You’ve discovered the flaw in the article. :) What I called “original versions”, should probably be renamed. To something like, “versions earlier than the versions we see presented most often in mass media”. I hoped to make that point clear in the article itself. But if I didn’t, or if I led you astray, I apologize. My intent was also not to find an original author (like the Grimm Brothers, or you mentioned Parrault), but instead to find the original storyline itself. In that way, we can know the story as it once was, not just presentation is popular today.

Andy

Thanks for your time and hopefully your help,
Katelyn

I don’t think these original stories would benefit really little children. Or you have to be a very good storyteller to highlight the message and make the gruesome scenes less frightening. (In case of little children I think it’s really hard!) I don’t think Disney did bad thing with making these stories nicer and adding happy end. Children wouldn’t like them if there were bad ends, I know that for sure. But as they grow older they should learn about these versions as well. :)

Monica: I don’t think children are always searching for messages in fairy tales. Maybe they notice the difference between good and bad, but the won’t likely to notice deeper meanings. (I have a little cousin (4 years old) who is a pricess-fan. I don’t think she understands anything else in Disney films than “Oh, princess!” ^^;)

There are a few stories by known authors, for example “The Yellow Dwarf” by Madame D’Aulnoy, written in the late seventeenth or early eighteenth century. Andrew Lang included it in The Blue Fairy Book. But most of them weren’t literary creations. They were stories that were in wide circulation, told by ordinary, often illiterate people; they spread from region to region, country to country, changing some details and borrowing others as they spread.

Stacy’s quote in the comment above yours sums it up pretty well:

“Although a scant few fairy tales can be traced to particular authors, the origins of most of these stories are long-lost; they’ve been told and re-told, through the centuries and across cultures, for many years.”

Andy

(I thought I submitted this comment yesterday; but it is either being held, or it didn’t go through, so I’ll try again!)

Thank you for your kind words. Though I’m not a professional folklorist, I’ve been interested in these stories and some other types of folklore for many years, and there’s one point I think it’s important to clarify. In your reply, you wrote (referring to “Cinderella”):

“The version by the Brothers Grimm I detailed does seem to be the original, version 1 story”–

Like most “fairy tales”, the story the English-speaking world knows as Cinderella is a very ancient story. How ancient? In their article on the story, Wikipedia says,

“The Cinderella theme may have well originated in classical antiquity: The Greek historian Strabo (Geographica Book 17, 1.33) recorded in the 1st century BC the tale of the Greco-Egyptian girl Rhodopis, which is considered the oldest known version of the story.[3] [4] Rhodopis (the “rosy-cheeked”) washes her clothes in an Ormoc stream, a task forced upon her by fellow servants, who have left to go to a function sponsored by the Pharaoh Amasis. An eagle takes her rose-gilded sandal and drops it at the feet of the Pharaoh in the city of Memphis; he then asks the women of his kingdom to try on the sandal to see which one fits….”

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella)

The brothers Grimm were collectors, not the authors of the stories they told. There are many earlier versions of “Cinderella” (Charles Perrault wrote a version of it in the 17th century.) Although a scant few fairy tales can be traced to particular authors, the origins of most of these stories are long-lost; they’ve been told and re-told, through the centuries and across cultures, for many years.

If you guys are already holding a comment like this, I apologize for repeating myself; I just wasn’t sure if it went through the first time!

Take care.

I

Thanks very much for not just disagreeing, but adding to the knowledge base! Your contribution was very helpful. A note on one thing you said:

You’ve removed only the the first layer of gloss that’s been applied in order to pretty up these stories. And then you’ve interpreted them according to–Freudian psychology?

The removal of the “first layer of gloss” was my original intent in writing this article. The critical thinking aspect came from not taking fairly tales in the way they are presented to us today. That layer of gloss covers up some drastic changes, which I personally find very interesting. The psychological analysis, while perhaps more interesting to you and some others, was a secondary intent.

The one point I disagree with you on was this statement: “the morals are always tacked on later anyway” …I don’t think that’s the case. Take Cinderella (which I wrote about in this sequel article). The version by the Brothers Grimm I detailed does seem to be the original, version 1 story, where the selfish “bad” people are punished at the end. Symbolism or no, psychological interpretation or no, there’s a clear (and brutally communicated) moral message.

As for the psychological analysis, I submit that’s more subjective and open to interpretation, because we can only guess at the writer’s intent. With that said, you make excellent points, some of which could replace or add to my original analysis. Specifically, your raising the issue of the “historical reality of infanticide and child abandonment” is intriguing. This aspect never even occurred to me.