Scan barcode
celtic_oracle's review
4.0
Wow, I forgot how much I loved this book as a kid until I read it to Mini-Me. And she seems to love it too.
glomdi's review
5.0
I remember this book from so long ago when I was little. This used to be one of my favorite books, as was any with these fun little bears. I think this spooked me a little, but it was a while ago so I may be mistaken. I was only like two when I was read this the first time and I would beg my mom to read it to me more until I could read it myself.
the_enobee's review
5.0
This was the first book I read myself, and I was 4. I think it was mostly that I had the entire story memorized because it was a favorite. But I still remember lying there one morning reading to myself and my mom walking in all excited because I was reading.
Spooky old tree was the genesis of my life-long love of the scary story. It was a total departure for Stan and Jan, but this is a revered classic in my family that has touched three generations.
Spooky old tree was the genesis of my life-long love of the scary story. It was a total departure for Stan and Jan, but this is a revered classic in my family that has touched three generations.
beyondevak's review
4.0
Great book for early readers. Liked the simplicity and word building + repetition.
mnstucki's review
3.0
Cute little spooky story with a good rhythm. Perfect for a Halloween read-aloud.
bkoser's review
2.0
One characteristic of great art is that you can engage with it over and over and continue to glean new meaning. This principle is born out in the acclaimed 20th century classic, "The Spooky Old Tree".
On the first few reads, I thought it was a straightforward tale of children running through a spooky sub-arboreal mansion filled with spiders and alligators, then climbing over a giant nude vagrant bear before sliding down an exit slide and sprinting home.
However, some things didn't add up. Why does the mother smile as she watches her children leave and return? Would she really let her children run around the neighborhood in the middle of the night? Especially when they live within walking distance of an abandoned death-trap house? Why did the original owner of the mansion build it underneath a tree, whether or not it was old or spooky at the time? I assume it's abandoned because the owner died, but why did the executors of the estate not remove the paintings or the suits of armor? Why are there so many nude animals? Are they dumb beasts or just very comfortable? Do the bear-shaped suits of armor mean there was a bear medieval age? Why are there no books about bear knights wearing bear armor living in bear castles? Is Great Sleeping Bear a squatter? Why is he called "Great Sleeping Bear"? Is "sleeping" really a significant enough character trait to be his middle name? Is he actually a nudist, or does he just sleep in the nude? Why are second-story exit slides not a standard house feature?
The answer, of course, is that it isn't really happening. I know surrealism when I see it, and this is obviously a narrative about a struggle through the Oedipus complex by children in shared custody.
The single mother bear lives with her children in a "tree", signifying the low-income housing she can afford on her monthly alimony check and part-time job at the local honey store. At the beginning of the story, the children leave for their every-other-weekend visit to their father. They leave at night (depression), passing through a creepy forest (resentment) before arriving at "the spooky old tree" (apparently dad isn't earning much more than mom). The three children (id, ego, and superego) carry a light (search for answers, carried by the superego), a stick (aggression, carried by the id), and a rope (both attachment and restriction, carried by the ego). They make their way through various haunted house staples (mental objections to their father), and lose their accoutrements one by one until they come face-to-face with Great Sleeping Bear, without design or pretense. Unable to interact with their father on a meaningful level, they seek only to escape, but are unable to avoid a violent confrontation and a quick departure. The story ends as the mother welcomes the children back, outwardly cheerful but inwardly torn by the children's inability to progress in their paternal relationship.
This interpretation answers many questions, but of course we are left to struggle thematically with the ambiguity inherent in great art. Was the separation caused by financial struggles (statistically probable) or perhaps the parents failure to communicate (neither parent is shown speaking)? Will the children ever break the cycle of resentment and fear? Is the interpretation as a literal family even valid, or is it just a comment on the modern state of the family unit in our postmodern Western world?
In summary: the art is fine, the prose is mostly okay, but probably too thematically dark and complex for children.
On the first few reads, I thought it was a straightforward tale of children running through a spooky sub-arboreal mansion filled with spiders and alligators, then climbing over a giant nude vagrant bear before sliding down an exit slide and sprinting home.
However, some things didn't add up. Why does the mother smile as she watches her children leave and return? Would she really let her children run around the neighborhood in the middle of the night? Especially when they live within walking distance of an abandoned death-trap house? Why did the original owner of the mansion build it underneath a tree, whether or not it was old or spooky at the time? I assume it's abandoned because the owner died, but why did the executors of the estate not remove the paintings or the suits of armor? Why are there so many nude animals? Are they dumb beasts or just very comfortable? Do the bear-shaped suits of armor mean there was a bear medieval age? Why are there no books about bear knights wearing bear armor living in bear castles? Is Great Sleeping Bear a squatter? Why is he called "Great Sleeping Bear"? Is "sleeping" really a significant enough character trait to be his middle name? Is he actually a nudist, or does he just sleep in the nude? Why are second-story exit slides not a standard house feature?
The answer, of course, is that it isn't really happening. I know surrealism when I see it, and this is obviously a narrative about a struggle through the Oedipus complex by children in shared custody.
The single mother bear lives with her children in a "tree", signifying the low-income housing she can afford on her monthly alimony check and part-time job at the local honey store. At the beginning of the story, the children leave for their every-other-weekend visit to their father. They leave at night (depression), passing through a creepy forest (resentment) before arriving at "the spooky old tree" (apparently dad isn't earning much more than mom). The three children (id, ego, and superego) carry a light (search for answers, carried by the superego), a stick (aggression, carried by the id), and a rope (both attachment and restriction, carried by the ego). They make their way through various haunted house staples (mental objections to their father), and lose their accoutrements one by one until they come face-to-face with Great Sleeping Bear, without design or pretense. Unable to interact with their father on a meaningful level, they seek only to escape, but are unable to avoid a violent confrontation and a quick departure. The story ends as the mother welcomes the children back, outwardly cheerful but inwardly torn by the children's inability to progress in their paternal relationship.
This interpretation answers many questions, but of course we are left to struggle thematically with the ambiguity inherent in great art. Was the separation caused by financial struggles (statistically probable) or perhaps the parents failure to communicate (neither parent is shown speaking)? Will the children ever break the cycle of resentment and fear? Is the interpretation as a literal family even valid, or is it just a comment on the modern state of the family unit in our postmodern Western world?
In summary: the art is fine, the prose is mostly okay, but probably too thematically dark and complex for children.
vikingwolf's review
3.0
This book is very much in the tradition of Bears in the Night, aimed at the very youngest readers. Three adventurous bears decide to go inside the spooky old tree to have a very scary adventure.
beingshort's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
simkern's review
5.0
The Spooky Old Tree is THE quintessential text of twentieth-century children’s horror. Truly, it is one of the most gripping adventure stories of our time. Do the Berenstain bears explore the depths of a spooky old tree or their own psyche? How does so much spooky stuff fit inside one tree? These are questions you’ll be left wondering through the ten thousand readings your child will demand from you.
outlander's review
adventurous
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0