Here is a new version with the photo resized. Thumbs up or down?
I definitely like that one better than the first photo card. And I feel that the larger photo is more likely to accomplish the formation of that feeling of connection than the smaller photo.
Say, is beth around - or anyone else who might know the reading preferences of ten year old girls? I posted a request in Facebook for recommendations, because a friend at work asked me if I know anybody who could give her a hint about a birthday present to give her boyfriend's daughter. I'm hoping for responses in FB because then my coworker will be able to see it as well. But you never know who will see what FB post, which is why I'm mentioning it here, too.
I don't know any 10 year old girls at the moment, Andi, but I do enjoy Carl Hiaasen's children's books.
They have strong female characters (though not the protagonist) and good messages about self-determination and personal responsibility...plus, they are funny as all get out.
Hey Andi, if she's at all like Kara, Dead Boys by Royce Buckingham; Dreadful Ed and Mary Scary both by Andrew Cosby; all the Goosebumps books, but especially the Horrorland series...she's been on a kick. She's also reading a lot of tweeny manga and books about or featuring fairies.
(Not really here, I'm sick and wandering the web in search of distraction before I try to ignore the seasick to see if I can sleep.)
Hey, thanks bonny and Deena! I'll C&P those ideas over to my friend.
P.S. Deena, feel better soon!
Andi, weirdly, my favorite of Hiaasen's YA work is not listed on his page.
It's called Scat and does have a strong female protagonist.
How in the everloving hell is Kara nearly ten?
How in the everloving hell is Kara nearly ten?
Yes, it is unpossible. Next she'll be saying that pale little baby boy is in school or something.
And she shouldn't be sick!
Bonny
I'm thinking there should be a comma between the phrase "build character" and the phrase "to learn successful habits" in the copy for the kids section. The comma is there on the proof without the picture but then is missing on the proof with the picture. I looked at the revised one first and was going to suggest that you add a comma and then saw it on the earlier version so I think it was punctuation that got just lost in change in formatting.
