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.

Take Hansel and Gretel, for instance. I’m 50 and in my day, sonny, we were always told that the kids were abandoned because their parents were too poor to take care of them–though if I remember aright the female parent was the ubiquitous “stepmother” and the father was presented as highly conflicted–he didn’t really want to expose the kids, she talked him into it–and ultimately he escapes moral censure. Everything was the wicked stepmother’s fault, and with her out of the picture, everyone can live happily ever after.

If I were going to fool around with psychological interpretations (and I would, and I will–I love this stuff)–I’d be more interested in this as a story about infanticidal impulse, and how children (attempt to) protect themselves psychologically from the intuition that their caregivers may sometimes feel resentment, rage, or worse, for them. The scary parent is doubly distanced–she’s a stepmother, not a “real” mother, then she’s a stranger with strange powers–a “witch”. Ultimately the kids (actually, in the versions of the story I’m familiar with, it’s always the daughter, Gretel) are clever and manage to kill her; they then reunite with their now-contrite papa.

If I were going to take a deeper look at this story, I’d begin by looking at the historical reality of infanticide and child abandonment. I’d also think about the ways in which people assign blame and choose scapegoats.

Torture of the “bad guys” is common at the end of the older versions of familiar fairy tales (part of the “happy ending”?); and misogyny is rampant. Placing these stories in their historical context, I think we find tales not originally intended for children, that often reflect the values and fears of the times of their origins.

I submit that the stories we call “fairy tales” have, like other folklore, lasted NOT because they offer pleasing and uplifting morals (the morals are always tacked on later anyway) but because they express raw human feelings, some decidedly un-edifying, including fear, rage, and hatred–as well as wonder, resourcefulness, and hope.

Note: I’m just making some (hopefully thought provoking) observations in the above paragraph. I’m not going to start tramatizing any of the kids I know by tucking them into bed after telling them a horrendous story about a wolf that eats little girls. I don’t think we’ve analyzed this enough from a psychological standpoint yet to know what is the most morally beneficial. When it comes to bedtime stories, I think for now, I’ll stick to the morals of Sesame Street, Clifford, and good old Frog and Toad.

I remember a story I read as a child, and for the life of me I cannot remember the name of it

Are you maybe referring to The Snow Queen, by Hans Christian Andersen?

Thanks for subscribing!

Andy

I remember a story I read as a child, and for the life of me I cannot remember the name of it, but it was about a spoiled child, full of vanity, a pair of red shoes and a mirror that smashed into millions of pieces and got in her eyes and made her see how ugly she was, that or I imagined the whole thing!

Fairy tales are the farthest thing from Disney! But then, Disney always traumatized me as a child. I still can’t watch Fantasia. Little did I know the acid trip of a movie that it was back then! :)

Hope you’ll write Part Deux soon! I’m subscribing!

Based on the so far 100% enthusiastic response and request for more, there will indeed be another article about even more classic fairy tales and their original versions.

If you want to be notified when the new article is available, then you can use one of the “Subscribe” methods at the top right of this page - Email alerts will send you an email every time a new article is published. Or, of course, you can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes or other reader.

As of right now, the new article is third on the list to be published, so you should see another article on this topic in approximately three weeks.

Thanks,

Andy

UPDATE: The new article has been published, and is available at this link.

This article talks too about modern interpretations of old traditions- reflecting the change of cultural behaviors and preferences. Although the original stories do carry much heavier morals, I think I’d prefer (overall) reading our modern interpretations to young children today. Discovering the true/original stories when you’re old enough is like a new adventure itself.

Can we have more adventures??