[New-Poetry] Re: POL: Prevent the “Artistic”Death of Another Innocent Animal
amy king
amyhappens at yahoo.com
Sun May 11 16:21:11 EDT 2008
Mark,
You're right -- the treatment of animals and for what purposes is not so black and white. I too never assumed so. In fact, I've struggled with the issue on a personal level, often hypocritically, for years. I eat seafood as though those living beings don't have feelings. I've been sick as of late and have turned to chicken soup, something I haven't eaten since 1990. I buy kosher and organic whenever possible. I cross my fingers and hope that promise that the animals were given food and treated humanely is true. I don't condemn people who eat animals or wear their by-products; I'd walk around angry all the time, especially at myself. Eliminating the products of animals from our lives seems next to impossible.
But when folks get bogged down or distracted by an "It's art" claim when it comes to issues of accountability (usually to shirk accountability), most especially by people such as artists who are making a public statement using animals, the territory gets dangerous. These "artists" try to set the terms and evade the ethical questions, as Vargas has done. He treated the dog in terms he won't acknowledge for "the greater good" of other starving dogs. Great. He brought attention to those dogs? There was no other way than to seemingly abuse one of them? Somehow I don't imagine that all of the other citizens of Costa Rica sit around idly ignoring what I'm sure is dubbed the starving dog problem. Certainly there are organizations he could produce a campaign for. He could speak out, contribute time, use his public persona to recruit attention and volunteers, any number of other efforts I can't imagine at the moment. Instead, the outrage he produced has
instead focused on his dubious treatment of one dog, rightfully so, instead of the cause he claims to have exhibited a starving dog for. How effective was his "piece" in its goal? Could he have been more effective?
Those who consider the ethical before the supposed artistic "gains" are dismissed with a variety of reasons, mostly ones that implicate they are not sophisticated enough to understand the artist's aesthetics. We are then supposed to feel less-then-intellectual and quiet down in embarrassment. Some of these "aesthetics" have managed to erase the ethical and lead to thinking like eugenics (Yeats, Eliot) and even the advancement of the Holocaust. Wasn't Hitler, after all, trying to make things better? Some have called him an artist. Didn't he sell that vision? The art produced under his regime, especially that of Riefenstahl's and her ground-breaking aesthetics, cost many lives and much torture.
Now without the shock value, where would Vargas be? Would he be a decent artist? Would he be noticed? Aren't art and aesthetics about much more than finding the next shock value boundary?
On another note and for those folks who are interested in the treatment of animals, most especially ourselves, I just started reading what already seems like a brilliant new book by Barbara Kingsolver, ANIMAL, VEGETABLE, MINERAL: http://www.kingsolver.com/bookshelf/miracle.asp
And a review:
Because It’s Good for You, That’s Why
By JANET MASLIN
ANIMAL, VEGETABLE, MIRACLE
A Year of Food Life
By Barbara Kingsolver with Steven L. Hopp and Camille Kingsolver
There are many ways for a
writer to tell you to eat your vegetables: earnestly, humorously,
scientifically, self-righteously, instructively or so voluptuously that
the page practically reeks of fertilizer. Barbara Kingsolver’s way is
both folksy and smart. While she is cogent and illuminating about
serious matters of nutrition, Ms. Kingsolver also finds ways to convey
what it’s like to be showered with friends’ plants as birthday gifts,
regard a full supply of potatoes as “homeland security,” and fend off
the amorous attention of a lovesick turkey hen.
“Animal, Vegetable, Miracle” is a wonderfully neighborly account of
stunt eating. Ms. Kingsolver and her family would describe their
adventure in other terms, but experiments in studied simplicity are
increasingly frequent.
Their basic plan to change their way of living was not unique by
either culinary or publishing standards. They decided to leave their
arid life in Tucson (“like many other modern U.S. cities, it might as
well be a space station where human sustenance is concerned”) and moved
to Virginia, where they already owned a farm in an Appalachian hollow.
They would work the farm and live on local or home-grown food for a
full calendar year.
This meant no snack foods, no processed ones, no cucumbers from
warmer parts of the world. “Six eyes, all beloved to me, stared
unblinking as I crossed the exotics off our shopping list, one by one,”
Ms. Kingsolver writes about the family’s adjustment to these
strictures. With the exceptions of olive oil, grains and spices,
everything they ate was simple and in season.
Was this a hardship? “If many of us would view this style of eating
as deprivation, that’s only because we’ve grown accustomed to the
botanically outrageous condition of having everything, always,” she
writes. She thinks most North Americans have lost their awareness of
what ought to be ripe when. So “Animal, Vegetable, Miracle” provides a
helpful shorthand for knowing which vegetables to trust at which times
and what questions to raise about how they’re grown. When a watermelon
the size of a toddler has traveled around the world to a supermarket,
Ms. Kingsolver suggests rethinking the process of how it got there.
Her ideas about this are not new. And she does not pretend
otherwise. “Animal, Vegetable, Miracle” expresses the basic tenets of
Slow Food International and sustainable agriculture (with accompanying
information about how to become better informed about and more active
in these matters), and for some of her readers this is just
reiteration. But she succeeds in dramatizing her own family’s story so
that these ideas come to life, anecdotally and charmingly. And she
gives her book the natural momentum of a changing calendar.
Meanwhile her husband, Steven L. Hopp, contributes informative
sidebars despite their occasionally cute names (“Looking for Mr.
Goodvegetable”). The older of her two daughters supplies recipes and
the enthusiasm of a self-proclaimed “veggie hog.” The younger daughter
keeps busy raising poultry and selling eggs, and Ms. Kingsolver herself
somehow manages to sustain a writing career while endlessly cooking and
canning. “We’re hoping our kids will remember us somewhere other than
in the driver’s seat of the car,” she writes.
A lot more people than the four members of this immediate family
will remember what their household is like. Without sentimentality,
this book captures the pulse of the farm and the deep gratification it
provides, as well as the intrinsic humor of the situation. Growing
seedlings in March and protecting them from a cold snap, Ms. Kingsolver
et al. bring the plants indoors “until our kitchen looks like the
gullet and tonsils of a Chia Pet whale.”
About a rooster that makes an annoying sound
(“Crr-rr-arrrr...BLUPP!”), she writes: “This guy had a future in the
culinary arts. Mine.” And about the supposed paucity of food in
January, she says, “I wish I could offer high drama, some chilling
tales of a family gnawing on the leather uppers of their Birkenstocks.”
But by January they had learned to plan ahead, and their menus were
just fine.
By then they had come to rely on the freezer. “Getting over the
frozen-foods snobbery is important,” Ms. Kingsolver writes about her
earlier presumptions, with the pragmatic wisdom that makes her work so
solid. Ever since she grew up in Kentucky tobacco country and “sallied
out into a world where, to my surprise, farmer was widely presumed synonymous with hee-haw,
and tobacco was the new smallpox,” she seems to have enjoyed the
benefits of a no-baloney attitude even toward things like baloney (“I
understand Spam as a reasonable protein source”) and a highly
functional conscience. Both serve her well in discussing the ethics of
food production.
“Animal, Vegetable, Miracle” aims to fill a hole in the soul. “We
came a long way, baby, into bad eating habits and collaterally impaired
family dynamics,” Ms. Kingsolver says. “No matter what else we do or
believe, food remains at the center of every culture. Ours now runs on
empty calories.” She adds: “A lot of us are wishing for a way back
home, to the place where care-and-feeding isn’t zookeeper’s duty but
something happier and more creative.”
And her final measure of the success of the year described here is
an altered set of priorities for a writer who says it took her decades
to find it flattering to be complimented as a housewife. “I enjoy this
so-called brainless work,” she says firmly. “I like the kind of family
I can raise on this kind of food.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/books/11book.html
I have to run as Mother's Day festivities call! Happy Mother's Day to all who nurture!
Amy
_______
http://www.amyking.org
----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Weiss <junction at EARTHLINK.NET>
To: POETICS at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 10:37:33 AM
Subject: Re: POL: Prevent the “Artistic”Death of Another Innocent Animal
Amy:
I of course agree with you, but it's not always
so straightforward. Most of us kill, at least by
proxy, to eat, and some animals are raised for
that purpose. I remember a performance piece in
New York in which an artist beat a chicken to
death against the strings of a piano. Horrible.
But I've also been at a religious ceremony in
which a chicken's throat was cut so that it bled
to death. The ceremony seemed less horrible, and
not just because the killing was quicker--it
seemed something like more justified, though for
me as an outsider the bird's near-panic has stayed with me.
Audubon killed every bird in his Birds of North
America and arranged their bodies in positions he
had observed them take when they were alive.
Thousands of birds. There was no other way to do
it. The water colors and the prints he made of
them are one of the glories of 19th Century art.
Nobody asked the birds what they thought. By the
time of Audubon's death one of the birds he
depicted was extinct, because of habitat
destruction, and he was aware that it was headed
in that direction. Another became extinct 60
years after his death, slaughtered for food.
The casual but necessary cruelty of the barnyard
and the hunt may prepare those who live with them
to an aestheticization of death.
Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will is one of
the monuments of film. One needn't go into detail
about what it cost. I sat through it once, and
left the theater homicidal with grief and rage.
Not an experience I plan to repeat. As a Jew, of
course, every time I engage with a work of Christian art I'm aware of the cost.
Most of us have attitudes about bullfighting, as
outsiders. Otherwise tender-hearted Spaniards and
Mexicans are devoted to it, as an art as well as
a sport. I used to watch bullfights on
television--they were broadcast to NY for several
years from the ring in Tijuana. I had a small
screen black and white tv and grainy reception,
so the expience was considerably distanced. I
went to one corrida years later. It was
fascinating, and also necessary for my slow
immersion in Latin American culture. It was also
extremely disturbing. But the bullring produced
Goya's Tauromaquia, and also Picasso's.
One could detail the cruelties of all the sports
in which animals are used, and also the art
produced by devotees. Is it less gratuitous to
breed horses for speed and then run them so hard
that their legs break? At least injury and death
is not an intended part of the spectacle, as in
bullfights, dogfights or cockfights, or the
pitting of animals of one species against
another. All of these have been central to various cultures.
And of course there's boxing.
None of this of course excuses an artist who's
making a political point at the expense of
another creature. Had Habacuc refrained there
would still be enormous numbers of starving feral
dogs on the streets of Central America, and there
would still be intentionally drowned puppies on
the banks of every body of water.
Mark
>"This is irritating moral territor
>Others of similar mindset, Ryan: "This is
>irritating moral territory, one doesn’t want
>to provide artists and their sponsors publicity
>for work that’s of no artistic value, but if
>the exhibitions are ignored there is a tacit
>acceptance of them. Therefore it’s necessary
>to identify that the dog was captured, tied up
>and exhibited to die by Guillermo Habacuc
>Vargas; that the woman who finds it necessary to
>kill various animals before photoshopping them
>is Nathalia Edenmont; and that it’s Adel
>Abdessemed, as announced in this publication’s
>news last week, whose exhibit includes videos of
>animals being clubbed to death. The argument has
>been made that these kinds of exhibits are
>justified if they challenge our sensibilities or
>confront our social, political and cultural
>norms. This is undoubtedly true and is sometimes
>valid. There is a case for shocking people so
>that an artist can intercede a new slant on some
>situation, directly or obliquely. But this can
>be done, and has been done, very effectively and
>many times, without having to kill anything
>anew. There is plenty of death out there to work
>with. … It’s been called psychotic narcissism
>but that ggives it too grand a gloss for these
>sorry exhibits by artists who may be nothing
>more than sadistic fools. It’s selfishness
>through arrogance and self-glorification. The
>artists should ask themselves a simple question.
>Why not put myself in there, in place of the
>animal? Too shocking? Yes, and just as stupid,
>but without the shock these artists wouldn’t
>matter, and that is their real fear."
>http://www.nonstarvingartists.com/Members/zaphmann/zaph-mann/archive/2008/03/06/death-for-no-reason
>_______ http://www.amyking.org ----- Original
>Message ---- From: Ryan Daley
><rcdaley at GMAIL.COM> To:
>POETICS at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU Sent: Saturday, May
>10, 2008 1:23:39 AM Subject: Re: POL: Prevent
>the “Artistic� Death of Another Innocent
>Animal Schwabsky, Sure. I'm familiar with his
>work as an artist in Costa Rica. You can google
>him. I'm sure you'll find more work of his.
>Great stuff. Real, "middle of the night attack"
>type .... Grabs a dog, makes gringos angry,
>assumes many people would not act in a crisis
>situation (human or animal), turns out to be
>right. Sophomore effort might need revamping,
>however. Shock and awe is difficult to surpass.
>On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:53 PM, amy king
><amyhappens at yahoo.com> wrote: > Call it what you
>like, Steve. I'll re-post one of my earlier
>points before > my original post gets lost in a
>separate debate altogether: > > 1. I am against
>the inhumane treatment of people and animals for
>any > purpose, including entertainment,
>political, and for "art's sake". This >
>"treatment" also includes non-treatment. If you
>assume the > responsibility of caring for a
>domestic animal, that includes getting > it help
>if needed -- especially help that consists of
>the basic > necessities. > > Would you adopt a
>child or an animal, who you find out later is
>sick, and > simply dismiss its condition and
>your decision not to treat it just because > "it
>would die eventually?" > > The above refers to
>people and animals who are dependent on others
>for > care. Dogs most certainly fall into that
>category, especially a sickly one > you "adopt"
>and "employ" for your own art exhibition,
>regardless of whether > you kill it or not --
>the least Habacuc could have done was get care
>and > treatment for what was obviously a sickly
>animal since it was suddenly under > his "care"
>and in his "employment." Instead of doing so,
>he publicly > dismissed outrage against him by
>stating that "the dog was going to die >
>anyway." Steve - What people autonomously do
>with their own bodies, and > the rights they
>have to do whatever they choose (i.e. suicide,
>amputation, > piercing, etc), is another
>question and subject altogether. > > 2. Another
>quote from the same post, since a couple of
>folks on the list > seem to have taken issue
>with the very fact that I even mentioned the >
>petition, as well as the dissent around the
>controversy: > > I might try Snopes or Hoax
>Slayer, > which both determined that the claim
>is ultimately disputed, as > originally pointed
>out in second half of my first post, though
>the > hyperlink to my > easily-googled article
>didn't come through. *** But does
>uncertainty > about how Habacuc ultimately did
>treat the dog, and his public unwillingness > to
>even claim if he killed it or set it free after
>he used it for his own > public spectacle,
>mean > Habacuc gets a free pass, and I should
>not draw attention to this > petition? *** > >
>Amy > > > > _______ > > > >
>http://www.amyking.org > > > > ----- Original
>Message ---- > From: steve d. dalachinsky
><skyplums at JUNO.COM> > To:
>POETICS at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU > Sent: Friday, May
>9, 2008 1:23:45 PM > Subject: Re: POL: Prevent
>the "Artistic" Death of Another Innocent
>Animal > > when folks pierce or mutilate them
>selves in the name of art is that ok > because
>they call it aRT? > bravo viva the
>performance > > On Thu, 8 May 2008 18:01:22
>-0700 amy king <amyhappens at yahoo.com>
>writes: > > First, you have fabricated for
>yourself and for your own aims > >
>Marcus, > > > > First, you have fabricated for
>yourself and for your own aims this > > quagmire
>of "anything is art" platform. You're trying to
>set these > > terms and argue that if I don't
>respond to your fabricated claim, > > then I'm
>somehow against you (see your last line
>below). I don't > > know where you conjured
>up this "anything is art" claim since I have > >
>not, even remotely, claimed or defended
>it. Check out your selected > > aggressive
>terminology below regarding "war", "battle", "if
>you're > > defending it" etc. -- you can't even
>decide what imaginary "side" I > > would assume
>should I take up your terms. But. Bully for
>you if > > you can find someone on this list to
>argue the notion that "anything > > is art" with
>you. > > > > But secondly and moreover, I know
>from firsthand experience with you > > on this
>list and other lists that you do indeed like to
>argue, very > > much, often just for the
>short-lived and shallow joy of argument's > >
>sake. Sometimes people need to feel like they
>have an Enemy in > > order to feel
>important. If this is the case for you, I
>suggest > > finding another opponent. I will
>not be your enemy; I will not make > > you feel
>important. Your bait is transparent and
>pointless > > regarding the entire
>situation. > > > > Amy > > _______ > > > > > >
>http://www.amyking.org > > > > > > -----
>Original Message ---- > > From: Marcus Bales
><marcus at DESIGNERGLASS.COM> > > To:
>POETICS at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU > > Sent: Thursday,
>May 8, 2008 7:33:45 PM > > Subject: Re:
>POL: Prevent the "Artistic" Death of
>Another > > Innocent Animal > > > > > > On 8 May
>2008 at 16:29, amy king wrote: > > If anything
>is art, then why > > > > My criticism of the
>"anything is art" school of > > thought Once
>you > > say "anything" you've lost the whole war
>-- if > > ANYTHING is art, > > "Anything is
>art", you say it is. I'm trying to > > point
>out "anything is art" > > > > But if you say
>that anything is art > > If you don't think
>that "anything is art that anyone > > says is
>art" then you can avoid my > > criticism by
>simply saying you don't think that. V "anything
>is art > > that anyone > > says is art" > >
>"anything is art that > > > > anyone says is
>art" > > > > > > and if you're defending it,
>then you're either defending it > > because > >
>you believe it, or you're > > defending it
>because, what -- you just like to
>argue? > > > > because NOT "anything is
>art that anyone claims is art". You're > >
>ARGUING with me. You're > > taking the OTHER
>SIDE. > > The other side is that you DO believe
>that "anything is > > art that anyone claims is
>art" -- > > or else perhaps you just like to
>argue, and will take any > > side I don't
>take. > > > > Marcus > > > > Marcus > > > > > >
>On 8 May 2008 at 16:22, amy king
>wrote: > > > > > And you know this because
>everything reported on Wikipedia is, of > > >
>course, true? > > > > > >
>Amy > > > > > > _______ > > > > > > > > >
>http://www.amyking.org > > > > > > > > > > > >
>----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Marcus
>Bales <marcus at DESIGNERGLASS.COM> > > > To:
>POETICS at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU > > > Sent:
>Thursday, May 8, 2008 1:54:14 PM > > > Subject:
>Re: POL: Prevent the "Artistic" Death of
>Another > > > Innocent Animal > > > > > >
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillermo_Vargas > >
> > > > > And besides, the reports of starving
>the dog to death are simply > > >
>untrue. > > > > > > M > > > > > > On 8 May 2008
>at 10:34, amy king wrote: > > > > > > > In 2007,
>the `artist´ Guillermo Vargas Haba > > > > THE
>STORY: > > > > > > > > In 2007, the `artist´
>Guillermo Vargas Habacuc, took a dog
>from > > > > the > > > > street, tied him to a
>rope in an art gallery and began starving > > >
>him > > > > to > > > > death. > > > > For
>several days, the `artist´ and the visitors of
>the > > > > exhibition > > > > watched,
>emotionless, the shameful `masterpiece´ based
>on the > > > > dog´s > > > > agony, until
>eventually he died. > > > > > > > > Does THIS
>sound like art to you? > > > > > > > > But this
>is not all... the prestigious Visual Arts
>Biennial of > > > > Central > > > > America
>decided that the `installation´ WAS actually
>art, so > > > > Guillermo > > > > Vargas Habacuc
>has been invited to repeat his cruel action
>for > > > the > > > > Biennial of
>2008. > > > > > > > > Let´s STOP
>HIM!!!!! Sign the petition: > > > >
>http://www.petitiononline.com/ea6gk/petition.html
> > > > > > > > > Here is another petition that
>is 2 million signatures strong. > > >
>Please > > > > feel free to sign it as
>well: > > > >
>http://www.petitiononline.com/13031953/petition.html
> > > > > > > > > Please do it. It´s free of
>charge, there is no need to > > >
>register, > > > > and > > > > it will only take
>1 minute to save the life of an innocent > > > >
>creature. > > > > > > > > AND, for those of you
>saying "This is all a hoax, etc," here
>is > > > > a direct quote FROM THE `ARTIST´
>himself!: > > > > "I knew the dog died on the
>following day from lack of food. > > > > During
>the > > > > inauguration, I knew that the dog
>was persecuted in the evening > > > >
>between > > > > the houses of aluminum and
>cardboard in a district of Managua. 5 > > > >
>children who helped to capture the dog received
>10 bonds of > > > > córdobas > > > > for their
>assistance. The name of the dog was Natividad,
>and I > > > let > > > > him > > > > die of
>hunger in the sight of everyone, as if the death
>of a > > > poor > > > > dog > > > > was a
>shameless media show in which nobody does
>anything but to > > > > applaud > > > > or to
>watch disturbed. In the place that the dog was
>exposed > > > remain > > > > a > > > > metal
>cable and a cord. The dog was extremely ill and
>did not > > > want > > > > to > > > > eat, so in
>natural surroundings it would have died anyway;
>thus > > > > they > > > > are all poor stray
>dogs: sooner or later they die or are > > > >
>killed." > > > > > > > > ~~~~ > > > > > > > > To
>be fair (with lots of comments from Costa
>Ricans): > > > > > > > > In his defence, the
>artist has claimed that what he was > > >
>attempting > > > > to prove was that those who
>saw the suffering of the dog just > > >
>walked > > > > on > > > > by and that if it had
>been left on the street to die, no-one > > >
>would > > > > have > > > > even known of its
>existence. > > > > > > > > It has also been
>reported that the dog did not die but
>escaped, > > > > and > > > > that it had been
>fed by Vargas and was only tied up during
>the > > > > gallery > > > > opening times. It
>has not been possible to confirm
>this. > > > > > > > > The Managua exhibition
>attracted worldwide attention and many > > > >
>people > > > > believe it to have been an act of
>cruelty rather than art. A > > > >
>petition > > > > has been started in an attempt
>to prevent Habacuc´s involvement > > >
>in > > > > the > > > > 2008 Biennial and from
>repeating the spectacle. > > > > > > > > If you
>would like to sign the petition, visit: > > > >
>http://www.petitiononline.com/ea6gk/petition.html
> > > > > -from Artist Guillermo Vargas -
>Habacuc > > > >
>_______ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>http://www.amyking.org > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
>____________________________________________________________________
> > > > > ________________ > > > > Be a better
>friend, newshound, and > > > > know-it-all with
>Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > > > >
>http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > No virus
>found in this incoming message. > > > > Checked
>by AVG. > > > > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus
>Database: 269.23.10/1421 - Release > > >
>Date: > > > > 5/7/2008 5:23
>PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>____________________________________________________________________
> > > > ________________ > > > Be a better
>friend, newshound, and > > > know-it-all with
>Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > > >
>http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in
>this incoming message. > > > Checked by
>AVG. > > > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database:
>269.23.10/1421 - Release Date: > > > 5/7/2008
>5:23 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > ___________ > > Be a better friend,
>newshound, and > > know-it-all with Yahoo!
>Mobile. Try it now. > >
>http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> > > > > > > > > >
>____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and >
>know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. >
>http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
> >
>____________________________________________________________________________________
>Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all
>with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
>now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20080511/e5c76156/attachment.html
More information about the New-Poetry
mailing list