John Astin Books

Control Therapy is excellent! It provided a theoretically coherent theory for integrating wisdom from the east and west into psychotherapy. After developing a clear and thoughtful foundation, the book further offered an in depth guide to using control therapy in clinical work. This book has helped me synthesize my belief that there are times to hold on and fight for change and there are times to let go and accept. This book has helped me both professionally and personally.

"Too Intimate for Words" by John Astin is a beautiful and inspiring expression of the causeless joy and conscious freedom of the Heart. He skillfully merges poetry and prose, while encouraging us to awaken to what may be too intimate to speak. Yet, John is masterful at allowing these wisdom words to flow as Grace. You may enjoy this lovely collection for daily inspiration.
~ Katie Davis, Awake Joy: The Essence of Enlightenment

John Astin interweaves poetry and prose into a beautiful expression of nondual wisdom. He gently encourages us to notice the Truth and to experience who we really are. I highly recommend this book for contemplation and times when a reminder of who we really are is needed.

I had never seen this movie until this past October, and that was only a portion. Still, I must say I was intrigued enough to order the DVD. And then I thought, hey, I'll go for the director's cut. So I really have nothing to compare that to, but let's just that I truly enjoyed it.

I understand that the movie is something of a cult classic and it is easy to see why. I hate to call it pure horror as it is much funnier and sweeter than that, but it does have the stuff of such. In truth, it is a movie about ghosts rather than a scary movie and the tortured man who works a con operation with them.

I'm a huge fan of Michael J. Fox and I think he does pretty good in this. His character is a little more sensitive than what I have seen him and he pulls it off, but he most comes to life as the stalwart and brave soul we all know he is.

The tale itself is really quite imaginative, especially those fascinated by the fun ghosts can offer. In fact, most of the ghosts we meet are nice and funny rather than scary. And hey, someone was actually to make ghosts work with objects in a logical way!

This is a great Halloween movie and if this had extra scenes I liked them. The extras are also plenty of fun, featuring the making of, interviews, and even a bit on real ghostly experiences.

I caught this movie on TV, and it was entertaining enough for me to sit through the whole film. I would have liked to give it a 3.6 stars if I could. I think it has a spark of something which makes it a little better than average, but I hesitate to call it excellent (4 stars). Since I knew nothing about this film, I was quite amazed to find people categorize it as a horror-comedy when I later looked it up here on Amazon.

I am an easily terrified person, so I generally stayed away from horror or gory movies. I remember when I finally gathered enough courage to watch "The Shining" because it is said to be such a classic, I had to turn my head away every time I sensed something potentially scary coming up. In the end, my total viewing time of that movie was less than 5 minutes. I suppose this explains how much I can stomach a horror movie. When I watched this movie, the word "scary" never came into my mind. I though it was fun, the special effect nice, and it was nice to see Michael J Fox again after a long while (although I wished his character weren't so headstrong, as usual). The plot could have been a little more unpredictable. But it was fun, entertaining, but no horror movie.

The director's cut of The Frighteners doesn't help the film's awkward shifts of tone much, but then this always seemed like two or three good ideas that never really gelled into the same movie. The idea of Michael J. Fox's paranormal investigator running a scam with a trio of real ghosts who haunt the houses he charges to exorcise is never given enough of a comic workout, just as the inspired idea of an undead serial killer trying to beat the competition in the body count stakes because "the title should be held by an American" never becomes a genuinely chilling figure. There are a few neat twists, but the film still feels more like it had a pitch and a treatment rather than a solid script, offering only a third as much fun as it really should. Still, no complaints about the lavish extras on this flipper disc (theEuropean release spreads the same extras over a 3-disc set) - aside from the usual deleted scenes and trailer there's even a four hour documentary produced by Jackson!

ITEM ARRIVED IN PERFECT CONDITION AND VERY FAST SHIPPING. I WOULD DEFINATELY ORDER FROM SELLER AGAIN!!!!!

Having never seen "The Frighteners" in the theatre, and now seeing Peter Jackson's Director's Cut makes me wonder why such a cut was released? This film, with all of it's slick special effects and Alan Silvestri-Knock-off-music by Danny Elfman, goes on and on and on without being truly funny (the endless one-liners are as old and corny as can be!) or truly scary; in short, the film is probably best described as campy with an overuse of effects and no focus on acting. If Trini Alvarado was meant to be bad, then this Andie MacDowell knock-off WAS every bit as numbing as her more famous look-alike. Michael J. Fox was not funny at all, and the endless barrage of ectoplasm and spirits and a Dee Wallace Stone in her finest role since Cujo (25th Anniversary Edition), made this film pretty tough to stomach. Glad to see that Peter Jackson did better work before AND after this one! Why a Director's Cut, though? Wasn't the theatrical release silly enough?

I had never seen this movie until this past October, and that was only a portion. Still, I must say I was intrigued enough to order the DVD. And then I thought, hey, I'll go for the director's cut. So I really have nothing to compare that to, but let's just that I truly enjoyed it.

I understand that the movie is something of a cult classic and it is easy to see why. I hate to call it pure horror as it is much funnier and sweeter than that, but it does have the stuff of such. In truth, it is a movie about ghosts rather than a scary movie and the tortured man who works a con operation with them.

I'm a huge fan of Michael J. Fox and I think he does pretty good in this. His character is a little more sensitive than what I have seen him and he pulls it off, but he most comes to life as the stalwart and brave soul we all know he is.

The tale itself is really quite imaginative, especially those fascinated by the fun ghosts can offer. In fact, most of the ghosts we meet are nice and funny rather than scary. And hey, someone was actually to make ghosts work with objects in a logical way!

This is a great Halloween movie and if this had extra scenes I liked them. The extras are also plenty of fun, featuring the making of, interviews, and even a bit on real ghostly experiences.

I caught this movie on TV, and it was entertaining enough for me to sit through the whole film. I would have liked to give it a 3.6 stars if I could. I think it has a spark of something which makes it a little better than average, but I hesitate to call it excellent (4 stars). Since I knew nothing about this film, I was quite amazed to find people categorize it as a horror-comedy when I later looked it up here on Amazon.

I am an easily terrified person, so I generally stayed away from horror or gory movies. I remember when I finally gathered enough courage to watch "The Shining" because it is said to be such a classic, I had to turn my head away every time I sensed something potentially scary coming up. In the end, my total viewing time of that movie was less than 5 minutes. I suppose this explains how much I can stomach a horror movie. When I watched this movie, the word "scary" never came into my mind. I though it was fun, the special effect nice, and it was nice to see Michael J Fox again after a long while (although I wished his character weren't so headstrong, as usual). The plot could have been a little more unpredictable. But it was fun, entertaining, but no horror movie.

The director's cut of The Frighteners doesn't help the film's awkward shifts of tone much, but then this always seemed like two or three good ideas that never really gelled into the same movie. The idea of Michael J. Fox's paranormal investigator running a scam with a trio of real ghosts who haunt the houses he charges to exorcise is never given enough of a comic workout, just as the inspired idea of an undead serial killer trying to beat the competition in the body count stakes because "the title should be held by an American" never becomes a genuinely chilling figure. There are a few neat twists, but the film still feels more like it had a pitch and a treatment rather than a solid script, offering only a third as much fun as it really should. Still, no complaints about the lavish extras on this flipper disc (theEuropean release spreads the same extras over a 3-disc set) - aside from the usual deleted scenes and trailer there's even a four hour documentary produced by Jackson!

ITEM ARRIVED IN PERFECT CONDITION AND VERY FAST SHIPPING. I WOULD DEFINATELY ORDER FROM SELLER AGAIN!!!!!

Having never seen "The Frighteners" in the theatre, and now seeing Peter Jackson's Director's Cut makes me wonder why such a cut was released? This film, with all of it's slick special effects and Alan Silvestri-Knock-off-music by Danny Elfman, goes on and on and on without being truly funny (the endless one-liners are as old and corny as can be!) or truly scary; in short, the film is probably best described as campy with an overuse of effects and no focus on acting. If Trini Alvarado was meant to be bad, then this Andie MacDowell knock-off WAS every bit as numbing as her more famous look-alike. Michael J. Fox was not funny at all, and the endless barrage of ectoplasm and spirits and a Dee Wallace Stone in her finest role since Cujo (25th Anniversary Edition), made this film pretty tough to stomach. Glad to see that Peter Jackson did better work before AND after this one! Why a Director's Cut, though? Wasn't the theatrical release silly enough?

There's not as much difference between the two Addams Chronicles editions as there is with the two Munsters books. But the added info and color photos make this Addams Chronicles the definate one to own.

I really loved the Addams family and this book brought it all back. Great info on what happened to each member after the family ended. If you're a fan it's a must read.

I loved the first edition of this book so much that I HAD to buy the revised edition! This is a must-have for all Addams Family fans! Stephen Cox makes you feel like you're part of the family!

Will we ever again see a TV show as full of nonconformity, deep dark humor, and head-scratching eccentricity as the Addams Family? I doubt it. This book is a treasure trove of trivia and collector's info for Addams geeks worldwide. Stephen Cox is as knowledgeable an enthusiast as you could hope for, though his writing could use some work. That's usually not a problem in a fun trivia book like this, though when it comes to cultural analysis he does get in over his head sometimes. Examples are his weak attempts to compare the show to the French playwright Moliere, or to explain the deep cultural significance of Gomez's love for cigars. But otherwise, you'll learn some great Addams TV tidbits here, like who played Thing (Ted Cassidy, better known for playing Lurch), and who did Cousin Itt's voice (soundman Tony Magro). You also may not have known that the pig who played Pugsley's frighteningly alive piggy bank also played Arnold on Green Acres. The only real problem with this book is the very quick and rather uninformative biographies of the stars. With the exception of Jackie Coogan (Uncle Fester), most of the actors get bios that are only two or three pages long. But in the end, I'm especially happy to learn that I'm not the only one who thinks that Carolyn Jones as Morticia was quite sexy, rather than creepy. [~doomsdayer520~]

"The Addams Chronicles" is a wonderful book that delves into the nooks and crannies of one of the best, most thought out and well crafted TV shows ever produced. The cast histories, behind-the-scenes stories and color photos are exhilarating. The chapter on the ravishingly beautiful Carolyn Jones who played Morticia is way way too short.

"Empire of The Air: The Men Who Made Radio," by Tom Lewis, HarperCollins, New York, 1991. This 421 page paperback is the book that accompanied the 1990s PBS series, a three-hour presentation of the story of radio. It emphasized the role of three individuals: Lee DeForest, Howard Armstrong, and David Sarnoff. Lee DeForest invented the audion tube by inserting a grid between the plate and the filament in a vacuum tube. Howard Armstrong perfected the invention with a series of circuits that made the vacuum tube more sensitive as a radio receiver and suitable as a transmitter. Later he invented FM radio, which greatly reduced static and distortions. David Sarnoff envisioned broadcast radio and provided leadership in its successful commercialization. Later, his company, RCA, also pioneered network radio, television and color television. Modern electronics owe their origins to the electric telegraph, which first brought wires and electricity into communities across the country. Indeed, Thomas Edison and David Sarnoff both began as telegraph operators.

Although the subject of the series was radio, the true subject was Radio Corporation of America or RCA. The book covers the technical developments that made broadcast radio possible and ends with RCA being acquired by General Electric in 1985.

DeForest billed himself as "The Father of Radio," but we learn he was a tinkerer who did not understand how the audion tube worked. In an age when white Anglo-Saxon (Calvinist) Protestants attended Ivy League colleges, and ran most corporations, you would expect Armstrong to win. He was a Presbyterian, educated at Columbia University, under the then leading professor of electrical engineering, Michael Pupin. He was reportedly shy and introverted, but his intelligence was recognized early, and he began experimenting with electronics as a teenager. DeForest, on the other hand, also Presbyterian was educated at Yale University, but his father, a minister, was president of a black college in the South, Talladega College. DeForest is described as an outgoing extrovert, but as a carpetbagger in the South, he had few friends. He spent his time reading patents in the college library, where he resolved to become an inventor. He selected electricity as a promising field of study. DeForest attended Dwight Moody's prep school in Mt. Herman, MA, on his way to Yale, but his rural background meant he did not fit-in with classmates.

Sarnoff was a poor immigrant (Russian) Jew, who was forced to support the family after his father died. After selling newspapers, he learned Morse code in the telegraph department at the New York Herald. From that experience, he got a job at American Marconi, the famous radio telegraph company. When RCA it was formed, he moved into management ranks, and functioned as the technical visionary who promoted broadcast radio as a more profitable venture than the radio telegraphy business. He arranged to have "music boxes" built, and demonstrated their utility. It was Sarnoff who recognized the technical superiority of Armstrong's regenerative circuit and recommended that Marconi license it. Later, he co-operated with Armstrong's demonstration of FM radio. But it was Sarnoff, who decided to invest in television, to resist FM and then to develop alternative circuits, which he claimed were outside of Armstrong's patents. The result was a patent fight, which proved expensive to Armstrong, and ultimately led to his suicide.

American Marconi was the US branch of the Italian Marconi firm. It had been founded by Guglielmo Marconi, based on his invention of radio telegraphy. He had improved the primitive art and greatly increased signal range. He is famous for having transmitted the coded letter S across the Atlantic, but the main use for radiotelegraphy was ship to ship and ship to shore communications (as became clear after the sinking of the Titanic in 1912), plus the flexibility of building stations without the need to install cabling. Unlike the fly-by-night radio telegraph companies founded by DeForest (which set up demonstrations in various cities, sold stock, and then disappeared often without even trying to build a successful business), Marconi was an honest businessman who provided a quality service at a fair price. (DeForest was charged with fraud for one of his ventures, but was judged not guilty in a jury trial. He had been duped by promoters who ran the business end of his ventures, often leaving him with debts and taking off with the cash.)

The PBS series told the story well, but some of the details omitted should be mentioned. In spite of pending challenges to his audion patent, DeForest sold nonexclusive rights to American Telephone & Telegraph Co., i.e., the phone company--in July, 1913. They used the technology in a practical amplifier, which made possible coast-to-coast long-distance telephone service by 1915.

A Canadian university professor named Reginald Aubrey Fessenden, working in Pittsburgh, invented a spade detector that advanced the art of radio telegraphy. He successfully broadcast a playing violin to radio operators in 1906. Later he sold his patents to Westinghouse, who set up, KDKA in Pittsburgh as the first broadcast radio station in November, 1916.

RCA came about because the most powerful transmitter at the time was the alternator. General Electric became expert at manufacturing the device, but a proliferation of patents made it difficult to operate without licenses under competitors patents. GE and American Marconi decided to set up RCA, when it was realized that the American government would not allow a foreign corporation to own a technology considered essential to the national defense. Germany operated an undersea telegraph cable to the Americas, but it was promptly severed in World War I. That made Germany dependent on radio telegraphy for communications and emphasized the importance of radio as a critical national defense technology.

Others soon realized the advantage of contributing their radio patents to RCA in return for part ownership. Westinghouse and AT&T participated, but General Electric was the major shareholder, and had greatest control. Both Westinghouse and AT&T had broadcast radio stations, which they contributed to the venture. It was GE's Owen Young, who recognized Sarnoff's talents and saw to his promotion in spite of the anti-Semitic practices of the day.

World War I had a major impact on radio. Thousands of soldiers were trained in the basics of radio during their military service. After the war, they came home to build crystal sets, and some times one or two tube radio sets constructed from kits. These sets were the audience for early broadcast radio. As with the personal computer, initially it was a hobbyist market. But Sarnoff believed radio should be made available to the average man on the street with a handsome set suitable for the living room with a speaker instead of headphones.

The quest for talking movies began in about 1919. DeForest was an early participant. His technology, called Phonofilm, proved cumbersome. Warner Brothers issued the first talking films using Vitaphone, a record synchronized to the film. In 1928, RCA and GE followed with the photocell film track technology, called pallophotophone. They with Joseph Kennedy formed RKO Radio Pictures to make and distribute talking films by the purchase of the Keith-Albee-Orphium theater chain. (At the time, theater chains showed only the films produced by their companies.) RCA owned 25%. The book does not say so but apparently AT&T/Western Electric was a key developer of talking film technology especially working with Warner Brothers. They built the large speaker amplifier system that filled the theater with sound. RCA came later to the business but entered into an agreement making films with either system compatible on the same projection equipment.

RCA repeatedly encountered challenges from Federal antitrust authorities. In a settlement reached in 1926, AT&T sold its broadcast radio stations to RCA in return for an agreement to be the exclusive carrier of NBC network transmissions to its affiliated stations for a $1MM annual fee. (William Paley founded CBS independently in 1928.) In 1930, an antitrust suit forced the founding companies to divest their interests in RCA, to discontinue manufacture of radio equipment for 30 months, and to cease any non-compete agreements regarding radio equipment. RCA would license its radio technology to others resulting in a proliferation of competing brands of radio sets. In addition, Sarnoff was freed of board members of the sponsoring companies allowing him total control of RCA and its board. ABC was created in 1945 after NBC was forced to divest itself of the blue network.

Television came to RCA almost as a lark. Vladimir Zworykin, a research assistant at Westinghouse, had taken out a patent on a primitive TV camera, but Westinghouse failed to invest in the technology. Sarnoff hired him to work in RCA's Camden, NJ laboratories (on the manufacturing site of the Victor Phonograph Co. which RCA had acquired in 1929 after working with it to provide radio phonograph combinations since 1924). The Sarnoff Labs in Princeton, NJ were constructed in 1941.

RCA became the leading manufacturer of vacuum tubes. DeForest had offered his audion tube for sale almost from the beginning, but he was unable to manufacture tubes with consistent performance. RCA reduced them to standardized designs with predictable characteristics. The Princeton Lab was a developer of over 150 new types of radio tubes. In 1940, a manufacturing plant for vacuum tubes was built in Lancaster, PA. It made 20MM tubes by the end of the war in 2000 types.

Early television technology relied on unreliable, mechanical devices to receive a moving picture. RCA was forced to license Philo Farnsworth's electronic television patents. However, it galled David Sarnoff to pay for such technology. It is said he resolved never to be bested again in patent negotiations. Perhaps that is the reason he fought so hard to avoid licensing FM rights from Howard Armstrong (after Armstrong rejected his offer).

This book is loaded with historical details that make interesting reading. It includes extensive references and notes as well as a bibliography. Indexed.

I greatly enjoyed reading this book, and viewing the documentary that was based on it. Tom Lewis crafted an interesting, well-written story, and did his research. His facts are almost all correct, and Empire of the Air does a service in reviving interest in the history of the single most-important technological leap of the past century. (It is even more important than the Internet; the Internet has precedents--computers, telephones, TV, FAX, etc.--but radio had no precedent. It was the very first instantaneous mass-communication system in the world.)

Empire of the Air likewise portrays the personalities of "the Men Who Made Radio" almost flawlessly. In all, this is a book not only worth reading, but worth owning.

But I have one problem with Empire of the Air. How is it that How is it that Powel Crosley, Jr., the man who built the most powerful commercial radio station in the U.S. is mentioned only once, referred to in passing as an inventor in a garage? Crosley, the creator of one of the first 100 radio stations in the U.S., a man who consistently led in breaking the barriers to higher power for more than a decade, and who almost single-handedly established the market for radios (something Sarnoff tried to do six years earlier--and failed). Crosley, who bested Sarnoff's RCA in a 7-year legal battle? I can't blame Tom for the omission; I believe it is part of the aftermath of Sarnoff's revenge of persuading his contemporaries to omit Crosley from history. (There's an argument for that, but this is not the place to propound it.)

That aside, Empire of the Air deserves a place on your history bookshelf. It's on mine.
--Mike

As a radio professional myself, I very much enjoyed reading about the evolution of radio and the marvelous myriad of personalities involved. Since the beginning radio has been filled with colorful and interesting people. It reinforced in me that I picked the right profession to dedicate my life to.

I would recommend this book to any professional broadcaster. If we fail to have an appreciation of history, we fail to grasp the big picture.

Jeffrey McAndrew
WHBL News Anchor and Editor and author of "Our Brown-Eyed Boy"

I didn't just read this book, I've read it three times and will probably read it at least two more times, slowly. It's easily the best recounting of an industrial development that I've ever been through in any medium. The amount of detail about the invention of "radio" is almost overwhelming. The way that the lives of the major figures are professionally interwoven and spiced up with backstabbing, deceit, lying and tragedy is also keeps the reader's eyes glued to the pages. You also begin to realise why the work of honest inventors needs to be protected.

However, the authors distinction between "wireless" and "radio" is pretty thin in my opinion and his use of that to exclude Marconi from the group is a bit ungenerous and just flat-out, technically wrong. The inclusion of Sarnoff is just as wrong. Sarnoff was a classic, ruthless American entrepreneur- not an inventor. He was no doubt a great visionary but he also appropriated for himself events to which he was not connected. Sarnoff more properly belongs in a second volume with Paley and others who raised broadcasting to the level of a major industry. They gave alot to their country, but, not as inventors.

It's an all round great read and I highly recommend it. Tom Lewis did a fantastic job and I've got an opinion thanks to his incredible research. In fact, his book has caused me to do even more reading on the subject.

Finally, I think there's also an accidental, back-door warning in there about the debasement of the American economy. As radio grew, it created hard, marketable skills and spread the wealth into just about every town and household. That's not happening today in an economy that's based on endless consumption, paper debt, cheap unskilled labour, easy credit, no savings and a manufacturing heartland that is anywhere but the USA.

Subtitled "The Men Who Made Radio," this book is concerned with the principal actors developing radio: Marconi, Sarnoff, Armstrong, and De Forrest. Sarnoff ("The General") was the egoist who founded RCA, and Armstrong was the secretive inventor of FM who refused to compromise and lost everything (and committed suicide). The first half of the book is the best; it's all about the inventors and their new inventions and is very interesting. The second half suffers from being mostly about the legal hassling that occurred among the principals. Recommended.

Twilight ZoneOne of my favorite episodes (The Shelter #68 season 3). For 1.99 this is a great deal. I downloaded this episode because I was writing a paper over how it effectively illustrates the state of human nature, as seen through Thomas Hobbes philosophy. Definitely beat paying $5 for a rental. No commercials, good image, downloaded in one minute with ethernet here in my dorm.

Who the heck is "Red" Serling? Everybody knows it's ROd Serling. Unbox' error is not just a typo either, because it is repeated in several places. C'mon, Unbox! Don't insult classical TV like that!

The viewer can see the conclusion this episode is going to only a third into it. Too predictable. Maybe original in its time but today a tale told too many times before.

I finally made my first purchase from Amazon's Unbox Video Downloads just to try the service and am happy to report a solid customer experience. For $1.99, I purchased and downloaded one of my favorite episodes of "The Twilight Zone", and it took about twenty minutes to download through a broadband connection. I don't think it's the most ideal way to see full-length motion pictures, but for a 26-minute classic TV program, I think my 17" LCD monitor makes for a suitable viewing experience, and the video quality of the downloaded file is clean.

Aired on September 15, 1961 as the show's third season opener, the episode is a Cold War fantasy appropriately called "Two" about the last two survivors on earth, a man and a woman, after an apocalyptic world war in 2109. Written and directed by TV veteran Montgomery Pittman, the simple plot revolves around the complicating fact that he is an American infantryman and she is an invading Russian soldier. Like two feral animals, they glare at each other among the debris of a deserted town destroyed by the war. He even knocks her out her after she aggressively throws pots and pans at him. The reality of their solitary existence, however, gradually dawns on them, especially after they see an evening dress in a shop window inspiring her to speak her only word of dialogue - "Prekrassnyi" - the Russian word for "lovely".

What really makes this episode memorable is the unlikely casting. Two years before she twitched her nose on "Bewitched", a brunette Elizabeth Montgomery, looking appropriately ravaged and sporting a deadly ray gun, plays the untrusting Russian soldier with surprising fierceness and vulnerability. The American is played by perennial tough-guy Charles Bronson, fresh from "The Magnificent Seven". Even though he has to spout some inane philosophical lines to describe the futility of war, he leavens his natural sullenness with a determined romanticism. They make an odd couple, but it works splendidly. I also learned that canned fried chicken will become a staple in the 22nd century. Narrated by Rod Serling in his inimitably halting manner, the show ends with my favorite line in his signature postscript: "This has been...a love story." This is classic TV.

This welcomed collection of clear and poignant pointers to nondual awareness is comprised of both poems and brief prose reflections. The book's title is as elegant as it is apt, given that it readily reflects Astin's central theme that "Truth is present, before the mind ever imagines it has been lost."

As in any poetry collection, some verses are stronger than others. The lesser works appear to be prose merely re-formatted into poetic form. Also, several lyrics contain needless repetition (e.g., "I should see a certain way/I should listen a certain way/I should talk a certain way..." from This Bickering).

But in Awake & Dreaming, for example, song and source are marvelously wedded: "I am awake/and you are awake./We are the same -- /awake and peering through these forms/ that are themselves/the expressions of/this wakefulness."

And here is a jewel of a prose pointer: "In order to search for anything--peace, awareness, God, and
happiness--there must be the belief that what is sought is not already present. Find out if this is true."

Astin, who lives in northern California, pens a one-page Introduction. Alas, he tells us nothing about himself. Still, this book deserves to be savored.

This beautiful collection of Zen-like poetry by John Astin radiates wisdom and the clarity of the Heart. John's expression could be a trusted resource of daily inspiration that guides you to the simplicity of this moment when "This Is Always Enough." I love this book.
~ Katie Davis, Awake Joy: The Essence of Enlightenment

Silent Retreat


The nametag
says it all:

"I am
observing
silence"

How true.

This is indeed
what I am -
the observing silence,
and everything
that is observed.


by John Astin


To see fish at the bottom of a pond, the water needs to be both clear and still. So does the observer. John Astin renders his precise observations with the artistry of a Zen master's ink drawing. Simplicity and naturalness characterize both his poems and prose. This book is a work of art that will stop you in your tracks. Will you see the vision of reality pointed to by the words? It would be hard to miss, presented in a way that goes so directly to the heart of the matter. Indeed, why complicate it? Few writers can paint a picture of essential truths so succinctly and with such loving grace. Like a hologram, each poem somehow contains the whole.

There is also a familiarity with the ways life can slip by us, how the moment may elude us. Reading the section "Our Argument with What Is" provides invaluable insights that question our habitual ways of thinking and our unexamined assumptions. The way "All Strategies Eventually Fail" is actually good news! So what if we are going from one unknown to the next unknown? Hasn't it ever been thus, whether we realized it or not?

"There is no escaping the truth of this impermanence, is there? But who would ever want to?"

The "Original of Literature" provides a historical perspective on the art of writing by explaining its roots in the sacred Hebrew writings. Defoe calls for a renewal and resurgance for the skillful craft of literature. Any serious student of literature and religion will find Defoe's book eye-opening and informative.