A guest post from Michael Justin Lee:

Nothing can distract one’s mind from unpleasantness like an unexpected kind word. I got to experience this first hand last night when, sweltering from this heatwave, I saw my first book reviewed in the Sunday New York Times.

I wouldn’t have appreciated a blast of arctic air more. What are the odds that the unpublished, untenured, junior-most faculty member in my department would wind up reviewed in The New York Times merely one year after meeting McGraw-Hill at ASJA 2011? Don’t bother to answer that, it was a rhetorical question.

Very, very nice for reviewer Paul Brown to commend the advice in my book gives me bragging rights at my next reunion. And just watch me brag. I’ll win the Gold medal for sure in this event. I may wear a sandwich board sign with the article blown up fifty times bigger. The faint of heart may wish to absent themselves from Lee-apalooza this year because they won’t hear the end of it from me.

Reviewer Paul Brown’s article is entitled, “Paths Around Investment Gloom and Doom.” That, my book certainly is. But I would like to believe that my book goes further than the mere evasion of doom.

As important as that is, not dying is not a very motivating objective. It is what is called a necessary but insufficient condition, being alive surely being a necessary precursor to the achievement of financial success.

No, my hopes for my readers are far, far grander than merely avoiding doom. I want my readers to get filthy rich! Obscenely, hideously, disgustingly, corpulently, rolling in the bucks rich!

I, for one, do not demonize those who obtain their wealth legitimately. Actually, I admire them. The achievement of prosperity in the free market system does not just benefit those who achieve it. It benefits all who live in this economy. To obtain his billions, Bill Gates needed to provide something that people could not do without. For all its flaws, Windows was a major driver of the information revolution. I’m aware that he’s quite a ruthless businessman but that does not invalidate his achievement, ruthlessness usually being in the opinion of the vanquished.

Nevertheless, I understand that to fit his review of my book into one article incorporating the review of another entitled, “Investing in the Second Lost Decade” required reviewer Brown to find a common meeting ground.

I don’t happen to share the other authors’ opinion that we’re in for a second lost decade but we certainly share an interest in helping people benefit despite it if it happens.

And if indeed it happens that we’re in for a second lost decade, reviewer Brown provided me a great idea for the title of a potential sequel to my book. “Paths Around Investment Gloom and Doom” would not be bad but it needs emphasis. I would prefer “Paths Around Investment Gloom and Doom!!!!!!!!!!!!”