Quotes of All Topics . Occasions . Authors
I would have to say 'The Crucible' stands out because it was one of the best experiences I've ever had, but, you know, Arthur Miller being present on the set - which was wonderful and incredible - but, to have him in your eye line is quite intimidating. It's such a beautiful language he created, so that was challenging but exciting.
Arthur Scargill's leadership of the miners' strike has been a disgrace. The price to be paid for his folly will be immense. He will have destroyed the N.U.M. as an effective fighting force within British trade unionism for the next 20 years. If kamikaze pilots were to form their own union, Arthur would be an ideal choice for leader.
I tap danced for ten years before I began to understand people don't make musicals anymore. All I wanted to do was be at MGM working for Arthur Freed or Gene Kelly or Vincent Minelli. Historical and geographical constraints made this impossible. Slowly but surely the pen became mightier than the double pick-up time step with shuffle.
Who wouldn't want to be wizard, at least for a day, as long as you didn't have the dilemmas and the situations that Merlin was thrown into. I'd be happy if you could actually use the powers to have a bit of fun and do something good for the world and maybe for yourself, whereas Merlin's kind of limited in that he has to look after Arthur.
Acting is rare. You can be rehearsing Ibsen with Sir Richard Eyre and suddenly he has to take a call on his mobile telling him his friend Arthur Miller has died. Or you can come back from a job on the Isle of Man to be told by your agent you're going straight out to South Africa on another shoot. There's not even any time to wash your pants.
The big, big block in the Arthur/Merlin friendship is the status issue, that Merlin is the servant and Arthur is royalty, and in that time, princes did not socialize with their servants; that wasn't the done thing. It just so happens that their relationship, their friendship, is strong: they have been through the thick and the thin of it all.
Arthur Laffer's idea, that lowering taxes could increase revenues, was logically correct. If tax rates are high enough, then people will go to such lengths to avoid them that cutting taxes can increase revenues. What he was wrong about was in thinking that income tax rates were already so high in the 1970s that cutting them would raise revenues.
