Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘narrative’ Category

I have so enjoyed the series on Scotland’s Music with Phil Cunningham on BBC. The final part in the series is called Home and Away and traces some of Scottish music’s origins and its influences around the world.

Well, Tommy Bibey, imagine my surprise when Phil’s journey from Scotland took him to Cape Breton then down through Appalachia to the home of bluegrass music! Bluegrass has just been a name to me really but when Dr Bibey connected to me through this blog I got more interested – really because I enjoyed his writing so, and he’s impressed me as the kind of doctor, doctors should aspire to be – caring, passionate and humble. He told me his favourite bluegrass had its origins in Scotland and Ireland. It made more of a connection between us. The Scotland’s Music series (by the way, it looks like the BBC has now removed all the video clips from the earlier parts of this series – boo!) was something I recorded on my hard drive and I just got round to watching the last episode yesterday. I watched in anticipation and sure enough he made the link with bluegrass and with Alison Brown in particular (whose album ‘Stolen Moments’ is on my pod – the track ‘I’m naked and I’m going to Glasgow’ always brings a smile to my face on the Stirling/Glasgow Scotrail train!). So, it turns out I had some bluegrass in my collection after all!

I have a very diverse musical collection, and that shouldn’t surprise anyone who reads this blog – I am a great fan of diversity. Neither uniformity nor conformity appeal to me. Why is that? What is it about diversity that I find so appealing?

Two things spring to mind –

first of all, Deleuze has a great concept which he terms “lines of flight” – it’s the idea of not thinking of anything as having fixed co-ordinates, not seeing anything as existing as a point, but instead seeing all points as lines, so that a point is just a cross-section through a line or a thread or even a vapour trail

vapour trails

I love that idea of seeing whatever it is you’re considering in its origins and its becoming (see that subtitle at the top of the blog? “Becoming not being…….”) It makes everything dynamic, changing, moving, developing and it connects what is both to what was and what is to come.

Secondly, I love the idea of connections, seeing patterns and resonances. I think that’s why ‘Linked‘ appealed to me so much.

Amy, has a lovely post about ripples of connection and what a good metaphor that is for blogging…..and there we go…..a whole other set of paths to follow…..the threads that connect us…….and the stories that weave us together.

Read Full Post »

We all cope in different ways. In this series we’re looking at ways of coping in parts 3, 4 and 5. In part 3 we looked at the activist way of coping.

Now let’s consider control as a strategy. The world can be a very scary place. For many people the events that occur in their lives face them with overwhelming uncertainty and doubt. If we feel the world is scary and dangerous and random, one way to cope with this reality is to shrink daily life into containable, controllable pieces. People do this to try and reduce the uncertainty and randomness in their experience. They do this by introducing routines, habits and rituals. They do this by either trying to control their physical environment – cleaning and ordering – and/or by trying to control the people in their lives. Watch the following three clips to see what this is like if we take it too far!

I’ll consider the third strategy – withdrawal – in final part – Part 5.

Read Full Post »

One aspect of understanding someone is listen to their story and hear what they talk about – material, physical, practical issues? emotional and relationship issues? or spiritual issues of meaning and purpose? Another aspect is to find out what kind of ideas they have about themselves in relation to others – in particular to explore to what extent they see themselves as connected to, and identifying with, others, and to what extent they see themselves as separate and independant. I’ve explored this latter aspect in Parts 1 and 2.

But another key issue for all of us is how we cope in the face of challenges, and how we adapt to change. Just as I have a map of body, mind and spirit in consideration of the kind of world a person lives in, so I have a map of coping strategies, and again there are three – action; control and withdrawal. Let me reiterate that this is a dynamic map and whilst some people almost always seem to default to the same strategy, most of us are more flexible and use each and all of these strategies to different degrees.

Let’s explore to activist – the person who when faced with a problem or a challenge, rolls up their sleeves and gets stuck into it –

You can see it takes a certain self-belief to be able to cope with challenges this way!

We’ll have a look at control as a strategy in Part 4

Read Full Post »

When patients consult me I begin the first consultation (after having made my introductions) with some variation along the lines of “Your doctor has sent me a referral letter which gives me some of the background information about your illness but it’s best you tell me your story yourself”. This allows the patient to set the agenda and to tell me whatever they want to tell me in their own preferred order. When they come back to see me for a follow-up appointment I tend to begin with a question like “How’s things?” – deliberately vague and open, again to let the patient tell their story their own way.

I try to write down their exact first words. How they are doing is often captured richly in those opening sentences. For example, something along the lines of “Doing well. Got back to work and really enjoying it now” or “Managed to have our first family holiday in years”, tells me that there has been a significant shift. The details follow but the essence and magnitude of the change is often right there in the first few words.

We use an “outcome scale” with our patients in Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital. “0” means no change; “1” means some improvement, but not enough to be of value in daily living; “2” means improvement of value in daily living; “3” is significant change which has brought a significant improvement in daily living; and “4” is hallelujah, I’m cured!

Whilst it’s satisfying to see that two-thirds of our patients score a 2 or more, these bare numbers really lack the richness of the actual words the patients use. What is more important really is to capture the “story” of the change. The story needn’t be a long one; the first few minutes are usually time enough the hear it because the essence of the story is conveyed literally in the first three of four sentences the patient utters.

Interesting that this issue was on my mind today as I was musing about to capture these changes more systematically, when I came across a post on Lifehack about stories. (This post, by the way is Part 6 in a series about Chip Heath and Dan Heath’s book Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die)

This phrase really struck me –

Stories, then, allow us to impart not just our conclusion, but the actual experiences by which we came to that conclusion.

That’s it! I thought. That’s it in a nutshell. Figures are so uninteresting because they present a conclusion. They are thin information. How much richer is the information conveyed in a story!

I can tell you that in all my years of practice I’ve never heard the exact same story twice. It’s by telling their stories, with their own preferred vocabulary, in their own preferred way, that patients convey the experiences of their illnesses to me. And healing is in no small measure a matter of enabling somebody to tell a different story, to start a new chapter with new vocabulary and to develop new themes – positive themes, health themes as opposed to illness ones. It’s such a treat!

Surely we must resist the current trend to do medicine by numbers where individual stories don’t matter, where individual people don’t matter!

Here’s to the richness of stories!

Read Full Post »

It is that loving you as much as I have been able to manage has defined the person that I am. That is who I have become.

Sebastian Faulks. Human Traces.

How do we gain a sense of self? How do we answer the question “Who am I?” It seems to me that we gain a sense of self through the stories we tell ourselves and others. It’s a narrative process and it’s an always unfinished, creative process. We are all unique. Every time I conduct a clinic I meet new patients. Never once have I heard a patient tell me the exact story I’ve heard before. Everyone has a new, unique narrative. But this implies that the creation of a sense of self is all internal. It isn’t. We create a sense of self through our boundaries, our connections, our interfaces and interactions. We create a sense of self through our experience of love – its presence, its absence, its possibility, its loss.

Loving you, I become me.

Read Full Post »

ISBN 1-905147-16-3. The Conqueror is the second in a trilogy by Norwegian author Jan Kjaerstad. The first volume, The Seducer, certainly seduced me. I read it when the English translation was published in 2003. That first volume hooked me before I even opened the book. On the back cover the blurb begins

So how do the pieces of a life fit together? Or, to put it another way: do they fit together at all?

Well, this is an idea which really intrigues me. I often think we have so many roles, so many aspects, so many threads running in our lives that it’s quite a challenge to see how it all fits together. Every time I sit with a new patient I’m doing the same thing – collecting the pieces of their lives, the fragments of their stories and trying to piece it all together, to make sense of it. The novel tells the story of one Jonas Wergeland, a famous Norwegian TV producer who arrives home to find his wife dead on the lounge floor. Shot. He is arrested and charged with her murder. The whole of the 600 pages of that first volume is made up of dozens of stories that try to explain how Jonas ended up at this juncture. By the end of the book we don’t know if he has been found guilty. The quality of the writing and the way he built up an understanding of Jonas by the telling of multiple stories of his life completely enthralled me. It’s taken four years to get volume two, The Conqueror, translated into English.

In The Conqueror we are made aware that Jonas has indeed been found guilty and Jan Kjaerstad uses the same technique to try to explain how a great TV producer, revered by a whole nation, could end up killing his wife. Here are a couple of lines from The Conqueror that will explain why this book so captures me as a reader

Maybe our existence is best understood as a story.

I don’t know any other way to understand either my existence or that of another. We construct ourselves and we communicate our private subjective unique experience of living through telling stories.

 For so it is: even though life is lived forward, it is always understood backward. You turn around and behold – in awe or fear – a pattern that you are not aware of having made.

Isn’t that so true? This man writes beautifully. I find his novels totally addictive. And how long will it be until the third and last part of this trilogy comes out in English? I suspect it’ll be around 2011! Well, you know what? I’ll content myself with a re-read or two of The Seducer AND The Conqueror while I wait!

There are many lines in The Conqueror that I’ve noted down and want to say something about. I’ll take them individually in separate posts (first of all over the next few days, then, probably, as I re-read these books, over the next few months). If you love stories, layers and layers of stories that develop an understanding of a person’s life, and you love good writing, I’d recommend you buy these novels and treat yourself.

This blog is titled “Heroes Not Zombies” because I have this belief that most of us sleepwalk through most of our lives, on automatic pilot, and that life can be better for any of us if we wake up, become more aware, more reflective and more creative. In short, the best kind of life is the one where we are the heroes of our own unique stories. Here’s Jan Kjaerstad again

Because most heroic tales can awaken forces which until then have lain fettered inside a person.

The BIG work of the main character of these novels, Jonas the TV producer, is his documentary series on Great Norwegians. As each episode is described, another Norwegian hero’s life and significance is manifested to the whole, hooked nation. Norwegians are described in the novels as a nation of spectators and the spectacle of this series on national heroes is what makes Jonas’ reputation. Every episode captured my imagination so much that I swung between wishing the series had been real so I could actually buy the DVD and watch it, and feeling I had seen and heard every detail in the author’s wonderful descriptions anyway.

This is a book which will make you think. It’ll make you think about stories and how we use them to understand ourselves and others. It’ll make you think this

But no occurrence, no day in a person’s life is so trivial that it might not be crucial. Important things happen all the time………all days are in a way, holy days.

Read Full Post »

We all experience the world differently. Think of the last time you shared an experience with a friend or loved one then talked about if afterwards. Think of, say, a journey, or movie, or a meal in a restaurant. If you both talk to a third person about that shared experience, chances are you will both tell about different parts of the experience and will have felt differently about. One of you will probably have noticed very different aspects of the journey, or the movie or meal, than the other one. This is because we all interact with a shared world of places, people, and phenomena, but we do it from our own, unique, subjective viewpoint. No two of us share an identical experience because no two of us is the same.
What influences these different ways of experiencing a shared journey, or movie, or meal? I read a blog post recently which began with the statement “You are what you pay attention to”. A variation of this idea was a huge billboard I saw in Tokyo – “You are what you buy” – ok, so it’s a similar idea! The point is that what we notice and therefore what affects us most is fundamental to the creation of our individual world views.
I think there are three major foci of attention. Not three separate, distinct, world views, but three dynamically changing “attractors” which create our experience of the world.

  • Body-objective. The physical, the shared, external reality. The world of objects, things, facts. The measurable world. You have an experience of who you are within a particular body. The size of that body, for example, profoundly affects how you see the world and how you see yourself in the world. Think of the amount of concern many people have with body shape for example.
  • Mind-subjective. What you experience is always personal. Nobody can really know or share your subjective experience. If you have a pain, nobody else can feel that pain. You can try to communicate it, and others can try to empathise (to imagine what it might be like to be you), but they can’t actually experience it. Our subjective experience involves our minds. Without a mind, there is no subjectivity. Yes, there are many bodily sensations but they are all experienced with the mind. You feelings, your sensations, your emotions, your memories and your imagination are all subjective. None of this is measurable.
  • Spirit-meaning. We are meaning-seeking, meaning-creating creatures. We continuously try to make sense of our daily lives. For some people, this is the most important aspect of life. It’s a focus on purpose, values, ideas and the reasons to live.

None of these world views is complete and none of them are superior to the others. All are equally valid. If we try to squeeze others into our own personal world view, we’ll find they don’t quite fit and communication will fail. To communicate with, to connect with, to touch another, we have to understand what kind of world they live in and to what extent we can share that world.
My final point is that life is a dynamic process. We move around these foci or “attractors” with different ones exerting different degrees of pull all the time. We can see our lives as constantly moving, continuously evolving and growing as we shift and shade our world views, developing richer experiences as we become more flexible and less fixed in one particular view.

Read Full Post »

Patients’ stories are often dismissed by doctors as being too subjective to be of value. Objective information is rated more highly. In fact the dominant paradigm of the biomedical model is “evidence-based medicine” where a hierarchy of value has been created which emphasises the findings from research trials conducted on groups of patients over the individual stories of doctors and patients. Let’s understand and maybe challenge this hierarchy.
By subjective we usually mean a person’s unique experience. No two people can have identical experiences because no two people are identical. The dismissal of a patient’s story is the dismissal of personal experience.
We tend to think of objectivity as being outside ourselves, as being a phenomenon which is free from individual prejudice, as if it is unfiltered or pure. However, objectivity is actually just a consensus of personal, subjective views.
Take a look around your room now. What do you see? A computer probably! Maybe you can see a chair. Let’s just focus on the chair for a moment. This experience you are having right now of seeing that chair is subjective. It is YOU who is seeing the chair. But if everyone who comes into your room can also see that chair then seeing that chair becomes objective. The observation becomes more reliable in the sense that you could say to a perfect stranger “Come into my room and tell me what you can see” and, amongst other things, the stranger will report seeing that chair.
But subjectivity and objectivity are not mutually exclusive, either/or, categories. There’s a range or degrees of objectivity. For example, what colour is that chair in your room? The answer to that question will vary. Not everyone will agree about the colour of an object because colour sensation is a highly subjective phenomenon. Let’s push this one step further. Is it a comfortable chair? Well, now the consensus will become seriously shaky. You cannot be sure that a stranger coming into your room will describe that chair as comfortable.
The greater the consensus of experience, the more we are likely to call it objective, because we know that there will be a high probability that almost everyone will concur.
However, what matters to me if I have a pain is my experience of the pain. Nobody else can experience my pain. The concept of objectivity becomes irrelevant. If I take a painkiller, only I can tell you if it is working for me. No doctor or scientist knows better than you do about your pain. So claims that only treatments which are “evidence based” ie which work for many other people should be offered to patients are not supportable. Clinical trials (group experiments) reveal useful information about possibilities and even probabilities but they should never be treated as the last word on something. “Evidence” is never complete. However, although a majority of people may claim relief of their symptoms from a particular treatment, we can never guarantee that that treatment will work for this particular patient. Some people will only respond to a totally different treatment, possibly one which has never been shown to help the majority of patients. We should never prevent patients from having the treatment that works for them just because that treatment hasn’t helped most other patients.
How many patients should get relief from a drug before we can claim this drug is “evidence based”? Well,
However, as Dr Roses of Glaxo SmithKline, specialist in pharmacogenomics at Glaxo SmithKline famously said,

“The vast majority of drugs – more than 90 per cent – only work in 30 or 50 per cent of the people,” Dr Roses said. “I wouldn’t say that most drugs don’t work. I would say that most drugs work in 30 to 50 per cent of people. Drugs out there on the market work, but they don’t work in everybody.”

That’s a minority then. This falls far short of objectivity as consensus. Why is that? Because what matters is not just what most people experience but, when it comes to your health, your illness, it’s your story that matters. A doctor can, and should, tell you that a particular treatment has been shown to help a certain percentage of patients but you will decide which treatment to continue with solely on the basis of your unique personal experience. It’s your story, your feelings, your sensations that matter most when it comes to your health.

Read Full Post »

There’s a website called Change This. They publish articles which they call “manifestos”. I just came across this one. Nassim Nicholas Taleb argues that unpredictable events are like “Black swans” – until one is seen we lack the imagination to even think such a creature is possible basing our expectations entirely on our previous experience. Taleb says a Black Swan is rare, its occurrence has a large impact, and it is predictable only retrospectively (we explain it with a narrative we make up after the event).

It’s an interesting idea. There’s a phenomenon described in complexity science which is similar to this. It’s called “emergence” and it means the kinds of events and behaviours that occur which are brand new and have never been seen before. For example, when a particular hurricane suddenly starts to behave differently from all previous hurricanes. I see this all the time in patients. There is a terrible tendency in Medicine to focus on diseases rather than the people who have the diseases. Once a diagnosis has been made (the disease has been named) a prognosis is made on the basis of how other cases progressed. But the thing is that again and again patients just don’t comply with statistics. Take Stephen Hawking as an example. He has a disease called Motor Neurone Disease. Usually people die within two years of a diagnosis of this disease. Stephen Hawking was diagnosed over 40 years ago.

People are different. It is impossible to accurately predict an outcome for any single individual with a particular diagnosis. The future is, and always will be, uncertain. That’s not a bad thing, though we crave certainty. I once had a patient who told me her husband had been diagnosed with cancer and had been told he had six months left to live. I asked her how she felt about this and her answer took me completely by surprise (you could say it was a Black Swan!). She said “I’m angry. Very angry. It’s not fair. How come he gets to know how long he’s got and I don’t get to know how long I’ve got?!” I had to explain that actually he might not die in six months time!

But Taleb’s idea about Black Swans makes another interesting point which is about the human use of narrative to make sense of things. Even though an event might be totally unlike any event we’ve ever seen before we’ll do our best to explain it as if it had been predictable all along. This further feeds our tendency to believe in certainty and predictability.

The contemporary practice of Medicine as strongly based on encouraging decision making on the basis of what’s already known (this is called Evidence Based Medicine), but as I once heard Dr Harry Burns (Chief Medical Officer of Scotland) say “If we base all our treatments on what we already know how can we come up with new, better treatments?”

We need imagination. Without imagination we cannot see what might be. Even with imagination however we’ll still have masses of experiences which we didn’t expect. That’s how life is… I don’t want a wholly predictable life. Do you? Understand me here, I’m not saying I want nothing to be predictable. I do want to know that when I catch the 0735 Glasgow train it’s got a good chance of getting me to Glasgow at 0820 (OK, maybe one day!!). I like routines and rhythms. But I like surprises too and the fact that every single patient I see tells me something I’ve never heard before makes my day. Every day.

Read Full Post »

The story so far……
I woke up on the morning of January 1st this year and this word popped into my head “storymapping”. I thought “what’s that?” The word came from a lot of thinking I’ve done about how we experience the world.
My basic premise is this……
We live in a real physical world – an objective shared three dimensional space – but we can only experience it subjectively. There’s no way for me to know how any other person experiences, say, the colour red, or the smell of coffee. But before I even get into thinking about relationships and how we communicate with others and understand each other, let me stay with the single person experiencing the world.
Let me start by saying that the phenomena of the real physical world impact on my sensory equipment. I can’t directly experience the phenomena of light or sound, but light waves or sound waves can impact on my eyes or ears and they translate these signals into electrical phenomena sent to my brain where they are somehow turned into what I “perceive” as red, or yellow, or hissing, or screaming, or whatever. I use my brain to make sense of this information, to interpret it so that I can react or not react to it. This is how I interact with the world. It’s how I find food, drink, shelter, how I connect to other people, cope with the weather…..everything.

Tools of perception and understanding
To make sense of the signals and stimuli I use a couple of really clever tools – maps and stories.
I make maps in my mind of the objective physical world. Maps contain information organised spatially and temporarily. Maps represent the shared space of physical reality. Maps, as the NLP practitioners say, are not the territory. They say that because we tend to get confused and think that the way we perceive things IS the way things are but it is isn’t, it’s only how we perceive things to be and that perception is not static. It is malleable. We can work with it, alter it, become actively involved in creating it. We can change the way we see things, change our focus, change what we give prominence to, change the feelings we have in association with certain perceptions. So maps are a useful way for making sense of the world and for acting in the world.
If I want to eat I need a map of locations for food and I need to orientate myself on that map to see where I am and figure out how to go get food. We use all kinds of maps all the time. In fact, we perceive everything through these maps. It’s almost as if they are filters between the external reality and internal subjective experience. This is all pretty much an unconscious process. We don’t need to think about our maps or make any big deal about it, but we CAN make them more conscious.
Maps help us to organise the mass of information that bombards us continuously – sights, sounds, smells and so on – and they do this by helping us to selectively notice some elements more than others.
The maps we use are created by ourselves but often on the templates, or bases of given maps. If we live life fairly unconsciously, by that I mean without a high level of awareness (a zombie way), then we are probably negotiating the world on through a largely given set of maps. We do still make every map our own however by factoring in our past experiences, preferences, qualities and so on.
This is an interesting question. It means that there is a creative component to every map we use, but we live on some kind of spectrum of passive/active or receptive/creative (zombie/hero) kinds. If we increase our awareness then we have an opportunity to increase the extent to which we can actively create the maps we use to perceive the world. In other words, we can change the way we perceive the world instead of just accepting how its been either given to us by others or how we’ve created a view of the world for ourselves from past experiences.

The second amazing tool we use is storytelling.
Stories are our way of making sense of our experience. We tell ourselves and others stories that help us to know what something means, to help us explain to ourselves and to others what we are experiencing. In fact, we even use stories to create a sense of self – this is who I am, this is how I came to be here, this is where I am going. Stories are the way I convey my subjective inner reality to another, or try to understand the subjective inner reality of another. They are also the way I work to achieve a better understanding of shared space, of external physical reality. I do this by seeing how my understanding fits with another’s understanding.

So what if we consciously combine map-making/map-reading with storytelling and create “storymapping”? Starting with our physical reality, the space and time in which we live, collecting information from our experiences as we move through that space, and marking this information on maps in a way that we note what that information means to us, how we make sense of it, in other words, by telling the stories of our experience and tagging them onto the map of the physical space we have travelled through over that period of time.

Well, I thought, I’ll try this out with my daily morning walk to the train station on my way to work. I actually did it by printing out a map of Stirling from google but since then I’ve discovered that google maps now lets you easily tag a map and add text – just the tools I needed! Here’s my example.

I think we could make all sorts of storymaps. Here are some I’m thinking of exploring so far –

The idea is that different maps can help us to understand different aspects of ourselves. We use multiple maps in our minds all the time. We can make these physical maps as an exercise in self-awareness, self-understanding so we can give ourselves an opportunity to more actively shape our lives the way we want to.
Here are some of the possible maps I’ve come up with so far.

Map of relationships
You need to choose the scales of maps for this exercise and to focus on a particular period. The period could be the present time, or you could chart it in real time by recording relationships over a defined period – day, week, month.
I suggest using different colours of pencil for each type of relationship – relatives, work colleagues, friends/social contacts, (for me also – patients and students)
What I mean by type of relationship is what’s the main nature of the current interactions you have with this person? Sometimes a person may be on your map largely as a work colleague, other times they might be largely there as a friend.
Who to put on the map? It’s always up to you but I suggest just the people you feel you are actively interacting with – in other words, not all your cousins and aunts and uncles but only the relatives who are “active” in your experience over the period under consideration.
Geotag them – by this I mean place a tag or flag or spot or something representing them on the map where they are when you interact with them. Each geotag needs a number which we’ll use later.
There are a number of other complexities you can add to this map – size of tag relating to importance to you of this person, or size of tag relating to the amount of time you are spending in interaction with this person…..whatever you think might be useful
The reference numbers of each geotag will be expanded with text around the map which is where you’ll write the stories which describe these interactions or what they mean to you or how they affected you.

Food map
Three colours – blue for where you buy the food, yellow for where it is prepared, red for where it is consumed.
Start with the red – where you eat – add the yellow if you eat where the food was prepared and add the blue if this is also where the food was purchased – so all three colours together represent eating out somewhere. If you’re not eating out draw lines from the red spot to where the food was prepared and also where it was bought (where the yellow and blue spots will be) – over a period of time this will show you your pattern of food gathering and consumption. Each red spot should be geotagged and referenced to a short story describing the situation of the meal and what it meant to you

Sensory map
Record for a period of time (say a day) the sensations you notice. This will obviously not be ALL the possible sensations, just record the ones that strike you, the ones you feel are “notable”. Sensations are visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory or kinesthetic. Note these as they occur to you using one of the following capture methods –
the video function of your cameraphone – making audio notes as you describe the sensation
the video function of a digital camera
write them on 3×5 index cards
write them into a pocket diary
Once you get to the end of the period of the exercise place the sensations on the relevant map geotagging them with index numbers to the storied descriptions/explanations.

Feelings map
As with the Sensory map but focussing instead on the feelings you notice

Attention map
As with the Sensory map but focussing instead on whatever catches your attention.

Activity map
As with the Sensory map but noting what you are doing over the period

What do you think? Any of these ideas appeal to you? If you do make any geostorymaps, please put the links into the comments to this post.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »