I get all the jokes, so you don’t have to explain them to me. I was commenting on how people today would insist on an explanation. They are a nice little touch to what could have been a really dry exercise. The Alfred Nobel one is one of my favorites.

I am looking for the Ferrel guide online, so there should be a comparison entry in a few months.

Seriously, though, the shoehorning was done. We would essentially discover a mechanic, feature, or philosophy in the game and try to find some aspect of history or historical analysis that would complement it.

Don’t get me wrong. We did serious research. But we also looked for evidence or theory to fit our “case.”

As for the jokes, they really do have something to do with each of the persons, real or imaginary. I couldn’t resist putting in Dustin Hoffman’s character from The Graduate under Plastics because of that party scene in the movie. Jean-Paul Sartre’s works included Being and Nothingness, so why not say “I don’t think. Therefore, I’m not.” as the faux quote under Philosophy. Having the godfather of bad journalism (I mean Hearst, not Limbaugh here) say “All I know is what’s read to me out of the paper” seemed very funny at the time. And for Magnetism, well, Alan and I are still at opposite poles politically. And to have the inventor of dynamite say, “Gentlemen, I think I blew it!” for Explosives seemed to be a neat thing.

Thanks for remembering the book. We always saw a serious side to the games, even if we liked to have pun…er….fun.