[sorry, trying to re-send in plain text] I took Philip Stead’s version of MT’s “Prince Oleomargarine” for a test drive with an authentic child, my 10-yo son T(h)omas (who, like Mark Dawidziak’s daughter Becky, was not in fact named for a character in _Adventures of Tom Sawyer_). I read it as a bedtime story over two nights and on the first night, it was my wife, in fact, who fell asleep, not my son! The book is attractive and since so many books are judged by their cover, I hope it will sell out and benefit MTP + Hartford. While my son enjoyed the Stead version, it did not seem very much like MT, which made me want to read MT’s notes, which being only a few pages, ought to have been published. (The copyright page states that they are available at www.princeoleomargarine.com but they are not in fact there.) I have since found MT’s original notes, which confirm my suspicion that the Stead version goes beyond MT’s version in several ways that do not improve the original, neither in content nor style. The CBS news story this morning wanted to make something of the illustrations featuring a black protagonist as being upsetting to MT ‘purists’, which it is not. There is no point in spending a beautiful Sunday pulling apart some of the unTwainian things that were introduced in the Stead version. Kevin Mac Donnell’s review of Aug 21 is an excellent assessment that could not be improved. I hope to see John Bird’s version published one day, since it hews more closely to MT’s text, which does not need anyone’s elaborations to be able to stand on its own as a terrific fairy tale. I will read John’s version to my son over the next few days and will let you know his assessment! :) Hope you have a great day, Taylor