I along with Holly would like to apologize for the extreme lateness of this particular post. I also had computer problems... I dropped my laptop yesterday evening (Tuesday) and when I tried to turn it on, it wouldn't. A predicament if ever there was one... but to cut a long story short I took it to my friend today and, after pulling it to pieces, he managed to fix it!! :D So I am now writing my post... at midnight on Wednesday rather than midnight on Tuesday. I hope I can still get some form of credit.
I was also much more interested in the Bettelheim article than the Darnton article. As a child psychologist, I believe that Bettelheim has a greater insight into the minds and lives of children than Darnton. Although Darnton is more of a fairy tale and folk literature scholar - it is Bettelheim that has a larger insight into the life of a child.
I found it really interesting how he discussed that meaning in the early life of a child can mean less psychological problems in later life. I had never really thought about how a fairy tale might be able to provide this meaning before.
For instance - I had never thought about the beginning and end sentences of a fairy tale. "Once upon a time" and "and they lived happily ever after." Although in the original German the literal translation of the end of the fairy tale is "And if they are not yet dead, they are still alive today." I had never really thought how discussing 'living' happily ever after would allow the child to believe that eternal life is not possible. When I was a child, this thought never occurred to me - in fact it didn't occur to me until I read this article - but I suppose it may have affected me through my subconscious. I am not sure about his point of view on this but it is certainly interesting to think about.
It is true however that the generalized nature of the characters in a fairy tale allow all children to relate to the characters and feel connected to the story. The simplistic and repetitive nature of the fairy tale - the repetition of the number 3 for instance - would also allow a child to make connections and begin to recognize elements occuring in each story. This perhaps would create a comfortable feeling in the child - fairy tales are all so similar that you can read new ones without feeling alienated.
However I do believe that fairy tales are meant to be read to children - not only do they provide moral truths for the child but the deeper and darker meanings behind the cutesy simplistic story make it an interesting read for the parent too.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Holly Meehl's post: Bettelheim
Ok, first of all I’m really sorry this is late and still hope I can get some sort of credit. I went on the blog yesterday night and no new posts had appeared, I think there must have been something wrong with my internet, but when I checked it this morning I saw all the posts.
Anyway, I have to go ahead and disagree with the last two posts and say that Bettelheim’s essay “The Struggle for Meaning” made me think about fairy tales as more than just children’s entertainment. Although Darnton’s essay, as the other blog’s suggest, does talk about the many different ways in which fairy tales go further than entertaining a child, I liked the specific ways Bettleheim talked about how a fairy tale affects the child’s psychology. Rather than simply making a child laugh or allowing her to imitate the princess in the story she was just read, fairy tales are important stepping stones. As Bettleheim says they “carry important messages to the conscious, the preconscious, and the unconscious mind” (271). They are important to a child’s development as there are not other stories like them. They are fantastical and induce wonder and bring up problem’s that must be solved. Different from other children’s stories, fairy tales are often upfront and gruesome, and don’t pad down the difficulties of life like say the Bernstein Bears do. Bettleheim says, “The fairy tale, by contrast, confronts the child squarely with the basic human predicaments” (273). Fairy tales show children that fairness is not a guarantee in life and that despite difficult circumstances, life goes on.
The way Bettleheim describes the importance of the fairy tale to a child’s development rather than entertainment made me see his as the better essay.
Anyway, I have to go ahead and disagree with the last two posts and say that Bettelheim’s essay “The Struggle for Meaning” made me think about fairy tales as more than just children’s entertainment. Although Darnton’s essay, as the other blog’s suggest, does talk about the many different ways in which fairy tales go further than entertaining a child, I liked the specific ways Bettleheim talked about how a fairy tale affects the child’s psychology. Rather than simply making a child laugh or allowing her to imitate the princess in the story she was just read, fairy tales are important stepping stones. As Bettleheim says they “carry important messages to the conscious, the preconscious, and the unconscious mind” (271). They are important to a child’s development as there are not other stories like them. They are fantastical and induce wonder and bring up problem’s that must be solved. Different from other children’s stories, fairy tales are often upfront and gruesome, and don’t pad down the difficulties of life like say the Bernstein Bears do. Bettleheim says, “The fairy tale, by contrast, confronts the child squarely with the basic human predicaments” (273). Fairy tales show children that fairness is not a guarantee in life and that despite difficult circumstances, life goes on.
The way Bettleheim describes the importance of the fairy tale to a child’s development rather than entertainment made me see his as the better essay.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Post #1
Darnton's "Peasants Tell Tales: The Meaning of Mother Goose" is a more indicative essay of fairy tales being more than just a form of children's entertainment, due to the numerous explanations of interpretations of the fairy tales, especially Little Red Riding Hood. Although many of the psychological explanations behind Little Red Riding Hood are interpretations that were made to later versions of the tale, they are still significant contributions to fairy tale literature and research. Due to the opinion of such psychoanalysts, some classic fairy tales are centered on sexual urges and desires of the protagonist of the story; Little Red Riding Hood, as said by some, depicts a daughter’s love for her father through an oedipal complex. If this were to be the case, it would be highly unlikely and inappropriate that this story would be written for a child.
I think the best essay to learn how to think about fairy tales as more than children’s entertainment is Jack Zipes Introduction in The Wondrous Fairy Tales of Western Culture. He discusses the history of fairy tales, highlighting how the genre has its roots in the aristocracy and only evolved over time into children’s literature. But, since that essay is off the table, I guess a distant second place for most productive in helping me think about fairy tales as more than children’s literature goes to Robert Darnton’s “Peasants Tell Tales: The Meaning of Mother Goose.”
Darnton’s essay makes some great points that aid in a fuller understanding of the idea that fairy tales are more than children’s entertainment. I like his long introduction that ends by critiquing psychoanalysis with the question, “How could anyone get a text so wrong?” (p282). There are few theories that make me sigh harder than hearing the word “psychoanalysis;” maybe it is because I’m Irish. But regardless of why I dislike psychoanalysis, I smile at his first point and then nod in agreement when Darnton suggests that my analysis might be more productive if I approached fairy tales from a historical perspective. Darnton reminds the reader that “fairytales are historical documents,” not some totally constructed fiction just to amuse kids (283). They may not be historical fact, but they are still useful in more than only morally instructive instances. According to Darnton, the tales make more sense when examined under a dual lens of anthropology and folklore (285). Incorporating knowledge from hard-hitting sciences like “anthropology” and “folklore” open up more areas to explore the idea that fairy tales might be more than children’s entertainment. In what is possibly the most important part of Darnton’s argument for realizing that fairy tales are more than children’s literature, he makes the point that, “Whether they were meant to amuse adults or to frighten children, as in the case of cautionary tales like “Little Red Riding Hood,” the stories belonged to a fund of popular culture, which peasants hoarded over the centuries” (287). It is pretty clear that originally fairy tales served more of a purpose than just being children’s literature.
It is obvious that Darnton’s essay is more about keeping the historical context in mind when trying to analyze fairy tales for deeper meaning. That is good advice, especially compared to the shenanigans of psychoanalysis, but it is not an essay about the fact that fairy tales are not simply children’s entertainment. All of the evidence that shows that this is not the case must be pulled out of the references to the historical origins of the tales. Again, I think Zipes’ Introduction does a more explicit job of showing how varied the role of fairy tales truly is.
A lesser creature, like an ogre or wicked stepmother, might argue that Bettelheim’s essay does a better job arguing that fairy tales are more than children’s entertainment. I can see where they are coming from, what with him making the point that fairy tales are important for child psychological development. Yes, if fairy tales are for childhood psychological development, then they are for more than just children’s entertainment. But if an ogre or wicked stepmother came away with only this lesson, they could easily think that fairy tales serve a multi-faceted role for children only. It is important to understand that fairy tales serve a purpose for more than children, or at least they did historically. Because Darnton reveals more of this overall utility of fairy tales, he wins the “better than Bettelheim” award for being more productive in helping me think about fairy tales as more than children’s entertainment.
Oh, and since this is a blog, the song of the blog is “Girl’s Night Out,” by The Knife.
Darnton’s essay makes some great points that aid in a fuller understanding of the idea that fairy tales are more than children’s entertainment. I like his long introduction that ends by critiquing psychoanalysis with the question, “How could anyone get a text so wrong?” (p282). There are few theories that make me sigh harder than hearing the word “psychoanalysis;” maybe it is because I’m Irish. But regardless of why I dislike psychoanalysis, I smile at his first point and then nod in agreement when Darnton suggests that my analysis might be more productive if I approached fairy tales from a historical perspective. Darnton reminds the reader that “fairytales are historical documents,” not some totally constructed fiction just to amuse kids (283). They may not be historical fact, but they are still useful in more than only morally instructive instances. According to Darnton, the tales make more sense when examined under a dual lens of anthropology and folklore (285). Incorporating knowledge from hard-hitting sciences like “anthropology” and “folklore” open up more areas to explore the idea that fairy tales might be more than children’s entertainment. In what is possibly the most important part of Darnton’s argument for realizing that fairy tales are more than children’s literature, he makes the point that, “Whether they were meant to amuse adults or to frighten children, as in the case of cautionary tales like “Little Red Riding Hood,” the stories belonged to a fund of popular culture, which peasants hoarded over the centuries” (287). It is pretty clear that originally fairy tales served more of a purpose than just being children’s literature.
It is obvious that Darnton’s essay is more about keeping the historical context in mind when trying to analyze fairy tales for deeper meaning. That is good advice, especially compared to the shenanigans of psychoanalysis, but it is not an essay about the fact that fairy tales are not simply children’s entertainment. All of the evidence that shows that this is not the case must be pulled out of the references to the historical origins of the tales. Again, I think Zipes’ Introduction does a more explicit job of showing how varied the role of fairy tales truly is.
A lesser creature, like an ogre or wicked stepmother, might argue that Bettelheim’s essay does a better job arguing that fairy tales are more than children’s entertainment. I can see where they are coming from, what with him making the point that fairy tales are important for child psychological development. Yes, if fairy tales are for childhood psychological development, then they are for more than just children’s entertainment. But if an ogre or wicked stepmother came away with only this lesson, they could easily think that fairy tales serve a multi-faceted role for children only. It is important to understand that fairy tales serve a purpose for more than children, or at least they did historically. Because Darnton reveals more of this overall utility of fairy tales, he wins the “better than Bettelheim” award for being more productive in helping me think about fairy tales as more than children’s entertainment.
Oh, and since this is a blog, the song of the blog is “Girl’s Night Out,” by The Knife.
Assignment: 13 January 2009
Please respond to the question below by midnight tonight.
Which of the following essays do you find more productive in helping you to think about fairy tales as more than children's entertainment? Why?
Which of the following essays do you find more productive in helping you to think about fairy tales as more than children's entertainment? Why?
- Robert Darnton's “Peasants Tell Tales: The Meaning of Mother Goose”
- Bruno Bettelheim “The Struggle for Meaning,”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
