THE ARCHETYPAL FUNCTION OF THE SCAPEGOAT:
Analyzing the Figure of the Pharmakos in Tragic and Ironic Literature
Paper 107: The Twentieth Century Literature: From World War II to the End of the Century
Subject Code: 22402
Title: THE ARCHETYPAL FUNCTION OF THE SCAPEGOAT: Analyzing the Figure of the Pharmakos in Tragic and Ironic Literature (A Comparative Study of Sophocles' Oedipus Rex and Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman)
Name: Siddhiba.R.Gohil
Date: 10-04-2026
Table of Contents
Academic Details………….1
Assignment Metrics ………..2
Abstract.................................. 3
Keywords and Research question, Hypothesis……….4
Introduction: Literature, Archetype, and the Ritual of Expulsion ..........5
The Pharmakos in Ancient Greek Ritual: Anthropological Foundations ……………..6
4.Northrop Frye’s Pharmakos: Theory of Modes and Archetypal Criticism……8
4.1 The Five Modes and the Descent into Irony
4.2 The Moral Ambiguity of the Pharmakos: Neither Innocent nor Guilty
4.3 The Pharmakos in Ironic Comedy and Tragic Irony
5.The Pharmakos in Comparative Context: A Structural Analysis ........9
5.1 Oedipus Rex: The Pharmakos as High-Mimetic Tragic Hero
5.2 Death of a Salesman: The Pharmakos in Modern Social Drama
5.3 Structural Parallels and Historical Transformations
6.The Pharmakos and Social Integration: Literature as Communal Ritual ………..10
6.1 Frye’s Theory of Social Integration through Literature
6.2 Synthesis: The Ideological Work of the Scapegoat
7.Conclusion.................................. 12
8.Bibliography................................ 13
Research Question
How does the archetypal figure of the pharmakos, as defined by Northrop Frye, function as a structural mechanism for negotiating social disorder and collective guilt across the transition from classical Greek tragedy to modern ironic drama?
Hypothesis
The pharmakos archetype persists as a fundamental literary structure because it provides a narrative "safety valve" for social anxiety; while the modal context of the scapegoat shifts from the divine/cosmic (as seen in Oedipus Rex) to the systemic/ideological (as seen in Death of a Salesman), the underlying structural logic remains constant: the restoration of communal order necessitates the expulsion of a morally ambiguous figure whose suffering is disproportionate to their individual agency.
Abstract
This assignment examines the archetypal figure of the pharmakos — the ritual scapegoat — as theorized by Northrop Frye in his seminal work Anatomy of Criticism (1957). Drawing on Frye's modal and archetypal frameworks, the study analyses how the pharmakos functions within tragic and ironic literature as a structural mechanism for the expulsion of social disorder. The assignment first traces the historical and anthropological origins of the pharmakos in ancient Greek ritual practice, before engaging Frye's literary-critical definition that positions the scapegoat as a character who is neither innocent nor guilty but is rejected by society to restore collective order. A comparative analysis is then conducted between Sophocles' Oedipus Rex (classical Greek tragedy) and Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman (modern social drama), demonstrating the pharmakos archetype's transhistorical persistence. Finally, the assignment evaluates how this archetype supports Frye's broader thesis of literature's role in social integration, drawing connections to Rene Girard's parallel theory of sacrificial violence. The study concludes that the pharmakos archetype remains one of literary criticism's most productive tools for understanding how narrative structures negotiate social anxiety, collective guilt, and communal identity across historical periods.
1. Introduction: Literature, Archetype, and the Ritual of Expulsion
In the long history of Western literary imagination, few figures appear more persistently across cultures, genres, and centuries than the scapegoat: the individual selected, often arbitrarily, to bear the sins of the collective and be expelled in the name of communal restoration. From the sacrificial rituals of archaic Greece to the tragic stage of fifth-century Athens, from the courtrooms of Salem to the modern American suburb, literature has returned again and again to this primal pattern of victimization and renewal. To study this pattern critically is to enter the domain of archetypal criticism, and no theorist has mapped that domain more systematically than the Canadian literary scholar Northrop Frye (1912-1991).
In Anatomy of Criticism (1957), Frye undertook nothing less than a comprehensive structural theory of Western literature, arguing that all literary works are organised around recurring mythic patterns — what he called mythoi or archetypal plot structures. Central to his theory of the ironic mode is the figure of the pharmakos, or scapegoat: the character who is neither clearly innocent nor clearly guilty, but who is expelled from society in an act that paradoxically restores the very social order that expelled them. This figure, Frye argued, inhabits a structural position of profound moral ambiguity that literature exploits to explore the deepest tensions of human communal life.
This assignment proceeds through three interlocking analytical movements. First, it examines the historical and ritual origins of the pharmakos in ancient Greek society, establishing the anthropological foundation upon which literary archetypes are built. Second, it conducts a close comparative analysis of the pharmakos figure in Sophocles' Oedipus Rex and Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, arguing that both texts — separated by twenty-five centuries — share a fundamental structural logic of sacrificial expulsion. Third, it interrogates Frye's claim that such archetypal patterns serve the function of social integration, examining how literature's rehearsal of scapegoat rituals performs ideological and psychological work for the communities that produce and consume it. Throughout, the analysis remains in productive dialogue with Rene Girard's rival theory of sacrificial violence, whose convergences and divergences with Frye illuminate the pharmakos archetype from multiple critical angles.
2. The Pharmakos in Ancient Greek Ritual: Anthropological Foundations
Before the pharmakos became a literary archetype, it was a social institution. The word pharmakos in ancient Greek referred literally to a scapegoat — a person selected by a community and ritually expelled or killed in order to purge that community of collective pollution, disease, or misfortune. According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, the pharmakos was a ritual figure in ancient Greek religion wherein an individual, typically drawn from the margins of society, was expelled from the city-state as a form of communal purification.
The practice was institutionalised in several Greek city-states, most notably Athens and Abdera. At certain festivals — particularly the Thargelia in honor of Apollo — one or two individuals were fed at public expense, then driven out of the city boundaries. Historical accounts suggest that those selected for this role were drawn from the lower strata of society: the disfigured, the criminally condemned, or social outcasts. Crucially, the pharmakos was not simply an innocent victim; their selection carried an ambiguity that was structurally essential to the ritual's efficacy. They had to embody simultaneously a degree of social taint (to attract the pollution that needed to be expelled) and a degree of communal membership (to serve as a legitimate surrogate for the community as a whole).
This structural paradox — the pharmakos as simultaneously insider and outsider, guilty and innocent, sacred and polluted — is what makes the ritual so fertile for literary adaptation. Jacques Derrida, in his essay Plato's Pharmacy, noted the deeply ambivalent semantic field of the Greek word pharmakon, which simultaneously means poison, remedy, and scapegoat — a convergence that captures the pharmakos's paradoxical social function perfectly. The ritual's anthropological grammar, in which the community's sins are transferred onto a single body that is then violently expelled, represents one of humanity's oldest technologies for the management of collective anxiety and guilt.
It is this anthropological structure — the community, the crisis, the selection of a victim, the expulsion, the restoration of order — that Frye identified as the deep grammar of a recognizable literary mode. When the pharmakos migrates from the ritual precinct into the theatre, from the civic square into the novel, it does not shed its structural logic but transposes it into a new medium, one capable of interrogating and critiquing what ritual could only perform.
3. Northrop Frye's Pharmakos: Theory of Modes and Archetypal Criticism
3.1 The Five Modes and the Descent into Irony
Frye's theory of modes in Anatomy of Criticism organises all Western literary history according to the power-relation between the protagonist and their world. He identifies five modal categories — mythic, romantic, high mimetic, low mimetic, and ironic — representing a historical progression from the divine hero of myth, through the aristocratic hero of epic and tragedy, down to the ordinary person of realistic fiction, and finally to the diminished, victimized figure of ironic literature. This descent charts not merely a literary history but a shift in the prevailing relationship between human beings and the forces that govern their lives.
The pharmakos is the characteristic protagonist of the ironic mode. In ironic tragedy, Frye explains, the exceptional catastrophe suffered by the hero is causally out of line with his character — whatever the protagonist has done is grossly disproportionate to their suffering. This disproportion between action and consequence is the defining formal feature of tragic irony, and it is precisely what produces the pharmakos figure: a victim who is selected arbitrarily, or for reasons so inadequate that their selection raises more moral questions than it resolves. As Frye writes in Anatomy of Criticism: We may call this typical victim the pharmakos or scapegoat. We meet a pharmakos figure in Hawthorne's Hester Prynne, in Melville's Billy Budd, in Hardy's Tess, in the Septimus of Mrs. Dalloway, in stories of persecuted Jews and Negroes, in stories of artists whose genius makes them Ishmaels of a bourgeois society (Frye 39).
3.2 The Moral Ambiguity of the Pharmakos: Neither Innocent nor Guilty
The most philosophically significant aspect of Frye's pharmakos is its constitutive moral ambiguity. Unlike the hero of classical tragedy, who possesses a definable flaw (hamartia) that can be analysed in causal relation to their downfall, the pharmakos exists in a condition of irreducible ethical undecidability. Frye articulates this with characteristic precision: The pharmakos is neither innocent nor guilty. He is innocent in the sense that what happens to him is far greater than anything he has done provokes... He is guilty in the sense that he is a member of a guilty society, or living in a world where such injustices are an inescapable part of existence. The two facts do not come together; they remain ironically apart. The pharmakos, in short, is in the situation of Job (Frye 40).
This formulation is theoretically crucial for several reasons. First, it fundamentally distinguishes the pharmakos from both the tragic hero (who is morally implicated in their fate) and the purely innocent victim (who would inspire not irony but simple pathos). The pharmakos inhabits the ethical middle ground: they are guilty by association as a member of a society already saturated with injustice, but innocent insofar as their particular suffering is wildly disproportionate to their individual actions. Second, Frye's invocation of the Book of Job is highly significant: Job's suffering is arbitrary from a human perspective, explicable only within a divine economy that remains opaque to human reason, and this opacity is precisely the ironic condition that the pharmakos inhabits in secular literature.
3.3 The Pharmakos in Ironic Comedy and Tragic Irony
Frye complicates the pharmakos further by showing that it operates not only in tragic literature but also in ironic comedy, where the scapegoat's expulsion is viewed from society's perspective rather than the victim's. In ironic comedy, the pharmakos is driven out by collective social pressure — as in the condemnation of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice, or the humiliation of Malvolio in Twelfth Night — and while society initially appears to be restored by this expulsion, Frye argues that the irony cuts against the expelling society itself. The audience is left with an uncomfortable awareness that society's self-restoration has been achieved at the cost of a scapegoat whose guilt was ambiguous at best.As Frye observes: Insisting on the theme of social revenge on an individual, however great a rascal he may be, tends to make him look less involved in guilt and the society more so (Frye 45). This is a remarkable critical insight: the pharmakos archetype is structured such that the very act of expulsion tends to transfer guilt from the scapegoat to the expelling community. The more forcefully society insists on the victim's guilt, the more the reader is made to suspect society's own complicity. This ironic reversal is, Frye suggests, one of literature's most powerful moral mechanisms.
4. The Pharmakos in Comparative Context: Oedipus Rex and Death of a Salesman
4.1 Oedipus Rex: The Pharmakos as High-Mimetic Tragic Hero
Sophocles' Oedipus Rex (c. 429 BCE) is the text most thoroughly associated with the pharmakos in both its ritual-anthropological and literary-critical dimensions. The play begins with Thebes in a state of plague and social crisis, and its central dramatic action is the investigation that will identify and expel the source of pollution (miasma) that has brought this crisis upon the city. Girard's analysis of the play, which runs parallel to the Fryean archetypal reading, argues that Thebes represents a community in which social distinctions have broken down: Laius, Oedipus, Creon, and Tiresias are all implicated in acts of symmetrical violence against one another, making it impossible to identify any single agent as uniquely guilty.
According to Girard's analysis as presented by the University of Kentucky's comparative literature resource, everyone in Thebes is equally responsible for the plague ravaging their city, and the resolution of this crisis requires the selection of a single scapegoat — Oedipus — whose expulsion will solve the religious and social crisis. Crucially, Oedipus is selected not because he is uniquely guilty, but because no one is present at the end of the play to protest against fixing guilt for regicide on Oedipus alone. This absence of protest, rather than any judicial determination of guilt, is what makes the scapegoating mechanism function (University of Kentucky MCL).
From Frye's perspective, Oedipus occupies the position of the high-mimetic tragic hero who is gradually revealed as a pharmakos. His hamartia — the tragic flaw that, in Aristotelian terms, causes his downfall — is simultaneously his greatness: the relentless intellectual drive that led him to solve the riddle of the Sphinx is the same drive that forces him to uncover the truth of his own origins. Yet Frye's modal framework reveals something Aristotle's model obscures: the grotesque disproportion between Oedipus's acts and his punishment. Oedipus killed his father in self-defence, not knowing who he was; he married his mother in ignorance; the crimes for which he is destroyed were committed in states of complete unawareness. His expulsion from Thebes restores communal order, but the moral economy of that restoration is deeply ironic — the city's health is purchased at the price of a man whose guilt was, in any meaningful ethical sense, negligible.
This is precisely Frye's point: Oedipus is guilty in the sense that he is a member of a guilty society — Thebes, which has already been corrupted by the violence of Laius — and innocent in the sense that his personal acts, committed in ignorance, scarcely justify the suffering that descends upon him. The irony of the pharmakos, the moral gap between individual action and collective punishment, is perfectly embodied in Oedipus's fate.
4.2 Death of a Salesman: The Pharmakos in Modern Social Drama
Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman (1949) transports the pharmakos archetype into the landscape of mid-twentieth-century American capitalism. Willy Loman, the play's protagonist, is a travelling salesman in his sixties who has devoted his life to the myth of the American Dream — the belief that personality, charm, and the aspiration to be well-liked are sufficient to guarantee material success and social recognition. As the play unfolds, this myth is exposed as precisely that: a consoling fiction generated by the very society that will ultimately destroy the man who most fervently believed it.
Willy Loman illustrates Frye's pharmakos in ironic mode with remarkable precision. He is guilty — or at least implicated in guilt — in the sense that he has bought wholly into the ideological values of American capitalism, including its competitive individualism, its equation of personal worth with professional success, and its systematic devaluation of human qualities that resist quantification. His self-deception, his emotional manipulation of his sons, and his adultery are real moral failures. Yet he is simultaneously innocent: his beliefs were not invented by him but instilled in him by a society that then discards him when he can no longer serve its productive demands. When Willy is dismissed by Howard Wagner after thirty-four years of loyal service, the act embodies perfectly the logic of the pharmakos: Willy is expelled precisely when he has become a social liability.
Miller's genius lies in deploying the pharmakos logic against the very society that enacts it. Just as Frye argues that ironic expulsion tends to make society look more guilty than the pharmakos, Death of a Salesman renders the American Dream itself as the true agent of violence, with Willy Loman as its sacrificial victim. His suicide at the play's end — orchestrated as a final act of faith in the system that destroyed him, in the hope that his life insurance money will redeem his son Biff — is the pharmakos's ultimate self-immolation: the scapegoat who has internalised the logic of their own sacrifice so thoroughly that they volunteer for it.
4.3 Structural Parallels and Historical Transformations
Placing Oedipus Rex and Death of a Salesman alongside each other reveals both the structural persistence of the pharmakos archetype and the significant historical transformations it undergoes across twenty-five centuries. Both protagonists are expelled by their communities at moments of communal crisis; both are guilty and innocent in ways that cannot be cleanly separated; both serve as surrogate bearers of a collective guilt that is in fact distributed across the entire society; and both generate, through their expulsion, a temporary restoration of communal order irradiated with irony.
However, the transformations are equally significant. In Oedipus Rex, the communal crisis has a theological dimension — the plague is divine punishment, and the pharmakos's expulsion is ratified by Apollonian oracle. The scapegoating mechanism operates within a religious framework that lends it cosmic authority, even as Sophocles' irony constantly interrogates that authority. In Death of a Salesman, the theological dimension has been replaced by an ideological one: the crisis is entirely immanent, a product of the contradictions internal to capitalist ideology, and the mechanism of expulsion is bureaucratic (dismissal) rather than divine (oracle).
This transformation reflects precisely the modal descent that Frye maps: from the high-mimetic mode of classical tragedy, where the hero is superior in degree to ordinary human beings and falls from a position of great power and dignity, to the ironic mode of modern social drama, where the protagonist is at or below the audience's level of experience and the forces arrayed against him are not divine but systemic and ideological. Yet the underlying archetypal structure — community, crisis, selection, expulsion, restoration — remains constant across the transformation, confirming the transhistorical validity of Frye's archetypal framework.
5. The Pharmakos and Social Integration: Literature as Communal Ritual
5.1 Frye's Theory of Social Integration through Literature
Frye's broader literary theory assigns to literature a fundamental social function: the integration of the community through the repeated rehearsal of archetypal stories. Literature, for Frye, is not merely an aesthetic object but a cultural institution that performs work analogous to myth and ritual — it processes collective anxieties, models social crises and their resolutions, and provides the community with shared imaginative frameworks through which to understand its own existence. The pharmakos archetype serves this integrative function in a particularly powerful way.
The logic of social integration through scapegoating is straightforward at the level of ritual: the community's internal tensions, divisions, and accumulated guilt are concentrated onto a single figure, whose expulsion allows the community to experience a temporary unification in the shared act of expulsion. As Girard argues, it is in precisely this moment of unanimous violence against the scapegoat that social distinctions are most powerfully reaffirmed and the community experiences itself as a unified whole. Literature transforms this act of unification into a subject of critical reflection.
For Frye, what literature integrates is not simply a community's desire for social order, but its need to understand and articulate the moral dimensions of that order. When an audience watches Oedipus Rex or reads Death of a Salesman, they do not simply participate vicariously in the expulsion of a scapegoat; they are also invited to interrogate the justice of that expulsion, to feel the irony of the pharmakos's moral ambiguity, and to become aware of their own implication in the social structures that produce such victims.
5.2 Irony as Critique: The Pharmakos's Subversive Potential
The pharmakos archetype's critical potential lies in the ironic gap between the social function of the scapegoat — who is supposed to be guilty, whose expulsion is supposed to restore rightful order — and the reader's growing awareness that this guilt is constructed, its distribution unjust, and its restoration of order deeply problematic. As discussed above, Frye notes that in ironic comedy, social revenge on an individual tends to make that individual look less guilty and the society more so — a dynamic that inverts the intended social logic of scapegoating.
This ironic inversion is the mechanism through which the pharmakos archetype contributes to social integration in a critically sophisticated sense. Rather than simply rehearsing the community's existing ideological self-understanding — by confirming that the expelled figure deserved expulsion — the pharmakos in ironic literature challenges that self-understanding by exposing the mechanisms of victimisation that the community depends on but cannot acknowledge. The reader who feels discomfort at Oedipus's fate, or who recognises in Willy Loman's self-destruction the workings of an ideological apparatus, is being invited to a more critical form of social self-knowledge.
5.3 Frye and Girard: Convergence and Divergence
Frye's theory of literary social integration finds its most illuminating interlocutor in Rene Girard's theory of mimetic desire and sacrificial violence. Girard's central claim, elaborated in Violence and the Sacred (1977), is that all human communities are founded on acts of collective violence against a scapegoat victim, and that this foundational violence is perpetually re-enacted in myth, ritual, and in literature. Girard himself acknowledged the proximity of his theory to Frye's analysis of the pharmakos, while criticising Frye for stopping short of what Girard called a radical analysis of the scapegoating mechanism.
The key divergence between Frye and Girard lies in their respective evaluations of what literature does with the pharmakos archetype. For Girard, myth tends to mystify the scapegoating mechanism — to present the victim as genuinely guilty and the community's violence as genuinely restorative — whereas literature, particularly in its ironic and tragic modes, tends to demystify it, revealing the arbitrary and constructed nature of the victim's guilt. Frye's position is subtler and more formally oriented: for him, literature's engagement with the pharmakos is less a matter of ideological demystification than of modal and structural exploration. The pharmakos in ironic literature opens up a space of moral undecidability that challenges the reader's desire for clear ethical resolution — and it is precisely in this space of undecidability that literature performs its most valuable social and cognitive work.
6. Critical Perspectives: Limitations and Legacy of the Pharmakos Framework
Frye's pharmakos framework, despite its considerable analytical power, has attracted significant critical scrutiny. The most persistent objection concerns the framework's tendency toward universalism and its potential to obscure the historically specific and politically contingent dimensions of scapegoating. When the pharmakos is theorised as a transhistorical archetype, there is a risk that its deployment in specific historical contexts — the persecution of Jews, the lynching of Black Americans, the punishment of women accused of witchcraft — is aestheticised rather than politically interrogated. Frank Kermode's critique of Frye's literary grid, which argued that it sacrificed the irreducible particularity of individual characters to the demands of a systematic myth, points in this direction.
Frye was acutely aware of this problem, however, and addressed it directly in his discussion of ironic comedy. He wrote that ironic comedy brings us to the figure of the scapegoat ritual and the nightmare dream, and that we pass the boundary of art when this symbol becomes existential, as it does in the black man of a lynching, the Jew of a pogrom, the old woman of a witch hunt (Frye 45). This passage acknowledges precisely that the pharmakos archetype has real-world analogues that are not safely contained within the aesthetic domain — that literature's rehearsal of scapegoat rituals is never entirely innocent, and that the element of play that separates art from reality is always potentially collapsible.
More recent scholarship in archetypal criticism has sought to integrate Frye's structural insights with historically and culturally specific analyses, producing what might be called a contextualised archetypal criticism. This approach acknowledges the transhistorical dimension of archetypes while insisting on the importance of understanding how specific historical formations — of race, gender, class, and empire — shape the selection of particular pharmakoi and the ideological work their expulsion is called upon to perform. The pharmakos archetype, in this expanded framework, becomes not merely a formal category but a critical tool for the analysis of power, ideology, and the politics of victimisation.
7. Conclusion
This assignment has traced the figure of the pharmakos from its ritual origins in ancient Greek religious practice, through Northrop Frye's theoretical elaboration in Anatomy of Criticism, to its literary manifestations in Sophocles' Oedipus Rex and Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman. The analysis has demonstrated that the pharmakos archetype is one of the most durable and analytically productive structures in Western literary history: a figure whose constitutive moral ambiguity — neither innocent nor guilty — enables literature to explore the deepest tensions between the individual and the community, between justice and social order, between the desire for a clear moral economy and the ironic reality of a world in which guilt is always collective and punishment is always unequal.
Frye's theory of social integration through literature finds in the pharmakos archetype its most complex illustration. The scapegoat does not merely restore communal order by absorbing collective guilt; in the hands of a great literary artist, the pharmakos exposes the mechanisms of that order, challenges the community's self-serving narratives of justice and guilt, and invites the reader to a more critical and more ethically demanding form of social self-knowledge. This is ultimately what Frye means when he speaks of literature's integrative function: not the naive integration of conformity, but the more demanding integration of critical self-awareness — the community's recognition of its own complicity in the structures of violence that it simultaneously deplores and depends upon.From Oedipus's expulsion from Thebes to Willy Loman's self-destruction in Brooklyn, the pharmakos continues to haunt the Western literary imagination — not because human beings have failed to transcend the logic of scapegoating, but because literature remains one of the few cultural institutions capable of holding that logic up to critical scrutiny. In this sense, Frye's pharmakos is not merely a historical archetype but an enduring critical instrument: a conceptual tool for understanding how societies tell stories about guilt, justice, and the price of communal order.
Works Cited:
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Pharmakos." Encyclopaedia Britannica, n.d.,. www.britannica.com/topic/pharmakos.
Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. Princeton University Press, 1957. drive.google.com/file/d/1Wo45dSrVkQfhThATw2gTG88XGyWlj2UR.
Girard, Rene. The Scapegoat. Translated by Yvonne Freccero, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986. brill.com/view/journals/nu/69/5-6/article-p489_3.xml.
University of Kentucky, Department of Modern and Classical Languages. "Rene Girard and the Scapegoat." Modern and Classical Languages, Literatures and Cultures, University of Kentucky, n.d.,. mcl.as.uky.edu/node/209155.
Vukovic, Aleksandra. "Neither Innocent, nor Guilty: The Scapegoat in the Ironic Short Stories of William Somerset Maugham." American and British Studies Annual, vol. 13, 2020,. absa.upce.cz/index.php/absa/article/view/2346.
Wikipedia contributors. "Anatomy of Criticism." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 2024,. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomy_of_Criticism.
No comments:
Post a Comment