I bought this book for my fiance who has a low self esteem. But since she has read this book I have noticed a major change in her. She now holds her head up high puts her shoulders back and is ready to face the world.

Before reading this book and doing the excercises, I was a mess. I had severe depression and didn't have a job. I couldn't cope with people and their abuse. My self esteem was so low, that I could't return something to the store that I didn't like. I tried seeing psychologists but my parents could't afford their bills. Then I found this book and started working about 10 minutes a day on the excercises. I felt stronger and increased the work load to 6 to 8 hours a day. I pulled myself out of the depression and feel very strong and confident. Thank you so much Dr. Branden for writing this book.

I read this book because I was interested in Branden's psychology, not to change my life, so I can't attest to that aspect of it. The other reviews have mentioned that the book brought positive results, but with so many self-help books on the market, why choose this one? I recommend it, because Branden is the foremost psychologist on self-esteem. His more in-depth work, _The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem_ is a classic. In his years of professional experience, he has helped everyone from clients seeking therapy to businessmen at seminars. When Branden says self-esteem, he means the real thing, having real things in yourself to be proud of, not a false, inflated image that can burst like a bubble. For a classic and brilliant analysis of self-esteem, along with ways to raise it, I recommend his other work I mentioned above. This one is more of a self-help book, and if that's what you're looking for, I can't recommend it more highly.

Though smaller and less ambitious than most of Branden's other works (such as the brilliant Art of Living Consciously), two women I know have reacted very favorably to this book, which suggests to me that it could be a useful primer on Branden's approach.

The book's modest size (and attractive cover art, I should add) may be an advantage in this regard. While intellectual purists might still prefer a tome, many people prefer a small book with essentialized information. A Woman's Self-Esteem is a good example in this regard.

Most of the book's chapters are expanded versions of articles Branden published in New Woman magazine in the early 90s. While many of the book's themes will of course apply to men as well as women, Branden's primary focus is on the challenges facing women: How to embrace their own strengths when doing so may not be fashionable, how to be assertive in a job or in a relationship, how to keep appropriate boundaries.

As with his other books on self-esteem, Branden devotes the first several chapters to summarizing his overall theory, and I found these to be among his most elegant summaries ever. Although I personally enjoyed the book as a whole, one mild disappointment for me was the chapter on "Embracing Our Strengths." Here Branden addresses the difficulty some women experience in finding the will and inspiration to assert their own intelligence and individuality. He addresses a number of helpful issues in this regard, but fails to mention the powerful function of good art. Since he is well aware of the role of art in inspiring heroic behavior, I found this omission puzzling.

Ayn Rand admirers will find interesting the last chapter of the book, which is a reprint of Branden's essay "Was Ayn Rand a Feminist?" from the anthology Feminist Interpretations of Ayn Rand (co-edited by Chris Sciabarra and Mimi Gladstein). Branden concludes the essay: "Where did Ayn Rand stand with respect to feminism (a term she never liked)? A feminism that sees woman at her best as a heroic figure will find support and validation in Rand's writings. A feminism that defines woman as victim and man as her evil oppressor will see Rand as the enemy -- because Rand sees woman not as weak but as strong, and because Rand sees romantic love between man and woman as an expression and celebration of their esteem for each other as well as their esteem for themselves."

One major yardstick for judging a book such as this one is the extent to which is encourages people (and women in particular) who might never do so to think deeply and clearly about the role of self-esteem in their own life. It seems to me the book will be very useful in this regard.

I gave this book to my daughter who had been struggling with a relationship. Because she's only 18 years old I thought I was taking a long shot. Branden's books had completely changed my own life, but they've all been intellectually thrilling to read, and sometimes teenagers are superstitious about being intellectually thrilled. Not my daughter. To my surprise. She took to this book like a duck to water, and it changed her life. No one's books, that I know of, make bigger IMMEDIATE differences in a person's life than Nathaniel Branden's. He is a national treasure.

There is loneliness in books which validate some feelings but don't encompass a consistent philosophy of personality, or provide a frame on which to hang all the delicious details of people: they depopulate the world of variety, filling in one small portion, dismissing the rest. Perhaps self-help books particularly fall prey to this, but it would be unfair to single them out, although almost universally they are "small-souled." One might wonder what philosophically valid books have ever been written on the concept of romantic love. Nathaniel Branden tries nobly and has many valuable criticisms of immature love, misconceived love, and of the critics of love, thus praising love's potential when fully realized. His understanding of exclusivity (which gains only a provisional acceptance), jealousy (which he views somewhat as inevitable but dangerous), children (which may stand in the way of love) and secularism and selfishness (both implied by love) are radical and could have been written by a hippie Ayn Rand. Unfortunately, Branden's attacks on the critics of love finally fails to find any other place for the uncommitted but as resentful and envious, or somehow sick (dependent, living out the lives of parents). How he has failed to step back and view things from a broader perspective, even briefly, is clearly shown in a simplistic history of love in chapter 1, that characterizes whole eras in brief unattributed sound-bites. Alas, if he applied his own proverb, "Take what you want and pay for it," universally, the "universal compensation that prevails in all things" (Hume), he might realize that this romantic love itself, having the high price it does, is, without sickness or resentment, only one choice.

I have always wondered if I really even understood what real love is. This book explained it all to me. It's history, how my self-esteem effects it, why selfishness is a normal and valid part of love, what characteristics help love to succeed, and what missing links cause it to remain unfulfilling. I'm going to make my children read this before they get married. Everyone needs to know this stuff.

This book made a deep impression on me and as a result I started a web site matchmaking forum based on Branden's concepts outlined in his wonderful book. The concepts are lucidly explained and derived from basic principles.

Psychology as a field has undertaken a roller coaster ride in the last century. Not only has it been split up into many disparate fields, it has been viewed by some as not being subject to scientific analysis. This has resulted in the development of the "behavioristic" field of psychology ala the work of B.F. Skinner. At the other extreme, one has seen the rise of psychological theories, such as Gestalt theories, that make no attempt to be scientific, agreeing that such an effort is unproductive.

This book is closer to the latter point of view, but perhaps not by intent. It could be viewed as a collection of the author's opinions on the "objective" need for self-esteem for every individual human being. He does recognize though, and states explicitly that psychology as a science is still in an early stage of development, a sign of this being in fact its division into many schools of thought. The first chapter of the book called "Psychology as a Science" is then a brief attempt to define what the author considers a scientific approach to psychology. In his words: "science is the rational and systematic study of the facts of reality; its aim to discover laws of nature, to achieve a comprehensive, integrated knowledge that will make the universe intelligble to man". And later he says that: "a new science is born when, out of the countless questions that man asks concerning the nature of things, certain questions are isolated and then integrated into a distinct category-isolated and then integrated by a defining principle that distinguishes these questions from all others and identifies their common characteristics." This definition though is too narrow, for it does not include the most important aspect of scientific practice: the use of experimentation and the resulting need for statistical and other forms of mathematical analysis. The reader will find none of this in the book, and hence it would be justified to classify its conclusions as "prescientific", or "philosophical".

This is not to say that the book is uninteresting or not worth reading. There are some very provocative ideas in it, and if further scientific analysis were included, it would be a very important contribution to scientific psychology. If self-esteem as the author views it, is an objective need for every human being, and this can be established using the usual tools of experimentation and statistical sampling, this would have profound implications for just how humans should interact and what kind of goals they should set for themselves. In addition, his assertion that mental disorders are "thinking" disorders are very much in line with current computational models of the mind, although this connection is not discussed by the author.

The first few chapters present a clear picture of how the human mind works and why it makes sense for it to have evolved this way. The author develops his ideas further from this foundation. This book is one of my All-Time favourites and ranks way up there with Atlas Shrugged for the excitement it caused in me when confronted with fundamental philosophical and psychological truths.

This book is not just about self esteem but reveals the truest essence of psychological health. Slowly but surely the individual who already has moderate to high self esteem begins to experience a profound sense of self and personal empowerment by integrating the principles laid out by Dr. Branden. From a sense of self and life comes the formation of individuality and personal values. From these, the potential to actualize our deepest values. From this, the ability to discriminate the unreal from the true. From this the trust in our own minds. From this the ability to experience a universe that is open to us.

In the early seventies just after the publication of The Psychology of Self-Esteem, I went to the library looking for other books on the subject. I found only one other book with self-esteem in its title. Over the years, I've watched closely as the word self-esteem has exploded into American culture, and has become as American as the proverbial apple pie, often with undercurrents of confusion and ignorance. Yet, with Nathaniel Branden, the innovator of the whole movement, the definition has always been the same; what has changed is his ever-increasing knowledge and awareness of the subject, much of which he shares In The Art Of Living Consciously. For those interested in the role of consciousness in improving one's life and one's self esteem -- that one is competent to know one's world, and worthy of happiness -- this will be the book for you. Once again, Nathaniel offers up a treasure chest of personal examples, as well as the examples of his clients. Also, offered is a facinating look into the world of ¨spirituality¨ as seen through the eyes of Mr. Rationality. Here, again, is another powerful and entertaining book from the man who launched the term into public discussion.

If you have a pulse, can read, and understand this book can cause you to reflect more consciously about the everyday things that you do in your life than you may have in a long time. If you can withstand that, then doing Nathaniel Branden's exercises which he presents throughout the book will push the envelope even further. He doesn't settle for feel-good platitudes, but the medicines he offers can open us up to possibilities that we have previously not seen through the haze of unconscious behavior and thinking.

I have become extremely jaded by a lot of the feel-good new-agey speak that has become closely identified in my mind with "self-esteem" and these days. Initially that association caused me to hesitate in buying this book. To the contrary, and to my relief I found Branden's message free from that kind of shallowness. If you merely seek self-flattery Branden offers none. On a personal note, in this book Branden even succeeded in rehabilitating the word "spirituality" for this once self-identified "atheist" who still occasionally refers to himself as a "secular humanist." On the whole his message proved very accessible, and I even found myself eager to reread it after getting through it the first time.

Okay,so I have a bit of hero worship and father figure identification with Dr. Branden so maybe my review is not the most objective but I want to express a great deal of gratitude to him.This is a fine book and I am in my first rereading of it.I think it is one of those kind of books where there is more to reflect on with each reading and more to learn.I still think "The Six Pillars of Self Esteem" is his masterwork but well maybe it's "The Disowned Self", no wait maybe it's "The Psychology of Self Esteem". The point is, buy this book and all the others if you would like to illuminate your path.(and do the sentence stems, they make a difference)

I found the insights very helpful in bringing "aha" thoughts to light. I especially thought the section found in "August" readings good. These readings dealt with inner integrity and congruence. The section that shared on "romantic love" was also very challenging and insightful. These readings confront and strip self deception to one that is open and seeking growth. I recommend this book. The opening section titled "Self-Esteem as a Spiritual Discipline" is excellent. This book is acollection from various writings of Branden.

This pocketbook is a handy and convenient tool which aids in helping one improve their self-esteem through daily reflection. The concepts presented facilitate positive change as they draw one's mind (back) into focus. Very helpful.

This tape is very informative and motivational, but I did find it a little brief (about 1 hour). I was feeling good listening to it ... but it left me wanting to know more.

There is no "mystery" to Rand's life. She has written volumes about all her ideas and her character. Branden has very little intellectual capacity left and does not even embrace Objectivism, but tries to undermine reason, virtue and value in the name of "Objectivism".
This book is one of the worst works of fiction I have ever read. If you want to know about Rand's life read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead, or for non-fiction; Capitalism The Unknown Ideal, The Romantic Manifesto, The Virtue of Selfishness or Objectivism:The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. For more reading pick up any of her articles written for the New York Times.
It is frightening that a person that has been removed from Rand's life because she discovered him to be without virtue and a liar can then claim to "know" her better than anyone and that others would want to read his book and take it as Truth.

Many people who are or were admirers of Ayn Rand heard about the devastating fallout of a love affair between Rand and her protege Nathaniel Branden. Rand was a mentor to the young Branden, who first contacted her while he was a teen in Ontario. She was impressed with his grasp of her philosophy Objectivism, and she, Branden, and Branden's future wife Barbara became friends, associates, and business partners.

When Rand began an affair with Branden, they both naively felt it would not affect their marriages (!) nor the functioning of the burgeoning Objectivist movement and the Nathanial Branden Institute. However, the idealism and fascination of a young man for his exciting mentor was ultimately not enough to base an emotionally satisfying relationship between a man and a woman 25 years his senior. Branden wished to withdraw; Rand felt her self worth threatened by a younger, more beautiful woman.

The resulting firestorm of recrimination by Rand against the Brandens was first rumored about, then exposed over a number of years in several books, one by Barbara Branden (The Passion of Ayn Rand) and this book by Branden. How could someone who was so passionate being coldly objective about facts AND emotions go so wildly off-course? Some of the answers, according to Branden as he saw it and experienced it, are here in this book.

What is NOT here is rather surprising from a noted psychologist, such as Branden is today. An in-depth analysis of the logic of Rand's fury is only sketchily guessed at, the logic of emotions as kind of a weather-report about the ego is not much dealt with. And Branden scarcely deals with his own duality in idealizing the woman he's with (either Rand or his wife) with the woman he truly wants (Patrecia.) Nor does he deal in much depth with Rand's monumental ability to deny reality when it pleased her or her form of intellectual bullying; shouting and cold, vindictive fury as a way to intimidate are surprising from someone who knew an ad-hominem attack from a logical argument and would not hesitate to call it out. I would have been interested in an examination of the psychology of this as Branden could have analysed it. But that isn't in this book either. However...if you want the story from Branden's viewpoint, this is a must-read.

Persons who know the facts of the Objectivist movement's history (facts primarily ignored by the Michael Paxton film) will know that it was Nathaniel Branden who was the prime architect of the movement. Through courses offered by Nathaniel Branden Lectures, later Nathaniel Branden Institute, the philosophy of Objectivism qua philosophy was first taught to the world.

Those familiar with the basic outlines of Nathaniel Branden's eventful life will also know: that he and Ayn Rand met and became friends when he was going on 20 and she was 45; that some years later they began an affair with the consent of their respective spouses; that the dramatic end of their personal and professional relationship in 1968 had explosive effects for the entire Objectivist community.

Branden has previously told the story of his life and relationship with Ayn Rand in the controversial memoir *Judgment Day* (1989). The present memoir is an extensively revised and updated version of the earlier book. Even readers who have read (and reread) *Judgment Day* will be fascinated by the new insights to be gleaned. *My Years with Ayn Rand* is as spellbindingly written as the previous work but it presents a richer, more complete account.

This is a not-to-be-missed by anyone interested in Objectivism -- or simply interested in the engrossing story of some remarkable people.

I'm not a philosophical expert, but I find Rand's epistemology to be very bad, basically little more than a twisted version of nominalism. However, I stand by my former assertion that there are some compelling and interesting ideas present in the ethical facet of her philosophy that stand alone from the epistemological foundation. Because, quite frankly, Rand's epistemology is not good. (At this point, I direct objectivists to hit "not helpful" and skip the rest of the review, because they probably hate me already.)

Rand's basic claim is that man's life should be used as a moral criterion, and a moral life supplicates a rational means of elucidating information and identifying what is right and what is wrong. With this NEW concept of egoism, Rand and Nathaniel Brandon explain that MY happiness should be my most important goal, but not to satisfy my happiness with whims, cheap thrills, or hedonistic kicks. (Brandon's essay "The Psychology of Pleasure" does a good job illustrating what a rationally selfish man seeks to give him pleasure in the context of art, love, and productive work.)

The prima facie perspective suggests that this should be workable, and Rand's confident, florid prose (which I must confess I like) might sway you. But I became skeptical of her argument when she talks about the immortal being who can have no values because it is not alive, nothing is for or against it. I don't see why an immortal would be incapable of valuing anything, and Rand's argument doesn't flesh that out enough. Could not an immortal being still love and value things because they give her happiness? Or is an immortal being without the desire to be happy? Not that I know any immortals personally, but you know...

Still, I think the basic premise lends itself to some interesting ideas. Of course, I'm one of those hardcore libertarian folks who believe in individualism, responsibility, small government, and all those good things. Since Rand was in many ways the same, I find myself agreeing with her on many issues. And let's face it, we usually like reading stuff that reflect our own ideas. In this volume, there's a pair of great essays called "Collectivized 'Rights'" and "Man's Rights" that tie in pretty well with the libertarian mindset. Also great is the essay "Racism," a brilliant, scathing attack on bigotry, although she takes it farther than you'd expect and writes some intuitive tidbits. Plus, I get a kick out of some of Rand's terms, like calling the USSR a "slave pen" and her use of "goon squad" in the last essay. Good stuff, hehe.

In my previous review of this book, I gave it 5 stars because I thought it was interesting. In this, my second review, I am deducting a star. Not because of my disagreement with the philosophy (although I DO disagree with a big chunk of it), but because I think this collection of essays misses a number of issues that, if they'd been addressed, may have given the ethical part of Rand's philosophy more credence. For instance, she doesn't accommodate much benevolence in this collection, but I think she could have worked it in. (She touches upon it with "The Ethics of Emergencies," but it doesn't answer a number of questions.) There aren't many Howard Roarks and John Galts in the world...most people aren't perfect, and need to cooperate and help each other in order to succeed. However, one of Rand's most important points, I think, is that human relationships should exist without sacrifice. Every man is responsible for his own survival, and it is morally wrong to sacrifice yourself for someone unimportant to you, and equally immoral to expect someone else's sacrifice for your sake. This doesn't eliminate charity, though. You just shouldn't bring harm to yourself in order to help someone. Of course, you could deleteriously affect your own welfare to help someone, but it might not be a sacrifice depending on the circumstances. Say you could pay fifty million dollars to cure your wife of the ULTRA DEATH VIRUS OF DOOM (ominous, eh?). Doing so is not a sacrifice, since your wife should be more important than money, of course. I think a lot of Rand's critics missed points like this. It wasn't ALL about money.

Even though Rand's ideas about love and sex come through, uh, rough in her fiction, here it's very clear what she was trying to show (questionable though it was, at least in The Fountainhead...Atlas Shrugged was just consenting sex that was rough). She avers strongly that love is an entirely selfish thing....you don't just love some random person off the street as favor. You love someone that mirrors personal qualities that are important to you: intelligence, conviction, self-esteem, and morality, for instance. I strongly concur with her on this one, and Brandon writes a good essay about it in the aforementioned "The Psychology of Pleasure."

I also think Rand's argument against bringing harm to others is too shallow. She deals with this in a part of the first essay, but doesn't get into it enough. This complaint isn't necessarily a problem with the philosophy itself, because Rand may have had good answers to this and other issues. But I think the book probably should have added more depth to this topic, as well as some others, but I'm not going to discuss them all.

I suggest that people read this book carefully, note to good bits of her ethics, identify the not-so-good bits, and keep it around for a laugh. She's so venomous about some issues that it gives me a chuckle. (That eyeball analogy is good stuff, hehe.) She also has some great arguments against the ethical basis for socialism.

Ayn Rand is a woman of almost unfathomable genius. I would encourage readers to disregard anything negative that other reviewers have to say about this book. For the small price that you have to pay Rand presents her vision of individual freedom that, even with its holes and shortcomings, is so far ahead of its time, it's difficult to imagine. It was far out ahead of its time when she published this book more than 40 years ago. Sadly, her vision is still WAY out ahead of the current state of the world even today.

Even if you don't agree with her, you will still have the freedom to use your own rational mind to challenge or discard anything that she says. Anyone who approaches Rand with an open mind, however, will have to admit that she had an uncanny understanding of how the value that each individual places on his own life impacts the course of history and the progress of man. She clearly describes how the cult of self-sacrifice is a logical and immoral progression from mysticism and how the resulting psychological, political and economic processes undermine individual liberty, man's pursuit of happiness, the general quality of life for all men, and the advancement of civilization.

The selfless and self-sacrificing among you can take comfort in the fact that when Rand's vision of laizzez-faire capitalism and individual freedom is finally realized (reason always wins in the end), you will still have compete and total freedom to live irrational, mystical, irresponsible lives. No one will have the right to prevent you from sacrificing your own life, mind or values to any person, state, religion, or collectivist ideals. No one will force you to achieve your full potential as a human being. It will still be your life and you will have complete freedom to sacrifice your own value in the service of lesser values.

The big change will be that you will no longer be permitted to force other men to sacrifice their own rational, life-sustaining, self-interest to your own. That is the virtue of your fellow man's selfishness. You will not be able to destroy him or deprive him of his liberty. You will no longer have the "right" to place liens on the success of others, or to force individuals to give up objective reality for subjective or collective delusions. Irrational, angry mobs will no longer have the "right" to enslave rational individuals and force them to sacrifice themselves to what is not rational and of their own choosing. You will not be entitled to legally force the efficient, intelligent producers to support the inefficient, the mediocre, or the parasites, be they rich or poor. All men will be free to use their own rational minds to seek their own values and happiness as long as it doesn't deprive others of individual liberty. All men will be free to learn and create, and trade freely with whomever they choose, which by default elevates the status of all men.

Rand's hyperbole sometimes made me laugh, but this book clearly articulated so many of my own perceptions and thoughts. It also made me see possibilities I never imagined before. This book and Rand's other writings are a must-read for anybody interested in the real meaning of liberty. Everything she talks about in this book is happening all around me.

Rand used the term altruism, in its original meaning (as used by philosopher August Comte who coined the term): self-sacrifice.

To Rand, to sacrifice a greater value (say your beloved child), for the sake of a lesser value (some strangers you did not know) was wrong. (I agree).

To save your beloved wife from drowning would be selfish--because you loved her; to let her die to save some other stranger--when you loved your wife--would be unselfish.

Selfish, as Rand uses the term, means to act in ones own LONG-TERM rational self-interest.

It does not mean that one cannot have friends--only that "friends" who stab you in the back are not really your friends.

In fact, if you think about it: love IS selfish. To paraphrase Rand, before one can say 'I love you', one must first learn to say the word 'I'.

Of course, if one actually READ the book, one would know this. If one reads the book, and still holds these distorted views of Rand's work, then one is either stupid or dishonest.

This does not mean one may still not disagree--there are some things I disagree with Rand on; but, one should not stoop to dishonest smears, name-calling, and outright lies about her work.

Ayn Rand, author of "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged," discovered more important philosophic truths than any other thinker of the 20th century. She held that morality is derived from the facts of reality. "Good" doesn't mean following the orders of an incomprehensible God or the whims of society. "Good" means "good for life." And since men can only survive by thinking and discovering what is needed for survival, she named rationality as the primary virtue. Recognizing that you can only prosper by thinking for yourself, constitutes the virtue of independence. Recognizing that you have to work for a living constitutes the virtue of productiveness. Being true to facts as a matter of principle, is the virtue of honesty. Being true to yourself is the virtue of integrity. Being rational in judging other men is the virtue of justice. And recognizing that you're able to live as a rational being and worthy to live, constitutes the virtue of pride.

During the 1960s Nathaniel Branden, who at that time was a brilliant thinker, formed a lecture organization to help spread Ayn Rand's ideas. I was one of the students who attended his courses on philosophy and psychology. No one suspected it at the time, and there was no independent confirmation of it until years after Miss Rand's death in 1982, but she and Nathaniel Branden had an affair. All relationship between them came to an end in 1968, when Miss Rand discovered that Branden was not practicing what he preached.

This is Nathaniel Branden's version of their relationship-or rather, one of his versions, for he's changed his story several times. Branden has never heard the adage "a gentleman never tells." Or perhaps he doesn't mind not being considered a gentleman.

This is a long book; but the reader should not lose sight of an essential fact. Branden confesses, on page after page, that he lied to Miss Rand and to others-not once, but repeatedly, for a number of years. His excuse-"she made me do it"-rings hollow, coming from a man who lectured on the virtues of honesty, integrity, and independence.

After confessing his prevarications and being so "candid," Branden expects us to believe what he's saying now. Instead, I suggest we ask the question: "How do we know you aren't still lying, given that you've had so much practice?"

The charming Dr. Branden explains in this sympathetic and heart-wrenching memoir how he was going to bed with three fantastic women simultaneously--his teacher, his wife, and his girlfriend--and, despite the complaisance of the husband of the teacher, and his own wife, and making an exciting living for everyone, and his own notable psychological acumen, simply blew it, and but good.Anyone who wishes to make like the Latin Lover should read this instruction manual of taking a simple matter to FUBAR--and beyond--with care.

Still, would those who laugh at Branden and Rand's romantic difficulties been cheered if it had all worked out? No, they would have been denouncing Rand and her menage a cinq as a threat to dull marriages everywhere, that's for sure.

What went wrong? I am reminded of the Spanish saying--repeated in the Dorsai series--that who annoys a philosopher annoys the lion in the den. The lioness got annoyed, particularly given her regimen of medicine that made her quite irritable.

Branden tells the tale better than expected of people who handled living a fantasy or perhaps a dream better than most. And anyone who has been torn by divided loves, and yet tried to make things work, will be with him. The rest was rotten luck and tuesday night quarterbacking.