Fabulous story. A mother dragon is telling a bedtime story to her child. When she finished the child asks for it AGAIN. The mother reads the story aga...moreFabulous story. A mother dragon is telling a bedtime story to her child. When she finished the child asks for it AGAIN. The mother reads the story again, shortening the story (I can completely relate to that!!). Each subsequent retelling she shortens and changes the story, inserting subtle messages to her child. Finally she falls asleep while she is telling the story (oh yes, I can relate to that), which makes her child upset (yup, my child got upset when I pretended to go to sleep while reading). I particularly loved it when the retelling became incoherent because the mother was pretty much asleep (done that too!).
Enjoyment Illustrations: 5/5 - Loved the last two pages the best. Readability: 5/5 - It was fun to read the 'story' and play act the mumblings and sleeping. Storyline: 5/5 - Fantastic.
Enjoyment Illustrations: 5/5 - Manky monster doing very gross things. Readability: 5/5 - A great rhythm, loads of fun making gross noises and animations...moreEnjoyment Illustrations: 5/5 - Manky monster doing very gross things. Readability: 5/5 - A great rhythm, loads of fun making gross noises and animations. Storyline: 5/5 - Basically the book describes all the manky bad habits of a very gross monster.
Values Gross Factor 5/5
I love reading this book. It is so much funny using disgusting expressions and pretending to be disgusted. The first time I read this it was to a group of three little girls and they were in hysterics. With each description I would grab the girls and illustrate on there body. "He keeps the walls moist with his tongue" (I mean, how can you not pretend to lick all the kids as you read a line like that one) --- Gross and the kids love it.(less)
Just finished it. Loved it. I borrowed this copy, which is a shame as I would have highlighted it, I shall have to buy my own copy and highlight it.
Ea...moreJust finished it. Loved it. I borrowed this copy, which is a shame as I would have highlighted it, I shall have to buy my own copy and highlight it.
Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.
This is the message of the book, brilliant in its simplicity. I plan to get a big poster made up and hung in the kitchen/dining area. I wholeheartedly agree with everything written.
The first half of the book talks about what is wrong with our western food culture. The second half of the books discusses some loose guidelines for improving your food intake, basically expounding on the ideas of "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.".
Go buy this book. Read it. Stop eating shit.(less)
I hate when common-sense parenting methods get labelled with a phrase and we all begin referring to it by the term. e.g. "Did you BLW?".
Baby led weani...moreI hate when common-sense parenting methods get labelled with a phrase and we all begin referring to it by the term. e.g. "Did you BLW?".
Baby led weaning is very simply letting your child wean themselves naturally. You don't give them special foods, you don't buy or make fancy purees, and there is no need for any "toddler food" recipe books.
You could the family dinner, you serve it up and you all eat. I used this method and it works.
The huge problem that I have with this book is the contradiction in ideals that it displays. On one hand it encourages you to do things naturally and just let your child eat whatever you are eating. This is great advice, not only is it a much simpler way for your child to learn to eat, it also requires less effort on your part (no extra cooking), and your child learns to enjoy the foods that you eat (kids need to taste foods multiple times to develop a like for them). So feeding kids what you are eating is perfect. So the book advocates for this, which seems like a really wholesome natural, back-to-our-roots kind of thing to do.
Then we contrast this with the book telling you exactly what you need to feed your child. e.g. you must give whole broccoli stalks to your child, and not panic when they gag. This part of the book (and the subsequent movement) completely rankles me. Basically the book is telling you to ignore your instincts, which I cannot support. My personal belief is that if you feel the need to puree, mash, or pre-chew the dinner in order to make it easier for you child to eat, then that is absolutely what you should do, you are all are the mother.
I still don't get what BLW supporters don't see how conflicting the two ideas are.(less)
I have been practicing saying "Fyodor Dostoyevsky" so it rolls off my tongue making me sound very cultured. I told my friend I had just finished readi...moreI have been practicing saying "Fyodor Dostoyevsky" so it rolls off my tongue making me sound very cultured. I told my friend I had just finished reading "Crime and Punishment", she asked if it was by Jane Austen (in her defense I read Jane Austen twice a year, and she had kids jumping all over her as I told her about the book). I said "No, it's by Fyodor Dostoyesvky" and then felt quite smug that I managed to get the name out without tripping over any syllables!! It helped that I listened to the audio book (I have an audio book on the go, I listen to them in bed while I settle my children, or while I am doing the ironing, or sewing, or baking because the book got so good I listened every chance I got). About a third of the way through I transferred a copy to my husband's phone so he could listen on the way to work, I was blown away by the book and needed him to listen so that I could discuss it with him.
The rest of this review will probably contain some spoilers, but it won't spoil the book, this book is about the writing and the pyschological insite, rather than simply the plot.
The first part of the book left me rather shaken. The main character did something rather heinous, but during the whole lead up to the act it was as if he wasn't going to do it, I mean he was thinking about how he didn't think he would do it, how he couldn't believe that he was considering doing it, that it was a funny thought that he might to it. He didn't seem particularly evil and yet it murdered a woman in cold blood. I was shaken. I sat there thinking about how his actions seemed so innocent to himself, up until he commited the murder. I thought about all the times I had fleeting thoughts of doing a heinous thing ie driving a car off a bridge or one of those scary thoughts that occasional pops into your head and makes you think "what the fuck I don't want a thought like that". Yet here is this guy having those thoughts and slowing making plans to actually commit the act all the while not actually believing that he has an intention of going through with it. I finish the first part of the book and wondered if I do would be capable of murder. I mean this guy murdered, how was he any different to me? (Thankfully by the end o the book I could see how different we were, what a relief).
I needed my husband to read the book so I could talk to him about how exasperating Raskolnikov, the main character, was. Basically he kills a woman for money, extensibly so he can set himself up with a good education and fulfill his destiny. Yet up until this act he had given up university and spent his days laying miserably on the couch. His mother and sister where scraping every penny together and sending it to him, but he would waste it or give it away and just continue to be depressed and doing nothing.
His friend is the contrast, his friend works hard doing this and that scrapping money together in order to finish university. He even offers a job to Raskolnikov who refuses it, thinking to himself that it is too little money and not worth the effort. Money is continually coming to Raskolnikov and we start to see that if he had only got off his ass then he could have made enough money to pay his own way through university... this shit me off.
The book ended with Raskolnikov realising that he loved the girl that had followed him (I won't give away who she is). But this is what I hate, at the moment that he realises that he loves her he realises that she is not good enough for him. He has an ephinany about life and her and awakes from his depression ready to begin life anew, but he looks at this woman who has been looking after him and helping him, and ponders how she isn't good enough for him because she hasn't had the same ephinany that he just had. I though "Fuck you Raskolnikov, she didn't need the ephinany because she was already living it!!". I mean Raskolnikov is an asshole and won't talk to anybody or be friendly. Yet the girl is friends with everybody, everybody likes her, she is alive and he isn't. So when he misses her, realises that he loves her, and is suddenly awakened and alive again... he looks at her and thinks she isn't smart enough, blah blah blah.
I loved how the book highlighted all sorts of crimes and awful people and we got to see how and why we considered one act a crime and yet another wasn't. Why did we, the reader, accept the murder of the old woman, yet it was the murder of the young woman that horrified us that most. Why did we cheer for Doonya as she pointed the gun at her attacker etc.
I love Russian doorstoppers, I didn't realise how much until I finished this book. Two of the most amazing books I have read are Russian doorstoppers (Anna Karenina and Crime and Punishment), I am of to start reading Crime and Punishment now.(less)
Strangely one of the things I took away from this book was a desire to be a better housewife. I do not want to insult or belittle any of the important...moreStrangely one of the things I took away from this book was a desire to be a better housewife. I do not want to insult or belittle any of the important issues in the book. I was just so struck by the simplicity of the men and women in the book. I felt myself longing to live there and be like them.
Rather than analyse such a classic book I just want to talk about some of my favourite things.
I have to applaud an author who is able to write a book in which an eight year old narrates a story that heavily involves a court case in which a black man is accused of rape. Her youth and her lack of a mother possibly make her the least informed person in the entire town. I can see how using this child really allows the author absolute control over the release of information. It is clear that the crime and the trial are the subject of endless town gossip, but as a reader we are kept in the dark until the author is ready to share the information, due to the narrator simply not being privvy to the gossip of town.
I like the fallibility of the father. Mr Finch really is the hero of the book. The narrator is telling us the story of her father. It seems rare to give the main character subtle character flaws (make them big or not at all). It is a small thing but I appreciate how naive he is to the danger he faces from both the mob of men (prior to the trial) and Mr Ewell (after the trial).(less)