This article presents a review of four chapters in "Part I, Section A: Making Curriculum" of "The SAGE Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction" (F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, J. I. Phillion, Eds.; Sage Publications, 2008). The reviewer asserts that these chapters ["Curriculum Policy and the Politics of What Should Be Learned in Schools (Benjamin Levin. Chapter 1, pp. 7-24); "Curriculum Planning: Content, Form, and the Politics of Accountability" (Michael W. Apple. Chapter 2, pp. 25-44); "Making Curricula: Why Do States Make Curricula, and How?" (Ian Westbury. Chapter 3, pp. 45-65); and "Subject Matter: Defining and Theorizing School Subjects" (Zongyi Deng, Allan Luke. Chapter 4, pp. 66-89)] take readers through remarkably large swaths of research related to the politically invested terrain of curriculum making. Michael Apple, for example, in Chapter 1, reviews research that "illuminate[s] the relations between curricula and power" and the "importance of social movements" influencing such relations. The reviewer observes in these four essays, the authors map the corporate negotiations of curriculum as a formal program of studies between sociologically defined groups and movements (Apple), professionally interested groups (Deng, Luke), politically motivated representatives (Levin), and all the above (Westbury). As Den Heyer interprets their work, in their review of what they deem relevant research to the questions around making curriculum, he finds that all authors take up "truth" as being "reproduced from generation to generation" by specific "knowledge heritages" (Westbury, p. 48). The politics of curriculum making--politics interpreted as a question of "who gets what?" (Levin, p. 8; Apple)--involves each group struggling to have its forms of knowing or knowledge-as-inherited-truth promulgated in the next formal curriculum text. (Contains 2 notes.)