Literature in Art Books

My 14 month old son loves the sign language books I've given him. He likes the brightly colored pictures in this book and the close up pictures of children's faces. This book contains signs for words such as big/little, sad/happy, and wet/dry. The words in this book seem fit for a little older toddler to me, but he does really seem to like looking at the pictures. The black and white illustrations of how to do the signs are easy to understand. The book is also a nice size for little toddler hands. A big thumbs up here!

This has lovely pictures and drawings of signs, but they are British Sign Language signs, not American Sign Language Signs! This book and the others by this author, are published in Great Britian. I wondered why so many of the signs were "wrong" until I discovered the books origin!

Contrary to the widespread myth, sign languages are not universal. If you are looking to learn and use the sign language that is used in the United States, these aren't the books for you.....

..The line drawings are not the best...but it is a nice way to read and sign with your child, even children under the age of 2. Giving children, even babies, the means to communicate thoughts, ideas, or wants is such a gift, why hold them back because WE think we know what they can and cannot do. The reality is, when it comes to language learning, children have the upper hand on us adults. That said, I do feel the book is small, but the drawings are actually larger than some of the ones in Slier's books, which also have signs. Both author's books require that you do a little "deciphering" of the pictures, but these are still some of the only books that have the sign pictures right in there. Happy reading!

Each night this book gets read. We were told that our 2 year old is profoundly deaf when he was 4 weeks. Although this was completely WRONG, he isn't even hearing impaired, he does have a speech disability, so we have used sign with him since he was an infant. Our 4 year old loves to sit down with "his baby" and go through the signs and pictures. It is a sturdy book and presents words that kids can relate to. Great pictures and sign illustrations.

I used this book as inspiration for a project with the grades 3-5 crafts class I teach at my daughter's school -- it was a LOT of fun! I told the kids it would be the "hardest" project we'd ever work on ;) Instead of using the included paints we used numerous little 2 oz bottles of acrylic paint, which were really inexpensive, more colorful and gave the rocks a wonderful look. While the kids flipped through the book for ideas, the room was filled with lots of "Oh, cool" and "Oooooh!" and "Awesome!" remarks. So many choices, so little time! This was a neat project with great results from the kids. I began several rocks myself and I'm just as hooked! With a virtually endless supply of free or inexpensive "canvas" around and a comparable bounty of ideas, this book can lead you to limitless fun creations. A+

Super choice for a stocking stuffer. Let your child use their imagination. My son loves rocks, and loves art, so this was a number one choice for us. I also reccomend "Pipe Cleaners Gone" and "A Look Inside Dinosaurs".

This book was used in an art class that my daughter was in. She loved it so much that I am going to order it for us. The truth is I got to paint a rock too, and I am dying to do more. It has great illustrations with lots of ideas.

I purchased this for my 7 year old granddaughter - we both enjoyed it! The book includes paints and a rock. Instructions include how to mix the paints for different colors and a myriad of examples and inspirations. If the stone you found does not already suggest something, there are many examples of things you can paint: one side says 'Turn me over' the reverse says 'Thank you'. I have found most Klutz books to be easy to follow and lots of fun. Great pictures!

This essay attempts and succeeds at explaining why horror literature fascinates our culture. I myself had wondered why people write in this genre,and why is that we can enjoy a seemingly strange area of fiction.

I espically recommend this book to any person who is new to horror,and would like to learn about it. Even thought this book is written in a scholarly manner I think the language is down to earth for most any person to read (One final note: If the author is reading this review,please emai me back!)

The book is an excellent resource for people who love the horror genre. It analyzes the elements of "art horror," in a step-by-step approach. The author strives to explore two questions- 1. why that which we know is not real still frightens us, and 2. why we like to be terrified. The author gives a history of art horror and focuses mainly on the classics (like Frakenstein, Nosferatu, The Shining, etc.) She writes an incredibly in depth primer discussing a very wide range of topics, all in great detail. My main problem with the text is that at times, it is way too in depth, and many times this drudgery is on irrelevant topics. For example, the author spends an entire chapter (80 pages) devoted solely to the purpose of defining horror. From a scholarly perspective, this explanation is great because it defines the art horror genre while leaving no stone unturned, and no gray areas about it. For the casual reader, the text can become dull and redundant. The book was created specially for the education of film students, so I would not recomend it for someone on the lookout for a vibrant and engrossing read.

This essay attempts and succeeds at explaining why horror literature fascinates our culture. I myself had wondered why people write in this genre,and why is that we can enjoy a seemingly strange area of fiction.

I espically recommend this book to any person who is new to horror,and would like to learn about it. Even thought this book is written in a scholarly manner I think the language is down to earth for most any person to read.

This is a philosophical and psychological look at why people love to experience the horror film (and novel). It teaches people how to understand the dynamics of film making and how simple techniques are used to fool our conscious (and unconscious) mind.

"Poetry Everywhere" by Jack Collom and Sheryl Noethe, offers insights into poetry in terms of the various forms, how to teach poetry, and examples of childrens work is provided for each form. I am a pre-service teacher and used this book in a writing workshop I headed for second graders (seven-year-olds). The essays at the end range from how to revise, to writing quickies that can be utilized to get the class started and thinking. This is a wonderful resource for anyone working with children and can be used not only for the writing lessons, but for any subject. Quickies are great and my students loved them! They were very creative and new. Get this book!

This book is a Poetry 101: A-Z for the novice teacher, or one like me wanting to incorporate poetry into my art classroom. This book is structured so that whatever you are looking for you will be able to find it easily. Though an easy read, this book fully engaged and inspired me to go forth into unchartered territory. There are NUMEROUS poetic styles to fit into just about any teacher's curriculum at ANY grade level. The ideas and exercises that the authors suggest to get you going are simple but extremely effective. The exercises work as a springboard to which you use your creativity to jump from and expand. I benefited from this book professionally as well as personally and my students (basically the entire student population) took to it from the first day of introduction. Many of them got so into it that they would write at home and bring what they had done in the next day to my class, eventhough they didn't do their "homework" for their homeroom teacher. Poetry has struck a chord in my students and that wouldn't have been possible without the Poetry Everywhere book to inspire me and get me majorly enthusiastic about the subject. I highly recommend this book for any teacher wanting to inject something new yet so beneficial into their daily routine.

Although I am a student of creative writing, I found this book a great help. It is indespensible for beginning writers and teachers of beginners. The book provides both detailed instruction and examples from famed poets to first graders. The authors show the practicality of the exercises by sharing personal teaching experience and even give alternatives for different skill levels. By teaching how creativity can work within a given form, they help students to eliminate the sterility often found in beginners' poems. For those who want to write poetry but don't know where to begin, Collom and Noethe not only give you the tools, but show you how to use them.

In her preface, Sheryle Noethe writes that the genesis of "Poetry Everywhere" was the year she spent as a resident poet in Salmon, Idaho, visiting school "in an effort to make creative writing full of opportunity." This mission was synonymous with mine when I entered the DC public school system two years ago to lead poetry workshops for inner city middle school children. I had little teaching experience and embarked on my journey with only my enthusiasm and my copy of "Poetry Everywhere." Luckily, these two things were all I needed to launch a successful series of classes. "Poetry Everywhere" turned out to be a phenomenal resource, a stew of delicious ideas meant to inspire-but not to instruct. This is not a manual for lazy teachers. There are no pages to be photocopied and filled with blank lines for students to "finish the story" or "imagine a very bad day and describe." Instead, as co-author Jack Collom writes, "This is a how-to book. It is also a big many-gated entrance to pleasure and excitement in learning . . . The writing exercises in this book allow for the possibility of poetry." In this sense, the book is entirely honest in its assessment of itself. It does not ensure success in the classroom, but it does provide creative teachers willing to put in a little extra effort an elaborate list of writing exercises. These include everything from acrostics to pantoums to William Carlos Williams imitations. In my experience these exercises are great launching pads, but in order for them to resonate with students both willing and hesitant to write, a teacher must be able to expand on the suggested courses of actions. For instance, as the book itself suggests, most children like to brainstorm in a group before they sit down to write. Also it is invaluable for them to see their work in print, or at least on the board, and also to have the opportunity to share what they write in an open and positive environment.
Although it seems the authors have tried all these exercises with age groups varying from first graders to high schoolers, I found that it is important to assess for oneself which activities are age appropriate for whom. Still, the examples given in each chapter of actual poems written by students are great to read out loud to the class. This way, students can be inspired by the potential of each exercise. Also, I found it encourages students to see their teacher trying the exercises along with them. And teachers, don't worry. Most of the activities are fun and sometimes challenging even for adults. Fortunately, once teachers have run the gamut of these exercises "Poetry Everywhere" provides supplementary chapters on enlivening standard English instruction, activities for more advanced students, revision, and inventing more exercises.
In the past two years I have read through a variety of books claiming to be manuals for the teaching of creative writing to children. But in essence these types of curriculums should be organic to the classroom, and "Poetry Everywhere" seems to be the only book out there that truly understands this idea. Nowadays, as creativity is is increasing squashed by the restrictions of hardened syllabi, I can only hope that teachers everywhere will realize the importance of doing exactly what this book recommends, encouraging students to discover not only that it's fun to write poems but also that the art of writing is central to the process of learning in general.

... Today my grandmother gave him the Puzzle Gallery: Food book, and he loves it! The only drawback is that the puzzles can be hard to fit together if you try to do them inside the book. I'd recommend doing them out of the book, on a table or the floor.

This book was a big hit with 2 boys (ages 7 & 8) They enjoyed answering the questions of what to look for in the painting. And the puzzle of the paintings kept them interested in the art by trying to put it back together. Very nice book great' value And a keepsake for other children to use

We got this book for our toddler daughter, who loved looking at the pictures, representing charming examples of children in fine art. At age 2 we introduced her to the actual working of the puzzles, and at 3, having mastered them, it is still one of her favorite books and activities. Highly recommended.

I just got this book for my 2.75 year old son who loves puzzles. I was very pleased to find that, not only did he love to work the puzzles, he was also fascinated with the paintings themselves. He's too young to address the questions that the text poses about each painting, but has spent a good deal of time simply studying each on his own. I highly recommend this book!

I received this book from Amazon yesterday afternoon and just finished reading it. It's not long, but I did skip through a number of sections where films were listed and described.

Having just completed a dissertation about the use of film in the classroom--although I found what was said in this book to be consistent with the literature and my own study findings--I subtracted a star for three missing pieces: lack of an index, more information about the logistics of showing a film (invaluable for teachers for whom this is a new activity), and more of a research base to address "why do this and not that." A further review of their references indicates that a basis for Teasley and Wilder's approach exists, but isn't used sufficiently for justification of their recommended methods.

For example, there are a lot of explanations made about appropriateness of a film to the audience which translates to development. Just a few references to pertinent developmental psych (or even cognitive, educational psych, or human development) would have been useful to explain not just "what" but "why." Although they do mention "deep structure" in their explanation of genre, they do not link it to the characteristics they ask learners to look for in genre films.

There are a number of good references included, but many more are missing. For teachers disinterested in this type of information, it might be included in one chapter that could be skipped. That would add significantly to the book's sparse theoretical foundation and make it equally useful for academics and researchers as well as practitioners.

Other research areas germane to learner response to film, for example, are the function of "mirror neurons" in terms of character identification and empathy, and a study by Israeli neuroscientists indicating that there is no consistency between participant brain scans while viewing a feature film, EXCEPT when they're watching faces, places, and hands--all external stimuli. (This research--the only of its kind--discusses what's actually going on in people's brains when they are watching film.) Nor did the authors directly address learners' worldviews and how they affect expectations, reactions, and the impact of films--which is huge.

I suppose I'm talking myself into writing a book to fill these gaps, aren't I? After having searched far and wide, there's very little available to help teachers both select and use film effectively. In our media-saturated society, it's a very good skill for teachers to develop, but one not as obvious or simple as might be assumed.

These criticisms aside, this book takes a leap forward in helping teachers who want joy and excitement--not to mention learning--to return to their classrooms. For anyone unconvinced how involved kids get with movies, just visit the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) forums. Kids are watching and discussing movies with or without responsible adult guidance. As educators, we're missing a huge opportunity here. This book--via highly practical and well-thought-out methods that are, in fact, based on theory--is an excellent start of a return to relevance in the classroom.

As a teacher of film studies in high school, I have found this book to be an invaluable source. It is full of intelligent, comprehensive and workable plans for teaching all kinds of films. I recommend it highly.

This book is full of excellent suggestions on how to teach film to young adults and help students analyze what they're viewing. It provides a very workable strategy for using film in the classroom, as well as gives great suggestions on unique film titles to use with students. Any teacher wanting to use films in class should check out this book!

This book is great for creating plans to teach film and media literacy to secondary school students.

If you are a huge Roswell fan, get this book. It is packed full of questions and answers and 8 pages of pictures. It is a small paperback book but alot of info inside.

I love this book it really let me see how much I actually knew about ROSWELL and I knew alot more than I thought I did Great for any Roswell Lover like myself to see if your obssessed or just a fan. I found out that I am DEFINETLY OBSSESSED....

I thought I knew everything about Roswell--before I picked up this book! I was shocked at how much I didn't know. It's jam-packed with every little factoid possible.

UFO Research and Investigation: How much do you really know about the crash of '47? This section starts off with you as an FBI agent, being tested on how much you know about the crash, and the suspects living in Roswell. Better study hard, or you'll end up with a desk job!

The Real Investigation: More questions about the different characters. Are you as informed as Nasedo, or are you as in the dark as Kyle?

Friends, Lovers, and Enemies: Do you know what the terms Candygirl, Dreamgirl, and Stargazer refer to? If not, you'll be in trouble in this section!

Do You Remember When?: How good are you with dates? This section covers dates ranging from the UFO crash in 1947 to Liz's first diary entry.

Episode Highlights: If you missed any episodes from season 1, this chapter could be tough. It asks questions about each season 1 episode--fill in the blank!

Grand Total: This is the section where all your totals are calculated! Are you a True Believer, or just a Tourist? I didn't do very well the first time I took the quiz, but I've done better each time I've taken it. I'm definitely a True Believer! This book is a must-have for any Roswell obsessive! As an added bonus, there are also color photos of each main member of the season one cast.

i thought i was pretty up to date on roswell until i bought this
book. this book will have you scratching your head pondering if
you are truly a roswell fan or just pretending. i did about average and i love the show. take the quiz if you dare to find
out what your roswell iq is.

I first saw this in a CommArts Magazine and couldn't beleive the images. This was also my introduction to Jorge Luis Borges who is now one of my favorite authors.

Featured in the photographer's epilogue is the claim that he began juxtaposing items such as snakes, skulls, and hands with mysterious books in Latin, Greek, Spanish and other languages before connecting his photographic inspiration with the literary inspiration of Borges. Once he understood the connection, however, it seems the influence of Borges contaminated him; several photographs not only capture Borges's enthusiasm for the enigmas within books and words, they quote the Argentine master within them. Therein lies my favorite aspect of this wonderful book: the photographer's particular fascination with secret books overlaps with yet remains distinct from Borges's particular fascination with the same subject, creating--as with Edward Fitzgerald and Omar Khayyam--a dialogue that is more beautiful and valuable together than apart.

As with Borges' writing, there is nothing quite like this stunningly original, evocative collection of photographs. The images contain all the elements for which the writer was so admired: paradox, beauty, and elemental simplicity. If you have any reverence for books as objects, or as vessels for meaning, then you should possess this "secret" book.

interwoven with poems and stories by borges are these stunning, surreal representations of books as objects of art and mystery. while none of them "illustrate" the text, they follow a parallel theme.

the imagination behind these compositions is both uplifting and a little scary. the notion of a text composed completely of small beetles opens all sorts of interesting possibilities. my only complaint is the binding- this would have made a beautiful hardcover.

The review posted below by David Kathman succinctly summarizes the content of this scholarly polemic against the absurdities of the literary "Oxford Movement". I just wish to note that the 1999 paperback edition is a straight reprint of the 1994 hardbound. Therefore, while it addresses the orthodox Looney-Ogburn-Whalen school of anti-Stratfordianism, there is nothing about more recent mutations. Readers who want to keep up to date on the controversy should take a look at Professor Kathman's Shakespeare Authorship Web site, which discusses virtually all of the Oxfordian arguments and links to such interesting material as a complete edition of the Earl of Oxford's extant letters, which may prove disillusioning to those who cherish an image of the earl as a polymathic genius.

Even though it does not swat the very latest fantasies of Authorship Cultism, "Shakespeare, In Fact" is both entertaining and useful. Reading it will leave one better informed about not only the narrow question of who wrote Shakespeare but also the broader context of the Elizabethan stage and Renaissance literature.

Irvin Matus's Shakespeare, IN FACT

Reviewed by Thomas A. Pendleton

The Shakespeare Newsletter, Summer 1994

The authorship controversy -- which nowadays is tantamount to saying the Oxfordian hypothesis -- is not often seriously investigated by Shakespeare scholars. There are a number of reasons why, with sheer cowardice and fear of being found out and losing tenure relatively low on the list. Almost all Shakespeareans, I expect, are aware that claims for any rival author are based on assertions and inferences about Shakespeare's biography, his inadequate education, the absence of his manuscripts, the plays' erudition, aristocratic bias, knowledge of Italian geography, and so on; assertions and inferences that are untenable and have been shown to be untenable. Most libraries can supply the Shakespearean with some older, but very useful, treatments of the subject, notably Frank W. Wadsworth's graceful and cogent survey, The Poacher from Stratford, and Milward Martin's energetically argued Was Shakespeare Shakespeare?. And probably nearer to hand is Shakespeare's Lives, which reviews the controversy in a longish section called "Deviations." For most Shakespeareans most of the time, Schoenbaum sufficeth.

A number of other considerations militate against the Shakespearean's engaging the topic. Public debates and moot courts, favorite venues for proponents of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, are far more compatible to categorical pronouncements than to the laborious establishment of detail, context, and interpretation required to counter them, not to mention doing so with enough panache to win the approval of a non-specialist audience. Shakespeareans sometimes take the position that even to engage the Oxfordian hypothesis is to give it countenance it does not warrant. And, of course, any Shakespearean who reads a hundred pages on the authorship question inevitably realizes that nothing he can say or write will prevail with those persuaded to be persuaded otherwise.

Perhaps the mos! t daunting consideration for the scholar who intends to seriously examine this claim is the volume and nature of the research that will be demanded. To begin with, he must become completely familiar with the nearly 900 pages of Charlton Ogburn's The Mysterious William Shakespeare, the authorized version of Oxfordianism, and then proceed to test at least a wide sampling of random claims of other adherents. He will continually be faced with the prospect of dealing with gratuitous assertions as if they were serious scholarly conclusions, and the necessity of demonstrating such assertions to be incoherent in the appropriate context, or based on incomplete or selective evidence, or logically faulty, or some combination thereof. The research required will be extremely demanding, much of it in quite recondite areas where very few have boldly gone before. He probably ought also to curb his natural temptation to say snide things when refuting especially preposterous claims.

As remarkable as it sounds, Irvin Leigh Matus, in his Shakespeare, IN FACT (New York: Continuum, 1994), has managed to perform all of these tasks, even the last. (Well, he's pretty restrained, anyhow.) Matus notes with some sympathy "The great frustration of the Oxfordians... that academic Shakespeareans do not pay attention to their scholarship nor address their questions." He adds, "It is also their great fortune," which he then proceeds to demonstrate.

To the best of my knowledge, no previous Shakespeare scholar has engaged so much of what Oxfordians have presented as evidence for their positions, or has done so as thoroughly. Matus gives not just fair, but even patient, hearing; and in many instances where a less forbearing respondent might give a short answer, he explores and explains in further detail.

Among such instances is the claim that Ben Jonson's "Sweet swan of Avon" actually refers to the Earl, whose manor at Bilton was on the Avon river and presumably frequented by swans. It might be thought ! sufficient to observe that the phrase is a direct address in a poem directly addressed "To My Beloved Mr. William Shakespeare," and that the epithet's reference to Shakespeare is, quite superfluously, confirmed in the dedication of the Beaumont and Fletcher folio (of which, more later). Matus, however, performs the supererogatory work of tracking down the history of the Bilton estate. It eventuates that Oxford leased it out in 1574, sold it in 1581, and never regained possession. This particular sweet swan had flown off 42 years before Jonson's poem.

The orthodox claim that The Tempest relies on the Bermuda pamphlets of 1610 cannot be allowed by de Vere's proponents, whose man died in 1604. Other and earlier accounts have been proposed, notably the 1592 shipwreck, off Bermuda, of the Edward Bonaventure, a ship supposed to be connected with Oxford, perhaps even to be the vessel he commanded against the Armada. Matus gives the short answer -- consult Bullough's standard work on the sources for the parallels to William Strachey's 1610 letter on behalf of the Virginia Company -- but he also resurrects the history of the ship. He demonstrates that Oxford's only connection was to consider buying it in 1581, it fought in the Armada campaign under other command, and neither of the two supposed eye-witnesses described its wreck for the very good reason that neither was on board.

The engraving of the Stratford Monument in William Dugdale's 1656 Antiquities of Warwickshire is a favorite artifact for Oxfordians. The picture differs in a number of respects from the monument we know; notably, it lacks the quill and paper which the figure of Shakespeare now holds. Proceeding from this, it is supposed that these items were added when the monument was restored in 1748, probably to enhance its literary aura for the tourist trade; the cushion on which the figure now seems to write is accordingly assumed to originally have been a bag of grain, appropriate to Shakespeare's local reputation as a malt jobber. Pre! vious commentators have been content to cite the letter of Joseph Greene, the local schoolmaster and curate in 1748, to the effect that the restoration was committed only to preserving the original design; that a number of Dugdale's plates are similarly in error is also frequently stated. Matus cites Greene, and more importantly, he too denies Dugdale's reliability -- but not just at the level of assertion. He provides a couple of comparable examples of Dugdale's inaccuracy -- the Clopton and Carew tombs in Holy Trinity Church -- and clinches his argument with the instance of the effigy on the Beauchamp tomb in Warwick. As with the Stratford Monument, here we have existing statuary inaccurately portrayed in the Antiquities, we have the record of an intervening restoration begun in 1674, and, in greater detail, we have records of the restoration that seem to insist that no alterations were introduced. We also know who planned and supervised the restoration: none other than William Dugdale.

Shakespeare, IN FACT is continually generous in treating such claims with a respect appropriate to far more firmly based conclusions by providing abundant materials to refute them. It also strikes me as remarkable restraint, perhaps even mansuetude, that the book never mentions any of the most hirsute of Oxfordian suppositions: that the Earl of Southampton was the illegitimate son of Vere and Queen Elizabeth, for instance; or that Ben Jonson murdered Shakespeare.

No one in Shakespeare's lifetime, or the first two hundred years after his death, expressed the slightest doubt about his authorship.

Irvin Leigh Matus should be commended for his industry. It must be hard work wading through the anti-Stratfordian swamp.

I am writing in regarding to the following "review" of SHAKESPEARE, IN FACT by Irvin Leigh Matus posted on Amazon.com:

----------------------------------

0 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
Nice try, Irv, April 23, 2003

Reviewer: A reader

You know, the Stratfordians change punctuation of 400-year-old documents in order to further their cause. This author can't be trusted. It's a book for those who want their myths propped up, not demolished. Nice going, Mr. Matus.

----------------------------------

I happen to be Irvin Leigh Matus - that Irvin Leigh Matus (just to make sure I am not confused with the untold other Irvin Leigh Matuses). I will here note this letter is not intended for publication on the Amazon website, or anywhere else.

I feel some temptation to let this review remain online. I share Samuel Johnson's faith in the "common sense" of "common readers," which is justified by their unanimous rejection of this posting. I imagine with pleasure that its author may visit it from time to time to learn it has captured little interest and been judged to have no value. The results, however, do not negate the intentions of this "reviewer" or the substance of the review. Further, the small number who took the trouble to enter their negative opinion of the review undoubtedly do not reflect the far larger number who saw it and did not give their opinion, some of whom may have come away with a negative disposition toward the reliability of the book and its author.

The only thing in my book that might be the candidate for his/her review is a lawsuit written in Latin, which is discussed on pages 39-40 of my book, in which I give a full account of its interpretation. It so happens, aware that the Latin used in legal documents was different from the classical Latin as it was then taught, I spent ten months seeking someone with expertise in these documents. The punctuation was not, as charged, changed - the document is in fact unpunctuated - and the punctuation added was supplied to me in written form by the scholar mentioned (who is not a Shakespearean but an expert in wills, deeds, lawsuits and similar documents; he requested anonymity after giving the information to me because he didn't wish to be hounded by the controversialists - which the review in question justifies).

If this is indeed the item in question, perhaps Anonymous doubts the honesty of my claim that I consulted an experienced, respected archival scholar (page 40). I was in fact directed to him by the then rare books librarian of the Library of Congress' Law Library, and I still have the scholar's handwritten notes with his signature, which include his request that I "not cite this as a communication from me."

Two things need to be noted about the content of Anonymous' charge. First, by not identifying the specific item at issue, it could be anything in my book. It is the rule of controversialist scholarship, the error rate of which hovers around 100 percent, that a single flaw in a work of orthodox scholarship, whether perceived or actual - or fabricated - is sufficient in their eyes to cast doubt upon the accuracy and authenticity of the entire work. Second, Anonymous' primary purpose is clearly to impugn both my standards of scholarship and my integrity as a scholar.

It should be noted that in the ten years since the publication of my book, it has been reviewed and commented upon by scores of Shakespeareans and Oxfordians (many more of the latter) and this review is the only instance I know of in which my integrity has been attacked or I have been accused of falsifying facts. This is also the first time I have openly responded to a criticism of my book.

To the point, even without the foregoing, I am surprised that Amazon.com would publish an unspecific charge of falsified data by someone unwilling to give either his/her name or email address. Whereas I understand that it may not be feasible to research the accuracy and authenticity of what reviewers say, the form and content of this review should have raised caution flags. Circulating such blind remarks invites all kinds and all degrees of false charges.

This is especially significant because I suspect that more people may get opinion about a book from Amazon.com reviews than any other source. As you must be aware of Amazon.com's influence on the perception of a book, it should be especially wary of posting a review that contains statements that attack an author and his work anonymously. Nor should an allegation of scholarly malfeasance be put online that does not mention the specific item in which it is alleged to occur. There is, however, a compelling reason for not publishing such things on a website, which is that the publisher can be held accountable. Laws against libel do not stop at the portals of the Internet. Perhaps a still more compelling reason from Amazon's point of view is that it discourages sales of books, which authors don't much like either.

I therefore request that this review be removed from the Amazon.com website.

With my thanks for your attention,

Irvin Leigh Matus

i had this shipped to my dad for his birthday and he loved it and said that it was packaged nicely and shippment was fast.

This is a fantastic, wholesome cartoon. Finally, something that is fun for young and old alike. I find myself calling the kids in so I don't feel guilty about watching it alone. This cartoon has everything: a good messsage, and a lot of fun. This book is a perfect companion. We've had a lot of fun with trivia questions when were out.

Very cute book for fans of Spongebob. Has lots of pictures and info on Spongebob and where he lives. It is definitley worth it for the price.

I am a big fan of Spongebob, despite my age. Yes, the cartoon is for young kids, around 5 - 10, but the producers made it sure that there are jokes that is aimed for mature audiences, to entertain watching parents or to those who are simply looking to feed their inner child.

Now the book, I can say is very informative and funny. You can learn a lot that surrounds the life of our yellow, squared friend; from what he thinks about his friends to the menu and price of the foods in the Krusty Krabs - all said in Spongebob fashion - stupidly funny. There are only a few quizzes though(so why call it trivia book?), like a driving quiz(it starts like a real driving test, but ends up very funny and silly, number 9 and 10 cracked me up!), and match up who said certain quotes(which I admit is quite challenging). Infos about the cartoons (and out) are in this book too.

I gave it 4 stars because for a Spongebob fanatic, there are only a few things that you dont know. Most of it, you do; and some parts here are taken from episodes, like how to blow a bubble("do this"?, to those who seen it in TV we know its from an episode, but to those who hasnt wont get it - they should have added pictures to those!). I think it is more aimed for newer fans, and to the very fanatic of fanatics... in the end, I still recommend this book, cuz even though we know most of it, the way they explained it still makes you laugh, its like watching reruns of Spongebob, we know what will happen but will still bring tons of laugh.