Scan barcode
jassmine's review
2.0
I loved the first book [b:The Princess and the Goblin|444381|The Princess and the Goblin (Princess Irene and Curdie, #1)|George MacDonald|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348689290l/444381._SY75_.jpg|3193161] as a kid and then had a major disillusionment with it on a re-read as an adult. I still decided to read the second book in the series because that was the whole reason why I re-read the first book and I was curious. This book isn't really problematic in the same way the first book is problematic, but it's really boring. This is just very thinly veiled Christian messaging and... I mean, if I wanted to read that I would have just picked up the Bible, probably Evangelium according to John, because that one is actually entertaining to read. Or Narnia books... though, I am a bit worried about that re-read now too. I thought I would write more detailed review for this book, but you know what, I don't really want to waste my time on that...
Also, dogs die in this one...
Listened to this free audiobook, it's not the best I listened to from LibriVox, but it was fine: https://librivox.org/the-princess-and-curdie-version-2-by-george-macdonald/
Also, dogs die in this one...
Listened to this free audiobook, it's not the best I listened to from LibriVox, but it was fine: https://librivox.org/the-princess-and-curdie-version-2-by-george-macdonald/
booksny's review
adventurous
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Some parts of it were still an entertaining read, but the plot was oddly all over the place
allaboutfrodo's review
3.0
I recently read MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin for the first time and was delighted. I eagerly took up The Princess and Curdie but alas was extremely disappointed. This one is dull and preachy, with a truly depressing final page. I will not be visiting this one again.
chrisannee's review
3.0
MacDonald's children's princess was so fun and childlike that I decided to pick up the sequel. It didn't quite work because the Princess is somewhat like Peter Pan, in that it's impossible to imagine her grown up. And, even if you manage to accept that, the metaphorical ending is somewhat shattering---metaphorically. But read MacDonald's other stuff for kids to your kids... especially when they're young. Especially if you love Lewis and want them to love Narnia.
ianlukemorel's review
4.0
I am a sucker for books like this and I can’t exactly pin what “this” is. It’s something about the heavy allegory, whimsical monsters, childlike resolution and adventuresome spirit of books like this one, Dawn Treader, Silver chair and a handful of other books that really draws me in. I’m uncertain that this is a “good book” (whatever that may mean) but it did completely capture my imagination and make me feel a little more enchanted in the Taylorian sense of the word.
brianna2626's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
toggle_fow's review
4.0
Was this as good as The Princess and the Goblin? No way.
Was it still good? Yes.
The same fairy-tale weirdness is here, along with the same kind of fairy-tale logic; everything makes absolutely no sense while simultaneously seeming perfectly natural, inevitable, and obvious. Curdie is still great, and so is the little princess. A lot less time is spent with the grandmother, and a lot less time is spent on the kind of delicate, mysterious discovery of self and others that made the previous book so captivating. Instead, Curdie is given a straightforward mission, which he straightforwardly carries out. This does kind of make this book Less than the first book.
The one other thing that majorly throws this book for an unfortunate loop is the ending. First of all... there are only three good people in the land besides Curdie and the princess? Why? How? This is strange and unsettling, but can be passed over because the book is only supposed to make a certain small amount of overt sense anyway. The thing that can't really be passed over is the epilogue, wherein Curdie and the princess get married and then die childless decades later, and the land descends again into inevitable antediluvian style evil and destroys itself.
I don't really need to point out that this is highly disturbing. And, like, what does this MEAN? MacDonald fairy tales are full of messages about humanity and morality, so is this a message of some kind? Is the moral of the story that human depravity is insurmountable? That doesn't seem right, and yet I can't imagine any other possible interpretation? What on Earth is going on here, honestly. I am left distressed and unsatisfied.
Was it still good? Yes.
The same fairy-tale weirdness is here, along with the same kind of fairy-tale logic; everything makes absolutely no sense while simultaneously seeming perfectly natural, inevitable, and obvious. Curdie is still great, and so is the little princess. A lot less time is spent with the grandmother, and a lot less time is spent on the kind of delicate, mysterious discovery of self and others that made the previous book so captivating. Instead, Curdie is given a straightforward mission, which he straightforwardly carries out. This does kind of make this book Less than the first book.
The one other thing that majorly throws this book for an unfortunate loop is the ending. First of all... there are only three good people in the land besides Curdie and the princess? Why? How? This is strange and unsettling, but can be passed over because the book is only supposed to make a certain small amount of overt sense anyway. The thing that can't really be passed over is the epilogue, wherein Curdie and the princess get married and then die childless decades later, and the land descends again into inevitable antediluvian style evil and destroys itself.
I don't really need to point out that this is highly disturbing. And, like, what does this MEAN? MacDonald fairy tales are full of messages about humanity and morality, so is this a message of some kind? Is the moral of the story that human depravity is insurmountable? That doesn't seem right, and yet I can't imagine any other possible interpretation? What on Earth is going on here, honestly. I am left distressed and unsatisfied.