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!
Sunday, February 11, 2007
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.
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Zipes and Fairy Tales
Reading Sticks and Stones by Jack Zipes was certainly very interesting. To see what Zipes had to say about children’s literature and the publishing field in general was especially interesting. After reading a bit of Zipes’ work, I must say I have a lot more respect for children’s literature. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not like I didn’t respect the works before, but after reading what Zipes had to say, I now know that writing for a child can be difficult. I always figured all you had to do was write a little, and include a lot of colorful pictures and bam; you have a work of art. Well, Zipes brought up a good point, it’s a lot harder then just including words and pictures because you are not only writing for the child, you’re also writing for the parent. You have to be careful of what you say or even draw because a parent might analyze the book before reading it to a child and you don’t want a parent to be upset.
This brings me to my next point. Zipes mentions that the wider audience who reads children’s books aren’t children; they are parents, and college students. I don’t know how accurate that is, but I think it’s a very good point. Look at this class right now, we’re all college students in this class and we’re reading children’s books. Obviously children read children’s books, but I just never really thought that they weren’t the main audience that these books targeted.
The other thing that I found very interesting in Zipes’ book was when he talked about the publishing industry. I never really thought about the publishers of these books, I just figured they were companies and that’s all. But from what I heard in class, something that Professor Kittle mentioned, these publishers are linked to other things. I believe that the example that Professor Kittle used was that a publishing company was linked to a bigger company and that company sold weapons of mass destruction. Again, before reading Zipes’ book and talking about it in class, I never really thought about publishers and publishing companies, they were irrelevant to me. But now, it’s a big deal, its linked to politics. I mean a company who publishes children’s books may also be selling bombs and guns. If that’s not politics then I don’t know what is.
One thing that got me a little puzzled was when Zipes talked about “junk food” as literature. I mean what does he define as junk food? I mean are comic books “junk food”? Zipes might think so but I think comics are wonderful because they capture the imagination of a children (and adults) and a lot of children see comics as something fun and entertaining. So, if something captures the child’s mind, then what’s so wrong about that? What is “junk food” and what isn’t? I personally believe that if something captures a child and allows them to think and wonder, then it’s not “junk food”.
As for the articles that we read about Little Red Riding Hood, well, those were a little disturbing to me. I mean I’ve read different versions of fairy tales, but I never read one of Little Red Riding Hood with so much emphasis on sex. I mean in one of the stories, the wolf asks Red to take off her clothes and go lay next to him. This made me think, are stories now at days being censored a bit? I mean censorship isn’t a bad idea at times. I don’t want my son or daughter reading books with sex and sexual images in it. I don’t know, all this did was made me think about the industry a little more in depth.
Reading Zipes’ book and the different versions of the fairy tales online made me think a lot about how many different interpretations might exist on one thing. Reading Zipes’ book made me think a lot about the publishing field and got me a little paranoid because now I think that these publishers are really all about money and profits, rather then putting out a good piece of work for the children.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)