Now this version of Cinderella was much more like the Brothers Grimm's version of Cinderella than Charles Perrault. It had the same kind of deep set magic, tied in with death, rather than the happy-go-lucky magic of the French version of Cinderella. However there are some major differences between the two stories.
Firstly, one of the major differences is that Pepelyouga's real mother, before she dies, is first turned into a cow. Now I do not know the significance of cows in Serbian culture, but I believe it would be quite interesting to find out. This cow then helps Pepelyouga with her seemingly impossible chores. It is after this little cow interlude, that the story returns to a more Grimm-esque fairy tale. The talking cow (mother) asks to be buried under a certain stone of a house and tells Pepelyouga that if she ever needs help, she is to come to the grave and ask for it. Also she asks Pepelyouga not to eat the meat of the slaughtered cow - this is interesting as it appears the Serbian tale puts emphasis on the evilness of cannibalism. It is okay that both the father, the evil step-mother and the step-sister eat the cow (who is actually the mother) but good sweet innocent virtuous Pepelyouga is forbidden to eat it, lest she turn into an evil person like the rest of her family.
There is also a great emphasis on religion in this version of Cinderella. Instead of going to a ball at the palace, the stepmother and stepsister leave Pepelyouga at home slaving away, whilst they go to church. The doves sitting on top of a chest on top of the mother's grave tell Pepelyouga to go to church dressed in the beautiful dresses, and it is here in the church that she meets her Prince Charming, the Czar's son. It is whilst she is being pious and virtuous that she is discovered by her Prince and of course, he immediately falls in love with her.
The Serbian version of the fairy tale ends in a similar way, however to the Perrault fairy tale. Instead of their being blood and maimed feet and faces, Pepelyouga is simply carried off into the sunset by her handsome Prince. However it is interesting to note though that it specifically says that "Later he won her love and they were happily married." This Cinderella seems to be more level-headed than the other Cinderellas. Instead of just swooning into the arms of the Prince, he has to win her love. This makes them seem more on an equal level. It would be interesting to see when this Serbian version of the tale was written - to see if it was written during a time of feminism etc.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Fair, Brown, and Trembling (or) The Irish love a good fight
I read "Fair, Brown, and Trembling," Jeremiah Curtin's Irish tale on Ashliman's Website. The tale is based in Tir Conel, nowadays Donegal, up in the Northern part of the Republic. The first thing that jumps out to me is in this version it is neither the father nor the mother who is the main catalyst for Trembling's (Cindarella) mistreatment; it is the sisters. While the father is a non-factor like the half of tales that portray the (step)mother as the bad guy, the sisters being the main oppressors stand out.
The next major thing that sticks out to me is how Trembling's identity is connected to her looks. Many other tales revolve around her being recognized as the right girl only after she is cleaned up; she must show up wearing all three different outfits to prove her identity, really stressing the appearances aspect of the tale.
Another fun addition is the fight scene. The prince has to fight several other princes over a series of epic battles until no one else is willing to fight him. Epic contests of this nature are very "Irish folktale," but don't really seem to surface elsewhere in Cinderella tales. It makes the prince seem more worthy, but doesn't really give Trembling any more agency in selecting her mate.
Towards the end of the tale, Trembling is swallowed by a magic whale. While this is not the only Cinderella tale where the sister tries to do Cinderella harm after she is happily married, this episode has a lot of detail in this version. Again, the prince must perform an epic feat of strength to save her, asserting his right to be her husband.
I am most puzzled by the henmother. Not surprisingly, Catholicism is an important part of this story. However, whenever the henmother helps Cinderella, she puts on her cloak of darkness and gets the clothes magically. It is not clear, but this sounds like witchcraft rather than magic to me. I don't have any problem accepting it, it just seems very un-Catholic and out of character for the story.
Overall, I like this tale a lot. In addition to being a retelling of the basic Cinderella plot, it incorporates lots of other motifs from completely different fairy tales. It also has a distinctly Irish flair.
Song of the Blog: "Coup D'Etat" by Lord T and Eloise
The next major thing that sticks out to me is how Trembling's identity is connected to her looks. Many other tales revolve around her being recognized as the right girl only after she is cleaned up; she must show up wearing all three different outfits to prove her identity, really stressing the appearances aspect of the tale.
Another fun addition is the fight scene. The prince has to fight several other princes over a series of epic battles until no one else is willing to fight him. Epic contests of this nature are very "Irish folktale," but don't really seem to surface elsewhere in Cinderella tales. It makes the prince seem more worthy, but doesn't really give Trembling any more agency in selecting her mate.
Towards the end of the tale, Trembling is swallowed by a magic whale. While this is not the only Cinderella tale where the sister tries to do Cinderella harm after she is happily married, this episode has a lot of detail in this version. Again, the prince must perform an epic feat of strength to save her, asserting his right to be her husband.
I am most puzzled by the henmother. Not surprisingly, Catholicism is an important part of this story. However, whenever the henmother helps Cinderella, she puts on her cloak of darkness and gets the clothes magically. It is not clear, but this sounds like witchcraft rather than magic to me. I don't have any problem accepting it, it just seems very un-Catholic and out of character for the story.
Overall, I like this tale a lot. In addition to being a retelling of the basic Cinderella plot, it incorporates lots of other motifs from completely different fairy tales. It also has a distinctly Irish flair.
Song of the Blog: "Coup D'Etat" by Lord T and Eloise
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.
Creepy Fairy Godmothers
I looked at the illustrations of Cinderella on the Sur La Lune website. After looking at many of the different drawings done to accompany Cinderella I noticed that there were many different depictions of the fairy godmother. Some of the illustrations showed the godmother to be rather evil looking, almost as if she appeared as a witch. But we all know that the fairy godmother is good and actually helps Cinderella so I thought it was interesting to portray her in this dark, ominous way. For example in Arthur Rackman’s drawing the godmother appears darkly cloaked and boney, almost as one would picture the witch in Hansel and Gretel to look like. She does not appear jolly and bright like the Disney fairy godmother. There is another illustration done by Paul Woodroffe which shows the fairy godmother with a black witch’s hat on. She is wearing a red cloak and a tight black dress. Her face is very pale and almost skeletal looking and she hovers creepily over Cinderella. She really does appear more like an evil sorcerer than a gift bearing godmother. I wondered why the illustrators chose to draw the godmother in this way. If I were a child reading these stories and viewing these pictures I would immediately associate the pictures of the godmothers as evil due to the way the illustrators drew them. Perhaps these artists were hinting at the moral that Perrault highlights at the end of his story, that beauty isn’t everything, but rather graciousness and a good heart. Although these fairy godmothers appear wicked, they have inner goodness and grant dear Cinderella’s wishes.
Assignment: 24 February 2009
Look through the sites below and choose either an illustration(s) or a version of the Cinderella story which we have not read for class and respond to it.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Walt, Prince of Fairy tales
I, along with Chester and sloanesc believe Zipes' thesis to be "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." (333)
Although Zipes' thesis may be true, I do not view Walt Disney in such a pessimistic light as Zipes seems to. If we take a pragmatic view on this, it is highly likely that Disney wanted to "transfix audiences" with his animations. In order to make more money, he would have wanted audiences to keep coming to the cinema to see his movies over and over again, and ways of doing this were to wow them with the filming techniques or to provide a happy feel-good movie. Disney did both of these things.
Since childhood I have loved the Disney movies (if you were interested, my favorites were the Lion King, Beauty and the Beast and the Sword in the Stone) and I still love them today, but that is part of the beauty of the Disney movie. They appeal to both adults and children. Children are amused by the talking animals, the beautiful princesses and of course the handsome prince who saves the fair maiden from the evil stepmother/sea monster/unwanted lover. At the same time, Disney appealed to adults by having a number of levels. For instance, it is only as you get older that you begin to understand all the humor in the movies. Also, a child would not get the reference to Hitler in the Lion King - as the hyenas march past Scar (during "Be Prepared") it is very reminiscent of the Nazis marching past Hitler at Nuremberg. Walt Disney was trying to appeal to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible. For instance, if the original ending of Snow White had appeared in the Disney movie with the evil stepmother being burnt to death by shoes provided for by Snow White and her new husband, children would be terrified, and parents would not take their children to see the movie. In the end no one would watch it and Walt Disney wanted his movies to be seen.
Many of the false promises and cutesy nature of the Disney movies are there simply to explain the fairy tale more thoroughly. It is very hard to explain the end of the Brothers Grimm's version of Snow White, where she wakes up in her coffin to find the Prince (who she has never seen before) sitting next to her, and falls immediately in love with him. In Disney's version, the Prince sees Snow White at the beginning of the film and they sing a love song together. Although this brings in a Prince Charming figure (which could be seen as a false promise) it better explains why Snow White agrees to marry him at the end.
If it was Disney's intention was to "divert... potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen," I do not believe this fact should be viewed cynically. Disney movies are loved worldwide by children and adults alike, providing happiness and laughter for all who watch them. It is true that his animations hold false promises; after all not every story ends with a Prince Charming and a happily ever after. However, as Zipes says, this is a part of their magic - they provide an escape from day to day life, where disasters happen, good people die and evil is not banished. In the Disney movies, we can live in a world where we know everything will turn out right in the end. Whatever motives he had, Disney rejuvenated the fairy tale, creating timeless classic after timeless classic, which live on in the hearts of many.
Although Zipes' thesis may be true, I do not view Walt Disney in such a pessimistic light as Zipes seems to. If we take a pragmatic view on this, it is highly likely that Disney wanted to "transfix audiences" with his animations. In order to make more money, he would have wanted audiences to keep coming to the cinema to see his movies over and over again, and ways of doing this were to wow them with the filming techniques or to provide a happy feel-good movie. Disney did both of these things.
Since childhood I have loved the Disney movies (if you were interested, my favorites were the Lion King, Beauty and the Beast and the Sword in the Stone) and I still love them today, but that is part of the beauty of the Disney movie. They appeal to both adults and children. Children are amused by the talking animals, the beautiful princesses and of course the handsome prince who saves the fair maiden from the evil stepmother/sea monster/unwanted lover. At the same time, Disney appealed to adults by having a number of levels. For instance, it is only as you get older that you begin to understand all the humor in the movies. Also, a child would not get the reference to Hitler in the Lion King - as the hyenas march past Scar (during "Be Prepared") it is very reminiscent of the Nazis marching past Hitler at Nuremberg. Walt Disney was trying to appeal to as many people as possible to make as much money as possible. For instance, if the original ending of Snow White had appeared in the Disney movie with the evil stepmother being burnt to death by shoes provided for by Snow White and her new husband, children would be terrified, and parents would not take their children to see the movie. In the end no one would watch it and Walt Disney wanted his movies to be seen.
Many of the false promises and cutesy nature of the Disney movies are there simply to explain the fairy tale more thoroughly. It is very hard to explain the end of the Brothers Grimm's version of Snow White, where she wakes up in her coffin to find the Prince (who she has never seen before) sitting next to her, and falls immediately in love with him. In Disney's version, the Prince sees Snow White at the beginning of the film and they sing a love song together. Although this brings in a Prince Charming figure (which could be seen as a false promise) it better explains why Snow White agrees to marry him at the end.
If it was Disney's intention was to "divert... potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen," I do not believe this fact should be viewed cynically. Disney movies are loved worldwide by children and adults alike, providing happiness and laughter for all who watch them. It is true that his animations hold false promises; after all not every story ends with a Prince Charming and a happily ever after. However, as Zipes says, this is a part of their magic - they provide an escape from day to day life, where disasters happen, good people die and evil is not banished. In the Disney movies, we can live in a world where we know everything will turn out right in the end. Whatever motives he had, Disney rejuvenated the fairy tale, creating timeless classic after timeless classic, which live on in the hearts of many.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
