Papers Books

"The Heart of the Master" begins with a vision of blood and terror. This is the way Crowley always imagined the New Aeon would arrive, since it involves a radical shift in human consciousness. Form this terror, the Great Beast is taken into the halls of the Great White Brotherhood and takes his place among the other Avatars from all Aeons past.

This work is among the more readable Class A (inspired) documents. The flow from one passage to the next is more logical than some of the more ponderous tomes such as the Book of the Heart Girt Round by the Serpent. This is because it basically celebrates Crowley's rise to power as the head of the O.T.O.

The edition includes a fanciful tale of this ascention, and an illustrated meditiation on each of the Trumps of the Thoth Tarot. A very good work of Crowley's, presented with historical context by the editior.

This rare book details Aleister Crowley's ascension as the prophet of a new Aeon, the Aeon of Horus. Out of all the Aleister Crowley books in mass market format, this stood out in memory years after I read it as one of Crowley's most disturbing works. In fact, I questioned my new faith in Crowley's religion Thelema reading this book; this was for real and not a joke. After contemplating, I thought it would be worth it stick with this because witchcraft is now a cool thing amongst today's youth and Crowley was a famous early form of witchcraft as we know it today. This is serious stuff, I wouldn't mess around with this unless you are interested in the occult. It should be noted that real life ritual magick as described in these type of works really do work; I did a ritual from Necronomicon and Lesser Key of Solomon to help with a college Astronomy course- I got a respectable C grade when I close to failing with a D-. But be prepared for some harassment aboyt alleged satanism.

I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.
Topic of Metaphysics is Ousia=substance and being. What is the meaning of being? With respect to matter and form, it is primarily about form. Analytically both can be separate and distinct, but not in reality. One can analyze matter by potentiality and actuality. Matter can't answer the question of being without form. Some natural things are always a composite of matter and form, it is the answer to the question of what is ousia or being in nature. Matter by itself can't give us the answer to what a thing is.

Ousia=substance and being. Ousia= Being is the "this" spoken of in primary ousia. This is contrary to Plato. Categories vs. Metaphysics. We can talk of the "being" as quality as "not white." Being spoken of in many ways but only of one thing, i.e., "the focal being." Word being has flexibility. Other flexible words is essence. (the what it is to be). In Greek for Aristotle, a bed is not an Ousia because it is from techne=craft it can have an essence. Ousia is reserved for material things self manufactured in nature. All things are derived from a primary ousia.
This has to do with focal being, health is such a word. When we talk about different aspects of health, it is not a universal definition like Socrates looks for. Aristotle says you can't find it. Thus, the word "being" is just a word in a sense a focal point like the word health, i.e. healthy skin, healthy food, then there is health, for Socrates what is health. Aristotle says no, health is unity by analogy. Aristotle is OK with using examples. Math is not independent knowledge, it is dependent on things math is not a primary existence. Being is neither a universal nor a genus, (genus is animal in hierarchy). It is as though Aristotle wants to say that the primary meaning of being is the "this" the subject, i.e. Socrates not human all by itself, not animal all by itself.

Ousia= Being is the "this" spoken of in primary ousia. This is contrary to Plato. Categories vs. Metaphysics. "This" is ontologically primary. Ontological= the most general branch of metaphysics, concerned with the nature of being.

In the categories discussion, he doesn't talk about the distinction between matter and form, it comes later on in the Physics and then the Metaphysics. The "this" is ontologically primary in terms of what the "being" something, what something is. Why would it be wrong to say that primary ousia can't be primary from the standpoint of knowledge, it can't be the distinction between ontological and epistemological? Why would it be wrong to say that the "this" the perceptible encounter wouldn't be primary from the standpoint of knowledge? Because, whatever the categories are whatever the notions of say "horse" the "this" is a horse, the "this" is ontologically primary, but it can't be epistemologically primary because a "this" by itself is just a "this" the question "What is this" called a horse is to involve the categories of knowledge. Therefore, from a knowledge standpoint, secondary ousia, which is things like categories and context, they have primacy in knowledge. However, from the standpoint of "being" the perceptible "this" has primacy. This is just a technical way of distancing him from Plato. In the Metaphysics, the question of form is primary Ousia. Ousia =form in Metaphysics. In Metaphysics, the "this" is simply matter. Aristotle did not give up on Ousia as form. This matter and form is never separated for Aristotle, thus a composite of matter and form is in the Metaphysics. In realm of nature, form and matter can't be separated for Aristotle. If you only talk about matter, you have nothing definable. You never come across things without their form. God is only exception to form and matter together.

Ousia as form and essence. The essence of a thing is "what" it is, it gives us knowledge. Definition= essence. Bronze can't be essence of circle, the form is important, not the matter.
Can't use abstract math to explain a human. When it comes to knowledge, we must emphasize the ousia as form. It isn't that first you have material things, and then the mind adds form to it, whatever the particular thing is, it always was that form. Then when we learn about it, we actually just discover what the thing is. Therefore, it is a process of coming to understand the universal, the essence, but that was always there in the thing, it just needed to be done. So what he is emphasizing in the Metaphysics is the idea of ousia as form, as some kind of essence, but never separated from matter!

Ousia --1. Grammatically basic. 2. Ousia As Ontologically basic, something that exists in its own right. The 1st example is how humans speak, the 2nd example is how things really are, both are both side of the same coin.

Principle of Noncontradiction
Arche= principle, beginning and rule. Aristotle thought that this was the firmest of all principles. It is impossible for the same thing to both belong and not to belong to the same thing at the same time to the same thing in the same respect. An important governing thought in Western philosophy. A thing is what it is, it can't be equal to its opposite. Aristotle thought reality was organized this way. It has to do with both knowledge and being. Aristotle states that if this principle is true then it is the firmest of all principles both for knowledge and reality. In the same respect, what does it mean? It shifts depending on circumstances. From standpoint of knowledge and reality principle of noncontradiction is stable. The three factors of the principle are: the same thing, in the same time, in the same respect, is what Aristotle is calling the principle of noncontradiction. In order for knowledge to be reliable, these factors are in play. Can't be going up and down a hill at the same time. 1 of 3 factors has changed, time. A "hill" is both up and down but meaningless unless you think in relation of motion. Aristotle believes when it comes to knowledge and reality the principle of noncontradiction is most basic and most fundamental and evident principle, because without it we can't communicate or think about things. Aristotle explains well how we lead our life by the principle a very pragmatic explanation. This is a principle we live by as humans thus, no one can deny it!
If you talk about change as a potentiality, you have a way of solving the puzzle. This actually serves as a slap at Renee Descartes in the future wondering if he is conscious or in a dream state. All philosophy stems from wonder and puzzlement. Aristotle makes distinction between worthy puzzles or useless ones.

Emphasis between primary and secondary being, Ousia.
For Aristotle Ousia or being is not just a thing, many ways being can be understood. Primary Ousia is things perceptible in nature. Secondary Ousia or being is sometimes being is how we understand things, i.e., big or small, etc, this is how we talk about things. He stretches the way Ousia in many ways. Matter can't be primary being like atomists, nor form alone like Platonists. However, when we analyze beings, we can use secondary being. Idea of "is" or "being" will shift depending on what you are talking about. The term "being" has plurality to it, depending on how we regard it (like using a hammer as a paperweight). Even though Metaphysics emphasizes form, it is "this form." Primary thing is the "this."

He wants to move away from Plato's idea that we can separate matter from form. A things essence is going to be the ultimate answer to the question of what is being. However, a things essence can't be separated from its statement of thing, it is almost as though that this essence is going to mean the definition of a thing, "what it is." Then in some respects, it has the characteristics of a secondary being. If you want to know what is the big deal about the perceptible "this," the primary ousia? Again, and again, the best way you can get a handle on that is he is critiquing Plato! He wants to move away from Plato's idea that it is possible to understand beings apart from the material world. Aristotle does make certain commitments; he makes certain commitments to the idea that the primary sense of being must be used in nature that are evident to us.

The Platonist in Aristotle says if the mind desires and is naturally inclined to pursue knowledge and he gives us a map how does it acquire knowledge. The Platonist in Aristotle says in the Metaphysics that if all there is, is matter and form then there is always an element of elusiveness in things because matter cannot fully deliver how we know things. When he gets to the question of the Divine, he does so because he believes that the natural desire of the mind can know that it will not have a final resting place with respect to just composite things. Especially since these composite things are always changing because nature is the realm of movement and change and the idea of form will at least give us access to how we can know changing things and actuality and potentiality. Changing things will always have this element of excess, beyond the minds capacity to grasp.

His talk of the Divine is the idea that there is something in reality that will satisfy the minds' desire for the ultimate stable resting point. If change were the last word, the mind could never come to rest. This is what Heraclitus argued for, Aristotle didn't like it. He wants to grasp the final. For him the Divine is satisfaction for the mind to grasp reality.
Uber Ousia. Aristotle here is talking about 2 senses of eternity.

1. Endless time.
2. Timelessness. 1st is never begins, never ends this is eternity or infinity. 2nd is in order to understand whole world there has to be something, the unmoved mover.

Ideas of potentiality and actuality criticizes Platonic idea. Potentiality has idea of negation in it. Thus, a thing in nature always has actuality; we are always on the move. Divine is pure form and actuality without matter and potentiality. Ontology now moves to theology. This is his theological science. (Theology in the Metaphysics is speaking about God for Aristotle). In reality, composite of form and matter is always in motion until it ends. Any actualization has potentiality it is prior. Actuality is prior to potentiality; this is his ultimate metaphysical statement. Two ways Aristotle proves this idea. 1st is human reproduction brings us into being. Our parents actually reproduced us. 2nd is God the ultimate sense of actuality prior to potentiality.

Talking about other philosopher's ideas. Hesiod question of the Gods in poetry, night comes before day, thus we don't have access in the "dark" symbolic of precedence of something unknowable, and Aristotle doesn't like it. Thus, for him he has the unmoved mover.
The pure actuality of the Divine is Aristotle's nominee for the principal that explains why there is this movement in the first place. Limitation in nature is matter which is unstable but all things in nature strive to their potential. Thus, you have pure actuality of Divine. God is Prime mover or final cause not efficient cause for Aristotle.

Rational and non-rational potentiality. This is how Aristotle recognizes the phenomenology of human thought. What rational means here is human drama of seeking what might or not work out. Now rational is stable when you heat water it boils no other potentiality. Thus, non-rational movement is very regular. Human reason is precarious we may not use potentiality to reach actuality. When we practice medicine, it might not work out.

Theoria=contemplation. There are three kinds of ousia, all are a study of secondary ousia in some way.

1. Physics-study of material and moveable.
2. Mathematical-study of ousia that is non-moving, (1+1=2 always), but is derived from matter.
3. Theology is study of ousia that is non-moving and non-material.

This is scheme of understanding the nature of understanding something. 3rd level is big for Aristotle. 1st two levels have limitations to them. We begin from wonder (ignorance) philosophy is to illuminate wonder with answers. He doesn't deny Greek deities but the way poets depict them is deficient.

Movement is a way of understanding change we see this in the Physics. Movement is actualization of potential. Psuche=soul which is the word he uses for life. Things in nature that are alive. Soma=body. Plato separates soul from body, Aristotle doesn't. Aristotle's text De Anima is on "The Soul" is a philosophical biological treatise. We have three-part soul, plant, animal and human all are part of this.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy. Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

Terence Irwin is to be thanked and congratulated for translating a difficult work by Aristotle and for providing over one hundred pages of notes that helps the student to understand and appreciate Aristotle's classic work on Ethics.

Irwin's notes are thorough and allow a person to study the Ethics without a professor. Most of us, however, need a teacher when it is time to read Aristotle. And a teacher who uses Irwin's translation will be greatly appreciated by students. I become convinced of this each semester since my college Ethics class is centered on Aristotle's Ethics and Irwin makes my job much, much easier.

Here's what I've learned. Why does Aristotle think that the life of pleasure is not the best life?

Pleasure is not the highest good for Aristotle because:
1. Happiness is continuous and pleasure is not (1177 a 20);
2. Pleasure is good and allows us to get back to the hard work of virtue (1175 a 20);
3. The philosopher should learn how to make the hard work of virtue pleaurable (1176 a 1);
4. Pleaure is a limited action of the body but happiness is the unlimited action of the mind (1177 b
25);
5. Pleasure is a tool for happiness, just as money, power, fame, beauty and priviledge (1099 b 1);
6. And happy people know that the best pleasure is found in friendship (1155 a 5).

Next, whether the life of pleasure might be excellent? Yes, since
1. The happy and excellent person can usually figure out the genuine cause of pleasure (1174 a 15);
2. Pleasure is natural and necessary for life (1172 b 10);
3. But there's more to life than amusing oneself all day (1176 b 35). What is there more to life? Making pleasure inferior to friendship, since friends will encourage us to do the hard work of virtue.

Imagine my delight as a paper doll collector to find these beautiful books about Girl Scouts. Imagine my further delight to find that the author is Kathryn McMurtry Hunt, who was in my Brownie and Girl Scout groups long ago in Lubbock, Texas! They are beautifully done and sure to bring on a great big Brownie smile for Girl Scouts current and long past!

This is an excellent book for any leader wanting to educate her troop on the history of Girl Scouts. There are many badges at the Brownie and Junior level that can be earned, in part, by using this book. It is written at a level for girls of all ages. I hope Ms. Hunt continues this series to present day uniforms with the diary notes. Very interesting book. Thanks.

The stated purpose of the authors in this book is to bring order to the variety of models that have appeared in the analysis of international trade policy in imperfectly competitive markets. Throughout the book they rely on partial equilibrium models. When there are cases in which general equilibrium effects alter conclusions, the authors point them out.

The three central issues that recur in this book are the effects of trade policy on market power, the strategic effect of trade policy on competition and the effect of trade policy on consumer choice.

The defining feature of imperfect competition is that firms do not take prices as given. As a result they do not regard the sole effect of selling another unit of output on their revenue as being the price of that unit; they have some conjecture about what effect selling more will have on the revenue they get from inframarginal sales. The end result is that price normally exceeds marginal cost.

The ratio of price to marginal cost is one measure of market power. A trade policy may alter the markup of price over marginal cost in ways that are benefitial or harmful to the country that initiates the policy.

This book shows that problems involving market power can be analyzed by focusing on perceived marginal revenue -- the increase in revenue that a firm expects to receive by producing one more unit, which is always less than the price (because of the effect on intramarginal sales) but may exceed the true marginal revenue that would prevail if the industry acted in concert.

An aspect of the new literature on trade policy under imperfect competition is the possibility that interventionist trade policies may have beneficial strategic effects. A strategic move is an action that is not profitable viewed in isolation but that alters the terms of subsequent competition to a firm's benefit. For instance, a firm may invest in excess capacity that it does nor intend to use, but whose presence deters potential competitors from entering the market. Government trade policies may serve the same kind of role.

Some questions that this book brings up in this regard are: How likely is it that a government will be able to have the information necessary to conduct a successful strategic policy? and Are there likely to be offsetting effects in the kind of industry to which the strategic trade argument might apply?

Making a commodity is costly, but if its price exceeds its marginal cost, then the resources used to produce it might not have an equally productive use elsewhere. In priciple, policies that induce consumers to purchase domestic goods whose price surpasses marginal cost may raise national income.

Protection can under some circumstances induce an increase in domestic production that actually lowers prices to consumers.

Arguments based on imperfect competition, external economies and factor market distortions have substantial empirical support and are the most powerful professionally respectable arguments against free trade.

In international trade policy analysis, distortions that could justify government intervention were superimposed on a theoretical structure whose logic was that of competitive equilibrium. In the new theory the imperfections are built into the structure from the get go.

The reasons for treating trade policy conclusions cautiously are: 1) Uncertainty, the effects of a given policy may depend crucially on the details of the market. 2) Domestic political economy, there are people eager to appropriate the result of new trade theories to support dubious causes. 3) International rivalry, a policy that benefits one country acting unilaterally may be harmful if everyone does it.

Since quantitative analyses seem to indicate that the gains from even optimal intervention are small, many economists have suggested that free trade remains a useful rule of thumb, even though it is rarely optimal in modern trade policies.

The book develops the arguments gradually, starting with market structures that exhibit one-sided market power and moving on to those that show two-sided market power. After providing background on trade policy in a competitive environment, the authors discuss import protection by a country with a domestic monopoly or oligopoly. Then they deal with import protection in an economy that faces a foreign monopoly or oligopoly, while domestic supply is nonexistant or competitive.

Later in the book strategic interactions come in to play beginning with an export-market scenario whereby domestic firms with monopoly power compete with foreign firms with monopoly power too. This is followed by an exploration of the role of strategic interactions in a domestic market in which domestic firms with market power compete with foreign firms with market power as well.

Trade policy in the presence of two-way trade, which may arise from monopolistic competition in differentiated products or for strategic reasons, is also examined in this volume. Finally, the authors review the recent literature that tries to quantify the effects of trade policy in noncompetitive environments. The new methodology and the numerical results are discussed.

There are four main areas in the analysis of trade policy under imperfect competition that deserve further investigation: 1) Models of market structure that make size distribution of firms endogenous. 2) Models of cooperative behavior to reflect some real-world activities of oligopolists. 3) Models with real dynamics in which trade policy can change the long-run rate of growth. 4) Quantification to confront the models with data so as to narrow down the possibilities.

In its time, this was a ground-breaking book. Hopefully, since its publication in 1989, economic researchers around the world could have taken note of the fields where deeper work was needed and made significant progress in constructing better models. By now, there should be already something in print that sums up the gains in the past decade, so it would be advisable to try to look up these updated books too.

This slim volume presents the normative theory of international trade under imperfect competition in a systematic manner. One cannot help but come away from it with a profound sense of caution about the advisablility of policies aimed at shifting rents. This ought to be required reading for all policymakers interested in "strategic trade theory." Unfortunately, it is not.

If you are contemplating the clearing away of housemate complexity, Henderson's House Rules offers a guide to domestic bliss. Leaving this around the house is sure to tempt anyone into reading "the rules" of the living-in-the-same-house game.

The humor in this book is especially enjoyable, occasionally subtle and at other times brilliant. The solutions for everyday challenges could be as simple as a division of labor or pet training. Of course, many of the items will either make you laugh or cause you to consider how your life could be improved with a few simple adaptations of behavior.

If only life was perfect, my husband would let me run the dishwasher while he was watching TV after dinner, he would never ever leave clothes by the bed and I would never leave dishes in the sink to soak. My theory on the matter is that whatever doesn't annoy us doesn't need to be changed.

I like the rule about cleaning the kitchen: "Clean as soon as possible after cooking unless there is a valid reason not to." Valid reasons are also included but could be expanded to include things like: taking a bubble bath. Sometimes I'm too tired to do all the dishes after dinner and have much more energy in the morning.

Some of the highly entertaining issues include:

Things you can and can't do in bed if you don't sleep alone.
Television
Cooking Versus Cleaning

Henderson's House Rules will be very useful for roommates or for couples who want to share house duties. As someone who alternates between leaving the house in total chaos and complete obsessive cleaning, this book shows the way to balance.

~The Rebecca Review
Lives in a Shoeless House
Currently breaking rules: 1.2, 1.17, 1.19, 2.10, 5.3, 5.6, 5.10 and 6.9. My husband is breaking fewer rules than I am...who knew? It will be fun to compare notes!

Who would have thought that a book would make you re-think such mundane tasks as washing the dishes? This book broaches all kinds of domestic issues, including things you never would have thought about but suddenly seem vital to good domestic order. The style is frank and no-nonsense to the point of being hilarious. The book makes for great bathroom reading, which is appropriate because it will teach you a thing or two about how to maintain that room.
Although it seems to be marketed to newlyweds, the books is perfect for just about anyone: kids leaving the nest for the first time, couples who have been married for 30 years, and even people who live alone.
I don't usually go for overly cute how-to books, but Henderson's House Rules seems to be the exception to that genre. It is without a doubt the most thoroughly useful gift/stocking stuffer type of book I have ever seen.

The characters of Henry, a little boy, and his big dog Mudge, a St. Bernard almost as big as Henry, appeal to my four-year-old. The easy-to-read, fun to listen to style that Cynthia Rylant brings to these stories is so welcoming that they invite you in like a warm and cozy home on a cold winter's night. These three short stories are just a few of the everyday adventures in the life of Henry and Mudge, told with catchy phrases and lots of character expressions to expose the loving friendship that they embrace. With bedtime a challenge for a pre-schooler (who has a wild immagination), we find this particular book a comforting and reassuring way to end a long day. We highly recommend this entire series, but expecially this selection. Our next favorite is "Puddle Trouble," but do read them all!

Massive Mudge is much more than a mere mutt. He is a tail-wagger, toenail-chewer, moth-eater, and breaker of grandmother's things. Most importantly however, he is Henry's best friend. Beginning readers will feel right at home amongst the words and illustrations of Rylant's tender story about a boy and his bog on a visit to grandmother's house. Unobtrusively, Stevenson's iluustrations harmonize with Rylant's words. Where Rylant describes grandmother's "strange house with a dark yard," Stevenson contributes a double-page illustration depicting the darkness of the yard where a racoon, owl, and assorted bats live. The images buttress the comprehension and readability of challenging words without suffocating them in a sea of lines and color. For example, as Henry voices his anxieties about a bear, bobcat, moth, and mouse, simplistic cartoon-like pictures of each animal are nearby, offering visual clues. Chapters punctuate the book's action-filled but will not intimidate young readers, for the five-word lines within do not exceed 10per page. Lengthy words like "fingernails" appear repeatedly and readers can dissect protracted sentences into more manageable chunks with assistance from commas and brief lines: "Henry bit his fingernails, (new line) Mudge bit his toenails, (new line)and the car drove on." Inexperienced readers, reassured by the resolution of Henry's realistic woes of sleeping in a strange new setting, will see this young dog-lover and comic-book-reader as a contemporary and as a source of comfort. With confidence in their reading, children will become lost in this Henry and Mudge adventure.

Reviewed by Kam Aures for RebeccasReads (7/08)

As you can probably discern from the title of the book, "Henry Potty and the Deathly Paper Shortage," is a spoof on author J. K. Rowling's ever-popular Harry Potter series of books. Following in the footsteps of its predecessor, "Henry Potty and the Pet Rock," this newest book by Valerie Estelle Frankel, chronicles more creative adventures of Henry Potty. In this book, Lord Revolting has divided his soul up into seven Plot Devices and it is up to Henry Potter to find and destroy them. There are many challenges to overcome and creatures to defeat like mimes, extremists, and even the Tooth Fairy. Will he be able to destroy the Plot Devices in time or will he be defeated by a paper shortage?

"Henry Potty and the Deathly Paper Shortage" is a silly, hilarious book that is perfect to read when you want to take a break from reality. Travel to Frankel's fantasy world, which is full of outrageous characters and funny story lines, and be prepared for a wild ride! Even with loads of wacky characters and crazy situations the plot flows very smoothly. This relatively short book, at 169 pages, flies by and I read it from cover to cover in one afternoon. It is a perfect summer read and is a great book to take to the beach. However, be prepared for questions if you read the book in a public place! At least three times I got asked, "Does that say `Henry Potty' on the cover?"

The book is very creative and the plays on the original Harry Potter series, as well as on other fairy tales and fantasy characters, are ingenious! I have only read a couple of the books in the Harry Potter series and think that if you are an avid fan you will completely appreciate this parody of the series and will understand all of the humor. Even if you can't stand the original Harry Potter books, I think that you will enjoy this book because of the way it pokes fun at the series. You definitely can't go wrong in choosing Frankel's newest parody!

Reviewed by Kam Aures for RebeccasReads (7/08)

As you can probably discern from the title of the book, "Henry Potty and the Deathly Paper Shortage," is a spoof on author J. K. Rowling's ever-popular Harry Potter series of books. Following in the footsteps of its predecessor, "Henry Potty and the Pet Rock," this newest book by Valerie Estelle Frankel, chronicles more creative adventures of Henry Potty. In this book, Lord Revolting has divided his soul up into seven Plot Devices and it is up to Henry Potter to find and destroy them. There are many challenges to overcome and creatures to defeat like mimes, extremists, and even the Tooth Fairy. Will he be able to destroy the Plot Devices in time or will he be defeated by a paper shortage?

"Henry Potty and the Deathly Paper Shortage" is a silly, hilarious book that is perfect to read when you want to take a break from reality. Travel to Frankel's fantasy world, which is full of outrageous characters and funny story lines, and be prepared for a wild ride! Even with loads of wacky characters and crazy situations the plot flows very smoothly. This relatively short book, at 169 pages, flies by and I read it from cover to cover in one afternoon. It is a perfect summer read and is a great book to take to the beach. However, be prepared for questions if you read the book in a public place! At least three times I got asked, "Does that say `Henry Potty' on the cover?"

The book is very creative and the plays on the original Harry Potter series, as well as on other fairy tales and fantasy characters, are ingenious! I have only read a couple of the books in the Harry Potter series and think that if you are an avid fan you will completely appreciate this parody of the series and will understand all of the humor. Even if you can't stand the original Harry Potter books, I think that you will enjoy this book because of the way it pokes fun at the series. You definitely can't go wrong in choosing Frankel's newest parody!

The cultural and political landscape may never be the same again. The definitive work of Show Biz and Strange Betpartners in and out of the Oval Office. The book is amazingly prophetic in its look ahead from the Clinton first to the second term, with all the right characters.

St George's portrayal of today's social icons is both hilarious and truthfully thoughtprovoking. He leaves noone out it seems as dr hibachi tells you how he sees the world and although satyrical, most of it's not far from the truth.

After reading this book, I must say that this is probably the finest work of Donald Jack. The jokes and punes are so subtle that you can read the book several times (As I have done) and discover new ones each time. A witty and very entertaining book.

For those who have followed the trials of Bart Bandy this book will not only bring you up todate on his misadventures, but bring back the enjoyable moments of his checkered past. If you haven't read the previous Bandy Papers - do so if you can find them. This is the best of his adventures as he trips his way through history. Hilarious!

These cards were even cuter in person! You can't help smiling with the upbeat attitude of Doodle Greetings cards. An added bonus is that they are printed on 100% recycled paper so in a few years you may be writing on the same paper you wrote on this year. After all, people throw away Christmas cards after the season is over. The only draw back was how expensive they are. $1 per card is alot when you're sending out a large amount of cards.

Great quality, thick card stock. The pictures have great colour quality. I bought three different styles from this product and am very satisfied with theses.