a thought on fairytales
Mar. 15th, 2009 07:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
If there's one point that I continue to waffle about with wrt fairytales, it's their fitness as feminist or woman-positive artifacts. I took them as such in my thesis last year in a tradition of thirdwave/minority feminist concepts of wholeness, subversion, and reappropriation - but I still haven't completely shaken my anxieties.
Okay, but. I was reading fairytale stuff this afternoon, for no particular reason, and I'm just going to go ahead and quote at length.
From Maria Tatar, Off With Their Heads!: Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood - "[the argument is based] on the assumption that fairy tales 'represent the child's point of view' and are thus constantly turning parent-victims into parent-oppressors, a line of thinking similar to the one followed by Freud in his qualified rejection of patients' stories about incestuous seduction.... The 'guilty' child simply projects its own sins and transgressions onto the 'innocent' parent. Were this so consistently the case...then 'Hansel and Gretel' would be a story that is ostensibly about children abandoned by their parents in the woods, but in reality about parents left to starve by their children. Or, more to the point for our context, 'Beauty and the Beast' would not really be about a girl who is forced into marriage with a beast by her father, but about a father who is forced into an undesirable marriage by his daughter. That the propositions are so preposterous for these two tales suggests something amiss."
And here's my thought: if patriarchy feels like it has to contort itself into such utterly bizarre readings of fairy tales, there's got to be something scary, something major, hidden there. Obviously the tales as they stand are for some reason deeply offensive to the literary sensibility of the patriarch. And I figure, anything those guys are so scared of is probably something I want a closer acquaintance with.
If fairy tales were simply and fundamentally patriarchal, male critical responses to them would be equally simple. As Tatar points out, though, they're not. Dudely philosophes apparently couldn't just let fairy tales stand. And in order to sanitize them, they had to resort to Orwellian doublespeak: oh, these stories obviously mean the exact opposite of anything you'd expect! Abandoned children? No, those are clearly horrid brats who drive their parents to distraction! It's victim blaming, and it's crazy, and its presence indicates a latent power in fairy tales.
Sometimes you can best see your allies by noticing who's furthest away from your enemies.
Okay, but. I was reading fairytale stuff this afternoon, for no particular reason, and I'm just going to go ahead and quote at length.
From Maria Tatar, Off With Their Heads!: Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood - "[the argument is based] on the assumption that fairy tales 'represent the child's point of view' and are thus constantly turning parent-victims into parent-oppressors, a line of thinking similar to the one followed by Freud in his qualified rejection of patients' stories about incestuous seduction.... The 'guilty' child simply projects its own sins and transgressions onto the 'innocent' parent. Were this so consistently the case...then 'Hansel and Gretel' would be a story that is ostensibly about children abandoned by their parents in the woods, but in reality about parents left to starve by their children. Or, more to the point for our context, 'Beauty and the Beast' would not really be about a girl who is forced into marriage with a beast by her father, but about a father who is forced into an undesirable marriage by his daughter. That the propositions are so preposterous for these two tales suggests something amiss."
And here's my thought: if patriarchy feels like it has to contort itself into such utterly bizarre readings of fairy tales, there's got to be something scary, something major, hidden there. Obviously the tales as they stand are for some reason deeply offensive to the literary sensibility of the patriarch. And I figure, anything those guys are so scared of is probably something I want a closer acquaintance with.
If fairy tales were simply and fundamentally patriarchal, male critical responses to them would be equally simple. As Tatar points out, though, they're not. Dudely philosophes apparently couldn't just let fairy tales stand. And in order to sanitize them, they had to resort to Orwellian doublespeak: oh, these stories obviously mean the exact opposite of anything you'd expect! Abandoned children? No, those are clearly horrid brats who drive their parents to distraction! It's victim blaming, and it's crazy, and its presence indicates a latent power in fairy tales.
Sometimes you can best see your allies by noticing who's furthest away from your enemies.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 01:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-16 07:45 pm (UTC)