Don't know much about biology. But I know more than Eric Carle, apparently.
And someone else pointed out to me that the butterfly wings are on upside down. He's not an airplane, he's a moth-- butterfly-- whatever. Butterfly and moth wings are wider on the top and narrower on the bottom. So either his wings are upside-down, or his whole body is upside-down in the picture and what everyone thinks is his head is actually his butt.
Caterpillars turn into butterflies?
If girls can wear pants, boys can wear dresses.
Another book with a great concept, but lacking in execution. I love that this book exists. It's definitely not a bad book. I just feel like they could have done so much more with this.
People can wear whatever they want.
Sparkle, sparkle, little boy.
I don't find this realistic, and I don't find the change in the older sibling meaningful. They aren't accepting the behavior because of its inherent harmlessness (or even benefits), they are merely switching sides, like they're the only one allowed to insult their sibling.
It's okay for boys to wear sparkly dresses.
The only interesting thing about it is the title. And someday, even that won't be interesting.
It's one of those books whose mere existence is important. It's a revolutionary book concept, but the book itself is just okay.
Children with two mommies are just like any other child.
Seriously, if you like my blog, I think you'll like the Fuse 8 'n Kate podcast. https://soundcloud.com/user-745466600
Every doll is lonely...
You can read all kinds of adult themes into this if you want to, but it's clear that the author did not intend them. This is just a children's book that is no longer in context. I can't ignore the creepiness, but walking through a dark hallway is creepy. But there's nothing inherently creepy about a dark hallway. It's just your own imagination that makes it that way.
Parents still love you, even when they get mad.
I wish I could eat cake every day.
Is it supposed to be metaphorical for something? Maybe a child getting up in the night, going downstairs and getting lost in the pantry, and hallucinating?
Cake is delicious.
Children are not tasty or nutritious.
This is described as the Chinese version of Little Red Riding Hood. I have to say that it's better than Little Red Riding Hood in many ways. In this book they save themselves.
Intelligence and persistence can triumph over evil.
Well, they're creeping, so I guess the title is accurate.
I'm honestly not sure what this book is trying to say. Maybe it's just trying to be a "scary" book without being a scary book. Like, funny-scary? It's just that the premise falls apart if you think about it for more than five minutes.
Don't eat carrots. Or, if you think you're being stalked by sentient vegetables, you probably are.
Because there are so many tigers on the old plantations.
This book is only bad because of Helen Bannerman's original racist drawings and the names of the characters. The characters don't act in a particularly stereotypical way, and the message of the book isn't inherently bad. Clearly the story is set in India, and I don't know why Bannerman decided to draw the characters as awful stereotypes from the American South.
Black people have certain exaggerated features.
