It's okay to be good and not great
July 17, 2019 4:07 AM   Subscribe

What if striving to be great is what's holding you back? “Good is the enemy of great” is one of the most popular self-improvement expressions there is... It sounds appealing and rolls off the tongue nicely, but there’s a good chance it’s downright wrong."
posted by smoke (46 comments total) 53 users marked this as a favorite
 
I'm more familiar with "the perfect is the enemy of the good", but then again I'm at the age when this sort of cultish, Pursuit of Excellence stuff just tires me out.
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:35 AM on July 17 [79 favorites]


I’m definitely in the “Done is better than perfect” crowd. How many writers do I know who’ve never gotten beyond Chapter 1 because they can’t perfect it? Way too many.
posted by Nancy_LockIsLit_Palmer at 4:41 AM on July 17 [21 favorites]


Yeah, "good is the enemy of great" is just a perversion of "perfect is the enemy of good."

The latter is advice meant to break someone out of decision paralysis or anxiety. It logically follows that the inversion would generate anxiety as we discourage people from celebrating victories unless they're complete and indisputable.
posted by explosion at 4:42 AM on July 17 [15 favorites]


I've long felt that the whole "dare to be great, give 110%, etc." mantra that has come to infest our society is sort of a "the poor are just lazy, it's their own fault" message, but aimed at the middle classes as a way to also imply that their failure to be at the top is their own damn fault and the result of them not trying hard enough.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:47 AM on July 17 [68 favorites]


Worse is better, talking about these contrasting styles in the development of systems software- makes a similar point, but based on some 40 years of Unix/Linux taking over the obeservable computing universe.
posted by jenkinsEar at 4:52 AM on July 17 [5 favorites]


Innovation is the enemy of function.
Disruption is the enemy of living.
Catchphrases are the enemy of meaning.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:07 AM on July 17 [25 favorites]


Perfect is the enemy of good, often attributed to Voltaire.
posted by gimonca at 5:23 AM on July 17


Two things really resonated with me from this article. Firstly, the quote about having to "train where you are at, not where you want to be "is very relevant to my running habits. It's something I often forget, and the result is injury.

Secondly, this part:
Research shows that sustainable progress, in everything from diet to fitness to creativity, isn’t about being consistently great; it’s about being great at being consistent. It’s about being good enough over and over again.
I'm on a new job at the moment and it was a great reminder for me to stay steady.
posted by smoke at 5:27 AM on July 17 [29 favorites]


When people ask me the throwaway "How are you doing?" question, offered by custom and social obligation, I usually answer "Adequate," or "Content," and they always seem to catch on the seeming mediumness of such an assessment. When pressed, or asked why I'm never great, fantastic, or amazing (to use the lexicon of the post-adjective culture of the US, which requires everything to be the Best [X} EVER at all times, I wryly point out that, were I in one of those halcyon moments at which perfection has appeared like a glint of sunset, I almost certainly wouldn't be somewhere where I'd have to answer the same question asked repeatedly by people who only ask to be polite and not because they actually have any interest in the answer.

I'm reminded of the earlier conversation about the intrusion of business scheduling into home life and the sort of motivational-poster mantra-mania and why I'm content as a haphazard secular taoist who took heart from Pema Chödrön's advice to abandon all hope of fruition. When you aim at the best of all things ever, nothing else ever seems to be enough, and in a culture where executive-level corporate dickfaces beat that mantra into the people who do all their work while they toil away at achieving "excellence" or whatever modern version there is of that fuckery.

As a performer in the spoken word and musical genres, I'm occasionally given to be a little regretful that I wasn't working as frequently or performing as I could have because I was always holding out to mutilate my best, freshest, most concise ideas until they were acceptably perfect, so instead of working out rough patches on a stage in front of a receptive audience, I was just keeping my work locked away while I fidgeted over le mot juste, and the perfect sound, and the most amazing show ever...which never came because when you aim for only the best, you neglect the whole story for the microscopic detail. It was useful, in getting away from that crippling inhibition, to look to work I always regarded as perfect and magical, only to find that the artists who made that work often incorporated a lot of happy accidents, rough corners, and defects-as-features and the perfection that was in the work was in the mind of the listener.

These days, I perform live with sketchy notes, vague ideas of what I'm going to do with my instruments, and a sense that comes from a continuing streak of successful performances that end with genuine applause and people who approach when I'm winding up cables and packing my gear to tell me that they enjoyed my work, and who are able to point out details and intentions that I'm proud of, or occasionally unaware of. I review my recordings and the mistakes and glitches don't bother me anymore, because the presentation of the whole beats back my insecurity about the details. I don't aim to be great—I aim to be there, fully present, fully invested, and accepting of when things don't go quite the way I planned. The last five years of my side hustle as a performer have been wonderful, moreso as I further gain confidence from being okay with being okay.

In my writing, I'm still working on that, though Metafilter has largely cured me of anxiety of my fucked-up wording, long sentences that veer into the wrong direction and then stop, and strange omissions of words that I was sure I typed, but do not appear in the posting as it appears, because my head is often ahead of my hands. I used to send whining emails to moderators in hopes of making a tiny correction or insertion, and to be sure, the advent of the brief edit window was a godsend, but there's something fine about writing to a receptive, engaged audience who read through the screw-ups and get to the gist. I'm working on a book, and it's a little harder to engage the same thing I have in performance because there's no audience to respond to help me with the Buddhist imperative to stay with what I am doing. I'm pondering returning to my old Livejournal mode of writing serially and publicly, which worked well for the same reason that stepping on stage with a synthesizer and a microphone works—being unable to give up so easily makes great practice for just continuing, regardless of how what you're doing feels when your anxieties are in play. Good often becomes great when it's been handled with a light touch and a sense of flow, for which the corporate imperative to aim high is absolutely antithetical.

Moments after I hit Post Comment, I will doubt this comment, find all the errors that arose because I'm fluttering through while I'm at work, or just out of haste, and in a few minutes, it will be locked down, and fixed in place.

That's okay. It's good, in fact. I'm content.
posted by sonascope at 5:44 AM on July 17 [47 favorites]


Here's another lovely phrasing of this concept, from a sweet little blog called "Meet Me At Mike's" that makes me cozy-happy: Pip Lincolne, The Middle Matters Too.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 5:50 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


Anything worth doing is worth doing badly— that’s the antidote catchphrase I like.
posted by SaltySalticid at 6:03 AM on July 17 [11 favorites]


There's a story in the excellent book Art & Fear about a ceramics teacher who divided his class into two groups. The first group was told: to get an "A," turn in 50 pounds of pots on the last day of class. The second group was told: to get an "A," turn in one perfect pot on the last day of class. The first group made the best pots.

The story's probably apocryphal, but I did something similar for my music and it worked out really well. I'd been going through cycles where I'd produce an album in 3 weeks and then create nothing for the next 4 or 5 months. But in 2016 I started a song-a-week project. It was a chore at first, but it got easier and easier... by the end of the year I'd recorded 120 songs, and then more than 260 in 2017.

The important bit though: I listened to my own work. A lot, repeatedly, and over time. I found that, with emotional distance from the process of making the music, some of what I was doing was just not very enjoyable to listen to -- and some of it really was. I made the conscious choice to drop what didn't work and specialize in what did. That was the best thing I ever did for my music and it was pretty good for my self-esteem too (even though it made me realize just how much I've produced in the past that wasn't so hot.)
posted by Foosnark at 6:13 AM on July 17 [20 favorites]


I did something similar for my music and it worked out really well. I'd been going through cycles where I'd produce an album in 3 weeks and then create nothing for the next 4 or 5 months. But in 2016 I started a song-a-week project. It was a chore at first, but it got easier and easier... by the end of the year I'd recorded 120 songs, and then more than 260 in 2017. [...] I found that, with emotional distance from the process of making the music, some of what I was doing was just not very enjoyable to listen to -- and some of it really was.

I often say that the biggest leap forward my writing took was when I had a column in the NYU student newspaper. It was a cheeseball weekly thing about "dorm life and living", and the only thing they cared about was filling column inches. (Once I was at the newspaper office typing my column into their computers - this was the days before email - and the associate editor walked up behind the computer, leaned over it, and intoned directly into my face - "Length, EC! Think length!") No matter how good or bad my work was, they would print it.

....And I also had friends who were honest enough to say things like, "....Saw your latest column this week. ....That one took you only 5 minutes to write, didn't it?" But I'd also already read it and agreed that "eughhg, yeah, that one kinda sucked."

But then there were a couple that were good, and I could see why they were good, and I also had the friends saying "yeah, that one was good", and once I even had a week of loose acquaintances and even a couple strangers saying "wow, I really liked that one," and it was all eye opening. It's still not perfect; I read it today and there are things I itch to rewrite. But there's definitely a there there.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:24 AM on July 17 [9 favorites]


Research shows that sustainable progress, in everything from diet to fitness to creativity, isn’t about being consistently great; it’s about being great at being consistent.

Definitely. But then being consistent, for me, can be anxiety inducing in the same way as striving for perfection. Thinking about doing anything for eternity makes me itchy so I give up anyway. I think there are millions more ways to sabatage myself than catchphrases, it's an arms race.
posted by waving at 6:40 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


I did a 75-day direct ink drawing challenge. It didn’t matter if the work was good or bad, as long as I made a mark and posted it (on Instagram) every day. Did I do great work? Not really. But my confidence in my line grew. I was surprised: some of the quick sketches I did in bed, disconnected from outcome, solely to keep my streak going, were sometimes the best received. People connected with the sketches made when I was in the flow of Now. Good enough? Yes.
posted by Nancy_LockIsLit_Palmer at 6:44 AM on July 17 [5 favorites]


I was an anxious perfectionist for most of my life, and hated myself and never made any artwork. Consciously trying to get over that is one of the best things I ever did. I’m almost mad at myself for taking this long to trust myself and be ok with making just a TON of mediocre work, because that’s how you get GREAT, as others have said.

I teach sometimes and I get really weird reactions from teachers AND students when I tell the kids that they should just get to work and make SOMETHING even if they don’t have an idea, or if they have half an idea, just roll with it and get it out because it’s probably not the best idea anyway and sometimes you need to work through the bad ideas and make a lot of bad work in order to get to the good stuff. But I’m really saying it for the baby perfectionists who need to hear that everything they do doesn’t need to be perfect and praised, because the habit of work (consistency!) and being comfortable with failure and also being able to recognize what’s good in what you’re doing, are all very important skills as a working artist.
posted by jeweled accumulation at 6:50 AM on July 17 [7 favorites]


Two books that discuss this concept are:

Impro (well, in the case of what I personally read, Impro for Storytellers, but my understanding is he addresses this in Impro also) by Keith Johnstone

The Inner Game of Tennis by Timothy Gallwey

In my opinion Johnstone does a better job of describing it, more concise and vivid. Improv (in his opinion) is about letting go of "trying" to be good. He had a great line about the constipation of people just bashing their heads against the problem with effort. I need to go dig up my copy and get the quote...
posted by Cozybee at 6:53 AM on July 17 [2 favorites]


I propose burning every single "self-improvement" and "business" book, block, seminar, TED talk and motivational series and then assigning all of the authors/speakers to a decade of forced public apologies.
posted by aspersioncast at 6:55 AM on July 17 [8 favorites]


Oh oh and exhuming Steven Covey and hanging his corpse in the town square.
posted by aspersioncast at 7:01 AM on July 17 [1 favorite]


I bet a book on the ancient Japanese Art Of Apology would sell
posted by thelonius at 7:01 AM on July 17 [1 favorite]


I see this coming up more and more often lately. There was a running set of anti-10x programmer memes on Twitter the past week from people who've gotten sick of the whole 10x / ninja / rockstar programmer mentality. I enjoyed the "how to tell if you have a 10x cat" series the most. (Proud to say all of my cats are 10x cats. Not that they can be bothered to care.)

I take pride in doing a good job. My father drilled into me, well before I even entered the workplace, the idea that you should give your employer eight hours work for eight hours pay. No less, but no more. And never be "afraid" of your job - and that's at least part of what this 10x and other crap is about. Creating a competition culture within the workforce and trying to convince people to run themselves ragged for the good of companies.

No thank you. I want to do good work. I want to feel good about giving something for what I get, and I certainly don't want to be underperforming to reasonable expectations.

But I'm getting older, have lost a few friends in the past few years, and can see with much more clarity what matters and what doesn't. Success in the workplace isn't it. Going to share this piece around a bit, for folks who need to hear it.
posted by jzb at 7:12 AM on July 17 [16 favorites]


I propose burning every single "self-improvement" and "business" book, block, seminar, TED talk and motivational series and then assigning all of the authors/speakers to a decade of forced public apologies.

Oh good lord this. Especially since my boss is all in on this kind of thing, to the point where he's enrolled in a whole course that charges him a couple grand a month to go through all this training in their method.

Fortunately he's chosen one that emphasizes making sure that you have a good work/life balance, at least, and sometimes the course reminds him to take care of his staff (one day one assignment he got was to close the office two hours early as a way to reward his staff for their work). However - a lot of times he will get all excited about one or another tip for customer service or business development tracking or whatthehellever and want to do it - but then will offload the actual work of doing it onto me. (Like, yeah, sending a handwritten birthday card to each of your old clients is a nice customer service touch. But that translates to "EC spends a good ninety minutes every week handwriting birthday cards to about 20-30 people she's never met.") This is one part of why I am already considering getting the hell out of here after only about five months.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:22 AM on July 17 [9 favorites]


I have literally never heard the phrase “good is the enemy of great” before this very moment.

It's a dumb phrase.
posted by kyrademon at 7:24 AM on July 17 [20 favorites]


he will get all excited about one or another tip for customer service or business development tracking or whatthehellever

I call this Executive Shiny Thing Syndrome. I've worked one or two rungs below folks who have this, and it's not pleasant. Even otherwise competent and decent managers can be really, really annoying when you're getting those "hey I just heard of this thing and I'm really excited about it, and can you just..." emails out of the sky.
posted by jzb at 7:28 AM on July 17 [6 favorites]


I guess the question of what it is you are comparing yourself or your efforts to in the pursuit of "great" is what seems to be the crux of the argument. The section on Eliud Kipchoge kinda shows that, where the notion of training consistently at something less than peak effort is given as his preference and in the races themselves he sets out to reach "personal bests" rather than focus on someone else's accomplishments, such as the world record. But at the same time, he's so good at what he does a personal best is roughly equivalent to a world record time, which he also would surely know.

It isn't the striving to be better than someone else directly, it's the focus on making one's own best effort, but that can still be a process towards a kind of "greatness" in different measures. In the arts there are people like Flaubert and Kubrick who were nothing if not obsessed by trying to get every detail exactly right and their work is celebrated for that effort, while other artists are more invested in working with whatever materials or circumstance they have at the moment and doing the best with what they have. Both methods can be fruitful for different reasons, the former for the exactitude of the choices involved showing a greater whole that couldn't be achieved by anything less than complete investment in every element, where the latter can show the "genius" of adaptability and the adjusting to the flow of the moment. Both though can still be chasing greatness for the amount of energy and self put into the works.

Some artists are focused on their "competitors" and the challenge involved in trying to do something more, something better adds an intensity and focus to their work, not unlike that of some sports figures perhaps. Michael Jordan was Michael Jordan because he wouldn't let others best him if he could do anything about it and Picasso was Picasso in much the same way.

The thing with chasing greatness is only a very few will ever be seen as great in a societal sense as that is what greatness is about, the truly exceptional. Most of us can't be great in that way because we don't have the talents and/or won't put in the effort. Accepting that is, well, great as it can allow us to focus on just doing our best, but chasing greatness doesn't have to be the wrong choice for everyone.
posted by gusottertrout at 7:32 AM on July 17 [2 favorites]


I have literally never heard the phrase “good is the enemy of great” before this very moment.

Yeah, like many here, I've only heard the opposite, as a way to think to snap yourself out of an inability to get something done.

I think this shows we're keeping good company.
posted by praemunire at 7:33 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


chasing greatness doesn't have to be the wrong choice for everyone.

Most of what's done in today's corporate America isn't worth anyone's sacrificing so much as an ice cream sandwich to pursue greatness in. It's not just whether some form of greatness is attainable; it's whether the actual substantive end is worthy.
posted by praemunire at 7:36 AM on July 17 [15 favorites]


"Letting the perfect be the enemy of the possible" is actually sorta useful occasionally, but it so often comes in the company of complete bullshit that it's hard to take.
posted by aspersioncast at 7:50 AM on July 17


And taking too much pride in something you've done half-ass is how you become Donald Trump.
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:02 AM on July 17 [1 favorite]


Personally, I combine a couple few aphorisms- "Perfect is the enemy of good", "Good is the enemy of good-enough", and "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"- and I get "Perfect and good-enough are friends", which is pretty close to a guiding principle as I'm going to get regarding my freelancing. If I'm getting paid below what I want and I have to take a job because I'm broke, I'm unashamedly turning in half-ass work to someone who wants to pay me half-ass wages. Just because I personally have high standards doesn't mean the person who I'm working with is going to have the same high standards, and there's no reason to make myself crazy doing my best work (or even good work) when it will not be appreciated.
posted by 23skidoo at 8:16 AM on July 17 [10 favorites]


Most of what's done in today's corporate America isn't worth anyone's sacrificing so much as an ice cream sandwich to pursue greatness in. It's not just whether some form of greatness is attainable; it's whether the actual substantive end is worthy.

Nine days in Hell and you get the tenth for free!
posted by waving at 8:55 AM on July 17 [1 favorite]


I’m definitely in the “Done is better than perfect” crowd.

sorry, my mom needs to interject here. That should read "finished is better than perfect".
posted by philip-random at 8:58 AM on July 17 [4 favorites]


I have an annoying twist on this. After realizing that I should be striving more for consistency than perfection in my creative endeavors, my procrastination shifted to trying to construct the perfect daily routine that would allow me to do all the things I want to do in a consistent manner.

It all fits into the schedule in theory, and I want to do all of it, but when it comes to actually carrying out the schedule, my rebellious side kicks in and I want to do anything but the thing I intended to do in that moment.

The biggest hack is sleep: if I spend a few unplanned hours on the internet in the evening, and don’t want to shortchange myself on sleep, my plans for the next morning before work go out the window. If I plan to do things in the evening instead, I feel too exhausted after work to get started right away, and suddenly it’s bedtime anyway. Still trying to figure that one out.
posted by mantecol at 9:20 AM on July 17 [7 favorites]


One of my former mentors used to say "nothing real is ever ideal, and vice versa."

That simple mantra has snapped me out of many cases of task paralysis...including the one I'm in now. I knew checking Metafilter instead of writing was a good idea!
posted by rpfields at 9:27 AM on July 17 [10 favorites]


Blowing stuff off was how I finished my Ph.D., wrote and published two books, and won three over-50 world championships in my sport. Blowing off most things except the thing you want to do, and NOT EVEN GIVING 100% TO THE THING I WANT TO DO. Only now that I'm retired do I try to get lots of little things achieved, and even then I have stricken several Important Things off my task list/schedule because I won't get anything done if I do them too.

I did not give 100% to my job when I was furtively writing a novel at my desk. I gave 20%, maybe. But that was good enough to get the job done, and I wasn't playing solitaire, anyway.
posted by Peach at 9:31 AM on July 17 [6 favorites]


... I usually answer "Adequate," or "Content," and they always seem to catch on the seeming mediumness of such an assessment.


'People ask me how I am, I say "Fairly decent." I don't give them any superlatives, nothing to gossip about: "Relatively okay." Sometimes I'll say "I'm moderately neato." If I'm in a particularly jaunty mood I'll say "I'm not unwell, thank you" - that pisses them off, because they have to figure that one out for themselves!'
      -- George Carlin
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:35 AM on July 17 [2 favorites]




This is something I have learned to try to impart in any education or training I do.

When I was doing barista and customer service training at my last job I put my empathy hat on and understood early on that a lot of the people I was training had a lot of social anxiety just like I do, and that it was helpful to assure them that nothing we were doing was more important than them getting their hands dirty and making mistakes, that nothing we were doing was mission critical or going to get them "fired" or yelled at or anything.

"You are here to make a mess and make mistakes! Go for it! I actually want you to make lots of mistakes! And if you do actually manage to break anything I can fix it. It'll be ok!"

This process helps de-stigmatize and breaks the link between making a mistake and feeling shame or fear or other negative or self-critical thoughts about making mistakes.

That has probably been more useful and productive in doing any training or skill shares than anything else because it opens the doors to discovery and exploration and such and helps foster and enable learning and curiosity.

I have also used this in creative skill shares for music and photography. In the process of making mistakes people learn the edges and details of a thing and they start asking more questions and stuff like "Ok, what do I do when this happens?" or "Ok, that didn't end up as I had visualized it or wanted it to end up. It sounds/looks bad and not good. Why?" and people I've trained just ask the best and sharpest questions, and that helps further my ability to learn new things as I teach as well.

In my own life and art I have also learned the value of leaving flaws and mistakes as a part of the process of art and the production of art.

Example: A completely perfect, flawless DJ mix of dance music can sound dull and lifeless. You can readily build and create this kind of a mix in, say, Ableton Live where every mix between tracks is constructed to have "perfect" beat matching and mixing, but it often ends up sterile. A more traditionally "live" DJ set has flaws. The mixes can swing a bit more off beat and it's evident there's a struggle and challenge to keep things in sync. There's actually fear there like it could all fall apart or trainwreck and this is thrilling and real.

Jazz knows this well and uses it all the time. Move fast and break things!

And in my personal life it's helped me grow a lot and learn what my limitations actually are, where my weak spots are and to be able to accept and know them and work with them or keep them from getting in the way as much. It makes it a lot easier to get over procrastination and inertia and just do things. "Ok, so I didn't do all of the chores. I did a lot of them, though, and this is fine."

I can strive for higher values while expecting nothing much at all or that it'll even all end in tears - and when it comes out pretty ok and close to what I had envisioned that's great and it was something.
posted by loquacious at 9:43 AM on July 17 [16 favorites]


I usually answer "How are you" with "okay", and then when they have nothing to contribute to further conversation, I add "...all things considered" and if they continue unresponsive append "...but then I try not to consider ALL things".

As for "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", I prefer to say "...is my ally, at least for now, subject to change."
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:50 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


As for "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", I prefer to say

... could well be my enemy as well. Some people are multidimensional assholes.
posted by philip-random at 10:27 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


I'm very happy to see that, like me, most of you have never heard of this “good is the enemy of great” perversion!
posted by Drab_Parts at 10:45 AM on July 17


I used to show my students this old Ze Frank vid to illustrate the idea that to get good at something, first you have to do it badly.
posted by Drab_Parts at 10:47 AM on July 17 [3 favorites]


Anything worth doing is worth doing badly

My thesis advisor used to say, "if it's not worth doing, it's not worth doing well".
posted by Rumple at 2:21 PM on July 17 [3 favorites]


MetaFilter: "moderately neato"
posted by droplet at 3:22 PM on July 17 [2 favorites]


Reminds me of this post on someone learning to dance (the video more than the comments).
posted by slidell at 11:48 PM on July 17 [1 favorite]


I think the thing about good v. great is that these are so subjective. My 'good' is someone else's great. Hell my 'horrible' is certainly someone else's great, in the big picture.

To me the whole thing that it's okay to be good, it's okay to half-ass things .... it's a counter to what I see as a toxic culture obsession to "be best" and always hustle and get to the top and compete compete and give 110% and all that protestant work ethic baggage. I've internalized that crap so much that I literally feel LIKE A TOTAL FAILURE for having a more-than-comfortable professional work-from-home low 6-figure income with great benefits and only very occasional travel or overtime.

So when people say "hell yeah it's okay to not be the best" or it's okay to be good or even mediocre and it's fine to not care very much, I don't take it so much as a slippery-slide to narcissism, rank self-interest and malice , but as a counter to a culture that would pat you on the back for literally working yourself to death(*).

I think the key is we should all have the ability and the freedom to match our efforts and desired outcomes. Yes, people who give 110% should probably rise above people who give 64% in terms of salary, promotion, etc. but not in terms of *personal validity* and that distinction isn't often made in a culture where wealth is too often a shortcut for value. The thing is - we don't really live in the protestant work ethic meritocracy we pretend. Some people have to give 200% to get a fraction of what others can get by working 64%.

(*) But only if you hit the right social class markers of course, because there's no pity whatsoever for folks who have to work 60 hours a week at 3 part time jobs just to barely survive, of course.
posted by ramble-on-prose at 2:34 PM on July 18 [3 favorites]


« Older Piano composition   |   It’s the Twine that Binds Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments