> So much is conveyed here about character, time and the natural world, because Cinderella’s piety is natural piety, respect for nature more than conventional Christian belief.
It's something that modern fantasy usually doesn't capture, by being too modern, and by being far too verbose. The latter is one aspect in which Tolkien's Simarillion feels better than his "The Lord of the Rings": The Simarillion leaves all the details out, it has little direct speech, and only mentions what's important. Its style is not as raw and authentic as in Grimm's fairy tales, or as in actual historical legends like King Arthur, but it gets close as times, mainly by avoiding the verbosity that is so common in all modern literature.
The Silmarillion is basically Elder Edda Pastiche.
Le Guin talks about the need for linguistic distancing in fantasy in one of her essays in The Language of The Night, that is to say language that sounds too close to our world is unsatisfying in Fantasy (by which of course she does means fantasy that is a completely other world, like Earthsea, LOTR, or similar) because an Elven Prince should not talk like a Senator on an appropriations committee.
It is probably this that you found objectionable about modern fantasy rather than verbosity. What do you feel about E. R. Eddison? The man was verbose, but not in any way modern.