Customer Reviews

Little Women and Werewolves

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Mixing werewolves, vampires(or vampire slayers) and zombies in classic stories is the latest trend to hit the market. I haven't read any of them, except this one(because I'm a Louisa May Alcott fan).

I think the author did a great job of weaving in the story of the werewolves into the classic tale. The reader is introduced to some Alcott ideology in this novel. For instance, the werewolves shouldn't be looked down upon or treated like second class citizens. They should be accepted in society, despite their faults. That piece of wisdom felt like Alcott through and through. I could see her writing that.

I didn't find the werewolves seen graphic. Some maybe offended, but I thought they were well written.

There were times my eyebrow went up. I remember Jo seeing Laurie for the first time, and she was checking him out like a modern day, hormonal teenager. I smiled. As I continued to read the story I thought the author would go in a different direction because it certainly felt that way. The ending was not the one I wanted. The ending doesn't take away from the novel in anyway, but my selfish expectations were disappointed.

Unlike the other reviewer I didn't find the pictures stunning. Most of the illustrations you see from Little Women are normally well done. However, the ones in this novel are simple pencil sketches.

Overall, this book was a fun read. I'm not sure I would run out and read every book that comes out like this. However, I might give the Little Women Vampire book a go. For Alcott fans who want something different I would encourage them to read this. Purists may want to stay away however.

Reviewed for [...]

Yet another literary mashup, Little Women and Werewolves is the classic tale of Jo, Beth, Meg and Amy, four girls trying to grow up, once rich, now poor, their father gone off to the Civil War and with werewolves running around. Unlike with other mash ups there is no tongue-in-cheek take on the original, just a tmesis of the traditional tale with the occasional line, or scene, about werewolves crammed in. If someone spliced frames from a slasher flick into a high brow romance then peppered in some morals, you'd get the same effect.
Grand mimics Alcott's style very well, even rounding the edges a bit. Readers who loved the original will likely enjoy this tale (particularly because Alcott also wrote gothic style novels, thus the set up of this being the "original" version of Little Women that was rewritten into what we know today is fitting). While it has a certain charm it also doesn't appeal to the same audiences as most paranormals and horror books because of an overdose of generally repressive morals and a lack of plot. The book encompasses about six years in the girls' lives, and a lot happens, and is often lovely written but it seems as if just when the good stuff is about to get going the narrative shies away for another lesson about being "a good little woman". Overall, despite promising prose, I found myself disappointed. Those acquiring for public collections should be assured that there are better mash ups out there, however if the library's patrons seem to have a taste for Little Women or the "new classics" no doubt they'll love this.
Contains: violence and some gore

I thought this book was a great read!
The tone of the story flowed with the original style of that time era and I enjoyed how the werewolves were weaved into the tale.
The author's command of descriptive vocabulary was perfect and I was pulled into the book and lost myself as I read!

I really wanted to enjoy this book. I was eager to read a mash-up of a book I loved as a kid and something that wasn't vampires. And I wasn't really disappointed. "Little Women and Werewolves" is a clever re-interpretation of a classic coming-of-age/didactic novel that manages to keep the charms of the original work while adding a surprisingly complementary Gothic undertone.

The werewolves make sense in this setting (it's a very "True Blood" feel) and don't feel forced into the narrative. The author also took liberties with many of the characters personalities and motivations, and in some cases it works. In other cases, it falls flat. Beth, most noticeably, is given a pretty thorough overhaul that doesn't seem to fit with the tone of the story. Jo, and her relationship with Laurie, is also approached very differently and their friendship doesn't feel as strong or as genuine.

The novel skirts the line between taking itself seriously and being an obvious satire of the original, and it's that indecision that hurts the story. Humans struggling to live alongside the deadly werewolves and the persecution of werewolves and their sympathizers are treated as important and serious. At the same time, many of the characters are seen shedding "a single tear" and the narrative seems to poke fun at the diadetic tone of the original. Sometimes its hard to tell if the author intended to be satirical, or she just isn't a fantastic writer.

Overall, I'd recommend the book to someone who isn't too attached to the original and enjoys a food good thrills.

I thought the switching between authors was rather clumsy. The good stuff was written by L.M. Alcott, while the not so good stuff by the other author. Language, priorities, and focus were too different between the two parts, on top of a bunch of human eating monsters. I thought the werewolf parts should have been better crafted, and really did not add much positive to the story. Reading this book was much like switching TV channels with Little Women on one station, and a Jason gore-fest on the other channel. I do not recomend this book.

This is a really fun read and it's going to test your vocabulary skills. The author tosses in some pretty cool archaic words which had me running to the dictionary and she does it smoothly and in a non pretentious manner. I appreciated that there is zero modern wordage or expressions, it truly reads as if it was written during that time period. I found the story engaging from start to finish. I also loved that the book is peppered with really good illustrations. The cover art is adorable.

I suppose I was expecting something a little more...funny. I had just finished Dawn of the Dreadfuls and was used to the humor used by Quirk Classics within the classics. However, Little Women and Werewolves lacks in humor. Well, I take that back - there's humor in Alcott's original work, but Grand does not offer any other humor within his story. In fact, it's quite a serious tone, as werewolves are vial creatures and there is a Brigade that enforces the killing (read: execution) of werewolves and werewolf sympathizers. Which, of course, our main characters are in some way or another connected to the werewolves.

Likewise, I would say that the story is mostly intact in its original form with maybe 20% of it having something to do with werewolves. The wolves certainly don't take over the original plot at all; it's almost as if they are an added element instead of a complete story rewrite (such as Pride and Prejudice and Zombies was).

Grand, however, writes in Alcott's style pretty flawlessly, so it was hard to tell that there was a second, newer, author. Major props on that because I know that sometimes readers are distracted by the attempt to recreate the original language.

If you love LITTLE WOMEN, you'll love this interpretation of it. Even though the other mashed-up books seem to rely on shock value and trying to be as outrageous and silly as they can, this one tells a story well and incorporates the werewolves smoothly in a way that follows the original themes. I love the choices the author made for which characters did and did not become werewolves. This book is head and shoulders above the others of this genre because it is so well written and carefully executed. The scenes with the werewolves are great, and can rival those of even the best horror novels. The illustrations are absolutely stunning, and those, alone, are worth the price of the book. I will definitely recommend this book to all my friends.

The werewolves "require" human flesh? Really? Why? The werewolves torture their victims indiscriminately for hours in horrible ways without reason, cause, or explanation. Then the werewolves are admired and accepted by our main characters. Really? People with massive flesh wounds manage to survive without a problem. I am a scifi-fantasy lover, but it just doesn't make sense nor does it fit. I thought the author must be socio-pathic - lacking in moral reasoning and delighting in pointless atrocity. I have never written a review before but was motivated by this one. I enjoyed Lincoln Vampire Slayer and I enjoyed Pride-Prej-Zombies, but this book ends it for me. I'm done with this genre.

One of the greatest charms of the recent trend in altering classic works of literature to become action-packed fantastic/gothic adventures is the way in which the authors mingle the new plot with the old text. To my mind, 'Pride and Prejudice and Zombies' is easily the most successful of these, because it retains large chunks of the original text and comes closest to replicating the tone of conversation in the newer passages (albeit in a rather affected way, and with the occasional double entendre so blatant it might as well be a single entendre). So what I find disappointing about 'Little Women and Werewolves' is the unnecessary rewriting and simplification of the text. I suppose it fits with the idea of the book as an 'earlier draft' of the final version, but I just found it unpolished.

I'll agree with some other reviewers that younger readers may enjoy this more; if you love the original text and would prefer a cleverer adaptation I'd recommend trying out other books in the genre.