Book Review: A Picture Book for the Grown-Ups

Take a look at the cover of this book to the right.  Is it not adorable?  Would you not just love to buy this for an adorable little girl in your life and cuddle up to read it with her in a rocking chair?

If you did that, I fear that your adorable little girl might become rather restless and bored.  That's because while George E. Edenfield's Would You Read Me to Sleep is a big beautiful picture book apparently intended for reading to a young child (that's who picture books are for, yes?), the content of the story is really geared more toward grown-ups.

For one thing, there is a lot of extended description of scenes which a picture-book age child will probably not have the patience to follow.  For another thing, the climactic moment that the story is building to is the death of an old man and his entrance into heaven -- not exactly the kind of story little ones usually dig.

Even more, the story is told mostly from the point of view of the father -- watching his daughter grow up, enjoying his final moments with his grown daughter reading to him, worrying about what will happen to her when he is gone.  These are not thoughts or emotions that a child can relate to.

Now, I didn't have an adorable little girl to cuddle with while reading this, so I can't give a direct testimonial to its appeal to that generation.  It's possible that the lovely pictures will be enough to entrance her into enjoying the story.  (Although some of the pictures are lovelier than others.  The adults aren't rendered as well as the children.  In particular, the depiction of Jesus is very odd-looking.)

Nevertheless, the fact remains that this story speaks to adults.  A sentimental, sweet story that will likely move the heart of the grandparent in the rocking chair while hopefully calming the child in his lap.


Disclosure:  I received this book free from bookcrash.com in exchange for an honest review.

Sarah: Standing on the Promises

And by faith, even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she considered him faithful who had given the promise.  (Hebrews 11)

An impossible thing, to bear a child when you are past childbearing age.  Laughable, even.  But Sarah was given that promise and (after laughing for a moment), she considered the one who gave that promise faithful.

After reading this, I wondered, what’s something that would be a similarly impossible promise given to me?  How about . . . I’m going to become a published author and before 2020, I’ll sell more books than J.K. Rowling.  Yeah, that’s pretty darn far-fetched.  But what if I were promised that – and what if I considered him faithful who had given the promise?  What would I do differently if I considered him faithful than I would do if I considered him flaky?

Well, I suppose I might be tempted to try to make the promise happen myself (Sarah did that, too resulting in Ishmael, ancestor of the Arab people – thank you, Sarah, for the conflict in the Middle East).  But the one significant thing I would do is keep writing.  I wouldn’t feel as discouraged on days when the well runs dry, or when people don’t like what I’ve written, or when no one seems to be reading at all.

Now, granted, Sarah had the advantage of having an outright spoken promise from the Almighty; not many of us are so privileged.  But that doesn’t let us off the hook, because we have been given MANY promises already that we don’t bank on.  Let’s start with a practical one:

Give, and it will be given to you.  A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap.  Luke 6:38

How many of us give of our money and possessions as if we considered him faithful who gave this promise?  Or this related one:

And the same God who takes care of me will supply all your needs from his glorious riches, which have been given to us in Jesus Christ.  Philippians 4:19

If believers really considered the one who gave this promise faithful, wouldn’t worrying become extinct among us? God tells us “Do not fear” over 300 times in His word – why do we continue to fear?  And folks, these barely scratch the surface of the big, fat, hairy, bold promises God has given us.

I’ve come to realize that I have a choice.  I can continue to live as an American cultural Christian with a wimpy faith that makes me comfortable and just kinda suffices . . . usually.  Or I can get bold and genuinely consider Him faithful who has given the promises.  I may crash and burn . . . or I may end up like Sarah with descendants as numerous as stars in the sky and as countless as the sands on the seashore.

Lemon Appreciation

“Depression over the centuries has often led to spiritual breakthrough, as God turns our wondering about what’s wrong into a search for what’s right."

This quote I recently read gave me pause, as I am one who has struggled with various forms of depression over the years.  I am quite familiar with how God can redeem even the worst things in our lives -- that "in all things, God works for the good of those who love him" (Romans 8). 

He can even work good in the ugly places we put ourselves in through our own screw-ups, once we repent and put it all in his hands again.  I remember studying the book of Joel many years ago.  God had sent a plague of locusts on the Israelites because of their tremendous sin, but once they repented and returned to him, he said, "I will repay you for the years the locusts have eaten..."   A friend of mine at the time was clinging to that phrase with a vengeance . . . and I've clung to it myself over the years.

But the earlier quote came from an article talking about research on the physiological nature of depression and the possibility of eliminating it.  The author considers: "What if a pharmaceutical adjustment provides the temporary fix so that the individual doesn’t get the benefits of depression?"  The BENEFITS of depression.  Wow, there's a loaded idea.  There are BENEFITS to the painful and difficult situations God allows in our lives.  Not just that God redeems them, makes lemons out of lemonade . . . but that the lemonade was the goal in the first place, and lemons were required to get there.  What if we eliminate the hard stuff in our lives and lose everything good they had to offer?

What if advanced technology eases the workload of daily life so much that we no longer get the benefits of hard work?

What if the increased accessibility of instant entertainment on television, laptop, cell phone means we no longer get the benefits of boredom?

What if all-encompassing social connectivity serves to deprive us of the benefits of loneliness?

And now here's the place this takes me that will get some people up in arms:  the "social justice gospel" folks are all about helping the needy and the oppressed -- and by all means, I support that.  Jesus and all of scripture clearly teach this, just as they teach us to comfort the depressed.  But is it possible that we rush to remove the lemons from people's lives when what God really has in mind is for us to help them squeeze those lemons into lemonade?

I mean, the purpose of life here on earth is not ease or comfort or shallow, temporary "happiness"  -- the goal is God.  And God forbid we tear up the rocky path that leads to Him and replace it with a smooth highway that leads to nowhere.

Vote Yes for Teachers

We were in Chicago over the weekend for my nephew's wedding and drove through the town of Galena, Illinois on the way back.  The most lovely little town!!  Beautiful old historic buildings . . . I wanted to move into the bed and breakfast and spend a week.  I saw a couple signs as we drove through that were encouraging the locals to vote yes for Galena schools.  The schools want money for something or other, apparently.

As we continued our long drive, I considered what the money was likely to be used for.  A new building.  Updating an old building.  Technology.  A football stadium.  That's usually what the schools promote when they want more money -- a capital investment.  Something immediately visible to the consumer.

But it made me think of a quote I just read from Bill Bennett, former education secretary:

“The research on this is fascinating: there’s a ton.  It’s not class size.  It’s certainly not facilities.  It’s not technology.  It’s the quality of the adult in front of the classroom.  The research is clear; you are much better off in a bad school with a good  teacher than a supposedly really good school with a bad teacher.  If you take kids from the 50^th percentile in the third grade, and you give them a teacher everyone regards as excellent, in two years they’ll be at the 85 percentile.  You give them a teacher everyone regards as not very good, in two years they’ll be in the 35^th percentile.”

I wonder if a school district told its constituents that they wanted more money strictly to spend on teachers -- to attract better quality teachers, to train its current teachers, to pay the legal costs of getting rid of bad teachers -- never mind the old facilities, forget about the athletics programs, worry later about a computer lab . . . I wonder how well that would go over.  Unfortunately, I don't think it would go over well. 

And frankly, if I were living in the district, I would be a bit skeptical, too.  I would be skeptical that they would be able to recognize a quality teacher when they saw one to hire.  I would be skeptical that the teachers they train would have any motivation to improve rather than continue in the safe entropy of what they've always done.  I would be skeptical of the administration having the guts to actually identify bad teachers and root them out.  All that is much harder to do than it is to buy a batch of shiny new computers to show off to the parents.

But that's the stuff that would actually make a difference.

Talking Like a Teenager

Being the language buff that I am, I’m fascinated by the terminology that teenagers are using these days to describe relationships.  It’s a very relevant topic for me, because conversations with my eldest daughter are almost incomprehensible without a good understanding of the current lingo.

For example, when I was in school and a person started a relationship with another person that qualified as a “boyfriend/girlfriend” relationship, we would say that they were “going together”.  Now, even then, when I considered it much, I thought that was an odd way to phrase it.  But that was the term.  A boy would ask a girl, “You wanna go with me?” and she knew exactly what that meant.

Today, however, a couple in such a situation is said to be “going out” -- even back when they were far too young to be dating.  Suzy is going out with Johnny.  Roderick is going out with Elmira.  The first few times my daughter said something like that, I was confused because “going out” to me, in that context, simply means that they are going to go out on a date – there may or may not be any long-term sense of commitment involved there, but best to assume not. 

Monkey facepalm.  Love it.

But oh, no – it is apparently not acceptable with teenagers these days to go on even one date with someone without assuming an implied commitment there.  There is no such thing as casual dating – or going on a date with, say, Suzy this Friday and Elmira next Friday, just because you have some interest in both girls and want to get to know each of them better to see who you might like to pursue a more committed relationship with.  No, no – such a person is a player.

(Now, “player” – I like that term.  Although apparently, it is only used to describe a boy.  A girl who behaves in this way is a “slut” – or less pejoratively, a “flirt” – or on occasion, a “girl player”.  But I digress.)

I haven’t decided how I feel about this new attitude toward dating.  If it meant that they were avoiding going on “dates” and just trying to get to know each other through friendships before making commitments, I would be quite happy with that.  But instead, it seems that they are jumping into committed dating relationships as an effort to get to know someone – only to get to know them and find out that they don’t like them – and so they’re constantly pairing up and breaking up.  No.  Not good.

And then there’s talking.  This is the pre-dating stage that we, in my day, just called “flirting”.  Suzy and Johnny aren’t going out yet, but they’re talking.  Let me tell you, this term opens the door to some ridiculous dialogues.  “Roderick was talking to Elmira.”  “Roderick and Elmira were talking?”  “Yeah, about how Elmira and Julio are talking.”   “Wait – who’s talking?”  “Elmira and Julio.”  “But you just said Roderick and Elmira were talking.”  “No, not talking.  Just talking.” 

*SIGH*  Facepalm.  SMH.  (Yep.  Got the lingo down.)

 

Book Review: Confrontational Politics

Most of us realize that politics in America is nothing more than a game – a game to get more power and influence and knock your opponents out of positions of the same.  An ugly game, at that.  In his book Confrontational Politics, former California senator Bill Richardson gives us a thorough run-down of how the game is played.  Creating a perception of popular support.  Organizing and leveraging the power of ideological minorities.  Manipulating people’s hot buttons.  Seeking out conflict in an effort to advance political goals.  It is a fascinating little primer on how to make things happen in America.

Here’s the catch: Bill Richardson is a right-winger and very much so.  He is founder of an organization called Gun Owners of America; that should give you a clue.  (In fact, Nordskog published this book on behalf of the Gun Owners Foundation.)  Richardson openly demonizes left-wingers in this book and makes no apologies for that.  The ugly, manipulative, confrontational political tactics he describes he specifically attributes to left-wing politicians.  His purpose for writing the book, he says, is to educate the good guys on his side in the tactics of the opposition and encourage them to start fighting fire with fire.

If you’re an extreme right-winger, you’ll probably love this book.  If you’re a liberal, you probably won’t get through the first chapter before you hurl it into the fireplace.  If you’re one like me, who hopes desperately for center ground, productive discourse, and genuine progress . . . well, you’ll probably walk away from the book enlightened but discouraged at where we have come to as a society.

If I’ve piqued your interest, you can purchase the book from Nordskog Publishing here.

I received this book free from the publisher in exchange for an honest, though not necessarily positive, review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Being an Open Book

"Guileless”.  There’s a word you don’t hear much on Main Street.  (Main Street?  Who lives life on Main Street anymore?  The next great social media phenomenon should be called “Main Street Earth,” because that’s what it ends up being.  But I digress.)

I came across that word the other day and looked it up for my personal edification.  “Devoid of guile (which is ‘sly or cunning intelligence’); innocent and without deception.”  That definition immediately brings to mind my youngest.  She has always been one to just put herself out there.  She is who she is, and that’s that.  I remember her preschool teacher comparing her to her older sister: “Your oldest is so quiet and shy, but this one has no inhibitions OF ANY KIND.”

Now, she has reined herself in a bit lately – thanks to pre-teen hormones and a year of trial-by-fire in the public schools.  But she’s still the closest I can think of to a guileless person.  And that’s good, because it is a wonderful quality to be guileless, to be genuine, to be real.

That has been one of my goals in my adult years:  to be more genuine.  With everyone.  I mean, what good does it really do to have people like you when you know that the you they are liking is just a façade?   I got very tired of that. 

In particular, I try to be genuine with God.  Really, what point is there to be otherwise?  As if he doesn’t know the real you.  I pray: Lord, I really want to quit this particular bad behavior . . . well, no, actually I don't.  The truth is, I LOVE doing that.  It feels good.  It comforts and soothes my ruffled feathers.  I know you say you have better things for me if I give that up . . . and you KNOW how I want to believe that . . . but deep down, I really don’t.  I believe it, and then I don’t.  I want to change, and I don’t want to change.  I’m a mess, God!  Good grief, what are you going to do with me??

You wanna know the real me?  I’m a selfish little snit.  I’m lazy. And boring.  I’m a hopeless sugar-and-carb addict.  I have very little fashion sense.  I get lost in my thoughts and wish I could stay there and forget about the world around me. I'm arrogant; I think I'm smarter than I am. An intellectual snob.  I get grand ideas for how to fix the world and then don’t have the courage to tell them to anyone, much less actually put them into action.  I take criticism too personally.  I think I know everything – and then I think I know nothing.  I think more highly of myself than I ought to think – and then I think I’m a worthless piece of humanity and want to crawl under the covers and never see the light of day.  Frankly, I’m a bloody mess. 

And I’m grateful every day for the people who love me anyway -- especially God who I find, to my great wonder, hasn’t just been tolerant of my weaknesses all this time . . . he’s been working on them.  All because I stopped pretending they weren’t there.