So far, I have had a lot of fun with the readings and discussions of the Grimm's Fairy Tales. I have felt that an interesting question that keeps coming up is "why are some of the stories more popular than others?" There are characters like Snow White and Cinderella whose popularity still seem relevant. These characters (Snow White, Cinderella, Rapunzel, and Briar Rose) do not have any really depth to them, yet people still care about who they are. I guess that the reason for there survival is the events that take place in the story. None of the women are strong and independent, but instead they represent the "damsel in distress"; they need to be saved. These stories have a hero, a victim, and enemy, adventure, magic, and love, which causes people to be attracted to them. The other reason that these tales are still popular is that there is an expectation of the outcome ("Happily Ever After"), which the female charters created.
One of my favorite tellings of the fairy tales come from the musical, Into the Woods. The Princesses, in the musical, dream of being with their princes, and they are driven by their pursuit. The two Princes in the musical are guided by their need to claim their Princesses combined with their own arrogance. The two Princes are my favorite characters in the show because of their mockery and fickleness of the Princesses and the one's they love. I think it is an insightful comment as to the desires of these Princes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFgMowOwek0
Blog 3/5
Modern Day Fairy Tales
A lot of these fairy tales that I have read remind me of modern day cartoon shows. For example, after I read The Cat and the Mouse Set Up House it instantly reminded me of the cartoon show Tom and Jerry. Just like the cat in the fairy tale, the cat (Tom) in this cartoon show is constantly trying to eat the mouse, which is basically what happens in the story in the end. The cat was very sneaky and lied to the mouse about the food they stored up for the winter and in the end when the mouse figured it out, the cat ate the mouse too. I find it interesting because shows like these that are very popular now have parallels with these fairy tales so maybe its possible the creators based the show off these fairy tales and changed somethings to make it more appealing for the audience like how Tom and Jerry is a slapstick comedy. Even though the show doesn't have any dialogue between the cat and the mouse like it did in story, it forces you to imagine what the characters are thinking and what they would say if they could talk.
Some other fairy tales that I read like The Devil with the Three Golden Hairs and Godfather Death (and this is sort of a stretch but it) reminds me of the cartoon show The Grimm Adventures of Billy and Mandy. Their story lines aren't exactly the same but to me this show had a close resemblance to these fairy tales. Again, since it does have some similarities it is possible that this show was based of the fairy tales like these. These fairy tales have a like a "what is the moral of the story" thing and so does the show to an extent I guess. But, this cartoon show incorporates powers from the grim reaper (from a higher being) and the characters Billy and Mandy controls the Grim Reaper.
I just think a lot of cartoon shows that have become sort of main stream drew inspiration from fairy tales like the ones we have read in the Fairy Tales from the Brothers Grimm.
I think this may be my favorite Fairy Tale. Not because it is short, but because the first half is almost completely irrelevant. There is a magical spear and a weird dwarf-thing in the first part, but that doesn't matter at all. What matters is that because of the first part, the second part happens, and the second part is this random dude finding a bone, trying to blow it like a whistle, and hearing it sing about the person who murdered the guy that the bone belonged to. There’s a minor religious angle to this in that part of the reason for the singing bone seems to be that “nothing is hidden from the eyes of God”, so justice needs to be able to be done, but that’s it. The bone sings, and justice is done. It’s short, sweet, and to the point. What's your favorite of the Not-Rumpelstiltskin Fairy Tales?
---
2 of 5
So, I am a nerd (as most of you are
aware) and I wanted to give a small crash course on the history of the
Brother's Grimm, the fairy tales and why they felt the need to compile all
these stories into a book.
First of, some of these fun stories
were published by a man named Charles Perralt (such as "Little Red
Cap" "Cinderella" and "Puss in Boots") in 1697. These
stories were meant to be read by much higher-class folks in those days. So the
Brothers Grimm decided that they wanted to re-explore some of these tales and
write them for the everyday folk. So they compiled a few of these stories
along with many others and published them in a volume with 86 stories (mind you
I'm skipping to the gems here) in 1812. Then a few years later in 1815, a
second volume was published that contained 70. The fist editions were highly
criticized because the public saw the stories as too sexual, violent or just
overall, not child friendly. So many changes were made over the years. For
example, Rapunzel asking the enchantress why her dress was too tight. And
changing the mother from Hansel and Gretel and Snow White into a stepmother. So
all sexual references were taken out, and the violent punishments for villains was
amped up.
What most people do not understand
is that these stories were not necessarily meant for children. As a
matter of fact, many of these stories were violet as shit (if anyone is
interested, look up “The Maid With No Hands” or “Child of Mary”). These stories
were ones that had been passed down by word of mouth by the common people. So imagine two women milking cows and while
doing so, trading stories about a singing bone or 13 Little Men in the Woods.
As a side note: a few years later there was a
smaller edition of only 50 stories intended for children. 3 of 5
All of these Fairy Tales that we've read thus far have been nothing like the ones I grew up with. I'm guessing the main reason is because Disney has predominately taken over the story-telling for everyone in the later 20th and 21st century. It's funny how much the stories have changed over time. I don't know about you but the Grimm's Cinderella and Disney's Cinderella are two VERY different stories. No where in the movie do you see the ugly step sisters hacking off their toes and heels so that their feet could possibly fit in the glass slipper. There is this feeling that if Disney put that in there, Cinderella wouldn't be the highlight it is today. I don't know, just a hunch!
I find it interesting that some of the Grimm's stories never made it to a Disney version, such as Godfather Death. After reading the tale, it's clear why it was never made into a fun, happy movie. There is no happily ever after and the protagonist is not some innocent (stupid) female. Well you may ask, how did the foot hacking of Cinderella make the cut. Stories like Cinderella or Snow White, all of the gruesome parts can be removed and the end will still be a happy ending. When you have a story like Godfather Death, there is nothing possible to remove or even add to the story to make it better or even "PG".
I thought the Brothers Grimm stories were certainly different to say the least. I thought it was crazy how far stretched out these versions were compared to the initial stories I was used to! For example, take the Hansel and Gretel story. At first glimpse, it seemed as though not much changed but after recalling the version I was used to I began to notice different small details. The version I was just used to Hansel and Gretel only dropped bread, not pebbles as well. I also did not recall from the version I was used to the part where there was a step-mother who was essentially a big jerk and convinced the father, her husband, to ditch the kids in the woods because they were so poor and hungry. The way I remember it, they siblings initially just got lost in the woods or something along those lines. After the beginning, some parts of the story seemed recognizable- even towards the end. HOWEVER, I was very thrown off at the ending involving the duck used to get across the lake. I had absolutely NEVER heard of that ending to Hansel and Gretel. But it does seem to make sense, considering they siblings wanted to use the duck as a symbol of guidance to get across the lake and make it home. That was certainly interesting. As far as the stories come, Hansel and Gretel was not too bad. I will say that the Brothers Grimm version of Cinderella is all types of screwed up! Some changes I noted first off in the story, the father was not dead- in fact he was a jerk for allowing the stepmother and stepsisters to gang up on his daughter and even give her the name Cinderella. Moving on in the story, we saw consistencies in Brothers Grimm version to Disney, where the stepmother and stepsisters were jerks and did not want to let Cinderella go to the ball. However, in Brothers Grimm- the ball lasted for 3 consecutive days.....they really knew how to party I suppose! Cinderella also got her dress from a hazelnut tree so in Brothers Grimm it was interesting not to see a fairy godmother aspect. Can we just examine the part where the princes on the third day of the ball tries to trap Cinderella by putting a sticky substance on the stairs to make her feet stick. What the hell?! So she loses the shoe....obviously. Thus, when the prince arrives at the family's home to try on the shoes of all the ladies, the stupid stepsisters are told by their mother to cut off their heel and big toe to make their feet fit the shoe so they can become queens. UM WHAT?! Then of course, he finds Cinderella and it all works out because her foot fits....but wait it's not over......at their wedding the stepsisters get their eyes pecked out by birds. Seriously?
Jessica Morales' Post #1 of 5
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Grimm's Fairy Tales
It’s really shocking to read about the fairy tales that I
sort of have some knowledge to, from a totally different perspective. A much
more sad and gruesome perspective I might add. I honestly didn't even know
these stories existed in this form and I get why the tales were toned down for
Disney. Obviously, you wouldn't want your five year old kid hearing about how
the evil stepmother of Cinderella told her own two daughters to “…cut a bit off
[their] heel…”and to “cut off [their] big toe” just to become the next
princess. Also, portraying doves pecking people’s eyes out at Cinderella’s
wedding in a Disney movie would NOT be acceptable by American culture.
The gruesomeness continues with Rapunzel when the
prince’s eyes were poked out by thorns when he fell from the tower, when the
hunter cuts open the belly of the wolf in Little Red Riding Hood to save them,
and also when the witch queen stabbed Snow White to death with a poisoned
combed on the head. Not to mention boiling kids up in a pot and eating them in the tale of Hansel and Gretel, which reminds me of it relating back to Mid-evil witches eating dead babies. So I can see there are some parallels there. But it's very interesting how these fairy tales can have multiple "moral of the stories" and themes and how it's not clear but is open to interpretation.
It is also interesting to see that in these stories and fairy tales that have been so popular, how all of the main characters are female that act as the protagonist and how a witch is the antagonist (for the most part). Maybe this is because the authors that wrote these stories grew up in a society that viewed witches as evil creatures. Why else would they cast the witches as the "bad guys"? It's just interesting to see how all the male protagonist stories aren't so popular vs the female protagonists. Maybe it's because some of the tales don't have happy endings like Godfather Death and people like seeing a story end on a good note rather than a bad one.
I want to go back a few classes now, and discuss Merlin one more time. We
had a class discussion about why Merlin has changed over time. In Geoffrey of
Monmouth’s story of Merlin, he is a old man who goes out of way to isolate him
probably because of the weight that knowledge put on him. The power he
possesses is seeing the past and future. In the Once and Future King, Merlin still is an old man, but seems more of
laughable character in his old age. He’s wise, but also a quirky old man. Then
moving on in time, we now have the Merlin
television show where he is a young man, who is still figuring out his path and
can be odd, but he also mischievous, clever, and compassionate. He has a sense
of duty and honor towards Prince Arthur. He uses his magic to move things, and
protect those he cares about. He is part of a community.
Why has Merlin changed from old to young? Why has he become more clumsy?
Why do his powers change? My feeling on this is that Merlin’s character meets
the need of the times. In the past old men were considered wise and respected
for their age, which is why Geoffrey of Monmouth created a character who is
older and wise to the point that it was a burden for him. In today’s time
however, society finds the old more useless, and are more concerned about the
life that young people will create, which is essentially what the television
Merlin does.
While observing the evolution of Merlin, a consistent idea of him being
a little foolish sticks out, which makes me think of The Sword in the Stone’s Merlin. (He also says a good lesson in magic)
