Its a "collection" of philosophical essays through the use of South Park to originate and create the essay themes. This 'collection' is 90% Richard Hanley and the rest being a group of other writers from some of the other Pop Culture books or from Hanley's University of Delaware. Overall... its the typical superfluous not needed, and not terribly great writing, or even that amazing of a piece of work, as is usual for the series (essays vary, the books/themes vary, some great, some bad). This one primarily seems poor - and I blame that on Hanley. All of his essays are pretty much atrocious. I understand the material/theme the book is based off, so I have no objection to the vulgar/crass/rude/uncouth nature of it; but Hanley is all of these things without the humor, and does it in such a stupid spiteful sense that it makes you wonder just how terrible his philosophy classes are at the University. As one reviewer wrote - it seems like reading a stoner's "great ideas and philosophical ramblings" while coming down from the high; not even at it's height, and not even after a good sobriety - but at the tail end as it wanes and the stoner drifts off to eat and eat and mellow out and crash. Hanley doesn't so much as give you an idea or a point, but instead bash you over the head with it, and if you object to it even to the slightest degree you aren't just ignorant, or obnoxious, or stupid in his mind; you're far worse, you're a liberal or something even lowlier. Hanley comes off as rambling, incoherent at times with tirades, meanderings, rambles, and tangents that go nowhere and lead you off for a paragraph and then goes back to the previous paragraph like nothing happened. The one other essayist in this collection who has two back-to-back essays near the end is likewise horrible trite that shouldn't even see print, and not for his philosophical ideas or ramblings but for just poor-writing, regardless of the theme or motive for the writing. Also waaaaaay to many numerous spelling errors and typos in this work to consider even beginning to give any type of praise to Hanley as an editor. ( )

Too many of the essays are written by Hanley himself, and some are even written by an undergraduate student of philosophy (not that I hate undergrads, being one myself, I just think more qualified people ought to have been used). Instead of using South Park as a menas by which to talk about philosophy and thne bringing it back to the show, most of these essays are thinly-disguised vehicles for the opinions of the authors (mainly Hnaley). If you're looking for a smart book on South Park, read Arp's South Park and Philosophy Johnson-Woods's Blame Canada!: South Park And Contemporary Culture. ( )

Note: This is a different book than the one subtitled "You Know, I Learned Something Today", edited by Robert Arp.

The other is much more in the spirit of South Park. Many of the essays in this volume are written by Richard Hanley, who is unabashedly liberal. He often twists the libertarian-leaning politics of South Park, using his essays as soundboards on gun control, anti-smoking, vegetarianism and various degrees of socialism.

It's not that I necessarily disagree with his views on these things (I'm in about 50-50 agreement with his points), it is just irritating that he chose to air them in THIS book, which makes an unstated promise due to the cover and subject matter, that the views of SOUTH PARK would be examined, not the views of RICHARD HANLEY.

There are also many printing/proofing errors (dropped words) throughout the book.

I strongly recommend the "You Know, I Learned Something Today", book edited by Robert Arp, and do not recommend this one despite some pretty good essays by some of the other contributers, especially Tom Way and Aaron Fortune's essays. ( )

Its a "collection" of philosophical essays through the use of South Park to originate and create the essay themes. This 'collection' is 90% Richard Hanley and the rest being a group of other writers from some of the other Pop Culture books or from Hanley's University of Delaware. Overall... its the typical superfluous not needed, and not terribly great writing, or even that amazing of a piece of work, as is usual for the series (essays vary, the books/themes vary, some great, some bad). This one primarily seems poor - and I blame that on Hanley. All of his essays are pretty much atrocious. I understand the material/theme the book is based off, so I have no objection to the vulgar/crass/rude/uncouth nature of it; but Hanley is all of these things without the humor, and does it in such a stupid spiteful sense that it makes you wonder just how terrible his philosophy classes are at the University. As one reviewer wrote - it seems like reading a stoner's "great ideas and philosophical ramblings" while coming down from the high; not even at it's height, and not even after a good sobriety - but at the tail end as it wanes and the stoner drifts off to eat and eat and mellow out and crash. Hanley doesn't so much as give you an idea or a point, but instead bash you over the head with it, and if you object to it even to the slightest degree you aren't just ignorant, or obnoxious, or stupid in his mind; you're far worse, you're a liberal or something even lowlier. Hanley comes off as rambling, incoherent at times with tirades, meanderings, rambles, and tangents that go nowhere and lead you off for a paragraph and then goes back to the previous paragraph like nothing happened. The one other essayist in this collection who has two back-to-back essays near the end is likewise horrible trite that shouldn't even see print, and not for his philosophical ideas or ramblings but for just poor-writing, regardless of the theme or motive for the writing. Also waaaaaay to many numerous spelling errors and typos in this work to consider even beginning to give any type of praise to Hanley as an editor. ( )

Its a "collection" of philosophical essays through the use of South Park to originate and create the essay themes. This 'collection' is 90% Richard Hanley and the rest being a group of other writers from some of the other Pop Culture books or from Hanley's University of Delaware. Overall... its the typical superfluous not needed, and not terribly great writing, or even that amazing of a piece of work, as is usual for the series (essays vary, the books/themes vary, some great, some bad). This one primarily seems poor - and I blame that on Hanley. All of his essays are pretty much atrocious. I understand the material/theme the book is based off, so I have no objection to the vulgar/crass/rude/uncouth nature of it; but Hanley is all of these things without the humor, and does it in such a stupid spiteful sense that it makes you wonder just how terrible his philosophy classes are at the University. As one reviewer wrote - it seems like reading a stoner's "great ideas and philosophical ramblings" while coming down from the high; not even at it's height, and not even after a good sobriety - but at the tail end as it wanes and the stoner drifts off to eat and eat and mellow out and crash. Hanley doesn't so much as give you an idea or a point, but instead bash you over the head with it, and if you object to it even to the slightest degree you aren't just ignorant, or obnoxious, or stupid in his mind; you're far worse, you're a liberal or something even lowlier. Hanley comes off as rambling, incoherent at times with tirades, meanderings, rambles, and tangents that go nowhere and lead you off for a paragraph and then goes back to the previous paragraph like nothing happened. The one other essayist in this collection who has two back-to-back essays near the end is likewise horrible trite that shouldn't even see print, and not for his philosophical ideas or ramblings but for just poor-writing, regardless of the theme or motive for the writing. Also waaaaaay to many numerous spelling errors and typos in this work to consider even beginning to give any type of praise to Hanley as an editor. ( )