Elephants Books

My two year old son loves the pictures in this book, especially the giant blue whale and the tan camels. But don't take it too seriously as an introduction to mixing color. Babar may be king of the elephants but as a color theorist, he's a lightweight. Babar tells us that mixing the three primary colors makes black. Then, a few pages later, he tells us that to make brown you have to mix the three primary colors PLUS black. What? But I thought... Also strange--the "what will you paint with white?" illustration done in ice blue and every color BUT white. The problem isn't the contradictions but the fact that De Brunhoff sets himself up with the difficult task of bridging color theory, practice, and artistic convention in less than 30 pages. In a children's book! But kids will probably like the bright, clean illustrations. Also odd (in a non-color mixing way)--the page where Flora, Babar's elephant daughter, paints a herd of ten naked elephants.

"The study of comparative religions is the best way to become comparatively religious." Ronald Knox

There is an old Hindu folk tale about blind men and an elephant. Popularized in verse by John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887), it is a parable about Man's understanding of, and relationship with, the transcendent. Six blind men went to see an elephant. Each touched the elephant in a different place, one the trunk, one his tusks, one his side, one his back, and so on. Since each sensed the elephant in a different way, they argued amongst one another about who described the elephant correctly. Yet, none was right, since none could really see the elephant for what he was. The blind men represent the religions of the world, who constantly fight and argue amongst themselves over who gets God "right", when none has the whole picture, and all just have little pieces of the big picture.

Is this an apt metaphor for religion? Are the different religions simply the variations and manifestations of Man's search for God, the ultimate, and the transcendent; all equally apt, though ultimately inadequate, means of seeking God? The vindicated secularist in us, and the open-minded religious pluralist in us, is ready to say, "of course." The orthodox Jew is us, and the traditional Christian in us, is ready to say, "those other religions may be `blind men', but not we. We have the Truth." Yet, there is a profound truth in this elephant tale. Blindness is a metaphor that takes us back to the Christian Scriptures, where Jesus heals the blind man. The authorities are troubled, since Jesus performed his healing, "worked," on the Sabbath, the day of rest. Jesus heals one man's physical blindness, but it was never that man who was really blind. He had faith. The men who are blind are the authorities who cannot look past their own preconceptions and expectations of God to recognize that the duty to honor the Sabbath is really about making time for God, and does not preclude helping others. Physical blindness as a metaphor for spiritual blindness has deeply embedded Scriptural roots. Maybe there is something to this Eastern myth.

The Elephant Tale is right. We are all, in many ways, spiritually blind, spiritually impoverished. Yet, how did we get this way? Is there a way out of the darkness and into the light? This story of blind men and an elephant is a good start, but needs to be expanded, and further delved into. Maybe what is needed is an extension of John Godfrey Saxe's poem. Let us continue from Saxe's final stanza, with free story rather than verse, as I do not bear the talents of Saxe.

...The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an elephant
Not one of them has seen!

Papa, the men of the world are blind. They no longer can see the elephant. They search for him, but do not find. They feel him, but are constantly at odds. Why is this so? Was this always so?

My child, this is a story of long, long ago. Of a time when all men were blind. This is no longer so.

Papa, we are blind! I feel the elephant. He is solid ivory. But, Krishna feels the elephant as long and rollicky!

Child, we are not yet ready to speak of the cure for our blindness, the light to be lived. It is a light that men of old had originally seen. Men were not always blind. It was not always this way. Men did not always "prate about an elephant not one of them has seen!"

In the beginning, the elephant raised his trunk, stomped his feet, and breathed life into men. Men could see the elephant. Men loved the elephant, the giver of life. Men touched the elephant. All men could see that the elephant is like a wall, and a spear, and a snake, a tree, a fan, and a rope. Man could see the elephant, and man was happy.

What happened, Papa!?

The elephant had raised his trunk and breathed life into men so that men would be happy seeing and feeling the elephant. One day, on a day like all others, men, who had been satisfied to see and touch the elephant, with no inclination towards disobedience, decided that it was not enough to see and touch the elephant. Men wished to be elephants, themselves. Then they would know what it would be like to have tusks, a trunk, and ivory skin. They would not need the elephant to experience the elephant feel.

Papa, did the men become like elephants? Did they become the source of their own ivory feeling?

No, my child! Far from it. Not only did men not become elephants, they lost the vision of the elephant. Because man lost his appreciation, reverence, respect, and love of the elephant, he became blind. Men could now no longer see the elephant. This is why men during the following era prated "about an elephant not one of them has seen!"

Why did the elephant not give men back their sight, Papa? Why must the elephant punish the men like this? I thought the elephant loves the men, Papa?

He does love the men, my child. He is not punishing men. Men have chosen to bring blindness upon themselves and their descendents by not seeing the elephant as the elephant. If the elephant simply restores their sight, they still will not see, since they have chosen to hide themselves from the true vision of the elephant. Even if they did see, they may choose to disobey again. How many times should the elephant keep restoring sight, my child?

You are wise Papa. This saddens me. Are men doomed to blindness, to never seeing the elephant again? There must be more.

There is much more, my child. Men were trapped in blindness for ages. The men would come upon the elephant, and each feeling about blindly, argue with each other about the elephant unseen.

This happened every day. The men would visit the elephant, sense about, and prattle on needlessly. Then, on a day like all other days, something changed. The elephant raised his trunk, and roared to one of the men. This one man did not have his vision completely restored. He had inherited the vicissitudes of his ancestors. But, he was given a partial vision of the elephant. As the chosen man, he was destined to teach the men of the world about the elephant. He would suffer cruelties and beatings. Men would continue to mock him, and reject his message.

Why, oh why, Papa? This pains my heart to hear of his sufferings. Why would men do this to this man of the elephant?

Men were blind, my child. They knew not what they were doing. But, fear not. Light would be returned to men. Out of the house of this man of the elephant would be born One who is not blind. This Man, who was with the elephant, who was the elephant, became flesh, became man, so that men could see.

As the men of long ago had lost sight, this Man had sight from the beginning. This Man, the Incarnation of the elephant, was sent to reveal, to be the revelation of, the elephant. He walked amongst the blind men arguing about the elephant. He healed their wounds. He consoled their hurts.

Men did not embrace this Man. Instead, they took this Man who could see, they accosted Him, and they blinded Him. They took away his sight.

Papa, it appears hopeless. All is lost. If even this Man the men would not accept, all hope is lost.

Be not afraid! Blindness does not have the final word, my child. Men had brought blindness into the world. By embracing this blindness, by allowing blindness to come to Him in all its might, this Man took away the power of blindness over men.

On the third day, this Man, who had been blinded, returned in all His glory, with full vision and sight and of the elephant. Because of this Man, men now have sight regained. No, this sight did not come all at once, and many are still blind. In the end, when all will be all in the elephant, the blind will see.

. . . a remnant from my childhood when Scarlet Fever was really scary and my siblings were 'farmed out' to various parishioners. My mother was my nurse until she became very seriously ill herself, and then we both had the care of a strict, old-fashioned nurse. I can't have been restful company during our shared recuperation, forever asking to be read to.

"The Blue Elephant & Pink Pig" was a gift that provided distraction. Marion McNeil's ten stories were published with a cheery cover by "Francoise" who illustrated in French nursery-style with bold child-like coloring. The Elephant was blue because of the Pig's one-ups-man-ship. The animals did not fare as well as the humans! However, most of the stories had 'nicer' morals; none were what you would call 'riveting.'

Like so many storybooks of childhood the illustrations seem to leave a longer-lasting impression - - except for books of poetry, with some poems imprinted on the mind forever from so many recitations. Reviewer mcHAIKU feels somewhat stingy with "stars" considering how precious the book was to me at age 5!

These are cute books which my son (14 months) loves to see and play with. The tape holding the wooden pages together, however, needs serious work. We are now using strapping tape to keep our books (we have three of these) in one piece. That was a bit disappointing.

When reading a religious book, I always ask myself this question: Is the book progressive or is the book archaic? Unfortunately, I find a lot of religious books to be the latter. I am tired of the whole world taking the Bible literally as I think this is a very dangerous thing. You cannot base your outlook on a book that was written two thousand years ago by quintessentially a bunch of men. You may argue that it is God's word that is written in the Bible, and to a certain extent it is. However, a lot of it is merely man's interpretation of God's word -- and this, as I said before, is a very dangerous thing. It's what gets women stoned for having children out of wedlock and when taken to the extreme, it can result in fascism.

Having said this, I like to think that I have an open mind and do not dismiss the religious view outright. I believe that if someone is so passionate (Charles Elephant's passion is extremely evident in this book) about their beliefs, and they have taken the trouble to put their passion down on paper, then I am obliged to read and see for myself if their interpretation of God's word is acceptable in modern society.

Echoes of Heaven is a well-written book and does present some interesting theories. Charles Elephant does not, for the most part, seem to be judging other people. Rather, it seems he would like to see the rest of the world rely on spiritual guidance as he has come to do. Yet, he does not seem to condemn those who have not taken the steps that he has. This is progressive. Also, he seems to embrace all other religions instead of claiming that his own religion is superior. Again, I would conclude that this is progressive.

Elephant also talks about the furore over The Da Vinci Code and refers to how some people have stated that if Jesus had a family, this somehow lessens his divinity. Elephant states that he does not agree with this. Yet again, I have to admit that this is progressive. However, there are few statements that I object to. He quotes Proverbs in detailing the qualities that a prudent wife should have. An example of one of these qualities is: "She keeps herself busy making wool and linen cloth." This example does not stand up in the modern world. In another passage, he talks about the qualities that he would expect from a wife; one of them is that she should be obedient. I think the term "obedient" should not be used. A healthy marriage or a loving partnership in the modern world does not ask for obedience by either spouse. I would hesitate to use such a word with even a child. These sentiments I find archaic.

In conclusion, I believe Charles Elephant is a good man struggling to be the best that he can be, and this is an admirable quality -- one that all of us should aspire to. Echoes of Heaven is a thought-provoking and interesting book. I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in religious theory and theology. However, I probably would not recommend it to militant feminists as some of the text might upset them just a little.

Hello, I'm StoryMaker. I've loved the JumpStart software since I was in Kindergarten. I learned about the JumpStart Workbooks and Readers in, oh, 2nd Grade or so. Despite my age, I bought Eleanor's Enormous Ears, a JumpStart Pre-K Reader.

In this book, and I quote, "Eleanor the elephant and Casey the cat were playing a game with a ball and a bat". As the wind whooshes by, Eleanor's ears flop over her face. Casey, finding this phenomenon very amusing (don't worry, the part that's not in the quotation marks isn't a quote!), starts to express his amusement by chuckling to himself. Eleanor is disgusted, and begins trying to cover up those embarrassing, floppy ears. In the end, Eleanor discovers that her ears serve an important purpose.

This book, intended to teach & exercise early reading skills, contains those lovable characters from the JumpStart software & workbooks. It also introduces youngsters to rebus reading (reading pictures). However, proceed with caution; the words aren't THAT easy. I mean, they use "elephant" - might not be the best for beginners. Of course, since this has rebus reading in it, some of the words are replaced with pictures - but some hard words still remain, unfortunately. This might be a good read-aloud to breed familiarity with a few words, but not as a child's first book - if you want something REALLY easy, try Bob Books instead.

As an older kid, I didn't love this book, though the story was fine considering my love of JumpStart characters. I think that they glorify Eleanor too much, but big deal! A million books and TV shows for little kids glorify certain characters too much. Gotta live with it, can't be a critic. After all, my keen, JumpStart-loving imagination can make up different stories and parodies to make up for it.

Overall, I'd say that this might be a good read-aloud to a 4-6 year old to strengthen reading skills. Please DO NOT shove it into a 3 year old's hands and suspect them to read it without yelling "Mommy! I can't read this word!" about 1,000 times. For that, try Bob Books. Oh, and, check out the JumpStart software & workbooks, too! Signed, StoryMaker. "Gotta trust the kid's review!"

This is a pretty interesting father/son story, told over the course of 40 years or so by the son. Set in Bradford (a formerly industrial city in Yorkshire), it all revolves around the son's attempt to grapple with his father's nature: which is that of a boozing, womanizing, fun-loving, extrovert, life-of-the-party, war hero, scoundrel, con-man. In a sense, he never escapes his father's shadow, with many of the same failings. None of this is all that fascinating in and of itself, however, Rayner keeps it popping along at a good rate as he switches back and forth in time, bringing up episodes from the past in cracking language. It's engaging and definitely likely to be more of interest to fathers and sons.

My two year old loves this book even though it's very basic. It's more entertaining than factual, however. There are references to elephant's friends, hippo and rhino, as if they frolic together. But for an elephant lover, it has some nice illustrations to look at.

Although it gives a nice view of historical Oxford ( as a University town in the late 1800's) life, the preteen girl seems to be encouraged to act out anger. This kind of behavior isn't well received in any age.
On the opposite the woman's right movement activity of young and
older women in public affairs in the case of Jumbo the elephant
is important in English history. Women in Spain or Italy
of the same period would probably have not been allowed
such protests.

Surprisingly, chapter 9, fungal foot fetaba is absent from my copy. Also, does not delve enough into corns or "Elephant's circus feet".