I'm going to give Johnston the benefit of the doubt and assume he didn't realize that Andersen wrote the original. I love the P&P story and had always assumed it was 'traditional' (anonymous and iconographic). So maybe Johnston and I both learned something.

I adore this version, with the strong female lead and the updated setting. I do wonder though if the MC's new husband is actually capable of helping her manage the spread. Maybe he can be a house-husband and do the cooking & cleaning & child-care. ( )

I liked this book because it based on the Princess and Pea story but, it was different because the author changed the culture of the stories background.

It is extremely frustrating to come across a truly wonderful adaptation of a fairy tale and then be forced to rate the book with only three stars, due to a (for me at least) glaring and problematic omission (and one that could have so easily been avoided). The Cowboy and the Black-Eyed Pea is a Texan adaptation of the Princess and the Pea story which was originally penned by Hans Christian Andersen, and I really enjoyed Tony Johnston's ingenious adaptation. It is sweet, quite hilarious in places, and Farethee Well (what a name) is both charming and clever. I also appreciate that, instead of describing how the cowboy finds a bride, this is definitely the story of how Farethee Well finds herself a husband by using the pea-under-the mattress trick on her potential suitors (except here, we have the pea-under-the saddle blanket). The illustrations, although perhaps a bit naive, complement the story, showing the boastfulness and silly pride of the unsuitable suitors (alliteration intended), the beauty and resourcefulness of Farethee Well, and the simplicity and humility of the only real cowboy.

My main issue with The Cowboy and the Black-Eyed Pea is the fact that while the story is clearly an adaptation of Hans Christian Andersen's The Princess and the Pea, there is no acknowledgement whatsoever made of that fact, no author's note, no mention of Andersen's name. I know that Tony Johnston's adaptation is greatly expanded, and that much of the details are original, but the author should have at least given credit to her sources. Not acknowledging the fact that the original story was penned by Hans Christian Andersen is (in my opinion at least) not only a major academic faux pas, but also a bit of an insult to Andersen, his achievements and legacy. With an adequate author's note (and even a short sentence of acknowledgement would have sufficed), I would have likely rated this story with four, perhaps even five stars. However, the fact that Tony Johnston has chosen to not at all acknowledge her sources is both problematic and academically suspect, and in my opinion, makes this otherwise wonderful fairy tale adaptation a three star book (and no more than a three star book). ( )

Compare contrast with princess and the pea

this fun book would be great to teach culture and counting. fun to relate to the princess and the pea