Customer Reviews

Ann Geddes 2000 Datebook

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I have to disagree with the first responder, in that, I don't think that Anne Geddes would put any baby in danger in order to make a buck. I think she has a wonderful talent and terrific insight. I just wish the book's days had a little more space to write.

Gripping story, I couldn't put it down.

It begins at a New Year's Eve party, but not just any New Year's, this is the start of a new millenium! The story follows one American family through a hectic year, a year full of appointments, holidays, birthdays, birthday presents shipped too late, online shopping and dashes to the mall, joys and tears, doctor visits and anniversaries, parties and special dates. The story winds up at the year end new years party, where the main characters reflect on the past year, and look back on the past year with smiles.

I was mesmerized by the author's style, which compressed one week into two pages.

Highly recommended!

I love the datebook, the babies are not comotose or drugged. I feel they are just cute babies and i find nothing more adorable than a peaceful sleeping baby

Having at times found Anne Geddes' photographs of overly cute babies in their butterfly and bee costumes mildly entertaining, it has still amazed me that she has become such a marketing marvel. For instance, why would a new mother want a baby book which featured Anne Geddes photos of bizarrely positioned babies instead of the mother's own newborn? But I will allow for individual preferences and a successful PR effort. Having said all of that, I have just browsed Geddes' new Year 2000 Datebooks and matching Calenders -- and found them to be absolutely unappealing, if not offensive. With but one exception all of the babies are so flacid as to appear medicated and comatose. They all look like they have been given massive doses of Robitussin or some other sedative or cough syrup. In that condition they have been forced into ackward and contorted positions, squished upon hard metal pedistals, or dangled in netting. Most offensive is a photo of a baby (in the Month of October) hanging in a cloth sling with its head dangling from an angulated neck and a dead-appearing arm propped over its head. Frankly, if any mother in the Northwest United States were photographed carrying her baby in such a manner she would likely be investigated for child abuse, and possibly would have her baby taken from her. Possibly Anne Geddes is frantic to produce something for a tiring audience. Or maybe comatose looking babies are now her thing. Whatever, this is a book of photos which, in my opinion, should be returned to the publisher in disgust. As an obstetrician who has delivered some 4,000 babies, I find this Geddes' Year 2000 series to be abusive of the babies involved and rather ugly. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to look at these photos throughout the Year 2000.