Rose Daughter, by Robin McKinley, is a gorgeous retelling of Beauty and the Beast. Actually, this is Robin’s second version of Beauty and the Beast. I read the first one, Beauty, when it was first published in 1978, and I absolutely loved it. I’ve reread it so many times that my copy is dogeared, and the pages are falling out. I also enjoyed this version (Rose Daughter was published in 1997) but it is very different from Beauty. It is also beautifully told, with the symbolism of the roses and thorns intertwined throughout the story, but it is a more complex story. The magic is more confusing and harder to overcome. I liked the characters very much. I liked Beauty’s sisters more in this version, and of course I loved Beauty, who is kind and good and loves roses. The Beast was not as easy to get to know, with his cryptic words and dark clothing, but I sensed his deep loneliness. The ending was a surprise, and I had to go back and reread the last few pages to make sure I hadn’t missed something.

Robin McKinley is a master storyteller, and I love her books. At the end of Rose Daughter, she included an author’s note to explain why she wrote another book about Beauty and the Beast: “...Rose Daughter shot out onto the page in about six months. I’ve never had a story burst so fully and extravagantly straight onto the page, like Athena from the head of Zeus. I’ve long said that my books “happen” to me. They tend to blast in from nowhere, seize me by the throat, and howl, Write me! Write me now! But they rarely stand still long enough for me to see what and who they are, before they hurtle away again, and so I spend a lot of my time running after them, like a thrown rider after an escaped horse, saying, Wait for me! Wait for me!, and waving my notebook in the air. Rose Daughter happened, but it bolted with me. Writing it was quite like riding a not-quite-runaway horse, who is willing to listen to you, so long as you let it run.” (pg. 291)

I understand perfectly what Robin means when she says, “If you’re a storyteller, your own life streams through you, onto the page, mixed up with the life the story itself brings; you cannot, in any useful or genuine way, separate the two. The thing that tells me when one of the pictures in my head or phrases in my ear is a story, and not a mere afternoon’s distraction, is its life, its strength, its vitality. If you were picking up stones in the dark, you would know when you picked up a puppy instead. It’s warm; its wriggles; it’s alive.” (pg. 291)

There is nothing I like better than an old fairy tale retold well, and this is an excellent version of that genre. Beauty and the Beast is not my favourite tale and to be honest, I liked this version much better.

I debated rating this higher but no. McKinley wrote Beauty and she should have left it alone after that. I've read many cozy mysteries which deal with rose growers who are so obsessed that it's not a surprise that one of them gets murdered, and I have no idea what it's about roses. But I get it now. McKinley wrote a whole second version of a fairytale spinoff just because she started growing roses and learned more. Like never mind the story? Let's get to the roses. Problem with that is that I care nothing for them. I have a couple in my own garden but honest to goodness they're such trouble and attract so many horrible aphids that I'm of half a mind to replace them with azaleas. So yeah. This didn't work at all, even without the nonsensical ending.

I recommend this retelling of Beauty and the Beast, but with a disclaimer. I don't know. I felt like the story was beautiful but its slow pacing especially in the beginning, is bound to put off some readers. For that reason I might suggest it to other adults before some teens.

I hadn't realized this is a second take on the subject for her, and as I haven't read Beauty I can't compare it. The story of Beauty and the Beast might just be my favorite fairy tale though, and compared to its original fairy tale and variants this was based on, it holds up very nicely. The world is rich and engrossing and I enjoyed seeing Beauty's sisters more fleshed out and given their own adventures. The growing relationship between Beauty and the Beast is handled especially well. Although the pace was slow, I felt like the way the story spun out worked with the material---as if the enchantment was gradually building. The ending might be a bit surprising to some, but I felt McKinley pulled it off. My only real complaint was that the back story of the beast and the curse felt incredibly convoluted---not least because we are fed a couple of different variations of it before the 'real" story comes out.

Read by Bianca Amato
Another Beauty and the Beast retelling and since I read T Kingfisher's Briony and Roses recently, it's hard not to compare and contrast. Both writers are excellent storytellers. Rose Daughter might be slightly lighter in tone though both focus on Beauty as a gardener. In this version we follow three sisters and their bankrupt father. The sisters are fully rounded characters in their own right, whichis a nice touch. They all have skills. Beauty's skill happens to be growing things are there are hints that she might actually bee a green witch. When Beauty ends up in the Beast's palace, she tries to save the Beast's roses which are slowly dying an an enormous glass house. It's a very pleasant listen with just the hint of the narrator's English accent sometimes defaulting to orff instead of off. I checked and she's South African so considering her English accent is probably learned, she does quite well. It does worry me sometimes that they don't have English narrators doing English accents. Surely there are enough English readers available.

I did not like this book. It made very little sense, plot-wise, and I'm even now not entirely sure what the actual story was. The narrative is rambling and directionless, what tension the author tried to build in failed utterly, and the characters were more annoying than anything else. There is no curse to be broken or puzzles to be solved. There is no reason given for anything that happens, and no moral dilemmas more complex or nuanced than "choose between being shallow and cruel or being loved and happy." And that wasn't even the Beast's choice.

Update: I have been thinking about this book for a while now, and I think I've put my finger on what was so dissatisfying about it. Not only is there no conflict, but there is no antagonist at all. I got the distinct impression that the author wanted her characters to go through trials and tribulations, but she just couldn't bring herself to make anything truly bad actually happen to them. So the characters basically just flail about, misunderstanding things, and making mountains out of molehills for the entire book. There is no antagonist. There is no curse, no spell to be broken, no true threats to anyone's safety or happiness. Beauty was never imprisoned, the Beast was never under any spell, there was never any curse on the three sisters... nothing threatening ever happens -- it's all misunderstandings and assumptions. There is the brief appearance of a petty bully who says some mean things and then gets punched for them, but that's about it.

Plus, magical pooping unicorns that make everything all better.

As Beauty and the Beast retellings go, this one is pretty good; it stays fairly traditional but adds a few little twists to make it inventive. And the writing’s good (It’s McKinley, so of course), but I did feel that it got sloggy in the middle and that the ending could have been edited some. Overall, though, a solid effort.

I much prefer this author’s first retelling of Beauty and the Beast, Beauty. This one was good but I often found myself skimming - the prose and descriptions just weren’t that compelling to me. I think the book would have been more engaging with some judicious editing. That being said - it is an interesting take on the old tale, and it’s squeaky clean (zero language - zero sex). Solid three stars.

(Re-read)

I liked this better than Beauty. At least, most of it. By the end, I was bored and ready for it to be over.

I came closer to believing in the love story here, but not close enough.

And I guess McKinley's writing doesn't match my tastes so well anymore. Too much description!

(Makes me want to read a really awesome Beauty & the Beast retelling, though. The trick, of course, being it has to be awesome for me.)

I talk about my love for Robin McKinley's books a lot. I know everyone's read Beauty. It was her first book. It's essentially a classic of fairy tale retellings now. And I love it and will always love it for giving me a Beauty who was not beautiful and avoided mirrors at all cost and a Beast with a library of books from all the ages, including ones that hadn't even been written yet. Makes my little heart sing just thinking of it and the way I absorbed it when I was twelve. But fewer people are as familiar with Ms. McKinley's second retelling of the story of Beauty and the Beast. If you have a free moment, it's really worth hopping over to her site to read the wonderful essay, "The Story Behind Rose Daughter." It's lovely. When I discovered she was returning to her favorite fairy tale twenty years later and giving it a fresh new take in an entirely new novel, my skin tingled with anticipation. And not a little curiosity at just how she would give the story she'd done so well by a fresh take and whether or not it would capture my imagination the way the original did. People seem to be very divided on their loyalties to these two books. Some would fight to the death for Beauty and don't give ROSE DAUGHTER a second glance. Others feel quite the opposite and gravitate toward the slightly more lush second version. I've listened to these conversations. As for me, my heart is big enough to love them both. And I am so glad she wrote both books. Because someone who understands and loves that particular fairy tale the way it seems she does should never stop telling it, in my opinion. I would read a third and a fourth version and I will re-read these two for the rest of my life.

n  Her earliest memory was of waking from the dream. It was also her only clear memory of her mother.n

Beauty and her two older sisters Jeweltongue and Lionheart live with their father in the city. Their lives have been rather gentle ones, filled with plenty to eat, soft beds, and the best society has to offer. Though they lost their mother early on, they have managed to make a good life with their father, each pursuing the hobbies and talents they love, as represented by their names. Lionheart is brave and strong and loves riding and sport more than anything else. Jeweltongue knows exactly what to say in every situation, sets people at ease, and sews and embroiders the most beautiful dresses. Beauty loves nature. She loves flowers and gardens and especially roses, in all their varieties and iterations, because they remind her of her mother. Then tragedy strikes. Their father loses all his wealth and they are forced to move to tiny Rose Cottage far away in the countryside. The sisters' talents are put to good use earning what meager money they can and their lives are changed in starkly unimaginable ways. But none more than Beauty's. All her life she's had the same dream. More of a nightmare, really. In which she is walking down a long hallway, uncertain of the mystery she will find behind that final door, but dreading it all the same and filled with the terror that she will both eventually get there and not get there in time. The usual events follow and Beauty takes her father's place and finds herself living in the Beast's home, where his lovely rose garden is dying. But, of course, everything is more than meets the eye, and Beauty will, in the end, have to make the hardest decision of all.

Roses are for love. Not silly sweet-hearts' love but the love that makes you and keeps you whole, love that gets you through the worst your life'll give you and that pours out of you when you're given the best instead.

Sigh. I love this book so much. It is, without a doubt, a more adult retelling of the fairy tale. And I don't mean that there is any potentially objectionable in it at all. I merely mean that you can feel the depth of experience and emotion in the work, which I think represents what the author brings to the tale twenty years after she first retold it. The sisters feel a bit older, a bit more mature, though I always love that McKinley represents them as loving and kind to one another and as in the whole thing together. The Beast himself feels more ancient to me, closer to the end of his long existence, and we get even more background information on how he came to be the way he was and what his interminable penance has really been like. And the love of beauty and gardens and all living things permeates the page in such a way that I, who am the most unskilled and amateur of gardeners, go looking for a spade and seeds the minute I put the book down. The language in ROSE DAUGHTER swallows me up as well. I find myself eternally charmed by the archetypal names and the various village denizens the girls encounter: Miss Trueword, Mrs. Words-Without-End, Mrs. Bestcloth. Each personality is distinct and you can tell that they each have their own vital stories playing out, even as the focus remains on Beauty and her path. Each time I read it, I relish getting lost with her in the ever-changing castle that is the Beast's home, as the words and the corridors wrap their twisty novelty around me and the heady magic that suffuses the place and the world has its way with me. The romance is wonderful and just as it should be. The magic is dense and carefully woven. And the descriptions so visual I can call them to mind on any given day, so vibrant are the impressions they made on me. And the ending, you say? Well, you shall have to find out for yourself. To me, it is perfect. I'm interested what it is to you.

I just got SO bored.

Sigh . . . After Beauty, McKinley should've left the Beauty and the Beast fairytale alone and not revisit it just to shoot herself in both feet with this second attempt at a retelling. Readers who observed the flaws and plotholes in Beauty will notice that Robin McKinley not only repeats the same mistakes but actually exacerbates them; they're much worse in this story.

And the sad part is, this time the author can't be given the benefit of the doubt. With Beauty she was a fledgling author and so you could always be indulgent about her beginner mistakes. Some readers don't even take them into account and rate that book 5 stars. But with Rose Daughter? McKinley is a veteran author now, and should know better. Should've known better not just to NOT repeat the mistakes but also when to call it quits and reflect that if second parts are rarely good, second attempts never are. Not when your first one was good enough to not need a rehash.