Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.92 AVERAGE
3.92 AVERAGE
Disappointed by this one--expected lush, feminist-leaning originality from McKinley but got a standard, problematic rehashing.
I read this book as a middle schooler and fell in love with it then and it started my great love of fairy tale retellings. I really enjoyed rereading this out loud to Alice, especially since she was in the middle of rehearsals for Beauty and the beast! It's still as lovely as when I first read it.
I quite enjoyed this book more than I expected too, especially since it didn't grab me at the beginning. It was well-woven to get the reader lost in the magic. Knowing how the fairytale goes does not diminish the experience of reading the tale in long form. This author does a great job with these, and I will read more of hers.
There is something about the Beauty and the Beast story that is attractive to society in general and to the literature, movie making crowd in particular. [b:Jane Eyre|10210|Jane Eyre|Charlotte Brontë|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266450134s/10210.jpg|2977639], [b:Wuthering Heights|6185|Wuthering Heights|Emily Brontë|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255584435s/6185.jpg|1565818], [b:Middlemarch|19089|Middlemarch (Signet Classics)|George Eliot|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1280853830s/19089.jpg|1461747] and other books in varying literary quality draw on the motif, subverting, perverting, or simply retelling it (One of my faves is Jane Yolen's version which is a mash up with O Henry's Gift of the Magi). It is no surprise that Robin McKinely was drawn to the tale, twice, and any reader can see the germ of the second novel in this book, her first.
McKinley's writing, in particular [b:The Hero and the Crown|77366|The Hero and the Crown (Damar, #2)|Robin McKinley|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1170900106s/77366.jpg|2321243], was one very important touchstone of my childrhood, as it seems to be for many fantasy reading women of my age. I can't help but wish that teen girls of today would read her the obessive way and in the vast amount of numbers of those that read [b:Twilight|41865|Twilight (Twilight, #1)|Stephenie Meyer|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1275613536s/41865.jpg|3212258] or [b:Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone|3|Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Harry Potter, #1)|J.K. Rowling|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1286232871s/3.jpg|4640799]. McKinley writes better, and she will most likely last longer.
This book, McKinley's first and her first retelling of Beauty and the Beast, was totally ripped off by the Walt Disney Company for thier movie. It's actually sad and insulting because not only did Disney rip it off, but they totally shortened the Beauty character (now, before people come and demand my Tigger shirt back, I happen to like the Disney movie, but a spade is a spade. Get over it).
McKinley draws heavily on the French version of the story, yet she makes it her own. Beauty likes to read, but unlike Disney's Belle (Beautiful in French), Beauty reads literature, not the romance novels of her day. Belle's love of reading is based on her love for romantic adventure; Beauty's is based on a love reading for itself and for knowledge. She is a scholar. It is difficult to imagine Disney's Belle having the same reaction to the library in this book, that Beauty does (also, we are never given a title of what Belle reads, hmmm).
Another change that McKinley makes, and she is one of the few authors who does this, is make Beauty's family a loving family. Beauty not only loves her father, but she loves her sisters. She and her sisters get along. They take to each other, not down to each other. They are not in competition. This isn't a fairy tale of the bad sisters being punished and the good (always the young one) being rewarded; it's about a loving family being rewarded.
Because this is early McKinley, there are flaws in the book, flaws that make the reader understand why McKinley basically rewrote the story in [b:Rose Daughter|8089|Rose Daughter|Robin McKinley|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1165652591s/8089.jpg|2321287]. Beauty, for instance, is almost too perfect. She is the girl who stands out because she is not only more bookish, but more boyish than the other women. This perfection is dealt with in the end sequence. Additionally, Beauty's gaining of Greatheart feels like a wish fullment version of the horse movie of the week. But these are really, almost nit-picking. The most serious flaw is the fact that Beauty's sisters, Grace and Hope, are almost interchangable, though fully likable. McKinley also presents the view that being non-bookish is not any worse than being bookish, which is nice.
What I truly love, now, however, is simply that I only realized when I re-read this book as an adult. Beauty and the Beast from its earliest days was always a story about women and marriage, in particular the fear of marriage that must have developed in a society when the marriages were arranged and husband and wife barely knew each other. McKinley keeps this, and adds, understandably, a fear of desire and of changing into an adult. In many of Beauty's reactions to Beast there is the change of pubertry but also that struggle of coming to terms with adult desire, love, and one's own sexuality.
McKinley's writing, in particular [b:The Hero and the Crown|77366|The Hero and the Crown (Damar, #2)|Robin McKinley|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1170900106s/77366.jpg|2321243], was one very important touchstone of my childrhood, as it seems to be for many fantasy reading women of my age. I can't help but wish that teen girls of today would read her the obessive way and in the vast amount of numbers of those that read [b:Twilight|41865|Twilight (Twilight, #1)|Stephenie Meyer|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1275613536s/41865.jpg|3212258] or [b:Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone|3|Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Harry Potter, #1)|J.K. Rowling|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1286232871s/3.jpg|4640799]. McKinley writes better, and she will most likely last longer.
This book, McKinley's first and her first retelling of Beauty and the Beast, was totally ripped off by the Walt Disney Company for thier movie. It's actually sad and insulting because not only did Disney rip it off, but they totally shortened the Beauty character (now, before people come and demand my Tigger shirt back, I happen to like the Disney movie, but a spade is a spade. Get over it).
McKinley draws heavily on the French version of the story, yet she makes it her own. Beauty likes to read, but unlike Disney's Belle (Beautiful in French), Beauty reads literature, not the romance novels of her day. Belle's love of reading is based on her love for romantic adventure; Beauty's is based on a love reading for itself and for knowledge. She is a scholar. It is difficult to imagine Disney's Belle having the same reaction to the library in this book, that Beauty does (also, we are never given a title of what Belle reads, hmmm).
Another change that McKinley makes, and she is one of the few authors who does this, is make Beauty's family a loving family. Beauty not only loves her father, but she loves her sisters. She and her sisters get along. They take to each other, not down to each other. They are not in competition. This isn't a fairy tale of the bad sisters being punished and the good (always the young one) being rewarded; it's about a loving family being rewarded.
Because this is early McKinley, there are flaws in the book, flaws that make the reader understand why McKinley basically rewrote the story in [b:Rose Daughter|8089|Rose Daughter|Robin McKinley|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1165652591s/8089.jpg|2321287]. Beauty, for instance, is almost too perfect. She is the girl who stands out because she is not only more bookish, but more boyish than the other women. This perfection is dealt with in the end sequence. Additionally, Beauty's gaining of Greatheart feels like a wish fullment version of the horse movie of the week. But these are really, almost nit-picking. The most serious flaw is the fact that Beauty's sisters, Grace and Hope, are almost interchangable, though fully likable. McKinley also presents the view that being non-bookish is not any worse than being bookish, which is nice.
What I truly love, now, however, is simply that I only realized when I re-read this book as an adult. Beauty and the Beast from its earliest days was always a story about women and marriage, in particular the fear of marriage that must have developed in a society when the marriages were arranged and husband and wife barely knew each other. McKinley keeps this, and adds, understandably, a fear of desire and of changing into an adult. In many of Beauty's reactions to Beast there is the change of pubertry but also that struggle of coming to terms with adult desire, love, and one's own sexuality.
adventurous
hopeful
lighthearted
“Beauty, will you marry me?” Every day Beauty must countenance the Beast with whom she voluntarily secludes herself away in his castle. Every evening he poses her the same question to which she must earnestly answer. However apprehensive she is about her companion, Beauty knows that names, such as “Beauty” or “Beast”, can belie the truth and it is not her appearance that will help her unravel the mysteries of the curse surrounding the Beast. This is a fantastic retelling of “Beauty and the Beast” and I was especially pleased that the author chose to depart from the original version of the tale in giving Beauty a very loving and supportive family, and made the Beast a much more interesting character as well. Unlike the Disney version of the story there is no “evil” antagonist to contend with; instead the characters must simply persevere to combat the magic that has enchanted them all. – Hannah V
Get it at the Library!
Get it at the Library!
Great retelling and I love the author so of course I loved the book. Not my favorite retelling but it's a close favorite.
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
3.5/5. I wonder if any of the Disney movie came from this retelling. I haven't read many other versions of this, but there were certain aspects that I don't think are in the original story that were in both this version and the Disney movie, which came out almost 10 years after the book.
I had read this years ago, as a pre-teen, and felt it deserved a revisit before I set my rating in stone. It was as good as I remembered it, and holds up well to adult readers.
The biggest hint that it's YA is the fact that the story begins with a young protagonist. McKinley never talks down to her readers or dumbs down the language.
My biggest complaint about the book is that the beast doesn't show up until the story's almost halfway through. While the texture of Beauty's world was a real treat to experience, it felt like it had a lot of setup, and not as much of the romance.
Overall, though, I would enthusiastically recommend this one to any readers of YA. The book is age-appropriate even for the younger set, as there's nothing that should get parents' eyebrows raised.
The biggest hint that it's YA is the fact that the story begins with a young protagonist. McKinley never talks down to her readers or dumbs down the language.
My biggest complaint about the book is that the beast doesn't show up until the story's almost halfway through. While the texture of Beauty's world was a real treat to experience, it felt like it had a lot of setup, and not as much of the romance.
Overall, though, I would enthusiastically recommend this one to any readers of YA. The book is age-appropriate even for the younger set, as there's nothing that should get parents' eyebrows raised.