Evaluation of the Artist in
Residence at HMP Grendon
Update and Next Steps
June 2016

Elizabeth Yardley
Associate Professor of Criminology and Director of the Centre
for Applied Criminology
Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences1

Contents
Scoping Exercise and Literature Review ................................................................................................. 3
Evaluation Themes and Concepts ........................................................................................................... 3
Evaluation Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Evaluation Methods ................................................................................................................................ 5
Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEIs) ...................................................................................................... 5
Comments Boxes at Grendon ............................................................................................................. 7
Participant Observation and Semi-Structured Interviews .................................................................. 7
Media Content Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 1. ........................................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 2. ........................................................................................................................................ 11
Next steps ............................................................................................................................................. 12
References ............................................................................................................................................ 13
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................... 15
Presentation to MLVM Trustees ....................................................................................................... 15

2

Scoping Exercise and Literature Review
Between November 2015 and April 2016, the Research Team at Birmingham City University1
undertook a scoping exercise and literature review. The purpose of these activities was to identify theaims and objectives of the residency of Edmund Clark, explore the expectations of key stakeholders
and draw upon existing research from a range of literature to develop a framework and methodology
for the evaluation. The findings of the scoping exercise and literature review were presented to theTrustees of the Marie Louise von Motesiczky (MLVM) Charitable Trust on Friday 20th May 20162.

Evaluation Themes and Concepts
The literature review and scoping exercise led to the identification of key concepts and themes thatwere important for the evaluation to explore. These concepts and themes are outlined below. Theirrelevance and importance for the evaluation is explained and questions are posed in relation to each.

12Uniqueness of HMP Grendon. As the only prison in the English and Welsh prison estate tooperate wholly as a therapeutic community, HMP Grendon is unique; it is an exception to therule. It is important for the evaluation to explore the extent to which the residency captures
this uniqueness. However, HMP Grendon is, nevertheless, still part of the prison estate and,as such, must comply with the institutional policies, rules and procedures that apply to the
management of all prisons. Therefore the evaluation should explore the extent to which thistension between uniqueness and conformity emerges within the residency.

Narratives of HMP Grendon residents. We all construct stories, which we use to tell others
about our lives and establish our own sense of identity or self-narrative (McAdams, 1993,2008). At HMP Grendon, residents analyse and confront their stories (Brookes, 2009, 2010).
Challenging the narrative identity is a key part of leaving crime behind (Maruna, 2001) and, assuch, this is an important premise of the therapeutic approach at HMP Grendon. Photography
is similarly about storytelling and the construction of narrative. However, photography has
also played a significant role in constructing the criminal body and identifying criminals as
deviant, distinct and other (Carney, 2010; Carrabine, 2014; Ferrell & Van de Voorde, 2010;
Sekula, 1986). Therefore photography is also about control, decisions and choices.
Residents at Grendon have been – and many always will be – under some form ofmonitoring and surveillance. Decisions about them are taken by others and representationsof them are produced by others. In relation to the images produced during the residency, thismay raise some interesting questions around their control over narratives. For example, what
are their views around the narratives in the images? What are their thoughts on the meaningthat audiences may attribute to the images – and in turn – the residents’ narratives? To what
extent does the residency and the images that emerge from it play a role in the shifting
narrative identities of the men? Art is about identity, defining oneself in a particular way
through creative expression – how does this have an impact upon the residents’ desistancejourneys?



HMP Grendon residents and staff as stakeholders in the images. HMP Grendon is a therapeuticcommunity underpinned by principles such as democratization and communalism (Rapoport,

Dr Elizabeth Yardley, Dr Martin Glynn, Shona Robinson-Edwards and Morag Kennedy.
The slides from the presentation are included in the Appendix.

3

1960; Genders & Player, 1995). Everyone in the community plays a role in nurturing andmaintaining the culture and physical environment. Therefore residents and staff have asignificant stake in the images Edmund produces during the residency. HMP Grendon is theirhome - their space - over which they have a sense a sense of ownership and pride. As such,the evaluation should seek to engage their views about the images produced during theresidency. Photography has historically been something that is done to prisoners– Edmund’s
work represents photography that is done with residents and staff – what are the views ofGrendon staff and residents about this?
Counter-images and counter-narratives. Prisons are often seen as closed and separate entities
existing on the edges of mainstream society. This supports the othering of prisoners – if theycannot be seen they are easier to demonise and exclude (Cheliotis, 2010). The public rely
heavily upon media representations of prison and ‘official’ images created by the Ministry ofJustice, HM Prison Service and their service providers. However, some images have thepotential to challenge official discourses. The images created during the residency an exampleof the counter image, and in turn the counter narrative (Brown, 2014; Schept, 2014). Throughprompting reflection upon lives lived out behind prison walls, the images Edmund is producing
have the potential to facilitate a re-humanising of the residents. To what extent is thisrealised? In addition, the residency may also evoke broader questions around attitudes,
beliefs and values in relation to control within society (Deleuze, 1992).

Victimhood and offending. The residents at Grendon are men who have in the past beenlabelled as “evil” and “bad”, defined by their crimes. Their experiences at Grendon involvereflecting upon their early lives and childhoods, which often encompass other identities – forexample as victims (Stevens, 2012, 2013). Whilst Edmund’s images do not depict the residents
or identify them personally, the images are representations of them and their lives and thespaces in which these lives are lived. This is relevant in relation to residents’ narratives as theimages will inevitably invite questions about who they are and what they have done. How doresidents feel about this and the audiences’ ability to separate the images from the context
of their creation?

Affect and encounter. The images produced during the residency will be seen by audiences.
This will include audiences at the annual exhibition and sharing days held at HMP Grendon
and Ikon Gallery respectively. In addition, audiences will also be indirect – for instance those
who may see coverage of the residency in mainstream or social media. As the aim of theresidency is to develop a public discourse about prison, rehabilitation and criminality, theevaluation needs to explore the reception that the images receive from these audiences –essentially the affect that is generated from the encounter with the image (Young, 2005, 2008,2010, 2014). What affect does an encounter with the image engender in those who attend
the exhibition and sharing days? Are the images produced during the residency opening up a
more compassionate envisioning of the residents and the spaces in which they are held? Arethey showing the impossibility of being able to judge? Beyond the exhibition and sharing days,
what affect does an encounter with the image engender among wider audiences? What is thenature of debate taking place in mainstream and social media? Are the counter-images andcounter-narratives produced and stimulated by the residency gaining traction in particular
media environments?

4Evaluation Scope
Having identified key themes and concepts, the proposed scope of the evaluation is presented
below. This outlines the key groups with whom the evaluation will seek to engage.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Impact of residency upon HMP Grendon residents;
Impact of residency upon HMP Grendon staff;
Impact of residency upon wider stakeholders3;
Impact of residency upon wider debates around prison, rehabilitation and criminality;a. Amongst direct audiences – annual exhibitions, annual sharing days, conferencedelegates.
b. Amongst indirect audiences – mainstream media, online and social media debatesand discussions.

Evaluation Methods
The following sections outline the methods that will be used in collecting and analysing data for theevaluation and explains why they are appropriate. The key methods and techniques planned by the
Research Team are: Photo-Elicitation Interviews; Comments Boxes; Participant Observation & SemiStructured Interviews; Media Content Analysis. Figure 1 outlines the key phases and tasks in fieldwork
and analysis. Figure 2 contextualises these activities within the overall evaluation timeline.

Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEIs)
PEIs present an opportunity to develop insights into several of the key concepts and themes within
the evaluation. PEIs are an example of a visual research method (Rose, 2012) and are essentially a wayof integrating images into the interview process and, as such, eliciting new layers of data (Gariglio,
2015). One such layer is the visual narrative - stories which are constructed with (and / or about)images that themselves tell a story (Riessman, 2001, 2008). The Research Team want to use PEIs to
explore narratives around images created during the residency and official images of Grendon4. Within
PEIs, participants have the space and flexibility to explore what the images mean to them. The images
are used to inspire dialogue, so as to give the participants more scope and freedom to construct andshare their narratives than is possible in semi-structured interviews. The questions posed during theinterviews are flexible and should respond to the natural flow of conversation around the image.
Interviews will be led by Dr Yardley or Dr Glynn. In relation to interviews that take place at Grendon,
Morag Kennedy or Shona Robinson-Edwards will also be in attendance and will take handwritten notesof the interviews. Interviews outside of Grendon will be recorded using a digital recorder. Handwritten
notes will be typed up after the interviews and audio recordings will be transcribed. The data will be

3

Notably other organisations working at the interface of the arts and cultural sphere and the criminal justicesystem e.g. Koestler Trust, National Alliance for Arts in Criminal Justice and Engage – National Association forGallery Education.
4
For example the photograph of HMP Grendon on the Ministry of Justice website https://www.justice.gov.uk/contacts/prison-finder/grendon

5

analysed via qualitative thematic analysis, assisted by NVivo qualitative analysis software (QSR
International, 2012). Examples of the type of question that may be included are:
What is in the photograph?
What is the photograph of, what do you think it represents?
How is the photo presented?
Who do you think will see it?
What does the photograph show?
What does it conceal?
Why do you think particular things are shown or hidden?
How does the photograph affect you?
What are your thoughts and feelings about it?
How do you interpret the image – is it a ‘counter’ image?
Does it make you look at the subject in a different way?
What do the images from the residency tell us when compared with the official images?
We plan to carry the following PEIs:


Three interviews with the Artist in Residence. We plan to conduct three interviews with
Edmund, one in August/September 2016, another in February 2017 and a final one in June
2017. These interviews will involve exploring official images of the prison and the new images
that Edmund has created during the periods in between the interviews.

Twelve interviews with Grendon Residents. Separate interviews will be carried out in the
periods January 20175 (four residents), May 2017 (four residents) and September 2017 (fourresidents). These interviews will involve exploring images that have been created by Edmund
during the residency, official images and where possible, images created by the residents
themselves (if they have participated in Edmund’s sessions).
The research team are keen to interview residents who have had varying levels of
engagement with the residency. We will liaise with the prison over identifying four residents
who have engaged fully (for example participated in all of the sessions Edmund hasorganised); four residents who have engaged somewhat (those who are interested in theresidency and may have attended a few of the sessions but not all); and finally four residents
who are not particularly interested in or engaged with the residency at all. In addition to thequalitative thematic analysis that will be applied to other PEIs, the research team will draw
upon narrative analysis in analysing the findings from these interviews. Drawing on ourprevious experience in this area (Yardley, Wilson, Brookes and Kemp, 2015), we will explore
the extent to which the images evoke discussion of particular narrative identities amongst theparticipants, contextualised within their individual journeys of desistance.

Up to eight interviews with Grendon staff. We plan to carry out eight separate interviews
with members of Grendon staff - Governor, Head of Clinical Services, Head of Psychotherapy,

5

The first period is scheduled for January 2017 to allow for any revisions that the National Offender
Management Service (NOMS) may request to our application for research approval, which will be submitted inJune / July 2016. Should our application be successful at first consideration (or be returned with minor
conditions), we will be in a position to consider commencing this strand of the fieldwork sooner if this isagreeable to HMP Grendon and can be accommodated.

6

Wing Therapists and Officers. These interviews will involve exploring images that have beencreated during the residency and official images. We plan to carry out these interviews at
three points in time to coincide with the data collection points for the residents’ interviews –January 2017, May 2017 and September 2017.
Up to six interviews with wider stakeholders. We plan to carry out up to six separate
interviews with representatives of organisations working at the interface of the criminal
justice system and the arts and cultural sphere. This will involve exploring images that havebeen created during the residency and official images. At this stage in our planning we haveidentified the Koestler Trust, National Alliance for Arts in Criminal Justice and Engage (National
Association for Gallery Education) as organisations we would like to engage in PEI interviews.
We will utilise the “snowball’’ technique during interviews to identify other key organisations
with whom it will be beneficial for us to engage with. We plan to conduct these interviews
between October 2016 and October 2017.

Comments Boxes at Grendon
The number of PEI interviews we will be able to conduct with staff and residents at Grendon is limited
to the time and resources available within the scope of the evaluation. However, the Research Teambelieves that it is important to give all stakeholders at Grendon an opportunity to share their thoughts
and experiences in relation to the residency. We plan to apply for permission to locate a comments
box on each wing and have them in place in December 20166. The Research Team will gather thecontents of each comments box on their research visits to the prison in January, May and September
2017. Comments will be analysed using qualitative thematic analysis techniques and where relevant,narrative analysis techniques, as described above.

Participant Observation and Semi-Structured Interviews
The events at which the images from the residency are exhibited and discussed represent important
opportunities to explore the impact of the residency upon debate about prison, rehabilitation andcriminality. Annual exhibitions will be held at the prison in November 2016 and November 2017.
During the same time periods, sharing days will also be held at Ikon Gallery. At these events, theResearch Team want to engage with the concepts of the encounter with the image and the affect thatthe encounter engenders (Young, 2005, 2008, 2010. 2014). As such, three members of the Research
Team will attend each event - either Dr Yardley or Dr Glynn, accompanied by Morag Kennedy andShona Robison-Edwards – and conduct participant observation and semi- structured interviews.
Participant observation will involve being amongst the audience as they are looking at theimages and noting particular reactions and key themes within conversations that are taking place
during these encounters. This observation will be overt in that attendees will be made aware of ourpresence and that we are there to explore the reactions that the images are eliciting. We will engage

6This is scheduled for December 2016 to allow for any revisions that the National Offender Management
Service (NOMS) may request to our application for research approval, which will be submitted in June / July
2016. Should our application be successful at first consideration (or be returned with minor conditions), we
will be in a position to consider placing the comments boxes sooner if this is agreeable to HMP Grendon andcan be accommodated.

7

in semi-structured interviews with attendees who are happy to speak with us for between 5 and 20
minutes about their thoughts and views in relation to the images.
In relation to the exhibitions at the prison, handwritten notes will be taken in relation to theobservations and semi-structured interviews and typed up afterwards. Regarding the sharing days at
Ikon Gallery, handwritten notes will be taken of the observations and semi structured interviews will
be audio recorded - with the permission of the interviewee - and transcribed afterwards. Analysis willtake the form of qualitative thematic analysis as described above. The Research Team will also
produce reflective accounts of the events, within which they recall their experiences and reflect upon
the events in relation to the key themes and concepts underpinning the evaluation. A list of indicative
questions to be explored during the observations and semi-structured interviews are included below:
Who are the audience?
Which particular images are they encountering?
What impact is the location of the event having upon the encounter with the image?
How are people looking at the images?
What affect are the images engendering?
What points are emerging in conversations about the images?
Are the images causing people to reinforce or challenge particular discourses?
Are the images introducing new perspectives on prisons?
What are audiences saying about rehabilitation?
To what extent are issues of offending and victimhood emerging within conversations around theimages?

Media Content Analysis
It is anticipated that the residency will spark considerable debate in mainstream and social media
around the themes of prisons, rehabilitation and criminality. Given that the aim of the residency is todevelop a public discourse around these themes, it is important to capture the nature and extent ofsuch debates. Dr Yardley was involved in Ikon Gallery’s Real Birmingham Family project 2010-2014, in
which the artist Gillian Wearing produced a sculpture of a Birmingham family. This family consisted oftwo sisters – Emma and Roma Jones - and their sons. There was considerable debate in mainstream
and social media about this project, which tapped into a wide range of values, attitudes and beliefs
around “the family” in contemporary society. Following this experience, the Research Team are keen
to capture and analyse such debates in relation to the Grendon residency to explore what themes arebeing raised around prisons, rehabilitation and criminality and what attitudes, values and beliefs areevident in discussions. This enables the evaluation to consider the impact of the residency beyond the
direct and immediate stakeholders.
The Research Team are experienced in analysing mainstream and social media content–
indeed Morag Kennedy and Dr Yardley recently published a study exploring debate around a violent
crime on Reddit (Yardley, Wilson and Kennedy, 2015). In relation to the residency, we will conduct a
structured search for any relevant content through setting up Google alerts using combinations of key
search terms such as “Edmund Clark”, “Artist in Residence” and “HMP Grendon”. This means that any
when new content is posted online we will be alerted to it via email. We will then be able to ascertain
whether it is relevant to the residency before copying the content to a repository and uploading it to
the NVivo data analysis software. We plan to use qualitative content analysis to draw meaning fromthe data – an approach which aims to develop inferences from text and is considered to be particularly
appropriate in fields where existing theory or research is limited (Weber, 1990), as is very much the8case with evaluations of prison artistic residencies. Qualitative content analysis enables themes andcategories to emerge from the data, as opposed to trying to fit the data into existing prescriptive
categories (Krippendorff, 1980). The media content analysis will be carried out by Morag Kennedy andShona Robinson-Edwards and will begin in July 2016, continuing throughout the residency.

9Dec-17

Nov-17Oct-17

Sep-17Aug-17

Jul-17

Jun-17May-17

Apr-17Mar-17

Feb-17Jan-17

Dec-16

Nov-16Oct-16

Sep-16Aug-16

Jul-16

Fieldwork & Analysis - Phases & Tasks

Jun-16

Figure 1.

Briefings, Updates and Research Administration Tasks
Communication of Update Report (including research design) to MVLM, Ikon and Governor of HMP Grendon
Application for ethical approval from Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences at Birmingham City
University
Application for approval for prison-based data collection from National Offender Management Service (NOMS) submit by end of July for application to be considered by mid-August committee
If applicable - Revise NOMS application
If applicable - Resubmit revised application for approval for prison-based data collection from NOMS - submit
by end of September for application to be considered by mid-October committee

Photo-Elicitation Interviews (PEI)
Artist in Residence
Grendon Residents (should NOMS application be approved after first submission, could begin earlier than Jan17)
Staff (should NOMS application be approved after first submission, could begin earlier than Jan-17)
Grendon
Other Stakeholders

Residency Comments Box ("C" indicates collection dates, should NOMS application be approved after firstsubmission, could place earlier than Dec-16)

C

C

C

Participant Observation and Semi-Structured Interviews
Media Content Analysis

10Dec-17

Nov-17Oct-17

Sep-17Aug-17

Jul-17

Jun-17May-17

Apr-17Mar-17

Feb-17Jan-17

Dec-16

Nov-16Oct-16

Sep-16Aug-16

Jul-16Jun-16May-16

Apr-16

Mar-16

Feb-16

Jan-16

Dec-15

Nov-15Oct-15Overall Project Phases & Tasks

Sep-15Figure 2.

Commissioning and Monitoring
Contract signing
Project initiation meeting

Conceptualisation and Design
Scoping exercise and literature review
Identification of outcomes and related concepts, research design draft
Finalisation of research design

Fieldwork and Analysis
Fieldwork design briefings and stakeholder updates
Research approval applications - University Ethics and NOMS
If applicable - Revisions to NOMS application and resubmission
Photo-Elicitation Interviews
Residency Comments Box
Media Content Analysis
Participant Observation and Semi-Structured Interviews

Reporting
Annual sharing days
Interim reports
Final report submitted

11

Next steps
The next steps in the evaluation are to submit this overview progress report to the MLVM Charitable
Trust, Ikon and the Governor of HMP Grendon. The Research Team will invite these stakeholders to
identify any key concerns or suggested amendments in relation to the research design.
If all are happy to proceed, the Research Team will submit their application for research approval to
NOMS. We will also submit our application for ethical approval to the Faculty of Education, Law andSocial Sciences Ethics Committee. We intend to make these submission at the end of June 2016 or inearly July 2016.
NOMS approval is needed for the prison-based fieldwork – notably the PEIs with residents and staff,
the data collection at the annual exhibition and the comments box. NOMS approval is however not
required for all other elements of the fieldwork, which do not involve researching with prisoners or
prison staff – notably PEIs with wider stakeholders, data collection at the annual sharing day andmedia content analysis. Therefore should our NOMS application require revisions and resubmission,
we are not prevented from progressing the other elements of the work.

12References
Brookes, M. (2009). The Application of the Good Lives Model within the Prison TherapeuticCommunity Regime at HMP Grendon. Forensic Update, 98, 12-15.
Brookes, M. (2010). Putting Principles into Practice: The therapeutic community regime at HMP
Grendon and its relationship with the “Good Lives” model. In R. Shuker & E. Sullivan (Eds.), Grendon
and the emergence of therapeutic communities: Developments in research and practice (pp. 99-113).
Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brown, M. (2014). Visual Criminology and Carceral Studies: Counter-images in the carceral age,
Theoretical Criminology, 18(2): 176-197.
Carney, P. (2010). Crime, Punishment and the Force of the Photographic Spectacle. In: K. J. Haywardand M. Presdee (Eds.), Framing Crime: Cultural criminology and the image (pp. 17-35). Abingdon:
Routledge.
Carney, P. (2015). Foucault’s Punitive Society: Visual tactics of marking as a history of the present.
British Journal of Criminology, 55(2), 231-247.
Carrabine, E. (2014). Seeing Things: Violence, voyeurism and the camera. Theoretical Criminology,
18(2), 134-158.
Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3-7.
Ferrell, J. and Van de Voorde, C. (2010). The Decisive Moment: Documentary photography and cultural
criminology. In: K. J. Hayward and M. Presdee (Eds.), Framing Crime: Cultural criminology and theimage (pp. 36-52). Abingdon: Routledge.
Gariglio, L. (2015). Photo-Elicitation in Prison Ethnography: Breaking the ice in the field and unpacking
prison officers’ use of force, Crime Media Culture. Online ahead of print, DOI: 1741659015614223.
Genders, E and Player, E (1995). Grendon: A Study of a Therapeutic Prison. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.
Maruna, S. (2001). Making Good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
McAdams, D. P. (1993). The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the self. New York,
NY: Guilford.
McAdams, D. P. (2008). Personal Narratives and the Life Story. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A.
Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 242-262). New York, NY: Guilford.
Rapoport, R. (1960). Community as Doctor: New perspectives on a therapeutic community. London,
England: Tavistock Publications.
Riessman, C. K. (2001). Analysis of Personal Narratives. In J. F. Gubriam & J. A. Holstein (Eds.),
Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 695-710). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

13

Rose, G. (2012). Visual Methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials (3rd Edn.).
London: Sage.
Schept, J. (2014). (Un)seeing Like a Prison: Counter-visual ethnography of the carceral state,
Theoretical Criminology, 18(2): 198-223.
Sekula, A. (1986). The Body and the Archive. October, 39, 3-64.
Stevens, A. (2012). “I am the person now I was always meant to be”: Identity reconstruction andnarrative reframing in therapeutic community prisons. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 12, 527-547.
Stevens, A. (2013). Offender Rehabilitation and Therapeutic Communities: Enabling change the TC
way. London, England: Routledge.
Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Yardley, E., Wilson, D., & Kennedy, M. (2015). “TO ME ITS [SIC] REAL LIFE”: Secondary Victims of
Homicide in Newer Media. Victims & Offenders. Online ahead of print, DOI:
10.1080/15564886.2015.1105896
Yardley, E., Wilson, D., Kemp, D., & Brookes, M. (2015). Narrative Beyond Prison Gates: Contradiction,complexity, and reconciliation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 59(2), 159-179.
Young, A. (2005). Judging the Image: Art, value, law. London: Routledge.
Young, A. (2008). Culture, Critical Criminology and the Imagination of Crime. In: T. Anthony and C.
Cunneen, The Critical Criminology Companion (pp. 18-29). Annandale, NSW: Hawkins Press.
Young, A. (2010). The Scene of the Crime: Is there such a thing as “just looking”?. In: K. J. Hayward and
M. Presdee (Eds.), Framing Crime: Cultural criminology and the image (pp. 83-97). Abingdon:
Routledge.
Young, A. (2014). From Object to Encounter: Aesthetic politics and visual criminology, Theoretical
Criminology, 18(2): 159-75.

14Appendix
Presentation to MLVM Trustees

15

16

17

18

19

20