Akanksha Singh Quotes

“I wouldn't go back to ashes or dustWords gave me life and in them I will surrenderFrom words to words..”

“Maybe if I stretch my lips, I will remember how to smile.”

“Success is not got in twinkling of an eye.”

“A no hurts but a broken promise hurts more, Listening to a no is not easy but a shattered wish stabs more! Don't ever promise anything that you will not be able to give, BECAUSE THE HEART BREAKS INTO A ZILLION PIECES WHEN PEOPLE PROMISE BUT DON'T GIVE .”

“This life belongs to you dear,Don’t live under any fear..You are an independent soul..you can do anything,You are a free soul..you can refuse to do a particular thing..You are different from them..you are a different soul,And you cannot get dominated by any other soul!Don’t be rude..be generous …be kind,But THIS IS YOUR LIFE AND NOT THEIRS..keep this in mind!”

“A flower blossoms when there is sunlight,It closes itself in the absence of light..But I am a tree..I keep expanding even at night,I blossom even in the absence of sunlight!Because I trust myself more than anything else,I rely on myself more than anybody else!Self-confidence is indeed my power,Don’t forget..I am a tree..not a flower!”

“Dare to make a wish that can change your life!”

“It would seem that the author’s name, unlike other proper names, does not pass from the interior of a discourse to the real and exterior individual who produced it; instead, the name seems always to be present, marking off the edges of the text, revealing, or at least characterizing, its mode of being. The author’s name manifests the appearance of a certain discursive set and indicates the status of this discourse within a society and a culture. It has no legal status, nor is it located in the fiction of the work; rather, it is located in the break that founds a certain discursive construct and its very particular mode of being. As a result, we could say that in a civilization like our own there are a certain number of discourses that are endowed with the “author-function”, while others are deprived of it. A private letter may well have a signer_ it does not have an author; a contract may well have a guarantor_ it does not have an author. An anonymous text posted on a wall probably has a writer_ but not an author. The author-function is therefore characteristic of the mode of existence, circulation, and functioning of certain discourses within a society.”

“The truth is quite the contrary: the author is not an indefinite source of significations which fill a work; the author does not precede the works, he is a certain functional principle by which, in our culture, one limits, excludes, and chooses; in short, by which one impedes the free circulation, the free manipulation, the free composition, decomposition, and recomposition of fiction. In fact, if we are accustomed to presenting the author as a genius, as a perpetual surging of invention, it is because, in reality, we make him function in exactly the opposite fashion. One can say that the author is an ideological product, since we represent him as the opposite of his historically real function. (When a historically given function is represented in a figure that inverse is, one has an ideological production). The author is therefore the ideological figure by which one marks the manner in which we fear the proliferation of meaning.In saying this, I seem to call for a form of culture in which fiction would not be limited by the figure of the author…”

“As a result, we must entirely reverse the traditional idea of the author. We are accustomed, as we have seen earlier, to saying that the author is the genial creator of a work in which he deposits, with infinite wealth and generosity, an inexhaustible world of significations. We are used to thinking that the author is so different from all other men, and so transcendent with regard to all languages that, as soon as he speaks, meaning begins to proliferate, to proliferate indefinitely.”