimple on my bell end; took me right back to the old Owens days. Mused a bit on why Fate made me dip my hand into the pockets of others when it just as easily could have found me a Saturday job at the Dog Inn in the city centre. I suppose Fate didn't have me down as a barman - it had me down as a 'tea leaf', as Edith would be wont to say if she ever found out about it. Felt a bit shivery and feeble after supper (lentil sandwich and cold tea - if only women could learn to enjoy lentils we would have harmony in this world) then coughed up some yucky stuff. Fate decreed it wasn't red, just yellowy-green. Chastised Gubbins for noisily slurping his rusk - that boy takes after his mother, poor wee common as muck mite that he is. Cursed the Fates that made me fertile. Moaned at Edith a bit for not teaching the boy more Greek nursery rhymes. She charmingly told me to 'do one'. O, why did Fate make me offer marriage to this totally-unsuited-to-my-particular-peculiar-pernickety-needs girl? After tea, penned letters to Alg; Nelly; Madge; Mother; Bertz; Roberts; Hick; Wells; Alg again, Nelly again and a post card to Alg's Katie's cat who is three next Monday. Quite overcome with writer's cramp after that, so took a nap. Odd dream where Bertz, wearing a spectacular black off the shoulder evening gown, came round to fix the gas boiler - not sure what it means, but it certainly woke me up. All these distractions keep me from the sacred art of book writing! Kismet, I suppose.'
So, what is passive-aggressive behaviour? How could we recognise it in our hero?
Here is a table formulating Theodore Millon's 4 sub-types of negativism (the 'passive' bit) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive-aggressive_behavior I've left the links in for your enjoyment.
We also have this: http://www.counselling-directory.org.uk/counsellor-articles/what-is-passive-aggressive-behaviour
'Passive aggressive behaviour takes many forms but can generally be described as a non-verbal aggression that manifests in negative behaviour. It is where you are angry with someone but do not or cannot tell them. Instead of communicating honestly when you feel upset, annoyed, irritated or disappointed you may instead bottle the feelings up, shut off verbally, give angry looks, make obvious changes in behaviour, be obstructive, sulky or put up a stone wall. It may also involve indirectly resisting requests from others by evading or creating confusion around the issue. Not going along with things. It can either be covert (concealed and hidden) or overt (blatant and obvious).
A passive aggressive might not always show that they are angry or resentful. They might appear in agreement, polite, friendly, down-to-earth, kind and well-meaning. However, underneath there may be manipulation going on - hence the term "Passive-Aggressive".
Passive aggression is a destructive pattern of behaviour that can be seen as a form of emotional abuse in relationships that bites away at trust between people. It is a creation of negative energy in the ether which is clear to those involved and can create immense hurt and pain to all parties.
It happens when negative emotions and feelings build up and are then held in on a self-imposed need for either acceptance by another, dependence on others or to avoid even further arguments or conflict.
Some examples of passive aggression behaviours might be:
Non-communication when there is clearly something problematic to discuss
Avoiding/Ignoring when you are so angry that you feel you cannot speak calmly
Evading problems and issues: burying an angry head in the sand
Procrastinating: intentionally putting off important tasks for less important ones
Obstructing: deliberately stalling or preventing an event or process of change
Fear of Competition. Avoiding situations where one party will be seen as better at something
Ambiguity. Being cryptic, unclear, not fully engaging in conversations
Sulking. Being silent, morose, sullen and resentful in order to get attention or sympathy.
Chronic Lateness: a way to put you in control over others and their expectations
Chronic Forgetting: shows a blatant disrespect and disregard for others to punish in some way
Fear of Intimacy: problems with trust issues and guarding against becoming too intimately involved or attached will be a way for them to feel in control of the relationship
Making Excuses : tending to come up with reasons for not doing things
Victimisation: unable to look at their own part in a situation; will turn the tables to become the victim and will behave like one
Self-Pity: the poor me scenario
Blaming others for situations rather than being able to take responsibility for your own actions or being able to take an objective view of the situation as a whole.
Withholding usual behaviours or roles for example sex, cooking and cleaning or making cups of tea, running a bath etc. all to reinforce an already unclear message to the other party
Learned Helplessness where a person continually acts like they can’t help themselves – deliberately asking others to do their dirty work for them or doing a poor job of something for which they are often explicitly responsible
One of the clearest indicators for assessing George's tendency to passive-aggressive behaviour is the way he looked to others to make his decisions for him, thus relieving himself of all personal responsibility for the outcome - classic learned helplessness. I mentioned this in the previous series of posts looking at the time he thought to divorce Marianne. In this, if we are to take his version as authentic, we can see he suspected the police spy/detective was immoral and corrupt and yet still employed him - George did not ask himself if such a tripe hound was reliable and trustworthy because then he couldn't be blamed tor making a wrong call if things went badly. He doesn't seem to have spoken to Marianne herself. He preferred to sneak around behind her back employing a dishonest policeman (who could also take the blame for doing the actual sneaking around) hoping to find evidence against her. He admits he does not want to be unfair (with her alimony) whilst plotting behind her back (did he really want her out of his life or was he looking to gain more control over her?), going to Fred Harrison for guidance, though in fact he was just looking for someone to agree with him as he had already made up his mind. Harrison would have taken the rap for instigating the divorce proceedings, and, if George had subsequently regretted it, he could have said, 'Fred Harrison made me do it'.
When no evidence materialised, George doesn't seem to have cared one jot. He seems to have embarked on it with a sort of distanced indifference and when it fizzles out, he just grieves for the money it cost him, not for the moral implications of his actions, or the existential emptiness of his passivity. One wonders if he ever thought of apologising to Marianne for his bad faith. But, did he ever really want her out of his life? I think not. Marianne was still very much his girl until the day she died - and then, she haunted him. Having her in the background would have been an immense totem of sadistic control - and we should never underestimate George's penchant for retributive cruelty especially towards his first and second wives. If you find that 'heroic', I pity your damned soul.
 |
| Part of the Jake and Dinos Chapman Installation at White Cube Gallery Summer 2011 |
Many converts become zealots and George was lured into the frenzy of middle class aspirational dogma - but embraced it wholeheartedly. There are no other words for it: he was a snob. The very worst snobs are those so ashamed of their roots they have to prove they are, despite financial elevation, not still mired with their origins
I qualify it as middle class because there are also working class snobs and presumably, all cultures and all peoples have snobs, too. Snobbism, like the creation of the Universe, is not a steady state. Like the Universe, it is expanding relative to place and time click ;) It's essence is about classifying selected others as inferiors but it requires a constant evaluation of everyone who is U and Non-U, as they say.
An example of George's snobbery is his criticism of Edith's accent. How hard he must have worked to rid himself of his Yorkshire one! This, I believe might go some small way to explain why Edith's accent offended him so. Neither of George's parents were from Yorkshire, so his 'mother tongue' was not infected with a Wakefield twang - for info on the varieties of Yorkshire accent click. There is in England a north-south social divide, between the more affluent south and the poorer north. In George's time, this would have been a significant marker of social class, despite the money being made by northern industrialists, many would have been looked down upon for their native accent. Then there is the regional difference in accent between Yorkshire and Lancashire - the county where George went to school and college. These two counties have their own internecine conflicts based on historic claims to the English crown, but accent is a sign of which camp you are in. Both are united in their mistrust for and hatred of, southerners. Again, accent comes into play. Generally, southerners think northerners are oiks; northerners think southerners are snobs. Southerners have variations in accent with layers of inbuilt snobbery which will quickly mark out the rich from the poor - and the U from the Non-U - hence, the fear of being mistaken for a cockney. Edith's north London accent would have sounded 'cockney' to George. As a southerner with excellent RP (Received Pronunciation), myself, I have no idea why it matters haha. click for examples and more info.
 |
| Pollice Verso by Jean-Leon Gerome 1872 |
Is it possible to say how George became first the over-achieving scholar and then the bullying weak and vacillating creature he was post-Owens? Perhaps the trauma and shame of imprisonment discombobulated his mojo and turned him into a passive-aggressive with deep undercurrents of resentment and frustrated rage. People who don't feel powerful often bully those they believe to be powerless beneath them. Amongst what he saw as the 'inferiors' - such as working class people, servants, children, wives - he could be quite the martinet. Sadly, he seems to have lacked leadership qualities of charisma and dynamism which might have inspired others to willingly follow; generally, 'might was right' to our man, and this was exacerbated by his point of view that the deference of others was his birthright.
For example, take his holiday in Paris and Italy with his German Friend Plitt. George invited himself along and then spent the trip telling his Diary what a rubbish travel companion Plitt was turning out to be. He moaned about all sorts of trivial things - see Commonplaces 20 and 21 for more. George could not bring himself to say what he thought and so he had to stew in his own juices. Plitt seems to have been a much more authentic communicator, which George wrongly attributes to vulgarity and stupidity.
And, then there is his bullying treatment of Marianne aka Nell; when she failed to comply with his house arrest orders he locked her up. This was for his good, not hers. And when she became an invalid he dictated she must live apart in a separate dwelling when her epilepsy confounded him once too often. Not because she wanted to live alone or with totally inappropriate strangers, but because George wanted to have her out of the way. Of course, he no doubt dressed it up as 'wanting the best for her' - to her face.
 |
| Mr Gissing Meets Miss Underwood and Won't Take 'No' For an Answer. |
Before redaction, was this a typical entry circa Summer 1892:
'Very trying day. Had to address two incorrect uses of the possessive apostrophe on Edith's shopping list. She refuses point blank to comply with standard usage. I said to her, 'If in doubt, leave it out, because to leave it in - and it be wrong - you prove to the world you are an ignoramus'. Made her do one hundred lines: 'I am an ignoramus'. She made four spelling mistakes with that simple task! Had to resort to a fair whack of Heine and several bowls of Cavendish Old Black Shag packed hard into my pipe to regain equilibrium. How I bless the Fates for making me a smoker. Thought about how the Romans in the Colosseum dealt with female dissenters and wondered if Edith would have arm-wrestled a tiger to the ground, or just make a lunge for its windpipe. Made me wish we lived in those days and could settle things once and for all with the jab of a trident. Noticed a smear on the hall mirror and cursed Edith (silently) for not managing the servants to a higher standard. Put my unused postage stamps in order of value, which took much longer than planned, then in colours of the spectrum, from red to black. Noticed I am very short of the 2d. How I rail against the Fates that omitted to remind me to buy more when I slipped out this morning to purchase tobacco. Fretted for a bit over why no-one wants to read my books - just because I think they are shit doesn't mean everyone else should. The monstrous cheek of it! Wondered at the number of turnips we are using - three since last Tuesday fortnight, which is a disgrace. The cost of turnips is astronomical; advised Edith to be more economical with them as they don't grow on trees. Noticed a pimple on my bell end; took me right back to the old Owens days. Mused a bit on why Fate made me dip my hand into the pockets of others when it just as easily could have found me a Saturday job at the Dog Inn in the city centre. I suppose Fate didn't have me down as a barman - it had me down as a 'tea leaf', as Edith would be wont to say if she ever found out about it. Felt a bit shivery and feeble after supper (lentil sandwich and cold tea - if only women could learn to enjoy lentils we would have harmony in this world) then coughed up some yucky stuff. Fate decreed it wasn't red, just yellowy-green. Chastised Gubbins for noisily slurping his rusk - that boy takes after his mother, poor wee common as muck mite that he is. Cursed the Fates that made me fertile. Moaned at Edith a bit for not teaching the boy more Greek nursery rhymes. She charmingly told me to 'do one'. O, why did Fate make me offer marriage to this totally-unsuited-to-my-particular-peculiar-pernickety-needs girl? After tea, penned letters to Alg; Nelly; Madge; Mother; Bertz; Roberts; Hick; Wells; Alg again, Nelly again and a post card to Alg's Katie's cat who is three next Monday. Quite overcome with writer's cramp after that, so took a nap. Odd dream where Bertz, wearing a spectacular black off the shoulder evening gown, came round to fix the gas boiler - not sure what it means, but it certainly woke me up. All these distractions keep me from the sacred art of book writing! Kismet, I suppose.'
 |
| Is This Really Worse Than Marriage To A Totally Unsuitable Woman? |
Here is a table formulating Theodore Millon's 4 sub-types of negativism (the 'passive' bit) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive-aggressive_behavior I've left the links in for your enjoyment.
Subtype
|
Description
|
Personality Traits
|
Vacillating
|
Including
borderline
personality disorder features
|
Emotions
fluctuate in bewildering, perplexing, and enigmatic ways; difficult to fathom
or comprehend own capricious and mystifying moods; wavers, in flux, and
irresolute both subjectively and intrapsychically.
|
Discontented
|
Including
depressive
personality disorder features
|
Grumbling,
petty, testy, cranky, embittered, complaining, fretful, vexed, and moody;
gripes behind pretence; avoids confrontation; uses legitimate but trivial
complaints.
|
Circuitous
|
Including
dependent
personality disorder features
|
Opposition
displayed in a roundabout, labyrinthine, and ambiguous manner, e.g.,
procrastination, dawdling, forgetfulness, inefficiency, neglect,
stubbornness, indirect and devious in venting resentment and resistant
behaviours.
|
Abrasive
|
Including
sadistic
personality disorder features
|
Contentious, intransigent, fractious, and quarrelsome; irritable, caustic, debasing, corrosive, and acrimonious, contradicts and derogates; few qualms and little conscience or remorse. (no longer a valid diagnosis in DSM) |
A passive-aggressive personality is 'often overtly ambivalent, wavering indecisively from one course of action to its opposite. They may follow an erratic path that causes endless wrangles with others and disappointment for themselves'. Characteristic of these persons is an 'intense conflict dependence on others and the desire for self-assertion. Although exhibiting superficial bravado, their self-confidence is often very poor, and others react to them with hostility and negativity'.
 |
| Monarch of the Glen by Sir Edwin Landseer 1851 |
'Passive aggressive behaviour takes many forms but can generally be described as a non-verbal aggression that manifests in negative behaviour. It is where you are angry with someone but do not or cannot tell them. Instead of communicating honestly when you feel upset, annoyed, irritated or disappointed you may instead bottle the feelings up, shut off verbally, give angry looks, make obvious changes in behaviour, be obstructive, sulky or put up a stone wall. It may also involve indirectly resisting requests from others by evading or creating confusion around the issue. Not going along with things. It can either be covert (concealed and hidden) or overt (blatant and obvious).
A passive aggressive might not always show that they are angry or resentful. They might appear in agreement, polite, friendly, down-to-earth, kind and well-meaning. However, underneath there may be manipulation going on - hence the term "Passive-Aggressive".
Passive aggression is a destructive pattern of behaviour that can be seen as a form of emotional abuse in relationships that bites away at trust between people. It is a creation of negative energy in the ether which is clear to those involved and can create immense hurt and pain to all parties.
It happens when negative emotions and feelings build up and are then held in on a self-imposed need for either acceptance by another, dependence on others or to avoid even further arguments or conflict.
Some examples of passive aggression behaviours might be:
Non-communication when there is clearly something problematic to discuss
Avoiding/Ignoring when you are so angry that you feel you cannot speak calmly
Evading problems and issues: burying an angry head in the sand
Procrastinating: intentionally putting off important tasks for less important ones
Obstructing: deliberately stalling or preventing an event or process of change
Fear of Competition. Avoiding situations where one party will be seen as better at something
Ambiguity. Being cryptic, unclear, not fully engaging in conversations
Sulking. Being silent, morose, sullen and resentful in order to get attention or sympathy.
Chronic Lateness: a way to put you in control over others and their expectations
Chronic Forgetting: shows a blatant disrespect and disregard for others to punish in some way
Fear of Intimacy: problems with trust issues and guarding against becoming too intimately involved or attached will be a way for them to feel in control of the relationship
Making Excuses : tending to come up with reasons for not doing things
Victimisation: unable to look at their own part in a situation; will turn the tables to become the victim and will behave like one
Self-Pity: the poor me scenario
Blaming others for situations rather than being able to take responsibility for your own actions or being able to take an objective view of the situation as a whole.
Withholding usual behaviours or roles for example sex, cooking and cleaning or making cups of tea, running a bath etc. all to reinforce an already unclear message to the other party
Learned Helplessness where a person continually acts like they can’t help themselves – deliberately asking others to do their dirty work for them or doing a poor job of something for which they are often explicitly responsible
 |
| Mask II by Ron Mueck 2001/2 |
When no evidence materialised, George doesn't seem to have cared one jot. He seems to have embarked on it with a sort of distanced indifference and when it fizzles out, he just grieves for the money it cost him, not for the moral implications of his actions, or the existential emptiness of his passivity. One wonders if he ever thought of apologising to Marianne for his bad faith. But, did he ever really want her out of his life? I think not. Marianne was still very much his girl until the day she died - and then, she haunted him. Having her in the background would have been an immense totem of sadistic control - and we should never underestimate George's penchant for retributive cruelty especially towards his first and second wives. If you find that 'heroic', I pity your damned soul.
 |
| The Eagle Slayer by John Bell 1851
You can see the bind George was in: to appease his peers in this middle class world he could not be authentic - just in case that authenticity turned out to be naturally lower middle class with working class traits! However, he stopped being authentic to himself when things didn't go his way quickly enough, and he degenerated into the bully who blamed Marianne for his failings and her lack of good health. Whatever tendency she had to scrofula would have been exacerbated by poor nutrition in damp, cold houses, and so George, inadvertently would have contributed to her decline.
But, who did he have to guide him? He felt himself surrounded by nonentities who were not up to his high academic standard, and that is why thinking movements like Pessimism and Socialism appealed, but he soon gave up on them. Demos was creeping up on him left right and left again. I like to think he wanted to be honest with his communication but he confused good manners with deceit - most people prefer the truth to lies, don't they? Suppression of rage is debilitating and counter-productive. We know from Maslow the self-actualised life requires authenticity of communication. The endless acute sense of having to edit every word - no wonder redacting the Diaries came easily to him. The nervous energy required to maintain a front at all times, and the assault to his sense of self-esteem at being a base liar must have dented his pride in his manliness. Poor George (for a change) indeed... So, we now know more about passive aggressive personality. Does any of it sound familiar? Where is the line between this and just being polite or easy-going or that dreaded concept 'nice'? It's very British to be this way - we favour politeness and making the other gal or fellow feel good. White lies, irony, manners, good-naturedness, kindness... maybe we all passive aggressives at heart - all except for you psychopaths! So, where does this leave us? There is another explanation... One that is not often considered as a cause for this sort of rank awfulness - syphilis. Sounds fanciful, I know, but the disease causes rampant personality changes, enough to mar a life. Easy-going dufuses become tyrants; good men become bad; gentle souls develop vices. Something to think about! |
No comments:
Post a Comment