'On Killing a Tree' by Gieve Patel,- an Analysis
Hello Friends...
Sure, we all are doing well... Be careful, we must stay fit and shouldn't fall ill and get our studies affected. We shall eat and drink healthy, exercise regularly, and won't avoid our domestic and social responsibilities. And whatever time we get for ourselves at the end of the day, we must study hard for most of the time, so that we learn to think... and learn. We simply cannot afford to stop thinking, for we are learners, and we are the chosen ones who got the scope to learn...
Who May Reap Some Benefit from the Discussion
This discussion on On Killing a Tree is primarily meant for any student studying for the purpose of H. S. Examination [WBCHSE] on her/his own. However, if anybody else wishes to learn the ways we enjoy and appreciate a poem, [s]he won't get disappointed; for here in this discussion, care has been taken so that young learners can think independently, and ask questions appropriately in order to comprehend any poem as per their best abilities.
Why don't you check it yourself? But before we start our discussion, you should go through the text of On Killing a Tree for a couple of times, at least. Either listen to the text [don't forget, poems are also meant for listening], or read, or listen and read. Listening carefully to the text will help you understand the sense groups, and their implications may come out clear from the intonation:
On Killing a Tree
 |
| By सुहास बहुळकर, दीपक घारे - https://w.wiki/57nm, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=117617991 |
It takes much time to kill a tree,
Not a simple jab [1] of the knife
Will do it. It has grown
Slowly consuming [2] the earth,
Rising out of it, feeding
Upon its crust, absorbing
Years of sunlight, air, water,
And out of its leperous [3] hide [4]
Sprouting [5] leaves.
Not a simple jab [1] of the knife
Will do it. It has grown
Slowly consuming [2] the earth,
Rising out of it, feeding
Upon its crust, absorbing
Years of sunlight, air, water,
And out of its leperous [3] hide [4]
Sprouting [5] leaves.
So hack and chop [6]
But this alone won't do it.
Not so much pain will do it.
The bleeding bark [7] will heal
And from close to the ground [8]
Will rise curled green twigs [9],
Miniature boughs [10]
Which if unchecked will expand again
To former size.
No,
The root is to be pulled out-
Out of the anchoring [11] earth;
It is to be roped, tied,
And pulled out- snapped out [12]
Or pulled out entirely,
Out from the earth-cave [13],
And the strength of the tree exposed,
The source [14], white and wet,
The most sensitive, hidden
for years inside the earth.
Then the matter
Of scorching [15] and choking [16]
In sun and air,
Browning, hardening
Twisting, withering,
And then it is done.
But this alone won't do it.
Not so much pain will do it.
The bleeding bark [7] will heal
And from close to the ground [8]
Will rise curled green twigs [9],
Miniature boughs [10]
Which if unchecked will expand again
To former size.
No,
The root is to be pulled out-
Out of the anchoring [11] earth;
It is to be roped, tied,
And pulled out- snapped out [12]
Or pulled out entirely,
Out from the earth-cave [13],
And the strength of the tree exposed,
The source [14], white and wet,
The most sensitive, hidden
for years inside the earth.
Then the matter
Of scorching [15] and choking [16]
In sun and air,
Browning, hardening
Twisting, withering,
And then it is done.
[From the anthology POEMS, published by Nissim Ezekiel, Bombay, 1966]
Maybe you have come across some words and expressions difficult to comprehend while reading the text. Please go through the list of annotations and check whether I have guessed them correct or not.
Annotations:
1. blow
2. a tree gets its nourishment from the earth [soil]
3. leper-like/ like a leprosy patient
Please note the contradiction. In case of leprosy, the human patient looses his/her appendages, but here, the tree has the power to heal such deadly wound inflicted by the blow of knife and can sprout new leaves again from this wound, thus proving its indomitable spirit.
4. 'skin' of larger animals
Would you like to consider this as an attempt to attribute the tree with animate features?
5. budding, giving rise to
6. blow repeatedly with sharp instrument
7. the bark [outer covering] of the tree is bleeding due to the hacks and chops
Have you noted the attempt of treating the tree as a living being of 'flesh' and 'blood' once again?
8. the tree is now felled, the stump left is close to ground
9. budding branches and leaves
10. small branches with leaves
11. sheltering
12. torn out
13. shelter deep within the earth
14. the source of the unique life force of the tree
15. burning, roasting
16. suffocating
The Title
Now it's time we share our thoughts and feelings in details. Let us start from the very title of the poem.
What's your opinion about the title of the poem? Does the title reflect the ways an expert suggests, or guides, or prescribes to deal with an issue? What do you expect to read about in the poem after you go through the title?
Does the title tell you that you are going to read a poem on the process of killing a tree? Do you really feel that this can be a theme, or is the theme, to compose a poem upon?
I think it’s time we should go through the text more minutely to discuss further.
The First Stanza
The Tone
How do you find the tone of the speaker at the very beginning? Yes, a very confident tone marks the beginning of the poem:
It takes much time to kill a tree,
Don’t you feel the first line to be an assertion, implying that killing a tree is no simple task, and it demands a lot more time and effort that had been thought of?
The Explanation
The elaboration follows soon:
Not a simple jab of the knife
Will do it.
Will do it.
Doesn’t it seem as if somebody has come to the wise speaker for guidance after [s]he failed to kill a tree with a blow of his/her knife? And the speaker seems to cite the unique life spirit of the tree as the reason behind the failure. The speaker explains how it [the tree] has grown out of the earth’s crust, absorbing the necessary nutrients for life from it. It has also been nourished by years of sunlight, air and water. Hence its power to thrive is immense: whenever it is jabbed with a knife, it starts the healing process on its own, sprouting leaves to cover and heal the leprous hide.
The Length of the Second Sentence
Have you noted the exceptional length of the second [and also the last] sentence of the stanza, starting from the third line and running up to the last of the stanza, repetitively pointing out how the tree has drawn its nourishment from its environment? Do you feel that the length and the repetition actually foreground/emphasise the indomitable life spirit of the tree?
The Second Stanza
The Next Step
The second stanza begins with another suggestion to kill the tree [apart from jabbing with a knife] from the wise speaker, but only to deny its effectiveness too:
So hack and chop
But this alone won't do it.
But this alone won't do it.
Do you find this trick effective to drive one’s argument forward? Do you yourself opt for this strategy in your own life? Do you foretell the impending failure of your friends' probable future moves and make them listen to your 'wise' suggestions? Let me know… And, maybe then, we will have a little chat over the ‘power’ of ‘hegemony’.
The Explanation
Even if the tree is felled, it has the power to fight against the enormous pain inflicted upon. It has got such a life force that it will heal its bleeding wound again. New curled green twigs will rise once more from the remaining stump close to the ground and will stretch themselves to miniature boughs soon. Provided they are not scythed off, they will soon expand to its previous size, ruining all our attempts to kill the tree.
The Third Stanza
The Negation Continues
The third stanza begins with a strong negation:
No,
The single negative word in the very first line of the stanza nullifies all the previous futile attempts to kill the tree. Have you noted how the speaker has opted for a long pause that is possible only at a line break here in the poem? Why do you think the speaker wants us to take a long pause here? Is the speaker readying us up for a fool-proof plan?
Killing a Tree Is not a Simple Task
For a successful killing, the attempts must be more planned and rigorous. The life of a tree remains in its root. [Does the fact remind you of those childhood fairy tales where we had the lives of the demons hidden in some chest buried deep underwater?] It is to be pulled out from the womb of mother earth. The tree is to be forced entirely out from the earth-cave; for it is this white root- wet and the most delicate part, safely hidden in the crux of the earth, acting as the tree’s life force.
The Fourth Stanza
The Final Touch [!!!]
Now, it is the time to complete the task of killing, and the fourth stanza lays down the details associated with it. The root that is pulled or snapped out, is to be kept exposed in sun and air, for getting it scorched and choked.
What Can Give Life, Can Take Away As Well
Ironically, the sun and the air that nourished the tree till moments ago, are now being used to kill the tree. The root, being the underground part, is not adapted to receive sunlight and air. The moment the root is exposed to sunlight, it gets burnt. The moment it is exposed to air, it gets choked. It is the time to paralyse the life force that flows through this white root, still wet, soaked with the elixir of life. In the process, it turns brown, hardened, and withers easily when twisted. And the tree gets successfully killed.
Gerund
Have you noted the words like ‘scorching’ and ‘choking’ in the final stanza? Have you been able to understand their functions?
Yes, they are functioning as nouns here, being the objects of the preceding preposition ‘of’.
If we get a word by adding the suffix ‘-ing’ to some word that is ordinarily used as a verb, to use it as a noun, it is called a gerund.
Would you like to check for a few more from the text?
Back to the Title Again
Let us get back to the title of the poem once again. Now that you have gone through the poem in minute details, do you really feel the poet is keen on making us learn how to kill a tree successfully?
The Argument
On Killing a Tree, written in free verse, reflects a conversational tone, as if an expert is guiding a novice through the task of killing a tree. [Don't you feel that this setting makes the poem quite dramatic? Just as in a drama, here too, we have characters like the speaker and the listener(s) actively engaged in an active conversation, which we may very well consider as the action of a drama. Isn't it so?] Please note the argumentative pattern in the poem. It starts explaining why the novice has failed to kill the tree with a blow of his/her knife [the first stanza], why his/her next assumed attempt of hacking and chopping the tree will undoubtedly fail too [the second stanza], and how actually a tree can be killed [the rest of the poem]. Throughout the poem, the common reasons of failures are explained, and instructions are imparted about a successful killing of a tree. But nowhere, the objective of the task that seems to be so important is explained.
Have you for once been thinking about the objective behind this task of killing a tree?
Have you been told for once in the poem why you should kill a tree?
And therein lies the irony… Such a task can have no proper and justified objective. We, the human beings often go for felling a tree for reasons that are mostly selfish and foolish. We rarely treat this form of life as living at all, and are therefore, really very indifferent to the pain we cause to it. The words and phrases used in the poem like ‘kill’, ‘jab of the knife’, ‘hack and chop’, ‘…to be roped, tied,/ And pulled out- snapped out’, ‘scorching and choking’ etc. mark the extreme brutality of mankind; whereas the ‘leprous hide’ and the ‘bleeding bark’ along with the browned, hardened, twisted and withered root lie witness to our misdeeds exposing this inhuman brutality of mankind to all. Don't you agree? The title, thus, actually hints not on the act of killing a tree, but on the selfishness, brutality and insensitivity of the killer of a tree.
The Irony
The poet is not helping us here to actually kill a tree through the advice of the speaker [poet's persona]in this poem, as it may have seemed primarily from the title of the poem. The title of the poem and the poem itself are in this way ironic. The poet is posing to guide us through a task we all are so accustomed only to point out our brutality and foolishness. He actually intends to make us aware of our insensitivity, for we are foolish enough to endanger every form of life on this planet in the process of killing trees. Each time we kill a tree, we also paralyse the chance of our existence. However, we refuse to acknowledge the raw truth, making a mockery of ourselves in the process.
The Images
On Killing a Tree, thus is a poem more about our suicidal attempts than being a poem about killing a tree. This poem is therefore, very effective in its suggestiveness, through its irony. And surely, the effect gets heightened with the usages of the strong images that are strewn throughout the length of the poem. Hence, we find a fond mother’s image in the portrayal of the planet earth, feeding the tree with its sap. Any sensible reader will also feel the pain as reflected in the image of a forceful abortion,- ripping off life from a mother’s womb, as the tree is prescribed to be ‘snapped out’ from the ‘earth-cave’. The use of the colours like white [indicating the peaceful existence of a tree in contrast to the brutality of mankind] and brown [signifying paralysis or lifelessness] are also rich in their connotations beside their regular meanings. However, the only hope that remains for us is our sensibility, as well as sensitivity. If we grow sensible enough, nature surely will grow green again. We are to be respectful to every form of life, we are not to be guided by our greed, and finally, compassion must not be forgotten.
Factors Deciding Our Conclusion
Now when we are already through our discussion, would you mind if I ask you to list up the factors that helped us to complete our discussion on the poem On Killing a Tree? Yes, any poem must have a theme, and an approach to build up the composition on the selected theme. An approach incorporates choice of words, phrases, and syntax; rhythm; and images. Just note, how we have built up our argument sharing our views about these factors. Whenever you read any poem, you can try to adopt a similar approach and see whether it helps or not.
Further Reading
Apart from these, a few things about the poet and his/her time always help as no text comes with a zero history. The socio-cultural context of the poet is bound to leave its signature on the text. Why don't you try, if you can trace out signs from the poem On Killing a Tree that reveal the poet to be a physician by profession? To know about the poet, you may visit:
Apart from the above link, here is another link which will guide you to another useful reading, a very meaningful interview of the poet, if you feel to look beyond the boundary of your H.S. Examination:
Please feel free to write to me in case you have any trouble in understanding the discussion, or if you have any further query...
Post-reading Activities:
Before you go through the model answers to the questions from the H. S. Examination, 2020, you may hit the link below to participate in an interactive quiz to check your understanding of the poem. Here, you will be evaluated instantly at the end of the quiz with points you score for each of your correct answers:
Model Answers to the Questions from the H. S. Examination, 2020
1. Complete each of the following sentences, choosing the correct option from the alternatives provided. [Each question carries 1 mark]
i. The poet seems to suggest that in order to kill a tree
a. plucking out all the leaves will do the job
b. some pain will do the job
c. cutting the branches will do the job
d. total destruction of the roots will do the job
[H.S. 2020]
Answer Key:
i. d
2. Answer the following questions, each in a complete sentence. [Each question carries 1 mark]
i. In what form of verse is the poem 'On Killing a Tree' written? [H.S. 2020]
ii. What is meant by 'leprous hide'? [H.S. 2020]
Model Answers:
i. 'On Killing a Tree' is written in free verse.
ii. The expression 'leprous hide' here refers to the stabbed bark of the tree.
3. Answer the following questions, each in about 100 words. [Each question carry a total of six marks]
i. 'And then it is done.' -What is being referred to? How is it done? On what tone does the poem end? [1+3+2] [H.S. 2020]
Model Answers:
i. The act of killing a tree is being referred to.
It is done by uprooting the tree. The root is the tree's ultimate source of life. It is to be pulled out from the soil and is to be left to get dried up in the scorching sun and air.
The poem ends with the tone of irony or satire. We all know it quite well how to kill a tree. But in the poem, the poet ironically poses to teach us how to kill a tree, making us aware of our insensitivity and immense brutality in the process. [Word count: 98]
Excellently written. An argumentative tone is carefully sobered by a discussive approach. One may find fault in the author's subtle tone of taking the reader to his point. But his gentle mood of helping the reader to his/her own reading is appreciative in-deed.
ReplyDeleteThe hidden conversation now comes clear with the author's peeling it out. Now a reader is compelled to think over the issue differently. Really, why is there such an elaboration to teach one to kill a tree. One incautious or half-cautious reader may proceed without caring for the issue. And here really lies the irony that we are generally such incautious or half cautious in killing a tree.
It may be read as a dig to our callousness...
Thank you Mr. Dakua for your support.
DeleteTruly, as you have said it, the poem is actually a dig into our callousness. We may very well recall the poem 'My Own True Family' by Ted Hughes in this context where the human child is accused of his [our] insensitivity by the oak trees:
..."We are the oak trees and your own true family.
We are chopped down, we are torn up, you do not blink an eye..."
Sir get my question or not
ReplyDeleteI repeat .......why does the poet use 'on'before the prase 'killing a tree'?...he will have to use 'for'also.....so why not
ReplyDeleteThank you for going through the discussion.
ReplyDeleteThe poet here intends his readers to understand that the poem is actually a criticism 'on' the the thoughtless action of killing trees. He is not teaching his readers to kill a tree here in this poem. Hence this poem is in no way a discussion 'for' killing a tree.
I do hope that you have got your answer explained. However, if you are still confused, please ask me again.
And if you want me to explain this in Bengali you should ask me to do so. But this should be your last option.
Sir in the 3rd stanza the poet used "No"......is it a sigle word sentence .....what is the reason behind using this ?
ReplyDeleteThanks for going through the discussion.
DeleteWell, it's technically not a sentence as there's a comma after the word.
But if you go by the meaning, it conveys a complete meaning,- the negation. So, the single word, also a single line, functions as a sentence in the sense that it conveys a complete meaning.
In the earlier stanzas, it seems that all the previous attempts (like jabbing with a knife, hacking, chopping etc.) to kill the tree were not successful. So, the poet uses this negation (No) at the beginning of this stanza as a command from the one who knows how to kill a tree. S/he commands others not to engage in meaningless attempts to kill a tree. Thus, the stage gets ready for the person to finally guide others to uproot the tree in order to kill the tree.
Hope this helps. But please feel free to ask me again if you are not satisfied.
Sir in your explanation you use a word regorous to explain the method for killing a tree completely ......what is meaning of the word?
ReplyDeleteThe word 'rigorous' means 'extremely thorough and careful'.
DeleteBy the way, if you remain doubtful about the meaning of any word or phrase, it's always better to look for its meaning immediately on the internet. Then, least time gets wasted. Otherwise, you have to wait for me to answer and thus waste your precious study-time.
But if you fail to understand what the dictionary says, you must ask me without hesitation.
Sir why does the poet use the root of the tree is white ?......And i knoww it is also wet due to water of earth cave but why is it white????
ReplyDeleteMostly the roots of trees are white. As they remain under the soil, they remain away from sunlight, and hence they are without chlorophyll and other colourful pigments. Hence they are white in colour. If roots remain above the soil, they get the colourful pigments and are not white. For instance, think of the prop roots of a banyan tree. They are aerial, that is to say, they stay above the ground or soil, and hence are not white. Instead that get the colour of the stem of the tree.
DeleteSir in the 2nd stanza the poet said that the miniature boughs grew up again if it was unchecked.......is the poet criticized the killer that the tree is expanded again if he forgot to cut new gree boughs?
ReplyDeleteYes, you are absolutely right. The poet is being sarcastic, and is criticising those who chop off trees and their branches randomly without any good reason. And hence, he sarcastically points out the fact that the chopped off trees will grow back their branches again if not regularly checked, or chopped off. Ironically, the poet insists them to uproot and thus, to kill the tree.
DeleteWhat is the structure of the poem?
ReplyDeleteIt is poem in four stanzas, written in speech rhythm (rhythm of ordinary day to day speech/conversation). It is a 'free verse' without any regular poetic rhythm and metre.
DeleteThak you sir
ReplyDeleteIt's been my pleasure, dear...
DeleteSir ,
ReplyDeleteIn the 1st stanza of poem ,the poet said "Feeding upon it's crust...
... sprouting leaves.what is mean by the poet.
I couldn't make understand it's meaning.
Thanks for participating in the discussion.
DeleteLet's try to get the meaning of the individual words and phrases first:
'Feeding upon' means 'eating'.
'It' refers to the planet earth.
'Crust' refers to the outermost layer of the earth. That is to say, here 'crust' means 'soil'.
'Feeding upon its crust' therefore refers to the trees getting nourishment (eating) from the earth's soil.
'Sprouting' means 'growing'.
'Sprouting leaves' actually refers to the trees growing their new leaves.
To summarise, the poet wants to point out that the trees get their food from the soil and thus they grow by growing their new leaves (and branches).
Please feel free to you ask me again if you still don't understand.
Sir ,
ReplyDeleteIn the 1st stanza of poem ,the poet said "Feeding upon it's crust...
... sprouting leaves.what is mean by the poet.
I couldn't make understand it's meaning.
Sorry sir I am a mistake
ReplyDeleteI am arpan modal
Dear Arpan, you are never a mistake...
DeleteLet me know if you have understood the part you referred to earlier.
Yes ,sir I can understand
ReplyDeleteMy pleasure, Arpan...
ReplyDeleteSir....লেখক এখানে 3 নঃ stanza টায় কি বোঝাতে চাইছে ....সেটা বুঝতে problem হচ্ছে
ReplyDeleteআর কেনো লেখক first line a NO sentence ta use করেছে
Thank you Rohit for going through the discussion and asking me about your doubts...
Deleteকবি এখানে কবিতার তৃতীয় স্তবকে বলতে চেয়েছেন যে গাছকে যদি সম্পূর্ণরূপে মেরে ফেলতে হয়, তাহলে মাটি থেকে তাকে শিকড়সুদ্ধ উপড়ে ফেলতে হবে। ছুরি দিয়ে গাছকে আঘাত করলে বা কুপিয়ে তাকে কেটে ফেলে দিলেও গাছ মরবে না।
প্রথম স্তবকে গাছকে ছুরি দিয়ে আঘাত করার কথা বলা আছে। আর দ্বিতীয় স্তবকে গাছ গোড়া থেকে কুপিয়ে কেটে ফেলার কথা বলা হয়েছে। কিন্তু এভাবে গাছকে সম্পূর্ণভাবে মেরে ফেলা যাবে না। তাই তৃতীয় স্তবক কবি শুরু করছেন 'না' বলে। অর্থাৎ তিনি প্রথম দুই স্তবকে গাছ মেরে ফেলার দুটো আলোচিত পদ্ধতি কে নাকচ করছেন।
In the third stanza of the poem, the poet has pointed out that the only way to kill a tree completely is to uproot the tree.
In the first stanza, it has been discussed how a jab with a knife cannot kill a tree.
In the second stanza, it has been discussed how even if a tree is chopped off, it doesn't get killed.
Hence the poet begins the third stanza with a 'No'. That is to say, he negates (says 'no' to) the earlier mentioned meaningless attempts to kill a tree and suggests an effective way (uprooting) to kill a tree.
Hope this helps you, Rohit. But if you need further elaboration, please ask me again...
রোহিত, আশা করছি এবারে তুই বুঝতে পারবি। কিন্তু বুঝতে না পারলে প্রশ্ন করতে দেরি করবি না।
Sir.. এই কবিতার 3rd stanza এর first 6 ta লাইন a তো কিভাবে গাছ কে সম্পূর্ণ মেরে ফেলবে সেটা আছে।but তার পরের 4 টে লাইন টায় কি বলতে চাইছে । কিসের সোর্স এর কথা বলা হচ্ছে??
Deleteএই স্তবকের শেষ চারটে পংক্তিতে আসলে গাছের শিকড়ের কথাই বলা হচ্ছে। গাছের শিকড়ই গাছের মূল শক্তি বা স্ট্রেঙ্থ। গাছ শিকড় শুদ্ধু উপড়ে ফেললে সেটা সবাই দেখতে পায়। সেটা তখন এক্সপোজড বা প্রদর্শিত হয়। গাছের শিকড় গাছের প্রাণ-শক্তির উৎস, বা সোর্স। শিকড় সাদা রংয়ের হয় এবং তাতে ভেজাভাব, wetness থাকে। বছরের-পর-বছর মাটির তলায় থাকা গাছের এই শিকড় খুবই সংবেদনশীল, sensitive হয়।
DeleteThe last four lines of the third stanza of the poem actually describes the root of a tree. The root is the strength of the tree that stays hidden for years inside the earth. When a tree is uprooted then the root gets exposed, and we are able to see the source of the strength of the tree. How do we find the root of a tree? It is white and wet. It is very sensitive as well.
Hope this helps, Rohit... Else, ask me again...
রোহিত, দেখ বোঝা যাচ্ছে কিনা। না বুঝতে পারলে আবার প্রশ্ন কর।
This was a very insightful discussion about the poem, giving us a view of the poet's ultimate message. It also exposes how we have been destroying the essence of our existence without realizing it's greater impact, all for the sake of our selfish needs. Would like to draw your attention to another endearing poem by Toru Dutt- Our Casuarina Tree. Here the poet talks about her fond memories associated with the tree, and how it's existence affected her childhood in a positive way. While these two poems are seemingly apart in context, what really binds them is the alternative human behaviour displayed- towards a single object. Both poets emphasize on the importance of the tree, yet one lavishes praises on it while the other treats it as a mere object up for slaughter.
ReplyDeleteThank you my dear Ishita for sharing your reading of the poem with the readers who will be reading the poem for the first time, just as I have done right now after going through your comment...
DeleteAnd I dare say that your reference will also be reminding many the almost forgotten poem [and the poet as well?!], who will be glad to revisit the peom once again.
Yes, I cannot but agree that the opposite perspectives that connects 'On Killing a Tree' and 'Our Casuarina Tree' shouldn't be missed by readers, as you have pointed out. In fact, earlier, I always used to refer to 'My Own True Family' [a poem by Ted Hughes], or 'bOlaka' [a story by Rabindranath Tagore], or 'The Apple Tree' [a story by John Galsworthy] for their thematic resemblance while discussing 'On Killing a Tree' with my young friends. But I had 'My Father's Trees in Dehra' [by Ruskin Bond] in this connection as the only text to refer to with a different treatment, and perspective as a whole . Now, I certainly will be referring to Toru Dutta as well...
And last, but never the least, I thank you for bearing the pain of moderating this discussion stylistically, and for those which you will be moderating in the future. I wish they had some emoticons in their library to insert here... But, I'am hopeful you get it anyway...
Love...
Sir ,where is the link??
ReplyDeleteIt's in the post-reading section.
DeleteOk sir ..i have just find out he link......
ReplyDeleteHope you will find it useful...
Delete