Grover is so entertaining as we follow him through 1) THE THINGS YOU SEE IN THE SKY ROOM, 2) THE THINGS YOU SEE ON THE GROUND ROOM, 3) THE THINGS YOU SEE ON THE WALL ROOM, 4) THE THINGS YOU SEE UNDER THE WATER ROOM, 5) THE LONG THIN THINGS YOU CAN WRITE WITH ROOM, 6) THE CARROT ROOM, 7) ALL THE VEGETABLES IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD BESIDES CARROTS ROOM, 8) THINGS THAT MAKE SO MUCH NOISE YOU CAN'T THINK ROOM, 9) THE SMALL HALL, 10) THE TALL HALL, 11) THINGS THAT CAN MAKE YOU FALL HALL, 12) THE HALL OF VERY, VERY LIGHT THINGS, 13) THE HALL OF VERY, VERY HEAVY THINGS, 14) THE THINGS THAT CAN TICKLE YOU ROOM, 15) THE THINGS THAT ARE CUTE AND FURRY ROOM where Grover decides to display himself.

I know that all the above sounds like alot of reading but I'll let you in on a little secret: [whispering] it is not everything in the whole wide world! [Ha!] Grover notices this too and says "Where did they put everything else?" He comes to this giant double-door with a sign above it that of course says "EVERYTHING ELSE." "AHA!" says Grover and enters.

This is one of the best, funniest books we own that my daughter and I BOTH enjoy. There are plenty of objects for her to learn and it is great entertainment reading a book with the charming, loveable Grover in it and laughing at all of his antics! Every family should own this book! I wish more books were this funny and entertaining yet a learning experience at the same time! 10 STAR BOOK FOLKS; IT DOESN'T GET ANY BETTER THAN THIS! BUY IT!

Calculus is hard enough as it is--I can't recommend this book to others until the multiple mistakes are corrected.

I picked up this book as a supplement for getting a better understanding of the math for a computer algorithms analysis course. The course relys heavily on an understanding of calculus to analyze growth rates of functions and function derivitives but it didn't go into a lot of depth of why the math works giving derivations, etc. It mostly assumed that the reader had already been exposed to calculus and was only offering a refresher. I've already read through half of the book and while there are some errors in the text, there isn't anything that can't be reconciled.

The book uses programmed learning so you can systematically skip in depth explainations of practice problems if you don't need them. The two main branches of calculus are covered: differential and integral. The material is initially introduced informally and uses graphical explanations (when possible) that really help the material sink in faster. After the main themes are explained, the material is formally defined and offers derivations in the appendices for those who are interested in them. I've found this method helps to distill the purpose of the calculus from the complexity of the equations and terminology.

There is a refresher for graphing linear equations, essential trigonometry, and exponentials/logarithms. The material is given adequate explaination in order "make the jump" to the key concepts of calculus. I've found the text easy to read both in terms of the author's teaching style as well as having crisp text with a large font. A full chapter, designed as an in depth review of both branches of calculus, is included to solidify your understanding of the material as well as offer a context of applying calculus to real world problems. The appendix also has an introduction on some advanced topics of calculus (that I havn't gotten to yet). A caveat is that when you start to work out the practice problems, if you are rusty with algebra you'll probably need a reference for reviewing the basics of factoring, racicals, and manipulating negative/fractional exponents, etc. The algebra is a little light in this respect when equations are solved step by step. The book assumes you have a good working knowledge of algebra and solving/manipulating equations. I found myself having to quickly review how to manipulate radicals and review the eponentation rules.

All in all I am extremely pleased with the text. It's very concise, well thought-out, with an incremental learning slope that is not too steep, offers meaningful exercises that reinforce an understanding of the material, and uncovers the mystique of calculus with intuitive explainations and repetition of key concepts (in key places) to help you retain the material faster.

The first bonus are two sections written by Gertrude Moakley - an introduction which gives nice background material on the deck and a section describing the rules of the tarot game, which I couldnt find elsewhere.

The second bonus is that cards' pictures are not black and white outlines, as in U.S. Games' and Samuel Weiser's editions, but rather have shades of gray. This way the reader has a better impression of how the card looks without resorting to taking the relevant card out of the deck.

With the availability of the text of Waite's book [excluding Moakley's text, of course] and cards on the web...

The book comprises two separate parts, each written by one of the authors. About Finkelstein's part of the book, the less said the better. He fails to address any of the central issues raised by the Goldhagen book, and instead makes a series of tangential points. He intersperses personal attacks on Goldhagen with a scattershot technique of refutation: many of the arguments he raises either support Goldhagen or are totally irrelevant. The words juvenile, badly-written and scatterbrained pretty much sum up his part of the book!

Ruth Bettina Birn's part of the book makes for much better reading. Using a more restrained tone of voice, she faults Goldhagen primarily on this major point: that his data does not support his conclusions. Citing his selective interpretation of German legal transcripts and his heavy reliance on secondary sources, she demonstrates Goldhagen's retrofitting of data to support his conclusions. In the case of Police Battalion 101, this is especially telling. Goldhagen bases a large part of his conclusions on selective interpretations of another book (Christopher Browning's "Ordinary men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland"), while in the same breath, discrediting the author of the book whenever his conclusions differ from Goldhagen's.

In the end, I would judge the debate a draw. Goldhagen's book, while thought- provoking, seems fraught with misinterpretations. (Personally, I find his monocausal "eliminationist antisemitism" theory a little wild-eyed). On the other hand, if you're looking for an incisive criticism of "Hitler's Willing Executioners", and a more believable explanation of *motive* in the Holocaust, then this book doesn't quite fit the bill, either!

The book is a response to Goldhagen's Harvard dissertation--which certainly challenges Harvard's academic credibility in my book--which asserts that the "ordinary Germans," a phrase frequently used by Goldhagen, though not defined by him, knew of and actively endorsed the mass slaughter of particularly Jews throughout the Third Reich. It consists of two separate essays, the first by Finkelstein and the second by Birn, the former the son of concentration camp survivors and the latter a professional in investigating crimes against humanity.

Both authors challenge Goldhagen's use of evidence. Finkelstein offers more "commentary," some essentially calling Goldhagen silly and inept. Finkelstein himself offers reams of contradictory evidence to the meager claims suggested as proof of Goldhagen's thesis. Many even of the Nazi officers were perfect bureaucrats more than they were ideologues. Anyone who has worked in a partisan political environment knows the tendency of many a staffer to do that. It's how promotions are allocated more than on the basis of competence or capability! So, because such and such an officer did what the Fuehrer said, didn't make him an inherent anti-Semitic, mass murderer.

And both authors criticize Goldhagen's contention that the "Holocaust" was unique in human history, and particularly suited to German brutality. Both offer several examples of similar activities undertaken throughout history.

As for the average German, there is more evidence of their helping out victims of the Reich than of their active complicity in the slaughter. Of course, these are petty items Goldhagen didn't use because they would have contradicted his angle.

Finkelstein has had a bone to pick with Goldhagen, and to some other hyper-Zionists for some time. His "The Holocaust Industry" showed something he reiterates more briefly in this text that "The Holocaust," while of less major political note before then became a veritable industry after the 1967 war. At that point to challenge anything about the Israeli state or about Judaism in general--even by Jews!--was proclaimed to have an anti-Semitic motive. Finkelstein, offering countless examples of that by "writers" such as Elie Wiesel, accuses Goldhagen of capitalizing off that sentiment and blatantly political motive.

Birn's is a very sober analysis of Goldhagen's selective use of evidence--pieces chosen simply because they fit his thesis. She even credited an earlier critique of Goldhagen of her work in which Goldhagen disputed her statements; apparently the quotation marks weren't in the right places. Her fine summary comments on the "trivialization" of the holocaust, which seems to be happening now that the number of actual survivors of that catastrophe dwindles.

I have a weakness for Finkelstein's matter-of-fact style. But if I were to be in a privileged enough position to have my work criticized by either Finkelstein or Birn, I would prefer Birn's criticism. My ego would be less bruised.

This book is important for those who have read Goldhagen's book and wonder about Goldhagen's--or Harvard's--integrity. It is important for those interested in the critical thinking process, and how someone of ostensible credibility, an Ivy League doctoral student, can make some awfully weak arguments in defense of his claims. And it is very important for those who want to keep contemporary politico-Zionism in context. Read it. But don't expect any soft pedaling by Finkelstein.

By the way, I would not have granted Goldhagen his Ph.D. for the sloppy, ideological work in his book. As Birn points out, his thesis is fit for those who want a simple answer to a more complex situation. I add that it resembles hate literature, that "those Germans" were like that. It is, therefore, a mirror image of what Goldhagen claims to despise: propaganda. I would not enroll in a course he teaches, or spend a minute reading anything he'd written.

Because she cannot see, speak or move, she is "imprisoned" in her body. She can hear what others are saying and she listens for clues from her neighbors as to the whereabouts of the killer and his possible next moves.

Elise's humorous observations of her caretaker and her visitors are often quite sarcastic but accurate. They go through their daily routines as if Elise has no cognizance of the world and the events surrounding her.

Without giving too much of the plot away, suffice to say that Elise has more than her share of "bad luck" in her search for the child killer loose in her neighborhood.

The author has taken great care in creating a realistic and gripping story. I certainly hope more translations of Aubert's other books are planned for the future.

Highly recommended!

Aubert has created a psychologically strong Elise who has a quick wit, keen mind, and clever sense of humor which help her overcome physical impairment so severe she is limited to raising her index finger as her only way of answering questions in the affirmative. Her strong mind helps her survive situations that would methodically drive a weaker person into incapacitating despair.

For a first rate mystery from a truly unique perspective portraying the resiliency of the human spirit, this is a highly recommended thriller.

An unexpected encounter with a child, Virginie, reveals that Elise can communicate by raising one finger. Virginie tells Elise about the children that have been murdered and how Death from the Woods has taken the life of yet another child. As a result of this encounter, Elise's previously dark and narrow world becomes one of startling possibility and a different kind of horror as the murders continue.

This book could have worked well as a simple primer on how to treat disabled people with greater awareness and respect. Making the reader experience Elise's frustration at her inability to communicate fully is superb and a testament to the author's skill. As a thriller, it is smart, suspenseful, unconventional and unexpectedly humorous. Elise Andrioli is an unforgettable character.