We haven’t
had a links for the weekend in a while and there’s some catching up to do.
First, Ethan Hein discussed “Don’t Know Why” a song made
famous by Norah Jones and a good primer for secondary dominant chords if you
hadn’t had a primer on those before. I
agree with Ethan that the music is beautifully made and the lyrics are, eh,
well, they’re there.
https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2024/dont-know-why/
Ethan also discusses “Stormy Monday” from the song’s birth
with T-Bone Walker through the Bobby Bland arrangement culminating in the …
Allman Brothers Band cover? Actually, it’s
a great cover and I normally don’t care for the Allman Brothers.
https://www.ethanhein.com/wp/2024/stormy-monday/
Sometimes you find a
song that is so full of clear examples of music theory concepts that you want
to build your whole syllabus around it. The Allman Brothers version of “Stormy
Monday”, which they adapted from Bobby Bland’s arrangement of a T-Bone Walker
song, is a case in point: it has extended chords, augmented chords, tritone
substitutions, and modal interchange at a nice slow tempo. I love when I can
get this much juice out of a single tune.
Ethan’s post reminds me of an old post by Kyle Gann where
he wrote about how students seeking to be the next avant garde wunderkind
should be warned that they will actually have to have real musical chops to
play vernacular music.
https://www.kylegann.com/PC150215-ToughDisciplineofVernacular.html
… I don't mind letting it viscerally sink in
that they would need to develop a stricter range of technical skills to pursue
a career in Broadway music or film scoring than to hang out a shingle as some
anarchic avant-garde composer. They need some respect for the amount of
expertise even a supposedly "fun" musical career will demand of them.
I'm a classical music
nerd, and when I was a young snob I probably bought into some foolishness about
the inviolable line between high and low art. But I studied aesthetics in
college, I worked as a music critic, I've analyzed a ton of music, and I never
tripped over that line; nothing ever went "click" when I crossed it.
It is, at the very least, pedagogically irrelevant. I'll take my chords
wherever I can find them rich and juicy and in vast quantities. (And still the
students think I'm some highbrow classical martinet.)
Now I figure we could all agree that what that doesn’t mean
is that kids go out and learn how to play “Giant Steps” in every key. It’s better if you don’t reduce one of
Coltrane’s songs to the jazz equivalent of Hanon exercises for keyboard!
In the realm of bewailing the never-ending death of the
symphony, Norman Lebrecht remembered where he was when he heard that Dmitri
Shostakovich died.
https://slippedisc.com/2024/12/the-day-the-symphony-died/
https://thecritic.co.uk/we-must-resurrect-the-symphony/
Now I adore the string quartets of Shostakovich and mostly
like his 24 Preludes and Fugues for piano (though I kind of like Nikolai
Kapustin’s cycle and the Zaderatsky 24 Preludes and Fugues to a similar degree). But commenters at Slipped Disc who
pointed out that the symphony was a has-been art form by the time DSCH died do
have something of a point.
I forget where he said it but the guitarist composer Angelo
Gilardino (RIP and I still owe him a discussion of his wonderful guitar
sonatas) once said that the relative demise of the orchestral literature would
actually be a boon for we guitarists because we’ll eventually stop getting
negatively compared to the symphony if the symphony’s moment of prestige has
finally gone.
Sticking with the concept of music, over at North American
Anglican Peter D Robinson has a little series going on eighteenth-century
Anglican worship and is discussing music, with a few details about the cathedral
and parish traditions.
https://northamanglican.com/eighteenth-century-anglican-worship-music/
https://northamanglican.com/eighteenth-century-anglican-worship-music-in-the-parish-church/
TL:DR for you, the high cathedral tradition is one part but
the low local parish musical traditions including metrical psalmody and minimal
instrumental resources is another. There’s
no reference to lining out but that was part of the tradition, too, and it is a
part of the low church Anglican tradition William T Dargan mentioned in Lining Out
the Word: Dr. Watts Hymn Singing in the Music of Black Americans. I’d love to write a blog post about that book
but since the music director of my church has that book in a box somewhere it
may be a while before I get the book back.
I revisited it briefly via Google Books and remembered that
in the first few pages Dargan name-checks Richard Foster and James Cone. I am overdue to write a commendation of the
book but I can say that, off the top of my head, one of the better things about
Dargan’s book is he anchors the lining out tradition in black American church
practices in terms of liturgical practices and bodies of repertoire. What this allows for is to show that the
shape note hymnody tradition is a point of contact within both white and black
churches (regular readers of Wenatchee The Hatchet should know by now that it
is also a point of contact for Native American Christian hymnody via Thomas Commuck (whose Indian
Melodies were harmonized by Thomas Hastings).
Providentially white and black churches in low liturgical
traditions have points of contact that people whose idea of “church” is only
highflyer won’t be paying much attention to.
If you only read guys like Roger Scruton he’ll tell you metrical
psalmody is bad poetry and worse music but that ignores the liturgical role of
the music, which is to aid the memorization of huge swaths of scripture (the
Psalms, after all) and to encourage musical participation on behalf of the
kinds of ordinary churchgoers who are not going to be singing Tallis or Byrd at
Chapel Royal. Not that I don’t admire
the masses of William Byrd or choral music by Thomas Tallis, but as Chiara
Bertoglio has put it, the Anglican legacy of music is just as much its “lowbrow”
history as its royal court legacy.
It's in the lowest of low liturgical norms and forms that
musical convergences can happen. Musical
convergences are something that interests me.
Brad East has a piece in Christianity Today on providence.
https://www.bradeast.org/blog/my-latest-providence
https://www.christianitytoday.com/2024/11/the-consolation-of-providence/?utm_medium=widgetsocial
There has been some interesting theological writing on the
doctrine of providence as a general and special category over the last
century. I’m finally getting around to Gerrit
Berkouwer’s famous work on the doctrine
of providence thanks to a book by Matt R Jantzen.
Matt R Jantzen's God, Race, and History: Liberating
Providence discusses the ways in which white theologians in the
trans-Atlantic world wielded the doctrine of providence for colonial and
imperial interests since Hegel transformed and mutated providence into a
philosophy of history.
https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781793619570/God-Race-and-History-Liberating-Providence
Hegel certainly was “a” voice doing that but I’ve been
slowly going through M H Abrams’ work. I
finished The Mirror and the Lamp this year, finally, and am working
through Natural Supernaturalism.
What English and German Romantics wanted to do was to develop a set of
doctrines about art mysticism that could retain what they regarded as the best
bits of “Christendom” while jettisoning all those actual doctrines. As Leszak Kolakowski put it in Main
Currents of Marxism, what Hegel pulled off was to secularize millennialist
utopianism. I think Jantzen’s case is
more succinct, arguing that it was the doctrine of providence that was
transformed into a rational for racial subjugation. Jantzen doesn’t pin blame on Calvin as some
would, and goes so far as to point out that in John Calvin’s actual doctrine of
providence it is inscrutable and a reason to be afraid because God sure ain’t
gonna tell you what the plan is. Yet
from the seventeenth century onward European and North American white
theologians mutated the doctrine of providence from a doctrine of consolation
into a doctrine of entitlement.
The last chapter drawing on queer theology didn’t really
stick with me but the bulk of the book is well worth reading for its survey of
shifts in trans-Atlantic European uses and abuses of the doctrine of
providence. The chapters on how Barth
and Cone attempted to grapple with the white supremacist aspects of Hegelian
providence are interesting … but Cone was a far more lucid and to-the-point
writer than Jantzen can be, and I wonder if Jantzen hasn’t cooked the evidence
a bit here and there. It’s a worthwhile
read, though, but I would suggest it’s worthwhile read alongside Crawford
Gribben’s books on shifting forms of millennialist eschatologies in the
trans-Atlantic world, about which I’ve blogged plenty in the past.
As election years go these are the kinds of years in which
Christians debate whether God picked Trump or not. There are other ways to look at election
cycles and Freddie deBoer, atheist that he is, chose to look at 2024 as
variations on a theme, of the failures of Clintonism to get anywhere since Bill
Clinton’s last term ended in the previous century.
https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/clintonism-lost-in-2000
Providence is a theme lurking in links here, whether on
philosophies of history or in matters of personal significance. Alastair Roberts specifically mentioned
providence in an essay at the Theopolis Institute on the pursuit of status:
https://theopolisinstitute.com/on-the-pursuit-of-status/
…
We should practice
humility, not thinking more highly of ourselves than we ought. While we should
seek to excel in what we do, too many have forsaken a modest station in life in
which they could have excelled for pursuit of high station in which they were
doomed to mediocrity or failure.
We should cultivate
confidence in providence [emphasis added] and consistently entrust our
life, its course, and its labors to God in prayer. We should be more
appreciative of how little power we have to determine our paths or discern
their destinations. Without succumbing to fatalism or passivity, we should
resist pervasive ideologies of self-making and autonomy, learning the goodness
of putting our lives in the hands of God and our neighbor. Although the modern
world might tempt us to think otherwise, we are neither our own creators nor
our own masters. The course of our lives is not in our own disposal. And a
deeper freedom is to be found in the appreciation of those truths.
Me being me, I was immediately reminded of this … ad copy
for Mark Driscoll’s Act Like a Man: 9
Ways to Punch Life in the Mouth.
Men, you are not the
problem...
rather, God intends for
you to be a part of the solution. This book will teach you how to architect
your life to be the leader God intends you to be. It doesn’t matter where you
are starting – single, married, father, husband, or grandpa – "Act Like a
Man" will show you how to use the Father’s instruction to build a life
that’s a blessing to your family and legacy.
So Driscoll obviously wouldn’t be going on and on about the
toxic masculinity of the Magnificat a la the late David Clines. But Driscoll’s ad copy tells us who his book
is for, for men who are supposed to architect their lives to be the leaders God
intends them to be. How does Driscoll
know this? This, you see, is where a
doctrine like the doctrine of providence shows up. Most of us are not going to be “leaders” of
the kind people like Mark Driscoll claim God “intends you to be”. It may not matter where you are starting
from, the endgame is “your family and legacy”.
This would be the kind of thing Clines was going on about, about the
prescribed and yet often tacit scripts of masculinity in the Bible and other
settings. My skepticism about Clines is
that he’s got no better. People who can
write whole books with a male feminist perspective on how the Bible is full of
male texts don’t change the fact that most male and female people are not going
to be leaders.
I have read things off and on in the last few years about
the power and importance of forgiveness.
A doctrine of providence is overt in the meeting of Joseph with his
brothers in Genesis. He tells his
brothers “What you intended for evil God intended for good.” Joseph said that after he had become a leader
in Egypt. Providence as a doctrine of
consolation is what we see in the account, at a personal level. There is also national providence in the
sense that Joseph prepared for a famine that could have wiped out the
descendants of Abraham before they could ever reach the land of promise. Providence is a doctrine that oscillates
between consolation in travails and entitlement in the pursuit of victory. Jantzen’s suggestion in his book is basically
that enough white racists invoked the doctrine of providence as entitlement for
white racial superiority they felt there was no “use” for the doctrine in the
wake of the Holocaust.
Europeans who swore by Providence more than they even
bothered to believe in the doctrines of Christianity itself in the 19th
century could abruptly turn around and reject providence in the 20th
century. Why? Because Europeans did awful things to each
other. This would be where reading James
Cone and Charles W Mills and other black scholars and theologians would come
in, because if all that was needed for white theologians in the 20th
century to reject providence was something like the Holocaust that suggested they
labored under the delusion that the Holocaust was terrifyingly unique when it
was, dare black theologians like Cone say it (he did, half a century ago),
simply a case of whites finally doing to whites what they had been doing for
generations to non-whites.
Election years are a great way to see which American
Christians suddenly decide God is in control or not in control depending on
whether they got what they wanted from the election results.
There’s a long history of conflicting theodicies about
national disaster. I’m still working
through Dalit Rom-Shiloni's Voices
from the Ruins: Theodicy and the Fall of Jerusalem in the Hebrew Bible. That Jewish sacred writings present a variety
of theodicies that don’t always fit together perfectly is a boilerplate
observation in biblical scholarship but it’s worth mentioning for people whose
knowledge of the Hebrew Bible is so passing they never picked up this element
of the scriptures in their own readings.
Then there’s the fact that there can be a variety of interpretive
approaches to texts. Is Leviathan cosmic
chaos or does he form the foundation of the cosmos in his defeat a la the axis
mundi traditions? I want to get around
to that at some point. Mark R. Sneed's Taming
the Beast: A Reception History of Behemoth and Leviathan was a fun read
but he seemed to think “nobody” was dealing with the axis mundi tradition of
Leviathan interpretation. It wasn’t long
after Sneed’s book came out that Andre Orlov’s Supernal
Serpent; Mysteries of Leviathan in Judaism and Christianity got
published. I only just cracked open the book but it promises to be very fun!
I mention that in part because … Cal Crucis has a post about Leviathan as his
Substack.
https://fiatiustitia.substack.com/p/capturing-leviathan
Another Alastair Roberts piece is about the way theologians
define and discuss time.
https://theopolisinstitute.com/its-about-time/
I read it and it was kind of interesting but it got me
thinking of this terse observation from the Swiss Reformed theologian Emil
Brunner:
... the questions that
worry the layman are both more interesting and more difficult than those which
are the favored subjects of discussions by theologians ...
Emil Brunner,
Faith, Hope and Love,
page 11
https://archive.org/details/FaithHopeAndLove-EmilBrunner/page/n9/mode/2up
It’s a lovely little book you can read in a weekend,
although page 41 is missing. I grew up
Pentecostal (Assemblies of God, no less) so I was more familiar with Gordon Fee
than Brunner growing up. Of the
neo-orthodox theologians I’ve found Brunner interesting. His take down of Schleiermacher style mysticism
appeals to me. It’s probably because I’m
an admittedly anti-Romantic opponent of
Art Religion in its highbrow and lowbrow forms. I have been mulling over how and why Art
Religion in the long 19th century emerged and evolved in German and
English settings and not necessarily so much in Switzerland.
Well, Zwingli and Bullinger are partial explanations. In the Swiss Reformed tradition (to which
Calvin contributed) music is beautiful but it’s also just music, it’s not
something you’re supposed to view as having magical/sacramental powers. The Puritans picked up a bit of this. I know it’s easy to bag on the Puritans but
given the way art religion has worked itself out in so many pernicious ways in
classical music I honestly think that burrowing deep into the counter-movements
regarding the alleged powers of music in Christian thought can be helpful. If we see that the Eurocentric art religion
in highbrow art asceticism and lowbrow art mysticism is bad Christian dogmatics
and not even honest about the history of vernacular liturgical practice then
Romanticism and its pile of lies and also-lies can be set aside, maybe. But when liberal arts professors stick with
canards about how the Calvinists were against the arts without bothering to
read any Dutch Reformed theological aesthetics from the last 120 years those
scholars are perpetuating myths rather than debunking them. I just this year realized that if Matiegka
made regular use of V7/V to V to IV chord changes in two of his guitar sonatas
that one of the most basic assertions in
harmony textbooks that in classical music V “never” goes to IV has been
disproven.
Reflecting on the nature of time is useful, depending on
what those reflections are used for. I
read a stylistically dry but content-fun book by Chiara Bertoglio in the last
year or so.
Musical scores and the Eternal Present: Theology, Time
and Tolkien
https://www.chiarabertoglio.com/musical-scores
https://wipfandstock.com/9781725295025/musical-scores-and-the-eternal-present/
She pointed out that the history of Western thinkers
translating time into space and space into time has a long history, particularly
and specifically in musical scores.
Richard Taruskin claimed in his last book that there are two metaphors
to describe the nature of music, as a kind of language and as a kind of space. He claimed that the linguistic and
architectural metaphors conflict and can’t be reconciled. I can hear Aku say “I disagree” to Samurai
Jack. Sight and hearing don’t have to “contradict”
each other in proprioception. We can see
something to our left and hear something to our left and feel it moving to our
left on our skin. Proprioception is a
concept that can be the central metaphor for metaphor convergence, taking the
metaphors of sight and sound and coordinating them as a way to conceive of
overlapping notions of time and space.
But how is that useful? As a Christian layman I don’t find mere
reflection on the fact that theologians think in spatial terms when thinking about
time to actually be useful. Jeremy
Begbie’s work on the nature of musical time is useful, very useful, but he
name-checked his reliance on Victor Zuckerkandl across his work. Concepts of musical time and space can have
overlapping and interpenetrating modes of time.
This is one of the observations Jason Yust made in Organized Time. L Poundie Burstein pointed out in Journeys
Through Galant Expositions that music theorists have been roundly rejecting
the receptacle concept of musical time, the idea that there are blocks of sound
within which only this or that can fit. Thomas
Torrance, were he alive, would have said that if you just read John of Damascus
and other Church Fathers discussing perichoresis in the immanent Trinity this
would all be old hat, that the Newtonian concept of time and space as receptacles
are has-been concepts. Thus, Torrance’s Space,
Time and Incarnation. So in Trinitarian dogmatics (immanent and social) the
concept of receptacles of time and space have been junked as of, well, a long
time.
What that means for a musician is that there are
distinctions in space and time made by people that are informed, I suggest, by
our proprioceptive engagement of time and space in and through our bodies. We are always translating concepts like time
and space into each other and calibrating them in light of each other. Do I have enough time to run across the
street before the lights change? We do
this kind of stuff so often we don’t stop to think about how complex the
cognitive and physical processes to even do this can be.
Just as sight and hearing do not have to be opposed,
language and space don’t have to be opposed.
A thoughtful musician should be able to switch back and forth between
metaphors of language and metaphors of space easily. This was what George Rochberg was trying to
get at in The Aesthetics of Survival.
There is musical time and space and these can be subdivided as timespace
and spacetime.
If music, as the old saw has it, is liquid architecture and
architecture is frozen music, the work of Roger Scruton fails to address the
question of what architecture (as music) is made “of”. He went to great lengths to defend a
vernacular architecture yet balked at conceding such a vernacularist approach
to music could be developed in and through popular and vernacular musics. Why?
Because he lazily appropriated Theodor Adorno’s invectives against pop
as kitsch. But I’ve read Adorno and
there’s a difference between Adorno’s vehement complaint that pop music was
made of interchangeable blocks of music that didn’t lend themselves to the making of
larger-scale organic symphonic-level forms (for this he blamed capitalism, of
course!) and Roger Scruton’s subsequent claim that pop music is made of blocks
and therefore cannot lend itself to “musical argument”. Adorno was paradoxically more cautious and
circumspect. He went so far as to say
jazz could develop into a new and promising direction if it could be shaken
free of its bonds to monopoly capitalism.
Adorno’s double bind about tonality would have ruined things but that’s
a separate topic.
The application of all these theological and philosophical
reflections on the nature of musical time and space is this, we may benefit
from going back to thinking of music as blocks of sound. This is actually what happens regularly in
audio engineering. I can watch an audio
engineer friend grab an entire block of audio and move it from one place to
another in a track. Music in this sense
is strictly linear and temporal. But
then the same block of music can have the drums mixed in the back and the
rhythm guitar mixed to the left and the lead guitar mixed to the right and the
voice in the “center”, which is a thoroughly spatial concept of music as you
hear it through headphones. We think of
music as linear “language” and spectacularly plastic omnidirectional space when
we put in earbuds or listen to music thinking of “where” everything is.
Rather than dismiss early and medieval Christian speculations
on the Trinity as “just” speculation, we can revisit the concepts of perichoresis
and circumincession in John of Damascus and Thomist Trinitarian dogmatics in
light of what we know about proprioception, the way the body synchronizes and
coordinates sensory perception into a gestalt awareness of the bodily self in
its surroundings. When Aquinas
delineated filiation, spiration and procession that can seem pointlessly
abstract but these are the kinds of distinctions that can be “translated” into
an awareness that you can hear a dog in front of you just to the right and you
can see that dog and you can smell the dog’s wet fur as it has come out of
swimming in a river and feel the drops of water hitting your skin as the dog
shakes off the water in its coat.
All of that entails many senses integrated into a single
experience by way of proprioception, and I admit I’m offering this as a layman,
but I hope that it can elucidate that concepts which seem inscrutable in one
discipline (theology) can become clearer if we take the trouble to translate
them into equivalents from some other aspect of experience. This is the central
work that metaphors accomplish, when the metaphors work. Scholars have a propensity to identify,
bracket and separate metaphors. Artists,
ideally, should be thinking of ways to accumulate, clarify, juxtapose, and
coordinate metaphors.
James Cone insisted in Black Theology and Black Power
that at the Cross Christ overcame the powers and principalities and he was
specific, Christ overcame the powers and principalities that enslave, and
particularly that enslave black people.
Now I have a few caveats about things Cone said but Cone had caveats
fifty years later that he wrote down in a forward to the fiftieth anniversary edition
of his landmark book. I would say that
Cone’s description of powers and principalities was so skeletal it would be
beneficial to go read Esther Acolatse, Daniel K Darko, and Robert Ewusie Moses
for more work on powers and principalities in Pauline writings. But I agree with Cone’s simple contention
that Christ came to conquer powers of racism and racial supremacist doctrines. My Dad was Native American and my Mom was
white. I’m not speaking hypothetically
about this stuff but as the son of a mixed race marriage. I can get it fairly simply when Black
Theology contends that Christ came to overcome the powers and principalities.
But Robert Ewusie Moses’ comment that Christians must discover
and confront the powers and principalities in each and every age because the
powers and principalities seem to disguise themselves and this is an element in
Paulin exousiology, that makes sense to me.
It also paradoxically converges with things I’ve seen in Philip Ewell’s
work. Now if only he’d read James Cone
and Robert Ewusie Moses. But he seems
like the kind of atheist who would not read Black American theologians of
biblical scholars from Ghana. Well, I
have been reading them and what their work suggests to me is that within the
realm of music and musicology Ewell has been making a not entirely successful
case that people of color have been confronted with the real power of what
Christian theologians have described as powers and principalities.
If Art Religion segregates into purity codes that are white
or black or pick-color-here then I think a Christian response should be to
demonstrate that those imaginations are constructs that can be confronted.
If someone tells me that you can’t make a sonata form out
of blues I say they’re wrong. Completely
wrong. There is no reason for us to be
bound by the failures of imagination of the kinds of metacultural pundits and
philosophers who take more pleasure in making exquisitely calibrated judgments
about what counts as “real” art rather than making things in the arts that give
people some pleasure in life that is so full of miseries. Haydn got the assignment, he wrote that life
is so full of difficulties and sufferings that if he could bring some joy and
share it with people through his music he felt he’d done his part to do good by
his neighbor.
Thinking of music as both in time and in space should come
naturally to us. We already do
this! The challenge is that ways in
which theorists theorize about the nature of musical time and space may have
trapped us into thinking some things are impossible which are actually fairly
simple. My Dad once said an old man told
him that the important things in life are simple … but the simple things are
hard. Babies learning to walk find out
how hard simply walking is. The concept
may be “baby simple” but if it were we wouldn’t cheer for joy when babies
successfully take their first steps.
Precisely why I have spent about ten years coordinating
reading on music theory with explorations in Jewish and Christian demonologies
developed in the wake of Greco-Roman imperial occupation and reflections on the
nature of the social and immanent Trinity in Christian theology as a way to
recalibrate concepts of time and space is because it has helped me think
through how to write blues and ragtime sonatas.
The goal has been musical. The
goal is also musical with an eye toward coming up with, I hope, musical and theoretical
results that will be helpful to people who are not religious in any way but who
want to show that classical music snobs who think that you “can’t” make sonatas
and fugues using blues and jazz and rock and ragtime riffs how wrong that
sentiment is. I hope I have done that in
the last ten years. I couldn’t just keep
blogging about my old church home, after all.
Since I name-dropped him earlier, there’s two books on Emil
Brunner that came out this year. It’s
the kind of thing my blogging buddy Jim West would probably be
interested in. He’s a big fan of
Brunner.
Well, Jim, here’s two 2024 titles of books engaging with
Emil Brunner’s theology.
Arttu Mäkipää's The Fall of Humankind and Social
Progress (Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical
Studies
Dong In Baek's Emil Brunner's Integration of Faith and
Reason: Modern Perspectives on Religious‐Philosophical Methods and Natural
Theology
https://wipfandstock.com/9781666782097/emil-brunners-integration-of-faith-and-reason/
Moltmann got thanked so early in this second one that kind
of raises a little red flag for me. I
can’t quite forget Richard Bauckham’s glorious beat-down he gave Jurgen
Moltmann’s eschatology in a book I was given for Christmas a few years
back. Bauckham contended that however
inventive the eschatology it has to be based on something in the text of
Revelation. Moltmannn’s response? Oh, well Calvin didn’t quote the Bible “that’
much and Paul Tillich wrote an entire systematic theology where he didn’t even
quote the Bible a single time.
Dude, for real? Why would I waste my time reading Paul
Tillich, then?
So … that about wraps up the links for the weekends
post. These have turned into fairly long
sprawls. This isn’t like Linkathon at
Phoenix Preacher, from which I only schematically modeled my ruminations.
No comments:
Post a Comment