April 10, 2013
RIP: Zao Wou-ki, 1921-2013

Transcript: Is There a Chinese Modernism? – Philippe Koutouzis
(A long edited version of my interview in Hong Kong done in November 2012 for The Art Newspaper with one of Zao’s dealers, where the http://www.feastprojects.com founder discusses Zao Wouki, Tang Haywen and Chu Teh Chun)

A champion of the Chinese modernists, Philippe Koutouzis is currently working on a book on Tang Haywen, who died of AIDS in 1991. He recently opened Feast Projects in Hong Kong, where the program includes the work of pioneering France-based Chinese abstract painters like Zao Wou Ki and Chu Teh Chun. The French art dealer co-founded Schoeni Art Gallery, a pioneer in representing contemporary Chinese art, and headed Asian business development for Marlborough Gallery.

Is there a Chinese Modernism?
Absolutely. Modernism finds its energy in the communication between different cultures. It is an aesthetic challenge and communication between cultures. The Chinese artists who left and went to Europe, mainly France, after being poor students and not knowing if they would ever go back to China, integrated China into the modern movement. Sanyu did line drawings long before Matisse, 30 years before. The debate is about meaning and goes back to national feeling. Modernity is the representation and accessibility of every national art in a global stage.

Why is there now such a desire in the market for Chinese modern art?
The artists are all “on their way out.” Chu Teh Chun is paralyzed and he is 92. Zao Wou Ki is in good shape and is also 92, but he can’t paint anymore. Most of the others are dead. Wu Guanzhong is dead and he was the youngest. Tang Hay Wen died in 1991, San Yu in the 1960s. The modern Chinese movement is not prolific. You don’t have dozens of them. Chinese modernity blossomed mostly outside of China.

What is behind the frenzy?
As my father used to say: look at the map. China is the center. It is a growing economy, very strong, the richest country in reserves. China has integrated the capitalist world, before it was red, now it is the color of money. It’s an area of growth. For now they might not really understand the achievement of modern Chinese painters. Now the call of money is so strong. Recently in London where two Zao Wou-kis were sold for very high prices, the under-bidders were Americans. Modern Chinese art prices could be brought to the summit not by Chinese but maybe by the Americans or the Germans or South Americans because now it is important to have one.

What is the link with traditional Chinese art?
Chinese modernity was not built by forgetting to start again but it was brought to life by assimilation of other values and integration of these values to the Chinese pyramid. They all paid tribute to their culture with modernity.

The names you mention – Zao, Chu, Tang — were the second generation of Chinese artists in the West.
Yes, the first generation was Lin Fengmian and Xu Beihong, but they did not embrace modernity as much. They didn’t really have the time. Zao, Tang, Chu and San Yu were stranded in Europe. They were prevented to go back to their homeland and in paradox this helped them make their dream more full and to realize their destiny as painters. That’s the story of all great Chinese painters. The air they breathed was never pure. They struggled. In the middle of that, they never abandoned their culture.

How does the intelligentsia in China regard Chinese modernism?
The writers, art critics, curators, in general, is that they see the artists as the “overseas Chinese painters.” The concept of modernity is Western. For them it was more renovation and revival of Chinese culture. In China they reconcile everything. [Jailed Nobel Peace Prize winner] Liu Xiaobo believed in democracy but he does accept that Mao Zedong is the paramount leader who helped China. This is the Chinese model, they take everything. Even Chu Teh Chun who hated the Communists, had empathy to kin. This is the strength of Chinese culture.

What influence do these modernists have on the current generation of artists in China?
Their influence is quite remote, as remote as the layer three meters under the roots of a tree. They cannot grow without it. They have an influence difficult to perceive. With contemporary art, we saw a moment of struggle in 1989, where artists were told: make business and shut up. Some of them started to protest, and at the begining some post-1989 artists brought to the West some meaning, then they began to pasteurize their work because they wanted to export. That led to Fang Lijun, Zhang Xiaogang, Yue Minjun, who started to produce, produce, produce. Then another generation came along that looked back at conceptualization, installation. They are reflecting at what is going on in the West. Modern Chinese painters that went to Europe achieved the wedding of two cultures wary of each other, never happened before in the history of art, and most likely will never happen again. The two cultures meet every time in the work of these people.

What is their aesthetic achievement?
The Chinese principle dominates. With abstraction and freedom of expression, they brought into their painting Western principles that helped them to revive the founding principles of Chinese art – mountain and water, it goes back to landscape. Landscape contains everything including the lonely hermit – man as part of nature.

Who is the best painter of the Chinese modernists?
That’s an expensive question. Bacon or Freud? To me the one who realized the dream was Tang because he embraced Western painting and the principles. The warrior, the butterfly and the mandarin; Chu, Tang, Zao. They are all facets of the same dream. Speaking from the bottom of my heart, I would say Tang Hay Wen did not achieve more, but he was lighter. He kept the modern model, but kept the lightness of the Daoist monk. He was not interested in career or money; his life was about the journey. Chu Teh Chun and Zao Wou Ki, their lives were about achievement. Tang was not looking for his social, historic achievement.


December 9, 2011
Transcript: curator Isaac Leung vs director Johnnie To

For the 2011 OneWorldExpo.org project, curator Isaac Leung has a conversation with director Johnnie To. Thank you to Isaac and the folks at OsageGallery.com for the transcript:

Issac 我們整個 展覽當中包括有展出一些七、八十年代較早期的作品,所以希望能夠有一些歷史的回顧。那麼或者可以講一講,七、八十年代你最初在TVB工作,後來涉獵電影,那個年代香港的電視或者當時你在TVB工作的一些經驗對你日後當導演的工作有甚麼影響呢?能否說說當時的情況? 


我想香港的經濟,或是整個動力 最大推進的時候為剛剛在香港發生暴動之後,亦可能是香港英國政府認為香港要和諧一點,即是發展得比較深入一點。在這個時候,社會的推動,公屋又建造了很多,工廠又開始做很多不同世界各地的產品,需要大量的人手,適逢那時是一個好的年代,我們電影業又不是很蓬勃,就出現了電視業。隨著無線電視的成立,一個年青的電視台亦都需要大量人手,年青人當時都係鬥學得多,專家人才亦只得幾個,我想當時無線電視還未取錄夠大概一千個員工,便已開始大量生產。在開始大量生產的期間就衍生了很多問題,因為還在摸索的階段,進入那個年代的時候就是我們這群當時好像是十七歲的後生仔在希望大量生產的時候就令到你有很多機會去學習,去容許一些學徒,或者取錄一些沒有經驗的人,全因為人手缺乏。適逢經濟起飛,我記得當時我們都挺受日本的電視劇影響。那時我們對人生的態度,對自己想要得到的都頗積極,覺得每日都有希望。整個環境的氣氛就是讓年青人可以去嘗試,去錯誤。到七十年代未八十年代,基本上香港的電視劇風麾了全港的人。記得那時我們每逢去吃東西的時候總會聽到七時多主題曲播放的聲音,香港電視就是那樣由零開始,發展到家家戶戶,成為了晚飯既其中一碟菜。那時的發展令到我們後來的電影,亦因為人才缺乏的原因,又在電視界裡發掘了很多導演、編劇、演員,而這令到電影業在七十年代未八十年代頭的起步直到九十年代這十幾二十年的風光成為發展中重要的一個階段。 我自己在那個年代裡面又沒有真真正正地學拍電影或電視,完全是跟師傅學習。亦在一個無線那大型製作的基地上得到很多不同資料去嘗試,到今時今日我覺得如果沒有了開始就無法發展其他的東西,過去電影業甚至電視業開始走下坡,我覺得這是因為無法突破以前的東西,而然在時代亦變遷了,例如從前我們看黑白電視,現在我們看彩色電視,我不知道現在3D立體電視又能否為電視、電影業帶來一個新紀元又是一個未知之數,個人來說贊同電影是一個發明,不能夠不進步。過去電影有很自私的看法就是一個人看一個人攪,很自私,一個人看,其他人要等他看完才可以看,到進入到默片時代、到影片有聲、彩色的時代,一路是在推進中。我會相信發明電視和電影上有很大關係,在媒體藝術上都是一個大時代,我們根本現在媒體的工作、藝術的發展都只在初步階段,尤其是香港,發展得比較慢。韓國、日本、中國大陸的發展都較好 香港算是個國際大都會 但偏偏這些事我們都只是有計劃,或是很多有的地方去用,我們香港的夜晚是很光,但我們容納不到媒體藝術,也是一個不太好意思說出來,都是一些大商家不大對香港有貢獻,只是在地產上不停地吸金,吸到大家冧樓為止,我自己相信人應該有一個責任,將香港這個城市推向國際,一定要有新的想法和前瞻性,去容許佢地做,去鼓勵,既然他們商家都已經將那些租金收得那麼貴,為甚麼他們不將更多的錢撥出來回饋一班使用者或是香港人呢?很可笑的一件事是,你現在聖誕節去尖東,每年都是看著同幾個燈泡,又是同一個圖案,那個時代已經過去了,已玩完了,為甚麼到今日大家都不願意去給那個空間出來,去鼓勵大家去做,令到香港的晚上更漂亮?我自己在歐洲,在很多人的城市裡面,我見過很多人都對社會有責任,肯付出一些地方,一些金錢,讓一班藝術家去擺放他們的作品,我覺得這些是香港政府未來要更努力推動的事,講數又好,用某些方法令到他們給多一些空間一班藝術家也好,香港最大的價值一定是走向國際,因為我們沒有其他可發展的東西,我們又不悟耕作,科技上的發展又不夠尖端,其他大產業也需要十年八年的時間去推動,如果社會不共同努力,大家有錢出錢有地方出地方,讓一班有創意,又出力的人結集起來的話,我覺得我們香港只會落後。我個人認為媒體藝術將來的發展是很適合香港這個人多,大廈又多,夜景又美的地方去發展。 


Issac  用家來說可能電話這些大家都很熟識。 


對,從每一個世界上科技的進步 你應該把握好 對每一件事你不應該等世界其他城市去做你才慢慢跟著去做,你跟得來別人已經轉了第二樣東西。


Issac  我覺得作為媒體藝術工作者,你加入了藝發局之後都有很多改變,例如新媒體的分枝。我贊同你所說電視的科技本身的改變真的影響了我們,例如電視機由一個人看到全部人可以在家裡看其實是一個很大的轉變,這個亦都是我們覺得新媒體,新,其實就是這個意思。可否說說八十年代由開始拍電影是否一個新的轉捩點?


  其實我在七八年拍了一部戲叫「碧水寒山奪命金」。其實當我入到無線當時做的是一個信差,我希望自己有機會參與到電影這些攝製工作,算是自己的理想,幸運地,做了兩年多的信差之後遇到機會做副導演,兩年多後又有機會做編導,那時候自己最大的理想就是去拍一部電影,也算是一個挺大的夢想,兩年多之後有機會拍了第一部電影,受到一個頗大的打擊就是,原來你想的根本就無能為力,想的和你有能力是兩回事來的。經過兩個多月的攝製之後,雖然完成了這部電影,當然有很多人幫手,但我經常回想,其實究竟我是否能勝任一位導演呢?經過很多次的反思後,我覺得我需要去學習如何成為一個導演,雖然當中有很多電影公司,例如嘉禾、邵氏公司又有請我再去拍電影,但我一直都拒絕,如是者過了七年,在無線學習導演基本上的工作,你是要從你的工作裡去更加找到那個方向、一個方法出來,那時最大的問題就是劇本。因為我們這些電視業出來的都不太懂劇本,那劇本上面應該是一個最大的影響,當然其他剪接、音樂、攝製上的一些調配上都很關注地逐一修正。直到八六年我再次拍攝電影,當時來說覺得自己對做導演的工作已沒有問題,困難不大,問題來自一件事,我的想法不是導演的條件,那時票房最緊要,其他甚麼劇情、論點錯了都不緊要,最緊要觀眾入戲院看你的戲便行了,養成了一種習慣就是從觀眾的觀點去做電影,並不是以一個導演的角度去做電影,這個行使直至到九二、三年的時候,我開始反思到一個導演是否就是我這樣,又好像不是,其實自己就只是個技工,並不是一個作為導演,一個創作作品的思維的人。九五年時我覺得我完全不想拍戲,我需要離開一會去想一想,九五年尾左右我就回到新藝城,再去拍「無味神探」。電影應該是我自己創意上要控制得比杜琪峰控制得更多一點。到九六年我亦成立了銀河影像,其實在過去的時間裡  我們這些不是從學院出來的人,在實際工作上需要很多時間去磨練、修訂自己,至今日,二零一一年,我每一段時間都會去重思自己的過去的電影,以後要怎去嘗試,有這個想法但往後有幾多機會讓自己調節亦不知道。我很肯定一件事就是我很熱愛做電影這個工作,而在這個熱愛電影工作裡面,我看得這個範疇愈耐,或攝製愈長久的時候,我相信我自己的調節會不停地出現


Issac 我覺得銀河影像是一個很獨特的情況就是因為它代表了一個香港電影公司裡面的其中一個很獨特的風格,有點提醒我們以前拍UFO也是一種很獨特的風格,我覺得銀河影像很著重去給一些機會提拔一些新的導演,這些是否你當初成立銀河影像的一個重點呢?




Issac 好同意你說的話,電影應該是無分商業或藝術的,這些是學者用的一些名詞。




Issac 這個名詞亦令到大家有誤解,會認為獨立電影就不是給大眾欣賞的。




Issac 我認為這是一個你能夠代表到的一個精神,其他香港甚或國際上很多電影人都會把自己分類,但你融匯了很多各方藝術和商業的因素。




Issac 另外一個我覺得很有你的風格的就是,你很多電影作品裡面都覆蓋了不同的風格和題材,這我覺得也是一個好的導演能夠做到的事。但我想講一講的是,譬如你拍一些英雄、殺手片之類的作品,我覺得你是顛覆了原本八、九十年代英雄既定了的性格,又增加了大家對不同人物的一些新的思維,究竟甚麼為奸、甚麼為忠等等這些。




Issac 我覺得銀河影像近年拍的一些警匪、英雄片,於我們對不同人物的確激發了新的思維。




Issac 你之前有在其他訪問說過你很喜歡黑擇明的作品,那他的作品裡面也有很吊詭,很重要的訊息,又不是黑白分明的。




Issac This is life.  人就是這麼複雜。




Issac 有否其他對你影響很深的導演?




Issac 正好又回應到之前所講,科技是影響了我們拍電影、做藝術的路線,因為一開始就是那個科技直接影響了我們的做法。接下來可以說說你對剪接,或視覺上的一些看法?之前在其他訪問中也得悉初期你開始第一部電影都是從這些背後的概念去看,可否多說一些你剪接的手法,或是在不同階段的你,對剪接的一些看法?


剪接其實是令一種創作。攝製上你有一個導演和一份劇本之間的關係,就是將文字變做影像,在這個過程中,你表達的就是從畫面上可以令人明白的,在演員的演譯上。不算音樂和其他在內,單是攝影的藝術。要靠的一件事就是你要在攝製的時候先取得全部你想得到的鏡頭、你可能想表達得到的東西,第二個階段當你進入剪接的時候,那才是真正決定你怎樣去說一個故事。你大可以把所有都混在一起,在這個創作上是肯定了你對整部戲的表達方式。而這個表達的方式可以有很多種,雖然都是一樣的鏡頭,但若你把他們先後調亂,效果會完全不同。早期做電視的時候只能跟著劇本做事,不然的話劇情就不能貫通,所以一定要跟著劇本去做。到拍電影的時候,都不太容許你對劇本的改變,你要做那個劇場效應,若劇場效應不達致的時候,你就很難過。即使你胡亂來都不緊要,但你一定要控制,笑就笑多少次,要哭就要哭多少次,全部都是用方程式計算出來的,剩下來的午夜場可能有人割櫈,有人呼倒彩,叫導演來打你一頓,大嗌呀甚麼的。經歷過那些之後就戰戰競競還是不想搞太多自己想法,他們想的,便給他們,結尾不好看就快快結束,要他們散場的時候興奮,全部都是計算出來的。後來你不想要這種感覺的時候,要自己思想上的東西就好困難,困難的原因是…如果要用自己的方法便需要很多耐性,細膩地想要帶領的幅度,直至到何時才將你要說的東西淋漓盡致地抒發出來。過程裡面無須考慮他們的反應。 我現在說這個東西的時候,一定要有節奏,說故事的人是很重要的,你不能支吾一會又不繼續,聽的人都睡著了。你要控制整個節奏而不失能夠慢慢令他接受你,你的表達是要不經意地進入了他的世界,近年來我的剪接師是一位外國人,都七八年以上了,這方面上,他對這事的想法和邏輯是非常之好的,我自己都在他身上學了不少剪接上的技巧,在電影感上,始終都是一句,電影的語言,不是單靠對白,不是單靠其他影像,他可能有靜,有音樂,或一些音效。當我們要全面利用他,而在剪接上一定要慢慢放一些,輕輕放另外一些,令到它綜合了全部藝術,有不同的東西在一部電影裡面,那這個我覺得是近這七、八年我才知道的,我們要全面地利用全部工具,我就是從這個時間裡學習。


Issac 你覺得這個手法很有你電影的風格嗎?




Issac  那之後我想問一問就是你對現今的電視劇和七、八十年代的電視劇相比有甚麼意見呢?




Issac  現在很多時候都會跟國內的朋友說,這個年代很多都已經去迷韓國或日本的電視劇,很多都對現在香港的電視劇沒那麼著迷。




Issac 就算歌曲也是。



Issac 那你對香港導演都回中國大陸拍電影有甚麼看法?




Issac 可以分享一下你之前拍攝「單身男女」的經驗嗎?




Issac 之前你說過其中張藝謀和賈樟柯是你其中最喜歡的導演,你對他們的作品有甚麼看法呢?




Issac 我覺得兩位導演都很懂得在很制肘的情況下走位。




Issac 最後想問下你在藝術發展局的一些經驗,你在那裡工作了七年,有甚麼經驗的分享或對之後有甚麼期望呢?




Issac 其實這也是香港一個很獨特的地方,之前跟一些內地的藝術家談論過,他們都批評香港太過公平。太過公平的時候對發展也會有影響,因為每個人都得到相同的資源,而變了一個政治的行使。




Issac 這個計劃我們根據藝發局的程序,最多只能得到五十萬的贊助,早期其實計劃很小型,卻愈搞愈大。很機緣巧合的情況下很多突出的藝術家都是年輕的,後來我們沒足夠的資金而成立了一個制度,與六個不同機構合作,在每個展覽場地由那邊的負責人去找那邊的展覽作品。譬如楊福東有個作品要買的器材都要三十萬,因為我們很想這件事能夠真的達成所以中間付出了很多。其實希望成為一個例子就是說錢不是全部都是政府給的,那或者政府給這四十六萬作為一個根本,然後真的再去做。




Issac   很多時候其實都要靠藝術工作者自己去努力。




Issac  因為其實我們已經很幸褔,我之前在美國住,聯邦政府沒有對藝術提供任何贊助,她有別的制度,譬如地產商他們起樓一定有撥出多少款項給藝術,就是政府不用付出額外的金錢,而是有其他政策。




Issac   內地的地產商都很發達。




Issac    而且無須要任何時候都用納稅人的錢。




Issac   就是說要有計劃。那先多謝你。其實我們想展覽一些你的作品作品,可能是你未在電影院發表過的,或是你的一些幕後製作的花絮,因為我們場地不同,所以很希望能夠展出一些電影院看不到的東西給觀眾。




Issac     還沒還沒。




Issac     好的。或者可能是一些不能在你DVD看得到的片段在展覽會場的空間中展出?因為這是個很特別的機會去看到你其他的作品。我亦知道你喜歡攝影…




Issac   好的,謝謝你。因為我們想展出一些在電影看不到的。



August 22, 2010
Unpublished Notes - Q&A: Chris Dercon on Films and Art

Through his career, Chris Dercon, 52, has pushed the boundaries contemporary art. Born in Belgium, he studied art history and film theory. He was a curator at New York’s PS 1, Rotterdam’s Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen and is currently director of the Haus Der Kunst, Germany’s most innovative museum for contemporary art.

In Munich, he has not only commissioned a number of original film-based works, but has pushed the program to include collaborations with fashion designer Martin Margiela, and the space to include the exterior of the building, which last year Chinese dissident artist Ai Weiwei covered with thousands of book bags, a commentary on the May 2008 Sichuan quake and the high number of dead school children.

In the spring of 2011, Dercon becomes director of London’s Tate Modern, arguably the world’s foremost contemporary art museum. An edit of our recent Q&A over the phone:

ALEXANDRA A. SENO: What is the place of film in museums?

CHRIS DERCON: The question that the famous film theorician Béla Balázs asked in the 1950s: “Where is cinema?” That question can now be answered: the cinema is everywhere. Also in museums. Because there are no film funds in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, getting support of museums and galleries is almost a normal procedure for many filmmakers like (Taiwan’s) Hou Hsiao-hsien and Tsai Ming-liang, (China’s) Wang Bing, (Indonesia’s) Garin Nugroho, (India’s) Amar Kanwar, (Thailand’s) Apichatpong Weerasethakul. In their approach of the image, their work can transcend different formats and one of them is in video museum installation. More and more museums not only have “solar wings” – daylight structures, but also “lunar wings” – artificial nighttime structures because there are more and more projections in museums.

Read More

July 15, 2010
Newsweek: Recalling Thailand’s Past Lives


Recalling Thailand’s Past Lives

by Alexandra A. Seno  July 10, 2010

In Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, Thai filmmaker Apichatpong Weerasethakul tells the story of a man dying of kidney failure who is visited by the ghosts of his dead wife and long-lost son. He regards his suffering as karma for “killing too many communists”—a nod to the area’s deadly anticommunist military campaign from the 1960s to the 1980s. Shot in 16mm, the film, which won the Palme d’Or at Cannes in May, incorporates elements of magical realism, science fiction, and subtle social commentary to explore Thai identity and official government recognition of repressive policies. “It is about loss of memory [and the classic] cinema that I love,” says Weerasethakul.

For the director, 40, film has become not just a medium but a metaphor for Thai society. His 20 short and feature-length films are all set in Thailand and evoke a dreamlike atmosphere while portraying the harsh realities that authorities prefer to gloss over—such as doctors who drink on the job, as depicted in his 2007 Syndromes and a Century. “It’s enormously important that he’s giving a voice to many different classes of people, but he’s not doing that in a propagandizing way,” says Chris Dercon, who will take over as director of London’s Tate Modern in 2011. “He’s doing it in a very poetic way. The public can find their own messages.”

Raised in the northern Thai city of Khon Kaen, where his parents were doctors, Weerasethakul credits a grade-school teacher for encouraging his interest in art. “He gave us free time and lots of creative materials to play with,” he recalls. After finishing an architecture degree from the local university in 1994, he attended the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, receiving his M.F.A. in film in 1997. In the U.S., where he stuffed envelopes to make money, he experienced the same kind of freedom he enjoyed in elementary school—“[but] this time, freedom of cinema,” he says.

Freedom of cinema has often eluded him in Thailand. When he made Syndromes and a Century, a tribute to his parents’ courtship, authorities ordered him, oddly, to cut scenes of a monk playing guitar, doctors boozing at a hospital, and a doctor making out with his girlfriend—changes he unsuccessfully fought for two years. Frustrated, Weerasethakul began work on Uncle Boonmee, part of a larger multimedia project called Primitive, commissioned by a group of museums including Munich’s Haus der Kunst, where Dercon is currently the director. The title refers to “going back to when we lived in caves,” as well as “how we live here in Thailand, politically [and] psychologically,” says Weerasethakul.

One of the other Primitive works is an 11-minute video called Phantoms of Nabua, which won South Korea’s Asia Art Award in April, just as red-shirted antigovernment protesters invaded the Thai Parliament. The film, made in 2009, shows youths kicking around a burning football at night. “The story of Nabua undeniably has echoes of the current political turmoil in Thailand,” Weerasethakul wrote in his artist’s note, referring to the wide-scale torture, extrajudicial killings, and rape that took place in Nabua during the Thai military’s anticommunist campaign. “Institutions involved in those events of the past, along with new ones, are the key players in the ongoing chaos. Just as in the past, they manipulate the public psyche, instilling it with faith and fear.”

But Weerasethakul insists he is not a political filmmaker. “I don’t think of myself as an activist,” he says. “Generally I am quite shy. But when it comes to the topic of cinema censorship, I have to speak out.” Thai authorities have allowed screenings of Uncle Boonmee, thanks mostly to its Cannes-winning cachet. It has been playing to full houses in one upscale Bangkok cinema. Without the prize, however, Uncle Boonmee might well have been banned. When the filmmaker recently made a plea for freedom of expression at a government banquet in his honor, the MC neglected to mention it in his English translation for the diplomats present. “So I translated my message myself,” he says.


Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »