Scan barcode
michellewatson's reviews
216 reviews
Mama Bear Apologetics(r): Empowering Your Kids to Challenge Cultural Lies by Hillary Morgan Ferrer
challenging
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
Fancy review here: https://bookdevotions.com/book-reviews-may-2022/
Every Christian mom should at least TRY to read this book. It’s apologetics-made-easier for moms who need help putting into words what they know to be true about the gospel and how our culture is tearing it down.
We can see what’s going on around us, but we can’t quite put verbiage to it. Our kids ask us questions, and words bubble out of us, but it’s not what we meant to say at all. Did we do more harm than good? Why don’t we have ready answers?! If you feel this way, this book will help you!
Now, this is apologetics made “easier.” Not “made easy.” This book does assume solid grounding in scripture and knowledge of what’s going on in culture. You don’t finish a chapter and say, “Now I understand!” Instead, you say, “Now I’m starting to understand.”
Each chapter follows a specific structure, and there are discussion questions at the end if you’re reading with a group of moms. There’s also a guided prayer to close out each chapter. So, this book is designed to be read in community with other moms, and I like that.
Part 1 of the book provides an overview of the problem (moral/spiritual confusion and kids leaving the faith). And it paints the solution in broad strokes (teaching our kids how to practice discernment—and, um, how to practice it ourselves).
Part 2 tackles 11 popular beliefs, such as skepticism, postmodernism, moral relativism, Marxism, feminism, and progressive Christianity. It points out what’s good about these beliefs/worldviews, and then it points out what does not align with scripture.
The back matter includes tons of notes and titles for further reading.
Honestly, what a gift these women have given to us. And the primary author, Hillary Morgan Ferrer, hasn’t ever given birth or raised a child, yet she’s done the great work of a spiritual mother in offering us this resource.
Every Christian mom should at least TRY to read this book. It’s apologetics-made-easier for moms who need help putting into words what they know to be true about the gospel and how our culture is tearing it down.
We can see what’s going on around us, but we can’t quite put verbiage to it. Our kids ask us questions, and words bubble out of us, but it’s not what we meant to say at all. Did we do more harm than good? Why don’t we have ready answers?! If you feel this way, this book will help you!
Now, this is apologetics made “easier.” Not “made easy.” This book does assume solid grounding in scripture and knowledge of what’s going on in culture. You don’t finish a chapter and say, “Now I understand!” Instead, you say, “Now I’m starting to understand.”
Each chapter follows a specific structure, and there are discussion questions at the end if you’re reading with a group of moms. There’s also a guided prayer to close out each chapter. So, this book is designed to be read in community with other moms, and I like that.
Part 1 of the book provides an overview of the problem (moral/spiritual confusion and kids leaving the faith). And it paints the solution in broad strokes (teaching our kids how to practice discernment—and, um, how to practice it ourselves).
Part 2 tackles 11 popular beliefs, such as skepticism, postmodernism, moral relativism, Marxism, feminism, and progressive Christianity. It points out what’s good about these beliefs/worldviews, and then it points out what does not align with scripture.
The back matter includes tons of notes and titles for further reading.
Honestly, what a gift these women have given to us. And the primary author, Hillary Morgan Ferrer, hasn’t ever given birth or raised a child, yet she’s done the great work of a spiritual mother in offering us this resource.
Mansfield Park by Jane Austen
emotional
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
Fancy review: https://bookdevotions.com/book-review...
It’s been so long since I’ve read Mansfield Park that it might as well be the first time. Even though this is NOT my favorite Austen novel, I DID really appreciate it this time around. One of the big reasons why is because I listened to Angelina Stanford’s deep dive of Mansfield Park on the Literary Life podcast, and it set a great tone for my reread.
Fanny Price is NOT Austen’s most beloved heroine. She reminds me of how Dickens wrote Esther Summerson in Bleak House—as a purehearted, good-as-gold girl who has zero (and I mean ZERO) self-esteem. But far from being downtrodden or resentful, she’s all gratitude and deference. She cheerfully goes about her day, getting bossed around, overlooked, and mildly ridiculed. Yet, she holds her head up and finds joy where she can. Because she’s such a moral paragon, she’s been called prim and judgmental. Honestly, I can see why, but I don’t agree.
It’s easy for us to relate to Fanny in that she’s ill used and unappreciated—we’ve all felt that before. Add to that her unrequited love for Edmund, and you’d think we’d LOVE her. (Angelina asserts that Fanny Price is Cinderella, and I definitely see it. The book is loaded with echoes of Cinderella, complete with a ball and evil step-sisters.)
But, even though we can relate to Fanny in how she’s mistreated by others, it’s hard for us to relate to how lamblike she accepts it. We want her to show a little of Lizzie Bennet’s spirit—fly off the handle at Mrs. Norris, slap Henry Crawford, and give Mary a verbal dressing down. The ’90s movie paints her as very spirited, but that’s not really Austen’s Fanny. She’s the model of self-restraint and…
…discernment. Angelina pointed out that in every scene, Fanny sits still while the rest of the characters move around. Fanny’s morality and judgment are fixed, and everyone else is swayed by doubt, bad logic, self-promotion, and unchecked feelings. Fanny knows her mind, and she’s always right. This might be where most of us throw up our hands and say, “Ugh, she’s too good!”
Fanny is also a frail, tender thing, almost pathetic at times. This is where she differs the most from her closest cousin in the Austen canon, Anne Eliot in Persuasion, who is mistreated and undervalued but never pathetic. Fanny is shy and reserved where Anne is open and sociable, so maybe that’s why we tend to dislike Fanny, she’s too reserved and restrained, similar to Jane Fairfax in Emma.
I do like how Henry Crawford throws wrench after wrench into the book. Is he truly reformed? For a man who is constantly trying to “make improvements” on everything from Rushworth’s garden to William Price’s career, he never manages to improve his moral character. Ah, Henry.
It’s been so long since I’ve read Mansfield Park that it might as well be the first time. Even though this is NOT my favorite Austen novel, I DID really appreciate it this time around. One of the big reasons why is because I listened to Angelina Stanford’s deep dive of Mansfield Park on the Literary Life podcast, and it set a great tone for my reread.
Fanny Price is NOT Austen’s most beloved heroine. She reminds me of how Dickens wrote Esther Summerson in Bleak House—as a purehearted, good-as-gold girl who has zero (and I mean ZERO) self-esteem. But far from being downtrodden or resentful, she’s all gratitude and deference. She cheerfully goes about her day, getting bossed around, overlooked, and mildly ridiculed. Yet, she holds her head up and finds joy where she can. Because she’s such a moral paragon, she’s been called prim and judgmental. Honestly, I can see why, but I don’t agree.
It’s easy for us to relate to Fanny in that she’s ill used and unappreciated—we’ve all felt that before. Add to that her unrequited love for Edmund, and you’d think we’d LOVE her. (Angelina asserts that Fanny Price is Cinderella, and I definitely see it. The book is loaded with echoes of Cinderella, complete with a ball and evil step-sisters.)
But, even though we can relate to Fanny in how she’s mistreated by others, it’s hard for us to relate to how lamblike she accepts it. We want her to show a little of Lizzie Bennet’s spirit—fly off the handle at Mrs. Norris, slap Henry Crawford, and give Mary a verbal dressing down. The ’90s movie paints her as very spirited, but that’s not really Austen’s Fanny. She’s the model of self-restraint and…
…discernment. Angelina pointed out that in every scene, Fanny sits still while the rest of the characters move around. Fanny’s morality and judgment are fixed, and everyone else is swayed by doubt, bad logic, self-promotion, and unchecked feelings. Fanny knows her mind, and she’s always right. This might be where most of us throw up our hands and say, “Ugh, she’s too good!”
Fanny is also a frail, tender thing, almost pathetic at times. This is where she differs the most from her closest cousin in the Austen canon, Anne Eliot in Persuasion, who is mistreated and undervalued but never pathetic. Fanny is shy and reserved where Anne is open and sociable, so maybe that’s why we tend to dislike Fanny, she’s too reserved and restrained, similar to Jane Fairfax in Emma.
I do like how Henry Crawford throws wrench after wrench into the book. Is he truly reformed? For a man who is constantly trying to “make improvements” on everything from Rushworth’s garden to William Price’s career, he never manages to improve his moral character. Ah, Henry.
Little House on the Prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder
4.0
There’s a lot of beauty in this plain-Jane classic, but I found myself wishing for more in the way of character and plot. Nevertheless, I feel like I could earn a few Girl Scout survival badges with the pioneer know-how that’s recorded here.
The novel chronicles how the Ingalls family moved from the Big Woods to the prairie, detailing a lot of the daily duties and how-tos of bygone days. How to build a log cabin. How to build a door, hearth, and roof for the cabin. How to dig a well, plant a garden, and care for animals. I feel a little superficial admitting that this didn’t “do it” for me. I wished for more.
My wish list for this book? A more varied cast and a deeper arc for Laura. A plot with more character-driven conflict, showing more nuanced relationships between family members. However, I realize this is a simple tale for kids, and I’m coming to this for the first time in my late thirties!
Having aired my grievances, I did appreciate the beautiful descriptions of the natural world, the suspense of certain threats, and the warm, cozy family feel.
Ma is my hero. I would never have been capable of such courage and self-restraint.
The treatment of Native Americans in this book is mixed but, I’m sure, can provide a lot of good talking points if you’re reading this with kids. Just help them discern the correct attitudes vs. the prejudiced attitudes vs. the mixed ones.
The novel chronicles how the Ingalls family moved from the Big Woods to the prairie, detailing a lot of the daily duties and how-tos of bygone days. How to build a log cabin. How to build a door, hearth, and roof for the cabin. How to dig a well, plant a garden, and care for animals. I feel a little superficial admitting that this didn’t “do it” for me. I wished for more.
My wish list for this book? A more varied cast and a deeper arc for Laura. A plot with more character-driven conflict, showing more nuanced relationships between family members. However, I realize this is a simple tale for kids, and I’m coming to this for the first time in my late thirties!
Having aired my grievances, I did appreciate the beautiful descriptions of the natural world, the suspense of certain threats, and the warm, cozy family feel.
Ma is my hero. I would never have been capable of such courage and self-restraint.
The treatment of Native Americans in this book is mixed but, I’m sure, can provide a lot of good talking points if you’re reading this with kids. Just help them discern the correct attitudes vs. the prejudiced attitudes vs. the mixed ones.
The Jane Austen Project by Kathleen A. Flynn
3.0
Premise? Outstanding. Fulfillment of the premise? Just so-so. I wanted to like this book. The setup is fascinating, and the beginning build is actually very interesting. But by the time I got to the halfway point in this novel, I was asking, "OK, what is this story about? What's the central idea?" I felt like the narrative wanted to take me somewhere...it just wasn't sure where. By three-fourths through the story, I was ready to stop, but since I'd invested so much time, I decided to finish, and I'm actually glad I did. The ending is quite interesting, if not exactly fulfilling.
*******Spoilers follow********
What I Liked:
I really did like the beginning of the book, how it all unfolded. I like that it starts with Rachel and Liam arriving in 1815, providing flashbacks to how they were chosen for the mission, how they prepared, the basic context of time travel, etc. There were clear goals and parameters for The Jane Austen Project, yet it became clear that things weren't going to go as planned, and I was interested to see what was going to unfold.
The other thing that I really liked was how this book took the parlor room novels that Austen was famous for and took the stakes up a notch (or ten). The minute, mundane details of life (for the gentry) carry a lot of weight in 1815. Will he pay a call today? Have they received our letter? Will we be invited to dinner? For Rachel and Liam, these small details hold much more significance — they matter hugely to the success of their mission. Because they must ingratiate themselves into the Austens' social sphere, anything that has to do with social niceties and customs is a huge deal. Does it matter what Mrs. So-n-so thinks? Uh, yes! Will the seating arrangement at dinner have extreme ramifications? Totally. Can the wording of this letter make or break our success? You bet. You can't give these mini-dramas an eye-roll when slip-ups have the potential to send Rachel and Liam to the gallows — or strand them in the past with no way back to present day.
What I Didn't Like:
I never got a strong sense of character for either Rachel or Liam...or maybe I just didn't like who they were as written. I couldn't connect to them for some reason. I didn't have a great grasp on who they were — their thoughts and actions weren't consistent enough. I think I connected more with their mission than them as people. That's why I couldn't really care about their relationship. They're in love? Yawn. I began to care again after they return to an altered version of the present day, and were left to grapple with everything that they experienced and wrestle the choice to either wipe away those memories or keep them. That's when I was like, OK.
I also felt that the plot was somewhat meandering. It wasn't clear exactly what themes the book was trying to convey. For example, is it about comparing 1815 life with modern life and deciding what's good and what's not? Is it about how humans should or shouldn't meddle with time and history and fix past wrongs? Is it about love and what makes a successful relationship? Is it about what's really important in life vs. what we think is important? The novel touched on all these, but never enough to present a unified theme that strongly weaves throughout the work.
This always happens in Austen retellings...there's a hugely confused sense of morality that's supremely inconsistent with everything Jane Austen stood for. Austen saw the inconsistencies with the way the world was and the way it should be. She was able to brilliantly illustrate these inconsistencies through character and plot, and that's why her work resonates with us. We see all of the ways in which we, as humans, compromise, rationalize, and justify ... and then she holds those up to a greater, better way. Like Dickens, I believe Jane Austen felt that true Christian love had the potential to solve the world's ills, and her work points to Christian love as the ideal for which we should strive. The characters who repent are rewarded. Those who dig in their heels and continue in sin are not. All of the retellings I've ever read just refuse to juxtapose this sinful world with the divine ideal, and therefore they don't touch our souls the way Austen's work did. One small example in this novel: Rachel thinks it's highly immoral to read Jane's private letters without permission, yet she doesn't scruple to sleep with Liam who is engaged to another woman. (I sure wouldn't want to contract some crazy vaccine-resistant STD in 1815, that's for sure. But I digress.)
Anyway, I have to describe this novel as full of promises that just weren't delivered. Oh well.
*******Spoilers follow********
What I Liked:
I really did like the beginning of the book, how it all unfolded. I like that it starts with Rachel and Liam arriving in 1815, providing flashbacks to how they were chosen for the mission, how they prepared, the basic context of time travel, etc. There were clear goals and parameters for The Jane Austen Project, yet it became clear that things weren't going to go as planned, and I was interested to see what was going to unfold.
The other thing that I really liked was how this book took the parlor room novels that Austen was famous for and took the stakes up a notch (or ten). The minute, mundane details of life (for the gentry) carry a lot of weight in 1815. Will he pay a call today? Have they received our letter? Will we be invited to dinner? For Rachel and Liam, these small details hold much more significance — they matter hugely to the success of their mission. Because they must ingratiate themselves into the Austens' social sphere, anything that has to do with social niceties and customs is a huge deal. Does it matter what Mrs. So-n-so thinks? Uh, yes! Will the seating arrangement at dinner have extreme ramifications? Totally. Can the wording of this letter make or break our success? You bet. You can't give these mini-dramas an eye-roll when slip-ups have the potential to send Rachel and Liam to the gallows — or strand them in the past with no way back to present day.
What I Didn't Like:
I never got a strong sense of character for either Rachel or Liam...or maybe I just didn't like who they were as written. I couldn't connect to them for some reason. I didn't have a great grasp on who they were — their thoughts and actions weren't consistent enough. I think I connected more with their mission than them as people. That's why I couldn't really care about their relationship. They're in love? Yawn. I began to care again after they return to an altered version of the present day, and were left to grapple with everything that they experienced and wrestle the choice to either wipe away those memories or keep them. That's when I was like, OK.
I also felt that the plot was somewhat meandering. It wasn't clear exactly what themes the book was trying to convey. For example, is it about comparing 1815 life with modern life and deciding what's good and what's not? Is it about how humans should or shouldn't meddle with time and history and fix past wrongs? Is it about love and what makes a successful relationship? Is it about what's really important in life vs. what we think is important? The novel touched on all these, but never enough to present a unified theme that strongly weaves throughout the work.
This always happens in Austen retellings...there's a hugely confused sense of morality that's supremely inconsistent with everything Jane Austen stood for. Austen saw the inconsistencies with the way the world was and the way it should be. She was able to brilliantly illustrate these inconsistencies through character and plot, and that's why her work resonates with us. We see all of the ways in which we, as humans, compromise, rationalize, and justify ... and then she holds those up to a greater, better way. Like Dickens, I believe Jane Austen felt that true Christian love had the potential to solve the world's ills, and her work points to Christian love as the ideal for which we should strive. The characters who repent are rewarded. Those who dig in their heels and continue in sin are not. All of the retellings I've ever read just refuse to juxtapose this sinful world with the divine ideal, and therefore they don't touch our souls the way Austen's work did. One small example in this novel: Rachel thinks it's highly immoral to read Jane's private letters without permission, yet she doesn't scruple to sleep with Liam who is engaged to another woman. (I sure wouldn't want to contract some crazy vaccine-resistant STD in 1815, that's for sure. But I digress.)
Anyway, I have to describe this novel as full of promises that just weren't delivered. Oh well.
Secrets of a Charmed Life by Susan Meissner
5.0
Where has Susan Meissner been all my life? This is the second book by her that I've read, and it's the second time she's brought me to tears (which honestly doesn't happen all that often for me in books). This is a novel about two young sisters caught in the London blitz during WW2 and how their decisions during that crazy time shaped the next two decades of their lives.
Honestly, reading this during the coronavirus pandemic has been especially interesting — maybe that's why I cried. It's a crazy time right now, too, and we're trying to carry on with some semblance of life as best we can, and many are grieving the loss of loved ones, and we seem to hear of new losses every day. We're faced with unfamiliar choices, and we have to do the best with what we know in this moment, and that's a lot of what this book is about.
I like how Meissner's novels convey a strong sense of theme. The theme in this one begins with the title — is there such a thing as a charmed life, and is there an actual path that leads to such a happy-ever-after? Or are there breadcrumbs (secrets) that will lead us to happiness if we can only find them? This is something that I think many people can connect with, especially young people who are just starting out in life. How do I get the kind of life I dream about?
Some of the other thematic questions that I grappled with while reading this:
1. What's really important in life and how does our answer to this question change over time? How do the characters come to realize what's truly important?
2. What is it that we, as humans, really want out of life in order to achieve a sense of wholeness and spiritual fulfillment?
3. When people are forced to make decisions under pressure or emotional stress, what can happen?
4. What do we do with intense guilt and regret? How do we find healing when we are "reeling from the choices made in weakness"?
5. What are the perils of keeping secrets?
The first chapter of the novel captured me — the last sentence, so fun. The story was, in a sense, a puzzle to be solved (but not a mystery). It's what happens when a bomb blows a family to bits, and each member is scattered somewhere different. Catastrophes leave holes, and some can be mended and others cannot. Can the blown-away bits crawl back together? That's the puzzle.
I thought the writing was great, not overly sentimental, not trying too hard. I'm not a huge fan of the contemporary frame device (an elderly Isabel is telling her story to a young history major who must write a paper on the blitz that includes an interview, and that's the frame for the story) but it didn't harm the telling, even though it's not my fave. I liked how the novel fit into three distinct parts, and I thought it was interesting how Part 3 is actually a journal. Epistolary novels get old for me after a while (Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, please don't hate me) but confining the letters to just one part of the novel felt OK.
Meissner grounds her novels in fertile Christian soil, but this book is not overtly Christian nor the least bit preachy. This makes it a wonderful book recommendation for anyone, from college grad to grandma. The book deals with some scandalous things, I guess, but it never feels slimy.
Quotes I liked a lot:
"I know what it's like to have other people stand around staring at you when they could just as easily help you."
"This was how people balanced the scales their world was tipping, Emmy reasoned. It was only after time had passed that a person was able to see whether she might have been able to bear the load she was sure had been too heavy. But life is lived in the moment you are living it, she thought. No one but God in heaven has the benefit of seeing beyond today."
"Safe is not the same thing as happy."
"Fear does not start to fade until you take the step that you think you can't."
"Truth is a strange companion. It devastates one moment and enthralls the next. But it never deceives. And because of that, in the end, it comforts."
"They were both starving for love and affirmation. When you are hungry for something, you often do not use your best judgement."
Honestly, reading this during the coronavirus pandemic has been especially interesting — maybe that's why I cried. It's a crazy time right now, too, and we're trying to carry on with some semblance of life as best we can, and many are grieving the loss of loved ones, and we seem to hear of new losses every day. We're faced with unfamiliar choices, and we have to do the best with what we know in this moment, and that's a lot of what this book is about.
I like how Meissner's novels convey a strong sense of theme. The theme in this one begins with the title — is there such a thing as a charmed life, and is there an actual path that leads to such a happy-ever-after? Or are there breadcrumbs (secrets) that will lead us to happiness if we can only find them? This is something that I think many people can connect with, especially young people who are just starting out in life. How do I get the kind of life I dream about?
Some of the other thematic questions that I grappled with while reading this:
1. What's really important in life and how does our answer to this question change over time? How do the characters come to realize what's truly important?
2. What is it that we, as humans, really want out of life in order to achieve a sense of wholeness and spiritual fulfillment?
3. When people are forced to make decisions under pressure or emotional stress, what can happen?
4. What do we do with intense guilt and regret? How do we find healing when we are "reeling from the choices made in weakness"?
5. What are the perils of keeping secrets?
The first chapter of the novel captured me — the last sentence, so fun. The story was, in a sense, a puzzle to be solved (but not a mystery). It's what happens when a bomb blows a family to bits, and each member is scattered somewhere different. Catastrophes leave holes, and some can be mended and others cannot. Can the blown-away bits crawl back together? That's the puzzle.
I thought the writing was great, not overly sentimental, not trying too hard. I'm not a huge fan of the contemporary frame device (an elderly Isabel is telling her story to a young history major who must write a paper on the blitz that includes an interview, and that's the frame for the story) but it didn't harm the telling, even though it's not my fave. I liked how the novel fit into three distinct parts, and I thought it was interesting how Part 3 is actually a journal. Epistolary novels get old for me after a while (Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, please don't hate me) but confining the letters to just one part of the novel felt OK.
Meissner grounds her novels in fertile Christian soil, but this book is not overtly Christian nor the least bit preachy. This makes it a wonderful book recommendation for anyone, from college grad to grandma. The book deals with some scandalous things, I guess, but it never feels slimy.
Quotes I liked a lot:
"I know what it's like to have other people stand around staring at you when they could just as easily help you."
"This was how people balanced the scales their world was tipping, Emmy reasoned. It was only after time had passed that a person was able to see whether she might have been able to bear the load she was sure had been too heavy. But life is lived in the moment you are living it, she thought. No one but God in heaven has the benefit of seeing beyond today."
"Safe is not the same thing as happy."
"Fear does not start to fade until you take the step that you think you can't."
"Truth is a strange companion. It devastates one moment and enthralls the next. But it never deceives. And because of that, in the end, it comforts."
"They were both starving for love and affirmation. When you are hungry for something, you often do not use your best judgement."