He is a good, but tired man. Geralt is described as being introverted in the game's glossary. He has a lot of friends and emotions, he just doesn't show it constantly. Well, he's pretty much the same in the novels. Geralt is kind of a contradiction, actually. Because he's a Witcher, Geralt tries not to care, and tries to be neutral with most things.
He tries, but he usually chooses a side and does feel things. Witchers have nearly all emotions eradicated from them because of the mutations and the training they undergo since childhood. But, Geralt is different because his body took exceptionally well to the mutations. The only side effect he actually had early on was when his hair turned white, but that was it. So, he underwent extra mutations that most others can't endure. It's implied that Geralt is a special case, where alot of his emotions are actually still intact despite the mutations.
The thing about it is, though, that he's still got the training and he's still a Witcher. They're trained to be cold and calculating. But, he definitely does have emotions. He just has a difficult time expressing it, since he's not really supposed to even have those feelings. He's basically the stoic hero, with few words to say than most, who has a heart of gold underneath the cold demeanor he puts up.
MY pet peeve is his use of words like "wanna" or "gonna" which sounds really off in that world and strange for someone who is usually super cold and formal. Every time he says something like "where you gonna go next" I cringe a bit for whatever reason. I'm going to guess that with all the little variables you can set up with your different choices in different situations and so on, having a protagonist with lines that can be used in several situations helps cut down on production work.
- See a Problem?.
- Why does Geralt talk in fragmented sentences?;
- The Bursting Asset Bubbles.
- Opposites Attract?
The voice actor has never bothered me, but hes not great. That is until I just played a section where he gets shit faced with two other witchers mid game. There was probably a drunk Geralt in the past games, but I cant recall. I really enjoyed his performance. It made me laugh pretty good! He did a WAY better job with the char, so I can only assume the stilted talk is intentional, and or partly from recording a sentence at a time.
Think the "lets wrap this up quick" endings in so many recent past games have tainted me. Would really lower my opinion on it it did end in the next hours. But seemed like there was a number of side quests to pick up allies. Which it should as Im only level 21 out of what 60 levels? Isnt 60 the cap? I've played the game for a good number of hours and I'm not sure what you are referring to. Maybe you can link to a video where he's speaking awkwardly? Geralt's gravelly voice is something that I get used to quickly every time I sit down to play one of the Witcher games. It bothers me for a little while and then I'm fine with it.
I even like it sometimes.
I've found Geralt's personality, dialogue, and delivery pretty entertaining so far, I like the character in this game a lot. Are you talking about the kinda weird stilted sentences when you have multiple options to pick? Because I think that's just some awkward writing to make the options make sense in whatever order you pick them. Doesn't seem intentional. I've been playing a few hours and have totally noticed this. It's a little odd, but I just chalked it up to him being curt and short with his words. To try and explain, he tends to say things like:.
He also often speaks in very short sentence fragments that could be like: "Just wanna talk. Geralt of Rivea. Looking for someone. Again, I just chalk it up to his quiet personality that he likes to keep conversations fast and impersonal, but I'm no Witcher lore junkie. Maybe this is not accurate to the books, or maybe there is a reason for it beyond my assumption. You just described me, if you replace "Wild Hunt" with "Life. I don't see how people don't notice this.
Also, Vesemir sp? Granted they have different personalities, but the interactions between them at the beginning of the game really highlight the differences in their speech. At times, I felt like Ves was mocking Geralt by speaking in full sentences - as if to say "Uh I saw someone say somewhere else that the cap is 70 and that they were level 40 odd by the end, but I can't tell you if that's true Strangely enough Geralt speaks very differently compared to pretty much everyone else in the game.
I would blame it on him being a Witcher as apparently they are supposed to be distant and introverted, but Vesemir is also a Witcher and he speaks in a perfectly natural way. Geralts speech is very stilted and robotic, delivering lines of dialog in awkward short bursts. It was like that in Witcher 2 as well so they are being consistent but it makes him always stand out in conversations in a weird way.
For instance I just did the whole questline for Keira and her voice actress as well as dialog was great, and it really made me grow to like her as a character. She's expressive yet elegant in her speech and her voice is full of intonations at the right moments. She delivers her lines in such a way that you're never sure if she's being nice or condescending, or both. Opposite her wonderful performance it felt like Geralts lines were placeholders waiting for the final versions, or taken from a table read or something. Even for a witcher his life has been pretty tumultuous and depressing. I mean, he literally died once already.
That being said, he talks a lot more when he's around people he cares about. There's a stark contrast between his conversations with Dandelion compared to some random villager. I haven't played any of the games, but from the quick-look I got a sort of noir-detective feel to his dialogue. And he has done this for about a decade now. Actually, closer to 80 years. Witchers don't age normally. Geralt's rumored to be close to or over a century old. I actually meant to write century But it does stand out in such a dialogue heavy game as this one. I don't remember Shepherd dealing with the same issues so I don't think it's a writing thing.
I mainly notice it with characters who are supposed to sound "cool" or "stoic". They often speak like the character they're speaking to is in their head rather than a separate character and it sounds a little like inner monologues writ public. Video game people more and more seem to speak like this: "Had a dream, a bad one. Felt sad after. Came time for me to make a move. Rather than: "I had a dream last night, a bad dream. I felt sad afterwards, and it came time for me to make my move.
I get that oftentimes it's a struggle to find more naturalistic speech patterns in dialogue compared to proper grammar, but I don't actually know many people that speak that way specifically. It feels very writerly. Yeah, I like his voice and style. He just doesn't mince his words: he's somewhat introverted and not much of a conversationalist, so he keeps his sentences to the bare minimum he needs to get his point across. He's very much more aman of action than words.
I get the impression too that he tries to keep things short as a way to not appear to take sides in a conversation but remain largely an impartial force. Not phrasing stuff with "I" might just be to do with dialect. He does use his pronouns sometimes though. Also I'm sure all those years of combat, injuries, drinking, and alchemy have probably taken somewhat of a toll on his vocal chords.
In Witcher lore, he's supposed to be emotionless because of the transformations. It's why they have him speak oddly like that, describing things he sees. Witchers also don't often do much socializing, people in the world see them as only in it for the money at best, monstrous freaks at worst. Letho of Gulet in the last game had an American accent too, and talked the same way as Geralt. I ascribe his monotone speech to the fact that he was subjected to more experiments than the other witchers did. If anything, Geralt being tired of people in general is probably the biggest reason he talks so curtly with many.
When he gets comfortable, and is surrounded by the people he cares about, he's an entirely different person. It's actually rather refreshing to see a game that humanizes its protagonist in this way. I can't think off the top of my head of many others doing this. He sounds the same as he always did to me, his voice has always been a bit of a contrast to everyone else's. It's not him just being a witcher though, as other witchers have more expression than him even letho. I used to hate his voice, but now i couldn't hear him any other way and think it makes his character stand out.
Also his voice reminds me more of solid snake than christian bale lol. It's just the writing and voice acting in the English version. The Polish Geralt is much less one-note and his lines are given much more flair - Jacek Rozenek does a lot to make Geralt homely and cool and then dangerous in a blink of an eye. He will write sentences like "One of the signs that you've awakened is that The horror, the horror! His main missteps are his over-rationalization of life and his posing as the wise guru. Here is a perfect example: "When my own mother got cancer, my sister said to me: "Tony, why did God allow this to happen to Mother?
I said to her "My dear, last year over a million people starved in China because of the drought, and you never raised a question". Anyway, I bet he was an extremely charismatic individual to be in the same room with. But this book is wishy-washy, bland tripe. Mar 28, Joel rated it it was amazing Shelves: non-fiction.
I picked up this book at a monastery in Northern California about 10 years ago and have kept it close ever since. De Mello, espousing no religious agenda, contends we've been brainwashed as to our typical ideas of love and happiness. This untypical priest--his writings were denounced by the Pope--says our attachments, illusions, conditioning and general unawareness keep us anxiety-ridden. The consequence of not doing this is terrifying and unescapable. We lose our capacity to love. If you wish to love, you must learn to see again How can you love someone whom you do not even see?
Do you really see someone you're attached to? Oh, what a relief. Happiness at last! You no longer feel the need or the compulsion to explain things anymore. View 1 comment. Jan 07, Anita Louise rated it it was amazing. My favorite spiritual book. Anthony de Mello helped me to understand, "I'm an ass, you're an ass". He tells us we're all sleeping, and he clobbers us over the head with a wake up call. Feb 03, Randy rated it it was amazing.
Awareness, Anthony de Mello's most popular book, is a beautiful bridge between Western and Eastern spiritual thought. After his death in , de Mello was censured by the Vatican's Defeneders of the Faith headed at Awareness, Anthony de Mello's most popular book, is a beautiful bridge between Western and Eastern spiritual thought. After his death in , de Mello was censured by the Vatican's Defeneders of the Faith headed at that time by Joseph Ratzinger, the current Pope. Consequently, his books are not allowed to be sold in official Roman Catholic bookstores.
All the more reason to read them ; Feb 23, S. Ach rated it liked it Shelves: spiritual-self-improvement. Challenge peoples thoughts. Destroy their beliefs, no matter what they are. Tell them how miserably they are leading their lives, what scoundrels and idiots they have been. Yes, people love to hear that.
Why does Geralt talk in fragmented sentences? - The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - Giant Bomb
A perfectly happy person would seldom pick-up a spiritually enlightening book. Ask them tough questions. What is "happiness"? Who is "I"? What is life's goal? You don't have to offer any intellectual answer. Just ask the questions and say "nay" to the fragmented answers. Now, tell them the things they already know, in a suave manner, with lots of funny anecdotes that they can relate to or laugh about.
And finally conclude with something like, "Live in the present. Don't think about the past. That gives the hope to people who still believe that there is much more to life than the wretched mechanical life they are clinging on to. If you have already read J Krishnamurthy or Osho's books, you can safely avoid this book.
And if you haven't read those books, then read those first. View all 4 comments. Aug 11, Maryska rated it really liked it Shelves: spirituality. I have read this one 5 times now. How obvious it is that we don't want to wake up. We don't want to admit, or give up our attachments! I have tried to focus on his teachings for years now, and denounce my attachments but I always end up back in square one.
I fall into the same patterns and expectations. How did he do this? Better, how do I do this? My biggest concern with this book is that he wants us to "give up" attachments like our family for example. He claims that once you no longer "need" I have read this one 5 times now. He claims that once you no longer "need" them, they lose the power over you and you will truly love them.
How are you to form close relationships with family and loved ones if you don't participate in the human connection? What is love then really if you don't experience the feeling of withering inside when let's say you end a long relationship. How do you rewire your brain to simply not get attached to any person or thing? I understand this theory in regards to detaching oneself from material objects better than I do the detachment from people.
View 2 comments. Aug 20, Garland Vance rated it did not like it Shelves: leadership-individual , worldview. I hated almost every minute of this book but had to read it for a class. Throughout the book there were sentences and sometimes paragraphs that I thought were insightful. But I continually found myself wishing that I was finished with this book. FIN I hated almost every minute of this book but had to read it for a class.
Don't waste your time. View all 3 comments. Nov 30, A rated it it was amazing. Book that tought me that I am not my emotions, and to wake up, which I haven't really done, because I have too many snooze buttons. Jun 18, Donna rated it it was ok Recommends it for: Zen enthusiasts. Shelves: essays-ideas.
Nature and the Human Soul: Cultivating Wholeness and Community in a Fragmented World
In addition, though, I have to say that, like a dictionary, it offers very little in the way of plot. Up to a point. The trouble is that Anthony de Mello, S. He died fairly young and very suddenly, before he had a chance to compile and edit his own writings. Consequently, it seems that those who loved and worked with him have gathered every scrap of wisdom, every utterance he left behind, and captured them for posterity. The result, in this book, is a patchwork quilt of loosely stitched anecdotes, parables, and exhortations.
One of my all-time favorite authors, Teillard de Chardin, was a Jesuit philosopher, so I rather hoped to find penetrating analysis and eloquent language such as I remember from his writings. Jun 09, Zach rated it it was amazing.
- 2013-14 NFHS Basketball Rules Book?
- Awareness: Conversations with the Masters?
- Site Navigation;
- Site Search Navigation.
- Taking Life.
Awareness Review Well, I must really love this book. There was a time in my life where I wanted to wake each day with a favorite quote — I chose 52 different quotes one for each randomly drawn card from a deck from books, with about 10 of the quotes from this one. The reading this most recent time in an effort to better understand the culture of India, where I am now working with several of their citizens. Anthony de Mello brought Buddhist parables, Hindu philosophies into Christian spirituality.
So there is a fine mix of a Catholic template with an overlay of Eastern mysticism. You identified yourself with things. For most of society, I would believe this to be true. But isolation can go too far. Here is the full Bishop Ratzinger notification. What I get into from de Mello is his easy grasp on what might be the most common U.
May as well be a smart phone. Like a good homily, you get a soundbite to catch your attention, a couple of Buddhist parables to twist your assumptions a little and then a drumbeat of his different themes which stretch through the book. I get it already! If you ask a person if they could give up their established way of life right now and accept that the suit of armor known as your body is temporary, could most do it?
De Mello wants to wear you down to the point where you could give it all up for a better reality. But the book seems to have an ephemeral quality to it. De Mello chooses the timeless metaphors, leaving the book to read like a New Testament set of readings and accompanying homily. I can imagine for some readers though, this book will seem like an exploration of Mars for solutions to problems on Earth. But unlike my typical experience of Eastern philosophy, this one seems to point to a way forward rather than just where NOT to find the truth. I kind of like this.
A taste of the destructive powers of drugs, a taste of the human bodies insatiable need for approval, appreciation, attention and then a treatment on the nourishment of life. You might be surprised by what you see here. Jan 17, Iliana Gonzalez rated it liked it. Think about that. Because if you do, the next thing you will be doing is demanding other people contribute to your happiness Perfect love casts out of fear where theres is love there are no demands, no expectations, no dependency. I do not demand that you make me happy; my happiness does not lie in you, If you were to leave me, I will not feel sorry for myself; "on dependence: to depend on another emotionally-- what does it imply?
I do not demand that you make me happy; my happiness does not lie in you, If you were to leave me, I will not feel sorry for myself; I enjoy your company immensely, but I do not cling. I enjoy it on a nonclinging basis. What I really enjoy is not you; it's something that I discovered, a kind of symphony, a kind of orchestra that plays one melody in your presence, but when you depart, the orchestra doesn't stop.
And when I am alone, it continues to play. There;s a great repertoire and it never ceases to play. Apr 28, Arthur rated it really liked it. Very challenging personal philosophy for everyday living. At first, I almost despised the content, but as the pages went by, the ideas contained therein wormed their way into my consciousnesses and really made me think about the nature of reality and how I perceive myself in it. The ideas are original, different and very difficult to accept.
See a Problem?
The language and tone that the book is written in seem like condescending preaching from a moral high-ground If anything, this book is a refreshing change of perspective, especially for people living in western society. May 14, Taymara Jagmohan rated it it was amazing. Now now. This was a soul grabbing one. I can't imagine I learnt so many theories from just a pages today. I learnt to never cling to anything; for life in itself is a disappointment, and once we understand that, then we'll get the happiness we truly deserve. I also learnt about happiness, and how it isn't a thrill.
It's just that wonderful feeling that cages us freely. It is an amazing feeling, and this entire world accepts us once we are happy. No one wants an unhappy soul. Once again I l Now now. Once again I learn the concepts of true love. It doesn't have to breathe from others' bossoms, but we must strive to help everyone with a little ounce of love.
Oh wow. Yours truly and ever blossoming, Taymara. Jan 02, Fatima rated it liked it Shelves: non-fiction , psychology. Anthony de Mello was an indian Jesuit priest and a psychotherapist. The book definitely felt like reading a speech. De Mello argues that life is easy only if you let go of your attachments, cravings and illusions. In order to change, Anthony de Mello was an indian Jesuit priest and a psychotherapist.
In order to change, you need to be aware, you need to wake up. Awareness is not easy and the more you try to work hard to reach it, it becomes even harder. One story mentioned by De Mello is about this alcoholic who knew all the damage alcohol is doing to him and to his family. It is not knowledge.
How do you let go of your attachments. Awareness is hard. Life is easy, life is delightful. Do you know where these things come from? From having identified with all kinds of labels! Happiness releases you from self. But we are filtering things out constantly. One demon doing the filtering is called attachment, desire, craving.
The root of sorrow is craving. They taught us that in order to be happy you need money, success, a beautiful or handsome partner in life, a good job, friendship, spirituality, God—you name it. Now, that is what I call an attachment. It could be your job, your career, your profession, your friend, your money, whatever. You are not my happiness, you are not my joy. Only then can you get sick of it. You can make use of suffering to end suffering.
I discovered one thing that changed me. I was lying in a gutter one day under a slight drizzle. I opened my eyes and I saw that this was killing me. I saw it and I never had the desire to touch a drop after that. Jan 13, Andrew Diamond rated it it was amazing. This book reads like a transcription of talks given before live audiences. The initial chapters read like the joke-filled exhortations of a professional self-help writer, but the book begins to deepen around pages De Mello was a Jesuit priest, a trained psychologist, and apparently a devoted student of both Eastern and Western religion.
His knowledge is broad and deep, and he has obviously brought great passion to his learning. At its core, this book is about the difference between realit This book reads like a transcription of talks given before live audiences. At its core, this book is about the difference between reality and our constructs of reality, most of which we have inherited from our culture, our parents, our teachers, the clergy, and the media.
The constructs are all second-hand and almost always false. Our suffering comes from the strife we feel when reality does not conform to our false understanding of how the world should be. De Mello points out repeatedly that most people are not aware of the constructs they live by. These constructs include the ideas that we must succeed financially, that we must find another person to give us love, that illness and death are personal affronts, that we must adhere to this or that ideal, that our lives must go a certain way. Our false understandings control us through fear and desire, and they do so invisibly until we take the time to see them and root them out.
Even the love we think we feel toward others is often simply an expression of our need for approval and validation. We don't see this until we look deep inside and discover that we expect to get something in return from the person to whom we think we are giving selflessly. Our most deeply cherished beliefs are the most dangerous. De Mello offers this excellent observation and parable: Reality, God, divinity, truth, love are unknowable; that means they cannot be comprehended by the thinking mind.
That would set at rest so many questions people have because we're always living under the illusion that we know. We don't. We cannot know. What is scripture, then? It is a hint, a clue, not a description. The fanaticism of one sincere believer who thinks he knows causes more evil than the united efforts of two hundred rogues. It's terrifying to see what sincere believers will do because they think they know. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we had a world where everybody said, "We don't know"? A man born blind comes to me and asks, "What is this thing called green?
One uses analogies. So I say, "The color green is something like soft music. So the next day I notice that the two blind men are bashing each other over the head with bottles. One is saying, "It's soft like music"; the other saying, "It's soft like satin. We see this kind of trouble in the world all the time. This is the difficulty of trying to use concepts that people understand to point them toward concepts that they don't understand. People get attached to the bits they understand, and their understanding ends there, often permanently.
We can only change our false concepts, De Mello says, when we become aware of them. In fact, our false understandings often lose their power as soon as we become aware of them. In this, he is in line with Socrates and the Buddhists, with the stoicism of Seneca and twentieth-century European existentialists. Life is flow. Abandon your ideas and go with it. Of course, that's easier said than done. There's nothing more terrifying than being asked to accept what you cannot control or understand.
Yet with the acceptance comes freedom. De Mello notes that the few people who really do start to question their understanding of the world do so only after immense suffering. Only after it becomes too painful for them to hold on to their ideas of how the world should be. He notes that there are only two paths for those whose world-view is completely shattered: they become insane, or they become mystics. De Mello is deeply critical not of religion, but of the way religion is practiced and misunderstood. If people devoted to awareness the time and energy they currently devote to worship, they and the world would be much better off.
Toward the end of the book, he gives this excellent parable: There was a man who invented the art of making fire. He took his tools and went to a tribe in the north, where it was very cold, bitterly cold. He taught the people there to make fire.