Here is the paper I wrote for information and social change about nine
months ago, based on the previous lgbtq* history month. The story of the
intervening year will be told after the 2006 lgbtq* hm.
Suburban satyrs: an essay in indexing
John Lindsay
This essay will not contain the usual scholarly apparatus; at this stage it
consists merely as pointers, for there is much more to be done, but it needs
opening out. The usual scholarly apparatus is itself part of information and
social change, that it needs deconstructing, not simply accepting. (It will
contain sections in (), where I am locating comment on the process of
information, following an essay in ISC 2004, dealing with scholarship and
method in general. In an hypertext document these may be organised in other
ways, but in linear text, or serialisation, or pdf, they either form a
separate section, in which the connections are lost, or they are inserted as
here.) (I end with a possible representation which might make a
difference.)
We could start with a walk from Hampton Villa and the Shakespeare rotunda to
Chiswick Villa. It might in fact be several walks. That is a problem
already sorted called classical transport, and we have the movie. We could
add to it the enlightenment gallery, also already a movie. There is also the
Hampton Court Gallery. That is three artefacts constructed using the new
technology and one form of indexing.
Now what we want is to be able to associate the objects with their original
owners, their original sites, their provenance, how they came to be where
they are now. But even that isnıt enough. The associations which exist in
my head will need further indexing.
It does rather surprise me that thirty years after we became capable of
doing this using the new technology, and some progress has been made with
librarianship, really how little has been done.
I am going to need to build a series of cases as evidence, but first I
think, a framework?
Start with the idea of the landscape garden. This strikes me as a strange
oxymoron. Landscape and garden are opposite one another, point and counter
point. Like human nature or free will. Yet landscape garden has a vast
scholarly apparatus. As do free will and human nature. Why do such
opposites attract? What are the social conjunctures which form them?
Let us take landscape garden long back, then forward, sort of retreat on it,
then advance, and then only approach.
Let us go back toTheocritus. He, we will suggest, was an urban sophisicate,
writing for friends who are urban sophisticates, amusing pieces on which
they may ponder. Tales to amuse, but with a touch of sadness and a touch of
irony. His shepherds, with their music, their poetry, their singing, point
to a memory of a simple life which never was, a memory of life outside the
town, a life of suburban simplicity. So suburban is a sort of country town
or town country, a unity of opposites. He describes what is pleasant about
it, green, groves, water, rocks, groves, caves, cool, springs.
He gives us names. Daphnis. Thyrsis. Corydon. Damoetas. Heracles, Hylas,
the Dioscuri, Adonis, Lysidas, Ganymede, Diocles, Polythemus, and quite a
lot more. How many of these names and these idylls are his construction,
and how many of them exist already? Is there such a simple dictionary? Not,
apparently. Tracking them through the Graves Greek Myths means trying to
work out which associations might be appropriate and which imaginary.
We need another thread here, the bucolic and the pastoral, for this will
occupy much space, what are they, what do they mean, all dealing with
everything except that to which I want to point.
Let us go back to Plato. We have more names, Lysis, Socrates, Alcibaides,
Phaedrus. More stories. Not in the form of idylls but of dialogues. The
consequence is that the form separates, for documents will appear in
different places in libraries and bookshops. The strings idyll and dialogue
(or even dialog) will produce different results, while (idyll and dialogue)
or (idyll or dialogue) unlikely to make much sense anywhere for things have
not so been built. We also have genre, with one meaning.
In the Phaedrus I find evidence which moves the suburban thread back too,
for they walk out of the town, indeed there is a comment on what size the
town should be, and how and why harmonious the walk. Then a description of
where it is pleasant to sit, and why. Stream, green, cool, walking, water.
Back from Plato we need to go to the Iliad. Achilles and Patroclus are the
two we want. (But here a danger, I am feeding what will be my proposition
into my selection; this is a construction. I am now moving from the general
to the particular, and to a particular particular.)
Then, after I have written four thousand words, about enough on any topic, I
find a reference to Anacreon, of whom I have never heard. In Encyclopedia
Britannica gives twenty seven references, linking some of what follows, more
evidence, and giving me new names too. In volume two of the Loeb lyrics, so
now I have another thread to follow, between Plato and Homer, and a good
search term. So Anacreon might follow Theocritus one day?
Now we may move forward, we have enough for now. Forward to Virgil and
Horace. Virgil uses Corydon with Alexis in the second eclogue. Do we need
to go through the whole of all their texts pointing to names or stories
which are told in the same or different manners, and do we need to go
through the whole corpus to find references which show that Virgil knew
Theocritus and do we need an entire scholarly apparatus to question whether
any connection is valid? Will half a dozen do, for they all tell different
stories, and none mine. Halperin, Gow, Lawall, Colie, Rosenmeyer, Ferrari,
Sinaiko, Hammond, Bredbeck? For these I should make the effort of minimal
citation otherwise no one will have a clue to what is being referred. (Is
it worth making the point here that these are also so badly indexed that
finding out whether they have referred to something (rather than someone),
often means a complete rereading of the text.) (Is it also worth pointing
that the way citation and bibliography are organised makes the difference
whether you can actually find out whether someone cited someone or not
without a complete rereading of the text?)
Virgil and Horace have an association with the villa of Maecenas, Horace a
farm in the Sabine Hills (as he calls it, now on the map a place outside
Tivoli). Was Maecenası villa at Tivoli too? What would count as evidence?
Now both our threads rejoin. The suburban, the satyrs, but much more clear
now from the first eclogue, irony. How many have made this reading?
(Do I need to explain this? Virgil lost his land in Augustan resettlement,
Theocritus Arcadia a desolate backland no one wanted, more would be an essay
in itself. Is this the wrong place to put this, does it loose the narrative
and the dramatic tension?)
Our next stop is Hadrianıs villa, also near Tivoli. Another huge
literature. But in particular we are after associations with Antinous.
Lambert is help here. There are all the statues of Hadrian, all the statues
of Antinous and all the statues which were at Hadrianıs villa, though as it
was occupied for some hundreds of years after his death, associations might
not be appropriate. In particular we are looking for statues which make
connections back to the Hellas of Theocritus and Plato, the names, the
characters.
Now we have enough pieces to take a great leap forward. This is not to say
there is nothing in between, simply that it would be a lot more work to dig
it out and we have enough to be going on with for now. Jump to Spenser and
the shepheards calendar, January. A short move back for he refers through
an apparatus called E.K. which has aroused enough literature. Which brings
in Aretino, which will bring in Titian, Perez and Philip of Spain, but those
we will leave a short while.
Around Spenser (not Spencer) is Sidney and Arcadia. Did I mention Arcadia
earlier? Or do we now have to move backwards through all the previous to
Arcadia, or to Arcadia as a string? Does that mean starting all over again?
(Notice that paragraph in brackets earlier.) When we remember Virgilıs
first eclogue and we find that Arcadian was the area which the Greeks
couldnıt be bothered conquering because it wasnıt worth the effort, and that
when Theocritus uses Doric, it is regarded as archaic or quaint, have we now
the justification for irony?
Hovering around us are Francis Bacon, his brother, Daphne (not Daphnis) du
Maurier, and when I find Hammond or Smith, a bunch of others of whom I have
never heard. Bacon made a landscape at Twickenham Park and at Gorhambury,
Raleigh at Sherborne. Indexing the parks in the landscape and the writings
will now slowly have to commence. And this will open up another separation,
the visual and the textual.
(Could we have a process document, rather than linear text?)
Round about this time, the collection of sculptures and paintings began, in
a serious way. We have texts on artists and gardens and we have painters of
landscapes. We have collectors. We have tapestries, which have been
collected for a long time for they were also furnishings, and verdage
(vendure). But these are put into Dewey as textiles. Painting with little
blobs of oil is a great work of art, with threads a wall covering. Finding
out where these are, who made them, what they were saying, where they are
now, their provenance is even harder than for paintings.
There will be a point about tapestries but I havenıt found enough to make it
with justification. They deal almost all with inside outside and outside
inside. They have landscapes and gardens, flowers, yet writings on
landscape and garden seem to have paid little attention to them? (We see why
I said I wasnıt going to equip this with scholarly apparatus. Is this point
justifiable? How many writers would I have to cite? If someone then pointed
to one illustration, would that refute my proposition? Would I have to take
the form in n illustrations, y refers to tapestry? Which takes us back to
discipline and decorum.)
Shall we also make a couple of joins at this stage? Of the sculptures which
are being collected, which came from Hadrianıs Villa, which are of Antinous?
Where are they now?
Insert here perhaps that those which are in places like the Vatican Museum
mean a trip to Rome, which has to be planned; those in Wilton knowing when
it is open, whereas those in Hampton Court are a walk across a meadow.
Windsor Castle, a bit of a journey, the British Museum at the end of a
corridor. But what is where? How the index?
Now we approach the national icon and the forest of Arden. Such a vast
literature, we wouldnıt live long enough to read. Now we have Wells,
Cousins, Hammond, Smith, and they refer in parts to how he was managed
before. We also have drama and theatre, a genre as yet untouched. Two
points here. Genre is genus or generic. The form dominates the contents.
Secondly, in performance all sorts of references might be made, which might
be understood by some, but never be recorded. The record is selection.
In this case, I build one on As you like it, for it seems to have been
skipped, around Ganymede, except by Smith. This allows us to involve
another national icon, Peter Hall, in trying to see what may be worked out.
Troillus and Cressida has had more attention. But another thread in now we
want to weave. For the story of Achilles and Patroclus, Troy and the Greeks,
Troillus, Hector, and the rest, seems to me not only a story, but a fable
about politics, in which the current is made comment on. What is the role
of Essex? But there is another layer of politics, how did the world of the
reformation cope with the realisation of the classical? Religious reference
takes us to what people actually thought about fate, about life and death,
life after death, good and evil, heaven and hell. And how their thoughts
determined their actions, or was it the other way round?
We had better put in Marlowe though on him there is much? Hero and Leander
will recur, as of course, in case we think we didnıt know about him, or his
sticky end, Edward II. Or Marloweıs. We had better put in Barnfield too.
Mentioned in the Variorum on As you like it, a sort of throw away line, then
because I now have the string, find in Borris, and google to Norton. Then
we discover Fraunce, but we will leave that for another occasion.
(There is something particular in the academic writers I have referred to so
far, they use us, we, our, as if we all know what this pronoun includes.
But I donıt know whether I am included in the communities to which they seek
embrace. To say that we share a culture is to put the answer to the
question into the question. Quite often, I donıt even know what they are
talking about, never mind why they are talking about it, or what they think
my response might be. They seem to chunk and clump stuff into categories,
then put stuff into categories different from what I would expect. To
demonstrate this assertion with too many representations would make all this
over long, and might be a different essay from one about indexing, but one
example will do? Smith constructs a category passionate shepherd (which is
fine, that strikes with my pastoral) and a category shipwrecked youth,
(which is fine, I can see that though I hadnıt thought of it), and then puts
As you like it and Ganymede into the latter and not the former. Why?)
(This leads me on to a point about the nature of scholarship and criticism
in a world of indexing. Trying to describe what you think someone is
saying, then criticising your thinking of their saying seems to me to lead
to the sort of clutter and impenetrability which I find in many of these
texts. Were they to respond, then turf wars proliferate, starting at the
most simple, of the author saying you hadnıt correctly understood what the
author was saying.
If the author is alive, asking for evidence of connection, why is passionate
shepherd in shipwreck, would seem to me richer, if the author dead, suggest
connections as evidence and let others add evidence. It is perfectly
reasonable not to know something and valuable to have it pointed out, if it
adds to the matter. If you judge it not to, it be because you are on
another matter. End of sidebar on method.)
In the court of the dying Elizabeth then James all these threads come
together. 1604 has its tri centenary as I start this, and there have been
activities or celebrations or scholarly events around it. Yet in none of
them, can I find the connection I am making here. Yet Betteridge has made a
book? Is this modern construction of history dishonesty, unknowing,
perfidy, or what? Who has an obligation?
In his title he used renaissance. Is that a thread as substantial as
Arcadia? Should it too have a capital? There is a vast literature on
renaissance. That takes us back to Pico, to Ficino, Aretino, Petrach,
Dante, Plato, and to Perez. Perez was in England, perhaps with Francis
Bacon? (Then in an essay in Hammond figuring I find a reference to Philip
and Lerma, neither indexed, and the reference source improperly cited, so
how important is that going to be, will I need to note it, how will I ever
find it again, and can I litter the essay with these little asides on method
while holding any thread?)
This essay is finished in the approach to the first lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgendered, history month, what a mouthful, February 2005. Now we have
enough of an apparatus to be able to make a modern connection? Near Hampton
Court is Ham House. As part of the Thames Landscape Strategy an avenue has
been opened up across scrubland called Ham lands. A little forest of Arden
has been formed. But for a long time, though I donıt know how one would
track the history, other events have happened here. How we have a new
concept, dogging, and dogging surrey in google produces us a nugget: Sandy
Lane. A new reality has been made. Suburban arcadia.
(Here we do our first scappod, an outdoor podcast, which will raise a whole
new issue in indexing.)
Let us simply gather the threads into a string so we may remember.
Theocritus, Plato, Virgil, Horace, Maecenas, Hadrian, Antinous, Spenser,
Shakespeare, Bacon, James VI and I. Now we move forward.
(But an insert, for at some point we found Norton, and almost all of this he
had worked out in 1974, but I must assert in good faith thirty years later,
I did almost all the above myself. Then in Borris I find Nortonıs essay of
1974 reprinted with an editorıs note on its significance. That was the year
we were starting the Gay Librariansı Group and making the argument about gay
as a concept.)
Milton and Marvel now we find a literature. Milton the key was Lysidas.
Had I mentioned him in Theocritus, the seventh idyll? But then I found him
somewhere else, though I canıt remember where, and of course I canıt know
whether it is intended to be the same or another, or anew. Christopher Hill
even says there is no need to imagine Milton even knew Edward King!
Hammond is hotting up the Milton and Marvel literature. Marvelıs the garden
had seemed obvious to me a time ago, and probably also his Appleton House.
This was continuing the landscape and garden connection, in case it has been
a little lost in the literature. We have also lost a little the pictures,
the sculpture collection, and so far not mentioned enough the grand tour?
Round about now we have a political point where a lot comes together and
separates. We might make another thread, simply to show how much
uncertainly people were having to make. From Bosworth Field, to the death
of Henry VIII, then of Edward, then of Mary, then of Elizabeth, then
Charles, then Charles again and James again (though not dead), then William,
then Anne. Hardly an ordered transmission of authority, each possibly could
have gone another way, religion on the surface, but each groups in and out
of power. I wonder how Starkie will deal?
Which allows us to jump forward, to Burke. For by then these bushes have
been cleared and a new thicket made, slavery, the colonies, though an old
thicket, Ireland and another, women, remain. (When can I introduce the
atheism and the science and the native thickets?) Burke in his essay on the
beauty and the sublime makes a connection and a difference which makes no
sense to me. He refers back to Longinus but doesnıt seem to me to be
writing about what Longinus was writing about. Burke, I have seen, in a
meeting with the ladies of Llangollen made a comment which might include
himself. How much Burke do we need? But that took me back to Hogarth and
his analysis of beauty with the illustration. The serpentine line is not
the dancing master, it is the bottom of Antinous.
We are nearly there.
For Hogarth was a next door neighbour of Burlington. Burlington at Chiswick
House. It is still there. Statues from Hadrianıs Villa. They are still
there, I think. Though the indexing and the cataloguing means I canıt be
sure.
Connecting Burke and Hogarth is Walpole and he has been outed by Mowl.
Round Burlington is Handel who has been outed by Harris. And she has done
much more, showing in the cantatas (whereas I was thinking of the operas)
how the characters make classical references and how the clients formed
clubs. I had picked the Arcadian Academy earlier. Burlington and Kent had
been outed by another Harris, and by Uglow but neither cite any sources so
leave us dangling.
Only one national icon is missing, Pope. We have the pastorals, in
particular Alexis, which take us back to the Eclogues. And tucked away on
page 46 of the Twickenham pastoral poetry is that Thyrsis metaphorphed into
Delia. (Then I pick up a link to Damon, which isnıt in the Twickenham index
but is the title to the spring, or first pastoral, to Trumbull. Did I
mention that he was secretary to William III? Had I mentioned Keppel or
Bentinck?)
Burlington, Kent, Handel, Pope, to which we add John Gay, who has been outed
by Nokes. Chiswick, Popeıs Villa, Walpole Strawberry Hill, Stephen Fox and
Redlynch, Lincoln, Castle Hill, Rousham and Esher, Oatlands and Claremont,
Cobham and Stowe, Sanderson Miller, Shenstone, Leasowes, Lyttleton and
Hagely and we want to add one more. Frederick, Prince of Wales, for he will
unlock a lot more. But that will take us into 1733 and I donıt have enough
material yet for that story. It also gives us dogs, I am his masterıs, and
that takes us back to Theocritus and the first idyll and the cup with the
wolves and the bunch of grapes. For then I find among statues in the
Ludoviski collection dogs and bunches of grapes and satyrs. Here is a whole
new feast which must be celebrated.
But we have enough for the points I want to connect.
What I am suggesting is that men wanting to have sex with men forms an
association with religion and politics, that in order to communicate these
things they formed associations with the suburban, which allowed for genre.
(Rough trade) That outside the town, behaviour was possible. These stories
were then decorated as art, in words, in images, which could be interpreted,
knowing and unknowing. Knowledge management. But older men also fancied
younger men, not necessarily reciprocated, which meant either artifice or
the exercise of power.
Sometimes there was love, but this is a design we haven t yet decoded. Love
might include the erotic, desire might include the physical connection and
that might include sodomy. Now there is a particularity which will allow us
another thread. But I canıt for the life of me see why one would want to
allow it so much voice?
There is so much else.
Indexing, as well as a pointing finger, seems to me to have three distinct
meanings. There is what we might have at the back of a book, which might or
might not be well done. There is what you might do in a file such as this
one, where I could using a package such as the one I am using, make at the
end a list of strings and the pages on which they occur, and probably an
hypertext connection forth and back. Then there is the building of an
inverted file where every occurrence of a string is mapped against the
fragment where it occurs. This allows for the Boolean., strings threaded, in
a paragraph and so forth. As entire corpuses are digitised there will be
new connections to be made, though proving propositions will be more
difficult.
But so far, one significant truth must be stated: in order to find a string
you have to know the string. Otherwise you have to make a connection, and
you canıt tell whether the connection is true. To look up a word in a
dictionary, you have to know how to spell the word, and you have to know the
word. Though we do know how to make a thesaurus, which means a treasury,
but the relation of the content and container is the machine of our devising
and that will take us into another world which we will keep for another
walk.
We have now probably lost the word information in any useful sense at all.
Perhaps we have lost the word indexing too? When people donıt understand
what is being done to them, or even that it is being done, they may hardly
be said to be in charge of the social change of their lives?
When I was very young and homosexuality was in Dewey as a medical condition,
and by accident I presume I found Corydon by Gide, in the public library, I
found another world. Nearly fifty years later, I found Theocritus, then
unpacked a gallery of such works as imagination is made of. Had I known
these fifty years ago, how different a life might I have lived? Those now
learning for the first time how to index, how to catalogue and classify, how
to blog, to podcast, will have a new world to make, in conditions not of
their own making, in which dominant ideas will class. I wonder what they
will make of it?
There is a chunk of work still to be done. Those writing between now and
then have to be discovered. Searching on the British Library catalogue on
Phaedrus, Theocritus, produces a vast literature. Among them, in 1811,
Polwhele, who on page 122 makes a plea for toleration which is tearful. We
after 1968 have achieved something, but there are voices hidden in the past
waiting for their liberation, in the way that Gay Switchboard was intended
to allow connections to be made.
Now I have to add the elements of an apparatus. I am putting in this only
works I have read, not those cited elsewhere, and nothing like all that I
have read. Just enough. I am also not giving references constructed
according to some protocol, just enough to identify.
I think I have answered the question I asked at the beginning, people make
history in conditions not of their own making, and some, under some
circumstances, shift the old dominant ideas into ones, some of which fail
and others come to dominate. In the process the shards of the past remain
and the prefigurative forms of the future form. This human nature, free
will and landscape garden. The one I now find most useful is otium
negotium. Unpicking that though I think I will leave to another essay, which
might start with Horace and Pope?
Betteridge, Tom. Sodomy in early modern Europe. 2002
Borris, K and Kluwitter, G. The affectionate shepherd. 2001.
Bredbeck, Gregory. Sodomy and interpretation. 1991
Burke, Edmund. A philosophical enquiry into the origin of our ideas of the
sublime and beautiful. 1757.
Colie, Rosemary. Shakespeareıs living art. 1974. (She gets all the pastoral
but none of the sexual)
Cousins, A. Shakespeareıs sonnets and narrative poems. Longmans
education.2000 (Has a line on queering the canon, which given this is an
educational text is interesting)
Dollimore, Jonathan. (ed) Political Shakespeare. First edition 1985 which
doesnıt contain, apparently, Dollimore, J. Shakespeareıs understudies, which
is in the second edition, 1994. This contains much wider material than this
essay needs but Iım inserting it simply to show a problem in apparatus.
Ferrari, G. Listening to the cicadas. 1987.
Gide, A. Corydon. 1920
Gow, Theocritus. 1952
Halperin, David. One hundred years of homosexuality. 1990.
Halperin, David. Before pastoral. Theocritus and the ancient tradition of
bucolic poetry. 1983.
Hammond, Paul. Figuring sex between men from Shakespeare to Rochester. OUP.
2002. (Should we add this isnıt available in main London bookshops at the
beginning of 2005? It is worth buying. Does that mean we should add ebay,
Amazon, google to the apparatus, or should I add the earlier essay in this
set?)
Harris, Eileen. Handel as Orpheus.
Harris, John. The Palladians. 1981
Hill, Christopher. Milton and the English revolution. 1977.
Hogarth, Analysis of beauty. edited with an introduction and notes by Ronald
Paulson. London ; New Haven : Published for the Paul Mellon Centre for
British Art by Yale University Press, 1997
Lambert, beloved and god.
Lawall, G. Theocritus Coan pastorals. 1967.
Lindsay, J. Knowledge Organisation: Information, Systems and Social Change.
Paper in Information and Social Change, Vol 20, 2004.
http://www.libr.org/ISC/articles/20-John_Lindsay.html
. (I put this in, not because I have referred to it in this text, but
because it provides a foundation for much of what I am placing here about
the nature of information.)
Maranon, Antonio Perez. 1954.
Maurier, Daphne du. The golden boys.
Mowl, Timothy. Horace Walpole : the great outsider. London : John Murray,
1996.
Nokes, David. John Gay : a profession of friendship.
Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1995
Norton, Richtor. Pastoral homoeroticism and Barnfield, the affectionate
shepherd.1974. in Borris.
Norton, Richtor. web site.
Polwhele, W. Theocritus. 1811
Pope, Alexander. Pastoral poetry. Ed. Audra, E. Twickenham.
Rosenmeyer, The green cabinet. 1969
Sinaiko, H. Love, knowledge and discourse. Plato on Phaedrus. 1965.
Sinfield, A. Faultlines. Cultural materialism and the politics of dissident
reading. OUP, 1992. This is much wider than this essay, but I am including
it to show a whole category, cultural materialism, of which I knew nothing,
It is also worth including for he makes no mention of libraries,
classification, controlled vocabularies, or any of the matters which I was
saying in 1975 are themselves part of that social construction.
Smith, B. Homosexual desire in Shakespeareıs England. 1991
Uglow, Jenny. Royal Academy magazine, 2004.
Wells, Stanley. Looking for sex in Shakespeare. 2004.
Woods, Gregory. A history of gay literature: the male tradition. Yale, 1999.
I wonder whether it is possible to construct a visual index to this?
Date line/genre
Literature
Landscape
Visual arts
Ideas
-500BC
Theocritus
Hmm
Bucolic
about 0
Virgil
Hadrian
Titian
Idyllic
1500
Spenser
Kent
Hogarth
Pastoral
2000
Smith
Wilkie
Jarman
Arcadian
Does this give enough of the idea? I have used particularities as anchors.
We could go further, and make hyperlinks to the dominant section where we
have discussed the category and the association? We could even use those as
section header names, though I suspect that would lead to confusion as they
in turn would need explanation? I have already referred to the
arbitratiness of dating lines, centuries, birth of someone, periods with
capitals, so my chunking and clumping is less arbitrary.
Then we could go a step further and show the references from one period
backwards to another? But that would lose this simplicity and need a more
careful outlining.
Do I need a reminding note on general method? In order to talk about
something, an evidence, it has to have a name. This is my response to
Wittgensteinıs poker. In order to talk about a greater something, a case,
it too has to have a name, but then the evidences must be listed within the
case. At some point, there needs to be grouping and ordering, ordering and
grouping, and these orders and groups have to have names. And so on.
When threads become tapestries, to see the whole, it helps to visualise.
Working on methods for visualisation is the next step.
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
|
