“Frivolity, under whatever form it appears, deprives attention of its power, thought of its originality, and sentiment of its depth.”

Bk. 1, ch. 3
Corinne (1807)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Frivolity, under whatever form it appears, deprives attention of its power, thought of its originality, and sentiment o…" by Anne Louise Germaine de Staël?
Anne Louise Germaine de Staël photo
Anne Louise Germaine de Staël 42
Swiss author 1766–1817

Related quotes

Louis Althusser photo
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel photo

“The force of mind is only as great as its expression; its depth only as deep as its power to expand and lose itself.”

Preface (J. B. Baillie translation), § 10
The Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)

“It is always from the depths of its impotence that each power center draws its power, hence their extreme maliciousness, and vanity”

Gilles Deleuze (1925–1995) French philosopher

Source: A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia

Aron Nimzowitsch photo

“The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it.”

Aron Nimzowitsch (1886–1935) chess player and theoretician

Quoted in Nimzovich : The Hypermodern (1948) by Fred Reinfeld

Siegbert Tarrasch photo

“The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it.”

Siegbert Tarrasch (1862–1934) German chess player, chess writer, and chess theoretician

Aron Nimzowitsch, as quoted in Nimzovich : The Hypermodern (1948) by Fred Reinfeld
Misattributed

Herbert Read photo

“Art differs from nature not in its organic form, but in its human origins: in the fact that it is not God or a machine that makes a work of art, but an individual”

Herbert Read (1893–1968) English anarchist, poet, and critic of literature and art

The Origins of Art (1966)
Other Quotes
Context: What I am searching for... is some formula that would combine individual initiative with universal values, and that combination would give us a truly organic form. Form, which we discover in nature by analysis, is obstinately mathematical in its manifestations—which is to say that creation in art requires thought and deliberation. But this is not to say that form can be reduced to a formula. In every work of art it must be re-created, but that too is true of every work of nature. Art differs from nature not in its organic form, but in its human origins: in the fact that it is not God or a machine that makes a work of art, but an individual with his instincts and intuitions, with his sensibility and his mind, searching relentlessly for the perfection that is neither in mind nor in nature, but in the unknown. I do not mean this in an other-worldly sense, only that the form of the flower is unknown to the seed.

Bertrand Russell photo

“The facts of science, as they appeared to him [Heraclitus], fed the flame in his soul, and in its light, he saw into the depths of the world.”

Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) logician, one of the first analytic philosophers and political activist

Source: 1910s, Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays http://archive.org/stream/mysticism00russuoft/mysticism00russuoft_djvu.txt (1918), Ch. 1: Mysticism and Logic

Neil Strauss photo

“The success of a relationship should be measured by its depth, not by its length.”

The Truth: An Uncomfortable Book About Relationships (2015)

Martin Luther King, Jr. photo

“What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.”

Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929–1968) American clergyman, activist, and leader in the American Civil Rights Movement

1960s, Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? (1967)
Context: Power properly understood is nothing but the ability to achieve purpose. It is the strength required to bring about social, political and economic change. … Now a lot of us are preachers, and all of us have our moral convictions and concerns, and so often have problems with power. There is nothing wrong with power if power is used correctly. You see, what happened is that some of our philosophers got off base. And one of the great problems of history is that the concepts of love and power have usually been contrasted as opposites — polar opposites — so that love is identified with a resignation of power, and power with a denial of love.
It was this misinterpretation that caused Nietzsche, who was a philosopher of the will to power, to reject the Christian concept of love. It was this same misinterpretation which induced Christian theologians to reject the Nietzschean philosophy of the will to power in the name of the Christian idea of love. Now, we've got to get this thing right. What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love. And this is what we must see as we move on. What has happened is that we have had it wrong and confused in our own country, and this has led Negro Americans in the past to seek their goals through power devoid of love and conscience.
This is leading a few extremists today to advocate for Negroes the same destructive and conscienceless power that they have justly abhorred in whites. It is precisely this collision of immoral power with powerless morality which constitutes the major crisis of our times.

Michel Henry photo

“Our flesh carries in it the principle of its manifestation, and this manifestation is not the appearing of the world. In its pathetic self-impressionality, in its very flesh, given to itself in the Arch-passibility of absolute Life, it reveals the one which reveals itself to itself, it is in its pathos the Arch-revelation of Life, the Parousia of the absolute. In the depths of its Night, our flesh is God.”

Michel Henry (1922–2002) French writer

Michel Henry, Incarnation. Une philosophie de la chair, éd. du Seuil, 2000, p. 373
Books on Religion and Christianity, Incarnation: A philosophy of Flesh (2000)
Original: (fr) Notre chair porte en elle le principe de sa manifestation, et cette manifestation n’est pas l’apparaître du monde. En son auto-impressionnalité pathétique, en sa chair même, donnée à soi en l’Archi-passibilité de la Vie absolue, elle révèle celle-ci qui la révèle à soi, elle est en son pathos l’Archi-révélation de la Vie, la Parousie de l’absolu. Au fond de sa Nuit, notre chair est Dieu.

Related topics