The Shakespeare Experiment book test

Discuss products and their reviews in Genii.

Postby Dick Christian » 11/11/08 10:17 AM

Just received my copy of The Shakespeare Experiment by Todd Karr, creator of the 2006 Da Vinci Zone book test. The 816 page volume bound in black leather with the title, The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, embossed in gold on the front cover and spine, gilt-edged pages, tipped in color portrait of the bard, and over 40 pages of Gustave Dor engravings, is the most beautifully produced of the hundreds of book tests Ive seen. The text is authentic Shakespeare and the format is consistent with that of The London Shakespeare and other scholarly editions of his works. With only 1,000 copies printed it can be expected to become a highly sought after collectable once those have been sold.

The 21 pages of notes and instructions on the accompanying CD include numerous tips and helpful suggestions. Unlike those used in many other book tests, this book may be freely handled by members of the audience yet the performer need never handle it himself. While none of the methods employed are new the manner in which they are keyed to the text and to each other is subtly disguised and, with the suggested ways of directing the spectators attention to the words, passages or images to be revealed, accord the performer a considerable degree of flexibility in making his revelations without reliance on other props or devices, suspicious forces, fishing/asking questions, or having anything written down, yet will defy detection under the degree of scrutiny the book might receive during performance. Minimal memorization is required and well disguised cribs are provided for backup use if necessary.

The Shakespeare Experiment is perfectly suited to use as a stand alone test and, while incompatible with other tests using the typical paperback books, could be effectively used in combination with others in which hardcover books are used. It is available from The Miracle Factory, 1909 S. Harvard Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA, 877-707-4268 www.miraclefactory.net for $300.00

Obligatory Disclaimer: I am not assciated with Todd Karr or The Miracle Factory in any way, so have no financial stake in this or any other Miracle Factory product; however, I both use and collect book tests (have approx. 1,000 of them) and am compiling a definitive reference work on their history and evolution.
Last edited by Dick Christian on 11/11/08 10:20 AM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: corrected typos
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby mrgoat » 11/11/08 11:42 AM

Dick Christian wrote:J The text is authentic Shakespeare and the format is consistent with that of The London Shakespeare and other scholarly editions of his works.


Sorry, need to check this.

So, you can sit there with it, and read it cover to cover and it is the authentic shakespeare text?

I was under the impression this was not the case...
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Dick Christian » 11/11/08 04:54 PM

Mr. Goat,

No, I never said or suggested that you could read it cover to cover; however, the text IS comprised of authentic text (but only selected portions, not complete text) taken from 3 plays (Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet, and A Midsummer-Nights Dream) and repeated, with some modifications, in blocks of pages cycled throughout the first 700 pages. The remaining 116 pages contain the complete (unadulterated) text of 151 of the 154 known Shakespeare sonnets interspersed with the Dore engravings and a "Shakespeare Lexicon" all of which are available for a variety of revelations. While the text of the plays has been manipulated in order to satisfy the requirement of the test, the words ARE all authentic Shakespeare and the format and notation of the text is consistent with the multi-volume London Shakespeare edition in my personal library. Although the 700 pages of text from the plays have been selectively arranged those changes from the original are not likely to be detected by anyone other than the a serious Shakespeare scholars who is intimately familiar with the original text in its entirety (and one such expert was consulted and reviewed the text in the final preparation of the book). While I would not use the book in a performance before the faculty of the classics department at Harvard and hardly suggest that the book will withstand the kind of detailed scrutiny it might receive in that environment, it can certainly pass the kind of cursory examination it would be expected to receive during the course of a performance before an audience with much more than average familiarity with the works of Shakespeare.

Karr has been careful to avoid the use of most of the methodologies typically employed in contemporary book tests (e.g., long words, anagrams, number forces, etc., etc.). IMO there are VERY book test using "special" books that equal or surpass this one.
Last edited by Dick Christian on 11/11/08 05:01 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: corrected typos, improved wording
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby El Mystico » 11/11/08 05:27 PM

Am I understanding this right? You talk about serious shakespeare scholars - but if I understand you right, if I try to use this with someone who knows that a complete Shakespeare ought to contain, say Macbeth, Julius Caesar, King Lear, The Tempest...I'd be in trouble? If that's the case, this wouldn't pass my 13 year old daughter!
To be fair - there may be a nationality issue here - I'm from England....maybe we are more familiar with his works than most Americans?
whatever - thank you very much for these details; this book is a steep investment, and it is helpful to have this sort of information to help decide.
El Mystico
 
Posts: 890
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby Dick Christian » 11/11/08 06:27 PM

El Mystico,

Certainly, IF you tell the participating audience member to "open the book to Julius Caesar," or some such, you've got problem, but that's NOT what you do. You let the participant open the book at random. There is nothing on the page to identify it as part of any particular play although someone intimately familiar with Shakespeare will quite likely recognize it as part of the play from which it is taken; however, unless they are familiar with every word and line in that play are unlikely to notice any modification to the original text (assuming that there are any on that particular page and there may not be). You are then able to reveal one or more of the words, phrases (or in the case of the pages with engravings, describe the image) on either of the two pages at which the book is opened. When they first open the book, you can let them change their mind and open it to another page, move to the sonnets near the back of the book, etc., but you are NOT going to let them sit there and read page after page -- after all, you're doing a book test as part of a performance of mentalism or mindreading, the spectator is a member of the audience at a SHOW, not someone in a library cramming for an exam on Shakespeare.

This is not something entirely different from other book tests. What makes it different, and IMO better than 95% of the others on the market, are the appearance and production quality of the book itself, not just the particular methods used (remember, my initial post specifically stated that NONE OF THE METHODS IT USES ARE NEW) but the various "standard" methods that are NOT used, the multiple (often subtle) ways in which the methods are deployed, the variety of revelations available to the performer (as opposed to simply divining a word or two as is often the case with other book tests), and the fact that (unlike most other book tests) the performer does not have to handle or even go near the book, etc., etc.

It is a book test, not a miracle -- it isn't "perfect" but it IS a helluva lot BETTER than the vast majority of the others book tests on the market, including some that sell for just as much or more.

"You makes your choice and pays your money" as they say. If you already have a favorite book test that uses a book with a recognizable and familiar title, that you don't have to handle, that you can let a spectator open at random, that doesn't require you to ask any questions or do any fishing, force any page number or line, have the participating audience member write anything down or say anything other than confirm the accuracy of your revelation then you certainly don't have any reason to invest in this effect.
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby mrgoat » 11/11/08 08:09 PM

Can we just clarify something here?

Now you are saying that this 'complete' works of shakespeare contains a small section of three of the plays which is repeated?

He wrote 37 plays.

I hardly think one needs to be a Harvard classics professor to quickly realise the flaw here.

Also, I have a question regarding this:

"There is nothing on the page to identify it as part of any particular play"

So, in a book with 37 plays in, there is no indication of which play you are looking at on the page?

Thanks for the information on this so far.
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Richard Kaufman » 11/11/08 09:39 PM

The ability of the average person to make any judgment regarding what part of a Shakespearean text he or she is looking at could be described this way: REMOTE.

VERY REMOTE.

Education in Shakespeare could well be better in the UK or other parts of the world, but in the US it's dismal.

And I doubt that anyone is going to be performing a book test on a child.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20925
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Dick Christian » 11/11/08 09:43 PM

Goat,

Once again, although the title of the book is "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" it does NOT actually contain his entire works; however, in a typical performance situation you would not be likely to give an audience member the opportunity to find that out. No one is suggesting that you give the book to a Harvard classics professor or anyone and ask them to confirm that it contains Shakespeare's complete works. I assume that anyone using this book test would be presenting a demonstration of mentalism or mindreading and not a seminar on the writings of Shakespeare.

Without revealing all of the details or repeating all 21 pages of instructions, the basic presentation (as in any book test) is as follows:

1) You hand the book to a member of the audience and don't handle it again (something that only a few book tests allow you to do)

2) You let them open the book to any page (again, something not every book test allows you to do)

3) You immediately know if they are looking at a page from a play (or a sonnet or the Shakespeare Lexicon) as well as WHICH play it is, although there is nothing on the page that identifies the play nor is there any reason why they need to know or why you would need to announce which play it is; however -- and this is the IMPORTANT part -- someone sufficiently familiar with the plays of Shakespeare WILL know which play it is and THAT serves as a "convincer" of the legitimacy of the book even though it is not (yet again, something that is not possible with most other book tests)

4) You are now in a position to reveal some of the words, or a phrase, or an image on the page -- WITHOUT PUMPING, FISHING OR ASKING ANY QUESTIONS (still another feature that is not possible with most other book tests)

You never ask the participating spectator to tell you anything other than to confirm that your revelation of the word, phrase or image they are looking at is correct. No one writes anything down. There is no forcing of a page.

Yes, there are A FEW other book tests that offer SOME of those features, even some that can be done with ungimmicked books that offer SOME of those same features, but how many can YOU name that give you ALL of those features? I'd dare say damn few and I have approximately 1,000 book tests in my collection and have more than a passing familiarity with several hundred.

Those who prefer to do a book test using one or more paperback books that the performer is obliged to handle and dare not leave in the hands of a member of the audience for more that a few seconds, and then has to ask for a page or line number, or fish for letters in a word, etc., etc., should find another use for their $300.

I have nothing to gain or lose whether or not anyone decides to invest in this or any other book test, but since it has just been released and is only now being delivered to those who placed pre-publication offers and is offered in a limited edition of 1,000 (yes, some might say that a pretty substantial limit) I thought that some readers of this forum might be interested in knowing something about its features and one person's opinion of how it compares with the many other book tests currently on the market and it is my opinion -- nothing more and nothing less -- that it is equal to most of the best and surpasses the rest. Everyone else is free to form their own opinion.
Last edited by Dick Christian on 11/11/08 09:46 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: corrected typos
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby Michael Close » 11/11/08 10:16 PM

In the instructions, Todd offers a strategy that helps you avoid getting a Shakespearean scholar up on stage. You also refrain from saying, "Please look through the book and verify that all thirty-seven plays are represented."

In the United States, you'd have a better chance of being busted for inaccurate text if you used a book titled The Complete Gilligan's Island scripts.
Last edited by Michael Close on 11/11/08 10:16 PM, edited 0 times in total.
Reason: None of your business.
Michael Close
 
Posts: 347
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Las Vegas

Postby Richard Kaufman » 11/11/08 10:22 PM

Actually, I could do pretty well on a test about Abbott and Costello movies!
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20925
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Dick Christian » 11/11/08 10:33 PM

Michael,

Right on! Not sure what point it was that "Mr. Goat" was trying so hard to make, but you have put the matter to rest far more succinctly than I.

Thank you.
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby Rick Ruhl » 11/11/08 11:29 PM

Star Trek Movies I could do :)
Rick Ruhl
 
Posts: 598
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby El Mystico » 11/12/08 03:10 AM

I think Michael adds another useful aspect - it is a stage trick.
I was viewing it as something to have lying around the house. On stage you can control the performance. If you want something to lie around the house, you run the risk (in the UK anyway) of someone picking it up out of interest/curiosity. Particularly if it is such a beautiful book as the ads suggest.
But I'm sure it is a great stage book test. and certainly there are few book tests that you could leave lying around the house.
El Mystico
 
Posts: 890
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby mrgoat » 11/12/08 08:21 AM

Dick Christian wrote:Goat,

Once again, although the title of the book is "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" it does NOT actually contain his entire works;


Right, this was my only point.

In your first post you clearly state it is the entire works:

"The text is authentic Shakespeare and the format is consistent with that of The London Shakespeare and other scholarly editions of his works"

That was all I had an issue with. Especially now you have said it is, in fact, just 3 small sections of 3 plays.

Of course it will work on stage. Of course it is lovely. Of course you like it.

None of that was bothering me.

The part that was bothering me was you saying it was authentic text that is formatted correctly. Now you have said it is neither of those things.

I am sure it's a lovely book, and that is great.
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby El Mystico » 11/12/08 08:25 AM

er - no he didn't mrgoat.
I think we both inferred it though.
El Mystico
 
Posts: 890
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby mrgoat » 11/12/08 09:32 AM

El Mystico wrote:er - no he didn't mrgoat.
I think we both inferred it though.


"The text is authentic Shakespeare and the format is consistent with that of The London Shakespeare and other scholarly editions of his works"

Well if that doesn't suggest it is the authentic text and it isn't stating it is formated in a way consistent with The London Shakespeare, then clearly my bad for misinterpreting the above sentence.

You see, when he said it was authentic text which was formatted in a way that scholars format this authentic text I (albeit foolishly) took that to mean it was the authentic text formatted in a way that scholars would format it.
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Dick Christian » 11/12/08 09:35 AM

Mr. Goat,

I try to choose my words very carefully and proofread/edit them several times before posting, although an occasional error may slip through despite my efforts to preclude it. I assume, perhaps mistakenly, that others will read them with similar care. When reading anything, but especially reviews, one needs to be just as cognizant of what is NOT said as what is.

While I accurately reported the title on the cover and spine of the book I never said that the text it contained was COMPLETE (it is not) only that it was AUTHENTIC (it is). The format (line/stanzas numbered, etc.) is CONSISTENT WITH with (albeit not a precise copy of) the format in the 6 volume edition of The London Shakespeare that has been in my library since the 1950s.

My intent was not to deceive, but merely to present an honest, even if IMO deservedly favorable review of the effect. Would that all effects were so well designed and produced. Even though the book test routine I use in my own performances has been carefully developed and finely honed over more than 15 years, I still spend a great deal of money acquiring almost every new book test released as part of my research for the book on the genre that I have been working on and hope to publish and to add to my already extensive collection. I find that 90+% of them are either absolute crap or (to be charitable) "highly derivative." "The Shakespeare Experiment" stands head and shoulders above almost all of the others and is therefor worthy of special note.

BTW, although the effect is intended and clearly suitable for use in a stage performance and I would not suggest leaving it lying around for anyone to pick up and examine, IMO it would also be ideal for including among other volumes of similar quality on a bookshelf in one's own library where it would be readily available for use in an impromptu demonstation for friends, family or visiting guests.
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby mrgoat » 11/12/08 09:51 AM

Yes I understand how I misinterpreted your language.

If you refer to Shakespearean text as authentic, I assumed you meant it is the authentic text. Not a small section of 3 of the 37 plays. But I did study Drama and English at University, and specialised in Shakespeare. So clearly, my interpretation of the word authentic twisted by this study.

OED: authentic

adjective of undisputed origin; genuine.

I never suggested your intent was to deceive. I was merely asking questions. Thank you for answering them.

Damian
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby El Mystico » 11/12/08 09:52 AM

I've found Dick's review honest and helpful, even if we reach different conclusions.
mrgoat - your last post was entirely accurate. But your previous post said "In your first post you clearly state it is the entire works".
But he didn't. I guess you realised that when you got to write your last post. Dick said the text was authentic. and that the format was consistent. But he didn't say it was entire.
El Mystico
 
Posts: 890
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby mai-ling » 11/12/08 10:17 AM

i was contemplating purchasing the book for my
shakespeare act. but $300 is way out of my budget.
(Anyone like to buy a copy for me as a present?)

Even just to have a way to participate with the
audience.

I was not pleased when I asked Todd what the contents
of the "complete works" were. because many complete
works are not 'complete".

the fact that only 151 sonnets and not all 154 are
not in the book. What about his poems? Why not
list a TOC at the website to make sure its complete.

My complete works of Shakespeare has it all.
It only cost me 50 cents and is hard cover.

Are we paying $300 for book or the CD?
(I realize its a gaffed book)

I will have to agree with whom ever above pointed out
about being spot on about exact text of Shakespeare.

Depending on what his reference was, there are many
books with alternate wordage of all his works.
When working on the sonnet project, i have come across
about a 1/2 dozen text of a varying degrees.
And in some of the plays i've scored for, the text has
been worked out with it being completely re-written.
It amazing what a little bit of editing can do.
User avatar
mai-ling
 
Posts: 740
Joined: 05/10/08 07:25 AM
Location: 60081

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 11/12/08 10:37 AM

I wish I did have use for this item - it sounds like great fun.

In the mean time I'm holding out for a version in the original Klingon. ;)
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6759
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Stuart Hooper » 11/12/08 10:47 AM

I'm probably going to pick this up as soon as I'm back in range of a U.S. mailing address as it sounds wonderful and I've never been disappointed by a Miracle Factory purchase.

I don't see anything wrong with Damian's questions, however. They help clarify a few things that I myself were wondering about. The details also help me consider this as a real purchase, if that makes any sense.
Stuart Hooper
 
Posts: 25
Joined: 07/19/08 11:54 AM

Postby Dick Christian » 11/12/08 11:06 AM

To whom it may concern:

Mr. Goat and I have now resolved our misunderstandings and he, I and El Mystico are now (I think) all "on the same page."

For the benefit of any readers who still may not "get it" this will be my final attempt to clarify.

"The Shakespeare Experiment" is a BOOK TEST. Like many other such effects it includes a gaffed 618 page book and 21 pages of notes and instructions on a CD-ROM. While the title of the book may be deceptive (i.e., does not accurately reflect the contents) the words in the text ARE authentic exerpts from Shakespeare's writings (or the works of Francis Bacon or whoever else you prefer to believe was the "real" author of the works commonly attributed to WS). The purpose of the book is not to allow anyone to prove that it is what its title suggests but to give the performer a means of revealing certain words, phrases or images contained therein in a demonstration of apparent mindreading. Nothing more or less. The book provided has been painstakingly produced in order to give it the aura/appearance of authenticity despite the fact that -- like the majority of the props used in performances of magic or mentalism -- in order to serve the purpose for which it was created, it may not actually be what it seems.

BTW, it DOES include a Table of Contents listing what would be in the book if, in fact, it DID include Shakespeare's "complete works" (which I hope I have made abundantly clear it does not); however, I would not suggest that the performer make a point of drawing a spectator's attention to the TOC as it does not lend itself to any revelation and doing so might encourage that the book receive greater scrutiny than either desired or necessary for the performance of the effect.

While hardly "perfect" (name a book test that is) it is far better than most. It is expensive because it is costly to produce any book of such size and quality. The price tag also serves to keep it out of the hands of the merely curious.

If it's more than you are comfortable spending, don't buy it. If you are not familiar with or experienced in presenting book tests it isn't for you.

'nuff said.
Dick Christian
Dick Christian
 
Posts: 209
Joined: 08/18/08 11:03 AM
Location: Fairfax Station, VA (Metro DC)

Postby Doc Dixon » 11/12/08 11:08 AM

Jonathan Townsend wrote:I wish I did have use for this item - it sounds like great fun.

In the mean time I'm holding out for a version in the original Klingon. ;)


Klatu Barrata Nikto

Not Klingon, but it's the best I could do on short notice.

DD
Doc Dixon
 
Posts: 216
Joined: 04/16/08 01:45 PM

Postby mrgoat » 11/12/08 11:14 AM

El Mystico wrote:I've found Dick's review honest and helpful, even if we reach different conclusions.
mrgoat - your last post was entirely accurate. But your previous post said "In your first post you clearly state it is the entire works".
But he didn't. I guess you realised that when you got to write your last post. Dick said the text was authentic. and that the format was consistent. But he didn't say it was entire.


Absolutely, I realised that we have different interpretations of the word authentic. It was a very helpful and honest review and I don't recall suggesting it was anything OTHER than that.

However, I know now he didn't mean authentic as I mean it.

Two countries separated by a common language etc. :)
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby El Mystico » 11/12/08 11:32 AM

So, mrgoat - "To be or not to be" is not authentic Shakespeare, because it isn't the entire works?
(Maybe we should take this off line, since it is getting a bit off topic!)
El Mystico
 
Posts: 890
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Leamington Spa

Postby mrgoat » 11/12/08 11:40 AM

El Mystico, I think it's the context of the word.

You say Complete Works of Shakespeare. Then you say 'authentic text'. (not 'you' clearly).

I assume that means it is the authentic text of the complete works of shakespeare.

I, however, was wrong with this interpretation of the word. Didn't mean to rile anyone, was just asking about it!
User avatar
mrgoat
 
Posts: 4190
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brighton, UK

Postby Rick Ruhl » 11/12/08 01:32 PM

It's a magic trick, the name of the book or it's accuracy of contents really don't matter.
Rick Ruhl
 
Posts: 598
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby David Vamer » 11/13/08 05:45 AM

"My friends, spit not the hair from off thy sack!"

Pretty sure that was from I Henry IV. In any case, it's perfect iambic pentameter.
David Vamer
 
Posts: 151
Joined: 10/16/08 03:15 AM

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 11/13/08 09:04 AM

I have to agree - it's a prop book - looks nice- has unusual endpapers, pretty illustrations and would go nicely on the shelf of the sort of person who has the plays in one volume rather than in script books - who was that character from SNL who called himself a "master thespian"?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6759
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Brian Morton » 11/13/08 10:47 PM

Jon Lovitz was the "Master Thespian." "One, two, three, aaAAAAACT!"

Having received the Shakespeare Experiment book this past week, I have to say that as a gaffed book, it is gorgeous. I plopped it into the hands of my former antiquarian bookseller girlfriend for a few moments this past weekend, and let her look at the beauty of the thing and she didn't notice anything odd (I distracted her as she got to the Table of Contents and took it back) about it at all. It is "pretty, yet boring" lookingwhat you'd expect of a quality tome of Shakespeare: it's classy but not "showy."

Some forget that this is something that is going to be handed to an audience member for a just a few minutes under possibly hot lights and the scrutiny of the rest of the audience under the pressure not to screw anything up or look stupid (because who wants to mess up when they're reading Shakespeare to a crowd, right?), with an easygoing, helpful performer kindly guiding them to do what they're told, right?

This sucker is gonna kill. I'm looking forward to when I've got it down enough to put it in a show.

brian :cool:
User avatar
Brian Morton
 
Posts: 387
Joined: 03/12/08 11:43 AM
Location: Bawlamer, Merlin


Return to Light From the Lamp