After writing my essay, I am beginning to notice something about Swami and Friends. It's one of those books that you know is about something deeper than what you originally read, but on the surface is just an entertaining read. It was hard for me to think about what the deeper meaning was behind this novel, until I picked a passage and read it closely. Now I am convinced that Narayan more than any other author we have read utilized punctuation, pace, syntax, and careful word choice to emphasize his subtle underlying points.
In an early post I made a comment regarding the idea that Swami's main interest in school comes from his main interest in his friendships, and now I think there's more to it. Not only is friendship what is driving Swami, it is also what is driving him away from colonial education. He tolerates it simply because he can see his friends at school but starts to rebel by going to M.C.C. practice instead of school. I think this decision defines him. At first he is torn by what his father wants for him and what he wants for himself. Similar to his participation in the protests, this is one of the few times Swami really shows his independence.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Hatterr and Friend(lessness)
One interesting aspect of the H. Hatterr novel is the small number of recurrent characters. We have Hatterr and Bannerji, and a little bit of info from the background character "Kiss-Curl," - okay, and the dog Jenkins - but otherwise, characters come and go with each chapter. The panorama that readers get from Hatterr's mind is pretty narrow: there is an influx of people, things, circumstances, propositions, but there are few actually persisting elements.
If there were more consistent elements, I think we might be able to track patterns, and build real ideas or theories about life itself according to Hatterr.
Instead of developing thematic patterns based on lessons or instructions, he seems to simply prove other people wrong, and then attribute the drama to "Life!"
It's late in the game, but what say you? Two propositions here - 1, that we come to few great instructions, and 2, that part of this is the result of having unstable and inconsistent relations with other developing, scrutinizing people.
If there were more consistent elements, I think we might be able to track patterns, and build real ideas or theories about life itself according to Hatterr.
Instead of developing thematic patterns based on lessons or instructions, he seems to simply prove other people wrong, and then attribute the drama to "Life!"
It's late in the game, but what say you? Two propositions here - 1, that we come to few great instructions, and 2, that part of this is the result of having unstable and inconsistent relations with other developing, scrutinizing people.
Friday, May 7, 2010
My Education
Looking back on my education through out the two years I have been in college I have noticed some major changes. The more classes I take and the more studying I do, I have a acquired more knowledge, but its what I have done with that knowledge that has affected me the most. Especially since coming to UT my opinion on a lot of things has changed. I feel like my eyes have been opened to the "real world" since I'm not attached to mommy and daddy anymore and I have also gained a new confidence in my opinions. The only problem with that is sometimes I tend to forget that I am not always right. It's as if ever since I came to college and acquired this new found education I feel like a know so much!! But in reality I have only hit the tip of the iceberg on what i have to learn. So my question is: Does education make you cocky? Or confident? Because I know that there are many other people out there that far exceed my intelligence level, so why do I feel superior sometimes? Is that because of my education? I can't help but wonder if somehow our education is giving us only part of the information and we are just left without luck to find the other half. Or are we like Gandhi, where the rest of our education does not come from a school, it has to be experienced. I just thought it was interesting to think about.
Gandhi
For the second half of the semester, Gandhi was surprisingly my favorite. I loved learning more about Gandhi than I had know before just for the simple fact of knowing more about his life. But I think the best part about reading Gandhi was the fact that our entire class was devoted to talking about education and colonization and when I read Gandhi I found myself, at first, wondering how it related to anything we were talking about. Of course, as I kept reading I was enlightened by his perspective. The thing that struck me the most about Gandhi was how his education had absolutely nothing to do with school. He rarely talked about his actual classroom time at all in the section of his autobiography that we read. And although I know the point of reading Gandhi was to take a look at colonization from his perspective, but I just found it extremely profound that he did not consider education something you could get from school. His experiences and true "life moments" were what gave him his education
I also loved reading about Gandhi's trials with vegetarianism. We have talked all semester about "you are what you eat" and in Gandhi's case it was definitely true. I just loved that by being a vegetarian he took a stand on being an Indian man and that is what people saw him as, of course to them it was a negative thing. But what he was labeled as, because of what he ate (or didn't eat, I guess) was exactly what he ended up wanted to be labeled as in the first place. Everything that has had to do with food in this course I have just found to be extremely interesting.
I also loved reading about Gandhi's trials with vegetarianism. We have talked all semester about "you are what you eat" and in Gandhi's case it was definitely true. I just loved that by being a vegetarian he took a stand on being an Indian man and that is what people saw him as, of course to them it was a negative thing. But what he was labeled as, because of what he ate (or didn't eat, I guess) was exactly what he ended up wanted to be labeled as in the first place. Everything that has had to do with food in this course I have just found to be extremely interesting.
Education
I think it's an interesting idea that education changes us. This may sound silly but one of the things that changed for me is my taste in music. When I first came to college, I like a lot of rock type music. I took a couple music classes and did a lot of independent listening and checking out CDs from the fine arts library, and now I listen extensively to jazz and classical recordings. I don't dislike the other kinds of music that used to dominate my life, but when I go back home my friends are always surprised that I listen to different things. I'm constantly labeled a snob and don't know all the words to top 40 type songs or the latest rap and hip hop (the last rap album i got was kanye west's graduation... so yeah it's been a while). So it's an interesting question as to if education changed my tastes, or let me discover something about myself through exposure to different things. either way, it makes for awkward Christmas gift giving moments. Your parents try to give you cds to bands you were into 4 years ago and stuff... weird.
Last thoughts on Colonial education
I particularly enjoyed our class this semester. As discussed in class today, I really appreciated the arch of the novels over the course of the semester. The exploration of the dilemma education and language was a heavy one, at times seemingly incomprehensible, but the question is well put.
“Is it right that a man should abandon his mother tongue for someone else’s?”
Is the only way to educate a culture on its impact on another, to communicate in the language of the oppressor? Or is this the most poignant? If one takes up another’s tongue is it betrayal to one’s own culture? What happens when your only avenue for advancement is the proverbial sell out? What becomes most important?
This answer was addressed in many ways, over the course of our semester. In Achebe we saw colonization and first contact. We saw generational disputes and divides, the old wanting to hold on to tradition, and youthful rebellion as is generally the case with the younger generations. Nhamo, the young artist Dedalus, Tambu, Swami, and Wole all struggled with the question of the dual identity. They questioned their environments, their conflicting loyalties, and observed their rebellions in their own ways. Though many of us cannot relate to the external struggle of fitting in, in a colonized society, we can identify with the struggle with sense of self, and the questioning of one’s surroundings which comes with age, growing into maturity, and education.
“It looks like betrayal and produces a guilty feeling” …
“But for me there is no other choice” (does this sound like Joyce) “I have been given a language and I intend on using it”
Perhaps there is a fatalistic logic to this.
We live now in a world of ever diminishing vastness. Cultures have always collided, but I sense it used to be the under the job description of conquistadores, orientalists, social scientists and magistrates. Now language and cultures cross bounds, take on new forms, and the propensity for hybridization is consistently increasing. If Achebe never wrote in Igbo then it would be betrayal, but casting multiple nets would provide more opportunity for more minds to grasp the problem. I know Achebe was critical of Conrad, but Conrad did speak three languages, so perhaps in that they could share a commonality. Writers express, and problems have a funny way of crossing languages.
“Is it right that a man should abandon his mother tongue for someone else’s?”
Is the only way to educate a culture on its impact on another, to communicate in the language of the oppressor? Or is this the most poignant? If one takes up another’s tongue is it betrayal to one’s own culture? What happens when your only avenue for advancement is the proverbial sell out? What becomes most important?
This answer was addressed in many ways, over the course of our semester. In Achebe we saw colonization and first contact. We saw generational disputes and divides, the old wanting to hold on to tradition, and youthful rebellion as is generally the case with the younger generations. Nhamo, the young artist Dedalus, Tambu, Swami, and Wole all struggled with the question of the dual identity. They questioned their environments, their conflicting loyalties, and observed their rebellions in their own ways. Though many of us cannot relate to the external struggle of fitting in, in a colonized society, we can identify with the struggle with sense of self, and the questioning of one’s surroundings which comes with age, growing into maturity, and education.
“It looks like betrayal and produces a guilty feeling” …
“But for me there is no other choice” (does this sound like Joyce) “I have been given a language and I intend on using it”
Perhaps there is a fatalistic logic to this.
We live now in a world of ever diminishing vastness. Cultures have always collided, but I sense it used to be the under the job description of conquistadores, orientalists, social scientists and magistrates. Now language and cultures cross bounds, take on new forms, and the propensity for hybridization is consistently increasing. If Achebe never wrote in Igbo then it would be betrayal, but casting multiple nets would provide more opportunity for more minds to grasp the problem. I know Achebe was critical of Conrad, but Conrad did speak three languages, so perhaps in that they could share a commonality. Writers express, and problems have a funny way of crossing languages.
Reverting Back to Joyce
I want to revert back to Joyce for a moment. As we have continued to discuss the class as a whole, and take a look at how all of these novels are interconnected I had a thought about Portrait of a Young Man as an Artist. The whole time we read Joyce I understood why it tied into the themes of the course but I felt that it stood out a little more than the others because it focused a lot more on religion Stephen is a rebel. In another class of mine we have been talking a lot about rebellion and it started me thinking about Joyce. Stephen fully throws himself into religion and does everything he is suppose to in order to be a devout Catholic. However, in the end, Stephen turns away from religion and realizes that the indulgence of sin is the only way to be an artist. I find it ironic that Joyce's story line is the same, but the complete opposite opinion as King Solomon in the bible. King Solomon turns from God and lives a life of complete sin, indulging in anything and everything he can. This is much like what Stephen does when he tries to train his body in order to think nothing but pure thoughts. But in the end King Solomon realizes that all the sin in the world is not as satisfactory as a life that devoted to God, the exact opposite as Stephen. I found it extremely ironic that Joyce is voices his opinions about religion and he does so by turning a well known biblical story around and using against the church. Of that doesn't tell you how he feels about the Catholic church Odontoceti know what does.
Arizona Controversy
So we talked in class on Wednesday about all that is going on in Arizona right now and which novel some of this related too. I feel that this situation is best represented in The Book of Not with Tambu and the other other African girls, but not that she would for this. I feel that if this law was put into place while Tambu and the other African girls were there it would somehow have a reverse affect and end up hurting them more than the white girls. If the law were to be put in place in order to help the discrimination of the African girls, as this novels always tends to go, I think the African girls would end up suffering from it. This would be a law and I law applies to everyone. So if the white girls have to follow it so do the African girls. I can just see Miss Plato lurking around every corner waiting for one of the African girls to say something bad about the whites and then all hell would break loose! As the trend seems to be: the oppressed never get a break. Plus I cannot imagine that if this law was enacted that the white population would he happy about it. Since they think ofthemselves as superior, they would take every chance they could get to turn that law around on the Africans and make them suffer because of it.
Ngugi’s book is easily the most overlooked book of this semester. No Ngugi’s book certainly isn’t fun nor is it light-hearted. The arguments Ngugi makes are difficult to swallow, but his ideas, to me, are brave in the face of towering issues that not a lot of people are clamoring to address. I once again wanted to try and make light of this book with my own lived experience. On page 16 Ngugi says about Colonialism, “Colonialism imposed its control of the social production of wealth through military conquest… But its most important area of domination was the mental universe of the colonized, the control, through culture, of how people perceived themselves and their relationship to the world.” What this brings to mind is my own education in the Texas public school system, especially when it comes to the history of the Alamo. Being a native of San Antonio, the narrative of this conflict between the Mexican Government and those who fought for Texas Independence is dear to our city. But for young Mexican-Americans in Texas, how does the Alamo make us look at ourselves, and our people’s contribution to the state? What kind of effects does it have on the “mental universe” of these young Americans to read about a conflict that occurred in their own state in which they can’t really relate to any its of its heroes? Ngugi asks this very question when it come to African writers and intellectuals. How do they view themselves when they have nothing in common with their heroes? For me the construction of the narrative of the Alamo was used as an “area of domination.” The white men who fought for the side of the Texas republic are made to look like nothing more or less than brave, righteous warriors, the roles played by the Tejanos (Mexican-Texans) in the revolution are downplayed, and the Mexican side and its leader Santa Anna are made to seem like one-dimensional haters of freedom. Now of course if you are able to take a college level course on the Alamo and Texas history, or you able to get your hands on some more recent books, you will get a more complicated and honest picture of what happened. The reality is that for most Mexican-Americans living in Texas, they won’t ever get that chance. I’m not an expert on the Alamo and I’m not going to argue over what happened, I just think to teach kids in elementary (this when I remember my first Texas history lessons which included a trip to the Alamo) this complicated historical event as if its this clear cut battle between good and evil, could definitely affect psyches in ways Ngugi alludes to.
to the end
Snehal brought up a very interesting point (or better yet, reiterated a point that he made in the beginning of the semester); we would be able to look at our own education and being to question the influence that it has had in our lives, and how much we are affected by our education. I thought it was interesting that you can connect it in that way. I mean, obviously, we are not being colonized by an outside force, but education can cause a tension within ourselves.
I know I have most definitely changed since I began my journey into "higher education". Some of my opinions have altered, as well as the way I communicate and the way that I interact with others. And there have been times when I will meet someone that I used to know, and not really know how to interact with them anymore. And as was brought up in class today, is that really because we "outgrow" people, or is that a result of our education? I personally think that we naturally progress as we grow older. But at the same time, education can cause tensions around us and within us. But if we realize that education can cause tension within/around us, isn't that in a way overcoming it?
I know I have most definitely changed since I began my journey into "higher education". Some of my opinions have altered, as well as the way I communicate and the way that I interact with others. And there have been times when I will meet someone that I used to know, and not really know how to interact with them anymore. And as was brought up in class today, is that really because we "outgrow" people, or is that a result of our education? I personally think that we naturally progress as we grow older. But at the same time, education can cause tensions around us and within us. But if we realize that education can cause tension within/around us, isn't that in a way overcoming it?
Joyce vs Gandhi
I find the differences between these two books to be very interesting. One is an actual autobiography, the other is loosely autobiographical. Both Gandhi and Joyce have to experiment with “sin” or experiment with acts that go against the religious/philosophical beliefs held by either themselves or those of their family members. With Joyce’s Stephen Dedalus, we see a young man seeking out prostitutes. Dedalus then throws himself back into Catholicism to the point that he is on the verge of taking orders and joining the priesthood. But then he rejects the priesthood in order to start living the life of an artist, which seems to him to be the only way that truth is really attained. Gandhi, on the other hand, is a vegetarian, but begins to experiment with eating meat. He then rejects meat eating and returns fervently to vegetarianism, which seems to him to be part of living a truthful life.
First off, it’s interesting to see this notion played out in literature that one must experiment with “sin” in order to come out on the other side with some “hidden knowledge” that they lacked before, or some new attitude. Secondly, it’s just crazy how differently these men “experiment”. One turned to meat, the other turned to prostitutes. But they were both on a quest for something to call their ultimate truth. But isn’t truth a relative term? I mean, what is truth to me, may not necessarily be truth to someone else.
First off, it’s interesting to see this notion played out in literature that one must experiment with “sin” in order to come out on the other side with some “hidden knowledge” that they lacked before, or some new attitude. Secondly, it’s just crazy how differently these men “experiment”. One turned to meat, the other turned to prostitutes. But they were both on a quest for something to call their ultimate truth. But isn’t truth a relative term? I mean, what is truth to me, may not necessarily be truth to someone else.
Things Fall Apart
Today we mentioned that Things Fall Apart is now being taught as THE leading multi-cultural novel. I think this is GREAT. As wonderful as Joyce is, and as much as I don't want to downplay the complexity and pain through which Ireland has gone, I think that the younger generation will benefit for reading about Africa as compared to Ireland - bluntly, to break down racial barriers some more. Ireland of course has its own culture and is definitely unique and valuable to any multi-cultural category, but with America's past (and still fairly present) racial problems, the study of Africa, even in fiction/novel form, can only be a good thing. Granted, racism as a whole has improved enormously, but there is still so much prejudice in our societies. Fredericksburg, Tx, for example, has virtually no black families. If the students are mixing with different races in person, at least they can do so in books.
If this came across as rude or anything, I'm sorry. I know it is a touchy subject and we have to be careful with the words we choose, but it's all in good faith and with the best intentions. :-D
If this came across as rude or anything, I'm sorry. I know it is a touchy subject and we have to be careful with the words we choose, but it's all in good faith and with the best intentions. :-D
More Gandhi please
I would like to suggest, first of all, that this class have more Gandhi in the future. His biography is supposed to be a really great work of our time, and I wish we could have read more than just to page 87. I do plan to read more of it this summer and possibly finish it (out of sheer interest and enjoyment), but I thought it was really important that we talked about him during class since he is such a famous figure. I know I wasn't the only one, so this means to me that it's all the more true - reading his biography really opened my eyes to his human-ness. It is well known that Gandhi has been held high on a pedestal. I know that my own vision of him was as a saintly, altogether good person. Reading this broke down those silly generalizations and proved to me that Gandhi was really just a normal guy.
I wanted to mention this in class and was surprised that no one else did - but I was totally reminded of Jesus. If a person has never read the Bible, it is likely that they have this image of Jesus as being a perfect human being, but once the Bible is explored, it is seen that he, too, is only human as can be deducted for all of the mistakes he made in his youth. (Note: I am not religious at all, and I'm sorry for the vagary, but this is generally true, yes?)
I wanted to mention this in class and was surprised that no one else did - but I was totally reminded of Jesus. If a person has never read the Bible, it is likely that they have this image of Jesus as being a perfect human being, but once the Bible is explored, it is seen that he, too, is only human as can be deducted for all of the mistakes he made in his youth. (Note: I am not religious at all, and I'm sorry for the vagary, but this is generally true, yes?)
Final Post, I swear!
I might be crazy but I actually really liked My Life in the Bush of Ghosts by Tutuola. Alyson did make a great point in one of her posts that they are ghosts and the connection experience is weaker than the connection made with other authors, like Desani. Even though Tutuola uses fiction in a ghost word and there was just not enough time to go through each metaphor. With this novel I feel it could reach a wider audience and I would recommend it over some other novels from this semester. Not that they weren’t great, but if certain ones weren’t assigned, like Gandhi, I would never think to read them. I really got absorbed in the ghost world and it was busting through the seams with so many connections to colonialism. I saw he had written The Palm-Wine Drinkard in some of the other book versions. Maybe when this class is back on the market on the course schedule, I think more of Tutuola would be a great addition to the reading load. For me, I am totally going to shell out the green to get that version because I enjoyed Tutuola’s writing.
Universality of Children
One of the things I enjoyed most about Swami and Friends was the universal quality that a lot of the characteristics and actions displayed in the novel have with children across the world. For me personally, I found that a lot of the things Swami did or said were things I myself did or said in my own childhood. In fact, I took them to be Narayan's way of pointing out the similarities in children around the world unencompassed by the idea of race or social status. For example, when we see Swami walking past the younger children's classrooms and trying to feel superior, that idea of wanting to have authority/wanting to feel superior is something I think cuts across the book into the realities of childrens' emotions. Similarly, we might see this universal quality in the group tactics, and the way Swami's friends get upset when he starts following Rajam around so closely.
Thought Provoking End to the Semester
I left the classroom today with my mind stuck on the ways in which we could view our own experiences in education through these novels, especially in terms of how we will view home, our parents, our old friends and ourselves. Like Snehal mentioned, the reality our generation is faced with is that the cost of education doesn’t always equal its benefits. So I don’t necessarily feel I’ve moved on my life in some way that my friends from back home who didn’t go to college haven’t. Not when some of them are now homeowners and I’ve spent the last five years spending 600 dollars a month on rent and piling on student-loan debt. This is not to say that I’d trade spots with any of them, its just to say that when I go home and chill with the old crew and someone says, ‘Your graduating right? That’s awesome!’ in my head thinking, ‘Do you have student-loan debt? No… That’s awesome.’
I agree with Snehal that maybe what we get out of our education in the humanities is the ability to view our upbringings and those who we may have left behind with more sympathy. I love that I’m from the south side of San Antonio and I cherish all my trips back home and all the friendships I’ve been able to maintain. However, when I left SA for Austin after high school-- Did I feel like I was escaping a place and people I held with some disdain? Sure I did. I think it had something to do with, as Ngugi puts it, viewing my past as “one wasteland of non-achievement” and I desired to distance myself from it. I see things differently now of course; I am a product of all my experiences and wish not to run from my past or the history of my people, but to understand it and embrace it all, good and bad.
I agree with Snehal that maybe what we get out of our education in the humanities is the ability to view our upbringings and those who we may have left behind with more sympathy. I love that I’m from the south side of San Antonio and I cherish all my trips back home and all the friendships I’ve been able to maintain. However, when I left SA for Austin after high school-- Did I feel like I was escaping a place and people I held with some disdain? Sure I did. I think it had something to do with, as Ngugi puts it, viewing my past as “one wasteland of non-achievement” and I desired to distance myself from it. I see things differently now of course; I am a product of all my experiences and wish not to run from my past or the history of my people, but to understand it and embrace it all, good and bad.
I just do not understand this book...
I just really don’t have any idea what to make of this novel. I understand what Dasani was trying to do, and I can even see consistencies in some places between Haterr and some of the other narrators that we have encountered so far, especially those of Soyinka and Joyce, but other than that, I can’t really comment, because, honestly, I was lost the entire way through this novel. There are a few important passages, I suppose, but it was so lost in the nonsensical relating that they either went over, or under, my head, I can’t decide which. I’d love to read some professional’s review of this book, both to help me understand what Desani is talking about, but also to see if I am alone in my lost-ness. I assume that someone must have taken something important out of all this, but I just don’t see it.
I will say that I enjoyed the point he makes about how life is contrast, because I think that’s something we all understand. There is no life without death, no victory without defeat, no love with pain, yadda yadda yadda, but if there are more gems such as these hidden in the ludicrous prose of Desani, I certainly did not find it.
I will say that I enjoyed the point he makes about how life is contrast, because I think that’s something we all understand. There is no life without death, no victory without defeat, no love with pain, yadda yadda yadda, but if there are more gems such as these hidden in the ludicrous prose of Desani, I certainly did not find it.
Post 12
There is no doubt that the schooling that Gandhi received in Law School in England was important to him and to his future as an activist, but just like for everyone who has ever gone to a school, at least as important is the education received outside the classroom. Social rules, new ideas, challenges to convictions and people of different heritages are encounters that we all face as we continue our education. Gandhi learned outside of school that he could defend his convictions (as with his decision to stay a vegetarian despite being surrounded by Hindus who did not prescribe to this) as well as learning that changing other people’s minds can be far more difficult than it may seem. He was heavily influenced by the works of famous British novelists who expounded on civil disobedience, belief in liberty, and religious will as ways to make important changes in life. Upon leaving England Gandhi was a staunch British supporter, as can be understood after a life and education in the nation. This is another aspect of his life that was unlikely to be learned in a classroom, but a trait the he gained as he fell in love with ideas of freedom, innovation of thought, and ruled by consent of the governed that are central to democracies like England’s.
Post 9
As we talked about in class back during the Joyce unit, its obvious that Joyce is one of the most prolific writers in human history. The guy’s writing in this novel is exceptional. He uses, perhaps, too many contemporary allusions, but you can hardly fault a guy for not writing for an audience decades after his novel was published. The writing style of this novel reminded me considerably of both Soyinka and Desani. It is so episodic and stream of consciousness-oriented that you really get a sense that real people, in real places, feel similarly to the characters. I think that is one of the most important aspects of writing in a novel that criticizes an institution. I’m reminded of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee. Even though Joyce and Lee’s characters aren’t really historical figures, they feel like they are, which makes it far easier for people to get behind them, and take a serious role in activism, which is, of course, the purpose of each of these authors, in one way or another.
Post 8
This novel is all about our fate as people who will not live forever. When the unnamed boy strays out of the mortal world into that of the ghosts, we begin to understand how people in Africa understand their lives, especially with regards to colonialism. The bush is found in a deeeeeeeep forest that is basically impenetrable, even though the colonials have destroyed most it to fuel industrialization and trade. Its easy to see how this is an indictment of the mercantile system, but even more, it is a belief in the idea that there are some things that just cannot be taken from you. I don’t know if that was Tutuola’s. purpose with the location of the bush, but it makes sense to me. In other novels we have read this semester we see the Europeans take different things from the people of their colonies, from their money, to their humanity, to their very lives, but here is a place that is solely African. It gives me some hope that these deep wounds inflicted on the people can somehow, someday, be healed, if not necessarily healed. The first step is to reclaim those things that were lost, from land, to resources, but most importantly culture. Its what makes us who we are. What would American culture be without those things that can’t be taken away? We are lucky to not have to worry about losing our lives or liberties to an unknown aggressor, but imagine if we did. Would we still be us? Its hard to say, but I have to say no.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)