Course syllabus:

English 567, Seminar in Prose Fiction: Transatlantic Naturalisms
Fall 2015, Thursdays 2:50-5:20,
Avery 110

Donna Campbell
Avery 202H

Syllabus available at
Readings are in Blackboard or available through the MLA bibliography on Ebsco.

Course blog:

WSU Databases for Literature * MLA Bibliography Ebsco * Project Muse * Historical New York Times JSTOR

English 567 explores late nineteenth­ and twentieth­century literary naturalism, a movement based in evolutionary science and praised for its commitment to truth and objectivity by its practitioners but condemned as sordid and shocking by its detractors. This version of the course pays particular attention to naturalistic works by women writers and writers of color from the United States, England, France, Spain, and Brazil.

• Fictions of the body; subjectivity and consciousness; evolution; biological and hereditary traits, including problematic theories of race and ethnicity; atavism, disease, and degeneration; sexuality and its various expressions; primitivism and emotional excess; animality and devolution.
• Constructions of the city and its crowds: the city as organism; bodies en masse, including mobs, crowds, and crowd psychology; the urban jungle; Social Darwinism
• Concepts of space and the environment, including built and natural environments; prisons and entrapment; the function of material objects and processes; the antiromantic indifference of nature; human beings as both destroying and being destroyed by nature.
• Commodity and consumer culture: the desiring self; commodity fetishism; department stores, advertising, and the role of text in constructing subjectivity.
• Technology and machine culture: the body as machine (Seltzer); machines and corporations as bodies (Michaels); the powers of technology, including industrial capitalism.
• Theories of scientific and philosophical determinism; the real, the “true,” and the “accurate”; philosophical coherence and emotional logic; naturalistic representation and its critics.
• Narration and genre: “objective” representation; the spectator; features of style and form (e.g., the naturalistic catalogue of decay).
• Gambling, speculation, risk and risky behavior; the vagaries of fate and accident and their relation to determinism; impulse and restraint.

In exploring these concepts, we’ll read both classic essays (Pizer, Michaels, Ammons, and so on) and newly published work that incorporates theories of economics, communications theory, animal studies, ecocriticism, posthumanism, and critical race theory, among others. You’ll also be choosing essays for all of us in the seminar to read. These should be chosen and sent to the rest of us (as a link or as a .pdf) at least a week in advance of the class.

Required editions

  • Frank Norris, McTeague (Norton, 1997) 978-0393970135
  • Edith Wharton, The House of Mirth (Broadview, 2005) 978-1551115672
  • Kate Chopin, The Awakening (Norton) 9780393960570
  • Paul Laurence Dunbar, The Sport of the Gods (Modern Library) 9780812972795
  • Thomas Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbervilles (Norton, 1991) 9780393959031
  • Stephen Crane, Maggie, a Girl of the Streets (Broadview, 2006) 9780553213553
  • Emile Zola, L’assommoir (Oxford World Classics) 9780199538683
  • Theodore Dreiser, Sister Carrie (Norton, 2006) 9780393927733
  • Ann Petry, The Street (Mariner Books) 9780395901496
  • Emilia Pardo Bazan, Torn Lace (MLA) 978-0873527842

Critical and theoretical readings include work by Eric Carl Link, Mary Papke, Gillian Beer, Donald Pizer, Jennifer Fleissner, Janet Beer, Katherine Joslin, Jeanne Campbell Reesman, Mark Seltzer, Walter Benn Michaels, and Gene Andrew Jarrett.
Assignments are all geared toward eventual presentation or publication. They include a 30-minute oral presentation; short 5-minute presentations of critical material; and two papers, one of conference length and one longer paper that may be based on the same topic.

NCE = Norton Critical Edition

1 8/27 Introduction
2 9/3 Emile Zola, L’Assommoir Jordan Engleke

  • Zola, Emile. “The Experimental Novel” (Blackboard) Amy May
  • Link, Eric Carl, “The Naturalist Aesthetic” (Blackboard) Jordan Engelke
  • Wilson, Colette. “City Space and the Politics of Carnival in Zola’s L’Assommoir.” French Studies58.3 (2004): 343-56. (Blackboard) 
3 9/10 Hardy, Tess of the D’Urbervilles Lissa Scott

  • Beer, Gillian, from Darwin’s Plots (NCE 446-460) Amy May
  • Williams, Raymond, from The Country and the City (NCE 460-470) Richard Snyder
  • Williams, Daniel. “Rumor, Reputation, And Sensation In Tess Of The D’urbervilles.” Novel: A Forum On Fiction 46.1 (2013): 93-115.(Blackboard) Allyson Herkowski
  • Poole, Adrian. “Men’s Words and Hardy’s Women.”(NCE 471-484) Amy Goldman
4 9/17 Norris, McTeague Allyson Herkowski

  • Fleissner, from Women, Compulsion, Modernity (Blackboard) Jordan Engelke
  • Pizer, “Late Nineteenth-Century American Naturalism” (NCE 306-31) Kyle Sittig
  • Young, “Telling Descriptions: Frank Norris’s Kinetoscopic Naturalism and the Future of the Novel, 1899,” Modernism/Modernity 14 (2007): 645-668. Allyson Herkowski
  • Michaels, from The Gold Standard and the Logic of Naturalism (Blackboard) Kara Falknor
  • Larsen, Erik. “Entropy in the Circuits: McTeague’s Apocalyptic Posthumanism.” Nineteenth-Century Literature 69.4 (March 2015): 509-538. Richard Snyder
5 9/24 Dreiser, Sister Carrie Curtis Harty

    • Pizer, Donald. “The Problem of American Literary Naturalism and Theodore Dreiser’s Sister Carrie”(NCE 573-583) Jordan Engelke
    • Fisher, Philip. “The Naturalist Novel and the City” (NCE 497-510) Kyle Sittig
    • Kaplan, Amy. “The Sentimental Revolt of Sister Carrie” (NCE 510-521) Lissa Scott
    • Lemaster, Tracy. “Feminist Thing Theory In Sister Carrie.” Studies In American Naturalism 4.1 (2009): 41-55. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.Cynthia Zavala (in Blackboard)
Proposal for Paper 1
6 10/1 Chopin,The Awakening Kyle Sittig

  • Joslin, Katherine. “Kate Chopin on Fashion in a Darwinian World,” from Cambridge Companion to Kate Chopin (Blackboard) Richard Snyder
  • Elfenbein, Anna Shannon (NCE 292-299) and Ammons, “Women of Color in The Awakening” (NCE 309-311) Jordan Engelke
  • Yaeger, “Language and Female Emancipation” (NCE 285-291) Kara Falknor
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Cynthia Zavala
7 10/8 Stephen Crane’s shorter works: Maggie, “An Experiment in Misery,”An Ominous Baby,” and “The Monster” (“The Monster” is on Blackboard) Kara Falknor

  • Laski, Gregory. “‘No Reparation’: Accounting For The Enduring Harms Of Slavery In Stephen Crane’s The Monster.” J19: The Journal Of Nineteenth-Century Americanists 1.1 (2013): 37-69.
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Kyle Sittig
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Cynthia Zavala
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Amy Goldman
Paper 1
8 10/15 Dunbar, The Sport of the Gods Cynthia Zavala

  • Morgan, Thomas L. “The City as Refuge: Constructing Urban Blackness in Paul Laurence Dunbar’s The Sport of the Gods and James Weldon Johnson’s The Autobiography of an Ex-Coloured Man.” African American Review 38.2 (2004): 213-37.(Blackboard) Lissa Scott
  • Jarrett, Gene Andrew. “Second-Generation Realist; or, Dunbar the Naturalist.” African American Review 41.2 (2007): 289-94.(Blackboard) Amy Goldman
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Richard Snyder
9 10/22 London, The Call of the Wild (choose your own edition) and selected short stories (including “To Build a Fire,” “South of the Slot”) Richard Snyder

  • Lundblad, from The Birth of a Jungle (Blackboard) Curtis Harty
  • Reesman, Jeanne Campbell. “‘Never Travel Alone’: Naturalism, Jack London, And The White Silence.” American Literary Realism 29.2 (1997): 33-49. Allyson Herkowski
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Amy Goldman
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Lissa Scott
10 10/29  Wharton, The House of Mirth Amy Goldman

  • Appendix A, B, C, & D (on The House of Mirth) (371-394) Curtis Harty
  • Saltz, Laura. “‘The Vision-Building Faculty’: Naturalistic Vision In The House Of Mirth.” MFS: Modern Fiction Studies 57.1 (2011): 17-46.(Blackboard) _______
  • Pizer, Donald. “The Naturalism Of Edith Wharton’s The House Of Mirth.” Twentieth Century Literature: A Scholarly And Critical Journal 41.2 (1995): 241-248. Amy May
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Lissa Scott
11 11/5 No class Proposal for Paper 2
12 11/12 Women’s naturalism; Pardo-Bazan’s Torn Lace and Edith Wharton’s “Bunner Sisters” (Blackboard) 

  • Essay from the Oxford Handbook of American Literary Naturalism (Blackboard) Kara Falknor
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Curtis Harty
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Cynthia Zavala
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Allyson Herkowski
13 11/19 Ann Petry, The Street / Amy May

  • Eby, Clare Virginia. “Beyond Protest: The Street As Humanitarian Narrative.” MELUS: The Journal Of The Society For The Study Of The Multi-Ethnic Literature Of The United States 33.1 (2008): 33-53.(Blackboard) Cynthia Zavala
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Amy May
  • Your choice (choose an essay and send the link to the class) Kara Falknor
14 12/3 Journal publication workshop Paper 2 due to respondents
15 12/10  In-class conference Paper 2 due

Course Requirements

Attendance and Participation. Attendance and good class participation are essential.

Papers and Presentations.

  • Papers. You’ll write two papers in this course, the first a conference-length (8-10 pages) treatment of a topic, and the second an extended paper (15-25 pages; page limits are flexible) suitable for submitting to the journal of your choice or for using as the basis of a dissertation chapter.
  • Presentations. Each member of the class will give a 30-minute presentation at one point during the semester. This might take any one of several forms:
    • preparing information about the author or authors assigned for that day and presenting a set of new ideas or questions for the class to consider;
    • giving a new interpretation of the work; providing a contextual overview of an author or work; or
    • analyzing and critiquing current critical perspectives.
    • You will need to provide a brief handout for the class, preferably one that includes a short annotated bibliography of your sources, an outline, and relevant quotations or information from your sources.
  • Of these three projects (presentation and two papers), two can be on the same subject: for example, you might choose to rework your first paper into the extended paper, or you may wish to use your presentation for the basis of that second paper. All three projects cannot be on the same subject, however. .

Proposals and Responses. Since one of your professional responsibilities as scholars will be to submit proposals to conference, you’ll prepare a 100-200 word proposal for each of the papers you will write in this class. These will receive comments but not grades. You’ll also prepare a response to a classmate’s paper during the last two weeks of class, which you will then deliver as part of the conference-style presentations at the end of the course.

Late Papers and Extensions. Late papers are penalized at the rate of one letter grade (10 points) per class day late; a paper that would have received a “B” on the due date will receive a “C” if handed in on the next class day. Papers turned in after 2 class meetings will receive a 50/100 toward your class grade.

You have one automatic extension in this class, which means that your paper will be due on the next class day (in our case,a week).You must request the extension ahead of time, and you should save it for a true emergency, since no other extensions will be granted for illness, funerals, weddings, or any other reason.

Presentations and Article Critiques

Article Critiques. In addition to reading primary texts, we’ll be reading some classic but mostly current criticism on the works so that you’ll have a good sense of what approaches are being published now. We’ll read all the articles, of course, but each week three or four people will be responsible for preparing a brief summary (5 minutes) and critique (no more than the front of 1 page) of one article each. You’ll bring copies for your classmates so that they’ll have a record.

These need not be terribly formal; their purpose is to allow the “article expert” to raise questions and discussion points about his or her article rather than do a formal presentation of it. You’ll all take turns being an “article expert,” but you won’t need to do this every week; you’ll be the “article expert” about four times during the course of the semester.

Here’s what should be included.

  1. Brief summary of the article (can be in point form).
  2. Your thoughts on the article. What was its main contribution to understanding the work? Did it relate to other work in the field (If you know this)? Did it have any weaknesses?
  3. At least one question either that you had about the the article or that the article inspired you to put to the class.

Remember these should be brief: No more than 5 minutes, and no more than the front of a page.

“Your choice” articles. If you signed up for a “your choice” article, go to the MLA bibliography and search for an article that you would like to share with the class. A week before the class, post the link to our course blog or send it to class members; you can also send me a .pdf of the article and I can post it to Blackboard. We will all then read the article before your “article expert” presentation.

Presentations. Each member of the class will give a 30-minute presentation at one point during the semester. This might take any one of several forms:

  • preparing information about the author or authors assigned for that day and presenting a set of new ideas or questions for the class to consider;
  • giving a new interpretation of the work;
  • providing a contextual overview of an author or work;
  • analyzing and critiquing current critical perspectives.

You will need to provide a brief handout for the class, preferably one that includes the following:

  • a short annotated bibliography of your sources.
  • an outline.
  • relevant quotations or information from your sources.

In-Class Conference. During the last week of class, you’ll present a conference-length version of your second paper to the rest of the class. The presentations at the end of the course will be based on the longer paper, which you’ll need to edit down to conference length.


Plagiarism Policy. Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of someone else’s words or ideas. This definition includes not only deliberately handing in someone else’s work as your own but failing to cite your sources, including Web pages and Internet sources. Plagiarism also includes handing in a paper that you have previously submitted or are currently submitting for another course.

  • For a first offense, any paper plagiarized in whole or in part will receive an “F” (0 points), and the incident must be reported to the WSU Office of Student Conduct.  You will NOT be allowed to rewrite the plagiarized paper for a better grade.
  • Penalties for a second offense can range from failing the course to suspension from the university.

WSU Email Policy: Per new WSU policy effective August 24, I will ONLY be able to respond to emails sent from your WSU email address.  I will NOT be able to respond to emails sent from your personal email address as of the first day of fall semester.  Effective the 24th, the IT Department will switch the “preferred” email address in your myWSU to your WSU email address.

WSU Statement on Academic Integrity. Academic integrity is the cornerstone of the university. You assume full responsibility for the content and integrity of the academic work you submit. You may collaborate with classmates on assignments, with the instructor’s permission. However the guiding principle of academic integrity shall be that your submitted work, examinations, reports, and projects must be your own work. Any student who attempts to gain an unfair advantage over other students by cheating will fail the assignment and be reported to the Office Student Standards and Accountability. Cheating is defined in the Standards for Student Conduct WAC 504-26-010 (3).

WSU Midterm Policy. Based on ASWSU student requests and action by the Faculty Senate, WSU has instituted Academic Rule 88, which stipulates that all students will receive midterm grades. Midterm grades will be reported as they are calculated in Blackboard.

However, at midterm only 35% of the total graded assignments will have been turned in. Midterm grades are not binding, and because the bulk of the graded work in this course occurs after the midterm point, it can only accurately reflect student performance up to that point.

WSU Policy on Students with Disabilities. Reasonable accommodations are available for students with a documented disability. If you have a disability and need accommodations to fully participate in this class, please either visit or call the Access Center (Washington Building 217; 509-335-3417) to schedule an appointment with an Access Advisor. All accommodations MUST be approved through the Access Center.

WSU Safety Policy. Washington State University is committed to enhancing the safety of the students, faculty, staff, and visitors. It is highly recommended that you review the Campus Safety Plan ( and visit the Office of Emergency Management web site ( for a comprehensive listing of university policies, procedures, statistics, and information related to campus safety, emergency management, and the health and welfare of the campus community.

WSU Policy on Excused AbsencesSection 73 of WSU’s regulations does not permit instructors to request official documentation to allow excused absences except for military personnel and those traveling on WSU business; hence no other excused absences are permitted by WSU policy. The attendance policy for this course has been relaxed from previous versions of the course to include an additional absence to make up for this decreased flexibility in policy.

WSU OEO Policy. Discrimination, including discriminatory harassment, sexual harassment, and sexual misconduct (including stalking, intimate partner violence, and sexual violence) is prohibited at WSU (See WSU Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Sexual Misconduct (Executive Policy 15) and WSU Standards of Conduct for Students).

If you feel you have experienced or have witnessed discriminatory conduct, you can contact the WSU Office for Equal Opportunity (OEO) and/or the WSU Title IX Coordinator to discuss resources and reporting options. (Visit for more information, including a list of confidential and other resources)

WSU employees, with limited exceptions (e.g. confidential resources such as health care providers and mental health care providers – see for more info), who have information regarding sexual harassment or sexual misconduct are required to report the information to OEO or a designated Title IX Coordinator or Liaison.

Student Learning Outcomes

At the end of this course, students should be able to Course Topics and Dates Addressing this Outcome Evaluation of Outcome
Understand how research is situated in a scholarly discourse embedded in the literature Weekly “article expert” presentations
Weekly class discussion
Discussing journal submissions, 4/21
Student responses to final paper
Formal assessment of discussion, participation, and responses
Preparation of article for paper presentation or article submission (informal)
Select appropriate methods to investigate research questions Research tools discussion,
Proposal workshop, 3/10
Proposals 2/3 and 3/31
Feedback on proposals
Develop graduate-level writing and oral presentation skills through course assignments 30-minute oral presentation
Two formal papers
In-class conference presentation
Formal evaluation of 30-minute presentation
Formal evaluation of papers
Synthesize research systematically Research tools discussion,
“Article expert” presentations
Formal assessment of discussion, participation, and responses

Grade Distributions

Approximate weights for grades:
Paper 1, 20%
Presentations, 20%
Paper 2, 45%;
Attendance and Participation (including proposals and short written responses to papers), 15%

Grading Policies and Criteria

I will use abbreviations as references to grammatical principles on your corrected papers. The abbreviations and accompanying explanations are available on the “Key to Comments” document here:

Grading Criteria. List available below and at See the following resources for more specific information:

I will use abbreviations as references to grammatical principles on your corrected papers. The abbreviations and accompanying explanations are available on the “Key to Comments” document here:

  • A (Excellent)
    • Ideas and analysis. Greatly exceeds expectations and develops in a consistently excellent manner. Readers will learn something from this piece of writing. Ideas are original or especially insightful for the level of the class (i.e., an excellent paper in a 200-level course does not need to demonstrate the same level of originality and depth as an excellent paper in a 300- or 400-level course).
    • Organization. Organizational plan is clear, as is the thesis and purpose of the piece. Thesis is original and interesting.
    • Development and support. Develops its points effectively, logically, and in an original fashion. Assertions are supported by evidence. Paragraphs are unified, coherent, and complete.
    • Style. Sentences are fluent, graceful, and a pleasure to read. They are free from errors, although there may be a minor error in the piece.
    • Mechanics (spelling, usage, and punctuation such as commas, semicolons, and possessive apostrophes, quotation marks, and title punctuation). Papers will be almost entirely free from mechanical errors.
    • Audience. Has a clear understanding of audience as demonstrated by the paper’s use of tone and an appropriate level of diction.
  • B (Good)
    • Ideas and analysis. Exceeds expectations and develops in a good but perhaps predictable fashion. Paper will cover the most logical points about a piece of writing but may not provide as much new analysis. Ideas may be good but perhaps not as insightful or well developed as those for work in the “A” range.
    • Organization. Organization and thesis are logical but could be clearer. Thesis is solid but less innovative than in an exceptional paper. Some transitions may be missing.
    • Development and support. Includes a thesis idea that is generally supported by evidence and a logical order of paragraphs. Some unsupported generalizations may occur, or  some paragraphs may lack unity or support.
    • Style. Demonstrates correct sentence construction for the most part, although some sentences may be awkward or unclear. Papers will generally have few (1-2) or no comma splices, fragments, fused sentences, tense and agreement errors, or other major grammatical problems. Minor errors in grammar may occur.
    • Mechanics. One or two instances of an incorrect use of words, spelling errors, or punctuation errors such as missing possessive apostrophes may occur
    • Audience. Clear sense of individual voice and awareness of audience expectations. Level of diction may be uneven or somewhat inappropriate for the assignment.
  • C (Satisfactory or Acceptable)
    • Ideas and analysis. Meets expectations but does not go beyond them. May respond to the assignment in a satisfactory but predictable or superficial way. May have more plot summary than analysis.
    • Organization. Exhibits a discernable organization but may not provide a clear connection to the thesis. Thesis may be obvious or too general. Paragraphs may not follow the most logical order.
    • Development and support.Development may consist of obvious generalizations that only tell readers what they already know with limited support from the text.
    • Style. May demonstrate little sentence variety. Grammatical errors such as comma splices, fragments, agreement errors, vague or awkward phrasing may obscure the meaning of an otherwise good paper.
    • Mechanics. May contain odd word choices, consistent errors in punctuation, or problems with usage.
    • Audience. Voice and diction may be significantly inconsistent with audience expectations or the requirements of the assignment.
  • D (Deficient)
    • Ideas and analysis. Limited ideas and cursory development; does not meet expectations or the terms of the assignment on one or more dimensions.
    • Organization.Focus may be unclear or the essay may lack an arguable thesis. Paragraph order may be confusing. May lack adequate organization or sufficient support for its argument.
    • Development and support.Relies strongly on generalizations rather than support and may lack specific references to the text. Paragraphs may lack unity, coherence, and completeness. Paragraphs may be insufficiently developed.
    • Style. Contains many errors in sentence construction, including comma splices, fragments, fused sentences, agreement problems, and awkward sentences. Some parts may be difficult to read and interpret.
    • Mechanics. May demonstrate significant deficiencies in punctuation, word choice, and spelling.
    • Audience.Paper may demonstrate a consistently insufficient awareness of audience.
  • F (Unacceptable)
    • Ideas and analysis. Fails to meet expectations for ideas and analysis.May include too much plot summary or so many quotations that analysis is missing.
    • Organization. Focus many be diffuse or unclear. Sentences and paragraphs do not follow a logical order.
    • Development and support. Thesis may be missing.Generalizations may be used in place of analysis. Insufficient development for the requirements of the assignment.
    • Style. Serious errors such as comma splices, fragments, fused sentences, and agreement problems obscure meaning and make this paper inconsistent with college-level writing standards. A paper at this level may be difficult, frustrating, or confusing to read.
    • Mechanics. Contains numerous errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
    • Audience.Serious problems with tone, diction, and sense of audience.
    • A paper will receive an “F” if it is plagiarized in whole or in part.

Grade Cutoffs for Assignments

The total number of points varies by assignment. The chart below shows the approximate letter grade for points earned in each assignment.

WSU final grade submission permits only solid, plus, and minus grades (e.g., C, C+, or C-) to be entered into zzusis.
WSU final grade submission has no “A+” grade, so the highest paper grade will be “A” (95) in compliance with WSU standards. There is no “D-” grade in zzusis, so a final average of 60-62 = D for the same reason.

Total Points 100 15 20 25 30 35 50 75 125 150 500 If your final % is Your final grade would be . . .
A 93 14 18 23 28 33 47 70 116 140 465 93 or above A
A/A- 92 14 18 23 27 32 46 69 116 139 463
A- 90 13 18 23 27 32 45 67 113 135 450 90-92 A-
B+ 88 13 17 22 26 31 44 66 110 132 440 88-89 B+
B/B+ 87 13 16 22 26 30 43 65 110 131 438
B 83 12 16 21 25 29 42 62 104 125 415 83-87 B
B/B- 82 12 16 20 24 29 41 61 103 124 413
B- 80 12 16 20 24 28 40 60 100 120 400 80-82 B-
C+ 78 11 15 19 23 27 29 58 98 117 390 78-79 C+
C/C+ 77 11 15 19 23 27 28 57 97 116 388
C 73 11 15 18 22 26 37 55 91 110 365 73-77 C
C/C- 72 10 14 18 21 25 36 54 90 109 383
C- 70 10 14 17 21 25 25 52 88 105 350 70-72 C-
D+ 68 10 13 17 20 24 34 54 85 102 338 68-69 D+
D/D+ 67 10 13 16 19 23 33 50 84 101 315
D 63 9 13 16 19 22 32 57 79 95 313 63-67 D
D/D- 62 9 12 15 18 21 31 46 78 94 312
D- 60 9 12 15 18 21 30 45 75 90 300 60-62 D

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s