califrey99's review against another edition
adventurous
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
storiesatstarfall's review
3.0
Star Rating: 3
This book had the hallmarks of something I should love: Belle, a fairytale remixed with historical context, and a whiff of magic. But this book suffered from such a glaring error that I could not manage a more favorable rating: characterization.
If you are looking for the cast of Disney's Beauty and the Beast that you know and love, then you will not find them here.
This Belle is not that Belle. The brave, bold, outspoken, independent young woman we know that fiercely fought for those she loved is not present here. This meek, passive, insecure, unconfident character is no one I know. The only vague connection to the original is the enjoyment of books and some glimpses of cleverness. But that is it. The name of the Beast was also changed, for inexplicable reasons. I do not know these characters as they are presented, and I cannot recognize them. If the Belle that is known in the Disney canon had been present, majority of this plot would not have happened—and that is where my frustration lies.
The writing and content on the whole was suitable for the younger YA crowd, the readers that need to be reminded to trust their instincts, have a healthy self-confidence, and not to be afraid of greatness or its responsibilities. It was a fair amount of telling over showing.
Honestly, the greatest problem is that this book tried to tell me this was a character I was supposed to know, and I feel this story would have benefitted heavily from being completely separated from the Disney canon. If the author had been given free reign to write a story of a reluctant commoner on the cusp of queenhood in a brink-of-bloody-revolution world that was not one readers are marketed to know, then this review would probably be more favorable for the actual story told.
Thank you NetGalley and Disney-Hyperion for an advanced copy for review.
This book had the hallmarks of something I should love: Belle, a fairytale remixed with historical context, and a whiff of magic. But this book suffered from such a glaring error that I could not manage a more favorable rating: characterization.
If you are looking for the cast of Disney's Beauty and the Beast that you know and love, then you will not find them here.
This Belle is not that Belle. The brave, bold, outspoken, independent young woman we know that fiercely fought for those she loved is not present here. This meek, passive, insecure, unconfident character is no one I know. The only vague connection to the original is the enjoyment of books and some glimpses of cleverness. But that is it. The name of the Beast was also changed, for inexplicable reasons. I do not know these characters as they are presented, and I cannot recognize them. If the Belle that is known in the Disney canon had been present, majority of this plot would not have happened—and that is where my frustration lies.
The writing and content on the whole was suitable for the younger YA crowd, the readers that need to be reminded to trust their instincts, have a healthy self-confidence, and not to be afraid of greatness or its responsibilities. It was a fair amount of telling over showing.
Honestly, the greatest problem is that this book tried to tell me this was a character I was supposed to know, and I feel this story would have benefitted heavily from being completely separated from the Disney canon. If the author had been given free reign to write a story of a reluctant commoner on the cusp of queenhood in a brink-of-bloody-revolution world that was not one readers are marketed to know, then this review would probably be more favorable for the actual story told.
Thank you NetGalley and Disney-Hyperion for an advanced copy for review.
wolfdreamer97's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Loveable characters? Yes
5.0
hmiceli's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
I saw an ad for the third book in this series (the Jasmine story) and it intrigued me enough to see what it was all about. So I started from the beginning and what a fun book! The story follows Belle and Lio (the Beast turned Prince - it's a nickname) as they deal with being part of the French aristocracy during the beginning of the French Revolution - that was meme at one point! Belle is kind of rightfully having difficulty being considered a princess, but over the course of the book, realizes her need to accept her role to save her Kingdom. I loved the portrayal of the supporting characters and the inclusion of new ones. Definitely a fun read if you like sequels to classic Disney stories.
reeniecrystal's review
3.0
TL;DR: This book is best read if you think about it as a story about Belle becoming a leader first and historical fiction second (or not at all.)
A solid "Meh."
The heart of the book is pretty solid, but it's got one glaring, overarching flaw: This book did not need to take place during the French Revolution.
The whole appeal of this book is supposed to be that it takes place during real history, however the history in question had very little affect on the plot. It serves the purpose of giving the characters a reason to fear for their lives and Belle a motivation to become a good leader, but this purpose could have just as easily been served by a generic fictional peasant uprising (there's even a built-in excuse for one to happen, that being the Beast's neglect of his principality while cursed), as most of the elements that define the French Revolution specifically take place "off screen." Instead of having Belle and the Beast become entangled with the likes of Marie Antoinette or Robespierre and being present to watch the events unfold before their eyes, real life history is instead relayed to us through occasional moments where a character bursts in with "news from Paris," gives us a paragraph-sized summary of a key event worthy of an unenthused middle school report, and causes everyone to gasp in horror before they promptly move on to deal with the fictional conflict.
The one exception is when Belle is present at the aftermath of the storming of the Bastille and gets to see one decapitation (which I'll give the author props for, I wasn't sure if she would actually go for it — let's be honest, being curious to see if she actually would go for it is one of the main reasons most of us picked up this book), but that's pretty much it. Even worse, because all of the history is relayed secondhand, it often winds up not being very good history as a result. For example, because we never meet Marie Antoinette in person, the book leaves you with the tired old implication that she was a purely ignorant rich girl who was somehow significantly responsible for France's troubles with her extravagant spending. In reality, neither Marie Antoinette nor Louis XVI played that big of a role in getting France to the point that it did, that was largely the fault of Louis' grandfather and predecessor, Louis XV. On the contrary, XVI and MA's reign was largely characterized by desperate attempts to reverse the poverty of the French peasantry and reform the French government in accordance with Enlightenment values, but these largely failed due to a mixture of incompetence (they had both been poorly educated on policy and economics, Marie Antoinette because she was a woman and Louis due to the out-of-touch ideas and priorities of his rich tutors) and just the fact that things were so bad at that point that no one could have fixed it and stopped the inevitable revolution.
Marie Antoinette did have a taste for luxury (largely as a response to her own spartan/neglectful upbringing at the Austrian court), but she also performed many charitable functions to try to ease the burdens of peasantry, adopted several poor orphans to raise alongside her biological children, and frequently negotiated with the revolution-sympathizers despite her personal dislike for many of them. While her incompetence and privilege did serve as an obstacle to reform, she was not the frivolous, callous twit pop culture makes her out to be. She was a flawed, complex, well-intentioned human being who genuinely tried her hardest (probably harder than her own husband) to help the common people and steer the kingdom in the right direction, but was tragically out of her depth and failed drastically as a result. Her story actually mirrors Belle's in a lot of ways, a woman having to unexpectedly step up as a leader to address her husband's failures, trying to balance her desire to save her people with her need to protect her family from those same people's wrath. Her and Belle's similarities could have easily been played up and her failures contrasted with Belle's successes for high degree of tragedy, a haunting example of what could have happened to Belle if just a few things had been different.
Instead, the book repeats the long-debunked "let them eat cake" myth.
Maybe I'm expecting too much about a historical event as complex and graphic as the French Revolution from a Disney novel, but I don't think I am. Plenty of other YA books such as Carolyn Meyer's "Young Royals" series and Scholastic's "The Royal Diaries" manage to address history in an appropriate way for kids. Is it because it's Disney specifically and they can't let too much nuance get in the way of their brand? Possibly. But then why did they even try?
Either do the history or don't. Don't market it as your big selling point and then half-ass it.
Moving on to the positives...
While this book fails as historical fiction, it is a good sequel to "Beauty and the Beast." I enjoyed the marriage between Belle and... sigh... Lio (dammit Disney, just let people call him Adam!), which was unexpectedly sensual at some parts and had a good mixture of respect and conflict. Beast struggles with being overprotective of Belle (in his own words, “And I was so scared of losing you that I stopped seeing you as my partner. I could only see you as something I needed to protect.”), but unlike with many YA books, it never reaches that frustrating point where's this unlikable, controlling, condescending ass, and he learns his lesson by the end.
Bastien was a compelling antagonist and really does keep Belle and the reader on their toes as to what his true plans are. Until the end, it's hard to tell if he's a secret revolutionary, an out-of-touch noble, or perhaps a sneaky ally of Belle and the Beast. It is difficult to write a villain who is clever manipulator without making either their intentions so obvious that the other characters look like idiots or so subtle that their big reveal seems to come out of nowhere, but this book pulled it off. My only complaint is that I wish they had gone into more detail about why he did what did, but that ties back into the issue of the book's unwillingness to get into the nuances of history.
The feminist angle is well done. Belle slowly comes into her own as a leader through trial and error, starting out already with noble intent but having to learn how to employ strategy and wit in addition to gaining the courage to employ it. The book doesn't engage in the shallow feminism that some of its peers do where the solution to all of the main character's problems is just to "be more confident" and everything else will click into place, Belle has to put herself at risk, put in the work, and be willing to make mistakes in order to fully realize her empowerment. I also liked how the sexism of characters was usually subtle, such as in ignoring Belle or accusing her of "not thinking clearly," instead heavy-handed rants about the inferiority of women. It overall gives a more realistic empowering message for young women that is appropriate for the age group targeted.
This book did a gay, redeemed LeFou better than the live action movie did. Enough said.
The message about the importance of helping the common people was strong, resulting in some pretty badass lines from Belle...
“The happenstance of someone’s birth should not determine whether or not they are impoverished. It is up to those of us with power in whatever form to work to make the lives of everyone better, starting with those less fortunate than us.”
“And I speak for myself alone when I say you’re wrong. Do you forget that I am a commoner? That I grew up in a poor village with the very people you seek to malign? I do not fear them in the same way I fear a rich man who believes justice is a fluid concept and that innocence can be bought.”
“Everything that is worth learning is already taught.”
“To whom?” Belle felt the heat rising in her cheeks. “Strictly the wealthy sons of wealthier fathers?” Some of Bastien’s guests gasped, they themselves being the children of France’s aristocracy, but Belle was heartened when she saw Marguerite smile encouragingly. “I believe that education is a right, monsieur, and one that has long been reserved exclusively for the most privileged among us. My salons will reflect the true reality.”
... though the more politically savvy may be annoyed at how the solution advocated to the problems that caused the Revolution seems to be Enlightened absolutism, with the actions of revolutionaries being framed as "too extreme." Then again, what were we expecting? For a Disney princess to denounce the inherent exploitativeness of monarchism? It's good enough for the limitations of its genre and for an age demographic that probably isn't yet ready to handle the idea that no actually, chopping off people's heads can be a good thing.
Overall:
As a book intended to be a slightly darker, feminist sequel to a Disney film for an older audience, it's fine. But the concept of Disney characters starring in real history is perhaps more ambitious an idea than Disney is willing to deliver on, and that creates false hopes which inevitably lead to disappointment from an otherwise decent novel. Maybe other authors in this series will handle this premise better, but as far as "Rebel Rose" goes, I would keep expectations low.
--
[[Pre-reading reaction]]
*sees this in recommendations*
Is that Beauty and the Beast? I love Beauty and the Beast! Belle is one of my favorite Disney princesses. Let's see what the summary says.
"Happily ever after is only the beginning as Belle takes on the responsibility of becoming queen and learns to balance duty, love, and sacrifice, all while navigating dark political intrigue—and a touch of magic."
Sweet, Belle would make a great queen, sounds awesome.
"It’s 1789 and France is on the brink of revolution."
Wait what
"Belle has finally broken the Enchantress’s curse, restoring the Beast to his human form and bringing life back to their castle in the province of Aveyon. But in Paris, the fires of change are burning, and it’s only a matter of time before the rebellion arrives on their doorstep."
OH NO!!
"Rebel Rose is the first in the Queen's Council series, an empowering fairy tale reimagining of the Disney Princesses-and the real history behind their stories-like you've never seen before."
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! BELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE!!!!!!
*sobs*
I'm totally going to read this.
A solid "Meh."
The heart of the book is pretty solid, but it's got one glaring, overarching flaw: This book did not need to take place during the French Revolution.
The whole appeal of this book is supposed to be that it takes place during real history, however the history in question had very little affect on the plot. It serves the purpose of giving the characters a reason to fear for their lives and Belle a motivation to become a good leader, but this purpose could have just as easily been served by a generic fictional peasant uprising (there's even a built-in excuse for one to happen, that being the Beast's neglect of his principality while cursed), as most of the elements that define the French Revolution specifically take place "off screen." Instead of having Belle and the Beast become entangled with the likes of Marie Antoinette or Robespierre and being present to watch the events unfold before their eyes, real life history is instead relayed to us through occasional moments where a character bursts in with "news from Paris," gives us a paragraph-sized summary of a key event worthy of an unenthused middle school report, and causes everyone to gasp in horror before they promptly move on to deal with the fictional conflict.
The one exception is when Belle is present at the aftermath of the storming of the Bastille and gets to see one decapitation (which I'll give the author props for, I wasn't sure if she would actually go for it — let's be honest, being curious to see if she actually would go for it is one of the main reasons most of us picked up this book), but that's pretty much it. Even worse, because all of the history is relayed secondhand, it often winds up not being very good history as a result. For example, because we never meet Marie Antoinette in person, the book leaves you with the tired old implication that she was a purely ignorant rich girl who was somehow significantly responsible for France's troubles with her extravagant spending. In reality, neither Marie Antoinette nor Louis XVI played that big of a role in getting France to the point that it did, that was largely the fault of Louis' grandfather and predecessor, Louis XV. On the contrary, XVI and MA's reign was largely characterized by desperate attempts to reverse the poverty of the French peasantry and reform the French government in accordance with Enlightenment values, but these largely failed due to a mixture of incompetence (they had both been poorly educated on policy and economics, Marie Antoinette because she was a woman and Louis due to the out-of-touch ideas and priorities of his rich tutors) and just the fact that things were so bad at that point that no one could have fixed it and stopped the inevitable revolution.
Marie Antoinette did have a taste for luxury (largely as a response to her own spartan/neglectful upbringing at the Austrian court), but she also performed many charitable functions to try to ease the burdens of peasantry, adopted several poor orphans to raise alongside her biological children, and frequently negotiated with the revolution-sympathizers despite her personal dislike for many of them. While her incompetence and privilege did serve as an obstacle to reform, she was not the frivolous, callous twit pop culture makes her out to be. She was a flawed, complex, well-intentioned human being who genuinely tried her hardest (probably harder than her own husband) to help the common people and steer the kingdom in the right direction, but was tragically out of her depth and failed drastically as a result. Her story actually mirrors Belle's in a lot of ways, a woman having to unexpectedly step up as a leader to address her husband's failures, trying to balance her desire to save her people with her need to protect her family from those same people's wrath. Her and Belle's similarities could have easily been played up and her failures contrasted with Belle's successes for high degree of tragedy, a haunting example of what could have happened to Belle if just a few things had been different.
Instead, the book repeats the long-debunked "let them eat cake" myth.
Maybe I'm expecting too much about a historical event as complex and graphic as the French Revolution from a Disney novel, but I don't think I am. Plenty of other YA books such as Carolyn Meyer's "Young Royals" series and Scholastic's "The Royal Diaries" manage to address history in an appropriate way for kids. Is it because it's Disney specifically and they can't let too much nuance get in the way of their brand? Possibly. But then why did they even try?
Either do the history or don't. Don't market it as your big selling point and then half-ass it.
Moving on to the positives...
While this book fails as historical fiction, it is a good sequel to "Beauty and the Beast." I enjoyed the marriage between Belle and... sigh... Lio (dammit Disney, just let people call him Adam!), which was unexpectedly sensual at some parts and had a good mixture of respect and conflict. Beast struggles with being overprotective of Belle (in his own words, “And I was so scared of losing you that I stopped seeing you as my partner. I could only see you as something I needed to protect.”), but unlike with many YA books, it never reaches that frustrating point where's this unlikable, controlling, condescending ass, and he learns his lesson by the end.
Bastien was a compelling antagonist and really does keep Belle and the reader on their toes as to what his true plans are. Until the end, it's hard to tell if he's a secret revolutionary, an out-of-touch noble, or perhaps a sneaky ally of Belle and the Beast. It is difficult to write a villain who is clever manipulator without making either their intentions so obvious that the other characters look like idiots or so subtle that their big reveal seems to come out of nowhere, but this book pulled it off. My only complaint is that I wish they had gone into more detail about why he did what did, but that ties back into the issue of the book's unwillingness to get into the nuances of history.
The feminist angle is well done. Belle slowly comes into her own as a leader through trial and error, starting out already with noble intent but having to learn how to employ strategy and wit in addition to gaining the courage to employ it. The book doesn't engage in the shallow feminism that some of its peers do where the solution to all of the main character's problems is just to "be more confident" and everything else will click into place, Belle has to put herself at risk, put in the work, and be willing to make mistakes in order to fully realize her empowerment. I also liked how the sexism of characters was usually subtle, such as in ignoring Belle or accusing her of "not thinking clearly," instead heavy-handed rants about the inferiority of women. It overall gives a more realistic empowering message for young women that is appropriate for the age group targeted.
This book did a gay, redeemed LeFou better than the live action movie did. Enough said.
The message about the importance of helping the common people was strong, resulting in some pretty badass lines from Belle...
“The happenstance of someone’s birth should not determine whether or not they are impoverished. It is up to those of us with power in whatever form to work to make the lives of everyone better, starting with those less fortunate than us.”
“And I speak for myself alone when I say you’re wrong. Do you forget that I am a commoner? That I grew up in a poor village with the very people you seek to malign? I do not fear them in the same way I fear a rich man who believes justice is a fluid concept and that innocence can be bought.”
“Everything that is worth learning is already taught.”
“To whom?” Belle felt the heat rising in her cheeks. “Strictly the wealthy sons of wealthier fathers?” Some of Bastien’s guests gasped, they themselves being the children of France’s aristocracy, but Belle was heartened when she saw Marguerite smile encouragingly. “I believe that education is a right, monsieur, and one that has long been reserved exclusively for the most privileged among us. My salons will reflect the true reality.”
... though the more politically savvy may be annoyed at how the solution advocated to the problems that caused the Revolution seems to be Enlightened absolutism, with the actions of revolutionaries being framed as "too extreme." Then again, what were we expecting? For a Disney princess to denounce the inherent exploitativeness of monarchism? It's good enough for the limitations of its genre and for an age demographic that probably isn't yet ready to handle the idea that no actually, chopping off people's heads can be a good thing.
Overall:
As a book intended to be a slightly darker, feminist sequel to a Disney film for an older audience, it's fine. But the concept of Disney characters starring in real history is perhaps more ambitious an idea than Disney is willing to deliver on, and that creates false hopes which inevitably lead to disappointment from an otherwise decent novel. Maybe other authors in this series will handle this premise better, but as far as "Rebel Rose" goes, I would keep expectations low.
--
[[Pre-reading reaction]]
*sees this in recommendations*
Is that Beauty and the Beast? I love Beauty and the Beast! Belle is one of my favorite Disney princesses. Let's see what the summary says.
"Happily ever after is only the beginning as Belle takes on the responsibility of becoming queen and learns to balance duty, love, and sacrifice, all while navigating dark political intrigue—and a touch of magic."
Sweet, Belle would make a great queen, sounds awesome.
"It’s 1789 and France is on the brink of revolution."
Wait what
"Belle has finally broken the Enchantress’s curse, restoring the Beast to his human form and bringing life back to their castle in the province of Aveyon. But in Paris, the fires of change are burning, and it’s only a matter of time before the rebellion arrives on their doorstep."
OH NO!!
"Rebel Rose is the first in the Queen's Council series, an empowering fairy tale reimagining of the Disney Princesses-and the real history behind their stories-like you've never seen before."
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! BELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLE!!!!!!
*sobs*
I'm totally going to read this.
andthatsonliterature's review against another edition
4.0
This is for my Disney Princess girlies! Please note this is not a retelling, but a continuation of Belle’s story after the curse has been lifted. It actually ties in with real life events of the start of the French Revolution, so if you are a history girlie (which I am) you will love this.
Now Belle isn’t my favorite Princess, but I did like this story a lot. We witnessed as she battled with how to help the Kingdom of Aveyon as their leading lady while still trying to remain her authentic self. One thing’s for sure and two things for certain, don’t mess with King Lio and don’t mess with the people of Aveyon because Ms. Belle stepped!
If you like magic, a splash of betrayal, and Disney gone ahead and read this one.
The next book in the Queen Council’s series features Mulan, and the third book which will be released this October features Jasmine.
Now Belle isn’t my favorite Princess, but I did like this story a lot. We witnessed as she battled with how to help the Kingdom of Aveyon as their leading lady while still trying to remain her authentic self. One thing’s for sure and two things for certain, don’t mess with King Lio and don’t mess with the people of Aveyon because Ms. Belle stepped!
If you like magic, a splash of betrayal, and Disney gone ahead and read this one.
The next book in the Queen Council’s series features Mulan, and the third book which will be released this October features Jasmine.
rynflynn12's review against another edition
adventurous
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
chelsbells1994's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0