
British novelist, poet, playwright and Nobel Prize for Literature laureate (1911–1993)
Missing: 2, 5, 6, 7, 8. Present digits repeat to show how many times they occur.
Four is the square, the table, the four walls. The tradition gives it method, endurance and an appetite for the unglamorous middle of a project where everyone else has lost interest. It is read as the most trustworthy number and the least celebrated one. Its tension is rigidity — a system built carefully enough becomes hard to change, and 4 is described as defending the structure after the structure has stopped serving the purpose.
Concentrated self-direction. Read as conviction that does not need external agreement — and does not always seek it.
Concentrated idealism. Read as a wide view that can lose sight of what is directly in front of it.
Read as bluntness: reaching the conclusion without the intermediate handling. The tradition frames this as a timing gap rather than a lack of feeling.
The centre of the grid, so its absence is weighted heavily. Read as difficulty adapting mid-course — a preference for the plan already chosen over the plan now indicated.
Read as a complicated relationship with obligation — either avoiding it or over-shouldering it, rarely a settled middle.
Read as reluctance to sit with an unresolved question. Associated with wanting the working answer rather than the true one.
Read as discomfort with power and money — not incapacity, but an unwillingness to claim authority openly.
Moolank 1 comes from the day of the month alone; Bhagyank 4 from the whole date. They differ, which is the ordinary case — the two numbers answer different questions.
The Sun. Authority, visibility, the self as centre. Read as leadership that is seen.
Bhagyank uses the same arithmetic as the Western life path, so the two will always agree. That is not two traditions confirming each other — it is one calculation under two names.
The Herr Doctor does not know about peoples.
The man who tells the tale if he has a tale worth telling will know exactly what he is about and this business of the artist as a sort of starry-eyed inspired creature, dancing along, with his feet two or three feet above the surface of the earth, not really knowing what sort of prints he's leaving behind him, is nothing like the truth.
Basically I'm an optimist. Intellectually I can see man's balance is about fifty-fifty, and his chances of blowing himself up are about one to one. I can't see this any way but intellectually. I'm just emotionally unable to believe that he will do this. This means that I am by nature an optimist and by intellectual conviction a pessimist, I suppose.
The theme is an attempt to trace the defects of society back to the defects of human nature. The moral is that the shape of a society must depend on the ethical nature of the individual and not on any political system however apparently logical or respectable. The whole book is symbolic in nature except the rescue in the end where adult life appears, dignified and capable, but in reality enmeshed in the same evil as the symbolic life of the children on the island. The officer, having interrupted a man-hunt, prepares to take the children off the island in a cruiser which will presently be hunting its enemy in the same implacable way. And who will rescue the adult and his cruiser?
One day I was sitting one side of the fireplace, and my wife was sitting on the other, and I suddenly said to her, "Wouldn't it be a good idea to write a story about some boys on an island, showing how they would really behave, being boys and not little saints as they usually are in children's books." And she said, "That's a first-class idea! You write it!" So I went ahead and wrote it.
I think women are foolish to pretend they are equal to men — they are far superior and always have been.
Sourced from Wikiquote, restricted to the subject’s own sourced sections.