When is a retelling not a retelling?

[Melanie]

Hi all! I've been lurking around for awhile (mostly on the 'what are you reading now?' thread which is a great thread!) and I'm hoping for a little help with a question I have about my current WIP...

How much of the original fairy tale does a novel need to have to be classed as a retelling? I've just finished the next book in my YA fairy tale retelling series and am planning to subtitle it 'A Reimagining of Little Red Riding Hood'. (I was thinking reimagining rather than retelling because it's a bit metaphorical.)

Anyway, I was just looking for some input from fairy tale fans. If you read the second book in a series (both basically stand alones but with character cross over) and the storyline followed on well from the first one but you thought the connections to the fairy tale in the title were a little light/a bit metaphorical, would you feel cheated?

Thanks in advance!

[Margaret]

Hmm, if there's a sub-title listing a tale, I do expect some obvious-ish similarities between the tale and the novel. However, I'm not a big fan of retellings that stick too close to the original, so my opinion is that as long as there are a few markers of the tale, it can digress from the original quite a lot and I would enjoy it and not be disappointed.

[Jalilah]

For me, a retelling has clearly recognizable aspects of the fairy tale and follows the story line of original. It could be set in a different time period, for example have the circumstances modernized if set in our time period, or different names of the characters or even a different out come.
If the fairy tale is not clearly recognizable, but influence a book then it would be "Mythic fiction"
If you have not read it out already, check out the Endicott Studio reading list http://endicottstudio.typepad.com/jom...
There are different lists for Mythic fiction, Adult Retellings and YA retellings.

[Melanti]

At some point it becomes just "inspired by" (Or as Jalilah calls it, mythic fiction) rather than a re-telling.

Alice Hoffman's works, for instance - which often incorporates broad themes from the fairy tales rather than following any sequence of events. Once you're told that it's a retelling, you can recognize it - but it takes a bit of extra knowledge and/or work.


But I'm not sure where that line sits.
I'd call most of Mercedes Lackey's Elemental Masters series retellings - barely - but others would call them mythic fiction. I guess they're on the boundary between the two?

[Leah]

Melanti wrote: "But I'm not sure where that line sits.
I'd call most of Mercedes Lackey's Elemental Masters series retellings - barely - but others would call them mythic fiction. I guess they're on the boundary between the two?"

I wrestle with that line a lot as a reader and a writer. I tend to lean toward Jalilah's definition, but there are times a story/book won't fit completely inside retelling or inspired by - it's a mashup of sorts. Yet another reason I loathe having to cram 'em into either subgenre.

ETA: Looking at your author page, Melanie, and reading the titles of both books and the blurb for the first one, I'm wondering if yours might fall more into "inspired by" -- Stray and The Glass Casket came to mind as strong examples of what I consider stories inspired by fairy tales more than retelling them. So I agree with your label of "reimagining." If I read a book titled accordingly I wouldn't necessarily be expecting every single element of the originals but I would expect a strong impression of the originals.

[Margaret]

Leah wrote: "So I agree with your label of "reimagining." If I read a book titled accordingly I wouldn't necessarily be expecting every single element of the originals but I would expect a strong impression of the originals. "

I agree.

[Melanie]

Thanks everyone! It probably shouldn't be surprising to me to see that there are a range of opinions :)

It seems like there's some level of agreement that the connection with the fairy tale can be looser if I use the word 'reimagining' rather then 'retelling' which is good to know. Another possibility is I could subtitle it: 'A Story Inspired by Little Red Riding Hood' which wouldn't fit as well with the naming formula of the first one but would probably lower reader expectations regarding connections to LRRH. (There are lots of connections, allusions and metaphorical characters from the fairy tale but it has its own completely separate story line.) I'll have to give it some further thought and see what my beta readers say.

Leah - thanks for taking the time to check out my page! The Princess Companion is probably more of a retelling because it sticks fairly closely to the original storyline (as much as there is of The Princess and the Pea anyway - it's a pretty short fairy tale!). The only main changes are that the girl who turns up in a storm isn't a princess (she's mistaken for one but that is quickly sorted out) and they don't immediately find out she felt the pea so the other princesses are tested after she turns up. Beyond that it's just adding a whole bunch of padding (such as character background, motivations and political intrigue) to turn it into a full novel and provide some understanding of why the princes' family was obsessed with a true princess. Oh and the pea is a magic pea because *really* I don't care how sensitive you are, you couldn't feel a pea under any number of mattresses, haha! Anyway, maybe that sounds like too many changes to you but I would think of it as a retelling.

The second book, however, has its own storyline with (mostly metaphorical) links to the fairytale which is why I thought reimagining was a better fit. My concern is that for some people, they'll see reimagining and their minds will sort of subconsciously substitute it with retelling and then they'll feel disappointed. So maybe 'a story inspired by' would be safer...

Thanks to everyone for providing all the examples. I had a look at the mythic fiction link and it doesn't quite fit my books as according to the site mythic fiction is supposed to be set in the real world (mine isn't) but it was interesting anyway. And, unfortunately, I haven't read any of the book examples listed (although I've read several of Mercedes Lackey's Five Hundred Kingdoms books) but I checked out the GoodReads pages of Stray and The Glass Casket. I'm interested to know where you guys would put a book like Crimson Bound by Rosamund Hodge or Scarlet by Marissa Meyer?

Anyway, this has turned into a monster post so thanks for your patience and for taking the time to help me out with your comments!

[Margaret]

I was thinking about this a more, and I definitely agree 'reimagining' is loser. For instance, if LRRH were a paranormal investigator on a completely separate case from the tale, with the wolf popping up every now and then as a humorous reoccurring trickster from her past--this would be LRRH reimagined versus a retelling.

A retelling does need to stick to certain elements of the original, but also gives new twists, either in perspective, adding depth and purpose, putting it in a unique time frame, changing certain parts, etc. If it sticks too close to the original, however, I feel like it risks being a bit cutesy, or too on point.

I haven't read anything by Marissa Meyer, so can't give any feedback on that!