Sondheim's Into the Woods

This musical is, on the one hand, a modern interpretation of the fairy tale in a different genre than its original creation. On the other hand, Into the Woods can also be called a modern day oral tradition. Oral tales with as much fervor and imagery as fairy tales probably demanded theatricality from the storyteller. I think that this play addresses a lot of interesting aspects concerning fairy tale structure. Firstly, just the setting of the interactions of characters—its always someone running into someone else in the woods. There are tons of chance encounters and run-ins, but even when the characters are at home, they all share a split stage. I think that this constant saturation of characters and disjointed scene structure comments on the inability to effectively mash these stories into one cultural context. According to the plot of Act II, Sondheim believes there are dire consequences to lumping all of these wonderfully rich, vastly different cultural stories into a boiled-down, condensed version for an end.

Willingham's Fables

In the graphic novel Fables, Willingham relies mostly on characters for its merit as an adaptation of fairy tale literature. There is a magical element to the story, as the wizards have the ability to make small apartments hold castle-sized rooms. But Willingham makes great use of the audience's previous exposure to popular fairy tales to further the plot by alluding to them. The story is full of winks and nods to characters we have studied inside class and outside in society. Detective Bigby Wolf; Snow White, director of operations; Jack from jack in the beanstalk; Mrs. Beauty and Mr. Beast (who have marital problems); Prince Charming as a don juan; even creepy old Bluebeard who killed his wives before "the amnesty." The scene of the invasion of fairy land is particularly interesting: dwarves and magical creatures, little red riding hood and the three pigs, it reminds me of the characters in Shrek (3 blind mice, gingerbread man, etc) getting together and singing and dancing in the swamp. All of these references weave together for a funny mash-up of characters we would never picture interacting together otherwise.

Into the Woods & Fables

I found Into the Woods interesting because it seemed to stay in line with the fairy tale tradition more so than Willingham's Fables. Both seem to have a sort of modern day twist with Fables in particular placing fairy tale characters in the modern world. Into the Woods was relatively true to the originals, but there was always a hint of "We know this is silly and wouldn't really happen in real life" to them. The actors were great at making jokes about their characters without making it seem as if they were in fact mocking them.

I think it is quite clear that both Into the Woods and Fables are more recent pieces because neither takes fairy tales as they were originally intended to be interpreted. Fables places fairy tale characters into a more dramatic world. Fairy tales typically aren't dramatic, at least not to the level of a comic book so seeing the characters in such a dramatic way is intriguing. Into the Woods is truer to the originals than Fables. It is lighthearted and is more aligned with the way that we think of fairy tales today. It's silly and fun while also teaching a lesson.

The Fairy Tale About Common Sense

This story is about an nice old gentleman that understands common sense over all else. He goes in front of a panel of nondescript heads-of-state to lay out an argument for town reform. His proposal includes a six bedroom home for every family, extravagant schools, and new hospitals built in densely populated areas. He asks the heads-of-state for one hundred thousand billion dollars to complete his proposal. They laugh him almost out of the room. He cleverly replies that one hundred thousand billion is the exact amount spent on the war. Why can't that amount be spent during peace time? They tell him that he is crazy--"war is something entirely different".

This story can definitely be considered a fairy tale. The protagonist is a nondescript old man that is full of virtue. We are instantly on his side because he believes in virtuous, common sense thought--not that poisonous manipulative thought. The old man goes on a journey of sorts to get to where he can impart his knowledge. Obviously, the rulers are inept an cannot listen to sound logic. Logic does not flourish in the aristocracy. The rulers are characterized as demonic and self-serving.

Also, this tale ends with a little "real life" paragraph. The author directly addresses the audience to tie his story to a relevant point in history. Its like a Perrault-ian fable at the end of the tale.

The Shadow

by Hans Christian Andersen.

First, "The Shadow" is set in a non-descript location, some sort of village with a lively main street and friendly townspeople. The village is in a very hot country that suffers from a heat blazing from the sun. It is the kind of heat that "turns the people a deep mahogany brown," and the man suffering from the heat is a "young and clever scholar from the colder north." The story interestingly personifies the man's shadow, which stretches and grows and regains strength.

The supernatural element is not very magical in this story, it's more just... strange. One day the man wakes up and says: "Look at this, I haven't got any shadow!" And years after a new shadow had grown in its place, the old shadow comes back wearing flesh and clothes, gold watches and rings. They sit down for a meal and story-telling time. The shadow had left him to be with Poetry herself. She lived in a brilliantly lit home. For some reason the shadow is very arrogant, insisting he not be addressed as "old friend" and reminding the man that he knows all. Years later, the shadow returns and asks the man to become HIS shadow! He is careful to take the place of the "master" and calls the man by his first name while he must be addressed by last.

Lastly, the story includes a princess. She is lovely, but considering that her malady was "seeing too clearly," the shadow fools her without problem. The shadow woos the princess with the unknowing help of the man, and they are prepared to elope. The man refuses to say he is his shadow's shadow, so they throw him in prison, kill him, and live happily ever after! But the lack of a happy ending for the poor scholarly man was a grave departure from normal fairy tales.

This tale dramatizes Anderson's mixed feelings toward the patronage of the upper class, according to Zipes. But the strangeness and simplicity of the story, as well as the unfair ending, are rather different than other tales.

A Chinese Fairy Tale

I read A Chinese Fairy-Tale by Laurence Housman. He was an Englishman
who wrote this story in 1904 (about half way through his life). The
story is about a little servant boy name Tiki-pu whose master was an
artist/ art teacher. He was treated very cruelly by his master but had
an intense desire to become an artist himself. Each night he was
locked in the art studio to cleanup and then sleep on the floor.
Finally he got the idea to try his hand at painting by stealing bits
of candles and scraps of rice paper, etc. and working at night. At one
end of the art studio there was a very famous painting by the most
highly revered artist, Wio-wani. The legend was that he had painted
the place he wanted to rest after he died and then just walked into
his painting one day and went through the back door of a castle. One
night while Tiki-pu was painting, Wio-wani came out and invited
Tiki-pu into the painting with him so he could teach him to paint.
Tiki-pu joined him in the painting each night for a while, before his
master caught him and painted a brick wall over the door in the
picture so he could not come back out. Tiki-pu stayed in there for 5
years, until one day him and Wio-wani took down the brick wall.
Wio-wani came out of the picture with him and beat the master with a
brick from the painting, killing him, then returning to the painting.
Tiki-pu was a great artist after that and no longer had to suffer
under his cruel master.

I think this story has some of the usual fairytale elements, such as the mistreated child being the hero of the story and the cruel master being brutally killed in the end. The concept is very interesting and honestly something that I have thought about before. The magical ability to enter and operate within paintings. While this story does claim to be a fairy tale and possesses some of the usual characteristics, I think it is actually more of a legendary type of story or myth. Just as we have been discussing in class about Eckbert the Blond and how Bertha talking about a fairytale directs our attention to the relationship between the overall story itself and a fairytale, this story discusses the legend of Wio-Wani entering the painting he had created within the story, which brought my attention to the legend genre when considering the overall story. I think there is almost a power of suggestion by mentioning things like that within the story.

As a side note, as someone who has spent time extensively studying Chinese culture, history, language, etc. I felt like this was not a very accurate story (especially considering the names); which brought up an interesting point of how fairy tales are written to encourage us to at least mentally escape to far away places, which was perhaps Housman's intention in writing about China (without what appears to be any personal experience with the country).

Of Feminine Subtlety

This story is a fairy tale because it starts out with a king on his death bed with three sons. Each son is going to be awarded some kind of posession. The youngest son is to gain three different magical items; a ring, a necklace, and a piece of cloth. Magical items being left to a son in the first place is a common element among fairy tales. Another common element that comes into play shortly after is the female figure. In many fairy tales, there is a female figure that is evil and deceitful, many times a witch. In this story, she is a concubine who is trying to beguile the son out of his posessions using her feminine sultry and charm. It works and each time she tricks him again gaining the objects in her control. Eventually, the woman is punished for her behavior, as in other fairy tales. She suffers an agonizing death which in many fairy tales is also the suitable punishment for witches. Lastly, everything works out and there is a peaceful ending. This is the traditional "happily ever after" element that is represented from fairy tales. There are many reasons from this story that can classify it as a fairy tale. On the other hand though, there are many examples in this story that stray from the traditional fairy tale elements.

The Story of the Fairy Tale (pg. 564)

I was drawn to this story mostly because of the title, but I think it also answers the question of "what makes a fairy tale?" while being a fairy tale itself. In the story, Truth disappears from the world and five wise men go in search for it. The wise men argue and try to figure out what Truth is with each wise man believing that it is something different from Science, to Love, to Gold, to Truth, to Wine. The wise men end up physically fighting each other and they all suffer their own individual bruises. A little girl comes to the men and tells them that she has found Truth. Upon seeing Truth, however, the wise men all call out that "It's a Fairy Tale" and walk away from it leaving only a few people with Fairy Tale.

In this brief story, Fairy Tale is given a description that allows it to encompass so many different aspects. It's neither male nor female, adult or child. It's as soft as a mother while also being as strong as the hand of a king. It has a smile that is bright yet quivers with sadness that is indescribable. A fairy tale is all of the above. It's a story that takes no sides and is whatever you want or need it to be.

The wise men of science, theology, love, gold, and wine all dismiss Fairy Tale and fight among themselves until the world is "shaken to its center." The wise men dismiss Fairy Tale because it is not serious. It isn't meant to solve the world's problems, and yet, somehow it seems to help. It gives people an outlet through which they can believe in the unbelievable. This story is a fairy tale because it doesn't claim to be the truth or anything serious, which is the entire point of a fairy tale.

comment on pharra's post

does anyone else find it impossible to comment on other people's posts? for some reason, the box doesn't let me type in it.

I liked how you mentioned the difference in tone between a typical "grimm's fairy tale" and the literary tales of this week. the tone is much more factual, detailed, and even historical, such as by alluding to the legend of Tristan & Isolde. It reminded me of the "historical background" on the nice guy that Bluebeard really was, who was taken advantage of by 7 different women and finally stabbed to death by the last wife's lover's henchmen. I did not know that this background on Bluebeard was not true, so I read the whole thing feeling terribly sorry for the poor guy, and angry at how history portrayed him! I totally believed it, just because the story began with a scientific, historical-sounding, objective tone.

Finding the Fairy Tale in The Philosopher's Stone

The main difference between this week's stories and the usual Grimm fairy tale is literary complexity. The Philosopher's Stone has complex dialogue, character development, humor and satire. It offers a social critique throughout the story, such as the contemporary issue of German subjects being sold to maintain an evil king's lifestyle. The tale even includes historical allusions that give the tale a superior, factual air about it. Yet despite these differences, magic and storytelling still take center stage. We still get our usual dose of animal-->human transformation, king-->peasant lessons learned, some weird gender mix-ups, and nature's role in helping things along. One notable difference between traditional fairy tales and this story was the inclusion of science and alchemy. Normally tales are timeless and therefore totally nondescript in time period, but this story shows some signs of modernity, with people either believing in the magicians or the scientists. Real magic combats real science. Of course, the ending to this story resembles a traditional fairy tale: happiness and the rite of passage into society that is marriage. They learn to be content with living simply.

Most of the tales we've read thus far have had a seemingly set tone of lightheartedness that conveys the idea that "this is a fairy tale." The tales for this week don't really seem to have that tone. They feel real which makes it harder to classify them as a fairy tale. I can't quite describe why a Grimm's story feels like a fairy tale and these stories don't though. All of the elements are the same such as the magic and mysticism, but they just feel...different. Perhaps it is the point of view through which the tales are told.

What I found interesting about The Philosopher's Stone was that the story is told not from the point of view of some omniscient narrator, but from the Egyptian, at least for a vast majority of the story. The story also takes on the whole satirical tone to where the reader almost wants to take it seriously and then realizes that it's a joke. On the other hand, the story is written in a way that makes it seem real and more plausible for the reader.

It is interesting to observe the transformation within fairy tale from the traditional ever adapting story telling to the unique, literary tale, written by an author and given a permanent identity. Even more interesting is that one of the first literary fairy tales we observe is Wieland's The Philosopher's Stone, a complete satirical take on the fairy tale genre. King Mark, an anti-heroic character who exhibits nothing but sin and vice, is the protagonist of this tale. The narrative arc of this tale is completely out of wack, and on purpose. There is no narrative purpose of the tale. Wieland's only purpose is to completely flip the fair tale genre on its head similar to that of Tex Avery's cartoons, but in a more old fashioned sense. The story changes directions more times than necessary, as fairies appear, disappear, reappear, and metamorphoses occur without explanation. Another approach Wieland takes to mock the fairy tale is his creation of the frame story lay out of The Philosopher's stone, by introducing the seemingly never ending dream sequences/stories. Wieland's satire culminates in these stories because he no longer mock the fairy tale genre, but in fact mocks the literary genre as a whole, because a character within this ridiculous story telling a story seems to be more important than the overarching story itself.

Why is this tale considered a fairy tale?

In the first paragraph of introduction, we are told that the tale contains "strange beings that are frequently found in the wilderness of this region....super-natural creatures." Right off the bat we are introduced to the fact there are fantastical creatures in this tale. This right here is an element that is found in fairy tales. Once the actual story starts, we are again presented with an element of fairy tales. "At one time there was a naked saint who lived in a remote cave near a small river." This starts the tale at an ambiguous place in time as well as with an ambiguous character and ambiguous setting. This piece further adds to the thought that this tale can be considered a fairy tale. Fairy tales are known for fantastical creatures, ambiguous time and setting, as well as magical elements of transformation. This third element presents itself first when the two lovers souls are transformed by the moonlight. Then, the singing transforms the naked saint back into a human. It even said that the singing broke the "magic spell." The overall trajectory of this tale also stays true to that of fairy tales. It starts off in the time and setting, moves through to the creature and his issues, and then is transformed by lovers that break the magical spell.

The Golden Goose

In seventh grade, I acted in production of “The Golden Goose” at my middle school. I was the King. I didn’t have a name. Nor a character, really. The king was only supposed to be really cranky with anything his daughter said. He also hated Simpleton with a passion. This translated to me furrowing my brow for the 20 or so minutes I was up on stage. That is, until the last scene, in which I give over my daughter to Simpleton. He proved virtuous, so he gets a wife. Standard stuff.

Reading the Golden goose tale makes me see the Simpleton character in a completely different light. I know that we car studying this story in conjunction with other men stories. Simpleton, though, is truly a fool. Not that he has any more sense than any other man in a fairy tale, but he is especially stupid by comparison to his cleverer brothers. But wait! His stupidity actually gets his somewhere. His cleverer brothers refuse to share their food with a dwarf. Simpleton doesn’t really know how to say no or consider that he is being taken advantage of, so of course his shortsightedness is rewarded. This is really the only proactive thing he does in the story. So, in one sense, maturity can be achieved through one virtuous or selfless act. Simpleton is already thinking about marriage, so its not physical maturity that he requires. Manhood is simply a state of mind that is somewhat given by a wiser more virtuous man.

Iron Hans

It is interesting to see how battle and war has finally made its way into the fairy tale genre, and I don't think it is a coincidence that it is present in the story about "wild" men. Violence and war stems from the uncontrollable nature of man and perhaps the Grimm's brothers have illuminated this aspect of peasant culture in these Iron Hans and Wild Man stories. Hair is also an interesting motif to study in the fairy tale genre, and in Iron Hans we have a slight inconsistency within the motif. Hair usually represents health and stature rather than beauty, but the "golden hair" of the boy dazzled and bewildered everyone in the story, including the young princess who actively pursued her attraction to this glowing golden hair. It is interesting to see how the gendered nature of hair here has been reversed as golden blond hair is usually sexualized and characteristic of the female gender. Yet this youth, this naughty boy who couldnt control where his ball landed, who couldnt properly guard a well, rose to military and popular fame all as a result of his roots back to his wild nature and his bond to Iron Hans. Perhaps the inner beast in man can be a good thing when tamed.

Do Boys Ever Really Grow Up?

The stories we have read this week are supposed to reflect the progression of boy growing into men. Apparently there is no smooth transition that does not include a variety of mistakes. In some of the stories, Clever Hans for example, he never grows up or learns anything. For the most part they don't tend to repeat the exact same mistakes, but pretty close. In Iron Hans, the boy learns not to put his finger back in the pool, but he still ends up putting something in it each time. So he learned from his mistake, but not enough to prevent him from messing up the same task again. I was surprised in the story of Bearskin that the main character did not need to make a series of mistakes to learn his lesson or acquire his wealth, but then again, he had already been an orphan and had gone to war, so he was not exactly a child just being introduced to the world. The same goes for the 3 soldiers who had to outsmart the dragon/devil to keep their freedom. I think the stories we have read where the characters truly were children, they would have made more mistakes (like in Iron Hans).

I think Iron Hans was the most interesting story of the most complete progression through the boy's life, but I still felt like there was interesting information missing. If the boy's hair was so beautiful and he was the rightful heir to a kingdom, why did he pretend to have scabs on his head and not want anything to do with the money the princess had given him. By participating in the war and contest, he clearly shows a willingness to be a part of the kingdom and win the princess over, but she doesn't know that he is giving the money away, etc.

I don't know that these stories give young boys much direction about how to become a man because it seems like most of what they have is somewhat magically provided for them. I also feel like the missing story of the wild man complicates this by having no explanation whatsoever of why he had been enchanted and why he was suddenly a king. Boys can't just suddenly be kings with no explanation. I think the Grimm's the wild man story had the most practical lesson to it, don't become a drunk vandal that is vulnerable to temptations and eventually ends up ridiculed in a cage... of course until the end of the story when he is suddenly a king after his giving "redemptive acts" toward the boy. I don't know what to make of all these stories and the progression of the boys growing up. Sometimes it happens and sometimes it doesn't.

After reading Clever Hans and Wild Man as well as discussing them in class, it is evident that there are many similarities as well as differences. Clever Hans, does not develop throughout the story. He is the same at the beginning as he is at the end. It seems that since there is no age or time progression throughout the story. In Wild Man, there is development of the boy because of his urgency and want to leave his parents and be on his own. One thing that I thought of upon reading both of these stories, which may be a stretch, is Peter Pan. While Peter Pan never wants to grow up, time passes and he stays the same. He consciously does not want to grow up ever. In these stories, the concept of time and age is unsure. Also, the conscious decision to not develop or move forward is not evident. It seems to be under the surface. The man in Clever Hans acts like a boy, not a mature figure that his age should resemble. This also relates back to the fact that subconsciously, he is not maturing or developing.

The Wild Man

Grimms the Wild Man starts with a boy getting independent from your parents. Disobeying the kings (who is also his father) orders is his first step to get away from his parents - a decision that is just followed by another much further reaching decision that makes him finally independent from his parents. Instead of taking his fathers punishment, which would probably not have been as bad (he would have be beaten), he chooses to leave the protection of his fathers kingdom and goes with a complete stranger. It seems as if he consciously tries to get away from his paternal safety and start his own life in a world he doesn’t know and understand yet. Still, taking the risk of leaving ones parents definitely is the advice for young men this story conveyes.
The second advice is how to get a wife. He takes a job and starts working. But instead of working on his own, the wild man does all the work and all he has to do is to take care of his appearance – which finally also guarantees him the princesss attention. Paired with his refusal to take her money and giving it to the wild man instead, we can see three basic manners how men should be: they should take care of their appearance, they should be willing to be only rewarded for the work they do which is basically honesty, and generosity, as he gives the money to somebody else even though he could have needed it himself. All these points finally influenced the princess to marry him.
Even though these features helped him convincing the princess, he couldn’t convince the king and the queen. He had to war to be accepted and appreciated by them, which is probably the final advice for young men who want to gain success in life. It reminds me of the rags to riches story: the only possibility for a regular man to be accepted by the higher society probably was great services in war. Thus military service was another important factor in a mens education.

Clever Hans

"How does a particular story reflect boy's progression into manhood?"

"Clever Hans" is interesting to me because while I was reading it, I assumed that Hans had to be a young boy due to his blatant stupidity and lack of common sense. Upon reading the final line of the tale, "That was how Hans lost his bride," I was surprised to discover that Hans, at least by the end of the tale, was an adult. I think this story says a lot about how men are perceived. Hans' lack of growth from the beginning of the tale (it's unclear as to how old he is at the beginning) to the end implies that man's ability to discern logically is somewhat stunted. Hans listens to his mother's suggestions and always utilizes them "next time," but never grows wise enough to discern when her suggestions are appropriate. Hans grows from a stupid boy to a stupid man who ultimately loses his bride because of his inability to use common sense.

In addition to lacking common sense, Hans continues to faithfully listen to his mother as if he were still a child. Whatever his mother tells him to do, Hans obediently does it. His growth into manhood is so stunted that there really doesn't seem to be a difference between his childhood and adulthood. It's difficult to discern any change and really makes the reader wonder if there is any progression into manhood at all for Clever Hans, which makes him an interesting choice when studying the progression from boyhood to manhood.

De wilde mann

Robby Bly based his book Iron John on the stories of rugged, wild men that we read in class. These same innocent fairy tales ignited the "Men's Movement" of the 90s to rescue masculinity and give men purpose in a society that was empowering women but leaving typical male gender roles very confused. Bly uses Iron Hans as an example of what real men should be like! LOL. But the story does successfully showcase a variety of characteristics of REAL MEN.

1. The Huntsman
The hunter, like in many fairy tales (i.e. LRRH), is a pretty burly and competent guy. The hunter looking for the Wild Man is fearless and intelligent (He lets his dog get dragged into the pool before he does). He valued teamwork, had manly friends, and wasn't afraid of hard work (three guys use buckets to empty out the pool). And the hunter nobly protects the safety of the peasants by putting the wild man into captivity.

2. The Wild Man
The wild man is persuasive and uses his leverage well (golden ball <--> cage key). He knows how to get things done. But he is still kind to the boy, teaches him the value of hard work (in the castle with the cook/gardener) and the value of the dollar ("There you shall know poverty").

3. The boy
The boy is willing to learn, help, fight in a battle, humble (doesn't want to take credit for saving England, prefers his cloppity horse), attracts a pretty woman, and work hard in the kitchen and garden. He is generous with his money with the gardener's children, and Iron Hans knows that he has a good heart.

So, what does this all mean for the roles that men should play in society?