|
Ai-Ren[愛人] is a series by Tanaka Yukata. This five volume manga is serialized
Magazine it serialize(s/d) in (and if possible, dates and issue numbers it was serialized in the Seinen magazine Young Animal (Hakusensha) since 1999.
Ikuru is going to die soon. He lives today, because of another girl's body parts that were grafted to him long ago. The parts that had once saved his life now threatens to kill his life. Weighed by the pain and lonliness of his condition and his dilemma, he decides to request the companionship of an AGH-RMS, an "Ai-Ren." These artifically generated humans have their personality and disposition artificially engineered to specification. Their origins are a mystery, but they currently serve to comfort terminally ill patients. When Ikuru's AGH-RMS first arrives, he is surprised by her decisively childish naivite. He names her "Ai" and rediscovers life, love, and how moments he once took for granted can take new meaning when shared with someone else.
However, the futuristic human society seems to be on the edge of an unavoiadable apocalypse while Ikuru and Ai live in their own sweet little bit of paradise. Ikuru finds solace in Ai's love, but AGH-RMS can only maintain their engineered persona and memories for a short time. Ai faces death too.
The introspective main character of the series. He seems like the stereotypical character of a Ren-ai game, but he is also very intelligent and cynical at times. Ever since the traffic accident, which killed his parents and left him living on borrowed time, Ikuru is haunted by memories of his death and his body's self-destruction, which leaves him occasionally unable to eat and paralyzed in place.
He is good at cooking and housekeeping. Ikuru grows a vegetable garden in his yard, where he later nurtures tomato plants with Ai. He is very kind and tolerant by nature, but he often feels left out and alienated from the rest of the world.
She is the "Ai-Ren" Ikuru requests to keep him companion near his death. Ai is very precocious and inquisitive, but naive and resembles many of Rumiko Takahashi's heroines. When she first arrived, she was more of an annoyance, drawing all over the walls and never staying still. Even though her personality is "engineered", she seems to prefer the more louder and flashier things in life (rock and roll music, cropped asian outfits) unlike Ikuru.
She keeps a journal where she draws out what happens in her life and her feelings. Ikuru teaches her how to play piano, but soon she surpasses Ikuru and learns to play guitar as well. Ai has a special charm that brings hope to other people.
Ikuru's Teacher and a "perfect being." She forced Ikuru to want to live and be self-reliant after his operation with his implanted body parts. She was attracted to Ikuru before and seems to be somewhat relunctant to accept Ai now. Haruka is a very esteemed doctor at the hospital where Ikuru is treated and appears to be connected to the precarious state of the earth at the moment.
Haruka worries about Ikuru a lot and for his well-being.
Ai-Ren is a departure from most of Tanaka's light-hearted ecchi slice-of-life stories in that their is a dark and philosophical sci-fi undertone to the whole story. He comments about this at the start of the story.
Some sources seem to indicate that this is actually a manhwa (a Korean manga), but I am not absolutely sure. The scans I read had some Korean sfx's and the names from the manga (Ai-Ren is derived from the Chinese word for Lover)seem to point to this as well. Can someone check this?
 Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
- This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text.
- If your request was declined and you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there.
Godfrey Mwakikagile is an African writer from Tanzania. He was born on 4 October 1949 in Kigoma, a town and port on Lake Tanganyika, in western Tanganyika. In 1964, Tanganyika united with Zanzibar to form Tanzania.
He grew up in Tanganyika, and Tanzania, and attended school in his home country from primary school to high school. He went to primary school in his home district, Rungwe, Mbeya Region, in the Southern Highlands in the Great Rift Valley, which borders Malawi and Zambia; attended Songea Secondary School from 1965 to 1968 in Ruvuma Region on the border with Mozambique; and Tambaza High School from 1969 to 1970 in the nation's capital Dar es Salaam.
After finishing high school (Form VI or Standard 14) at Tambaza, he joined the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in the nation'a capital as an information officer and later became a news reporter at the country's largest English news paper, the Daily News, which was also and still is based in Dar es Salaam.
His relationship with the Daily News started earlier when he was still a student at Tambaza High School in Form V and Form VI from 1969 to 1970 when he started working at the paper as a news reporter (see his web site, Tanzanian writer: Godfrey Mwakikagile). The paper was then known as the Standard. It was nationalised in 1970 and renamed Daily News.
After working at the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for some time, he returned to the Standard, after it was renamed Daily News, and joined the editorial staff as a news reporter.
He later attended school in the United States where he graduated from Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan. He also attended Aquinas College in Grand Rapids in the same state.
He burst into prominence among many people in Tanzania and elsewhere after he wrote a major book about Julius Nyerere not long after the former Tanzanian president died. He is considered a major authority on Nyerere and his most prominent biographer.
And his works have been getting serious attention among many people including academics in a number of countries who have also reviewed some of his books in scholarly journals.
His first book was published in 1999 and he has maintained a steady pace since then, writing books, as demonstrated by the number of titles he has on the market. He is one of the most prolific African authors today; and he may be the most prolific in Tanzania. He is also one of the most prominent Tanzanian authors.
He has written 20 books (since 1999) mostly about Africa during the post-colonial period, and has been described as a political scientist (see people.africadatabase.org) although his works defy classification. He has written about history, politics, economics and contemporary affairs from an African and Third World perspective and is known for such works as Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era, and Africa and the West.
Both have been favourably reviewed in a number of publications including the highly influential West Africa magazine which reviewed two of his books in the name year; a rare accomplishment in such a major magazine.
His work Nyerere and Africa, probably his most well-known title, was reviewed by West Africa magazine three years after Nyerere died of leukemia in October 1999 at the age of 77 ( see the review by Kofi Akosah Sarpong, "Nyerere's Vision," in West Africa, 25th November - 1st December 2002, p. 41).
It was also reviewed by the Daily News, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, which said about the book: :"For a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the interior narrative of Mwalimu Nyerere, one needs not look elsewhere" ( see Fumbuka Ng'wanakilala, "Nyerere: True pan-Africanist, advocate of unity," in "Three Years After Mwalimu Nyerere, " Daily News, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Monday, October 14, 2002, p. 19).
The book has also been cited by some African leaders including South African Vice President Ms. Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka in one her speeches about African leadership and development in which she quotes the author (see "Address Delivered by the Deputy President, Ms. Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, at the Third Annual Julius Nyerere Memorial Lecture, at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa. Issued by the Presidency through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Pretoria, South Africa, 6 September 2006).
His books have obviously got the attention of a number of African leaders although it is impossible to know if they have had any influence on any of their decisions. But the mere fact that they are cited by them shows that he is taken seriously as an author, not only in Tanzania but also in other African countries and perhaps elsewhere.
Godfrey Mwakikagile's other book, Africa and the West, which is a sweeping survey of the continent before the advent of colonial rule and during the colonial era as well as after independence, was also reviewed by West Africa magazine in its edition of 21st - 27th January 2002.
It was described by Kofi Akosah Sarpong, a Ghanaian and editor of the magazine, as "a new book calling for a return to African traditions and rejection of harmful Western ideas...and an uncompromising demand for dignity and respect for Africans....Godfrey Mwakikagile's book is also a reflective treatise, especially in its philosophical discussion of the importance of African values, history and traditions, African philosphical concepts, and the way of life in pre-colonial times as compared to the advent of colonialism" ( see Kofi Akosah-Sarpong, "Back to The Roots," in West Africa, 21st - 27th January 2002, p. 43 ).
West Africa magazine also described Godfrey Mwakikagile as an author who articulates the position of "African Renaissance thinkers." He is one of the most influential African writers today.
Although he has been exposed to Western cultures, was educated in the Western intellectual tradition and even lived in the United States for many years, his perspectives and philosophical conceptions have undoubtedly been shaped by his African upbringing and are deeply rooted in African cultures and traditions. And he rejects the notion that Africa was a blank slate until Europeans came to write on it.
He passionately argues that the history written about Africa by Europeans when they first went to Africa and even during colonial rule as well as after independence is not African history but the history of Europeans in Africa; and maintains that traditional Africa has produced philosophers and other thinkers whose knowledge and ideas can match and even surpass the best in the West and elsewhere in the world. He forcefully articulates that position in his book, Africa and The West (see his book, Godfrey Mwakikagile, Africa and The West, pp. 1 - 46, and 201 - 218).
He undoubtedly has strong convictions but does not neatly fit into any ideological category. He expresses strong Pan-Africanist views in his writings and sees Africa as a collective entity and one organic body and has strongly been influenced by staunch Pan-Africanist leaders such as Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Sekou Toure and Patrice Lumumba whom he also strongly admires (see Godfrey Mwakikagile, Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era. For Godfrey Mwakikagile's Pan-Africanist views and perspectives, see also Professor Eric Edi of Temple University, in his paper, "Pan West Africanism and Political Instability: Perspectives and Reflections," in which he cites Godfrey Mwakikagile's books, Military Coups in West Africa Since The Sixties and The Modern African State: Quest for Transformation).
But some of his critics contend that he overlooks or glosses over the shortcomings of these leaders precisely because they are liberation icons and played a leading role in the struggle for independence and against white minority rule in southern Africa (see reviews of his book, Godfrey Mwakikagile, Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era on amazon.com).
He also seems to be "trapped" in the past, in liberation days, especially in the seventies when the struggle against white minority rule was most intense (see Godfrey Mwakikagile, Nyerere and Africa: End of Era; and Godfrey Mwakikagile, Africa After Independence: Realities of Nationhood). But that may be for understandable reasons.
He was a part of that generation when the liberation struggle was going on and some of his views have unquestionably been shaped by what happened during those days as his admiration of Robert Mugabe, for example, as a liberation icon clearly shows; although he also admits in his book, Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era, that the land reform programme in Zimbabwe could have been carried out in an orderly fashion and in a peaceful way.
But his admiration for Mugabe as a true African nationalist and Pan-Africanist remains intact; a position that does not sit well with some of his critics. And by remarkable contrast, his contempt for African leaders whom he sees as whites in black skin also remains intact. He mentions Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda as a typical example of those leaders (see his book, Godfrey Mwakikagile, Africa After Independence: Realities of Nationhood, pp. 156 - 163).
So, his identification with liberation heroes is clear and understandable; and so is his "nostalgia" about liberation days in the sixties and seventies. And that may be why some of his critics and supporters say "he belongs to the old school of thought" (see reviews of his books on youngafrican.com).
He also lived and grew up under the leadership of Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere, a liberation icon and staunch Pan-Africanist, whose socialist policies he has also defended in his writings because of the egalitarian ideals they instilled in the people of Tanzania enabling them to form a peaceful, cohesive nation in which they saw themselves as equal in terms of rights and dignity as fellow human beings in spite of the poverty they endured under ujamaa (Nyerere's African version of socialism).
Yet, in spite of his admiration of liberations icons, he also is highly critical of African leaders from the same generation who led their countries to independence, contending that most of them did not care about the well-being their people; a position he forcefully articulates in his writings ( see his books, Godfrey Mwakikagile, Africa is in A Mess: What Went Wrong and What Should Be Done, and Africa After Independence: Realities of Nationhood).
He sometimes seems to be a contradictory character, or simply difficult to understand, but he is actually torn between two worlds because of the generation to which he belongs, having been born before independence and partly brought up under colonial rule.
One critic of his works has described him as "a shrewd intellectual in defence of liberation icons" and accuses him of not being intellectually honest about leaders such as Nyerere and Nkrumah for not criticising them harshly for their failures (see Kwesi Johnson-Taylor in his review of Godfrey Mwakikagile's book, Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era, on amazon.com, February 21, 2006).
In a way, some people may see him as a complex character not always easy to understand, although he articulates his position clearly and forcefully.
Some of the confusion among his readers about his position on African leaders of the independence generation has to do with his own background since he was a part of that generation in the sense that he witnessed the end of colonial rule and the emergence of the newly independent African states although he was not old enough to have participated in the independence struggle himself (see his biography, "Tanzanian Writer: Godfrey Mwakikagile).
He admires the leaders who led their countries to independence, yet he is highly critical of them in most cases for their failures during the post-colonial period. He admires many aspects of Nyerere's socialist policies in Tanzania, yet concedes the policies were also a failure in many cases. And he strongly favours fundamental change in African countries, yet he is nostalgic about the past (see his books, Godfrey Mwakikagile, Africa is in A Mess, and Africa and The West).
His advocacy for fundamental change is articulated in many of his writings including The Modern African State: Quest for Transformation, one his more well-known books.
In his review of the book, Ronald Taylor-Lewis, a Sierra Leonean and editor of Mano Vision magazine, London, described it as "a masterpiece of fact and analysis. In the one book he manages to extensively cover the 'rebirth' of Liberia, the 'powerless' state of Sierra Leone, 'ethnic cleansing' in Rwanda, 'stateless' Somalia, slavery in Mauritania and Sudan, and the fall of Mobutu in the Democratic Republic of Congo (former Zaire). Any one of the topics is the subject of a book in itself'....The whole book is a great read for scholars and people merely interested in the affairs of the continent and reads as a piece put together by someone who has taken the trouble to research his facts properly" (Ronald Taylor-Lewis, in his review of Godfrey Mwakikagile, The Modern African State: Quest for Transformation, in Mano Vision, Issue 23, October 2001, pp. 34 - 35. See also Professor Catherine S.M. Duggan, Department of Political Science, Stanford University, in her paper, "Do Different Coups Have Different Implications for Investment? Some Intuitions and A Test With A New Set of Data," in which she cites Godfrey Mwakikagile on fundamental changes in African countries. See also Godfrey Mwakikagile, cited in Christopher E. Miller, "A Glossary of Terms and Concepts in Peace and Conflict Studies," p. 87; and in Gabi Hesselbein, Frederick Golooba-Mutebi, and James Putzel, "Economic and Political Foundations of State-Making in Africa: Understanding State Reconstruction," Working Paper No. 3, 2006).
The book has also been reviewed in other publications. Tana Worku Anglana reviewed Godfrey Mwakikagile's Modern African State: Quest for Transformation in Articolo at www.africansocieties.org/n1/paginaarticolo2.htm and stated, in "Discussing African Social Fates: A First Overview of An Unbiased Literature," the following:
"Another group of authors maintain that the reasons for Africa's crisis mainly lie in an inadequate political system. An interesting example comes from the analysis carried out by G. Mwakikagile, in the book The Modern African State (2001) , which stresses the need for a democratic system as a prerequisite for peace and stability in Africa. However, in the author's view, democracy per se cannot survive in countries torn by conflict. Conflicts spring from poverty, and the poverty in many African countries is caused by dictatorships, corruption, tribalism and want. For the author, these are the gravest problems that feed one another and give rise to a dangerous vicious circle.
This is why Mwakikagile makes a list of necessary actions for Africa to achieve political stability, which is the essential foundation for widespread development. These include: the decentralisation of power; an independent judiciary; promoting political pluralism and consensus for coalition governments; introducing federal systems favouring greater freedom; creating independent electoral committees composed of members of all political and ethnic groups and of community representatives; promoting national conferences for the participation of all regions and ethic groups; promoting citizen participation in legislative and political changes; establishing an independent free communication service; setting fixed terms of office for presidents (6 years) and members of parliament (3 years); setting up monitor groups to investigate power abuse and corruption in the governing class.
In short, the author feels that development cannot be possible without fundamental changes inside African countries themselves, damaged by decades of dictatorships and that still have a significant number of one-party systems."
In what is probably is his most controversial book, Africa is in A Mess: What Went Wrong and What Should Be Done, he strongly crticises most of the leaders of post-colonial Africa for tyranny and corruption, and for practising tribalism, a common theme in the works of many African writers and other people including well-known ones and many African scholars in and outside Africa.
Unfortunately, because of its vitriolic condemnation of most African leaders during the post-colonial era, the book has been cited by some people, who obviously have not read it, as a clarion call for the re-colonisation of Africa (because things are so bad, colonial rule was better) although the author says exactly the opposite in his work (See Kenday Samuel Kamara of Walden University in his abstract, "Considering the Enormity of Africa's Problems, is Re-Colonization an Option?" in which he cites Godfrey Mwakikagile's Africa is in A Mess and related works by other African authors including Professor Ali Mazrui, and Professor George Ayittey's Africa in Chaos. See his book on the subject, Africa is in A Mess: What Went Wrong and What Should Be Done. See also Tunde Obadina, "The Myth of Neo-Colonialism," in Africa Economic Analysis, 2000; and Timothy Murithi, in his book, The African Union: Pan-Africanism, Peacebuilding and Development).
He unequivocally states in his book, Africa is in A Mess, that he does not support any attempt or scheme, by anybody, to recolonise Africa, although he also concedes that African countries have lost their sovereignty to donor nations and multilateral insututions such as the World Bank and the IMF dominated by Western powers including those who once colonised Africa. He also admits that African countries have really never been free in spite of the instruments of sovereignty they are supposed to have. Yet he has wrongly been portrayed, along with some prominent African scholars, as someone who advocates the recolonisation of Africa as one writer asked:
"Given the crisis in post colonial Africa, is it time that the former Western colonial powers (Britain, France, Belgium, Portugal, Italy & Germany) committed themselves, as proposed by a growing body of African and European academics - Ali Mazrui, Christoph Blocher, Mahmood Mamdani, Peter Niggli, R. W. Johnson & Godfrey Mwakikagile - as well as number of African diplomats and politicians, including the Prime Minister of Sierra Leone in the nineties, to a form of temporary semi re-colonisation of the continent?" (Hobbit, in "Gaire: Africa Re-Colonized," 28 March 2007).
Godfrey Mwakikagile says exactly the opposite in his book Africa is in A Mess.
His fellow Africans who have reviewed the book on amazon.com and elsewhere in different publications and on the Internet strongly support the author and share his concerns about Africa's plight and the misguided leadership the continent has had to endure for decades since independence (see Professor Sabelo J. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, a Zimbambwean teaching international studies at Monash University, South Afica campus, in his abstract, "Gods of Development, Demons of Underdevelopment and Western Salvation: A Critique of Development Discourse as a Sequel to the CODESRIA and OSSREA International Conferences on Development in Africa," June 2006. Professor Ndlovu-Gatsheni advances the same argument Godfrey Mwakikagile does and cites Mwakikagile's work, Africa is in A Mess, to support his thesis. See also Floyd Shivambu, "Floyd's Perspectives: Societal Tribalism in South Africa," September 1, 2005, who cites Godfrey Mwakikagile's Ethnic Politics in Kenya and Nigeria, in his condemnation of tribalism in post-apartheid South Africa; Mary Elizabeth Flournoy of Agnes Scott College, in her paper, "Nigeria: Bounded by Ropes of Oil," citing Godfrey Mwakikagile's writings including Ethnic Politics in Kenya and Nigeria; Professor Eric Edi of Temple University, in his paper, "Pan West Africanism and Political Instability: Perspectives and Reflections," in which he cites Godfrey Mwakikagile's books, Military Coups in West Africa Since The Sixties and The Modern African State: Quest for Transformation).
In his book Africa is in A Mess, he is also hghly critical of Western powers for ruthlessly exploiting Africa even today in collusion with many African leaders.
His books have also been reviewed in African Studies Review by leading scholars in their fields.
They include Military Coups in West Africa Since The Sixties which was reviewed Professor Claude E. Welch of the Department of Political Science at the State University of New York, Buffalo ( see Claude E. Welch, Jr., in African Studies Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, December 2002, pp. 124 - 125); and Ethnic Politics in Kenya and Nigeria, reviewed by Nigerian Professor Khadijat K. Rashid of Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C., (see African Studies Review, Vol. 46, No. 2, September 2003, pp. 92 - 98).
For more reviews of his books, see also Expo Times, Sierra Leone; The Mirror, Zimbabwe, and other publications including those feautured on the Internet.
He has also written about race relations in the United States and relations between continental Africans and people of African descent in the diaspora. His titles in these areas include Black Conservatives in The United States; Relations Between Africans and African Americans; and Relations Between Africans, African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans.
Godfrey Mwakikagile's books are found in public and university libraries around the world and have been adopted for class use at many colleges and universities in the United States and other countries.
Here is a list of titles by Godfrey Mwakikagile:
Economic Development in Africa, 1999
Africa and The West, 2000
The Modern African State: Quest for Transformation, 2001
Military Coups in West Africa Since The Sixties, 2001
Ethnic Politics in Kenya and Nigeria, 2001
Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era, 2002
Africa is in A Mess: What Went Wrong and What Should Be Done, 2004
Tanzania under Mwalimu Nyerere: Reflections on an African Statesman, 2004
Black Conservatives: Are They Right or Wrong?, 2004
Nyerere and Africa: End of an Era: Expanded Edition with Photos, 2005
Relations Between Africans and African Americans: Misconceptions, Myths and Realities, 2005
Life in Tanganyika in The Fifties: My Reflections and Narratives from The White Settler Community and Others, 2006
African Countries: An Introduction, 2006
Africa After Independence: Realities of Nationhood, 2006
Life under Nyerere, 2006
Black Conservatives in The United States, 2006
Africa and America in The Sixties: A Decade That Changed The Nation and The Destiny of A Continent, 2006
Relations Between Africans, American Americans and Afro-Caribbeans: Tensions, Indifference and Harmony, 2007
Investment Opportunities and Private Sector Growth in Africa, 2007
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
- This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text.
- If your request was declined and you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there.
About This Area
Who Are the Plateau Indians?
Anthropologists call Native American people who lived on Columbia River Plateau and the drainage territory of the Columbia River before the Europeans came to this region, "Plateau Indians".
Where Did They Live?
The Columbia River Plateau is a place and a culture.
A plateau is a high flat piece of land. The Columbia River Plateau is a high relatively flat area that includes most of Eastern Washington, as well as parts of Oregon and Idaho. It is part of the drainage territory of the Columbia River. All the Native Americans who have lived in the Inland Columbia Plateau were "Plateau Indians."
But because of similarities in culture and language, many peoples who lived, lived north of the Columbia and the Spokane Rivers are also considered “Plateau Indians”. They did not live on flat plains at all, but in the forested river valleys that drain into the Columbia.
Here is a map showing the main tribes considered to be Plateau Indians. You can see that most of the tribes spoke the Salish language.
Who Are The Spokane Indians?
The Spokane Tribe of Indians are direct descendants of the Spokane (or "Spokan") Indians, who were a Plateau Indians and shared many cultural traits with their neighbours.
The Spokane spoke a language that is part of the Salish language family, and is sometimes spoken of as a Salishan tribe. Most of the tribes in the Northern Part of the Columbia Plateau cultural area spoke Salishan.
Where Did The Spokanes Live?
The Spokane tribes lived in the area of land centered around the Spokane River. Their permanent villages were primarily located on the Spokane and the Columbia.
But they used the backcountry for hunting and summer camping. Starting at the point where the Spokane River meets the Columbia, their lands would include a boundary going up to Hunters, over to Deer Park and then over to Mount Spokane. From there the boundary would go South to Rosalia, over to Ritzville, North to Peach and from there back to the Columbia.
In their villages on the Spokane River, the Spokane tribes were located at the upper end of salmon country, as the salmon could not swim up and over Spokane falls.
The present-day Spokane Indian Reservation is completely on land that was part of the original area inhabited by the Spokanes, but it is just a small part of the original three million acres or so that formed their aboriginal land.
How Long Have They Been Here?
Anthropologists cannot be sure how long the direct descendants of the Spokane Tribe of Indians have lived in the greater Spokane region. Most believe that the Salish speaking tribes of the Columbia Plateau Culture, which include the Spokanes, have lived here a long time.
There is a backward time-limit. Much of the Columbia Plateau was covered by glaciers until around 14,000 years ago. The climate was different then. There were probably no salmon at that point.
As the glaciers slowly moved away, the climate changed as well. Relatively damp and cool conditions supported large herds of mammals.
Ethnologists disagree about whether the Salish speaking tribes arrived in this area from the East or from the West. There are Salishan speaking tribes on the Pacific Coast and in Puget Sound, and there are Salishan speaking tribes on the Columbia plateau. Did the Salish tribes come from the East and cross over the Cascades to the coast, or did they first arrive on the coast, and later crossed over into Eastern Washington? The Salishan tribes, including the ancestors of the Spokanes, may have come from the Coast, crossing over the Cascades or travelling up the Columbia River. Or they may have come from the North or East at some time. This may have been very early, or perhaps they forced from the Plains by the Blackfoot, after they, later, obtained guns. Some of them may then have crossed the Cascades to live by the coast.
Who Were Their Neighbours?
To the East, North and West, the Spokane Tribe lived next to tribes that spoke languages they could understand - the Coeur d'Alenes, the Flatheads, the Sanpoils and the Colvilles.
To the South lived the Nez Perce and the Umatillas. These tribes spoke a very different language than the Spokanes. But Pat Moses pointed out that there were Spokanes who could speak both Salish and the Nez Perce Shapitan language.
In spite of their different languages, all these tribes shared a similar way of life. Their food supply was primarily based on the huge salmon runs that took place every year on the Columbia River and the rivers that ran into the Columbia. Salmon was supplemented by gathering of wild plants and by hunting. They lived in villages and shared similar myths and religion. They used similar kinds of clothing and houses. Scientists group these tribes together into what they call the Columbia Plateau culture.
Further to the East in Montana, lived the Blackfoot Tribe. They were enemies of the Spokanes. They had a different way of living, based on the hunting of the buffalo. They belonged to the Plains culture.
To the West, across the Cascade Mountains, were Indians of the Northwest Coast cultural area who lived next to the ocean, among the huge trees of the Pacific coast. Further to the South, were tribes who lived in the dry deserts of Utah and Nevada.
And further to the North, were the Athapaskan tribes who lived in the vast and cold Canadian forests.
What Was The Weather Like?
The temperature for the last several thousand years has been similar to what it is today. Temperatures range from very cold in winter to very hot in summer. There is not much rain during the summer; the Columbia Plateau is the most northern desert in North America. In the winter snow accumulates in the mountains.
What made this area different from almost all other desert regions in the world, is that even though the land is very dry, the rivers were full and teeming with salmon and other fish. The Plateau Indians, though they lived in a relatively barren region, were blessed with easy and dependable access to food.
What Animals Were There?
Because the climate was very dry, there were are not a lot of animals in the area. There were deer and elk in the mountains and salmon and trout in the rivers. What made the Plateau area different is that even though the land was very dry, the rivers were full and teeming with salmon and other fish.
There were a small number of buffalo in the area, but nothing like the vast herds that were on the Great Plains of Montana. The last recorded buffalo was seen in 1830. After they began to use horses, the Plateau Indians would cross over into the Montana plains in order to hunt buffalo.
Traditional Culture
Where Did They Come From?
No one knows where the Plateau Indians came from when they first came into this area.
Some scientists think that the Plateau Indians came up from the South. According to this view, they came from the desert Basin Culture of dry Western North America, a primitive, seed-gathering culture
Other scientists think that the Plateau Indians came in from the Coast - either up the Columbia Gorge or over through the passes of the Cascade mountains. According to this theory, they came from the "old Cordilleran culture" of the Plateau and North Pacific Coast, a culture with hunting, fishing, and gathering activities.
What Language Did They Speak?
The Spokane Indians spoke in their own language. But they could understand people from the neighbouring tribes of the Coeur d'Alenes, the Flatheads, the Sanpoil, and the Colville tribes. These tribes spoke a language that was very similar to the language of the Spokanes. Scientists now call these languages Salish, or Salishan.
Their neighbours to the South - the Nez Perce, Umatillas, etc. spoke a very different language. Scientists call these languages Shapitan. But there were members of both tribes who could speak both languages.
There are only a few people left who can speak the Spokane language fluently. The last native speakers could pass away within ten years.
What Language Did Their Neighbours Speak?
The Indians of the Plateau speak four different kinds of languages : Salish, Sahaptian, Klamath and Kootenai. Most of Plateau groups speak Salishan and Sahaptian. The Spokanes spoke Salish.
The Salish speaking tribes in the Plateau Region were - the Spokanes , Okanagan , Lake, Wenatchee, Sanpoil, Nespelim, Kalispel, Pend d'Oreille, Coeur d'Alene, and Flathead.
The Sahaptin speaking tribes in the Plateau Region were - the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Yakima, and Wallawalla.
The Klamath speaking tribes in the Plateau Region were - the KlamathModoc (Lutuami).
The Kutenai speaking tribes in the Plateau Region were the Kutenai.
What Did Their Writing Look Like?
The Plateau Indians did not have writing. So, we don't know what they thought or believed, in their own words. But a strong verbal tradition of passing down stories, preserved some of their experiences.
Today, to preserve the Spokane language, linguists use symbols from the International Phonetic Alphabet [IPA] to write down the words of the Spokane language. They can’t use the regular English alphabet because the Spokane language contains sounds that aren’t used in the Western European Alphabet.
What Do We Know About Their Early History?
We do not know very much about the earliest history of the Plateau culture.
We know that 3000 years ago, the Indians who then lived in the Plateau had a culture, a way of life that extended through the seasons for many generations, based on hunting, fishing and gathering activities.
Social Structure
Did They Have A Government?
Before the introduction of the horse and the influence of Plains culture, the village always formed the socio-political unit. There was no nation or state that ruled over the villages. The forms of government varied over time, as well as from one tribe to another.
But the rule of the village differed from tribe to tribe. The Thompson Indians had informal village meetings for decision making, and in matters of general interest the consent of all the villagers had to be obtained. The Sanpoil had a more structured form of government - the village had a chief, a sub chief, and a general assembly in which every adult had a vote (except for young men who were not married). The Nez Percé had a similar organization until the buffalo hunts on the Plains started.
Each village had a chief whose office was hereditary, except in the case of poorly qualified sons.
Sometimes groups from several villages came together at certain fishing sites or camas (edible lily) meadows, and on these occasions the leading men of the villages constituted an informal council.
Early in the 19th century this organization was overruled when families from different villages joined to form bands for the autumn hunts on the Plains. The authority of the village chiefs lapsed as good hunters and fighters became band chiefs.
As a result of pressure from missionary and governmental agencies, a tribal head chief was appointed in the 1840s, but he was unable to win any influence over the people.
A truly tribal political organization existed among the Flathead, who had a head chief of great power and band chiefs under him. The head chief decided on matters of peace and war and was not bound by the recommendations of his council.
What Was The Role Of The Chief?
Although there were chiefs in all Plateau Cultures, they did not have much real power. Chiefs were prominent in the village and in most cases their position was hereditary.
But although Sahaptin chiefs could exert their authority through whipping (perhaps a Spanish trait), social control was as a rule achieved through social pressure and public opinion. There was no police force or military force to control the people.
No one was forced into following the advice of a chief or the decisions of a council meeting.
Those who did not want to conform could move to another village or another band.
What Were Families Like?
For the most part, Plateau Indians had families similar to the ones we see today. The children saw themselves as members of a small family group consisting of a man and a woman. And like today, the average Plateau kinship group consisted of the nuclear family and the closest relatives on both the father's and the mother's side.
But unlike our society, all over the Plateau, it was permitted that a man could have more than one wife (polygyny). But this was not common.
These family ties are shown in the words used to designate family members. There was a connection between family relatives of the same generation on both the father's and the mother's side. All female cousins were called by the same terms as those used for sisters.
Marriages did not occur among first cousins (in distinction to the custom in clan organized Indian societies). Newly wedded couples could live either with the father's or the mother's group.
The Tenino show a patterned kinship behaviour that has possibly existed in other Plateau groups, such as a "joking relationship" between a father's sister's husband and his wife's brother's child, and permitted sexual license between a man and his sister-in-law.
Were There Rich People And Poor People?
Men and women had power in Plateau Indian society. The chief had a girl relative among his advisors. These highly respected women also existed in other groups, such as the Coeur d'Alene, and bear-witness of the independence of women in Plateau society (except for the “Plains-influenced Kutenai” and “Flathead”).
The Northern Plateau Salish, and several other groups kept slaves, as did the Indians on the Northwest Coast. They traded them between each other. The Spokanes did not keep slaves.
What Was Birth And Childhood Like?
In Plateau society, the life of a person was marked by ritual acts that opened the gateway to the different social roles he had to enact. From baby to child, from child to adult. Some rituals even began before a person was born.
Among the Sinkaietk, for example, a pregnant woman was not supposed to give birth to her child in her regular home but in a menstrual lodge or another separate lodge.
The newborn baby spent its day strapped in a cradle of the flat board type. At the age of one the child was ceremonially conferred a name from the wealth of names in the family.
The training of the child was left to the mother and grandmother, but even as a small boy a Sinkaietk could accompany his father on fishing and small-game hunting trips, while the little girls helped their mothers about the house and gathered roots in the fields.
Grandparents saw to it that the child was hardened by such practices as bathing in cold streams.
Disobedience was rare but could sometimes result in the child being whipped.
When Did They Become Adults?
The ceremonies for becoming an adult member of the tribe were different for the boys and the girls. Both took place shortly after puberty. A boy was considered an adult at around 16 or so, a girl at around 13 or so. In either case, they took on adult responsibilities much earlier than we do in our society.
Boys - At puberty the boy was sent out to spend some days fasting on a mountain top and probably to receive a blessing vision from some spirit. Upon returning to the community, he took his place among the adult men.
Girls - A girl who had her first menstruation was secluded in a menstrual lodge some distance from the village. Her hair was bound up in rolls, and she was only allowed to touch it with a small comb. Her face was painted red or yellow, and she wore undecorated clothing. She was not allowed to drink directly from a well but had to use a drinking tube, and she cleansed herself after the flow in a sweathouse.
After a long time - one or several months - she finished her seclusion with prayers in the evening on a hill. Then she returned to the village, a full-grown woman.
Did They Get Married?
They did marry, but marriage was an informal affair, as was divorce.
A woman who was tired of her husband, or had been expelled by him, returned to her parents if they were alive. She could then remarry if she wished.
What Did They Do With The Dead People?
Two forms of burial predominated in the Plateau area, pit burials and rockslide burials.
Pit burials took place in sand or gravel near the river banks and were often marked with piles of boulders. The rockslide burials were also located close to the river huts, with a cedar stake used as a marker. Also some cremation burials occurred in the Yakima Valley and at The Dalles and also in the Lillooet-Thompson area.
The wife and close relatives of the dead person had to follow certain taboos - that is, there were certain things that they couldn't do. A widow was supposed to dress poorly and wail at the grave, sometimes for as long a period as a year.
There are reports that the house where the death occurred was torn down so that the dead person would not reappear there.
Daily Life
Did They Live In Towns?
The Plateau Indians did have permanent villages. These villages were generally located on waterways and particularly at rapids and other places where fish were abundant during the winter season. River villages were permanent winter quarters and could at least temporarily lodge several hundred people. A Kalispel village, for example, numbered 300-400 and a Yakima village as many as 2,000.
Each village had an upland area for hunting. And while the villages belonged to the individual tribes, these uplands were mostly open for people from other villages as well.
There were also permanent or semi-permanent summer camps for hunting and root gathering in mountain valleys.
What Kind Of Houses Did They Live In?
The plateau people had two kinds of houses: winter houses and summer houses. Winter houses were permanent village houses. Summer houses were portable and lightweight.
Winter dwellings were of two main types, the semi-subterranean earth lodge and the mat-covered surface house.
The average earth lodge was circular, with a pit 4-6 feet (1-2 meters) deep and a diameter of 10-40 feet (3-12 meters). The roof was conical or flat and was supported by leaning poles fastened to some central posts. The smoke hole in the top was also the entrance, the floor being reached by an inside ladder or notched log.
The mat-covered surface house was apparently more recent and existed only in the southern Plateau, where it had replaced an older earth lodge. It was made of two walls of varying length leaning together and covered with tule mats. It was a "longhouse" with a series of hearths in the middle, each one of them shared by two families, one on each side. It was replaced in its turn by the Plains Indian tepee.
During the summer people lived in conical mat lodges of small size or in simple windbreaks.
What Did They Eat?
The most important source of food was fish such as: eels, suckers, trout, and especially salmon. They were caught using spears, traps, or nets. Some were eaten fresh, but large amounts of fish were dried on high wooden racks or kept in storage pits, so they could be saved and eaten in wintertime.
Another important source of food was roots of certain plants. The main root was the camas bulb, but bitterroot, onions, wild carrots, and parsnips were also gathered. Roots were dug with digging sticks. The digging sticks were made out of cross handles of antler or wood. The roots were cooked in earth ovens heated by hot stones. Lots of roots could also be saved for the winter.
Berries were still another important source of food -- serviceberries, huckleberries, blueberries.
Hunting for meat barely-ever played an important role, even in the winter. The Indians hunted with the bow and arrow and sometimes, a short spear. The Indians hunted mostly deer but also bear and caribou.
In the winter they tracked animals on long and narrow snowshoes; in the summer they could use a canoe, and also, horses.
The Spokane Indians got all of their food from the wild. There were reliable sources of salmon, fish, edible roots, berries and meats. But sometimes, especially during the winter, food supplies ran low. Maybe, the salmon died, or were stolen. In this situation the Spokane Indians had a backup food supply: they could survive by eating black moss gathered from pine trees. They boiled the moss until it was like glue. Sometimes, they made cake out of it. Sometimes, they flavoured it with meat or wild onions. It probably didn’t taste good, but it was like emergency food.
What Did They Wear?
The way that the local Indians dressed changed over time.
For the last several hundred years, all Plateau peoples used tailored skin garments of the type well-known from the Plains Indians.
Before that, both men and women wore a bark breech-cloth or apron, and a twined bark poncho falling a little below the waist.
During the cold season men wrapped their legs with fur, and women had leggings woven from the fibers of the hemp plant. In winter, they also wore rabbit-fur robes or other skin robes.
Sahaptin women had twined basket hats. Men everywhere had headbands. Caps of fur and feathered head-dresses only appeared in the last two hundred years.
What Did They Look Like?
Both men and women braided their hair.
The Chinook flattened the infant's heads as sign of free birth.
The Flathead, despite their names, never shared this custom. One theory is that flattening of the forehead resulted in a rounded appearance of the head as seen from the front. The Flatheads, because they did not flatten the forehead, had a flat appearance when seen from the front.
Did The Native Indians Own Things?
Yes. Some things were owned by individual people, other things were owned by the whole community.
The village community owned the land, in particular the fishing sites. The village also owned the larger fishing weirs.
The individual owned household tools, weapons, traps and snares, and similar items.
Food resources were in most places distributed according to needs.
A more restricted system prevailed on the northern Plateau, where gift-giving ceremonies occurred, reminiscent of the potlatches of the Northwest Coast Indians: after some days of games and contests, gifts were distributed to the guests, who in their turn reciprocally handed over presents to their hosts.
Although possessions were valued in many parts of the Plateau, the Klamath paid greater attention to them than any other group and held wealthy persons in great esteem. But the attitude of the Klamath, probably derived from the Northwest Coast, differed from the more general Plateau pattern: equality and the sharing of necessities.
How Did They Travel?
Before the horse arrived in the 1700s, Plateau Indians walked, or used canoes. The rivers were the natural highways for native people.
After acquiring horses, overland travel became much easier. People could travel longer distances and take more things with them.
What Was Their Medicine?
Native Indians had special men or women, medicine men or medicine women, also called a shaman, who cured sickness in people by means of his or her powerful helping spirits. The sickness itself was often assumed to be caused by spirits.
But the calling in of spirit medicine was used only when the sickness was severe, and worth the feasting and other expenses involved. For more common diseases, like colds, colic and fevers, people would use local herbs, often gathered by women who preserved the directions for preserving and using the herbs.
What Did They Do For Fun?
They played lacrosse; they played a guessing game, where you have to guess which hand someone is holding something in; they played a game called roulette (an outdoor game, which involves a ring on a stick; and they did horse racing.
Religion, Art, and Mythology
Did They Have A Religion?
For the Plateau Indians, religion, like the rest of the culture, was closely tied to the landscape in which they lived and the animals in it.
The religious beliefs of the Plateau Indians had many similarities with North American religions of other Native Americans. There was a "great spirit." The Okanagan thought of this Great Spirit as a bearded white man. There were also spirits of the atmosphere (winds, thunder, etc.). And there were many lesser animal spirits which served as personal guardian spirits.
What Holidays Did They Celebrate?
The Plateau Indians did not have holidays ("holy-days") in the same way that we do now. For one thing, they did not have a calendar - a fixed common numerical way to keep track of the days.
But they did have special times during the year where special rituals and behaviour took place. The main rituals, religious holidays, were the guardian-spirit quest, the firstling rites, and the winter dance.
What Was The Guardian Spirit Quest?
The Plateau Indians had an institution called a "guardian-spirit quest". This was compulsory for boys and was recommended for girls. It was usually performed in connection with the puberty ceremony, when a boy or girl became a man or woman.
In a spirit-quest, the person would spend several days and nights alone in an isolated spot, waiting for a communication with a spirit. This spirit would become a protector of the person, as well as giving the person a direction. Some spirits made their clients into hunters, others into warriors or medicine men.
Both boys and girls, but preferably the former, could become medicine men. Medicine men were much feared and sometimes very wealthy. They cured diseases by extracting the bad spirit that had entered the patient's body.
On the Northern Plateau they brought back souls that had been stolen by the dead, describing their feats in a dramatic pantomime.
What Were Their Myths?
Most Plateau myths and legends revolved around stories of a culture hero and transformer. They were usually stories about Coyote but in some places it could also be the Blue Jay or another mythical personage. He is a beloved character in the stories, creator and trickster at the same time. Here is a story about “How the Chipmunk Got Her Stripes”:
___________________________________________________________________
There was an old woman who had a granddaughter. Her name was Chipmunk.
One day she told her grandma, "I'm hungry. Give me something to eat. " Her grandma gave her camas, but she didn't want that. She didn't want dried meat or roots.
She saw a service berry bush, so she ran to that and climbed up. She had a little bag to put the berries in. The berries were really ripe, so she picked and ate and picked and ate. She put some in the bag.
All of a sudden she heard someone down by the bush. It was Dirty Face, an animal. Dirty Face asked her if her family had prayed for the berries to be so ripe. Chipmunk said she didn't have any family. Dirty Face said, "Come here and I will be your family.”
Chipmunk made Dirty Face close his eyes first and then she jumped down. Just as she was getting on the ground Dirty Face was going to catch her, but he just scratched her back. He ate her skin under his fingernails. It was so good he was going to kill her and eat her.
Chipmunk ran to her grandma. "Hide me, hide me. Run run!" she cried. Grandma bid her in the back of the teepee where the people squat.
Meadowlark told Dirty Face where Chipmunk was.
He went in the teepee and killed her. He put Chipmunk on the fire and grandma started to cry.
He let grandma have the hind legs, the forelegs, the backbone and the head. He put the heart in his mouth and ate it. Grandma put the backbone, the legs, and the head together, but there was no heart. She went out and she looked around and there she saw the kinni-ki-nic berry. She put it in for a heart. Chipmunk came alive.
The stripes are where the monkey scratched her back, and her heart really is red and round like a kinni-ki-nic berry.
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
 Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
- This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text.
- If your request was declined and you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there.
When people want to have their historical fix in Manila, the first thing that comes to mind is the walled city of Intramuros.
And rightly so, for Intramuros is Manila's innermost sanctum - the place where the beginnings of the city was established. However, it's not as old as what most people like to think.
Except for the San Agustin Church and parts of the walls, practically the whole of Intramuros is Post WWII Imeldific kitsch. If you want a glimpse (and smell!) of the real thing, check out San Nicolas district.
For the armchair-traveller, San Nicolas is a part of the third district of the city of Manila. Long overshadowed by her bigger and brasher big brother (Binondo aka 'Chinatown' ) , parts of San Nicolas is simply known to many as Divisoria- the biggest flea market in town.
Now, unlike the Manila's other districts, San Nicolas carries no national lore of epic proportions like those we equate with Intramuros (the old capital) and Binondo (the financial hub), instead it has slumbered in obscurity for ithe last 400 years of its existence.
To this walker's delight(!)
In San Nicolas we have what is probally Manila's single largest concentration of Period houses and mind you, not the 'old-new' (bagong-luma) wannabe architecture that characterizes much of Intramuros. This is as true as it can get.
On a personal note, I can honnestly say this district is special, not just for every true-blue, heritage-loving Manileño but personally for this walker who, as a child, spent his early years amidst these beautiful wooden houses, playing on the very streets while sucking in the atmosphere of commerce, dark esteros and the overpowering smell of onions.
These days, the historic properties are still there. Though diminished substantially, they still provide a backdrop of what old Manila looked, felt and smelled like in the days of our ancestors.
What revolutions, earthquakes and a world war didnt destroy, our 21st century cavalier attitude eventually will. It's a conststant battle between the old and new, commerce and culture, development and destruction, why can't we get these acts together?
It's only a matter of time before San Nicolas looses her special quality and turns into another concrete ,streamlined , homogenised Makati. Or Alabang. Or Whatever.
But before she does, let's give her a last look. In her last gasp.
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
- This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text.
- If your request was declined and you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there.
Writer, poet, literary critic. Born in Italy and educated in different universities at graduate and post-graduate level. Previously a lecturer of literature in higher education in Milan, an ESOL tutor and lecturer, he now teaches English at Haberdashers' Aske's Hatcham College in London.
His earliest publications are in the late 90's, with atricles about composition, the Modernists and Derek Wallcott. He has also published in 'The Guardian' and published a collection of short stories, 'Illuminations' in 2004 and a collection of poetry 'Ybo' and Other Lies' (ISBN 190061190) in 2005.
'Ybo' and Other Lies' collects his more experimental poems ('Ybo'' and 'Heaven from Hell') as well as some political poems, erotic poems and his 'Flickers'.
'Ybo'' is a hallucinatory journey into the subconscious, suspension dots represent inferential and subconscious links between lines and words that appear slurred and heavily apostrophated.
'Heaven from Hell' is a post-modernist and parodical journey among the dereliction of modern society. It is written in several languages including French, Latin, Italian and ancient Greek, but is mainly in English. It clearly refers to Eliot's 'The Waste Land' in strucure and theme, but does not seem to find a solution at the end, the fragments remain fragments, the sould does not come to new life. Themes within the poem are war, the theatre as a symbol of life (the refrain'We cannot drop the curtain' may refer to suicide), ancient mythology and literature itself.
'Flickers' are short spiritual landscape with very visual images, strong, isolated sounds and harsh flavours.
He is currently said to be working on a novel, 'Case Study' and rumoured to be working on another novel to be published under a pen name. === Sources ===
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- Archived discussion follows below. Please do not modify it.
|
|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
