Thanks and Goodbye

Dear all,
we are at the end of our "Law and the Humanities" course and, I have to admit it, I'm a little bit sad. It was a pleasure to read your comments and discuss with you about so many unusual topics: some of your comments were really interesting and they made me think about a lot of issues from many different perspectives that I hadn't considered before and it is obvious that your enthusiasm was a source of great satisfaction for me. I do thank you all and I'm really sorry that I won't be able to be with you on June 9th. I would like to say goodbye with a quotation, which I think really represents our course. Well, it wasn't written by a lawyer but by one of the most famous theologians of all times (actually his father wanted him to become a lawyer...): his name was Martin Luther.

"Ein Jurist, der nicht mehr ist denn ein Jurist, ist ein arm Ding".

"A lawyer, who is no more than a lawyer, is a poor thing".

Summing up

I expected that the final lectures about Law and music should be a right conclusion for our course, but I think it was even better than I expected. As the wonderful examples played by M. Polimanti have shown, music is a phenomenon that shows a strong parallelism with law. History and traditions, writing and publishing texts, sensibility of society, technical innovation, have a great influence on music, just as in law.
Giorgio Resta insisted very much on a point that has been in the core of the whole semester. This idea is that it's time to break the cultural isolation of law. Since the 19th century (but in some ways since the beginning of the second Millennium) law has been taught and practised as a language for initiated, a religion with her priests and her rituals. Since some years, things are changing. Isolation of law isn't any more a way of increasing power and respect for lawyers. On the contrary, the tehcnical structure of a legal education can represent an obstacle for lawyers as they try to understand the deep functions of society.
That's why I think that the different cultural experiences we had during this course are more than a breath of air in the middle of a series of serious, technical and boring exams. Looking at law from an external perspective can really improve our understanding of law and – what is more important – can help us to evaluate the impact that law has on human beings and relationships.


I’m very keen to read your general impressions about the course. You can post them with your name if you want to discuss them with your colleagues and with me and Stefania Gialdroni, but if you want to be anonimous you can also send them to me per e-mail or even post them in my postbox.
Let me say that I’m proud of the success of this experience, and let me thank all of you for your enthusiastic participation.

Preappello!

Dear all,
finally we have fixed the time and the hall of your "preappello":

Monday 25th and Tuesday 26th, "Ex-economia" building (Via Ostiense 139), Hall 11, 9:30.

We've divided you into groups:
Monday, May 25th:
9:30:
1. Caciotti Giuseppe
2. Casini Ginevra
3. Ciucci Giorgia
4. Colorizio Alessia
5. Contartese Antonio
6. D’Antona Valentina
7. Di Bartolomeo Laura
8. Faranca Silvia

10:30:
9. Ferri Valeria
10. Fraia Andreina
11. Giuliani Pietro
12. Luzietti Camilla
13. Malizia Vanessa
14. Manzo Massimo

11:30:
15. Marinelli Valerio
16. Moreno Garcia Alaia
17. Oddone Pierluigi
18. Rosetta Antonio
19. Severini Andrea
20. Simeoni Alessandra
21. Viti Michele

Tuesday, May 26th:
9:30:
1. Buonanno Maria
2. Capece Minutolo Ferdinando
3. Cordani Flaminia
4. D’Annibale Daniela
5. Festucci Alessandro
6. Fiengo Astrid
7. Galanti Giuseppe (4:00 p.m., room 232)
8. Giacomini Giulia

10:30:
9. Hernandez Emanuela
10. Lanfranconi Fabiana
11. Mambrini Francesco
12. Marangoni Andrea
13. Petriccione Marina
14. Pischedda Federica
15. Westphal Caroline

Wednesday, May 27th:
1. Graziano Flavia (11:00 room 232)

A link about censorship and cinema

Hi all!
Maybe someone will be interested in deepening the topic of censorship. Unfortunately the website is in French but I'm sure you will understand a lot. It is incredibly good and complete and, anyway, it can give you some ideas.

http://bibliotheque.sciences-po.fr/fr/produits/manifestations/censure-cinema/index.html

Prof. Giorgio Resta's Lectures

LAW AND MUSIC:

"MOZART AT THE BAR:

The interplay between Legal Theory and Musical Interpretation"

Abstract

At a first look, law & music might appear as one of the most recent and less investigated frontiers of the law & literature movement. To some extent this is true. However, the interface between law and music has also been the subject of important studies in ancient times, in the middle age (one of the first examples is the anonymous treatise of the fourteenth century "Ars cantus mensurabilis mensurata per modus iuris") and during the twentieth century. Prominent legal scholars have written about musical estethics and musicology (f.i. Salvatore Pugliatti) and at the same time several important composers and musicians have had a legal training (among the others Carl Philipp Emmanuel Bach, Schumann, Stravinsky). The most important intersection between the two disciplines is represented by the theory of interpretation. Interpreting and performing a score raises a set of questions involves a range of problems not entirely different from interpreting a constitution, a statute, a regulation, or even a legal precedent. Lawyers have frequently confronted themselves with the theory of musical interpretation, in order to enhance their self-comprehension of the legal techniques of interpretation. Not by chance, we can find the same debates between originalists, intentionalists and contextualists in law and in music as well. In my lecture I will try to elaborate more on this subject, with the aid of a professional musician (M° Enrico Maria Polimanti) who will illustrate the most important intellectual trends and the practical problems of interpretation day by day faced by a musical performer. I will also approach the subject from a comparative perspective, looking at the different ways in which civil lawyers (Betti, Pugliatti) and common lawyers (Jerome Frank, Posner) have conceived the interaction between law and music.

Readings:

- J. Frank, "Words and Music", in 47 Columbia L. Rev. 1259 (1947).

- S. Levinson, J.M. Balkin, "Law, Music and other Performing Arts", in 139 U.Pa. L. Rev. 1597 (1991).

- T. Hall, "The Score as Contract", in 20 Cardozo L. Rev. 1589 (1999).

- J.M. Balkin, S. Levinson, "Interpreting Law and Music: Performance Notes on "The Banjo Serenader" and "The Lying Crowd of Jewes", 1999.

C.V. Prof. Giorgo Resta:

Giorgio Resta is an Associate Professor of Comparative Law at the University of Bari, Italy, where he teaches courses on private comparative law, contracts and intellectual property. He is author of three books and numerous articles on privacy, fundamental rights, contracts and torts in comparative perspective. He edited the Italian translation of Hesselink’s “New European Legal Culture”. His book “Autonomia privata e diritti della personalità” has been selected as one of the best legal books of year 2005 by the Italian “Club dei giuristi”. He is currently serving as member of the scientific board of the Legislative Committee for the reform of third book of Italian Civil Code, appointed by the Italian Ministry of Justice. He is member of the Italian Association of Comparative Law and editor of “Il diritto dell’informazione e dell’informatica” and “Rivista critica del diritto privato”. He received several scholarships from the Canadian Government (Faculty Research Program), the Max-Planck-Institut für Internationales und Ausländisches Privatrecht (Hamburg, Germany), the Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Patent-, Urheber- und Wettbewerbsrecht (Munich, Germany) and the Italian Research Council. He has been visiting scholar in the Yale Law School, the McGill Law School, the Law School of the University of Toronto, the Duke Law School, the Ludwig-Maximilians Universität (Munich, Germany), the Max-Planck-Institut für Internationales und Ausländisches Privatrecht (Hamburg, Germany). In 1995 he graduated with magna cum laude from the University of Rome “La Sapienza”. In 1999 he received his PHD in Private Law from the University of Pisa. He is member of the Italian bar. His principal academic interests are privacy, information property, media-law, contract and legal history.

C.V. M° Enrico Maria Polimanti, pianist:

Enrico Maria Polimanti studied piano and chamber music at the Conservatorio di Santa Cecilia. Awarded of the prestigious Foundation Scholarship of the Royal College of Music, he moved to London where he studied with Yonty Solomon. Once back in Italy he attended courses at Accademia Chigiana di Siena, at the Scuola Superiore Internazionale del Trio di Trieste. He also took part in numerous international master classes given by Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, András Schiff. He won several prizes in Italy, among them: Hyperion chamber music competition 2001(first prize), Euterpe 2003 (first prize, also special prize “Duo Binetti”), “Pietro Argento” 2003 (first prize, also “Prize of the Critics”), Seghizzi International Song Competition 2004 (“Prize for best pianist”). He plays as soloist and in chamber ensembles for numerous Festivals and concert seasons in Italy and abroad, recently: Orchestre International de la Citè Universitaire in Paris, Primavera in musica agli Uffizi and Radio Vaticana. He regularly gives lessons, lectures and lecture-recitals in several schools and associations of Rome, at Università Roma3, St. Petersburg College-Florida and Federazione Italiana di Musicoterapia. He translated Charles Rosen’s book “Beethoven’s Piano Sonatas” (Astrolabio-Ubaldini, Roma) and recently he has written the essay The Earth has many keys. Emily Dickinson in the italian contemporary music (Mazzanti, Venezia). He took part in several radio, television and cd recordings (lately Rossini’s Petite Messe Solennelle for the label “Tactus”). His solo and chamber music repertoire covers a wide range of works dating from early eighteen century to the contemporary epoch.

Prof. Georges Martyn's Lectures

Dear all,

we are at the end of this year's course and we will have a very full and interesting week. We will begin on May 20th with a lecture about "Law and Iconography" held by Prof. Georges Martyn from the Ghent University and we will end on May 21st and 22nd with two quite spectacular "Law and Music" lectures, where Prof. Giorgio Resta, from the University of Bari, will explain the links between legal theory and musical interpretation with the help of the pianist Enrico Maria Polimanti. First, some information about Wednesday's lecture:

LAW AND ICONOGRAPHY:

Readings:

1) A. H. Manchester and M. A. Becker-Moelands: "An Introduction to Iconographical Studies of Legal History", in W.M. Gordon-T.D. Fergus (eds.), "Legal History in the Making". Proceedings of the ninth British Legal History Conference, Glasgow, 1989, London, 1991, pp. 85-94 (Chap. 6).

2) G. Martyn, "Painted Exempla Iustitiae in Southern Netherlands", in "Symbolische Kommunikation vor Gericht in der Fruehn Neuzeit", hrsg. von R. Schulze, Berlin, 2006, pp. 335-356.

Prof. Martyn's CV:

Georges Martyn (Avelgem (B), 1966) studied Law (1984-89) and Medieval Studies (1989-91) in Leuven and received his Ph.D. in Legal History at the Catholic University of Leuven in 1996. He has been an ‘advocaat’ (barrister/lawyer) between 1992 and 2008 and is a substitute justice of the peace in Kortrijk (B) since 1999. He is professor at the University of Ghent (Department of Jurisprudence and Legal History) since 1999. He teaches and published books on ‘History of Politics and Public Law’, ‘General Introduction to Belgian Law’ and ‘Legal Methodology’. His scientific articles consider the history of legislation in the Netherlands in early modern times, the reception of Roman law, the evolution of the sources of the law in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and legal iconography (http://www.rechtsgeschiedenis.be/).

De Froment's Law and Cinema: Last Remarks

Dear students,
Thanks to this blog and the numerous discussions we had in class, I would like to summarize the important points you made about the relationship about law and cinema. There is nothing knew if you followed all of our discussions, and if you read the blog. But I thought I would be good to go over the main points before you move to the next lesson on law and cinema.
Like in class, I am not following a very strict outline, and I start with the same question: law and literature or law and cinema? As you will see, both literature and cinema have according to me good arguments to account for the law. I am not insisting so much on literature (this is not my task), my goal through this very brief comparison is only to clarify for you what it is at stake in the field of “law and humanities”.

LAW AND CINEMA, May 6-8, 2009

Many of you said, even if you immediately gave counter-arguments: “The relationship between law and cinema is a young one. Therefore, this relation is less obvious than the one between literature and law (for example)”.
Comment: of course, the absence of a long tradition makes things harder when one wants to characterize long-term evolutions between law and cinema. But the point I wanted to make was slightly different, and had to do with to the very physical “nature” of the law. Though they are many unwritten customs which produce legal effects, one thinks about law at first as a written text. Therefore it is clear that literature has substantial arguments when it comes to describe the law as a text. One needs however to distinguish here between two definitions of literature (the same in cinema, as we will see below).

1. Literature = (simply) books.

Then the question is whether some authors wrote great masterpieces about legal issues (“LAW IN LITERATURE”). You studied this question with Dr. Stefania Gialdroni this semester. As in cinema, it happens very often that some great minds, though not necessarily being lawyers from training, grasp the logic of the law in a very interesting way. I don’t know Italian literature well enough, but it is very clear that “realist” authors such as Balzac or Dostoievski (see for instance, Crime and Punishment, a wonderful reflection about law and social justice), thanks to great preliminary works, can teach us a lot not only about the law or Justice “ideal” – and that would more be the task of a philosopher – but also about its practical functioning (NB: at the time, the “division of labor” between writers, novelists and scholars was only emerging, it is therefore right to say that Balzac was a kind of sociologist). Another possibility is to make a giant survey of influential books which talk about law and draw conclusions as to the perception, the image of the law (cf. below, same reasoning about law and cinema).

2. Literature as a scientific (more or less…) discipline, with its set of tools.

From this point of view, the question is no more “law in literature”, but “LAW AS LITERATURE”: how are laws, judgments written… Can the tools developed by scholars in the field of literature help us to understand the law in a more accurate way? For instance, many scholars in the 1960s-1980s, in a field called “critical legal studies” used theories developed in the linguistic and philosophical field (structuralism and post-structuralism, from Saussure to Derrida) to address sharp critics against the law. The purpose of this move was to reveal the true nature of the law behind the superficial objectivity of the rule.
What about cinema then?
Well with cinema, it’s just like with law and literature. We could also characterize cinema simply as “all movies that have been made so far”, and therefore as an artifact of both elitist culture (cf. Michele’s comment about Pasolini’s “SALO' E LE 120 GIORNATE DI SODOMA”, not exactly a blockbuster… ) and POPULAR CULTURE (important point here). With this definition, studying law and cinema means studying LAW IN CINEMA.
Or, we can think of cinema primarily as an art, with, again, its techniques, and try to see how these techniques may, or may not capture the essence of the law (CINEMA AS A TECHNIQUE revealing the true nature of the law).
Of course, you have already noticed that these 2 approaches cannot really be separated from each other, but it’s easier for our reasoning.
Let’s summarize here what “cinema and law” in both these approaches can teach us about law, and maybe about cinema as well. (WHAT FOLLOWS IS AN ORGANIZED SUMMARY of what you discussed in class and of what you wrote on the blog; of course, some important points are missing, it’s not meant to be exhaustive).

1. Law in cinema.

a. A GENERAL (STATISTICAL) APPROACH: Cinema, popular culture and the law (cf. article from Friedman, Yale Law Journal). Cinema and legal culture. Almost all of you agreed on this point: cinema or cinema/television is currently the most important form of popular art. Therefore, by studying how law is treated, understood in films, one can draw conclusions about the perception of the law within a significant part of the population, because cinema is a great way to understand the cultural values of a society. For instance, the image of the law in movies is very different in Italy, where many films have recently insisted on how corrupt the legal and political system could be (cf. movies about the mafia) and in the US.
And because movies, TV shows are so important in our perception of the reality, the way law is handled in them influence very much the legal system itself! (some lawyers talk about a “CSI effect” ; people in France often say “your honor” to judges! ; in Germany, people are surprised when they enter a court for it doesn’t look like American tribunals!
Ø Cf. short excerpt from Machura’s article about “Globalizing the Hollywood Courtroom Drama”

But ATTENTION!!! Studying the perception of law within movies is fine. It is also important sociologically speaking. But one should pay attention to methodological issues. YOU CANNOT DRAW SOCIOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS with one, two or even 5 movies. You need to have many different examples, and almost make a quantitative, statistical analysis… Of course, life is short, and you have better things to do right now. So you need to trust your own culture, or your intuition, and remark for instance that, “most of the time lawyers had a good image, but since the 1990s, it changed”, or “in Hollywood movies, lawyers are often depicted as” etc. But be cautious!

To be honest, I also have other things to do and I can’t watch movies all day long. That is why I introduced you through 2 movies, “12 Angry men” and “Dirty Harry”, which according to me represents two of the most important images of the law in Hollywood movies.
Ø In “12 Angry men”, Lumet shows that when the law is put into practice in the good way, the rule of law, the legal process can be the best tool against social prejudices. The ideal of a balanced Justice (cf. our/your! analysis of the opening scene of the movie is finally met through the process of law).
Ø But as we saw in “Dirty Harry”, and it happens in many other films, sometimes the bureaucratic/procedural nature of the legal order stands in the way of justice (cf. extract). This is the case in many thrillers, where members of the audience often know from the beginning who is guilty. Tension between Justice and respect for the legal order is also present in westerns. We can also think of one great Orson Welles’ movie calles Touch of Evil. In this movie, the sheriff Quinlan (Orson Welles himself) is convinced that a man is guilty of murder, but doesn’t have the evidence to prove it. He doesn’t hesitate to forge it! At the very end of the movie, the audience will learn that, in fact, the alleged killer was indeed guilty though nothing could prove it. Eventually, the death of this guilty man after a long chase doesn’t solve this philosophical/legal question we have already seen in 12 Angry men and in Dirty Harry: what is Justice? Should we let a man walk free if we can’t legally prove he’s guilty?
Ø To summarize, the relationship between law and Justice or between justice and Justice is a very important theme in the cinema history.

b. Films about the law.

Apart from this statistical/cultural approach of cinema considered as an important expression of popular culture, and popular legal culture (cf. for the definition of popular legal culture Friedman’s article), we can also study law within particular movies. As lawyers, we are in an excellent position to evaluate movies in which the law, lawyers, judges etc. play a very important role. Movies are most of the times fiction, so the question is not so much whether the movie is or isn’t “realistic” but whether it represents well the law, the idea of Justice, even in a symbolic way. Not everything is realistic in “12 angry men”, for instance it is not certain a judge would really behave like him if it was a matter of life or death, or that the jurors would be so biases at the beginning of their meeting. But S. Lumet wants to represent in a symbolic way the tension between the idea of Justice, and the day-to-day “bureaucratic production of justice” as some of you said it in the class (cf extract 1).Some great films can then be used to teach law, or to reflect about law. With “12 angry men”, we had the opportunity to reflect on the importance of prejudices in a trial, and to what extent they should be left to one side during the process. Society and its prejudices should never enter a tribunal. But it doesn’t mean law in itself is sufficient! On the contrary, whilst giving up step by step these prejudices, the jurors nevertheless invoke their own experiences but only to make a better interpretations of facts and therefore to serve the law (cf. extract n°2). Social knowledge can be used, but not to (pre)judge an individual, but to appreciate facts, or to be more accurate, legal facts (for instance: someone heard a noise = legal fact to be discussed; someone thinks the kid is probably guilty because he’s from the slums = prejudice that should never enter the jury room): cf. extract n°3 when the juror from the “slums” explains how to use a knife. Lumet makes us think about the ideal interaction of law and society, and how, in a democratic society where all opinions are respected, one can reach justice with our judicial institutions. The purpose of the movie is also certainly to warn future jurors against their own prejudices. The movie is a somehow a normative educational depiction of the legal system!
With “It’s a free world”, of course, a very different perspective is given us on the law, and the role it plays within society. I am just giving some insights here, because I hadn’t time to fully explain why I chose the movie during the class. Some of you made a comment saying 12 angry men was a better match than “It’s a free world” to talk about “Law and cinema”. I totally understand this opinion, and there are very strong arguments to support it. Nevertheless, here are some interesting points that we can study in the movie “It’s a free world”.
It’s very much a realistic movie. Everything or almost everything, although it’s highly symbolic, is supposed to account for an economic, social, legal reality. It’s somehow in-between a film and a documentary about a forgotten part of the labour market and what it means for our society. Of course, the focus is not only on the “law” or on the “legal system” in the narrow sense of the term. But the movie challenges the role we usually grant to the law. Ken Loach knows legal problems pretty well, and his scriptwriter, Paul Laverty, is a lawyer from training… and I think we can see it in the movie.
First, the movie underlines how often laws are broken, circumvented, unapplied. The movie starts with a sexual harassment scene (cf. extract n°4). But we can clearly see that Angie has almost no possibility to contest her dismissal, though the English in particular is particularly protective against all sorts of discriminations and sexual harassments on the workplace: law is not always the solution, and to praise for its better application may be a loss of time. Maybe mentalities, culture should change first! Second example: Rose abides very much by the law, she’s the one having the most naïve relationship to the rule of law: she believes that penalties provided in statutes are to be applied strictly (5 years for providing illegal workers for instance). But believing in the law doesn’t really make her a better person, as she is the one proposing a “legal” way to exploit even more workers through her double-shift housing system for temporary workers. And she also refuses to help the Iranian family. (cf. end of extract n°1)
Second, the movie provides us with a survey of legal practices in the world of temporary workers: in the extract n°1, you can see Angie’s client complaining about Polish workers’ behavior as soon as they have “papers”, which means as soon as they have regular contracts of employment (I guess). As you can see in Collins (ed.) Textbook, the most protective rights are granted primarily to regular “employees”, whilst “workers” (having a contract for and not of services), independent workers etc. have less and less rights. Loach show us therefore the ambiguous connection between labour laws and real practices and explain us that the fear of legal obligations as well as the will to have workers who obey like machines can explain the success of these new forms of employment.As often in Ken Loach, there are prejudices and biases, and employers’ awfulness is as exaggerated as employees’ kindness and fairness (cf. beginning extract n°2). Economists argue sometimes for example that the protection granted to some employees (protections very much defended by Ken Loach) are being “paid” somehow by this flexible workers, and some of us should be more flexible so that the others can be less flexible… But this movie is one of the rare attempt to capture the margins of our world, and to try to explain injustice in a subtle way. Besides, both Loach’s arguments (represented by the father) and liberal’s arguments are (almost) fairly exposed in the park scene (cf. extract n°3). I find the way in which Angie starts to work with illegal workers (out of social empathy and greediness) particularly interesting. Ken Loach seems to argue (cf. the father during the park scene) that immigrant workers should rather stay in their home land to develop their own economy, but it’s easy to find counter-arguments, especially for Italians (should have all qualified Sicilian workers stayed in Palermo instead of going to the US?)The main argument in Loach’s movie is well-represented in the very symbolic organization of the movie and in some particularly violent scenes (when Angie is beaten up in the street and at her own place, cf. extract n°5). You have probably noticed (that’s why I put together in extract n°4 the sexual harassment scene and the scene where Angie and Rose text some of their temp workers to have sex with them) that they are many symmetric elements in the movie, the victim often becomes the executioner, the friend becomes the enemy etc. During the class, I read you a passage of a famous M. Thatcher’s interview in which she states that “there is no such thing as society”. Loach’s argument through his production is to prove the contrary in a symbolic way (and of course fictional): our actions have always consequences (cf. scene in the park –extract 3-, where the grandfather accuses Angie to jeopardize her son’s future), “Thatcherian” individualism (whose birth in the labor world is described in a previous movie called the Navigators) destroy the very equilibrium of our existence which should be built on social solidarity. The division between work and life is broken, everything is affected by individualism, including the sex life.A last remark about Ken Loach’s movie. One could easily argue, apart from the fact that Ken Loach clearly doesn’t believe in capitalism (when the majority actually do), that this is quite a conservative movie in the end, praising for the impossible return of a golden age, which, in fact, may never have existed!

2. Cinema as an art, with its techniques: is the cinematographic art well-adapted to the law?
It is so hard to separate dimension 1 from dimension 2 that I have of course already talked about some techniques which made cinema particularly adapted to account for the law production. Some of you made very nice comment about it during the class and on the blog (the last Georgia’s comment 12/05 for example) so I will just summarize it very quickly:
Ø a movie plot is in many respects very similar to a trial “plot” or even to the legal process in general (complicated facts step by step combined together in a rational story)
Ø similarities between lawyers and actors. Judges in England wear “wigs”. Ritualistic nature of the law particularly well-adapted to movies and cinema
Ø tension between Justice and law in action: in 12 Angry Men, we start with a static shot, before following people in dark and complicated corridors. Cinema can both combine this static and moving element of law
etc. etc.
Let’s go back to our first question, law and literature rather than law and cinema or the contrary? So, my opinion is, but it can be challenged, that both points can be argued. To grasp the image of law, lawyers etc. in our different cultures, both literature and cinema are essential. With the success of cinema and television, it may however be more relevant to study these last two if we’re interested in the modern image of law. What about techniques then? Well, as we said earlier, law is a text, which puts literature in a very good position to win our contest. Nevertheless, all arguments that we have pinpointed above (plot, actor-lawyer, representation of law-in-action etc.) plead for the victory of cinema. That’s your call!
Well, it was longer than I thought, congratulations for those who have read until there, and enjoy your last “law and the humanities” lessons.
Charles.