Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad: A Mostly Irish Farce
The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad: A Mostly Irish Farce
The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad: A Mostly Irish Farce
Ebook593 pages14 hours

The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad: A Mostly Irish Farce

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

4/5

()

Read preview

About this ebook

The hapless inhabitants of Killoyle, Ireland, face all manner of chaos in this comic novel from an author “capable of spinning a fabulous yarn” (Minnesota Daily).
 
After local lush Mick McCreek gets into a car crash with a cross-dressing church sexton, he enlists the help of a lawyer, Tom O’Mallet. As it turns out, the lawyer’s real gig is selling missiles to an IRA splinter group, and he plans to use his clueless client as a patsy.
 
O’Mallet also hoodwinks Anil, an Indian waiter who has found himself the unlikely target of a manhunt. What Tom doesn’t know is that his lucrative weapons are destined for a massive terrorist attack on the Pint-Pulling Olympiad, and that Anil’s sexy cousin Rashmi—a sweatshop worker turned intelligence operative—is hot on the bombers’ trail.
 
With a wink and a nudge, Roger Boylan’s pyrotechnic prose brings to life Ireland at its manic extremes, proving the author a dazzling and distinctive talent in American fiction.
LanguageEnglish
Release dateDec 1, 2007
ISBN9781555846107
The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad: A Mostly Irish Farce

Related to The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad

Related ebooks

Humor & Satire For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad

Rating: 3.906683576186998 out of 5 stars
4/5

2,738 ratings71 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Read this in high school and didn't enjoy it- but reread now and can see a lot I didn't understand or relate to back then. Worth the reread for sure.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    waiting and waiting and waiting...
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Going to the party as Godot and never showing up.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I finally listened to this famous play by Samuel Beckett. It had been on my radar forever, and it was just a couple of hours long and so I did it. Then I went and read the wikipedia page, to try and figure out what I had listened to. It seems nobody really knows what it's about, nor did the author when he wrote it. Gotta love existentialists. At least I had some idea of what I was getting into, so wasn't exactly terribly surprised by the absurdism. Now I have 1952 covered for my "Century of Books" challenge (reading a book from each year of the 20th century), at least, but I doubt you could make me sit through that play anytime soon.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    Story is like doing laundry. Watching the drier go round. Knowing it will happen again next week.

    Supposedly means 'Waiting for God." They wait and wait.

    Hey maybe i have this confused with No Exit by Sartre. By gum i do. Existentialism is dull.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I love this play. I teach it every year and it never gets boring. My students and I never come to the same conclusion of the story, and my conclusion changes all the time.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I found this play perplexing. Two men, Estagon and Vladimir, are waiting on the side of a road for Godot. Apparently neither of them have ever met the man nor do they seem to know why they are waiting for him. They pass the time with conversation. Two other men enter the scene. Pozzo seems to be well-to-do and holds a rope which is around Lucky's neck. Lucky is a slave and they are on the way to the market to sell him.The setting is minimal - one tree and some rocks - which reflects the minimalism of the play. The characters are simple people living simple lives. Their actions and interactions are short and to the point. With one exception. Lucky is told to think and delivers a non-punctuated line that covers three pages.What does it all mean? Better minds than I could offer explanations. I, however, am left to ponder.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I absolutely, unabashedly love Waiting for Godot!I first read it in college, having discovered this and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead around the same time. Both plays have that beautiful existentialism that involves two characters having no idea what is happening around them and trying to make sense of their world. And failing miserably.What can be said? What needs to be said? I can't really think of much to say other than it's wonderfully, madly absurd.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I am being very kind here in giving Beckett's famous play two stars out of five. The play may or may not be about existentialist despair, the meaninglessness of life, or simply the playwright's thumbing his nose at dramaturgy. It is for me the equivalent of an oversized blank canvas with a single tiny dot hanging in the modern art museum of your choice which one may take for commentary on the futility of life, the isolation of every human being in a post-modern world or some similarly pretentious, futile attempt at explaining what could be simple fly poop or, just as likely and of equal intrinsic value, a metaphor for the artist's lack of the slightest scintilla of talent or imagination and the curator's boundless gullibility. At least one can analyze and dismiss the latter immediately without experiencing the existential angst of a wasted evening at the theater or (seemingly) endless hours reading and re-reading the former while waiting for something, anything (meaningful or not) to happen.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I admit to not having a full understanding. As a matter of fact, I read several reviews on Amazon hoping for enlightenment. Not much help there. While some of the stark symbology would seem to evoke Christ, I wouldn't want to go out on a [metaphoric] limb. The tree symbolizes the passing of time. In the first act it was leafless. In the second, it has leaves. All four characters wear bowlers, which they seemingly exchanged for no apparent reason. Could this be somehow representative of Christ's crown of thorns? The same for the boots. They didn't fit, they fit, they didn't fit... were spikes driven through Didi's feet? I'm probably reaching. The men could not not wait for Godot. But neither, in their frustrated nihilistic existence, commit suicide. In our hearing they tried twice. I think we must assume they will unsuccessfully try again and again...Reading the some of the other review convinced me that I must see a stage production.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    The quintessential Absurdist play.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    A play that can be called true genius. Word play is delightful, and the characters are quirky and original. It does lose a bit in the reading as the action must be visualized rather than seen, but reading it makes it easier to catch all the double entendres and language tricks that sort of pass over you while watching the play staged. This is a play for the ages; the central theme does not date, and the metaphor is subtle enough to be enjoyed, but not so subtle that it is overlooked altogether. A must for any theatre aficianado.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Beckett's amazing. A near perfect piece. It's funny, because I've seen it staged before, and it's always rendered as incredibly odd and abstract and mannered... but I don't get that feeling when reading it at all. Somehow it all feels more lively and believable on the page.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I know this is one of those works that are supposed to be masterpieces, but it did absolutely nothing for me. To be fair, I'm not a theater person, and I never got the appeal of absurdist works or anything else along those lines. I got about a third of the way into this and just couldn't stand to read it anymore, it drove me nuts. If you can appreciate that kind of stuff then I guess I can see why so many people love it, I'm just not one of them.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    It's very different reading this play when you're 15 as compared to when you're 50. In my high school drama class, we loved doing scenes from Godot because it was absurd, but I doubt very much we understood the show's complexity. It features existential banter and dark comedic turns. I think all I got out of it was that the characters were stuck and petulant and clownish. But now at 50 I am starting to get the subtleties that went completely over my head at 15. Plus, I recently saw an excellent production of it which, of course, brought the characters to life.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Impossible for me to summarize my thoughts on this in any coherent fashion.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A truly provocative play. Despite Beckett's claim not to possess any understanding of what Godot meant (which may, in fact, have been a deliberately ironic way of pointing toward the play's existential menaing) it begs interpretation.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I suppose I'll see this one of these days, and that might make a difference, but for me, there simply wasn't much here. I got bored, and waited throughout for more, but found nothing. I'm told (and believe) that that's the point, but I don't see much value in the reading or the lesson by the end.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Existentialism served raw! After reading The Stranger by Camus, I did not think that existentialism could be more plainly defined in prose, but Godot has left me debating (and yes, also waiting). Beckett, it seems, is also magically able to actualize ennui as a comedy -- as he puts it, a tragicomedy. But moreover, the piece does well to capture a subtlety of the existential mood: man's inextinguishable, incorrigible hope.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    You may well have heard of Theatre of the Absurd and of this play which started it all fifty years ago. You are quite likely aware that the play involves two down-and-out men who occupy center stage throughout, who, during the entire play, cannot make up their mind whether or not to continue waiting for the arrival of an unknown third man, Godot. Until you have actually encountered the book and read it, or perhaps have seen the play, I would venture that you are entirely unprepared for the direct assault that this work will present upon your previous literary and theatrical sensibilities. It is a drama with almost no action, written with very sparse dialogue, set in a nearly barren landscape, presenting a very bleak view of an almost sub-human condition. Two episodes, which involve one forlorn man enslaved as a beast of burden by another, will add to your general dismay. Through these episodes, man's inhumanity to man comes to the fore in the limited action which the play presents. Described as an allegory for the human condition, this work will challenge you, the reader, to provide your own interpretation of its message and compare that to your own understanding and outlook on life. Here is an ultra-bleak existential view -- 'absurdist' is the word -- to kick-start your thought process. If you are so inclined.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    As thought provoking as this quintessential example of Theater of the Absurd is, every time I read it I find that it drags in the second act. It pulls me back in over the last few pages, however. It is possible that it would feel less as if it could just as effectively worked as a one-act if I saw it on stage, but then again it's also possible it would bother me more. Almost certainly, watching it would take longer than reading it, after all.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Klassiek toneelstuk over de absurditeit van het leven, de schraalheid van het bestaan, de onmenselijkheid van de mens, de onmogelijkheid van communicatie, enz. De eerste lectuur heeft een groot schokeffect; tweede lectuur 20 jaar later stelt wat teleur.Een eerste keer in het Engels gelezen, op 17 jaar; vond het geweldig!
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I know Beckett, and I like Beckett, but this is still my favorite. Funny and depressing, deep and shallow, angry and passive, Godot has it all, and does it all better than most things.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    has to be seen to be appreciated--like most drama--but can still be understood by being read--to understand Godot is to understand Beckett--ha, ha, ha--and the waiting never ends
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I don't think I really know what to say or think about this. Perhaps if I saw it performed I'd like it better, but as it stands, I wouldn't feel it a loss if I never read it again.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I saw this play during my college years but had never read it. Now that I have, I think that reading it provides the better experience. Much of the dialogue is very quick on stage and having the time to reflect on it a bit made it more enjoyable. There are also notes in the stage directions that lend some annotation to what's going on.I used to date a theater major and heard many of the interpretations that Godot was God. However, it doesn't seem convincing to me and I'm glad that Beckett has refused to confirm or deny this. For me, the play is just an Existentialist work about the lack of a meaningful objective in life and the futility of talking about it. It's a difficult play to complete as, in my opinion, by the time you reach page 128, it's boring...but then, that's part of the point, at least as I interpret the play.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    If the author was trying to effect in the reader the pain of interminable, open-ended waiting in line with no insight as to when the line might move, with no other diversions, he succeeded. I found this book excruciating to read. Imagine the dull rambling--desalinated of anything whatsoever interesting--of two nondescript nobodies with nothing to say. That pretty much sums it up. Once one gets that, then some nuances come in to play. First, it is funny at times. The author manages to insert some subtle plays on words; irony; playful symbolism. These are not pointed to with a neon sign, but have to be watched for--no sleeping here! The insertion of the rich man and his human 'horse' pulling a cart was truly demented. While there may be a few ways to take this work, I'll stick with re-interpreting the phrase 'waiting for Godot' not to mean a long wait, but rather an interminable wait so filled with boredom that not only can I understand why the characters in this play considered suicide, but wonder why I am not considering it as well.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    As postwar "what the fuck now?" this gets five stars. Six. As anything else it gets one, or zero, or a spider or a rat. So we average it out to three, minus one for the cult, plus a half for the riveting potential of what I'm gonna call the "bugeyed reading" and another half for the comedic frisson of, let's say, the "Monty Python"" reading (or maybe "Animaniacs," with Estragon as Wacko). I'm getting pretty sure comedy is the only place for existentialism anyway.So. Plus another half if somebody ever figures out how to blend the two readings, I thinks, but for now, three stars. Math.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Four pages in, I stopped dead, took stock, and said:

    "........ MAN this is weird!"

    I read Act One in London. At Michelle's urging, I read Act Two in Dublin.

    By the end of the book, my reaction hadn't really changed. I was later asked, "Good weird? Bad weird?"

    I ... have no idea. Just -- WEIRD!

    Beckett. Huh. What a crazy guy.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Excellent meaningless play with a lot of symbolism. It's meaning in litrature can be describes as what is abstract painting in art. Two guys wait around a tree for someone or somethig called Godot. During the time of their wait many things happen and yet nothing really happens. It is a very simiple play that at points becomes completly uncomprehensible. See comments for my personal take on the play.

Book preview

The Great Pint-Pulling Olympiad - Roger Boylan

ebook_preview_excerpt.html˒G%+^D"BJ Etw #U?Ԣg7^\+]v sT#zfjGU}I) }z~: cջ*^UC;cbLaR ]vWc1ƊcJU9>}*l4M Ux?yuhT! ê]gn8b؜]Pi8,TEOc8C }?u0i[}nrUi; scU*xqq寧* b!骸nU446wVz8`x(Fdžb*v0=0N}hpm6n}5cJw62MFUf)n>b"p +'qUzwy(p}w|i(OtUЕ;>܇nßpZo/;W&LtHF XOy-0w|:aI1JMp)t|2k,EФDZOF /cZ&Qc:MCh |:;H 0_s/5MS?0Kk ]Ao1L5@80GMyOG+}ҟzqk=_| M(q%Rl#$LKnbi.a1n(O}SʇqԘdo{ Xbǟ6IhG`쿟 _S n.&% J@|r%^Ctik~4uiֿjv^ rnRm5||&(1{3uÈP/(^|DjW_߮W_8?yyo?tvo>{S&%qjw&eU 9CnC)GH1!جbdP ~wsl&JLm~ǻoV lX0_Y|Uq_"$&l'Yk!{R #``IqͶ8p;U*Pkc{- \ S?¿PB?.{xʩAb`X4AxZfkiOcU7ooz KK\*`ۦnSQN j:ҧ,f#$*T6Vעu^K[ hcLrc}"\:R94m;L^ +%M= Pc31wZ]u<pntG2~j7Mܙjhq13L4@5FՇua1.P!UxS@+P?ؖ+IFwlSa7(c(Ǻb%n?)1tRpI &-w&6ZG}LK]1eL{}]󞨟;,U ,Xv*&q=5ƴ6 rX6čg[ﰘ.u!\&\*dGRaʠ\!5Dkbb+SI" FP1CAoAc0GhjRa(ԏ|Z&mZǩ;2}^:J>GǖjL" Ue j1V٤Rv" /-12GrTV:Q}PL)GZJ/7ZߎFu?[_d[=8P(" k3ұVP!Д T=$:ebd+m3p.**-R{.n#GEÊڻئ\->Ch$n+8S1o$cF_>h[J@ x '$'“F@ލK|əh) r.ȣZCoNIkM6ΌIBQTs6LhI*A<`n0(eVd!xe`u͊PWI7I U) @nTh 6Ͼ>4[lM(ÅTN&x]x͖4]+ikK.yIU"ўŏi⦈fX Z@ֺk^F,{VoҘ?;V@Ui V>A&. ca5?M2\]Zd\H_ _m(PǻzSѹX55tC}Fyx<`35л_B!t }QͨV:hm|n)UTap;}\qi5~48 szypEcTi/{u`MFy.Ym S|Z)[ma'}O {)G:X=kr75ujQJ}W>o=ǔ>@/˃=)kzn**I;.Ծ>)u٦q}%\QѩLh& H6) ţ>SQ+}Š X oõ7fюѤRZlG7>k n&m]Ͻt:Y ,< ;n CI!KG*C}{1o8n\9w]Wdec+r"(f8hၶyJśDy HhV@YUt6}<*f@)zm7u1`B?w> .Ii P O;܅8MhO:<=m,y &fhfp@hD ?=.0ȷL6oEfdck2^Tf()B b4hx;%#Va!E`oa 1=ܝ֛f"i,{a3W!GOЇH$4cDC6N =?2gZ`=d#h_Z%T*a'_hrdK=;$s1Xi{ _3ł7Gٱ5KDLk8a%Ps5}x$chD[材dpL M˰aDbMKpZC9d_3zcMT'q>x@_)׭wCs#t״B_*/߃/e-!Sy͠sÚ?m,F%xcmpw)}@j&!!0_ eZXNwvPz%!nd ~WЦګ!h}u9#㼂[H)t<4-TNLa︡ZDPp̚˦.ǁbקAg1 AêF!#OD7HE101{{51G>ؖz%;Y;Z[^ 䁎l61^萪Y6)xОQ8[Cu!kxE&I؛ 6&R])J3 z<^y^f@@۩=e H+rRNw(ЕaMT@VdL΍MVD`.טkC;|Í.%,ьцb.Xb &aj=vI^jN6}V6էdXܞQ:}UD <;6!'h Ţ?iυ*"g?L/ @^. >'ïSt@h"<.pEy|\yk;ikخ4U?Nnt\ )JUs:#el/Q(*%ǬlGזyiCC";$excw_:d`QH ϝN2QEnBqgwvu^#~8r/M2F ec"`/W2[s71 #J*́d%~a4h:IMAa 'fH0m|9n\*hb-> >ӭg7ATO"u>Y\LxSjoM+mz)!25!hVK?b=KvÇUlhd9@7̟Z0JUq|&{N|W|k5i.]~W!+ȌvQ(ljyם9z$U]b[&)G=Ռi/hؓfpvm=^ވM⻚,DO U Lc3{%cɱH<_">C|&P(n 4k5Ud߃vԷbٗg8]ʾhF棱ZdL)` mrwk'9S'W7L <7aZyIքTbװ#Q6vS:N! 0SqxO+aq G +x+;%ĺ%S^/y/P79Kw= ȷx}jZ!{9r|DI2\_;ґZ̋+`p@8{DA;nȶEʹ)!Ks6{}r\D$ZJa2yLL75l8]Nc#6%X<7?"mmk>yxڢBo gl92mL_*?9̯4FĥU~7f8#M\$o=EW9*|Ht|/u@ٻ W *LI.kqA оٯ`߱Z%% \dܔipHah4ec;ƦҢx]LSbmjFTbjڇG$xiٶ;LzreԱN1 z2I[[L"d:6qsT+x0Ot¨ J0dӝ]|7޺x[+|Dnm |:IjD.n+]لuzOtsLCGXvPqv҆Q2 7TcZ7R9"0>؆xvm/- {pɍ9+."q}֭Lb4PΈۙ@" "F)K8'.}y̞ nzR5>*㣦CY3ֱmwHBy8;lKH6H #O}7܂ĈX"PBb|yU7)^)5PŌeT=%Btfs@K 'XnGϲ`n# `C>Eww3XG9S8-I؟s=zo"#Xq #_gܞa05&T88S]~Uei<6˜\3_^^<*14i%f}hzL6,ɴtȴ<cbtHذps^H +Qq<D0 M/ KMG`$#(LՋ2wqd1T/;)ax%}/Ueʌce_-^>a/|=Qdq2"?/S_w֩iXV[-#F9̢.)9MlWD s;,rZVbK˨ *?]ūUg*M-2MK[Kb:{桊0"Ed+8qd2l?3tЭNy4OL1x%TtZWhX WX}Iȕ ,?T ` %'2Dc&V}`axUg/P1Ng(u~5{ O%t^cqX99FFG}X;s煢0=bR<2(Jg%ZRB2eX1˻\ t>)'m%<'.rFM=B8U2cXS}<)i=joiHLC:sUmyH?xXqMP+*r.g$x1 uyb"2Sm1d. l\3Ѭ}4k: .\Ɇՠ%B@/'L1) ؘRZ^[CDIzdU8R8zW \)b@HMϢFzwMvAҺ##=3g\~Q-O13ă~3ѐXL+`~XZKeBcB:VdRJe=dAߦd;ۉ9pJޝ^ԻRr E:j.mu(Lzi3*rݵ|s2 gڭyA$X}t2sa\˯W,=]nhCʹd%gQz 2]*'#bh,UujRۅzU- Fcj Ǹ~U|5 &hv*e43Iſs|Z'0x-]Ɂ^PڸEdž};-,zKn*I Z̵2S+buL@oP :G ʬ [ϲ-Zy9+]mUnu"kkz 7uxR*FB ݆WCfk z FBsΥ3n_Ğ`[V2s0"9 g&=XÙz/U-]-)xfڢ6=Tm sό5\MqҜ1J[Ptd]GwVq·ڷ"Km!lᓰ 7X,侎ǙMߵT>Fe"?[~yu^hE^ ]!{(:#R’N(:m6\jRQZsv{z-F X0DT%$mjk1!95Oɕ<}M.e8J!+"͝Wu]\!Yvk1 rTg4ԴdJNUZ HC365<ߠ쩞3K \G}R<;w*ݚy~jicKѥ?xB~yr줛AjlxF!&ci՗VO&(tJU!ݓho1_#Un;'Y*w)STry2fߎ4rL z1TcK~!;%6zMgZFdiCΥ$ X)]M݉ 5y"ҷs&qVe[8v ;iy-TRZ d$WlJhibIk[ Ӷ IVK(hNKڍaTϾ Ucx ޡ[6%Fa GO]:$iՂYq+V4"B*edMA*9ô.*4H|NOfH'm{=#hdmm>s p vтtEG"s0;#)yѫ4iM"TaQq l1 ͝[/vxYh*d}k/N[4Ĭ@AP@URW/WdkA\* m3eaWm>JBVCߎx$F49" )'!p!r?{@^7:i) ^F]΃ H  *`d|sN7oa Y|YHyŜޘ^.~uaR^eHuHS:=%_P`°V}ffD2k9Z ST_Znb# KOK,,ǥzelIV`_!%ֲ =c>a0q&%K_7/kֶ!"BfB/LWڷbP/w&l/B `Xf^ 'K{"a ٛZ,{ 1n&yK!Ae!r VE) =OSޘ_̲PxԖb/VZ5QkF xG6$/dш%u-Ek#`_jV K^&0ΠF@c~CoIF%WNy>rEZyUNnM%x.Is΋^qCN&KPJs':5&czF>"uTL-&J:ȯsMօ+hE9~\ ^,M`G|(!蔟zdThLJ,TdN0oO'HkiKGCo[{{-,xm" T76p Mt#~R@,49<(EPɶ~%#`87JY1; _ WbBA/yb a(@+'cl>Yε\shZoJf4ބk?&)!7ƖY-sS߅]0;Įc%eݝ1<=sb:Xs^C%oV̲ C0o &P1cL W[{,+Ĵ8j,JQ3%d)5 N!q9]| 3'(ȰcSZ *I)gX}PxQ@B4jj_2ܫo,աʥh-2{ɕ$]Ai[spZ9ɔeyTeSkY 1.)D*oMTnOO>W}KLnWy[#h%tEOrzpߋLn±9gyT>[/ o)ia5|S ^skɏ*4]YQQ+0{nq؟4_E>Έ/(cHz(cl>u]ekL/>f Q75+Ia;3<2Zxܨy1ɘߣx$SmϜ3PsYzܵxeeNY;2 cvpBXي6*Ml+K'!qX_Z>b3Ս-HYx]WD?Yz`c2aW +D .Bu04:75zȣs8 q7a49 Cv[&+1qA{aZs/&Z0zb{NE54HYR c aԕeW/Bt܈̟Xě0rxw=|g^JvfQn0oXʎ~gI,\4K"U&"fU&Ȭ9@d? -DAfk={6QW;5d qQ~_1\/Ri _CU3T=xN s;^<8^짳Z!,O+IAR$Ǟӛ1֚*qcM }\ -㦷ZĽCq_&zRƮԌ6XtqnP>C. .o l#R,Ǭ¢fV̸vxzݹ|/[:#,;@w6=ceZ`%V@ݼzs&p#~@ڝ]1I~|聾XTWۺU!*zџ߰7IW)^_. uS?|ϏX;k1NkA3yqx#1w)qqV!s9'YU~Z1%7eܚX،+u^g.+L +s2Jge`b..ԛ;`rK U}O6z^UJE8Llk?nU`i^|fXţr&ZZ*9,oELd-oi?6rk3昊( s˕F+2@0>ؖn{|jY?{\ R(* ;gΧ(46JMխv]6L15WFORo ꫤq{F.<&N\313f3y~zY%{-܃TMND:Bށjbcsl1xzo|WÐeyu UԽ޲i>Ӯd9RHpPbgx `u <`Xp+B8&FOfC^ݠؖ9zm7MG^g4TN]OG4iĊg0#ֿkcE-pYO հ V楲Rɺ. Y6'NpRSRA{?o󑕑7Im9N '^H3pt^{擭qLgLOP*Ia +Μwfb~}$2}pmsb ^)^=lIx^Ç~DRd|=)nj( M˾h١v]֫h>M|Jm:ӊrt[X,T"ݐ9^dxrnuN|'Ճ{ K `'-\k7*Q@oMLuSUL(2.\FjgT=Q1g!jʰhzLY Hk쁿⛆~COP%cԙb*klڹ&B#Kxy,'[⥺ #Cc=?-ߔ͕@`[,H[B+=HCizHR'̨X)̤c#ZeC琑+b3]wCC5͝yཫA$fFt@k˛Q(@-,WJu پO|-*yC^[U9C駡L1ChSV*JZ]"i퉇v~dc=oljθ)`JLpŭ!_aU([W0i8t0 j4!|>qt#Ź}9;Y>yg=Zx&6ٍ}#¾GAfN9nI׶SWQ]ͯ5Wǻ?3HRqŅrT&A`*mÜ+ ~ be!zԡSK8.%Ǥ=[bsp|E'9w&)$i0L풽0ܞ̜Uzc.4~#8Ҷ#LCZ9Ljz91S9m`8yv#שxaUHgdn"rO`Jmϡ:Irew렓=`kCEy>rH.uV/+(صfL8A\dQ7cQ,aZ|mO?01~*֑:k53`!+^!CRU{L LҲFQ]6~4CF:YbW|yFσoXI]ofz&:).=$9duvi8XGL_/d,3#m~jӧ_]þIw\|.7)Μ֙'eAz(4bg8.9ě͝U g?74i>^ŏV7|av}涭jƋyefX *k^:!crZ?Sp-7ز}7P(WէsV9XW|naㅄ:Epn-;q[ܢ <7LA2ɏ zj@,ب;ŵ׎j:#Mho MQlf1F~&1g=)T~XPMjj-dŒǶJun'YzE YSM~P\(Sak|F] +C ir+"A`mt.eXt3~f~CJ#4n&6ek;;чec.ƅK8Y]eIpuCed7xBoX RlZ`X0w4B=ޙJ]w Fg$G>/RI O>+ێ:]@ Z79VJO:(غ(X]w$_uv&nnƺv؜B0m⭚BYM῍a3l*Q[@#a3fRH X dr_{iTm;-ծ.aj ]=lҖP.7· V͘ܕ'RS9b3ſ29_+%qi[Yr?:cX=N`A}~L,Vs+Ш31OM5T4W[XKz*cB Ş5syyF+-xbu_wI'k"ۑ!bo\Eɒz PDOay<ոBtVV4׶6m x~eO;=lrdRӂ@a* vHFB%&l{{;%<j>,1vG[x)F̥s&xڮxV0f"Yv(/cX16 k\~@Kb0,Z[pZ}/X}a2wYįJә sHV?W`ce1'e[ɬ|ڭ- Kp30{'oNPփr 5ENka/>}Im=+WZeȁ ^B0|ʲʿx'J5ꚱ ͞Y0`%Վ V(e!ro9>:6 c6%uGlQ*~bV?k$Oku W3k!5:]} _ZٛOG)~5d>a.&j1]OByÂAz l_`ޛ䝷zIOC].28yM8qPSjNl އD6h&$18kĸ8?>Q?DIfT.,V/gv?Kda$WKJhfYGΕ d"MunyhB*spX[G2AA0r j=9:][4SW svL$u;J1[Lvܰ1`q[l%B5G`k tLlÁEzt.8b)4'} ?0qFlǙn\EF#[ә:;5Gr_ޡRE~T6Csc".쬒(}6Y>Gb+?h~qʹP 'i
Enjoying the preview?
Page 1 of 1