o;tern Awlralia for it, grant of a Hackett
Studenuhip
which made the writing of thi.
Hart-Clive-1962-Structure-and-Motif-in-Finnegans-Wake
d.
Tn my l~t three Chapters-'Co=poodwc.
.
', 'fAiIRIDlw, 'Two Major
TAO'" II
FURTn~. 1l (;ORRy,. sPONDL'ICF. 5 IN THE THRH~P\. US-O)';E CYCLE
-,, _n
. ~
~
~
~
NOO"I" M ot"- ~. M? ?
Motif,'- I have attempted to fill rru. critical gap. Useful dis_ cussions on which J have occuion. ally drawn are to be found in W. Y. Tindall', TM bwary SytMol, and esp""ially in Prof=or Harry Levin's ]am4S Jo,,<, which, though $poiled in the most recent edition by a t. . . teleM ptroration, ,till provid. . the best balanced ,hort introduction 10 Fitwt! 1JU Wake. The work hithorto published in Engfuh on the nature and function of the
T~" ~ nr
FIJRTlint CORRF. 5PONDE. . . '1CF-S IN THE fOLlR_PLUS-Q). ;f:
_III _,v
M. ". .
-"' sa"",
. ?
,-
Rot. . . . ti""ioIo
Ir- ,. "
Pu'"",
'-" w" ,- w"'
,
~
literary Itumol;" is surprisingly inadequate, 10 that I ha. ve found it neceuary to introduce my special discussion ofJOYce's motifs
(Chapter &ven) by a vcry briefoutline of the geMral tlu:ory of the devke. The bulk of the concbuions are baled on my Own reading of ~nn, Prou,t, Pound, ~nd other exponents of the /tiIRIDtil! , but I have gained a great deal ofinsight and stimula_ t i o n f r o m O s h r W a l z e 1 ' , D r u IV(If/kun. stweri, O r . R o b e r t
'9
? i'rtjafe
Pe. cock',0. . u~ HiT~M_andF. . K,Brown', nJlA- i. o tbN. n. AD initial difficulty wat the lack oru -s. eed . system 0{ terminology. Throughout this work I adb_ COR- ,iMently 10 "" td "'" terminological m llw:ntion which it would be . . wclI 10 ru! DIILal'ioe hero. The: . . . . . ro. 'kibnilti8' (or, man: simply, 'motif') is wed 10 designlle . . ,bon vcrhaJ conStrucl,
charactcrioed by certain easily recognisable pUtcrru uf rhyth"" IIOUnd, f<. >rm and, oomctimes, sense. TI,e IItmw are the m'\ior narrative and allegorical clementi of the book, such u 'Eating
the God', 'hom<Jllel<ua! ity', 'ritual murder'. A third category or rccum:nt material is m nn itllted by such bighly charged I)'mbob as tn, the U'tt, tbe mnben. . . These an: . . . . . a1ly quite d_Iy awri. . cd with the themca and motiD, and baw: themselves frequently hct;n called 'motifi'. O$b. r Walzel "'Xu. . teiy dc? scribed them u l#i~ti. uIiu:MS",. ,iI4k' bill, sin"" virtually every image . . . . d oymbol in Fi~",,1llU 1V. d. fUDerio. . . 'hil""'tWUlkaii)l', the qualification i, redundant ami I [lrd? ? W cal! tI'em limply Sftrllml.
During more than five ye. . 1"1 ofJoyce ItuWes I bave ma. de many valuable friendships antOO( . he do7. c. . . ofpcople actively engaged in work on the ~me fic,ld. A fat file of hundred. of letten <Cttivcd limn tbre. e 611t. . :l_ J OYCC:Ofl3-Mn. Adaline
GIash<<11 of Fumingtou, Connecticut, Mr. J. S. AthertQn of Wigan, and Mr. Frit>: Senn ofZQrich-1aa been a better IOUra: of cnlightalment to me than hu any publiohed work on Fi~""atU Iliah-. Mr. Serm in particular---a remarkably aCUle
reader of the book_ has been a patient any in the ,low work of analysing Joyce's patternl of motif and Iymbol; the Ind"" of MOlifl in Aj'l'endix A OwCl much of il\ bulk to the: many houn
thai Mr. Senn devoted 10 it.
My ,,? ;re', wide general knowledge, and he-. percipienl
~ading both of thu book and ofFUt-l"'" IV", ha~ allbled me 10 make mlny irnp. . . . . vetnClllI and 10 <Xn. a:t ocveralilupid blunders.
During. year 'pent in Paris I WaJ furtun. . tc in being able to
, O. W. ! ul. 'Lei"""". . . in Dich. u"<<n', D. u W. . . . _ , l. eipoir, '906,pp? '5. -. 8. ?
"
? Prifoce
mee' many friuds and acquaintanceo ofJOYC~. I am ~ally indebted to MUs Sylvia Beach, Mr. ;. Maria Jolas, l. ueie Nod (Mr. ;. Paul Uon), and Mr. Stuart Gilbert, for their hospitality ~nd stimulating convenation. In u. mdon I wa. privileged to meel and become intimate with I""only manJ oyce ever . . ,. ,ms to have treated aa a real friend-M r. Frank Budgen, who in h;" wise maturity has consnved all the enthusiaam and ehul- lienO' of youth. I have been greatly helped by Mr. Budgen'.
perceptive comrru:nt. and by u. . , large body offactual informa_ tkm whiclt he WaS able to give me.
Atn(lng nther Joyce critics who have given me valuable advice and encouragement I must mention particularly M=n. l 1>om. . . E. Connolly, David Daich. . , Nathan Halper, Fred H. Higginson, J. Mitchell Morse, Geo~ Paimer, Thornton
Wilder, and Lawrence A. Wiggin. Essential documentary am. tance wM given m e by MiM Anna RUMell of the Lockwood Memorial Library, Buffalo, Mr . M. Pollard, Assistant Librarian at Archbishop Manh's Library, Dublin, and Mr. D. . mond
Kennedy, Mistant Librarian of the National Library of Ireland. My brother_in_law, Mr. ]. A. L. Watson, gave :w;"tance which saved me hours ofworl< and anxiety.
r am grateful to the University of We.
o;tern Awlralia for it, grant of a Hackett Studenuhip which made the writing of thi. work po""ible.
Finally, I mwl offer my warmest thank, to Mr. M. J. C. Hodgarl of Pembroke College, Cambridge, for hi. con"ant
friendship, for his unfailing willingness to put hi, wide know- ledge of all Joycun matten at my diopos. al, and above all for
the Itimnlu. of hi. ever_fem approach to the moat intractable pmb1cm~ ofJoyce scholar. ;hip.
C. H.
? CHAPTER ONE SOME ASPECTS OF
FINNEGANS WAKE
I : NEW IRISH STEW (190. 09)
'F our fa. cinating best-,eIlers brilliantly edited and oon_ domed fuc Y{JUc gceater enjoyment, and all bound together in one luxurio'lJ vOlume. ' So ruru a recent ad""IIuemeot for a collection <>f 'conden",d boob', but it also doc. ""ry wdl as a descriptioo ofFiltlltgaM Wake, unle. . fouc be
too Iowa figure, F. ven the word 'lxst-oeUers' is not "" wide of {he mack as it would have be<':n a few yean ago. The novd of which Mc. J. I. M. Stewart ha. written: 'it is in the main a dOled book even to m""t pe. . . . . m of sub,tantial literary c ulti_ vation" has recently be<':n is,ued in a low_priced paperbound edition of ~o,ooo oopies, and I am wld that a further prinling U already proje<:ted. It may be that the number and variety of the 't:t>nden,ed boob' oontained in FilllllllaM Wah accounts for the growing popularity of what must by any estimate be a(<:<>onted an extremely difficult work w penetrate, for once . . hrcu-thT"()ugh h", bun achieved, the reader can find in it, according to taste, a hi'llory of Ireland, a survey of English literature, a universal mythology, a naturali,{ic novd, an autohiography of J ames Augustine . /oyu, a . ummary c"'<nO- logy. 'Whether this impr. . . as intriguing, pretentious, annnying, repellent, beautiful, dull or brilliant, aU must age<< that FinlltgaM Wakt is a quite ",,{raordinarily rich production. J oyce claimed to have diooovcred that he oould do anything with language,' but e""" more imprcoeive than hi, undoubted
'J. I. M. s,. ,. . ,. rt,J_fl1<',I~, '%7,p. ]). , Gi=. . p. I'.
'3
? Srmu ASPldS ofFiFllllgoIU Wah
lioguiltic nopuity was his re. . . . . . . hble 1""""'" 10 adapt and
integrate literally any raw material th. o. t came 10 h. o. nd. Nothing wa. reje<:r. ed. Deletions in tm ~{SS are minimal; additioru abound. Joyce', devdopment al . . writer;" characteri. . ed by a conlinuo\1l and rapid movement away from paradigmatic art - Ihe lelection and recreation of a typical and powerfully symbolic unit ofexperiellCe which illuminates thingl far beyond Ihe bounds <>fits own COnttJCt (Ihat i. . the technique which he
caLLed the 'epiph. o. ny')---40wards lhe all_ind~'? e art offill/lt,. . 1I'd:. whet<:, irutcad ofchoosing tm most lypi. . . . l and ilium;n. atins cx. ample of a theme, he attempted 10 pt'CStnt e'o"ffy con<<ivable trope. In hil later yean Joytt . . ,. ,~ to haV<) adopted ILl Jill mollO Voll. aire', ~radox thaI tk superfluous iJ a very necessary thing. Caution and lilrrary :lSCClicqm were abandoned and the utmost rkhneu was allowed to repla~ the mOil 'ICrupulow meann. . . '. If Fi/lJt"ml. l W. . . . . can be contained within anyone artistic modc, it mUll be the baroque; the great Ihema of dealh and resurrection, pn and redemption, are ft"OOtIlded into finn cytHc oudina, while rnasaa of omate particuLan-a closely WOVI":fI network of moti& and symbo'-
define, dewlop and embellish lhae lhem. at. ic abslnLctions.
The teruion inherent in Joyte'. UR of tile baroque mode, an interplay betw~n c1auicism and rontantici$m, between the limplicily Dr h;" themes and the ex~mc compbcily of ,heir development, i. reflected in the remarkable and ofien u""table
duality of an? for? art'. -sakc ,. nd penonal confeSlion in Hn. . . ,~1tS Wd-t. The critics have alWII. YS been a1o. . " to appreciate the U"U~ quality of the penonal conlenl in J oyce. work. . . . . . . . fact which
has led to a . . ,rious nWundenWlding of the fundamental
double? talk inherenl in his rymbolic language. Yel,
h<<n misunderstanding, Joyce " hinuelfvery largcly to blame. H. obscwm his own position- no doubt intentiooaily-- by his <:<>rutant championing ofallihat WOUI nol cbauvini. nic in litera. ture. by Jill interest in late nioetetnlh CtnlUry fiamhoyanl, decorative style, and by m. a. king Stephen propound a KIf? sufficient aesthelic in A I'liI"lI"ml. Joyet'S position has been obecured htcause tllt:oc U\lu. . nca Ita"" oftl":fl h << n thought the
'f
if
~ Iw
? Some Asp<<ts '? /Finntgans Wake
,(. . ndard. by which w. . m. . y bat judge. hU work. The great",( fallacy of all h. . . ~ en the asoumption that hU theories never changed, that he always thought in tcTTIU of 'lyric, epic, and dramatic', '~piphanies', 'th~ thing well made. It h. . . variously hc<:n , upp""'d that, in J oycean terms, A P",/Tail i. lyric, tflyms epic, andFinntg. vu Waktdramatic,or that all thre~ arc dramatic, that Fj""'gaIU Wak. mark! an unfortunate return to the lyric manner, and 50 on- the three booh pr"viding a plamihle houi_ for neat tripartite IIChcm. ,. . . . . . "nd y<:t therc i. ! no evi&nce that by the time he W aJ writing A Portrail Joyce held the vicw. ascribed 10 Stephen, that he held ,uch view; in later maturity or, more importAnt, that he oonsiderffi. hi. ! vario". book! aJ forming any ,ort of "esthetic progress at all. T he", is, on the contrary, mud, evidence to mggcst that Joyce wa> n"""r ",ri? oudy intere,ted in anything other than the book on which he wa. engaged at the moment and that once he bad completffi. a work he ceased thinling about it and even di. liked it. He alm"'t prevented the publication of Chamh", Musil,' and Mrs. Maria J ola! tell! me that while he WaJ busy with P;""'gans W~h Joyce grew v"ry umympa,hetic to what he had done in Ulyn. . and talkd about the book with considerable dist""tc: 'Ulyss. . ? Chef Who wrote ulysStsr
Joyce', works are all in the nam", of self. purgations. Mr.
TAO'" II
FURTn~. 1l (;ORRy,. sPONDL'ICF. 5 IN THE THRH~P\. US-O)';E CYCLE
-,, _n
. ~
~
~
~
NOO"I" M ot"- ~. M? ?
Motif,'- I have attempted to fill rru. critical gap. Useful dis_ cussions on which J have occuion. ally drawn are to be found in W. Y. Tindall', TM bwary SytMol, and esp""ially in Prof=or Harry Levin's ]am4S Jo,,<, which, though $poiled in the most recent edition by a t. . . teleM ptroration, ,till provid. . the best balanced ,hort introduction 10 Fitwt! 1JU Wake. The work hithorto published in Engfuh on the nature and function of the
T~" ~ nr
FIJRTlint CORRF. 5PONDE. . . '1CF-S IN THE fOLlR_PLUS-Q). ;f:
_III _,v
M. ". .
-"' sa"",
. ?
,-
Rot. . . . ti""ioIo
Ir- ,. "
Pu'"",
'-" w" ,- w"'
,
~
literary Itumol;" is surprisingly inadequate, 10 that I ha. ve found it neceuary to introduce my special discussion ofJOYce's motifs
(Chapter &ven) by a vcry briefoutline of the geMral tlu:ory of the devke. The bulk of the concbuions are baled on my Own reading of ~nn, Prou,t, Pound, ~nd other exponents of the /tiIRIDtil! , but I have gained a great deal ofinsight and stimula_ t i o n f r o m O s h r W a l z e 1 ' , D r u IV(If/kun. stweri, O r . R o b e r t
'9
? i'rtjafe
Pe. cock',0. . u~ HiT~M_andF. . K,Brown', nJlA- i. o tbN. n. AD initial difficulty wat the lack oru -s. eed . system 0{ terminology. Throughout this work I adb_ COR- ,iMently 10 "" td "'" terminological m llw:ntion which it would be . . wclI 10 ru! DIILal'ioe hero. The: . . . . . ro. 'kibnilti8' (or, man: simply, 'motif') is wed 10 designlle . . ,bon vcrhaJ conStrucl,
charactcrioed by certain easily recognisable pUtcrru uf rhyth"" IIOUnd, f<. >rm and, oomctimes, sense. TI,e IItmw are the m'\ior narrative and allegorical clementi of the book, such u 'Eating
the God', 'hom<Jllel<ua! ity', 'ritual murder'. A third category or rccum:nt material is m nn itllted by such bighly charged I)'mbob as tn, the U'tt, tbe mnben. . . These an: . . . . . a1ly quite d_Iy awri. . cd with the themca and motiD, and baw: themselves frequently hct;n called 'motifi'. O$b. r Walzel "'Xu. . teiy dc? scribed them u l#i~ti. uIiu:MS",. ,iI4k' bill, sin"" virtually every image . . . . d oymbol in Fi~",,1llU 1V. d. fUDerio. . . 'hil""'tWUlkaii)l', the qualification i, redundant ami I [lrd? ? W cal! tI'em limply Sftrllml.
During more than five ye. . 1"1 ofJoyce ItuWes I bave ma. de many valuable friendships antOO( . he do7. c. . . ofpcople actively engaged in work on the ~me fic,ld. A fat file of hundred. of letten <Cttivcd limn tbre. e 611t. . :l_ J OYCC:Ofl3-Mn. Adaline
GIash<<11 of Fumingtou, Connecticut, Mr. J. S. AthertQn of Wigan, and Mr. Frit>: Senn ofZQrich-1aa been a better IOUra: of cnlightalment to me than hu any publiohed work on Fi~""atU Iliah-. Mr. Serm in particular---a remarkably aCUle
reader of the book_ has been a patient any in the ,low work of analysing Joyce's patternl of motif and Iymbol; the Ind"" of MOlifl in Aj'l'endix A OwCl much of il\ bulk to the: many houn
thai Mr. Senn devoted 10 it.
My ,,? ;re', wide general knowledge, and he-. percipienl
~ading both of thu book and ofFUt-l"'" IV", ha~ allbled me 10 make mlny irnp. . . . . vetnClllI and 10 <Xn. a:t ocveralilupid blunders.
During. year 'pent in Paris I WaJ furtun. . tc in being able to
, O. W. ! ul. 'Lei"""". . . in Dich. u"<<n', D. u W. . . . _ , l. eipoir, '906,pp? '5. -. 8. ?
"
? Prifoce
mee' many friuds and acquaintanceo ofJOYC~. I am ~ally indebted to MUs Sylvia Beach, Mr. ;. Maria Jolas, l. ueie Nod (Mr. ;. Paul Uon), and Mr. Stuart Gilbert, for their hospitality ~nd stimulating convenation. In u. mdon I wa. privileged to meel and become intimate with I""only manJ oyce ever . . ,. ,ms to have treated aa a real friend-M r. Frank Budgen, who in h;" wise maturity has consnved all the enthusiaam and ehul- lienO' of youth. I have been greatly helped by Mr. Budgen'.
perceptive comrru:nt. and by u. . , large body offactual informa_ tkm whiclt he WaS able to give me.
Atn(lng nther Joyce critics who have given me valuable advice and encouragement I must mention particularly M=n. l 1>om. . . E. Connolly, David Daich. . , Nathan Halper, Fred H. Higginson, J. Mitchell Morse, Geo~ Paimer, Thornton
Wilder, and Lawrence A. Wiggin. Essential documentary am. tance wM given m e by MiM Anna RUMell of the Lockwood Memorial Library, Buffalo, Mr . M. Pollard, Assistant Librarian at Archbishop Manh's Library, Dublin, and Mr. D. . mond
Kennedy, Mistant Librarian of the National Library of Ireland. My brother_in_law, Mr. ]. A. L. Watson, gave :w;"tance which saved me hours ofworl< and anxiety.
r am grateful to the University of We.
o;tern Awlralia for it, grant of a Hackett Studenuhip which made the writing of thi. work po""ible.
Finally, I mwl offer my warmest thank, to Mr. M. J. C. Hodgarl of Pembroke College, Cambridge, for hi. con"ant
friendship, for his unfailing willingness to put hi, wide know- ledge of all Joycun matten at my diopos. al, and above all for
the Itimnlu. of hi. ever_fem approach to the moat intractable pmb1cm~ ofJoyce scholar. ;hip.
C. H.
? CHAPTER ONE SOME ASPECTS OF
FINNEGANS WAKE
I : NEW IRISH STEW (190. 09)
'F our fa. cinating best-,eIlers brilliantly edited and oon_ domed fuc Y{JUc gceater enjoyment, and all bound together in one luxurio'lJ vOlume. ' So ruru a recent ad""IIuemeot for a collection <>f 'conden",d boob', but it also doc. ""ry wdl as a descriptioo ofFiltlltgaM Wake, unle. . fouc be
too Iowa figure, F. ven the word 'lxst-oeUers' is not "" wide of {he mack as it would have be<':n a few yean ago. The novd of which Mc. J. I. M. Stewart ha. written: 'it is in the main a dOled book even to m""t pe. . . . . m of sub,tantial literary c ulti_ vation" has recently be<':n is,ued in a low_priced paperbound edition of ~o,ooo oopies, and I am wld that a further prinling U already proje<:ted. It may be that the number and variety of the 't:t>nden,ed boob' oontained in FilllllllaM Wah accounts for the growing popularity of what must by any estimate be a(<:<>onted an extremely difficult work w penetrate, for once . . hrcu-thT"()ugh h", bun achieved, the reader can find in it, according to taste, a hi'llory of Ireland, a survey of English literature, a universal mythology, a naturali,{ic novd, an autohiography of J ames Augustine . /oyu, a . ummary c"'<nO- logy. 'Whether this impr. . . as intriguing, pretentious, annnying, repellent, beautiful, dull or brilliant, aU must age<< that FinlltgaM Wakt is a quite ",,{raordinarily rich production. J oyce claimed to have diooovcred that he oould do anything with language,' but e""" more imprcoeive than hi, undoubted
'J. I. M. s,. ,. . ,. rt,J_fl1<',I~, '%7,p. ]). , Gi=. . p. I'.
'3
? Srmu ASPldS ofFiFllllgoIU Wah
lioguiltic nopuity was his re. . . . . . . hble 1""""'" 10 adapt and
integrate literally any raw material th. o. t came 10 h. o. nd. Nothing wa. reje<:r. ed. Deletions in tm ~{SS are minimal; additioru abound. Joyce', devdopment al . . writer;" characteri. . ed by a conlinuo\1l and rapid movement away from paradigmatic art - Ihe lelection and recreation of a typical and powerfully symbolic unit ofexperiellCe which illuminates thingl far beyond Ihe bounds <>fits own COnttJCt (Ihat i. . the technique which he
caLLed the 'epiph. o. ny')---40wards lhe all_ind~'? e art offill/lt,. . 1I'd:. whet<:, irutcad ofchoosing tm most lypi. . . . l and ilium;n. atins cx. ample of a theme, he attempted 10 pt'CStnt e'o"ffy con<<ivable trope. In hil later yean Joytt . . ,. ,~ to haV<) adopted ILl Jill mollO Voll. aire', ~radox thaI tk superfluous iJ a very necessary thing. Caution and lilrrary :lSCClicqm were abandoned and the utmost rkhneu was allowed to repla~ the mOil 'ICrupulow meann. . . '. If Fi/lJt"ml. l W. . . . . can be contained within anyone artistic modc, it mUll be the baroque; the great Ihema of dealh and resurrection, pn and redemption, are ft"OOtIlded into finn cytHc oudina, while rnasaa of omate particuLan-a closely WOVI":fI network of moti& and symbo'-
define, dewlop and embellish lhae lhem. at. ic abslnLctions.
The teruion inherent in Joyte'. UR of tile baroque mode, an interplay betw~n c1auicism and rontantici$m, between the limplicily Dr h;" themes and the ex~mc compbcily of ,heir development, i. reflected in the remarkable and ofien u""table
duality of an? for? art'. -sakc ,. nd penonal confeSlion in Hn. . . ,~1tS Wd-t. The critics have alWII. YS been a1o. . " to appreciate the U"U~ quality of the penonal conlenl in J oyce. work. . . . . . . . fact which
has led to a . . ,rious nWundenWlding of the fundamental
double? talk inherenl in his rymbolic language. Yel,
h<<n misunderstanding, Joyce " hinuelfvery largcly to blame. H. obscwm his own position- no doubt intentiooaily-- by his <:<>rutant championing ofallihat WOUI nol cbauvini. nic in litera. ture. by Jill interest in late nioetetnlh CtnlUry fiamhoyanl, decorative style, and by m. a. king Stephen propound a KIf? sufficient aesthelic in A I'liI"lI"ml. Joyet'S position has been obecured htcause tllt:oc U\lu. . nca Ita"" oftl":fl h << n thought the
'f
if
~ Iw
? Some Asp<<ts '? /Finntgans Wake
,(. . ndard. by which w. . m. . y bat judge. hU work. The great",( fallacy of all h. . . ~ en the asoumption that hU theories never changed, that he always thought in tcTTIU of 'lyric, epic, and dramatic', '~piphanies', 'th~ thing well made. It h. . . variously hc<:n , upp""'d that, in J oycean terms, A P",/Tail i. lyric, tflyms epic, andFinntg. vu Waktdramatic,or that all thre~ arc dramatic, that Fj""'gaIU Wak. mark! an unfortunate return to the lyric manner, and 50 on- the three booh pr"viding a plamihle houi_ for neat tripartite IIChcm. ,. . . . . . "nd y<:t therc i. ! no evi&nce that by the time he W aJ writing A Portrail Joyce held the vicw. ascribed 10 Stephen, that he held ,uch view; in later maturity or, more importAnt, that he oonsiderffi. hi. ! vario". book! aJ forming any ,ort of "esthetic progress at all. T he", is, on the contrary, mud, evidence to mggcst that Joyce wa> n"""r ",ri? oudy intere,ted in anything other than the book on which he wa. engaged at the moment and that once he bad completffi. a work he ceased thinling about it and even di. liked it. He alm"'t prevented the publication of Chamh", Musil,' and Mrs. Maria J ola! tell! me that while he WaJ busy with P;""'gans W~h Joyce grew v"ry umympa,hetic to what he had done in Ulyn. . and talkd about the book with considerable dist""tc: 'Ulyss. . ? Chef Who wrote ulysStsr
Joyce', works are all in the nam", of self. purgations. Mr.
