Science Nature Books

This books been around for quite a number of years now but has to be simply the BEST illustrated book on Gems there is. It's absolutely jam packed FULL of all the information you need to learn about precious stones.

an encyclopedia of knowledge on stones and gems.

This is an excellent book for anyone wanting to learn about the physical properties of gemstones. It would be especially useful to students interested in the scientific properties of gems. I found it useful because it describes where gemstones are found and how and when they were discovered. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the subject.

Well written but a bit out of date. Scientific data often ages like egg salad on a warm day.

and it is a little more technical than the rest (explains things like twinning, establishment of density, calculating specific gravity, cleavage, moh's scale, refractive indices, law of refraction, genesis, cutting, cutting styles etc).
it includes gem descriptions in much detail (thou the order in which they are arranged is a mystery to me and really bugs me, as i have to flip and flip until i find what i need).
for diamond it includes a table comparing 4 color grading systems used (which is cool).
large section on organic gems and synthetics.
all in all i see it as a really good (almost) professional level book on gems and precious stones.

This is an example of a marvelous children's book. Through pictures
and relatively simple text, it expands children's awareness of the water
cycle. Because it illustrates water's cycle "around the world", it gives
the reader a sense of the interconnectedness of humanity with one
of its greatest resources - water.

I am an environmental educator for a Soil and Water Conservation District. I use this book with elementary aged students. I read it before doing an activity where the children go on their own "water journey" and pretend that they are raindrops. The book serves as an excellent background and visual reference for the children when they go on their own journey.

The illustrations are beautiful, factual and informative. HIGHLY recommended for all ages!

A clever poetic presentation integrates Language Arts and Science in a creative way. In addition to accuracy of content information, the author, Barbara Shaw McKinney incorporates literary devices: figurative language, alliteration, onomatopoeia, and personification. The opportunities for learning are endless as children read across the curriculum.

I particularly like the symbols that appear throughout the text, where the drop demonstrates the water cycle properties. They are further explained in the end pages titled, "A Magic Show Starring H2O." During subsequent readings, my students enjoyed dramatizing Drop's travels. "A Drop Around the World" lends itself well to interactive dramatization. For example, by pairing an action and sound effect with each water property/symbol, students are able to reenact Drop's journey, totally engaged in the text.

On another level, children are anxious to locate the drop on each page as it is revealed by the context of the story.

A "must have jewel" for innovative teachers attempting to engage the imagination of their students! Barbara Shaw McKinney's love of Nature's Magic is contagious as evidenced by the response of my students. They loved it!

I can hardly wait to see what wonders her next book will unearth!

Who would have ever thought the water cycle could be so entertaining! As an Environmental Educator, I am very VERY picky about children's nature books. Many are too technical to become a household favorite. Many others are too "watered down" (sorry very bad pun) to have any value in the classroom as a content book. Once in a very long while will a book be able to accomplish both goals. "A Drop Around the World" does this and much more.

Amazon lists it as suitable for ages 4-8 -- a conservative estimate, at best. Like only the best children books can, it appeals to all ages. And like only the best EE books, it has educational messages for young and old. At first, my 3-year-old was mainly concerned with searching out the "protagonist" drop from the rest of the water on each page. Now he also enjoys identifying all of the animals, so expertly drawn, as the pages go by. I myself get caught up in the text. I marvel at how factual and informative McKinney can be and still maintain an engaging and unforced rhyme scheme.

And finally as an added bonus, even the artwork is virtually flawless. I'm pleased to say that after close inspection I have found only one error. On the African Rainforest pages there is a Harpy Eagle which is a species only found in South America. Few $60-$80 ecology textbooks fair as well under my scrutiny!

This book is a wonderful introduction to primate behavior, ecology and conservation. A collection of articles originally published in Natural History magazine, this book provides a perfect balance of the above topics in primatology. If you are just getting started in the field or you are simply curious about our primate cousins this book is great. If you are a seasoned primatologist, this is a fun weekend read!

Natural History magazine has published a wealth of information about primates, written by leading experts in field research. Students of primatology, and anyone interested in animal behavior and ecology, will find this anthology relevant and informative. These studies demonstrate the diversity of our closest animal relatives and the intricacies of their lives and relationships amongst themselves and with other species.

The writings of field scientists such asChristophe Boesch, Robert Harding, Dawn Starin, Thomas Struhsaker and Patricia Wright cover wide taxonomic and geographic ranges. The editors' glue that effectively binds these essays together is the excellent prefacing overview accompanying each section (Behavior, Community Ecology, Diet, Reproduction and Conservation). These writings demonstrate the skills of biologists in translating field observations into literate and eminently readable images of their primate subjects.

This anthology provides valuable testimony tothe contributions of field studies in understanding our primate kin-- their context in nature, and the strategies they employ for coping with daily life and the encroachments of mankind.

Phillip T. Robinson - Society for the Renewal of Nature Conservation in Liberia, West Africa

As a novice RM reader, I had no expectations regarding theme or writing style. I simply dove into a delightful and engrossing exploration of newparenthod. What a funny and riveting book! Hats off to RM.

Although I hate to repeat what so many reviewers have said already, this book was a disappointment. That is not to say it isn't a wonderful book. The story is wonderful, and the dragons just as magical as they are different from the Hero and the Crown dragons. The characters, especially Billy, Eric, Jake, Lois, and the Dad are wonderful three-dimensional characters. Her writing is brilliant and witty--but, and I really hate to say this because I love Robin McKinley, rather annoying. I read the first couple of chapters and had to stop. I ended up purchasing a second copy of the book and finished it out of loyalty. But although it was sad to not cherish every page like I'm used to, I sort of saw it coming. Sunshine was another story much more character and POV-driven than plot-driven. Sunshine was sort of cinnamon roll, cinnamon roll, secret, early morning, ate another apple, still keeping the secret, not all vamps are bad, cinnamon roll, Charlie, cinnamon roll. Dragonhaven was HEADACHE, BIG DRAGON, goop, burn, teenage attitude, bold, uppercase, secret, HEADACHE, dragons aren't all bad, HEADACHE. The writing was really bold, and I can imagine it being assigned as required reading or for reading groups in sixth grade classrooms all over just because it is well done. I just wish she hadn't been so good at what she set out to do. It was interesting, but where's the beautiful language, the wonderful heroine, the romance, the danger? You've created another wonderful world--sort of a 90% earth like in Sunshine--but where's the drama, the suspense? I know you don't like being pestered about the Damar books because they were a long time ago and blah blah and you like to focus on current books--but could you bring back a little of the Damar style? Or just reverse your trend, go back even to Spindle's End-Rose Daughter-Outlaws of Sherwood style. Those were beautiful books. And your short stories in Water were captivating too! I will let Jake Mendoza, and to a lesser extent Sunshine, fade into the back of my mind, and sincerely look forward to Chalice.

The details are so perfect, I felt like I should be able to take a field trip to this Dragon park and look at the museum and buy a scale to take home. I totally felt what the main character did, too. This is not a copy of someone else's idea of a dragon book!!

McKinley's strongest assest as a writer is her ability to captivate you with her characters depth. Every book that I have read has been great, and this one is no different! Dragonhaven

I dearly dearly LOVE the work of Robin McKinley. "Sunshine" "The Blue Sword" "The Hero and the Crown" "Spindle's End" and "Beauty" are books I will read continually throughout my life. It isn't just young adult literature - these novels are so amazingly thoughtful, inspiring, thought-provoking and engaging I can find new things within the text each time I read. I am awed, uplifted and inspired with each new reading. All the characters are dynamic, well-drawn and endearing (endearing except of course for the essential bad guy) - but regardless, engaging, dramatic, etc. Her normal storylines are so very clear yet multi-layered. Once you start reading, you can hardly bear to put it down.

In the case of "Dragonhaven," however, this particular version of 1st person gave me a bit of the headache Jake describes from the dragons. "Sunshine" too is written in first person - more like the diary of someone going through something no human has ever experienced before and goes through several months of not knowing what to do about it. This novel is written the same. It's Jake's diary of raising a baby dragon and all the goings-on of Smokehill. And I will say, McKinley's description is, as always, incredibly detailed and evokes wonderful images during the reading. But the frenzied, unorganized, slang-heavy voice of Jake seems to insert a scattered, wordy barrier between the reader and the heart of the story.

On another note, it takes a totally different direction from McKinley's other writings. For one, it's in the voice of a male character. Also, it's in a world very much like our own except for the presence of dragons. This is good, she's branching out, it's new and interesting. I just wasn't as caught up due to the lack of major epiphanies and clear-cut, new found talents that seem to come from a previously-hidden source, etc. Jake is still pretty much just a normal human who did something (raising a dragon and communicating "telepathically") that other humans could learn to do too. It doesn't make him into a new person as wholy as these totally-life-altering situations make McKinley's other characters. It changes him, certainly, and sends his life in a new direction, but I don't see any MAJOR major breakthroughs.

I'll compare it to "Sunshine" a little more as they do have similarities in style and format. Rae definitely has experiences with a vampire no human ever had before, she tends to go off on pages-long tangents in the course of the book, she's never comfortable or confident with her previously-unknown talents or "affinities," and the novel is set in a world of cities, automobiles, phones, computers, etc. BUT, there are HUGE themes of magic, supernatural creatures galore, great personal discoveries, defeat of an ultimate evil, and romance. My favorite story elements, personally. Sure, Jake has some romance in the end, but it's sort of a brief sideline as opposed to a key, hinging element of the whole plot. Yes, intelligent, "telepathic" dragons are certainly supernatural, but in a different way entirely.

Mainly what I'm saying is, there are those books I mentioned at the beginning of the review, and then there's "Dragonhaven" which I doubt I will read again. It was more like trudging through a word-clogged swamp than floating through a rich, colorful, enthralling landscape. Kudos to McKinley for doing the teenage-dialogue so well though! Her description and her talent for dialogue are truly great. Perhaps my biggest issue is that I just don't like listening to frantic, unorganized, hyper teenagers - not even when I was one myself!

Regardless, McKinley is an author of RARE talent and I will continue to return to her works with great anticipation and enjoyment. To use L.M. Montgomery's way of describing people with like-minds, I feel she is essentially a "kindred spirit."

Clear and attractive. I used this book to teach the process, but it struck me that it has other potential uses.

This book may be useful in combination with Johnny Appleseed and A Packet of Seeds. Although this picture book is considered young juvenile, it could be used with higher levels, and worked well with some of my older English language learner students.

The book ends with a "From seed to plant" project planting beans, which may be appropriate for integrating science and math curricular concepts. The book simplifies a hard to understand process and may help prompt some experiments about growing plants under different conditions.

The class could talk about the kinds of crops grown during a particular historical time period and US location. When discussing pioneer history, for example, the students could plant sweet potatoes, which sprout easily in water, to talk about food availability during that historical period. The book may work well with other books--such as the cooking books--when teaching about food and farming.

Gail Gibbons has the best books for kids. I can see why educators use this books in the classroom. The concepts are broken down into easily understandable parts; great for little kids!

Great for primary introduction to plants and a must have nonfiction book for teachers ~ very informational.

This is an excellent book for younger students (K-3) about seeds and plants. I am using it as part of my summer school reading/writing program. First, I read the book to the students and we planted little radish seeds (they grow quickly) in see-through plastic cups. Later, the students read the book out loud to one another and we discussed the seed to plant concept. They also kept a journal to record their observations of their seeds with illustrations about every other day. This book presents a great opportunity to combine reading, writing and science.

This book's big, colorful illustrations and simple language do a superb job of explaining subjects such as plant reproduction, seed dispersal, pollen transference, and seed germination. Although intended for a younger audience, I read this book aloud to my fourth grade students to quickly build their background knowledge.

This book is exactly as described and what I wanted. After a trip to the Channel Islands where great precautions are taken to keep the environment as natural and pristine as possible, I developed an interest in California's flora and fauna. This book along with some other natural history guides has given me a new perspective on living in Southern California.

This is a wonderful reference book for more serious California native plant enthusiasts. It has detailed drawings of most referenced plants and also shows a map illustrating the native range of every specimen (which I find particularly interesting). Although I have found some missing species -- I really value this book. It is a great companion to the Sunset Western Garden Book (I go back and forth between the two). It also provides information on non-native plants that have long naturalized in the Golden State.

Hi I was required this book for my course at UCB, Trees: taxonomy, growth & structure. This book was extremely helpful for identification. The only weird thing I found thus far is in the index for hairy bush it says refer to hairy bush. Funny, but good reference book if you are just starting to identify.

This guide is easy to use and full of information. A great field guide for anyone interested in California's native woody plants.

This would seem to be OK. Nicely printed with attractive line-drawings that give a good overall picture of what the plant looks like (not quite one for every species, also somewhat short on botanical detail) and distribution maps (one for every species). A separate section with pretty decent color photographs (39 total).

The downside is that this is a guide for North and Central California, with the occasional South Californian species thrown in, which makes it a compromise. Also I don't really like the size: I would have preferred a bigger page size in a less chunky volume. But good value for money overall.

First, go read Kevin Currie's review, because it is fairly insightful. Much of what I would say is written there, and there is nothing there that I disagree with enough to contradict it, except that there is a great deal of science, you just have to filter it out of the remainder of the book. To be fair, much of it is after page 307, where he apparently stopped.

My generalized comment about this book is that reading it is like looking through a microscope with the eyepieces too far apart: There is some region in the center that is viewable through both eyes, but the remainder of the field of view is only accessible by part of what should be seeing it. The two fields are science and the humanities. They are overlapping in part, but there are problems with the integration. For example, as in all carefully worded scientific statements, the author is careful to word things as "evidence of this was not found in the study", which means that it is not disproven, it is merely inconclusive. The humanities references are largely inappropriate, making little or no sense in the context that they are in. They seem to scream, "I'm not just a scientist! I am a renaissance man, and my interests are diverse!" The problem is that they are irrelevant at best, distracting at worst, and never tied into the flow of ideas, except perhaps as a joke would be in Family Guy.

More particular comments, as I am wont to do with science books, are as follows:

First, his mention, on pg. 10, of the evolution of distanced altruism being formerly impossible, is quite clever. I haven't ever seen this suggestion before, even if it is not unique, and it is quite useful.

Second, on pg. 136, amongst other places, Dr. Hauser refers to the unchanging status of human moral and psychological systems. This is, perhaps, the second greatest flaw with the book (the first comes shortly, rest assured). As at least one other reviewer has mentioned, the nature of mankind should never be assumed static.

Third, and the greatest weakness of the book, the acceptance of the "Rawlsian creature" is made fait accompli, as Kevin Currie alludes to. To see why this is a problem, greater details are necessary.

The premise of the book is that there is an underlying moral system that is universal to all humans, but that is largely inaccessible to our cognitive system. It just does its job, and then the conscious mind reationalizes whatever decision is made. Dr. Hauser then gives three different conceptions of moral creatures: a Kantian, which may or may not be accurate (see other reviews), a Humean (which has not been commented upon), and a Rawlsian (which seems to be lifted from the thesis of a graduate student, at least from the text).

In typical philosophical and scientific style, the three are presented, and then the alternatives are tested. This goes on for about two hundred pages, with little or no resolution. Then, somehow, the Rawlsian creature wins, without any explanation, on pg. 251. This is not only one of the last mentions of ANY of the moral systems, until the final page, but it marks the point where the other systems are no longer mentioned at all. This smacks of bad philosophy (which is understandable, since it appears Dr. Hauser's hobby, rather than his forte) AND bad science (which is inexcusable, since this is his career).

Fourth, and more minor, on pg. 313, Dr. Hauser suggests that a stable reciprocal system requires that: "individuals must recognize each other, recall what was given to whom, how much, when, and with what costs." This is inaccurate, at the least. He backs off of this, to a degree, later, never fully restating this entire list (although portions are continually mentioned). A stable reciprocal system merely requires that there is knowledge that one or more persons or entities owe other persons or entities something. How much, who, and costs are irrelevant. They are "tuning" if you will.

Other than these specific complaints, I will reiterate that the book tends to wander, as if the author decided that he only wanted six chapters in the body, and refused to consider additional ones. This makes them an awkward pastiche of multiple, seemingly unrelated subjects. The connections are somewhat mysterious, at least to me. Also, there is needless repetition of many experimental results and statements that elongates and muddies the book.

It is good subject matter, and it is a good effort at summarizing it. The best thing here is the synopsis of what remains to be discovered. Now if we can start answering those questions, we can decide how morality works and how it evolved. Until then, breeze through this and go back to Shermer for better writing.

C-

Harkius

In "Moral Minds", Marc Hauser makes a great case for the existence of an innate morality that exists within all humans, similar to Noam Chomsky's innate organ of language. Drawing on a vast field of research and history, the reader is led step by step to the understanding that morality is an evolved capability which exists not only in humans, but in various degrees in the other animals in the world. His expositions are clear, his thoughts lucid, and aside from a short and mostly pointless digression discussing Conway's Game of Life, the book is brilliant. Highly recommended to anyone, especially those who are tired of the old "atheists are amoral" arguments.

For the definitive review of this book, readers should consult Richard Rorty's piece in the New York Times (available online). Rorty points out the absurd mismatch between on the one hand the triumphalist rhetoric of the book (Hauser declares we are entering a new era when science will finally reveal the Truth about "The Nature of Right and Wrong" (the book's subtitle)), and on the other hand the almost total lack of actual concrete results. In the end, despite its excessive length this book tells us little about morality. It mostly deals with the debate between the role of emotion and reason in ethics, but giving us rather caricatured views of each side (especially of Kant's rationalist ethics, which Hauser badly misunderstands). Hauser's actual concrete claims about morality are mostly trivial or vacuous(my favorite is Hauser's "scientific" conclusion that people are partly selfish, partly altruistic). This book is largely an exercise in armchair speculation about how morality evolved to suit a hunter-gatherer lifestyle on the "savanna" many thousands of years ago (one might call this the Flintstones Theory of human nature). There is however no evidence for this claim, and lots of evidence against it (for example, most people recognize some sort of moral duties to animals, yet this would make no sense from an adaptive perspective). In fact, Hauser does not reveal the depths of the controversy even among biologists as to whether morality is even an adaptation at all, let alone an adaptation to the hunter-gatherer state. In the end, the only practical recommendation he offers us about morality is a deeply conservative one: you can't change human nature, our "moral instincts" are "immune" to the attempted changes mandated by religion, laws, and social rules. In fact, the advice is useless, since he doesn't say just what particular instincts can't be changed, or even what our moral instincts are in general. But there is little reason to take his advice anyway. In fact, even a basic knowledge of history shows the possibility of radical moral shifts in very short time periods: think of the rise of women's rights, or how after slavery was universally accepted for thousands of years, yet in the course of a century became morally forbidden. (One can imagine a 19th century Hauser declaiming against the abolitionists, warning that our moral "instincts" to oppress the "outgroup" are too strong for society to meddle with!). As Rorty points out, when society wants to change people's moral attitudes, it would be better off simply trying to see if the changes can be made, rather than listen to the unsupported speculations of biologists about how human nature is fixed and unchangeable. Indeed, there is an ironic reversal here. Usually, it is the religious & political leaders are usually portrayed as dogmatic and conservative, and the scientists who are supposed to be the experimentalists, calling for trial and error. Now it is the non-scientists who have become the open-minded experimentalists!

After about 300 pages, I decided to look at some amazon reviews for this book. I was wondering if others had as tough a time as I did following Hauser. I was curious to find out if others were as confused as I was about how this book could be called a work of science rather than an attempt of a scientist to delve into philosophy.

I am somewhat relieved that others came away with the same impression. Before I got this book, I was excited indeed to read it. I have read much both in moral philosophy and explorations of the intersection between it and biology (books by Shermer, Midgley, Ridley, Richard Posner, and works of evolutionary psychology.)

I don't want to risk exagerating, but this one is probably the worst of them. Hauser states his intent to show that morality is instinctual and innate in the sense that linguists have shown a "language instinct." That is, Hauser recognizes moral differences between cultures, but wants to show that morality has basic rules that are innately present, and that variation - like in language - is an acquired thing.

And on top of this, he wants to tie his findings to the conception of morality of John Rawls' "Veil of Ignorance" theory, rather than David Hume and Adam Smith's more emotive theory of morality. Where he does this exactly, I am not sure. I tried to decipher his argument, but the section of the book where he argues for a Rawlsian, rather than a Humean, conception of moral development seems actually to do the opposite. He succeeds only in showing that human moral judgments are first made on gut intuition and only after use reason either to justify or refine them. Humean indeed!

The other area where I was unclear was on how, exactly, Hauser showed that our moral sense is in any way objective across cultures. (I happen to believe this, but I have seen the argument made much better elsewhere!) In fact, this is a very hard case to make. Hauser says over and over that while the human moral sense is in some ways universal, variation is to be expected. Unfortunately, that is a very difficult statement to make in science. (It is like saying that while we are predicting that a certain law is universal, it manifests itself in so many different ways that appearance of universality should not be expected, enough that the law will not seem universal at all to our tests. In other words, "It is universal despite the fact of numerous exceptions to the rule." Science indeed!)

I also missed the part where Hauser goes into the possible explanations for how we may have acquired such moral instincts. (That is okay, I have heard and seen them elsewhere, and am convinced of many of them. I think particularly of Matt Ridley and Michael Shermer.) This may not be Hauser's fault, but my own. As I mentioned, I stopped at around page 300. But should it have taken him that long to get around to evolutionary explanations of moral development?

To conclude, the biggest problem with this book is that it meanders to a degree that writing a summary for each chapter would be almost impossible. Hauser goes in several directions during each chapter. Because of this, it seems that he doesn't make any real case for anything because he meanders too much.

Another big problem is that too much of this book is spent on moral philosphy such that a reader wanting discourse on science will be disappointed. There is some here, to be sure, but most of it is social science and speculative economics (games devised by economists to get a glimpse of our moral faculties at work).

But here are the seven words that sum up why I gave it two stars: this book falls flat on all counts.

Synchronicity is when you are with a company called BuzZen and your favorite poet writes a book called Honeybee. It arrived today and I have spent the day savoring it.

"Watch us humans as we enter our rooms,remove our shoes and watches, and stretch out on the bed with a single good book. It's the honey of the mind time. Light shines through our little jars."

Bees Were Better

"In college people were always breaking up.
We broke up in parking lots,
beside fountains.
Two people broke up
across the table from me
at the library.
I could not sit at that table again
though I did not know them.
I studied bees, who were able
to convey messages through dancing
and could find their ways
home to their hives
even if someone put up a blockade of sheets
and boards and wire.
Bees had radar in their wings and brains
that humans could barely understand.
I wrote a paper proclaiming
their brilliance and superiority
and revised it at a small cafe
featuring wooden hive-shaped honey dippers
in silver honeypots
on every table."

Part of me feels as though I should include a disclaimer when I write about a new book by Naomi, but that is silly -- she is not really my cousin; it just feels that way, having been lucky enough over the years to spend tiny bits of time around her and receive the occasional note that always carries with it a peacefulness like that which I experience upon reading correspondence from Tony, my eldest cousin on my Sicilian side. As I've written previously, Naomi is a fellow Piscian and fellow vegetarian whom I've seen deftly transform a cardboard convention center room into a sacred space with simply a basket of pita, a bowl of hummus, and a book of poetry.

I read and admire a lot of poetry for children and adolescents. I am quite often entertained by it and always share it at booktalks -- including some pieces I first read as a child.

I find something so special in getting to spend an afternoon reading Naomi's work.

HONEYBEE is Naomi's new collection of poetry. Each of the eighty-two poems has a wonderful personal quality; the collection reads as if it is a series of notes in various poetic forms that she has written to the reader.

"...My niece in Australia told me that the students in her university class were required to read the blog of an Iraqi citizen and write about it before they could graduate. She chose a girl who is now fifteen writing under the pseudonym Sunshine. I began reading Sunshine's blog too. I love the way she writes about the details of her life-her friends, the books she is reading, her activities and memories. Life is so difficult since the war started, but still she ends her entries with lines like, 'Try not to lose hope.' She wishes she could live the way kids in other countries live, without so much constant violence surrounding them. Sunshine has become my personal hero, drinking deeply out of the moments. So much is passing so fast..."

This is a bittersweet collection, as Naomi is clearly feeling the pain -- like so many of us -- that continues to be the product of five years of war and war spending. It is also a collection that repeatedly alludes to bees and to the mysterious and well-publicized disappearance of a lot of honeybees in a very short time:

"All the theories about the disappearing bees omit one possibility: they are sick of the word 'busy.' They are on strike. Sure this cycling and collecting and producing is what they've done for so long...worker and queen and drone...blossom and hive and comb... but the last thing the bees want stuck in their pollen baskets is a cliche. Busy? Not I. We can't even know if they adore the fragrances of flowers...but they must, right? Let's hope so. Let's hope there's pleasure in it.

In France, some teenagers asked me, 'Is it true, in your country, students don't take time to sit down and drink tea and eat pie upon return from school?'

Eat pie? This was hard to answer.

'I hope they eat pie,' I said. We all need pie.'
Then I started looking for a restaurant that served pie..."

I, myself, headed for the funky little cafe in Sebastopol where my teenage daughter works after school. I spent the afternoon there, with Rosemary bringing me iced herbal tea and little vegetable sandwiches, and Naomi talking to me through her book, bringing me up to date on her life and observations as one of our most treasured poets.

"And I looked around that gate of late and weary ones and thought, this is the world I want to live in."

I highly recommend that you find a nice place to spend an afternoon and experience HONEYBEE.