Four Kernels*
Just caught the newest Meryl Streep flick, Julie & Julia, based on two memoirs: Julia Child's My Life in France and Julie Powell's Julie and Julia, an account of the year she spent trying to cook every recipe in Child's seminal cookbook, Mastering the Art of French Cooking, and blogging about the experience. The film deftly switches between the two women's stories to show how Child (played by Streep) came to write the book, essentially how she became THE Julia Child of cookbook and TV fame; and how 50 years later her efforts inspired rudderless Julie Powell (Amy Adams) to get some direction in her life.
Much has been made of Streep's glorious performance as Child, capturing not only the distinctive warble, but also the infectious enthusiasm of the famous chef. Every superlative is justified, as Streep once again turns in a stellar performance sure to garner another Oscar nomination. She IS the definitive actress of our age. Unfortunately, her portrayal is so good that poor Adams bears the brunt of criticism directed at the film simply because her character is not as interesting or vivacious as Child. Other critics gripe about how Powell's character reflects all the narcissistic, celebrity-obsessed, get-rich-quick, etc. traits of the modern Internet generation. I think those who level such criticism at the film miss an important point: Powell would agree with them.
Based on interviews I've seen and read with Powell (an Austin native, BTW), her portrayal on screen---warts and all---is a fair reflection of her personality and life. In 2002 Powell was at a crossroads in which many young people find themselves: facing her 30th birthday and feeling like she had not lived up to her potential. As shown on screen, despite being married to a very nice guy, Eric (Chris Messina), Powell has no direction. A college graduate who was apparantly a very good student, she find herself underemployed as a calltaker at a New York center handling issues related to the 9-11 disaster. She has no power and must listen to a barrage of complaints and sad stories all day. It's enough to make anyone depressed. Add to that, she and Eric can only afford to live in a tiny apartment over a pizza parlor. Meanwhile, all of her college friends (which whom she masochistically endures regular lunches) have gone on to great career success and treat her like a poor, sad relation. Julie, who once aspired to be a writer, has nothing to show for that dream but one unfinished novel.
One thing Powell likes to do is cook, so she issue a personal challenge to herself to cook every single recipe in Julia Child's mammoth cookbook (524 recipes) in one year. Eric suggests she take the project a step further by blogging about it (in the movie she gets the idea to blog first, but in real life blogging was secondary to the experiment). The film shows how Julie becomes obsessed by Julia Child, reading all about her life as well as her cooking. The experiment yields some culinary ups and downs, but in the end, she succeeds in cooking every Child recipe and in having a hugely successful blog that spawns a professional writing career and this film.
The movie intercuts Julie Powell's experiment with the story of Julia Child, taking place mainly in France during the 1950s. One can see why Julie Powell felt a kinship with Child. Both were childless, married to wonderful and supportive men, in love with fine food, and looking for direction in their lives. Child, a Smith graduate who had once been a clerk for the OSS, arrives in Paris in the late 1940s when her husband, Paul (Stanley Tucci), is assigned to the U.S. embassy. Financially, she has no need to work, but she is bored with many of the matronly duties of other embassy wives. Fascinated by French culture, and especially French cuisine, Child enrolls in the all-male Le Cordon Bleu cooking school and blows away skeptics with her fearlessness. She soon becomes a cooking teacher herself and along with two French friends, writes a French cookbook for Americans that will transform the cookbook industry. Her later career as a pioneering TV personality is reflected only through taped shows that Powell studies.
As portrayed in the film (and in real life), Child was indeed fearless and funloving. The title of her cookbook was apt, as she was totally dedicated to the art of cooking as well as to the proper instruction of it. She and her co-writers toiled for eight years to produce the cookbook, carefully testing recipes and revising wording to make sure the text was useful for its intended audience. This was a labor of love and obsession, much like French cooking itself. There should be no shortcuts (a point well-made when one potential publisher insists the length of the tome be cut and recipes simplified for modern cooks who prefer working with boxed mixes). Not surprisingly, in 2003, when the nearly 90-year-old Child was informed about the buzz surrounding Powell's project, she is said to have dismissed it as "disrespectful" and "not serious." It is to Powell's credit that she neverlet this lack of admiration by her idol dim her own spirit. In fact, to this day Powell still talks about Child with an air of reverence and mist in her eye.
If critics think Powell stacks up unfairly when measured against Child, then they get the point of the movie and of Powell's experience. None of us can dare measure up to our idols. Julia Child was an original and trailblazer. That is why Powell admired her. By taking on the daunting task of cooking every recipe in the book in a year, Powell came to admire Child even more. French cooking (heck, any REAL cooking) is hard and time-consuming (since Powell worked until 6 p.m. and many of these recipes were time consuming, she and Eric often didn't eat until after midnight). It requires dedication and artistry, just as with other creative efforts, like writing.
It is no wonder that during the course of the experiment, Powell finally became the professional writer she always wanted to be. As she herself has said, the experiment gave her focus for the first time. Lest anyone think that Powell is just a second-rate blogger who lucked out with a gimmick, it should also be noted that she has since won two prestigious James Beard awards for writing about food (the Beards are considered "the Oscars of the food world," according to Time magazine). She may not be Julia Child, but she has a talent that might never have been tapped without the inspiration of Julia Child.
So, in addition to being a fun, inspiring film worthy of a Saturday night out, Julie & Julia also offers something else: reminders that sometimes we need to challenge ourselves to find out what we are made of, and that we can look to amazing women who have gone before us for inspiration. For some, this might be cooking 524 recipes in 365 days. For others, it might be training for a marathon, losing 100 lbs., or completing a novel. Whatever it is, the challenge is worth it, because if you stick to it, you just might find it opens up new possibilities in life that you never knew existed. As Julia Child might say, life is a banquet, so bon appetit!
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
DVD of the Week: Knocked Up
Four kernels*
Sitting through Katherine Heigl's less-than-impressive rom-com The Ugly Truth last week made me nostalgic for her much better rom-com, Knocked Up (2007). I remember actually seeing this one in the movie theater, inspired by its positive ratings and my fondness for the Emmy-winning Heigl from Grey's Anatomy. To say I was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked the film is an unstatement. I LOVED this movie, and still do.
What's more, I noticed an interesting phenomenon as I discussed the movie with family and friends. The people who seemed to like the movie the most were women over the age of 35, married with children. Young male slackers, who ostensibly might relate to the male lead and the gross humor, were turned off. I recall one college-aged relative expressing his complete revulsion at a memorably graphic shot of childbirth that produced appropriate fits of laughter among women who had personally gone through the experience. Once you see the movie, you'll know exactly which scene to which I am referring.
Why does this movie appeal so much to the hen crowd? For one thing, it contains the two elements essential to any successful rom-com: likeable characters whom the audience cares about and big, big laughs. A third essential element, which Knocked Up aces, are memorable and funny supporting characters. But what really sets this movie apart is writer/director Judd Apatow's script, which is so realistic in its dialogue and approach to family relationships that one wonders whose home he was bugging to write this story.
For those who don't know, the story centers around Heigl's character of Alison, a beautiful, ambitious entertainment reporter who is clearly on her way up in the world. During a drunken lapse in judgment, she winds up having a one-night-stand with total stranger Ben Stone (Seth Rogen). As his name suggests, this tubby, unemployed pothead comes across in the light of day as a mistake Alison would just as soon forget. She tries, until a pregnancy test reveals a surprise for these unlikely co-parents.
Alison and Ben decide to have the baby and even start dating while pregnant to try to see if they can make a relationship work. Along the way they are influenced by their families and friends. Alison lives next door to her sister, whose marriage to a nice guy and good father is fraught with tensions over unresolved longings and pressures. Their example makes Alison wary of entering into a relationship in which the two parties might wind up acting more like they hate than love one another. The conversations between this couple (played by Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd) are almost painful to watch in their realism.
Ben is a child of divorce who has never had a strong model for relationships. He and his slacker buddies live a carefree lifestyle in which their major concern is making the first showing of the latest big-budget action flick. It is to Apatow's credit that he doesn't make Alison a snob about Ben's friends. She and the buddies like and accept each other as they are. She just doesn't want these stoners to raise her baby, lest they forget which is the baby and which is the bong.
Inwardly, Ben knows that to be a good father and partner he will have to give up some of his bad habits and grow up a bit. Apatow's script reflects this internal struggle in a realistic way (save for one less-than-realistic road trip to Vegas subplot). Despite his atypical leading man looks, Rogen and Apatow imbue Ben with enough charm to make the audience understand why someone like Alison might be attracted to him. Another memorable scene involving an empty ring box had every woman in the theater ready to take Ben home with her.
This films resonates with hens because it is ultimately about the struggle to make relationships work. Anyone who has even been married, had long-term friendships, or raised children, understands that maintaining such close relationships is not always easy. Sometimes it is very hard and requires sacrifices. But just like the little bundle of joy that Ben and Alison ultimately bring home, the struggle proves worthwhile. For a reminder of that reality, get Knocked Up this weekend.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Sitting through Katherine Heigl's less-than-impressive rom-com The Ugly Truth last week made me nostalgic for her much better rom-com, Knocked Up (2007). I remember actually seeing this one in the movie theater, inspired by its positive ratings and my fondness for the Emmy-winning Heigl from Grey's Anatomy. To say I was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked the film is an unstatement. I LOVED this movie, and still do.
What's more, I noticed an interesting phenomenon as I discussed the movie with family and friends. The people who seemed to like the movie the most were women over the age of 35, married with children. Young male slackers, who ostensibly might relate to the male lead and the gross humor, were turned off. I recall one college-aged relative expressing his complete revulsion at a memorably graphic shot of childbirth that produced appropriate fits of laughter among women who had personally gone through the experience. Once you see the movie, you'll know exactly which scene to which I am referring.
Why does this movie appeal so much to the hen crowd? For one thing, it contains the two elements essential to any successful rom-com: likeable characters whom the audience cares about and big, big laughs. A third essential element, which Knocked Up aces, are memorable and funny supporting characters. But what really sets this movie apart is writer/director Judd Apatow's script, which is so realistic in its dialogue and approach to family relationships that one wonders whose home he was bugging to write this story.
For those who don't know, the story centers around Heigl's character of Alison, a beautiful, ambitious entertainment reporter who is clearly on her way up in the world. During a drunken lapse in judgment, she winds up having a one-night-stand with total stranger Ben Stone (Seth Rogen). As his name suggests, this tubby, unemployed pothead comes across in the light of day as a mistake Alison would just as soon forget. She tries, until a pregnancy test reveals a surprise for these unlikely co-parents.
Alison and Ben decide to have the baby and even start dating while pregnant to try to see if they can make a relationship work. Along the way they are influenced by their families and friends. Alison lives next door to her sister, whose marriage to a nice guy and good father is fraught with tensions over unresolved longings and pressures. Their example makes Alison wary of entering into a relationship in which the two parties might wind up acting more like they hate than love one another. The conversations between this couple (played by Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd) are almost painful to watch in their realism.
Ben is a child of divorce who has never had a strong model for relationships. He and his slacker buddies live a carefree lifestyle in which their major concern is making the first showing of the latest big-budget action flick. It is to Apatow's credit that he doesn't make Alison a snob about Ben's friends. She and the buddies like and accept each other as they are. She just doesn't want these stoners to raise her baby, lest they forget which is the baby and which is the bong.
Inwardly, Ben knows that to be a good father and partner he will have to give up some of his bad habits and grow up a bit. Apatow's script reflects this internal struggle in a realistic way (save for one less-than-realistic road trip to Vegas subplot). Despite his atypical leading man looks, Rogen and Apatow imbue Ben with enough charm to make the audience understand why someone like Alison might be attracted to him. Another memorable scene involving an empty ring box had every woman in the theater ready to take Ben home with her.
This films resonates with hens because it is ultimately about the struggle to make relationships work. Anyone who has even been married, had long-term friendships, or raised children, understands that maintaining such close relationships is not always easy. Sometimes it is very hard and requires sacrifices. But just like the little bundle of joy that Ben and Alison ultimately bring home, the struggle proves worthwhile. For a reminder of that reality, get Knocked Up this weekend.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Hen Movie of the Week: The Ugly Truth? Heigl Needs to Pick Better Material
*Two Kernels
The latest rom-com entry of the summer season is "The Ugly Truth," a movie I had actually been looking forward to seeing based on the amusing trailers and the casting of Katherine Heigl, whom I enjoyed in the movie "Knocked Up," as well as on the TV series "Grey's Anatomy." Alas, this is one of those films in which the trailer is better than the actual movie, more because of creative editing than because the marketing folks put the best bits in the preview. The ugly truth is, there aren't any best bits.
Heigl plays a character very similar to the one she portrayed in "Knocked Up"---a smart workaholic in the television industry who is beautiful, but unlucky in love. Here she is the producer of a local morning news show in Sacramento whose ratings are tanking. The station manager decides to draw in Jerry Springer fans by hiring Gerard Butler, a cable shock jock whose bits entitled "The Ugly Truth" purport to explain how men really think. His act relies on the belief that meaningful relationships are bogus because men are simple apes guided by their private parts. Heigl is completely repulsed by his philosophies, though he proves great for ratings. Against her better judgment, she even helps him perfect his neanderthal schtick, if only to save her news show. The best scene in the movie is a dream in which she imagines how far she might sink to his level just to win ratings.
Then, on a bet to get rid of Butler, she agrees to follow his advice in her own love life. Despite her best efforts, she can't seem to find the man who meets her 10 criteria for the perfect mate, until she runs into her doctor neighbor. Butler guarantees her success in snagging this perfect guy, if she follows his advice and changes everything about herself. Of course, eventually she figures out that the guy isn't so perfect if he can't accept her for who she really is. Guess who turns out to be the real perfect guy?
As with any rom-com, much depends on how funny the gags are and how much we care about the characters. Unfortunately, this one comes up short. I never laughed out loud once in the theater. A couple of crude gags involving soda spilled on a crotch and vibrating underwear simply fall flat. Despite an intriguing premise of discussing the differences between male and female expectations, the dialogue lacks wit and creativity. In fact, the whole film feels like an effort that never lives up to its potential.
And I never really cared much about the characters. Unlike films such as "Knocked Up" and more recently, "The Proposal," none of the supporting characters is interesting or funny. The best rom-coms know how to accessorize with a good supporting cast. As for the main couple, I just wasn't feeling the love. There are hints of a relationship building as a friendship grows between the two, but I wasn't sold by the finale. Also, while hints are dropped that Butler's character contains more depth than he allows for his TV persona, the story could have used a few more scenes to establish this nice guy lurking beneath the pig exterior. A few more tweaks on the screenplay and at least ten minutes of crucial footage added to the 94-minute movie could have bumped this from a mediocre film into a good one. Too bad.
Finally, it is a testament to Katherine Heigl's star quality that I enjoyed watching her onscreen, even if I didn't care for the movie. She definitely has presence, and based on her previous work (including her Emmy-winning stint on G.A.), she has talent. I fear, though, that she needs to be pickier with her big-screen material, lest she wind up shunted to the B-list of rom-com flicks. If she is going to stick with rom-coms, at least pick quality material. Better yet, break out of the rom-com formula and do something different. It is a risk, but one that has worked well for the likes of Julia Roberts. Not so much for Sandra Bullock, but Sandy is still making good rom-coms (see previous review of "The Proposal") mainly because her strength is comedy. She is more of a modern-day Lucille Ball.
So far, Heigl has not excelled as a comedienne. She is better as the straight woman or in drama (which so far has been limited to television), but producers seem to want to push her into the rom-com mold. I'm sure her great beauty contributes to such casting. Every rom-com movie-maker is looking for the next Julia Roberts. But Roberts won an Oscar for . . . a drama and successfully broke out of the rom-com mold. In that respect, Katherine Heigl has the potential to truly be the next Julia Roberts. Heigl would do well to recall that she won her Emmy for dramatic acting. She should take a chance and use those skills on the big screen. Just pick a better script than she chose for this lame rom-com.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
The latest rom-com entry of the summer season is "The Ugly Truth," a movie I had actually been looking forward to seeing based on the amusing trailers and the casting of Katherine Heigl, whom I enjoyed in the movie "Knocked Up," as well as on the TV series "Grey's Anatomy." Alas, this is one of those films in which the trailer is better than the actual movie, more because of creative editing than because the marketing folks put the best bits in the preview. The ugly truth is, there aren't any best bits.
Heigl plays a character very similar to the one she portrayed in "Knocked Up"---a smart workaholic in the television industry who is beautiful, but unlucky in love. Here she is the producer of a local morning news show in Sacramento whose ratings are tanking. The station manager decides to draw in Jerry Springer fans by hiring Gerard Butler, a cable shock jock whose bits entitled "The Ugly Truth" purport to explain how men really think. His act relies on the belief that meaningful relationships are bogus because men are simple apes guided by their private parts. Heigl is completely repulsed by his philosophies, though he proves great for ratings. Against her better judgment, she even helps him perfect his neanderthal schtick, if only to save her news show. The best scene in the movie is a dream in which she imagines how far she might sink to his level just to win ratings.
Then, on a bet to get rid of Butler, she agrees to follow his advice in her own love life. Despite her best efforts, she can't seem to find the man who meets her 10 criteria for the perfect mate, until she runs into her doctor neighbor. Butler guarantees her success in snagging this perfect guy, if she follows his advice and changes everything about herself. Of course, eventually she figures out that the guy isn't so perfect if he can't accept her for who she really is. Guess who turns out to be the real perfect guy?
As with any rom-com, much depends on how funny the gags are and how much we care about the characters. Unfortunately, this one comes up short. I never laughed out loud once in the theater. A couple of crude gags involving soda spilled on a crotch and vibrating underwear simply fall flat. Despite an intriguing premise of discussing the differences between male and female expectations, the dialogue lacks wit and creativity. In fact, the whole film feels like an effort that never lives up to its potential.
And I never really cared much about the characters. Unlike films such as "Knocked Up" and more recently, "The Proposal," none of the supporting characters is interesting or funny. The best rom-coms know how to accessorize with a good supporting cast. As for the main couple, I just wasn't feeling the love. There are hints of a relationship building as a friendship grows between the two, but I wasn't sold by the finale. Also, while hints are dropped that Butler's character contains more depth than he allows for his TV persona, the story could have used a few more scenes to establish this nice guy lurking beneath the pig exterior. A few more tweaks on the screenplay and at least ten minutes of crucial footage added to the 94-minute movie could have bumped this from a mediocre film into a good one. Too bad.
Finally, it is a testament to Katherine Heigl's star quality that I enjoyed watching her onscreen, even if I didn't care for the movie. She definitely has presence, and based on her previous work (including her Emmy-winning stint on G.A.), she has talent. I fear, though, that she needs to be pickier with her big-screen material, lest she wind up shunted to the B-list of rom-com flicks. If she is going to stick with rom-coms, at least pick quality material. Better yet, break out of the rom-com formula and do something different. It is a risk, but one that has worked well for the likes of Julia Roberts. Not so much for Sandra Bullock, but Sandy is still making good rom-coms (see previous review of "The Proposal") mainly because her strength is comedy. She is more of a modern-day Lucille Ball.
So far, Heigl has not excelled as a comedienne. She is better as the straight woman or in drama (which so far has been limited to television), but producers seem to want to push her into the rom-com mold. I'm sure her great beauty contributes to such casting. Every rom-com movie-maker is looking for the next Julia Roberts. But Roberts won an Oscar for . . . a drama and successfully broke out of the rom-com mold. In that respect, Katherine Heigl has the potential to truly be the next Julia Roberts. Heigl would do well to recall that she won her Emmy for dramatic acting. She should take a chance and use those skills on the big screen. Just pick a better script than she chose for this lame rom-com.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Beauty Shops as Sacred Spaces
Rebecca Wells's latest novel, The Crowning Glory of Calla Lily Ponder, tells the story of a woman whose destiny is linked to the perfection of hair. Early in the book, Calla Lily Ponder recounts vivid memories of growing up in the shadow of her mother's beauty shop in a small Louisiana town. The shop, wonderfully named The Crowning Glory Beauty Porch, is more than just a place where women get their hair done. It is a place for sharing gossip, learning the ways of the world, and in some cases, healing the soul. In one touching scene, Calla Lily realizes her own calling as she watches her mother ease a widow's pain through a loving shampoo and set---the beautician as minister surrounded by mirrors and shampoo bottles rather than stained glass.
Louisiana native Wells is a master at vividly portraying setting (always within her home state) and character (if ever a state was full of characters, it's Louisiana). In describing this small town beauty shop (called the Porch because it is, literally, built on the family's back porch), Wells perfectly captures the spirit and feel of the beauty parlor for women of all ages.
Which got me to thinking: what is it about this place, the beauty parlor, that makes it a sacred space for women? Certainly not every establishment that services hair qualifies. Suffice to say that most large-scale chains function mainly as a site of commerce for speedy and cheap service rather than as holy ground. Those are mere hair-cutting stores. But true beauty parlors still exist, those that feed the soul as well as set the hair, and not just in small towns.
Part of the beauty shop appeal is surely the ability to get together with other women, though men are sometimes allowed in (and small children, as my sons have learned). There is also an intimacy to the process of taking care of someone's hair, or even doing a manicure or pedicure. It involves the human touch and a certain amount of trust on the part of the client. Perhaps that is why so many women feel comfortable sharing information with their hairdresser, even personal details they might not share with anyone else. For women who establish a routine with a stylist, the relationship becomes personal. They have regular get togethers, sometimes as often as once a week, that rival any other friendships. It usually provides a relaxing break from other responsibilities, a time in which the client can "let her hair down," both literally and figuratively.
When I completed my first novel a few months ago, the first person I asked to read it was my hairdresser. I have been going to her for several years now. She works in a family-owned shop located in a building that was once a house and still looks like it. If you drop into the shop at certain times, you are sure to see "the regulars," like the Thursday morning crowd that gathers every week at 10 a.m. Through them I have learned more about public opinions, local news, and popular culture than I often do from the daily newspaper.
My hairdresser is not a professional writer, but rather a prolific reader and honest evaluator of written works. Age and gender-wise, she also fits the demographic of my target readership. I am not the first writer whose work she has evaluated. In a town full of artists, she has become a savvy first reader. A screenplay she reviewed for another client has been optioned and is in now in pre-production. For many years the late, great Molly Ivins was a client. This lady has serviced some talented heads. If we trust her with our heads, we can trust her with our work. She has a wisdom and insight that comes from years of living and interactions with the human race. It is that wisdom and insight that we seek from her during our visits, like spiritual pilgrims beckoning our sage. For our work to be acceptable, they must be blessed by passing "the beauty shop test."
In a world of cheaper and faster options, there is value in the healing, nurturing, and educational realm of the beauty shop. The sacred space that Wells describes still exists and is worth seeking out. Especially on bad hair days.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
Louisiana native Wells is a master at vividly portraying setting (always within her home state) and character (if ever a state was full of characters, it's Louisiana). In describing this small town beauty shop (called the Porch because it is, literally, built on the family's back porch), Wells perfectly captures the spirit and feel of the beauty parlor for women of all ages.
Which got me to thinking: what is it about this place, the beauty parlor, that makes it a sacred space for women? Certainly not every establishment that services hair qualifies. Suffice to say that most large-scale chains function mainly as a site of commerce for speedy and cheap service rather than as holy ground. Those are mere hair-cutting stores. But true beauty parlors still exist, those that feed the soul as well as set the hair, and not just in small towns.
Part of the beauty shop appeal is surely the ability to get together with other women, though men are sometimes allowed in (and small children, as my sons have learned). There is also an intimacy to the process of taking care of someone's hair, or even doing a manicure or pedicure. It involves the human touch and a certain amount of trust on the part of the client. Perhaps that is why so many women feel comfortable sharing information with their hairdresser, even personal details they might not share with anyone else. For women who establish a routine with a stylist, the relationship becomes personal. They have regular get togethers, sometimes as often as once a week, that rival any other friendships. It usually provides a relaxing break from other responsibilities, a time in which the client can "let her hair down," both literally and figuratively.
When I completed my first novel a few months ago, the first person I asked to read it was my hairdresser. I have been going to her for several years now. She works in a family-owned shop located in a building that was once a house and still looks like it. If you drop into the shop at certain times, you are sure to see "the regulars," like the Thursday morning crowd that gathers every week at 10 a.m. Through them I have learned more about public opinions, local news, and popular culture than I often do from the daily newspaper.
My hairdresser is not a professional writer, but rather a prolific reader and honest evaluator of written works. Age and gender-wise, she also fits the demographic of my target readership. I am not the first writer whose work she has evaluated. In a town full of artists, she has become a savvy first reader. A screenplay she reviewed for another client has been optioned and is in now in pre-production. For many years the late, great Molly Ivins was a client. This lady has serviced some talented heads. If we trust her with our heads, we can trust her with our work. She has a wisdom and insight that comes from years of living and interactions with the human race. It is that wisdom and insight that we seek from her during our visits, like spiritual pilgrims beckoning our sage. For our work to be acceptable, they must be blessed by passing "the beauty shop test."
In a world of cheaper and faster options, there is value in the healing, nurturing, and educational realm of the beauty shop. The sacred space that Wells describes still exists and is worth seeking out. Especially on bad hair days.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Not My Son, You . . .
As I have mentioned previously, my Tweener is an obsessive Harry Potter fan, counting down the seconds until we see the new film. It has been quite the topic of conversation among his age group lately. Oddly enough, such conversations have had me relating to the Potter character of Molly Weasley in more ways than one.
Molly, for the uninitiated, is the matron of the large, but poor Weasley clan. Molly represents the ideal earth mother, providing a simple but safe home, always keeping tabs on the kids even when they aren't home, dispensing tough love as needed (try talking back to a screaming letter chewing you out in public for crashing the family car, as Ron endured in The Chamber of Secrets), lovingly sewing hideous sweaters, and cooking hearty feasts for any friends and family who drop by. But Molly has her penultimate motherhood moment in The Deathly Hallows, the series' final installment. STOP READING HERE IF YOU DON'T WANT SPOILERS.
Okay, you've been warned. After evil villainess Bellatrix Lestrange gets away with killing one of the Weasley boys and starts to go after daughter Ginny, Molly springs into maternal action, screaming: "NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU BITCH!" She orders everyone else to back off as she and the wicked sorceress duel it out. The moment is both shocking and rousing for Potter fans, whom I anticipate will cheer loudly when actress Julie Walters (who plays Molly in the movies) gets to shout the words in the final film. As a writer, I appreciate author J.K. Rowling's well-chosen use of profanity to make a point. So much modern literature and film overuses profanity to such an extent that the words lose much of their power. Molly is not a character prone to such vulgarities in everyday speech (nor, for that matter, are most of the characters in this series geared towards young readers). For that reason, when she shouts the words they express the full power of her righteous anger. Bellatrix learns it is not smart to incur the wrath of a protective mom.
When my Potter-crazed son first read these words on the page, he was shocked because, as he told me "that's one of the worst words!" He also knows what I would do to him if I ever heard the term coming out of his mouth, even repeating the line from the book. But he understood what it conveyed about Molly's feelings.
So it was that I felt a sisterhood with Molly while listening to one of my son's conversation about Harry Potter. You see, for the past couple of weeks Tweener has been participating in a "Rock Camp," as in "rock 'n' roll." Musically, it has been a great experience for him, but his band's lead singer is tiny diva in the making. On day one, she came across like a Leann Rimes Star Search wannabe, hitting the high notes and trying to "work the crowd" even if it meant moving from her assigned mark. Since then she has insulted audience members whose reactions don't seem enthusiastic enough, channeled her inner Janis Joplin to brag in a gravelly voice about getting her coffee fix between sets, and basically made it clear that she intends to be rich and famous someday. Hubby describes her as one of those children who usually require a visit from Supernanny. She's something else.
She is also a Harry Potter fan, thus she and Tweener have engaged in numerous discussions about all things HP, forcing visions into my head of him one day bringing such a girl home for dinner. Pardon me while I shudder . . . Okay, all done. Yesterday provided a moment of sympathy for Tiny Diva. Upon arriving to pick up Tweener, I brought along a special treat that I had picked up while running an errand on the way. Tiny Diva (who is always picked up by a babysitter) wished somewhat pathetically that her mom would bring her such treats. I felt sorry for the kid for about 30 seconds, until, during the day's final discussion of Harry Potter, Tiny Diva felt the need to shout Molly's infamous line, unedited and disregarding any adults and small children within earshot. As Tweener shot me a glance that indicated he knew exactly what I was thinking, I declared that it was time to leave.
Inwardly, however, I was repeating an edited version of Molly's declaration. Sorry, Tiny Diva, but my (unspoken) reaction should you ever show up as Tweener's dinner date is likely to be, "Not MY son, you . . ." It is not smart to incur the wrath of a protective mom.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
Molly, for the uninitiated, is the matron of the large, but poor Weasley clan. Molly represents the ideal earth mother, providing a simple but safe home, always keeping tabs on the kids even when they aren't home, dispensing tough love as needed (try talking back to a screaming letter chewing you out in public for crashing the family car, as Ron endured in The Chamber of Secrets), lovingly sewing hideous sweaters, and cooking hearty feasts for any friends and family who drop by. But Molly has her penultimate motherhood moment in The Deathly Hallows, the series' final installment. STOP READING HERE IF YOU DON'T WANT SPOILERS.
Okay, you've been warned. After evil villainess Bellatrix Lestrange gets away with killing one of the Weasley boys and starts to go after daughter Ginny, Molly springs into maternal action, screaming: "NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU BITCH!" She orders everyone else to back off as she and the wicked sorceress duel it out. The moment is both shocking and rousing for Potter fans, whom I anticipate will cheer loudly when actress Julie Walters (who plays Molly in the movies) gets to shout the words in the final film. As a writer, I appreciate author J.K. Rowling's well-chosen use of profanity to make a point. So much modern literature and film overuses profanity to such an extent that the words lose much of their power. Molly is not a character prone to such vulgarities in everyday speech (nor, for that matter, are most of the characters in this series geared towards young readers). For that reason, when she shouts the words they express the full power of her righteous anger. Bellatrix learns it is not smart to incur the wrath of a protective mom.
When my Potter-crazed son first read these words on the page, he was shocked because, as he told me "that's one of the worst words!" He also knows what I would do to him if I ever heard the term coming out of his mouth, even repeating the line from the book. But he understood what it conveyed about Molly's feelings.
So it was that I felt a sisterhood with Molly while listening to one of my son's conversation about Harry Potter. You see, for the past couple of weeks Tweener has been participating in a "Rock Camp," as in "rock 'n' roll." Musically, it has been a great experience for him, but his band's lead singer is tiny diva in the making. On day one, she came across like a Leann Rimes Star Search wannabe, hitting the high notes and trying to "work the crowd" even if it meant moving from her assigned mark. Since then she has insulted audience members whose reactions don't seem enthusiastic enough, channeled her inner Janis Joplin to brag in a gravelly voice about getting her coffee fix between sets, and basically made it clear that she intends to be rich and famous someday. Hubby describes her as one of those children who usually require a visit from Supernanny. She's something else.
She is also a Harry Potter fan, thus she and Tweener have engaged in numerous discussions about all things HP, forcing visions into my head of him one day bringing such a girl home for dinner. Pardon me while I shudder . . . Okay, all done. Yesterday provided a moment of sympathy for Tiny Diva. Upon arriving to pick up Tweener, I brought along a special treat that I had picked up while running an errand on the way. Tiny Diva (who is always picked up by a babysitter) wished somewhat pathetically that her mom would bring her such treats. I felt sorry for the kid for about 30 seconds, until, during the day's final discussion of Harry Potter, Tiny Diva felt the need to shout Molly's infamous line, unedited and disregarding any adults and small children within earshot. As Tweener shot me a glance that indicated he knew exactly what I was thinking, I declared that it was time to leave.
Inwardly, however, I was repeating an edited version of Molly's declaration. Sorry, Tiny Diva, but my (unspoken) reaction should you ever show up as Tweener's dinner date is likely to be, "Not MY son, you . . ." It is not smart to incur the wrath of a protective mom.
Yours in Sisterhood - VB
Monday, July 13, 2009
Hen Movie of the Week: The Proposal
* Rating - Three kernels
It is Saturday night, the babysitter is booked and hubby and I get to have a date night. Yeah! He picks the movie, one of those romantic comedies marketed as the ideal date flick. Actually, most of the audience is made up of women obviously on Girls Night Out, with only a few scattered couples like ourselves in attendance. This is NOT the type of movie that straight men go out to see alone or in pairs.
We expect something light and frothy, with an appealing cast. We are not disappointed. This type of rom-com hinges entirely upon actor and character appeal, and how funny the execution of the predictable plot is. Sandra Bullock plays Margaret, a hard-nosed editor at a major book publishing house (think a younger, less wicked version of Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada---in some ways I suspect Sandy’s parodying Meryl, to positive effect). Ryan Reynolds plays Andrew, her long-suffering assistant, who has endured three years of abuse for a shot at a promotion and a published novel (having worked in the publishing industry for many years, I can affirm such employees and bosses do exist). A Canadian faced with deportation because she was too busy working to observe U.S. immigration policies, Margaret orders Andrew to marry her in exchange for fulfilling his career goals.
In order to convince skeptical immigration officials that their engagement is legit, they fly off to tiny Sitka, Alaska, for the weekend to celebrate the birthday of Andrew’s grandmother (Betty White). Along the way we meet his loving mother (Mary Steenburgen) and macho father (Craig T. Nelsen), from whom he is estranged because he moved to New York to work in publishing instead of staying home to run the family business empire (which seems to include most Sitka commerce).
Of course, soon the orphaned, hardnosed city girl is so charmed by the family and quirky locals that her hard heart begins to melt. Thus opens the way towards appreciating Andrew’s charms as well. We in turn, begin to understand that Andrew’s devotion to his boss goes beyond mere career ambition. Will they realize they are actually in love before immigration officials catch onto their ruse? If you’re looking for mystery, you need to find another movie.
In a nutshell, the rom-com formula works this time around. The actors are all appealing in their roles, I did come to like them (if not care too deeply), and I laughed out loud several times (to the point of weeping at least twice---a sign of quality laughs and the main reason the film gets three full kernels instead of two and a half). These three elements lend themselves to a successful rom-com and Sandy has presented us with one. Good on her that this movie provided her best opening weekend ever.
Other positives: Alaska was a nice choice for the plot (not just because Sarah Palin continues to remind us how quirky Alaskans can be). The scenery is gorgeous, though I was a bit disappointed to discover that nothing was actually filmed in the state. But such is the magic of movie-making. Few audience members will know or care that the lush views were created by digital wizardry. I actually heard an audible gasp from the audience when the first panoramic mountain image came into view (louder even than when we first glimpse Reynolds in the altogether).
Speaking of which, Sandra Bullock has her first nude scene ever in this film---played for laughs, not lust. But I must say on behalf of all females over 40: I salute you. Sandy. Whatever you are doing to maintain that spectacular bod, keep it up. Ryan ain’t too shabby, either.
White, Steenburgen, and Nelson are all pitch perfect as the family. While White has been getting a lot of buzz for her humorous role, in my opinion Oscar Nunez steals the show as a multi-talented local who can handle virtually every wedding need from the bachelorette party through the nuptials. At a certain point, the audience began to laugh just by virtue of his showing up in a scene. His mere presence becomes funny. I’m glad he was included in the ending montage (do NOT leave the theater until the credits have rolled) to emphasize his contribution to the film.
So if you have a free night out and are looking for a light, frothy rom-com that will make you laugh and not think too hard, this is the ideal formula flick for you.
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
It is Saturday night, the babysitter is booked and hubby and I get to have a date night. Yeah! He picks the movie, one of those romantic comedies marketed as the ideal date flick. Actually, most of the audience is made up of women obviously on Girls Night Out, with only a few scattered couples like ourselves in attendance. This is NOT the type of movie that straight men go out to see alone or in pairs.
We expect something light and frothy, with an appealing cast. We are not disappointed. This type of rom-com hinges entirely upon actor and character appeal, and how funny the execution of the predictable plot is. Sandra Bullock plays Margaret, a hard-nosed editor at a major book publishing house (think a younger, less wicked version of Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada---in some ways I suspect Sandy’s parodying Meryl, to positive effect). Ryan Reynolds plays Andrew, her long-suffering assistant, who has endured three years of abuse for a shot at a promotion and a published novel (having worked in the publishing industry for many years, I can affirm such employees and bosses do exist). A Canadian faced with deportation because she was too busy working to observe U.S. immigration policies, Margaret orders Andrew to marry her in exchange for fulfilling his career goals.
In order to convince skeptical immigration officials that their engagement is legit, they fly off to tiny Sitka, Alaska, for the weekend to celebrate the birthday of Andrew’s grandmother (Betty White). Along the way we meet his loving mother (Mary Steenburgen) and macho father (Craig T. Nelsen), from whom he is estranged because he moved to New York to work in publishing instead of staying home to run the family business empire (which seems to include most Sitka commerce).
Of course, soon the orphaned, hardnosed city girl is so charmed by the family and quirky locals that her hard heart begins to melt. Thus opens the way towards appreciating Andrew’s charms as well. We in turn, begin to understand that Andrew’s devotion to his boss goes beyond mere career ambition. Will they realize they are actually in love before immigration officials catch onto their ruse? If you’re looking for mystery, you need to find another movie.
In a nutshell, the rom-com formula works this time around. The actors are all appealing in their roles, I did come to like them (if not care too deeply), and I laughed out loud several times (to the point of weeping at least twice---a sign of quality laughs and the main reason the film gets three full kernels instead of two and a half). These three elements lend themselves to a successful rom-com and Sandy has presented us with one. Good on her that this movie provided her best opening weekend ever.
Other positives: Alaska was a nice choice for the plot (not just because Sarah Palin continues to remind us how quirky Alaskans can be). The scenery is gorgeous, though I was a bit disappointed to discover that nothing was actually filmed in the state. But such is the magic of movie-making. Few audience members will know or care that the lush views were created by digital wizardry. I actually heard an audible gasp from the audience when the first panoramic mountain image came into view (louder even than when we first glimpse Reynolds in the altogether).
Speaking of which, Sandra Bullock has her first nude scene ever in this film---played for laughs, not lust. But I must say on behalf of all females over 40: I salute you. Sandy. Whatever you are doing to maintain that spectacular bod, keep it up. Ryan ain’t too shabby, either.
White, Steenburgen, and Nelson are all pitch perfect as the family. While White has been getting a lot of buzz for her humorous role, in my opinion Oscar Nunez steals the show as a multi-talented local who can handle virtually every wedding need from the bachelorette party through the nuptials. At a certain point, the audience began to laugh just by virtue of his showing up in a scene. His mere presence becomes funny. I’m glad he was included in the ending montage (do NOT leave the theater until the credits have rolled) to emphasize his contribution to the film.
So if you have a free night out and are looking for a light, frothy rom-com that will make you laugh and not think too hard, this is the ideal formula flick for you.
*The Henhouse Movie Rating System:
Four kernels – An exceptional film worth paying for a babysitter to see in the theater, or worth staying up late to watch on DVD after the kids have gone to bed and devoting your full attention to.
Three kernels – A good film that has many entertaining elements and might be worth seeing in the theater if you have a free babysitting offer from relatives or renting to watch while folding the laundry.
Two kernels – A so-so movie that might be worth seeing if it happens to be on cable and you want something to take your mind off washing dishes without thinking too hard.
One kernel – A bad film only worth watching if you need an unintentional laugh or if it’s the only decent thing you can find on free TV while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Zero kernels – A film SO awful you should avoid at all costs; yes, worse than watching even a bad infomercial for the 20th time while breastfeeding at 2 a.m.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Kid Flicks and the Meaning of "Family"
Having just sat through Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs with my boys, I couldn't help thinking about a common theme in kid films today---the formation of new, alternative "families." In some ways, this trend isn't entirely new. Ever since Bambi's mom bit the dust, family films have had an inordinate focus on orphans. Almost every major Disney hero or heroine seems to be missing at least one parent. Now, though, films allow the protagonists to create a new family. Take three examples just from this summer's fare:
Up: An excellent movie that all film-lovers should see, even if you don't have kids. The story focuses on Carl, an elderly grouch still mourning the death of his beloved wife. The couple were never able to have children, but had a wonderful marriage. Just as Carl is trying to escape from the world with his giant clump of balloons, he encounters Russell, a little boy desperately trying to earn a scout badge just to get the attention of his absentee father. We discover that Russell was once close to his dad, but ever since his parents divorced and his dad remarried, the father has dropped out of his life. By the end of the movie, Carl decides to re-enter the world by becoming a surrogate dad to young Russell. If the montage at the end showing the two of them engaged in all types of fun activities doesn't make you well up, you are made of stone.
Ice Age 3: Like the previous Ice Age movies, a funny and well-made animated movie with quite a bit of action this time around. The running theme of this entire franchise is the creation of an unconventional family (or "herd"). At the beginning of this film, the motley family consists of two mammoths, two opossums, a saber-tooth tiger, and sloth. The family cohesion is threatened by the arrival of the a new baby mammoth for the herd's stand-in "mother and father." The "adopted" children think they will be left out by the biological child. Of course, in the end, every family member proves their value and the herd remains intact, with the addition of the cutest wooly baby you've ever seen.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: My Potter-crazed eldest is dying to see this one when it opens next week, but having already read the books, we already know how it will fit into the theme of making your own family. Harry's search for family is a running theme throughout J.K. Rowling's fictional masterpiece. Harry actually gets orphaned twice---once as a baby when his parents are killed by Voldemort and later when his godfather is killed by Voldemort's follower. Though he still feels the love of his parents, his other "blood kin" treat him horribly. He is forced to endure their abusive company just to survive until age 17. Harry envies the poor, but loving Weasley clan, who represent the ideal family he wishes he had [read the end of book seven to see how this element unfolds]. In the end, Harry really survives by relying on a family of his own making---his friends.
Those who push a "traditional family" agenda may protest this theme of making up your own family, but it reflects a reality of our times. Statistics prove there are many Russells out there, growing up without a strong father-figure; as well as many Harrys, whose abusive blood-relations reflect more hate than love. In all the stories, love, loyalty, and presence count more than DNA in building family. To me, this is a hopeful message, telling kids that, no matter what life throws your way, you can find happiness and love. It is a worthwhile message for any kid to hear.
Up: An excellent movie that all film-lovers should see, even if you don't have kids. The story focuses on Carl, an elderly grouch still mourning the death of his beloved wife. The couple were never able to have children, but had a wonderful marriage. Just as Carl is trying to escape from the world with his giant clump of balloons, he encounters Russell, a little boy desperately trying to earn a scout badge just to get the attention of his absentee father. We discover that Russell was once close to his dad, but ever since his parents divorced and his dad remarried, the father has dropped out of his life. By the end of the movie, Carl decides to re-enter the world by becoming a surrogate dad to young Russell. If the montage at the end showing the two of them engaged in all types of fun activities doesn't make you well up, you are made of stone.
Ice Age 3: Like the previous Ice Age movies, a funny and well-made animated movie with quite a bit of action this time around. The running theme of this entire franchise is the creation of an unconventional family (or "herd"). At the beginning of this film, the motley family consists of two mammoths, two opossums, a saber-tooth tiger, and sloth. The family cohesion is threatened by the arrival of the a new baby mammoth for the herd's stand-in "mother and father." The "adopted" children think they will be left out by the biological child. Of course, in the end, every family member proves their value and the herd remains intact, with the addition of the cutest wooly baby you've ever seen.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: My Potter-crazed eldest is dying to see this one when it opens next week, but having already read the books, we already know how it will fit into the theme of making your own family. Harry's search for family is a running theme throughout J.K. Rowling's fictional masterpiece. Harry actually gets orphaned twice---once as a baby when his parents are killed by Voldemort and later when his godfather is killed by Voldemort's follower. Though he still feels the love of his parents, his other "blood kin" treat him horribly. He is forced to endure their abusive company just to survive until age 17. Harry envies the poor, but loving Weasley clan, who represent the ideal family he wishes he had [read the end of book seven to see how this element unfolds]. In the end, Harry really survives by relying on a family of his own making---his friends.
Those who push a "traditional family" agenda may protest this theme of making up your own family, but it reflects a reality of our times. Statistics prove there are many Russells out there, growing up without a strong father-figure; as well as many Harrys, whose abusive blood-relations reflect more hate than love. In all the stories, love, loyalty, and presence count more than DNA in building family. To me, this is a hopeful message, telling kids that, no matter what life throws your way, you can find happiness and love. It is a worthwhile message for any kid to hear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
