Hundertwasser died early this year in a little town in the North of New Zealand. Eventhough I had never met the man, I felt saddened, as I had come of know of him, and his work from this book, which is a biography of sorts.

While for me, the great attraction was the beautiful quality of the reproductions which replicated the pure pure colours, the text is mostly in an interview format, and one gets to hear Hundertwasser's 'voice' - and from that his spirit. I found myself wondering at times, if it was solely his work, or his passion which made the legend of Hundertwasser. The artist has strong opinions about everything, from garden gnomes to his hatred for conventional and boring buildings. I found his concepts of 'tree tenents' (trees should live with us in apartments) and houses that should be indistinguishable from above (by growing grass roofs) fascinating. However, at the end of the day, it is his bold use of colour - vivid, vibrant, confrontational colour coupled with his enigmatic yet child-like imagery, which glows in my memory.

i love this book. just like that other guy, i was walking my library and i saw this really colorful book and i picked it up and was so suprised at how awesome it was. this guy is now one of my favorite artist. its strage how someone this brilliant isnt in the limemight. thats one of the reasons i like him so much, people dont a big deal out of him. one of the things i fisrt noticed was how well he can use nearly eery color and make it not irritating to the eye. that doesnt happen very often. just buy this book if you have money to blow on a great art book

I was in an extremely bad mood, walking around with a scowl and wishing there was more to the mundaeity that was around me. And that was when I found this book. I had never come across Hundertwasser before. This book is a magical journey throughout the artists life with beautiful reproductions of his amazingly inspirational works. The strength in the book is in its layout, sequencing and the question and answer format between the author of the book and Hundertwasser himself. This book, without sounding cliqued, has changed me and I will continue to hunt for any Hundertwasser I can find. Pure Magic.

This book is precisely what the title states. It is an "introduction" and as such is the gateway to Rand's theory of knowledge by way of her theory of concepts. Human knowledge is conceptual knowledge and Rand validates the objectivity of concepts by explaining, from the ground up, the method by which they are formed in the mind. The points she makes which seem misguided and arbitrary are cleared up in subsequent re-readings as long as the reader keeps in mind that once she defines a term, she does not deviate from its meaning. For most of us who are generally unsure about specific definitions of terms and rely on our feelings to give meaning to the words we read, discipline is required. For those who start with an axe to grind based on their disagreements with Rand's political philosophy, deliberate mis-interpretations of terms generally abound (as can be seen in most of the on-line reviews.) One such example is the damning of Rand over her claim to have solved the problem of "universals". In this context, this problem refers to the issue of the relationship between concepts and their perceptual referents; the HISTORICAL problem of universals. It is unfortunately too common to find those who are willing to drop this necessary context and argue against the Objectivist claim based on various meanings of the term universal, few of which are relevant to the issue at hand.

It is amusing to read disagreements of the Objectivist theory of concepts which are addressed and cleared up in the appendix. The appendix of the second edition of I to OE really is amazing. It is simply transcripts of round table discussions of professors who had read the original text presenting their questions and objections on finer points of epistemology. Rand was, apparently, at her intellectual pinnacle at this point, and any potentially hazy points are clarified beyond question.

The criticism that this is not presented in as scholarly a way as an epistemological monograph should be has its merits. The preface clearly states that main work is a reprint of a series of articles in which Rand presented her theory of concept formation. I certainly would have preferred a more scholastic presentation and a deeper exploration of the background of certain ideas, but this was Rand's style. She did not "write down" to her readers and her writing requires objective truth seekers to do their own research. I have, on multiple occasions, encountered the criticism that a reader was left wondering what Bertrand Russell was attempting to "perpetrate" in his theory of numbers. After encountering this passage I went to a philosophy text and read a passage describing Russell's theory of numbers as an attempt to create a purely logical language which would allow one to understand numbers without relating them to their perceptual referents. Since Rand demonstrates that concepts are valid within the context of the totality of human consciousness, and that abstractions must be derived primarily from their perceptual referents (numbers, specifically, are covered) which form their fundamental context, the dismissal of Russell stands.

For those who are familiar with Rand only from Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, this is a fascinating opportunity to understand the underlying support of a novelist's reasoning process, rarely made this explicit.

This is THE reference work on epistemology. Rand explains clearly how we derive concepts from reality and the conversation form of the book is very lively and enlightening. This is a must-have book for anyone interested in philosophy, period. A brillant account of human cognition. This book helped me understand the nature of concepts and how to apply this with real-life concepts.

The criticisms about this book are shoddy, to say the least. I usually don't comment on what others say, but this is too silly to pass up. "Scott Ryan" says that Rand's ideas hold the theory of a priori knowledge, but that is patently false. He also says that negation and necessity would be hard to deal with, but that is not obvious at all. Negation, for example, is part of logical operations on concepts, and its differentia is reversing (negating) said concept.

"A reader" says that we cannot use measurement-omission unless we know the concepts of length, colour, etc. But that is akin to saying that a baby needs to know what "identity" means before he acquires such. They are all perceptual characteristics which can be used implicitly.

Philosophy has traditionally (since the nineteenth century) been the province of "intellectuals", religious Pooh-Bahs and the like who seem to derive some sort of perverse pleasure out of constructing riddles out of real-world moral and ethical questions. As Rand herself put it, "The men who are not interested in philosophy need it most urgently: they are most helplessly in its power. The men who are not interested in philosophy absorb its principles from the cultural atmosphere around them from schools, colleges, books, magazines, newspapers, movies, television, etc. Who sets the tone of a culture? A small handful of men: the philosophers. Others follow their lead, either by conviction or by default." This book explains the fundamentals of Objectivism it's shared roots (Aristotle's) and it's opposition (Mysticism, Kant, etc.). It's not an easy read, but the author doesn't talk down to the reader and it is readily understandable by someone with a high-school education. I wouldn't recommend this book for folks who are new to philosophy as it requires some background knowledge. For this I would recommend Rand's wonderful introduction (to philosophy in general and Objectivism specifically) entitled "Philosophy, Who Needs It?"

Although the book's own cover suggests that this book is suitable for people who are new to Objectivism as well as long-time devotees, I would recommend this book to the latter more than the former.

As the title of my review suggests, the book is an excellent reference guide to Objectivist writings. However, the material provided is made up of quotes from other sources, rather than being an actual summary of Objectivist thought on the particular subject at hand. I mostly use my copy for quickly finding pithy quotes to use in papers or articles, or as a way to find where the original full-length essays are located if I can't immediately recall. Thus, it's my opinon that it is best used as an index to your pre-existing library of Objectivist books.

The book also suffers a little from its age, as it is limited almost exclusively to Ayn Rand's own writings. A second edition including material from newer Objectivist thinkers, such as Tibor Machan, would be both a benefit to Objectivists and serve to diffuse those critics who claim that the philosophy is the exclusive toy of Ayn Rand.

This work is extraordinarily useful for a person studying Ayn Rand's philosophy. This well organized book offers an explanation of Ayn Rand's crucial concepts, as well as commonly used terms. It also presents, in brief, her views of other schools of thought. One can spend a lot of time simply browsing through the work. "The Ayn Rand Lexicon" displays information by essentials, allowing the reader to understand ideological fundamentals. For example, one can learn that the difference between altruism and egoism is not so superficial as charity, but has far deeper roots. Does man have the right to live for himself, in the pursuit of his own happiness, or must he serve others and their needs? The answer is derived from man's nature and can be found in this proficient reference. This is an excellent first exposure to the philosophy behind Ayn Rand's fiction. One will find her philosophical writings impressively honest. These excerpts are clear and unequivocal, something rarely found today.

Most people do not know Ayn Rand's ideas. The Ayn Rand Lexicon provides a way to quickly discover what Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism says about various philosophic issues. The references cited in the book can guide further research.

Harry Rand's Book "The Implication of Symbols" is indeed well-written and full of important information. Furthermore, his interpretation of the symbolic aspects of Gorky's work as it relates to his life is competent stuff. But here's where to start with a book on visual art: how many paintings does the book show, and of these, how many are in color. An art book discussing artwork that is either not shown in the book, or that is shown only in black and white (when a colorplate is crucial), is a frustrating read. At $..., one expects more than 15 color plates, some of which are poorly reproduced. I'm grateful for the information Mr. Rand provides, but greatly disappointed at the amount of work reproduced in what could otherwise be a complete presentation of the artist and his painting.

There have been many attacks on Rand and her philosophy, some more coherent than others. The author is almost a caricature of a Rand hater. His Randists insist that someone must wear the dollar sign on his person before going to a meeting; the heroing wants to be raped. He completely misses all of Rand's points; this book is totally ridiculous. And the author's understanding of Rand's philosophy is better than his writing skills!!

This book is a collection of short stories. It takes a certain type of wit to appreciate it. It would appeal to a very limited minority of thinkers, namely of the abstract, academic type.

Each story seems to have this ever-present nerdy college guy theme to it. Between you and me dear reader, I haven't had much thought about my GPA or major or any other sort of thing a college student thinks about in nearly two decades, so I found the book to be a bit juvenile.

The author's highlighted short story, 'The Pianist Who Liked Ayn Rand' is reasonably entertaining. The character compares the novelist's writings in the story, 'The Fountainhead' to his dealings with the complex emotional need of the typical collegiate female. The main character takes lessons in manhood from reading Rand's interpretation of what the ideal man should be like.

In addition to this somewhat satirical look at young relationships, the author has a couple of vaguely entertaining essays included in the overall book. Of honorable mention was one that discussed the consequences of one man sporting a new mustache.

Unfortunately, the better stories are overshadowed by the inclusion of some tasteless or absurd creations. But again, it takes a certain type of wit to appreciate this type of writing and mine isn't one of them.

Like Thomas Mann, the author's protagonists are often passionate about classical music. However, the "tone" of these stories are overall light and humorous: a difference between Latino and German styles perhaps. Nonetheless, the "review" of the San Juan piano recital and murder, one of my favorites, reminded me slightly of Mann's "Mario and the Magician". Unfortunately, the events of this particular story evolve in the 3rd person, leaving me with many unanswered questions of character and plot motivation.

Although the book comes across as a fairly loose collection of unrelated stories and satirical essays, a unifying theme becomes clear as one reaches the last page. The common impulse towards the careless, oftentimes hapless, adoption of the seemingly new or sophisticated, and the resulting descent from what was initially mere self-delusion towards self-made hells is my view of the author's dark vision. It's a journey from a young boy's energetic innocence in the Dickey stories, of the first half of the book, towards the final description of an island society that has become too sophisticated to have any use whatsoever for human speech.

I feel grateful to the author for, what is for me, an auspicious introduction to Latino literature. Now I feel inspired to give Marquez a whirl.