Why are there Differences Between the Book and the Movie Version of Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt?

Imagine you are in the movie theater watching a movie, and all of a sudden you cower back, frightened of what happened on the screen. You then move to the edge of your seat, waiting to see what will happen next. After the movie, you are excited to read the book that goes along with the movie, but when you read it, you find that your favorite scene never occurred in the book. This commonly happens when movies are made to go along with books. Movie screenwriters add or discard characters and scenes that take place in books when making a movie for it. They want to make the movie viewers feel many emotions while watching the movie, so they add suspense or romance when they make it. The same goes for the movie Tuck Everlasting that goes along with the book Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt. Even though there were many differences between the book and the movie, both thoroughly told the story by Natalie Babbitt and captured the major points.

The book Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt is about a young girl named Winnie who meets the Tucks, a family that is immortal. A man, whose name we never learn, wants to find the Tucks. Throughout the book, Winnie grows to love the Tucks. She does everything she can to keep them safe and keep their secret, a secret. In the end, Winnie must decide if she wants to live a good life, but die, or join the Tucks in their immortal journey.

To start off, in the movie, Winnie is portrayed as being around five or six years
older than she is in the book, where she is ten. This leads to her having a very different, and much stronger relationship with Jesse. In the book, Winnie has a mere schoolgirl crush on him, but in the movie, Winnie kisses Jesse, swims with him, dances with him by a fire, and they both climb Jesse’s “Eiffel Tower” together. Also, the book and the movie took place in different time periods. In the end of the movie, there are motorcycles, cars, and trucks, while in the end of the book, automobiles are just starting to be made. Although, the movie does keep one of the major parts of the book: Winnie never drinks the spring water and never becomes immortal. If the movie failed to show that Winnie dies, or if they even changed the movie so that she drinks the water from the spring and becomes immortal, then a big part of the book would have been missing.

Secondly, the movie ejected the scene where Winnie and her grandmother
hear Mae’s music box, or as Winnie’s grandmother puts it, the elf music. This is a crucial part of the book. It is our first sign of the Tucks’ existence, even if the readers don’t know it yet. To add to it, the movie directors also modified the ending scene. In the book, Mae and Tuck visit Treegap many years later to see if Winnie is still alive. While there, they see that the Foster’s wood has been reduced to an empty lot. They go to a diner, and there they find out what happened to the wood. Once they leave the diner, Tuck goes to the cemetery and sees Winnie’s grave, meaning that she died. However, in the movie, Jesse is the one that visits Treegap, and he only goes past the Foster’s old house, before going off to Winnie’s grave. Also, Winnie’s grave is in the wood, in front of the immortal tree and by the spring. The wood didn’t even exist by that time in the book! One scene that was kept in the movie was the scene where Winnie spots Jesse drinking from the spring, and then, she wants to drink from it too. It is good that this scene appeared in the movie, because it is our first glimpse of the spring. Readers or viewers don’t yet know that the water makes anyone who drinks immortal, but from this scene, they know that whatever it is, it is important.

Lastly, besides deleting scenes for the movie, many scenes were added to the
movie. For example, in the movie, Miles went to a bar to play poker, but this never happened in the book. This changed a big part of the movie, because it changed the way the man in the yellow suit found the Tucks. In the book, the man in the yellow suit searches the woods, and when he finds the Tucks, he steals their horse. In the movie, the man in the yellow suit just follows Miles home from the bar. However, the movie does keep the part where Mae knocks out the man in the yellow suit with the butt of a gun. After this, instead of just Mae going to jail like in the book, both Mae and Tuck go to jail. Moreover, the scene where Miles, Jesse, and Winnie help Mae escape from jail was changed a lot in the movie.

In conclusion, the movie Tuck Everlasting and the book Tuck Everlasting have
many differences. Some of the changes made the movie more entertaining, but some of the parts that were left out should have been kept in. Would you prefer to have the movie be exactly like the book, or did you enjoy the changes that the movie director made when creating this movie?


I keep kosher, which means that there are certain types of foods, mostly meats, that I can’t eat.The laws of kashrut are important because G-d gave these laws to B’nei Yisrael, and they followed them. These laws help make us pure and connect us to G-d. Although, keeping kosher can get a little annoying, because we have to check every food to see if it is kosher or not. The sayin, “You are what you eat,” relates with the laws of kashrut because the food we eat is kosher, and we keep are kind of kosher too. We keep kosher, so it is like we are kosher, even if we aren’t actually kosher in relation to the laws of kashrut. What we eat is a religious issue, because keeping kosher is part of our religion. The Torah is something that is part of our religion, and the rules of Kashrut are in the Torah. I like that I keep kosher, because it connects me with the early Jewish people when they just received the Torah, and they kept kosher too

Trophies for Participation Need to be Cut Out of Children’s Sports

In my Sixth Grade language arts class, we learned about persuasive essays. My essay is about the importance of banning trophies for participation in children’s sports.

In many American sports, all of the children receive trophies for participation whether they win or lose, which can cause the awarded children to believe that they are amazing at that sport. When the child moves on to competitive sports, they will learn that they are actually not amazing at that sport, which will make them feel bad. By handing out trophies for participation, children get a false sense of accomplishment and their self-esteem will end up deflating. Moreover, by not handing out trophies for participation, kids will work harder and strive to be better in that sport. Therefore, trophies for participation in children’s sports need to be eliminated.

To start off, when a child is handed a trophy, they generally feel that they have accomplished something to earn that reward. However, when a trophy for participation is awarded, the only thing that the trophy stands for is that the child went to their sports games and played in them. They don’t stand for the amount of skill that the team played with. Every child is handed a participation trophy, even if their team lost the game. This causes them to develop a false sense of accomplishment. That false sense of accomplishment will end up hurting them. A child can tell all of their peers that they did a phenomenal job at their sports game that weekend because they got a trophy. Any one of their peers can tell them that, in actuality, they did a terrible job, which will make the child feel bad. According to Roxanne Jones from CNN, a study showed that children that are overrated by their parents have a higher chance of establishing characteristics like superiority and feeling that they are obligated to receive awards for all of their actions. By disposing of trophies for participation in sports, children won’t develop a false sense of accomplishment and won’t establish self-serving characteristics.

Secondly, Whit Honea said that trophies for participation are not handed out to say that everybody won, but are handed out to show that each child tried hard when they played and to have a memento to show this (Wallace). However, many kids only do a sport to get the trophy. Also, many people say that when all of the players are awarded trophies, it boosts the children’s self-esteem; although, it does quite the opposite. When a child finds out that their team lost, they are upset and their self-esteem deflates. Jim Nance said that handing out participation trophies “does not teach kids about the real world, and promotes a warped sense of their own self-importance (O’Sullivan).” Instead of bestowing upon all of the children trophies for participation, the losing team’s coach needs to give their team a pep-talk, while the winning team is granted their trophies. This way, whether they won or lost, every child walks away feeling proud of the way they played.

Lastly, ousting trophies for participation will motivate the kids that lost their game to work harder to help their team win the next game. If trophies are handed out every game to every team, the players on the teams that lost won’t have the incentive to work towards their goal of winning. By only awarding trophies to the teams that win, all of the kids will work harder to strive to be better. The winning teams will work harder to maintain their winning streak, and the losing teams will work harder to achieve a winning streak. Roxanne Jones wrote in an article on CNN that stated, “the biggest lesson sports teaches us is how to face defeat and still return another day to try and improve your game until one day you can put yourself and your team in a position to win.” Doing away with trophies for participation will increase the effort of the children while playing a sport, and it will push them to work harder and strive to be better.

To sum it all up, there are many reasons why we should eradicate trophies for participation. A few of those reasons include that trophies for participation give children a false sense of accomplishment, deflate their self-esteem, and by terminating them, kids will be more motivated to work harder to improve their game. Ultimately, trophies for participation need to be extracted from children’s sports in our society.





Works Cited


Jones, Roxanne. “Listen Kids, Not Everyone Is a Winner (Opinion).” Opinion, Cable

News Network, 18 Aug. 2015,

www.cnn.com/2015/08/18/opinions/jones-sports-trophies/. Accessed 5 Apr.



O’Sullivan, John. “The Great Trophy Debate: Do We Need Participation Awards?”

Changing the Game Project, Changing the Game Project, 10 Sept. 2015,


n-awards/. Accessed 5 Apr. 2017.


Wallace, Kelly. “Debate: Does Sports Participation Deserve a Trophy?” Health, Cable

News Network, 18 Aug. 2015,


Accessed 5 Apr. 2017.

My New Ceremonial Item to the Passover Seder

At every Passover Seder, there is a Seder Plate that has many ceremonial items on it, like the Charoset, which symbolizes the mortar that B’nei Yisrael had to stomp to make bricks. If I could add a ceremonial ritual to the Seder, I would add something that represents the splitting of the Red Sea. When B’nei Yisrael was leaving Egypt, Pharaoh started to chase them. When they came to the Red Sea, B’nei Yisrael thought that they would be captured, but then a miracle happened! G-d split the Red Sea in two, and B’nei Yisrael escaped from Pharaoh’s clutches. I would add a ritual to the Seder where everyone pours a little bit of water onto a plate, and then they take a piece of matzah and use it to push the water to opposite sides of the plate. Then they eat the matzah. This would represent the splitting of the Red Sea and also, by eating the soggy matzah, we would remember that B’nei Yisrael did not get wet when they crossed through the sea.

Delivering Mishloach Manot for Purim

This Saturday night to Sunday is Purim. Purim is the time when a woman named Esther became a queen and defeated an evil man named Haman who wanted to kill all of the Jews. One of the customs of Purim is delivering bags with different types of goods called Mishloach Manot. For our Mitzvah Project this week we delivered Mishloach Manot to diffferent people. One of the deliveries that I remember was our first one and was one that I personally gave the bag to the people. The man that opened the door was really grateful for our bag, and he said that we were doing a really good thing. Hearing that made me feel really good inside. I really enjoyed delivering Mishloach Manot for our Mitzvah Trip this week. Happy Purim! חג שמח!

The Purim Story: How it connects to Anti-Semitism

A week from this Saturday night and Sunday is the holiday of Purim. The Purim starts off with מלך אחשורוש is having a huge banquet, and his wife ושתי is having her own banquet at the same time. When מלך אחשורוש tells ושתי to his banquet, she refuses to go. מלך אחשורוש send ושתי away and then has “auditions” for a new wife. A Jewish girl named הדסה, we call her אסתר, gets picked to become the new queen. Her uncle מורדכי tells her not to tell anyone that she is Jewish. מורדכי finds out that the king’s advisor המן is planning to kill all of the Jews because מורדכי won’t bow down to him. מורדכי tells אסתר, and she fasts for three days and prays to G-d. In the end, she tells מלך אחשורוש about המן’s plan at a small dinner that she planned and המן was killed.

The story of Purim has to do with Anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is when people strongly dislike Jewish people. המן didn’t like the Jewish people just because one person didn’t bow down to him, because he believed in only one god. המן was saying to bow down to him because he was like a god, but the Jewish people don’t believe in multiple gods. מורדכי was just doing what he believed in. המן created this whole elaborate plan to eliminate all of the Jews because מורדכי didn’t bow down to him. I somewhat understand where המן was coming from. I understand that המן felt disrespected, but instead of trying to wipe out all of the Jews, he could have just talk to מורדכי to understand why he wasn’t bowing down to him.

The Purim story teaches us to stand up for what we believe in and what is right. אסתר was afraid to approach מלך אחשורוש, but she still did, and when she talked to him, he told her that he would give her half of his kingdom, which can be interpreted as giving her what ever she wanted. Then, she told him about the cruelty that was going to happen, and he took charge and made sure that it didn’t happen. Whenever we see someone getting bullied, or we are getting bullied ourselves, for the color of their skin or their religion, we should stand up for the person and do what is right. All of the bigotry in our world is terrible, and any little thing we do could maybe help eliminate some of it. I’m not saying that if you see an adult being prejudice or bullying someone you should stand up to them, but if you see a kid acting this way, then you should stand up for the victim, or at least get an adult to help

Happy Purim!

Why is The Giver by Lois Lowry Censored?

In the book The Giver by Lois Lowry, a boy named Jonas lives in a utopian society. There are many problems in this society like seeing no color, everything being the same, and the “releases” are not actually people being released, but people being killed. This book is censored in many places because people don’t want their kids to be reading about this type of community. I understand why The Giver is censored, but I think that it shouldn’t be censored because it contains a lot of challenging vocabulary, it provides an example of an advanced school curriculum that we could learn from, it teaches us about the power of memory, and it teaches us an important moral.

The Giver contains a lot of good vocabulary that kids might not learn without reading it. The book includes many synonyms like “scrupulously” and “meticulous,” which mean taking your time and working with care. Since the book is about a community where all things are the same, the book teaches kids words like “standardize” and “nondescript.” By exposing elementary school and middle school-aged kids to this harder form of vocabulary, it will expand their knowledge of words, and they will start to use more challenging vocabulary while speaking in everyday life.

Jonas, along with all of the other kids in his community, goes to a very
advanced school. They learn “language and communications,” “commerce and industry,” “science and technology,” and “civil procedures and government,” all at a very young age. It is also a requirement to do volunteer hours for school. This teaches kids that it is important to do volunteer work in their communities and to do mitzvahs. At my school, we go out into our community and volunteer our time every Friday to do good deeds. By reading The Giver, schools could learn about these volunteer hours and enforce them in their school work.

At the Ceremony of Twelve, Jonas becomes the Receiver of Memory in
training. He goes to train with the Giver of Memory everyday. The Giver transmits many memories to Jonas that the citizens in the communities don’t know about. Lois Lowry writes about a few of the bad memories that Jonas receives. This teaches us that it is good to have our own memories, so we can reflect over them and learn from our mistakes. The citizens in the communities in The Giver burden one person with all of the memories that they aren’t ever able to experience. Those citizens can’t learn from their mistakes and can not repeat them if they don’t know about any of the mistakes humans made before their community was created. It is good to have our own memories because being able to reflect on them, teaches us right from wrong and to not repeat our mistakes.

Lastly, The Giver has a very good moral to it. Many kids wish that they lived in a fantasy world where everything they want, they get. From reading this book, we learn that we should be grateful to live in the world we live in because if you take a look at Jonas’ utopian community, it is far from perfect. A perfect world to one person could be the worst world to another. Even though we live in an imperfect world, it is still great. Instead of longing for a world we don’t have, we should spend time in the world we do have.

In conclusion, I don’t think that The Giver should be censored because it contains a lot of advanced vocabulary, the kids in it learn many things starting at a young age, it teaches us about the power of memory, and it teaches us an important moral. Do you think The Giver by Lois Lowry should be censored, or should kids read this book?

My Eleventh Commandment

You might not know what the Ten Commandments or עשרת הדברות are. The Ten Commandments are ten rules that G-d gave us when we got the Torah. If I could add an eleventh commandment to the Ten Commandments, I would add, “You shall not fight; no battles and no wars.” I want their to be peace in the world, so everyone can be happy and lead a good life. No one will be dying while fighting a war. Also, no one would have hatred towards another place, making them want to start a war. No fights could help eliminate no hatred. We could live in a place where peace is everywhere and we could all be happy. With this eleventh commandment, we can achieve that.