Princess and the Frog

First, regarding the criticisms from Tatar, I found the detail and specificity of Aarne and Thompson's system of classification to be extremely fascinating. Every possible plot (of about 2500 basic plots) seemed to branch out into identified subplots, settings, and motifs. Their entire catalogue must have taken decades to sort through every detail of folk tales. I thought it was interesting how, though there are thousands of mixed and matched plots and motifs to create infinitely many combinations and different stories, the same re-occuring 5-step plot is generally followed.

One thing that stuck out to me from Propp's first essay, Folklore & Literature, is this: "A literary work is immutable, but the reader always changes." A perfect example of such cultural analysis is Disney's latest animated feature, Princess and the Frog. As a culture, we are somehow accustomed to the idea of a prince trapped in a slimy frog's body and having to be slammed against a wall or kissed or some other drastic action to change him back. Whoever first came up with this strange idea probably didn't imagine the story taking place in the French Quarter or the Louisiana Bayou, with a jazz-playing alligator, Cajun firefly, or master of voodoo. The "reader" or perhaps listener of the tale centuries ago would certainly have expected a different story than what Disney gives us. Regardless, the basic 5 plot structure is still ever present and followed to a T, right up to the marriage. Motifs such as magic helpers, evil spirits and, of course, transformed humans seeking a solution, make Princess and the Frog a recognizable fairy tale. We are used to how a folk tale should begin and end, certain aspects that should be in them, and our attention is still captured by the old folk tale of the frog prince.