It was a night spent in the basement of a burnt out building. People injured by the atomic bomb took shelter in this room, filling it. They passed the night in darkness, not even a single candle among them. The raw smell of blood, the stench of death. Body heat and the reek of sweat. Moaning. Miraculously, out of the darkness, a voice sounded: "The baby's coming!" In that basement room, in those lower reaches of hell, A young woman was now going into labor. What were they to do, Without even a single match to light the darkness? People forgot their own suffering to do what they could. A seriously injured woman who had been moaning but a moments before, Spoke out: "I'm a midwife. Let me help with the birth." And now life was born There in the deep, dark depths of hell. Her work done, the midwife did not even wait for the break of day. She died, still covered with the blood. Bring forth new life! Even should it cost me my own, Bring forth new life! by Sadako K...
Comments
Can't resist, though, mentioning Churchill's comment on learning Gandhi was back in town (London)..."oh no, not that bloody fakir again!"
:-))
Salams,
b.
http://www.overgrownpath.com/2014/09/this-digital-fixation-is-damaging-live.html
I must say that the words attributed to Churchill by billoo sound a lot more characteristic of Eric Idle. But that apart, the words of WSC that gave rise to the "half-naked fakir" image, surely one of the best-known of the plethora of things Churchill never said, were:
"...a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well-known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the viceregal palace..."
When historians of my age and (even older) Peter Brown's speak of the 'historical imagination', we don't mean just making stuff up. (See Collingwood, Oakeshott, Barfield, White, et al.) That we really do leave to Monty Python, Hollywood filmmakers, and the historical novelists averse from research. Oh, and also to the younger generations of historians who adhere to post-modernist thought, giving primacy to subjective opinion and bringing the historical discipline to an undignified end.
So, yes, your point is well taken...it was a flippant comment and I can see how it must be quite infuriating as a scholar to read that. I would be interested to know in what sense Churchill used the word 'fakir' but am extremely weary of using Pli's space here for this digression)
Perhaps we can at least agree that it was quite funny?