Last update: 2000 April 6
``Anyone who uses the phrase `easy as taking candy from a baby'
has never tried taking candy from a baby.'' --- Unknown
20) Where in the New York Area is Jimmy Hoffa?
19) The Unabomber Pop-Up Manifesto and Coloring Book
18) The Frog Formerly Known as Prince
17) Alice in WonderBraLand
16) The Legend of Three-Card Monte
15) 40 Whacks: Counting With Lizzie
14) The Little Engine That Could, If Only That Damned Gout Would Go Away
13) Girls Are From Venus, Boys Are From Cootieland
12) Where the Wildings Are
11) The Little Big Book of Necrophelia
10) The J. Edgar Hoover Dress-Up Book
9) Joe Camel and The Magic Cancer Stick
8) The Crack House at Pooh Corner
7) The Dummy's Guide to Crying
6) When Mommy Leaves Daddy, And What You Did to Cause It
5) Where's Waldo's Weewee?
4) The Dyslexic's Big Anagram Book
3) Barney's Bleeding and Nobody Can Help
2) Things Rich Kids Have, But You Never Will
1) Furious George Delivers the Mail
The Cat in the Hat is a hard-hitting novel of prose and poetry in which the author re-examines the dynamic rhyming schemes and bold imagery of some of his earlier works, most notably Green Eggs and Ham, If I Ran the Zoo, and Why Can't I Shower With Mommy? In this novel, Theodore Geisel, writing under the pseudonym Dr. Seuss, pays homage to the great Dr. Sigmund Freud in a nightmarish fantasy of a renegade feline helping two young children understand their own frustrated sexuality.
The story opens with two youngsters, a brother and a sister, abandoned by their mother, staring mournfully through the window of their single-family dwelling. In the foreground, a large tree/phallic symbol dances wildly in the wind, taunting the children and encouraging them to succumb to the sexual yearnings they undoubtedly feel for each other. Even to the most unlearned reader, the blatant references to the incestuous relationship the two share set the tone for Seuss' probing examination of the satisfaction of primitive needs. The Cat proceeds to charm the wary youths into engaging in what he so innocently refers to as ``tricks.'' At this point, the fish, an obvious Christ figure who represents the prevailing Christian morality, attempts to warn the children, and thus, in effect, warns all of humanity of the dangers associated with the unleashing of the primal urges. In response to this, the cat proceeds to balance the aquatic naysayer on the end of his umbrella, essentially saying, ``Down with morality; down with God!''
After poohpoohing the righteous rantings of the waterlogged Christ figure, the Cat begins to juggle several icons of Western culture, most notably two books, representing the Old and New Testaments, and a saucer of lactal fluid, an ironic reference to maternal loss the two children experienced when their mother abandoned them ``for the afternoon.'' Our heroic Id adds to this bold gesture a rake and a toy man, and thus completes the Oedipal triangle.
Later in the novel, Seuss introduces the proverbial Pandora's box, a large red crate out of which the Id releases Thing One, or Freud's concept of Ego, the division of the psyche that serves as the conscious mediator between the person and reality, and Thing Two, the Superego which functions to reward and punish through a system of moral attitudes, conscience, and guilt. Referring to this box, the Cat says, ``Now look at this trick. Take a look!'' In this, Dr. Seuss uses the children as a brilliant metaphor for the reader, and asks the reader to re-examine his own inner self.
The children, unable to control the Id, Ego, and Superego allow these creatures to run free and mess up the house, or more symbolically, control their lives. This rampage continues until the fish, or Christ symbol, warns that the mother is returning to reinstate the Oedipal triangle that existed before her abandonment of the children. At this point, Seuss introduces a many-armed cleaning device which represents the psychoanalytic couch, which proceeds to put the two youngsters' lives back in order.
With powerful simplicity, clarity, and drama, Seuss reduces Freud's concepts on the dynamics of the human psyche to an easily understood gesture. Mr. Seuss' poetry and choice of words is equally impressive and serves as a splendid counterpart to his bold symbolism.
In all, his writing style is quick and fluid, making The Cat in the Hat impossible to put down. While this novel is 61 pages in length, and one can read it in five minutes or less, it is not until after multiple readings that the genius of this modern day master becomes apparent.
(below is a reply from a literary critic, particularly referring to my terming this review ``post-modern deconstructionist'')
The review pretty much falls under straight pyschoanalytical interpretation, based on Freudian theory. For it to be considered postmodern, it would need a Lacanian twist (Lacan, a French critic who added Marxism to pyschoanalytical interpretation -- Julia Kristeva also falls under this category).For a reading to be considered deconstructionist, it needs to be separated almost down to phonemes and morphemes, not have an interpretation laid over it--Derrida is the major deconstructionist critic, and the terminology involved in deconstruction is fairly complex--when you run across ``differance'', ``hors texte'', ``langue'' and ``parole'', you are probably dealing with deconstruction. Example of deconstruction: to a deconstructionist, the answer to the question ``which came first, the chicken or the egg?'' is ``differance''.
If you are interested in unravelling the variations of lit. crit. in a not-so-technical (yet more sophisticated than the Seuss reading) way, get a hold of a copy of The Pooh Perplex, which presents a dozen or so different literary readings of our favorite A.A. Milne hero--it was published before deconstruction left the confines of French academia, so does not include structuralism, deconstruction, revisionist theory. aesthetic-reception theory, queer theory, habitus theory or post-colonialism ( to give you some terms to wield mightily at social gatherings...)
(and here, a counter-response from "John Doe")
I have to admit, that when I first clicked into your page, I was prepared for some hackneyed attempt at putting "down" deconstructionism / post-modern theory by playing it up as merely pseudo-intellectual bullshit. I was pleasantly suprised to find a humorous and truly deconstructive analysis of The Cat In The Hat.I would argue against the claims of the "literary critic" when he says, "for a reading to be considered deconstructionist, it needs to be separated almost down to phonemes and morphemes, not have an interpretation laid over it--Derrida is the major deconstructionist critic, and the terminology involved in deconstruction is fairly complex--when you run across ``differance'', ``hors texte'', ``langue'' and ``parole'', you are probably dealing with deconstruction. Example of deconstruction: to a deconstructionist, the answer to the question ``which came first, the chicken or the egg?'' is ``differance''."
First of all, I'm not sure he's read much of Derrida's works, since the vast majority of them ARE (re)interpretations. In fact, that is "the" major theme of deconstruction - to find the various ways a work can be found produce multiple meanings, or meanings contrary to the "accepted" (read: official) meaning of the work. Despite the truth behind the claim that "the review pretty much falls under straight pyschoanalytical interpretation," made by the "literary critic", I would say your critique of The Cat In The Hat *is* a wonderful act of deconstruction.
But that's the funny thing about deconstruction, really, that trying to pin down its "meaning" will only leave one frustrated (or with an unfounded sense of accomplishment!). As the Taoist sage Lao Tzu expressed, "chasing the limitless with the limited can only end in disaster".
Also, I find it ironic that the "literary critic" presumed that a post-modern critique would have needed a Lacanian twist, especially since Lacan was trying to usher in a return to Freud. A Lacanian twist wouldn't have to be any different than a Freudian twist. (As a side note, Derrida mentioned Freud quite a bit, and Freud's theories have always played a strong part in deconstruction, and deconstruction has "always" played a strong role in postmodern theory!) Also a bit odd was his recommendation of The Pooh Perplex, since he was so concerned about your "misuse" of the term deconstruction and postmodernism, and The Pooh Perplex has nothing to do with either of those topics! He even admits to this ("[The Pooh Perplex] does not include structuralism, deconstruction, revisionist theory [...]"). I just hope he doesn't teach any classes on Literary Theory...
Anyway, hats off to you. If Derrida were alive today, he most definately would have championed your effort!
Childhood is a syndrome which has only recently begun to receive serious attention from clinicians. The syndrome itself, however, is not at all recent. As early as the 8th century, the Persian historian Kidnom made references to ``short, noisy creatures,'' who may well have been what we now call ``children.'' The treatment of children, however, was unknown until this century, when so-called ``child psychologists'' and ``child psychiatrists'' became common. Despite this history of clinical neglect, it has been estimated that well over half of all Americans alive today have experienced childhood directly (Suess, 1983). In fact, the actual numbers are probably much higher, since these data are based on self-reports which may be subject to social desirability biases and retrospective distortion.
The growing acceptance of childhood as a distinct phenomenon is reflected in the proposed inclusion of the syndrome in the upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, or DSM-IV, of the American Psychiatric Association (1990). Clinicians are still in disagreement about the significant clinical features of childhood, but the proposed DSM-IV will almost certainly include the following core features:
The overwhelming number of children has made government intervention inevitable. The nineteenth century saw the institution of what remains the largest single program for the treatment of childhood -- so-called ``public schools.'' Under this colossal program, individuals are placed into treatment groups based on the severity of their condition. For example, those most severely afflicted may be placed in a ``kindergarten'' program. Patients at this level are typically short, unruly, emotionally immature, and intellectually deficient. Given this type of individual, therapy is essentially one of patient management and of helping the child master basic skills (e.g. finger-painting). Unfortunately, the ``school'' system has been largely ineffective. Not only is the program a massive tax burden, but it has failed even to slow down the rising incidence of childhood. Faced with this failure and the growing epidemic of childhood, mental health professionals are devoting increasing attention to the treatment of childhood. Given a theoretical framework by Freud's landmark treatises on childhood, child psychiatrists and psychologists claimed great successes in their clinical interventions. By the 1950's, however, the clinicians' optimism had waned. Even after years of costly analysis, many victims remained children. The following case (taken from Gumbie & Pokey 1957) is typical.
Billy J., age 8, was brought to treatment by his parents. Billy's affliction was painfully obvious. He stood only 4'3'' high and weighed a scant 70 lbs., despite the fact that he ate voraciously. Billy presented a variety of troubling symptoms. His voice was noticeably high for a man. He displayed legume anorexia, and, according to his parents, often refused to bathe. His intellectual functioning was also below normal -- he had little general knowledge and could barely write a structured sentence. Social skills were also deficient. He often spoke inappropriately and exhibited ``whining behaviour.'' His sexual experience was non-existent. Indeed, Billy considered women ``icky.'' His parents reported that his condition had been present from birth, improving gradually after he was placed in a school at age 5. The diagnosis was ``primary childhood.'' After years of painstaking treatment, Billy improved gradually. At age 11, his height and weight have increased, his social skills are broader, and he is now functional enough to hold down a ``paper route.''After years of this kind of frustration, startling new evidence has come to light which suggests that the prognosis in cases of childhood may not be all gloom. A critical review by Fudd (1972) noted that studies of the childhood syndrome tend to lack careful follow-up. Acting on this observation, Moe, Larrie, and Kirly (1974) began a large-scale longitudinal study. These investigators studied two groups. The first group consisted of 34 children currently engaged in a long-term conventional treatment program. The second was a group of 42 children receiving no treatment. All subjects had been diagnosed as children at least 4 years previously, with a mean duration of childhood of 6.4 years. At the end of one year, the results confirmed the clinical wisdom that childhood is a refractory disorder -- virtually all symptoms persisted and the treatment group was only slightly better off than the controls. The results, however, of a careful 10-year follow-up were startling. The investigators (Moe, Larrie, Kirly, & Shemp, 1984) assessed the original cohort on a variety of measures. General knowledge and emotional maturity were assessed with standard measures. Height was assessed by the ``metric system'' (see Ruler, 1923), and legume appetite by the Vegetable Appetite Test (VAT) designed by Popeye (1968). Moe et al. found that subjects improved uniformly on all measures. Indeed, in most cases, the subjects appeared to be symptom-free. Moe et al. report a spontaneous remission rate of 95%, a finding which is certain to revolutionize the clinical approach to childhood.
These recent results suggests that the prognosis for victims of childhood may not be so bad as we have feared. We must not, however, become too complacent. Despite its apparently high spontaneous remission rate, childhood remains one of the most serious and rapidly growing disorders facing mental health professional today. And, beyond the psychological pain it brings, childhood has recently been linked to a number of physical disorders. Twenty years ago, Howdi, Doodi, and Beauzeau (1965) demonstrated a six-fold increased risk of chicken pox, measles, and mumps among children as compared with normal controls. Later, Barby and Kenn (1971) linked childhood to an elevated risk of accidents -- compared with normal adults, victims of childhood were much more likely to scrape their knees, lose their teeth, and fall off their bikes.
Clearly, much more research is needed before we can give any real hope to the millions of victims wracked by this insidious disorder.
From a newspaper contest where entrants age 4 to 15 were asked to imitate "Deep Thoughts with Jack Handy". [well, okay, not quite baby humor, but amusing nonetheless...]
My young brother asked me what happens after we die. I told him we get buried under a bunch of dirt and worms eat our bodies. I guess I should have told him the truth - that most of us go to Hell and burn eternally- but I didn't want to upset him. Age 10
When I go to heaven, I want to see my grandpa again. But he better have lost the nose hair and the old man smell. Age 5
I once heard the voice of God. It said "Vrrrrmmmmmm." Unless it was just a lawn mower. Age 11
I often wonder how come John Tesh isn't as popular a singer as some people think he should be. Then I remember it's because he sucks. Age 15
I like to go down to the dog pound and pretend that I've found my dog. Then I tell them to kill it anyway because I already gave away all of his stuff. Dog people sure don't have a sense of humor. Age 14
I believe you should live each day as if it was your last, which is why I don't have any clean laundry. Come on, who wants to wash clothes on the last day of their life? Age 15
Democracy is a beautiful thing, except for that part about letting just any old yokel vote. Age 10
Home is where the house is. Age 6
Often, when I am reading a good book, I stop and thank my teacher. That is, I use to, until she got an unlisted number. Age 15
Give me the strength to change the things I can, the grace to accept the things I cannot, and a great big bag of money. Age 13
For centuries, people thought the moon was made of green cheese. Then the astronauts found that the moon is really a big hard rock. That's what happens to cheese when you leave it out. Age 6
If we could just get everyone to close their eyes and visualize world peace for an hour, imagine how serene and quiet it would be until the looting started. Age 15
Of the beasts of the field, and of the fishes of the sea, and of all foods that are acceptable in my sight you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the hoofed animals, broiled or ground into burgers, you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the cloven-hoofed animal, plain or with cheese, you may eat, but not in the living room. Of the cereal grains, of the corn and of the wheat and of the oats, and of all the cereals that are of bright color and unknown provenance you may eat, but not in the living room. Of quiescently frozen dessert and of all frozen after-meal treats you may eat, but absolutely not in the living room. Of the juices and other beverages, yes, even of those in sippy-cups, you may drink, but not in the living room, neither may you carry such therein.
Indeed, when you reach the place where the living room carpet begins, of any food or beverage there you may not eat, neither may you drink. But if you are sick, and are lying down and watching something, then may you eat in the living room.
And if you are seated in your high chair, or in a chair such as a greater person might use, keep your legs and feet below you as they were. Neither raise up your knees, nor place your feet upon the table, for that is an abomination to me. Yes, even when you have an interesting bandage to show, your feet upon the table are an abomination, and worthy of rebuke.
Drink your milk as it is given you, neither use on it any utensils, nor fork, nor knife, nor spoon, for that is not what they are for; if you will dip your blocks in the milk, and lick it off, you will be sent away. When you have drunk, let the empty cup then remain upon the table, and do not bite it upon its edge and by your teeth hold it to your face in order to make noises in it sounding like a duck; for you will be sent away.
When you chew your food, keep your mouth closed until you have swallowed, and do not open it to show your brother or your sister what is within. I say to you, do not so, even if your brother or your sister has done the same to you.
Eat your food only; do not eat that which is not food; neither seize the table between your jaws, nor use the raiment of the table to wipe your lips. I say again to you, do not touch it, but leave it as it is. And though your stick of carrot does indeed resemble a marker, draw not with it upon the table, even in pretend, for we do not do that, that is why. And though the pieces of broccoli are very like small trees, do not stand them upright to make a forest, because we do not do that, that is why.
Sit just as I have told you, and do not lean to one side or the other, nor slide down until you are nearly slid away. Heed me; for if you sit like that, your hair will go into the syrup. And now behold, even as I have said, it has come to pass.
But if you eat a lesser number of peas, and yet you eat the potatoes, still you shall not have dessert. And if you eat the peas, yet leave the potatoes uneaten, you shall not have dessert; no, not even a small portion thereof. And if you try to deceive by moving the potatoes or peas around with a fork, that it may appear you have eaten what you have not, you will fall into iniquity. And I will know, and you shall have no dessert.
Likewise, if you receive a portion of fish from which every piece of herbal seasoning has not been scraped off, and the herbal seasoning is loathsome to you and steeped in vileness, again I say, refrain from screaming.
Though the vileness overwhelm you, and cause you a faint unto death, make not that sound from within your throat, neither cover your face, nor press your fingers to your nose. For even I have made the fish as it should be; behold, I eat it myself, yet do not die.
And the first thing God said to them was: "Don't."
"Don't what?" Adam asked.
"Don't eat the forbidden fruit, said God."
"Forbidden fruit? Really? Where is it?" Adam and Eve asked, jumping up and down excitedly.
"It's over there," said God, wondering why he hadn't stopped after making the elephants.
A few minutes later God saw the kids having an apple break and he was very angry.
"Didn't I tell you not to eat that fruit?" the First Parent asked.
"Uh huh," Adam replied.
"Then why did you do it?" God asked exasperatedly.
"I dunno," Adam answered.
God's punishment was that Adam and Eve should have children of their own.
Thus the pattern was set and it has never changed. But there is a reassurance In this story. If you have persistently and lovingly tried to give your children wisdom and they haven't taken it, don't be so hard on yourself. If God had trouble handling his children, what makes you think it should be a piece of cake for you?
Dear GOD,
In school they told us what You do.
Who does it when You are on vacation?
-Jane
Dear GOD,
Are you really invisible or is that just a trick?
-Lucy
Dear GOD,
Is it true my father won't get in Heaven if he uses his bowling
words in the house?
-Anita
Dear GOD,
Did you mean for the giraffe to look like that or was it an
accident?
-Norma
Dear GOD,
Instead of letting people die and having to make new ones,
why don't You just keep the ones You have now?
-Jane
Dear GOD,
Who draws the lines around the countries?
-Nan
Dear GOD,
I went to this wedding and they kissed right in church. Is that
okay?
-Neil
Dear GOD,
What does it mean You are a Jealous God? I thought You had
everything.
-Jane
Dear GOD,
Did you really mean "do unto others as they do unto you"?
Because if you did, then I'm going to fix my brother!
-Darla
Dear GOD,
Thank you for the baby brother, but what I prayed for was a
puppy.
-Joyce
Dear GOD,
It rained for our whole vacation and is my father mad!
He said some things about You that people are not supposed to
say, but I hope You will not hurt him anyway.
Your friend (But I am not going to tell you who I am)
Dear GOD,
Why is Sunday school on Sunday?
-Tom L.
Dear GOD,
Please send me a pony.
I never asked for anything before, You can look it up.
-Bruce
Dear GOD,
If You give me a genie lamp like Aladin, I will give you anything
you want except my money or my chess set.
-Raphael
Dear GOD,
My brother is a rat. You should give him a tail. Ha ha.
-Danny
Dear GOD,
Maybe Cain and Abel would not kill each other so much if they had
their own rooms. It works with my brother.
-Larry
Dear GOD,
I want to be just like my Daddy when I get big but not with so
much hair all over.
-Sam
Dear GOD,
I think the stapler is one of your greatest inventions.
-Ruth M.
Dear GOD,
I bet it is very hard for You to love all of everybody in the
whole world. There are only 4 people in our family and I can
never do it.
-Nan
Dear GOD,
If You watch me in church Sunday, I'll show You my new shoes.
-Mickey D.
Dear GOD,
I would like to live 900 years like the guy in the Bible.
Love, Chris
Dear GOD,
We read Thomas Edison made light. But in school they said You
did it. So I bet he stoled your idea.
Sincerely, Donna
Dear Mom and Dad:
We are having a great time here at Lake Typhoid. Scoutmaster Pigpen is making us all write to our parents in case you saw the flood on TV and worried. We are OK. Only 1 of our tents and 2 sleeping bags got washed away. Luckily, none of us got drowned because we were all up on the mountain looking for Chad when it happened. Oh yes, please call Chad's mother and tell her he is OK too. He can't write because of the cast. I got to ride in one of the search and rescue jeeps. It was neat. We never would have found him in the dark if it hadn't been for the lightning. Scoutmaster Pigpen got mad at Chad for going on a hike alone without telling anyone. Chad said he did tell him, but it was during the fire so he probably didn't hear him. Did you know that if you put gas on a fire, the gas can will blow up? The wet wood still didn't burn, but one of our tents did. Also some of our clothes. John is going to look weird until his hair grows back.
We will be home on Saturday if Scoutmaster Pigpen gets the car fixed. It wasn't his fault about the wreck. The brakes worked OK when we left. Scoutmaster Pigpen said that with a car that old you have to expect something to break down; that's probably why he can't get any insurance on it. We think it's a neat car. He doesn't care if we get it dirty, and if it's hot, sometimes he lets us ride on the tailgate. It gets pretty hot with 10 people in the car. He let us take turns riding in the trailer until the highway patrolman stopped us. Don't worry, he is a good driver. In fact, he is teaching Terry how to drive. But he only lets him drive on the mountain roads where there isn't any traffic. All we ever see up here are logging trucks. This morning all of the guys were diving off the rocks and swimming out in the lake. Scoutmaster Pigpen wouldn't let me because I can't swim and Chad was afraid he would sink because of his cast, so he let us take the canoe across the lake. It was great. You can still see some of the trees under the water from the flood. Scoutmaster Pigpen isn't crabby like some scoutmasters. He didn't even get mad about the life jackets. He has to spend a lot of time working on the car so we are trying not to cause him any trouble.
Guess what? We have all passed our first aid merit badges. When Dave dove in the lake and cut his arm, we got to see how a tourniquet works. Also, Wade and I threw up. Scoutmaster Pigpen said it probably was just food poisoning from the leftover chicken. I have to go now. We are going into town to mail our letters. Don't worry about anything. We are fine.
Love, Cole
P. S. How long has it been since I had a tetanus shot?
He passed the Mother again in the candy aisle. Of course, the little girl began to shout for candy. When she was told she couldn't have any, she began to cry. The mother said, ``There, there, Ellen, don't cry. Only two more aisles to go, and then we'll be checking out.''
The man again happened to be behind the pair at the check-out, where the little girl immediately began to clamor for gum and burst into a terrible tantrum upon discovering there would be no gum purchased today. The mother patiently said, ``Ellen, we'll be through this check out stand in five minutes, and then you can go home and have a nice nap.''
The man followed them out to the parking lot and stopped the woman to compliment her. ``I couldn't help noticing how patient you were with little Ellen...''
The mother broke in, ``My little girl's name is Tammy... I'm Ellen.''
Before Children: I was thankful to have been born
the USA, the most Powerful free democracy in the world.
After Children: I am thankful for Velcro tennis
shoes. As well as saving valuable time, now I can hear the sound of my son
taking off his shoes--which gives me three extra seconds to activate the safety
locks on the back seat windows right before he hurls them out of the car and
onto the freeway.
Before Children: I was thankful for the recycling
program which will preserve our natural resources and prevent the overloading
of landfills.
After Children: I am thankful for swim diapers
because every time my son wanders into water in plain disposables, he ends up
wearing a blimp the size of, say, New Jersey, on his bottom.
Before Children: I was thankful for fresh, organic
vegetables.
After Children: I am thankful for microwaveable
macaroni and cheese -- without which my children would be surviving on about
three bites of cereal and their own spit.
Before Children: I was thankful for the
opportunity to obtain a college education and have a higher quality of life
than my ancestors.
After Children: I am thankful to finish a
complete thought without being interrupted.
Before Children: I was thankful for holistic
medicine and natural herbs.
After Children: I am thankful for pediatric cough
syrup guaranteed to "cause drowsiness" in young children.
Before Children: I was thankful for all of the
teachers who had taught, encouraged and nurtured me throughout my formative
years.
After Children: I am thankful for all of the
people at Weight Watcher who let me strip down to pantyhose and a strategically
placed scarf before getting on the scale each week.
Before Children: I was thankful for the
opportunity to vacation in exotic foreign countries so I could experience a
different way of life in a new culture.
After Children: I am thankful to have time to
make it all the way down the driveway to get the mail.
Before Children: I was thankful for the Moosewood
Vegetarian cookbook.
After Children: I am thankful for the butterball
turkey hotline.
Before Children: I was thankful for a warm, cozy
home to share with my loved ones.
After Children: I am thankful for the lock on the
bathroom door.
Before Children: I was thankful for material
objects like custom furniture, a nice car and trendy clothes.
After Children: I am thankful when the baby spits
up and misses my good shoes.
Before Children: I was thankful for my wonderful
family
After Children: I am thankful for my wonderful
family.
Joel Parker
(joel@boulder.swri.edu)
