The distant mountains

Fables and Into the Woods

2010-04-22T23:23:00.002-05:00

A fable always has a moral or lesson. A fairy tale is full of magic and usually contains magical numbers (3, 7) and a plot of good versus evil. The previous statements are generalizations for these two types of tales however each of the rules can and have been broken due to the author's wish. Just because fable's always have a moral or lesson does not mean they are not filled with magic and fantasy. The majority of fables have animals that are main characters and are extremely personified. Is this not a mystical element that has been added to the "fable reality"?

Into the woods takes the characters from multiple fairy tales and elaborates a story in a fantastical way. The general consensus would state that it has all of the necessary elements to be categorized as a fairy tale, if the definition is a simple as being mystical and fantastical. By including the fantastical characters from previous stories written while also following the traditional good vs. evil theme, yes into the woods could be categorized as a "fairy tale". If we all truly know what that is.

"Fables: Legends in Exile" and the Morphological Fairy Tale

2010-04-21T23:23:00.002-05:00

Is Fables a fairy tale? In the vein of many of the literary fairy tales that we have read in the last couple of weeks, I think Fables, considered as a whole, is both un-fairy-tale-like as well as fairy-tale-like.

In an un-fairy-tale-like manner, Fables is splashy (and not just because of all of the blood staining Rose Red’s apartment). At the same time, there is something particularly punchy, raunchy, and contemporary in its vernacular. Granted, the text with which we are dealing is a graphic novel, which often permits extra room for creative license, but the story itself often leans more toward a routine case for Gotham City Police Department than for a band of fairy tale myths in New York.

On the other hand, Fables – like many of the kunstmarchen – foregrounds self-conscious storytelling and allusions to the fairy tale canon. Flashbacks sequences are framed with fluid, opulent borders and function as “mirrors” to the past. They are like petite tales unto themselves. One of the more memorable self-conscious tales is Bigby’s “parlor room scene” in chapter five. Repetitively, Bigby prefaces his tale with: “Anyone who’s ever fancied himself a detective, openly or secretly, longs for the day he can do the famous parlor room scene. It’s the moment when I get to reveal who did what, how they did it – and most important – how I figured it all out.” In a way, all of the flashback sequences up until this point have been reflections (mirrors) of the past, whereas this one concerns Bigby writing history in the same self-conscious fairy tale way. Bigby is a fairy tale author; granted, his tale is sordid, but it reveals the nature of the entire Fables tale itself. It (unwittingly?) morphologically studies the Fables tale as a whole.

Regarding Fables’ explicit allusions to the fairy tale canon, are the characters themselves not the most notable quotations? Snow White, [Bigby] Wolf, Rose Red, Bluebeard, and Prince Charming (among others) all bring with them expectations that readers remember their tales. In other words, the presence of famous fairy tale characters demands that readers know the canon. Also, Fables is bookended by fairy tale conventions: The beginning commences with “Once upon a time […] in a fictional land called New York City,” and the ending closes with “The end” (and “for now,” at that). Even the tale’s haunting message, “No more happily ever afters,” invites further recollections of particularly indelible rhetoric from the fairy tale, notably: “And they lived happily ever after.” In fact, I would say “No more happily ever afters” functions as a tiny symbol that essentially and consequentially sums up the entire tale in a nutshell. That is, although the exiled fairy tale characters live dolorous lives, their sordid existence continues to be “unhappily ever after,” or so it seems, especially after the graphic novel’s punitive conclusion.

More simply, the most I can say about Fables is that it is as much of a fairy tale as the literary fairy tales are. As my fellow classmates, I am pretty certain you can vouch for the particular je-ne-sais-quoi with which my conclusion is inflected.

thoughts on Fables

2010-04-21T23:06:00.002-05:00

I very much enjoyed the modern twist Fables gives the fairy tale genre. The tales keep the characters from fairy tales, but other than their names, they are extremely different. All the princesses are divorced, the wolf is a good guy, and they now live in a place where the fairy tale world is a distant memory.

I think that this is very reflective of our generation. We live in such cynical times that it makes perfect sense to create a story where fear and death are the main complements and fairy tales are nothing but naive children's dreams- a distant memory.

Interestingly, to me the book was a cross between "old-school mysteries" and modern day Law and Order style tv shows. It opened up with a introduction, the discovery of a crime, then an investigation follows but instead of a trial the resolve includes a "parlor scene" and a sort of happily every after.

I particularly found the "general amnesty" concept to be a nice twist. Characters who had violent past were not supposed to be judged on actions they claim happened hundreds of years ago. (Bluebeard specifically). It is like the creators are purposely trying to dismiss any preconceptions we as readers may have about fairy tales, yet at the same time, Snow White couldn't- therefore we cant either. All they can do is challenge our perception of fairy tales, but even though they will never completely change. Snow White will always be Snow White, the Wolf will always be the Wolf, etc.

Our Happily Ever After...i.e. last blog post

2010-04-21T22:23:00.003-05:00

Despite ignoring conventional rules of writing, I'm going to start off with a personal side note. As interesting as "regular" fairy tales were/are to me, my excitement for this class was truly peaked when I went to the bookstore at the beginning of the semester and bought a comic book for this class. Chalk it up to the inner-nerd in me. Even though I was soon disappointed that we weren't going to read it until the last week of class, I now understand why; reading it at the beginning of the semester would have detracted from all of the implications and inside jokes within "Fables." It would be like having a friend introduce you to a TV show by having you watch the season finale. Sure you get the premise and it would keep your attention, but it wouldn't be the full experience.

Anyway...I'm going to take the alternative point of view that most in our discussion group have taken regarding whether or not "Fables" is a fairy tale. In other words, I'm going to argue that it is. While satire looms around the corner of every panel, the fairy tale characters that we all know are still a part of a magical realm despite being stuck in the mundane one in the first volume. And despite the lack of regularly occurring magic, transformations, and outlandish fantasy, there is still enough of it within the storyline to keep our attention (at least mine, but then again, throw a book that is primarily colorful pictures rather than words and you've got me). Isn't that what fairy tales are all about? Some combination of wonder and fantasy that is grounded just enough to make it comprehensible if not believable? I'm not saying that I took stories like "The Juniper Tree" as fact, but the story was structured to make the reader believe that the gruesome murder and resurrection of the child was orthodox enough that if the family could respond to this by finishing their meal, then we as the audience could accept this and share it with a future audience. I believe "Fables" falls along these same lines. Sure the characters may be a bit too magically restrained and sexually crass for our expectations, but this class has shown that most fairy tales have undergone serious revisions in order to accommodate for the audience of the given time period. Do I prefer all the fairy tale characters redesigned this way? Not really. Did it entertain me? I'd say it did. Would I consider this a fairy tale? Sure, why not?

Fables

2010-04-21T21:51:00.004-05:00

These stories were very interesting takes on the fairy tale genre. By putting these classic characters in a modern setting and domain everything is changed. Obviously, we would expect interactions and reactions in this new and strange setting (as far as the characters are concerned) to be wholly different from what we might expect in classic fairy tale settings, and these stories do not disappoint.

Something that stood out to me were the obvious stabs at somewhat old and outdated ideals. For instance, when Snow White and Prince Charming get divorced, the entire notion of happily ever after is shattered. Likely the fact that divorce is such a prevalent end to marriage in this modern day and age played a part in influencing this particular aspect of the story. In this sense, Fables kind of makes the statement that these might be the same characters, but this is not the same old story we've read time and time again.

There were also other very interesting aspects, like the reformed Big Bad Wolf. Again, this is like a stab at classic fairy tale ideals, but in a more positive way. It shows the healing power of society and promotes the idea that people (or wolves) can become good. Additionally, it seems Willingham tries to eliminate the stigma that is associated with people who were once guilty of misdeeds by allowing the wolf to transform into a human. In that sense, his outside change is a physical manifestation of his inside change and shows that the transformation is legitimate.

All in all, I enjoyed the transplantation of these famous and aged characters in a modern setting. It provided for some interesting story lines.

Fairy tale characters - not necessarily fairy tales

2010-04-21T21:08:00.003-05:00

Both "Into the Woods" and "Fables" use stock characters that their audience will already know. They will already know the tropes, the peculiarities, the details of their story -- which is key for picking up on the inside jokes. That aspect of the stories, while very enjoyable, is something that is not seen in the straightforward plots of fairy tales. There are no sequels, no funny jokes outside of the satire we've seen in the last couple weeks.

I would argue that "Into the Woods" is a fairy tale in that there is the fantastical and the unhumanistic foe. There is metamorphosis with the witch, characters defying death, some magic, lots of quests, and lots and lots of advice/morals (although then those pieces of advice are spun around). There are lots of unexpected plot twists, which is neither fairy tale-like or un-fairy tale-like. There is quite a bit of character development for some of the characters, which is unusual for fairy tales, but overall I would say the story could be called a contemporary fairy tale, or a twist on the fairy tale (but still in the fairy tale genre).

"Fables," though, wasn't a fairy tale, in my opinion. It was a great murder-mystery, but there is nothing super fantastical. It's kind of like "Enchanted," only without the helpful animals. Fairy tale characters, sure, but not much of a fairy tale. It's set in a city, the characters are more or less normalized, the murder isn't even a murder. There's no quest, no foe. Just lots of people who don't like each other and have some baggage/relationship/family issues. The story doesn't even end with the sexy wolf getting the maiden. She pretty openly rejects him. That is definitely not in the category of popular ways to end a fairy tale.

"Fables" and "Into the Woods"

2010-04-21T19:49:00.002-05:00

I think both works are fairy tales in their own right. Both “Into the Woods” and “Fables” use the method of combining numerous well known fairy tales and using these characters to assist and develop the plot of a totally new story. “Into the Woods” is fairly plausible when compared to the usual fairy tale, but “Fables” may be a little more extreme and strange.

Unlike the traditional fairy tales that we have read, these stories are almost satires of the tales. They do aim to entertain the audience, but in different ways. These works probably more closely resemble what the original oral fairy tales would have been like, the tales that were told for the salon audience as opposed to children. “Fables” is definitely aimed at a more mature, adult audience with its language and sexual jokes and comics. I think it’s funny that the fairy tale characters have all been exiled, and thus they have to hide from humans and conceal their true identities in one of the busiest cities in the country. On the other hand, “Into the Woods” seems to be more child-friendly, even if the plot gets a little complicated as a result of all the stories being woven together and intertwined. In terms of an unidentified setting, “Fables” tells the reader at the very beginning of the book that it is set in New York City. From what I can remember, “Into the Woods” does not explicitly state its setting, but we are obviously in the woods or forest. "Into the Woods" includes tales about magical spells, talking animal helpers, evil stepmothers, and witches.

“Into the Woods” keeps the stories of “Cinderella”, “Little Red Riding Hood”, “Jack and the Beanstalk”, and “Rapunzel”. “Fables” keeps elements of “Beauty and the Beast”, “Jack and the Beanstalk”, “Snow White and Rose Red”, “Bluebeard”. Then, it also contains characters from stories like “Little Boy Blue”, “The Three Little Pigs”, and the song “Molly Malone”, so “Fables” makes other references to popular culture of the time. “Fables” is written in a modern style that is easy to read and follow. “Into the Woods” does not have an overtly modern tone, but it’ focus seemed to be more on the songs and musical aspect of the story. "Fables" could be considered a fairy tale simply because it includes so many traditional fairy tale characters. However, the actual tale seems to be more of a modern action or mystery story than a fairy tale. Ultimately, “Into the Woods” seems to maintain more aspects of the traditional fairy tale than “Fables”, but both are entertaining to their respective audiences in a unique way.

Fairy Tale or CSI?

2010-04-21T18:43:00.000-05:00

Fables: Legends in Exile is a compulsively readable contemporary reworking of the traditional fairy tales. Incorporating characters from such classics as Snow White, Jack and the Beanstalk, and Beauty and the Beast, this story, which is rendered in comic book form, takes place in modern-day New York City.

In many ways, the fairy tale has been updated to reflect a more contemporary milieu. Characters are decidedly modern: they use profane language, make raunchy jokes, and essentially look and behave like normal humans, dressing in modern garb and using public transportation. Moreover, the female characters have evolved from passive, demure creatures to autonomous and assertive individuals. Many of the story’s female characters are divorcees, and many, like Snow White, occupy positions of power in society. Unlike the traditional fairy tale, a rigid patriarchal framework does not underlie Fables, mirroring the more progressive conception of women in today’s world.

Another way in which Fables deviates from, say, a traditional Grimm Brothers tale is through its explicit sexual content. Many of the scenes are explicitly erotic, and characters frequently make bawdy jokes and references. For example, Prince Charming emerges as a shameless womanizer who sleeps with a steakhouse waitress simply to nab money off her. In this way, Fables departs from the decidedly de-sexualized 19^th century fairy tale and returns to the outright crudeness we see in older tales such as “The Story of Grandmother.”

One of the most marked digressions from the fairy tale tradition is the glaring lack of magic. In order to blend into humanity—or, rather, the “mundane” masses—the characters refrain from the use of magic. Indeed, in order to solve the crime, the Wolf relies solely on his wits, employing crime scene investigation techniques to unravel the mystery. No “magical helper” swoops in to elucidate the truth and uncover the murderer.

Aside from the fact that it borrows fairy tale characters, Fables is more evocative of an episode of CSI than an actual fairy tale. Willingham has revised the fairy tale almost beyond recognition, in my opinion. Really, the only way I could understand Fables as a “fairy tale” is the fact that it adheres to Vladimir Propp’s Five Functions of a fairy tale—there is a lack of something (Red Rose is missing); a quest (the Wolf sets out to solve the mystery); presence of helpers (Snow White jumps in to help) and opponents (Bluebeard proves uncooperative); tests (trying to unravel the case); and finally, a reward (the mystery of Red Rose’s disappearance is deduced). What do you think? Are they any other ways in which Fables is distinctly paralleling the fairy tale tradition?

The Fairy Tale of Reality

2010-04-15T20:02:00.002-05:00

Wilhelm Wackenroder’s “A Wondrous Oriental Fairy Tale of a Naked Saint” is considered to be in a tale representing stories that have instituted elements of imagination and mysticism. It has been said that literature has been reflecting social attitudes of the authors' environment's for years, and Wackenroder's is no exception. The protagonist of this tale is a misunderstood genius who rejects the pettiness of everyday life. Only music can save him, and he abandons earth for a more divine artistic life.

Romance is the key element in this tale that drives the character's action to reach the ultimate state of bliss and peace thereafter. By embarking on a journey of spiritual enlightenment the main character finds himself in a better place than he began. Like all fairy tales, the story begins with a lack of something, and by beginning the search and finding peace, it falls under the fairy tale category. The ultimate gain after a life of suffering is "happily ever after", and that is the exact thing that was found.

I AM truth

2010-04-14T23:31:00.002-05:00

After scanning the table of contents for a story to read, "The Story of the Fairy Tale" caught my attention. I was sure it was going to be a long history, fictional of course of the genre. To my surprise the tale was 2 pages long! However, within those 2 pages the author told a power story I think.

The tale begins with the disappearance of Truth. Five wise men set out to find Truth. They all come back with different answers: Truth= Science, Truth=Theology, Truth=Love, Truth= Gold, and finally Truth=Wine. The men argue and get into a fist fight. Interestingly the narrator makes sure it is know that Theology was the most badly injured. Then a child steps in, and says she found Truth and they all follow her to a meadow. There the whole town see a beautiful creature who proclaims she is Truth, and everyone immediately identifies her as a Fairy Tale. The Five men leave the meadow, but everyone, child and women especially, stay with the fairy tale.

I think that the author is offering us the fairy tale as Truth because truths can be hidden a narrative. In a way, the fairy tale is more truth than the five wise men's individual claims because a fairy tale can incorporate all those things. They are comforting, entertaining and educational. They are the epitome of everything anyone would want because all truths can exist in them without contradiction. Thus, this story itself is not a fairy tale, but it is meant to make us appreciate the concept so that we can freely enjoy any fairy tale.

Forgotten Heros of the Fairy Tales

2010-04-14T22:33:00.003-05:00

Oh, to be a prince! Or a knight! Or a boy without fear! But what if luck casts you as a bit player in the larger drama? Where are your accolades? Your adoring public?

Franz Hessel's The Seventh Dwarf tells the story of Snow White but from a rather different perspective. A smaller one if you will -- horrible pun intended. The narrator is the seventh dwarf (one who remains unnamed -- this isn't Disney, after all) and he takes credit for saving Snow White's life time after time.

Why, it was he who pulled the poisoned comb from her hair. It was he who loosened her corset. And when she ate the bewitched apple, it was he who startled the coffin bearers into dropping the glass coffin and dislodging the apple from Snow White's throat.

It is a fairy tale because it still deals with the main themes of Snow White. We have magic and witches and spells. Did I mention we have dwarfs? But it also is a fairy tale because of the story-telling narrator. The reader is being directly addressed. You are sitting by the fireside listening to this dwarf tell his tale.

He ends the story by saying, "She probably think about the seven dwarfs every now and then, especially when the children sing about the seven dwarfs, who live beyond the mountains. But I'm sure that she las long since forgotten me, the last one, the seventh." Notice that the dwarfs described as being "beyond the mountains." They are not in the normal realm of reality. The "She" here is Snow White but it could also refer to history -- the dwarf's story long forgotten for some falsehoods about a prince riding to the rescue. What a shame!

-Matt P.

"Of Feminine Subtlety"

2010-04-14T22:25:00.003-05:00

Gesta Romanorum's story is quite funny, if not a bit unpleasant toward women. That is one of the themes (women are evil) that makes his story "Of Feminine Subtlety" (I'll get to the title in a moment) have fairy tale qualities. A basic outline of the fairy tale-ness:

*A youngest son is given
*three magical gifts by his father (a king) that will help him achieve happiness outside the realm of material goods (the kingdom and personal possessions go to his brothers).
*The mother is the keeper of the items, but does not do a good job of making sure the son can handle them.
*He is warned "to beware the artifices of women" so he does not lose his magical possessions.
*He is well loved but too trusting, so he loses his gifts to a
*wily, cunning, plotting, beautiful woman (also called a "concubine"), who not only figures out how to get them from him, but she steals them away and lies to him about it later AND then leaves him in the desert to die.
*Although he is forsaken and upset, the prince doesn't forget to "fortify himself with the sign of the cross."
*He then goes on a journey through
*a magical space, where nature gives him the powers to hurt and heal, restoring him to health. He also learns some lessons about trust in this time.
*He uses his powers to nurse a king back to health and cheat his former love into a painful illness. But not before getting her to confess and give him all of his talismans back. Then "she was tortured with agony." This line is rather blunt and without feeling, as many of the evil women's ends have been.
*The prince is welcomed back with open arms -- "the whole kingdom rejoiced at his return."
*"Then he recounted how God had saved him from various dangers, and after living many years, he ended his days in peace."

Also, structurally, this story had much of the feel of oral tales. While the characters had names (unusual for a fairy tale), the writing was sparse and without elaborate (or any) details. The thing that catches me about this story is the title - "Of Feminine Subtlety." The moral of the story is don't let a woman trick you out of your magic powers, and don't get carried away by a woman's beauty. The story is pointing out ways women subtlety (I guess - how subtle she is is up for debate) trick men out of their powers (whatever they may be) and aims to help men realize this. The story has no real focus on happiness being found in hard work or trusting God (although those are both in there); it is simply a complaint about women and the tricky things they do to hurt men. Women are often not the best of characters in fairy tales, as we've talked about, especially when they are cunning or smart. They are never tricky for good - only for bad.

The Enchanted Castle

2010-04-14T22:14:00.002-05:00

The Enchanted Castle is a classic tale of forbidden love caused by magic and mysticism. The story is about a prince who forgets his quest for knowledge when he encounters a mysterious mute veiled woman in an enchanted castle. The mute veiled woman is an interesting addition to the fairy tale. In most fairy tales, the women are judged by their looks, or in some remote cases their wit and personality. However, in this case, the man is not able to neither see nor talk to the woman even after they share a bed- a very intimate act. Nonetheless, the man is intrigued and before he can determine whether he wishes to pursue this woman he must- can you guess it? See her face to see if she is pretty enough to merit his affections. However, his selfishness and superficial tendencies backfire when he realizes after viewing the queens face (and subsequently falling in love) that she is under a curse. This curse is an example of the magical aspect in this typical of a fairy tale. In addition, there is also a connection with nature. When the prince was unable to muster the will to kill the hare (or "nature") he was rewarded. The hare led him to the castle where he would meet his true love. Therefore his interaction with and kindness towards nature catalyzed his marriage.

Also, there is a "fairy godfather" type character in the figure. The hobbit helped the prince discover the true reason behind his unusual drowsiness, as to save the innocent innkeeper. In addition, the hobbit saved the tokens left behind by the queen which ultimately caused the prince to win the jousting match and get the queen as his prize. This helper character is also characteristic of classic fairy tales. The objectification of women as prizes to be won is another quality of some fairy tales. In most fairy tales women are the object, they are to be wooed and married off. Women who are not married are unaccepted in society. Therefore the fact that the queen is a prize to be won as well as a maiden waiting to be saved, speaks to the vulnerability and overall helplessness of most women in fairy tales- especially so if the women are not beautiful.

Finally the ever present theme of love conquers all. The idea that love has the power to overcome any obstacle including magic and evil curses. When the prince won the jousting match he was able to meet his true "love" (a woman he had only met twice before) and marry her.

"The Fairy Tale About Technology" has to be a fairy tale, right?

2010-04-14T21:34:00.002-05:00

"The Fairy Tale About Technology," written by Alfred Doblin in 1935, is the story of a Jewish family that is broken apart due to the ravages of World War I. Living in Ukraine before WWI, this family (like so many other fellow Jewish families in the area) faced the threats of others as a result of fear-mongering and religious prosecution. Eventually all the hatred towards the Jewish people boiled over, leading to a massacre of all Jewish men, women, and children. The father of the aforementioned Jewish family was able to violently protect is family, but decided to flee the first chance they got rather than wait for more attacks. However, one of the eldest sons was lost during the escape and the family presumed him to be dead. Years and years went on. The mother died. The children grew up. The father got old. For his seventieth birthday, the father received a gramophone and a radio because of his love for music. One day, the father was certain he heard his long lost son's voice over the radio. The rest of the family did not hear the song, but if the father was sure, then they were sure too. After a bit of resourceful investigation, the father finally made contact with his long lost son.

Despite the fact that this story was written about 75 years ago, this story should be considered a modern fairy tale. It has some of the fairy tale staples: a "once upon a time," a broken home life, and a recognition that good things happen to those that believe in God. On the other hand, it lacks quite a few of the things we commonly associate with fairy tales: no transformations, talking animals, or bippity boppity boo type magic. As I've said though, this still qualifies as a fairy despite all of the typical fairy tale mysticism being stripped away. This story reminds me a lot of "The Juniper Tree" really. Although it does not have an evil stepmother of sorts, the son's "resurrection" comes to the great relief of the father, freeing him from the guilt the mother placed on him by saying "You set an example for him. He probably took an ax or a knife. A Jew should hide." Lastly, the technology in the form of a radio is the modern magic bestowed upon a humble and faithful man, allowing his son to be returned to him.

The Green Serpent

2010-04-14T21:07:00.002-05:00

Well, I was going to give a brief synopsis of this story, but it's very long and extremely convoluted, so I'll get right to the meat and taters.

There is little about this story that doesn't make it a fairy tale. The length of the story, the intricacy/complexity of the storyline, and little things like the uses of real places (Paris, for instance) that point to a literary genre other than fairy tale. However, the bulk of the story is devoted to magic, morals, transformations, redemption, etc., which are all fairly characteristic of fairy tales.

First off, there are actual transformations of various characters from human to beast, but the main character, Laidronette, does not undergo so explicit a change. She does go from the ugliest person on the planet to very pretty, but this is after she learns to value her intellect more and wants to atone for her past misdeed of indulging her curiosity. Thus, she ends up being saved.

The magic is also pretty obvious, in that it's jam-packed into every sentence in the story. From the beginning there are fairies, talking animals, tiny pagods made of of jewels and such, magic teleportation, and many others.

One thing that I found interesting is that this story seemed to take aspects from many types of stories we have read, as well as some others. The initial scenes where the twin princesses are born and 12 fairies are to bestow gifts is reminiscent of Snow White tales. When Laidronette is given the task of filling a pitcher with a whole in it, I couldn't help but think back to Greek myths and punishments in Tartarus. And when the queen is told to spin spider wed though she does not know how to spin, I think back to The Three Spinners. It was as if the author took bits and pieces of other fairy tale traditions and wove (no pun intended) them into one massive tale.

I think this story could have worked better as a traditional, short, to the point fair tale than the long story it is. Since storytelling was introduced, the author had to apply logic to many situations that we would normally just take for granted and not need explained, but as I noticed, the logic does not quite hold up. That's a big problem with filling in all the nooks and crannies that are missed in a shorter fairy tale: you just shouldn't apply logic to a clearly fantastical story.

"The Fairy Tale about Common Sense"

2010-04-14T15:41:00.000-05:00

I read “The Fairy Tale About Common Sense”, by Erich Kastner. This story is obviously meant to entertain its reader and is a commentary on politics and society of the time. The tale does not seem to be a fairy tale at all, except for the fact that the entire story was fictional, which the author notes at the end of the story. It was written in 1948, just three years after the end of World War II; and thus, many references to war are made. Essentially, the story is about a “nice old gentlemen”, really a crooked politician, “who had the nasty habit of thinking up sensible things to do every now and then” (622). Immediately, the reader can tell that this story is a satire. The writer proceeds to explain how this rich man would “torture” experts with his sensible suggestions and diminish the significance of their expertise. Both the rich and poor are mentioned in this first paragraph. Then, the man gives a speech on how to make peace at a conference filled with many influential men from all over the world. He asks that they listen to what he’s about to say, “not for my sake, but in the interest of common sense” (623). He then gives his pitch, which is filled with references to social structure and giving equal wealth to each member of a community.

My favorite lines are spoken after the gentleman has given his speech, and he says, “I envy you, for even though I don’t believe that material things embody the highest earthly goods, I have enough common sense to realize that peace among peoples depends first on the material satisfaction of human beings. If I’ve just said that I envy you, then I’ve lied. Actually, I’m happy” (623). Unlike the typical crooked politician, this man blatantly lies and then admits that he lied. To top it off, he then takes out a cigar and begins to smoke it while discussing his plan with the statesmen, who believe he is joking with them. When the statesmen call him crazy and begin laughing uncontrollably, the gentleman admits that the plan requires a lot of money. He does not understand what they think is so funny, so he asks, “If a long war costs one hundred thousand billion dollars [WWII], why shouldn’t a long peace be worth exactly the same?” (624). More laugher erupts, and one man tells him, “War is something entirely different!” (624).

This whole story was fascinating to read because it honestly does not contain any aspects of a fairy tale. The story does begin with “Once upon a time…” and we know that the tale and its characters are fictional. However, there are no references to magic; there is no physical transformation of the protagonist; there are no talking animals; there are no fairy godmothers or witches. The story is purely a commentary about politics, war, and even the notion of “common sense”. I am not fully versed on the political problems after WWII, so I’m sure there are deeper meanings that can be drawn from this story. Feel free to comment if you know!

Wilde's "The Nightingale and the Rose"

2010-04-14T15:34:00.004-05:00

I was profoundly moved by Oscar Wilde’s “The Nightingale and the Rose.” The tale is at once haunting and exquisite: in a moonlit garden, a nightingale impales herself on the thorn of a rose, willingly enduring a slow and torturous death in the name of love. In my opinion, the tale serves as a poetic tribute to the power of love, art, and music.

In the tale, Wilde dramatizes the tension between passion and reason. On the one end, we have the Nightingale, who acts a prototype of love. From the very beginning, we understand that there is something special about this Nightingale, that she is more than any mere bird. Profoundly wise and sage-like, she possesses a deep appreciation for human love and will do anything she can to ensure its protection. The Nightingale’s selflessness immediately manifests itself in her attempt to help the lovesick student find a red rose. To procure a rose for the boy, the Nightingale must sing all night long and then impale herself on the rose’s thorn. She heroically agrees to carry out the morbid ritual, declaring, “Love is better than Life, and what is the heart of a bird compared to the heart of a man?” (Wilde 263). Through such valiant, unselfish words, the bird emerges as something of a tragic martyr, willing to endure death in the name of love.

In the end, however, reason reigns over passion, as suggested by the student’s devolution from hopefully romantic to cynical academic parallels. At the beginning of the tale, the student is wistful and starry-eyed, his heart filled with the innocent, clumsy love of an adolescent. Sitting in a moonlit garden, the student ruefully muses aloud, “Ah, on what little things does happiness depend! I have read all that the wise men have written, and all the secrets of philosophy are mine, yet for want of a red rose is my life made wretched” (Wilde 261). Here, he boldly renounces his schooling—deeming rational thought the meaningless jargon of academics and “wise men”—and asserts his allegiance with the simple beauty of the “red rose,” which stands for true, pure love. Soon, however, the force of reason proves too strong for the student to resist. By the tale’s conclusion, the boy, disillusioned by his lover’s rejection of him, carelessly discards the Nightingale’s red rose in the street. With an air of cynical defeat, he retreats into a solitary existence of “dusty” books and education, sighing that love is “quite unpractical, and, in this age to be practical is everything” (265).

By flinging the Nightingale’s red rose into the street, the Student resigns from his duty as a disciple of love and returns to the ranks of scientists and philosophers. As readers, we are to see the boy as naïve, frustrating, and ultimately foolish. Wilde, it seems, is commenting on mankind’s futile quest for knowledge. In man’s attempt to p ursue science and “truth,” the more important things in life, such as love, are carelessly tossed aside. This phenomenon, whereby love becomes engulfed by reason, is a tragic event, as tragic as the image of the broken Nightingale, lying dead in the grass with the last notes of her haunting song reverberating in the night.

I searched the web for a bit of further insight into the tale. Many sources mentioned that Wilde was a key figure in the aesthetic movement, which exalted the doctrine of “art for art’s sake”—creating art for its intrinsic value, divorced from any external moral function. Clearly, Wilde injected many of these ideals into this particular tale. For example, on page 256, the boy’s statement that the Nightingale’s notes “do not mean anything, or do any practical good” stands in direct contradiction to the principles of aestheticism (Wilde 265). Failing to recognize any discernable meaning in the song, the Student thinks it must be worthless and amateur. His teachings have conditioned him to vigorously analyze works of art, reducing something that was one whole and beautiful into scientific, sterile pieces.

However, the beauty of the Nightingale’s song is not that it has meaning, but rather that it abounds with passion and feeling. The song possesses an almost transformative quality; it causes a fragrant rose to unfurl in the middle of the moonlight-infused garden. The tragic notes rise and fall in the cold morning air like the incantation of a spell, holding the world breathless, if only for a moment. As the last of her blood begins to seep out, the Nightingale delivers one final, passionate burst of music, and suddenly the world stops, enchanted—the moon, even, “forgets the dawn, and lingers on in the sky” (264). Through this lovely language, Wilde nods to art’s inherent power. Although the science-minded boy fails to grasp the beauty of the song, the song elicits a powerful, noticeable response in nature, a realm that has not been tainted by science or reasoning. Thus, Wilde's "The Nightingale and the Rose," which is saturated with allusions to the aesthetic movement, dramatizes the tension between reason and passion in society and adopts the stance that passion, although grossly undermined by modern society, is more important.

"The Happy Prince", Oscar Wilde, and Christian values

2010-04-13T22:06:00.000-05:00

Although I have now only read two literary fairy tales by Oscar Wilde – the first being this week’s required reading of “The Selfish Giant” and the second being the subject of this blog posting, “The Happy Prince” – the theme of selflessness seems to be a privileged one. In “The Selfish Giant,” a selfish giant (sorry to be repetitive) finds children playing in his garden and banishes them with a giant wall. The winter comes and freezes everything, but it is not until the children sneak in through a little hole in the wall that the giant realizes that the winter has been unnaturally prolonged (supposedly as a reflection of his icy heart). The giant decides to be nice to the children and to let them play there always, even being so nice as to befriend a mysterious little boy in the corner of his property. The giant is saddened when the little boy never returns (punishment for the giant’s heretofore icy heart?), but then one day, the boy returns bloodied. He turns out to be an allegorical representation of Jesus, and he takes the giant to the afterlife as a token of appreciation.

In “The Happy Prince,” the golden statue of a prince watches over a city and realizes that the conditions are not as perfect as he thought they were when he was alive. He sees poverty and anguish and opts selflessly to donate his golden hide, the ruby jewel on his hilt, and his sapphire eyes to those people in the city that need them. As a statue he cannot move, so he befriends a swallow who is late for his seasonal migration to Egypt. Together, the swallow and the statue work anonymously to help the impoverished people of the city until, eventually, they have nothing left to give. For having lingered, the swallow dies, and for having nothing opulent left, the city melts the statue to construct a new one. At the end, God tells his angels to bring him the two most precious things in the city, and he is brought the statue’s remaining lead heart and the dead bird.

The interesting thing about these tales is that not only do they moralize, but they do so through a distinctly Christian lens. The tales of the Brothers Grimm are predicated consistently on a general moral (in the sense of right and wrong), and the protagonist must learn his/her lesson for having not obeyed it. In these two tales, Oscar Wilde seems to propagate protagonists whose earthly redemption is rewarded with spiritual redemption in heaven. (Note: Because these are the only two fairy tales by Oscar Wilde I have read, I cannot assert a definitive solution that represents his entire œuvre. “The Happy Prince” first appeared in 1888, so perhaps there are contextual implications (Tatar 246).)

As a result, the Christian tenet of “Love thy neighbor” becomes exacted. Especially in the case of “The Happy Prince,” Wilde intends to set up identification between readers and the selfless statue and swallow and to vilify the Mayor’s and Town Councillors’ vanity and selfishness. The Art Professor at the University is an equally unlikeable character, as he agrees with the Mayor and Town Councillors that the statue must go, since “as he is no longer beautiful he is no longer useful” (260). At the bottom of the page, Tatar makes the note that Oscar Wilde famously said, “All art is quite useless” (260). Nevertheless, an inert, artistically opulent statue has just dedicated all of his riches to the poor.

It is interesting to note that the Other to whom good deeds are done in these Oscar Wilde fairy tales is persistently a youth. In “The Selfish Giant,” the giant’s deeds are done for the sake of children; in “The Happy Prince,” the golden statue and kind swallow help a sick little boy (and his mother), a young man, and a little match-girl, in order. Is this just another story proclaiming moralistically the beauty of the inner self, or does the statue’s subservience to youth indicate the significance of preserving youth, who is often synonymous with beauty?

Thoughts?

Dispension of disbelief

2010-04-08T22:44:00.002-05:00

The stories examined this week serve the purpose of representing the extraordinary events of life as we know it. The stories begin as an entrance and/or opening of describing every day reality, relationships and occurrences available for interpretation by the everyday human being who experiences day to day interactions with other human beings. The mystical element of the stories enters with a drastic occurrence of magic and mysticism that could stand for the unknown many of us try to dismiss in our ordinary lives as simple "occurrences". Though this could be a stretch, the depth and longevity of these stories shows they are not "ordinary" fairy tales serving to teach us a moral at the end of the tale, but a possible representation of how unpredictable and mysterious and/or unpredictable life can be. The sudden poof of magic or unexplicable occurrences described to the audience cause us to search for a deeper meaning which may in turn lead us to a more fulfilling interpretation of our lives, leading us to challenge the ordinary ideals that have been ingrained in us since birth.

Love conquers all

2010-04-08T22:26:00.003-05:00

Sounds pretty cliche right? Not in the "Wondrous Oriental Tale of the Naked Saint" its not. Love really does conquer all- even an incessant seemingly uncontrollable ticking in your mind. In this literary fairy tale there are a few specific elements that are classic fairy tale. First is the interaction with nature. The nature of the setting is very descriptive and the author pays attention to the specifics of the cave and the surrounding forrest. In fact, the saint has such an intense interaction with nature that nature and its "song of love" cures his ailment. Another aspect is the mystical and unknown setting of the Orient. It is not specific to a certain place or time period. This lack of specificity of this location ads to the universality of the story and the underlying messages and themes of the tale. The last fairy tale characteristic is the one the only L-O-V-E. Of coarse in this fairy tale it is a couple of star crossed lovers who cause the man with the incessant ticking of time to forget his problem and realize that the in life one should focus on finding happiness, preferably with another person, than worry about the passage of time.

The magic in this story is not about a fairy god mother or magic wands- it is about the amazing and awesome power of nature. It was natures song of love, not a supernatural force, which caused the saint forget his focus on the passage of time and the ticking of his internal clock. The saint is released from his human prison when he witnesses love. I found this aspect very interesting. Humans have an internal clock- we obviously dont live forever. the saint was trapped in a human form with this ever present lingering concern for the inevitability of death. However he saw love and was able to release himself from being human and the accompaning worries of mortality. This story highlights the power of love and magic of nature to defeat the omnipresent fear of death in humans and return a saint to the heavans. Thats some pretty powerful stuff if you ask me.

Do you believe in magic?

2010-04-07T22:13:00.003-05:00

The question of the role of magic was one that was especially alluring to me. As we talked about in class, the first part of Wieland's "Philosopher's Stone" seems to be making fun of those who believe that alchemical magic exists; yet, the second half of the story is entirely magical. I make sense of this because I think that even Enlightenment guys like Wieland can believe in metaphorical transformations and believe that those who believe in this voodoo, abra cadabra magic are discrediting the very real "magic" that can occur inside someone. That type of remarkable change, seemingly magical, is discredited by those who believe they hold the powers for that change or that the ability to change is based off of psychic abilities.

The ability for a man like King Mark to change is seemingly miraculous - something that would not have come about if not for some magical influence. But I think this "magic," Wieland is trying to show, is spiritual, not a man-held gift. He believes in the ability for people to change and in figurative "donkey" stages (a rock bottom of sorts) that some men might have to go through to realize their satisfaction does not lie in gold, and while that is "magical," he does not want that spiritual, superhuman magic to get confused with the phoney "magic" of man.

I also want to make a comment about something that was brought up in class today and which I was thinking about earlier in the week because a book I'm reading outside of class mentions a lot of what we've talked about this semester. If you haven't read Dan Brown's latest, The Lost Symbol, I'd highly recommend it. I started it Monday and I only have about 70 pages to go. It's all about the Freemasons and the Ancient Mysteries and Eqypt and the search for the Philosopher's Stone (that's what the lost symbol is). It's like Wieman's tale but reads more like JK Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone." Just as good as The Davinci Code, for sure.

The longest "fairy tales" ever, come on

2010-04-07T22:00:00.002-05:00

Well, I think the use of story-telling for these particular tales had two important effects. The first one was, of course, that these stories were excruciatingly long and full of somewhat inane and impertinent information. The second effect was that of creating a level of imagery that we have not encountered with the previous fairy tales. There was so much detail that little had to be left to the imagination, whereas the other stories we read were fairly to the point and just threw in the important stuff with no time for logical flow, detailed imagery or in-depth story-telling. But what makes these stories classifiable as fairy tales is that they feature some of the time-tested fairy tale methods, including fantastical events and the transformation of humans into animals.

For instance, the first few pages of The Philosopher's Stone seems like a plausible story that is even set in England and all of the characters have name and realistic back stories. Then all of a sudden the king becomes a donkey and later receives the King Midas of lilies. It almost seems like a non-sequitur. However, without those fantastical elements the story is just a nice anecdote or a fun read (despite the length).

These stories go in an entirely different direction than previous stories and the only factor that seems to draw them back into the realm of fairy tales is that magical, fantastical turn of events.

Art History in Action

2010-04-07T21:33:00.002-05:00

As an art history major, I tend to examine everything through an art historical lens. Therefore I think it may be interesting to look at The Philosopher's Stone as a piece of art from the Romantic era. Firstly, the Romantics considered nature to be extremely spiritual. Many pieces of art from the time period layer religious symbolism into the work. It is clear from what we discussed in class today that nature is a big theme in this tale: king turns into a goat, goes out into the wild, eventually finds peace (queen follows). It is not just nature however. The king's journey can be seen as ecclesiastic. The journey allows him to go out and experience nature from an animals point of view, and this leads him to realize he lead a sinful life and he has divinely been given a second chance. The story's moral is clearly understood.

Something else that I think can be applied is the concept of "Gesamtkunstwerk" which basically means art as an experience. I think that the author chooses to densely pack the narrative with many minor narratives for this very reason, to create an intense experience for the reader which they could not otherwise have. I realize this may be a stretch but I think that the king's journey thus becomes the reader's journey and the author becomes the our fairy/guardian angel. The king and queen are given a choice at the end, and so are the readers, do you read this story and brush it off as entertainment, or do you recognize its true value and apply it to your own life?

"The Philosopher's Stone" in Relation to "The Romance of Tristan and Iseult"

2010-04-07T20:08:00.004-05:00

Christoph Martin Wieland’s “The Philosopher’s Stone” is interesting because it seems to believe it belongs to a history of storytelling. Its self-reflexivity in storytelling is apparent, but I want to focus on its ostensible kinship with The Romance of Tristan and Iseult, a medieval narrative that popularly espouses the prototype for an “adultery myth” that has persisted through the ages in texts such as Anna Karenina and Madame Bovary. By Wieland indicating that the young King Mark of “The Philosopher’s Stone” belongs to the heritage of mythmaking that is The Romance of Tristan and Iseult, I wonder what the implications are. It is true that Wieland chooses young King Mark to follow in the footsteps of his grandfather, King Mark of The Romance of Tristan and Iseult. However, as those familiar with the traditional tale know, King Mark is a veritably supporting character to whom the injustice of Tristan’s and Iseult’s love affair is done (NOTE: Notice the passive verb because it will be important later).

Perhaps the key lies in the line: “The young King Mark was very much like his grandfather. He was arrogant without ambition, sensuous without taste, and greedy without knowing how to be economical” (233). That is, perhaps Wieland is trying to say that history repeats itself. By calling on the medieval narrative of magic potions and star-crossed lovers, Wieland associates his modern tale with a classic tale of similar faults: arrogance, tasteless sensuality, and greed. This is a curious assertion, though, because the King Mark I remember from The Romance of Tristan and Iseult was a horribly passive character easily duped by his vicious court.

Ah, ha! That is just it! It must be the fact that King Mark is so easily duped, just like readers see young King Mark is in “The Philosopher’s Stone.” Therefore, credulousness is the problem that runs through both narratives. In the age of Enlightenment in which Wieland lives, excessive gullibility is impossible. Faith is impossible. Trust is impossible. … But knowledge is possible.

But even the protagonists of The Romance of Tristan and Iseult know they want each other, but they do not really know why. To Wieland, this would be another fault of the tale. The Romance of Tristan and Iseult emphasizes passion, emotion, instinct… all of which are characteristics insupportable in Wieland’s times. As I have stated, history repeats itself in “The Philosopher’s Stone,” which gets its protagonist into trouble because instinct is wrong.

In Walter Benjamin’s “Theses on the Philosophy of History,” he states that history is filled with the present. That is, in telling history from the present time, the concerns of the present often find a way into a historical tale through particular parallels. Using Benjamin’s logic, the concerns of Wieland’s time – that credulousness is unacceptable and truth, logic, and reason are essential – parallels and shapes the implication of The Romance of Tristan and Iseult, which is equally filled with credulousness and unconscious action. And, again, history repeats itself. More specifically, the tale repeats itself. In this way, “The Philosopher’s Stone” is inevitably a tale repeating tales.

Thoughts? Leave ‘em in the comments!

The Power of Love

2010-04-07T18:01:00.002-05:00

I'd rather imagine this is the two lovers' song

The first thing one notices when reading "A Wondrous Oriental Tale of a Naked Saint" is that the setting is not some fairy tale land but rather the "Orient" -- a place that held much of the same charms for Westerners at the time as Cinderella's kingdom would have. Both places have the potential for magic and mysticism, due to things (and cultures) that were misunderstood or not known.

Oh and did I mention that being naked is what saints do in this foreign land? As Wackenroder writes, "We would call them crazy, but they are honored there as supernatural creatures." Yet this supernatural creature can't deal with time going forward. The "wheel" of time drives him insane as he can't slow it down.

Well, no duh you can't slow it down! Silly non-Westerners and their saints that don't understand time (this is sarcasm if you can't tell). The magic in this piece is not really magic. The "wheel" of time is something that everyone understands. It's nothing special -- no real magical properties. The climatic night is also described as magical with how the moonlight shines.

So nature and time are both magical. But so is music, and more importantly, music that's fueled by love. The two lovers' song soothes the saint's pain. He then soars up into the heavens. Is the moral here that love is what makes the passing of time bearable? Maybe. I'd argue more that love is being presented as the point of life. Don't worry about the days going by. You've got to appreciate the magical stuff around you -- nature, love, music -- or you'll go insane.

-Matt P.

"A Wondrous Oriental Tale of a Naked Saint"

2010-04-07T17:47:00.001-05:00

“A Wondrous Oriental Tale of a Naked Saint” has both traditional and nontraditional characteristics of a fairy tale, but it is still a fairy tale. Because this story is a literary fairy tale, we can tell that it was written for a more literate and educated audience. It goes into greater detail than the typical fairy tale, but is much shorter when compared with “The Philosopher’s Stone”. In this sense, this tale is about the same length as a traditional fairy tale. The line, “At one time there was a naked saint who lived in a remote cave near a small river” resembles the typical beginning of a fairy tale that would read something like “once upon a time there was a king who lived in a castle...”. In terms of magic, there are no talking animals, but the magic spell placed on the man is broken in the end. There is also some sense of repetition (the cycle the saint is stuck in, anger to sadness), but it does not have to be blatantly stated or repeated word for word for the reader to understand. Finally, there is a physical transformation of sorts, but we are told that the saint is “like a tiger” and “like a snake” in his actions; therefore it’s not an obvious, true transformation.

However, this story also deviates from a few traditional characteristics of the fairy tale. First of all, the characters are not flat. The saint immediately starts developing from the beginning of the story, and he develops until the story’s end. Secondly, while the story does name an undefined place where the saint lives, the cave, the tale opens with a description of native people from the Orient. It gives the reader an actual idea of where the tale will take place and allows the reader to envision the setting. I think this story should be considered a fairy tale because while it diverges some, it still maintains many qualities of what we deem a traditional fairy tale.

An Unconventional Fairy Tale

2010-04-07T15:58:00.001-05:00

At first glance, Wackenroder’s “A Wondrous Oriental Tale of a Naked Saint” is not your typical fairy tale: there is no gallant hero, no terrifying villain, and no fantastical spectacles of magic. If we view the tale as an artifact of its socio-historical climate, however—as a distinct product of the Romantic era—then we can more easily come to understand how this story represents an unconventional fairy tale, but a fairy tale nonetheless.

When we first meet the naked saint, he is a mad, pathological being, a social recluse who frantically and compulsively propels a great wheel, driven to insanity by the sound of “the rushing of time.” Visitors flock to gawk at the naked saint’s demented activities, laughing at him like a carnival spectacle, yet the madman cannot fathom what they find so amusing: he “mocks those people who could still think of such mundane affairs when time was terrifyingly moving on.” For years, the naked saint lives on in a state of paranoia and bitter torment, yearning to fill the cold, clinical void of his existence with “unknown beautiful things,” until one day, the ethereal notes of a beautiful song float into his cave, and suddenly, he is liberated from his imprisoning spell.

The story is an eloquent ode to the transformative nature of music and art. Before he discovers the ecstatic experience of art, the naked saint is condemned to a sterile existence, devoid of creativity or impulse, an existence that clearly mirrors the lifeless Enlightenment era. Going off this idea, the wheel can represent science, which men compulsively turn and twist to no avail. Cranking the massive wheel is a mechanical, scientific pursuit that brings about no true progress; rather, it simply heightens a person’s sensitivity to the slow, monotonous advance of time. It yields more destruction than actual positive change, and it only impels people into insanity. In this way, the Enlightenment Era, which is embodied by the naked saint’s lonely confinement in the cave, can be seen as this fairy tale’s “villain.”

If science and progress are seen as the tale’s villains, then art is exalted as its hero, as the positive, vibrant force that emancipates individuals and transcends evil. As soon as the saint’s ears hear the first notes of song, he is freed from his prisonlike state and—in typical fairy tale fashion—undergoes a transformation, his human form dissolving into a “soft vapor” that dances delightedly towards the heavens. Music also introduces an element of magic into the story. In the tale, music acts as an ethereal, ecstatic energy that acquires magical capabilities of its own. It is the liberating force that frees the naked saint from his spell and elicits a sense of awe and “nocturnal wonder” in the world. Thus, art—in particular, music—is cast as the tale’s hero. It is a triumphant presence that sweeps in and saves the hopeless saint from a cruel spell, all the while introducing magic to the lackluster, Enlightenment-weary world.

Naivety: the Seed to Masculine Adulthood

2010-03-31T23:13:00.002-05:00

A common theme for this week's stories includes the notion that to become a man, a boy must be fearless. This is not all that uncommon in modern stories either; characters are often proving themselves to win the girl, fame, riches, etc. However, the character from our studied fairy tales often develop this fearlessness through naivety or outright stupidity. It isn't so much that they learn to be brave, but rather that they are just placed in trying or scary situations and driven by their own ignorance to the situation. The characters that are undergoing this "masculine transformation" in each of theses stories have a varying amount of success both in what they learn and what they are rewarded with, yet none of these stories seems to have a clear-cut moral for young boys seeking to become men. The point is simply that if you act on instinct rather than analyzing the situation, you will be successful (for the most part).

I found this vaguely similar to the feminine education that we've read about in previous stories this semester. Many of the protagonists survived or came out on top simply because they were a) beautiful and b) righteous and pure. Hardly any of these stories directly addressed how to outsmart a witch or charm a prince that wasn't interested in you using your own given talents; instead, some amount of magic and dumb luck was necessary in addition to the natural beauty and purity of the young girl. Like the early versions of LRRH in which the girl outsmarts the wolf in order to save her life, the stories of male growth that involve some failure or actual cleverness tended to give way to stories about successful protagonists with no real talents other than the uncanny knack of survival.

Its a gift and a burden

2010-03-31T22:57:00.003-05:00

"A Tale About the Boy Who went Forth to Learn What Fear Was" is an interesting tale. The boy leaves home to "get the Creeps." What really got my attention was how he kept saying, "if only I could get the creeps!" as if getting them would solve all his problems. As a reader I find it hilarious that the boy wants to learn how to fear. To me he's screaming out "I need to conform, I want to fit in!" He wants to be like everyone even if that means being fearful.

I read the blissfully stupid boy as the richest of all the characters because his ignorance is a gift that allows him to achieve great things that other men can't. Its even more beautiful because he is not motivated by wealth or glory. I think that he is really just searching for a a means to relate to other people with "the creeps" as his vehicle. The beauty of the ending is that he remains ignorant. If he were to become aware of his great potential he would most likely lose his gift and become just another cowardly man.

Parody

2010-03-31T22:20:00.002-05:00

"The Story of the Youth Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was" can be referred to as somewhat of parody of the typical fairy tale and all of its hidden cultural values. Although the hero of this story is a youngest son, he does not fit the usual character of such a son, who normally achieves his goals with the aid of magical helpers. Accomplishing his task with his own skill and courage, he fits more in the mold of a heroic character.

During his stay in the haunted mansion, the younger son comes across a multitude of corpses. His act of cutting down the corpses to let them warm themselves is similar to the test of compassion that many fairy tale heroes face, but where the act typically wins the hero a gift or a magical helper, here it is merely an incident, perhaps a parody of the more typical plot lines of many popular fairy tales.

The boys "lack" of fear stemmed from his ignorance of the cultural norms we are told to fear. This tale points us in a direction asking us to question if values or traditions we previously held important due to society telling us we should are really as correct of important as they appear. Are all of our unconscious or intense fears truly all mental? Have fears been instilled into us without legitimate reasons supporting these irrationalities? It seems as if there may have been a hint to the general public to take a deeper look into the public fluff we have been presented with throughout our lives.

"Clever Hans"

2010-03-31T22:13:00.001-05:00

The story “Clever Hans” is a different take on this particular tale type of boys going on quests and then undergoing a transformation to adulthood. The story is similar to “A Tale About the Boy Who Went Forth To Learn What Fear Was” in that the main character is a young boy that simply has no common sense and seems pretty stupid. In this story, instead of being ignorant about what it means to be afraid, Hans is ignorant about how to treat a girl named Gretel, who is also his future wife. The tale begins with Hans’ mother asking where he is going, and he tells her he’s going to Gretel’s house. When Hans gets to Gretel’s house, she asks if he brought her anything; he tells her no and instead says, “Want something from you.” Somehow, Gretel knows what it is he wants and she gives it to him. Hans puts the object in a place that doesn’t make sense, and his mother is quick to tell him of his stupidity when he returns home that night. She tells him the proper place to put that object, and he tells her, “I’ll do better next time.” The cycle repeats itself multiple times and each time Hans makes a mistake. He keeps putting his new item from Gretel in the previous place his mother told him to put the other object. He simply cannot figure out what he is doing wrong. Hans says he will improve the next time, but he never does. It’s interesting that Hans goes to Gretel’s house, and she apparently expects something from him, but we do not know what. Instead of bringing her something, he always demands something from her, and then he cannot take care of what she has given him. In the end, Hans takes his mother’s advice, but once again he does not understand what she means. Instead of exchanging glances with Gretel using his eyes, he thinks she means the eyes of their cattle and sheep. Therefore, he cuts out their eyes and throws them at Gretel, who he had tied up to a rope after his mother’s instruction that he misunderstood. Gretel becomes so fed up that she leaves. In this story, Hans starts out as an ignorant boy. However, he never learns from his mistakes or fights a brave battle to become a strong, desirable man. He is unable to figure out what he is doing wrong, and therefore he loses his bride and cannot make the transition into adulthood. “Clever Hans” is definitely a strange and entertaining story that does not seem to fit with the other stories (like “Iron Hans” or “Bearskin”) in its tale type.

The Godfather

2010-03-31T20:39:00.003-05:00

I'll go ahead and tackle a different tale. The "Godfather Death" story is just bound to have a bad ending from the start. Rejecting God - bad move. It seems the beginning is taking a turn for the better when the poor man rejects the devil, too, but then he somehow makes an even worse choice by choosing death. This first story is in itself a lesson. God is wise in his choice of distributing wealth, the first part seems to imply, and happiness is paramount - more so than material wealth or perceived fairness. One can be happy without earthly pleasures (the devil) or fairness (death). Instead he chooses the path of the rich and famous. This is what the poor man thinks will make a man happy, never knowing need.

So then we have part 2: death's godson becomes a famous power by teaming up with death. The boy tries to outwit death and, unlike the other stories that have happy endings, he fails. While normally failing life's tests would result in hardship (like the boy in Iron Hans being sent to the court as a pauper servant), here the punishment is death. There is no learning from messing up (clearly the verbal rebuke is not enough). You never win by trying to cheat death. You also learn that death does not hold its promises. There's not much of a realm of forgiveness here or chance for the boy to grow by learning from his mistakes. So the lesson is either don't ever make mistakes (impossible) or don't try to be tricky when the stakes are high - realize that a beautiful princess and the kingdom are not as valuable as life.

My comment on the growth process we see the boy go through is that it's rather short since death decided to blow the candle out, but I think lessons can easily be taken from it by those who heard or read the story.

“A Tale about the [Ignorant] Boy Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear [Adulthood] Was”

2010-03-31T19:48:00.005-05:00

The very second tale I ever read for this course (Week 1) was “A Tale about the Boy Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was,” and I do not think I shall ever forget it because it was just so peculiar. It has very interesting things to say about boyhood educational development, as well. Zohar Shavit writes [in “The Concept of Childhood and Children’s Folktales”] that by the nineteenth century when the Grimms were writing their tales, children had become a distinct people and that society had come to place a great emphasis on the education of these children. This is derived from the emphasis on teaching morals to child protagonists in many of the Grimms tales.

What is curious about “A Tale about the Boy Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was” is that the father has no interest in educating his youngest son, who is written off as stupid. Certainly, the boy’s education comes from his own desire to learn about “the creeps,” which is strange because children are psychologically egocentric, so why would his father just let him do what he wants? A child does not know what he needs in life; in fact, the desire to do whatever you want without care is particularly child-like. Maybe the boy is stupid, but he obviously does think about at least something, if only himself. I actually think the boy is probably just ignorant, and there is a big difference between ignorance and stupidity. (Ignorance means you just do not know something, and stupidity means you have been taught something, but you just do not understand it, or you do not know how to apply it.) Again, I would argue in favor of the boy’s ignorance because his father has no desire to teach him anything. As he says, “Learn what you want. It’s all the same to me.”

I would say that this family is actually very backward. If many German (or Prussian, at the time) families were teaching their children how to read so that they could piously read the Bible (for example) and grow up to be well-to-do adults, then why does the father not care to educate his youngest son? To me, his son is quite resourceful. He survives three nights in a haunted castle with his resourcefulness. In a way, though, I think it is his ignorance that saves him. Because he hasn’t been taught what to fear, he has no fear. Is fearlessness stupid,” though? Why is it that fearlessness is coded as stupid in this tale? (In the Daredevil comic book series, Matt Murdoch is certainly not stupid, but he is also “the Man without Fear.”)

Also, why does he get “the creeps” because of the minnows at the end of the tale? Are “the creeps” tickles? Does the boy just need to be touched? Do “the creeps” indicate a desire on the young son’s part to enter the adult world? That is, do “the creeps” carry a sexual connotation that would mark a rite-of-passage from childhood to adulthood? Also, if “the creeps” indicate fear, then is the boy actually scared to enter adulthood? Is the concept of adulthood, then, “the creeps”? In either case, it all circles back to adulthood...

Comment away!

The Role of Iron Hans in the Prince's Development

2010-03-31T19:42:00.000-05:00

The stories “Iron Hans” and “The Wild Man” both feature a young, immature boy who is taken under the wing of a mysterious beastly man. When I envision Iron Hans, the image that pops into my mind is that of a large Hulk-like creature with bulging biceps and wild, unkempt hair, stomping boisterously throughout the countryside and slaughtering innocent people left and right with his bare fists. After engaging on a killing spree, the beast-man is eventually captured and thrown into a cage, where visitors flock to come and gawk at the frightening specimen.

In both stories, a foolish young prince fishes the key through the bars of the cage, allowing Iron Hans to free himself. The beast-man proceeds to kidnap the boy, who winds up getting lost and taking up work in a royal palace as a gardener’s assistant. A bit later, war seizes upon the kingdom, and the prince sees an opportunity to establish a name for himself. He gains fame in battle and manages to score the hand of the king’s daughter.

On his own, however, the prince is essentially useless. In these tales, Iron Hans is instrumental in the boy’s education and development. Without his guidance and support, the prince would surely remain a clumsy, bumbling buffoon who can barely keep himself from falling into the spring. Emerging as a sort of endearing, gentle mentor-figure—a far cry from the barbaric Hulk we saw before—Iron Hans bestows valuable gifts onto the prince, such as a gallant steed to aid in battle, and it is only with the beast-man’s unexpected assistance that the boy is able to emerge as a valiant fighter and secure a marriage with the princess.

In addition, at the end of the tales, just as the prince is getting married to his new bride, Iron Hans enters the wedding hall and graciously bequeaths his treasures and riches onto his newly-married student. Furthermore, he explains that he had been transformed into a wild man by some nameless magic spell but that this spell has now been broken. Interestingly enough, we never learn the nature or circumstances of this spell—why was Iron Hans condemned to assume a barbaric guise, and what did he have to do in order to become re-transformed? Although these questions are never answered, we might safely conclude that Iron Hans’s active involvement in the prince’s development somehow freed him from the shackles of beasthood.

Overall, it seems to me that all the credit and glory is wrongfully awarded to the prince, who is exalted as a war hero when in actuality it is Iron Hans who was the true orchestrator of the battle’s successes. Basking in the glory of his newfound fame, the prince fails to even acknowledge the invaluable contributions of Iron Hans, his mentor and teacher. Instead, he lets the people naively assume that he is a mighty warrior. At the end, then, when Iron Hans embraces the prince and expresses his gratitude, it seems somewhat backward. Shouldn’t the prince be indebting himself to Iron Hans, not the other way around?

Clever Hans- Had to learn the hard way

2010-03-31T19:05:00.002-05:00

Clever Hans is an interesting fairy tale. The story is comprised of mostly dialogue and there is little description. The repetition in the story is the aspect which I wish to focus on in the education of a boy prompt. The story is about a boy who continues to go to his friend Gretel's house for something. Every time he goes to her house she, being a "typical" needy woman, expects something from Hanz. Instead, he asks her for something and she seemingly randomly chooses an item for Hanz to take back. However, nearly every time (except once- the knife) he journeys back with the object it is lost or hurts him in some way. His mother informs him that he must learn to decide which method of transportation is best suited for the object he is transporting. However, he always utilizes her suggestions with the wrong items and therefore continues to lose his item. He seems to shrug off his loss because he knows he will have the chance to get another object and try again another time.

However, Hanz finally learns his lesson when Gretel offers up herself. He, taking his mothers advice about transporting a cow, locks her up in a stall, and shockingly pisses her off. I dont know, i guess girls back then didnt like being treated like cows- wierd. And again, very shockingly, she does not run into his arms when he saves her from the shed he put her in in the first place. This story exemplifies the lesson: "you dont know what youve got till its gone." Now gretel is gone and maybe hanz will learn not to treat girls as objects and to use his head a little more often- this may be a stretch but perhaps thinking for himself... i dont know it could work.

Everybody's Special! No, seriously.

2010-03-31T17:05:00.002-05:00

In the story, A Tale About the Boy Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was, things turn out a little different from most of the stories we've read. As we talked about in class, a character who is described as "stupid" and unable to "learn nor understand anything" somehow gets to marry a princess and be the hero. So how should we understand this story? One in which the shining knight is a total doofus?

I look at it as a tale for the rest of us. If you're born to peasants and are more familiar with crop planting than dragon slaying, here's a tale where you can succeed without be extraordinary. In fact, the hero' stupidity is his strength. He isn't smart enough to realize he's supposed to be afraid. He shoves a fake ghost down the stairs. He tells real ghosts that he'll hang them again if they don't leave him alone. He wins the king's daughter by spending three nights in a haunted castle.

In summary, by being too much of an idiot, the hero becomes rich and a king. The moral here seems to be working with what you got. Stupidity can be an asset. Stubbornness as well. Thus, everybody is a little bit special. If you use what you got, and even if it's not a lot, things might just end up as well for you as they did for the hero.

As for his wife, it's interesting that she is the one who gives him the creeps at the end. I'm not sure what to make of that. Is it saying marrying an strong woman a good thing? Let me know what you think in the comments.

-Matt P.

Intelligent or a bit slow?

2010-03-25T22:59:00.002-05:00

Disney's version of "Snow White" portrays a somewhat intelligent young woman (snow white) who the Wicked Queen wants killed. She sends her out with one of her hunters who is supposed to kill her and he brings the heart of the wild boar back to the Wicked Queen.The Queen finds out that Snow White is still alive because she talks to her magic mirror while Snow White finds her way to the seven dwarfs. She lives with them and is eventually saved by a handsome prince who comes and kisses her which brings Snow White back to life.
In the Grimm's version the Wicked Queen does not want Snow White's heart but much more gruesome, her lungs and liver. When the boar's insides are brought to her, she boils them and eats them, thinking that they are Snow White's. It takes three attempts to kill Snow White with the Queen using the same disguise, insinuating that Snow White must not be too smart. A prince comes and he thinks that the body is beautiful, so he wants it. It is only when servants drop the coffin that the piece of poison apple dislodges from Snow White's throat and she is brought back to life.

It is interesting to see the turn of events and personalities of the characters that make up the flow of the story. Why is it that the woman must be quite slow and can only be seen as an object of desire vs. being intelligent and being silenced and then being saved by a prince? Another revelation of the ideals of society and culture during the times these versions were created? I think so.

Oh foolish father, you bring doom wherever you go

2010-03-25T16:43:00.002-05:00

The character I'm going to comment on is an archetype that has garnered a lot of attention in all fairy tales and despite being a minor character in almost all circumstances has a profound effect on the development on the story. I speak of course of the parents of the main character, in this case the father of Snow White. Like in most other fairy tales, his actions are directly responsible for the plight of the beautiful young girl.

In The Three Little Gnomes in the Forest, he actually almost avoids putting his daughter in any sort of peril by being wary of his possible marriage to the evil stepmother. However, that wouldn't have resulted in a very good story, would it? So as fate would have it, the boot held water and the father married his daughter's would-be tormentor and the rest is history. After the marriage though the father mysteriously disappears from the picture, again facilitating the progression of the story by not stopping or hindering the evil stepmother and her wicked doings.

In the Brier Rose story, again the father plays a part in the misfortune that befalls his daughter but it is not by his marriage to some evil stepmother (though the woman he scorns is still an old crone). By failing to invite the 13th wise old woman (unlucky 13?) to his feast, he causes her to lay a terrible curse on his young daughter. Though unlike the father in the Three Little Gnomes story, the king takes a proactive approach to help his daughter and destroys all of the spindles in his kingdom, one of which is prophesied to be the cause of a hundred year sleep for his daughter. Unlike the previous story, the king does not just disappear into oblivion but still plays a central role in the story.

In Snow White, again the king is the cause of his daughter's turmoil (indirectly, anyway) by marrying the evil stepmother and sealing her fate. But again in this story the father just kind of disappears and plays no further role in the unfurling of events. He serves as a catalyst for a reaction, and once the reaction has taken place he ceases to be useful and is cast off. Though it appears his role as the spark that starts the fire, so to speak, never really changes, his role in the rest of the story changes from tale to tale.

The Huntsman

2010-03-24T23:55:00.003-05:00

The huntsman is a minor character in “Snow White”, but it is still interesting to note the subtle differences in Disney’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and the Grimms’ and Anne Sexton’s text versions. To begin with, the Grimms’ version goes into quite a bit of detail about the huntsman and his emotions. After taking Snow White out into the woods, the huntsman pulls out his knife to kill her, but cannot do it. Snow White begs the hunter for her life, and “Snow White was so beautiful that the huntsman took pity on her and said: ‘Just run away, you poor child’ ”. In comparison, in the Disney version, the roles are reversed and the huntsman actually gets down on his knees and begs for Snow White’s forgiveness.

In Anne Sexton’s version, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”, the huntsman’s duty is simply stated and then the story continues. There is no explanation of the guilt that the huntsman felt, which kept him from fulfilling the Queen’s desire. Sexton writes, “Bring me her heart, she said to the hunter, and I will salt it and eat it. The hunter, however, let his prisoner go and brought a boar’s heart back to the castle.” In both stories, the huntsman decides to disobey the Queen’s order because of his compassion for Snow White, and instead he brings the Queen a boar’s heart. We are never told what happens to the huntsman if he does not succeed.

The huntsman in Disney’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” is a larger man who reluctantly agrees to obey the Queen’s order. Unlike the other versions, the Queen threatens him about what will happen to him if he does not follow through with her order. The huntsman looks weak and inferior when in the presence of the Queen. However, as he approaches Snow White, he looks frightening and his eyes are so focused on Snow White that it seems he is intent on carrying out the plan. As Snow White realizes what is happening and the huntsman raises his sword, he hesitates. Then, he immediately drops to his knees asking for her forgiveness, instead of the Grimms’ version in which Snow White pleads with the huntsman.

The huntsman is the one who takes pity on Snow White and disobeys the Queen. Some versions give the huntsman a larger role, while others hardly mention him.

Why do we think the huntsman is even part of the story? Why doesn't the Queen just kill Snow White herself instead of calling upon the huntsman?

Snow White- no excuses

2010-03-24T22:55:00.002-05:00

So, I know the story is called Snow White, but I think there should be an immediate renaming. Snow White is the most static and uninteresting character, especially Disney princess EVER. I think the with of the story is much more dynamic and interesting. I would like to compare the change in characterization of the witch from the Briar Rose version to the Grimms Snow White version.

In Briar Rose, a relatively short version of the story, non of the characters are described in great detail, especially, ironically, the protagonist. The witch, unlike most other stories, is not related to snow white at all. She is neither stepmother or biological mother. This lack of relation between snow white and the woman who is trying to kill her provides a wierd sense of security- it is not someone you know or are related to trying to kill you, but a random person who you dont even know. In fact, interestingly in this story, the "witch" wasnt jealous of Snow White's beauty. She was pissed that she didnt get invited to a party. Seems like wishing death on a baby is a pretty overdramatic response for not getting an invite. However, this dramatic reaction makes the witch more interesting and questions the reader to inquire as to her motives and the roots of her inner evils. In Briar Rose, snow white is at fault for her sleep. She goes wondering into unknown parts of the castle. She finds the room full of spindles, the tool that should lead to her demise, and voluntarily tries to reach out and touch the fascinating piece of sewing machinery. The witch did not entice or coerce her in any way. I have never heard of a snow white story where the spell is cast when snow white is a baby and the witch doesnt have to do anything to make sure the curse comes true. She didnt even have to try twice to make Snow White sleep. Also, in this version the witch doesnt die and is not punished for her evil actions. She walks. For a 3 page story i found the queen and her inner struggles and background a more appealing story.

Next, Snow White. Here, the Grimms take on a longer version and characterize the major characters more fully- especially the queen. Snow white is pretty much the same dumb protagonist as in all the other versions. In this story, the evil stepmother is introduced. While a stepmother is not blood related. which would make her wanting to kill her daughter much more disturbing and perhaps would not have been accepted by the general public, the notion that the woman is related to Snow White increases her evilness. She is also concerned with looks in this version and the motives behind her attack on snow white are clear, she is jealous and wants to be the "fairest" in the land. Also, the magic mirror is introduced. The mirror speaks to the queen almost daily and until the maturation of snow white, reassured the queen of her superiority. However, when the mirror surprised the queen as he revealed that snow white is, in fact, the most fair- the inner demon of the queen is exposed. The reader can now delve into her personality, her desire for acceptance and preference over the other women, and watch as she lets her emotions become extreme in her many many plots to kill snow white. Well, 4th time is a charm when she finally succeeds in "killing" snow white. However, as we all know, while the witch might be a more interesting character, the good girl with virtue (and stupidity- not always interrelated) wins the prince and gets revenge. Interestingly, the last paragraph of the story is not about snow white, but about the queen and her interesting and questionable response to snow whites marriage. What was with the dancing? Why was she petrified of snow white? Thoughts?

The Man in the Mirror

2010-03-24T22:35:00.003-05:00

I wanted to examine some of the similarities and differences between the mirror representations. As we've discussed all week in glass, Gilbert's and Gubar's argument is that the mirror is a "tool patriarchy suggests that women use to kill themselves with art" (Tatar 77). Disney uses a deep, monotone male voice and a forboding mask to represent its mirror. There is only darkness and fire. The queen, representative of women, is caught in an "imprisonment of the looking-glass" (Tatar 77). What once began with vanity is now an obsession, and she must keep returning to hear what the voice will say to her. There becomes a constant need for this affirmation, to which Disney gives an unmistakable male authority.

I'd like to compare this to the movie we saw on Monday. This 1961ish version has many, many differences, but I found the difference in the mirror to be most striking. The mirror is in a well-lit room, and it has jewels around the side that light up with a cute jingle every time the queen asks it a question. The voice is a lovely woman, who sounds more like Glinda the Good Witch than anything evil. The mirror is overall pleasant. The worst part about it is the reflection betrays the horrible acting skills of the woman who plays the queen. The facial expression changes are pretty terrible.

What the mirror actually reminded me was of the toy Snow White mirror I had growing up. Here's a link to a modern version. When you pressed the button, pleasant, happy chimes would sound and images from the movie (I think) would flash around the screen. I can't remember if it answered questions or what the phrases were. But I also found this beauty. A real talking mirror that tells you that you are the fairest in the land! The voice is Snow White, so it's not a demeaning patronizing one, but still.

Like Kate mentioned today in class, although the mirror in the stories is genderless, I found myself always thinking it had a male voice. In the romance languages, "mirror" is a masculine word, but I doubt that was what the casting people at Disney had in mind when choosing the way to play the mirror. Looking online, I found an audition for a new Snow White movie, and it is also casting a "male voice" for that of the mirror. It would be interesting to talk to casting directors who do representations of Snow White today and see what their logic is behind making the mirror a man. Is it a conscious choice, or has Disney so shaped America that we all assume it should be male because that's the way we first saw it?

2010-03-24T21:50:00.001-05:00

Diluting Evil

2010-03-24T21:37:00.002-05:00

Through the countless variations of the Snow White stories, the "villainess" generally falls into one of two categories: evil stepmother to Snow White that becomes queen through marriage, or an evil witch with a vanity vendetta against Snow White. The final Brothers Grimm version of Snow White takes the former route. The evil stepmother tries to kill Snow White so that she will be the fairest of them all. The same can be said for Disney's film adaptation of Snow White; the stepmother is in place from the beginning of the story and is out to eliminate her competition. Representing the other malicious faction is Briar Rose, which personifies evil in the form of a non-blood related witch. Finally, combining elements of both of these factions is the 1916 film version of Snow White, which included both an evil witch and a (pawn-like) stepmother.

All of these versions represent different pathways to dilute the evil within the fairy tale. In order for a story to truly be a "Snow White" story, there has to be someone after Snow White, whether for her beauty or other half-schemed reasons. The original Brothers Grimm version involved the mother attempting to kill Snow White in response to her increasing beauty. However, this version was cleaned up in order prevent audiences from being terrified while still maintaining the evil (regardless of how diluted). Consistent with most themes of fairy tales, maternal characteristics are ideal, so making the mothers the villains of the story is out of the question. Yet by placing the cruel deeds on a stepmother or evil witch, the evil is maintained while protecting the domestic inner circle. The general evolution of the Snow White fairy tales has steered away from slandering this inner circle, especially mothers, and placing the blame elsewhere.

From Pig to Prince

2010-03-24T20:25:00.001-05:00

On the whole, Disney’s 1937 animated film Snow White and the Seven Dwarves closely adheres to Grimm Brother’s classic version of the tale, although slight revisions are added here and there to render the film more idiosyncratically “Disney.” With the character of the Prince, however, we most see Disney depart from the Grimms’ original plotline. In the character of the Prince, Disney faced the biggest challenge: the Prince of the fairy tale tradition is, to put it bluntly, a necrophiliac, a lecherous pig who views women as little more than museum artifacts. Clearly, such a character would prove problematic in a film geared toward impressionable young children, so a series of adjustments were in order.

As it goes in the Grimms’ version of the tale, a Prince is strolling through the woods one day when he stumbles upon a lifeless Snow White, resting inertly in a glass coffin. Infatuated by her beauty, finding her extremely aesthetically pleasing, the Prince desires to take the coffin under his possession. He announces immediately—as though bartering for a piece of livestock—“Let me have the coffin. I will give you whatever you want for it.” Keep in mind that the Prince has never before laid on Snow White. It is not Snow White the human he desires, but rather Snow White the object, the handsome ornament that will make a fine centerpiece for his living room. It is noteworthy that the Prince says “let me have the coffin” rather than “let me have her.” Clearly, the Prince fails to even consider the fact of Snow White’s humanity. Seemingly unnerved by the fact that he has just purchased a dead woman, the Prince exhibits no sorrow for her tragic condition and is instead giddy at the prospect of his fine purchase, his “toy,” if you will. Snow White is eventually resuscitated, but it is not the result of a romantic kiss—instead, the apple is accidentally dislodged from her throat, to the quiet dismay of the Prince, we might imagine, whose pretty, passive plaything has been suddenly transformed into a living, breathing woman.

Now, we turn to the Disney film. Disney swept in and inserted an element of indelible romance into the Snow White story. At the very beginning, he attempts to establish some sort of romantic attachment between Snow White and the Prince—to be sure, it is the cursory “love at first sight” romance of the Disney variety, but a sense of romance and intimacy nonetheless. Thus, when the Prince later finds Snow White unconscious, feelings of strong, overwhelming love compel him to revive her, and so, with a tender kiss, he breathes the life back into his beloved. Unlike the Prince of the fairy tale tradition, Disney’s Prince exhibits horror at seeing Snow White dead, a horror that obliterates his ability to simply sit back and admire her beauty. In this way, Disney effectively transforms the persona of the Prince from a salacious pig into a romantic, courageous hero.

Comparing the Basile and Disney "Queens"

2010-03-24T14:33:00.001-05:00

I want to trace the “Queen” paradigm through two variations on the classic “Snow White” text: Giambattista Basile’s “The Young Slave” and Walt Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937). As we shall see, Basile’s Baroness and Disney’s Queen, though two sides of the same coin, are mostly dissimilar characters.

In “The Young Slave,” the Baroness’ action of defying her husband and opening the last room of the house parallels closely the tale of “Bluebeard.” However, the Baroness is not actually Lilla’s stepmother, like in other “Snow White” tales; she is instead her aunt. Despite this major difference, like “all women,” the Baroness is motivated by jealousy and curiosity – the latter of which, according to Basile, is “woman’s first attribute.” Also, like “all women,” the former attribute drives her to treating her fellow woman badly. It is interesting that this aunt permits Lilla to live because other “Queens” are intent on killing their “Snow White” enemies with a “sleeping death.” Insated, the aunt rouses Lila from her “sleeping death” and then submits her to subservience, thrashes her, and makes her physically ugly externally by cutting off her hair and dressing her in tatters. At the end, when the Baron realizes this grievance wrong, he simply sends his wife away to her parents. She is not killed.

In Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the Queen is depicted as a vamp, unlike Basile’s antagonist, who is never really described at all. Unlike Basile’s Baroness, the Queen is actually Snow White’s stepmother, but the Baroness and the Queen are similar in that they are motivated by jealousy to destroy the physical beauty of the younger, innocent female. Unlike the Baroness, the Queen does not want Snow White to live life as a physically ugly slave; she instead wants her to live in “the sleeping death.” To dupe Snow White into this state, the Queen transforms herself physically into a hag with the powers of magic. Eventually, nature (lightning) kills her because she is “unnatural.”

Comparing the trajectories of these two “Queens,” the Baroness acts on her “feminine instincts” and is hardly punished (although I suppose in Basile’s time, to have to return to one’s parents was akin to “social suicide”), and the Queen transforms from a curvy woman into a crusty hag. In this case, her “insides” match her “outsides,” in terms of beauty. Unlike Disney’s Queen, Basile’s Baroness is never described physically (unlike the explicit depictions of Lilla), so the ramifications on her person are never described. In this way, Basile’s tale lacks key character development, something upon which Disney’s film hinges.

BlueBeard

2010-03-18T15:49:00.002-05:00

The Bluebeard story has been adapted multiple times but remains to have connections to horror and has been argued to have inspired the serial killer genre of film today. Following the pattern of women being targeted, collected, and killed repeats itself in many common thematic elements of cinema. George Melies version of "BlueBeard" has the ability to engage the spectator and truly engross them within the film's world. Contrary to its peers, the Bluebeard story lacks the fantastical element of many fairy tales and focuses on the gruesome and unexplainable greed of a man who kills his wives for their fortune and the woman (Melies' version) is a helpless damsel in distress who seemingly is unable to call upon her family for help (brothers come on their own). Why is it that such gruesome and horror befalls the helpless dependent women? Why have they been placed in situations that they clearly are not able to overcome on their own? The Grimm's version has a slightly positive feminist approach as the woman almost causes her own troubles; which is far more acceptable to any human being in reaping what they sow or getting into trouble and accepting the consequences. The Grimm's heroine is independent and her curiosity gets her into trouble, meaning if she can get into trouble she should be able to get herself out of it.

Looking at these versions shows a progression of culture and values. Though not where we are in our stories today, the Grimm's later version shows a distinct maturation of how women are presented in stories, and that we too have the ability to problem-solve and fend for ourselves. Somewhat.

The Devil Made Me Do It!

2010-03-18T02:03:00.003-05:00

After watching the silent film in class today, one image that stuck with me was that of the imp jumping from the pages of the book to tempt the heroine into entering the forbidden room. The inclusion of the imp in the story, along with the fairy godmother-type character, changes it into something more than just a moral tale about picking the right sort of husband. Now the Bluebeard tale has become a classic battle of good vs. evil.

The two forces counter each other. The imp makes the key grow bigger. The fairy godmother shrinks it. Bluebeard and his wife are now secondary characters. Or maybe a better word to describe them is puppets. Their actions are not their own. They are merely pawns in a bigger game.

So how are we to understand this take on the tale? What is the new moral? Perhaps it is something more along the lines of there is good and evil in all of us. The bride gives into the evil urges by opening the door but she is saved by listening to her good side, shown by the fairy godmother. Bluebeard does not listen to the fairy godmother (nor is he visited by her since he is so far gone) and dies for his sins. The imp claims his soul, not bothering to protect him like the fairy godmother did for the bride.

So be nice and good and fair at all times! That way when you marry a psychopath, it'll all work out in the end.

Castle with and Awesome Name

2010-03-17T21:13:00.004-05:00

I'm going to go ahead and comment on The Castle of Murder because holy crap, that is one of the coolest names for anything. Ever. Not that I approve of murder, but you know only a badass can live in a place named that.

First of all, I thought it was really strange that the author just sort of randomly included the fact that the same fate destined for the protagonist bride had been ordered for her two sisters as well. There is no mention of their involvement anywhere before or after this point and its like the tidbit was just thrown in as a second thought. It seems like an important point to note, so why is it simply a tiny afterthought? If "One must indeed know that this was the way her two sisters had lost their lives before her," why does the author render it a seemingly inconsequential and removable detail? Strange.

Second, the exchange between the bride and the old woman scraping intestines just seems weird. Initially, the old woman claims that she will be scraping her intestines tomorrow, yet somehow, only after the key had been dropped in the blood, does she assert that now the bride's death is certain. If the bride was going to die either way (i.e. whether she entered the room or not), why was the detail about the key with the unwashable blood included at all? In fact, the husband never even forbade her to enter any particular room, so logic follows that she was indeed doomed no matter what. Consequently, the detail about the key and the blood is irrelevant and seems out of place.

Lastly, unlike the other stories where the "villain" is slaughtered at the end in some fashion, at the end of this story he is only arrested (as far as we know). Considering the fact that his castle was the Castle of Murder, and considering what his former bride had said about the dealings in that place, it would seem a more fitting punishment was in order. Now that I think about it, it seems like there was an attempt to keep this story sort of "clean" by excluding any explicit killing and any excessive gore (save for the scraping intestines scene). Maybe all my points are connected.

Anatole France's "The Seven Wives of Bluebeard"

2010-03-17T20:31:00.003-05:00

I find myself drawn to the tale “The Seven Wives of Bluebeard” by Anatole France because it takes me back to an amusing story I enjoyed as a child – The True Story of the Three Little Pigs, written by Jon Scieszka and illustrated by Lane Smith. As I was reading “The Seven Wives of Bluebeard” in Zipes’ Spells of Enchantment, I was amused by the author’s way of blending a historical analysis of the real lives of the Marshal de Rais and Guillaume de Flavy (and possible others) with the tale of Monsieur de Montragoux in order to do justice to the big, bad wife-killer, “Bluebeard.”

To quote a famous saying, “The winner writes history.” In this way, the popularly propagated tales of “Bluebeard” – from Perrault to the present – have been told from the side of the “winner.” In the “Bluebeard” tales, it is instead the final wife, who we could think of as being like the “Final Girl” paradigm from the horror genre. In “her” story, her antagonistic husband is a heartless beast with a penchant for killing wives.

However, the rhetoric of France is important in order to understand how his tale might help demystify and accredit the name of “Bluebeard.” Several times, France highlights how he assembled historical documents and old tales that follow the “Bluebeard” myth. The use of historical documents implies fact, or what France calls “irrefutable proofs” (France 567). Therefore, in order to make his tale seem credible, he refers to his historical documents for evidence.

Moreover, he critiques Perrault’s own use of language in writing “Bluebeard,” noting how certain word choices are equivocated. He also questions Perrault’s objectivity in writing the tale, claiming that his intuitions lead him to believe that Perrault may have been partial to the wife in telling his version of “Bluebeard.”

In any case, France’s unabashed defense of history’s “loser,” “Bluebeard,” is particularly amusing since it plays on the motifs and actions readers recall from the popularly disseminated versions of “Bluebeard” and then provides alternative – and equally compelling – explanations for them. This kind of parody has amused me since childhood when I first read: “Everybody knows the story of the Three Little Pigs. Or at least they think they do. But I’ll let you in on a little secret. Nobody knows the real story, because nobody has ever heard my side of the story” (from The True Story of the Three Little Pigs, pg. 1).

In the case of “Bluebeard,” whose tale is the right one? Was “Bluebeard” a raging, homicidal maniac? Or was “Bluebeard” an unjustified historical figure who was a victim of being “in wrong place at the wrong time”? We may never know.

…But France’s passion sure makes me wonder.

Probing the Unconscious: "Bluebeard's Egg" by Margaret Atwood

2010-03-17T20:26:00.002-05:00

Margaret Atwood’s “Bluebeard’s Egg” is a fascinating contemporary rendering of the classic fairy tale. Glaringly absent from this version are the elements of stupefying horror we find in the older tales--the haunting images of dead women hanging limply from chains, the pools of splattered blood. Rather, in her tale, Atwood takes us on a psychological journey through the deep, unexplored realms of the unconscious. The tale is told from the perspective of Sally, a middle-aged wife who obsessively tries to unlock the mystifying mind of her frustratingly unreadable husband, Ed.

Atwood’s take on Bluebeard reminded me of Bartok’s operatic adaptation of the tale. In Bartok’s decidedly pessimistic one-act opera, Judith’s insistent attempts to pry into the deepest chambers of her husband’s psyche ultimately destroy the couple’s prospects for achieving eternal satisfaction and happiness. The opera seems, in many ways, to suggest that a woman who dogmatically strives to possess her husband’s mind risks losing him. Similarly, Sally’s dogged desire to decipher her husband’s inner world leads to disaster, casting her relationship in an atmosphere of paranoia and distrust. In the end, she deduces that her husband is having an affair with her best friend. Whether this assumption is correct remains unanswered, but it is likely that her conclusion is simply the product of a paranoid mind, a grossly exaggerated misinterpretation of an otherwise harmless gesture. In this way, both Bartok and Atwood’s renditions of “Bluebeard” caution against forceful curiosity—not a sexual curiosity, as in Perrault’s version, but a curiosity of the psychological variety. Both tales, to some degree, imply that certain regions of a companion’s mind are best left undisturbed, and to encroach upon these forbidden regions is to unleash a torrent of catastrophe.

If we are to assume, however, that Sally’s deductions prove correct—that her husband is, indeed, engaging in an affair—then Atwood’s version represents an interesting inversion of the classic Bluebeard tales. Steeped in sexual imagery, Peraullt’s version of the tale can be read as a metaphor for sexual curiosity and loss of virginity; after all, the woman’s trespassing into the “forbidden” chamber leads to an irrevocable bloodstain on the key, a development rich in sexual implications. Slapping a moral onto the end of the tale, Perrault essentially shifts the blame onto the woman for “succumbing” to curiosity. Atwood, however, subverts Perrault’s warnings against female sexual curiosity--in her version, it is the husband, not the wife, who strays. Assuming Sally's interpretations of her husband's behavior are correct, here we have a case of a male's infidelity spelling dire consequences for a couple's marriage.

Atwood’s “Bluebeard’s Egg” is a densely layered, complex short story that lends itself to varied interpretations. Eliminating the Hitchcock-esque horror that defines the classic Bluebeard tales, Atwood opts instead for a rich exploration of the human mind.

Anatole France blurs history and reality

2010-03-17T18:53:00.002-05:00

While the humor in the Anatole France version of "Bluebeard" is what obviously stands out to me the most, his blurring of the lines between fictional story and historical story was one of the more interesting aspects of his story. From the beginning, France starts by justifying that Bluebeard, rather than being a made-up character, actually existed, just like Napoleon. By pairing a fictional person with one who did indeed exist, France begins to play with this line of what historical accounts can be trusted and which ones are actually true. He makes fiction seem plausible.

The most memorable story he brings to life (other than Bluebeard) is that of Macbeth, which I initially thought was a strange parallel to this story. However, there are two key things in common between the two accounts. The first is the actual key, the parallel of which was briefly mentioned in class, I think. The key becomes stained with blood that Bluebeard's wife cannot wash out in the Perrault version; Lady Macbeth's famous lines of "Out damn spot!" with the invisible blood on her hands fall into this motif.

This blood problem sets up the parallel of Jeanne as Lady Macbeth, implying that both were involved in a conspiracy to kill someone who did not deserve it. France draws a line for us near the end of the story when he says Jeanne's "hallucinations must be compared with those of Lady Macbeth" (Zipes 579). But since that paragraph also discussions conspiring with lovers to kill men who stand in their way, it is implied that there are more comparisons that could be made between Lady Macbeth and Jeanne. Jeanne is cunning, malicious, enjoys sex, and is cruel to her supposedly good and faithful husband.

Again, these are all fictional characters, although France discusses them as though they existed in history. I'm not sure what to make of using Macbeth's supposed true account to make Bluebeard seem true, but overall, France's use of all types of stories as real stories was intriguing. I think since the original Bluebeard story was so un-fairy tale-like, it almost makes more sense as a real historical account than as a fictional story. Horror itself plays with the ideas of reality, and horror seems more plausible in real life than magic does. France's use of fictional stories as reality makes the reader question what he or she reads.

Bluebeard the relationship counselor

2010-03-17T18:39:00.000-05:00

What stood out to me the most in the Tatar introduction to Bluebeard is that “cultural historians have been quick to claim that the Perrault’s Bluebeard is based on fact, that it broadcasts the misdeeds of various noblemen.” It is curious that if this is even slightly true, why has this story been transformed into a tale about the deadly curiosity of a woman? The tale’s most distinctive features include male cruelty, murder and cannibalism. They are the true villains, yet Perrault’s moral blames the female! “Curiosity, in spite of its many charms, can bring with it serious regrets; you can see a thousand examples of it everyday. As soon as you satisfy it, its ceases to be. And it always very costly.” So Perrault, you’re telling me as a female, I shouldn’t give into curiosity in such a situation because it will result in me finding out my husband is a vicious murder? As long as I don’t know he enjoys killing women, I will be blissfully happy? Awesome.

I think that this moral is better applied to the Opera that we discussed in class. In this version the male figure is revealing his inner self to the women. All is well and they reach the status of a perfect relationship. Yet she gets greedy and demands more. Unfortunately this is their downfall as a repressed truth is revealed. I think that this version should be more widely told. It teaches a great message on maintaining a happy and balanced relationship. With a little tweaking their roles could be reversed but the message would stay the same: Recognize happiness and accept it. Even in the strongest couples their will and needs to be some secrets- some mystery may even keep a couple in love for a longer period of time. A partner’s secrets will be revealed to the other partner when if they are ready, but seek them out too soon, and the relationship will suffer.

Comparing "Bluebeard" to "The Castle of Murder"

2010-03-17T16:28:00.000-05:00

There are several versions of the “Bluebeard” story in which a wife’s curiosity leads her to somehow disobey her husband’s rules, and she must find a way to save herself from being killed by her husband. When comparing “Bluebeard” and “The Castle of Murder”, it is interesting to note the similarities and differences between the two stories. In both tales, the men must leave the castle to finish some business, but they give the women all their keys. Both girls receive some type of aid: the wife in “Bluebeard” receives help from her sister and brothers, and the wife in “The Castle of Murder” receives help from an old woman. With this helper’s guidance and knowledge, they are able to escape death. Additionally, both girls drop the key into the blood and cannot remove the stains, which serves as evidence that they entered a forbidden place and now have knowledge of the husband’s deeds.

At the start of the tales, there are minor, but significant, details that are different. First of all, Bluebeard is actually a king (which is interesting in itself and a detail I overlooked at first) and in the other story the husband is a rich nobleman. In “Bluebeard”, the girl immediately fears the king because of his blue beard and feels uncomfortable. However, the girl in “The Castle of Murder”, is said to have “gladly agreed to ride off with him” (619). It is not until he asks whether she has any doubts about marrying him that she begins to feel uneasy. In “Bluebeard”, the king specifically tells the girl that she may go anywhere in the house except the one forbidden room, and she will die if she disobeys him. In “The Castle of Murder”, the nobleman gives her all his keys and tells her she can go anywhere around the castle. When she reaches the cellar, which is essentially the forbidden room that he never verbally forbid her to enter, she finds an old woman scraping intestines. We learn that the girl has unknowingly disobeyed her husband because the old woman says he will know the girl has been in the cellar when he and the old woman are the only ones allowed to enter.

“The Castle of Murder” seems like it is going to be another version of “Bluebeard”, but in the middle of the tale it shifts more towards “The Robber Bridegroom” when a helper warns the girls to escape while they can. Later, they are able to publically reveal the true nature of their husbands at a party. In the end, the husband is punished for his deeds and the wife receives all of his wealth and lives happily ever after.

In my opinion, “The Castle of Murder” seems to be a combination of “Bluebeard” and “The Robber Bridegroom”. So here are a few questions I had when reading and comparing these stories:

Why would the Grimm brothers omit “The Castle of Murder” and “Bluebeard” from the collection, but keep “The Robber Bridegroom”? Why was it ultimately decided that both stories should be omitted, as opposed to keeping one?

Parents Know Best?

2010-02-24T23:15:00.002-06:00

To be frank I feel that parents being present in fairy tales jump start the plot. I believe that if it were up to the children they wouldn't know where to go or what to get into if parents were not a part of their decision making. I would go as far as even putting the children as innocent until the parents are actually noted for saying something. This could even stem from the ideal that children were not children but ignorant adults until taught further. I believe that the parents are in fact essential to any story because they seem to be a driving force in the children's lives of helping the reader to identify the child's character whether it be virtuous, selfish etc. Nonetheless it does not go without saying that the reason why these stories came into fruition was due to the parents always seeming to fall into fault of some kind.

Yo Mama So Dumb, She Made You Marry a Pig

2010-02-24T23:01:00.002-06:00

Parents in the Beauty and the Beast-type tales vary as do the morals. In "Beauty and the Beast", one of the morals is clearly to take care of parents, even when they cannot take care of you. Her father is much like the Beast; he is never witty nor handsome. But he is kind and for that he is eventually rewarded. The father is a push-over. Beauty must take care of him and fix the problem he creates.

"The Pig King" has a similar parental figure in the mother of the Pig King's three wives. She is poor and has no real say in the matter. She needs the money. Even after her first two daughters are killed, the third still goes, all to protect her mother. Once again the child looks after her parent who has passed the prime of her life. There are no retirement homes. Your old, aging parents need active care and that's what this story seems to preach.

On the other side, in "The Frog King", the father is wise and still in his prime. The moral in this story is to listen to your father. The daughter does not want to take the frog in but father knows best. He insists she keeps her promise, trying to raise her right. It pays off in the end.

So in summary, take care of your parents when they get old and listen to them before they do. Any questions?

Belle as mother and daughter

2010-02-24T22:46:00.002-06:00

I want to focus on the lack of a mother figure in most Beauty and the Beast stories. What I've noticed about the lack of a mother is that Belle, whether or not she has siblings, steps into that role. She assumes the roles as daughter, spouse and mother - the role of being a single woman is left aside. In fear of being alone and vulnerable as a young woman, instead of flocking to a suitor, she clings to the one she has: her father.

This is why I think she clings to her chastity and that idea is promoted throughout a lot of the stories. But I think this provides a dichotomy that is somewhat irreconcilable. On the one hand, she's supposed to plan for her future by preserving her chastity, the one thing she has left of her own. But on the other, she's supposed to cling to the past rather than look for a future; current family comes before possible family. I think this is why so many Beauties or Belles are torn, such as Beauty in the movie. She has Avenant and her father. For her, papa wins, but she is not without her own desires. The bigger message is recognizing there are two options, choosing to take care of your elders who have provided for you, and then doing so without being bitter.

For me, B&B stories show the horrible things that happen in the absence of the mother. Belle goes to this extreme and sacrifices her future (the possibility of a suitor) to take care of her father. This almost ends in disaster ... although that it ends up so well maybe throws off my theory?

The (oedipal) purpose of “Papa” in the “Beauty and the Beast” tales

2010-02-24T22:28:00.002-06:00

At the risk of a collective groan, I think psychoanalytic theory provides a useful starting place for understanding the purpose of parents in the “Beauty and the Beast” tale. Specifically, I want to frame the narrative in Freudian terms – as the oedipal tale of a young girl who must remove all attachments to her father in order to reroute her attachments toward a “beastly” male suitor, resulting in a heterosexual union in the end.

In a way, it is difficult to think of the “Beauty and the Beast” tale strictly in terms of Freud’s Electra complex because of the lack of a maternal figure. (By the way, the Electra complex is the notion that the young girl identifies with her primary love object – her mother – and then, without ever dropping her first identification, with her father. This means that the young girl – like the young boy – is inherently bisexual (although the young boy must repudiate his mother and youthful bisexuality to become an obligatory heterosexual). However, the young girl eventually discovers that her mother is a “rival” for the affections of the father, and so she must take the mother’s place in order to complete her oedipal trajectory toward (heterosexual) union with her father.)

Though the maternal element of the Electra complex is inaccessible in the “Beauty and the Beast” tales, the paternal factor continues to exist. The power of “Papa” in all (Western) versions of the tale holds tremendous sway over the young girl’s decisions. For example, she refuses to ever leave her father because she loves him and believes he cannot live without her. However, the “Beauty and the Beast” tale forces her to make the decision to take the place of her father as the Beast’s eternal prisoner (a curious notion since the young girl never usually assumes the father’s place in the oedipal trajectory). As a result, the tale requires that she displace her father in order to forge a heterosexual union at the end of the story. This heterosexual union is the goal to which the Beast persistently aspires, and eventually it must come to fruition for the young girl’s trajectory to be a success (as it does).

Therefore, the purpose of “Papa” in the “Beauty and the Beast” tales is as “part one” of the two-step process (young girl relinquishes Papa; young girl bonds to beastly male suitor) that underlines each “Beauty and the Beast” narrative. The renunciation of Papa is required in order to permit the “arranged marriage” tale (Tatar) to be effective.

Parents: The Bridge to Eternal...Pleasantness

2010-02-24T21:56:00.002-06:00

The role of the parents in the Beauty and the Beast-type fairy tales is to provide the plot enough logic for the story to make sense (I get the feeling that we can accept the fact that a handsome prince can be cursed into a dreaded, ugly beast, but we would have a hard time following the story if the "beauty" randomly encountered the beast and stayed with him longer than that split-second of fear without some kind of obligation to him). Some versions, like Beaumont's, accredit the Beauty's devotion to her father and willingness to sacrifice her own life/free will in order to save him. It is only over time that she gets to know the Beast and ends up falling in love with him, or whatever the 18th century equivalent of "true love" was. In "Hans My Hedgehog," the marriage only occurs because the King has already promised his daughter to Hans My Hedgehog in exchange for saving his life.

While this notion doesn't exactly make a lot of sense in today's terms of true love and happily ever afters, the payment of daughters to satisfy a debt isn't necessarily meant to be demeaning. Rather, it is meant to instill the values of self-sacrifice and virtue among the female audience in a time when marriage in the name of love was an unknown concept. If you can't be in love, you might as well narrow your search to those that you "treat you nice" and that you "respect." That's where parents come in, to bridge the gap into these forced interactions.

Beauty and her Unfortunate Progenitors

2010-02-24T21:44:00.002-06:00

It seems to me that so many of the Beauty and the Beast stories include the parents of the latter because they play a crucial role in the development of the story and the relationship between Beauty and the Beast. For instance, in Beaumont's version, due to the misfortune of the father Beauty is forced into a position where she must suffer the death of her father or see her own mortal fire extinguished at the hands of the Beast. Had it not been for the old man getting lost in the woods Beauty would never have faced such a predicament.

In another version, Straparola's The Pig King, again the parent of the Beauty character is at least ;artially responsible for her involvement with the Beast character. Granted, the pig boy becomes enamored with her and demands her marital hand from his mother as a result, the only reason the marriage occurs is because Beuaty's mother was so poor and the Queen offered her many riches.

So, a pattern seems to arise in which the misfortune of a parent, whether it be getting lost in the woods, seeking shelter in a castle and then just happening to take his most prized possession, or simply beng down on one's monetary luck, the end result is a sort of contract that results in Beauty forming a relationship with the Beast in some way. If the parents were not in the picture the stories would have to change entirely to get to the desired end. This also makes me think that the parent characters are meant as scapegoats that can be blamed for the suffering of their daughter. If Beauty brought her unfortunate situations upon herself readers would pity the character much less. However, since somebody else is to blame the Beauty character can retain all of her virtue. The parents are just a means to an end.

How Important is the Parent's Role anyway?

2010-02-24T21:42:00.004-06:00

I think an interesting parent relationship in these types of tales can be seen in the Straparola version, "The Pig King." In this case the parents in which the parents truly love their child. They wanted a child so much, that they were so happy when the wife finally conceived thanks to the mischievous fairies. They love the child or at least the mother does unconditionally, even though it is born a pig and willingly put up with his antics. ("defiling them with all manner of dirt, but because he was indeed their own son they bore it all" pg. 43) The mother ends up finding him three wives to please him and they all eventually live happily ever after. This is in sharp contrast with the parents from Hans My Hedgehog. Here the parents do not show the beast the same type of love and affection. Their lack of care even pushes him to leave home. Interestingly, both these beasts go through similar trials (multiple wives) and are eventually turned into princes thanks to the virtuous women. So my question is this, if both of these stories have similar obstacles with two very different types of parents, but still reach the SAME outcome, then does it really matter what role the parents play in their lives?

Beauty and the Beast- the role of parents

2010-02-24T21:28:00.003-06:00

In Tartar's essay before the series of stories, she discusses the repeating motif of arranged marriage. She states that these Beauty and the Beast stories would console the wives of an arranged or forced marriage. In these stories, as in arranged marriages, the parents play the influential role in determining who their daughter is to marry. However, in the well-known Beauty and the Beast stories the parent does not intentionally mean to surrender their daughter to an unfit suitor. Nevertheless, in Beauty and the Beast stories, the parents play a significant role in determining their daughter's fate.
In Beaumont's version of the story the close relationship between father and Beauty results in her imprisonment. The father, after stealing the rose, has no intention of surrendering his daughter to the beast. However, Beauty loves her father so much that she volunteers to take his place. The relationship, therefore, was the cause of Beauty meeting her "suitor." Interestingly enough, the close relationship with her father is reemphasized to serve another purpose toward the end of the story. When Beauty realizes that her father is sick, the Beast, in an act of unselfish love, allows her to go to her father's bedside. This might be a stretch, but I think Beauty's father was the catalyst for Beauty's realization of her love for the Beast.
In contrast, in the "Pig King," the father is never present and the relationship between the protagonist and the parent is not stressed. In the "Pig King" the women play a key role in the arranged marriage between the Beast and Beauty. The mother of the Pig King is on a quest to find someone for his son to marry, even though she realizes that no well- off woman will agree to marry him. Therefore, she takes advantage of a poor woman's desperation and exploits her desire for money. The poor woman agrees to give up her daughters, even after two of them get killed. Why does she do this? Because she wants money? I dont get it. But anyway, the Pig King is ultimately satisfied with the 3rd and most beautiful daughter and reveals his true self.
In both of these stories, the parents play a crucial role in coercing their daughters into marrying a beast of a man. The parents exploit their daughter's good bigheartedness and force them into a potentiall dangerous situation with a beast of a man. Side note: while all of these stories are supposed to be about inner beauty and accepting people regardless of their looks, the beast always seems to want the prettiest daughter. Any thoughts? Is Beauty beautiful because of her beautiful inside that is translated outward?

Parents in "Beauty and the Beast" tales

2010-02-24T18:43:00.001-06:00

In all of the “Beauty and Beast” tales and their related counterparts, a beautiful young girl finds herself coerced into an undesirable marriage at the urging of a parent figure. Most often, a desire for money motivates the parent to deliver their beautiful daughter into the hands of a grotesque, frightful beast. For example, Beauty’s father is on a money-driven quest to retrieve his merchandise when he stumbles unwittingly into Beast’s palace, and similarly, in “The Pig King,” a destitute peasant mother, lured by the prospect of money, freely sells off all three of her daughters to the vile swine-like Prince.

By today’s standards, this practice seems hard to believe. What decent and rational parent would willingly consign their child to an unfavorable marriage with a horrific, foul beast? Given the historical context in which these tales were fashioned, however, the arrangement would have been perfectly sound. Up until the mid-20^th century, after all, marriage was a purely economical phenomenon, devoid of sentiment or feeling. The idea of marrying “for love” served no practical purpose; it was simply a blessed bonus if the partnership actually ended up generating feelings of love. For this reason, the practice of subjecting reluctant daughters to unwanted marriages was widespread. In almost all instances, the parent of the “Beauty” figure is impoverished and desperate, while the beastly character possesses vast wealth and power. To turn the arrangement down would be unthinkable. In this way, the Beauty and Beast tales are a reflection of the social environment in which they originated, an environment in which money trumped all other considerations, and love emerged as a trivial consideration.

That the “Beauty” figure initially begrudgingly enters the marriage proves crucial to the tale’s overarching theme. The “Beauty and Beast” tales, above all, speak to the idea of “inner beauty”—that what matters is not so much appearance or courtly manners, but virtue, kindness, and gentleness. The longer Beauty resides in the palace, the more Beast’s quiet, unassuming kindness begins to emerge, and she discovers a surprising gentleness lurking beneath his frightening façade. Of the Beast’s inherent goodness, Beauty remarks:

“You are very kind. I swear to you that I am completely pleased with your good heart. When I think of it, you no longer seem ugly to me.”

And later, more tellingly:

“There are certainly men more monstrous than you. I like you better, even with your looks, than men who hide false, corrupt, and ungrateful hearts behind charming manners.”

Here, Du Beaumont’s message rings clear: rather than being dazzled by such superficial qualities as charm and attractiveness, women should choose suitors on the basis of their inner qualities, seeking someone with virtue and morals. Had Beauty entered the marriage willingly, without the external prodding of a parent, swayed herself by the prospect of wealth, this crucial message would be utterly lost. What is important for the story’s trajectory is that Beauty initially finds no inherent positive good in her situation. The only thing keeping her at the castle is her selfless devotion to her father. Although Beauty initially is repulsed by the Beast’s external appearance, his bumbling animalism, soon her new suitor’s genuine goodness begins to manifest itself in small, gentle gestures, such that the Beast no longer seems so beastly. At the end of the day, Beauty recognizes how fortunate she is to have a suitor who treats her so kindly, and this idea—that all a woman needs in a partner is friendship and companionship—forms the moral core of the tale. Had she not been pushed unwillingly into her situation, this crucial burst of insight could have never taken root.

The Role of Parents

2010-02-24T17:20:00.000-06:00

It seems that the parent tends to serve as a catalyst through which the beauty is forced to meet the beast. Tatar writes, “Yet what many of these tales seem to endorse in one cultural inflection after another is a reinscription of patriarchal norms, the subordination of female desire to male desire, and a glorification of filial duty and self-sacrifice” (Tatar 27). This quote is particularly applicable to de Beaumont’s “Beauty and the Beast” and Straparola’s “The Pig King”.

In “Beauty and the Beast”, the father is the bridge that connects Beauty to the Beast in the first place. Beauty and her father have a close relationship, which is the basis of her strong filial obligation. Beauty is unable to marry her many suitors because of this responsibility- at least until the Beast enters the picture. It is Beauty’s father who makes the fateful decision to pluck the rose that was his favorite daughter’s only request. This action binds him under the Beast’s power, and thus he is forced to comply with the Beast’s wishes or suffer the consequences. Beauty originally believes that the beast intends to kill her father, so she takes his place and saves his life by sacrificing her own. After she arrives at the castle, she soon realizes that the Beast has a kind heart and actually intends to marry her.

In “The Pig King”, the parent also connects the beauty to the beast. “The Pig King” shows the female figure, the pig’s mother, succumbing to the wishes and demands of her son. Once he is old enough to be married, the pig demands that his mother find him a bride. However, he kills his first two wives because they were apparently plotting to kill him. The pig becomes more domineering as “…he persisted in his purpose, and threatened to ruin everything in the place if he could not have her as wife” (Tatar 45). A few lines later, the pig “became more insistent than ever, and in the end began to threaten the queen’s life in violent and bloodthirsty words, unless he should have given to him the young girl [Meldina] for his wife” (Tatar 45). Even after consulting her husband (the king, who is mentioned in the story but does not hold any power over his son), the mother, who dearly loves her son despite his cruelty, continually gives in to the pig’s desires. Without the mother’s cooperation in granting all of her cruel son’s demands, this beast would never have met his beauty.

Looney Tunes Does It Right

2010-02-18T16:36:00.002-06:00

First off, in this version, Little Red Riding Hood is annoying. Like goofy glasses and bad haircut annoying. From the start, I wouldn't mind if she got eaten and that's obviously the intent of the animators. Listen to that singing voice. It's so grating This is no cute angel in need of being protected from a wolf (representing that evil seducer that's come to take her innocence)

The wolf is still a dastardly fellow. Look at him switch that sign! Good thing Grandma isn't home. In this version, she's off working the swing shift instead of being prone in bed.

Then in a hilarious jab at all the different versions of the story, the wolf kicks three (no, wait...four!) other wolves at the bed. Similarly, when Little Red Riding Hood tries to start her "What big eyes, what big nose" speech, the wolf chases her out saying "Yeah, yeah, yeah." He's heard it all before and so have we.

Cue typically Looney Tunes physical comedy, which results in the wolf being unmasked and then being precariously perched above burning embers. However, annoying Little Red Riding Hood comes back one more time and now Bugs is FED UP!

The final shot is him and the wolf, arm in arm, while Little Red Riding Hood finds herself in the wolf's previous position--dangerously hovering above burning coals. We are told to enjoy the wolf's cunning, just as we enjoy Bug's. The annoying girl gets put in her place. Too funny.

"Little Red Riding Hood" for Babies & Toddlers

2010-02-17T23:58:00.006-06:00

While searching for a suitable “Little Red Riding Hood” video on YouTube, I happened to stumble upon one by Oxbridge Baby, written “specifically for babies and toddlers.” I thought this was a particularly interesting selection, and so I watched the short animated video to see what their version of the classic tale would be. The tale turns out to be an even more “cleaned up” version of the tale told by the Brothers Grimm.

In this version, Little Red Riding Hood wears a red cloak with a hood and, as a result, is called by how she dresses. (There is no explanation of why nor how she got her hood.) One day, Mother decides to send Little Red Riding Hood to Grandmother’s to take her some cakes. She gives her specific, moralistic instructions (like in the Bros. Grimm’s tale) before Little Red Riding Hood departs. Although the young girl was told not to stray and pick flowers, she does anyway, and a Wolf suddenly appears beside her. She tells him of her plans to see her Grandmother in the forest, and he dupes her into a deliberate race to Grandmother's house. The Wolf arrives first and gobbles up Grandmother in one swallow. He puts on Grandmother’s nightgown, her cap, and some of her perfume (“for good measure”), and then takes her place in bed. When Little Red Riding Hood arrives, she asks the Wolf the usual questions, and then she realizes he is not actually Grandmother and dashes away (without stripping, getting into bed, nor further interrogation). A Woodsman comes along, saves Little Red Riding Hood, and turns the Wolf upside down until he releases Grandmother. Afterward, the Woodsman takes the Wolf into the woods so he cannot harm anyone else ever again. At the end, Grandmother and Little Red Riding Hood have their overdue picnic with the cakes. The end.

Departures:
• No wine nor milk taken to Grandmother
• No specified paths of pins nor needles; instead, a deliberate race
• Little Red Riding Hood has to tell the wolf where Grandmother lives
• Little Red Riding Hood never gets into bed with the Wolf
• The hunter is now a woodsman
• No one dies – not even Grandmother!

This version of the tale actually blames no one but the Wolf for the narrative conflict. Little Red is (somehow) absolved of all blame usually placed on her in "moral" versions of the tale, even though she does not obey her Mother’s orders to the letter. The tale also reinforces the sense of patriarchal order established in the Bros. Grimm tale by permitting the woodsman to save the day (again). Also, both Little Red Riding Hood and Grandmother survive in the end (true in the Bros. Grimm tale, but nowhere else).

In the end, this particular video follows the Bros. Grimm tale, but “cleans it up” even more so than the Grimms did. In addition, although this particular video emphasizes the moral side of educating the young child, it never persists in teaching the child a lesson from her mistakes; instead, it places all blame on the insidious Wolf.

And then granma eloped with the wolf

2010-02-17T22:18:00.004-06:00

I give you this rendition to view. It's worth the 7 minutes, promise:

I'm more or less positive that I saw this growing up. It looks somewhat like your classic Looney Tunes animation, with the exaggeration in the characters and the ways their bodies can stretch and move. It deviates quite a bit from the Grimms' "Little Red Riding Hood" and the "Story of Grandmother," but there is something in common with the video we watched in class today, and that is the addition of what I think is some female agency into the plot.

Our story begins with LRRH trotting along toward "granma" (a nice childish spelling), who is being taken care of by a doctor (new character). This is where most of the magic comes into play. The doctor gives granma a special medicine that makes her heart feel lots better. She accidentally spills a drop onto her slipper, which turns into a high heel. At this moment, granma realizes the powers of this drug and pours the whole bottle on her, turning herself into a Minnie Mouse-looking woman.

The wolf meets LRRH in the forest, beats her to granma's (LRRH gets sidetracked picking flowers, similar to the path of needles in the "Story of Grandmother") but, in a twist, falls in love with granma instead. They dance together and have a grand old time until LRRH shows up. In a panic (like two teenagers about to be caught by their mother), granma jumps into the closet and the wolf jumps into bed (similarity - the wolf has to get in bed with granma's clothes somehow). Then he tosses the sheet onto LRRH, and he and granma escape in his wolf car to go to a church to get married. LRRH runs home to her mother, who, with a herd of children, goes to the church to stop granma from marrying the wolf. They're too late (blah blah blah, "I do," blah blah blah, "I do"), but the mother chases the wolf out the door and pounds him with her rolling pin until he runs away. Granma cries, LRRH suddenly SOBS, along with the minister, but then they all smile and say, "And that's the story of LRRH!!"

I'm left in some confusion at this point.

I have found several similarities with other renditions we've looked at. As I said, the female agency in this video is similar to what we saw in class today. LRRH took the agency in that strip tease, and granma does a similar thing here. The wolf is bewitched by female beauty and loses sight of his goal of devouring humans where there is a pretty young girl in the room. I'm not sure that's a very affirming message to women: it's not your brains that will get you out of the situation, it's your good looks that will captivate your attacker.

When the wolf walks in the room, he tells granma, "What beautiful eyes you have!" This is a reference, I think, to the traditional, "Grandma, what big eyes you have!"

The dancing I can't really explain, other than the story ends badly for the dancers. I can't explain the ending much at all. I guess granma runs away with the wolf because she's all alone and she feels empowered by her new health and good looks. She's sad because she doesn't get to marry anyone (her daughter plays the role of the mother - I think that's key), but I'm not sure why LRRH cries so much more than granma at the end. I'm not really sure why anyone is crying, frankly, but LRRH has literally oceans of water pouring out of her eyes. Maybe she's scared? Maybe she's sad because she wanted her granma to be happy and her granma is crying? I can't make much sense of the ending, or why it's a LRRH story. Other than the basic characters (wolf, sick grandmother, LRRH) and the initial plot line of LRRH going to visit her sick grandma, the story isn't similar at all.

Kick-Ass Riding Hood

2010-02-17T20:21:00.001-06:00

This version of Little Red Riding Hood is a modern twist of the classic version. It has a youthful, smart-aleck tone of today’s youth generation in which we tend to think we know everything and possess all of the knowledge to overcome any obstacle. An independent woman is one of the more acceptable norms of today’s society compared to the times these stories were originally written. Instead of a helpless, clueless, somewhat of an idiot little girl, we are now presented with a girl who is already two steps ahead of the game and possesses a no-nonsense type of attitude. I much prefer this version as the wolf is completely dominated by the young girl who seems unafraid of anything, and I would much prefer this version to be circulated to youngsters today (despite the cursing, and references to the mentally ill) as it promotes a much stronger sense of self.

Little Red (Bull) Riding Hood

2010-02-17T19:45:00.002-06:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4I6jj_Bam0

This is the link to a commercial Red Bull has been playing on TV recently. I couldn't find an English version of it on YouTube, but assuming you are not fluent in Italian, here is the transcription of what I remember from the commercial.

Little Red Riding Hood comes in and says hello to her grandmother, who is sitting comfortably at home with surrounded by her wolf-skin rugs and wolf heads hung on the ceiling. The two talk before deciding to go bag another wolf with the help of none other than Red Bull.

Red Bull commercials have been known to take popular icons (I can think of the Three Little Pigs and Sherlock Holmes off the top of my head), and spin the story to make Red Bull a vital part of the mythology. In this case, the wolves are the victims of the granny and Red Riding Hood because of Red Bull. A lot of the versions we have read of this story have differed on how in control LRRH/granny were, but the wolf has generally been the predator. With the exception of the film we watched today in class, this has been the Red Bull version is relatively unique in making LRRH the one in control. Then of course, there is the commercial spin that with Red Bull, you can overcome your own big, bad wolf. I would say I enjoy Red Bull commercials as a whole, so it's nice to see that this commercial perfectly coincided with the Red Riding Hood week for this class.

A Not So "Little" Red Riding Hood

2010-02-17T17:45:00.001-06:00

Here's the url just incase the above isn't working:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX1MQ9DyuzU

The above is a link to a Little Red Riding Hood clip I found on you tube. The clip is very short but uses the symbolism of the narrative without telling the whole story. The first shot shows a girl walking in the forest with the tradition red tunic, white tights, and mary-jane flats. She is presented as a young, innocent girl- but that quickly shifts. Just before she enters the “grandmother’s” house we see that she is in fact a beautiful, made up young adult. Her lips are bright red and highly sexualized. As she enters the house, she turns around and scans the area. To me it seems like she is making sure she was not followed, or no one saw her enter the home. The music is playful and upbeat, it gives no indication that she is in any danger. The line that caught my attention in the song played as she approaches the bed, “you’re everything a big bad wolf would want.” Want how? Everything he would want to eat? Or everything he would want sexually? That question is quickly answered as she takes off her hood and slowly moves her hand along the bed to the figure lying in it. Suddenly, a wolf pops up and scares her, yet her expression quickly changes to a pleased even seductive gaze. She then removes her red tunic to reveal a skimpy dress and crawls onto the bed with the wolf- whose lower body we can see is a man’s. The wolf takes of his make to reveal a man, and the two fall into bed together and the scene closes. The end caption includes the phrase, “get primal.”

I love how this version of the tale speaks more to the clip we saw in class today than the story most of us grew up with. It shows her not as a naive lost child, but a sexual being who seeks out the wolf, who is happy to receive her. The caption at the end seems to refer to her more than the wolf. The animal is already primal, thus it is an invitation for this female to give into her desires. The removal of the wolf mask indicates that man and animal are one in the same.

I think that the best part of the clip is the song in the background. It replaces the narration setting her up as sexual, and then ending with “I don’t think little big girls should, go walking in the spooky old woods alone.” It acknowledges the theme or moral of the story, but then the singer’s howl at the end undermines it as if he is enjoying the sexualized, fantasy [not so] little red riding hood.

Little Red Riding Hood and...perfume?

2010-02-17T15:49:00.002-06:00

The ad for Chanel No. 5 definitely plays on the sexuality and eroticism of the classic “Little Red Riding Hood” tales. The commercial begins with an image of a beautiful young woman clad in a silk red dress, walking down the length of a hallway. We can infer, from her erratic, confused movements and the wide-eyed expression on her face, that the girl is naïve, frightened, and vulnerable. Ill-equipped to venture out alone into the dangerous, uncertain urban forest that is Paris, she requires some sort of magical token to offer safety and protection.

And then—voila!—the young Parisian woman stumbles upon a rich trove of Chanel No. 5 perfume bottles, aligned in a brilliant, glowing array that stretches all the way to the ceiling. Enchanted, the maiden grasps a bottle in her hand, and a smug, almost mischievous look flits across her face. In the background, we see a forbidding shadow—the wolf, lurking in the background, waiting to pounce. Armed with the perfume, however, the woman is invincible: she fastens on her red cape and boldly swings open the door, to the magnificent sight of Paris sprawling before her. Then, with a coy smirk, Little Red Riding Hood looks back at the expectant wolf and seductively shushes him before walking out the door. As if by command, the animal submissively sits down and, with an air of defeat, watches Little Red Riding Hood disappear into the night. The ad closes with the wolf omitting a despondent, forlorn howl.

In the advertisement, Chanel No. 5 is dramatized as a sort of magical elixir that confers protection against “big, bad wolves.” In other words, if a young lady wears this scent, she will be immune to seduction and temptation. She will be able to tackle the dangerous realm of the “forest”—the modern city—without succumbing to the advances of the “wolf”—predatory men.

The commercial subverts the original Little Red Riding Hood trajectory. In this version, Little Red Riding Hood is not a submissive, meek little girl who blindly follows the wolf’s commands. Rather, we see a strong, sensual seductress who is in control of her situation. In the end, she expertly triumphs over the wolf, silencing him to submission like an innocent pet dog.

Overall, I think the ad successfully exploits a popular fairy tale to sell a product. Playing on the inherent eroticism of the classic Little Red Riding Hood tales, the ad suggests that Chanel No. 5 will empower women to be strong and independent and to navigate the uncertainties of the modern world, warding off any “wolves” they may encounter on their way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnwHS3wc1B8

"Little Rural Riding Hood"

2010-02-17T01:14:00.002-06:00

The title of this particular version, “Little Rural Riding Hood”, really intrigued me. The focus of this particular Red Riding Hood story is not remaining true to the fairy tale itself, but is to show a stark contrast between rural and urban areas.

It opens with a stereotypical country bumpkin Little Riding Hood, who has a thick Southern accent, poor grammar, buck teeth, and is not wearing shoes to cover her big feet. After we are introduced to the tall and lanky rural riding hood, we meet the wolf at grandmother’s farm. He is already in the grandmother’s bed, wearing overalls and a bonnet of course, and he explains that he is supposed to eat the girl, but he refuses to do that. Instead, he eagerly says that he will catch her and then hug and kiss her. The rural wolf is like a Goofy figure that is silly, dumb, and eager to meet the girl. After the wolf chases the rural riding hood around the house for a while, he receives a letter from his cousin living in the city. His cousin, who is more sophisticated and cosmopolitan, tells the rural wolf to come to the city to meet a real woman. The cousin will teach the ignorant wolf how to treat women and live in the city. The urban riding hood is a singer at a nightclub, who sings the Andrews’ Sisters “Oh Johnny Oh” song with the words changed to be about the wolf.

In the end, the cousin says city life is too much for the rural wolf so he takes the wolf back to his home in the country. However, little rural riding hood is still there waiting for the rural wolf, and the urban wolf immediately falls in love with her. The roles of the wolves are then reversed, and rural wolf says the country life is too much for the city wolf so he takes him back to the city.

Some interesting observations:

-Instead of one wolf and one girl, there are two wolves and two girls.

-The grandmother is left completely out of the story.

-The wolf does not desire to kill the girl, but instead has a weird, almost childlike attraction to her.

-Only the rural riding hood wears red, but both girls have red hair.

-This may be a stretch, but the urban riding hood seemed almost like a Marilyn Monroe figure, while the rural riding hood was like an unattractive Daisy Duke.

This version seems to be a social commentary that simply perpetuates the stereotypes of rural life and the types of people it attracts. It is an entirely new and different take on the traditional “Little Red Riding Hood” story that we all know so well.

Good and Evil

2010-02-10T22:40:00.002-06:00

Birds have been symbolically referred to in literature as having the ability to communicate, having the ability of ultimate freedom, flight, and a mediator between heaven and earth. Flight can also be seen as a stand in for an awakening of some sorts which is exactly the metaphorical transformation the boy experiences in "The Juniper Tree". The boy began his life as human, and unfortunately ended rather abruptly and in no means naturally. The boys transformation into an animal that represents "freedom" is by no means surprising as he escapes and begins setting his plan of revenge into motion. By punishing the wicked stepmother, he "earns" his life back as a human being, never getting lost in the momentary transformation of becoming a bird. Birds often beautiful and representing freedom, can also bring a sense of impending doom, black or white. As we have read in Cinderella and Snow White, the hero/heroine continues to suffer until the stepmother's evil regime comes to an end. Cinderella was protected by doves, and they ended up pecking her stepsisters eyes out at the conclusion of the story. Serving as protection for the good, as they took Cinderella under their wing and made her beautiful for the ball, were Snow White's best friends and aided her during dark times, while also serving as a mediary of existences for the boy in the Juniper Tree.

The Juniper Tree's "beautiful" song (and thoughts on transformations)

2010-02-10T22:39:00.002-06:00

We've seen a lot of examples of transformation from animal to human on film so far, most of which haven't come off very well in practice (they work better in imagination). It's interesting that the two animal metamorpheses we're looking at this week (if you count today's film as one of those) involved food in some fashion. The people were turned into gingerbread and the boy was chopped up into a stew and, as a bird, sat upon a Juniper tree, whose berries caused his birth in the first place. I don't know if there's anything to the food link; it's just something I noticed.

Most of the transformations we've seen have been into animals that aren't really desirable, in my opinion. They don't use lions or tigers or bears (oh my) - the boys are all turned into birds. But they're all incredibly wily in figuring out how to use their position for the best. They make the most of what they've been given.

In reference to the song, can I ask a semi obvious question: Why is that song so beautiful? Every person in the story comments on how beautiful his song is. I don't think that song is beautiful, so maybe they are all referring to his voice? Which would be perhaps saying something about how his voice (his agency) is pure and true, and how innocent children who have been abused by their bad mothers can be beautiful?

The Juniper Tree

2010-02-10T22:35:00.002-06:00

Trying to place the boy from the Juniper Tree in a category of human or animal is hard. In some myths or wives tales or religious beliefs (whichever you prefer) there are tales of birds who are the souls of the past; they seem to be the human but in animal form as a means of guidance, protection or fore-warning. In the case of the boy I would assume that the tales would be true, the spirit of the boy is in this bird. I would suggest that the whole belief in reincarnation could be placed within this story along with the myth belief as to why the boy came back as a bird which is interesting in its own right. The song that the bird/boy sings could be an indication of actually being him to his family. Though birds sing many ways this song was specific such that the family knew it was him which was significant for the boy to do in order to get recognized but also I would assume for the story to come full circle. As far as others transformations, this one would be the only one not aided in. He transformed on his own and couldn't transform back to an original "human" though he portrayed qualities of a human. Nevertheless, I feel his being turned into a bird in the first place was aided by a force if not his own yet he has to stay as a bird and not ever return to the human realm.

Murderous Bird

2010-02-10T21:12:00.005-06:00

Obviously the boy in The Juniper Tree does not fall at the extremes of totally human or animal and consequently he lies somewhere in between, but "in between" is a large place. As far as this particular story is concerned I believe he falls much closer to the totally human side of the plane. Not only does he begin his life as human but after he dies and is transformed into a bird he goes about the task - whether knowingly or not - of trying to become human again. If he were more bird than human I think it would be safe to say he would have remained in the form at the conclusion of the story.

To me, the bird embodies the guilt of the mother (though she did not appear overly broken up over the murder of her step-son initially). The song serves as the record of her misdeed and consequently she is tormented by it.

This particular transformation is interesting to me because unlike many fairy tales the transformation occurs so that the boy can apparently seek revenge on his stepmother. He is given a second chance at life to punish his stepmother and then he is rewarded with the completion of his transformation cycle. Also, the transformation in a lot of other stories is less literal, such as in Donkeyskin where the girl remains a girl the entire story but her status in the kingdoms changes.

As to the reasoning behind the boy's resurrection, well, why not? I've never known a fairy tale to be bound by the laws of physics and nature that regulate our own world, so if a boy wants to come back to to life as a bird and murder his grandmother, so be it.

Sorry if this is short or not particularly insightful, I just got my splint off today and my hand is still really stiff. And though the nerve damage in my hand is not permanent, it will take about 18 months for me to regain full mobility and feeling in it, so typing is still a little tough.

Also, has anybody seen that movie The Crow with Brandon Lee (Bruce Lee's son)? Similar idea, check it out.

The Juniper Tree and the Law of Conservation of Mass

2010-02-10T20:44:00.002-06:00

The law of conservation of mass states that mass is neither created nor destroyed in any ordinary chemical reaction.

One of the most puzzling aspects of "The Juniper Tree" is the boy’s transformation from human to animal and back to human, especially since the change to bird form and the return to human form both result in the brother breaking the law of conservation of mass. Granted, the folk fairy tale is allowed to take liberties with the natural order of things, but because I wonder where on the scale of human to bird the brother fits, I recall this particular law. As a result of this law, the answer would be that the boy dies forever and for always when his stepmother decapitates him with the lid of the trunk and that his corpse would be the physical mass left over, as mass is not destroyed (just separated). On the other hand, the bird’s appearance and the boy’s reappearance occur in puffs of smoke and flame, indicating that they have been constituted out of thin air. Again, the law of conservation of mass would beg to differ.

By the statutes of this law, the boy was always human and will always be human, dead or alive. Although the folk fairy tale permits his soul to reappear in bird form and, later, in a renewed human body, he could never be more than human, as he was created (and destroyed).

However, I am forgetting that this law states that “mass is neither created nor destroyed” in any ordinary chemical reaction. The situation presented in "The Juniper Tree" is clearly not “ordinary.” I do not know how human nor how bird he is, then. If I had to postulate, I would say that the boy as a being is tied more to his soul than to any sentient human or animal shell. In that case, it would be true that his soul is neither “created nor destroyed” and lives on, although the physical shell dies or transforms. (But can a “soul” count under the statutes of the law of conservation of mass?)

Thoughts?

The Juniper Tree

2010-02-10T19:07:00.002-06:00

The Juniper Tree employs a common motif found in fairy tales: the transformation of a human into an animal (in this case a bird). However, The Juniper Tree also includes the transformation of the bird back into human form, which is an aspect that not all fairy tale transformations include. Leading up to this, a boy is killed by his stepmother, who then tries to blame her daughter and makes her swear not to tell anyone. Doing what any person trying to hide a dead body would do, the stepmother chops up the boy and makes a stew out of it for the father to eat. The daughter, Marlene, then buries the boy's bones beneath a juniper tree. At this moment, the tree starts moving to and fro and, with a puff of smoke, a bird flies out of the tree. The bird then enchants a goldsmith, a shoemaker, and a miller with his beautiful song recounting his (the boy's) death and receives a gold chain, a pair of red shoes, and a millstone. Upon receiving his prizes, the bird flies back and sings the same song to his family, all of whom are enchanted by it except for the stepmother. Each member of the family comes out one at a time to hear the song, which prompts the bird to give the gold chain to the father and the shoes to the daughter. Once the stepmother comes out, the bird graciously gives her the millstone, which comes crashing down on her and killing her. The boy then appeared at the site of the boulder impact and the family, like any good fairy tale family, does not question the events and goes back inside to eat together happily.

I think that Son 2.0 is primarily human, but his animal side can't be discounted either. Unlike other fairy tales where a human is changed into an animal and changed back, this character was killed (pretty definitively at that unless decapitations aren't a surefire way of killing someone anymore) and then resurrected as a bird. It's not that it would be illogical for this new son to be entirely human because logic doesn't really have a place in fairy tales. Rather, the fact that Son 2.0 originally came from a bird and not his first human form can't be ignored.

His song and his plot to gather the items necessary to lure out his family and kill his stepmother further suggest that Son 2.0 are primarily human. It is not entirely implausible to give higher reasoning skills to an animal in a fairy tale, but it is more of a human characteristic considering how many fairy tales assert that humans are better than animals.

Son 2.0 can come back from the dead for the exact same reason the bird can sing a song that its listeners can not only understand, but be enchanted by; for the same reason that the same bird can carry a milestone big enough to crush a woman; for the same reason that the juniper tree can clap its branches together and produce a flame and smoke without erupting in flames itself:

...it's a fairy tale, anything is possible.

More than meets the eye

2010-02-10T18:16:00.003-06:00

In a lot of the stories we've read--Hans the Hedgehog comes to mind--a character is transformed until he completes a task, be it finding someone to love him in his hideous form or in the case of The Juniper Tree, vanquishing his evil step-mother. I view the brother's transformation as a consequence of his father marrying the wrong type of woman. This needs to be put right before their family life can continue as normal.

Thus I do not think the brother ever truly dies. The bird is a vehicle of escape, one of flight. The story reminds me in a way of Where The Wild Things Are in that the boy has to escape a family situation he finds disagreeable. His step-mother is cruel to him so he wishes to turn to a bird and get away. In a fairy tale land, he can do so. In a fairy tale land, his father finally sees how awful his new wife is and she gets her comeuppance by having a rock dropped on her head.

In that sense, to me the boy is all human. The bird transformation is merely metaphoric. He can only maintain his normal form when his family situation has become normal and stable.

Transformation in the The Juniper Tree

2010-02-10T18:15:00.001-06:00

The transformation in The Juniper Tree is very interesting. As the story goes, the stepmother kills the stepson, convinces her daughter that it was her fault, and then chops him up and serves him for dinner. The little girl feels sorry for him and gathers his bones in a silk cloth and takes him to the Juniper tree to lay him to rest. At that moment the tree begins to move with life and smoke mixed with flames give rise to a singing bird. Interestingly, the boy’s spirit enters the tree and bird not because he is has been forced into the transformation by a witch’s curse, but rather uses the transformation as a vehicle to avenge his death. Once he has become he bird he visits a goldsmith, shoemaker and mill to get the necessary tools for his plan. (Which he acquires by singing once, and then requiring payment for the second song.) Again he sings to lure the family out of their home to the tree, and gives the father a gold chain, the daughter red shoes, and kills the stepmother with a millstone. Then he is suddenly transformed back into a boy and the three live happily ever after.

I think that in this case the bird falls more on the human spectrum than animal, even though he is trapped in an animal’s body. This is because he uses the transformation to get revenge for the stepmother’s horrible act and reward the father and sister. Normally I feel like transformations are used as a mechanism for escape (for example, the princess and Roland in Sweetheart Roland) or is the result of a curse (for the ravens in the Seven Ravens or swans in The Six Swans). I also think that the bird’s most powerful tool is his song. He uses it to get the chain, shoes and millstone, and to lure the family out of the house. It is also beautiful to listen to everyone but the stepmother who harmed him (to her it sounds like a storm).

On a complete side note, isn’t it interesting that in the sixth month of pregnancy the fetus is described as a large and firm fruit, and then the stepmother kills the boy while he reaches for a fruit? –It may be insignificant but it is an interesting subtle foreshadowing.

Transformation in the Juniper Tree

2010-02-10T18:04:00.002-06:00

The premise of The Juniper Tree is, to put it bluntly, bizarre. In the tale, we find a wicked stepmother who devises a twisted, perverse scheme to kill her stepchild: first, she chops his head off, Guillotine-style, and then stirs his dismembered body parts into a stew, which she proceeds to serve to the unsuspecting family at suppertime. It’s like a bad family drama with a little Silence of the Lambs mixed in.

One of the most intriguing developments in the tale involves the reincarnation of the dead stepchild into an exquisite, mystical bird. Birds emerge as common tenants of classic folklore—time and time again, sons are transformed into ravens or swans or black crows. In this sense, then, the boy’s magical rebirth into a bird is nothing surprising. What is surprising, however, is that the boy seems to retain a good deal of agency in his bird form. Unlike other fairy tale transformations—in which the victim of transformation becomes passive, exiled to some unspecified, enchanted imprisonment where he or she is utterly powerless to change their condition—the boy in The Juniper Tree evolves into something of a hybrid bird species, a powerful juxtaposition of his human and bird beings.

Consider The Seven Ravens. In this tale, a father’s curse transforms his seven sons into ravens, and the birds are banished to confinement in a mountain. The sons do regain their human forms eventually, but only because their sister intervenes on their behalf. Let’s contrast this scenario to The Juniper Tree. Rather than passively waiting to be saved, the boy in this story mobilizes into action and sheds his bird persona strictly through his own craft and wit. In a cleverly designed scheme, the bird-boy charms several merchants with his beautiful song into donating certain valuables to him. He then travels back to his former home and drops one of his gifts, a millstone, on the malicious stepmother’s head, crushing her to death. In this way, we see the bird of the Juniper Tree as an autonomous creature, capable of employing intelligence to exact revenge and resume human form.

The Birds and The Boys

2010-02-10T17:59:00.003-06:00

As we have discussed in class, magic, fantastical elements, and the human interaction with nature play a key part in the characterization of fairy tales. The transformation stories that we read 2 weeks ago as well as the Juniper Tree exemplify these three key elements of fairy tales. In both stories, boys are cursed and transformed into birds. However, the types of transformation are significant. In the stories such as the "Seven Ravens" and the "Twelve Brothers," the boys are transformed while they are living as a result of some magical element such as a wicked witch or a malicious wish. In these stories the boys are more animalistic than the Juniper Tree transformation. The boys cannot communicate with humans, however they clearly maintain their humanistic morals and thoughts.
Conversly, in the Juniper Tree story, the boy is transformed into a bird only after he is dead. The transformation, many people would argue, represents a reincarnation or afterlife. I believe this transformation represents the middle ground between death and life- the boy cannot die an unjustified and unavenged death. I believe this speaks to the supposed purity of children and the sense that children should not die a wrongful death (I realize this may be a stretch). Therefore, the boy is reincarnated to a bird like exterior, but maintains his human interior. I dont think he is purely animal or human- he is a mixture of both (animal exterior and human interior). That is one of the advantages of using fantasy and magic in fairy tales- anything is fair game. The song the bird sings represents this hybrid of bird and boy. In the other tales, the birds were unable to communicate with humans. I think the fact that the bird in the Juniper Tree can communicate with humans demonstrates his human like qualities. For one of the main characteristics of a humans is their ability to communicate with one another.
The fact that the boy comes back from the dead, only after the malicious step mother who wronged him in the first place, represents the righteousness of justice. When justice is served, the wrong doings of the accused is made right. The boy comes back to life because he was not meant to die in the first place and when the step mother dies, she takes his place in the afterlife. And in fairy tales authors can bring people back from the dead- they can do whatever they want.

The Juniper Tree

2010-02-10T16:57:00.002-06:00

While the transformation in "The Juniper Tree" is important, it’s hard to comprehend in terms of the purpose it is supposed to serve. I find myself wondering why the boy specifically changed into a bird, as opposed to some other animal, or why the little boy only communicated through song and only with strangers, as opposed to his father or sister. That said, I’m not exactly sure how I feel about the boy being totally human or totally animal. In my opinion, he seems to fall more towards totally human on the scale, because his animal form is only temporary. While he physically loses his human shape, he can still reason and sing.

While the boy was a bird, he had to sing his beautiful song in order to get humans to listen and obtain the necessary materials through bargaining to get his revenge and become human again. As we know, the little bird sang his song twice in exchange for a golden chain from the goldsmith, a pair of red shoes from the shoemaker, and a millstone from the miller. In the end, the bird gives the red shoes to his sister Marlene, the golden chain to his father, and he drops the millstone on the stepmother’s head to kill her. It is interesting that the humans never pay attention to the words in the bird’s song; instead, they simply notice his pleasing voice. The little boy is only able to come back from the dead once he gets his revenge and kills the evil stepmother. Thus, the “spell”, if it can be considered one, is broken and the little boy changes from a bird back to a human.

In comparison with other transformations, it is similar in the fact that a certain spell must be broken in order for the animal to revert back to its previous human form. For instance, in "The Twelve Brothers", the brothers can only be changed back from ravens to humans if their sister is silent for seven years, and only then will the spell be broken. In addition, because this person’s life was taken and therefore he or she temporarily becomes an animal, another life must be exchanged so that the animal can live again as a human. This exchange can be seen in "Brother and Sister", when the brother, who had previously been turned into a fawn by his evil stepmother, became human again after the king issued the stepmother's execution. Likewise, in "The Jupiter Tree", the little boy drops the millstone on the evil stepmother’s head, similar to how she slammed his head against the chest, and as she dies he instantly becomes human again. He then lives happily ever after with his father and sister.

Plus ce différence, plus ce MEME chose: How Zipes Indirectly Connects Darnton and Bettelheim

2010-02-03T22:56:00.006-06:00

Two weeks ago, I thought the difference between Robert Darnton’s and Bruno Bettelheim’s arguments would be perpetually unsolvable. I saw their works as two sides of the same coin, although they (and Darnton, especially) saw their own works as completely irreconcilable. However, while reading “What Makes a Repulsive Frog So Appealing” by Jack Zipes, I discovered a way that the original two arguments can be approached simultaneously.

I found the thesis of Zipes’ argument to be “I would like to suggest that an evolutionary psychological approach might be able to provide a method for interpreting ‘The Frog Prince’ (and other classical tales) that not only sheds greater light on the conflicts within the Grimms’ text but also enables us to comprehend why and how the tale has retained its relevance throughout the world, has become a meme [“defined as a cultural artifact that acts as a cultural replicator or cultural adaptor that manages to inhabit our brains. It becomes so memorable and relevant that we store it and pass it on to others” (Zipes 110)], and continues to exercise its memetic force today” (117).

As you recall, Robert Darnton is invested in an anthropological way of extracting historical and cultural information based on the oral tradition of peasants’ recounting of folk tales. On the flip side, Bruno Bettelheim depends on psychoanalysis in order to document how fairy tales – and “our cultural heritage” (Bettelheim 269)” – shape the imaginations and self-importance of children. When Jack Zipes interprets how certain folk fairy tales stick with readers/listeners because they “enable us to comprehend our strategies and to learn how to court and mate” (Zipes 117), this angle blends the cultural coding of Darnton’s work while simultaneously involving the mind – wondering specifically how the human mind retains the information of a folk tale better than others and puts this information to work in its cultural context. In this way, Zipes’ argument indirectly finds the point where Darnton’s and Bettelheim’s work merge. The meme becomes the cross-section where it is useful to ponder the psychology of how people come to latch onto a particular meme and to analyze what the use of the meme then says about the user’s anthropological context.

Zipes goes on to provide some psychoanalytic interpretation of the motifs of golden rings and phallic frogs, but he never loses sight of what these motifs – when put to use – begin to say about a culture’s interests, thoughts, fears, and practices. As I said before, are Bettelheim’s and Darnton’s respective arguments not two sides of the same coin? With the introduction of Zipes’ work, I think they are closer to the same side than ever before.

Fairy Tales remixed

2010-02-03T22:51:00.003-06:00

I wanted to take this time to think of how my perception of fairy tales is now changed or maybe the better word is remixed. The definition of remix on definition.com is to mix again and for me reading all the original fairy tales is leading me to conclude that "no matter how your heart is grieving, if you keep on believing; the dream that you wish will come true" is now flipped on its head to not wanting to dream in that "fairy tale" way anymore. Although I always figured that dreaming is just that I guess I never figured that the original versions would be so blunt. However they have been remixed in my eyes such that I am growing and so are the stories for me. The fairy tales that I knew as a child are for children as well modified and accepted in our present societal norms. The fairy tales I am discovering now are real which is ironic because it is a fairy tale yet they have more of a human aspect of reward and punishment that is suited for a land far away. Hence for me a remix of sort; a better mixture of what I now believe in and what could have happened once upon a time.

I'm not buying it...

2010-02-03T22:29:00.000-06:00

The Aarne-Thompson Classification system brings many elements into question when examining the reasoning for the continuing emergence of the same folktales with the same underlying meaning on various parts of the planet. It has been explained as the result of the subconscious motivations of all human beings as we supposedly all think alike, as well as the constant migration of people to different parts of the world. However, just because the stories are repeated in various parts of the world does not answer the question as to why they remain so popular. If one takes a broader perspective and thinks about how we are all unique in our own way in terms of looks, genetic make-up, and thought processes, then how do we all know what is right from wrong? A more logical thought would be that we have been conditioned from the moment we were born to accept certain moral and cultural ideals; arguably from a patriarchal society which has continued to push a gender, social, and racial hierarchy as long as history has been recorded. This leads to the possibility of the enactment of a hidden agenda by the patriarchs who have ruled society for ages opposed to a non-scientific conclusion of us all just happening to think the same. It is difficult to believe everyone imagines the world to be one way as I myself do not necessarily think in these terms. There is no way I would ever be caught dead remaining silent for an extended period of time in order to appease my significant other (male), ever. This simple example forces one to investigate the validity of the reasoning that has been presented to the general public (by males of course). Considering an alternative perspective may lead one to the possibility of exposing a conspiracy that has successfully manipulated popular culture into denouncing activities that threaten patriarchal control for thousands of years on end.

Crushed hand

2010-02-03T22:16:00.000-06:00

Nerve damage + painkillers = no blog

Evolution of "The Princess and the Frog"

2010-02-03T22:09:00.004-06:00

Today in class (but also throughout the semester) we've talked about how different societies adapt the fairy tales to make sense to them in their time or to fit their culture. We don't know about a lot of these changes, because being oral stories, their changing isn't documented. But as these big compilations have been gathered and stories have become classified, it's easier to track what motifs have been added or changed and how the stories continue to adapt to modern times. We looked at this a lot with Cinderella, from the early written versions to the first film adaptation to the modern Hillary Duff version. I want to try to explore how the Princess and the Frog has adapted and changed over time. So if you want to comment with things you find online or think about, that'd be great!

I think my only other "Princess and the Frog" experience outside reading the fairy tale in our book and the movie (which is still playing at one theater in Nashville -- 100 Oaks -- if you haven't seen it yet) was a similar type story that I think would fall into this category because of some similar motifs: the ugly frog who turns into a prince when the princess kisses him ("The Frog Prince"). I remember seeing this in movie form when I was still able to count my age on one hand from a tape we checked out from the library. It's similar to the story in our book, only now there's kissing, which is also in the Disney version.

The wikipedia site for "The Princess and the Frog" movie says it's "a 2009 American animated family film loosely based on E. D. Baker's novel The Frog Princess, which was in turn inspired by the Grimm brothers' fairy tale "The Frog Prince"." (Or "The Frog King," I guess.) I know I read another post where someone said they hadn't ever been exposed to this story, but haven't you kinda heard the kissing the frog prince story? Or some version of a frog that's a prince that the princess needs to stay faithful to or make some sacrifice to transform back into a prince? Disney put a little twist on that, but the general idea is still there. Sometime, though, between the story we read and the versions we have today, kissing was added. Like someone said today in class about the bird metamorpheses, it's a sacrifice and a gender role the woman has to take upon herself to transform the man back into human form. She does not change them back through any big shows of valour, but simply through doing womanly things.

Does Disney change that up, though? Tiana has a lot more character development than most fairy tale (and Disney) princesses. What new motifs are added? Are they from other fairy tales (like the idea of a magical helper) or from current American values (like New Orleans and Tiana being the first African-American princess)? What old ones stay the same? And why is music such an important part of Disney fairy tale movies???

I am one of those people...

2010-02-03T21:47:00.002-06:00

I want to use this week's blog post to comment on a point that has been brought up multiple times already this semester in order to hopefully allow me to atone for my sins. Up until sophomore year here at Vanderbilt, I was under the impression that Disney was the originator for stories like Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, etc. Like most kids of my generation (and past generations I'm sure), I grew up to these stories as told by Disney. There really was never any reason for me to question whether or not they were authentically Disney. I lived under this veil of unquestioned Disney loyalty until ENGL 118W sophomore year when I read the Grimms' version of "Cinderella" and my childhood was shattered before my very eyes (not really, but I'm just trying to liven this post up a little bit).

Anyway, this brings me to the apparent grudge Zipes has against Walt Disney for his supposed monopoly on these classic fairy tales in America (and perhaps worldwide). Politically, I can understand where this is coming from given Zipes's Marxist beliefs and Walt Disney's domestic conservative beliefs; the two clearly can't coexist and I won't argue whether or not one is right. What I do want to comment on is that Zipes is taking the whole issue WAY too far. Saying that Disney has a "stranglehold" on these fairy tales and that he is imposing his domestic values is really trying to force an issue more than anything else. Disney's versions are so popular because they are entertaining for all viewers (and yes he was a successful businessman, but that's beside the point). Yes Disney altered previous versions of these stories to fit what he deemed to be both entertaining and appropriate; there really is no denying that after reading these earlier versions. However, both of these primary issues that Zipes has with what Disney has done to these classic tales can be applied to the Grimms' versions. They also altered previous versions of the stories to be both entertaining and appropriate for their audience. Disney may have censored more by our standards, but he did so with the same intentions as the Brothers Grimm. Because of the positive influence Disney movies had on my childhood and because of over-analytical people like Zipes who were apparently deprived of a fun childhood, I am not ashamed to admit that I am one of those people that naturally associates Disney with a lot of these fairy tales.

Casual Thoughts on Zipes and My Fairy Tales Experience

2010-02-03T18:29:00.001-06:00

It may be hard to believe, but I did not grow up with the “Frog Prince” fairy tale told to me. In fact before this class, I have never owned a book of fairy tales! My exposure to fairy tales came from the tales my mom would tell me (Hispanic versions of The Little Red Riding Hood in particular) and Disney videocassettes. This is why Zipes’ article, “What Makes a Repulsive Frog So Appealing: Memetics and Fairy Tales,” appealed to me. Zipes explains that motifs can become so ingrained in the human mind that they are informative about subconscious cultural actions. He explains that fairy tales, “reveal very important factors about our mind, memes and human behavior.” He uses “The Frog Prince” as his vehicle to argue the sexual implications of some fairy tales. In particular he is arguing that this tale type teaches us about mating strategies and courting practices. This thought really struck me. Before reading the assigned tales, I had no previous conceptions of the story, however, I have always known of the enchanted frog and his desire for a kiss from a princess to return to human form motif. (In fact the first time I ever saw this in action was in Sherk!)I guess I am living proof of part of his argument!

The hidden, or not so hidden sexuality- however you want to look at it, in the “The Frog Prince” surprised me. I may be naïve or just plain dense, but before this argument suggested to me the incorporation of sexuality and courting practices I did not make that connection. It is almost frightening to me that I have so blindly accepted Disney as the source of fairy tales and I have never before bothered the values imposed upon me. My fairy tale paradigm has already been rocked. I can only except the the rest of the semester will challenge my understanding of fairy tales so much that I will never look at them the same way again.

Walt Disney and his "Fairy Tales"

2010-02-03T17:51:00.003-06:00

I wanted to write my blog on the Zypes article "Breaking the Disney Spell." As a typical American girl, I loved Disney movies as a kid- all of them. I sang along with the songs and imagined what it would be like to be a Disney princess. I always knew the stories were imaginary and the damsel in distress who ends up marrying a prince plot probably would not happen- even though I am still holding out for Prince William. Being a Disney movie fan, I found Zypes' article very intriguing. I had always accepted what Disney put forth in his films as the "correct" version of the well- known tale. Perhaps that is why Zypes argues that Disney presents film in a way in which the viewer does not question what he or she is watching; it is a "one-dimensional portrayal." Zypes argues that Disney has "cast a spell" on most of the modern world with his animation of the fairy tale. Disney, according to Zypes, has censored the stories to appeal to a younger, more naive audience. Disney created his versions of the fairy tale with his past and life in mind. He struggled at a young age, as do most of the protagonists in the films. Tiana in "Princess and the Frog" has an incredible work ethic and works toward her dream of owning her own restaurant. Cinderella is oppressed by her evil stepmother and stepsisters. Snow White has a witch who is ready to poison her.

Perhaps Zypes is right. Disney may have taken the "classic" fairy tales and censored and warped them until they are virtually unrecognizable to those who originally told them. Would they be shocked to hear that Cinderella didnt voluntarily cut off parts of their foot in order to fit into the glass slipper? Maybe. However, it seems to me that Zypes is overly critical of Disney and his masterpieces of animation. They are timeless. He must have done something right. Zypes believes that Disney animated movies that made people falsely optimistic and have a Utopian view on life. I think Disney was a businessman and he was trying to be the most successful person in his field- which happened to be animation. He wanted to sell movie tickets. People would not have gone to the movies to watch girls get their head cut off or be pursued by their father. During the 1950's, when Disney had his first "hit" with Cinderella, the nuclear family was the most important aspect of most people's lives. The women were domestic and the men provided financial stability. Disney needed to create movies that parents would want to take their kids to, and those were not the Brothers Grimm stories. I think Zypes was reading too far into Disney's work.

Also, I dont completely understand why there seems to be such an issue with Disney creating movies with happy endings and love. Let's be honest, most people want to find someone they love to spend the rest of their life with- what is so wrong with that? Will it be a prince? Probably not. Even so, I dont see a problem in having an ending with the protagonist finding love. It is true some people wont find love or get married, but whats wrong with hoping? What's wrong with working towards a "happy ending." If the world was full of cynical people who don't believe they can achieve things they want to achieve, it would be a much worse place to live. Hope is a powerful thing and I think Disney movies help instill the hope and optimism kids need in order to persevere through obstacles and hopefully attain their goals (maybe not all but a few). I may be completely naive but I still think that the overall messages of Disney movies hold true.

Some Random Thoughts about "The Frog Prince"

2010-02-03T14:54:00.003-06:00

I enjoyed reading Zipes’ article “What Makes a Repulsive Frog So Appealing” because it offered an extremely thorough analysis of a fairy tale we all know well: “The Frog Prince”. I feel like most children in the Western world have heard this story at least once during their childhood. Zipes focuses on why this particular story has been told and also modified over many years, placing a strong emphasis on its themes of mating, love, and the search for one’s identity.

Personally, I remembering hearing this story when I was younger and had never seriously considered its true meaning and moral. I simply thought that a young girl stumbled upon an ugly frog one day, who told her that he was really a prince and that the only way to break the spell was to kiss him. Therefore, the girl kisses the frog, and he immediately turns into a handsome prince and the two live happily ever after. Honestly, I never thought about the main argument that Zipes makes about the frog choosing the princess as his mate and how the story is intended to show courting and mating strategies. Zipes believes that this story is a meme, which he explains is a term used to describe something that becomes well known and relevant to humans or a particular culture through the process of storing the knowledge and later passing it on to others.

Because this tale has been told and retold, the story has evolved and adapted to fit particular cultures. Like we discussed before, often fairy tales will change to address the problems of a particular culture or time period, thus making the story more relatable and memorable. Zipes argues that it is in this way that tales like “The Frog Prince” have become memes and will continue to be told for years to come. I loved how he discussed numerous different versions of the story and how the tales adopted new modern ideas, like the prince’s search for identity taking precedence over his finding a mate, over the years. His examples were effective in that we could see the changes taking place, like the gender reversal or the change to make the story more kid-friendly. I have to say my favorite story that made me actually laugh out loud was “The Horned Toad Prince”, about the cowgirl that lost her sombrero and had to make a deal with a horned toad in order to get it back.

One final note: Every time I think of this tale, I think of Keane’s song, “The Frog Prince”. The song opens with, “An old fairy tale told me / the simple heart will be prized again. / A toad will be our king / and ugly ogres are heroes.”

I’m not really sure what Keane intended for listeners to get out of this song (I still love it though!), so if any of you are familiar with it, what are you thoughts?!

Here is the best live version I could find of Keane's song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLbERo9wJDw

When Wishing Still Helped

2010-02-03T12:24:00.002-06:00

What interests me about Zipes' article, "What Makes a Repulsive Frog So Appealing: Memetics and Fairy Tales" is how it interacts with Disney's "The Princess and The Frog". Zipes spends the early part of his essay discussing how the Frog Prince story evolved throughout the Grimms' collections. I'd argue that the "The Princess and The Frog" is that story evolved to modern times. If the Frog Prince is interested in partichal control and rebellion against it, then "The Princess and The Frog" is interested in being a self-made man (or woman) while maintaining that feeling of rebelling. Truly American, no?

Walt would be proud of how his company has continued to craft its morals to attract a larger audience. Instead of being a princess, Tiana is poor, having to work menial jobs to support herself. What audience member wouldn't want to see some of themselves in that description I just gave?

Instead of having a strong father figure who knows best, Tiana's father is dead. She must fend for herself. She's tough. She's independent. She works hard. Yet she isn't happy. She is going to lose the building she'd hoped to open her resturant. Life isn't fair. Who can't relate to that?

In true Disney fashion, the only way for Tiana to be happy is fall in love and get married. However, she's the one who must be transformed from a tough cookie into a more tolerant girly-girl. Thus it makes sense that when she kisses the frog, she is turned into "ugly beast," as Zipes calls it, as well.

Prince Naveed is not the focus of the story. Sure, he changes too. But the drama and the pay-off of the film come from Tiana allowing someone to help her. That's when she gets what she wants. That's how she is able to rebel against the status quo. Only by joining the upper-class by marrying Naveed can she best the rich and mighty she used to serve. She needs Naveed's money (and handywork as the montage shows) to complete the resturant. No way she can do it on her own! Everything ends happily. Down in New Orleans...blah blah blah.

Maybe I am alone in this but I enjoyed the old Tiana more, the one who didn't take crap from anyone. She deserved a man that could handle her as she was, rather than changing onto the typical Disney princess. Productive, hard working, beautiful, blessed with good fortune. Sounds like Cinderalla to me. And that's a shame. The MRS degree is not the most worthwhile thing in the world and Disney should stop acting like it is.

In Defense of the "Disney Spell"

2010-02-01T22:40:00.002-06:00

When I watch any classic Disney film, the experience is steeped in nostalgia. Almost immediately, I am whisked back to the long-forgotten sunny afternoons of my childhood, becoming, once again, an overall-clad little girl sitting cross-legged in front of the T.V. and staring at the fantastical images lighting up the screen with wide-eyed enchantment—images of fairy godmothers and flying carpets and even a lovable salt shaker who sings and dances.

Disney films have come to shape our modern conception of fairy tales. Mention of the tale Cinderella rarely conjures an image of Perrault’s oppressed wretch Donkeyskin, who fled home to escape her father’s incestuous advances. Rather, we envision Disney’s creation—the blond, beautiful woman who blissfully sweeps dust while serenading a troop of house-mice. Indeed, Disney has, in many ways, monopolized the fairy tale genre. In his critical essay Breaking the Disney Spell, Jack Zipes deems the pervasiveness of Disney films a cultural atrocity, writing:

“The great ‘magic’ of the Disney spell is that he animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen.”

One of Zipe’s biggest critiques, among others (and there are many), is that Disney appropriates the fairy tales and injects his “all-American” morals and values into them. By projecting his idealistic vision onto the screen for filmgoers across the nation to watch and ingest, Zipe claims that Disney, in effect, insults the historical integrity of the folklore tradition, deceiving audiences with a highly-stylized, utopian “illusion.”

But what’s the harm in a little idealism? What’s so bad about, to adopt the cliché, “daring to dream?” To me, Disney movies were much more than a mere childhood diversion, something to entertain all those happy overall-wearing days. It was Disney, after all, who instilled me with a capacity for wonder, who cultivated my imagination, who awakened my creativity. It was Disney who taught me to wish upon a star, to believe in true love. It was Disney, above all, who inspired me to dream. Yes, such notions may be considered naïve, the product of a childish mind. But inevitably, there comes that fateful day when a child is not a child anymore and he discovers that the real world doesn’t always resembles Disney’s real world—discovers that, sometimes, the bad guys prevail and that the fairy godmother doesn’t always appear. And it’s okay to preserve a little bit of that long-lost child somewhere deep inside of you, to dream the Disney dream. If Zipes had his way and children’s movies were produced with a healthy dose of realism, we’d be breeding a generation of cynics and skeptics who lack the ability to imagine and dream and think big.

"Cinderella" and "Donkeyskin"

2010-01-27T23:43:00.001-06:00

When first reflecting on “Cinderella” and “Donkeyskin”, I would have agreed with Tatar when she writes,

The two narratives encoded in the tale-type index seem virtually unrelated at first glance. The plots of “Cinderella” stories are driven by the anxious jealousy of biological mothers and stepmothers who subject the heroine to one ordeal of domestic drudgery after another; the plots of “Catskin” tales are fueled by the sexual desire of fathers, whose unseemly behavior drives their daughters from home (Tatar 102).

The two stories seem to have different overarching themes. In “Cinderella”, she must triumph over servitude and her cruel stepmother, while in “Donkeyskin” the daughter must triumph over her incestuous father and his desires. However, there are many parallels between the two stories that can be observed and that suggest the two stories can be studied together. “Cinderella” is like the toned down children’s version of “Donkeyskin”. There are countless versions of both tales, but “Cinderella” has definitely been told more frequently than “Donkeyskin”, most likely due to the theme of incest in “Donkeyskin”.

Although these two stories have evolved and changed over many years, several ideas have remained the same. Both tales focus on the idea of good ultimately overcoming evil because both Cinderella and Donkeyskin are girls being forced to comply with a higher authority figure (a stepmother and a father) but they choose to rise above the oppression to find happiness. Cinderella wins the handsome prince’s heart and is no longer under her stepmother’s command, while Donkeyskin runs away from her father and falls in love with a foreign prince. Donkeyskin’s father even attends the wedding once he comes to his senses and realizes the madness of his wish to marry his daughter. In both stories, the girls must disguise their true selves and work as servants. Both Cinderella and Donkeyskin have mothers that are dead, and their fathers play different roles. In both the Grimms’ version and Charles Perrault’s version of “Cinderella”, the father has no control over the stepmother, and therefore cannot fight for Cinderella. In “Donkeyskin”, the father holds all the power and is determined to do whatever it takes to marry his own daughter. Also, both Cinderella and Donkeyskin must prove to be the right woman by either trying on a glass slipper or a ring, both of which fell into the hands of their respective princes at one point in the story. I liked how both Perrault’s “Cinderella” and “Donkeyskin” directly stated the moral of the tale and what Perrault intended for the reader to learn from the story. He writes, “…this story [“Donkeyskin”] teaches children that it is better to expose yourself to harsh adversity than to neglect your duty. Virtue may sometimes seem ill-fated, but it is always crowned with success” (Perrault 116). Likewise, one version of “Donkeyskin” that I read is the Italian version called “The She-Bear, which ends with the moral, “Those who do good may expect good in return” (http://www.pitt.edu/%7Edash/type0510b.html#basile).

Ultimately, I agree with Tatar that “Cinderella” and “Donkeyskin” should be studied together because there are enough similarities to relate the two, but there are also subtle differences to offer good comparisons between the two stories.

Should "Cinderella" and "Donkeyskin" Be Read Together?

2010-01-27T23:36:00.003-06:00

I strongly believe that the “Cinderella” and “Donkeyskin” tales should be read together. Although the major plot points that run through every version of the “Cinderella” tale differ in some important ways from those that wind through every version of the “Donkeyskin” tale (respectively – a cruel stepmother and stepsisters degrade a rich man or king’s pitiful daughter versus an amorous father and king motivates his young daughter to run away), I think reading one off of the other provides compelling material to fill in the gaps. Again, the “Donkeyskin” tales provide a potentially incestuous relationship as the primary motivation (cause) for the effect of the princess running away from her father. If we deliberate as to why the father is such a weak figure in the “Cinderella” tales, we could extrapolate from his typical motivations from the “Donkeyskin” tales and assume that “Cinderella” is, in effect, a “cleaned-up” version of the “Donkeyskin” tales. Indeed, as Maria Tatar points out (regarding the work of Marian Cox), many variants of the “Cinderella” narrative actually incorporate a father with incest on the brain as a plot point.

But to compare the two types of tales is perhaps the best way to see how they work for and against each other. Maria Tatar rightly notes that

the two narratives encoded in the tale-type index seem virtually unrelated at first glance. The plots of ‘Cinderella’ stories are driven by the anxious jealousy of biological mothers and stepmothers who subject the heroine to one ordeal of domestic drudgery after another; the plots of [‘Donkeyskin’] tales are fueled by the sexual desire of fathers, whose unseemly behavior drives their daughters from home. In tales depicting the social persecution of a girl by her stepmother, the central focus comes to rest on the unbearable family situation produced by a father’s remarriage… In tales depicting erotic persecution of a daughter by her father, stepmothers and their daughters tend to vanish from the central arena of action (Tatar 102-3).

After noting these significant plot points, Tatar rightly asserts, “Yet the father’s desire for his daughter in the second tale type furnishes a powerful motive for a stepmother’s jealous rages and unnatural deed in the first tale type. The two plots can be seen as conveniently dovetailing to produce an intrigue that corresponds to the oedipal fantasies of girls. Psychoanalytic criticism has indeed seen ‘Cinderella’ and [‘Donkeyskin’] as enactments of Oedipal desires, with each tale suppressing one component (love for the father or hatred of the mother) of the Oedipal plot” (Tatar 103).

Honestly, I do not know what more I could say that Tatar did not already make so clear in her introduction to the “Cinderella”/“Donkeyskin” section of The Classic Fairy Tales. I think the oedipal readings are undeniably compelling, and I am disposed to reading the modern-day preference for a wicked stepmother over an incestuous father as reflective of modern inclinations toward patriarchal order and a readership comprised of children. This would be why we hear so little about the “Donkeyskin” tales, as opposed to the extremely popular “Cinderella” stories.

Disney's "Donkeyskin": Coming to a Theater Near You?

2010-01-27T22:56:00.003-06:00

Upon reviewing the blog posts of my fellow group members, it seems apparent that we agree Donkeyskin and Cinderella are closely related fairy tales. Simply put: the basic storyline formula is the same for both Donkeyskin and Cinderella. There are basic plot details that are altered for each story based on the origin and historical background, but that is to be expected. In fact, I would argue that Donkeyskin is closer to some historical versions of Cinderella than Walt Disney's watered down version is to the "originals" but that is an entirely different blog post all together.

As mentioned, both Donkeyskin and Cinderella share some very similar elements. Girl of unrivaled, yet hidden, beauty overcomes her guise of poor appearance caused by either a manipulative older woman or her sexually-assertive father (or both) with the aid of her overseeing (god)mother to marry a dashing prince and live happily ever after. Various parts were added or embellished based on the story teller in order to fit the audience, but the formula remained the same.

The other story I chose to read was the Donkeyskin-esque "Gold Teeth," an Italian version as told by Estella Canziani. In this version, a man is made to give a promise to his dying wife, who has gold teeth, that he will not remarry anyone that does not have gold teeth. For years, the widower lived alone with his daughter, desperate to remarry but unable to find another woman that satisfied the demands of the promise he made to his wife. That is until one day a "well-dressed gentleman" pointed out that such a woman lived in his very house (his daughter...surprise!). The daughter seeks the help of her godmother who suggests she ask for a series of extravagant dresses, to which the father obliges; the last dress of which is dirty gown made of flea skins (plot twist). In the end, the daughter runs away and lives in the disguise of an old lady wearing the flea skin gown, only to have a (somewhat abusive) prince eventually fall in love with and marry her.

Like Perrault's "Donkeyskin" and the Grimms' "Cinderella," "Gold Teeth" follows the same Cinderella fairy tale formula. Dispite the fact that these three stories where written in three different eras in three different regions around Europe, they all have too much in common not to be related. I will say that it could be argued that they are not the same stories entirely, but it is not logical to argue that they shouldn't be studied together. How Donkeyskin got lost in the flurry of Disney remakes is a mystery to me...

Similarities between donkeyskin and Cinderella

2010-01-27T22:34:00.002-06:00

The previous posts have done a great job in summing up some of Tatar’s arguments for why donkeyskin and Cinderella stories should be read together. I want to add some of my own observations as to the similarities between the two. There is the overarching theme of a girl who has been forced to grow up without a mother and abuse (or near abuse) ensues, but of course the type of abuse is very different.

For Cinderella, it is an oppression by her new mother and her new stepsiblings and a lack of a father figure that leads to a physical and verbal abuse, best illustrated in one of my favorite Disney songs:

For the heroine in donkeyskin stories, the abuse (or near-abuse) is sexual and predatory from a very-present father figure. In both cases, unlike in the majority of fairy tales, it takes cunning and quick-thinking abilities to escape the situation (although not without a little bit of help from the world of magic). As Helen Pilinovsky wrote in the “Donkeyskin, Deerskin, Allerleirauh: The Reality of the Fairy Tale,” the secondary reading for the week: “The action which fits the mold of unassertive femininity starts the ball rolling, indirectly causing a series of harmful effects, while the more assertive, independent actions of the daughter are both required and rewarded.”
However, in the extra Cinderella story I read this week (“Cinderella; or, The Little Glass Slipper” by Charles Perrault), I noticed some of the weird incestuous father figure that still lingered in the background. At the ball, right after Cinderella appeared in her beautiful dress, “The king himself, old as he was, could not help watching her, and telling the queen softly that it was a long time since he had seen so beautiful and lovely a creature.” That’s kinda creepy, for lots of reasons. Plus, can you imagine having your husband lean over and whisper into your ear how pretty another woman is? The Cinderella/donkeyskin male figure is shown as perverted or as effeminate, unable to take manly positions which protect his daughter from harm (even if the harm is himself).

I also noticed in the donkeyskin story that the trope of a beautiful girl covered by something ugly was also a commonality. Cinderella is covered by the ashes from the hearth by which she sleeps. The donkeyskin heroine is not only covered with the skin outfit (“It’s Donkeyskin. There’s nothing beautiful about her,” was the answer the prince got when he asked about the nymph (113).) but “her face dirtied with mud” as she traveled (112). These cloaks, as Pilinovsky wrote of the donkeyskin, are not mere coverings:

“The fact that it consists of skins, either from a creature magical in itself, or procured through magical means (as a skin consisting of the fur of a thousand creatures)cannot be ignored: the basic Law of Contagnation (dictating that any given part of a thing carries a connection and a portion of that thing in its entirety), which is a product of both magic and of fairy tales as a whole, dictates that this cloak is more than simply a source of warmth or a method of camouflage.”

The coverings are a magical, transformative disguise that reveals a great deal of inner and outer beauty when removed. A different, though, is Cinderella also has magical coverings that are beautiful, where as the donkeyskin’s magical covering is ugly. Both mask what’s underneath, although Cinderella’s reveals more of her actual nature. Maybe that’s a big difference between the two types of stories, but it’s also a similarity in a way, too, and each type of story reveals layers that reside in the other.

Donkeyskin and Cinderalla: Brothas from Anotha Motha

2010-01-27T22:21:00.005-06:00

It is fairly obvious to me that the two types of stories should be studied concurrently. Though there are many glaring dissimilarities between Donkeyskin and Cinderella fairy tales there are still many aspects that make them seem to be different versions of the same story. As Darnton had noted in his critical essay, historical context is an important lens through which to look at fairy tales and he criticized Bettelheim for having too narrow a focus. I can deduce from this train of logic that if Darnton wants a broad and all-encompassing view of fairy tales one needs to look at historical, cultural and many other influences on the stories to gain a complete understanding of them.

For instance, there are many similarities between the Donkeyskin story in Tatar's book and Joseph Jacobs's Cinder Maid, but I will focus on a few of the major ones. In both stories the father and mother (stepmother in the case of the latter) are equally responsible for the squalid condition of the main character. In Donkeyskin, the mother ignites the incestuous love of her husband by attempting to keep all of his love for herself even in death and the father feels he must marry his daughter, no matter how morally reprehensible a situation it would be. Somewhat similarly, in Cinder Maid the stepmother's scorn and the father's passive submission lead to the character living a squalid life as well.

Next, in both stories there is the outstanding image of the ornate and magnificent three dresses. Besides the repeated idea of things coming in threes as a theme for both stories, the aspect I mean to focus on here are the designs of the three dresses in each story. Specifically, the two sets of dresses are different but they all have one common quality: mirroring of and atunement with nature, which is a very important motif in fairy tales.

Lastly, in both stories, the scorned and destitute main characters are both given a chance to free themselves from that life by marrying a prince. In Donkeyskin a gold ring is used as the fitness test and in Cinder Maid a gold shoe is the deciding factor but the idea behind each is the same: the one girl who fits the famed object will receive the love of a prince and marry him.

There are definitite differences between the two types of stories but the underlying storylines and messages are the same and they share too many qualities for it to be simply coincidental. Consequently, if one takes into account historical and cultural factors, it seems easy to discern that these are retellings of the same story in different times and places. Donkeyskin and Cinderella stories should absolutely be studied together to show how a story can transform relatively drastically over time and places and still keep the same skeleton.

Donkeyskin: Not Exactly Bedtime Story Material

2010-01-27T20:29:00.002-06:00

It is a phenomenon we see time and time again, so frequent that we have become desensitized to its peculiarity: the beautiful young heroine of a classic Disney film, struggling to navigate her fantastical world in the absence of one or both parents. In some films, a cause is attributed to the parent’s absence, such as a recent death; other times, however, the parent is mysteriously missing, no explanation offered as to their whereabouts. The Disney adaptation of the classic fairy tale Cinderella, for example, opens with the melancholy sight of a young Cinderella, weeping beside her father’s deathbed as the darkened figures of her stepmother and stepsisters loom ominously in the shadows. This hardship, in effect, sets the film into motion and drives its various conflicts.

To someone acquainted with the folktale tradition, this tragedy is something of a relief. In killing Cinderella’s father from the get-go, Disney successfully bypasses the uncomfortable paternal tension that ensues in the tale’s traditional variants.

Indeed, the modern Cinderella story as we have come to know it revolves around the evil, atrocious deeds of the wicked stepmother. It is she, the sinister Disney beauty with the volumptuous body and severely-arched eyebrows, who acts as the film’s demonic, dynamic agent of evil. In spite of ourselves, we delight in her cruel designs, for they imbue the plot with suspense and breathless anticipation. But examine the classic folklore versions of Cinderella, and this compelling femme fatale—this idiosyncratic “evil stepmother”—is glaringly absent. Instead, a new antagonist arises: Cinderella’s father.

Take, for example, Perrault’s “Donkey Skin.” The story begins with a powerful king’s promise to his dying wife that he will only marry another woman whose beauty and intelligence surpasses hers. Fast-forward a few years. The king’s only daughter has blossomed into maturity, and, as luck would have it, she is pretty darn beautiful—more beautiful, perhaps, than her mother, the late Queen. Enamored by her rare and remarkable beauty, the King embarks on a passionate, erotic pursuit for his daughter’s hand in marriage. But the daughter, disturbed by father’s strong sexual desire, disguises herself in a “donkeyskin” cloak and flees the castle, taking up residence as a lowly scullery maid on a farm, doomed to carry out a number of domestic tasks. Starting to sound familiar?

It is understandable why later versions of the tale, such as the Grimm Brother’s 1857 retelling, modified the traditional Donkeyskin plotline almost beyond recognition. Purging the tale of its incestuous encounter, the Grimms substituted the archetypal wicked stepmother in place of the lecherous father. In doing this, of course, they were attempting to preserve the integrity of the nuclear family in keeping with Protestant norms. After all, the concept of an oppressive stepmother is much more acceptable to a Christian reader than the idea of an incestuous father, which was (and is) considered unnatural, horrifying, and taboo. Indeed, in our culture, the issue of incest is generally too uncomfortable and heavy-handed a subject to openly discuss. To include such troubling subject matter in a work of children’s literature would be downright absurd.

But Marina Warner makes a valid point when she argues that the censorship of the core Cinderella plotline is not entirely desirable: “The proposed marriage of a father to his daughter becomes hard to accept…because it is not impossible, because it could actually happen, and is known to have done so. It is when fairy tales coincide with experience that they begin to suffer from censoring, rather than the other way around” (104). Do the Donkeyskin tales bring awareness to a crucial issue that tends to be banished from societal discourse? Yes. In this sense, Donkeyskin serves as a critical reminder of a pressing social issue. But does this mean we should be reading a tale about incest to our four-year-olds? Probably not.

In short, the Donkeyskin versions of Cinderella should remain in circulation, but strictly for adult, scholarly audiences to enjoy. As for mainstream American culture—well, let them be content with their happy, singsong Disney adaptation, no matter how drastically revised it may be.

Donkeyskin = Cinderella?

2010-01-27T19:18:00.000-06:00

Maria Tatar argues in her introduction to Cinderella stories that both Donkeyskin and Cinderella stories posses so many similarities that it is reasonable to consider both types together. On page 102 she claims that over time Cinderella stories are reinvented, and it is this idea that bring me to believe that the two types of stories should be considered together.

Tatar explains that usually Cinderella stories are driven by the jealousy of the stepmother/stepsisters and father figures are usually eliminated as characters (but not always as we will see in the Italian version of this tale). In All-Fur stories the plot is driven by the sexual lust of a father for his daughter and the stepmother is eliminated as a character. (These stories, Tatar explains, touch of the taboo of incest thus this is why we may not be as familiar with them). Although there some strong differences, the basics of both stories run parallel, especially in the second half of the tales.

Tatar interestingly points out that in All-Fur stories the mother is basically to blame for all that the daughter must suffer through (because the promise she requested from the kind on her death bed so that he could not marry again). Therefore, in this version both biological parents become the villains even though the mother is essentially eliminated from the tale. In the Italian version of Cinderella, a mother figure of any kind is not present. Instead the father is said to have three daughters of his own. The father in this case becomes a sort of villain, as he does not favor Cinderella, calls her silly, ignores here, and in the end claims to only have two daughters when the prince’s messengers come calling. In this case, Cinderella is also more clever and active as she rejects the initiation to go to the ball with her family, and then shows up later to capture the princes heart. Other parallels between the two stories can be drawn such as the ring compared to the shoes, the occurrence of three balls instead of just one and so on.

Despite the obvious presence of differences in both types of stories, I think that it is fair to conclude that both come from a common point of origin as the similarities are to close to ignore. As stories cross boarders and time passes, they are changed be who ever is telling them. At some point in time these two story types may have been one in the same and depending on the storyteller and audience evolved into the separate tales we have today.