Book Review: Beauty and the Beast retellings

Beauty by Robin McKinley
Pages: 256
Rating: 3 our of 5 stars
Goodreads

I've always thought of this as one of those classics I "should" have read a long time ago. It felt like one of those Important Books that I somehow missed out on during my childhood. It also very like a very 1990s book (this cover was from the 1993 edition and the one I most associate as the "real" version), but I was surprised to realize that it was actually first published in 1978. To me, that's "old" and make more sense why I've associated it with a classic or standard version.

Unfortunately, I didn't read it in the 1990s. I read it in 2016, and I read it six years after I'd read Cameron Dokey's version Belle (part of the excellent Once Upon a Time series). Considering McKinley's version came out long before Dokey's did, I have things kind of reversed in my mind, which isn't entirely fair to McKinley but it is what it is. Since I read the Dokey version first, to me that's the "original" and McKinley's is the copy.

Belle by Cameron Dokey

Pages: 224

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

Goodreads 

Both versions are so similar that I don't know that my opinion of them wouldn't just be reversed had I read them in the opposite order. They're both written in that superficial way that works really well for fairy tale retellings. What I mean is that the characters don't have depth, the romance is very undeveloped, and the plot doesn't always make perfect sense, but none of that is a bad thing because it's supposed to be that way in a fairy tale.

Both versions stick closely to the bones of the fairy tale: family of sisters lose a mother and fortune, father has an incident with the beast and a rose (a man whose appearance and estate are cursed because his personality is beastly), girl takes place of father in a bargain with the beast, girl and beast find love, enchantment is broken, happily ever afters abound.

There isn't really much to either story beyond that, and nothing more is needed. Both stories are pleasant, slightly beautiful, forgettable in the details, but remembered fondly in the broad strokes. I'd recommend them both equally, but I personally lean toward Dokey because we met first (also, her book has the more beautiful cover. Even the reprints).

I enjoy these types of fairy tale retellings and I think it's somewhat unfair to compare them to the types of retellings where the author takes the bones of the fairy tale and then fleshes them out with their own unique story. Both approaches have their value and I enjoy them both. But, the latter has the ability to stick in my mind more, grip my heart more, and just feel more. 

Heart's Blood by Juliet Marillier
Pages: 402
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars, Special Shelf
Goodreads

Juliette Marillier's version is the more kind of retelling. It's a Beauty and the Beast retelling, yes, but it's also it's ok unique story. The bones of the original tale are used as a framework that Marillier then weaves her story around. The original becomes almost more inspiration, loosely alluded to and there enough to guide the story but not enough to dictate it or make what happens next wholly predictable.

What sticks in my mind is less the traditional tale and more a mix of ghosts, wintry chill, and peril. An old, isolated castle with cold stones, exploration, and hidden treasures waiting to be discovered. And by treasures, I don't mean gold, but things like libraries, hidden historical clues, stories lost to time, curses, magical artifacts, and secret rooms.

This is the kind of book where things are uncovered. My joy in reading came from following main character Caitrin as she explores the castle, meets the mysterious, friendly, and frightening denizens, uncovers the past, and pieces together the curse. The romance itself was ok. I wasn't a huge fan of the beast because he's, surprisingly, kind of weak. But that's ok, because everything else more than made up for this.

This is the type of book that makes me think of the word storytelling all italicized and underlined. This was a book to be savored, even though I flew through it, utterly absorbed. This is a book to be reread. It reminded me of books like Uprooted and The Thirteenth Tale and holds a place on my Special Shelf.



Tweet

Cover Review: Daughter of the Forest

Daughter of the Forest by Juliet Marillier

A little while ago I wrote a Spotlight List called Fantasy Authors I Should Have Read about fantastic fantasy authors I somehow (shamefully!) managed to have missed out on reading. This list included Juliet Marillier and many wonderful commenters raved about her book Daughter of the Forest. And I totally trust you. So much so, that I went and bought a copy when I saw it for sale.

But, of course, I still haven't read it! I wonder if part of that has to do with the fact that I kind of hate the cover. I'm sorry, but it's true! I've since read and loved Wildwood Dancing, so I'm pretty confident that I'll love Daughter of the Forest, but THAT COVER. Nope, I just don't like it.

You can click on all of these pictures to make them larger so you can get the full impact.

First, here it is in all it's glory:

I'm feeling a whole lotta meh. It's all washed out and faded looking. I'm totally superficial and I like shiny, bright new things. The colors on this cover make it look old and boring. I can almost smell that musty old book smell (which I hate, sorry), but this is an almost new and entirely musty-odor-free book.

I'm sorry to say, but the colors aren't the only thing working against it. Let's break it down and analyze all the pieces.

Swirly header/footer things:

These are good. I don't think you can ever really go wrong with swirly things on covers. They're just pretty. The colors here could use a boost of, well, color, but the swirlyness of it all still manages to score it some points. Yay for that.

Title treatment:

Things could be worse here. But they could also be a lot better. There are barely any swirls, which is an automatic point reduction. The D hardly counts. The rest of the font is just plain old whatever and while it doesn't score negative points, it isn't gaining any points either.

But what the heck is that F??? That's just a little too ye olde castle for my tastes. We're not in the 1980s anymore. Plus, it doesn't match....anything. This brings the title treatment to an overall NEGATIVE point score.

The swans:

Ok, so the colors are still pretty bleh here, but swans get automatic points because they're graceful and beautiful and next to ponies and unicorns they are practically the number one animal embodiment of princessy wonderfulness.

(Or, you know, magically cursed princes. Which is what that swan probably is, seeing how this is a Six Swans retelling). 

The girl:

Are you kidding me??? This is worth about a million negative points right here. I've said I can be superficial, right? Well, I am. This girl isn't ugly, but she sure isn't gorgeous either. And that hair! Honey, get yourself some frizz-controlling shampoo!

Oh, they don't have that in this world? You know what they do have? Magic. And if I had magic, you'd better believe I'd be using some of it on my own frizzy hair. 

And that "dress"! Sure we may be inundated with beautiful dresses on covers, and fine, maybe they are becoming a little trite. But you know what? They're pretty, and pretty trumps trite every time.

But does this girl have a pretty dress? Noooo, she has a sack. An ugly, drab, sack of a dress with unflattering folds and a weird shoulder covering thing. Fail.

(I don't care if she's focused on weaving painful nettle sweaters to save her brothers' swan-sucked souls. Can't she weave while wearing silk???)

So, what do you think about this cover?
Do you like it? Dislike it? 
Does it make you want to read the book, or are you totally superficial like me? 

(and, I know, I know, the book is much better than this awful cover would imply. Don't worry, I'm still going to read it. Someday.)

 

Interested in covers?
Be sure to check out another Cover Crazy post by Gina from My Precious.    Click here for more of my cover reviews!

Tweet