I backed the project, and think it will make a great gift for my nephew. It's something he can grow into, where he can read the book part with his parents right now, and then start doing the problems as he gets older.
I think this project did well for a few key reasons:
1) STEM, STEM, STEM and code, code, code. The timing is right. Look at all the coverage this got in big mainstream media publications. Here is a project to help your child get into programming at a young age.
2) There is a need for introducing programming to children in an accessible way. There is some stuff on the market, but not that much, and this might be the first centered around a colorful children's book. I also think this is more approachable for parents too. A cold, clinical textbook would scare off many parents.
3) Linda is attractive, bubbly and non-American (on a heavily American site). This never hurts with crowdfunding. The fact that she is female in a heavy male-dominated space helps too. I can't fault her at all for this, and why not harness it?
I hope it turns out well and that this is just the beginning for Linda and her books. I'm excited to read it with my future child.
? Free publicity always helps. I'm not sure how Rails Girls is popular in the US, but considering we have it in Slovenia, I'd say it's pretty successful.
I like the idea and I backed it. Book for kids can be as simple as picture books. Parents and mentors are the one supposed to help them to learn the hard stuff.
But I also want to say that I have some feedback for the video. I just thought there was too much "smiles". I don't know how to put it: but it's strange and weird to see someone posting a video of her smiling like literally every few seconds, throwing things every minute or so. A bit formal will be great.
There was too many moving. Scenes were constantly changing while the speech was on-going. It was hard to concentrate, pay attention to the dialogue and the animation at the same time. The main point wasn't delivered/pitched to me right away. I wasn't too sure what exactly would go into the book and how parents/mentors can help guide the kids in general from the video. Essentially, an ad that changes scene every 1 second is going to hurt viewers.
Here is another project (which I backed too), I am not trying to promote it (but putting out here is guilty of promoting it). Check wongfuproduction movie fundraising video on Youtube. That was a lot easier to grasp.
I suspect that the goal was to show the author's personality. The word that comes to mind is playful. This is a book for 5 to 7 year olds. You want it to be playful to capture children's attention and imagination. Judging from number of sexist comments around this was misinterpreted in number of wrong ways. Fortunately, as the campaign numbers proved there are many people who believe in the presented idea and in Linda being able to deliver a great book that will inspire kids to learn even more about the technology!
"The word that comes to mind is playful. This is a book for 5 to 7 year olds. You want it to be playful to capture children's attention and imagination."
To play Devils Advocate, the video was not intended for children. Unless even the kids in the Bay have their hands on fat stacks of cash.
I had similar issues with the video. I normally just ignore Kickstarter videos, but watched this one hoping to learn more about what was in the book and workbook. It definitely didn't solve my problem, and there was something about the forced gaiety that felt a little creepy to me.
What would have been much more effective for me was videos of kids actually working their way through the materials. Lots of potential for visual appeal and warm fuzzies, but practical and on point.
The smiling is very much a cultural thing. Americans find it strange when Japanese and Korean women choose to talk in a very high-pitched voice, also; it's the same type of effect.
Americans will also laugh right up in your face; if they cover a laugh, that's considered rude and condescending. Cultures differ.
> Start a blog where you share progress on your project. This will hold you accountable and let people know what you’re working on.
For a long time I wrote off the idea of having a blog because it seemed vain. I don't usually have any great ideas that anyone else needs to know about, and my trials of learning new things are just the same as everyone else's. However, over the past few months I've realized that I was dead wrong. Watching a few good series of blogs like [1] and [2] has shown me that even if you don't have anything world shattering it is still great as a means to make learning more important. After all, you can't let down your readers, can you?
How do you think the chronological, little-bit-at-a-time blog format compares to longer articles, or books?
I've found individual blog posts, linked to from sites like HN or found in web searches, to be greatly helpful, but often when I go to a blog like one of those that you shared here, and try to start reading it from the top, it feels disorganized; the content isn't presented in any ordering that necessarily makes good pedagogical sense.
When blogs first started getting popular, I thought, "Man, chronological organization is the dumbest possible structure. Somebody will soon come up with something better." And so I never started a blog. Now I just feel dumb for waiting.
The best solutions I've seen for this are a) organized post series (e.g., [1]) and posts that aggregate a bunch of things previously written (e.g. [2]). I'd like to see people take that further, so if people have other examples of interesting approaches, I'd love it if they could reply with them.
I will say that editorial work is hard. As I've experimented with writing a book, it's clear to me that whatever I think the plan is up front, it's going to change, and that refactoring the structure as I go is expensive. It's cheaper to do it in large batches. So I think most blogs will just always suck in this regard. I suspect the future is in collaboration, where the author and blog readers can collectively build and maintain the table of contents and intro material. That would mirror the writer/editor collaboration that goes into books.
I had similar sentiments about the vanity of blogging. But I also like to write, and found that posting something publicly forces me to take the task seriously and actually attempt to do a good job and/or follow through. I reconcile with my concerns of vanity by doing nothing to promote the blog. From what I can tell, I have yet to attract a single reader, other than spam bots. The added bonus to not having any readers, is that I don't have to worry if the topics I write about are interesting or original.
I consider the blog to be good writing practice, and if/when the time comes where a job I am pursuing requires some extensive writing experience, at the very least I will have a small body of work to show off.
This is really inspiring! I had no idea that Linda co-founded Rails Girls, and for some reason I had formed the impression that she was an illustrator before becoming a programmer. I didn't know that she had learned to draw so that she could create the book.
This advice is golden, and it's pretty cool to see such joy, enthusiasm, and generosity rewarded.
I know that you're just kidding, but in all seriousness, a "Scary Stories" book would be useful as a training doc.
Most startups have a coding conventions guide for new hires -- and in my experience, it's a dry and tedious thing to study.
It would be funny and interesting to engage new programmers with animated horror stories instead of just: "Braces go on the next line...and please sanitize your data."
I think it would be fantastic to have a scary stories version. It would fit in with a slightly older audience too after they grow out of the children's book phase.
I'm pretty sure the only reason this is getting so much funding is because the majority of computer science folk are horny men who are glossing over the dreamhouse attire / makeup / presentation put on in the video. "Hi I'm little Ruby and I wear polka-dots and pink lipstick, let me be your fantasy" That said, I did fund it, because I'm a horny coder and Linda is very sexy.
Although you have a point, it does lie within the mix of others. There are horny men in every sector/industry but yes it is much noticeable in the IT and gaming sector. However this has a lot to do with the social settings, stereotypes and minority/majority issue. I remember once setting up an Xbox account for my gf and making her play a round of some game (she is not into gaming). I was amazed at how many friend request and messages she received in such a short period of time.
There are three types of people who funded this project:
1) People who were really interested in the book.
2) People who saw a woman and thought funding it would be right thing to encourage and lessen the gender divide.
3) People who saw a pretty girl and wanted to please.
I honestly don't believe the third type of people were responsible for the majority of funding. Why? Simple, most of them would have tried to get in touch with her by now and since its not a pleasant experience getting creepy messages from strangers, had it happened, it would have been mentioned on her blogpost.
The reasons why I din't fund?
I was turned off by the marketing video. She was being unnecessarily flirtatious/kiddish with the camera. Not even once did they show an actual kid in the whole video, let alone trying to get them to learn from it.
I din't have a need for the product, or it wasn't appealing enough to have it for my nephew and niece.
> Not even once did they show an actual kid in the whole video, let alone trying to get them to learn from it.
Many parents are extremely hesitant to put pictures of their children online. If you're concerned, ask about it – a testimonial, note, etc. might be more within her comfort zone.
>If you're concerned, ask about it – a testimonial, note, etc. might be more within her comfort zone.
I don't really care enough to ask(email) about it but it is really unusual to see a product targeted for children being marketed by a flirtatious woman (or mom?) instead of showing actual kids using it. I would find it similarly unusual if I were to see an ad on TV for a kid's toy without any kids in them.
The difference is that most of the TV ads you see are produced by media professionals with 6+-figure budgets. I thought the video was understandable for someone who isn't a professional video producer and is trying to get a project off the group on a shoe-string budget.
There is a huge difference between finding someone attractive and reducing them to nothing more than a sex object. Funding this because you're horny is disrespectful to everyone.
Imagine for a second that Lebron James were to create a Kickstarter for a cookbook he wanted to make, which was funded to the tune of $100,000. Obviously, much of this money would come from people who didn't really care about the superstar's take on the perfect omelette, but valued his athleticism enough that they wanted to support him in other endeavors. Is this reduction of James to nothing more than his basketball skills equally problematic? If not, what do you see as the difference that makes this latter example of objectification ok?
What a terrible analogy. It's not like Linda Liukas is a pin-up model trying to trade on her sexuality. She's an educator and illustrator who is trying to do something great.
Please, stop being so damn creepy and/or supporting people who are so damn creepy. This community doesn't have to be such a hostile place.
> It's not like Linda Liukas is a pin-up model trying to trade on her sexuality.
So, I get what you're trying to say, but this is a tough one. Because, Linda did play up as a flirtatious girly girl in the promo video. Seriously, just watch the video: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lindaliukas/hello-ruby - and imagine if it was a man doing all of those things. Very strange, right? She's not behaving like a mature adult, she's got her shoes on the sofa... she's sitting in a clearly uncomfortable way... and I have to sit through a video in which I have to watch her fix her cute shoes? Why? Why not feature some kids in a promo video doing kiddy things, if she was going for the kiddy vibe? The flirtatious vibe that she instead chose to force in that video was very unnecessary in my opinion. So, paradoxically, it's Linda that's reducing women to sexual objects if she feels she has to behave in that way in order to sell up some books.
If you think that is flirtatious and sexualized, you have some serious issues. That video is whimsical and a bit over-produced, but it evokes play, not foreplay.
Does someone need to be in a burqa and talk in a monotone to keep the creeps from being creepy? How narrow a range of expression do you want for women before you start to make their objectification their fault?
Thought experiment: you see a man, same age as Linda, doing all the things Linda is doing (squinting eyes, and then abruptly opening them and doing an affected laugh, fixing clothes, fixing cute socks, sitting on a sofa with legs bent and shoes sitting alongside, jumping up and down on the couch, etc.), what do you think of him?
If you're not picking up on the flirtatious undertones, if you have no problem with that kind of unprofessional presentation, it's not me who has some serious issues, it's you.
Also, I'd rather have my kids focus less on trying hard with clothes and looks and more on the more substantive things in life. The focus in that video simply should not have been on Linda and her awesome persona. But it was. I wish I didn't have to sit through Linda fixing her shoe-socks, but it was in the video, I watched it. It was peculiar.
Can't agree more. If people can't see what you're talking about, they're probably vulnerable to it. They're buying what that manipulative effort sells.
I totally find her gestures and the shots pretentious. I believe that's a part of her sales pitch but it didn't have to be, because the book idea is already good enough to sell.
Finding this video pretentious is one thing, but being upset at the video because you have converted a person into a sex object based on really sexist notions about play and child-like behaviors is a red flag. We have seem multiple commenter take that point of view on the video.
Yes, that is precisely and literally what I am saying. I'm saying that if women wish to be taken seriously they need to behave like men.
Thank you for this very constructive dialogue, I have developed so much insight in this exchange. You've clearly gone to great lengths to communicate thoughtfully and understand the true matter in this situation. Thank you.
I think you're downplaying the fact that many people still view computer science with mystery, fear, and antagonism. Improving pointlessly negative cultural attitudes from a young age is a worthwhile venture, and I wish someone would do it with mathematics as well.
I didn't understand the mathematics, but I thought the cartoon characters were delightful. They made me want to learn math, and I could hardly wait until getting to calculus myself, so I could actually understand the book.
An educational app for children's mathematics has been on my mind for years. But I always thought the market was too small. The success of this story is making me think about finally writing one, maybe less technical and more adventurous.
The funding level validates the kickstarter and the video not necessarily the topic. I totally support thoughtful, engaging intellectual children's apps. Build something small and see how well it sticks, iterate.
Do you realize that this talks more about yourself than about other people?
I watched the entire video and not a single sexual thought came out out it, far from it, just the thought that it could be useful for my kids.
I found also very interesting how she frame adding publicity of her cause in HN as useful advice, because it is useful advice!!. I have a company on my own so I know a little about marketting.
Ugh. This video wasn't made for your male gaze. I can't believe you are sexualizing a video featuring a woman because its whimsical (well I can believe it, you sound like a tremendous asshole).
The presentation and video was amazing. I immediately fell in love with her. She smiles non-stop. She jumps around with giddy excitement in a cute little dress. She's the perfect manic pixie dream girl trope. I want her to have all my babies.
I really need to earn the right to down vote. That this nonsense appears so high up bothers me. I supported her campaign because I thought coding needs to be made more approachable and interesting to kids. Let's be honest, most kids have no idea what most professions do. I think just making people more familiar with programming is a great social goal.
I'm ready to bet that if she wasn't attractive, she wouldn't have gotten past the $10k milestone. In other words, by being "playful", flirtatious, she was using her looks to her advatange. To me this is manipulation.
What, that the dominant/only reason men want more women in tech is to have sex with them? Really? Do people really think the bulk of the men in tech are that cynical?
We can be brutally honest and say that yes, having women who share our passions (and workplaces) would be good for the personal lives of many developers. But I don't think there's any advocate for more women in the industry who would see that as anything but a fringe benefit.
That isn't what was said. The video was extremely flirtatious. It had the same sexualized energy of a Disney movie about Tank Girl starring Bjork with the sound track by Blonde Redhead. It was way to over the top.
No it wasn't. It is whimsical and youthful, which fits with the theme of making a book for children. Attributing that personality type with flirtation is disturbing and misogynistic.
> It had the same sexualized energy of a Disney movie about Tank Girl starring Bjork with the sound track by Blonde Redhead.
This video was a toned down version of SBV with a grown woman acting childish and coy, my hyperbolic statement tapped into other performers who utilize the same mechanic. It is not whimsical and youthful, it is offensive. She was selling herself rather than her art. I don't need to look at her knitted socks, watch her fluff her hair or jump on the damn couch. It is manipulative. Recognizing that manipulation is not sexist, on the contrary.
This video would have been way more mature if it showed children engaging with the content, rather than an artful selfie. We need to see how she explains ideas that lead children to a scientific mind.
> She was selling herself rather than her art. I don't need to look at her knitted socks, watch her fluff her hair or jump on the damn couch. It is manipulative. Recognizing that manipulation is not sexist, on the contrary.
Not only are you blaming the creator for your own sexualized interpretation of the kickstarter vid, but you claim that non-sexual behaviors are evidence of sexualized flirting.
> This video would have been way more mature if it showed children engaging with the content, rather than an artful selfie. We need to see how she explains ideas that lead children to a scientific mind.
Now you are considering her behavior in a video targeted towards parents and children to be inappropriate based on your highly inappropriate sexualization of normal behavior. The video aims to be fun, visual, and cutesy, not a come on for dudes.
Hah, yes. Honestly, if that woman's behavior is "sexual and flirtatious" then my son's kindergarten teacher is hitting on him (she puts on the same act around her students).
Yes, the video was as much about selling Liukas as a character and internet-celebrity as it was about selling her book. That's how marketing works. But anybody who sees it as "sexual" watches too much of the wrong kind of anime.
When that same kindergarten teacher behaves towards one of the male parents as to an infant then it's flirtatious. Certainly in Western society much behaviour which is considered fine with a child is inappropriate with an adult, and vice-versa of course.
If I bounce my friend's daughter on my knee and chat to her it's fine - if I bounce my (married) friend on my knee then it would be considered highly inappropriate in the same circumstance and an affront to my partner and hers. Same behaviour, the first is innocent; the second might be but would be assumed to be sexual or appear pseudo-sexual and so [in my country and circumstance] be considered wrong.
[I've not watched the video yet but am addressing the general case.]
> When that same kindergarten teacher behaves towards one of the male parents as to an infant then it's flirtatious.
The kickstarter video is not directed towards men specifically. A lot of posters seem to see it that the default audience is men and therefore her behavior is somehow flirting. Of course, the audience for kickstarter includes all type of people, including younger children.
Harold and the purple crayon is a great book that introduces programming concepts, but it doesn't beat you over the head with any computer lingo.
This book is a neat idea and the illustrations look cool, but here is one concern:
Why name the main character Ruby? Good kids books are timeless and ruby the programming language is not, and it dates the book too. Why associate any programming language in particular with programming concepts like sequences or sets? That seems like a message from "learn to code" school. So does DRY to a lesser extent.
Harold and the Purple Crayon is the first book I ever read in my life. Now I draw, paint, and program - and when I do these activities, it is all literally an attempt to harness the power Harold showed me as a child.
I'd never thought of Harold and the Purple Crayon as related to programming. How is that? In perhaps the broadest sense the crayon gives him the power and freedom to create in the same way software might, but that's a pretty big leap.
Okay, I hope this convinces you it's a leap instead of a pretty big leap:
He lives in a seemingly boring world, but it isn't boring after all. It may not even be a world after all. He invents solutions using the contrived rules i.e. using a purple crayon. Some of the solutions become problems. For example the dragon scares him and makes his hand shake, so he falls into the water, but he comes up thinking fast and makes a sailboat.
Both these lines remind me of computers or programming:
Nine identical pieces of pie that Harold likes best.
A forest with just one tree in it.
Also word play is important in programming and in HATPK.
Lots of things are more like programming than things obviously designated that way such as programming languages. In Hoare's communicating sequential processes he goes on and on about vending machines for example.
I backed this project and loved how the author presented per project. I was able to identify with her and, more surprisingly, my non-technical spouse and family were also able to identify with her. I am excited to see where the story of Ruby goes for both my young daughter and myself.
Would really like to see a couple of starting pages from this book. I hope she has an idea about how to deliver this stuff to children: coding by itself is pointless for somebody who does not even comprehend the manifold of applications it can solve. Video games are fun, because they exploit the basic survival instinct within us. With programming, there is no low hanging fruit to reach for a child, as the mental link between writing code and receiving a reward is build by experience, which minors lack.
I find it hard to explain the fundraising which went way over the goal, without including gender into equation. Anyway – a pink-colored children's book about tech stuff, written by girls, sounds comforting in every way.
I've been watching this project since it was first posted on HN, getting giddy over the thought of it. I love the execution in how this book will teach kids about programming. I also love that the main character is a girl and that the whole book is cutesy.
I plan on using this both for my own enjoyment, and sharing it with a soon-to-be five year old boy who will be absolutely in love with the little animal/Android characters.
I'm toward the end of a rough patch financially, and usually pass up supporting projects on Kickstarter for this reason... But I couldn't resist, and ordered the double package.
Congratulations on the extreme success, Linda! I hope you find the process enjoyable enough to continue the series for years to come. I also hope the app or even a little indie game will be possible to create in the future (I realize it won't reach the $500k goal.)
As a final note - I just thought of the possibilities of this being implemented in a classroom!
I just thought of the possibilities of this being implemented in a classroom!
Years ago, I was a guest at my son's kindergarten's career day and I showed the kids how I could move around a cartoon mouse with Scratch. I'm not a great presenter or teacher, but the entire class, boys and girls, was completely engaged. They were tossing out suggestions and laughing and I'm convinced they "got" the basics. It was incredibly rewarding.
It took me a while to work this out - but I think its a great and brave choice.
Yes, totally agree software is "literacy 2.0". And yes, of course, we need pre-school books on software. I had weird books teaching me BASIC without putting it into context - and context not ability has been where I have missed opportunities or regreted actions.
So I applaud Linda for her insights, hope her world view is one I want my daughter to take into the 21 C, and look forward to seeing my copy at the end of the year.
To be honest, I'd focus less on it being about learning how to code, and more about deductive problem solving skills and numeracy in general. If you have a pretty good foundation there, picking up a particular programming language isn't problematic. I think most people who stumble in basic programming have trouble because of a more fundamental deficiency than "I never learned to code in grade school".
Thank you for posting this – I was thinking the exact same thing. The real, huge win for kids is thinking about how to decompose a problem into easier, repeatable steps and that's of benefit in many fields even if you never write a line of code.
Poorly written software has cost lives. Of course, the vast majority of software devs work on CRUD apps, but increasing this pool will only make it more probable that a huge number of people not well versed in logical skills will be building critical software.
Question: Why are we not doing the same thing for the medical profession? Do we say medicine is the literacy 2.0?
This project was the subject of a lot of debate when it launched, and at that time, I was on the side of the author because I thought it seemed like a nifty project, though not a fit for what I'd give to my children.
Now that I see it turned into a write up like this, I can't help but wonder if those criticizing the project for its intentions were correct.
I think pretty much only No. 2 is sufficient and almost necessary these days. That is if you have a community already, you can sell your project/book even if it lacks much substance(this project certainly has some substance and is a good cause).
If you do not have the early adopters who will also help you spread the word to secondary adopters, you are SOL.
There have been countless posts on HN where the author has made some amazing sales on e-book, SaaS MVP, apps, other software, and so on.
In pretty much all those cases, they already had some sort of community/e-mail list to kickstart(ahem) the sales.
Cool idea. My only gripe was after she said she was from Finland, she mentioned Scandinavian summers, when Finland isn't a Scandinavian country. Nordic, yes. Scandinavian, no.
I'm a Finn and although I didn't truly grow up there, I've always considered Finland a Scandinavian country. You can be pedantic and say that because of geographical and linguistic reasons, it's not Scandinavian, but outside of those specific contexts, no one really cares.
Am I really the only one who things that she is annoying and fake? I literally threw up when I tried to watch her playing Manic Pixie Dream Girl-role.
Ruby and Snow Leopard? Really? This book will be completely useless in 5 years when technologies change. She should have wrote about basic CS principles instead. But I guess most of the women just cannot think logically. And that's probably why there are so few women in tech...
This is a sad grouch, not a coherent analysis. Most Tech books are obsolete in 5 years. Children do not learn from principles, they learn from example and mimesis and play and repetition. You have much to learn about human beings, and until you learn to lighten up and be constructive in the world, you will remain grouchy, unhappy and unfulfilled.
So, I suggest a more constructive response for you if you think she's wrong and don't like her style: have a look around: what can you do to make things better?
People are going to pigpile on you b/c you are wrong about the longevity of the tech information and sarcastic remarks about women, etc.
I DO agree with the cringe-factor, though. I really didn't like watching her adjust her purple knit slippers, giggle and fluff her hair, etc.. It was like watching any other advertisement involving models which I don't like either and is one of the reasons I don't watch television.
I also didn't like her trying to increase the aura for her work by saying, "My country is also where Linux and IRC, etc." came from. There's probably a logical fallacy for that :)
Just like all bad art though, there is almost always information to be gained in the layer of meta-communication. Obviously, many people respond to this kind of stimulus. Perhaps it is because there isn't enough "cute" out there in the world already? It is my belief that cuteness and happy feelings should be more widely distributed, not just reserved for celebrities.
But even this morning on NPR (don't usually listen, was in a rush), I heard them announce the birthday of a celebrity.
We are in a celebrity culture that believes in foregoing our own happiness in exchange for concentrating wealth and happiness on certain other people. We are schizophrenic in that we pay money for impressions of the happiness that others experience. Is it made worse by the fact that we don't even care if celebrity's happiness is authentic or not, we still pay for the illusion.
I have to disagree about the country part. I didn't hear her trying to halo at all (whether or not that's an effect) - I heard her saying that that's her culture, her influences, and her inspiration. Plus, you really cannot take anything away from the Nordic countries when it comes to innovative computer applications. I would add to her list the whole Demo Scene, which laid much of the technical foundation for the game industry boom of the late '90's and '00's. And of course, Minecraft, which is the biggest realistic, interactive, shared cellular automata world simulation that I'm aware of.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on her being annoying and fake, but your last statements are just un-called for. Women cannot think logically? Obviously she though logically enough to create an idea that struck a chord with enough people to raise over 250K? Hacker News shouldn't be the place for such blatant misogyny.
Just move on - change the channel, not for you troll. And your remarks towards women not thinking logically is embarrassing to see in this forum.
A lot of what we learn today in technology specifics changes frequently - it's the thought process behind our execution and methodologies to build that is the most valuable.
Probably not the only one, but 100k in 24h say that you are in vast minority. There are many books about "CS principles" or programming or ruby or whatever. There're books for kids, there're good ones written by well known computer scientists. It's not some unique book that raises funds, it's marketing.
I think this project did well for a few key reasons:
1) STEM, STEM, STEM and code, code, code. The timing is right. Look at all the coverage this got in big mainstream media publications. Here is a project to help your child get into programming at a young age. 2) There is a need for introducing programming to children in an accessible way. There is some stuff on the market, but not that much, and this might be the first centered around a colorful children's book. I also think this is more approachable for parents too. A cold, clinical textbook would scare off many parents. 3) Linda is attractive, bubbly and non-American (on a heavily American site). This never hurts with crowdfunding. The fact that she is female in a heavy male-dominated space helps too. I can't fault her at all for this, and why not harness it?
I hope it turns out well and that this is just the beginning for Linda and her books. I'm excited to read it with my future child.