What do you think?
Rate this book
Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years
Based on the 1930 Newberry Award Winner
On a cold Maine night in 1829, an old peddler carved a small doll out of a piece of mountain ash wood. Her name was Hitty and she was no ordinary doll.
Hitty's first owner, Phoebe Preble, takes her from Boston to India. From the hands of Phoebe Preble, Hitty travels on with a snake charmer, a Civil War soldier, a riverboat captains daughter, and a former slave. Along the way she meets presidents and painters, relating each adventure in vivid detail.
Rachel Field's masterful novel "Hitty: Her First Hundred Years" was first published in 1929; it was awarded the Newbery Medal in 1930. In this full-color adaptation, the award-winning team of Rosemary Wells and Susan Jeffers has taken Hitty down from the shelf and dusted her off for a new generation of younger readers. The short, fast-paced chapters and pictures on every spread bring life to this beloved classic, and make it perfect for sharing with the whole family.
112 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 1999
About the author
Rosemary Wells
488 books388 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Rosemary Wells is an American writer and illustrator of children's books. She often uses animal characters to address real human issues. Some of her most well-known characters are Max & Ruby and Timothy from Timothy Goes To School (both were later adapted into Canadian-animated preschool television series, the former’s airing on Nickelodeon (part of the Nick Jr. block) and the latter’s as part of PBS Kids on PBS).
Rosemary Wells is an American writer and illustrator of children's books. She often uses animal characters to address real human issues. Some of her most well-known characters are Max & Ruby and Timothy from Timothy Goes To School (both were later adapted into Canadian-animated preschool television series, the former’s airing on Nickelodeon (part of the Nick Jr. block) and the latter’s as part of PBS Kids on PBS).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
June 8, 2020
Honestly, why would Rosemary Wells abridge and pretty much totally rewrite Rachel Field's classic Newbery Award winning novel Hitty: Her First Hundred Years in the first place, and why (more importantly) would she then also alter much of the content of the original novel in such a fashion that her Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years so often simply just teems with groan-worthy, annoying historical and cultural anachronisms (such as for example describing how Phoebe, the original early 19th century owner of Hitty the doll, is good friends with Native Americans, something that might well appeal to Rosemary Wells as a late 20th and early 21st century author, but is also a concept that realistically speaking and especially in early 19th century America would more than likely NEVER have even remotely been the case)?
Now indeed, Rachel Field's original Hitty novel is by nature of when it was penned (in 1929) and due to the time period it describes (the 19th to the early 20th century) often very much dated with regard to in particular gender and racial issues. But the past is what it was, and really, it is far more reasonable and appropriate for an author to present historical fiction realistically than to paint some kind of a fantasy world, where issues of gender stratification, racial intolerances and other such sadly nasty attitudes are ignored or artificially smoothed and glossed over. And this is (in my opinion) precisely and very much frustratingly, sadly the case with Rosemary Wells' retelling, with her Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years. For her version of Rachel Field's original has not only been massively shortened, but many of the not politically correct by modern standards thematics and events have either been "sanitised" or even removed altogether, something that I for one consider not only historically and academically, culturally suspect in and of itself, I also and furthermore do very much and strongly believe that this kind of what I can only call authorial overreaching is rather massively insulting to children, as it basically attempts to point out that children, that child readers need to be coddled, need to be told artificially improved historical facts and stories, that children supposedly cannot handle the past and seemingly should not even be exposed to reading materials from the past that are in today's world no longer acceptable and appropriate (no longer PC), that we actually need to keep much of the past from our children (which I for one find not only massively infuriating but also totally and utterly irresponsible), as to and for me, the best if not in fact the only true way to make sure that the past, that historically significant problems and issues, that the mistakes of bygone eras are not automatically repeated is for us, and this also includes children, to actively be exposed to them and learn from these mistakes and falsehoods. And yes and very much frustratingly, this is just completely lost with Rosemary Wells' bare bones and leaving out much of the politically incorrect bits and pieces retelling, a sad state of affairs that from a teaching and learning point of view truly makes her Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years pretty much a total and epic failure in every way.
Now indeed, Rachel Field's original Hitty novel is by nature of when it was penned (in 1929) and due to the time period it describes (the 19th to the early 20th century) often very much dated with regard to in particular gender and racial issues. But the past is what it was, and really, it is far more reasonable and appropriate for an author to present historical fiction realistically than to paint some kind of a fantasy world, where issues of gender stratification, racial intolerances and other such sadly nasty attitudes are ignored or artificially smoothed and glossed over. And this is (in my opinion) precisely and very much frustratingly, sadly the case with Rosemary Wells' retelling, with her Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years. For her version of Rachel Field's original has not only been massively shortened, but many of the not politically correct by modern standards thematics and events have either been "sanitised" or even removed altogether, something that I for one consider not only historically and academically, culturally suspect in and of itself, I also and furthermore do very much and strongly believe that this kind of what I can only call authorial overreaching is rather massively insulting to children, as it basically attempts to point out that children, that child readers need to be coddled, need to be told artificially improved historical facts and stories, that children supposedly cannot handle the past and seemingly should not even be exposed to reading materials from the past that are in today's world no longer acceptable and appropriate (no longer PC), that we actually need to keep much of the past from our children (which I for one find not only massively infuriating but also totally and utterly irresponsible), as to and for me, the best if not in fact the only true way to make sure that the past, that historically significant problems and issues, that the mistakes of bygone eras are not automatically repeated is for us, and this also includes children, to actively be exposed to them and learn from these mistakes and falsehoods. And yes and very much frustratingly, this is just completely lost with Rosemary Wells' bare bones and leaving out much of the politically incorrect bits and pieces retelling, a sad state of affairs that from a teaching and learning point of view truly makes her Rachel Field's Hitty: Her First Hundred Years pretty much a total and epic failure in every way.
Read
August 3, 2011This book might be enjoyable for younger readers. Instead, please read the original 1930 Hitty book which inspired this more politically correct, modern, picture book. Rachel Feild painted images in her reader's minds and did not need these elaborate illustrations to draw her reader's interest.
The original book, "Hitty Her First Hundred Years" was a monumental achievement for women: The author, Rachel Fields, was the first woman to win a Newbery award and she did it with this 1929 novel. Dorothy Lathrop, the illustrator, was also the first woman to win a Calecort Metal - again with this book.
The original book, "Hitty Her First Hundred Years" was a monumental achievement for women: The author, Rachel Fields, was the first woman to win a Newbery award and she did it with this 1929 novel. Dorothy Lathrop, the illustrator, was also the first woman to win a Calecort Metal - again with this book.
February 7, 2018
Warning: This is NOT the beloved children's book that won the Newbery Medal! It is a horrible misappropriation of a beloved character from a prize-winning book.
Recently I came across a very pretty jointed clothes pin doll in a second-hand store for $3. I don't collect dolls but this one was wearing a pretty calico dress and she appealed to me so I bought her. Thanks to Google I discovered that my doll is a clothes pin version of the Hitty doll. So I decided to buy the book and read it. Unfortunately, this is the edition of the book that I came across first. It had Rosemary Wells' name on the cover and she is the author of the totally fabulous Max and Ruby series. I did not realize at first that this is not just a slightly changed adaptation of the original book, Hitty, Her First Hundred Years. It is a completely different book altogether. It is less than half as long as the original book with whole sections removed, other sections rewritten, new characters and situations added, and the original characters that remain in the book have been changed.
If there is a problem with the original book, it is that it was written in 1929 and our grandparents' attitudes about pretty much anyone not white would be considered condescending now. Although the original book was no worse than, for example, the British attitude towards 19th century Egyptians in the Amelia Peabody series by Elizabeth Peters. Slightly changing just a few sentences in the book could have eliminated that without mutilating the original book. But Wells' book changes so much and goes so far in the other direction that it is completely dishonest about the past. Wishing that people were extremely liberal 100 years ago doesn't make it so.
As if changing the story weren't bad enough, the illustrations have also been changed radically. There are plenty of color illustrations in this new book that will probably appeal to modern children -- like a stranger offering them candy.
Since I wanted to sew additional clothes for my own doll based on the outfits in the book, I was surprised and disappointed to find that the dresses in the re-written book are not only not the same as the classic outfits in the original book but that some of the illustrations of Hitty's clothing in the new book don't even accurately match the text descriptions in the same book (when did scarlet become a shade of blue?). I also discovered that the materials needed to duplicate the outfits in the modern book are prohibitively expensive. Most of the outfits in the original book can be made from scraps as the real Hitty's clothes were.
In response to the New York Times Book Review that said "One hopes that both these very appealing books will eventually lead children to the denser, more demanding original versions." That was never the case with Reader's Digest condensed books and I don't believe that it any more true of this book. People who read the condensed books felt that they had read the book. I knew a number of people who had subscriptions to the condensed books and I never heard of anyone who felt the need to find and read the original versions.
Two stars instead of one because I save one star ratings for books that are headed for recycling. This book is just a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Recently I came across a very pretty jointed clothes pin doll in a second-hand store for $3. I don't collect dolls but this one was wearing a pretty calico dress and she appealed to me so I bought her. Thanks to Google I discovered that my doll is a clothes pin version of the Hitty doll. So I decided to buy the book and read it. Unfortunately, this is the edition of the book that I came across first. It had Rosemary Wells' name on the cover and she is the author of the totally fabulous Max and Ruby series. I did not realize at first that this is not just a slightly changed adaptation of the original book, Hitty, Her First Hundred Years. It is a completely different book altogether. It is less than half as long as the original book with whole sections removed, other sections rewritten, new characters and situations added, and the original characters that remain in the book have been changed.
If there is a problem with the original book, it is that it was written in 1929 and our grandparents' attitudes about pretty much anyone not white would be considered condescending now. Although the original book was no worse than, for example, the British attitude towards 19th century Egyptians in the Amelia Peabody series by Elizabeth Peters. Slightly changing just a few sentences in the book could have eliminated that without mutilating the original book. But Wells' book changes so much and goes so far in the other direction that it is completely dishonest about the past. Wishing that people were extremely liberal 100 years ago doesn't make it so.
As if changing the story weren't bad enough, the illustrations have also been changed radically. There are plenty of color illustrations in this new book that will probably appeal to modern children -- like a stranger offering them candy.
Since I wanted to sew additional clothes for my own doll based on the outfits in the book, I was surprised and disappointed to find that the dresses in the re-written book are not only not the same as the classic outfits in the original book but that some of the illustrations of Hitty's clothing in the new book don't even accurately match the text descriptions in the same book (when did scarlet become a shade of blue?). I also discovered that the materials needed to duplicate the outfits in the modern book are prohibitively expensive. Most of the outfits in the original book can be made from scraps as the real Hitty's clothes were.
In response to the New York Times Book Review that said "One hopes that both these very appealing books will eventually lead children to the denser, more demanding original versions." That was never the case with Reader's Digest condensed books and I don't believe that it any more true of this book. People who read the condensed books felt that they had read the book. I knew a number of people who had subscriptions to the condensed books and I never heard of anyone who felt the need to find and read the original versions.
Two stars instead of one because I save one star ratings for books that are headed for recycling. This book is just a wolf in sheep's clothing.
July 19, 2016
A crime of abridgment and rewriting. Get the real book, whether for adults or kids.
August 24, 2018
Jacob picked this book off the shelf for us to read next...krb 8/13/18
October 10, 2010
Aieee, this is not the real book! This is an ugly, pointless rewrite and I hate it with all the breath in my body.
July 25, 2011
I tried. Honestly. I loved the story line but they never begged me to keep reading. Not sure what all the fuss is about.
July 1, 2016
Not a fan of this illustrated re-write of the 1929 Newbery Medal winner. In an attempt to reach more modern readers the story fails to be engaging.
December 17, 2022
I've only read the intro and first 7 pages...and looked at all of the illustrations, but I am having some problems with this book.
But first a pro...the illustrations are marvelous! Which is the main thing I look for in a picture book. And I always look at them first. Susan Jeffers is very talented, inspired and skilled. She uses multiple perspectives to enhance interest.
Now my first con: In reading the "Note to Reader" I learned that this not Rachel Fields book. This is Rosemary Wells VERSION and INTERPRETATION of FIelds highly acclaimed book.
She has shortened it..."pruning it like rose bush" she calls it...and "giving it a new lease on life."
And when Fields' story speaks of a possibility that Hitty will be sent to child in the South during the Civil War, Fields does not do it.
However, Jeffers decides to follow that line of probability, and in doing so she excitedly relates that "she makes the story her own."
But I had wanted to read Fields' story. So this was disturbing for me.
Also, there are many inconsistencies and inaccuarcies that keep jumping out at me. Are they Fields' or Jeffer's? I'll have to read the unabridged Fields version to find out.
But here are some examples:
On page 4 Jeffers alludes to Hitty's first family as living " in the middle of Maine." Now, I'm a Mainer and the middle of Maine, to me is the center of Piscataquis County. But let's say they lived in the southern part of the county...Dover-Foxcroft. That's still a "fur piece" from the coast...where the father , who is a sea captain... would have his home port for his ship. Bangor is the nearest deep water port.
In, let's say, 1785 he would most likely have to travel by open long boat , rowing, N. 40 crow fly miles up the Penobscot River from Bangor to the Piscataquis River, and 30 crow-fly miles East along the very winding Piscataquis River to Dover Foxcroft.
But he could have been sailing a merchant ship sailing still in the late 1800s.
But why would any sea captain , at any time , make his home that far from his port? All along the coast are many fine homes of sea captains, but I know of none inland. Yet Jeffers terms his home as being in "the Middle of Maine!"
Later on she tells us the home is in Northern Maine ." Big difference; and even further from any port!
On page 6 she says, "Captain Preble went to Portland 3 times a week for the mail." What?
There was no coastal driveable route until about 1825. And it involved crossing a few rivers by ferry. It wasn't until 1927 that the coastal route ( now Rte.1) the Kennebec River via a bridge rather than slow ferry. Ferry service ran from 1837 - 1927. And before that?... you sailed down east...or you portaged a canoe.
Sailing from Bangor ( let's say) on a coastal schooner? At 10 mph ( average speed) and about 150 miles one way that's about 15 hrs...one way. Two ways is 30 hours...three times a week is 90 hours a week of travel to get the mail? Hmmmm.
And on page 7 she mentions taking the Boston stage coach for a jaunt to Bean Town. This would not have been possible before 1825. And the trip from Bangor to Portland one took 36 hours...and on to Boston...another 12 hours....through mud and ruts and potholes.
But a stage coach from mid or northern Maine was still a LONG way off. Maine did become a state in 1820 and a dirt road was built between Augusta and Portland soon after it became the new state capital in 1827. But it was often muddy and very slow going. If they lived in the "middle of Maine" it might have been in Augusta. And the captain could, theoretically , have had a ship in Portland harbor. But getting to and from his ship would have been a long arduous trip. And going to Portland to get his mail 3 times a week...impossible!
If Wells had glanced at a map of Maine, she would have placed the story and family in wealthy Cape Elizabeth in 1840 or so...prior to rail service in 1843.
That would be Southern Coastal Maine. And a trip to Portland for the mail 3 times a week would be within the realm of possibility. Also a stage coach to Boston would be feasible and likely.
But then the story about the little girl often meeting friendly Indians while berry picking , becomes highly unlikely. The last Native Americans in that area were very hostile to whites and the last attack was in about 1726. After that the Natives stayed away from Coastal Southern Maine.
Wells creates an anachronism with that happy Indian/ child contact. In early colonial Massachsetts, soon after the pilgrims landed in 1620, some Natives were still friendly...but not for long. Whites were not good new neighbors, overall.
Even in some of Jeffers' illustrations are a problem. The sea captain arrives home in gentleman's garb...including tall hat. Maybe a ship owner...but a rough sea captain?
Also on page 10 she illustrates a fully rigged ship, AT ANCHOR, in a harbor. No one on deck or in the rigging. Would they ever do that?
In any case, the illustrations are very nice, but the whole book feels unrealistic and I wouldn't read it to child.
But first a pro...the illustrations are marvelous! Which is the main thing I look for in a picture book. And I always look at them first. Susan Jeffers is very talented, inspired and skilled. She uses multiple perspectives to enhance interest.
Now my first con: In reading the "Note to Reader" I learned that this not Rachel Fields book. This is Rosemary Wells VERSION and INTERPRETATION of FIelds highly acclaimed book.
She has shortened it..."pruning it like rose bush" she calls it...and "giving it a new lease on life."
And when Fields' story speaks of a possibility that Hitty will be sent to child in the South during the Civil War, Fields does not do it.
However, Jeffers decides to follow that line of probability, and in doing so she excitedly relates that "she makes the story her own."
But I had wanted to read Fields' story. So this was disturbing for me.
Also, there are many inconsistencies and inaccuarcies that keep jumping out at me. Are they Fields' or Jeffer's? I'll have to read the unabridged Fields version to find out.
But here are some examples:
On page 4 Jeffers alludes to Hitty's first family as living " in the middle of Maine." Now, I'm a Mainer and the middle of Maine, to me is the center of Piscataquis County. But let's say they lived in the southern part of the county...Dover-Foxcroft. That's still a "fur piece" from the coast...where the father , who is a sea captain... would have his home port for his ship. Bangor is the nearest deep water port.
In, let's say, 1785 he would most likely have to travel by open long boat , rowing, N. 40 crow fly miles up the Penobscot River from Bangor to the Piscataquis River, and 30 crow-fly miles East along the very winding Piscataquis River to Dover Foxcroft.
But he could have been sailing a merchant ship sailing still in the late 1800s.
But why would any sea captain , at any time , make his home that far from his port? All along the coast are many fine homes of sea captains, but I know of none inland. Yet Jeffers terms his home as being in "the Middle of Maine!"
Later on she tells us the home is in Northern Maine ." Big difference; and even further from any port!
On page 6 she says, "Captain Preble went to Portland 3 times a week for the mail." What?
There was no coastal driveable route until about 1825. And it involved crossing a few rivers by ferry. It wasn't until 1927 that the coastal route ( now Rte.1) the Kennebec River via a bridge rather than slow ferry. Ferry service ran from 1837 - 1927. And before that?... you sailed down east...or you portaged a canoe.
Sailing from Bangor ( let's say) on a coastal schooner? At 10 mph ( average speed) and about 150 miles one way that's about 15 hrs...one way. Two ways is 30 hours...three times a week is 90 hours a week of travel to get the mail? Hmmmm.
And on page 7 she mentions taking the Boston stage coach for a jaunt to Bean Town. This would not have been possible before 1825. And the trip from Bangor to Portland one took 36 hours...and on to Boston...another 12 hours....through mud and ruts and potholes.
But a stage coach from mid or northern Maine was still a LONG way off. Maine did become a state in 1820 and a dirt road was built between Augusta and Portland soon after it became the new state capital in 1827. But it was often muddy and very slow going. If they lived in the "middle of Maine" it might have been in Augusta. And the captain could, theoretically , have had a ship in Portland harbor. But getting to and from his ship would have been a long arduous trip. And going to Portland to get his mail 3 times a week...impossible!
If Wells had glanced at a map of Maine, she would have placed the story and family in wealthy Cape Elizabeth in 1840 or so...prior to rail service in 1843.
That would be Southern Coastal Maine. And a trip to Portland for the mail 3 times a week would be within the realm of possibility. Also a stage coach to Boston would be feasible and likely.
But then the story about the little girl often meeting friendly Indians while berry picking , becomes highly unlikely. The last Native Americans in that area were very hostile to whites and the last attack was in about 1726. After that the Natives stayed away from Coastal Southern Maine.
Wells creates an anachronism with that happy Indian/ child contact. In early colonial Massachsetts, soon after the pilgrims landed in 1620, some Natives were still friendly...but not for long. Whites were not good new neighbors, overall.
Even in some of Jeffers' illustrations are a problem. The sea captain arrives home in gentleman's garb...including tall hat. Maybe a ship owner...but a rough sea captain?
Also on page 10 she illustrates a fully rigged ship, AT ANCHOR, in a harbor. No one on deck or in the rigging. Would they ever do that?
In any case, the illustrations are very nice, but the whole book feels unrealistic and I wouldn't read it to child.
September 2, 2019
I may be overrating this book. Reading the book of which this is a sort of adaptation, Hittie: Her First Hundred Years, took me a long time, and I would say I was halfway through the book before I started enjoying it. Then, as soon as I began enjoying it, there was a distasteful racist passage. It may have been normal to use the Bad Word for African Americans, but it's too shocking today. [Several reviewers disagree; they apparently believe that a scene where a child prays that God will kill one of the "xxx children" in the terrible storm instead of her because they have just been baptized and she hasn't, is helpful for children; I just don't see it.]
This book is a much bigger but shorter version created for modern-day audiences. The author, who loved the original, created a better book all around: partly because she trimmed it down quite a lot, and partly because of the very charming -- and informative! -- color illustrations by Susan Jeffers. I can almost guarantee I wouldn't have liked them as much had I not first read the original, which is why I suspect I'm overrating this book. Well, too bad! I really enjoyed it. [Why informative? Mainly because Jeffers draws parents (and some other adults) as young adults, as they undoubtedly would have been in that day and age, even though traditional illustrations of children's books tend to make all parents look middle-aged.]
The illustrations do better than I could have imagined presenting both the small doll and the various locales of her adventures. Some of the illustrations are appealing scenes of home life with her various owners, such as a simple picture of Hitty in bed with her first owner, Phoebe. Some would have just killed me when I was a child -- I would so much have wanted a doll like Hitty with the hammock and small chest made by sailors on Phoebe's father's ship.
Hitty also has some subtle but very entertaining expressions on her face in situations where people could not have seen her -- something that wouldn't have occurred to me, but did occur to this artist.
Between a simplified and (dare I say it?) improved story and the really wonderful pictures, this book is a winner. The only bummer to me is that the cover is unappealing -- it just looks boring, whereas not a single one of the many pictures inside the book are boring. I doubt it would have attracted me in 3rd or 4th grade, and I wish it would get a wide audience. Who knows? Maybe it has. I do hope so.
This book is a much bigger but shorter version created for modern-day audiences. The author, who loved the original, created a better book all around: partly because she trimmed it down quite a lot, and partly because of the very charming -- and informative! -- color illustrations by Susan Jeffers. I can almost guarantee I wouldn't have liked them as much had I not first read the original, which is why I suspect I'm overrating this book. Well, too bad! I really enjoyed it. [Why informative? Mainly because Jeffers draws parents (and some other adults) as young adults, as they undoubtedly would have been in that day and age, even though traditional illustrations of children's books tend to make all parents look middle-aged.]
The illustrations do better than I could have imagined presenting both the small doll and the various locales of her adventures. Some of the illustrations are appealing scenes of home life with her various owners, such as a simple picture of Hitty in bed with her first owner, Phoebe. Some would have just killed me when I was a child -- I would so much have wanted a doll like Hitty with the hammock and small chest made by sailors on Phoebe's father's ship.
Hitty also has some subtle but very entertaining expressions on her face in situations where people could not have seen her -- something that wouldn't have occurred to me, but did occur to this artist.
Between a simplified and (dare I say it?) improved story and the really wonderful pictures, this book is a winner. The only bummer to me is that the cover is unappealing -- it just looks boring, whereas not a single one of the many pictures inside the book are boring. I doubt it would have attracted me in 3rd or 4th grade, and I wish it would get a wide audience. Who knows? Maybe it has. I do hope so.
March 12, 2021
What a lovely book! This book, told in the voice of a little wooden doll, is an adventure. From her carving in 1829 the reader is carried through history that includes whaling, Abraham Lincoln,the Civil war, Teddy Roosevelt, and travels around the world. The illustrations have a vintage feel to them that works incredibly well with the story. This book is a treasure.
January 7, 2023
I loved this version! Read a loud to my daughter. Found the artwork perfect, the story fun! Took a chapter per night which was just right at age 7. Loved the colorful characters, journeys, and ARTWORK. The map at the end of the story was a nice chance to go back and connect all of the different stories and adventures. This is a keeper!
February 6, 2025
Such a great read-aloud book with some wonderful illustrations. I read to kids ages 5-9, boys and girls. Their mom picked it out, but I really got into also. When they were off playing, I read the rest, hehe.
November 6, 2017
This book follows the adventures of a doll as she gets lost and found by different people over the years. The pictures in this book were detailed and helped you picture the story.
December 4, 2020
This is a lovely story, but apparently I need to read the original.
books-to-avoid
July 6, 2024Bowdlerized and expanded by a race hustler.
May 5, 2025
It was awesome how she traveled around the world!!!
March 23, 2011
Have you ever thought what it would be like to be a doll? What it would be like to travel through history? I know I have. " Look, Mamma! she's got a real face now!" that was the beginning of my life. And the begging of this book. My book is about a young doll named Hitty! Has one owner but gets lost on a a ship Hitty travels from owner to owner never knowing who's hands she would fall into next. Hitty travels through many exciting adventures. But by the end of the book she has a horrible surprise that she realizes it is the end of her travels through history. The main character is a doll, Hitty. Hitty is outgoing and loves adventures she loves to play games, talk, and look outside. her arms and legs moved on pegs and hair painted brown. The setting of the story changes many times Hitty explores many different homes. One conflict that approaches Hitty are the Indians and being lost in India. My book has been around for many years. Its written beautifully, and illustrated AMAZING. The stories in this book are all true and i think thats what makes this book a classic.
I loved this book. i thought it was so interesting, it was a great way to learn about my past. The book made it fun to learn about history. I would recommend you read this to your little ones to give them a boost. One thing the Author did well was keep me excited to see what was gonna happen next. She also talked about the history in a way young kids like myself would understand it. I already thought the book was phenomenal, but one thing the author could have done better is to give more detail when saying something important like really factual events in history like she talked about. I think 8-14 could read this book. One theme that i noticed in my book was History. This is talked about throughout the whole book.
Over all I thought it was a phenomenal book
I loved this book. i thought it was so interesting, it was a great way to learn about my past. The book made it fun to learn about history. I would recommend you read this to your little ones to give them a boost. One thing the Author did well was keep me excited to see what was gonna happen next. She also talked about the history in a way young kids like myself would understand it. I already thought the book was phenomenal, but one thing the author could have done better is to give more detail when saying something important like really factual events in history like she talked about. I think 8-14 could read this book. One theme that i noticed in my book was History. This is talked about throughout the whole book.
Over all I thought it was a phenomenal book
June 19, 2010
Reading this aloud with my 5 year old daughter. We absolutely LOVE it! Fantastic text with rich illustrations. We love that the story is easy to follow and interesting. Grace has enjoyed learning about American history and I have loved having discussions with her about a variety of wonderful, thought-provoking topics as a result of this book. This is not the original Newberry winner, it is an adaptation by Rosemary Wells. She adds a new bit on the end with the Civil War, but it seems in keeping with the spirit of the book. I highly recommend this wonderful tale told from the perspective of a carved wooden doll. (My 8 year old son has even snuck in to listen on several occasions.)
March 26, 2012
This book was given to me as a child by my childhood babysitter whom i adored: she practically raised me from the ages of three months to nine and a half years old. She gave me this book and then read it to me, and I have the fondest memories of this book for it. I read it again recently, and even though I never liked dolls, the sense of adventure permeated it and I loved it yet again. Five stars for great memories and a great book.
September 2, 2009
The team of Rosemary Wells and Susan Jeffers is perhaps my favorite children's duo out there. The stories are always well written and pleasing to the ear as a read aloud. Susan Jeffers is a wonderful illustrator that provides richness and color to all of her pages. Although this is based upon the book by Rachel Field, it still has a lot of Wells and Jeffers magic.
October 6, 2008
Haven't read the original yet (1930 Newbery)...supposedly a re-telling by an ardent admirer of Rachel Field's book, given by Rosemary Wells and beautifully illustrated by Susan Jeffers. Follows the life of a doll, Hitty, through 100 years of history and all her owners.
May 31, 2008
This is one of the first chapter books I ever read, and I must say it is still one of my absolute favorites!
May 18, 2009
The girls and I loved this book!
August 10, 2009
She kept going to other girls, it kind of shows that she's sharing herself.
December 14, 2010
Wow, this is a cool book.
January 16, 2012
Delightfully illustrated and wonderfully written. This adaptation is a great intro to Hitty, a most remarkable doll. My little girls loved reading this. It's a great read-aloud.
February 5, 2014
Wonderful, colorful update of a classic!
August 1, 2014
It's very pretty, but I didn't really get much out of it. I know a doll's POV is limited, but that's what the suspension of disbelief is for.
July 18, 2016
an old classic revitalized
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews