I thought this was a wonderful book. I enjoyed Thayers use of poetry to exrpress the emotion in the story. The language used in the text is of very high quality and when read by an adult to a child, the child is able to thourghly understand. The illustrations play an important role with the text. They not only enrich the text, but they tell a story in itself. We can feel the emotion of the players and the crowd through Polacco's work. Overall I thought this was a wonderful book and reccomend it to a child of any age.

Thayer's classic ballad, 'Casey at the Bat,' is greatly enhanced by Patricia Polacco's brilliantly achieved, big-hearted illustrations. Ms. Polacco captures emotion, action, and character through wittily exaggerated, slightly loopy pictures, and through lots of uncrowded background shenanigans. It's very cinematic: She effectively isolates action through extreme close-ups, and extends time through a montage of events occurring within a single picture. Like the auteur she is, she even adds some opening and closing story elements (while leaving the poem intact) that augment the poem's appeal to the younger reader.

This book is simply great fun to read aloud; you'll find yourself wanting to memorize its evocative imagery and epic aspirations:

"Ten thousand eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with dirt; Five thousand tongue applauded when he wiped them on his shirt. Then while the writhing pitcher ground the ball into his hip, Defiance flashed in Casey's eye, a sneer curled Casey's lip."

You and your youngsters will love the humor and the drama in this a classic rendition of Thayer's beloved poem. Infants and toddlers will enjoy the bright pictures, and all readers will appreciate the perfect teaming of Thayer and Polacco.

Casey at the Bat tells about mighty Casey and his missing 2 strikes - like messing up in life.

This is an enjoyable grouping of over 100 poems. There are many that most of us will remember but a few that I had never read before. Some of these poems are the very ones that were read to us as children: "THE OWL AND THE PUSSYCAT," "THE DUEL," and "LITTLE ORPHANT ANNIE." Reading these old favorites again brings back memories of my sister, Joan who always had time to read to me.

I also enjoyed encountering a few of the poems that my teachers made me study: "THE LOST CHORD," which was turned into a hymn and often song by Enrico Caruso; the very inspiring "INVICTUS," and the sad but lyrical "ANNABEL LEE." It's rather amazing how much more meaning you can take from the poems when you read them as an adult.

There are also very interesting short biographies of each author and these are not the versions that we learned in school. They make the poets seem real and not quite so lofty. Unfortunately, many people never learn to appreciate poetry, but I think that perhaps they may not have realized that the key to poetry is their own imagination.

Open the book to any page, and you will read phrases you've heard all your life but never knew, or now can't remember, from where they came. It's a great English language poetry course in a single volume. The only book in it's class is "The Top 100 Poems" (which costs 5 times as much).

This is perhaps the only book in which Carnap is almost invariably informal. It is a remarkably clear introduction to some important topics in the philosophy of science: the nature of scientific laws, probability, scientific measurement, the structure of space, causality and determinism, theoretical concepts and laws, and a last chapter called "beyond determinism". The point where Carnap gets a bit formal, sections 26-28, is boring and absolutely out of date; his approach to analyticity is certainly not the best available. As for the rest, Carnap's conceptions are generally reliable (although it should be observed that his "logical conception" programme for probability was a complete failure). The sections I enjoyed most are those which deal with the structure of space. Carnap is highly proficient there (Carnap's doctoral dissertation was called "Der Raum") and his philosophical observations are always lucid and precise.

This is probably the clearest account of the way Science works and why certain decisions are made. Within it is contained the clearest explanation of portions of General Relativity (as a concrete example of why Einstein presented the theory in the manner he did) I've ever read, as well as many other little interesting tidbits. Some parts of the book are a bit dry, but that is probably because this book is a rewriting of college lecture notes given by the author.

Looking for the perfect gift for that puzzle buff friend of yours? Look no further. Mad Mazes is a delightful book of 20 different mazes, each with its own rules for traveling through the maze. Each maze is challenging and fun and, if you solve it, you will shout Eureka! In this book, you see the genius of Robert Abbott at work and at play! We call him the O. Henry of puzzles as his solutions often have a surprise or twist to them. Each maze is preceded by a fun story which gives the rules for traveling through the maze. So, whether you are 7 or 107, if you enjoy challenging puzzles, this treasure of a book is for you. The good news is that Robert Abbott has written a wonderful sequel to Mad Mazes. It is called SuperMazes.

By saying the word "maze" I'm probably conjuring the image of those flat angles of black lines. This is NOT what you'll get if you buy this book. Mad Mazes is precisely that--each maze has a complex set of dynamic rules. One allows you only to turn right--unless you pass a certain point, after which you can only turn left. Another is three-dimensional, and you climb and descend levels in an effort to reach bottom. You actually have to (gasp) think. I first got this book 6-7 years ago and still haven't solved all the puzzles! (And there are only twenty, to my everlasting regret.) Each is accompanied with illustrations and a delightfully humorous story.

In this vintage collection of essays and reviews Gardner goes after pseudoscience and seeks to enlighten us about various delusions and mistaken ideas in science. As usual the old guy displays a most engaging and exciting style while countenancing no fuzzy thinking and especially no BS. He begins with parapsychologist Joseph Rhine of Duke University, who, half a century ago, tried to establish extrasensory perception. One recalls that Rhine used cards with five different symbols that one person would concentrate on while another at a distance would attempt to guess. Dr. Rhine used a statistical analysis of hits and misses to demonstrate that extrasensory perception had taken place. Last I heard, some decades ago, Rhine's methods and stats were considered highly suspect, and he and his work have gradually faded into oblivion. Now Martin Gardner adds a further criticism: Rhine failed to expose cheating in experiments that he knew about. Rhine thought that no good purpose would be served by exposing the maleficence and those practicing it. Gardner argues in this essay, "The Obligation to Disclose Fraud" that the contrary is a better rule, if for no other reason than not to disclose fraud is to mislead later researchers.

The second essay, "Occam's Razor and the Nutshell Earth," deals with the strange, but apparently non-refutable idea that the earth is hollow and we live on the inside. It seems that it is mathematically possible to describe such a universe. Gardner asks on page 19, "Why then does science reject it?" The answer lies in Occam's Razor, one of the truly beautiful ideas in science, which states that given alternative explanations of phenomena, we must choose the one that is simplest. In this regard I must mention again my (fanciful!) idea that it is not space-time that is expanding, but matter that is contracting. I wonder if it is possible to chose which is really correct, or if such a choice has any meaning--or if, as Gardner's text might suggest, Occam's Razor might be applied.

Other essays deal with such delectable subjects as President Reagan and First Lady Nancy's reliance on astrologers for the timing of certain presidential events; the scientific basis of homeopathy, or actually, the lack thereof; geneticist (and author of the much anthologized essay, "On Being the Right Size") J. B. S. Haldane's embarrassing support of Stalin and the crackpot genetics of Lysenko; some stuff on Linus Pauling and the very weird Wilhelm Reich, etc. My favorite essays were on Frank Tipler's fantastic Omega Point "theology," which doesn't sit well with Gardner, and the essay "Relativism in Science" (Chapter 10), remarkable for the fairness that Gardner extends by reproducing astronomer Bruce Gregory's very effective rebuttal to Gardner's criticism of his book, Inventing Reality: Physics as a Language (1989).

But where I find myself in rare disagreement with Gardner is in his treatment of James E. Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis in the chapter entitled, "Gaiaism." His technical objection is stated on page 48, namely that Lovelock broadens the meaning of "alive" to the point where it is "what philosophers like to call a category mistake"; however Gardner's tone suggests that what really bothers him is the use of the Gaia hypothesis to further New Age pseudoscience, a concern I can certainly identify with. However, I think that Lovelock's hypothesis raises an interesting point that might be examined more closely, namely that our definition of life is needlessly restrictive. We humans, who exist at a certain narrow span and level of awareness have definitions of what is alive and what isn't that are heavily dependent upon our limited experience. Of course we have nothing else to go on, but a little imagination might suggest that life could take some very diverse forms. The stars, for example, might be "alive" in ways that we cannot appreciate. After all, they are born, grow, evolve, and die. And their life span dwarfs ours. They even reproduce themselves in the spewing of their elements into space (or in their nurturing of us!). To me it makes as much sense, maybe more, to say that the stars are "alive" than to say that viruses are alive. And there might even be something "beyond" being "alive," something marvelous that happens to matter and energy that we cannot yet imagine. Furthermore, our definitions of life, e.g., something that has a metabolism, that grows and reproduces, or, a more modern definition, "something that undergoes Darwinian evolution," break down at the extremes, and we can easily imagine entities outside our definitions that we may want to say are alive. Lovelock chose to include the entire earth within the definition of being alive. I don't think it's so far fetched.

This superior collection of essays reveals Gardner's extraordinary breath of learning and the lively frolic of his very fine intelligence.

Martin Gardner takes the skeptical view on several subjects in this book. He critizes many in the paranormal and Christian fundamentist movements. Basically, he treats them almost as symoptioms that are caused by the larger problem of people looking for answers without knowing what the heck the question is. So, they grab onto irrational beliefs in paranormal or religious faith. You challange both the believers in the paranormal or those with fundamentist religious belief systems and you get pretty much the same standard response. Things like "you can't disprove this" or "and how would you know?" stuff that is more or less, lacking in real intellicual thought or commentary.

Gardner exposes them for what they are: frightened little people who don't want to think for themselves.

I consider Martin Gardner to be the best there ever was in writing about mathematics. His essays are always entertaining and contain enough content to suggest other applications of the main point of his thesis. This book contains a series of short puzzles, most of which have quick solutions based on an "alternate" form of reasoning. That form is described as an "Aha" moment, where looking at the problem a different way leads to a simple solution to what appears to be a hard problem.
I first read this book when it was first published over twenty years ago and recently read it again. It has stood the test of time quite well and I consider it to be the best of the collections of material by Gardner. I have three children under the age of ten and they are occasionally subjected to a puzzle in this book. It is always interesting to see how well they do. Quite frankly, there are occasions when they get the aha! answer faster than I did.
Recent research indicates that the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease can be reduced by constantly stressing your mental abilities. Martin Gardner has received many accolades in his life, We can now add that his books can help prevent serious mental diseases. Go ahead and clap, he has earned the applause.

This book gave me a lot to think about when I was young, and of all the books with math and logic puzzles I enjoyed, this was one of the best. Gardner has a way of turning problems into challenges, making the solving of them fun, and he also provides interesting explanations of problems with simplicity and clarity. For children, this book is an opportunity to explore math as something other than repetitive calculations or irrelevant word problems from bad textbooks. Adults too can use this book to hone their problem solving skills.

The difficulty of aha! insights is the lack of technique in coming to such an insight. It's a spontaneous reaction, something sudden and unexpected when you discover a simple solution. These problems do not teach you how to have these insights, but allows for practice in order that they may become more frequent. But the point is: it's recreational math... Enjoy it for the sake of enjoyment.

Unlike most of the author's other books on mathematics, this one is generous with whitespace, requiring less concentration. The puzzles are illustrated by the often-humorous cartoons, which greatly enhances the understandibility and readability of the book.

The book itself is quite thin with an attractive cover, reinforcing the idea that math can be fun. A great way to stimulate someone's interest in the subject.

Aha! Gotcha is filled with very different types of puzzles than aha! Insight, which has many problems to solve. This book just presents many fun paradoxes that make you use your head, and while some of them are problems you have to take some time to solve, most are short paradoxical situations that you can think about for a short while and then go on the next page. It is easy to read, and Gardner again shows his skill in explaining interesting phenomena in a clear and interesting way. All the problems are good exercises on logical thinking and introduces various concepts of mathematics and statistics without seeming like you're studying. It is insightful enough for adults, but I think children would be able to understand these concepts too if they are interested.

This amazingly useful book presents the concept of paradoxes in a comfortable, light format that makes it easily presentable to children in addition to the fun cartoon drawings that accompany every paradox. Simple explanations allow enough depth to encourage further explanation of the topic. In addition, it is helpful for writing reports about paradoxes.

Those who have read any of Martin Gardner's famous books know that he is the master at explaining difficult concepts in witty and precise language. This book is no exception! It's a great book to buy for children AND adults alike.

I encourage readers of this to purchase "Aha, Insight!" by the same author, and his "The (first,second,etc...) scientific american book of mathematical puzzles and diversions"

"The Hunting of the Snark" is a brilliant nonsense-poem. Yet Gardner has seen fit to put pretentious, geeky, ...pedantic annotations all over it. Now I like nonsense, but the vulgarly rational "sense" of some of these annotations irritates me. Do we really need to know that the word "BOMB" begins and ends with B (thereby relating it to the Boojum) and that OM is the Hindu name of God??? Do we really need to know of a political cartoon in which Kruschev says "BOO", and does Gardner have to tell us that he was trying to say Boojum??

Annotations should be done in the manner of Gardner's own annotations of Alice in Wonderland. Now those were annotations that made *sense*. Annotations that simply explained out of date concepts, gave relevant details from Carroll's own life, or obscure humour. That's all! That is what annotations should be like.

The pedantic geekery of these annotations remind me of the...games of Star Trek fanatics (or Sherlock Holmes fanatics).

The poem is brilliant, though; and the illustrations were funny, before the annotations over-analysed them.

Lewis Carroll is brilliant in this piece. First of all the poetical music is perfect, absolutely perfect, and yet the words don't mean much. Many of these words are not even to be found in any dictionary. Be it only for the music, this piece is astonishingly good. But the piece has a meaning. I will not enter the numerical value of the numbers used in the poem : 3, 42, 6, 7, 20, 10, 992, 8, and I am inclined to say etc because some are more or less hidden here and there in the lines. Hunting for these numbers is like hunting for the snark, an illusion. But the general meaning of the poem is a great allegory to social and political life. A society, any society gives itself an aim, a target, a purpose and everyone is running after it without even knowing what it is. What is important in society is not what you are running after or striving for, but only the running and the striving. Lewis Carroll is thus extremely modern in this total lack of illusions about society, social life and politics : just wave a flag of any kind, or anything that can be used as a flag and can be waved, in front of the noses of people and they will run after it or run in the direction it indicates. They love roadsigns and social life is a set of roadsigns telling you where to go. Everyone goes there, except of course the roadsigns themselves who never go in the direction they indicate. Lewis Carroll is thus the first post-modern poet of the twenty-first century. He just lived a little bit too early.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

I am a fan of Lewis Carroll, but somehow was unaware of the existence of an edition of "The Hunting of the Snark" with annotations. As someone who tremendously enjoys Martin Gardner's "Annotated Alice," I heartily recommend this book to like-minded readers. Gardner's annotations and introduction set the stage for the reader, putting the composition of the poem in its proper context in Victorian England, and in Lewis Carroll's life. And as with "Annotated Alice" the annotations are fascinating and amusing in their own right. "The Hunting of the Snark" is one of Carroll's lesser-appreciated (or at least lesser-known) works, and this paperback is an excellent introduction.

I noticed some confusion in the Amazon listings for this book, so let me clarify that the edition with Gardner's annotations is the paperback, and for illustrations it contains reproductions of Henry Holiday's original woodcuts from the 1800's. There are only eight pictures, and these are in old-fashioned style which may turn off some modern readers. This edition does not contain the illustrations - listed in the review of the hardcover editions - by Jonathan Dixon, nor the illustrations by Mervyn Peake also listed as available in hardcover from Amazon.

To Snark fans, though, I would unhesitatingly recommend both those editions as well. Dixon's is little-known, but excellent, the most profusely illustrated Snark, with pictures on every page in lush, gorgeously detailed and humorous pen and ink. It may still be available through the website of the Lewis Carroll Society of North America, who published it in a small edition. Peake's drawings are also in beautiful black and white, and capture his own rather dark, quirky "Gormenghast" take on the poem. (A good companion, too, to the recently released editions of "Alice" with Peake's drawings.)

A joke is always funnier if you understand it, and the Alice tales are so full of inside jokes that you need someone to explain them. The Annotated Alice does just that. Carroll's tales are here, complete and unabridged, and the editors have painstakingly provided every piece of explanation and commentary you could ever wish for. Complete with Tenniell's original illustrations (although, alas, not colorized), this is a book any girl, little or big, can cherish.

Victorian-era readers of Lewis Carroll's delightful fantasies knew the poetry and song and public figures referred to; we moderns need to have the jokes explained to us, and Martin Gardner does a masterful job of it. We're fortunately past the more bizarre Freudian and Marxist interpretations of Alice that Gardner takes to task in his preface, but Gardner's annotations survive, as they should. The White Knight's encounter with Alice is heartbreaking when you know the background information, the lyric the White Knight's doggerel alludes to. By all means, give this to children at risk of being pithed by exposure to a certain indigo reptile; as children, they'll appreciate the story, and as they mature, they'll appreciate the commentary, and you'll have saved a budding intellect.

Alice in Wonderland is an extraordinarily fascinating and delightful story, replete with jokes, puzzles, and nonsense of the highest order. But in order to appreciate it fully, the modern, non-Victorian reader requires some guidance, as well as an adequate background on the man and the times that produced Alice. Martin Gardner, the greatest figure ever in recreational mathematics, provides readers with all the information they need to appreciate this story at its various levels. This book occupies a place of privilege in the library of every serious Alice fan.

I've read a lot of Chesterton in the last year or so, and I guess I have mixed feelings about his work in general and this book in particular. Chesterton provides extraordinarily beautiful word pictures. I feel like taking a trip to England just to see if the real English sky can match a fraction of the descriptions Chesterton gives it. (Smog abatement measures may have made a fair comparison impossible.) Chesterton's love of paradox can be fun, but it may be best to take it in small doses for optimal enjoyment. The Father Brown stories are short enough that the character development suffers in comparison with G.K.'s novels; on the other hand, these stories benefit from omission of some of the more bizarre flights of fancy found in his longer works.

Now for the footnotes. I've been reading Martin Gardner for a long time. As a young boy, I spent many hours in the local library reading and enjoying his columns in archived copies of Scientific American. I must say that I find his footnotes in this book somewhat obtrusive. They seem to give away too much of the plot too early, and are probably, therefore, best for a second reading of the text. Gardner has deep philosophical differences with Chesterton, and although he does a fairly good job of restraining himself, there are occasions when he apparently can't resist giving us his two cents. I found that a little annoying. The footnotes in the Ignatius edition of _The Man Who Knew to Much_ are an example of what I would have preferred in this book.

The Father Brown stories are a bit fantastic and improbable, but that is true of Sherlock Holmes too. For the reader unfamiliar with G. K. Chesterton's creation, this quiet, somewhat shy priest will be a surprise.

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson are so familiar that today's readers sometimes need to remind themselves that these two friends are indeed fictional characters. For many it may be difficult to imagine, much less accept, that other private detectives were also at work unraveling crimes in the fictional realm of Sherlock Holmes.

Father Brown coexisted in London with Holmes (during Sherlock's later years), but it is not obvious that they ever collaborated. While both exhibited a unique genius, their cases and their methods were indeed different. The solutions to Father Brown's mysteries are often improbable, but logically consistent, and usually have a metaphysical or moral aspect. Father Brown is not a sheltered cleric unaware of sin and evil, but just the reverse. He is able to place himself in the mind of the perpetrator, thereby seeing solutions that the reader fails to notice. Like Holmes, he is often more interested in understanding and solving a mystery, rather than meting out human justice.

Matin Gardner's extended footnotes clarify references that otherwise might be obscure today such as Edwardian manners, outdated technology, London landmarks, literary references, etc. The footnotes are not essential, but I found Gardner's annotation useful and entertaining.

The five Father Brown collections (53 stories in all) begin with these 12 stories,"The Innocence of Father Brown". Father Brown won't displace Sherlock Holmees, but you will not regret getting to know this clever contemporary of Sherlock Holmes.

"The Innocence of Father Brown" is the first book of G.K. Chesterton's ingenious, thoughtful and lyrically written mystery short stories featuring the unassuming little priest who solves crimes by imagining himself inside the mind and soul of the criminal and understanding his motives. The stories are full of paradox, spiritual insight, and "Chestertonian fantasy," or seeing the extraordinary in the ordinary.

This particular edition is enhanced by Martin Gardner's extensive notes, which are both entertaining and illuminating. He points out that it's worthwhile to take your time in reading GKC's stories so you can savor their many arresting, beautifully worded sentences. And by reading too fast, you might also miss out on some very subtle puns (there's one in the story "The Secret Garden" that would have gone right past me had not Mr. Gardner pointed it out!).

At the end, you'll find an index of annotations, plus a comprehensive Father Brown bibliography compiled by Chesterton expert John Peterson. If you enjoy this book, you'll probably also like "The Annotated Thursday," Gardner's edition of GKC's "The Man Who Was Thursday."