Ross Books

I was pleased to see that the redoubtable Ross King (of Brunelleschi's Dome fame) was recruited for this book. For readers unfamiliar with the "Eminent Lives" series, the idea is to pair distinguished authors with interesting subjects, the result being "short biographies perfect for an age short on time."

How very 21st century.

King does an excellent job of putting Niccolo Machiavelli's life and times into perspective. Machiavelli was much more of a man of action than I had realized; he interspersed his peripatetic diplomacy for Florence with an obsession with raising and training a citizen militia. And Machiavelli was hardly the black-hearted villain so often characterized. His greatest character fault may have been obsequiousness, as epitomized by his dedicating The Prince to Lorenzo Medici (a syphilitic lout who apparently never read the book at all.)

If I had any cavil about Ross King's book, it is that The Prince is not analyzed in the kind of detail that I hoped it would be. (One supposes a short biography designed for an age short on time has its limitations.) I intend to now follow the example of rapper Tupac Shakur, who read The Prince while imprisoned in 1995, and subsequently gave himself the moniker "Makaveli." (How much cooler than "Puffy" is that?)

Also recommended: Thomas Jefferson: Author of America (Eminent Lives)

This is one of several volumes in the HarperCollins Eminent Lives series. Each offers a concise rather than comprehensive, much less definitive biography. However, just as Al Hirschfeld's illustrations of various celebrities capture their defining physical characteristics, the authors of books in this series focus on the defining influences and developments during the lives and careers of their respective subjects. In this instance, Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527).

Obviously, this is not a definitive biography nor did Ross King intend it to be. However, for most readers, it provides about all of the information they need to understand the meaning and significance of this excerpt from the final chapter in King's biography: "The key to some of the ambiguities may lie in the nature of the man himself. Machiavelli's numerous undertakings - diplomat, playwright, poet, historian, political theorist, farmer, military engineer, militia captain - make him, like his friend Leonardo, a true Renaissance man. Yet, like Leonardo, who denounced the 'beastly madness' of war while devising ingenious and deadly weapons, Machiavelli is awash in paradoxes and inconsistencies...Probably his greatest contradiction was that he understood better than anyone else in the sixteenth century how to seize and maintain political power - and yet, deprived of power himself in 1512, he spent many long years in the political wilderness, making a series of bungling and fruitless attempts to regain his position."

With remarkable precision, concision, and eloquence, King examines not only Machiavelli's life and career but also the cultural, political, and religious environment in which he was so actively involved more than 500 years ago. The Prince (or The Ruler) is Machiavelli's most famous work but was not published until four years after his death, in 1531, when Pope Clement VII granted that permission to Antonio Blado. It was published together with Machiavelli's Discourses on Livy and The History of Florence. The Art of War (1520) was the only one of Machiavelli's works to be published in his lifetime. King notes that The Prince circulated in manuscript and earned for Machiavelli a certain notoriety. "'Everyone hated him because of The Prince,' one commentator observed around the time of Machiavelli's death. 'The good thought him sinful, the wicked thought him even more wicked or more capable than themselves, so that all hated him.' This was no doubt an exaggeration: Machiavelli was far better known as a popular dramatist and controversial state functionary than as the author of a tract on statecraft. Still, in the decades that followed, the hatred did indeed begin to curdle."

King points out that a well-worn edition accompanied Napoleon Bonaparte to the Battle of Waterloo and Adolph Hitler kept a copy on his bedside table. Today, many people who have never read The Prince and know little (if anything) about its author do not hesitate to invoke his name -- or at least apply it as an adjective -- to describe or repudiate any political maneuvering they perceive to be devious. However, King asserts, rather than having been uniformly demonized or unfairly misunderstood "as a preacher of the straightforward message of evil," Machiavelli has been "conscripted into service" by adherents of all manner of political causes because his thought is strangely malleable to any number of diametrically opposing ideologies and approaches."

As I hope these brief remarks indicate, I learned a great deal about Machiavelli, a man of "numerous antimonies," that I did not know before. I am grateful to Ross King for that but also for all that I learned about the extraordinarily interesting age in which Machiavelli lived, more than 500 years ago. It would be an exaggeration to suggest that King "brings it to life." No one could. But he does present material with the skills and eloquence of a storyteller...and in seamless combination with the skills of a cultural anthropologist.

Bravo!

Though she hates to admit Kate Campbell is totally gone over Alec Mackenzie, but she's going to divorce him anyway, and then she's going to get him to take part in her companies Bachelor Auction. But first she has to get to him - which means a quick trip into the jungle. Indiana Jones meets a city girl and looses his heart in JoAnn Ross's Mackenzie's Woman. A fast paced, story of love and adventure that will melt the hardest of hearts.

was the last place Kate Campbell planned on finding her true love. Unfortunately, I'd lose since Kate was responsible for finding her husband - her ex-husband - on the block. Alec was the man she'd dreamed of, the man she married and divorced - but was he the man she should bid on? She should take a chance on him and the things he did to her heart? Mackenzie's Woman is a story that delights long time fans and new readers alike! JoAnn Ross is one of my "must buy" authors. Her stories make me laugh, make me cry and make me sigh over love and what it does to a human heart. In Mackenzie's Woman, Ross once again delights her readers with a story that spans the globe, from the city to the jungle - a story that no matter where it goes leads its readers right back to their heart.

I am a kindergarten teacher who uses and loves this book. The kids get excited picking the page to 'make'....the illustrations are colorful and fun. This is a fantastic book.

I work with kids in my church, and have run into way too many "kid's crafts" that are anything but kid's stuff. This book, however, proves to be exactly that, a KID'S craft book. The projects are do-able, with instructions that even a 4-year-old can understand. My child liked this book so much that she would choose it for her bedtime story.

From back cover:

"Maria Sabina, visionary and shaman, has long been celebrated in her native Mexico as an extraordinarily gifted woman. She emerges as a living practitioner of religious customs stemming from pre-Columbian times, and is the fount of wisdoms long thought lost to the world. She was born in Huautla de Jimenez - by her own reckoning over 90 years ago. She still lives there, speaking only her own native Mazatec dialect."

About the author:

"Alvaro Estrada, born to the same village as Maria Sabina, now resides in Mexico City where he makes his living as an engineer and as a journalist. His work in this book is direct oral testimony based on conversations with Maria Sabina in Huautla de Jimenez and on the shamanic chants which she recited in ritual ceremonies."

I spent time with her in the early 70's. Before I was introduced to her, I had no idea who she was. Fancy that. I went to Huautla de Jimenez because a beautiful young woman, in Tampico, had told me to go there if I wanted to "see God". I was in the ministry of tourism, looking at a big map of Mexico. She saw me and remarked, I can see that you are looking for a "very special" map. I said, yes. She said, I can tell you where to go. I followed her advice, met someone who was well acquainted with Maria Sabina, and spent some time with her, participating in and learning about her Velada. Maria was in possession of a very special map, whose pathways she followed when she sang. At that time, I felt as if my entire journey had been conditioned by Strange Attractors to deliver me to this encounter at just this particular moment in time. In the Christian spiritual tradition, which Maria was apart of, there is a concept of a specific moment in time when history is swallowed up by eternity. This book is important for someone who wants a little more background information about her and wants a good translation of one of her veladas. The woman was an existential Saint. The significance of this is hard for sophisticated urbanites to entirely grasp. She was an extremely advanced and individuated master of spiritual healing. When she sang, it was as if her voice shaped space and time in such a way as to draw the perceptible boundary of another, superluminal, dimension. This book provides a little insight into her personal history, but if you are unfamiliar with her original cultural context, you will not be able to read between the lines, which is essential to understanding.

Michael Ross' book is a comprehensive and well thought out book with practical applications to real issues encountered in training. This book is a must-have for any competetive or committed cyclist, runner or skater. The subjects are also applicable for other athletes, providing useful information regarding common medical problems and situations encountered with physical activity.

Dr. Ross' witty prose makes this book easy to read as well as helpful...He is well versed and knowledgeable about this very important subject.

I look forward to Dr. Ross' next installment!

Maximum performance by Michael Ross is one of the best books on the topic of sports medicine for endurance athletes, especially cyclists. What makes the book an invaluable resource for athletes is its foundation in evidence-based medical research. (Dr. Ross lists complete references with every chapter.) Dr. Ross has a way of synthesizing the research into a practical format which non-medical readers can easily digest, comprehend, and apply to their exercise routines. The cycling world should welcome this book to their libraries as a standard essential text and await further work from Dr. Ross.

I came to Amazon to locate a copy of this book for a friend -- and discovered that the author has a new book coming. I can hardly wait. "Mercy, Lord" is a delicious little book. It makes you feel that you want the author as a best friend. She touches feelings and experiences we all share with a deftness that makes you feel wrapped in her knowing compassion and wonderful wit. If time has ripened her terrific writing skills, her new book is going to be a huge treat!

this short book of poetry is fantstic. It's funny and charming. Toby is a great writer who just happens to be my mother. Hope you all rally to get it back in print.

Most people believe that if they read some ancient author, it is only the work that counts and the translation doesn't matter. Well, things aren't that simple, especially when it comes to Philosophy works. So, if you wanna read Aristotle's Metaphysics, keep in mind that if you don't understand some of the philosopher's ideas, the fault could be the translator's (it happenned to me). And to avoid this, it is best to choose a good translation, such as Ross's one. This translation is recommended by many of the specialists in Greek Philosophy and they probably know what they're talking about...

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.

So...we're at our local library and my 5 year old son finds this book on the shelf and asks me to read it to him. OK!! so, I start to read this book and think "oh, what a cute story" and then I get to the end....and WOW! I am completely overwhelmed! My breath catches and my voice quivers and I'm sitting on a little couch in our library with tears rolling down my cheeks. EVERY MOTHER should read this book! This book is so sweet and so pure...It is PERFECTION! Ms. Camp & Mr. Ross, Thank You!!

We have owned Midnight Feast for 4 years now (our
eldest child is 7), and we'll get quite a few more years use out of it. It's the story of a brother and sister (sister looks smaller, but is definetly in charge) who decide to pretend to be asleep so as to stay up for a midnight feast. The brother is sent to fetch all the necessaries (cookies and apples, aka pomegranites and lobsters, something to sit on etc.), while the sister waits for the princess to arrive. Girls will like it that they are in charge, boys will like the fantasies the little boy has whilst getting the supplies and mums will enjoy the ending (read it and see why).

I found this book by accident while waiting for someone, and I was enthralled by it. Ross uses the sensational circumstances of Mishima's very public and gruesome suicide to explore Japanese martial culture in general and tries to explain his own fascination with it along the way.
While he keeps tracking Mishima's life and death as a guide to his narrative, it becomes clearer and clearer that Mishima is conceivably of no importance outside his role as a popular author of nationalist appeal, and that his very theatrical life and death actually stand for very little. His careful reconstruction of himself and his image is not so uncommon, and in the end there is just another guy coming to terms with the very big chips on his shoulder, although he does so in a spectacular way.
But along this way Ross manages by description of his travels and interviews to highlight and clarify Japanese history and fascination with death in a highly insightful way.
Sometimes this book is just about Christopher Ross: For instance there is a whole section, where he describes feeling unwell and having to interrupt his stay in Japan to return to the UK. One can't help wondering if his editor slept through that part, since it seems to have very little to do with the rest of the story.
Fortunately these deviations are relatively brief, as is the whole book, and you have basically read past them before they really trouble you. The rest of the ride is wonderful for people who share Ross' fascination with the martial aspects of Japan.

Christopher Ross goes on a quest for the sword used to assist in the suicide of Yushio Mishima, one of Japan's most famous authors. Along the way, the reader is treated to a history of Japan, lessons on Kendo, and insight into Mishima himself, and icon (or iconoclast?) of Japanese literature. In essence, the quest for the physical sword takes secondary importance, behind Ross's quest to understand the man, the times, and the context of his suicide.

For those that read Twigger's Angry White Pajamas, this book is a more serious, and more culturally detailed view of the same genre. Perhaps the connection comes as Christopher Ross was the uber-guru that Twigger wrote about...

If there's one issue I have with the book, it's that the writer at times talks down to the reader. For example, most anyone reading this has experienced international travel - the audience is a cosmopolitan set. Explaining the details of an inflight entertainment system detracts from the overall story.

That said, the book is still concise and well written, and worthy of a read from any afficianado of Japan. It certainly earns a prominent place on my bookshelf!

I found this novel to have many unexpected twists and turns as well as
a sense of sensitivity. It is fast-paced and a very enjoyable read. Very nicely written too. I liked it very much. A sequel will be most welcome.

David Ross Willis uses an array of intriguing characters to bring Missing Dimension alive to his readers. It is a fast-paced mystery that filled my inquisitive mind with questions as I progressed from chapter to chapter. As an author and former publisher, I usually anticipate the twists and turns in a book, but this one surprised me over and over again--especially the ending.

The ordinary person can easily identify with Nick Davis, the main character, who is a machinist residing in Rosewood, New Jersey. His life is simple and organized. Single at the age of 42, he lives alone but has frequent contact with his elderly, sick father and at least talks with his sister Amy on the telephone every so often to get an update. But recently, he could not reach her--only her answering machine.

Nick Davis works at the Lou-Paul Machine Shop where his boss, Lou Evans, the sole owner, suddenly fires everyone except him. It seems Mr. Evans has taken on a silent partner who wants Nick involved in a rather strange and secret work project--one that takes priority over every other job. This is just the beginning of many happenings that Nick doesn't understand. He believes that someone is watching him--and they are. One such person is Stan Kreig who has been on the Rosewood police force for many years. He later proves to be one of the few people whom Nick finds he can truly trust. Certainly, Nick should not have trusted the beautiful woman with the Russian accent who had totally captivated him when she mysteriously appeared in his life. Her name was Mila--or so he thought. She worked for the FBI--or so he thought.

Nick is shocked when his boss is poisoned, but reels in disbelief when he eventually finds out who is behind the death. Readers are introduced to Henry, who, according to his psychiatrist, was tailor-made for the term Missing Dimension--someone who enters another dimension of the mind--a false reality. Though a madman, he is a key player in this twisted plot that leaves a trail of dead people.

It is chilling to see how the world of Nick Davis changes so quickly. When his father and sister disappear, he is frantic...that is until Mila assures them that they are safely hidden away for their own protection. His sister's latest boyfriend is with them. As it turns out, Nick's father is poisoned, and he believes his sister and her boyfriend are dead. His beautiful Mila helps hold him together as the mystery continues to unravel--that is until he discovers that she has lied to him about many things, including her identity. As far as his sister and her boyfriend...are they really dead? When he opens his mail, he finds a letter from Amy that tells him she is sorry and will always love him. But, apparently, ten million dollars is worth more to her than the love of her family. I know you are asking where the money came from; buy the book and find out!

Missing Dimension is a good first novel by David Ross Willis; however, there are times I became confused as the story moved from character to character and from scene to scene so quickly. Some strategically placed additional details would aid the reader in understanding Nick Davis and his connection to the evil characters surrounding him. It is a book that mystery lovers will enjoy, and I believe a prelude to future books that will showcase the talent of this writer. I look forward to reading them.

An Indpendent Professional Reviewer