ON THE SMALL MATTER OF DISHES JENGA (AND THE OTHER LITTLE THINGS THAT GET US IN A TIZZY).

Having stopped over at Joey's place and read this, a list of the top ten things that cause us most aggravation, I simply had to comment.

Urine on the seat or floor.

Hmm! I think I can safely say this winds most of us up. But what about the ... positioning of the toilet seat?

Ah! That age old chestnut that I'm led to believe has resulted in many a heated row discussion though, unlike the squeezing of the toothpaste tube from the middle (I hold my hand up to this one), its not problematic in the Terry residence.

You see, there's only two of us in the house and thankfully Mr T (he who comes from a family where the male of the species outnumber the female by 4 to 1) is well trained when it comes down to, well, making sure that the toilet seat is left down which is just as well as not for one single moment (male visitors take note) has it ever crossed my mind that it belongs in any other position.

Then remaining with the positioning of things, there's not so much the not replacing the toilet roll (though that, be warned, does wind me up) as there is the ... positioning of the toilet roll.

Once again there is only one correct position and, as has been borne out in this 124 year old diagram, that is my way over the roll and NOT under it. Something I choose not to make a big fuss about but I admit to having changed the position of the loo roll not only in our bathroom but in that of friends (sorry) and even public toilets.

And finally, from the bathroom to the kitchen, there's the matter not so much of dishes left in the sink as the playing of dishes Jenga. 

Dishes Jenga? 

Let me explain ...

You may have heard (perhaps even played) Jenga the game in which wooden blocks are stacked in a tower and players take turns removing pieces trying not to cause the tower to fall over ...

Well! One of us is accused of playing it not with wooden blocks but with ... dishes; the aim of the 'game' being that said person (big hint, it isn't Mr T) stacks washed dishes to drain in what is said to be a somewhat precarious manner until the other one of us has cause to remove them without causing the pile to topple.

Which of the 10 'little' things linked to at the top of this post most winds YOU up? Or perhaps you'd care to spill which 10 'little' things other than those listed most get you in a tizzy.

AGGGHHH! ME CUTTING OFF MY NOSE TO SPITE MY FACE?

'To contribute to Community Features (for example, Customer Reviews, Customer Answers), you must have spent at least £40 on Amazon.co.uk using a valid payment card in the past 12 months. Promotional discounts don't qualify towards the £40 minimum. You do not need to meet this requirement to post Customer Questions, create or modify Profile pages, Lists, or Registries, or to read content posted by other customers'.

- Amazon.co.uk
See their 'Eligibility' and other Community Guidelines by clicking here

OR ...

for Amazon.com's
'Eligibility' and other Community Guidelines click here

Just as I know I'm not the first, I know I won't be the last.

The last that is to be held to ransom by Amazon. And, yes, at this moment in time, that is truly what it feels like.

It may have escaped your notice (I know it had mine until, having received a pop-up message from amazon politely declining my latest review, I checked) but lots of bloggers are having not only their recent reviews declined BUT their reviews going back weeks .. months .. even longer deleted. Why?

As of 2018 ... 

For many reasons but seemingly way up there as one of the most common reasons  ... I refer you to the Amazon Community Guidelines at the top of this post.

Yes, I'm guilty of not spending £40 (if in the US $50, I don't know about elsewhere) in a year with Amazon.co.uk .. OR am I? 

Not uncommonly between Mr T and myself (Note I make no mention of all the family members who buy things for us as listed on our respective Wish Lists) we easily spend £40 (and the rest) each but, for reasons I won't bore you with here, I refuse to set up an online account and therefore always buy things  using his account.

Am I, as my nana would say, 'cutting off my nose to spite my face' by not taking the simple step of setting up an account in MY name? Probably, but, right now, I refuse to be held to ransom.

And especially not held to ransom by a site that as a fellow blogger explained ...

"I NEVER buy books from Amazon - I buy teabags and make up, but never books and I review EVERY book that I read, on Amazon.

Because I spend money with Amazon, I am allowed to review on Amazon, it doesn't matter where I bought the book from."

So basically, a site that allows you to review books when in fact you haven't bought a book off them for goodness knows how long (if ever) preferring to spend your £40/$50 if in the US (that by the way is £40 and another $50 if, like me, you are sometimes asked to post your review on both Amazon.co.uk AND Amazon.com) purchasing whatever it is your purchasing off them that isn't books.

Not that this is the only reason people are having their reviews declined/deleted. 

Not unlike many others, whenever I have reviewed a book on behalf of a second party (IE an author, a publisher, ETC) I have always added a disclaimer that is basically the same as the one you'll find at the top of the left hand side-bar. The proper thing to do? You'd may have thought so BUT woe betide anyone who gets the wording of this wrong. 

Yes, it seems as if Amazon has it as being OK for authors etc to give copies of books or Advance Reading Copies (ARCs) away so long as they don’t require a review in exchange (which by the way is considered your being financially compensated). Soooo best not use the term “I received this book for free in exchange for an honest review" ... Amazon doesn't like it. Far better to go with something along the lines of “I received an this book/ARC at no cost from the author.”

Hang on a minute, a second party providing a print copy in thanks for a review is considered my being 'financially compensated'? Yes, and Amazon will decline your review AND possibly delete others.

What's more ...

Enter competitions where the prize is an Amazon gift card? I have it on good authority that entering a competition where the prize is an Amazon gift card IS considered to be compensation for a review (even if the review is years into the future). 

Hmm! It seems Amazon can and do track gift cards that authors send out by email and thus authors in the know apparently {whispers} buy Amazon gift cards from their local supermarkets, ETC, and mail them out to their readers, which doesn’t draw a direct line between them.

Then, nothing new, Amazon has always stated that "reviews written by anyone with a personal relationship to the author are inappropriate". Yes, we're talking nepotism. 

All well and good. Of course no one wants to think that all those five star reviews are being written by the author's mother, right?

Of course we don't BUT for me I guess the crux of the matter is how exactly Amazon defines a personal relationship?

A relatively small community, how many of us who review books on behalf of second parties (despite probably never having met them in the flesh and hardly likely to do so) befriend, lets say, an of author or heck, even their cat on FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram, GoodReads .. I could go on? Hardly what I'd describe as a personal relationship and, yet no matter how tenuous the link, Amazon don't like it. Far better, if they/their cat have one, rather than befriend them on their personal page, follow them on their public/author page'.

And finally, rant almost over ...

Were you aware that authors aren't allowed to review on Amazon? 

No, of course I don't mean they aren't allowed to go dishing out five stars to their own books, that goes without saying. I mean they aren't allowed to review full stop, the reason?

Having finally managed to solicit a response from them, an author friend received an email that  strongly suggested that they (authors) were unable to be circumspect; that they'd either (a) give positive reviews to those published by the same publishing house and/or (b) give negative reviews to their competitors.

A blow to the blogging community and authors (especially those authors who self-publish and don't have the backing of a big publishing house)?

I'd like to think not. After all, when all is said and done ...

• Our reviews are important to authors. As I have been informed by several authors, reviews are the life-blood of the 'indie' author. If nothing else, its a way of getting their name/book(s) out there; even if less than glowing, its still feedback and, if well done, can provide constructive criticism.
• Gutted to think all of the hours (to say nothing of the considerable thought) I've put into my review(s) has gone, deleted at the press of a button, BUT ...

1. I started blogging as a way to chronicle the books I had read and, yes, whilst its both an honour and a privilege to receive books from second parties; to think that I might have provided just that little bit of exposure, no matter what, I'll carry on reviewing.
2. Theirs isn't the only site, there are others apart from Amazon. OK so there isn't any research out there as to how much (if anything) reviews help sales on other sites but, again, its a way of getting an authors name out there and I'd like to think, no matter where posted, readers might, just might, be influenced by them.

Why might you ask, that given these issues and the fact that Amazon's working conditions have been questioned, do I still shop with them.

A good question and one I've been pondering for a while now.

Anyway,

Thank you for sticking with me, I know its a been a longer than usual post but, well, I needed to say it.

RISQUE, PATRONISING ... OR BOTH? WHAT THINKS YOU?

Warning: Whilst not what I'd consider rude - and as many of you know I consider myself a bit of a prude - this advert has been certified as risque enough to be only shown after the 9 PM watershed here on British TV. TT

• Considered by some as too rude, that any young children watching might be 'offended', that any parent(s) watching with a young child might be embarrassed. I'd argue that, only shown after 9 PM, surely little children will be in bed. And besides which, wouldn't any young children who happened to be awake and watching only see a woman spilling her chocolates and not get the sexual connotation?
• Considered by certain Men's Rights groups as being 'sexist' in that if this had been a man instead of a woman there would have been cries that the ad was making light of sexual assault. I'd argue, the woman was talking about a partner (albeit a new one) and not some random stranger that she had groped, that, far from a sexual assault upon a person, this was more of a 'mishap', a mishap that the woman's partner quite clearly enjoyed.
• Considered by some as patronising towards disabled people. I'd argued that its wonderful to see actual disabled people (and not able-bodied people playing disabled people) on TV, that its refreshing to see someone disabled actually advertising 'everyday' products, that, most of all, its fantastic that its being acknowledged that, guess what, disabled people do have sex lives.

What are your thoughts? Love the advert or loathe it? Find it too risque, merely patronising ... or both?

Way behind with my reviews and with a busy few days ahead of me, I'm hoping to catch up with things and as such shan't be posting until Tuesday (possibly Wednesday) soooo, as always ...

HANDLE WITH CARE.

HANDLE WITH CARE by JODI PICOULT.

BACK COVER BLURB: Willow O'Keefe had seven broken bones before she took her first breath.

Now her life is lived on a knife-edge. Born with brittle bone disease, she will never learn to skate like her sister. Even walking can be dangerous: one wrong step and she is back in a cast.

The medical bills are crippling her family. So when a lawyer tells Charlotte, her mother, that they might have a case to sue for wrongful birth, she feels bound to consider it.

Except that winning would mean losing her best friend - and telling the world that she wishes her much-longed-for, adored daughter had never been born ...

FIRST SENTENCE{Prologue: Charlotte, February 14, 2002}: Things break all the time.

MEMORABLE MOMENT {Page 137}: Sometimes I think there's a beast that lives inside me, in the cavern where my heart should be, and every now and then it fills every last inch of my skin, so that I can't help but do something inappropriate. It's breath is full of lies, it smells of spite. And just at this moment, it chose to rear its ugly head.

SOURCE: A charity shop buy.

MY THOUGHTS: Formulaic as I've come to expect of Ms Picoult's books. I guess the key (or one of them at least) as to whether or not/how much you enjoy this authors books lies in whether or not/how much you have an interest in the issue(s) at the heart of the story. And with its issues of disability I was bound to enjoy Handle With Care, right?

You'd have thought so, wouldn't you? And up to a point you'd have been correct. I tend to enjoy Jodi's books and had more than a passing interest in the issues but I would have enjoyed the book a lot more if it weren't for ...

• Mother, Charlotte and youngest daughter, Willow. Now whilst I've come to accept as a matter of fact that the chances are I won't like the mother figure at the heart of these books I was surprised at how little I cared for Willow. Of course I empathised with her BUT I'm afraid I found her character implausible. And more than that I thought how she was portrayed quite frankly nauseating. Something I could rant about ad infinitum but won't except to say that I hated that she was portrayed as so stoic, as so uncomplaining. Physically limited, yes, but when all is said and done an otherwise 'normal' five/six year old with surely all of the tantrums etc that go with being this age. 
• Not that I found Willow the only totally unrealistic character - thinking about it now whilst I didn't exactly like older daughter Amelia she was actually the only characters I found totally believable. Talk about unprofessional, how either of the two lawyers were still practising I'll never know.
• The ludicrousness of certain aspects of the plot and I quote 'Boys the same age were terrorizing the escalators, teaching each other how to ride their wheelchairs up and down them.' What? 
• The inclusion of the recipes. OK so Charlotte had been a pastry chef but I just didn't get the need for the inclusion of recipes. The cynical side of me wondering if this was just a nod towards the 'foodie' books that are so popular at the moment.
• The issues of abortion. Arguably it isn't part of a novel's job to debate the rights and wrongs of these issues but the exploration of such moral dilemmas is one of the things I enjoy most about Jodi's books. Somewhat lacking here I thought the 'debate' disappointingly one-sided. 

Still, all-in-all compulsive reading. If nothing else its always fascinating to compare the health/legal systems of the US and UK.

A LIBRARY CAN BE REPLACED BY AN E-READER AS MUCH AS .......

 Aggghhhh!

...... So, Terry Deary, author of the Horrible Histories books, thinks its a good idea to hand out free e-readers to the 'impoverished', that it would be a 'hell of a lot cheaper' than keeping libraries open. Libraries after all being places that must 'move with the times',that have to 'modify' in order to survive by becoming part of the electronic age.

I'm sorry Mr Deary but I can't help but wonder when was the last time you where in a library?

Living in an area with high levels of unemployment and one of the highest populations of elderly people in the north east of England, our library is open from nine 0' clock through to 5.00 (5.30 on a Friday) and as well as 'tree books'  has a wide range of audio books, DVD's and, yes Mr Deary, even digital books not to mention the use of computers, a selection of newspapers AND several readers groups, one of them offering a reading scheme for children.

So far from not keeping up with the times, the library offers something no e-reader can - a sense of community - just valuable to the 'impoverished' don't you think?

Not that, as the ARTICLE goes on to point out, the author is saying close all libraries. No, as he says (and I quote) 'If there's a problem of poor people - and I'm not picking on them particularly - having access to books, is there a better way of doing it than a library." 

Hmm, interesting.

For as Mark Taylor from the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals said (and I agree with him) .....

"A library can be replaced by an e-reader as much as a playground can be replaced by a PlayStation".

What thinks you?

Please note All original content on http://pettywitter.blogspot.co.uk/ is created by the website owner, including but not limited to text, design, code, images, photographs and videos are considered to be the Intellectual Property of the website owner, whether copyrighted or not, and are protected by DMCA Protection Services using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Title 17 Chapter 512 (c)(3). Reproduction or re-publication of this content is prohibited without permission.
In addition I would also urge that if you are reading this on any other page you contact the original blog owner/reviewer.

TWO OF MY CHILDHOOD PASTIMES RUINED.

Never a demanding child, the simplest of things pleased me (they still do), I never asked for a pony or the latest gadget, of which admittedly there weren't as many as there are today, as far as I can remember the only two things I ever really, really, really wanted were a Mr Frosty ice maker and (hint to husband dearest) a Cabbage Patch doll. 

Anyway, I digress ......

With no computers, no games consoles and (gasps) only three television channels ..... for goodness sake the BBC were only just beginning trials of their new colour service ..... we had to entertain ourselves and entertainment for me generally meant ........

Playing schools, Two Baller which was played by throwing, err, two balls against a wall
(generally the side wall of my grandparent's home) whilst singing a rhyme, Hopscotch and, of
course, my nightly routine of Bath > BED > BOOK.

Ah, those were the days, all squeaky clean, my (naughty) little sister and I would lie as snug as the proverbial bug in a rug awaiting the latest chapter of whatever book it was we were currently working our way through - I seem to remember Enid Blyton's Enchanted Wood books being amongst our favourites.

A shame to think that no longer might bedtime be a time for child and 'parent' to bond over a book, a tragedy to think that for future generations the role of 'parent' might become that of a pair of hi-tech 'smart pyjamas' that work with an app.

Yes, hard to believe I know BUT we now have nightwear that amongst other things will tell a bedtime story.

OK, so the video does show a family lying together happily at bedtime BUT, and call me a cynic if you wish, I don't for one minute believe this app is capable of recreating the magical awe of listening to your grandparent voice all of these different characters - I don't think I've ever heard anything as funny as my grandad voicing Dame Washalot), of him actually carrying pans upstairs in order to recreate the rattling that was the Saucepan Man.

Not done yet, my second rant concerns that other childhood favourite of mine, Hopscotch.

With childhood obesity becoming increasingly worrying, with many parents afraid to let their off-spring play outside, with claims that our youth spend too much time on-line/texting each other, shame on the police officers who allegedly told a 10 year old off for playing Hopscotch saying her chalked Hopscotch grid could constitute criminal damage and thus was against the law.

What says you?

Please note: All original content on http://pettywitter.blogspot.co.uk/ is created by the website owner, including but not limited to text, design, code, images, photographs and videos are considered to be the Intellectual Property of the website owner, whether copyrighted or not, and are protected by DMCA Protection Services using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Title 17 Chapter 512 (c)(3). Reproduction or re-publication of this content is prohibited without permission.
In addition I would also urge that if you are reading this on any other page you contact the original blog owner/reviewer.

ANY MORE HARMFUL THAN SCOOBY-DOO?

Having asked for the passcode to some electronic device or other, a five year old British boy ran up a huge, and I mean huge, bill when on playing a free game he stumbled across the games on-line store and managed to order dozens of costly add-ons.

Knowing nothing about this until she received a phone call from her credit card company querying the payments the boy's 44 year old mother explained ......  

"'D' was pestering us to let him have a go on the iPad. He kept saying it was a free game so my husband put in the passcode and handed it to him.

“It worried me when he asked for the password but I had a look at the game it said it was free so I didn’t think there would be a problem."

Disgusted that a child could have innocently run up such a huge bill? Of course I am even though I don't understand how he did so, wouldn't he have needed his parents debit/credit card details? BUT what worries me even more is the fact that, left alone with the device while his parents entertained friends, he was allowed to play a game with the title Zombies v Ninja, the object being to ....

 Survive as long as you can and defend yourself against hordes of zombies.

Hmm, perhaps not the best of games for a 5 year old.

Then again .......

Not a game I'm familiar with, more interactive for certain, BUT is it any more harmful than the Scooby-Doo cartoons I watched as a girl?

Maybes not but as my mam pointed out She always knew just what I was watching  which was probably true as like most children at that time (the late 1960s/early '70s) there was only 1 television in the house (I didn't get my own until I was 12, maybe even 13) with only 3 channels which people tended to sit down and watch as a family and as for home computers and the like? Well, they were merely the stuff of science-fiction.

What thinks you?

Disclaimer #1 :Removal of any part of this post without my express consent is considered copyright infringement. This post was created by and for Petty Witter @ Pen and Paper. If you are reading this post on any other site please contact the original blog owner/reviewer.

HAND ME THE CHOCOLATE AND NO ONE GETS HURT.

Having heard several of my friends comment on their various children having had playground meltdowns got me thinking that surely I wasn't the only adult who would love to throw a full-blown fall-to-the-ground-kicking-and-screaming tantrum every now and then. 

Embarrassing? Yes and especially for the parent BUT surely, less socially acceptable as it might be, in many ways it has to be healthier than the adult who reaches for the cigarette, the glass of wine or, like me, the bar of chocolate.

What thinks you?

Coincidently it isn't only my friends children who are having meltdowns. It seems Blogger is doing the same. Having stopped by several of your blogs this morning, on leaving a comment I got a message saying an error had occurred only to discover that my comment was then published again and again and again ...... 15 times in one instance. My apologies if my comments keep multiplying on your blog.

PS I can't believe I've just admitted to Naida (aka The Bookworm) that Paddington Bear could be my literary Valentine, what was I thinking? Ok, so he is soft and very cuddly, lives at home so there won't be any washing his dirty socks, AND he is usually to be found with a sandwich but still ...... my literary Valentine?

Disclaimer #1 :Removal of any part of this post without my express consent is considered copyright infringement. This post was created by and for Petty Witter @ Pen and Paper. If you are reading this post on any other site please contact the original blog owner/reviewer.

A BLOGGER WITH A MISSION - I URGE YOU TO READ THIS AND CONSIDER REPOSTING IT.

Never before has the blogosphere caused me to feel so angry and upset, so outraged and powerless ....... I can only imagine how Naida, a good blogger buddy of mine, must have felt when she discovered that someone had been stealing not only her blog posts, but her reviews, her memes and, worst of all,  her personal images and passing them off as their own as far back as 2010.

Not naive enough that I didn't realise that copyright theft went on I didn't however realise that anyone could be so blatant as to basically replicate someones posts like this in what Naida explains is known as SCRAPING.

So, how can we even begin to predict our blogs which after all, for many of us, are a labour of love.

Naida suggests the following steps you might like to take, the following sites you might like to visit......

• Add a disclaimer to the end of your blog posts. I've seen several bloggers (Naida for one) now include something along the lines of this .... Disclaimer:Removal of any part of this post without my express consent is considered copyright infringement. This post was created by and for (add your blog title here). If you are reading this post on any other site please contact the original blog owner/reviewer.

• Consider installing a script so there is no right click or text hi-lighting. (Advice available from Nadia HERE OR I'm reliably informed that if you use the Blogger platform you can disable text selection from your blog by manually installing the following Javascript from BLOGGER TIPS AND TRICKS though as I haven't as yet tried this myself I cannot confirm. PW) 

• Report Scraper pages to Google - more information HERE.

• If you are on blogger:

1. Sign up for GOOGLE WEBMASTER TOOLS. It's a free service that will show in detail who is linking to your blog and where your blog traffic is coming from.
2. Sign up for GOOGLE ALERTS. Enter some key words from your blog posts, maybe your disclaimer at the end of your postor enter your blog title post. Google will let you know if this key phrase is being used elsewhere.

• Register your site at CREATIVE COMMENTS , it's free. (You might also consider MYFREECOPYRIGHT which I also use at no cost. PW)

• Consider visiting the following sites:
• STOP INTERNET PLAGIARISM
• HOW TO MAKE YOUR WEBSITE HACKER PROOF
• PLAGIARISM: HOW TO DEAL WITH A THIEF
• CONTENT SCRAPERS: HOW TO FIND OUT WHO IS STEALING YOUR CONTENT & WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT
• THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE TO BLOG CONTENT SCRAPING & HOW TO STOP IT
• HOW TO PROTECT YOUR BLOG FROM CONTENT SCRAPERS
• THE BEGINNERS GUIDE TO PREVENTING BLOG CONTENT SCRAPING IN WORDPRESS

THANKS, BUT I REALLY DON'T WANT OR NEED VIAGRA.

Yeah, yeah, I know exactly what I did. Here was I posting about tolerance when I was feeling anything but tolerant towards those ......

(A)  Spammers who left me with no option other than to turn back on word verification ....... I neither need nor want viagra or any of the other various pills and potions you seem to think I'm in need of, a penis enlargement, a bust reduction, etc, etc.

(B) My very own mother who, having talked of nothing but 'C' since the back end of October, now feels the need to remind me every day that, not only has she finished her 'C' shopping but she has every last present wrapped. The reason I'm not full of the Christmas spirit mam is because it isn't Christmas.

Not that I can say a lot here for legal reasons but......

(C) The company who did such a terrific job of installing our boiler that we have been left without any hot water or heating for the last four months. Do they really think it is acceptable that a woman who needs crutches to get about is safe to carry boiling kettles of water.

Ah, that feels better, rant over, how are you today?

SMALLEST BOOK, EDITED BOOK, FREAKS, SWINDLERS, ECCENTRICS AND MORE.

This is the world's smallest book - smaller than a pinhead but set to last more than a million years.

Boffins set the new world record with the scaled-down version of Malcolm Douglas Chaplin's Teeny Ted From Tulip Town.

The nano book - which has to be read using a microscope - measures a mere 0.07mm by 0.10mm. 

Valued at £10,000, it's kept in a tiny box in a bank vault. More

A 200 year old book illustrating 'freaks, swindlers, murderers, and eccentrics', such as an Irish Giant, a Hairy Girl and a Wild Boy (pictured right), has been discovered.

Entitled The New Wonderful Museum and Extraordinary Magazine, the book is a complete listing of all the ‘wonders, curiosities and rarities of nature’ known to man in 1808 in this Georgian-type freak show display, its pages filled with images and descriptions of a variety of society's outcasts. More



"The stump of a pipe he held tight in his teeth,
And the smoke it encircled his head like a wreath"

A children's book publisher has outraged the American literary community (and me) by editing the 18th century poem ''A Visit from St. Nicholas' - which is better known by its first line, 'Twas the Night Before Christmas' - by omitting any mention or image of Santa puffing on a smoking pipe.

Canadian publisher Pamela McColl changed the poem, which was written in 1823 by the late American professor Clement Clarke Moore, to 'save lives and avoid influencing new smokers,' she claimed on her website. 

McColl's version also clips the classic illustration of Santa holding a pipe between his teeth. The edited the poem is printed in a book that McColl published through her own publishing company.

The American Library Association has cried foul, saying the changes amount to 'an act of censorship that denies the audience access to the author's authentic voice.' More

Simon Callow is acclaimed as one of Britain's finest Shakespearean actors, but he's gone from Bard to barking by narrating the world's first bedtime story for dogs.

Called Teddy And Stanley's Tall Tale, the book has been scientifically developed to relax canines on and after Bonfire Night (5th November) by minimising the stress caused by fireworks. More

Books which portray ‘traditional’ images of mothers caring for their children or fathers going out to work could be barred from schools under proposals from Brussels.

An EU report claims that ‘gender stereotyping’ in schools influences the perception of the way boys and girls should behave and damages women’s career opportunities in the future.

Critics said the proposals for ‘study materials’ to be amended so that men and women are no longer depicted in their traditional roles would mean the withdrawal of children’s classics, such as Enid Blyton’s The Famous Five series, Paddington Bear or Peter Pan. More


Remember my mentioning Wearside Women In Need who planned to burn copies of 50 Shades Of Grey on Bonfire Night (5th November)? Well, more recently spokesperson Clare Phillipson had this to say .... 

"There were a range options.

"We discussed the book burning while getting the message across that this book is a dangerous trend.

"I think we've got a culture now which has completely sexualised women and in which women feel obligated to take part in that culture. We want to draw a line under that.

"We will be cutting them up, using them for toilet roll and sticking them on our compost heap and they will go back into the ground... although the ideas they represent will continue." More

Dennis Wilson, a World War Two veteran who wrote poetry during lulls in fighting on the front line has secured a publishing deal at the age of 91.

The then 22-year-old soldier wrote about the horror of war and the life-changing injuries he sustained during enemy action in Normandy. Ripping pages from his Field Service Pocket Book, he sent copies home to his mother in Southampton, Hampshire, so his work would survive if he died in battle.

Now Dennis has finally made it into print with his book, Elegy of a Common Soldier, after a researcher at Goldsmiths College, University of London, read his collection of 125 poems. More

And finally .....

Who would have thought it .... a book I read and reviewed way back in May has become an e-book literary session.

Hilary Boyd's Thursdays In The Park (see my review HERE), the  romantic tale of a sixty something woman who meets the man of her dreams while looking after her grandchildren, has now topped the charts for four weeks, outselling noted thriller writer Ken Follett and Fifty Shades Of Grey author EL James. More

BANNED: GREEN EGGS AND HAM.

As you may have noticed it's Banned Book Week and I'm delighted to be joining Book Journey's Sheila (our hostess with the mostest) along with lots of other bloggers who are also participating in Jump On The Banned Wagon.

To join in the event of seven days of books, reviews, and many giveaways be sure to stop by HERE at Sheila's site.

Running this year from the 30th of September through to the 6th of October, BBW started in America in 1982 as a response to the sudden surge in the number of challenges to books in American schools and libraries since when more than 11,300 books have been challenged, the top 10 of last year (according to the official BBW site) being ......

1. ttyl; ttfn; l8r, g8r (series), by Lauren Myracle
   Reasons: offensive language; religious viewpoint; sexually explicit; unsuited to age group
2. The Color of Earth (series), by Kim Dong Hwa
   Reasons: nudity; sex education; sexually explicit; unsuited to age group
3. The Hunger Games trilogy, by Suzanne Collins
   Reasons: anti-ethnic; anti-family; insensitivity; offensive language; occult/satanic; violence
4. My Mom's Having A Baby! A Kid's Month-by-Month Guide to Pregnancy, by Dori Hillestad Butler
   Reasons: nudity; sex education; sexually explicit; unsuited to age group
5. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, by Sherman Alexie
   Reasons: offensive language; racism; religious viewpoint; sexually explicit; unsuited to age group
6. Alice (series), by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor
   Reasons: nudity; offensive language; religious viewpoint
7. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
   Reasons: insensitivity; nudity; racism; religious viewpoint; sexually explicit
8. What My Mother Doesn't Know, by Sonya Sones
   Reasons: nudity; offensive language; sexually explicit
9. Gossip Girl (series), by Cecily Von Ziegesar
   Reasons: drugs; offensive language; sexually explicit
10. To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee
    Reasons: offensive language; racism

Anyway, onto just one of the many, many books to be banned at some point in time.

Please be aware that this is not my usual book review and though it is not overly adult in content it may be moreso than many previous posts.

GREEN EGGS AND HAM by DR SEUSS. 

Picked not least of all because it's a book I, along with the now grown-up Niece #1 and nephew, have read and enjoyed countless number of times (without any of us actually having picked up on any sexual innuendo) I also think its a perfect example of just how silly the censoring of books can be.

One of the most popular writers of children's books, since 1936 when he developed the idea for his first book Dr Seuss has charmed his way into the lives of four generations of children and parents alike - in the process of doing so helping many kids learn to read. Hard to believe that his 1965 novel, Green Eggs and Ham was banned (albeit temporarily) in the People's Republic of China as well as more recently in California.

A book about a character called about Sam-I-Am who makes it his mission in life to get a somewhat grouchy unnamed individual to eat a plate of green eggs and ham, it was banned between 1965 up until the authors death in 1991 in the People's Republic of China because of its 'portrayal of early Marxism and in California because of it containing what was deemed as homosexual innuendo and seduction.

Yes, that's right ...... homosexual innuendo and seduction  - was I reading the same book?

For goodness sake, I think its fair to say that most of us stopped sniggering (if indeed we ever did) about a sausage looking like a penis a long, long time ago and yet it would seem that, far from giggling like primary school aged school boys, (if what we read is to be believed) someone in California deemed it fit to ban this book because .......

• Sam tries to convince his friend to 'eat' the green eggs and ham - the ham of course representing a sausage, the sausage of course being a phallic symbol.
• Several of the lines (Would you, could you, on a boat'/would you, could you, with a goat) were said to suggest 'sexual locations'. 

Oh please!

Read purely innocently by hundreds, thousands, millions(?) of children and adults alike across the globe I can't begin to wonder what kind of mindset these people had to come up with the notion that Sam, in trying to convince his friend to eat the ham (aka the 'sausage, aka the penis), was encouraging his friend to engage in certain sexual acts and that 'with a goat' obviously put the thought of sex with animals into the head of the books mainly pre-school-aged readers.

And, what's more ......

Would I be the only one who had concerns about the pre-school child (the age range at which the book is aimed) who, having heard the story, drew the conclusion that far from being a story about a young boy trying to get his friend to try a new foodstuff this was a story full of sexual connotations?

Not that Green Eggs And Ham with its secret messages that corrupt the minds of innocents is the only one of Dr Seuss's books to be banned - The Lorax (anti big business), The Sneetches (issues surrounding racial equality)  How The Grinch Stole Christmas (issues surrounding consumerism), Horton Hears A Who (a story about an obviously gay elephant) have all also been banned at one time or another

Sources: Bannedbooksweek.org, Wikipedia, OPPapers.com, mudmap.

PS For those of you wondering where my Media Monday post is, worry not, I shall be posting it tomorrow.