I have another bone to pick with Beedle the Bard and Rowling's assertions about it...

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

So, it just so happens that I am currently in the middle of taking a class on storytelling at my college. As its name suggests, a lot of what we do in that class consists of, well, telling each other stories--with a particular emphasis on folktales and fairy tales. And the more I learn, the more blatantly laughable Rowling's assertion that her made-up folktales are better because the heroines are more active in seeking their fortune becomes.

See, a lot of real-world folktales involve heroines that are perfectly capable of seeking their own fortunes and doing what they want. This almost certainly did not reflect the reality, of course; and it is true that in a good many famous stories the heroines end up married (or whatever); but by this point in the class I've read stories about (for example) a cook who finds a way to outwit her master; a princess who cuts the head off a magical man to gain her freedom from him; and another princess who, after being kicked out of her home, figures out a way to support both herself and her man when he's sick, and not only heals him but makes them both rich. Hell, the story I'm preparing to tell right at this point in time is about a little girl who rescues herself from a monster without any sort of help from a man.

So, all told, not only is Rowling's assertion that Beedle the Bard deserves praise because it features more independent and capable heroines than real folktales arrogant, patronizing, and yet ANOTHER instance of devaluing the real world; it just plain has no base in reality, and seriously makes me wonder if Rowling has ever encountered any folktales at all beyond the basics like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty! Good to find new reasons to hate that book, I guess!

Comments

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Yes, good point! I'm not sure I know all the stories you're learning to tell, but I certainly know several, from many different traditions, that feature smart and proactive girls/women. The Potter books, on the other hand, strike me as deeply sexist. I wouldn't argue, personally, that Rowling didn't/doesn't know the literature. She seems to me to be extremely familiar with 19th century British lit, in particular. But I would argue that she tends to throw undigested tropes into her story, and doesn't think about them much. The Potter books are just a mish mash, really.

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

A lot of people know fairy tales and other children's stories only through the Disney versions, and until relatively recently (about the 1990s), Disney films usually changed female characters to make them weaker than they were in the original versions. One that has always annoyed me (though it is not a traditional fairy tale) was Alice in Wonderland. The film includes a scene in which Alice breaks down and cries about being alone in this strange world--something that never happens in the book. And at the end of the film, Alice shrinks back down again and runs from the living cards in terror, while in the book she grows to giant size and simply sweeps them away. It's possible JKR is thinking about Disnified stories instead of the real thing.

[josephinestone.livejournal.com]

Is that what she majored in at University?

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

That makes a lot of sense! After all, we know these books were influenced by at least one TV show (The Worst Witch ), as well as by other books.

Not that there's anything wrong with that - no story can exist in a vacuum - but Rowling didn't seem to think out the implications of things at all.

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

She obviously never read "Women Who Run With the Wolves" - a great book specifically about Myths and Legends (and fairy tales) dealing with women. A very empowering book, if you have not read it already. Covers many cultures.

[oryx_leucoryx]

TMK she studied the classics.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

This almost certainly did not reflect the reality, of course; and it is true that in a good many famous stories the heroines end up married (or whatever);

Indeed, good thing the "real-world" situation in the Potterverse is so different... wait.

[nx74defiant.livejournal.com]

If that is true it is very disappointing.

[vermouth1991.livejournal.com]

I hated the 1989 Little Mermaid adaptation. Andersen's little mermaid did not have a creepy obsession with everything on land, made her own mind to seek the sea witch's help, and the sea witch did not have any uterior motives for helping her and demanding her tongue as payment for the dark magicks required. She felt terrible pain every time she walked, and in the end the Prince honest-to-God fell in love with another maiden and wanted to marry her. "Ariel"'s sisters gave her a knife that could kill the prince and turn her back into a mermaid, but she tossed it back into the sea before turning into lifeless foam herself. The End. The edition in which God turned her into an air spirit where she can gain her human soul after 300 years of helping little children did not come until later.

The original little mermaid persued love on her own terms, tripped and failed, yet she did what was best for the man she loved.

[nx74defiant.livejournal.com]

The original fairy tales were much darker than the Disney versions most people know. Cinderella's step sister cutting off part of their feet to fit the slipper, Rupunzel's prince being blinded and so on.

[vermouth1991.livejournal.com]

I know, and Hansel and Gretel killed the witch who tried to eat them by throwing her into the oven.

I just keep thinking that with The Little Mermaid Disney went too far and actually castrated the spirit of the fairy tale. The little mermaid's quest was foremost a quest for an immortal soul, one which the land-dwellers have (and some waste it in their lives) in contrast with the merfolk who live several of our lifetimes' but end up as foam in the sea.

But the Disney film it was all about love, and Ariel messes up but doesn't rectify her mistakes by herself. As opposed to the girl in, say, "Brave", who messed up her mother and kingdom and does her best to mend the tears before war breaks out.

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

The Potter books, on the other hand, strike me as deeply sexist.

Not so much that, but all protagonists are pretty ineffectual, usually waiting to be prodded to action

[tenoch azteca (from livejournal.com)]

The stepsisters cutting their feet only appears in "Aschenputtel", the version of the story published by Jakob and Wilhelm Grimm during the 19th century.

It doesn't appear in Giambattista Basile's "Cenerentola" or Charles Perrault's "Cendrillon" (both published in the 17th century.

[tenoch azteca (from livejournal.com)]

I think you're rather underestimating the sexism present in the work of Basile, Perrault, and the Grimms, personally.

In "Sun, Moon, and Talia" (the source for "Sleeping Beauty"), the princess is raped and impregnanted by a king and wakes up when one of her children tries to nurse from her finger, pulling out the piece of flax under her nail. Then rapist king comes back and finds Talia and the children and takes them to his castle and his wife throws a fit and tries to have Talia and the children killed. But before she can manage it, the king finds out and orders his wife's execution and marries Talia.

In Perrault's "Bluebeard", the heroine marries a serial killer who attempts to kill her after she finds out his secret, but Perrault's moral tacked on into the end is about the perils of female disobedience and curiosity. This really does not fit with the story at all, but he throws it in anyway.

[tenoch azteca (from livejournal.com)]

That's nice. But folklore can also also be ugly and unpleasant.

Look up the ballads "The Cruel Mother", "The King's Dochter Lady Jean", "Little Sir Hugh", "Long Lankin", "The Maid and the Palmer", and "Pretty Polly" or the tales "The Good Bargain" and “The Jew in the Brambles.”