Public policy, social issues, gender politics, religion, civitas, and other taboo topics fall under the hammer of Shava's iconoclasmic force of natural philosophy.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
50,000 words without using the letter E
Tuesday, February 25, 2003
10:38 PM
OK, so some of the lists I'm on get into serious odd trivia...
==============
At 06:00 PM 2/25/2003, [a friend] wrote:
>nancy wants to know if you ever wrote a book with no use of the letter
>e...is that true or was it somebody else or was it just an essay or is a
>total literary urban myth?
Urban myth, I guess. I've heard that some Frenchman did it,
but never by anyone who cd remember the name of
the alleged author....
Anybody else?
friend@site.com
====================
Many of my friends call me The Information Ferret. I love google, but I'll use other sources, and I adore a good research library.
Still this sounded like a fun thing to pursue.
Well I found this:
from philobiblon.com:
Lipograms . . .
Interesting ideas can be generated by prohibiting a particular letter from being used in a work. This is called a 'lipogram.' The first lipogram book in English was Gadsby written by Ernest Vincent Wright in 1939. Georges Perec of the Oulipo group wrote the lipogram novel A void which tells a story in 200 pages without using the letter 'e.' For a humorous example, read "Mary Had a Lipogram" reprinted in Making the alphabet dance by Ross Eckler.
and another reference:
from www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek:
A few daring writers have even deliberately reduced the richness of English by taking something out. How about taking out something that appears quite often, like the letter "e"? Of all the twenty-six letters of the English alphabet, "e" appears most frequently. To write even a paragraph without using "e" taxes one's ingenuity, but how about a whole novel without even one "e"? That novel idea certainly seems hopeless.
Ernest Vincent Wright managed to do just that in his novel Gadsby, A Story of Over 50,000 Words Without Using the Letter "E", Wetzel Publishing Co., Inc. 1939. [The "E" in quotes doesn't count, nor does the fact that the author's name contains "e" three times.]
Wright claims, in his introduction, that "this story was written with the E type-bar of the typewriter tied down..." [Appearances of "e" in the book's introduction don't count either.]
and in confirmation, alibris.com has one copy available.
So, I'd say it's real! Truly odd.
No furlough?
10:19 PM
The union officials and the school district have come to a settlement, here in Portland, and if the agreement is ratified, we've got no strike.
And if that's the case, then the teachers have pledged to work ten days for free, and the city is buying the remaining fifteen days with a 1% increase in the business license tax -- and there will be a full school year. No furlough. It's almost too good to be true, but I confess I've breathed my profound sigh of relief.
Hallelujah! No mission k5? I've never been so happy to find that I might be out of a job! (well, it's just a volunteer job, but I take those seriously too...!)
The "F" word
8:49 AM
I was talking to my mother, a sweet 82 year old labor liberal, and as we were chatting about the State of the Nation, she said it was about time people resurrected the "F" word, talking about the current administration.
Being as my mother is not accustomed to using bad language, I was taken aback for a minute. "What word, Mom?"
She said, "I am old enough to remember the rise of fascism in Europe. Fascism rises out of jingoism and xenophobia, building up the little man by putting a paternal government over him, and taking away choices. The suppression of dissent."
I could see that.
"Every time people use the word fascist they think of the horrors of folks like Hitler, but Mussolini invented the word. He was an Italian good-old-boy, a horror of banality. He made the trains run on time. What's so different?"
So, I decided to look up what might be considered to be the characteristics of fascism.
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini (1883-1945), Fascist Dictator of Italy
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or any controlling private power."
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt - on the threat to democracy by corporate power
Go Mom! Passion keeps you young I guess...;) I'm so used to associating fascism with the sort of rhetoric where you stop the conversation by calling someone Hitler. Even as a political hack, I don't think I could have defined the characteristics.
I'm not sure I'm quite as radical as my parents. I don't know if I'd use the "F" word in mixed company. But it does give one pause.
Food for thought, if a bit emetic...
Proof I shouldn't try to write when I'm insomniac
2:56 AM
Or, at a minimum, I shouldn't try to write html.
Mission K5 indymedia call for volunteers
This is where I don't write a sonnet to the cat, who apprarently groks my allergies and therefore sneaks into my room at every chance she gets. I could sleep if I could breathe...
Pardon my dust
12:41 AM
I'm giving the blog a facelift, and as soon as I can figure it out, I will -- I promise -- set up comments. Meanwhile, email works.
Monday, February 24, 2003
11:43 PM
Mission K5 ready for launch!
Tonight I went to an organizational meeting for the Student Activist Association, seeking volunteer help and allies, and to help them organize furlough activities for the older kids (middle/high school) . KBOO-FM was there, and pulled me for an interview, so I guess I'm officially opening up the Mission K5 project, even though I wasn't going to go public until we had terms settled with the GSA and Parks & Rec.
So I guess I'm going public a week sooner than I thought. It shouldn't hurt at all. You can find the yahoogroup at Mission K5.
In organizing Mission K5, I'm finding this is probably the easiest organizing job I've had, even though the logistics are nearly impossible. But it's a project everyone can get behind, regardless of interests -- or that people would have a hard time being against, fer sure. I find myself wishing more people would get involved on an exec committee level, so I can have people to swap stories with from the inside. This is going to be fun...
Making community organizing transparent
No more secrets!
It's a basic truth of organizing and politics that no one will ever get a real journal of what goes into organizing a project. You try to protect your relationships. Sometimes you threaten people into giving you things, but you want it to seem to the rest of the world that it was all their idea to help. Sometimes you play one resource off against another. This is why I want to teach activism, because when most people talk about what they really do with organizing, they lie. It's like some strange mystery cult, the Masons or something odder -- traditionally you can't learn real organizing from a book because no one's been willing to make the process transparent. You have to gain the trust of a veteran, be sponsored, and mentored, and gain more trust. Then when someone trusts you really well, they'll tell you what's really going on...!
Well, the matter of fraternal organizations is just becoming the fabric of square society. I think it's time we separated the mysteries (which, perhaps, you do need a mentor to learn -- the artsy finesse bits!) from the secrets.
The "secrets" about organizing are all about keeping the tools out of the hands of the masses, because then we'd have a very noisy and participatory democracy. I say, about time to give everyone a toolkit -- it might take that much fixing to bring us all together.
I'm not exactly a populist, though I've come close. But I will say that the "noisy democracy" horse has been out of the barn since people learned to use the web. Now, if we want people to learn to be critical of media, to be truly informed and educated citizens, we need to expose the secrets of the media, the system, the marketing juju of it all. And we need to teach them to use it, to understand it.
If I can just slow down enough to write it all down, we'll have the book maybe by the end of this year.
It's the petroleum dollar standard vs. the petroleum euro standard, stupid!
Ever since we started pushing the UN so hard on Iraq I've been trying to figure out where the fire was. I mean, why would we be pushing for a spring invasion quite so hard and quite so unilaterally (counting Blair as being dimensional with Bush)?
My personal convictions say "follow the money." But even with the second largest certified oil reserves in the world, it's hard to believe that handing the extraction as well as refining rights to US interests would be worth the tens of $B and the lives and political capital spent on a unilateral war.
So, I've been musing to myself... Control of supply? Where's the money crisis here?
Then today, I got forwarded this article, originally on evworld (who better to criticize oil economics?), posted from this link from indymedia.
And I'm thinking, where's George Soros when I really need his opinion on a paper on the monetary system? Huh? Where?
The summary goes:
Although completely suppressed by the U.S. media and government, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking -- it is an oil currency war. The real reason for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. This essay will discuss the macroeconomics of the `petro-dollar' and the unpublicized but real threat to U.S. economic hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. The author advocates reform of the global monetary system including a dollar/euro currency 'trading band' with reserve status parity, and a dual OPEC oil transaction standard. These reforms could potentially reduce future oil currency warfare.
Now, ain't' it a pip when something like that comes in that perfectly fits your anxieties about the root economic causes of the war, and you just don't have the macroeconomic chops to deconstruct it?
Someone help me out, email me with a terse critique.
Sunday, February 23, 2003
2:31 PM
The integrated intellectual
Recently, a friend has been tempting me to join an intentional community in east Texas, with a group of amazing people. It was actually really nifty to go through the process of thinking about moving to Texas, because it clarified a great deal of my feeling about community. East Texas seems like a place where my ability to act in civil society might be seriously stunted. I need to be immersed and active in a civic environment that is receptive to my efforts -- I've jelled that out of my values. It's probably just necessary to my sense of community on all scales.
It's important to my sense of family, because I want Joseph to grow up seeing how to be active in the civil society around him. It's important to me socially, because it is through these kinds of efforts that I often find sangha, a company off seekers. And it's important to me on a grander social level, because I feel that I have a vision of society, and know the way to manifest things that will make it better -- and that's not ego, it's obligation. It's part of what I'm for, to do these things, and in the process, teach others how to do the same.
I think it's so important for those of us who walk through life with our eyes open, that we not become disaffected from community. So many of us were treated very badly by our peers, growing up. We were made to feel that we were hopelessly clueless geeks, when in many cases, our perspective and perceptions were more astute than the adults around us.
As adults, many of us have been branded (and embraced!) the label of intellectual, yet our society doesn't trust intellectuals. The greater social perception is that intellectuals either waste their lives on useless problems, or spend their lives arrogantly imposing values on society that are disjunct from the general values of the people.
Today, more than ever in my personal historic memory, we need to energy of perceptive, smart, wise people to be working in society, not disaffected from our government and from the people. And not all of us working in little intellectual self-imposed ivory towers and cultural ghettos, though much good work can come out of those environments, too. Which means we need to learn to integrate the values of the people, and become part of the public, and gain the trust of those people by working with what is obviously needed, respecting the will of our communities, and educating our communities to our own visions. It's the only way to preserve democracy and education in a time of rapid change and media overload.
Let's make being smart, pattern making, media savvy, critical thinkers into a fashion trend. "Intellectual" is a subculture. It's not an IQ threshold. It's an attitude.
This is a world that needs to bridge the gap between the culture of intellectuals and the good will of the people. We can not afford, in the age of media and information, to be anti-intellectual, and that means that intellectuals have to be part of the people.
My dad did that, and it's part of what I need to do with my life too. I'm not a city girl, or a country girl. I grew up in a smallish town in Vermont, and I lived in Boston for about eleven years, and Portland is in between. I have been a rural digital divide activist, and am now working on a particularly urban problem with Mission K5. But regardless of where I live, rural or urban, I am a creature of civitas, a civic animal. And I will devote what energy and talents I can to making my community better.
12:33 PM
Why this is a religious war
Sometime back, my friend Chris wrote this on a mailing list I'm on:
> Every religion has
> it's warriors that are supposed to kill and destroy to force their opinions
> down the throats of their perceived enemy.
To the best of my knowledge, though the Tibetans have had armies of conquest in their time, they have never imposed buddhism on anyone. The wars they have fought have been either defensive, or an attempt to seize lands primarily inhabited by ethnic Tibetans -- to protect them from people who were not allowing them to keep their own culture.
To the best of my knowledge, most stateless cultures war openly to seize resources, but rarely to spread their beliefs to others. They may *enslave* and *kill* others, but usually assimilation (forced or otherwise) is a cultural artifact of civilized organized states and religions.
Since all cultures have spiritual traditions, we can show that not every religion has warriors with this purpose.
However, we are raised to believe that war is natural to human culture, and that it is the right and prerogative of states to organize forces (bunches of young men usually) to war on Others. These wars usually involve seizing resources, and assimilating land by assimilating the people, or as often by forced or voluntary relocation of the original cultures' people into the "new" land as settlers. The original inhabitants who are not killed are sometimes assimilated, or else killed, relocated, or made impoverished refugees. (Israel comes to mind, or Northern Ireland, or South Africa, or the US...)
I personally believe that wars are fought over resources, with religion, paternalistic patriotism, and various tactics used as propaganda to rally support from the masses. Taking sons and as much as half of the wealth of the homeland and diverting it into war concentrates wealth in the ruling warrior/statesman/industrial class, and keeps the poor city and farm folks from having enough resources to consider their general plight.
Derrida (oh, gods, am I now ever revealing my fringe left-y pull) describes the current push of globalism as being a basic extension of the cultural machine built for that purpose by the Catholic Church in the Renaissance. However, he is not the only person with this view. In fact just about every non-Christian power and culture sees the blatantly Christian-imperial world view inherent in globalism. It's actually hard for us to see those assumptions, because we grew up with them like fish in water.
I would like every one of you, for example, to examine the concept of Progress. The word implies that "change is good," "technology is liberating." Progressives (and to some extent I'll include myself) believe that the current generation's understanding of the world is the best, the most evolved, and the best bet for survival. This is a concept that is not shared by most of the individuals in the world, if you get past surface beliefs. In fact, we are very cognitively dissonant in our own progressive beliefs.
Our beliefs about ecology are progressive, but the beliefs of our parents in better living through chemistry, while progressive at the time, are not progressive anymore.
Our parents' beliefs that creating nuclear weapons (or other weapons of great destruction) will mean the end to all wars, proved to be hardly progressive. However, if you read the source material around the two WW's you will find that people believed that if war proved horrific and wasteful enough, we'd end up with peace. Even the Cold War (that promised "utopia????") was never peaceful.
What of our progressive beliefs are merely new ways to insult the intelligence of our own children?
But in Central Asia, much as they may suffer under the despotic rule of Modern dictators, much of the populace still embraces non-progressive views, in the sense that they wish that they could live as their people did a hundred years ago, perhaps adopting a few new things as they are proven in the overly eager West.
Alas, Progress competes unfairly. Much as a business that is willing to pollute can generally be more successful in the long term than a business that works for sustainability, Western(ized) nations that adopt the mondialatinisation (roman catholic derived empire building globalization model per Derrida) will be able to overcome non-Progress-enthusiastic nations in the short term, where our short term is measured in years or decades, and others are still used to thinking in centuries.
WE ARE THE FORCES OF CHAOS, people. Our idea that this chaos is good, bad or indifferent is almost beside the point. Ours is a world where there is no time for thoughtful consideration, where our recent ancestors are inherently idiots and we never consider that it might be inheritable. We are bringing our idea of productivity and progress into cultures where a month used to be considered a short time, and sending their children into time warps such that their parents can no longer talk to them. These children adopt western views, and "realize" that their parents are inherently idiots, and begin to frantically and blindly change everything in a mad rush to reach internet time and save their nations.
No wonder they hate us. They hate us because religion is something that spans generations, that allows us to listen to something older and be patient, and in fact, we have none.
I have met people with profound religious connections from traditional societies, and one of the most amazing things I learned is that the sense of time, both as experienced and as it is thought of historically, and as the lessons of history are respected, all of that is profoundly different.
I would never be the historian I am, if my parents had not come from tribal people, and if I had not had my brain turned inside out by a Tibetan lama at 20.
Our culture has stolen our time, and handed us desire and lust and righteousness and self-determination and individuality to blind us to the loss.
There may be peace in the world if we can learn to change time, yet learn to keep flexible. But anyone in this world will be destroyed by the time vampires, who do not let anyone survive who will not enslave their people to the clock. So I doubt there will be peace. I have little doubt that the old ideas of time will only be preserved on the fringe. Among the Tibetans, and the monastics of some cultures, and the people who still will live on the marginal lands of the Gobi and other deserts where they can't get orange trees to grow.
I do not, I find, fundamentally believe in world peace. I believe we are a generation of vipers devouring our past, and the past of every other culture.
I believe that a few of us will try to remember, and pass some of the old ideas to our children. And some places they will land on the stones and regrew.
The old world, some parts of it, actually had something approaching honorable wars, but we lost that scale ages ago. Now we have only suffering, but as a Buddhist I believe that is what we had already.
There are a few of us, and of us I only know one beside myself, who see this as an end time for the world in some ways. People have been awaiting Armageddon, yet for myself, I think that this is the Kali Yuga, and that it's waiting for some phase change into something we can't even anticipate, as we destroy our ancestor's ideas of time and faith and tradition and generational cohesion.
But ye GODS people, stop looking at religion as something handed down by priests. Yes that is an aspect of it, and the aspect that is on most of the war flags. But religion is about the subtle and deep connection of generations, and those are being ravaged and destroyed by Progress and Modernism.
So if you want the religious flag of this war, the belief system it is waged under, PICK THOSE:
Progress
Modernism
Those are our religions, and no other. There is hardly a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, or anyone in this country who has an iota of a chance to preserve their faith in anything but Progress and Modernism as the rules around which they organize their lives. And *THAT*, my friends, is what religion is.
The rules around which we organize our lives may as well have nothing to do with our personal spirituality, or professed religion, or where we find our religious community. They have to do with the minimal trappings of our lives. That we live in dense cities unable to support themselves without so much technology and so many tons of toilet paper per week. That 75% of us would not know how to feed ourselves without refrigeration and electricity once the canned goods ran out. That most of our children have never seen an animal slain for food. That most of our children grow up without a feeling that old people are important, nor that anything before maybe Vietnam was historically pertinent to them. That Darth Vader is as eternal a figure as the images from any mythos (most of which they've been introduced to by Disney).
We are immolating the world of our parents and washing the brains of the world's children in pervasive media, and we wonder why people are willing to die to symbolically give us the finger.
Like the Star Trek "Genesis Effect" we are cleansing the world of old slow thoughtful ossified reactionary sexist (and I'll admit to all the negatives too) cultures. I just don't think we're replacing it with a garden.
And unless you believe that progress and modernism are a religion, I'd say we're doing this DESPITE all the old valuable lessons of mystical genuine religion -- those "I love Jesus but it's Christians I can't stand" levels. But I'd say that this is not a fight against Islam. This is a fight against the values of traditional spirituality with all the beauty and warts involved.
It's inexorable, and unstoppable, and swift on an historical scale.
I am not a Luddite. In fact, I think the only way to hope to "save" anything valuable in the world is for the people of good character and faith to get *ahead* of the technology somehow, to surf on top of the wave rather than get crushed beneath it. But I do not see that invisible revolution working very well. To do this, you need to keep the old values while competing with individuals with the new values in the environment created to favor them.
I don't believe that going back to the earth will help anyone for more than a couple years.
But what I do -- I teach young people to crochet, so they can take control of the concept that they can make their own clothes, and that is a valuable and peaceful and meditative skill. I encourage DIY where I can find it. I live reasonably simply as I may, and try to reduce the chaos around my son, while giving him frank preparation for this brave new world.
I don't give up hope, even though I see no good short term outcomes, but I try to lend a long perspective to conversations I'm in. I see hope in the long future, just as I draw strength from a long past.
Namaste!
Shava
12:03 PM
A sketch of circumstances
As I write this, I document some of the circumstances of my life. Some seem more important than others, some seem more fun. A few I'd rather not mention, but they are important to understanding who I am.
To most of the world, in all likelihood, I am a successful if outspoken businesswoman, VP of Marketing and Business Development at eMarket Group, a reasonably successful dotcom here in Portland, Oregon. I was nominated for woman entrepreneur by the Portland Business Journal this year. I'm coordinating the Growth Company track for the Oregon Entrepreneur Forum "University of the Entrepreneur" conference in May. It's likely that my company will get 100 Best Companies to Work For from the Business Journal next week, and we will certainly be in the BizJournal's Top 100 Fastest Growing Private Companies in Oregon in the top ten again this year.
Me, I'm the person they send to NY and LA and SF and various places to sign up new contracts. I go there from this little company in a warehouse in Portland's industrial NW, and walking into the office of, say, a VP at Viacom, and convince her that we are exactly what she needs. It's actually really fun -- and a LOT easier than raising large donations for a nonprofit from major donors!
Yes, woman entrepreneur is only my day job, my secret identity cover. In my own hours, I have three things I do that seem far more important, most days, although it can be hard to work on each, every day.
First, I'm a single mother, with an incredibly wonderful and gifted ten year old son: Joseph, named after my dad. My parents were married over 55 years when my dad died last year -- I never really expected to be a single mom. Yet incredibly, my last two husbands both left me for younger women from North Carolina named Melissa. What's that about? I have tried to engineer my life so that me and my kid can be relatively sane. We live in a "single parent co-op," a big old victorian monstrosity in a nice neighborhood (NW 19th & Lovejoy, more or less, very old pedestrian neighborhood, packed with coffeeshops and restaurants, and on the trolley line to downtown) where we are five blocks from Joseph's school, and eleven blocks to my work. We share our house (and its one bathroom) with another single parent family. My friend Ioan Mitrea, his 11-year-old son Will, and 2-year-old daughter Kiva. Ioan works at home and covers the boys for afterschool and when I have to travel. When I am in town, I have teaching projects with both boys, this year. I'm working with Will on his writing, and teaching him a bit about cooking, and I'm working with Joseph to teach him to sing, and we're learning Spanish together. I love my kid, and I love spending time with him, but most of the time, he'd prefer Age of Mythology to hanging out with me!
Then, I'm a social crusader -- until recently in semi-retirement, but these are times that try our souls. The Portland Public Schools are cutting off four weeks at the end of the school year. When Oregon Measure 28 got voted down, I thought, "Omigod, that's another $600 or so in Parks & Rec day camps" but then I realized: there might be no day camps. The Parks & Rec centers are already scheduled. The college kids (backbone of their summer staffing) won't be here yet. And, the summer day camps were never set up to cover *all* the kids at once. I saw a train wreck. In Oregon, it's illegal to leave a child under 10 unattended (even in the car for five minutes to run into the store). What would all the already stressed low income parents with elementary kids do?
I anticipated that the possible regular church, community, neighborhood, parks, clubs and other normal ways to cover these youngest kids would fall short. I started talking to my friends about it. Everyone agreed -- there might be thousands of kids who wouldn't be able to get care. So, being a civic animal, I knew to call Lew Fredericks, who is the public information officer at the Portland Public Schools. Lew is an incredibly friendly guy, and we had a good time talking about back "in the day" when both our families were involved in civil rights activism. Lew told me that there are 25,000 kids in K-5 in PPS, and that an estimate that 2,000-5,000 of those kids would be without oversight from institutions nor friends & family was totally reasonable. He referred me to a group meeting the next week (now two weeks ago) for a Furlough Summit at OMSI.
At the Furlough Summit, I made myself a nametag: "Shava / Mission K5" Mission K5 was just an idea I'd had, that I'd recruited some interest in from some of my networks of folks around Portland. The idea was that, if someone else were planning to cover these unserved younger schoolkids, we'd volunteer. If no one were, it was just necessary to make sure that someone was there for them. I mean think about it -- 5,000 kids, under ten, alone at home or on the street for four weeks. We'd have house fires, accidents, child predators, lost and kidnapped children -- you could just go on. Not to mention all the kids with no lunch at all without their such-as-it-is USDA hot lunch programs.
Well, everyone seemed to think "Thank God someone's thinking about this." Parks & Rec offered us space or spaces if we want multiple sites. The Girl Scouts are pitching in volunteer training, curricula and volunteers, and (perhaps most critically!) liability coverage for every girl on site. Volunteers of America offered to make our lunches if we could get the materials, in their USDA certified kitchen with their menu plans. All sorts of people chimed in, and more since.
Of course, the only problem with this project is that it's impossible. But more on that later. I am, in fact, a woman who's traditionally pulled off impossible things.
And, finally, I am a writer, when I have time, and often when I do not. I want to write unpopular nonfiction -- not in the sense that I set out to make my work unreadable, but that I want to write about things that might be overtly unpopular topics. For example, I want to write a book based on a curriculum for "applied civics" called Civic Ecology, that would be something like "Activism for Dummies." The world needs a nonpartisan, every day guide to how to constructively raise hell and change the civic environment, and today most people have no clue how. More on that later too. There are lots of things I might write, and I'll post a couple items I've written recently on mailing lists that I'm on -- in essence, I'm an essayist, so blogging should come naturally, neh?
11:17 AM
On Wearing Purple
When I retire, I want to write Unpopular Nonfiction. I can't imagine not writing! I can't imagine the kind of retirement where you read and don't write, sit passively and recreate and not create.
My own writing has been shaped by my life. I wrote a great deal about religion in my 20's and 30's, and more and more about social issues in my 30's and 40's. Here and there, I've written about gender politics and sex. So I have it all covered -- sex, politics, religion -- all the important things.
Today, I start my early retirement plan! Why let the sixty-somethings have all the fun? I'll write unpopular nonfiction starting today.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
