Bean Books

Dear Good People:

The books were not what I expected. I ordered two.

I did notice that the text size would have been

better if darker and larger.

I sent the two books back and asked for a refund.

Lyle Christiansen
701 Imperial Drive
Morris , MN 56267

Folks, be warned - this is not a cookbook, although one would think so from the title. It is a very nicely done genealogical work focusing on eastern Kentucky. If you order it thinking it is a cookbook, you will soon be paying the return postage.

An excellent book that covers all the aspect of health problem. Recuuring problems like headache, children problem like thumb sucking has definite solution.

I loved the story and was really looking forward to giving these books to my two GRANDSONS (Damion & Micah). Although I do think they are a bit pricey for what they are. Damion's book was fine when it arrived. Micah's was personalized for a GIRL. I called customer service and returned the book with assurance it would be replaced with the correct one for a BOY named Micah. When the replacement arrived, it was identical to the one I had returned.
There is no place on the order pages to indicate boy or girl. The company (?) just determines which sex the child is. This is poor business, especially in our time of such unusual names.
I finally returned both books and will not order them again.

I ordered 2 of these books for my grandsons Easter baskets. They are great little books, although a bit pricey for what it is.
One of them came in perfect. The other one ordered for my GRANDSON Micah, refers to HIM as a girl. At no time during the online ordering process did it ask for the sex of the child. You need to be very careful when ordering for certain names that can be either boy or girl.

Drive through Decatur, IL on a warm summer afternoon and enjoy its "eau de Decatur" as it wafts across the highway. It's the same aroma that comes from McDonald's when it fires up the deep fryers at lunchtime. Presumably freshly made soybean oil is being heat processed to remove the last traces of impurities. Decatur is the center of the US soybean industry, home to two processors, AE Staley and ADM. Forrestal tells the story of Staley.

Staley was founded by AE Staley Sr in 1897 in Baltimore. As grocery stories moved from bulk barrels of commodities to packaged foods, Staley undertook the packaging of bulk purchased corn starch in convenient one pound packages. His brandname was Cream starch sold for use in cooking but also as laundry starch and wallpaper paste. After a bumpy start, his business grew steadily especially in the East. But once bulk suppliers saw him as a competitor, they threatened his supply. Staley came to Decatur in 1908 by acquiring a defunct corn processing plant to supply his own requirement.

The book gives us an example of a typical midwestern factory town. Staley grew to be a major employer in Decatur. The family lived in town and were prominent leaders of the community. The 14 story company headquarters building was built of limestone in 1928. It was thought to be the largest building of its kind in downstate Illinois. Some called it the castle.

Industrial league sports was an important activity. A star high school player could often get a job with the company based on his athletic ability. Staley saw the teams as a vehicle to promote the Staley product line, much as companies now sponsor race cars. To insure winners, he went the next step and recruited semipro players from across the US to work in his plants and play on the company teams. Forrestal gives the example that the Staley Football Club moved to Chicago and became the Chicago Bears in 1921.

In the early days, corn processing was the core of the company business, but Staley became an early processor of soybeans and a promoter to encourage farmers to raise soybeans. Initially soybeans were raised in crop rotation to enrich the soil between corn corps. It took a while for a full range of markets to develop for soybean products. Paints came early (1920s), and animal feeds soon followed. But use as a vegetable oil in foods and in margarine took longer (1930s). Soy flour was accepted in the food industry, but rejected by consumers. At Staley, corn was always king, but soybean processing eventually became a major business line.

During World War II, Staley worked with International Paper to develop a corrugated box board that would resist water long enough to let the Allies unload war supplies into the ocean. The packages were designed to be floated ashore without excessive losses. Staley developed the starch for the formulation; American Cyanamide provided a urea formaldehyde resin.

By 1946, the company installed a new process for the recovery of soybean oil. Rather than pressing the oil out in "expellers," the new process used hexane to extract the oil. This resulted in greater oil recover from the beans.

In 1947, a shipment of soy sauce sold to downstream bottlers had to be recalled after a raw material, caustic soda, was received in a rail car contaminated with an arsenic containing insecticide.

In 1951, Staley ventured into formulated feeds in competition with its usual soybean meal customers like Ralston Purina. The business failed to make money and had to be discontinued in 1954.

In 1952, Staley worked with Kingsford Charcoal to develop an odorless binder for charcoal briquettes for the home barbeque market. Lignin could be used but was pungent. Dry milled corn flour could be used, but it smelled like burned chicken feathers when burned. Staley won the business and was the exclusive supplier to Kingsford until 1975.

In 1959, Staley acquired UBS Chemical of Cambridge, MA, based on the advice of AD Little, to emphasize new technologies. USB made polymers used in wax, paper, paint and leather finishing. The acquisition failed to mesh with Staley's strong focus on products derived from grain processing. The business was moved to New Jersey, where its significance declined.

The UBS incident dramatizes the corporate culture at Staley based on grain processing and on extensive expertise in buying grains as raw materials. Starch can be viewed as a natural water soluble polymer. Staley missed out on chemically modified starches and on acrylic based synthetic technologies such as superslurpers used in products like disposable diapers and in various synthetic thickeners. The culture seems not to have tolerated synthetics.

In 1963, AE Staley IPOed and became listed on the NYSE.

After World War II, Staley pioneered StaFlo liquid laundry starch. A venture in monosodium glutamate failed when the technology changed. Staley's entry, Zest, gave way to market leader, Accent. Sta-Puf fabric softener originated in 1981, when an Ohio dentist developed the product to prevent itchy collars caused by synthetic detergents. Sno-Bowl toilet bowl cleaner joined the product line in 1962. In 1981, the consumer products business was sold to Purex.

Corn based sweeteners have a long history at Staley. Corn syrup production was begun shortly after World War I in response to sugar shortages. After World War II, the company introduced Sweetose, an enzyme based syrup that was 60% as sweet as sugar and about half again sweeter than traditional corn syrup. In the 60s, a dextrose product was developed that was 80% as sweet as sugar and twice as sweet as corn syrup. The 70s brought the IsoSweet line of high fructose corn syrups, which became the dominant sweetener in soft drinks. The IsoSweet technology came from the Japanese Fermentation Institute's Takasaki-Tanabe enzymes, which were licensed to Clinton Corn Refining Company division of Standard Brands with the right to sublicense. Staley obtained a 10 year sublicense and set about developing customers and an improved process. Gradually over time, improvements were implemented and three plants were built: Morrisville, PA, Lafayette, IN, and Loudon, TN. The Loudon plant also makes ethanol for motor fuels use.

A gunk stream from corn syrup manufacture had long been dried into corn chip sugar, a product sold mostly to leather tanners and fermenters. It was a popular product for use by bootleggers during Prohibition. It was inexpensive and easily fermented to alcohol. Stories are told of gangsters visiting the plant, although Staley sold exclusively to distributors who then supplied various industrial customers. The company used its expertise to buy corn for the Hiram Walker distillery in Peoria. A special corn syrup called Sta-Bru was made for beer makers. It is specially suited to the production of light beers. It increases brewing capacity and reduces residual carbohydrates in beers.

In 1975, HJ Heinz tried to buy Staley, probably for its high fructose corn syrup technology. The hostile takeover offer was rebuffed.

In 1976, Staley acquired four soybean processing plants from Swift & Company, and reemerged as a leader in soybean processing after a long stretch as an also ran.

In 1980 when the book was finished, the company was working on methyl glucoside, which it hoped to market as a new product.

Competitors included Corn Products Refining Company, Cargill, and Union Starch Company. In soybeans, Staley was the leader until 1957, when Cargill took the lead. Archer Daniels Midland, also in Decatur became the second largest processor of soybeans. In corn starch, competitors were Corn Products Company, National Starch, and New York Glucose Co (financed by Standard Oil). New York Glucose later merged with Corn Products to form Corn Products Refining Company. Corn Products has a plant in Argo, IL. In the 1930s Staley was second behind Corn Products in corn processing. Other players included Union Starch and Clinton Refining. ADM is a competitor in high fructose corn syrup.

Purina, Allied Mills and Central Soya were competitors in formulated feeds.

Surprisingly we get no mention of wall board, which uses starch as a binder. There is no mention of USDA research labs. The one in Peoria, IL is famous for its work on new uses of grain products. Its work must have contributed to the Staley research efforts.

The book gives us a glimpse of a typical agribusiness company. Staley went through three generations of family ownership before leadership passed to professional management. Innovation in a low margin commodity business poses special challenges. New products must be large volume to pay their development costs. But payoffs require patience and there is little room for error. In spite of it all, Staley manages to reinvent itself fairly consistently.

This is a nicely done corporate history. It includes the usual family stories and the names of long term employees. Many will enjoy the look inside a typical company.

I'm not sure why you have to purchase these separately from the doll--and definitely not sure they're worth the price. These are pictures of animals printed on fabric that are made into bean bags. They are somewhat shaped around the outlines of the animals, but they are bags nonetheless. I had hoped these would be little animals stuffed with beans (like beanie babies).

I will try to express what I felt about this book. I am an avid reader and Karin Slaughters series with Sara and her husband was one of my favorites.

With the introduction of Lenas life drama in previous books, I was waiting for her to learn from her mistakes and grow. She didnt, hasnt,and now, in this latest book, her actions have lead to the death of someone who always stood by her time and time again. Her character is too ignorant and weak and I have now lost all empathy with her after this book. She should have been the one to open the mailbox...

The story began with Sara so unlike herself, and in an intolerable position, and it ended with even worse...she did not deserve this treatment from the author.

I would have rather had the series end, if that is what is happening, with a divorce...not this darkness and death.

The story started out interesting, lost cohesiveness, and then took a dive..

Im not sure I want to read the author again...

Here is the order in which I approached this book:

1. I discovered and bought it at the airport, lack of anything else looking promising. I (European) was reluctant, as I had been disappointed by a number of recent American "thrillers" in the past; they were too simple, too PC, too much boring filler sentences. Needless to say, "Beyond Reach" was my first "Karin Slaughter" book.

2. I read the book and got completely fascinated by her creative, dense, multi-fold and yet reader-friendly writing style. Slaughter thinks about the tiniest logical details, she builds up enormous suspense, and the best is, she then takes the reader by his hand to make sure he gets all the solutions. I especially liked the two intermingling timelines. It is a literary accomplishment, to keep both those stories alive and connected at the same time like Slaughter does. Also (but this is probably the same with all her books), I like how vividly she relates the somber, thick atmosphere in redneck America to the reader.

3. I check the Amazon page - completely buffled by discovering the disappointed comments of all those faithful readers feeling apparently cheated by this book. I just thought: If this is one of her worse books, how excellent must be all her previous books!

Having been a huge Karin Slaughter fan since the beginning, I can honestly tell you I wouldn't buy one of her books now even if I were about to embark on a 24-hour-train ride through a remote desert, I would much rather read the graffiti on the train's toilet instead.
It's bad enough she kills off the main character, Jeffrey Tolliver, but she has the rudeness, callousness and arrogance to wait until the last page to do so, and, to top it all off, his arm has to go flying across the driveway, and his heart has to be visible, too. Letting him die otherwise wouldn't have been brutal and sensational enough, I guess.
On behalf of all disappointed readers, I'd like to point out that whatever cunning plot twist this lady may have in store for those still willing to pay for her concoctions, it's pure heartless disregard for her faithful readership to pluck this character from life on the very last page.
I will donate every single one of my Slaughter books to the local charity shop, at least some good will come from them.

I will never read another of her books. I feel so betrayed and ripped off. Karin, honey girl, you just killed your writing career, based on all the reviews I've read. You may have had a huge fan base in the past, but you screwed up. You forgot that an author is no-one without their loyal readers. Our loyalty was rewarded with a lousy book and an emotionally devastating ending. So as payback, I won't read you any more.
I only gave you one star because I had to in order to get this review posted. Consider it retracted.

In Beyond Reach, Lena Adams returns to the small town of her youth, where she becomes the prime suspect in a vicious murder. It is up to her boss, police chief Jeffrey Tolliver, and his wife Sara Linton to prove her innocence. Their case is not helped, though, when Lena goes on the run.

This book deals more with the character Lena Adams, than the other books in the series, and I found it quite a depressing read. It's not that I don't like Lena's character, but I feel the author really piles on the misery in this one.

As for the storyline itself, I found that it was quite slow moving for the most part, and only really got me hooked towards the end. Overall, an okay read, but there are better books in the Grant County series.

I have to say I really enjoyed this book, but it's not surprising my review goes against the grain. I found this book a fun read/a different read. I get stuck sometimes reading the same kind of books; historical romance, paranormal romance and modern romance. Killing time was a nice change of pace (a little Sci-fi) and I wasn't disappointed. I actually took some advice from another reviewer and went yesterday and bought a few of her recommended books by Howard. Thanks for the info!

Since I'd read the reviews and knew this book was about time travel and sci-fi, both of which interest me, I liked it. Granted there were a few loose ends but they were minor. The character of Knox caught on with me right away, Nikita took a bit longer.

I love Linda Howard books, but this one just didn't cut it for me. The plot was interesting and would have been MUCH better if the drama surrounding what was in the time capsule were developed more.

The characters were dull and it was really hard to identify with either of them. The idea that Nikita was a "copy" didn't add anything to the story and could have been left out, unless we'd heard something about it from Nikita's mother and/or father. It would have been much more interesting to shuttle back and forth from the future to the past in respect to her family.

It would also have been interesting to have Nikita exploring all the items from the past rather than just saying that "she studied them in preparation for her assignment". It would have been fun to see how she figured out how to use the coffee maker, washing machine/dryer and shower, since those were the items most talked about in Knox's house.

I found the "link" stuff pretty dopey because it wasn't explained exactly how they worked. Just put them on and be transported back and forth? Doesn't seem to make too much sense.

I wouldn't recommend anyone buy this book. I got it from the library and I'm glad I did.

The characters did not interest me as much as I would have liked. There was not much in the way of romantic or emotional development. I much prefer Ms. Howard's other books. Story brief: Bad guys from around 2200 time travel back to 2005 to get something of value. Nikita is an FBI agent from 2200 who travels to 2005 to stop them, but doesn't know what they are looking for. She and the police chief Knox work together and fall for each other. Some people are murdered. The author toys with Nikita's lack of understanding of slang. For example, instead of calling someone a "big baby" she calls him a "large baby." Knox says she might "split". She doesn't know that means "leave." It wasn't that interesting for me. Sexual language: moderate. Number of sex scenes: two. Setting: 1985 and 2005 small town in Kentucky. Copyright: 2005. Genre: time travel mystery story with a little suspense and a little romance.

The plotline is interesting, but what happened to the editor? There are repeats everywhere. In one short paragraph, "this morning" appears three times. Due to poor editing, it was a bit of work to get through what could have been a good story.

What does it mean when someone gets excessively-defensive?
It doesn't express that they have peace or comfort with themselves.

Writing sludge like this just fuels the fire - that I suppose they are trying to put out. If .. there .. WAS .. ever .. a .. fire.

I bought this book hoping for a Christian perspective on the Christian-themed The DaVinci Code by Dan Brown. What I paid for is unabashed preaching on how the Gospel can be spread through never re-interpretting or revisiting the collection of stories called the Bible.

These two theological scholars don't add any additional light to Brown's story nor do they actually show proof that the DaVinci Code couldn't have been true (which, in fact, I agree that most of Brown's work is fictional interpretation.)

It seems like another opportunity for Christians to talk to themselves and reinforce a narrow viewpoint through villianizing the "mass media" and the general population. Pure back-patting fluff.

This book is an excellent affirmation of Christian values that must be read by anyone who didn't realize that "The Da Vinci Code" was a work of fiction. Please reread that sentence; "The Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction, like "Star Trek" or "Harry Potter". Unfortunately, the same people who fail to appreciate this fact are the same people who actually need to read "Cracking Da Vinci's Code," in order to restore balance to a worldview so easily upset by Dan Brown's clever yarn.

Unfortunately, this book is poor ammunition for anyone actually hopeing to defend the Christian faith from a popular fascination with the romanticized Cult of the Magdelene presented by Dan Brown. Doctors Garlow and Jones, both highly educated evangelists, have crafted a book that is more or less comfort food for their audience, not any scholarly attempt to address the factual underpinnings of Brown's novel. Somewhat pointedly, Garlow and Jones choose some of the weaker elements of Brown's novel to base their case on. For instance, by way of dealing with non-Canon gospels (the Gnostic gospels, and the somewhat-less-offensive Apocryphal texts), Garlow and Jones give a selective history of the Council of Nicea which posits that they merely reaffirmed a version of the New Testament already in circulation. This is somewhat true, but ignores how the wording of the gospels were decided to specifically reaffirm the Nicean view of Christianity at the expense of other popular Churches of the time (including churches established by the very disciples of Jesus). They cast aspersions on non-Canon texts without actually addressing why they are or aren't considered reliable. Likewise, when it comes to a discussion of Paganism and its influence on Christian theology, the authors steadfastly refuse to acknowledge even the possiblity (much less the accepted fact) that rituals central to Christianity - such as baptism, the eucharist, and chrism (annointing with oil or ashe) - were all employed by pagan cults for thousands of years prior to Christianity. Instead, Garlow and Jones rely on the emotional impact of the epithet "pagan" on their reader to cast aspersions and reinforcce doubt.

Most disappointing about this book is that the authors attack fiction with fiction. Where there exist stronger points in the scholarship that underpin Brown's fiction (and I can't emphasize enough that "The Da Vinci Code" is JUST an entertaining story), Garlow and Jones turn instead to a fictional couples experience attending a discussion group of Brown's book and it's central thesis, which naturally involve secularist ridicule of faithful Christians engaged in acts of ministry.

There are even a few instances where the authors manufacture assertions by inferral that were never made by Brown or any of his characters. Half way through this book, I got the distinct impression that neither Garlow or Jones (nor their editor) ever actually read Browns fictional works.

This is one of those rare books where I was relieved to finally have finished it. There is no vice in the spirited defense of ones faith through the presentation of facts in support of rational argument. Unfortunately, this book is very light on facts, and frequently resorts to emotional arguments. The Gospels tell us that Jesus himself debated with authority found in a thorough knowledge of the law, and was skilled in avoiding rhetorical traps. Garlow and Jones do the opposite: they count on the unfamiliarity and uncertainty of the general population, and frequently employ rhetorical traps. Anyone seeking to be Christ-like, and defend their faith, would do well to not rely on this book.

Highly recommended, very easy to read, yet well-researched.

The chapters are subdivided mostly into three sections describing the major historical/theological claims of The Da Vinci Code (DVC), a Christian rebuttal to these claims, and short narrative in each chapter about a hypothetical college student's related experience. If you want to head straight for the claims and rebuttal, and by-pass the narrative, it is very easy to do. But the narrative is quite useful in understanding the types of arguments and beliefs you can encounter with devotees of DVC and how to respond to them. The narrative describes the student's doubts about Christianity, the pagan rituals that go along with DVC, and the responses of Christians who gently lead her to the real truth. It also has a good series of questions that can be used for a group study situation. The index is available only on the Internet.

A few examples from this book showing the lunacy of buying-into DVC follow. "The Priory of Sion," claimed to be the keeper of the secrets since the Middle Ages, is a complete hoax, started in France in the 1950s by a person who thought himself to be heir to the French throne (112). Nearly all of the New Testament was documented as recognized scripture by no later than 200 AD, or 125 years before the Council of Nicaea (142), contrary to DVC's claim. Christ's divinity was not decided by a "close vote" at Nicaea as claimed by DVC: the vote was "two" against and over 300 "for" (96).

In summary, this book adeptly exposes the major supposed "facts" that Dan Brown claims DVC is based on as a series of neat deceptions and lies, and built upon the wishful thinking of the aging New Age Movement.

Garlow and Jones soundly refute the charge that the church was and is antisex. But then again, this is an age-old trumped-up charge, going back to ancient pagan Rome, and still leveled against those who do not agree with the hedonistic and libertinistic practices of the accusers. The same holds for those who accuse the church of being sexist or misogynist (anti-woman), as the Da Vinci Code does. It is routine for feminists to call anyone sexist or misogynist who has the temerity to disagree with their ideology or their policies.

Garlow and Jones show that there was no such thing as a matriarchial society. They also expose the irony of the fact that the Da Vinci Code presents the Gnostic writings in a positive light even though Gnostic writings contain obvious misogyny!

Garlow and Jones elaborate on the persecution of witches. It turns out that most instances of such persecution were instigated by secular rather than religious authorities. What's more, witch-baiting is a great exaggeration. The number of victims was quite small--perhaps 50,000 witches executed over a long period of time, certainly not millions. What Garlow and Jones do not mention is the fact that the persecution of others by the Christian church is dwarfed by the persecution of others by atheists. The hundreds of thousands of victims sent to the guillotine by the Jacobins during the French Revolution and the tens of millions of innocent people murdered by the atheistic Communists come to mind.

A major shortcoming of Garlow and Jones' book is his failure to contextualize the DaVinci Code trash as a manifestation of overt anti-Christian bigotry--yes, a form of bigotry that would never be applied to any other religion. After all, the DaVinci Code (yes, I have read the book) not only attacks the Christian faith as an error, but accuses the church of being a deliberate conspiracy that is attempting to conceal a fraud. The fact that it is admittedly fictional does not change the fact of this bigotry. If Hollywood made a fictional film accusing the Prophet Mohammed of being a fraud and concocting a conspiracy to hide the true origins of Islam, it would be widely denounced as Islamophobic bigotry. Were Hollywood to make a film that positively portrays the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, even as fiction, it would be universally condemned as anti-Semitic. The real lesson of the DaVinci Code that needs to be stressed by Garlow, Jones, and others is the fact that anti-Christian bigotry is now just about the only acceptable form of bigotry, and that this is an ominous portent for the future. Christians, wake up!