Ilaria Guarducci

(Originally posted on Word Cauldron.)

I received this as a Kindle First Reads book for June 2019.

When I got my selections for Kindle First Reads this month, it was more of the same: WWII, biographies of people I’ve never hard of or have no interest in reading about, and psychological thrillers. Boring! I was going to pick nothing, but then looked at the children's one and it seemed promising.

Until I read the disturbing and alarming reviews on Amazon.

I decided to not get it and forego a free book this month, but morbid curiosity has won out and I got Spiky. I wanted to read it for myself and form my own opinion.

Spiky has a lot of spikes on him. This is great because he is a loner and the spikes keep people away from him.

He is also BAD. VERY BAD. His dad even sent him to a school for being bad, that is how bad he is.

To demonstrate how bad he is, there are lots of snarling drawings of him, and we learn that he steals food from other animals, makes faces at the trees, and laughs at frogs for being ugly. The most upsetting bits for other reviewers were that he also:

- Pulls the wings off butterflies because he is jealous they can fly (this is only in text, the graphic shows him trying to catch a butterfly with a net).

- Captures birds in glass jars to punish them for being so happy (graphic does show birds in a glass jar).

- Pokes holes in the shells of live snails because are slimy and slow (this is only in text, the graphic shows his shadow looming over a fleeing snail).

But, one day, all of his spikes fall out.

Here we come to the crux of Spiky's identity crisis: His whole view of himself came from his dad, who taught Spiky that he is bad because he has spikes, which are sharp and hurtful and intimidating (meaning that as a person porcupine Spiky must also be sharp and hurtful and intimidating to others so his inside reflects his outside).

But, now that he has no spikes, who is Spiky? His only representation of his identity and personality has disappeared. He had never considered who he is beyond the physical attribute of his spikes.

While contemplating all of this, the other animals make fun of Spiky because he is naked and squishy and pink and does not look scary any longer.

While sulking on a rock, a rabbit named Bernardo approaches Spiky and asks him what's wrong. Spiky tells Bernardo that he doesn't know who he is anymore without his spikes, and Bernardo takes Spiky under his wing paw, introduces Spiky to his family, and Spiky gets to know them all.

Spiky also learns about all the activities you can do that don't involve hurting others and what a hindrance his spikes had been—suddenly, he could now feel the cool breezes, enjoy swimming as the water splashes on him, sunbathe, and roll in the grass so the blades tickled him.

Eventually, Spiky's spikes return (there is no explanation for these occurrences, other than I guess the Universe is trying to tell him something) and, with that, he assumes his scary identity has also returned, so he resumes scaring the other animals in the forest as if nothing ever happened.

Except something did happen, because he experienced personal growth.

So, being scary doesn't feel quite right anymore.

Spiky goes back to his sulking rock and ponders what the point of all the scariness is. He thinks about how he has come to appreciate the vibrancy the other animals bring to the forest, how the trees had sheltered him when he played in the grass, and how the birds weren't as annoying as the thought (though he still doesn't like snails).

Sidenote: I do wish he had also had thoughts here about how terrible it was to trap the birds, bore holes into the live snails, and de-wing the butterflies to reinforce that those things are to be regretted too since they were the most reprehensible.

Bernardo finds him and asks what's wrong. Spiky asks Bernardo if he is afraid of him now that he has his spikes back, and Bernardo says he isn't afraid because Spiky is still Spiky, with or without his his spikes. Bernardo invites Spiky to visit his family again and for many days they do activities and have fun (there is a cute drawing of Spiky on a blow-up raft in the water, but it is deflating because one of his spikes poked a hole in it, LOL).

Over time, Spiky learns that it feels good to be kind and open to new experiences and to make friends and that his spikes don't define him.

I think this book is supposed to be a commentary on how:

- Our looks do not define who we (or others) are

- Letting others define us instead of figuring out who we are on our own can be detrimental

- Being open and honest about who we are with others instead of learning to hide behind "armor" (spikes) and masks results in happiness

- It is hurtful when we judge others (and ourselves) on appearance only

- Overly identifying with physical features or doing that to others can be harmful and limiting

The fact that it does all of this in less than 20 pages is pretty impressive, honestly, and I do think these are valuable lessons and present a good opportunity for a talk with children about this kind of self-awareness (critical thinking in these areas can never begin too early, in my opinion).

What is unfortunate is that I do think the book would have been just as effective and more appealing to a wider audience without the three disturbing animal abuse examples, particularly since some may stop reading at that point and never get to the life lessons Spiky learns. For one thing, there are plenty of other examples that could emphasize how bad Spiky is without venturing into sociopathic territory—honestly, the author could have stopped after laughing at the frogs for being ugly. But, my biggest concern is that these examples could plant ideas into the impressionable heads of children. Even though the book repeatedly says these things are "bad" (meaning, "don't do them"):

- I'm not sure very young children reading this on their own would be mentally and emotionally mature enough to really understand this book is not condoning those things without a parent to back it up.

- "Bad" things can be appealing because of the contrary nature of humans in that, once we are told not to do something, that thing is then all we want to do (even knowing, or especially knowing, it's a "bad" thing to do).

So, because of these nuances I docked a 1/2 star, bringing it down to a 3.

I don't have kids, but if I did I always thought that I'd try to read the books my kids are reading (or at least skim them) to vet the content, and this book is an excellent example of why I feel this is a good idea. I think the way I would handle this book is to read it with the children (even if they are able to read on their own) at least for the first time, then use it as an opportunity to talk about what Spiky learned and specifically to address the animal cruelty issues. For very young children, you could skip those pages altogether or alter the wording to make it less disturbing until the children are old enough to read on their own and realize you are skipping whole sections, which would also mean they'd be old enough to have a talk about it all.

I did like the artwork. The colors were soothing and the style of drawings was unique. It almost felt reminiscent of some of the drawings in books from when I was a kid (70s).… (més)