Thursday, March 29, 2007

Tutti Fruity, The Lost Jewels of Nabooti

CHOOSE YOUR OWN ADVENTURE books are back!! Are you not mightily stoked, fellow adventurers? As soon as I learned today about the CYOA resurrection, I became sorta fixated on acquiring some. And I SHALL. Oh yes. I shall. I just gotta pick which exciting titles to purchase. ("The Lost Jewels of Nabooti" is one of the options...in case that subject line was confounding ya) Ostensibly,** I will be buying these books for my niece but... y'know...if any CYOA books found their way into el bano de mi hermana...well, that would be convenient. I am often stinking it up in there and I would like some other reads than Cottage Living for a change, eh?

I had better make up my mind and make my purchase ASAP because this maybe a short-lived revival, since the Vermont based publisher that is re-issuing these seems to be pretty hard up for moolah, as evidenced by their ridiculous efforts to sue Daimler-Chrysler.

Well first off, lemme say that words cannot express how tremendous this swell of pride is that overtakes me when I think that CYOA is being resurrected right here in my home state. YAAAAAY, VT!! Buuuuut, that said, this lawsuit is pretty tacky. I am no professional legal counsel (though I am a DAMNED good amateur fake lawyer) but I say they should totally take Jeep up on the offer to give them a link on their website.

If you....
..Accept Jeep's offer to link to your website on their insanely high traffic website...go to page 32

..Persist in following through with a totally futile and mildly absurd lawsuit...go to page 45

..drop the lawsuit reluctantly and--crushed by failure-- take a mini-sabbatical from publishing in order to stay home, eat lots of Mrs T Perogis, not change out of your pajamas, watch all 3 seasons of Just the Ten of Us on DVD and write a dozen or so creepy fan letters to Rick Springfield....go to page 54

HAAA , HA HAAA I know what you're thinking, jerkies, but I WOULD SO turn to pg 32!!

**This is just to say that I ADORE the word "ostensibly"

No comments: