Customer Reviews

Nobody's Family Is Going to Change (Sunburst Books)

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

 

 

This was a very interesting book, and it has kept me thinking about it for the two days since I finished it. I enjoyed Louise Fitzhugh's (author of Harriet the Spy) other books, and purchased this one solely for this reason, knowing nothing about this book. I am a third-grade teacher, and after reading this book, and considering carefully, do not not feel it is appropriate for elementary school. It is very appropriate for middle school. It was written in 1975, and some of the issues in the book reflect that--when American society was still going through the Women's Liberation movement. It is the story of two kids--a 7-year-old boy, and a teen-aged girl--in a black family. It deals with issues of not getting along with your parents, and finishes with the kids coming to grips with that, and ends by the kids feeling better about themselves and gaining self-confidence. The reason I feel it is inappropriate for elementary school is that these issues are dealt with in a teenage way, menstruation is mentioned several times, and the word "faggot" is used as an insult between kids in the dialog. But actually, while some younger children could read this book and understand it, a lot of the deeper meanings the book is intended to convey would go right over their heads. This would be a great book for kids and parents to read together and discuss.

In 1975, my mother chose this book in hard-bound to give me for my 5th grade graduation. I read it right through and really liked it, but never realized the affect it would have on me. As my life has progressed and through all the seemingly impossible glass ceilings I've bumped my head into, I've turned to this book and remember Emma and Willie. They had to be themselves even though 'those who knew better' didn't want to allow them to. I used this book (and The Phantom Tollbooth) in a composition for a college English examination because unlike any other piece of media, I continue to learn from this novel. Now, at age 33, I'm buying a copy for my mother to learn from. I think she's ready for it!

I discovered this book when I was in the tenth grade. I had read Harriet the Spy, and loved Louise Fitzhugh's books. This is the last book that Fitzhugh wrote before her untimely death from a brain hemmorhage.

Eleven year old Emma and her eight year old brother Willie don't really get along. Their parents won't let them grow up to be what they want. Overweight Emma wants to be a lawyer like her father, while slim Willie wants to be a Dancer. Emma's father is against female lawyers, and finds Willie's dancing most irritating.

I really liked the part when Martha, the babysitter asked them if they wanted custard or ice cream for dessert, and Emma asked for both and Willie asked for neither. ... Other than that, this is a great book, and I would reccomend it to any teacher or student. Buy it at once.

my title is meant to be sarcastic.
I was deeply, deeply impressed by this book. I was searching for books for my niece and began reading Nobody's Family. the mature language threw me off, and as an older reader I admit I frowned at first. but what the book is really made of is fantastic stuff. in real life, children do use crude language, they do treat each other meanly- not that this is right, but why pompously shield children from what they're already exposed to? children are much stronger and more exposed to adult situations than people think, and this book handles that subject very well. more than that, it might be key to helping readers how to overcome realistic difficulties- through determination, faith in their ideals, and reaching out to others.

I am an aspiring writer of young adult literature, and this is my favorite type of book to read (and Louise Fitzhugh is one of my favorite young adult authors). It is brave, real, honest, and funny. What a perfect heroine Emma is! The book ends in a realistic way, and Emma keeps pushing on. This is a character that people admire, and this is a character to which people can relate.

Louise Fitzhugh captures the angst, strenght and healthy resistence in adolescent girls. She opens up possibilities for her characters, not stereotyping them by gender constraints. A faboulous, timeless book

Yes, it is a serious theme. It's still going on around here (stereotyping, sexism or whatever you'd call it), tho' I wonder if it'll be as bad as Emma's - her father being the one who's being "unfair". I like the fact that Emma and her three new "friends" realize what's going on (in a way), and that not everything becomes solved coz that's the way it is in real life. And it's still humourous in some ways... I think it is, anyway.
Emma wants to be a lawyer - her dad is against female lawyers. Willie (Emma's younger brother) wants to dance - but again his father is against the idea and would really like Willie to be a lawyer. And... well, that's all I'm gonna say!

I don't know how to explain this, but it seems Fitzhugh's writing declined as as she aged. Harriet and the Long Secret were masterpieces. Sure, they defied convention and provided role models and all that (none of which should be dismissed; it's quite important) but what made the books good reads was their stunningly accurate portrayals of characters from life. Also the somwhat otherworldly atmosphere the prose created. This book has none of that. It feels like a cultural sensitivity training session (which is of course very important) and i found it difficult to get through. The characters, particularly th mother and father, the antagonists, are cardboard cut-outs of confused and midguided parents. The title is preachy. The girl doesn't really resolve anything, and the lessons sher learns are phony. The book advances the feminist agenda quite nicely (something I unequivocally approve of) but falters on the homosexual agenda. Itkinda sells out, or grazes the surface of some other issues. The book frustrated me and dissapointed me. I guess I'll have to go read Sport now.

Parents, be warned that this is a dangerously subversive book. *This review includes spoilers.*

It uses the word "faggot" on the second page (the eleven-year-old girl saying it to her seven-year-old brother), and has quite a bit more "language." The main character is a girl who wants to be a lawyer; her little brother wants to be a tap dancer, so the book is basically "misunderstood children with mean parents." The uncle of the little boy, who's a dancer himself, understands him, but the father doesn't. Early on another man says he wishes his son could dance like that, and the little boy starts wishing that man were his father. Not because his own father is bad; there's no indication of that. Late in the book the author tries to make the father look bad by showing him looking with "hatred" at his children, from the perspective of the eleven-year-old--but I didn't find that convincing. But basically dancing is more important to the boy than his father is.

Midway through comes a "children of the world unite" meeting reminiscent of Communism, and very secret. What they do is receive complaints about bad parents (definitely not all abusive), and then send gangs of adults to the home to threaten the parents (and presumably to get children removed from the home if necessary). The group has a slogan of "Children First" and a power salute.

The "children's army" theme sort of fizzles out, because the girl protagonist rather decides that it's a male way of handling things; she decides it has hints of violence in it, and violence is wrong. Also, the teenage (male) leader tells her that the father has a right to decide that his boy can't be a dancer, that that isn't abuse--and of course the reader is supposed to see that he is wrong and to think that it really is abuse. The little boy gets to dance (and his overt disobedience is overlooked) because everyone else in his family insists that his father can't stop him. The father is really emasculated and made to look bad, without any good reason that I can see. And toward the end of the book, the mother tells the daughter that she (the daughter) may not feel like she wants to get married now, but she'll change her mind someday. Here's the daughter's response, a quote: "If you mean sex, I didn't say I didn't intend to have sex. I said I didn't intend to get married." The book ends up with more or less the thesis, "Parents are bad and don't have our best interest at heart, but we can't really change them. We can only determine to do what we want to do, whether or not they agree with us." (Thus the title, Nobody's Family Is Going to Change.) Truly it's a mind-boggling level of subversive. Nor is it well written. It's more than 200 pages, but it's all one long chapter! It has occasional breaks marked by two dots, but mostly they come mid-page, so there's no logical stopping point in the whole book.

Please, parents, trash it. And children, probably nobody loves you the way your parents do, or has your best interests at heart the way they do. Reading this book may cause you to doubt things you really know to be true. It's not worth it. Talk to your parents if you have disagreements with them; don't shut off communication and make your own decisions without their input. This book is a waste of your time. There are many better ones available.