theladyrose: (Default)
I'm not quite sure why, but I've always been drawn to this particular passage of Ian Fleming's. The man's not John le Carré by any means, but Fleming does have his profound moments amidst the "kiss kiss bang bang" of the Bond novels.

He was amused by by the impartiality of the roulette ball and of the playing-cards — and their eternal bias. He liked being an actor and a spectator and from his chair to take part in other men's dramas and decisions, until it came to his own turn to say that vital "yes" or "no," generally on a 50-50 chance.

Above all, he liked it that everything was one's own fault. There was only onself to praise or blame. Luck was a servant and not a master. Luck had to be accepted with a shrug or taken advantage of up to the hilt. But it had to be understood and recognized for what it was and not be confused with a faulty appreciation of the odds, for, at gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.

One day, and he accepted the fact he would be brought to his knees by love or by luck. When that happened he knew that he oo would be branded with the deadly question mark he recognized so often in others, the promise to pay before you have lost: the acceptance of fallibiity.


[/end tonight's studying]

Profile

theladyrose: (Default)
theladyrose

June 2010

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27 282930   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags