This is not my typical book. I was attracted by the cover and my recent revival of interest in Origami. I now have a stack of books on the subject to read. Hull says in the intro that this book took him ages to write. By the same token, it took me ages to read, though I did read every page. Except for maybe the 30 page list of references at the end. OK, I said I read every page. I think that the verb read indicates a greater percentage of absorption of content. Let us say I LOOKED at every word and the multitude of mathematical symbols. For the avoidance of doubt I leave this message to potential readers who may have been attracted by the beautiful purple modular origami on the cover: This is essentially a textbook. If you do not have a good foundation in higher math, there will be a huge whoosh factor. Still, it was interesting and more seeped in than I expected. It was peppered with diversions which amounted to proving the theorems discussed in the book. Some people might find them fascinating. To me a diversion is something that takes you away from something. While I read this book I went off on countless diversions looking up things discussed along the way (you must check out Britany Gallivan's record breaking paper folding experiment) and Newton's historical dispute with Leibniz over priority in the development of calculus or why belcastro spells her name in lower case. Naming conventions are interesting. Do we go with the Tortilla-Tortilla, Taco-Tortilla or Taco-Taco Condition?
I did fold the two versions of the square twist in illustration 6.12 and the next time I attempt a tessellation I will have a better understanding of what's going on. I am giving this five stars because it kept me engaged through to the bitter end. Next book I pick up on math will have no formulae. Thanks, Mr Hull.