User Profile

Unexpected 'beer' reference, which is kind of funny because every other time? It's really been like they've been trying to ensure that the two have been tied to "child-friendly" things.

-groan- No, that doesn't need to happen. This is modern fiction; they could organise however they want.

N... no?

Though it is interesting because my understanding has always been reversed (nectar is a food, and ambrosia is a drink), but actually... Both can be correct.

In Homer, ambrosia was the food and nectar was the drink; in Alcman, nectar is the food and in Sappho's work, ambrosia is the drink.

But I highly doubt either were cake-like or apple juicey, and this just feels like undermining kids' interaction with the world around them. (Not even for the sake of a joke, but for the sake of keeping them innocent of something.)

And this repetitive used of "old Greek speak" is making me wonder if this was a series of books commissioned out of a need to have "easy to read" books rather than just... writing books that were interesting. It's a huge tell for me because these kinds of 'jokes' are often used as a "we know this word is above you, so we're going to give you synonyms in the text and not footnotes" sort of thing... Which bothers me a lot now, but I've never met kids who like when books do this? Not to say there aren't any, but the complaints I often get if this is something a kid comes across? Is that it's condescending.

... Which makes me want to look more into Capstone Press.

And if it's not a book written for that purpose, then it's a whole entire failure for this writer to understand her audience.

Ughhh, I really am not fond of these sorts of things? I know it's a joke, but again. It's not even a funny one, and it also just undermines any characterisation that could happen? Though, it seems like the author doesn't really like anyone she's writing about at this particular moment, lol.

This is such a regional thing that I don't even understand why it's a pun that was chosen. It's... not even funny? Just say recliner and don't make people try to remember La-Z-Boy is a thing (if it didn't take them a few moments to even realise it was a pun on a regional company of furniture makers).

I feel like the author missed a trick where they should've used 'they' over 'he', since it's a three-headed dog. Which is just more interesting to show wider grammatical usage rather than a statement on anything.

Doing some of my "would this be a good recommendation to my English students" reading.

I've been reading this series with one of my students, so it's taking us time to get through them. We read it together as part of her English lessons (they're learning English, and they love actually reading books). For that purpose, it's great because my student is absolutely engaged by the story; while there are some more uncommon phrases (regional or generational slang) or 'higher level' language, it's mostly put within contexts where they are able to figure out what things mean by the context around it.

Overall, I really recommend it for anyone working with English learners who aren't yet confident enough to read novels that are fully text.

That said, I do feel like there are parts where it's hard to engage with certain characters. Sometimes I find myself forgetting the names of people (such as the Old Man Stonekeeper teacher guy, and it took me until the very end to remember the name of his female student because she wasn't as prominent). I think this kind of comes down to how the characters are presented and then engaged with, and I sort of wish that the characters were more present in their own story.

That isn't to say it's not enjoyable; I do like reading it with my student, and they look forward to reading it. From our conversations, they say that they absolutely adore Emily because she's so determined, and they really like her relationship with her mother because her mother actually apologises when she's wrong... which is not a common familial dynamic that is shown towards children. Personally, I have to agree with them, especially on the latter point.

Sometimes I have to wonder if it's really that Russian literature is more 'dry' (as stereotypes have told me) or if it's the translators making it sound dryer in English than it otherwise would've been.

The more I read Russian literature in translation, the more I lean toward the latter.

Some of this isn't hard, but the people who said this is "the most accessible text" on Orientalism... definitely didn't read it. Or were fluent in French (mostly) and German (secondly).

It's not bad, but it requires a lot more work to understand the point because there are so many untranslated quotes (and very few of them have translations or explanations).

Unsurprisingly, one of the most common ways of the right (and, honestly, anyone with a neoliberal agenda) pushing through their beliefs is by creating reports that are factually incorrect but enable intimidation and harassment unless their beliefs are adhered to.

You'd think people would recognise this pattern, but I guess it's difficult when you wan to pretend a lot of these think-tank groups are there purely as independent outsiders and don't want to investigate their motives further.