This book has you on the edge of your seat and waiting to figure out what the big reveal is going to be. Back and forth through the chapters the reader questions whether the main character, Beth, is hallucinating seeing her best friend and children. The problem is that the children haven’t aged; they are still three and five years old like they were before Beth and Flora had a falling out 12 years ago. This book was really enticing and a very easy read that keeps you involved and motivated to solve the mystery that consumes the characters. A story that comments on how terrible the urge for perfection can be and the importance or not giving up on the truth, “Perfect Little Children” shows that friendship can prevail even after many years.

3.5 rounding up. It was awfully cute, I liked that everything about the diversity was casual-even when the grandmothers messed up pronoun usage it was just part of the flow and immediately fixed (though I would have adored more than a reference to a sukkah, I'm so desperate to see some non Holocaust Jewish representation...) and I generally liked the art style. It just felt a little like catching the second movie of a trilogy, or starting a new series a few episodes in. Media res works sometimes, but here it felt a little too far in and made the relationship feel like a wham insta-love kind of deal. I would have really loved more about the demon-how did it become one since it wasn't one to start? (All I could think of was princess mononoke with the spirits becoming demons.) And the stepdad-mom thing. And the ghost parents. It's like there wasn't quite enough world to hold up all the story.

Based on a Sufi folktale, a silly version of the don't be scared of something just because it's unfamiliar. Messagey, but silly and colorful, and that's always a good message to emphasize.

It drives me nuts when artist biographies don't show any works by the artist. I feel like the biography aspect of this was well written, but just again, the art and lack thereof. The illustrations were lovely and held true to the surrealist aspect, but still. And stylistically they owe more to Peter Max than Leonora Carrington...

This book has you on the edge of your seat and waiting to figure out what the big reveal is going to be. Back and forth through the chapters the reader questions whether the main character, Beth, is hallucinating seeing her best friend and children. The problem is that the children haven’t aged; they are still three and five years old like they were before Beth and Flora had a falling out 12 years ago. This book was really enticing and a very easy read that keeps you involved and motivated to solve the mystery that consumes the characters. A story that comments on how terrible the urge for perfection can be and the importance or not giving up on the truth, “Perfect Little Children” shows that friendship can prevail even after many years.

It's wonderfully illustrated, but not much of a biography. I'm not keen on biographies that make statements about the subject's interior life, or on books about artists that never show examples of the artists work. (Or in general, on books that compare women to animals, even though I get it's meant to be a positive bridge.)

Good read, short but lots of information. A nice mix of more and less well known ladies. I like their summaries of other women they wanted to include in the back, and that they do have a research and resources page, though I really wish it had a bibliography. (And better art, I really don't like the art style.)

Attractive enough, but so vague as to be nearly useless. More a stilted but dreamy picture book than anything actually informative. (And as much as I like the idea of nods to the artists style, seriously, can we have some actual examples of his art, more than two small photos in the end material?! I'm really not digging this narrative nonfiction trend where bios of artists don't actually include much of the artists work.)

Torn on this one. It's very sweet, but despite being based on her life, I feel like it really shouldn't be in non-fiction. Even in kid's books I'm not big on non-fiction books putting specific thoughts in people's heads unless those people have written or spoken along those lines. So I'm suuuuper not big on non-fiction books showing animals thinking like people. I'm also iffy on how she turned herself into a tween/teen and glossed entirely over her injuries. It's lovely to have a thoughtful and positive portrayal, and first hand, view, I just wish it had emphasized more on the training and working together and less on an imaginary dog's POV and a quasi-fictional view on her. Two separate books-maybe a more real non-fiction and then a picture book might have been more appropriate here?

It was okay. I feel like there was too much tell when it came to plot (exposition is still exposition, even if it's a talking cat that's somehow also a Titan), and any characterization was sacrificed to speed and fighting. Also, all the easily identifiable villains are female? All the male monsters in Greek mythology and they cherry-pick the female ones and imply Zeus is a good guy?! (What the heck is the Jabberwocky doing in here? Just saying...)