In their article, Cushman and Monberg argue that, “we must adopt a responsible, socially reflexive approach to negotiating our authority in composition research, one that truly facilitates the kinds of boundary/border crossings that begin to reduce social distance” (167). The authors begin by discussing common issues pertaining to authority and representation and then give personal accounts in order to reaffirm the need for more reflexive approaches to daily living and scholarship. While the authors are writing for a scholarly audience, their assertions can be applied to the lives of the general population as well. Isn’t it ironic that I just separated the scholarly audience from the ‘general population’ as if I have the authority to do so?!
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
This article would be advantageous reading for anyone, particularly those involved in active research. One section that really hit home was where the authors are discussing repositioning as a complicated practice because, “those accustomed to the comfortable distance the academy often provides (in physical and intellectual locations) rarely seek to socialize with those outside their class and race” (177). It is ironic that for somebody who is constantly trying to figure out how to get a foot in the door at a university, I never really considered the actual, physical university as part of the barrier that keeps me out. I have always thought of myself as being on this journey with the intellectual/physical university location as my final destination and have never really deconstructed these institutions of scholarship for their authenticity as barriers to achieving my goals. I thought that they were inextricable linked, up until now. This article really changed the way that I see myself in relation to this institution that I have been so starved to become a part of.
In her article, Gail Okawa, “explores a growing awareness of critically conscious learning, teaching, and research” (283). She uses narrative and autobiographical style in order to convey her own research as well as to reinforce narrative and autobiography as useful, authentic, and irreplaceable means of scholarly discourse. While she is clearly addressing a scholarly audience, her style lends to the possibility of reaching a much broader audience.
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
I think that this was some of the most useful and poignant reading that I have done thus far. Okawa’s text was just so accessible. She manages to accomplish the same tasks as authors in ISMLL, but her narrative and autobiographical style really does lend to a deeper understanding of her underlying theory. I really like the possibility that the process of making a personal investment in students can expand our own knowledge as educators and end up being mutually empowering. When I think back to the professors, and people, that have truly impacted my life and empowered me (figuratively and literally), I am left with a tiny unique conglomerate of women who made an investment in me. Women who took the time to learn about who I am and how I write and what I think and where I came from- also (coincidentally?) women that are all still a part of my life and my continuing education beyond their classrooms, office hours, and dinner tables. That is the kind of professor I want to be. I looooved this article. It invigorated that little spark in me that has kept me yearning to be a student, and a professor, for the rest of my days.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Week 10 Blogs
In their article, Cushman and Monberg argue that, “we must adopt a responsible, socially reflexive approach to negotiating our authority in composition research, one that truly facilitates the kinds of boundary/border crossings that begin to reduce social distance” (167). The authors begin by discussing common issues pertaining to authority and representation and then give personal accounts in order to reaffirm the need for more reflexive approaches to daily living and scholarship. While the authors are writing for a scholarly audience, their assertions can be applied to the lives of the general population as well. Isn’t it ironic that I just separated the scholarly audience from the ‘general population’ as if I have the authority to do so?!
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
This article would be advantageous reading for anyone, particularly those involved in active research. One section that really hit home was where the authors are discussing repositioning as a complicated practice because, “those accustomed to the comfortable distance the academy often provides (in physical and intellectual locations) rarely seek to socialize with those outside their class and race” (177). It is ironic that for somebody who is constantly trying to figure out how to get a foot in the door at a university, I never really considered the actual, physical university as part of the barrier that keeps me out. I have always thought of myself as being on this journey with the intellectual/physical university location as my final destination and have never really deconstructed these institutions of scholarship for their authenticity as barriers to achieving my goals. I thought that they were inextricable linked, up until now. This article really changed the way that I see myself in relation to this institution that I have been so starved to become a part of.
In her article, Gail Okawa, “explores a growing awareness of critically conscious learning, teaching, and research” (283). She uses narrative and autobiographical style in order to convey her own research as well as to reinforce narrative and autobiography as useful, authentic, and irreplaceable means of scholarly discourse. While she is clearly addressing a scholarly audience, her style lends to the possibility of reaching a much broader audience.
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
I think that this was some of the most useful and poignant reading that I have done thus far. Okawa’s text was just so accessible. She manages to accomplish the same tasks as authors in ISMLL, but her narrative and autobiographical style really does lend to a deeper understanding of her underlying theory. I really like the possibility that the process of making a personal investment in students can expand our own knowledge as educators and end up being mutually empowering. When I think back to the professors, and people, that have truly impacted my life and empowered me (figuratively and literally), I am left with a tiny unique conglomerate of women who made an investment in me. Women who took the time to learn about who I am and how I write and what I think and where I came from- also (coincidentally?) women that are all still a part of my life and my continuing education beyond their classrooms, office hours, and dinner tables. That is the kind of professor I want to be. I looooved this article. It invigorated that little spark in me that has kept me yearning to be a student, and a professor, for the rest of my days.
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
This article would be advantageous reading for anyone, particularly those involved in active research. One section that really hit home was where the authors are discussing repositioning as a complicated practice because, “those accustomed to the comfortable distance the academy often provides (in physical and intellectual locations) rarely seek to socialize with those outside their class and race” (177). It is ironic that for somebody who is constantly trying to figure out how to get a foot in the door at a university, I never really considered the actual, physical university as part of the barrier that keeps me out. I have always thought of myself as being on this journey with the intellectual/physical university location as my final destination and have never really deconstructed these institutions of scholarship for their authenticity as barriers to achieving my goals. I thought that they were inextricable linked, up until now. This article really changed the way that I see myself in relation to this institution that I have been so starved to become a part of.
In her article, Gail Okawa, “explores a growing awareness of critically conscious learning, teaching, and research” (283). She uses narrative and autobiographical style in order to convey her own research as well as to reinforce narrative and autobiography as useful, authentic, and irreplaceable means of scholarly discourse. While she is clearly addressing a scholarly audience, her style lends to the possibility of reaching a much broader audience.
Topic of Invention: Advantageous
I think that this was some of the most useful and poignant reading that I have done thus far. Okawa’s text was just so accessible. She manages to accomplish the same tasks as authors in ISMLL, but her narrative and autobiographical style really does lend to a deeper understanding of her underlying theory. I really like the possibility that the process of making a personal investment in students can expand our own knowledge as educators and end up being mutually empowering. When I think back to the professors, and people, that have truly impacted my life and empowered me (figuratively and literally), I am left with a tiny unique conglomerate of women who made an investment in me. Women who took the time to learn about who I am and how I write and what I think and where I came from- also (coincidentally?) women that are all still a part of my life and my continuing education beyond their classrooms, office hours, and dinner tables. That is the kind of professor I want to be. I looooved this article. It invigorated that little spark in me that has kept me yearning to be a student, and a professor, for the rest of my days.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Week 9 Blogs
In her text, Feminisms, Genders, Sexualities, Anne Donadey offers what she calls, “a still photograph of objects in motion, some of which may be outside the frame entirely” (226). She outlines the present phase of the ongoing evolution in feminism and sexuality studies without claiming to cover the gamut. She acknowledges her situational location and focuses on, “the self-representation of marginalized groups.” Donadey walks the reader through a variety of approaches to feminism in order to uncover their shared goals which include theorizing the experiences of women, LGBTQ people, people of color, postcolonial people, and women with disabilities, and seeking to shatter the binaries my redefining masculinity, heterosexuality, whiteness, the West, and ability. Donaday is seeking a scholarly audience with likely hopes of sparking new interest and, as a result, new definitions and binaries meant to be shattered.
In his article, David Setiz argues that, “while composition studies often claim to privilege practice, our programs rarely allow these theories to be informed by practice” (66). Seitz uses 3 of his students as examples and parallels conversations that he had outside of class with their in-class responses and writing in order to show that when “students are from working-class backgrounds or are recent immigrants, we can miss out on views from outside middle-class institutions that imply valuable critiques to these theories and their application to the writing process” (65). Seitz is trying to prove that as “critical teachers,” we might better understand our ability or inability to elicit desirable responses both in the classroom and in practice in the every day lives of students. Seitz speaks to his reader almost as a comrade, like we have a common purpose and brotherhood with its foundation in composition theory, practice, and instruction.
Topic of Invention: Similarity/Difference
The most important similarity that I found in the Seitz and Donadey texts is that, in a sense, they both focus on the situatedness of the reader/creator. Both articles seek new definitions and new perspectives in order to get a more true-to-reality view of research and student writing. I really liked Donadey’s section on the duality of memory and history. On one hand, the past will repeat itself if not remembered, but on the other hand, the danger seems to be that the past will repeat itself if remembered too much. It is in this grey area that Seitz’s students appear to be floating. They are stuck in the middle ground between working-class values and out-of-the-box thinking. It is easy to assume that college students are all part of this new movement toward individuality, when in reality, some cling to the traditional binaries outlined by their dominant cultures. This can be seen vividly in the LGBTQ population. While it is easy to lump us all together as deviants, or progressive, or sexually free thinkers, there is an abundance of gays and lesbians who would really prefer to stick to the binary- hetero OR homo. No bi’s. No trans. No grey area. Similar to everything else that we have read, these pieces show how loosely interpreted everything that we read truly needs to be.
In his article, David Setiz argues that, “while composition studies often claim to privilege practice, our programs rarely allow these theories to be informed by practice” (66). Seitz uses 3 of his students as examples and parallels conversations that he had outside of class with their in-class responses and writing in order to show that when “students are from working-class backgrounds or are recent immigrants, we can miss out on views from outside middle-class institutions that imply valuable critiques to these theories and their application to the writing process” (65). Seitz is trying to prove that as “critical teachers,” we might better understand our ability or inability to elicit desirable responses both in the classroom and in practice in the every day lives of students. Seitz speaks to his reader almost as a comrade, like we have a common purpose and brotherhood with its foundation in composition theory, practice, and instruction.
Topic of Invention: Similarity/Difference
The most important similarity that I found in the Seitz and Donadey texts is that, in a sense, they both focus on the situatedness of the reader/creator. Both articles seek new definitions and new perspectives in order to get a more true-to-reality view of research and student writing. I really liked Donadey’s section on the duality of memory and history. On one hand, the past will repeat itself if not remembered, but on the other hand, the danger seems to be that the past will repeat itself if remembered too much. It is in this grey area that Seitz’s students appear to be floating. They are stuck in the middle ground between working-class values and out-of-the-box thinking. It is easy to assume that college students are all part of this new movement toward individuality, when in reality, some cling to the traditional binaries outlined by their dominant cultures. This can be seen vividly in the LGBTQ population. While it is easy to lump us all together as deviants, or progressive, or sexually free thinkers, there is an abundance of gays and lesbians who would really prefer to stick to the binary- hetero OR homo. No bi’s. No trans. No grey area. Similar to everything else that we have read, these pieces show how loosely interpreted everything that we read truly needs to be.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Week 8 Blogs
In Race and Ethnicity, Kenneth Warren attempts to “make an account historically for race in the production of American literary and intellectual life without giving way to an anachronistic tendency to praise or blame historical figures for having anticipated or failed to realize current concerns” (257). The purpose of his text is to lead researchers to read and not condemn writers for the processes that they are a part of, but to try and understand how and why being subject to various contingencies and interrelations shapes their works. In order to get this point across, he gives an account of the last two decades of literary critique and then makes suggestions for looking at these works with a more (or less) critical eye. While he is clearly addressing an academic community, his language is not over-elevated or text-bookish. He reads smoothly like he is speaking to you personally.
Topoi- Past fact/future fact
“A topic of invention in which one refers back to general events in the past or to what we can safely suppose will occur in the future based on the record of the past.” There couldn’t be a more direct correlation between this topic of invention and Warren’s article, as he very specifically dares us to re-read our history with a more open mind in order to prevent that from happening. I really liked his reference to Claudia Tate’s proclamation on the institution of marriage, especially after our conversations last Thursday… perhaps Aristotle was more right than we educated folk like to admit with the whole past fact=future fact idea. The struggle that African Americans fought in order to obtain their civil rights is too often mirrored in the battles being fought by this generation’s “others.” Hopefully the when this history is read, it will be interpreted by the right mind before it is too late for the next generation’s “others.”
In her text, Migrations, Diasporas, and Borders, Susan Stanford Friedman outlines the scope and theory of this new field of literary study. She first gives an overview of the field and then offers concrete definitions and histories of migration, diasporas, and then borders in order to provide the reader with a substantial knowledge base. The purpose of her essay is to lay the foundation and provide a roadmap for further research in this field. This fact makes it apparent that she is addressing a scholarly community with hopes of sparking new interest and bringing new ideas to young minds that might continue to advance her field.
Topoi- Injustice
Well I was on a rampage about gay stuff...so I figured I’d roll with it. I was really moved by Stanford Frieman’s description of desire as a state of lack. I never really thought about it that way. When I think of the word desire, I think of “want,” not lack. She goes on to say that “home is often the perpetual object of desire, a longing that is never fulfilled in the ambiguity of existence caught between a consciousness of roots elsewhere and the realities of routes, of like shaped by movement through different locations that are never quite home.” When I read those words my heart bled for all of the people in my life (present company included) that have condemned themselves (and some by others) to an eternity of shuffling about in this state of soulful torment because they are longing for the acceptance and approval that they knew only as children (never as adults) and, ironically enough, probably never even existed to begin with. That is fucking injustice.
Topoi- Past fact/future fact
“A topic of invention in which one refers back to general events in the past or to what we can safely suppose will occur in the future based on the record of the past.” There couldn’t be a more direct correlation between this topic of invention and Warren’s article, as he very specifically dares us to re-read our history with a more open mind in order to prevent that from happening. I really liked his reference to Claudia Tate’s proclamation on the institution of marriage, especially after our conversations last Thursday… perhaps Aristotle was more right than we educated folk like to admit with the whole past fact=future fact idea. The struggle that African Americans fought in order to obtain their civil rights is too often mirrored in the battles being fought by this generation’s “others.” Hopefully the when this history is read, it will be interpreted by the right mind before it is too late for the next generation’s “others.”
In her text, Migrations, Diasporas, and Borders, Susan Stanford Friedman outlines the scope and theory of this new field of literary study. She first gives an overview of the field and then offers concrete definitions and histories of migration, diasporas, and then borders in order to provide the reader with a substantial knowledge base. The purpose of her essay is to lay the foundation and provide a roadmap for further research in this field. This fact makes it apparent that she is addressing a scholarly community with hopes of sparking new interest and bringing new ideas to young minds that might continue to advance her field.
Topoi- Injustice
Well I was on a rampage about gay stuff...so I figured I’d roll with it. I was really moved by Stanford Frieman’s description of desire as a state of lack. I never really thought about it that way. When I think of the word desire, I think of “want,” not lack. She goes on to say that “home is often the perpetual object of desire, a longing that is never fulfilled in the ambiguity of existence caught between a consciousness of roots elsewhere and the realities of routes, of like shaped by movement through different locations that are never quite home.” When I read those words my heart bled for all of the people in my life (present company included) that have condemned themselves (and some by others) to an eternity of shuffling about in this state of soulful torment because they are longing for the acceptance and approval that they knew only as children (never as adults) and, ironically enough, probably never even existed to begin with. That is fucking injustice.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Week 7 Blogs
Jerome McGann
In this article, Jerome McGann attempts to outline the field and process of interpretation. He begins with an analysis of a Weil quote, and then gives a brief introduction to performative interpretation. McGann concludes his inquiry with Della Volde. In the process, he outlines contemporary theory and structure of the process of interpretation in order to establish interpretation as ‘a game that must be lost.’ McGann is likely trying to reach a scholarly audience comprised of fellow researchers that are familiar with (or frustrated by) interpretations.
I would argue that this article was unworthy as it pertains to this class and relative to the other articles that we have looked at. Not that I am a fan of long, boring, analyses, but I thought that there could have been more information. I don’t know much about the field of interpretation and would have found a little more emphasis on theory and practice to be beneficial. Fortunately, much of what he said mirrored the translation piece so there was little confusion. It is ironic- in essence, I wanted him to justify interpretation as a legitimate field and outline its underpinnings which is exactly what we discussed hated having to do as contributing members in this field of English Studies.
Yuet-Sim D. Chiang
In her article, Yuet-Sim D. Chiang argues for a critical inquiry that not only addresses identity constructs, but also embraces their centeredness, including their intersubjectivities in composition research and practice (151). She walks her reader through her own experiences as researcher, other, insider, outsider, and professor. She examines each of these roles in order to “put the ‘human voice and face’ back into composition theories that have become increasingly highfalutin and removed from our daily realities” (163). She develops an intentionally personal relationship with her audience in order to reaffirm her belief that the center, while important as a separate entity, is equally important as part of the whole.
I found this article to be significantly advantageous for my training as a researcher, but also practically advantageous for my job. I was involved in a discussion at work today about my desire to begin implementing support systems for LGBT students at the middle school level. This is a groundbreaking and highly volatile topic everywhere, but when you throw children and the upper echelons of administration in SAN BERNARDINO in to the mix, it is down right chaos. I found myself having to consider my role as a member of the LGBT community and devise a combat plan to defend my role and my intentions in this process of building supports that are long overdue. Similar to Chiang’s description of the empathy and community that she felt with her students and her research participants, I too look into the faces of these lost little awkward people that have all of these things inside of them that they don’t know how to compartmentalize, and see myself. The only difference is that I was going through that at twenty, and they are going through it at twelve. I think that it is a beautiful thing- but that doesn’t matter because it is reality, and therefore, it is a conversation that desperately needs to be had. While the article gave me a great frame of reference and some important factors to consider, I am not sure that SBCUSD is ready for a gay woman to use her position to push a gay agenda- whether or not the two are even related.
In this article, Jerome McGann attempts to outline the field and process of interpretation. He begins with an analysis of a Weil quote, and then gives a brief introduction to performative interpretation. McGann concludes his inquiry with Della Volde. In the process, he outlines contemporary theory and structure of the process of interpretation in order to establish interpretation as ‘a game that must be lost.’ McGann is likely trying to reach a scholarly audience comprised of fellow researchers that are familiar with (or frustrated by) interpretations.
I would argue that this article was unworthy as it pertains to this class and relative to the other articles that we have looked at. Not that I am a fan of long, boring, analyses, but I thought that there could have been more information. I don’t know much about the field of interpretation and would have found a little more emphasis on theory and practice to be beneficial. Fortunately, much of what he said mirrored the translation piece so there was little confusion. It is ironic- in essence, I wanted him to justify interpretation as a legitimate field and outline its underpinnings which is exactly what we discussed hated having to do as contributing members in this field of English Studies.
Yuet-Sim D. Chiang
In her article, Yuet-Sim D. Chiang argues for a critical inquiry that not only addresses identity constructs, but also embraces their centeredness, including their intersubjectivities in composition research and practice (151). She walks her reader through her own experiences as researcher, other, insider, outsider, and professor. She examines each of these roles in order to “put the ‘human voice and face’ back into composition theories that have become increasingly highfalutin and removed from our daily realities” (163). She develops an intentionally personal relationship with her audience in order to reaffirm her belief that the center, while important as a separate entity, is equally important as part of the whole.
I found this article to be significantly advantageous for my training as a researcher, but also practically advantageous for my job. I was involved in a discussion at work today about my desire to begin implementing support systems for LGBT students at the middle school level. This is a groundbreaking and highly volatile topic everywhere, but when you throw children and the upper echelons of administration in SAN BERNARDINO in to the mix, it is down right chaos. I found myself having to consider my role as a member of the LGBT community and devise a combat plan to defend my role and my intentions in this process of building supports that are long overdue. Similar to Chiang’s description of the empathy and community that she felt with her students and her research participants, I too look into the faces of these lost little awkward people that have all of these things inside of them that they don’t know how to compartmentalize, and see myself. The only difference is that I was going through that at twenty, and they are going through it at twelve. I think that it is a beautiful thing- but that doesn’t matter because it is reality, and therefore, it is a conversation that desperately needs to be had. While the article gave me a great frame of reference and some important factors to consider, I am not sure that SBCUSD is ready for a gay woman to use her position to push a gay agenda- whether or not the two are even related.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Week 6 Blog 2
Topoi- Advantageous
In our discussion yesterday, Dr. Pilinovsky illuminated our reading on “Translation Studies” by bringing her own personal experiences with translation to the table. She also offered wonderful insight into common research dilemmas. Dr. Pilinovsky neatly paralleled the issues surrounding what qualifies as a ‘good translation’ (as addressed in the Venuti article) with her own experience in hunting for original fairy tales. She established camaraderie with the class by personalizing her message and creating an open-forum discussion dynamic as opposed to a lecture dynamic (which I’m sure would have been equally fascinating).
I would argue that the information gathered from Dr. Pilinovsky is advantageous from multiple perspectives. From my personal perspective, the insight that she offered on translation proved advantageous to my general understanding of translation studies, but most useful was her recount of her own quandaries with research. Finding sources for a study on Atlantis has proven to be an arduous task. I would think that these same aspects proved beneficial for my classmates as well. Now thinking on a bigger scale, society and/or academia, it is advantageous for us to understand that there are casualties in any translation and that we often have to compromise literal interpretations (word for word) in order to achieve a greater understanding of authorial intent (spirit for spirit).
In our discussion yesterday, Dr. Pilinovsky illuminated our reading on “Translation Studies” by bringing her own personal experiences with translation to the table. She also offered wonderful insight into common research dilemmas. Dr. Pilinovsky neatly paralleled the issues surrounding what qualifies as a ‘good translation’ (as addressed in the Venuti article) with her own experience in hunting for original fairy tales. She established camaraderie with the class by personalizing her message and creating an open-forum discussion dynamic as opposed to a lecture dynamic (which I’m sure would have been equally fascinating).
I would argue that the information gathered from Dr. Pilinovsky is advantageous from multiple perspectives. From my personal perspective, the insight that she offered on translation proved advantageous to my general understanding of translation studies, but most useful was her recount of her own quandaries with research. Finding sources for a study on Atlantis has proven to be an arduous task. I would think that these same aspects proved beneficial for my classmates as well. Now thinking on a bigger scale, society and/or academia, it is advantageous for us to understand that there are casualties in any translation and that we often have to compromise literal interpretations (word for word) in order to achieve a greater understanding of authorial intent (spirit for spirit).
Monday, May 5, 2008
Week 6 Blog
In "Translation Studies," Venuti outlines the key problems that are faced by practitioners in the field of translation studies. These issues include equivalence and shifts, cultural systems and norms, and ethics and politics. Venuti’s article is broken down into sections focusing on each of these critical elements. He explores the works of prominent scholars in the field in order to provide a roadmap of further research that might take place in order to advance the field (Venuti, 308). He addresses his audience as scholarly kin in an attempt to forge a relationship founded on the appreciation of interdisciplinary research as it pertains to English Studies.
Venuti’s article struck me as posing a question of virtue. The process of trying to define what is virtuous or noble directly mirrors one of the challenges posed in this article: What is accurate/accessible/good translation? Neither argument has a concrete solution. Should good translations be accurate to author intent? True to spirit or word? Not to get too Derrid-ish, but can there even be such a thing as an accurate translation? If everything fluctuates based on how the centre interacts with the periphery and the periphery (society/norms/etc) can never be constant/defined, then what exactly are we looking for? How can we establish a criterion for what is virtuous or for what is an accurate translation? With all of the different factors at play in translation, even in just defining the term, Venuti’s call for an interdisciplinary approach to research seems logical. Human nature creates this need that we have to compartmentalize (or binar-ize) everything we read, see, do, and hear, but to what end? And through what means? Venuti’s directive to begin researching popular cultural mediums like film, advertisements, and video games is to begin again this never-ending process of attempting to attach language to something that we don't even have the capacity to name! I guess that's just what we do...How many other professions can you never really be wrong about anything and make a case for everything in?! I love it.
Venuti’s article struck me as posing a question of virtue. The process of trying to define what is virtuous or noble directly mirrors one of the challenges posed in this article: What is accurate/accessible/good translation? Neither argument has a concrete solution. Should good translations be accurate to author intent? True to spirit or word? Not to get too Derrid-ish, but can there even be such a thing as an accurate translation? If everything fluctuates based on how the centre interacts with the periphery and the periphery (society/norms/etc) can never be constant/defined, then what exactly are we looking for? How can we establish a criterion for what is virtuous or for what is an accurate translation? With all of the different factors at play in translation, even in just defining the term, Venuti’s call for an interdisciplinary approach to research seems logical. Human nature creates this need that we have to compartmentalize (or binar-ize) everything we read, see, do, and hear, but to what end? And through what means? Venuti’s directive to begin researching popular cultural mediums like film, advertisements, and video games is to begin again this never-ending process of attempting to attach language to something that we don't even have the capacity to name! I guess that's just what we do...How many other professions can you never really be wrong about anything and make a case for everything in?! I love it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
