I must have read this book when it first came out in 1984, and it was one of my favorites. Now, reading it again later (for a Children's Lit class), I can see why. It's a bit sad, but a wonderful book.

I liked this book a lot. It was sad when Jeff and the dog named Foxy almost got killed in a car accident. It was happy too. Like when he found it. It was also iteresting that the kid Jeff could sneak out of the hospital. This time I actually liked reading it because it was like a adventure.

It is a very good book and has a great ending. My favorite part is when Jeff finds Foxy, after being lost, and fixes her up and makes her happy.

I read this book as a child and it was a wonderful book.You really feel that you are there with the characters.I went on to read other books by the same author all were written with the same ability to take you to that moment and share it with the characters.Many years later I was fortunate enough to meet someone through our mutual love of horses,who became a good friend.She told me that she was a writer and yes she was Helen Griffiths.The main character of this book was a real dog who the family had adopted from the streets in Spain,I met her too and she was a fabulous personality in her own right.She died of old age surrounded by those who loved her.I feel privileged to have known her and her family,and having known what she went through in her earlier life makes it amazing that she was such an even tempered sweet natured soul.Highly recommended reading for kids (even grown up ones).A book that will definitely be on my sons' reading list

I read this book when I was a kid several times, I absolutley loved it. It kept me reading and also taught me valuable lessons. It teaches compassion- you are reading this with the perspective of a homeless abused dog. It has many adventures and is just a great book for the imagination and soul. I recommend it, as soon as my little boy can read I definatley want this book to be on his list!

This book is a wonderful epic tale with a message that tells you how strong a mother can really be when her children are on the line. It is a story that shows the ups and downs of motherhood, and childhood through a dog's perspective. One example of the ups of their lives were each puppy needed food from their mother, and every day the mother ventured out into the world to get it. Another example, but this time the downs were the mother left to get food,and the pups' got to excited and left the home. The went far away from their current position until their couriosity, and anxiety drove them so far away they couldnt find their way back. Now, this is where the proverb couriosity killed the cat, or in this case kills the dogs would come to place. Never the less, I thought that this book was wonderful, and it even made me cry at some parts. I recommend this book to anyone who is someone who loves epics, but still kind at heart.

Reading this book to your child will remind you of how loving and caring your child is in his or her own way. How children love to imitate the adults around them because they admire them, want to spend time with them, and love to help. But most of all how in their innocense they can persive our state of mind and and give us in a simple act more love than we ever thought possible.

Janetta, a city girl, is not certain that she will like visiting her grandfather in rural Georgia. She's never been in the country before and everything--including the mule--frightens her. Grandaddy, however, is a gentle man wise to feelings and needs of little girls. He soon puts her at ease by telling outrageous tall tales. Their relationship grows closer throughout a series of visits.

This is a remarkably sweet--but never cloying--book. The book is a reprint of three previously published books, but the stories flow together so well that it seems as though they were originally designed to be one book. The chapters are short enough and contain enough pictures to encourage beginning chapter book readers. The characters are engaging and the stories are funny and frequently touching.

Reading this book to my son brought back so many chidhood memories of spending time at my grandaddy's place. It is a wonderful story for teaching young children about relationships with older adults and learning to appreciate differnt lifestyles.

This is a very fun, interesting, and funny book... I loved it! This book is about a teenage boy genius who is always doing experiments and making discoveries... a very good book... I recommend this book to anyone who enjoys fun/funny books... A great book for all!!! EXCELLENT!!!

I am a cat lover, myself. I did a book project of this story where I had to act out the main charactor, which was Moshie! I got an A!!! I loved the story!

A wonderful, unique "ghost" story. I got so into the characters and the scenes I thought I heard a horse trotting as I read the book.

A great book for those children who maybe the end result of a bully.

Enought action and mystery to keep the pages turning. I would give it to a 9-10 year old to read.

The young man in the story deals with many problems and situations while trying to adjust from city to counrty life, and the appearance of a horse that supposedly died in a barn fire. I think it will be very interesting reading for our students. Recommended for the 3rd grade level.

As I read this play, my family is in the process of moving a thousand miles away from the farm where I grew up. Though I am so far away from the Russian culture and time of this play, the themes of place, tradition, and inevitable change resonated inside of me, and I am grateful to Chekhov for the way he has handled them.

The Cherry Orchard is a play about change, and the symbolism is pretty easy to recognize. What makes it stand apart, I think, from a thousand other plays on the same theme is its wonderful sense of comedy, of smiling sadness. Chekhov all his life insisted it was a comedy. As the Cherry Orchard slips away from the Ranevskys, they seem to smile at its going. As they are unable to change their habits -- still lending money they don't have, still spending extravagantly -- they quietly laugh at their own foolishness. The change comes, and they leave, heartbroken -- but embracing the change at the same time, only feebling struggling against it. One feels saddest, in the end, for Lopakhin, the new owner of the Cherry Orchard. He seems to believe he has bought happiness and friends, but is quickly discovering the emptiness of money and possessions, as no one wants to borrow from him, and no one seems to pay him much heed at all.

Chekhov paints with a fine brush, and I appreciate that. There is no thunderstorming, no ranting and raving in this work. There is a fine and subtle, sad and comedic portrayal of a family and a place encountering change. It is a heartbreak with a smile.

The translation, though the only one I've read, seems good. It is easy to follow and rich in simple feeling.

if you'd like to discuss this play with me, or recommend something i might enjoy, or just chat, e-mail me at williekrischke@hotmail.com.

The cherry orchard is symbolic of the old order in rural Russia, and Chekhov's short play illustrates the social transformation started in the 19th century in a simple and impressive manner. I find it interesting that one previous reviewer calls the Cherry Orchard an "effective allegory of the Bolshevik revolution", since it was written long before 1917. This goes to show exactly how in tune with his times Chekhov was. Character development is limited in this play as there are many roles and few pages, but we are introduced to the classic types also found in other pre-revolutionary Russian literature: the arriviste businessman, the radical escapist student, the obnoxious clerk, the nostalgic aristorcrat, the loyal peasant. In the play, Madame Ravensky leaves her good-for-nothing husband in Paris and returns to the family estate, which she owns with her brother Gayev. The economy of this aristocratic family is fledgling, but they are unable to change their spending patterns and accumstom themselves to a lower living standard. They are also unwilling to cut down the cherry orchard and use the land for villa development, as they are urged by the crude but business-savvy businessman Lopakhin. Lopakhin eventually buys their entire property at an auction, and the reality of the new age eventually dawns on everyone except the ancient servant who takes his last breath still repeating 'young wood, green wood'. An almost spooky dialogue occurs in the last act between Lopakhin and the radical student Trophimov, with the 20th century future of Russia clearly in the balance: work and money, represented by Lopakhin, is rejected by the young utopian idealist. In retrospect, this single scene gives a mind-boggling perspective on Russian history; and some sense of why Russia is still a barbarous country of 'dirt, vulgarity and boredom' as described by the disgruntled characters in Chekhov's play.

"How should one live?" is the fundamental question driving most of Chekhov's work, and it is very overtly laid bare in The Cherry Orchard. Should the aristocratic family in decline stick to owning their cherry orchard (representative of the grandiose trappings of Russian aristocracy), or give in to modern commercialization in order to survive? What is the value of tradition, and how many trees should one own? Chekhov will not answer these questions for you, but he poses them in most interesting ways. In addition to wise insights into such fundamental dilemmas, Chekhov also provides a lot of witty banter, and a great slice-of-life view at 19th century Russian high culture. But this is not just a Russian play or a 19th century play; its themes, questions, and prospective answers are relevant for individuals coping with society and history in any place, and at any time.

Despite its "trendy" title -- very postmodern, combining Salman Rushdie with George Lucas and Star Wars -- and the multiple authorship, this survey is a very readable, clearly articulated consideration of the central problems and issues in post-colonial scholarship. The authors write seamlessly as one, not as a committee, though it is clear that they combine complementary areas of expertise. The consideration of feminist scholarship was perhaps the most disappointing: unlike the other analyses, it seemed desultory. The book is also to be commended for being not merely a conscientious account of post-colonial research, but also a thoughtful and fair-minded critique as well.