I don't understand how this is meant to be a reply to the review article. At any rate, Smith's book is really good, but (obviously) written as an academic analy

I don't understand how this is meant to be a reply to the review article. At any rate, Smith's book is really good, but (obviously) written as an academic analysis. Stylistically maybe a little overkill for the layperson in this forum, but there are people with wide-ranging interests here who might dig it.