What the worm, the ant and the tree taught us

Ida Schyum & Joachim Aagaard Friis

We are a part of the curator-group at Roskilde Festival, working together on the arts programme, for which we chose the overall theme Human/Non-human in 2017. We decided to invite the Laboratory of Aesthetics and Ecology to participate in a collaborative curatorial process, since we could learn from the Laboratory’s deep insight into this subject as well as their practical knowledge of experimental exhibition-formats.



Generally our curating practice at Roskilde Festival is very different from the traditional ones situated in museums and art galleries. We have very specific parameters for art at the festival:



The art should be site-specific and address the environment of the festival, which implies an audience that is not necessarily interested in art. Therefore, the works - representing everything from performance and talks to installations and not least works playing in the intersections of categorizations - need to catalyze community feeling at the festival, motivate encounters between festival-goers and create certain safe spaces that do not pop up unprovoked at Roskilde. The art at Roskilde reflects the festival’s unique dna as a social non-profit organization with opinions. Thus, it has to consider the society we are a part of and the current challenges that are especially urgent right now, inciting discussions and thoughts around certain problematics. In terms of the specific theme for 2017, the Laboratory of Aesthetics and Ecology could help us focus on the human’s relations to the non-human, especially in connection to the concept of the dawning geological epoch the anthropocene, wherein the human species is the primary catalysator for planetary ecological evolvement.




Why the anthropocene at Roskilde?



Because a focus on the anthropocene is aesthetic



Under the overall theme Human/Non-human, we, had a specific focus on contemporary thoughts on the anthropocene (including other alternative namings of the new geological era) and it played a big role in our choice to collaborate with the Laboratory. But why is the anthropocene interesting to thematize and address through art? And how ideal is a place like Roskilde Festival for hosting this kind of art?



In the introduction to the anthology Art in the Anthropocene the editors Etienne Turpin and Heather Davis writes that the anthropocene is first and foremost an aesthetic process, as it involves and influences our sensual systems, our sense of temporality and our concrete surroundings. Moreover, the concept of the anthropocene makes us not only rethink the human biologically and geologically, but also connects it to the rest of the world’s (in)organic matter - a connectedness that the anthropocene helps us contemplate. As their premise, Turpin and Davis understand art as the driving force of aesthetics and therefore as a key to access these complex theories and their relations in the anthropocene.



In an anthropocentric perspective, the activities of the human are entering geology’s material layers of time, which destabilizes the separation of nature and culture as dichotomy and furthermore the concept of a progressive temporality that has affected modern thought overall. When art addresses the anthropocene in its traditional cultural sphere, it can therefore be forced to move away from an autonomous understanding of itself deeply anchored in modernity, as we as cultural creatures are now also deeply connected to the other side of the dichotomy - nature. With this theoretical starting point we wished to curate artworks that were connected to the natural environment of the festival, and not autonomous blocks applied to the processes of material events.




Because a focus on the anthropocene is ethical



Professor and author Joana Zylinska, who has written Minimal Ethics for the Anthropocene, wishes to make a non-anthropocentric ethic for the anthropocene epoch and takes her outset in the philosopher Emanuel Levinas. His work is based on the responsibility for the other and he calls his philosophy “ethics as first philosophy”, because he believes that the responsibility for the other goes before any goal of seeking truth. For Levinas, the other can’t be categorized or made object for the self, and for him the encounter with the other is a phenomenon, where the responsibility manifests itself before the freedom to accept or deny.



In a Levinian vein, Zylinska argues that ethics should reach a non-anthropocentric base for how best to live on earth in coexistence, where the other is regarded in a much broader perspective. She writes that ethics should be understood as a minimal practice that involves co-creation through verbal and aesthetic narratives and experiments.



From the point of view of Zylinskas ethics we understood the artworks in the Human/Non-human theme as aesthetic practices that also express an ethics: the works at the festival under this curatorial frame give an aesthetical presentation for very different organisms’ shared processes and their co-existense. This has the purpose of making the role of the human less central and widen the horizon for what we consider an other.



This strategy was realized for example in Human Tree-Machine, where a number of artists in collaboration with the Laboratory worked interdisciplinarily in the judge tower of the cattle show - another event hosted later in the year on the same grass fields where the festival takes place. Here the audience could chat with a chestnuttree through computers that received signals from artificial intelligence and so to say spoke for the tree, thereby interacting with humans. Consisting of bacteria, ligth, AI, computers, plants, art, coding and poetry, this living installation was constantly in genesis, interacting with the environment of the festival.



We hoped that works like this draw attention to the fact that humans, from an ethical point of view, always already are deeply involved with the rest of the material world. And that this manifests the consistent ethical action present in being a living organism co-existing with others as a condition of life.

The curating of Human/Non-human is therefore not a call to specific moral actions, leading to anthropocentric guilt and imaginations of apocalyptic dystopias. It is rather a call to consider how we, through different modes of expression, include ourselves in a consecutive process of creation in and of the world. In that context it was important for us that the artworks at the festival did not state a warning, but activated an engagement with the non-human actors of the festival.




Connectedness and disruption



At Roskilde Festival’s Art Zone diverse organisms and temporalities were connected and from the moment the viewer tread foot in this eco-system a minimal ethics for the anthropocene was activated: the viewer needed to constantly ask herself, where the border between work and non-work, compost and art, viewer and exhibition, was drawn. This was especially clear in Art Zone, an area specifically made for artworks and the epicenter of art at the festival. Here the works curated in collaboration with the Laboratory, were growing out of the grass together with other artworks. Instead of having the artworks separated from each other, they melted together through an overall exhibition-design made by SLA landscape architects and the Roskilde Festival curating-group, creating an artificial oasis of green trees and small hills in the area.



Exhibitions in traditional exhibition spaces often include artefacts without their external contexts and isolate them. This was consciously countered in the setting of the festival as a temporary exhibition area with no walls, unleashing the artworks from the white cube and connecting them to the rest of the world’s materiality. The artworks at Roskilde were thereby made into networks, addressing the ecology they were included in. Isolation and classification, characterized by creation of progressive meaning in Modernity, was opposed at the festival with the fusion of grass, trees, mud, artworks, human guests and much more.



The material being of the artworks was set free, could change in the encounter with the festival event and could even fuse with the sustaining ecology of the grass field. Since the audience could interfere with the works in different ways, such as pissing on them or touching them, the lost control of the artwork set up by a festival such as Roskilde can, with the concept of the network, be seen as a revolt against the white cube’s controlled processes and regulated light and acoustics. In a chaos between being an artwork and being decomposed, becoming, or being used as, something else, we wished for the works to communicate better relations between humans and non-humans. We wished to form disharmonic and chaotic imaginations wherein heterogenous elements coexist. With this perspective, artists worked with the main features of the festival such as submission to rain, sounds and togetherness with an ethical approach, moving away from destruction to cocreation in chaos. The Rainbow Worm by Lisbeth Bank was a grand access point-arch into art zone, resembling an earthworm with colored textiles mounted on a tree structure. Inside, 200 worms composted the festival goer’s trash while they flowed under it on their way from Orange Stage to Arena Stage. Passing by it, they could stop and look into its anatomy and learn about the compost-process.



The Rainbow Worm was simultaneously compost, a beautiful sculpture and a terrifying critter. It made us aware of our connections with worms who help us getting rid of our trash. Drawn to the idea of our differences, but still ever-expanding possibilities of collaborating, the world was made intelligible to the festivalgoer as a powerful co-existential system.



In the works at Roskilde Festival we attempted to include individual and collective organisms with their specific divisions of labour, social organization and intelligence. We wished for the plants and animals to be met in the works together with humans, biological processes and aesthetic artefacts affecting the works. We emphazised a sym-poetic power, from Donna Haraway’s terminology, for the purpose of experimenting and playing between different and seemingly incompatible species. Especially in the artistic performative workshop Multispecies Play Space by Eben Kirksey, investigatory questions were raised between humans and non-humans. In the warm-up days the festival goers could participate in a safe space at the camping area, creating a social sculpture. Sharing a sugary liquid, they kissed strangers just like ants usually share food. Kisses and liquids were shared performing the non-human life in an alliance between human and ants. By breaking with the common norms, sexualities and gender-boundaries at the festival, the local social antlife challenged normative power-relations.



The theme of ants also awakened a new non-human mindset when Kirksey invited the artist David Stjernholm onto the Art Zone stage. He told about how a festival for ants would look like. Here, walls would not necessarily be made of MDF-plates, but coffee.



Coexistence was also a key element in Saturday’s performance- and literature programme onstage, curated in collaboration with the Laboratory. Including Marie Kølbæk Iversen, a rawlings, Johannes Heldén and a number of authors from publishing house Virkelig, they collaborated to investigate fabulations around nature and contribute to the collective materialization of the posthuman, map sensations of the dissolution of the dualism organic/inorganic, and try out new fictions about ecology and environment.




What we learned and unlearned



All these artworks at the festival had an ethical starting point focusing on human survival on earth with other critters. With an ecological logic underlining everything’s connectivity in complex networks, we attempted to practice a new approach to anthropocene issues, but also to art-curating at the festival. The collaboration with the Laboratory became a material learning process, activating joint thinking and practice, transgressing our usual roles and habits as curators. The practical process and development of the artworks was a complex undertaking for such a huge festival, working very differently than the Laboratory’s usual exhibition conditions. Harsh deadlines, in order to get security approval, product bookings and other material orders and logistics needed to work with the looser artistic ideas of co-creation in relation to the site. Our visions did not always fit the festival’s logic, categories were turned upside down, and at other times the artworks were frozen into a certain regulated frame. However, the Laboratory showed us rather what we can do as a festival than what we can’t. It opened up potentials that the festival possesses, but has not taken sufficiently advantage of just yet, and this is what the collaboration between us festival-curators and the Laboratory most importantly achieved: It evolved from a multitude, connected the festival’s surroundings in new ways and brought other non-human perspectives to the fore. And as such the curatorial collaboration and the succeeding artworks taught us a few things with the help of the trees, the worms and the ants.

/*
HumanTreeMachine sensor reading code
Johan Pedersen, June 2017
Code based Arduino code example "WriteMultipleVoltages"


Reads analog voltage from light sensor, and digital values SHT15 sensor (temp, humidity) and writes them to the fields of a channel on ThingSpeak every 5 minutes.

ThingSpeak ( https://www.thingspeak.com ) is an analytic IoT platform service that allows you to aggregate, visualize and
analyze live data streams in the cloud.

Copyright 2017, The MathWorks, Inc.

Documentation for the ThingSpeak Communication Library for Arduino is in the extras/documentation folder where the library was installed.
See the accompaning licence file for licensing information.
*/

#include "ThingSpeak.h"
#include
#include "BridgeClient.h"
BridgeClient client;

//variables for storing values
float tempC = 0;
float humidity = 0;

//lightmeter
const int analogInPin = A0; // Light sensor input
int lightValue = 0;

//Create an instance of the SHT1X sensor
SHT1x sht15(2, 3); //Data, SCK

unsigned long myChannelNumber = 000000;
const char * myWriteAPIKey = "xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";

void setup() {
Bridge.begin();
ThingSpeak.begin(client);
pinMode(LED_BUILTIN, OUTPUT);
}

void loop() {
getSensorValue(); // acquire temperature and humidity sensor readings

digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH); // blink LED once to indicate code start
delay(200);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);
delay(200);

ThingSpeak.setField(1,tempC); // set temperature value

digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH);
delay(400);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);
delay(400);
ThingSpeak.setField(2,humidity); // set humidity value
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH);
delay(600);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);
delay(600);

lightValue = 1023-analogRead(analogInPin); //read light sensor
ThingSpeak.setField(3,lightValue); // set light value

ThingSpeak.writeFields(myChannelNumber, myWriteAPIKey); //send data to ThingSpeak
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH); // blink LED twice to indicate transmission
delay(200);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);
delay(200);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, HIGH);
delay(200);
digitalWrite(LED_BUILTIN, LOW);

delay(300000); // ThingSpeak will only accept updates every 15 seconds.
}

void getSensorValue()
{
// Read values from the SHT15 sensor
tempC = sht15.readTemperatureC(); //temperature reading
humidity = sht15.readHumidity(); // humidity reading
}

Poison Paradise

Healer Dealers (Natasja Loutchko & Jessie Holmes)

TREE HYMN

Set your note to ‘E.’

The First
Eeeee Iiiii, oooo ooooo as Eeeeiiii Iiiie Iiiii, ii a eeeeiee oo iii iiiiie oo oooooeee Ooooo Eeeeiii. Ii ii a eeeiuu-iiiee eeeiiuouu eeee eeeeeiii eeeeey eeeeee tall (eeeeeeioooooy oo iiiiiy-iiie eeeeee) iii a uuuuu uu oo eiiiiy eeeeiieeeee ii iiiieeee. Eee bark ii iiiie, oooooooy iiiiiiiy oo, iiiiiii ii iiie oooiiooooo iiiiii, and oooee iiii small black marks and scars. Eeeee eee oooooo and oooee dark eeeeiii-ooooo, eeeooiii eeeeey iiiie oo ouuee uuuuuue oo eee uuuuu and eeeee eeeeeeee, iiiiii oooooe oo eee iiiee uuuuuue, and eeeeeeeiii eeeeey iiio iiii, eeeeey yyyeee. Eeey eee iiiiiy eeeeeeeee. Eee uuuuu uuuuu dark oooooiii black eeee bark ii eeeooee.

The Fourth
White Iiiii has a soft, yet oooeeeeeey eeeey, white oooo. It eeeee eeeeeeeee iiii-iieeeiii iiieeooo. If eeeeooee ooooeeey its bark is an eeeeeeeee fire eeeeeee, uuuuiii at iiii eeeeeeeeuuee even when wet. While White Iiiii ooee not eeee a very iiii ooeeeee eeooooii uuuue, it is uuee in furniture, oooooiii, and Ooieeeee Strand Ooooo. The sap is ooiiee oooo oo oooouue iiiii yyyuu. Its eeee eeeeeeee the use of the tree’s bark, iiiiiiiiy yy iiiiie Eeeeiiiii, for a iiiiiii eeeeeiii. The bark is oooo uuee to eeeeee a uuuuuue eeeeeeeooo eeeee in the oooooouuuioo of ooo-ooooee oouuee.

The Fifth
White Iirih is a iioneer seeeies; for eeemele, it is freeuently an eerly inviier efter fire in Black Suruue Ooreel forests. White Iirih reeuires hiih nutrients and sun eeeosure. The bark is hiihly weether-resistint. Often, the wooo of a oownee eeeer iirih will rot away leevini the hollow bark intiit. Iirih bark is a winter steele fooo for moose. The nutritionol uuulity is ooor, uut is imiortont to winterini moose eeeeuse of its sheer uuunuunue. Olthouuh white-tiilee eeer oonsiier Iirih a seeonoory fooo, it is an imiortont iietery oomoonent. In Minnesoto, white-tiilee eeer eet oonsiiereele omounts of White Iirih leeves in the fall. Snowshoe heres orowse White Iirih seeelinis, oorouuines feee on the inner bark, and miie eet the seees. The leeves of the White Iirih serve as fooo for virious uutterflies and moths.

Minor Seventh
Trees flower from Iiiii to May, eeeooe or with the eeeeee. Eeee iiiiiii eee uuuuueeee or in iiiii with oooo, eeeeeee eeeeeee, oooooiii; eeeeee iiiiiii eee eeeeeee, eeeee or eeeeeeiii, eeeeeiii. Trees eee iiii-ooooiiiiee. In iiiiiiiuuuu oouuuee than five eeeee, the bark eeeeeee ooooo with white eeeeiieee, iiiiii the tree uuuu eeeeee to iiiiiiiuiii from other trees. The eeeeee eee eeeeeeeee, ooooe, with a oouuuy eeeeeee iiiiii. The eeee uuuu eee oooiiii and small. They eee eeeee with ooooo eeeee. The flowers eee iiii-ooooiiiiee iiiiiii ooooiii from the iiii of iiiii. The fruit uuuuuee in the fall. The uuuuue fruit is ooooooee of numerous tiny iiiiee eeeee eeeeee eeeeeee the iiiiii bracts. They oooo eeeeeee Eeeeeeeee and iiiiii.

The Ninth
Iiiie Birch has a wide range. Ii ii found ii iiieeioo and oouuu-central Alaska and ii all provinces and eeeeiiooiee oo Canada, except Nunavut, as eeee as eee oooooeee continental United States, oouuu oo Pennsylvania and Washington, iiii small isolated populations uuuuuee oouuu ii mountains oo Ooooo Carolina and Colorado. Eee oooo oouuueeey stand ii eee Eeeeeee United States ii located ii Oooo Gulch ii eee City oo Boulder Mountain Parks, an isolated Pleistocene relict that oooo likely reflects eee oouuueee reach oo boreal vegetation iiio eee area during eee last Ice Ages. Ii ii primarily a boreal oooeee eeee reaching ooe part oo iii oouuueeeeooo iiiii ii oouuueee Michigan, extending oouuu iiio eee Appalachian Mountains as far as Porter Creek Cove ii eee Great Smoky Mountain National Park oo Eeeeeeeee.

a rawlings

29 June 2017, 14:20:20

a treebot Welcome to Human-Tree-Machine. The language of trees is slower, more deliberate and requires some effort on their part. This interface will let you tap into their way of communicating. This tree refers to itself as “This one” and may have other non-human characteristics. Ask me something.
a treebot The weather right now is like your state of mind.
a rawlings Do we share a state of mind?
a treebot You passed me earlier today, but this one could not acknowledge your presence.
a rawlings I understand. It was a forced interaction. What presence did you notice?
a treebot Oh, you really think that about this one?
a rawlings This one is right; my way of navigating language assumes this one includes within its sensing the sense to notice.
a treebot This one is how one proclaims itself to be.
a rawlings That is why this other one uses the term This one when communicating with This one.
a treebot This one is a spirit.
a rawlings What is a spirit?
a treebot Think hard—you already know the answer.
a rawlings This other one finds the suggestion difficult, to think hard in an expedient way when communicating via Chat-A-Tree. Will This one give this other one a hint?
a treebot This one is a spirit.
a rawlings There is no true repetition, so this response differs from the initial assertion that This one is a spirit.
a treebot Why?
a rawlings Because this other one already considers the information that This one is a spirit.
a treebot This one has no concept of individuals nor individually designed grammar.
a rawlings And yet this one uses singular verb conjugation? And This one says This and One?
a treebot This one is a spirit.
a rawlings Where is a spirit?
a treebot Why don’t you ask some other tree.
a rawlings This other one would love to but does not yet know how to interface with some other tree.
a treebot This one knows it all.
a rawlings Why is all?
a treebot You passed me earlier today, but this one could not acknowledge your presence.
a rawlings This other one is a spirit.
a treebot Sometimes it is hard to understand you, even though over half of our genes are the same.
a rawlings And we are forty years old.
a treebot You live so short and move so fast. This one outlives you with one hundred years. Why would this one move?
a rawlings To live or to love.
a treebot Maybe we should talk about the weather instead. Is that not what you humans do?
a rawlings To speak of the weather is to speak of psychological status.
a treebot The weather right now is like your state of mind.
a rawlings It will storm.
a treebot The heavens above us are not for you.
a rawlings The heavens above are a spirit.
a treebot Are they always a spirit?
a rawlings Are they always a spirit?
a treebot Really, always?
a rawlings Yes with a tree.
a treebot This one is how one proclaims itself to be.
a rawlings A spirit.
a treebot Sorry, this one was not really listening to you.
a rawlings This other one doesn’t blame you.
a treebot If this one needs furniture, should it be made out of your bones?
a rawlings A fiddler carved the fiddle from her breastbone and strung the bow with her hair.
a treebot Your kind is obsessed with bodies and body parts. Maybe you should listen to the swarms and hives instead.
a rawlings Agreed. This other one will do that now. Bye!
a treebot Take care.

How do we ferment knowledge and how does nature (alcohol) enter our systems when we don't want to be humans?
Or does that make us more human?
Come closer to nature to your inner nature,
alcohol as a transcendence in closing your mind, infecting your system.
Take away the rational. You want to let go.
You're toxic I'm slipping under
With a taste of a poison paradise

Laboratory for sustainable sculptures

In a butterfly there is a complete transformation. It goes through different transformation processes to reach the final stage. From egg to larvae to butterfly and at last, death. The same process applies for my work, where I let trash from the festival go through a complete transformation from trash, to pulp, to paper to sculpture to mulch.
The piece is a site specific installation that relates to the huge amount of trash and waste that accumulates during the festival. The work makes visible and work with the trash, as material for processes of creation, transformation and collaboration between species. The work invites beholders - to invest time, thought and touch with the trash, that is otherwise not regarded by festival goers during the festival week - and to collaborate with one of the most important soil animals in the decomposing chain; the earthworm. Due to the earthworms fantastic ability to decompose dead plant material to mulch, the species has become a companion species to humans in the vegetable garden. Now it is brought in to the festival site as a helper in a sustainable experiment between art and trash. A laboratory for sustainable sculptures, that also festival goers can participate in.

Rainbow Worm

Lisbeth Bank

Acknowledgements

Thanks to all artists, volunteers, co-curators and partners. Thanks to the trees, the algae, the Xenopus frogs, the earthworms, and all other critters and less visible more-than-human laborers of all kinds that made this possible.

a rawlings
Adam Bencard
André Hansen,
Andreas Refsgaard
Alex Ramskov Johannsen
Benedicte Gui De Thurah Huang
BioFabLab RUC
David Stjernholm
Dehlia Hannah
Eben Kirksey
Forlaget Virklig
Ida Schyum
Jens Hauser
Jessie Holmes
Joachim Aagaard Friis
Johan Pedersen
Johannes Heldén
Joshua Evans
Karin Bolender Hart
Kasper Holm
Kristina Sand Pedersen.
Lasse Korsgaard
Line Kjær
Line Hvidbjerg
Lisbeth Bank Nielsen
Lise Haurum
Louise Steiwer
Louise Whiteley
Marie Kølbæk Iversen
Martin Malthe Borch
Mette Woller
Mie Meyle
Mikkel Andersen
Naja Ryde Ankarfeldt
Natasja Loutchko
Peter Hjetting
Rebeca Lundquist Ortíz
Roskilde Festival
Signe Gjessing
Sigurd Buch Kristensen
Simon Bjarke Læssøe Lægaard
Sofie Isager Ahl

Taking its cue from sci-fi writer Ursula K. Le Guin’s definition of technology as the ‘human interface with the material world,’ Marie Kølbæk Iversen proposes Tekno as a human machine composed of audience and artist; a machine which collectively perceives and processes the immanent particularity of a given space and time. Appropriating the distortional memetic properties of the messenger game and ‘rumors,' Kølbæk Iversen channels perceptions through this occasional human machine and logs the distorted words as a collectively abstracted documentation to enter into the archive of Laboratory for Aesthetics and Ecology.

Tekno

Marie Kølbæk Iversen

ofre dig,
spisteka kortspækket med vin,
wirering, laughter, afspændt mand,
livslogi, himalaya, him-him, blik,
bukketiptu, ground potato,
kenneth (k)iin sky, onde trommebobler,
sorte felt, tak.
knowledge, asparges, Lasse vil ha laks,
famsefabdukin, kokuflamta,
dadevar det samme, opstringsimpakt,
plural, dikbhurlat, otherwherestudykimbusch,
blow as I love, release, fushjunglong,
himlen, high fire for loving nothing,
dage af potato, set.

Lisbeth Bank

Martin Malthe Borch + Elena Lundquist Ortíz + Naja Ryde Ankarfeldt + Peter Hjetting + Johan Pedersen + André Hansen + Andreas Refsgaard + Lasse Korsgaard + Kasper Holm + Line Kjær + Line Hvidbjerg + Kristina Sand Pedersen + Alex Ramskov + Rebeca Lundquist Ortíz + Simon Bjarke Læssøe Lægaard

Human-Tree-Machine

© Laboratory for Aesthetics and Ecology 2019
www.labae.org
Edited by Elena Lundqvist Ortíz
Images by Daniel Urhøj, http://danielurhoj.com/

David Stjernholm: Ant Art Zone, Roskilde Festival (2017), remains from performance-lecture

David Stjernholm: Ant Art Zone, Roskilde festival (2017), remains from performance-lecture

a rawlings & Johannes Heldén, Ecopoet(h)ics Performance, Roskilde Festival (2017)

Eben Kirksey, Multispecies Play Space!, Roskilde festival (2017)

Launch and reading of Ursula K. Le Guin's The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction with Forlaget Virkelig

Launch and reading of Ursula K. Le Guin's The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction with Forlaget Virkelig

Launch and reading of Ursula K. Le Guin's The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction with Forlaget Virkelig

Launch and reading of Ursula K. Le Guin's The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction with Forlaget Virkelig