Lisa’s Comments (group member since Aug 16, 2014)

Lisa’s comments from the Once Upon a Time... group.

Ooh - thanks for the perspective, Susan! Looking forward to getting into it later this week.

Well, I have just discovered that I have already read Rump! I gave it 3 stars, so it wasn't fantastic, but I liked it. LOL. I fully intend to read it again. Perils of a voracious reader.

I read two versions today. One was in the Blue Fairy Book. The other is the Grimm version as illustrated by Donna Diamond. It was printed in 1983 and doesn't say who it was translated by, but other than a minor more updated wording of the rhyme Rumpelstiltskin sings around the fire, there aren't any differences. I'm sure I have read it before, but the ending of these was definitely more gruesome than I remember.
As we are going to be doing the Grimm tales in September, I am waiting until later in the month to download that one, but will read the original by mid month.
I also found and checked out Rump: The True Story of Rumpelstiltskin by Liesl Shurtliff. This is children's middle reader book, but looks like fun. Hopefully, I will get to it this month too.

I'm getting my copy from the library today. I am also currently reading The Blue Fairy Book, which has Rumpelstiltskin in it. I looked quickly and saw that it was only like 4 pages or so, which I found unexpected. The copy from the library is 26 pages, so must have a lot of illustrations.

Awesome, Bonnie!
I freely admit that I didn't re-read the Villeneuve version again this time, as I have read it so many times it's kind of crazy. But I'm like you, it's my very favorite tale and my favorite retellings.
I was wondering if anyone other than Kyle had read the Villeneuve original and was waiting to see their take on it, since it is actually very different than the much shorter Beaumont version, although the main plot is the same.
As you have very aptly summed up the cool things about the original, I will let it stand at that.
As Cheryl said, I'm off to visit your website too.
Thanks again!

Hello, Susan! Welcome to the group. Interesting career you have had.

Well, I finished the book finally. I agree with Kyle's rating too. LOL. I would rate it a 2 1/2, but I rounded up, so gave it a 3. Oh well, I will certainly not be reading any other books by Liz Braswell.

I agree with Kyle about liking the aspect of having the background for Belle and Maurice and what happened to her mother. Honestly, I enjoy the Disney movie, and the soundtrack is wonderful, but I always found the Disney version somewhat insubstantial compared to the original. I have read so many various retellings that I kind of wanted to see how a retelling of the Disney version (which is a retelling itself) would be handled.
Thank you, Kyle! I am not finished with the book, but went ahead and read your spoiler anyway. Don't worry - it won't effect my enjoyment of the story. I am actually really liking the unraveling of the mystery of all that happened and how they might break the curse. However, that being said, something just kept irritating me about Belle and some of the things she said or did. I hadn't put it together in my mind, but what you said is exactly it!

As the book progresses, I am liking it more. Once they got past the back and forth between time frames, it reads much more smoothly. Definitely not the best retelling of Beauty and the Beast, but I'm not finding it unenjoyable or a huge waste of time.
I am actually really enjoying the mystery aspect of the book.
I see Kyle only rated it 2 stars, so didn't really care for it either I guess.

OK, so I am only on page 68, and while I am semi liking the story line itself, I really do not care for how it is written.
I have read books that switch between the past and present before, and that isn't a problem. However, the transition between the two should be smooth and in this book the transitions seem very choppy.

Kyle, very interesting that your version didn't include the monologue explanations from the beast and fairy. I do agree that in the original they are a bit long, but I think they are important for the story, and that is one thing that I missed in a few of the children's versions I read.
I agree that the dreams are an interesting part of how Beauty comes to view the Beast and her life. I always wondered why Beaumont removed that aspect.

Nothing to be sorry about! That's the thing about books. Sometimes ones that have an interesting description or blurb turn out to be disappointing. Also, everyone has slightly different tastes in writing styles, and some readers don't like books that others love. For example, I know a ton of people love the Luna series (Cinder), but I completely dislike it.
I haven't gotten far as I had other things I had to do this morning, so just barely started it, but have to say I'm not impressed with the beginning either.

One thing I am really enjoying in these readings is the illustrations. In previous readings, I have had the tale in anthologies or unillustrated versions, so this is a change for me.
As the beast is not really totally described, other than hideous usually, it is up to the illustrator to imagine what he looks like, and their perceptions have been very entertaining.

This is the copy I read this morning. It is the Beaumont version, but unless I am mistaken, I found very little integral differences between the Villeneuve and Beaumont versions. The differences were length and some minor details.
Of the three versions I read this time, this is the only one that mentions the brothers as well as the sisters.

Very interesting idea, Kyle! I never actually thought about the fact that the "retelling" type monologue could very well be a trend in writing adapted from plays, but it makes complete sense.

Hmm. Not viewing the spoiler yet, as I haven't even started the book, but that does seem disappointing. Guess I shall see. Hopefully it will improve.

True, Shanna. In Fire Rose the actual elemental spirit was a salamander that she controlled for the most part. Elementals usually are creatures made of the element, but I have also seen those that manipulate the elements being called elementals or elemental sorcerers before too. So I personally think it can be either way, but probably the more known kind would be the creature or spirit.

An elemental - a person that can control the elements or either fire, air, water, or earth.
In the book that I was thinking of she is a fire elemental. However, the book is Mercedes Lackey's "Fire Rose". It is a very loosely based retelling, but it was a good book.

Beastly is on my TBR list, but I haven't gotten to it yet. I had never heard of the Wendy Mass one, so will add that to my list.
I really enjoyed the Robin McKinley version. It's been a long time, but if I remember correctly, that one has Beauty as an elemental.

I have the same copy as you, Cheryl, but won't be starting it until tomorrow or the weekend. Hope you enjoy it!