Anti-Hauntology: Mark Fisher, SOPHIE, and the Music of the Future
March 8, 2021 10:14 PM   Subscribe

Fisher essentially sees that contemporary music has been trapped in a cycle of repetition which has allowed the capitalist culture industries to trap listeners in a state of suspended animation; a state through which novel and new ideas are not being created or even expected by the listener. Here, in some respects, Fisher is harking back to Adorno and Horkheimer’s critique of the culture industries and their subsumption of cultural forms into the machine of late capitalism.

I thought this was an good read, despite the fact that I disagree with it - mainly it definitively goes against differences between Derrida's and Fisher's formulations of hauntology. Interested to see what the Meta thinks.
posted by antihistameme (29 comments total) 22 users marked this as a favorite
 
I have zero background in critical theory but I am a music fan, so I clicked on the link despite not fully understanding your post and was happy to find that it was clear, approachable writing that explained most of what I’d missed in your framing. I don’t mean this as a criticism but to encourage anyone who was similarly confused.

What really struck me about this essay was that while the author’s point was that some people are still making truly original music, his examples both reminded me of things I’ve heard before. To my ears, the track he included from Sophie sounds like a natural extension of Kelis’ sampling of Einstürzende Neubauten, and the FKA twigs track reminds me of the Bristol scene of the 1990’s.

We went through a period of time in the 20th century where it seemed like novelty was the primary virtue, beyond technical skill or beauty or even complexity. I think this has lost it’s appeal for many people (certainly for me), and what’s really interesting is how musicians now are applying older methods of reworking and playing with what was once futuristic and is now dated.
posted by cali at 11:38 PM on March 8, 2021 [7 favorites]


Heh. Unlike cali, I'm interested in theory, but don't consider myself much of a music fan, in the deeply devoted listener sense, but as with cali, the Sophie track didn't stand out as shockingly new, it felt familiar enough within a construct that does go back to Fisher's idea of hauntology, where the electronic sound and somewhat staccato revisions of the shop my face lyric call upon an idea of what the "future" is supposed to sound like based on other music made to evoke a sci-fi robot machine age, while the more lyrical interlude at the 2:30ish minute mark draws on a more R&B influenced idea of beauty in phrasing.

This isn't a knock against the song, that more or less fits the concept Sophie appears to be conveying in those contrasting styles, but it still feels "haunted" by past ideas of the future, which the song reworks to give a different sense of unity. (The video too isn't exactly "new", which the author of the piece signals himself in referencing the earlier FKA twigs video as having a similar visual aesthetic.)

While I'm absolutely certain there is music being made that isn't recycling old forms into newish packages, I recently did dig into popular music from the last 5ish years from around the world to catch up on what I might be missing and was a bit surprised by how much of it is essentially duplicative, trying to capture the same sounds as music from the US, particularly hip-hop influenced singers and sounds. It isn't that the popularity of hip hop influence surprises, but how closely the singers echo the same intonations, phrasings, and general concepts of certain song types and how comparatively minimal the local influences often are.

Again, that isn't all to the bad or anything, but it does feel like a flooding uniformity of sound that isn't quite "hauntological" necessarily but is capital driven, where so much music seems to be drawn from the same common pool of popular sound. That's worrying and is something that is affecting more than just the music business. The 21st century is so far proving to tearing up ideas of art as it once was, but has yet to replace those notions with something better. We don't need novelty, we have more than enough craft, but profoundly original work is being shoved back by the glut of the familiar.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:17 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


OH, and let me re-emphasize I'm not making a value judgement about the merits of any given songs or works, it's not a "good/bad" thing, just a noting of influence. It may be that the rate of change and reach of access makes "the new" become familiar much quicker and thus lessen its fuller development.

There also might be some aspect of it that reminds me a bit of a podcast discussion on synthesizers I listened to recently, where musicians first jumped into synths, the complications of the early programming made it easier to just use the presets, which became somewhat ubiquitous for a while until it became too familiar and stale and artists developed greater skills with the machines. We are still relatively early in an era where everything is accessible, so wanting to try out variations on all the existing "pre-sets" before moving on to the new could still be happening.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:41 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]


where musicians first jumped into synths, the complications of the early programming made it easier to just use the presets

Well, there weren't any presets, at that time. Do you have in mind bands in the 80's maybe?
posted by thelonius at 1:01 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]


Yes, the "jumped in" part was intended to reference popular music use.
posted by gusottertrout at 1:06 AM on March 9, 2021


There also might be some aspect of it that reminds me a bit of a podcast discussion on synthesizers I listened to recently

Blindboy’s recent dive into the (para-)musical influence of Yellow Magic Orchestra’s early electronic musicianship feels somehow relevant here, too, in illustrating (and incidentally, also substantiating, given it’s a sponsored extra) an (arguably successful) attempt to subvert capital and cultural imperialism via music, across various contexts and platforms/technologies... My instinct is to see potentials that arise out of the kind of collapse that we see happening between periods/styles/genres, though putting a timeframe on it will likely prove elusive: there’s no rushing the rhizome ;-)
posted by progosk at 2:41 AM on March 9, 2021 [2 favorites]


Adorno was wrong the first time.
posted by spitbull at 5:54 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


I like Fisher, I really do--I just finished Capitalist Realism a few days ago, in fact--but I think it's necessary always to strip away the Derrida and take a look at the actual grumpiness underneath. The article quotes his thought experiment: "Contrast this with the rapid turnover of styles between the 1960s and the 90s: play a jungle record from 1993 to someone in 1989 and it would have sounded like something so new that it would have challenged them to rethink what music was, or could be."

Is that true? It could be, if your 1989 listener's only experience with music was top-40 radio. But if your listener had been to the right clubs, that 1993 album wouldn't have seemed alien in the least. In the same way, SOPHIE only provides future-shock for people who weren't listening to the right music before.

The thing is, Fisher seems to get this. A sense of originality, a sense of the new, is only possible by forgetting something's lineage. As he says, "Everything that exists is possible only on the basis of a whole series of absences, which precede and surround it, allowing it to possess such consistency and intelligibility that it does." Corporate music culture functions by not allowing those absences, so that nothing jars or surprises, and there is a smooth continuity of one hit to the next. But that culture can't help but respond to popular outsiders by attempting to engulf them. Some of the novelty of SOPHIE--as well as the larger PC Music project and other groups with a similar aesthetic--comes from a sort of mutual engulfing--commercial pop isn't allowed, in this genre, to be simply bland and hegemonic, but is metabolized into an object of worship as well as a tool, a lens, pulling it completely out of the hands of corporate culture, out of its control. SOPHIE's Immaterial Girl gets at the freedom this brings, I think, in maybe a more direct and literal way than Faceshopping--if our selves are no longer material, no longer constrained by physicality, then we transcend the commoditization of both self and music, and become creatures of pure will, desire, and power--rather than simply hungry consumers of corporate culture.

Bluemink is absolutely correct to point out that Fisher's "future that was no longer white, male or heterosexual" is here now, is coming to pass as we speak, and in fact has always been here. When you give a marginalized community access to new cultural tools, it's not surprising at all that new culture happens. (I know SOPHIE is sort of the darling of this kind of analysis, but I hope one day we're talking about Laura Les of 100 gecs as the same caliber of innovator.)

Anyway. All I really wanted to say is, I think Fisher's problem is that in his grouchiness, he was overcomplicating things, and wasn't willing to see how our perceptions of innovation and continuity are really just a matter of focus. If you pay too much attention, you see continuity and never any novelty. If you allow absences, then you get surprised (although you do need to ask why some artists are erased by those absences).
posted by mittens at 7:07 AM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]


I think one big reason we're caught in a cycle of repetition in popular music is the Internet—but not because of algorithms and big business. We now have the ability to listen to nearly every piece of recorded music going back to the dawn of popular music, with just a couple of taps. People are re-discovering styles and sounds of older pop, and recycling them into modern contexts. Done poorly, which it often is because of Sturgeon's Law, it is derivative and boring. Done well, and it's fantastic. A young musician who has never heard, say, Philly Soul music, could hear something Philly Soul inspired by a contemporary artist, and start exploring how to make that sound in their musical explorations. For those of us familiar with the sound of Philly Soul, we've heard it before, and go "It's been done." but to that kid it's new.
posted by SansPoint at 7:11 AM on March 9, 2021 [9 favorites]


I keep seeing the complaint among electronic musicians that electronic music doesn't sound "like the future" anymore and there is too much focus on the past. And invariably, people making this complaint are blaming instrument designers, people who make presets, and other musicians instead of themselves.

They don't want to hear that maybe "good" -- whether that is functional, emotionally impactful, meaningful, etc. is more important than "novel."

Nor do they want to recognize that in the early days of electronic music, you could record 300-year old fugues and concertos (admittedly with a good ear for sound design and a lot of painstaking effort) and be hailed as a visionary pioneer, because it was the sound itself that represented the future and the fringe. But now, we are completely used to the idea that every sound is possible. So in a sense, the normal order of things was inverted in the early days of synthesizers and they have returned to normal: electronic musicians have to use the same creativity, expression, skill, passion etc. as every other composer and performer and not just rely on novelty.

And they don't want to hear that after 300,000+ years we have not yet exhausted the possibilities of the human voice, and a few centuries haven't been enough to exhaust guitar-like instruments... so that rejecting "retro" synths as obsolete is patently ridiculous. With a Minimoog and tape echo, or two sticks and a rock and your voice, you can make music nobody has ever made before.

And finally, there's a question of what "futuristic" even means anymore. There's no near-universal vision of rockets and robots, lives of luxury and exploration and adventure. Instead "futuristic" seems to mean cooler interfaces for computers and then the end of humanity, or just endless remixes of the present and past.

Honestly I think that mining the past is a vital part of our present and future. Thanks to easy online access to decades of recordings, people are choosing to listen to the best music of the last 50+ years rather than just whatever is on the radio now. I can imagine people in 2150 enjoying Ghostbusters or Duran Duran or All Your Base memes.
posted by Foosnark at 7:20 AM on March 9, 2021 [14 favorites]


We went through a period of time in the 20th century where it seemed like novelty was the primary virtue, beyond technical skill or beauty or even complexity.

Yep. The idea that novelty or "progress" in music is important - or even desirable - is itself largely a product of capitalism. Compare, for example, the mid-60s commercial singles market and any traditional culture w/music at its core.
posted by ryanshepard at 7:44 AM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]


Want to make something genuinely new?

You're going to need new tools.

Let's talk about the piano keyboard. Invented over four hundred years ago, it's an amazing piece of technology, allowing for the control of dozens of hammers striking strings in a way that lets the musician shift between keys and scales fluidly. It's an immensely well-organized way of playing music.

But the trade-off is expression. The piano keyboard can do melody to some degree, but it will never be able to compete with the expressive qualities of an oboe or a violin. There's a reason those instruments didn't disappear when the piano came around; the piano isn't the be-all and end-all of musical instruments.

But electronic music is trapped behind it. Sure, there have been some attempts at adding expression to the piano keyboard, and there are electronic versions of violins and wind instruments. But all of these are based on the physical designs necessitated by vibrating strings or tubes; they're still using interfaces that are hundreds of years old, and were designed for a completely different function.

Music is all about the interface. Singing is easy; playing music with traditional instruments is really, really hard. To me, that indicates that there's a lot of room for improvement in our musical interfaces. We can create instruments that are easier to play, that are more accessible, that make it possible for anyone who wants to to play music. We can make instruments that allow multiple axes of effect control while playing. Instruments that take advantage of electronic music's infinite potential for expression.

Fortunately, there are a lot of people working on this these days, and I think you're going to see some really interesting developments in the next few years.

The musical learning curve is about to be significantly reduced. The expressiveness of electronic music is about to escalate exponentially. And music, once again, is never going to be the same.

It's a very exciting time.
posted by MrVisible at 7:56 AM on March 9, 2021 [8 favorites]


I am so happy to see SOPHIE here. In the first couple weeks of 2021 I was going through the "hot new artists of 2020" lists, and bumped into what I saw described as "hyperpop" or "PC Music". The music was really exciting to me. My favorites remain 100 gecs, umru, iglooghost, and the ouvre of the PC Music label. Whilst wandering the trove, I tried to get a sense of the scene itself: how old is it? who are the artists driving the scene? does it have a geographic connection? Fun times!

I keep coming back and listening to SOPHIE's music. It feels important in a way that I don't understand. It's not really my jam, but I was 100% riveted during the entirety of the It's Okay To Cry music video (and I love the "i think your inside is your best side" lyric).

I'm not sure what to call my relationship with this kind of art. Like, some art I don't really like, but it nevertheless has a kind of indelible effect -- it changes the way I experience other art. It has become part of my internal aesthetic gestalt, and it seems inappropriate to qualify art like that on a scale of "I like it" or "I don't like it." If the art that I love is ensconced in its own shrine-like room of my memory palace, how do I evaluate or even come to terms with art that warps the very palace itself?
posted by pol at 7:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]


"But electronic music is trapped behind it.'

I think this is perhaps a narrow viewpoint of what electronic music is/has been. Entire genres have been produced by musical interfaces that have nothing to do with the keyboard. The immediate example that springs to mind is acid, which was based around a repurposed bass synthesizer built by Roland. Yes, it has what look like 'keys' on it, but the music and sound itself is pattern-based and entirely 'played' with the dials, not the keys.

Jungle/drum 'n bass is another great example of electronic music that has little to do with keyboards and everything to do with sampling.
posted by jordantwodelta at 8:38 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]


Singing is easy

Well, if you happen to be a natural at it, I guess. It's far from easy for many people.
posted by thelonius at 8:42 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


I think this is perhaps a narrow viewpoint of what electronic music is/has been. Entire genres have been produced by musical interfaces that have nothing to do with the keyboard.

Keyboards, and the keyboard-centric design of MIDI, have had a lot of influence, and it's kind of insidious to where a lot of electronic musicians working with DAWs don't even remember there is another way. People think in terms of discrete notes, and accept 12TET as the standard and everything else as weird/exotic.

But it's also true that there are many counterexamples, music made with no keyboard, no MIDI, free tuning, very expressive control over dynamics, etc.

The same is true in terms of timing. Very regimented, on-the-grid tempos seem pretty natural to computers and simple electronics with a steady robotic clock, but it's not actually forced that way by the technology.

And of course you can live within any of those restrictions as part of the form, and still have infinite possibilities to explore.
posted by Foosnark at 8:52 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]


I think the whole thesis is cracked to begin with - looking for the 'new' Kraftwerk is from the get-go a backward-thinking process. What concrete characteristics would the new Kraftwerk show off that would key the listener in? Are you looking for a technological paradigm shift? Do they have to be European? White? I guess you could try to out-Richter Gerhard Richter with even more depersonalization - good luck with that. Is the revolution in the music or in the creator or all of the above? My first thought listening to Sophie is that Autechre has been repackaged for a new generation. Great! It's an effect of old age that everything sounds a little like everything else because all those connections in the brain are forged and impossible to knock loose.

My 2 cents is that we are leaving an era of technological innovation owned by a minority of people and entering an era of democratization as that previous era's technology diffuses to every corner of the globe and is tweaked a million times in ways nobody expected. The taste-makers won't be able to keep up and they will write essays about how nothing is good any more.
posted by Dmenet at 9:02 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]


Foosnark: Keyboards, and the keyboard-centric design of MIDI, have had a lot of influence, and it's kind of insidious to where a lot of electronic musicians working with DAWs don't even remember there is another way. People think in terms of discrete notes, and accept 12TET as the standard and everything else as weird/exotic.

Wendy Carlos was railing about this in editorials in Keyboard Magazine and any other electronic music publication that would have her back in the 80s.
posted by SansPoint at 9:17 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


Entire genres have been produced by musical interfaces that have nothing to do with the keyboard.

True. Which seems to indicate to me that people are desperate to move beyond the keyboard.

My 2 cents is that we are leaving an era of technological innovation owned by a minority of people and entering an era of democratization as that previous era's technology diffuses to every corner of the globe and is tweaked a million times in ways nobody expected.

I've been building small handheld controllers which have multiple axes of expression and can be played by anyone with just a couple of minutes of explanation. And I have no idea what I'm doing. So yeah, things are about to get very weird indeed.
posted by MrVisible at 9:18 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


Fisher essentially sees that contemporary music has been trapped in a cycle of repetition which has allowed the capitalist culture industries to trap listeners in a state of suspended animation.

I'm a fan of discovering new music (SOPHIE was a highlight of mine from 2014 or 2015), and I'm not really a fan of the "music industry" because it tends to produce music that I don't really like. But what I'm confused by this summary of Fisher's thinking is that human beings used to pass down the same music from generation to generations... For thousands of years! It's only been in the past 500 years that this passing of "traditional" music has been interrupted by a culture that's seeking the cutting edge all the time (I wonder if our culture invented this constant hunger of the new with the advent of classical music—your Bachs and Mozarts and Beethovens).

Maybe the music industry found out that people actually like to hear simply newer renditions of old go-to's, which is why pop stars recycle similar melodies and beats?

It really is only a contemporary idea that music must always been new and original—it's a rat race, possibly created by the product-ization of music: If I have to buy it, it better be newer and more original than ever! Take money out of the equation—are we in suspended animation or are we enjoying the music of our forebears in occasionally new ways?
posted by oneboiledfrog at 10:41 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


oneboiledfrog: There's always going to be an avant-garde, poking and prodding at the limits of music and musicality, and the very idea of what we define as music. There's people out there making wild, experimental, complex, and difficult work. It's far from mainstream, and it is almost certainly not commercial for any sort of sense we have of commercial. Eventually, ideas and techniques from the avant-garde trickle their way into the popular vernacular, and in time we're hearing stuff in popular (or at least populist) music that would be completely shocking and offensive to mainstream audiences of a century ago, or less.

I think we are seeing less of that trickle-down from the avant-garde into popular music forms, but the reason why is multi-faceted. There's the endless recombination of older musical forms now that we have access to basically everything ever recorded, the algorithmic and marketing-driven music industry that prioritizes hits over art, and the fact that the process of avant-garde techniques and sounds filtering into popular music is a slow one. Only the first is a new factor in this equation, though.

To further bang on the point about having access to everything, people do crave novelty in music, and I think this is part of why we see things like the rise in interest of Japanese City Pop. Unless you were in Japan in the 1980s, the average contemporary music lister is unlikely to have ever heard this style of music before—and even City Pop is a Japanese re-interpretation of Western 70s pop music idioms.
posted by SansPoint at 10:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [4 favorites]


Last night I dreamed that I was explaining this essay to an old friend that I haven't seen in years. So thanks for the post.
posted by gamera at 11:11 AM on March 9, 2021 [1 favorite]


Back in 1970, a guy I met in the dorm told me I had to listen to this record. It was a double LP and I took it back to my room and put it on. I listened to all four sides, hearing music that I had never heard before and music that I had heard before. After listening, I walked back to his room, and as I walked there was music coming out of a lot of dorm rooms, typical popular stuff of the times. But that music sounded so weird, really weird, almost unpleasantly weird. The record I listened too? Trout Mask Replica by Captain Beefheart. The approximate 70 minutes of that record rewired my brain and opened up a new music for me. That rewiring also ruined normal music for awhile, which was just fine. The only other music that affected me in a similar way was Charles Ives. Ives and Beefheart heard a different music and were able to help us to hear it too. Switched on Bach affected me, not in terms of music, it was Bach, but in terms of timbre. I'm hooked on synthesis and now oh so many years later have a modular system of my own to explore. But since that time of the late 60's early 70's nothing else has reached in and changed the music in my head. In the late 70's Punk reared its ugly head, and for a moment there was something new. The whole question of originality in music seems to be moot. There is an overall sameness that's tiring. I read the article and watched the SOPHIE video. The music there was for me nothing new or exciting. It just was. I feel that a number of music people really lack any knowledge of the history of music. There was once a time when music could cause a fucking riot. I guess now, music can cause an argument rehashing Derrida and Adorno.
posted by njohnson23 at 11:33 AM on March 9, 2021 [5 favorites]


Metafilter: strip away the Derrida and take a look at the actual grumpiness underneath.
posted by thelonius at 11:58 AM on March 9, 2021 [6 favorites]


Take money out of the equation—are we in suspended animation or are we enjoying the music of our forebears in occasionally new ways?

While money may have been a key factor in leading us here, it's as much in the way we consume music thanks to the way it can now be reproduced and distributed to provide a constant stream of different things for us to hear. This is something still relatively new, I mean within the last century or so for most people, before that music was mostly participatory or event driven, where change wasn't quick as it took a much longer time for the new to travel, and wasn't really as necessary or desirable for the enjoyment being more centered around your own skills, or those of the people you knew, in playing music or on occasion attending an event where it was played, aside from possibly church where both were involved.

The way we consume music now increases the desirability for some level of novelty or newness as we want to keep getting more, up to a point, and one generation wants to distinguish themselves from the previous one and their music, with which that music consumption is associated more often as a taste tied to an era rather than activity. What I think is changing, and tend to think animates some of the talk over "hauntology" is the feeling of that time, the era of mass largely homogeneous culture, nearing an end. That mass culture era is being scavenged by the younger generation for the pieces they can use, combining them in different arrangements without necessarily caring all that much for what the purpose or context was of the original or for its greater whole.

It's something like a continuation of the sampling ethos but writ even larger, where one borrows the interesting bits, drops the problematic or dull stuff and basically rewires those fragments of history into a form that either attempts to reanimate the dead sounds to renewed popularity of mass appeal, or tears apart and reworks the old mass culture to speak to a subculture which was previously ignored. The potential end of meaningful mass culture is both good for that latter sense of space being taken by those who may have lacked chance to do so before, but it also can mean that those same groups or individuals won't have the same opportunity to influence the mass public as was the case during the last century.

The ability to make and distribute music easily comes with the potential cost of influence on audience and understanding. A recognizable influence carries its familiarity as part of its appeal, but the more diffuse the culture becomes, the less familiarity any single reference will have. This all accompanies other issues surrounding the arts, like debates over appropriation and morality in the works or of the artists, which also can work to narrow how audiences respond to the works. Some of this is necessary, but some of it also feels a bit like its pulling the rug out from those that follow the white male dominated culture for not having the same potential access and opportunity to the whole of the culture that was there in the 20th century. But we'll see, that's just a guess and some concern, but I can't see the future any more than Adorno could, so it'll undoubtedly be different and more complex than I imagine.
posted by gusottertrout at 11:59 AM on March 9, 2021 [3 favorites]


The expressiveness of electronic music is about to escalate exponentially.

It already has! I have a Linnstrument and it's pretty great. It feels much less like a control surface and more like the notes themselves live under the little pads, and you can squish them around directly. Here's one good YT demo.
posted by echo target at 12:00 PM on March 9, 2021


This sounds pretty new to me- I've never heard a key AND temperament change like the one starting about 1:20 https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=CALkqFNY_Tc&feature=share
posted by ergomatic at 6:29 PM on March 9, 2021


I swear I'm not an anti-auto-tune crank, because there are songs that utilize it that I like a lot, but I listen to a fair bit of contemporary pop from all over the world and for me the liberal use of auto-tune has a flattening effect I find a bit eerie after a while. Is this song from Jamaica? Nigeria? Korea? The United States? If you're not watching the video (and the lyrics are in English, which of course is often not the case) a lot of the time it could be from anywhere.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:45 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]


Yeah, that's something that grabbed my attention recently as well. I mean I kinda get the desire to have music that sounds like it could come from anywhere/nowhere in the internet age, where locality and space have entirely new associations, but to give up so much of the individualism of the voice and its range of inflection seems like a trade that loses as much as it gains even at best. But then again, maybe this is my "I'm too old to get it" moment, where the kids today have a different sense of it all.

On an entirely unconnected, but related note, does anyone else wish Fanfare would allow people to post music they listen to like it does movies, TV and books? It doesn't seem like it'd be difficult to implement in any way and it would be most welcome from my end for getting a chance to catch up on things other people are digging that I'd otherwise never hear and to post some stuff I find interesting but don't want to FPP on the blue since I have no idea how well known most of it is or how its been received as I'm so out of the info loop on music trends. I suggested it once before, but nothing came of it, though obviously there've been plenty of other issues needing attention since then too.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:36 AM on March 10, 2021 [3 favorites]


« Older "American adverts make me feel like I’m in some...   |   Government is back: The first 50 days of the... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments