Five Favorite Picture Books

Inspired by a book meme and my recent trip down memory lane to the children’s section of the public library, here are my five favorite children’s picture books:



1. Roxaboxen. Written by Alice McLerran and illustrated by Barbara Cooney.

Barbara Cooney is quite possibly my favorite children’s illustrator of all time. Her vivid watercolors evoke a sense of a better world in days gone by. However, Alice McLerran’s story is the real reason I love this book. A small group of children create an imaginary town in the desert, complete with stores, currency, and a mayor. I always wanted to live in Roxaboxen and have my own house, edged with white stones and desert glass.

2. Tikki Tikki Tembo. Retold by Arlene Mosel and illustrated by Blair Lent.

I first remember hearing Tikki Tikki Tembo at the age of five years old, when my teacher at BSF read it to our class. This retelling of a Chinese legend quickly became a household favorite. After all, who wouldn’t want to repeat Tikki-tikki tembo-no sa rembo-chari bari ruchi-pip peri pembo over and over again? We always made our babysitter read it to us and gave her a copy when she got married last summer.

3. Bored—Nothing to Do! Written and illustrated by Peter Spier.

I think Bored—Nothing to Do! is my mom's favorite children’s book. Illustrated in detailed watercolors, Peter Spier tells the story of two brothers who were bored and end up tearing the house apart to build an airplane. I always marveled at the number of toys the boys had strewn all over their room and yard – how could they still be bored? Sadly, this book is now out of print and nearly impossible to find.

4. The Tooth-Gnasher Superflash. Written and illustrated by Daniel Pinkwater.

If you’re starting to get the impression that we watched too much Reading Rainbow as kids, you’re right. The Tooth-Gnasher Superflash sat on our shelf until our grandpa came to visit and gave each of the characters a funny voice. The book became an instant hit, as we went around the house chanting in high voices, “Buy it, Daddy, buy it!” (the five little Popsnorkles) and remarking in an airhead voice “It is a lovely color” (Mrs. Popsnorkle). Besides enjoying the characters, we thought it would be cool to have a car that turned into a giant chicken, too.

5. Could Be Worse! Written and illustrated by James Stevenson.

This tale of a fantastic nightmare has the refrain, “Could be worse!” Another of our read-aloud favorites, we made our babysitter read it over and over again. As she got to the familiar refrain, we would always chime in, “Could be worse!” (Our babysitter probably said this often to herself as my siblings and I climbed on each other and locked ourselves in closets for protection.)

What were some of your favorite picture books?

Some Thoughts on Reading

First thought, I know next to nothing about anything I say on this blog. I am a perpetual student, and one of my recurring lessons is that there is way more to learn about everything. I still waffle on the issue of whether anyone under the age of 50 has any right to speak in public.

Anyhow, on Reading. Specifically, reading great books, or classics.

First, reading classics does not start fun--even for the whiz kid that has been reading at the college level since age 6. Philosophy is dense and boring, epic poetry takes 16 lines to say "Patrocles died," and history comes in 18 volumes to every particular bias of the writer. Reading great books in the beginning is straight, unvarnished, hard work. The joy of the thing though, is that is does not remain hard work. It is hard to see the progress, but be faithful in tackling the hard books and change will occur. I read The Republic in my Junior year of college, and it was one of the most dreadful dull books I had ever read. I learned nothing but facts and I decided I hated Plato. A year and a half later, I read Plato's Phaedrus, and I laughed at the jokes and got quite a bit out of his arguments. It was in fact, a pleasure to read. Trick to reading: persistence.

Second thing about reading. Books are not written in a vacuum. Every great or influential book in history was, well, influential. In other words, it actively interacted with the cultural and historical atmosphere. It was born of history and in turn, was the midwife of history. It is not necessary to have a profound understanding of the English Revolution to read Milton, but even a cursory knowledge of the times will make him much more clear. If you are confused, read a bit of the history of the time and it will help you appreciate the great book, and may even help your confusion. In a similar vein, Cliff Notes are your friend. Cliff Notes are not the equal of the great literature, but there are an excellent way to give the reader a general outline of what is going to happen and why it matters, thus freeing him to concentrate on the truly great and irreplacable parts of the work.

Third thing, if you are trying to read a great book for fun, read a great book you honestly want to read. Granted, it makes you look brilliant to be seen reading Les Miserables in public, but if it is putting you to sleep, there really isn't much point in reading it at this phase. Unless of course you are one of those people that can admit they don't find something interesting yet still give it its due. But, when browsing the shelves, looking for something impressive to read, pick something that actually sounds interesting. Having read numerous books just because I ought to read them, and getting absolutely nothing out of them, it really is a waste of time.

Fourth, some books just need and certain kinds of experience to understand. If you hate all things pertaining to the sea, you will hate Moby Dick, it has, roughly, 100 pages of marine biology, and 75 more on how to maintain a ship. Great Expectation needs an understanding of pain, lost hope, and ambition. Dostoevsky needs an understanding of suffering and the ability to grasp the brilliant agony of insanity. If you read a classic, and everything but the characters make sense, give it ten years and try again. It just may not make sense because you haven't lived enough yet to be able to hear it.

Fifth, some great books are not worth it. If the book is driving you insane, to gut-wrenching tears, or any other excessively damaging reaction, it is alright to put it away and never read it again. There are some great classics that exact an unbearable amount of confusion and pain for the sake of the story, and that story, objectively, may not be worth it for you. I will never read Tess of the D'Urberville's again, and Finnegan's Wake is never going to happen.

Reading is an art. It is an art for everyone, but it is not an art for everyone to approach in entirely the same way. When attempting the canon, give yourself space, acknowledge the masters, and bear in mind that there is a delicate balance between letting the work expand your horizons and forcefeeding yourself bricks the hard way. Give it time, and reading the greats will become a great pleasure.

Vampires and Unrequited Love

I think, should I ever become a heroin addict, that I shall start by taking 1-6 very conservative shots and then accidentally killing myself with a seventh overdose. I am a somewhat addictive. Fortunately, I limit my addictions to books and tea. The latest bibliographic addiction is the Twilight Series. I am done 2, working on number 3, and I think I understand why they are so rabidly popular, now I need to figure out if I approve.

Bella Swan is a very weak, feminine, human girl. She is afraid of blood, gets motion sick, has the grace of a drunk centipede, she has lousy self-esteem, and struggles with school. A typical young woman with no pressing reason for anyone to fall passionately and self-sacrificingly in love with her. Yet, here comes Edward Cullen, who loves her deeply, loves her so deeply that he cannot leave her and will not drink her blood. Even though her blood is more sweet to him than anything else on the planet.

Here you have it girls. The perfect boyfriend. He will never leave, he can never leave her. He also loves her enough to put her good before his own--he wants to drink her blood and kill her, but he will never hurt her, and in fact drops everything in his life to protect her from all harm. The comparison is fairly obvious, he has a raging lust for her blood yet controls it for her good, contrast this an average stereotype of a boy who has a raging lust for sex, and can either choose to guilt the infatuated girl into sleeping with him or he can not sleep with her, risk losing her, and generally make himself miserable for her sake. To add to this boyfriend's general perfection, he is no wimp. Far from it, he is a perfectly designed killing machine: fast, strong, precise. So, here is a man who who has perfect self-control, has the ability to destroy every living thing in the town if he chose, and is wise enough to fall for a girl who isn't really pretty and has all the feebleness of your average human girl.

In all this, I can see why it is so appealing to large portions of the teen population--though I do admit I have no idea why it is so appealing to boys. But, while painting a beautiful picture of what should be the case in relationships, I wonder if they aren't tainting the the expectations of youth and presenting just too clear a picture of what the reader will not have. I am not sure what I think--but it appears to be a very pleasing lie.