05/19/24 - David Wengrow (Repeat)
Makes you such a threat. We choose the right to be who we are. We know the difference between the reality of freedom and the illusion of freedom. There's a way to live with Earth and a way not to live with Earth. We choose choose the way of earth. It's about power.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Greetings and good day, and welcome. My relatives, I shake your hands with good feelings in my heart. It's a good day for all of us to be here. This is First Forces Radio. I'm Tioka Sen, Ghosthorse, and I send you greetings and strength from the east gate of Turtle Island where the sun and the water touched the earth at once.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And our producer of First Forces Radio is Liz Hill. Studio engineer, Ally Guide, is z Malcolm Byrne. And I'd like to thank Jadina Lillian for the recommendation and referral to this book and the guest that we are about to interview. And you can hear us on Itunes, Apple Podcasts, Buzzsprouts, Spotify, as well as First Voices Indigenous Radio dotorg, or archive, downloading, and listening. Once in a while, I step out of the stereotypical native American American Indian indigenous Aboriginal monikers, all really, and go to see and interview authors who are interested and invested in bringing attention to a way of being very different than a silver spoon fed knowledge that we seem not to question.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And in doing so, I often am given reference to books that have a noticeable tact of seeing the glitches in Western society strangled over what just is not working with understanding the future, past, and especially the present time restrictions. And to some listeners, the apocalypse means a biblical mentality while others experiences see it as a truth worldwide. Some see it in how humans treat earth with ambiguousness and are left with the same gold digging control of what's left of any earth culture's intelligences. First Forces Radio welcomes a co author of The Dawn of Everything, a new history of humanity. David Wengrow, a professor of comparative archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, who is also a visiting professor at New York University.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:He authored The Dawn of Everything, along with the late David Graeber, who was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics. Graeber was also an organizer of the occupy Wall Street movement. So those of you who are tuning in to First Forces Radio, I'm just usually having conversations with people that I'm interviewing, and one of them right now I'd like to welcome is David Wengrow. Let me honor you by asking thanking you for being here today, David Wingro, and I I think about those peoples who are thinking maybe of their own origins when they talk about indigenous peoples. So I think that is at this gist of of humanity that is often defined by Earth as indigenous peoples.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Earth defines humanity, but we are in a time and place where humans define what humanity is, and it's not working. Thank you for being here.
David Wengrow:Thanks so much for having me.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And so I wanted to begin with the ideas of the myth of progress, and I think the whole gist of when progress begin for native people here, I often think of, well, we know the history before 1492.
David Wengrow:Mhmm.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Right? And others know it after 1492. And so their ideas or ideals of how we were are the savage or the romanticized you, but there's the humanity was squeezed out. And so we were we were able to be put binarily into this box of rationality that we too need to be civilized.
Narrator:Yeah. And one of the things which surprised us as we, worked our way into some of that material, the literature that, that comes out of that early colonial encounter in the northeastern part of, of what's now, I guess, up state New York and parts of Canada, was the, the relationship between the genesis of that particular idea of civilization as progress and that philosophical divide between Amerindian societies and mainly French colonists of various stripes, missionaries, soldiers, traders, who were deeply embroiled in the goings on of the colonial frontier. And the way that encounter in its intellectual dimensions fed and its philosophical dimensions fed back into Europe via intermediaries. This is not an original insight, of ours. There is a literature on it, And I, I had the great honor recently of, of being put in contact with a historian, George Seeley, who wrote a very important book in the 1990s called for, for an Amerindian Autohistory, where he makes many of these points about the impact of Laurentian's encounter with the Huron Wendat, for what we've come to call the Age of Enlightenment.
Narrator:But I I don't see that book cited very often, if at all, in mainstream histories of the Enlightenment. So the, these are not entirely original points, but the key point which he and others have made and which we reiterate in the book, that the European notion of progress and history as material progression in many ways seems to have developed as a direct counter reaction to the impact of what's been called the indigenous critique of European civilization in those crucial decades of the 18th century leading up to the French Revolution. These ideas were spreading like wildfire in European intellectual circles about other ways of organizing society, about the possibility of women's freedoms, different attitudes to religion and marriage. Of course, we're never talking about a direct transmission, We're talking about, garbled translations of ideas on, on both sides. But clearly, they were embraced by many, and others regarded them as deeply subversive and dangerous.
Narrator:And among them, were the economists, the physiocrats like Anne Robert Thiago in France, who actually came up with the idea of progress in the way that we understand it today and who did it. And we we actually have the correspondence between him and other members of his intellectual circle where he pretty much spells it out. He says, Well, the reason that, these, Iroquoisian speaking peoples and, Algonquian speaking peoples can have these social freedoms is not because they're ahead of us, it's not because they're superior to us. He says, It's because they're inferior to us. And what he means by that, and he spells it out for the first time, is that they're inferior in the realms of material progress, material production, commercial capacity, labor capacity, the very few number of things that Europe was really ahead on at that time.
Narrator:And that's where you get that disjuncture that was famously discussed by the German anthropologist Johannes Fabian in his book Time and the Other about how anthropology, on the one hand, describes people, describes alien societies, but at the same time, puts them in a totally different category, almost in a different time zone. So what your goal does is basically to say, well, what's important, about these people is not what they can teach us, but the idea that they somehow represent some previous stage of our own development. They're a kind of relic from some primordial state. Suddenly it becomes very important how people get food and their productive activities. You know, before 17th century, nobody, you know, even European commentators don't really seem to have put a great deal of importance on whether people are farming maize or whether they're hunter gatherers, but suddenly around that time, the 18th century, this becomes the only thing that matters.
Narrator:How do we classify these people? And they often got it wrong. I mean, you know, the Wendat were not strictly hunter gatherers, but that's how they were often classified. And by virtue of that, they end up at the bottom of this new ev, evolutionary ladder of progression. So yes, you, you know, we all like the idea of liberty, we all like the idea of freedom, but if you wanna have it, you're gonna have to turn your back on all this other good stuff and go back to living in autonomous little households with simple technology and sacrificing what someone like Thiago would have defended as civilization.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:You mentioned enlightenment, and I think about the imagination and where that would go with the possibilities back then that, okay, now we can really validate why we are powerful. Overall, we're looking at the ideas of how does one convert this power into even now where it seems things are in a mental state of slavery. And it's hard to get away from that because we don't want to be viewed as a savage because we're not queuing up for civilization.
Narrator:This question of conversion of values is something we we touch on in the book because we we notice there's a consistent thread, particularly in some of the missionary relations. They were puzzled that Native American people didn't recognize the equivalence between material wealth and power. In other words, they didn't appear, at least through European eyes, to take it for granted that having more stuff than someone else, having more land than somebody else allows you to boss them around or make them work for you, which was simply assumed to be a natural principle among European, colonists and European societies at the time. And this, this is interesting because it means on the one hand, these were not egalitarian societies in the sense that they were obsessively sharing out, everything in in equal measure. We know this because there, there are descriptions from the 17th century of families, Wendat families, for example, having to pay compensation for a crime that somebody's committed.
Narrator:And it's clear that different families can do this to different capacities. They They even compete over who can give away more. So, you know, these weren't strictly equal societies the way that some more romantic European authors liked to paint them. But at the same time, those differences of wealth, those, those inequalities of, of, resources, there doesn't seem to have been any obvious or simple way to translate them into authority. And this to me as an archaeologist is extremely important for the way we understand history in general.
Narrator:For example, I have colleagues in the United States, who've been trying to look at the whole of world history through the lens of possessions, material possessions. They come up with all kinds of statistically quite sophisticated ways of measuring inequality all over the world and- and- and actually published, you know, right back into Palaeolithic times. And a paper was published in a very prominent science journal recently which claimed that pre Columbian North America had lower rates of inequality than, Eurasia going back 1000 of years. Now, that's interesting, but what, what was it based on? What are they actually measuring?
Narrator:Well, they were measuring things like the size of people's houses, as archaeologists find the remains. They were measuring things like the number of objects that are put into a burial when somebody has a funeral. At one level, I think, okay, there's something interesting there. You know, they've picked up on something. But on the other hand, if you read all of the the ethnohistorical accounts of native peoples in North America, it's clear that they didn't share those assumptions, that having a bigger house than somebody or, or having more grave goods than somebody necessarily implies social status, May imply quite the opposite.
Narrator:So I think one could view this, to put it perhaps in a, a slightly more explicit way, as a kind of intellectual colonization. Because in a way, what it's suggesting is that everybody was essentially trying to be a European and, you know, how many fields you own and so on, which of course is extremely patronizing. And it's very clear to anthropologists, I guess it it it should be clearer that indigenous forms of property took a different form and had a different character and very often seem to have been immaterial in the sense that what was most sacred and most important was not actually materialized, if, if, if I understand the literature, you know, at all correctly. It didn't take the form of, landed wealth, for example, in the way that Eurasian societies were based on since the Bronze Age. So I thi I think this philosophical division, this material extraction and material wealth gets projected back deep into, to human history.
Narrator:And it gets universalized in ways that I, I think can actually become obstacles to understanding not just the history of the pre Columbian Americas or sub Saharan Africa or Oceania, but there are also, I think, obstacles to understanding the deep history of Eurasian societies, which were not always uniformly based on those same principles, if that makes sense.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It does. And I'm I'm thinking, David, the dawn of everything, this new a new history of of humanity is when I woke up this morning, I was curious this morning for some reason that and I realized that I've always I'm always having to search for anything about native peoples, published or otherwise, in this den of media often controlled by assumptions and towards original peoples. And at least here in the Western Hemisphere, that that's my experience. But I'm often involved in short conversations or no conversation at all when it comes to native or indigenous history or it's really dismissed entirely or not participating in civilization or anxiously waiting to debunk anything, any resistance to western religion, sciences, or government. But one thing I do know, David, is and this happened, the experience of in the middle of Auschwitz.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And I was with some Lakota elders, and we had a ceremony there. And this is for the first time I I knew it, but at first time I was confirmed and verified by my elder. And I asked him, is there a word for domination or concept? And he quickly said no. How could we dominate that which we are trying to relate to?
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:So maybe it's the languages, and I'm thinking the languages. I'm a casualty of language that is dealing with only domination. And I'm the language, Lakota, is relationship, including humanity. There is another way to think than linear.
Narrator:I think we're also victims. I mean, it's personal to me, the example you give, because, many of my father's family were murdered, at Auschwitz. And, I think we also are, divided in some ways as victims of racism and victims of colonialism. You know, there are there are potential solidarities there, which are very fragile. They're very easy to break down.
Narrator:My, my co author and I, sometimes simply refer to as white male professors. But our our family histories are rather more complicated than that. Actually, my mother grew up in, in the very same society, with the same people who murdered, most of our family, in Austria after the 2nd World War, which is a very extreme experience that I, I think is, unusual, but shared by many indigenous peoples to grow up in the society that has committed those kind of crimes, against you and your relatives. It shapes your perspective. I think we're into a, a, a discourse which is skin deep in terms of the way we think about identity.
Narrator:And in, in the book, in The Dawn of Everything, we, we go into some of this, business of societies defining themselves against one another in very systematic and often very creative ways, which seems to be much more fundamental to the way that cultural systems work in general than, we tend to assume. You know, it's earlier than the nation state. In a way, it's perhaps more closely linked to the idea of nations, in the sense of First Nations, the way that politics can happen, not necessarily through, through violence or through the erection of borders, but through people changing their internal moral and philosophical systems. So we talk, for example, about those cases of societies which found ways to create a kind of buffer against practices like slavery by changing their ritual systems, by changing their domestic arrangements, by changing themselves, not by building walls or fences. And that's a much deeper kind of transformation which I think takes a great deal of, of courage and a great deal of effort as opposed to the rather easy, you know, it's very easy to divide people and break down solidarities.
Narrator:You can do it with, with one tweet, you know. But this kind of thing is much harder, and we, we, we try to, to just scratch the surface of the history of some of that, which I'm sure must also have been characteristic of, of at least some of those colonial encounters, where you've got such radically different philosophical systems embroiled with one another, especially in the context of debates. You know, we talk about these debates that were clearly staged between French colonists and the most gifted speakers and philosophers of the indigenous nations, which seem to have been extremely rich. But in those situations, you know, we always play games. We exaggerate our differences strategically to make a point, or we disguise them strategically to make a point, and there's a, there's a complex process that goes on there in which, opinions very quickly can get polarized.
Narrator:And that's a very hard process to unpick from that colonial period literature, I think. What's intriguing to us is that some of our colleagues don't even want to go there. I mean, as far as they're concerned, there is no indigenous interlocutor. And it's, it's something that George Sooey pointed out many years ago, is that it becomes portrayed as a dialogue. And, and many of these texts are, are literally dialogues between a European and a so called savage interlocutor who gets characterized in the modern literature as an extension of the European.
Narrator:It's essentially meant to be a European talking to himself or to herself and just using the image of the savage to talk back or maybe express subversive ideas that would have got them into trouble with the authorities. Now, in some cases that's clearly true, you know, some of these dialogues were just made up. But in a case like that of Laurentin, this French nobleman who lived for 10 years in the colonies, learned at least 2 native languages and had many problems himself with the Jesuits and with French society. To suggest that none of those experiences had any impact on his thinking seems a little bizarre when you have people living together, trading together, intermarrying. It's odd.
Narrator:I can't explain it, but we kind of predicted it. Actually, there's a place in the book where we write, these days, more or less, any attempt to suggest that Europeans learn anything at all of moral or social value from Native American people is likely to be met with mild derision and accusations of indulging in noble savage tropes, or occasionally almost hysterical condemnation. And guess what? It's happened. So we saw it coming that way, but it's a a little depressing.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It is. And I I deal with it over here all the time. You know, I think that, America is simply a symptom of root of the problem, which began in in Europe in a sense. When I picked up the book, how does it intuit to me? How does it feel?
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:The dawn of everything means that there is that this modernity, the hospicing of it is that's the stage we're in. And and I'm thinking about maybe there's a myth, meted out of the old way of thinking, so to speak, and that privilege of material and financial access, so to speak. But now we are defaulting almost nature is defaulting us to to become this other human, more not savagery. But, yeah, we got to bring along some technology, but not entirely the whole ideas about about how we use technology because people had technology too. And and I'm into this while they're sustainable cultures that have been around for 100000 years, We are often referring to 1 one cultures that have been around for 3, 4, 5000 years.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It's that civilization. But yet, how did cultures sustain themselves as one of trying to becoming as a sustainably developed? This is the the wordplay I'm going with. Mhmm.
Narrator:This is a
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:developing society.
Narrator:Yeah. I mean I mean, I think it suggests that we we just need a totally different concept. We need a rethink of of this term civilization and and what it's come to imply. And and something we're very keen to emphasize in, in the book is that when we talk about non Western societies, you know, very often we're not talking about small scale societies, we're talking about very large scale cultural systems. Systems that, that, that, that produce the, centers, demographic centers like, Poverty Point in Louisiana, what, 3 and a half 1000 years ago.
Narrator:You know, it's the size of many of these settlements. You know, if that was found in Eurasia, people would call it a city. And we know that there are regional systems and networks created across the continent by people who were obviously using technology in a very sophisticated way in terms of the way that, these earthworks and other architectural features were planned out according to strict metrical principles which are replicated over very long distances. You know, this implies a very sophisticated social infrastructure and a process of decision making among very large people. And I think that's something that's extremely difficult for people like myself who are brought up in a certain way, taking literacy, you know, for granted as a higher form of knowledge and, and, a higher mode of transmitting information.
Narrator:There's a certain degree to which, as an archaeologist, you know, if, if you're going to even try to comprehend these things, there's a certain process of unlearning that one has to go through. And, and I'm not sure that we're terribly good at that as, as professionals. I was talking to a friend who works in what they call CRM, cultural resource management. There's a euphemism, if ever I heard one, which here in the UK we call it contract archaeology, and it's it's the kind of archaeology that goes on commercially outside of campuses, outside of universities quite often. When there's a construction site or a development project, you know, they hit something of heritage or historical value.
Narrator:So they send the archaeologists in and they have to produce a report. And the report follows a certain format which comes out of a kind of, it comes out of a certain philosophy, a certain idea of what, archaeology is, which you could refer to as behavioral ecology. You know, it's very much about measuring stuff and classifying stuff, you know, all the different plant foods and, you know, the house sizes and the village plans and measuring and classifying, measuring and classifying. But it doesn't actually require you to think very much about culture or about the cultural system that these things belong to. It's, it's quite a bureaucratic exercise, actually.
Narrator:Somebody made a movie about this, now I'm not gonna be able to remember, but a friend sent me this thing, it is there on YouTube, back in the 1970s. It's quite a haunting film. It's a very strange film. Actually, I think it's kind of a work of genius because they just put the camera on one of these groups of, of archaeologists, excavating the remains of an ancient indigenous village in California somewhere. There's almost no commentary.
Narrator:They just observe and they film as the place is measured out, turned into a grid. The forms, you know, there's paperwork, there's an awful lot of measuring going on. And then occasionally the camera just pans upwards to the trees. And you just get these shots of the landscape and then it goes back down and then it goes back up again. And the whole thing is so disturbing because what you're looking at there almost certainly is, is the result of some kind of human rights violation.
Narrator:Being processed, you know, being put through a scientific machine that normalizes it. And that is part of the reality of archaeology all over the world. And it's why, it's why when somebody says, Wait a minute, those are my relatives, you know, the archaeologist has to back off. And I think a lot of that becomes very focused on particular issues, like the treatment of human remains. But, of course, it applies to every aspect of culture.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:This is only a beginning, the dawn of everything, a new history of humanity. And kudos to your coauthor, David Graeber.
Narrator:Yes.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Thank you. Glad that you both got together, and maybe I'll have some more questions for you. I do want to give it more time, but I would like to thank you for being here because I think it it stirs not just intellectualism or imagination, but it stirs something that you know is is coming our way, this postapocalyptic, how are we gonna get along? Are we gonna get along and bring those ideals of of language, of how we live, and extraction, and in that way, we can truly learn how to share by, you know, the economy of of what's in place now?
Narrator:Well, I'm I'm very grateful to you for for for opening that question up, and I'll be very pleased to continue the conversation. This was always for for David, my co author, and I. This was always meant to be the beginning of a conversation. The book isn't, it's not the Encyclopedia Britannica or something like that. It's not meant to contain everything.
Narrator:But it is meant to open up these kind of conversations. And I'm very, very appreciative, that that that you reached out and and that we've started talking.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Thank you, David. It's an honor to have you here.
Narrator:Thank you so much.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Ed, welcome back. This is First Voices Radio. I heard y'all say last week that why why do we say welcome back, welcome front? Right? So let's let's think about it that way too.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Thank you for that, Malcolm. I wanna say thank you for joining us here at First Voices Radio. My name is And that was David Wingrove and talking about David Graber, who is the one of the organizers of the occupy Wall Street back in a decade ago. So those of you who don't know who that is, yes, we were speaking about the book, the dawn of everything, a new history of humanity. And to be not trendy with what's going on out there and thinking that we are out of contact, out of touch, out of the moment, I wanna just offer this time for a few words, a few songs that really speak more than I can to what's going on and and, you know, the awareness or not.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:So but I give that to you. Kick back and listen a little bit and put your thinking cap. Open your ears up, your heart, and listen to this a little bit. We'll be back after maybe 2, 3 songs. Okay.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Thanks for joining us here.
Music:Rich man's war. Industrial streets. Class lines. Money talks. Turning Language to Paper Pieces, Rich Man's War, Free man society, raging violent insecurity, nuclear man, nuclear woman, unclear how to act, Rich man's war.
Music:Pershing's cruising Europe. America, Russia. Governmental nuclear views. Industrial allies cutting the world as though they cannot see blood flowing. Rich man's war.
Music:Central America bleeding, wounds same as Palestine and Harlem. Three Mile Island in El Salvador. Heinrich in Belfast. Rich man's war. The poor starving for food, starving for land, starving for peace, starving for real.
Music:Rich man's war, attacking human, attacking being, attacking earth, attacking tomorrow. Rich man's war, thinking of always war, thinking of always war. With machines for ancestors, new unborn generations, chemical umbilical cords are only wiring. In your electrical progress, human lives burnt offerings to the god greed. With lies for ancestors, there is no truth in some futures.
Music:Rulers of minds feeding next generation souls to the control machine. Sacrifice ritual for the proper technology. With isolation for ancestors. There's only the present, bought by the credit material uses, forging chains binding you to destruction, compliments of your deities, the industrial priest. No more than neon flash.
Music:Trying hiding an neon mask. Have to face who we really are. At some point, we have no choice. Distant star, distant light. In real world, we are human beings.
Music:In shadow of real world, we are being human. Neon mask for neon flash. Distant thunder, distant cloud. Passion's ring. Drenched in possession, what we take is hard to do, What we do is hard to take.
Music:Someones are crazy or maybe we take turns. Dreaming about some kind of life, we say it could have been different. But it wasn't because we weren't. No matter what it turns out the same, a lot of things we said weren't true. Industrial stories in an electric instant, neon mask, neon flash, Neon flash.
Music:Thing is nihilistic desires. Civilized gone insane. Didn't imagine it turning like this. Some things start good and go bad. Some things get bad and stay bad.
Music:Are we caught in between living a lie or not living at all? Eliminated choices lost in dreams we let go. Memories we never got to have, something else to think about. Waking up in industrial society surrounded by angry days. Going through motions of not being.
Music:Wanting the best but not expecting it. Surviving paid foreign dreams. Being like a world alone. Serving god with the devil to pay, feeling like something in no place, what goes on in hell anyway. Thing is, it has to do with heart.
Music:We have to understand what hearts are for before we can get back to heaven or paradise for the power in our mind.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:Alright. This is how I view this music as medicine. I'm coming from a native place in its own land that we know as native people. This is my personal thought is that we all came here. You all came here in a sense to find peace.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And, what I often say is that peace is with the earth. And there's a lot of things that got in that way to bring other ways. And, you know, I often say we have to stop with the idea of creating peace on Earth. Think about this. And begin with creating peace with mother Earth.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:We've tried the first alternative for 1000 of years, but look where that has led us. Now is the time for original ways, the native ways, and after all, it's coming this way that we all must make peace with mother earth. There's no more altering the native way, and that's peace, as we say. We know the power of peace, not the power of war. And I'm thinking about the Earth.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:All this time, I'm thinking about this Earth. No one goes past just a humanistic or the anthropocentric aspect of war. Richmond's War. Yes. That was the first song we played by John Trudell.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And it came from an album way back when called AKA Graffiti Man, John Trudell with Jesse Ed Davis. Number 2 was prayer with vocals by Lisa Bodner and myself with the flute and spoken words, 2007 from the album Ghosthorse and KSA. And then number 3rd, when he just heard darker than a shadow by Terry Collier from the album Speak Your Peace. And that's another album I'm talking about is, 2 I think that's 1998. And to go out with this, I'm going to just ask you to take a look at the Akantu Institute site, which is akantuinstitute.org, akantuinstitute.org.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:And give me a holler, alright, and support these ideas that may not be according to the standard alternative as you all kowtow to. Some of you do, not all of us, but all of you. But some of us do. And I know I'm not very articulate with English, but I continue to learn. So the next song we're gonna go out with is, First Voices Radio, The Oaks and Ghost Tours.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It's about time, also by Terry Collier from the 1968 album, the new folk song. And, excuse me, the new folk sound. And I would say he was singing about the Vietnam War. So when I was young, very young, this was going on. And it's the same feeling, but at that time, watching cousins, uncles, older native men coming back in boxes.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It's not so distant, this feeling of frenzy. I think about where is it gonna take you. Will there be the moon war? I think this war stuff is antiquated because we don't know what peace is. So I'll go out with that, and thank you for joining us here on First Voices Radio.
Tiokasin Ghosthorse:It's about time. It's about time
Music:I know. You and me, brother, but we can make it so. Was young, since I was a little boy with a toy gun. Never really wanted to be number 1. Just a boy with nowhere left to go. Fell in love with the voice on radio. Since I was a little boy with a toy gun. It's a lot
