Hasan Ali Tokuqin Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Papal Visit was a Meta-Event Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian philologist, defines historicity as the quality of meta-time universality. This is how I interpret his idea. According to Bakhtin, an action becomes a historical event if it has the quality of teaching future generations. This quality can be obtained when value judgments as spatial derivatives become part of the event, and when narration of the event contains value judgments. I think the pope’s visit will become a historic event. This should not be perceived as an expression of exaltation. I mean, even 100 years from now this event will have great value for those reading, studying or simply remembering the pope’s address at Regensburg, his visit to the top Turkish religious authority, his somewhat religious service at the Hagia Sophia and his meeting with the patriarch. In this regard, anyone who seeks to write about the papal visit must remember that his or her writing will transfer today’s value judgments to the future, and will teach the next generations about us. Bakhtin’s definition of historicity as meta-time universality is not only concerned with what follows an event. Very few historic events shape our perception of what has happened before them. The Holocaust is such an event in Jewish history. Each carnage, exile and pogrom makes sense only with reference to value judgments the parameters of which it sets. On a different level the coming of the Koran is such an ‘event, but this is not to be understood as comparison at all. The Koran gave meaning to the phenomena of faith that came before and after it. (A note to students of theology: I’d like to emphasize that I’m not using the concept of event from the viewpoint of traditional historicism; I’m benefiting from Bakhtin’s reference to ‘event’ as a sort of meta-event. Some Muslim theorists like Yedullah Kazmi would rather refer to it as phenomenon.) Sept. 11 is a meta-event on a different level: it cannot be accounted for with parameters of the present culture. It is on its own an architect of culture. The pope’s visit has great value not because of what he brought or took back but because this event has at present developed a mechanism that creates culture. This event has already gained a dimension to construct words like Turk, Ankara and Islam. The NATO summit might be of greater importance in the immediate interests of Turkey; but it would not create culture. It would not alter good and bad in meaning. It would not teach a lesson of forbearance that would last for ages. It may even be obvious from the two previous papal visits that the current papal visit is a meta-event. What we are experiencing is not an act of remembering; it is rather re-fictionalization that we do with reference to parameters stemming from the visit. While a pope kissing the ground, on the one hand, and a pope praying in the Hagia Sophia on the other hand are not meta-events, they are perceived today as detached from the Regensburg address of the current pope. But none of us would view the Prophet Mohammed’s last pilgrimage to Mecca, for instance, in comparison with our own religious visits to Mecca; quite contrary, we would try to embellish our religious visits to Mecca with values coming from that magnificent meta-religious visit. None of us would be able to justify the Crusades with the parameters of evil that came with the war in Iraq; on the contrary, we would transfer concepts extending from the Crusades to modern age concepts. If the papal visit has become a meta-event in time, it is now obligatory for us to hope that the next week comes with good news for the Turkish nation as it is resolved to reinterpret the past and to write the future from now. 01.12.2006 KERIM BALCI http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&hn=38850 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Pope and the Patriarch Patriarch Bartholomeos is the one who invited the Pope to Turkey last year. Due to the Greek Orthodox Church’s “ecumenical” attribute not being recognized, the invitation was intrpreted by Turkish President Sezer as an intermediary formula. In other words, not only Pope Benedict XVI wanted this visit, but Bartholomeos did as well. The September 30th edition of the International Herald Tribune wrote, “The goal of the Pope, who is to visit Turkey, is not dialogue with Muslims, but an effort to reunite with the Orthodox.” The quotation from the Byzantine King that the Pope made during a speech in September was a hidden message. No one who is going to visit someone, even if it is just a courtesy call, would make a speech to distress them a few days before the visit. As I mentioned on Monday, the Pope wants Europe to unite around a Christian identity and the West to gain religious internal unity. The deep infirmity that Christianity, the Church and Europe in general, have entered has begun to give dangerous signals. According to the Pope’s assessment, taking other churches under wing, or at least playing a “protective” role in resolving the problems they face, would be suitable steps to be taken in this area. If a “positive result” is obtained from this visit, a similar strategy can be followed for the Syrian Orthodox, Armenians and Nestorians. Well then, is there a situation that demands the Pope’s becoming the “defender” of the other churches and sects in their eyes? What is obvious is that the Orthodox Church and other religious minorities have some serious problems. Let Turkey resist as much as it wants, the whole world and 250 million Orthodox, in particular, accept the Phanariot Patriarch as “ecumenical.” More importantly, the Catholic Church has also confirmed this attribute of the Patriarch, because it was the reason for the 1054 separation and bloody campaign arranged in 1204. Turkey, straying from its own Ottoman tradition, is taking on the whole world. It is interfering in the Orthodox religion because of its groundless conjectures. A second issue that bothers the Church is the absence of permission to open the Heybeliada Monastic School. If it is necessary to talk from a just and fair point of view, the Church is absolutely right on this subject. Neither our religion nor our Ottoman experience sees this behavior towards non-Muslims as proper. The Patriarch and Orthodox Church are bound to the Caesar of the state they live in. However, this does not mean that Caesar can interfere in the Church’s theological doctrine and educational curriculum. Not even Roman emperors and Ottoman sultans tried this. Treatment of community foundations also leads to various difficulties like this, and this problem has to be resolved according to just principles. The Pharaniot Patriarch invited the Pope in hopes of receiving “aid and support” from him. This is a dramatic situation resulting from Turkey’s leaving its own non-Muslim citizens dependent on outside help. If non-Muslims were able to take their places in the system as citizens whose injustices had been redressed, the Phanariot Patriarch would not have made this invitation, which was based somewhat on “Orthodox suppression.” The Orthodox Church has as great a claim as the Vatican, both in respect to Christianity’s formulated doctrines and in regard to its authority over Christians. The Pope knows that there will not be a permanent and long-range “unification” with Protestants. This is not only true in respect to doctrine, but in respect to political and diplomatic power as well. Protestants, particularly Evangelicals in America, are living their “golden age.” However, the Orthodox do not possess the same opportunity and advantages. In fact, they are cornered in their religious and spiritual center, Istanbul. This is the reason for their being exploited. Just like in the Kurdish and Alawi issues, by not allowing for their problems to be resolved, Turkey has led these citizens to “seek hope from the outside.” Before finding fault with the Pope’s intentions and goals, Turkey should question its own faults and, acting in a fair and just way, listen to its citizens and throw aside unnecessary conjectures and fears. 30.11.2006 ALI BULAC http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&hn=38802 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Pope and his Mission The visit of the pope is the very first topic on the agenda these days. The reason of his visit is still a matter of curiosity and everyone is commenting from his or her own perspective. Meanwhile, there are tons of conspiracy theories flying around. The pope’s visit has an aspect concerning Turkey and also relates to the general status in the wider world of Christendom, and the Catholic Church in particular. Today, we will try to dwell on the second of these three aspects. It is also necessary to underline this fact: Without the slightest doubt, Benedict XVI is different from his predecessors. Not only through his mindset and the way he interprets theology, but also through his personal style and emphasis on natural disposition. He is a very well-educated person and confidently carries his German identity which apparently gives him some kind of courage; plus he has very clear ideas on how he will make the plans he has laid down for the future of the Church materialize. Obviously, he took his time pondering over the things he is going to implement. He is of the opinion that the developing Western conjuncture, and that of the world in general, is taking shape in his favor; and even if this were not the case, he would still remain determined enough to do everything within his powers to turn the tide in his favor again. It is possible to say that he has two main targets which will be intrinsic to the mission of his papacy. 1) First and foremost, uniting Europe around the core of Christianity again and laying the foundations on which the new Europe -- or European Union, if it continues its existence -- could achieve internal completeness around the basics of Christianity. The pope highlights these issues in his speeches: A) Europe today has distanced itself from God and it is impossible for it to exist without having a firm belief in God no matter the level of civilization it attains, no matter the level of its economic and technological advancement, and no matter the level of the worldly riches it possesses. Europe is on the verge of an alarming moral decline given its unlimited sexual freedom, and the family has been ripped apart. The very sign that uncontrolled sexuality and the lack of filial affection are turning social life in Europe into shambles is that it is no longer able to procreate. For instance, countries like Switzerland are being described as “societies no loger able to beget children.” C) Generally, the West has plunged into the bottomless ocean of nihilism and can no longer provide anything to the world other than nihilism. We know that Jürgen Habermas, one of the most important thinkers in Europe, shares the concerns in question. Habermas states that Western laicism -- or rather “secularism” -- has collapsed and has come to naught as a social project. The philosophical foundation of laicism was the positivism of the 19th century; but positivism has also collapsed and therefore can no longer create any values. How will these be replaced in Europe? That is the question! 2) The pope’s second aim: He is now well aware that billions of forlorn, ignored and aggrieved people in the world today no longer believe that Christendom will ever render a helping hand. Christianity has lost its former following in the hearts and minds of the huge masses of people. Despite missionary activities in which billions of dollars are being spent every year, there is obviously no remarkable progress. According to the pope’s impression, Christianity is losing face and power before 80 percent of the world’s population. In marked contrast to Islam which has been under all kinds of attacks for centuries, Christianity has all sorts of financial and diplomatic sources at its disposal, yet it cannot make any progress or spread. The same goes for the Vatican. Even Catholics no longer care about the Catholic Church as they did in the past; and most of them have become “nominal Christians.” This religion has lost its power and influence on the daily lives of people; and churches, especially those of Catholics, all over the world find it difficult bringing people together for services once a week. Furthermore, because of all these reasons, in many places, churches are being put up for sale since people no longer attend services and due to the rapidly declining number of Christians who only come only on Sundays. Moreover, the Catholic Church no longer has 1 billion followers as is being claimed; this number may have well dropped to as low as 700 million. On the contrary, Islam is spreading at high speed and millions of people, who are helpless against the impositions of globalization, pin their hopes on this religion. In not-so-distant future, the people of Latin America may embrace the teachings of Islam and may finally do away with socialism and the Liberty Theology which undoubtedly have failed to meet people’s material as well as spiritual needs. It is possible even today to feel these underground vibrations. The pope wants to put an end to the current trend by taking “one huge, giant step.” 29.11.2006 ALI BULAC http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&hn=38765 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic World, Pope Benedictus XVI, arrived in Ankara on Tuesday upon the official invitation of Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer. The long-awaited meeting took place at the airport. Shortly before his departure for NATO Riga summit, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan welcomed the Pope at the stairs of the aircraft, and, as scheduled before, held a 20-minute meeting with him. So, he baffled the commentaries, which indicated that he had deliberately avoided meeting with the Pope. The Pope’s immediate messages are of the pleasing kind for Turkey. He responded to Erdogan, who asked for support towards Turkey’s EU bid, saying, “We desire Turkey’s accession to the European Union.” Though a gesture, the papal statement is of great importance for Turkey’s membership to the EU, especially given his impact on European policies. In a way, the pope corrected his previous negative remarks on Turkey’s membership in the EU. In addition, he praised Islam and its followers. He headed to the Directorate of Religious Affairs, where he met with the President Ali Bardakoglu. From this perspective, it could be said that the Ankara leg of the papal visit went pretty well. The pope was welcomed in Ankara with both his religious and political identity; he was hosted as a head of state; extraordinary security measures were taken; the traffic flow was regulated accordingly, as regular flow was negatively affected by the abrupt and temporal arrangements. Hopefully, the positive climate in Ankara will continue throughout the remaining phases of the visit, and he will avoid offensive remarks or actions in Ephesus and Istanbul, as the prospect of the visit depends not only on Turkey, but on the pope as well. I suppose you have already noticed the conspiracy theories, and amazing scenarios extensively covered by the media. Certain circles ascribe pretty unusual meanings to the four-day papal visit closely followed by the entire world. Foreign press has for the last few days cited the trip as “as a highly risky visit with the probability of assassination.” They have also frequently published footage from the protest rally held in Istanbul. The domestic approaches are quite diverse. While some dub the pope as an “unwelcome guest,” others are prone to treat him as a very important visitor. Both are extreme. I do not approve of either the extreme attention, or the reactionary approach. It should not be a right to bring the past negativities to the fore today. No doubt, the trip is not ordinary. Surely it will have important repercussions for both the pope and Turkey. It may serve world peace, but also may trigger new troubles. For this reason, its outcome should first be awaited. I noticed that when making an assessment of his Turkey visit, the Pope describes the present conjuncture as the most difficult moment of history. True, it is a troubled period. There is no peace in the world, and it is constantly bleeding. The turmoil in Iraq causes 50 casualties daily. Wars and pains are prevalent everywhere in the world. All of humanity is struggling with enormous problems. In such an environment, the positions that are adopted by the leading clerics are very important. Depending on the content of their approach, the world may witness either the cohabitation of the civilizations, or a deeper schism between the major cultures and religions. The Pope’s visit to Turkey may turn into a beginning to seeking dialogue between civilizations. Today, there is a potential for both a clash and a dialogue between the civilizations. The future of the relational status between the civilizations depends on the stances of the world’s influential actors. I am quite optimistic. I hope that after seeing Turkey, and the Blue Mosque, the Pope’s negative views on Islam will change. This soil, especially Istanbul, has the magic to impress every human being. 30.11.2006 MUSTAFA UNAL http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&hn=38803 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pope's Remarks… Powerful forces that have a say in the world, for years, have been exerting extraordinary efforts to portray Islam as violent and Muslims as barbarians. Today, there is a big gap between Islam itself and the way in which it is being perceived. Looked at from this perspective, it can be concluded that the black propaganda has yielded results. The Islamic world is drowning in its own problems, and so is unable to respond to high-pitch propaganda in an effective and convincing manner. Our news channels don’t measure up to their Western counterparts. Today, the sacreds of Muslims are targets of constant attacks… No other religion has come under such blistering attack. It is necessary to evaluate the pope’s unfortunate remarks about Islam and the Prophet Mohammad in this framework. The pontiff’s remarks are nothing other than an extension of this black propaganda. Is it appropriate for a clergyman to speak indiscriminately about another religion which has billions of followers throughout the world? The content and the style of the pope’s speech is terrible… If you read carefully between the lines, you will understand that this is beyond just a slip of the tongue. Is the aim to pave the way for a clash of civilizations? There would be real violence and bloodshed in this conflict; the war of civilizations would mean the end of the world. In spite of all the smear campaigns and black propagandas, Islam is the religion that continues to attract worldwide interest; there is extraordinary tendency everywhere towards becoming Muslim. When we look at world history from the religion perspective, it can be clearly seen that Islam is the only religion which has mostly refrained from violence in spite all the negative examples. I don’t think it is necessary to remind about the religion which caused the sectarian wars that terrorized Europe… Then, the inquisition which was the mother of all violence, torture and tyranny … Those who are looking for a link between Islam and violence, had better look at the history of their own religion. Leaving the past behind and looking at the present … We can say that the world is under Christian rule today. There is only one answer to the question, “What is the world’s sole super power’s religion”? It is evident that its leaders have very close relations with the Church… The dominant religion in Europe, which is another world power, is definite … I wonder what the dominant religion in countries such as Germany, the UK, France and Italy is. If a religion is to be blamed for the chaos, conflicts and wars in the world, which religion should this be? The most crucial questions are, Can the pope make the same comments about the Jews? Can he express the Vatican’s opinion on Judaism in the same manner? This is the reason why I complained about the weakness of the Islamic world at the beginning of this article. Islam is poor, Muslims are weak in the today’s balance of power. Just as many others say, the pope’s unfortunate remarks do not compel us to erect walls between ourselves, but rather points to the urgent need for more dialogue. The goal is to explain Islam, which is the religion of peace and to introduce the Prophet of Love Mohammad to the world in an appropriate way. There is no other way to achieve this than dialogue. The important thing is not to condemn the darkness, but to light a candle … It is not possible for a Muslim to remain indifferent to the pope’s remarks. The reaction of the Religious Affairs Directorate head Ali Bardakoglu is commendable, that of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) too. Reactions have not only come from the Islamic world, similar voices have risen from those with a conscience even though they belong to different religions. One of the most influential US newspapers, the New York Times, said in its editorial [over the weekend] that the pope “needs to offer a deep and persuasive apology” to Muslims for quotes used in his speech. But certain circles in Turkey say, “We are secularists, we do not care about the pope’s statements” and things like that. These are equally as upsetting as the pontiff’s remarks … No matter how secular a state is, it is unthinkable for it to remain aloof to an issue that hurts the majority of its people. Not only Muslims but also anyone with a conscience expects the pope to retract his offensive remarks and apologize to the Islamic world. It is not enough for him to say “sorry.” Otherwise, his planned visit to Turkey could end without even starting. September 17, 2006 19.09.2006 MUSTAFA UNAL http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&hn=36606 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pope Benedict came as a theologian and left as an ambassador -- Part II Sunday, December 3, 2006 YÜKSEL SÖYLEMEZ The main part of the pope's September Regensburg talk contained nothing of interest to the Islamic world. It was just three paragraphs that caused offense and created uproar and condemnation, when he quoted a Byzantine emperor from the 14th century, Manuel Paleologus, who criticized the Prophet Mohammed for “proposing brute force for the spreading of Islam and the concept of Jihad as the only innovation of Islam.” As this was not the first time that the anti-Islam and anti-Turkish thoughts of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had been made clear, it was not a surprise to hear this coming from Benedict XVI. The pope is head of the Vatican state and his speeches presumably meet with his final approval and benediction before he delivers them. But it is also possible that as an intellectual theologian, he might himself have written this speech for his old university. Before making those remarks, even if he did not consult his cardinals, the pope should at least have consulted with Professor Huntington on the appropriateness of some of his phrases' provocative nature, because freedom of expression does not give you the right to insult or abuse, whether you are a pope or a Danish cartoonist. Like any head of state, the pope is a political symbol, and what he said in September was political. Like any politician, he claimed with regret that his words were misinterpreted, that he had not meant to insult, and the fact that he quoted one Emperor Manuel did not mean that he was endorsing him. Pope Benedict on his first visit to an Islamic country has now become the second pope to visit a mosque, touching the Turkish public when he so surprisingly prayed in the Blue Mosque, while diplomatically not doing so in Hagia Sophia -- once an Orthodox Cathedral, now a museum. He visited the holy places of Christendom, including Ephesus, where the Virgin Mary spent her last years and is believed to be buried, and where St. Paul preached the Gospels. In spite of everything said beforehand, the fact is that the pope's visit to Turkey from Nov. 28 to Dec. 1 was a diplomatic achievement of great importance and significance for both the Vatican and Turkey. The latter has high respect for the Vatican, and has maintained an ambassador there for decades. The visit started auspiciously with a friendly 20-minute welcome from Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and then the head of the Directorate of Religious Affairs Ali Bardakoğlu had a very heartwarming meeting with His Holiness, with the unfortunate Regensburg speech seeming to be put behind them, which was very positive. All's well that ends well. This visit has contradicted its controversial prelude and proved a God-given opportunity for friendly understanding, rather than an occasion for either side to make further polemical remarks. While welcoming Pope Benedict to Turkey, the home of the Virgin Mary, St. John and St. Paul, a Muslim but secular country where the seven churches of early Christianity were established, we hope that President Ahmet Necdet Sezer invited him to return and visit the sites of the other six churches in the Book of Revelations besides Ephesus: Smyrna, Laodicea, Pergamum, Philadelphia, Sardis and Thyatira, and to feel for himself the truth of Pope John XXIII's words, which Pope Benedict XVI quoted, “I love the Turks.” Now that the pope's visit is over, after all the pessimism and trepidation beforehand, we are left with his all-embracing remarks and gestures, which turned this visit into an historic success and transformed His Holiness into a cherished and honored guest in the eyes of Turkey. Hopefully the same is true for the rest of the Islamic world. We pray that his mission for inter-religious understanding, rapprochement and harmony may one day become a reality, and he is now expected to give not only his blessing but also active support to the Alliance of Civilizations of Prime Ministers Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and Erdoğan, under the protective wings of the Vatican. We appreciated and enjoyed this open-hearted papal visit, as a God-sent mission at a most critical and timely moment in the East-West divide. © 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews.com.tr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the pope on our side, now we have two left Saturday, December 2, 2006 Michael Lake, former European Union representative to Turkey between 1991 and 1998, was in Istanbul not long ago for a seminar directed at 14 leading European newspapers and organized jointly by the Open Society Institute and the British Council. GILA Benmayor Michael Lake, former European Union representative to Turkey between 1991 and 1998, was in Istanbul not long ago for a seminar directed at 14 leading European newspapers and organized jointly by the Open Society Institute and the British Council. Lake, who continued to be “Turkey's voice in Europe” following his mission in Turkey, named three people opposing our EU bid during a speech at a dinner after the seminar: Greek Cyprus leader Papadopoulos, French presidential candidate Sarkozy and Pope Benedict XVI, who has been occupying the media for the past week. Benedict XVI proved Lake wrong. The moment he landed in Ankara, he said, “Turkey should continue on its EU path,” leaving Papadopoulos and Sarkozy to convince. I have no hopes about Papadopoulos, but I think it is worth working on Sarkozy. Lake also expressed his belief that England could convince the sides involved for a settlement in Cyprus. According to Lake, Turkey's PR, or its promotion, in other words, is simply terrible. Only four days before meeting with Lake, I was at a luncheon with Marian Salzman, who is considered as the leading trend spotter in the world. Salzman, who was in Istanbul for the organization of Retail Days, is the executive vice president and chief marketing officer at ad agency JWT. After she enlightened us on the recent trends in the United States and around the world, I asked her how Turkey's image was. Salzman is not only a trend spotter, but also a brand and marketing wizard. She said, “I don't know what Turkey's brand is.” “Turkey brings together history and modernity. I know it is, in one sense, the modern face of Islam and I know that it has a wonderful climate, but I really don't know what its brand is.” Salzman briefly said the same thing as Lake. “Turkey does not know how to promote itself. It has an image problem.” Salzman used two examples to elaborate on what she said. The first one was the World Economic Forum (WEF) held in Istanbul the other week and Istanbul being voted as the European Culture Capital in 2010. “Look,” Salzman said: “Before I came to Istanbul I searched foreign newspapers for articles about the WEF. I couldn't find any. You failed to promote this important meeting in the foreign media. Just like the cultural capital event. I wasn't able to read one single line about that anywhere." I think these two examples are very important. We, as a country, are very weak at public relations. The pope's visit, which thankfully went very well, found great attention in the foreign press. Important press organizations such as CNN and the BBC covered the visit sometimes as their headline story. The pope's visit made a great contribution to dialogue between religions, but also to our image. Campaign against domestic violence in the Berlin State Council: Hürriyet's campaign against domestic violence has moved beyond Turkey's borders. The campaign so far has been introduced in four cities of Germany. The other day, we as a group of journalists were in Berlin for a few hours with Hürriyet executive board director Vuslat Doğan for the campaign's introduction in the Berlin State Council. A high level of interest was shown to the campaign's introduction carried out with support from the Merkel government's state minister responsible for refugees, integration and migration. Turkish members of the council and members from both German and Turkish associations were also present in the hall. As Böhmer also underlined, “domestic violence” is currently one of the “hottest” topics in Europe. Only five days earlier, the European Council discussed violence against women. This is why Hürriyet's campaign is important both in Europe and in Germany. According to information stated by Böhmer, one out of every four women in Europe is subject to violence, while this rate is one out of two for Turkish women in Germany. The good news is, Germany is ready to cooperate with Hürriyet on this subject. © 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted December 4, 2006 Report Share Posted December 4, 2006 Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian philologist, defines historicity as the quality of meta-time universality. This is how I interpret his idea. According to Bakhtin, an action becomes a historical event if it has the quality of teaching future generations.Historicity?? Meta-time??? I suggest using the simple word important instead. According to me, every action can become a historical event unless nobody hears it fall in the forest. This quality can be obtained when value judgments as spatial derivatives become part of the event, and when narration of the event contains value judgments.This sounds like bad modern poetry that I endure at the occasional coffee-house reading series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.