What do you think?
Rate this book
Enchanted #2
Enchanted Again
Following the overwhelming success of Enchanted, author Nancy Madore has responded to her fans' pleas for a follow-up with a brilliant second collection
--this time comprised of superbly sensual, delightfully debauched and decidedly darker modern-day interpretations of classic nursery rhymes.
Meet Dan, the handyman whose toolbox is full of surprises. . . Georgie Porgie, no longer the boy who's content with only kissing girls. . . Jessica, who, torn between two men, may be lured into the wrong web. . . Peter, whose wife's wandering eye arouses his libido. . . As well as an interesting assortment of characters who will entertain and arouse the adult in you. . .
242 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 21, 2008
About the author
Nancy Madore
20 books162 followersNancy Madore achieved enormous critical acclaim with her ENCHANTED series, which includes ENCHANTED, ENCHANTED AGAIN and ENCHANTED DREAMS.
Now, following her life-long interest in ancient history and mythology, Nancy Madore is launching a new series in the historical and science/speculative fiction genres, called LEGACY OF THE WATCHERS. So far, the series includes THE HIDDEN ONES and POWER OF GODS. Madore is currently working on the third book in the series.
You can read more about Nancy Madore's LEGACY OF THE WATCHERS series by visiting her website at www.nmadore.com.
Now, following her life-long interest in ancient history and mythology, Nancy Madore is launching a new series in the historical and science/speculative fiction genres, called LEGACY OF THE WATCHERS. So far, the series includes THE HIDDEN ONES and POWER OF GODS. Madore is currently working on the third book in the series.
You can read more about Nancy Madore's LEGACY OF THE WATCHERS series by visiting her website at www.nmadore.com.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
September 8, 2016
If my resources are correct, then this book fits into the literary genre of erotica instead of smut.
Sex, in these stories are consequential result, a part of the conversation and expression of person. It's not sprinkled there just to get you off. It's there to emphasize the characters, their burdens and worries and mislead contentment. Like how a good fiction is supposed to be.
It's detailed and sexy, oh don't get me wrong. The stories do contain the explicit details of sexual approaches, but they're written with so much depth and thoughtfulness. What differentiates between smut and literary erotica is that the characters do not stop being characters once the action commences.
Sex is like food, right? We don't forget our thoughts and feelings when we eat nor when we make love, mate, no matter how violently the bed rocks or how sumptuous is the food. In fact, we become more aware of ourselves once reflected so intimately by the ones who share our beds and tables.
-----
How easily we get bored once we've managed to secure the relationship we want with the person we tried so hard to impress. It's not bad, it's just the way things are with us people. We do get bored. And it's a reason so blatant that most of us would rather glorify the drama that follows that boredom instead.
"I fell in love with another."
"I was not happy in that relationship."
So if I can pick a favorite out of the entire selection, it'd be the one with the man who isn't afraid to see a woman ruffle her feathers and vent her feelings. The one where the man forcefully protects the woman he loves and the sustainability of their relationship by choosing to ignore her bouts of feelings and by physically controlling and subduing her. And there is a whole huge lot of difference when control is exerted with love or with fear.
And it's a kind of strength that requires practice. And does not get better with age (because feelings are contagious and impractical). And we can only hope that we can share it with someone who deserves the sacrifice of emotional self-control.
Sex, in these stories are consequential result, a part of the conversation and expression of person. It's not sprinkled there just to get you off. It's there to emphasize the characters, their burdens and worries and mislead contentment. Like how a good fiction is supposed to be.
It's detailed and sexy, oh don't get me wrong. The stories do contain the explicit details of sexual approaches, but they're written with so much depth and thoughtfulness. What differentiates between smut and literary erotica is that the characters do not stop being characters once the action commences.
Sex is like food, right? We don't forget our thoughts and feelings when we eat nor when we make love, mate, no matter how violently the bed rocks or how sumptuous is the food. In fact, we become more aware of ourselves once reflected so intimately by the ones who share our beds and tables.
-----
How easily we get bored once we've managed to secure the relationship we want with the person we tried so hard to impress. It's not bad, it's just the way things are with us people. We do get bored. And it's a reason so blatant that most of us would rather glorify the drama that follows that boredom instead.
"I fell in love with another."
"I was not happy in that relationship."
So if I can pick a favorite out of the entire selection, it'd be the one with the man who isn't afraid to see a woman ruffle her feathers and vent her feelings. The one where the man forcefully protects the woman he loves and the sustainability of their relationship by choosing to ignore her bouts of feelings and by physically controlling and subduing her. And there is a whole huge lot of difference when control is exerted with love or with fear.
And it's a kind of strength that requires practice. And does not get better with age (because feelings are contagious and impractical). And we can only hope that we can share it with someone who deserves the sacrifice of emotional self-control.
July 21, 2015
Blargh. Lots of self-hating women whining and thinking stupid thoughts and occasionally having decidedly untitillating sex. When did smut get so soul-suckingly boring? Don't pad the stories with insipid characters, and maybe they'll do something a little more inspired in the sack (or elsewhere).
February 14, 2015
I was on a quest to get a couple of erotica books a few years ago. This was one of the ones I picked up that looked interesting. Unfortunately, this was pretty much an awful book. I was expecting a series of erotic stories based on fairy tales, this was really not that at all.
Each story starts with a nursery rhyme and that is supposedly what the story is based off of (which is a bit...uh...weird). There is absolutely no element of fantasy in these stories (there is a bit of magical realism in one of them I guess). These are supposed to be "erotic bedtime stories for women" but in the majority of the stories the women in them are abused, subjecated, and manipulated by the men in them.
The characters are deceitful and manipulative; which makes them hard to engage with or care about. I do understand this is supposed to be erotica which is maybe less about emotion than a romance, but it still helps to have characters that are engaging and interesting.
However, given the above I at least expect the sex scenes throughout to actually be good...which they really weren't. Basically the majority of sex scenes consisted of the man going down on the woman and then having vigorous sex with her, rinse and repeat for scene after scene. Soooo boring. Even the description of the scenes is a bit awkward at times and could have flowed much better and been written with much more engaging descriptions.
The first story of the book did have some interesting and creative sex scenes, although they were also very violent, disturbing, and demeaning to the woman in them.
My favorite story of the book was one called Hot Cross Buns, which did a really nice job of showing a functional and loving submissive/dominant relationship between a man and a woman. This was hands down the best story of the bunch (although again, why did the woman have to be the submissive one?).
I don't read a ton of of erotica, maybe a book or two a year. So I am definitely not all that knowledgeable about it...however this was just a poorly written book in a number of ways.
Overall this was just a bad book plain and simple. Most of the stories in this book just left me feeling mildly disgusted; both with the writing quality and the content. I did read Taboo by Jess Michaels last year and enjoyed that book, so I would recommend that book over this one if you are looking for an engaging erotica.
September 14, 2019
Enchanted was, I think, the first explicitly erotic book I ever read. I loved how the author managed to blend fairytales deeply embedded into European lore with all manner of female sexual fantasies without it turning out obscene or somehow marring fond childhood memories. So, naturally, I was curious about the continuation of the series and went on to read Enchanted Again.
While the first collection of stories did enchant me, I’m afraid the second one had quite the opposite effect. Instead of garnering the magic that worked so well in the first book and building on it, the second collection focused way too much on squeezing in familiar fairytale-like characters and way too little on the magic and enchantment themselves.
First of all, the author’s choice of tales to base her stories on is entirely wrong. Most of them don’t even come from tales of yore, but rather nursery rhymes. What worked so well in the first book is that you got to build upon characters that already had their own original context, back story and lore. For instance, we all know the story of Beauty and the Beast or Snow White. No matter which version you prefer, you know that a righteous, virginal girl named Belle somehow ended up in a cursed castle run by a beast who used to be human royalty. After numerous trials and tribulations, the two of them fall in love and the strength of their bond lifts the beast’s enchantment. Many creators took this basic formula when building upon the story in subsequent renditions. Some stuck with Belle’s haughty sisters, others omitted them, some included dancing crockery, others left it out, some (Heaven help us) even translated it into CGI and so forth and so forth. The point I’m trying to make is that we should never underestimate a solid template. There is a reason certain stories never go out of fashion – it is because they keep building on the same template over and over again, building different aspects into the core narrative and adapting the story for each new generation. Just think about how many different Dracula movies there have been over the past one hundred and twenty years, with each new adaptation bringing something different to the core story, more or less successfully. Therefore, no matter what you do with Cinderella – be it sending her to space, having her fight dinosaurs or putting her in an erotic novella, her core narrative and her circumstances remain more or less the same, making her tale one that is easy to navigate and follow, even with all the extra adornations.
So, compare now, if you will, those core narratives of the Brothers Grimm princesses or, as they’re more commonly known today – the Disney princesses, with those of Humpty Dumpty or Georgie Porgie. What the hell do I or your average reader know about Humpty Dumpty? Humpty Dumpty was an egg that fell, Georgie Porgie a guy who kissed the girls and made them cry, Desperate Dan some unkempt strong guy. And that is pretty much it. They lack a solid, well-known back story, they lack motivation, circumstances and defining traits, bar a few perfunctory ones.
The issue lies precisely in this lack of characterisation. Once you decide to build upon a vague character from a vague in-universe, you are free to tag on to them any number of personality traits and life circumstances you want. This is something that would be infinitely more difficult to do to already established characters. For example, if someone told us Snow White was spiteful or malicious or lazy, that would be fine, in and of itself. There are plenty of great characters out there who happen to be spiteful, malicious or lazy. However, that character would cease to be Snow White. Snow White, as we know her, is diligent, conscientious and righteous. Her core traits are well-established and, while a few tweaks may be possible, her personality is pretty much set in stone. All we can do with her is change her circumstances and how she reacts to different external forces. By taking vague, insipid characters such as Georgie Porgie and making them protagonists or deuteragonists of their own stories, the author is pretty much at liberty to ascribe whichever traits she wants to these characters. And that brings me to my second point.
By creating a whole new character and then tagging a famous nursery rhyme name to it, the author has done exactly that – created a new character. I can sit down and create a character however I see fit and throw them in any number of made-up situations and then decide that character will be Superman. That, however, doesn’t make my character Superman. It just makes him an original character who occupies some fan-fiction-y universe, nothing more. What worked so well in the first collection of novellas was the familiarity of not only the characters’ names, but also their back stories and their already established personalities. It was easy to believe that even within her magical world, Cinderella was experiencing marital problems and had to teach her husband how to satisfy her beneath the sheets. It was easy to imagine Belle adjusting herself to the Beast’s umm... Magnitude, within the confines of an enchanted castle. That’s what made these stories enchanting. By comparison, the Desperate Dan of the author’s story shares little with his famous namesake. In the story, Dan is just some guy who makes elaborate sex toys for the satisfaction of women. That could make him any guy. By taking away the magical aspect of the stories, especially the well-known in-universes whose details are so famous they need not even be elaborated upon, the author ended up with just some guys and just some girls. The stories ceased to be about famous princesses having sex and became just tales of everyday people having sex. Which is all well and fine, but not in a collection titled Enchanted.
Another issue I have with this new collection is the markedly darker, bleaker tone. What defined the first collection was its joy for life and joy of sexual exploration, a message that should be heeded and embraced by women and men alike more so nowadays than in any other period, what with the Madonna-whore complex and a number of other difficulties women experience in today’s biased society. The second collection is not nearly as joyous or empowering to read about. Most stories end on very dark notes, with our heroines not only failing to obtain what they want, but also failing to draw any relevant conclusions from their experiences. They are far too judgemental, of themselves, of other women, of men, too jaded, and, frankly – too desperate. It’s one thing to pine after somebody who doesn’t want you and a completely different one to trick that somebody into being with you via black magic. So, in conclusion, the stories went from frustrated or entrapped princesses getting what they wanted through personal sexual liberation to desperate everyday women getting some sexual satisfaction, which soon enough turns out to be very shallow and fleeting, and then walking out the door as neither transformed characters, nor empowering role models. And where, I ask you, is the joy, the playfulness, the enchantment in that?
While the first collection of stories did enchant me, I’m afraid the second one had quite the opposite effect. Instead of garnering the magic that worked so well in the first book and building on it, the second collection focused way too much on squeezing in familiar fairytale-like characters and way too little on the magic and enchantment themselves.
First of all, the author’s choice of tales to base her stories on is entirely wrong. Most of them don’t even come from tales of yore, but rather nursery rhymes. What worked so well in the first book is that you got to build upon characters that already had their own original context, back story and lore. For instance, we all know the story of Beauty and the Beast or Snow White. No matter which version you prefer, you know that a righteous, virginal girl named Belle somehow ended up in a cursed castle run by a beast who used to be human royalty. After numerous trials and tribulations, the two of them fall in love and the strength of their bond lifts the beast’s enchantment. Many creators took this basic formula when building upon the story in subsequent renditions. Some stuck with Belle’s haughty sisters, others omitted them, some included dancing crockery, others left it out, some (Heaven help us) even translated it into CGI and so forth and so forth. The point I’m trying to make is that we should never underestimate a solid template. There is a reason certain stories never go out of fashion – it is because they keep building on the same template over and over again, building different aspects into the core narrative and adapting the story for each new generation. Just think about how many different Dracula movies there have been over the past one hundred and twenty years, with each new adaptation bringing something different to the core story, more or less successfully. Therefore, no matter what you do with Cinderella – be it sending her to space, having her fight dinosaurs or putting her in an erotic novella, her core narrative and her circumstances remain more or less the same, making her tale one that is easy to navigate and follow, even with all the extra adornations.
So, compare now, if you will, those core narratives of the Brothers Grimm princesses or, as they’re more commonly known today – the Disney princesses, with those of Humpty Dumpty or Georgie Porgie. What the hell do I or your average reader know about Humpty Dumpty? Humpty Dumpty was an egg that fell, Georgie Porgie a guy who kissed the girls and made them cry, Desperate Dan some unkempt strong guy. And that is pretty much it. They lack a solid, well-known back story, they lack motivation, circumstances and defining traits, bar a few perfunctory ones.
The issue lies precisely in this lack of characterisation. Once you decide to build upon a vague character from a vague in-universe, you are free to tag on to them any number of personality traits and life circumstances you want. This is something that would be infinitely more difficult to do to already established characters. For example, if someone told us Snow White was spiteful or malicious or lazy, that would be fine, in and of itself. There are plenty of great characters out there who happen to be spiteful, malicious or lazy. However, that character would cease to be Snow White. Snow White, as we know her, is diligent, conscientious and righteous. Her core traits are well-established and, while a few tweaks may be possible, her personality is pretty much set in stone. All we can do with her is change her circumstances and how she reacts to different external forces. By taking vague, insipid characters such as Georgie Porgie and making them protagonists or deuteragonists of their own stories, the author is pretty much at liberty to ascribe whichever traits she wants to these characters. And that brings me to my second point.
By creating a whole new character and then tagging a famous nursery rhyme name to it, the author has done exactly that – created a new character. I can sit down and create a character however I see fit and throw them in any number of made-up situations and then decide that character will be Superman. That, however, doesn’t make my character Superman. It just makes him an original character who occupies some fan-fiction-y universe, nothing more. What worked so well in the first collection of novellas was the familiarity of not only the characters’ names, but also their back stories and their already established personalities. It was easy to believe that even within her magical world, Cinderella was experiencing marital problems and had to teach her husband how to satisfy her beneath the sheets. It was easy to imagine Belle adjusting herself to the Beast’s umm... Magnitude, within the confines of an enchanted castle. That’s what made these stories enchanting. By comparison, the Desperate Dan of the author’s story shares little with his famous namesake. In the story, Dan is just some guy who makes elaborate sex toys for the satisfaction of women. That could make him any guy. By taking away the magical aspect of the stories, especially the well-known in-universes whose details are so famous they need not even be elaborated upon, the author ended up with just some guys and just some girls. The stories ceased to be about famous princesses having sex and became just tales of everyday people having sex. Which is all well and fine, but not in a collection titled Enchanted.
Another issue I have with this new collection is the markedly darker, bleaker tone. What defined the first collection was its joy for life and joy of sexual exploration, a message that should be heeded and embraced by women and men alike more so nowadays than in any other period, what with the Madonna-whore complex and a number of other difficulties women experience in today’s biased society. The second collection is not nearly as joyous or empowering to read about. Most stories end on very dark notes, with our heroines not only failing to obtain what they want, but also failing to draw any relevant conclusions from their experiences. They are far too judgemental, of themselves, of other women, of men, too jaded, and, frankly – too desperate. It’s one thing to pine after somebody who doesn’t want you and a completely different one to trick that somebody into being with you via black magic. So, in conclusion, the stories went from frustrated or entrapped princesses getting what they wanted through personal sexual liberation to desperate everyday women getting some sexual satisfaction, which soon enough turns out to be very shallow and fleeting, and then walking out the door as neither transformed characters, nor empowering role models. And where, I ask you, is the joy, the playfulness, the enchantment in that?
December 13, 2018
Awful. Complete fail. The first book was good and had a greater variety of situations. I didn't even finish this book. Who's fantasy is it to have a murderer beat the crap out of them as foreplay? That's not sexy and that is basically the whole book.
I honestly think that Madore and team didn't expect to write a sequel and had to settle on who knows what what fairy tales (I researched and still couldn't find out what tales she was using here which was ticked me off). I wish she had just used the same fairy tales and characters from the first book and told new retellings. Fairy tales are endlessly adaptable and it would have been better than this.
I honestly think that Madore and team didn't expect to write a sequel and had to settle on who knows what what fairy tales (I researched and still couldn't find out what tales she was using here which was ticked me off). I wish she had just used the same fairy tales and characters from the first book and told new retellings. Fairy tales are endlessly adaptable and it would have been better than this.
June 14, 2018
Not bad but I probably would not recommend.
Want to Read
July 19, 2020elibrary
October 1, 2021
Not nearly as good as the first.
October 3, 2023
Spicy but not vulgar.
July 21, 2024
Honestly I didn't really like it.
April 26, 2012
What a pile of rubbish! These tales were based around nursery rhymes, although they were linked in the most ridiculous and far fetched ways. Yes they contained some smut, but how any of these situations could be described as 'fantasies' I do not know. Most of the tales were about women being sexually abused, secretly 'loving it' and then realising that their partners weren't abusing them at all, but helping them to realise their inner selves. One of the tales was about a man giving his neighbours mechanical devises and them realising that although he was a disgusting pervert, he awakened their sexual desires...WTF! Yes, I've secretly always wanted to meet an ugly older man who'd give me a giant dildo, instead of perhaps having a great sexual relationship with a man I find attractive. Ok rant over...it's awful and I'll be sticking to J.R. Ward in future.
October 21, 2009
For the genre this was pretty dark and depressing. I know nursery rhymes (which these stories are based on) usually have a dark twist to them but I didn’t expect them to be translated in to odd and sometimes downright creepy stories with unhappy endings. I really only enjoyed two: Curly Locks and Hot Cross Buns – the two with happy endings. The others just left me feeling uncomfortable.
A slightly disappointing sequel to the refreshing book Enchanted.
Imaginative tales cleverly written but too dark and intense for me.
A slightly disappointing sequel to the refreshing book Enchanted.
Imaginative tales cleverly written but too dark and intense for me.
December 20, 2010
Having not read the first book Enchanted, I picked this up with the expectation that it would be naughty fairy tales...something fun and steamy at the same time.
Maybe I expected the book to be more light hearted than it was, especially with the beautiful, ethereal type cover.
These tales are pulled from stories past, but were a bit too creepy and dark in some parts for my taste. I did like a couple of them okay, but some of the fetishes were a bit odd to me. It just wasn't my thing as a whole.
Maybe I expected the book to be more light hearted than it was, especially with the beautiful, ethereal type cover.
These tales are pulled from stories past, but were a bit too creepy and dark in some parts for my taste. I did like a couple of them okay, but some of the fetishes were a bit odd to me. It just wasn't my thing as a whole.
November 25, 2008
I love Nancy Madore and picked this book up expecting short and erotic warm fuzzys and got the dark side of eve instead. The story telling was eerily excellent, but left me feeling oddly spooked because I hadn't expected it to be dark.
After the shock of the first story I found it hard to get into the erotic parts because I was waiting for the 'bad thing' to happen and ended up more drawn into the negative aspects. I'm still not sure if I loved it or hated it.
After the shock of the first story I found it hard to get into the erotic parts because I was waiting for the 'bad thing' to happen and ended up more drawn into the negative aspects. I'm still not sure if I loved it or hated it.
May 27, 2013
This was really not very good. Most of these stories seem to have unhappy endings, which really just dampens the erotic part of it. Additionally I didn't really feel like any of these were fairy tales, they were just given the names of them. There is nothing wrong with them just being stories, but then don't market them as erotic fairy tales. Overall most of these stories just left me feeling a bit disturbed and sad.
August 22, 2010
Initially I gave this book 2 stars because of all the unhappy endings but today I realized that it helped me to appreciate my own relationship more, for having read this.
I didn't consider it as good as the first one but the kink in this one made me feel downright normal.
I didn't consider it as good as the first one but the kink in this one made me feel downright normal.
October 23, 2011
A little worse than the first one, but more realistic. It did lack in symbolism as the first volume was rather exceptional. Still a nice book for feminists (not recommended for romantic readers at all)
February 13, 2013
I read this a while ago and my reaction to it was - meh. Some short story books I keep around because they continue to be a source of entertainment. This one, not so much. I read it because after reading the first book, my expectations had been determined.
April 22, 2009
This was so fantastic. I felt every story. Nancy Madore is an amazing storyteller!
February 3, 2009
Naughtily erotic twists on fairytales - a perfect nighttime read ;)
March 7, 2009
More tales of romance rather than anything else. I guess Americans have a different idea of erotic fiction than us Brits as I was expecting more literary porn.
June 21, 2009
This was NOT my cup of tea.
July 18, 2009
Fairy tales, with a twist. Loved it!
December 28, 2009
Well written creative stories. Just didn't click with me on an erotic level like 'Enchanted' did.
January 30, 2010
huh?!!!
February 28, 2011
I picked this up because I really liked the last one but I didnt like this one at all. It was too dark and disturbing. The only one I found worth reading and not skipping was the Carla story.
May 18, 2011
I liked it better than the first book, but it was still a little intense for me...
May 18, 2011
Read in 2011.
July 25, 2011
Only a couple of these short stories kept my interest. Some of them were too long for me to enjoy what the point was. I just didn't seem to care. I'd put the book down walk away and forget.
February 27, 2012
Ms. Madore brings us more of her "enchanting" fairy tales, all told with delightfully naughty twists!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews