Prelim review: I liked this unique twist on Cinderella. Unlike 'Princess of the Midnight Ball', which was a fairly straight forward retelling of 'The 12 Dancing Princesses', this book took the Cinderella fairy tale and gave it a more disturbing and dark appeal. What if the godmother wasn't so benevolent? What if Cinderella was just a pawn in a larger scheme?

I also enjoyed that Poppy wasn't the center of the story. Not exactly at least. She wasn't the substitute for Cinderella, she was the means by which Cinderella found her freedom and happiness however.

--
In Midnight Ball, we got a recounting of 12 Dancing Princesses, which is one of my favorite fairy tales. Its so underused too in my opinion. I'd be over the moon if Disney did a variation of that. Back to point. The novel was pretty straight forward as far as integrating the fairy tale with the novel. In Glass however, we get a variation on Cinderella and George takes us away from the standard retelling and into a whole new category.

What if Cinderella wasn't quite the victim of circumstances as she was a victim of her own pride? What if the godmother wasn't as kindly or benevolent as she appeared? What if the Prince was in love with another girl?

At first I honestly believed I had misunderstood the synopsis. The novel spends a lot of time setting up the characters in their lives before Eleanora (aka 'Ellen' aka 'Ella') meets her 'godmother'. We see Poppy dealing with the fall out from defeating the King Under Stone three years previously (she has PTSD, though its never labeled as such). We see Christian coming to Breton to find a wife and helping cement friendly ties between the kingdoms again. We see Eleanora fail at being a maid.

The different storylines the book follows at times connected only superficially at first, but fate conspired to bring them all together and that's when things got more interesting. I'm not sure what to make of Poppy's nightmares about the Kingdom Under Stone. I think they were more than just nightmares, but that's just a guess on my part.

Since Poppy was moved to a different Kingdom, away from her sisters who also scattered across the lands, we didn't see much of them. Poppy mentions Rose and Daisy quite often, and refers to Galen and wishing he was around to help out, but its not til the end of the novel that anyone shows up. Poppy remarks at one point its the longest time she's been away from her twin (Daisy) or any of her sisters. She could have easily just become a watering pot or melodramatic, but Poppy did what she does best--she adapted.

Its obvious that the Kingdom Under Stone isn't through with Poppy and her sisters, but I wonder how much of what happened in Breton was coincidence and how much of it was fate. One of Poppy's nightmares would suggest it was less coincidence then ought to be, but then does that mean all of her sisters are facing or will face similar situations? In some variations of the 12 Dancing Princesses, the youngest daughter is the one who marries the soldier/guard who saves them, so I wonder if George is working towards the youngest daughter's story of defeating the Kingdom Under Stone completely? ( )

2023 re-read review:

This second book in the trilogy is more enjoyable than the first: there's more action, more agency given to both the MCs and the antagonist, and the Cinderella retelling is given a twist which—while not entirely unique—makes the story a lot more enjoyable than if it had been the standard version. I remember liking this book the best out of the trilogy, and so far that memory is holding true. This is still a young-YA novel (the heroine is 16 in this book, and I feel the target audience was aimed there or slightly lower) but feels less simple than book one did. ( )

I'd read the first book in this trilogy years ago and liked it well enough to be intrigued by the other two books when I saw George had written more. This one follows Poppy who is on a royal exchange to another kingdom and gets embroiled in a Cinderella plot by a spirit known as the Corley.

I loved that this was very different than other Cinderella retellings I've come across. The Cinderella in this story is a victim of the Corley and that makes this book taken on a darker turn than I've seen before. That said, Eleanor/Ella was really not a sympathetic character until well toward the end of the book. She was nasty, mean, and I spent much of the story hoping she'd get tossed into a pigsty. It's a bit hard to reconcile that with the HEA she did eventually get.

Despite that, this was a good romp and worth a read if you like fairy tales. ( )

it took me ridiculously long to figure out it was a Cinderella story, probably because I had my head set on it being the princess of the glass hill instead. ( )

The writing is childish, underdeveloped, unpolished and flimsy. The plot? Some good ideas but, for goodness sake!, explore the options, don't let everything work out oh-so conveniently for all concerned and let SOMEONE speak, act and think their age (i.e. OLDER than 10). Oh, and the world could do with some strict definition. This is the sort of story that leads to Twilight. To be honest, I used to write this kind of stuff. But at least I have the sense now to look back and laugh at it. There's talent here, but someone needs to harness and mold it. ( )