Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Leave a Comment »
3/20: We nearly forgot to mention — of the Arctic Summit in Oslo’s Hotel Bristol last week sponsored by The Economist Events Group– some of wonderfully packaged reading materials, including a Delegate Book titled, Arctic Summit: What will the Arctic resemble in 2050? available online at economist conferences/arctic; the latest copy of Arctic Update from DNV to the Maritime, Oil and Gas Industries published by Det Norske Veritas (DNV) Maritime and Oil & Gas Market Communications, also available online at dnv/arcticupdate; and finally, a booklet written by Dr Stephan Tschudi-Madsen, formerly Norway’s Director of National Heritage titled, The British Ambassador’s Residence in Oslo, which is available on line, but should be noted, appears in a slightly different form than the actual booklet, at UK ambassador residence/Norway .
Oh. We should note in passing of the images that adorn the covers of these fine documents, that the booklet about the British Ambassador’s Residence was sponsored by an oil company, as was the Delegate Book from The Economist, and of course, the Arctic Update is a DNV company, a strategic knowledge firm for the energy industry, publication. Well. Before looking at these three visuals in detail, let us take a moment to acknowledge the circulation of this event’s primary documents.
First, let us examine the various locations of the banner image for the The Economist’s Arctic Summit. Here are a better set of images taken from the internet:
First of all, the image representing The Economist’s Arctic Summit was visible in various forms throughout the day appearing, for example, as a wall-sized backdrop behind speakers on stage.
Turning from the speakers and toward the rest of the room, this image is visible in the form of the delegate book cover, lying face-up on participant tables. Here, attendees come into contact with the image throughout the day, not only from holding it in their hands, but also by positioning their body in direct relation to the image, as when seated at a formal dining table.
In this image, directly above, we see several ways that participants interact with the Delegate Book. On the far right, we see that flipping through the book is part of a dispersed attention to activities going on in the room, as well as the movement involved in those activities– from turning one’s head witnessing passersby, to the actual flipping of the pages, and the general occupation of having something to play with in one’s hands.
Also, notice how the image plays a role in the setting arrangement of the dining room table experience: a table with white linen, coasters for glasses and the Delegate Book table mat all within proximity to each other, and acknowledged as such by participants who position themselves in alignment to this setting. Notice, in fact, the intention in this image, with which the glass rests atop the coaster (if a glass appears on the table, it appears atop a coaster).
In this way, the banner image for this event participates in a practice of formal dining etiquette, of encircling dish ware, a practice replicated during the breaks as evidenced by the doily between cup and saucer used for coffee.
The magazine and hotel names printed on locations associated with delicacy (the encircling of dish ware), is an assertion of title recognition in a particular way, calling attention to discovery (picking up the cup to reveal a message) but also to finger pointing (placing the glass directly on the coaster). Thus, the banner image by its association to this etiquette, participates in game of peek-a-boo, hide-and-seek, vanishing acts, and other games of visual apparition.
After the Arctic Summit meeting, participants were shuttled by bus to a networking event at the British Ambassador’s residence. As with the Delegate Book, attendees had the opportunity to mingle along side each other while handling copies of the Ambassador’s residence booklet (mentioned at the top of this post). You can see in this photograph, there is a general networking of persons, and each is taking on a different relationship to the booklet.
What ties the Ambassador’s Residence booklet together with The Economist’s Banner image (and the DNV Arctic Update) is the appearance of the advertisement banner itself, whose two-dimentionality confronts the attendee as a conflation of images, both of The Economist’s banner and the Ambassador’s Residence Booklet images, as one visual instance.
Turning now to the images themselves, the Delegate Book on left depicts an uninhabited cold region, presumably somewhere in the Arctic where open water in conditions of relative darkness suggests that ocean surface ice has melted fully leaving the water a dark blue, thus decreasing its reflectivity from the sun or albedo effect.
Notice here that the book publishers have placed what appears to be a blurred vision of an off-shore oil and gas rig reflected on to the water, facing upside down, whose foundation is joined at the base of a land mass directly in the middle of the image.
The image is not a clear reflection by any means, but the shadow is recognizable as a multi-billion dollar industrial structure. What does this reflection portray? Is it a submersible installation representing subsea technology? Is it a fallen rig, barely perceptible under water, sinking into the depths of a pristine environment?
The title above is Arctic Summit, possibly an additional reference also to the actual physical summit of the rocky outcrop in the image. Perhaps the off-shore platform — as a reflection, represents the true nature of the rocky outcrop, and that the outcrop is a metaphor for the solidity with which the Arctic will soon be industrialized– as a solid, common sensible and unassuming idea as the image of an rocky outcrop. Tomorrow’s sense will look nothing like today’s Arctic sense, but it will nonetheless be acceptable and accepted upon the same principles of sense making.
Another actuality, a version that cannot be discounted is that the rocky outcrop may be considered an Island of Inland Empire. That is correct, an Island of Inland Empire, where the rocky earth stands as an illusion that masks an assemblage of science, capital, regulation, development, entrepreneurial infrastructure built exactly into its core, much like, say, Crab Key Island in the James Bond movie Dr. No, sees the transformation of the equatorial island land mass, its core, into an internal technological wonder, much like Disney’s Magic Mountain and other sorts of diabolical resorts, distance the performance of industry from its mask of leisure. The blurred image, then, like the invisible under-belly of an ice berg is the foundational principle that keeps an Arctic Summit aloft.
But wait! Could not we also see image, its intended blurry quality, as a residue appearance, like an oil slick on the surface of water? In any event, we can state with confidence that The Economist’s image is by far, a deliberately elaborated, computer manipulated, thought provoking artefact. Its drama is elucidated strictly on the basis of its hand crafting through computer graphics in a work setting.
Okay, let us now turn to the image of nature on the right. Well let us take a look at this image for a moment, more closely.
The first thing we can say about this image is that it is not a graphic designed image. That is, it is not intended to appear as a graphic design image but as a photograph, an image by the way, that shall be viewed on its own terms. We know this because the image, in addition to appearing on the cover of the magazine Arctic Update, also appears as an independent photo image on the PDF version of the magazine available on-line. Directly above is how the image appears as a PDF on the internet, within the context of the Arctic Update magazine.
What I mean to indicate here, is that this image –unlike The Economist’s banner image– can be witnessed as a photograph separated from the logo or title of its current affiliation. It does not only represent DNV, but represents itself as a product of artistic deliberation to be understood as such outside the promotion of the Strategic Knowledge firm. The copyright is Getty Images. Perhaps DNV did not hire someone in particular to take the photo, or if they did, they did not retain the copyright.
Thus, this image resides in proximity to the adulterated intention of The Economist‘s image, but stands apart from marketing, the dining etiquette experience and games of chance, all together.
Well, what can we say about the image itself. It is taken from the perspective of the bow of a ship and portrays a human dimension of scale.
Notice that we (I am assuming someone is driving the boat in addition to the photographer) are heading directly under this ice formation. The sea appears calm and the sky is without incident. The weather is fine and randy. But the ceiling of this lofty cavernous ice bridge is shadowed and dark, indicating a lack of viewing power to test its integrity to pass under the bridge without risk. Moreover, the viewer sees on the right hand side the cracks in the wall, and the precariousness of conjoining section on the left hand side, all suggesting even when the Arctic may appear safe, there are overlying risks associated with any safe passage through its locale.
Thus, while global climate change may be destabilizing the integrity of Arctic ice structure, nevertheless, confrontation of risk is personal in the Arctic and must be dealt with head on, no matter whatever the causes (anthropogenic, local, global). Thus, causality of change is not important and delay of policy is not important, only technical response in measuring the safe passage forward registers as a mature response.
Finally, turning briefly to the nature scene that adorns the cover of the British Ambassador’s Residence booklet, we see an image representing not the future or the present, but in fact, the past. It is an image of idyllic urban gardens at a time when Oslo was becoming more aware of a romantic-period style connection with the landscape, purchasing surrounding farms in the area and cultivating new estates with acres of adjoining woodland. Of course, the image is not a direct photographic reproduction and thus represents something similar to The Economist’s Banner image.
Before leaving, let us just add a few of the pages inside these publications:
Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Tagged Oslo | Leave a Comment »
“The future of Europe is inextricably tied to United States. Imagine dissolving national parliaments and replacing it with a trans-atlantic parliament composed of persons in the room, peace loving intellectuals, a fantastic potential to discuss the future”.
Berlin means so much to so many in Berlin, as if life itself begins and ends with tearing down Berlin Wall, an emotion like Check-Point Charlie, that is now a tourist attraction.
Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Tagged Berlin | Leave a Comment »
A history channel on the video screen retells the truth.
Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Tagged Berlin | Leave a Comment »
The Economist’s One-Day Arctic Summit meeting on oil and gas development in the High Arctic
Epilogue: The Hotel Bristol is known among old timers in Oslo, mainly artists, for its Moorish Hall, once a two story high lobby decorated in the Moroccan style. There was resistance when some years ago, the ceiling was lowered to create a second floor– what was now the conference hall where we gathered for the Arctic Summit meeting.
Some art remains, such as this image of innocence above — were it hanging in public in the United States, it would surely raise eyebrows, especially in the context of a business conference. Here, as you see by the reaction of those waiting in line to gather their coats, the painting registers negligibly as a signature of sexualized bodies.
Perhaps the most central theme of the meeting was a discursive divide between representatives of the environment and industry.
Meanwhile, voices of government and local community were for the most part absent.
The environmental side was predictably blunt in declaring that “The Arctic” — whatever that is– should remain safeguarded, and that perhaps there is no possible scientific or industry account in the present that can legitimately guarantee development without catastrophe.
On the industry side, in a rather interesting but somewhat disorganized way, they sought to delineate the Arctic into various zones of expectation.
Representatives of both Statoil and DNV delivered various terms that drew attention, on the one side, to an industrialized Arctic in the present (near north) and on the other side, to a potential development zone, that could be drawn into the present by the lessons learned in the near High North (North Sea). A final zone of distinction was the untouchable, unthinkable High Arctic, the zone (still as of yet) of all-year ice area.
All in all, it was intriguing. No one of course, presented a topic called “Steps to Non-Development”, which would have been our topic.
Not even the environmentalists could think fast enough on their feet to come up with that. Given that the entire meeting was sponsored by three industry companies, by an organization titled The Economist, the concept of Development the elephant in the room.
By the way: Did we not say from the outset that we had a superb time at the meeting?
Everyone of our friends from across Norway was in town — a veritable who’s who of nearly top drawer delegates– the Highest of the nearly-High, including folks from INTSOK, CICERO, Research Council Norway, DNV, American Embassy, Nansen Institute, Fram Centre, etc.
In short, we had a blast. Many thanks to the wonderful folks of the The Economist for such a pleasurable day.
3/12: Up now is Henrik Madsen, CEO, Det Norske Veritas (DNV), just after the first coffee break. I have notes for the morning session and will post them below soon.
Henrik up now, citing the Torgeir Larsen, State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Norway, who provided the opening address (see below), that there are many Arctics, different from other areas in terms of variation ice and snow conditions, bio production, light (animates ice coverage on video — talk begins with a dramatization with voice over).
To understand the High Arctic, moving from the known areas to the more challenging areas.
Each area of the Arctic has its own set of individual risks. “Zero Risk” equals Zero Activity. Some risks are so great that government will not carry it out. Nuclear power will NOT happen in Norway, for example, even though risks according to others are very low.
Possible, we should want to go to ships operating on LNG, bunkering of LNG all over the Arctic, to reduce the possibility of spills.
This would require a modal shift, using a CO2 friendly, would require different shifts, more truck travel, more Suez canal, so, more costly, how they are introduced in a step wise manner, and avoid modal shifts we don’t want to see.
How safe is safe enough?
Well, everyone would agree that it should not be lower than in the North Sea, and could argue that it should be higher. Then can we develop safety standards. Barents 2020 (report on standards written by DNV) supported by the Russian authorities sponsored by Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway, creates standards for safety level.
Accident preparedness: No perfect solutions for oil spill on ice, a need to develop of new solutions, also for search and rescue. Fishing fleet could have a role.
It would not be difficult to design fishing vessels that could serve as stand-by vessels, recovery vessels and search and recovery.
Mocando: complex systems fail in complex ways. The accident only happened because many barriers had not work as intended.
Comprehensive risk management.
Oil and gas is complex already. A wholistic approach to manage.
Collaboration, different relation to risks in operation.
Collaboration between industry, civil society, regulatory bodies, take inclusive approach, share data, share experience and development of barriers, to mitigate consequences of accidents, and share this with partners.
To sum up.
Collaboration among stakeholders; Stepwise exploration; Risk-based approach.
Now we have Runi M. Hansen, Head of Arctic Unit, Statoil:
Why are we in the Arctic?
We need oil and gas to raise living standards for global growth. We believe that offshore development will put new demands on industry and communities.
Quite important to mention here, that the Arctic is “not only the arctic” — we like to divide the Arctic into 3 categories: Workable Arctic ( No Ice — Alaska, Western Canada, Barents Sea, East Greenland); Stretch Arctic (Ice part of the year); Extreme Arctic (North East Greenland– ice all year).
Step-wise approach. Developed from shallow water to ultra-deep, applied to Arctic, meaning Southern Norway moving north. Finally “Collaboration” — across industry, community, government (develop technology).
USGS — resources
Offshore constraints_ high oil prices will go out 2017, over $100 barrel. Long term oil price environment makes Arctic development more viable.
Breaking even oil prices, will vary, depending on the chain in different locations. Offshore will come under greater scrutiny, regulations will differ from country to country, relief well; oil and gas arctic will develop major competition from unconventional development of arctic oil and gas development.
After 2020. While media attention to territorial issues, but technical issues and costs involved in drilling and regulatory environment will be more major. Competition with shale are equally important.
The Stretch Arctic — going through various regions of the “Stretch Arctic” across the Greenland locations, mainly an exploration category. “Far in the future” — “Should we be discouraged by progress in Western Greenland” because of the lack of finds.
Off shore Russia? — working on a deal with Rosneft, developing 6 operation, exploration wells in Russia, Arctic Sea of Okhotsk.
“Pulled out of Shtokman- competition enormous, Statoil pulls out. Is it wary?”
Shtokman was a specific case. We are working actively with our portfolio all the time.
Commentator, The Economist’s James Astill:
One gets the impression, there has been tremendous excitement over the past years about Arctic development, but over the past few years, opportunities elsewhere are more possible, and that the Arctic is slipping out of view.
Statoil: Arctic is “longterm” — our exploration strategy (3 strategies), “early access at scale”. Alaska example, we have a set back, not even before 2025 development.
We postponed drilling to 2015.
We have to remember that we are not committed to drill a well there, we will do it when we are ready, and compare with portfolio worldwide.
Henrik: Emergence of shale gas has created retraction from the Arctic. Drilling for many years already, so progress over many years in the future.
Commentator “How should we look at technology?”
Henrik_ we have bits and pieces of technology, there is a lot we can do today, and always moving step by step. On East Greenland, Research Rescue is a big deal, oil spill on ice, infrastructure can be better.
Statoil: Prevention is everything for us. especially in the Arctic, no room for error. nine companies working together to develop ideas about oil and ice.
Peter Kiernan– lead Analyst Energy, Economist Intelligence Unit — looking at Shell, 5 to 8 years later, Shell decides not to go back into the Chuckchi, because of regulatory.
Shtokman collapsed, European gas demand slumped, shale works. Expectations being down played. Definitely a long term option.
After Lunch, Environmental Panel
Nina Jensen, CEO and Secretary General, WWF-Norway, went over time by twice her allotted amount.
Frederic Hauge, President, The Bellona Foundation, now up, talking about safety and the Arctic.
“Slow down the campaigning and be more informative” —Pano Kroko, Chairman, Environmental Parliament. The true value of capital is life. The returns, quarterly, that is life. Proper investment, looking at the present, 200 years of investment from the Arctic, oil from Whales, oil from the ground. Not a fantastic land, a lot of economic activity, as it should be, a life investor, long term value of arctic.
Oil and gas industry is “too heavy on our long term evaluation”. Solar energy, green bonds. “Arctic is not a virgin…[she’s] not a hookah [hooker?] in Bangkok”.
Nina Jensen; The Arctic is unique, life developed a thousands of years for above and below the ice, changes are happening so rapidly, we cannot diagnose the changes and where the last ice area will be.
We don’t say that we don’t want to ban economic development, we need more knowledge on how life is changing, build resilience, have adequate science for development.
(Presentation consistent with Madsen’s talk, an emphasis on responsible regulation and sound science. I wonder if she could envision a moment of adequate science and government regulation).
Pano Kroko, you’re not going to stop people looking for oil, gas, tourism.
Will happen, already happening. Coastguard co-ordination. Oil spills are eventualities, they are actualities. A lot of companies have to consider all these things in place, industrial bases need to be put in place.
Next Session — New Shipping routes.
Exploring the potential of new trading routes.
Sturla Henriksen: Norwegian Shipowners Association (NSA): Published a report, high stakes in the Arctic, global warming, a need to take a comprehensive approach, global implications with generational perspectives.
Internationally accepted regulatory framework, need infrastructure that can underpin safe and sustainable development (search and rescue, forecasts weather, polar load pressures, oil spill contingency, need to develop industrial standards).
Offshore oil and gas will be the activities increasing fast with largest commercial potential (2) Arctic destination for supporting regional communities and tourism (3) trans-arctic crossings Cathay to Europe. Key element to create common understanding, an Arctic business council.
Oslo.
Sergey Frank, President, Sovcomflot (one of the Summit’s sponsors), moving one unit of cargo via shipping is much more green than aviation, trucks, train.
Sturla: 90 percent of world trade is shipping and 2 percent of co2 emissions.
Dr. Huigen Yang, Director General, Polar Research Institute, China, responding to Arild Moe‘s point about regulation of coastal states_ Arctic more open for collaboration — especially for shipping, if Northern sea route is open, all countries would participate, more dialogue, more collaboration, open sea, northern sea route is open for four months, if ship is allowed to pass freely, if ships require convoys– reduce convoy passage.
Artic — Sergey Frank — co-producing ships, reacting — Russian government to be responsible to respect the traditions of the Arctic, rules and regulations have to be tougher, and stability in this region.
Government– protect environment but not establish protective regimes, important that regulatory framework be based on law of the sea, specific regulatory measure, also, circumpolar states need to establish cooperation in standardization in safe and sustainable frameworks in this area.
We have now– floating Arctic dialogue: George Atkinson, Exec. Dir. Institute on Science for Global Policy. Creating consensus- environmentally compatible energy. (three areas of region — infectious diseases. politics simple, no one wants disease). Politics on environmentally compatible energy.
Focusing on decision makers — who in the long run can make short term decisions. But they also focus on public endorsement. Lindblad project,
National Geographic– environmental capacity session, on the ship.
Geo-politics, collaboration and governance Panel
Gustaf Lind. Ambassador of Norway. “If I would have sat here in 2003, and said that Arctic Council would be doing policy, would be doing policy, permanent secretariat for the AC, my colleagues would even more confused.” If I would say that we have applications for observer status, my colleague would say that I’m completely insane.
Arctic states and indigenous representatives, have been able to react to the Arctic, and have adapted the Arctic Council to this new situation. Shift from “Decision shaping forum” to policy making forum.
Ambassador Anton. Arctic is home and its future — 1/5 GNP in Arctic. it is the largest part of Russia, and we (try to) act responsibly and constructively. We are “solving” problems. The boundary limitations between Norway and Russia, The Canadian/Denmark boundary dispute resolved. Most information in the public is total ignorance.
The key element of the situation in the Arctic is growing cooperation, and we welcome that. Judging what I heard today, the most important think I have heard is that we think of the Arctic as “one Arctic” — very strong commitment from each of the states to find solutions to pressing problems. Many of the proposals that I have heard today are included in Arctic policy, and will be released May 15, as part of the ministrial meeting.
Main challenges mitigation and adaptation to climate change, sustainability, future of the Arctic is peace, sustainable development, cooperation, strong arctic council.
James Herman. Ambassador to Norway, European Union.
1) Global warming will continue to be an issue (2) exploitation of resources will take some time (3) Arctic has become a region of stability and peace, and do everything to preserve it (4) this will have to reinforce international cooperation
Steffen Weber, Secretary General — EU Arctic Forum. Everyone agrees that people want development, responsible development, sustainable development.
Business and politics is separating from each other. Besides the state as the main actor in the Arctic, private actors, investors having a major impact in the Arctic. It is a business space, not just a political or practical space.
James Astill — Anxiety comes from Westerners seeing Russia as a protagonist in instigating fights.
Anton Vasilien, ambassador at Large- Russia responds, that there is no conflict driven agenda. Rather.
All Arctic States share in common : Arctic interest in maintaining sovereignty, maintaining balance between economic development and sustainability, knowledge based science, there should be very clear support coming from the Arctic… But they also can achieve these goals because they are involved in strong conversation with each other.
Geopolitically risks– Steffan.
The Arctic is a cool place, and will continue to be a cold place no matter what the climate change. and people are likely to cooperate because it is cold.
James Astill blows him off, “Ach – I don’t disagree”
Where is Arctic Council going in ten years:
Gustaf Lind — we have decided to have a budget, but for projects, payments for projects, waiting for Russian money and we’ll move forward. more appetite for legal binding agreements, legal international cooperation.
Anton — scope will be broadened, bring more issues. quite obviously that one direction to go, Arctic business ties in the Arctic. But I agree with Gustav that Arctic Council (high level intergovernmental forum) should involve into full fledged international organization.
Still a rather long way to this final destination. An organization that could have a common set of priorities. An organized that has a budget from member states, thirdly, chooses its projects based on its priorities.
Steffan, I found Anton’s statements interesting, it would lead to more connections to business and science communities.
American Navy — “I don’t believe that militarization is the goal of anyone, it is military control, and it is a good idea” — Militarization versus military presence.
Janos Herman — EU. responding to a Chinese
Kevin Vallely — Rowing the Northwest Passage — Explorer and Adventurer. giving a lecture about his rowing a boat across the Arctic during summer. Did some research last night to understand what “exploration” means. Traveling around the world, Sumatra, has a passion for the North West Passage, “alway have” —
8/9: We learned of the Arctic Summit, organized by The Economist, from Timothy Moore, great guy that he is, US Ambassador to Norway’s right hand man, who blew in our direction the names of sponsors and a few hints as to how to attend the event as special envoys. We would like to acknowledge his support. We do that here at StudioP‘s Paparazzi Ethnography — acknowledge the continued support of our sponsors and mentors, without which our grasp toward enlightenment would be that much more distanced.
Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Tagged Oslo, Villa Frognæs | Leave a Comment »
In the New York Times movie review of Decasia, Sarah Boxer suggests that popular culture has seen a revival of interest in “the will of things” to become more disorderly, to resist form, to seek entropy, maximum disorder, minimum sense. There is a growing aesthetic fascination with the deterioration of objects into matter, shape into stuff, form into deformity. The subject of decay has acquired new drama and character. It has fans, chroniclers, hangers-on.
Similarly, in Romanticism and the Life of Things, H.T. Mitchell observes that today’s interest in thingness has its roots in Romanticism, though not quite the spiritual kind of yesterday. Today, we are physical with Romanticism. The slogan for our time is nothing falls apart, but things come alive. “The modernist anxiety over the collapse of structure is replaced by the panic over uncontrolled growth of structures—cancers, viruses, and other rapidly evolving entities” (2001:171-2).
In her work on dwelling in West Virginia, anthropologist Kathleen Stewart, examines how progress literally creates the conditions for a kind of forgetting and discarding of things — old trucks, factories abandoned and worn down by rain and rust, cast away littered in out of the way spaces, hollers, streams and gulleys across Appalachia. For dwellers living among these “spaces” neglected on the road to progress — these discarded objects become a time and space experience.
Objects long abandoned become relevant and potent emotional markers of a personal present, past, and future. By binding themselves in folksy (ethical) and practical (mimetic) ways to “useless” objects, Stewart’s informants are members of an ethical-cultural landscape — defined by being “passed over” — an externalized space on the side of the road.
James Faubion has an equally fascinating take on debris, in particular, the remnants of Greek architecture within the city Athens. Here, decayed materials are a mode by which Athenians historically construct their present. 
Thus, whether finding love among the ruins in Athens, Greece, or in Athens, West Virginia, our daily relationship with the past is analogous to the practice of bricolage. Nothing complicated. Claude Lévi-Strauss suggested all practical living is about privileging “historical facts” selected from an inexhaustible multitude of “psychic movements” (1966) or, in Faubion’s words, different modalities of the modern.
The three images are spaces of intersection that reside on the threshold of everyday movements. They are spaces of intention left over from my father’s handiwork in a home where years later, today’s residents live among his debris.
A square block of wood. Sandwiched between a banister from one side and wooden handrail on the other.
Posted in Paparazzi Ethnography | Leave a Comment »
Paparazzi Ethnography 