Forgotten Vintage Children's Lit We Want Republished! discussion

I finally got around to reading this, and it's easily my 'Book of the Year'. Straight up to the top of my "Top 10" for republishing.

I don't know why this isn't better known, I really don't. I know I was a bit put off by this cover, and the highlighting of motorcycle-riding witches:

It somehow reminded me of The Whispering Knights, which was probably my least favourite of Lively's children's stories (Morgana Le Fay tries to run down some kids in a black Rolls Royce... the book just didn't work for me at all).

There was another cover that I thought attractive, but the hair colours were wrong, and that drives me mental:


When I bought a second copy of The Hounds of the Morrigan, I went with the same Puffin cover as my copy:

I like this one best - felt it was best representative of the characters and the story.

You can imagine my shock, horror, and then bemusement that the copy I purchased (not listed as being in anything other than acceptable/good condition) was MINT - the spine has no creases, but has been faded and bumped and torn at the bottom. That doesn't matter much to me, so much as the fact that it was never read!

Why not?! It's not ex-library, was purchased from what appears to be an independent bookshop in the W. Mids (tiny sticker tucked inside the front cover), and then... mothballed?!

Far be it from me to discuss marketing in a positive light, but - this one deserved better. Timing wrong, maybe? I see later re-prints have the obnoxious, "If you liked Harry Potter,.." sales pitch firmly printed on the covers... they didn't seem to catch that wave, either.

What is it with this book? Too thick? It is chunky.

I honestly think it's one of the best kid's fantasy books I've ever read. It's bizarre to me that it just never took off!

Not being Irish, I haven't been previously compelled to read much of Ireland's folklore. I saw Abigail mention on the Patricia Lynch thread ( https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... ) that The Turf-Cutter's Donkey might have stood as inspiration for O'Shea's book. It's on my to-read list (I have The Grey Goose of Kilnevin to read here first).

I suppose Meta Mayne Reid is also of the Emerald Isle, and I have read quite a bit from her. ;)

I also have Red Moon and Black Mountain by Joy Chant to read for vintage juvenile fantasy (thanks, Len!).

Anything else I'm missing out on?! Because man was this one a corker!

Capn wrote: "I finally got around to reading this, and it's easily my 'Book of the Year'. Straight up to the top of my "Top 10" for republishing.

I don't know why this isn't better known, I really don't. I kno..."

I have the 1st edition hardcover. Saw it, snaffled it. The size might have been an issue or perhaps the marketing, whatever it was, was aimed at the wrong audience? I really don't know.

I could recommend a few non-fiction books on Irish mythology. Novels - I'll need to think about it. Red Moon and Black Mountain is great.

I read this almost exactly a year ago (after tracking down a reasonably priced original 1986 hardcover). I enjoyed it mostly, parts of it tremendously, but other parts less so. I spoke with Abigail, who is a fervent champion of this book, and determined that it is likely that my lack of background knowledge of Irish mythology impaired full enjoyment and appreciation.

Looking back on my review, I am reminded that I did find the book a bit inconsistent. I think it might be editing (or lack thereof) that has kept this one from wider acclaim. It's long - telling its story in nearly 500 pages - but I don't think it should have been split into smaller books. I just feel that perhaps it could have been improved by more consideration of structure - where the climaxes occur, the lengths of the chapters, how the scenes (and sets of characters) change.

Michael wrote: "I read this almost exactly a year ago (after tracking down a reasonably priced original 1986 hardcover). I enjoyed it mostly, parts of it tremendously, but other parts less so. I spoke with Abigail..."

I got a little bogged down with the earwigs, truth be told. But it didn't last. :)

I take your point on pacing - it's not a punchy story, is it? Slow-burning, really. Being middle-aged, I adored it. But in my impatient youth...? Perhaps you have a point there.

When it was first published in America it didn't receive a glowing review from Kirkus. The end of the review says,

"This long story is full of charm and invention, but it vacillates between slapstick and adventure. The children are impossibly precocious and the magical rescues begin to get boring, but the story keeps moving. Some readers will bog down, but those with an interest in words and myth will be captivated."

Perhaps there was a feeling at the time that it was too long and a little too complex in places for its expected audience. With the main child characters being ten and about eight the appeal to YAs could have been seen as limited and a 500 page novel for pre-teens a little daunting. These days we're used to long novels for a younger audience but I don't think that was the case in the 80s.

Thanks, Len - this explains a lot. I totally forgot to look at Kirkus (I'm not a fan of them - they have questionable taste these days!). ;)

I had a look at the 1986 review in The Washington Post (by Brian Jacomb) which consists of 95% summary and very little criticism.

Overall he likes it (his last paragraph uses the word "delightful" twice), though he and I must have read different books because he writes, "This is a long book, but never a dull one and the chapters are just the right length for reading aloud," and in my review I said, "One thing that I didn't like is that the chapters were wildly inconsistent in terms of length: sometimes barely more than a single page, sometimes fourteen or so."

Personally, I wouldn't consider this a good read-aloud choice, at least not for kids who are the ages of the characters. (Patricia Lynch's books on the other hand: absolutely, definitely, yes!) My sense is that this long book is probably best appreciated by the kid who devours those long later Harry Potter books and can devote hour upon uninterrupted hour to inhabiting a fantasy world without the constraints of a read-aloud scenario.

This is a good read, entertaining, but it's been pointed out to me that other than being brave, the boy and girl didn't have to do very much. No solving puzzles or diplomacy, definitely no swordfighting. I think the chat was in the context of turning books into computer games.

Michael wrote: "I had a look at the 1986 review in The Washington Post (by Brian Jacomb) which consists of 95% summary and very little criticism.

Overall he likes it (his last paragraph uses the word "delightful..."

I am that kid-at-heart! :) Makes sense to me.

Clare wrote: "This is a good read, entertaining, but it's been pointed out to me that other than being brave, the boy and girl didn't have to do very much. No solving puzzles or diplomacy, definitely no swordfig..."

That's true! I hadn't thought about the lack of violence and weapons - kind of refreshing, actually!

Did someone seriously suggest trying to turn this into a video game?! :O I'm a big fan of RPGs (talk to me, any time, about any Legend of Zelda game!), but... well, I suppose just because I can't envision it, doesn't mean it couldn't be done (and well).

Film tie-ins like TLOTR won in that regard.

I'm a terrible hypocrite. I hate movies in general, and I hate it even more when someone turns a book into a movie and rips out the soul in the process.... and when I like a juvenile fantasy book, my first thought is usually, "WHY CAN'T THEY TURN THIS INTO A MOVIE?!" Ha.

Just a brief thought with this book - realised that unless Studio Ghibli did it (and even then...), the movie would be shorter, flatter and duller than the tale. As is usual.

Man, I hate Hollywood movies. I've just seen too many. They're all the same... :S

In defence of video games, though - nowadays, with open-world RPGs, you can really layer in the essence of the story, and have so much more content than a feature-length film. You can include every scene, either as part of the 'main quest' or 'side quests' (optional, skippable), and character, and your interactions with the characters can be much more elaborate (different circumstances, for example), so there can be quite a lot of depth that just isn't captured in a movie. :)

In general, though - I think the folk at Nintendo and Bethesda and elsewhere who 'write' video game scripts, etc., are a pretty fun and creative bunch and are doing fine without requiring external source material. ;)