• Home Page
  • About this website
  • Biography
  • Dr. B's Notes
  • Contact
Richard S. Beam

​145   An Accusation is NOT a Guilty verdict!

3/29/2019

0 Comments

 
There’s something which has been going on in our society which I find most disturbing.  I think it’s a product of the rise of the so-called “social media” on the Internet, which has created an atmosphere that appears to believe that there are no such things as demonstrable, provable facts and that all that really matters is the number of people repeating a statement to establish the “truth” of something.  Now, I will confess to be a bit old-fashioned, perhaps, but I was not taught that mere repetition of popular opinion, was an appropriate way of establishing the veracity of some claim.  This is particularly true because, as Peter Steiner suggested in this 1993 cartoon:
Picture
Thus, the relative anonymity of the “digital world” makes it seem safe to indulge in “gut-level” responses, without doing much to check facts, or even think.
 
I’ve touched on some of this before (see #6 in the archives) in relation to religion, but I’m afraid the problem has become more pervasive (and even more insidious) throughout our society.  The recent college admission scandal (which I confess I haven’t followed all that closely) brought the general subject to mind, but my concern goes far beyond just that “blip” on the highway of life.
 
In the past few years, we have seen quite a few people’s lives/careers damaged/destroyed from having been convicted of some “crime” by the jury of public opinion based on accusations made and amplified by “me, tooers of all sorts” on the Internet.  In recent days, it’s been famous people who, apparently, cheated, bribed, etc., in order to make sure that their children got into the school of the parent’s choice. Now, I don’t like it, but the reality is that college admissions (and similar sorts of things) really haven’t been played on a level playing field for a VERY long time and at virtually all types of schools.  If a parent, grandparent, or some other interested party, is willing to make it clear that their large monetary donation (scholarship, building, whatever) might be conditional on the basis of some specific student being admitted, most colleges can find a way to justify the admission in order to get the “donation.” 
 
Now, what is alleged in the recent case is a bit different in that it seems to involve actual cheating on SAT/ACT tests, bribing coaches to “recruit” students with no discernable athletic records, etc.  One can wonder, however, if this is all that different from Admission Committees going out of their way to make sure that “legacy” students (the children/grandchildren of wealthy alumni) are made to have a place at the school, even with less than highly desirable academic credentials.  Note the word “alleged” above.  It IS important.  There have been accusations made, but there have been no trials, no guilty verdicts, no confessions, at least that I know of, except for the man charged with organizing the whole admission fraud operation.  Yet people have lost jobs, performer’s shows have lost sponsorships, students have been expelled, all sorts of people have been “convicted” in the court of public opinion, but there hasn’t seemed to be much real proof(I believe that there IS such a thing as “proof”) produced.  Whatever happened to “Innocent until proven guilty?”
 
I won’t go into all of the cases which have bothered me, but one has to think that it’s just possible that a good many public figures should have had the right to expect a bit of skepticism when the allegations started to roll in.  From what I’ve seen, many of the alleged “crimes” are questionable behaviors or statements from the past, often in the long past.  It makes me wonder why we bother with education since we seem to believe that people don’t grow, change, mature, acquire new information and/or ideas, and change their behavior on the basis of that education?  
 
Doesn’t this picture, which was used to destroy Al Franken as a political figure, seem just a little too obviously staged to be taken all that seriously?  It doesn’t look all that believable to me, and it was several years before he ran for the Senate while he was working as a comedic entertainer.
Picture
Okay, it’s a stupid pose and a poor idea, but I remember something about throwing stones in glass houses, or something like that. This doesn’t look to me like a “sex-craved monster violating this innocent young woman” (who is wearing a “flak jacket,” probably the least attractive piece of clothing known to humankind).  Note the “intense lust” in Franken’s eyes as he looks at the camera instead of his “victim.” I’ve already said it was a stupid pose and a poor idea and he should have known better, but to throw him out of politics as “irredeemably corrupt, brutish and insensitive?”  
 
I’d suggest that this picture looks pretty staged to me, although that hasn’t been proven, either.  Now the “victim” MAY have been asleep, as she has claimed, but this picture was, rather obviously, taken with a flash, so other people knew it was being taken.  Could it be that “the lady doth protest too much?” in order to get her 15 minutes? Franken SHOULD have known better than to do something this stupid, but his conviction by social media and people seeking attention offends me.
 
If Al Franken, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Donald Trump, or any of the other accused can be proven to be guilty of the accusations made against them, I say “throw the book at them.”  However, there is something quite disturbing and un-American about the self-righteous anger and the glee with which we, as a society, have taken to destroying people in the press and on “social media.”  Do Ithink that many of the people who have been attacked are likely to be guilty of the charges against them? Yeah, I do!  But that’s not proof, nor is it based on more evidence than just what I have seen, or heard, in the media.  
​
The legend of the “casting couch” has been around in the underbelly of Hollywood since the days of the silent movies, and probably predates that in live theatre.  Do I know if it was ever used?  No, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it had.  I have heard stories about cases where students have, apparently, tried to use the “seduction for a higher grade” ploy in schools, but I only heard about them from others, so those stories shouldn’t be considered as evidence.
 
An accusation (even many accusations) is(are) not a conviction.  That was one of the problems in Salem in 1692 and the Congressional investigations of the early 1950’s.  There was an assumption of guilt.  Our system of justice is based on a presumption of innocence, which we got from English Common law, and which dates back to Roman times.  I find it sad that we have come to be quite so quick to rush to judgement without making sure of the facts and the evidence. 
 
I lost an ancestor to what seems to me to have been, largely, this sort of “popular” conviction in Salem in 1692.  Yes, Martha Carrier (my ancestor) was actually convicted in a court, but the evidence against her was quite questionable, much of it being “spectral” in nature.(See the records of the Salem Witch Trials for August 2, 1692.) This being the case. I may be somewhat more sensitive to this sort of injustice and, perhaps, more than usually cautious regarding conviction based on personal opinions, rumor, innuendo, etc.
 
Please Note: I am NOT, defending those who have been accused in recent years, I’m simply pointing out that it seems more than slightly unfair to base actions on the fact that people have made “news” out of their accusations.  I think that Martha’s words are worth remembering when she said, “It is false and a shame for you to mind what these say, that are out of their wits!”  I suspect that we would have a better society if we exerted just a bit more care before assuming that someone is guilty of something just because they have been accused.
 
I confess to doubting that this is going to go very far in stopping all injustice, but it might help put a small dent in it.
 
LLAP
0 Comments

​144     St. Patrick’s Day 2019

3/16/2019

0 Comments

 
Tomorrow is St. Patrick’s Day, the day when everybody is, at least a little bit, Irish.  A day which, in spite of it being the Lenten season, is a day for feasting and dancing and wearing of the green and, of course, having a bit of the “water of life.”  I confess that I believe myself to be only about 27% Irish (I haven’t had my DNA analyzed, but my sister did and that’s what it said for her, so I’m guessing that my DNA would test out similarly. In any event, it would appear that I have at least some heritage from “the Ould Sod.”  I will admit that I’m more likely to have a glass of Guinness than of Irish whiskey, but to each his/her own.
 
For whatever reason, the day seemed worthy of some recognition, so I though I’d pull together a “wee bit of a post” in honor of the occasion.  Nothing very serious, just some fun stuff I’ve found with an Irish theme. I’ll be back in a couple of weeks with more usual commentary.
 
I saw this somewhere on the Internet and thought it was amusing.
Picture
This MAY be a bit much, but it does conform to what people think about the Irish (especially on St. Patrick’s Day).  And who says that it’s only people of color who have been discriminated against?  Only people who don’t know their history!
Picture
Of course, jokes about the Irish and drinking have been around a long time.  Here’s a couple I have enjoyed, in spite of the fact that they are demeaning, sexist, and/or have other not nice qualities.  I still think they are funny and think it’s too bad that everyone has to be so “politically correct” that there’s little left in the way of traditional joke material, so we, as a society have been reduced to ridiculing individuals because it’s “not correct” to poke fun at groups.  I’m not sure I see the logic in that, but what the heck, I still think these are funny.
 
An Irishman who had a little too much to drink is driving home from the city one night and, of course, his car is weaving violently all over the road. 

A cop pulls him over. 'So,' says the cop to the driver, 'where have ya been?' 

'Why, I've been to the pub of course,' slurs the drunk. 

'Well,' says the cop, 'it looks like you've had quite a few to drink this evening.' 

'I did all right,' the drunk says with a smile. 

'Did you know,' says the cop, standing straight and folding his arms across his chest, 'that a few intersections back, your wife fell out of your car?' 

'Oh, thank heavens,' sighs the drunk. 'for a minute there, I thought I'd gone deaf!

 
One can’t poke fun at the Irish without mentioning Catholics, so here’s a story which I like a lot:
 
The wise old Mother Superior from County Tipperary was dying. 

The nuns gathered around her bed trying to make her comfortable. 

They gave her some warm milk to drink, but she refused it. One of the nuns took the glass back to the kitchen.

Remembering a bottle of Irish whiskey received as a gift the previous Christmas, she opened it and poured a generous amount into the warm milk. 

Back at Mother Superior's bed, she held the glass to her lips. Mother Superior drank a little, then a little more. Before they knew it, she had drunk the whole glass down to the last drop. 

"Mother," the nuns pleaded, "Please give us some wisdom before you pass." 

She raised herself up in bed with a pious look on her face and said: "Don't sell that cow."

 
 
I read that this story happened a long time ago in Dublin, and even though it’s a bit hard to believe, the word is that it really happened.  I can’t verify that, but it does seem possible.
 
John Bradford, a Dublin university student, was on the side of the road hitch-hiking on a very dark night and in the midst of a big storm.
 
The night was rolling on and no car went by. The storm was so strong he could hardly see a few feet ahead of him.
 
Suddenly, he saw a car slowly coming towards him and stopped.  John, desperate for shelter and without thinking about it got into the car and closed the door… only to realize there was nobody behind the wheel and the engine wasn’t running.
 
The car started moving slowly.  John looked at the road ahead and saw a curve approaching.  Scared, he started to pray, begging for his life.  Then, just before the car hit the curve, a hand appeared out of nowhere through the window, and turned the wheel.  John, paralyzed with terror, watched as the hand came through the window, but never touched or harmed him.
 
Shortly thereafter, John saw the lights of a pub appear down the road, so, gathering strength, he jumped out of the car and ran to it….  Wet and out of breath, he rushed inside and started telling everybody about the horrible experience he had just had.
 
A silence enveloped the pub when everybody realized he was crying… and wasn’t drunk.
 
Suddenly, the door opened, and two other people walked in from the dark and stormy night.  They, like John, were also soaked and out of breath.  Looking around, and seeing John Bradford sobbing at the bar, one said to the other….

“Look Paddy… there’s that fooking idiot that got in the car while we were pushing it.”

 
Happy St Paddy’s Day!  I’ll be back in a couple of weeks.

0 Comments

143     Awards, Art, Acting and Other Foolishness

3/14/2019

0 Comments

 
I see that the world of the performing arts is in the middle of another “Awards Season,” where organizations representing many of the performing arts decide who is the “best” in a number of categories related to the creation of their brand of performing endeavor. This is, of course, usually accompanied by a highly promoted television SPECTACULAR!  I’ve touched on this phenomenon before (see Post #32 in the archives), and many of my former students undoubtedly noticed that, after the first couple of years I spent in Cullowhee, I didn’t attend the year-end awards ceremony for the Little Theatre/University Players, which later expanded to include the motion picture program, musical theatre, etc.  There were a number of reasons for that.
 
First, no matter how much one may try to suggest that no one takes such awards with any real degree of seriousness, I know that’s not true from talking with students after the fact. I don’t think winning, or not winning one of those student awards probably had any real impact on anyone’s career, but I do know there were hurt feelings on occasion.
 
Of course, the stakes seem to be even higher in the commercial world of theatre, motion pictures, recording, etc., but I would contend that the basic premise of trying to decide who is “best” in any category at any given time is, essentially, meaningless and stupid.  It can, I suppose, provide an opportunity for one to promote his/her career based on “winning” the award.  It can also be demonstrated, however, that many “winners” have lost work because it was assumed that they would demand more financially than others, based on their being “award winners.”
 
I’m quite fond of a section of an article from Time magazine from a good many years ago when they interviewed Paul Newman (whom I accept as having been a more than competent actor) about such things:
 
Time:              Paul, you usually don't go to the Oscars even when you're nominated.  Why?  [Newman makes a face like he's just taken a swig of lemon juice.]
…
NEWMAN:      I don't understand why competition has to exist between actors.  Some guy starts with a marvelous character, and the script is all there.  All he has to do is show up.  Another guy digs it out by the goddamn roots with a terrible director and turns in this incredible performance.  And someone says one is better than the other.  That's what's nice about car racing.  It's right to a thousandth of a second.  Your bumper is here.  That guy's bumper is there.  You win.
 
I suspect that Neuman didn’t go far enough, however.  Most performing arts creations at any level are, in fact the product of a team (as is auto racing), and, while we might like to think we can pick out individual contributions, I would maintain that it’s a lot harder than most people think.  The fit of a costume, the color of set, the angle of a light, the construction of a prop can all have an effect on a production for good, or for ill, be it on a stage or in a movie.  Hence, there is an impact on the production made by EACH of the individual contributions to the project.  How can we pretend that we are actually making an even reasonably fair judgement based exclusively on the work of an individual?
 
In addition, I think the whole idea is based on a false premise: that premise being that some work is just, plain “better” than some other work and that we can judge this on some sort of objective scale.  I think that is a pile of X@&%, at least within a given level.  It is probably fair to say that a theatrical production, or musical performance at a small college (for example) really isn’t comparable to a major, professional one, but when you are dealing with roughly comparable talent (in all positions), essentially similar budgets, etc., then it MIGHT be reasonable to make comparisons.  In other words, when you have work being done which it is, overall, comparable, then comparison MIGHT be reasonable.  However, if we are discussing ARTS, I think that the judgement mostly comes down to how the individual responds to a given work at a given moment, which is too variable to have any real, objective value.
 
Then, in recent years, especially in the Motions Picture Awards (the Oscars), we have seen a variety of stupid pressures to correct all of the wrongs of various sorts of past discrimination by insisting that awards (at least nominations) should go to people because they are people of color, or women, or gay, or whatever group we are worried about at that particular moment.  The idea that some people seem to have that past injustices are somehow going to be rectified by making awards selections (or nominations) based on a political desire to prove that we (the industry) are somehow “better” than we used to be and we are now “good” people is ridiculous!  No member of a previously ignored category can be proud of an award given to him/her in order to “make things right.”  That’s at least as big an insult as having your work ignored in the first place.
 
Besides, if we have to use the awards to prove that we have gotten beyond those prejudices and inequities, doesn’t it amount to admitting that the selections aren’t really based on actual merit?  In reality, the “equality” which everyone SAYS they want can only be achieved when such “categories” of contestants disappear and all we are attempting to do is arrive at a decision based solely on the quality of the work, not a desire to “be fair.”
 
Even if we someday arrive at a state of truly unbiased choices, I don’t think it’s possible to actually decide artistic questions based on merit, so I will continue to think that these awards are dumb.  Or, is there some way to PROVE that Beethoven’s works are greater that Mozart’s?  Or, Leonardo’s are inferior to Picasso’s?  Or, Shakespeare’s are greater than Tennessee Williams’?  Each of us is entitled to our preferences, as we are entitled to change those preferences over time.  But, art has something to do with individual, personal taste, mood, experience, etc. There are many art objects (performing and visual) which I have admired over the years and I know that my reactions as to what “moves” me at one moment may not be what accomplishes that same effect at some other time.  I have never forgotten walking around a corner at the Museum of Modern Art in New York and encountering Picasso’s Guernica (which was then displayed there) on a visit to NYC with the Indiana Theatre Company in the mid- 1960’s.  That was an experience I doubt I ever will forget.  I can’t really describe it, but my does my experience make that painting “better” than, say, the Sistine Chapel ceiling or A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte?  I don’t think so.  I don’t think art is about better.  

I do think it’s about what has an effect/affect on me as a person.  It is a personal experience.  And, therefore, any judgements I make about are personal in nature.  But my experience doesn’t have any real impact on yours.  It doesn’t prove anything about how you should respond to the same work, let alone provide any sort of truly objective evaluation.
 
To move on to a related, but quite different, idea, I was very much amused at the recent (mostly social media) hullabaloo about how Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper MUST really be in love based on their performance of “Shallow” at the Academy Awards show recently.  Talk about a bunch of malarkey!  I must confess that I didn’t watch the “Oscars,” but I sure heard about them.  The "social media" uproar was all over the news.  

Now, I’ve done enough performing, both acting and singing, (Yes, I have done some of both.) to know that there is very little difference between the two, if one is going to have much of an impact on an audience.  (Just in passing, a lot of teaching is, in fact, a performance, as well, but that’s a story for another time.)  And I’ve seen enough of what I would consider to be high quality performances by performers (both professional and amateur) that I believe my opinion has more validity than my cat’s, for example.  I strongly believe that performing a song, perhaps especially a “love” song, requires that the performer(s) take on the attitudes and behavior of the character(s) in the song, itself.  I think we call that sort of performance “acting!”  Yes, I am suggesting that many songs are a lot like short plays.
 
Now if two experienced performers (one nominated for an Oscar as a leading actor three times in recent years and the other once) can’t make you (the audience) believe that they are in love while singing a love song crucial to the story of the performances for which they were nominated, I doubt they should have been nominated in the first place.  I don’t KNOW what the facts may be (and I really don’t care), but both were nominated for “best actor” awards for the roles which included them performing this song, so it seems reasonable that in performing the song together, they should understand (and use their abilities) to create the illusion that they were in “love,” whether they were or not.
 
Many years ago, I saw a classroom-oriented movie which stated that “Acting is the art of making an audience believe that real things are happening to real people.” I didn’t like that idea at the time (I was too much under the influence of some “method” acting teachers, perhaps), but, as I’ve grown older, I’ve come to accept it as a truism.  It IS a statement worth examining in detail.  
 
First, it suggests that acting is an art, meaning that it is “artificial,” it is “made up,” it is created, it doesn’t just happen, and it’s not “real.”  Furthermore, it is specifically created for an audience, not just for “the heck of it.”  It’s created for the purpose of getting an audience to believe that something is happening which, in fact, is not.  Robin Williams once quoted one of his acting teachers as having said, “Method acting can be like urinating in brown corduroy pants; you feel wonderful, but we see nothing.” After all, the characters portrayed by actors (or singers), were conceived by the playwright, or song writer, or author to serve the needs of a story, or situation.  Those characters are NOT real, even if they are based on real people.  Which means that whatever is happening to them is not “real” either.  
 
Sir Laurence, Lord Olivier, himself, a rather well-respected actor, put it quite succinctly, “Acting is illusion, as much illusion as magic is, and not so much a matter of being real.” The point, I think, is that the audience should believe it to be real, not that the actor needs to (or, necessarily, should).

[Side Note: I'm really not against using any of the variations of "The Method," if they are of assistance to you as a performer.  Just remember that the point of your work should be to have an effect on us in the audience, who really don't care what you are actually feeling.]
 
I also wish the “awards show” business would just go away because these programs are, for the most part, just not very entertaining, although they try desperately to be so. I don’t even bother to watch them very much because I usually haven’t seen at least most of the nominees.  In many cases they simply didn’t interest me very much.  Like most people, I’m not willing to spend a lot of time and/or money to see everything, so I choose what to see from what’s available to me.  In many cases, I find that I’m not attracted to the stories portrayed enough to see many of the shows which I could see.  While I don’t doubt that some very good work is being done, I find myself more attracted to the theatre I can see live at prices I can afford (and only those productions which capture my interest) and the occasional movie which captures my attention (and, usually, Bonnie’s) enough to make the trip to a movie theatre.
 
I’ve spent my life working in the theatre, I enjoy live theatre and some movies (either in the theatre or on TV/DVD), but I also have a life to live and somewhat limited resources. I have other ways of spending my time than to watch an awards “show” consisting mostly of people pretending to be humble and thanking a bunch of people I have never heard of and don’t care about (since I don’t read the tabloids and stay away from “social media”).  I LIKE good work, but I have not found that the “awards shows,” for the most part, contribute to my pleasure in it.  Nor, does “winning,” or even being nominated, guarantee that I will be more impressed with the work I do see.  I’ve seen a lot of what I would consider “good” work that was never nominated for anything.  Some of the best acting I’ve ever seen was in a high school acting class which I was fortunate enough to be in about 1960!
 
I will, probably, at least turn on the Tony awards show, but I doubt that I’ll watch it all that closely. Mostly, I’ll just watch to see the excerpts of the nominated shows.  I can (and do) always hope that some of them will be interesting and that I might get a chance to see them on tour.  Oh, well. 
 
If someone wants to argue with me about this, I’d enjoy having a discussion.  Who knows, you might convince me that I’m wrong.  I am human, I can be convinced by reason, logic, and facts. Go ahead, have at me….
 
LLAP
0 Comments

142     Mardi Gras! 2019

3/3/2019

0 Comments

 
It’s almost Lent (starting on Wednesday), so, it’s Mardi Gras!  Or, as those who know nothing of the French language might say, “Fat Tuesday!”  That seems worthy of breaking my usual pattern and indulging in a “special” blog posting.  With that in mind, I thought I’d encourage my readers to “laissez les bon temps rouler” (let the good times roll) by posting (or re-posting) a few cartoons related to the occasion.
 
Enjoy!
 
I did like this image of a “Mardi Gras Girl.”
Picture
Mardi Gras being, of course, a time to “let loose” just before the beginning of the Lenten season, this seemed appropriate:
Picture
My colleague, Susan Brown-Strauss, attended a USITT conference in New Orleans a number of years ago (which I didn't attend) and brought me back some of the traditional Gold, and Purple and Green beads, which I wore a to my classes, etc. number of times on Mardi Gras.  I believe that I still have them around somewhere, but I’m not sure I’ll have occasion to wear them this year.  
 
I have no idea what she may have had to go through to get them for me, but my understanding is that things can get pretty wild in that city during Mardi Gras season, so when I saw this e-card, it did make me wonder.

Picture
I ran across this picture of the “Mardi Gras Spice Girls” and it made me laugh.  I doubt that it’s the wildest image one could find of Margi Gras celebrations, but, as one who enjoys an occasional foray into some Cajun food, I thought it was worth saving.
Picture
Anyway, I hope that you have a good time on Mardi Gras, but I’d suggest paying some attention to road signs:
Picture
I’ll be back in a week, or two, with a more normal post.
 
LLAP (and Happy Mardi Gras!)
0 Comments

​141 Signs Seen Along the Way 2

3/1/2019

0 Comments

 
 As I indicated when I wrote post # 134 (#1 in this occasional series) that, every so often I encounter a sign, along a road, in a store, on the internet, or just on the street, which I find amusing.  When I can, I try to get a picture of it to add to my collection so I can make a post about such signs (or other such trivia) when the mood strikes me.  
 
It’s been really winter-like in Omaha the last couple of weeks with snow (sometimes a LOT of snow) and some fairly cold weather.  Like lower than -20º cold!  What’s more annoying is that it looks like this pattern may well continue for another couple of weeks.  Definitely not the early Spring I was hoping for!  In any case, here’s some samples of some more interesting signs I’ve run across in the last few months.
 
Our recent weather made this one particularly appropriate.
Picture
I found this one on the internet, and I thought it quite appropriate advice given the recent weather.
Picture
Speaking of actual interesting (confusing?) signs along the road:
Picture
Thinking about highway signs brought this to mind, even if it was on a church.
Picture
Of course, this sign in front of a pub in Great Britain was, I thought, one to remember as an interesting idea.
Picture
I think that’s probably enough for now, but I’ll continue to collect and probably do this again sometime.  In the meantime, don’t suffer too many sore muscles from snow shoveling or slip on ice and fall as I did the other day (No, nothing was hurt but my dignity and pride.), but I am getting VERY tired of shoveling the snow off of our three-car driveway.
 
LLAP
0 Comments

    Just personal comments about things which interest me (and might interest others).

    Archives

    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly