I’ve always been a big fan of the Wizard of Oz and reading this book made me like it even more. I’ve read the book several times before, and I’ve also had the book read to me when I was a child, so when we had to read the book for this class, it was a nice refresher for me.
One of the main reasons that I like this book so much is because it just allows your imagination to run free. I talked to my mother the other day and I mentioned that I was reading this book and she began telling me stories that I didn’t even remember about how much I loved the book as a child and how she would read it to me all the time. I guess its one of those books that everyone enjoys, whether you’re a child or not.
The characters in this book also make it very special because you’re following a bunch of different people (maybe not human, but I see then as human) as they embark on this trip to see the Wizard. You kind of grow close to them and feel what they are feeling and you just want to support them and cheer them on. I’ve always liked all of the characters in this book and I think that these characters make the book really special. I mean come on, who doesn’t like the cowardly lion?
Though the book is a little different from the movie (for example, Dorothy has silver slippers in the book, as to red ones in the movie, and how you need to wear goggles when you reach Emerald City, where in the movie you didn’t), I really like the book more then the movie because I grew up on the book and when someone mentions the Wizard of Oz, I think of the book first, and then the movie.
As I mentioned before, this book was amazing and it allowed my imagination to wonder with the colorful characters as they embarked on their journeys. I think this is a wonderful book and it’s a book that I have owned for many years and I would recommend it to anyone, both child and adult readers. I have a feeling that this book will be a book that I will one day read to my kids, and I’m sure they will love it as much as I have.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Alice in Wonderland
I don’t know about you guys, but when it comes to fairy tales, I’m not the best person to go to. Though fairy tales were a part of my childhood, they weren’t a big part. I would usually fall asleep to the sound of the television with cartoons on it, rather than the voice of my parents reading a book to me. It wasn’t my parents fault, they read to me, but I was more interested in watching t.v. then listening to them read, so this section of fairy tales is interesting for me.
Anyway, now with Alice in Wonderland. Well, I have seen the Disney movie several times; however, reading this version of Alice was also interesting for me. In this version of the text, Alice is once again curious. We see that when she drinks out of a bottle and all of a sudden she doesn’t know who she is. Now, like I said, I have seen the Disney version, but that was a long long time ago, so I really don’t remember much. None the less, when I read this, I found Alice’s curiosity very interesting. I mean she is a child, right? So, even though she is a child, that doesn’t stop her from being curious, she still wonders off and does things, that’s what made it interesting.
Alice goes on many different trips in her adventures. She talks to animals and just has a good old time on her adventures. However, later on in the story, she is woken up and she realizes that none of it was real, it was a dream. But that doesn’t seem to bother her, she still enjoyed her adventures and she still has a great imagination.
I personally think that whichever version you read (whether it was this one or another one), Alice in Wonderland is the pinnacle of fairy tales because it just allows your imagination to run free and it’s just so magical. Like I said, fairy tales weren’t a big part of my childhood, however, I always enjoyed a couple of them, one would be Little Red Ridding Hood, and the other would be Alice in Wonderland. I really enjoyed reading Alice in Wonderland.
*I didn’t know who was supposed to post first this week. I guess it was Gabriela Sosa, but it looks like she’s either not in our group anymore, or she dropped the class. Either way, I went ahead and did the lead post. *
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Briar Rose
I have enjoyed reading Briar Rose. Over the weekend I watched Disney's version of Sleeping Beauty to try and refresh my memory of the fairy tale. In the fairy tale the three fairies renamed princess Aurora, Briar Rose so the evil witch would not find her. I found a number of similarities and of course, differences between the fairy tale and the book.
The "contamination" as Zipes would call it, was definitely prevelant in the book. Personally, I think its interesting when an author decides to put a different spin on a classic fairy tale and that is exactly what Jane Yolen did. From Zipes perspective, he would most likely say that Yolen contaminated the fairy tale. She took a classic fairy tale and made many changes. She has stolen the essence of the fairy tale and made it her own. I would say, great job Yolen! In this book, there is an underlying Jewish history portryaing one woman's travels to try and make it during World War II. On the back of the book, there is a quote from the Library Journal that said, "Showcasing Yolen's skill at transforming the real world into a realm of fantasy." I think that is the perfect quote. Yolen took a part of history that a number of people experienced and was able to turn it into a fairy tale experience. I wouldn't mind reading more "contaminated" fairy tales like these.
Most people will always know and love the original fairy tales and I don't think that we'll ever lose them. In saying that, I don't necessarily think that when authors, like Yolen, write a book based on a classic fairy tale and change the plot are actually "contaminating" the fairy tale as Zipes would probably say. They are taking a magical story and bringing it to life, they are putting their own personal life into a fairy tale and I think people enjoy that. Maybe it's just me, but I find the real stories with a fairy tale realm to be exciting and make for an awesome read!
The "contamination" as Zipes would call it, was definitely prevelant in the book. Personally, I think its interesting when an author decides to put a different spin on a classic fairy tale and that is exactly what Jane Yolen did. From Zipes perspective, he would most likely say that Yolen contaminated the fairy tale. She took a classic fairy tale and made many changes. She has stolen the essence of the fairy tale and made it her own. I would say, great job Yolen! In this book, there is an underlying Jewish history portryaing one woman's travels to try and make it during World War II. On the back of the book, there is a quote from the Library Journal that said, "Showcasing Yolen's skill at transforming the real world into a realm of fantasy." I think that is the perfect quote. Yolen took a part of history that a number of people experienced and was able to turn it into a fairy tale experience. I wouldn't mind reading more "contaminated" fairy tales like these.
Most people will always know and love the original fairy tales and I don't think that we'll ever lose them. In saying that, I don't necessarily think that when authors, like Yolen, write a book based on a classic fairy tale and change the plot are actually "contaminating" the fairy tale as Zipes would probably say. They are taking a magical story and bringing it to life, they are putting their own personal life into a fairy tale and I think people enjoy that. Maybe it's just me, but I find the real stories with a fairy tale realm to be exciting and make for an awesome read!
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Hansel, Gretel, and Zipes
As I read the Hansel and Gretel variants I realized there is an overwhelming theme throughout them; although, they were written by different people. The theme is that the wives/mothers die, and it does not matter if they are nice or evil. My question is, why?
Another theme is those whom are nice or genuine will prosper and those whom are evil will die. This is evident when the children kill the witch, find the jewels, go home, the step mother has died, and they are reunited with their father and live happily ever after. This theme also shows through when the child is killed by the stepmother and the bird collects “gifts” by singing the story of the boy’s death. In the end the father and other child are rewarded, while the stepmother is smashed to death by a stone.
I also realized that there were two distinct versions of Hansel and Gretel. The first is the Grimms version, which is of a poor father and evil stepmother who is over powering and doesn’t like the father’s children. The children are smart and when they are thrust into a horrible situation their wits are what save them (ex. Marking the trail with white pebbles in order to find their way home, giving the witch the bone to feel instead of his finger and Gretel acting “dumb” and tricking the witch into the oven then baking her to death) The moral of the story is children should be able to think on their feet and fend for themselves. The second version involved a magical bush, the pure love of a mother, an evil stepmother who dislikes the child of the previous wife, a bird who represents the dead child, and in the end the two kind people are rewarded while the evil stepmother is smashed to death.
Each of the following quotes are from different authors and each supports Zipes’ opinion that children’s literature does not exist and that adults do not write for children but rather about themselves as children and how they see childhood. I’m glad to read these quotes, because now there is proof that Zipes is not the only author out there that believes what he writes about.
“I want to show just what Marchen meant to me as a child” p.86
“You do not chop off a section of your imaginative substance and make a book for children….you have, in fact, no idea where childhood ends and maturity begins.”p.86
“I write for the child I am myself. “, “Not tales for children but projections of her childhood.” P.86-87
On page 87 Zipes questions Gag’s life and why she wrote the way she did, in particularly how she had a theme of “overcoming of obstacles to become successful and the reward of the persistent and diligent heroes.” I don’t see this as true because this was also a theme in the Grimms brothers version of the fairy tale Hansel and Gretel. Maybe she was attracted to these tales because of that theme, and not because she created that theme herself. Does this make sense? Do you have a different take?
Over and over again Zipes explains how Gag was imagining herself in the story and was not writing a true translation of the Grimms brothers’ fairy tales. He says the same for Disney, that he was “projecting himself into the story and projected visions of childhood” (p.93). Zipes book really does seem to go in circles and I find it very difficult to pay close attention, because I get annoyed with the repetition and constant preoccupation with the same theme. I get it “children’s literature” is written for both the child and the adult. Both audiences are going to enjoy the same piece of work and that is okay by me. If anything, the creation of children’s literature is brilliant, in that it captives a wide audience, and is all the more successful and profitable. If Zipes knew I wrote that last sentence he would surly scorn me. THE END.
Another theme is those whom are nice or genuine will prosper and those whom are evil will die. This is evident when the children kill the witch, find the jewels, go home, the step mother has died, and they are reunited with their father and live happily ever after. This theme also shows through when the child is killed by the stepmother and the bird collects “gifts” by singing the story of the boy’s death. In the end the father and other child are rewarded, while the stepmother is smashed to death by a stone.
I also realized that there were two distinct versions of Hansel and Gretel. The first is the Grimms version, which is of a poor father and evil stepmother who is over powering and doesn’t like the father’s children. The children are smart and when they are thrust into a horrible situation their wits are what save them (ex. Marking the trail with white pebbles in order to find their way home, giving the witch the bone to feel instead of his finger and Gretel acting “dumb” and tricking the witch into the oven then baking her to death) The moral of the story is children should be able to think on their feet and fend for themselves. The second version involved a magical bush, the pure love of a mother, an evil stepmother who dislikes the child of the previous wife, a bird who represents the dead child, and in the end the two kind people are rewarded while the evil stepmother is smashed to death.
Each of the following quotes are from different authors and each supports Zipes’ opinion that children’s literature does not exist and that adults do not write for children but rather about themselves as children and how they see childhood. I’m glad to read these quotes, because now there is proof that Zipes is not the only author out there that believes what he writes about.
“I want to show just what Marchen meant to me as a child” p.86
“You do not chop off a section of your imaginative substance and make a book for children….you have, in fact, no idea where childhood ends and maturity begins.”p.86
“I write for the child I am myself. “, “Not tales for children but projections of her childhood.” P.86-87
On page 87 Zipes questions Gag’s life and why she wrote the way she did, in particularly how she had a theme of “overcoming of obstacles to become successful and the reward of the persistent and diligent heroes.” I don’t see this as true because this was also a theme in the Grimms brothers version of the fairy tale Hansel and Gretel. Maybe she was attracted to these tales because of that theme, and not because she created that theme herself. Does this make sense? Do you have a different take?
Over and over again Zipes explains how Gag was imagining herself in the story and was not writing a true translation of the Grimms brothers’ fairy tales. He says the same for Disney, that he was “projecting himself into the story and projected visions of childhood” (p.93). Zipes book really does seem to go in circles and I find it very difficult to pay close attention, because I get annoyed with the repetition and constant preoccupation with the same theme. I get it “children’s literature” is written for both the child and the adult. Both audiences are going to enjoy the same piece of work and that is okay by me. If anything, the creation of children’s literature is brilliant, in that it captives a wide audience, and is all the more successful and profitable. If Zipes knew I wrote that last sentence he would surly scorn me. THE END.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)