You published my previous book on this website in 2001 when I couldn't find a publisher. As I have already told you, this critcrim.org post by you is by far the greatest promotion the work has received. The work is long conceived and well edited and produced, reasonable too, just scarcely advertised. As author, I want you to know that now--as I enter my retirement--I seek engagement (such as posts right here as I have in classes)and have no need for pay. Sales are a bonus primarily to U Ottawa Press, to whom under Bob Gaucher's editorship of a series on new directions in criminology I owe publication at all. That's fitting or karmic if you will. My first book in 1976 (see pubs list at the end of the proofs) was in 40 publishers' hands when an English firm took it. In the last book I can count for an increase in salary,in the peacemaking book,I found a university publisher in Canada after 4 tries with US critcrim series. In a publication you'll find in the list for 1980, I distinguished myself from being "critical" by embracing "radicalism"--capable of truly being only Hal and Hal's gut-level honesty with his and her relations tell each other. Basically, a test of my radicalism (or earlier, "anarchism" and so forth)is whether what Hal and Hal alone shares with you honestly and dependably when it counts,whether as political comedian Mort Sahl put it in the sixties, whether I don't have views that as a whole defy stereotyping. I postulate that we offer one another and all our relations more when we get to respect and learn from one another's individuality, rather than by determination to be on a winning side, to put them(?) in their place. If you haven't seen it before, welcome to page proofs that are virtually identical with a carefully edited manuscript, for which I also thank U of Ottawa Press. I have time to log on and share experience with anyone who should read this message. I'm Hal Pepinsky, pepinsky@indiana.edu, in Ohio till 1/25 at614-433-7386, back in Bton to move out then. I flatter myself that I have raised issues not otherwise addressed by criminologists in this work and perhaps in earlier work as well. Here I conclude that hope for building national, international, global and personal security rests transforming violence through negotiation. I propose, therefore, that other criminologists particularly and human beings generally give up studying crime and criminality in favor of studying violence and using processes of negotiation--of peacemaking--as transformative at any social level. So here it is, and if you check it out, I'd love to hear your reactions. Love and peace, Hal