Take a photo of a barcode or cover
history_bot 's review for:
Scavenge the Stars
by Tara Sim
I’ve been sitting on this book and thinking about my review for awhile because I just don’t know how I feel about the book. The problem for me, I think, is simply that it is a [b:The Count of Monte Cristo|7126|The Count of Monte Cristo|Alexandre Dumas|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1309203605l/7126._SY75_.jpg|391568] retelling, and the Count of Monte Cristo is my all-time favorite book (despite its flaws, lol). I had high hopes because I love the original so much, but this just didn’t live up to it and because of that I wasn’t able to look at the book with a neutral feeling.
So instead, I have been trying to think about why I was disappointed with the retelling, which was also challenging because what makes a good retelling? I have, admittedly, read very few retellings; I guess more of the retellings that I’ve consumed have been movies and such—She’s the Man, Rent, West Side Story, I guess the only book I can remember reading is [b:Peter and the Starcatchers|34262|Peter and the Starcatchers (Peter and the Starcatchers, #1)|Dave Barry|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1435312363l/34262._SX50_.jpg|1625130]. So what is it about these retellings that make them compelling, and loved by both myself and the public?
I think the above retellings, and other retellings I can think of, fall into two different categories. Firstly, the same characters but either an alternate point of view or an alternate timeline—like Peter and the Starcatchers, or Wicked or Maleficent. These retellings bring something new to the old story, add a twist to the original. The second category is the alternate universe category—these stories use the original and keep the essential elements (the conflict, the strong feelings and themes) but create a new world and often update the setting so to make it relatable to modern readers. This second category is, of course, the category that Scavenge the Stars falls into.
So, this retelling needs to, in theory, reflect the same themes as The Count of Monte Cristo—the things that make The Count of Monte Cristo a good story needs to also be present in Scavenge the Stars. So what do I love about The Count of Monte Cristo?
The problem for me was that I simply didn’t see most of these elements in Scavenge the Stars. The elements of the story were changed in a fundamental way. The enemies are not clear-cut, the people Amaya thinks she can trust betray her, and she is simply not well put together. Yes, maybe this makes her more relatable as a character, but it loses the charm of the original story. Amaya does not lay out intricate plans to take down her enemies slowly and painfully. I might even forgive this if she had laid out such plans, but the plans were foiled; instead, it feels like she is just floundering and doesn’t know what she’s doing at all. She is not all-powerful with the downfalls of man, she is not able to hire highly competent people to carry out her plans, she does not have the years of wisdom and knowledge imparted onto Dantes by the Abbe Faria. You really lose something essential to The Count of Monte Cristo when you don’t have that.
Frankly, most of the issues I had were with Amaya’s perspective. I actually really enjoyed Cayo’s perspective (our Albert). His storyline and plot was much more compelling and I think it fit into the Count of Monte Cristo story much better. Honestly, I think I would have preferred this book if we hadn’t gotten Amaya’s perspective at all—if she could have appeared as Countess Yamaa and started controlling the city like a puppet, but we saw it all through Cayo’s eyes (except, maybe, her flashbacks from the beginning of the book. I thought those worked alright as well). Even if the plot moved the same way, and the ending was the same, I think that taking away Countess Yamaa’s perspective would have done a lot for the retelling. I don’t think including it added anything to the story.
As for some other issues I had with regard to the the retelling, I’ll have to wait to comment on it until the second book. As I said above, due to these issues that I had trouble overcoming, I was struggling to evaluate the merits or pitfalls of the book itself with a neutral eye. I think the pacing was a little quick, but it was honestly a pretty fast book in general and I got through it very quickly—were I not a working woman, I probably could have finished it in one sitting. At the end of the day, it was an enjoyable enough read but my expectations were too high and I was bummed with the end product.
So instead, I have been trying to think about why I was disappointed with the retelling, which was also challenging because what makes a good retelling? I have, admittedly, read very few retellings; I guess more of the retellings that I’ve consumed have been movies and such—She’s the Man, Rent, West Side Story, I guess the only book I can remember reading is [b:Peter and the Starcatchers|34262|Peter and the Starcatchers (Peter and the Starcatchers, #1)|Dave Barry|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1435312363l/34262._SX50_.jpg|1625130]. So what is it about these retellings that make them compelling, and loved by both myself and the public?
I think the above retellings, and other retellings I can think of, fall into two different categories. Firstly, the same characters but either an alternate point of view or an alternate timeline—like Peter and the Starcatchers, or Wicked or Maleficent. These retellings bring something new to the old story, add a twist to the original. The second category is the alternate universe category—these stories use the original and keep the essential elements (the conflict, the strong feelings and themes) but create a new world and often update the setting so to make it relatable to modern readers. This second category is, of course, the category that Scavenge the Stars falls into.
So, this retelling needs to, in theory, reflect the same themes as The Count of Monte Cristo—the things that make The Count of Monte Cristo a good story needs to also be present in Scavenge the Stars. So what do I love about The Count of Monte Cristo?
- The story has a little bit of everything—similar to the line at the beginning of [b:The Princess Bride|21787|The Princess Bride|William Goldman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327903636l/21787._SY75_.jpg|992628], The Count of Monte Cristo has “Fencing, fighting, torture, revenge, giants, monsters, chases, escapes, true love, miracles…”
- The Count learns that revenge doesn’t solve all his problems BUT the ones who wronged him still get their due. Yes, he learned it was wrong, but not before everyone’s lives were ruined. It’s satisfying.
- There are clear enemies. The reader knows, right at the beginning of the story, who did Dantes wrong, and why they did it (and they all did it for selfish reasons. It wasn’t the way of the world, their actions were completely self-serving, which is important to the story).
- The Count sees how his actions to destroy his enemies ultimately affect people he loves, through the romance between Maximilien and Valentine; furthermore, by the time he arrives in Paris, the "bad guys" aren't really committing crimes anymore; they're shown to be regular people with good traits and bad who may or may not deserve what is done to them (ethical tension).
- Those who helped Dantes, and were kind to him, get their reward. Again, the lines are clear-cut—by the time Dantes escapes, he knows with certainty who was his enemy and who was his friend.
- Intricacy. The Count of Monte Cristo has an extremely intricate plot. The Count lays the groundwork for the end game much earlier in the book, and the reader sees everything play out in such a satisfying way.
The problem for me was that I simply didn’t see most of these elements in Scavenge the Stars. The elements of the story were changed in a fundamental way. The enemies are not clear-cut, the people Amaya thinks she can trust betray her, and she is simply not well put together. Yes, maybe this makes her more relatable as a character, but it loses the charm of the original story. Amaya does not lay out intricate plans to take down her enemies slowly and painfully. I might even forgive this if she had laid out such plans, but the plans were foiled; instead, it feels like she is just floundering and doesn’t know what she’s doing at all. She is not all-powerful with the downfalls of man, she is not able to hire highly competent people to carry out her plans, she does not have the years of wisdom and knowledge imparted onto Dantes by the Abbe Faria. You really lose something essential to The Count of Monte Cristo when you don’t have that.
Frankly, most of the issues I had were with Amaya’s perspective. I actually really enjoyed Cayo’s perspective (our Albert). His storyline and plot was much more compelling and I think it fit into the Count of Monte Cristo story much better. Honestly, I think I would have preferred this book if we hadn’t gotten Amaya’s perspective at all—if she could have appeared as Countess Yamaa and started controlling the city like a puppet, but we saw it all through Cayo’s eyes (except, maybe, her flashbacks from the beginning of the book. I thought those worked alright as well). Even if the plot moved the same way, and the ending was the same, I think that taking away Countess Yamaa’s perspective would have done a lot for the retelling. I don’t think including it added anything to the story.
As for some other issues I had with regard to the the retelling, I’ll have to wait to comment on it until the second book. As I said above, due to these issues that I had trouble overcoming, I was struggling to evaluate the merits or pitfalls of the book itself with a neutral eye. I think the pacing was a little quick, but it was honestly a pretty fast book in general and I got through it very quickly—were I not a working woman, I probably could have finished it in one sitting. At the end of the day, it was an enjoyable enough read but my expectations were too high and I was bummed with the end product.