Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Cinderella Post
From the Ashliman website, I read the Norwegian version of Cinderella, Katie Woodencloak. I found this version not as exciting as the Perrault or the Grimms version, despite the fact that there were some magical elements in the story. Although many of the versions are unrealistic, the magic within the stories is enjoyable. I found the magical elements in Katie Woodencloak unappealing, especially the three trolls in the forest that the talking bull has to fight; however, I do realize that trolls are a part of Norwegian culture. I also did not like the fact that the prince was so mean to Katie Woodencloak when she was in her wooden cloak and that despite this, she still went to see the prince in church those three times. The storyline with the dead bull was also left in the open; did he magically turn into the man who gave Katie the copper, silver, and gold kilts? Overall, I was not impressed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, the magic is often what makes the story the most appealing. Even in the Grimms vs. the Perrault I find the magic more appealing in the Perrault version with the aspect of the fairy godmother and the transformation of the pumpkin into a coach and the mice into horses. It is more fantastical and visual than the Grimms version with the hazel tree simply throwing down the clothes. Perhaps it's my fondness of the Disney version of Cinderella but I like the idea of magic presented before us like a godmother who says magic words and swishes her wand and miracles occur.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that it is the film aspect of the magic that transforms viewers and makes them more fond of Perrault's version as opposed to the Grimms. If Disney's Cinderella were based on the Grimms version, it wouldn't nearly be as fantastical.
ReplyDelete