The Forum > General Discussion > Visual art versus film?
Visual art versus film?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
-
- All
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 2 March 2014 1:12:52 PM
|
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
![]() |
![]() Syndicate RSS/XML ![]() |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
The children's book that you mention is also
a great favourite of my grand-children. I've
used it for numerous Story-Time sessons - and
of course received laughs of delight from the
youngsters. One of my grand-children recently picked
up from child-care the words "pooh-bum," which he
delights in repeating to adults to see what their
reaction is going to be. Children are constantly
testing us . I recall one Story-Time session when
we were singing the old favourite - "Old MacDonald
Had a Farm," and going around the class kids came
up with the various animals, "Old MacDonald had a
farm, and on that farm he had a cow ..." "And a
horse.." "And a dog..." and so on - until finally
one smarty-pants came out with, "Old Macdonald had
a penis!" And everyone stopped and looked at me to
see what my reaction would be. I merely smiled and
replied, "Yes, he had one of those, but we're talking
about animals here ... Old MacDonald had some ducks..."
The mother's thought I'd handled the situation well.
Kids will continue to surprise us.
As for the film in question here?
I haven't seen it and probably won't because sitting
through anything that takes six hours has to be
really exceptional for me to do that. The last film
of that sort of length that I attended was "War and
Peace." But that was exceptional.