There are three tales in this book. I assume that the first, "The Tug of War", was intended to be humorous. If so, it is at the expense of others. A vengeful turtle uses trickery and lies to convince an elephant and a hippopotamus that he is their equal. The turtle finally wins their friendship. What was the moral? If you're small or weak, the only way to gain the respect of others is to pretend to be something you're not. How is that going to sound to a child? The next tale, "The Hunter Who Was King", seems to focus on laziness in the beginning. This seems to lead nowhere, however. The hunter is given a chance to live an ideal life as a king in a hidden realm and loses everything by indulging a curiosity. What was the horrible atrocity he committed? He opened a door. Granted, the queen had warned him not to open the door. Maybe this was where the lazy moral was supposed to be understood. He should've said something, right? Nope, he opens the door and all is lost. He didn't even walk through. He just opened it. Pathetic. The moral: never ever be curious about anything or suffer the consequences. How about this one: if you want to avoid sentencing yourself to ultimate doom, try asking more questions. The last tale was slightly redeeming. In "The Boy Who Sang to the Egg" an ailing father commissions his youngest son to watch over an egg. Upon the father's demise the son is unsure but dutiful to the memory of his father. The tale also focuses on the importance of trying to accept the unkown, especially if it's frightening. The boy is rewarded for his faithfulness in the end. A herd of cattle bursts from the egg and all is right with the world. There are no family squabbles and the story ends well for everyone. The pictures and pop-ups are well done. Overall, the pictures do not make up for the stunted moral lessons.