Libraries and Museums Books

In the late 1990s, New York's beloved (but aged and failing) Hayden Planetarium was torn down to make way for what designers promised would be a state-of-the-art showcase of Earth & space science. At first, skeptical New Yorkers weren't sure if the controversial design would fit in with the surrounding residential neighborhood... but when the construction was complete, they gazed in awe at the marvelous steel and glass cube of the new Rose Center for Earth and Space, which featured a multi-story Planetarium that seemed to hover in midair within the structure.
Pick up this book if you'd like to see how New York's spectacular new planetarium came into being. Inside, you'll find beautiful full-color photos of the Rose Center as it appeared during construction and as it stands today, and you'll learn about the new technologies used to create its many hi-tech exhibits.
As an added bonus, the book provides an overview of some of the recent discoveries and hot topics in modern earth and space science... as you'll see, when it comes to learning about our planet and our universe, we've come a long way!
I highly recommend this book to space science fans, as well as architecture buffs. It's a great look inside an exciting new facility that's sure to delight visitors for decades to come!

100 pieces from the collection are profiled, each with a full color photo and text background. The 245 pages of content is presented in sections for Paintings (173pp), Works on Paper, Sculpture, and Decorative Arts. From the Foreword "The George Walter Vincent Smith Art Museum, founded in 1896, and the Museum of Fine Arts, established in 1933, house art from all periods of American history. ... Although themuseums have published other exhibition catalogues, this is the first that gives a comprehensive overview of their outstanding American holdings and provides detailed discission of select pieces."

this book presents the art of glaziery through brilliant still photographs and vivid descriptions of the origin of each style and process represented. the author is deep and insightful in her research and presentation, and the book is sure to appeal to anyone who appreciates beauty and form, whether a collector, sculptor or observer of fine glass. from cover to cover, this volume is a beauty to behold.

This is a book for children, but adults would find it an excellent read. Ms. Ayer, a non-jew writes about the museum and you feel as if you are visiting there yourself. This book is an emotional journey for the reader, it includes pictures of children who were killed at the hands of the nazi's. It described the museums exhibits in great detail, and even though I personally dont think I can emotionally handle it, the book would be a great read before actually visiting the museum.

I have never really embraced my Jewish roots, but with the help of this book and other holocaust readings in recent days, I am glad to say that I am now able to see myself as a Jew. If you are on the fence about your Judaism, read this book, it will draw you toward Judaism.

For all those anti-semites who say the holocaust never happened, I wish you were right. To think that there is such horrible cruelty in this world and hatred makes me terribly sad.

May peace prevail

I've used earlier versions of this trail guide for years as I've explored Yellowstone's backcountry. It is comprehensive and full of very useful information. Explore this guide before your trip so you can pick hikes matched to your abilities, goals and available time. Also read and heed the author's discussion of the dangers of Yellowstone's backcountry.

Mark Marschall is a ranger and medic with years of experience in Yellowstone. Note: I owe Mr. Marschall thanks, as he is the medic who responded and treated me when I was struck by lightning in Yellowstone on August 1, 2000.

After the Witches by Roald Dahl this is my second favorite children's book. I just absolutely love it!!

It was a good book because it was full of suspense, action, funny stuff, and laughter. I would like to read it again somtime when I have free reading time.

I feel funny reviewing books that are older than I am (this was published in 1967), but I will share what I thought. I thought this was a cute story, and I don't know how I missed this one when I was young...it seems like it would have been just my style! And, except for a few details (such as how much things cost and the fact that Claudia wears a petticoat), it doesn't feel like it's outdated. I thought a couple of parts were particularly funny, like when Claudia and Jamie find an unopened candy bar on the ground, and Jamie wants to eat it. Claudia says "You better not touch it. It's probably poisoned or filled with marijuana, so you'll eat it and become either dead or a dope addict." How funny!

I think you have to be a kid or a kid at heart to properly understand the magic of this book. What kid did not dream of running away? Here is a girl, a very practical girl, who makes that dream come true. She and her younger brother create an elaborate plan to run away and hide in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Remember, this was written before huge advancements in security. As they live an awesome life in a museum, they allow themselves to become part of a possible mystery.

This is an exciting and smartly-written book that manages to laugh at itself and his characters while still making you love everyone connected to this clever story.

It's wonderful to see a book first published in the later 1960's still being loved and enjoyed today. It was a special treat to pass this fantastic read on to my children since it was one of my favorites growing up. Living near enough to New York that we get to the MET at least once a year made it even better for them.

Some things haven't changed in over 40 years. Kids Claudia's age still feel they have the worst parents and most miserable situation at one point or another. What sets this story apart from other "kid hates parents, kid runs away..." stories is that Claudia comes up with an adventure so that she isn't running away, but running to something - the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art. Rather then reciting the whole story I'll just say this is a fabulous book and if you didn't read it as a child, get it and read it now with your children.

Kate Atkinson manages to find humor in many of the terrible and strange situations that a person can go through. I will admit that the characters are a bit hard to follow because of the order in which the author adds footnotes. She skips back and forth from great-granddaughter to great-grandmother, however, I enjoyed slowly finding out what happened to each individual character. I fell in love with Ruby Lennox (the main character) and the clever way the author tells her story. If you are offended by someone finding the humor in disaster, this is not the book for you. If you are like me, you find the humor in life, I think you'll enjoy this book tremendously.

You know it's bad when you go online to see what the big secret is when you're halfway through the book. But that's what I finally had to do with this book. I just got overcome by curiosity. Or possibly driven mad by all the vague hints and innuendo. (And yes, all my suspicions were correct.) If you're looking to find the answer, you'll have to look elsewhere (I suggest Wikipedia), but at least now you know you're not alone in not being able to wait for the big reveal.

Aside from all the secrets, this book is populated by a vast and confusing cast of characters. Told in alternating chapters between the life of Ruby Lennox (who narrates her own story from the moment of conception) and the stories of her maternal antecedents (told in the third person), we learn about several generations of women who make bad decisions in marriage and what happens to them as a result. Needless to say, this isn't a particularly cheerful book.

I really enjoyed Emotionally Weird, but I can't stand Behind the Scenes at the Museum. I have about 100 pages to go and although I plan to finish the book I'm certainly not looking forward to it.

I can't figure out how this book won any awards or was considered to be good by anyone. Unlike some other reviewers, I really like the third-person stories about Ruby's ancestors; it's Ruby's own story that I find completely unbearable. First of all, it's hard to develop any investment in the characters when you are told from the outset most of the things that are going to happen to them. I guess there is something interesting about a story being told this way, though. What really made it impossible for me to like the book was the incredibly cutesy asides in Ruby's sections.

Some of the cutesy asides are supposed to be funny because they're about child-Ruby not knowing things the reader presumably knows, like when she wonders why no one will tell her what Durex is. It is really hard to find these funny because after a while reading a book about someone who doesn't know anything just gets annoying. You can't even use the excuse that Ruby is a child, because the narrator is simultaneously Ruby-as-a-child and some older version of Ruby looking back. Don't worry, Ruby-looking-back is also responsible for many cutesy asides. Some of the cutesy asides are just irritating because they're not necessary--"Buck and Bunty! What a wonderful-sounding couple they would have made--I can almost see them." Others are terrible puns/references: "Auntie Babs prides herself on being a good cook and suffers none of the Strindbergian gloom that Bunty experiences when cooking. (Or perhaps it's Ibsenesque--perhaps Bunty is also trapped in a doll's house? Just a thought.)" I can't believe that other people were able to wade through this writing without going crazy.

Also, the secret about her past that Ruby doesn't know is pretty obvious almost immediately. Atkinson insults the reader's intelligence for hundreds of pages with crap like "My Gillian, my pearl;" I mean, how stupid do you have to be to not get that? The only thing I can think of is that this is supposed to be similar to Ruby not knowing what Durex is--the reader is supposed to know something Ruby doesn't know, although why Atkinson would want to frustrate her readers so much I don't understand.

The action of "Behind the Scenes at the Museum" starts in 1951, when its narrator, Ruby Lennox, upon her conception exclaims "I exist!".

Ruby, a daughter of Bunty and George, tells the story of her life from the very beginning until adulthood. Her family - the parents and two elder sisters, Gillian and Patricia, live in York, in an apartment, which Ruby calls "Above the Shop" - as owners of a small pet store. Each family member is a character, from always upset, embittered Bunty, openly fornicating George, malicious Gillian who meets her tragic fate too soon, to the oldest sister, Patricia, a teenage rebel who turns out the sane, independent woman following her own path after cutting all her ties with the family.

The main narrative is woven around the "Footnotes" which alternate with ordinary chapters, but really are full, rich chapters in themselves. The footnotes go back in time, always triggered by some seemingly meaningless item encountered in the main story - a photo, a button - and recall the lives of the maternal side of Ruby's family - her great-grandmother Alice, who one day disappeared from her children's lives and was supposed to be dead (the real events of the day of her disappearance are revealed late in the book, as many other shocking or unexpected details about the Lennoxes), her grandmother Nell, unlucky with her boyfriend choices and finally settling for second best, and -last but not least - her great-aunt Lillian, strong and opinionated, living her life to the fullest. I liked the structure of this novel, Ruby's brisk, eloquent, flowing sentences, the dark humor, showing nonchalantly throughout the whole book, the brilliant portrayal of the English people of this complicated, yet average family living during the long and variegated decades of the twentieth century. I also liked, and pondered on, the different shades of grief shown her - perhaps the most important theme throughout the whole novel.

The two facets of the novel, the present and the past of the Lennox family are firmly placed in history. The background of pre-war England and the torrents of World War II are essential to the developments in the family, and at the same time round up the novel and make it wholesome and rich. A plethora of secondary characters, who are, nevertheless, fully developed (like Auntie Doreen, a beautiful portrait), and unexpectedly connect with the Lennoxes, is a plus in my opinion. The prose flows smoothly, the novel is absorbing and hard to put down.

I agree with the previous reviewers on two faults of this novel. First, Ruby's omniscience from fetal life and her incredible eloquence and knowledge, are funny when contrasted with the fact that she is still a child and much of her thinking is characteristic for a child (imagination, her own creative visions of the Cupboard and explanations of things she does not understand, her confusion and enthusiasm for life...), and fun to read, but not very believable. This is not so bad though, it is a question of style and Atkinson's style is original and fresh, largely because of Ruby's voice. Second, much worse in my opinion, is the introduction of the most shocking news in the novel. I agree it is a gimmick and made the story "too much" for my taste - it just went over the edge, while without it the novel had a chance to be really perfect. There were just enough secrets and just enough ends that come together, without the central revelation. This is a pity, but considering it was a long-form debut, "Behind the Scenes at the Museum" deserved the Whitbread prize and deserves the four stars I give it.

This is a weird and wonderful and amazingly talented bit of writing. I'm not surprised to see the controversy in the reviews here on Amazon. Behind the Scenes at the Museum is a difficult story emotionally - and uses some extremely unconventional tropes and techniques that can be hard to swallow. But it is a brilliant depiction of family dynamics, English culture, and the weird twisted nature of love.

The first hard to swallow trope is the omniscient fetus. Fetal Ruby Lennox has complete awareness of her mother's thoughts and emotions and full vision of the world around her mother - not to mention an excellent grasp of the English language (and even a good background in modernist literature - Ibsen and Strindberg are specifically cited by the fetus (!)) It's tough to get behind this - but I chose to suspend my issues and go with it. Fortunately that part ends very soon.

The second tough to follow aspect is the footnotes section that follows each chapter - really a whole separate chapter that takes place in a different time and generation - but relates thematically in often cryptic way. This weaving back and forth among the generations gives the novel a meandering feel - and takes some of the wind out of the sails of the narrative flow - but something is also gained. By braiding the different narratives across time, it adds to the emotional impact when they come together.

My third big issue with this book is that the coincidences of long lost family members showing up as unrelated characters takes on a bit of a ridiculous quality in the final moments of the book. Atkinson uses lost family members to good effect earlier. She manages to throw in one more at the end who shows up (unknown to any of the characters - but known to the reader) as a nurse at a final deathbed scene and I just felt it was too much. If I were the editor I would have recommended cutting that one.

If you look past the distracting mannerisms of these issues you are rewarded with a brilliant representation of history and family dynamics. Poverty, war, love, abuse, all impact the lives of - particularly - the wives and daughters of this family and produce some thoroughly believable and familiar characters. The emotionally distracted, sometimes adulterous, bad mother is pretty familiar to a lot of people in life. I have never met this character better portrayed than Bunty is here. The dynamics amongst sisters is also spot on. Not since Stephen King have I admired realism in kid dialog so much.

Even better is the miraculous way the narrative braids and interrelates across generations. Atkinson manages to complicate the narrative every time it seems wrapped up a in a bow. A couple of these complications come across as shocking haunting revelations. Atkinson's vision is brilliant and stays with you long after you finish this book. That's my bottom line for a good novel. The central theme is trauma and then recovery (and sometimes redemption). Some have complained there's too much tragedy in this book. They should read some English history. The last hundred years of European history is soaked in blood. Sure it hurts to get to know characters who go through the horrors of the first and second world wars. I'm sure there are plenty of families with body counts similar to the Lennox's across the generations. It's pretty silly to argue historical validity in a novel that's basically magical realist. There's a lot of death and emotional trauma in this book. How the surviving carry on - sometimes by recovering and sometimes by bearing emotional scars - is the central theme of this book and it had a lot to teach me. Some have complained about the neutral, almost uncaring tone of the narrative when presenting the violent scenes. I have to admit I loved this tone. It makes the tragedy much easier to take - and it also serves the narrative. Detachment and repression are basic human survival mechanisms to trauma. The general thrust is ultimately redemptive, however - and this book accentuates the positive, particularly in the end.

Ultimately, while I acknowledge some flaws, I conclude that this novel breaks new ground and creates a new style. It's a towering achievement and really great read. Normally I'd consider the flaws and give such a book 4 stars - but I feel this is really 4.5 stars and deserves the 5th to counter the low rating by those that didn't get it.

this book is absolute garbage. the author has no concept of history and completely disregards the archaeological and historical record. If you you want to know more about ancient history, go to the experts. heck, even Livy is better than this guy!

Looking through this book reminded me of the movie "A Beautiful Mind". A brilliant mathematician constructs a fantasy world complete in every detail. The only problem is that it doesn't exist, and that he's as mad as a hatter.

Just two examples of the many "possibilities" suggested by our schizoid author:

(1) The Biblical flood and the Trojan War were the same event because Noah was Aeneas, who fled Troy to found Rome. (Noah and Aeneas had names that sound alike. Thus it is proven.)

(2) Nine kings fled the fall of the Tower of Babel and seven kings founded Rome. Therefore, Rome was founded by the kings who fled the fall of the Tower of Babel. (In the author's words, the Biblical figure of nine is "close enough" to the Roman figure of seven.)

Need I go on?

The professional historians faint as prominent mathematician Doctor Fomenko et al research the known historical data and come to fairly controversial conclusions.

For example, the English historians rage at the suggestion that the history of Ancient England was de facto a Byzantine import transplanted to the English soil by the fugitive Byzantine nobility. As the sign of recognition of the special role of the English historians who consider themselves the true scribes of World History, the cover of the present book portrays Tintoretto's Jesus Christ crucified on the Big Ben.

The Russian historians brand it as pseudoscience because Dr Fomenko asserts that there was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by over two centuries of slavery, providing a formidable body of documental evidence to prove his assertion. The so-called `Tartars and Mongols' were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a trilingual state and aspiring Global Empire with Arabic and Turkic spoken as freely as Russian.

The ancient proto-Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities and the hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called `blood tax'). Their `invasions' were punitive operations against the regions that attempted tax evasion.

Fomenko proves for a fact that official Russian history is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scholars brought to Russia by the usurper dynasty of the Romanovs. Their ascension to the throne was the result of conspiracy, so they charged these German historians-imports with the noble mission of making Romanov's reign look legitimate.

Dr Fomenko et al prove Ivan the Terrible to be a collation of four rulers, no less. These rulers represented the two rival dynasties - the legitimate Godounovs and the ambitious Romanov upstarts.

The European historians fume not only because Fomenko blows consensual Russian history to smithereens, successfully removing a crucial cornerstone from underneath the otherwise impeccable edifice of World History but for asserting that all medieval European Kings and Princes were but breakaway vice-regents and vassals of the Global Empire who badly needed glorious and very `ancient' past in order to legitimize their new independence from the Empire.

Dr Fomenko adds insult to injury, wiping out one by one: the Ancient Rome: the foundation of Rome in Italy is dated to the 14th century A. D., the Ancient Greece and its numerous poleis, which he identifies as the mediaeval crusader settlements on the territory of Greece, the Ancient Egypt: the pyramids of Giza become dated to the 11th to 14th century A. D. and identified as the royal cemetery of the Global Empire, no less.

The civilization of the `ancient'' Egypt is irrefutably dated to the 11th to 15th century A. D. following the breakthrough in decoding of the ancient Egyptian horoscopes cut in stone and painted on the temple walls.

Arabic historians may find some consolation in the crucial historical role of the Ottoman Empire as a part of the Global empire in the 15th - 17th century. The trouble is that this Empire was initially a proto-Christian state, with Hagia Sophia identifiable as Temple of Solomon, but built in 1550-1557 A.D. by Sultan Suleiman according to Fomenko and Islam with all its key figures is datable to 15th 16th century A. D.!

The Chinese historians are also an unhappy lot because Fomenko wipes out the Ancient History of China outright. No such history. Period. The compilation of the so-called Ancient Chinese History is reliably datable to the 17th 18th century only. It is perfectly recognizable as the Ancient European history, reworked and transcribed in hieroglyphs as yet another historical transplantation.

The Divinity excommunicates Dr Fomenko because the history of religions according to Fomenko looks as follows: the pre-Christian period (before the 11th century and Jesus Christ ), Bacchic Christianity (11th to 12th century, before and after Jesus Christ), Jesus Christ Christianity (12th to 14th century) and its subsequent mutations (15th to 17th cy) into Orthodox Christianity, the Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, and so on..; and The Old Testament written after the New Testament in xiv-xvi cy A.D., if you please! Everybody served? Saint Augustine was quite prescient when he said: "be wary of mathematicians, particularly when they speak the truth."

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/RAZQNMXM4M9CL Has history been tampered with? Yes, it has! Did events and eras such as the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Roman Empire , the Dark Ages, and the Renaissance, actually occur within a very different chronology from what we've been told? Yes, they certainly did!

The history of humankind is both drastically shorter and dramatically different than generally presumed.

Why is it so? On one hand, it was usual custom to justify the claims to title and land by age and ancestry, and on the other the court historians knew only too well how to please their masters. The so called universal classic world history is a pack of intricate lies for all events prior to the 16th century. World history as we learn it today was entirely fabricated in the 16th-18th centuries. It's likely that nobody told you before, but

there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that is reliably and independently dated prior to the 11th century.

Naturally, after what you've learned in school and university, you will not easily believe that the classical history of ancient Rome, Greece, Asia, Egypt, China, Japan, India, etc., is manifestly false.

You will point accusing finger to the pyramids in Egypt, to the Coliseum in Rome and Great Wall of China etc., and claim, aren't they really ancient, thousands of years ancient? Well, there is no valid scientific proof that they are older than 1000 years!

The oldest original written document that can be reliably dated belongs to the 11th century!

New research asserts that Homo sapiens invented writing (including hieroglyphics) only 1000 years ago. Once invented, writing skills were immediately and irreversibly put to the use of ruling powers and science.

The consensual chronology we live with was essentially crafted in the 16th century by the Jesuits.

The world history was compiled from contradictory mix of innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts and other irrefutable proofs delivered by late mediaeval astronomers that were cemented by the authority of writings of the Church Fathers.

Early in life, we learn about ancient history. Children love the magical lessons of history - they are like fairy tales. Teachers recite breathtaking stories; very soon We learn by heart the names and deeds of brave warriors, wise philosophers, fabulous pharaohs, cunning high priests and greedy scribes.

We learn of gigantic pyramids and sinister castles, kings and queens, dukes and barons, powerful heroes and beautiful ladies, emaciated saints and low-life traitors.

Ancient history is based documents, manuscripts, printed books, paintings, monuments and artefacts - called primary sources.

The problem is that neither these ancient documents, nor events described therein can be irrefutably dated, moreover they contradict each other for the most part.

When a school textbook tells us that Genghis Khan in year X or Alexander in year Y, have each conquered half of the world, it means only that it is so said in some of the written sources.

There are no answers to simple questions:

When were these primary sources written?

Where and by whom were these sources found?

It is wrongly presumed that ancient and medieval chronicles, written by Genghis Khan's or Alexander the Great contemporaries and eyewitnesses, are readily available. Actually, only sources written hundreds or even thousands of years after the events are there, compiled mostly in the 16th 18th centuries, or even later.

As a rule, these sources suffered considerable multiple manipulations, falsifications and distortions by editing. At the same time,

innumerable originals of ancient documents under various pretexts were destroyed in Europe under various pretexts.

The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries.

Geographical locations became clearly defined on maps only with the advent of printing.

This made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes of the military, navigation, education and governance tasks.

Historians from Oxford say: "hey, everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.

`Julius Caesar' statement is only a point of view as

there is simply no irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar or any other great name of antiquity ever existed.

Better than that - extremely rare sources that can be reliably dated back to the 10th-14th centuries A D, do not show the polished picture of classical history.

They show a picture both contradictory and confusing.

All methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts are erroneous:

Radio-carbon C14 method produces dating with exactitude of plus minus 1500 years, therefore it is too crude for dating of events in historical timeframe!

The Almagest tractate, which lies as corner stone contemporary chronology, compiled in the 2nd century A D by Ptolemy, the founding father of astronomy, contains astronomical data of 9th to 16th century!

The Bronze Age,that has supposedly began 5000 years ago. Bronze is made of 90% copper and 10% tin, but the technology for tin extraction dates back to 14th century A D!.

All eclipses contained in manuscripts, like Thucydides one, relating 'ancient' events have exclusively medieval dating. All horoscopes cut in stone or painted in Egyptian temples, like Dendera have exclusively early medieval dating solutions.

Not quite what you have learned in school? Open your eyes, and, you will find sufficient proof to reach step by step the inevitable conclusion that the classical chronology is false and therefore, that the history of ancient and medieval world universally accepted today, is also false. Have a fresh outlook on everything said or printed about "ancient" and "enigmatic" Roman, Greek and Egyptian, medieval as well as all other "lost and found" civilizations.

Antiquity and Dark Ages are phantoms invented in the 16th 18th and polished in 19th 20thcenturies. Human civilization is in fact barely 1000 years old!

This book will change your perception of History forever!
What if Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented during Renaissance?
What if The Old Testament was a rendition of events of the Middle Ages?
What if Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD?
Sounds Unbelievable?
Not after you've read "History: Fiction or Science?" by Anatoly Fomenko, the genius mathematician.
Armed with astronomy and computers Anatoly Fomenko turns History into a rocket science.

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

we bought this book on a whim not knowing what to expect. Our daughter, who is two and a half, loves it and brings it to us and we explain it in a very simple way. It can be understood at so many different levels that I am sure we will be reading it for years to come. When she is older, we are looking forward to taking her to the Met - with the book in hand - and I am sure we will get a real buzz from that.

I got this book without much research, I wasn't aware that there were no words in it when I got it for my toddler art class. Glancing through it, I was at first dissapointed, until my kids (6, 4, and 2) looked at it with me. As an artist and art history major in college, great pieces of art aren't unusual in our house, but the kids really looked at the pieces trying to find every funny tie in that the crazy balloon and balloon chasers stumbled into. What's more they started looking at other pieces and coming up with their own funny ideas of what could happen. It won't work for my class, it's better for older kids, but I'll be buying others in this series because they work perfectly for my home!

I live in New York City, and my sister lives in Iowa. I always try to buy her books that are local to where I live. I loved the concept of the book and the illustrations were great, but was dissapointed to find that it didn't have any words in in. I gave it to my sister anyway and she told me "Monica books are supposed to have words!" That said it all.

I purchased this book knowing I was going to take my kids to the museum during the holidays. I was disappointed with it. Although it is a lovely, humorful story, I had one major problem with it.
Namely, I would have preferred more examples of art from the museum (there were only 18, I believe).
This is a lovely book to check out of the library but not to buy for my personal library.

A fun picture book,with lots of action. Which compares pictures to the things of the metropolitan museum.
Age 7
I recomend it alot

I bought this book for the pictures, hoping that the story would be worth the money. Unfortunately, the story left me cold - in fact there really is no plot. The premise for the book is that there is a tiny girl inside a toy-sized castle inside a museum. She has no adventures, nothing interesting happens, and you get to the end of the book and wonder why you bothered. The illustrations are beautiful though.

i absolutely love the illustrations in this book. this artist is one of my preferred, her pictures are so soft and expressive, i just love it. and as if the illustrations themselves weren't enough, the story isn't that bad either. it's very short and is about a girl inside a miniature castle in a museum (hence the title). someone tells us about the girl and then we get to see the girl up close and find out that she wants a friend. in the end she gets the reader to be her friend... in a way. its a cute story line, but with the ethereal pictures it goes beyond being cute to being something more meaningful.

amazingly well done.

I purchased this for my daughter but found myself drawn to the book. It's beautifully illustrated -- you'll linger on every page. The story is simple yet magical, with a "surprise" at the end for the reader. Enjoy!

The pictures are unbelievably imaginative, hard to take your eyes away. The text, though, is average; not nearly on the same level as the pictures. I would say you should take this one out from the library.

It would be neat to order reprints of the illustrations to hang on a child's wall.

I gave this book to my four and a half year-old granddaughter. After we had read it a few times over a few days, her mother asked her, "Is that a good book?" Caitlin replied in her matter-of-fact way, "It is a WONDERFUL book." I agree, but I was more interested in what she thought. I now give the book regularly as a gift to other families.