Brother Nathanael 20 August …



Pussy Riot are not musicians; they are part of the West's attack on Russia - Israel Shamir

(1) My emails arrived in the Spam Folder - NB check it regularly

(2) I received the same mail 3 times: Banks fined for violating sanctions

(3) Pussy Riot's desecration of the sacred has Yewish underpinning - Brother Nathanael

(4) NED-funded NGO supports Pussy Riot

(5) Assange wrong to back Pussy Riot - Come Carpentier (from Israel Shamir's forum)

(6) Pussy Riot are not musicians; they are part of the West's attack on Russia - Israel Shamir

(7) Robert Hughes exposed much Modern Art as junk, promoted by a cabal of critics, curators and art investors

(1) My emails arrived in the Spam Folder - NB check it regularly

Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 07:06:01 +0900 Subject: Just to let you know

From: chris lancenet

that two of "Peter Myers"'s mail arrived into our Spam Folder as of yesterday;

one starting with 'Zionism' the other one with (3); the one re

Stephen Sn.was well received into our INBOX folder.

Best

chris

(2) I received the same mail 3 times: Banks fined for violating sanctions

From: "Web of Debt"

Subject: About some messages : they came later...

Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:18:17 +0200

Hello Peter,

glad that you are back !

I see this email , the first one since 19 july ( Syrian rebels) , which I received at 4.30 hours.

Then five hours later I received the same mail 3 times: Banks fined for violating sanctions...

Then a few more minutes later I received : Zionists pursue banks over currency transfers to Iran.

I hope this will inform you about what happened.

Best wishes, Jos.

Reply (Peter M.):

I am only getting back on my feet now after a few months' dealing with problems.

About 20% of my readership do not receive these bulletins. I get bounce messages, mainly from servers in the US, where ISPs surreptitiously block emails even though I am no longer on Black Lists.

To test whether my emails get through, I include one of my own addresses in the mailing list.

I found that my email about Banks was not getting through to the Inbox of my Gmail account. So I kept sending it, in different ways.

Later, I found these emails in the Spam folder. My own emails had been filed as Spam. Yet I do not have any Filter set.

The only reason they could have been filed in the Spam folder is that they contained the words "Yewish" and "Yews" (note the substitution, which, since this incident, I am trying as a way to avoid being filtered out again). Yet this email did not demean "Yews". It merely pointed out that those behind the fining of the Banks had to be in a different camp from those in the Banks. One group of Yews was dominating another.

You can mention any other group of people with impunity - including Freemasons. Only one group causes the search engines to freak out.

Some people may still not have received the email about Banks. Instead of sending it out yet again, I have uploaded it to my website at

Note the statement of Eitan Arusy, "dollar transfers, even from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, must comply with U.S. law". That is, any transaction involving US Dollars, anywhere in the world, is subject to US authorities. That's Hegemony.

Peter

(3) Pussy Riot's desecration of the sacred has Yewish underpinning - Brother Nathanael

   Brother Nathanael 20 August 2012 16:06

Pussy Riot's Global Showdown



August 19, 2012 @ 10:04 pm

By Brother Nathanael Kapner

{

My Name Is Brother Nathanael Kapner

I'm A "Street Evangelist"

I Grew Up As A Jew

I'm Now An Orthodox Christian

I Wish To Warn How Zionist Jews

Are Destroying Christianity Throughout The World}

Some call it a clash of civilizations but I call it a clash of spirituality.

On the one side is the West's promotion of decadence—which leads to a police state—and on the other is the East's, that is, Russia's promotion of a Christian society.

And the pawns in this global showdown are three young girls of the Russian punk group, Pussy Riot.

In February 2012, these girls—part of a staged "protest", largely funded by the Yewish CIA cover, the National Endowment for Democracy, led by its Yewish founder, Carl Gershman—entered Christ The Saviour Cathedral in Moscow and performed a sacrilegious dance. Mocking the Cross was part of their blasphemy.

The cameras were ready and the script was carefully written …yes, attack what Yewry fears most, the "Symphony of Church and State," the Byzantine ideal which Russia inherited and Putin is fostering.

It is Putin and his government's strong tie to the Orthodox Church, the "Symphony of the Spiritual and the Temporal"—for this is what's at stake here—that these worthless girls were instructed to denounce through a 'media event' easily propagated by the Yewish globalized press.

And one look at the Russian supporters of Pussy Riot's desecration of the sacred evinces a strong Yewish underpinning:

Boris Nemtsov – Valerie Novodvorskaya – Democracy's pin-up boy, chess player Garry Kasperov – Leonid Gozman – and Vladimir Posner.

This past week, Pussy Riot was handed a lenient 2 year jail sentence instead of the mandatory 7 years stipulated by Russian law for desecrating a religious site.

Now think for a minute. If a punk group did the same thing in a synagogue every media venue would be crying bloody murder and World Yewry would be demanding the punks be hung by their toes.

But this is about a Church and the Yewish-led West is all in an uproar over the Russian verdict. Russia's reaction? The West can shove it.

This is illustrated by the Russian people's attitude toward the old hag Madonna's August 9th concert in St Petersburg…mostly attended by Western outsiders.

Responding to Madonna's lewd promotion of Pussy Riot's 'right of artistic expression,' Russian deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin called Madonna a "moralizing whore," adding, "with age every former slut tries to lecture everyone on morality especially on overseas tours."

Upping the ante, citizens of St Petersburg filed a 10-million dollar law-suit against Madonna for preaching homosexuality to minors, a violation of Russian law.

The showdown has arrived. Pussy Riot is only a small skirmish in the LARGER clash of spirituality upon us.

You see, the Zionist West with its spiritual decay is on the decline. Yet they're not going to go down without a fight.

But Christian Russia with its Spiritual ripening is on the rise.

"A Star shall rise in the East," Dostoyevsky once proclaimed.

My friends, the battle against the wicked West has only just begun.

(4) NED-funded NGO supports Pussy Riot



Pussy Riot's 'stunning victory' over Kremlin

Democracy Digest

August 15, 2012

"On Friday, Judge Marina Syrova will deliver her verdict in the trial of three members of the female punk group Pussy Riot, who performed their profanity-laced anthem "Mother of God, Cast Putin Out" on the altar of Moscow's Cathedral of Christ Our Saviour in February," writes John Lough. ...

Fellow rights activist Lev Ponomaryov, head of the For Human Rights NGO, said Judge Syrova may yet play "good cop" to the prosecutor's "bad cop". "It is possible this is a political game. The prosecutor asked for a real sentence and the judge could free them. I will only be in favor," he said.

"But the fact that the authorities are looking for support among the most conservative groups [such as the church] is a very troubling signal. It means that the intelligentsia for a large part have turned their backs on the regime."

Tanya Lokshina, head of the Moscow office of Human Rights Watch, said that hopes for the trio's release remained dim given what he said were clear procedural abuses during the trial, which critics say has become a showcase for the inadequacies of the Russian legal system. ...

The Moscow Helsinki Group and For Human Rights are supported by the National Endowment for Democracy, the Washington-based democracy assistance group.

(5) Assange wrong to back Pussy Riot - Come Carpentier (from Israel Shamir's forum)

Re: [shamireaders] Assange's speech

   Come Carpentier 22 August 2012 17:04

In response to John Spritzler, I would agree that the wrong aspects and tendencies in the Russian government need to be opposed but that is far from what "Pussy Riot" (the name they chose says it all) are doing. They are mocking the christian liturgy by invading and desecrating a symbolic national place of worship (I note in passing that the balaklavas they use are also the distinctive headgear of bank robbers as well as terrorists, which is why many Western states ban full face covering in public).They also show contempt for the electoral process in Russia which, whether they like it or not, gave Putin a majority in conditions that were generally free and fair. The West is so exasperated by Putin's remaining popularity that it claims that he should not have stood for election anyway because an election could only have been fair if he had not been a candidate. Pussy Riot is also openly calling for a violent revolution and the murder of Putin (how is that for the democratic West?). The fact that the Church in Russia is conservative can be seenin fact as a blessing (even if a mixed one) when we compare it to the utterly politicized, "ideologically" correct Protestant and Catholic denominations.

No one who supports a restoration of spiritual values in a healthy society can express sympathy for Pussy Riot. There can be disagreement as to what sort of punishment they deserve but Russian law, good or bad, should be applied without interference. The Western masters of discourse realise that and are trying to convince the public that there is no judicial system or Parliament in Russia, only Putin alone who decides case by case the fate of 150 million Russians every day... He must be a busy man!

Assange is unfortunately prone to the mistake of many well meaning anti-establishment voices in the West. They rail against the Global Leviathan but they want to get rid of those governments which stand their ground against it. I have friends in Venezuela who are well aware of the nefarious role of the US in their country's past but who are desperate to see the end of Chavez even though it may bring the pro-US politicians and oligarchs back in full force. They prefer to put their hope in some utopian non-violent reform inspired by Gandhi's thought, the Catholic Church and "middle of the road" environmentalism. I wish them luck!

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Michael Gunin wrote:

It would be interesting to see some clear evidences regarding Pussy Riot's affiliation with Western NGOs and agencies.

However, from my point of view, this is more of an internal affair related to the artifical clericalization of Russian society and a reactionary role the official church plays here. Authorities should stop the extreme "patriotic" Orthodox right-wingers from teaching the secular society what we should do and what we're not allowed to. Otherwise, turning into a fundamentalist country similar to Saudi Arabia seems something worse than any kind of colour revolution.

{Gunin now quotes an earlier email by Come Carpentier}

2012/8/21 Come Carpentier

Dear Israel Shamir and Friends,

I read the transcript of Julian Assange's address from the balcony of

the Ecuadorian Embassy and I found it to be a powerful and inspiring

rallying cry against the tyranny of the powers that be but I was

disappointed by his uncalled for reference to the sentence meted out

to the "punkers" of the Pussy Riot Gang in Moscow, as if it part

related to the persecution launched against him and other whistle

blowers.

Yet, as you better than most are aware, the vulgar stunt staged by the

Punks in the Moscow Cathedral to try triggering a popular revolt

against the elected government or at least to damage it in the eyes of

the country and of the outside world, has nothing to do with the

Wikileaks campaign. It has been reported that the "Pussy Riot" group

which speaks surprisingly fluent american English and seems to behave

in every way as if it had just been flown in from California to

Russia, was in fact acting under the instructions of certain American

government-related agencies, which would account for the immediate

interest and tremendous publicity they got as soon as they were

arrested and tried. Their action seems to reflect a typical "western"

strategy to try provoking an "unliked"foreign government into a

reaction that might then unleash a chain reaction of rebellion and

repression. It is rather clear that the "Pussy Riot" which is so upset

that Putin was elected that it hopes to force it to quit through

street protests, is on the contrary quite happy with American policies

at home and abroad.

I am afraid, therefore that Assange has fallen into the trap of so

many Western and Eastern "liberal" or Libertarians who end up wanting

to overthrow any and all authority, including those powers that still

resist, at least in part, the global imperial behemoth. It is a rather

self-contradicting and potentially self-destructive attitude. If

Russia, China, Venezuela, Syria, Iran and all other recalcitrant and

"authoritarian" regimes (including Ecuador) are brought into the

global mainstream, then there will be no more counter-force to the

Empire's sway.

What do you think Assange think in this regard?

Greetings

Come

--

Michael Gunin

mgunin@

(6) Pussy Riot are not musicians; they are part of the West's attack on Russia - Israel Shamir

[shamireaders] Pussy Riot - Secret History Corrected

   Israel Shamir 22 August 2012 20:14

Pussy Riot - Secret History

By Israel Shamir

Universally admired, Pussy Riot (or PR for short) have been promoted as superstars. But what are they? A rock or punk group they are not.  A British journalist marvelled: they produce no music, no song, no painting, nada, rien, nothing. How can they be described as "artists"? This was a severe test for their supporters, but they passed it with flying honours: that famous lover-of-art, the US State Department, paid for their first ever single being produced by The Guardian out of some images and sounds.

We are able to stomach obscenity and blasphemy; I am a great admirer of Notre Dame de Fleurs by Jean Genet, who combined both. However, the PR never wrote, composed or painted anything of value at all. Chris Randolph defended them in Counterpunch by comparing them with "the controversial Yegor Letov". What a misleading comparison! Letov wrote poetry, full of obscenity but it still was poetry, while the PR have nothing but Public Relations.

Hell-bent on publicity, but artistically challenged, three young women from Russia decided – well, it sounds like a limerick. They stole a frozen chicken from a supermarket and used it as dildo; they filmed the act, called it "art" and placed it on the web. (It is still there) Their other artistic achievements were an orgy in a museum and a crude presentation of an erect prick.

Even in these dubious pieces of art their role was that of technical staff: the glory went to a Russian-Israeli artist Plucer-Sarno of Mevasseret Zion, who claimed the idea, design and copyright for himself and collected a major Russian prize. The future PR members got nothing and were described by Plucer as "ambitious provincials on the make", or worse.

Lately they have tried to ride on a bandwagon of political struggle. That was another flop. They poured a flood of obscene words on Putin - in Red Square, in subway (underground) stations - with zero effect. They weren't arrested, they weren't fined, just chased away as a nuisance. And they did not attract the attention of people. It is important to remember that Putin is an avowed enemy of Russian oligarchs, owners of the major bulk of Russian media and providers of the Moscow literati, so they print on a daily basis so much anti-Putin invective, that it's lost its shock value. You can't invent a new diatribe against Putin – it has been already said and published. And Putin practically never interferes with the freedom of the press.

My foreign journalist friends are usually amazed by the unanimity and ferocity of the anti-Putin campaign in Russian media. It can be compared with the attacks on G W Bush in the liberal papers in the US, but in the US, there are many conservative papers that supported Bush. Putin has practically no support in the mainstream media, all of it owned by media barons. A valuable exception is TV, but it is expressly apolitical and provides mainly low-brow entertainment, also presented by anti-Putin activists like Mlle Xenia Sobtchak. So PR failed profoundly to wake up the beast.

Eventually the young viragos were mobilised for an attack on the Church. By that time they were willing to do anything for their bit of publicity. And the anti-Church campaign started a few months ago, quite suddenly as if by command. The Russian Church had 20 years of peace, recovering after the Communist period, and it was surprised by ferocity of the attack.

Though this subject calls for longer exposition, let us be brief. After the collapse of the USSR, the Church remained the only important spiritual pro-solidarity force in Russian life. The Yeltsin and Putin administrations were as materialist as the communists; they preached and practiced social Darwinism of neo-Liberal kind. The Church offered something beside the elusive riches on earth. Russians who lost the glue of solidarity previously provided by Communists eagerly flocked to the alternative provided by the Church.

The government and the oligarchs treated the Church well, as the Church had a strong anti-Communist tendency, and the haves were still afraid of the Reds leading the have-nots. The Church flourished, many beautiful cathedrals were rebuilt, many monasteries came back after decades of decay. The newly empowered church became a cohesive force in Russia.

As it became strong, the Church began to speak for the poor and dispossessed; the reformed Communists led by the Church-going Gennadi Zuganov, discovered a way to speak to the believers. A well-known economist and thinker, Michael Khazin, predicted that the future belongs to a new paradigm of Red Christianity, something along the lines of Roger Garaudy's early thought. The Red Christian project is a threat to the elites and a hope for the world, he wrote. Besides, the Russian church took a very Russian and anti-globalist position.

This probably hastened the attack, but it was just a question of time when the global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs, big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself.

This offensive against the Church began with some minor issues: the media was all agog about Patriarch's expensive watch, a present from the then President Medvedev. Anti-religious fervour was high among liberal opposition that demonstrated against Putin before the elections and needed a new horse to flog. A leading anti-Putin activist Viktor Shenderovich said he would understand if the Russian Orthodox priests were slain like they were in 1920s. Yet another visible figure among the liberal protesters, Igor Eidman, exclaimed,"exterminate the vermin"- the Russian Church – in the rudest biological terms.

The alleged organiser of the PR, Marat Gelman, a Russian Yewish art collector, has been connected with previous anti-Christian art actions which involved icon-smashing, imitation churches of enemas. His – and PR's problem was that it was difficult to provoke reaction of the Church. PR made two attempts to provoke public indignation in the second cathedral of Moscow, the older Elochovsky Cathedral; both times they were expelled but not arrested. The third time, they tried harder; they went to St Savior Cathedral that was demolished by Lazar Kaganovich in 1930s and rebuilt in 1990s; they added more blasphemy of the most obscene kind, and still they were allowed to leave in peace. Police tried their best to avoid arresting the viragos, but they had no choice after PR uploaded a video of their appearance in the cathedrals with an obscene soundtrack.

During the trial, the defence and the accused did their worst to antagonize the judge by threatening her with the wrath of the United States (sic!) and by defiantly voicing anti-Christian hate speeches. The judge had no choice but to find the accused guilty of hate crime (hooliganism with religious hate as the motive). The prosecution did not charge the accused with a more serious hate crime "with intent to cause religious strife", though it could probably be made to stick. (It would call for a stiffer sentence; swastika-drawers charged with intent to cause strife receive five years of jail).

Two years' sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For much milder anti-Yewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence. The Russians applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is probably a Russian novelty. The Russians proved that they care for Christ as much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who apparently thought 'hate laws' may be applied only to protect Yews and gays. The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians, while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.

The anti-Putin opposition flocked to support PR. A radical charismatic opposition leader, the poet Eduard Limonov wrote that the opposition made a mistake supporting PR, as they antagonise the masses; the chasm between the masses and the opposition grows. But his voice was crying in the wilderness, and the rest of the opposition happily embraced the PR cause, trying to turn it into a weapon against Putin. The Western media and governments also used it to attack Putin. A Guardian editorial called on Putin to resign. Putin called for clemency for PR, and the government was embarrassed by the affair. But they were left with no choice: the invisible organisers behind PR wanted to have the viragos in jail, and so they did.

Commercially, they hit jackpot. With support of Madonna and the State Department, they are likely to leave jail ready for a world tour and photo ops at the White House. They registered their name as a trade mark and began to issue franchises. And their competitors, the Femen group (whose art is showing off their boobs in unusual places) tried to beat PR by chopping down a large wooden cross installed in memory of Stalin's victims. Now the sky is the limit.

In August, vacation season, when there is not much hard news and newspaper readers are at the seashore or countryside, the PR trial provided much needed entertainment for man and beast. Hopefully it will drop from the agenda with the end of the silly season, but do not bet on it.

Israel Shamir reports from Moscow, his email is adam@

(7) Robert Hughes exposed much Modern Art as junk, promoted by a cabal of critics, curators and art investors

The man who dared to tell the truth about the charlatans of modern art

By HARRY MOUNT

PUBLISHED: 21:52 GMT, 7 August 2012 | UPDATED: 23:22 GMT, 7 August 2012



Pretentious pedlars of junk masquerading as art can breathe a little easier today, for the voice of one of  their greatest foes has been stilled.

To the very end, the writer Robert Hughes argued brilliantly that, where much modern art was concerned, the emperor had no clothes.

The Australian, who has died at 74 after a long illness, saw the Damien Hirsts and Tracey Emins of the modern art world as fly-by-night con artists, unencumbered by skill, who floated to the top of their profession on a sea of money supported by a cabal of critics, curators and art investors.

'Hirst is basically a pirate,' Hughes wrote of our richest living artist before a record-setting £111?million auction of the artist's work at Sotheby's in 2008.

'His skill is shown by the way in which he has managed to bluff so many art-related people (from museum personnel to billionaires in the New York real-estate trade) into giving credence to his originality and the importance of his "ideas".'

Hughes — a burly mountain of a man, said by one fellow countryman to resemble a 'brick dunny', or outhouse — held no truck with the nebulous realm of 'concept art'. He believed artists should make things, should draw, paint, build and carve, and do those things well.

Sadly, it seemed to Hughes as if, all too often, those people dominating the powerful positions in the art world, and pulling the strings of the art market, had been deluded into thinking otherwise.

It is a favourite trick of such fools to dismiss someone like Hughes as an old fogey — as they also do to the brilliant Brian Sewell of the London Evening Standard, one of the last surviving critics in Hughes's mould, who really knows his stuff and is not prepared to yield to the passing idiocies of fashion.

Hughes knew the difference between good modern art and rubbish modern art, and he really let rip — in glorious, beautiful, thundering prose — when it came to pointing out the vast difference between the two.

He made his name with the book and TV series The Shock Of The New, which described the progress of modern art from the end of the 19th century to the end of the 20th.

Hughes explained why Picasso mattered and translated the alien dreamscapes of the Surrealists into language everyone could understand.

He was a tremendous fan of much modern art of the last century or so, but he diagnosed a sudden and steep falling-off in quality in the 1970s, with the emerging fashion for avant-garde works of minimal skill.

He believed that something had gone horrifically wrong in the last 40 years, as a result of what he called 'the appalling commercialisation of the  art world'.

Money had become the driving force — and those with too much of it often have too little taste.

'Most of the time they [the rich art investors] buy what other people buy,' Hughes wrote. 'They move in great schools, like bluefish, all  identical. There is safety  in numbers.'

Not surprisingly he triggered a backlash. For the power brokers of modern art are a notoriously touchy, defensive bunch. But Hughes couldn't have cared less. He dismissed personal attacks by saying: 'As far as I can make out, when an artist says that I am conservative, it means I haven't praised him recently.'

Damien Hirst was his bête noire. Hughes damned the Briton's work as 'both simple-minded and sensationalist', remarking acidly of Hirst's infamous dead shark suspended in a tank of formaldehyde: 'One might as well get excited about seeing a dead halibut on a slab in Harrods food hall.'

As for Hirst's equally notorious diamond-encrusted skull — sold for £50?million in 2007 — Hughes bluntly dismissed it as 'mere bling'.

Staring at the artist's sculpture The Virgin Mother — a bronze monstrosity showing the Madonna half with skin and half without — Hughes declared: 'Isn't it a miracle what so much money and so little talent can produce?'

Nor was Hirst's partner-in-crime Tracey Emin spared the vitriol. Her 1998 'masterpiece' My Bed — a stained, unmade bed surrounded by knickers and condoms — was, Hughes scoffed, nothing more than 'a stale icon of sluttish housekeeping'.

Whatever the fashionable art world thought of him, ordinary art lovers adored him. A true rebel, he became more of a revolutionary as he got older.

In his memoir, Things I Didn't Know, Hughes admitted to being an unashamed elitist: 'I prefer the good to the bad, the articulate to the mumbling, the aesthetically developed to the merely primitive, and full to partial consciousness.

'I love the spectacle of skill, whether it's an expert gardener at work or a good carpenter chopping dovetails.?.?. My main job is to distinguish the good from the second-rate, pretentious, sentimental, and boring stuff that saturates culture today, more (perhaps) than it ever has.'

Although an exile in New York, he continued to care deeply about his native Australia. His 1987 book The Fatal Shore, on the history of the British penal colonies and the first European settlers in Australia, became an international best-seller. He wrote monographs on the Spanish artist Goya, Lucian Freud and the city of Rome.

For the true giants of art, Hughes was an unstinting champion. In his eyes, 'a string of brushmarks on a lace collar in a Velasquez' were far 'more radical' than Hirst's shark 'murkily disintegrating in its tank'. ==

The acid wit of a very critical critic...

On Damien Hirst

'His presence in a collection is a sure sign of dullness of taste.'

On Andy Warhol

'He was one of the stupidest people I'd ever met in my life. He had nothing to say.'

And on Warhol's portrait of Marilyn Monroe...

'Can you imagine what it would be like getting up in the morning and the first thing you see is the by now unspeakably tedious cliche of Marilyn's face staring  at you?'

On elitism

'I don't think stupid or ill-read people are as good to be with as wise and fully literate ones.'

On greedy art collectors

'The new job of art is to sit on the wall and get  more expensive.'

On rich philistines

'So much of art — not all of it thank God, but a lot of it — has just become a kind of cruddy game for the self-aggrandisement of the rich and the ignorant.'

On second-rate exhibitions

'An ideal museum show would be a mating of Brideshead Revisited with House & Garden, provoking intense and pleasurable nostalgia for a past that none of its audience has had.'

On money

'On the whole, money does artists much more good than harm. The idea that one benefits from cold water, crusts and debt collectors is now almost extinct, like belief in the reformatory power of flogging.'

On self-doubt

'The greater the artist, the greater the doubt. Perfect confidence is given to the less talented as a consolation prize.'

On being a critic

'It's like being the piano player in a whorehouse;  you don't have any control over the action going  on upstairs.'

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download