staarcharmed's review
adventurous
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
kristaallysa's review against another edition
4.0
This was a cute retelling of the Princess and the Pea.
breama2022's review
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
iamnugget's review
3.0
I've never read the Princess and the Pea and only know the basic story so that might be why I didn't really enjoy this one. I liked Ella Enchanted but this is just kind of boring. It's a easy quick read for people who like fairytale retellings.
aftanith's review against another edition
2.0
In the interest of perfect honesty, I will confess that I have never read Hans Christian Anderson's The Princess and the Pea. In fact, prior to reading the wikipedia summary (which I did just before sitting down to write this review), all I knew of the story was that there was a princess who for some reason or other had a pea under her mattress.
Speaking from personal experience, I advise anyone who is planning to read The Princess Test to familiarize themselves with at least a summary of Anderson's tale. (Here is the summary I read.) I imagine that if I had read The Princess and the Pea before The Princess Test, I would probably have enjoyed it more than I did.
As such, The Princess Test bored me. It was quirky, which I normally like, but the quirk seemed muffled somehow, like it simply was rather than was something. It wasn't funny. It wasn't quite annoying. It was just there. From the absurd world and its ironic occurrences to the vaguely sarcastic quips of its inhabitants and their own odd character tics, I didn't feel connected or invested at all. Everything that happened was ridiculous, and every character accepted their lot without question or complaint. If the quirks were muffled, the overall tone was restrained.
Perhaps I could have enjoyed it better if I could have enjoyed it from a metaphysical standpoint. As I had only the vaguest familiarity with the original The Princess and the Pea, however, most of what Levine was saying passed me by. Yes, obviously the idea of a princess test is ignorant, but what's your point? I had to wonder. If I'd read The Princess and the Pea first, I wouldn't have wondered.
So maybe I ruined my own enjoyment of this. Who knows? Either way, I think I'll be adding Hans Christian Anderson's The Princess and the Pea to my to-read list. That line in the Wikipedia summary--"In the morning the guest tells her hosts—in a speech colored with double entendres—that she endured a sleepless night, kept awake by something hard in the bed"--certainly makes it sound like something I'd much rather read.
Speaking from personal experience, I advise anyone who is planning to read The Princess Test to familiarize themselves with at least a summary of Anderson's tale. (Here is the summary I read.) I imagine that if I had read The Princess and the Pea before The Princess Test, I would probably have enjoyed it more than I did.
As such, The Princess Test bored me. It was quirky, which I normally like, but the quirk seemed muffled somehow, like it simply was rather than was something. It wasn't funny. It wasn't quite annoying. It was just there. From the absurd world and its ironic occurrences to the vaguely sarcastic quips of its inhabitants and their own odd character tics, I didn't feel connected or invested at all. Everything that happened was ridiculous, and every character accepted their lot without question or complaint. If the quirks were muffled, the overall tone was restrained.
Perhaps I could have enjoyed it better if I could have enjoyed it from a metaphysical standpoint. As I had only the vaguest familiarity with the original The Princess and the Pea, however, most of what Levine was saying passed me by. Yes, obviously the idea of a princess test is ignorant, but what's your point? I had to wonder. If I'd read The Princess and the Pea first, I wouldn't have wondered.
So maybe I ruined my own enjoyment of this. Who knows? Either way, I think I'll be adding Hans Christian Anderson's The Princess and the Pea to my to-read list. That line in the Wikipedia summary--"In the morning the guest tells her hosts—in a speech colored with double entendres—that she endured a sleepless night, kept awake by something hard in the bed"--certainly makes it sound like something I'd much rather read.
snowbenton's review against another edition
4.0
A charming story that I enjoyed as a kid and as an adult. A cute, short retelling of the Princess and the Pea.
liralen's review against another edition
3.0
Entertaining (very funny on a line level), but it's also interesting to think how different a fairytale style this is than Levine's better-known [b:Ella Enchanted|24337|Ella Enchanted|Gail Carson Levine|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1410727190s/24337.jpg|2485462]: in Ella, the emphasis is on inner strength and being your own hero; in The Princess Test, Lorelei...how do I put this? The proof that she's made to be a princess is that she's physically weak. Courageous, yes, and of strong moral fiber...but also pretty helpless. The book's doing something specific and classic, but it's a pretty interesting comparison point.
afaithu's review
4.0
These little fairy tales are adorable, and definitely something I would have laughed at when I was younger. Cute and clever, even now.