Madness # 4

Madness # 4

The Madness continues with an abundance of reading and thinking.  The realization sets in that as a child I may have been sheltered with the stories my father read to me, forcing a personal examination to see if I may have done the same to my now grown sons.  With my oldest graduating with honors from Vanderbilt University and my youngest son attending LSU, maybe I did not shelter what I read to them too much.  I do know that in the future I will pay closer attention to the reading choices for my grandchildren, especially when fairy tales may be involved.

Week Two Discussion

A preface might be in order before I actually address the assignments in the discussion for week two.  Similar to Zohar Shavit in The Concept of Childhood and Children’s Folktales, I felt compelled to examine as many variations of Little Red Riding Hood (LRRH) as time would allow.  Unfortunately, in addition to the versions assigned to read, ultimately fifty-eight variations were found (Smithsonian.com), some being over 1,000 years old, with many having rather unusual, even unexpected endings.  Actually, the only versions I was really familiar with included the children’s Dell series LRRH version where the woodsman appears as the hero to rescue grandmother and the granddaughter, or with a version similar to the one written by Leanne Guenther, where even though the wolf swallows grandmother, she is later spit out.  No real violence, no sexuality, or rape occurs. 

Although a teacher of high school and middle school English for forty-four years, I must confess that most of the versions of (LRRH) mentioned in this class, I have never read and have never examined these variations in a class.  I feel as though, I may well be the lone wolf (pardon the pun), not having the exposure that many in our class do seem to have.  In the time period in which I grew up, words such as “sex” were never spoken. I almost felt like calling my father who is eighty-eight, to ask him why he did not share more knowledge with me about LRRH.  With our professor saying that we should try to incorporate this class into our teaching, I realize that many of these versions of LRRH would never be acceptable to address in most schools.  Therefore, I search for ways to be sure that a classical fairy tale can continue to be taught in our elementary, middle and high schools.

While understandable that the concept of a child and childhood had to have time to come of age, I struggle with the idea that most versions of LRRH would ever be suitable (acceptable) reading for most children.  Students can clearly be shaped by the books they read, and although we do want classic literature available for them to read, school guidelines, parish approval and good judgment are required.  In the very beginnings of published folktales wealthy people mostly read tales with somewhat childish plots with the intended purpose of using the tale for educational purposes to separate or remove children from a corrupt adult society, still an idea that should be a possible consideration in today’s choices of children’s literature.

I am hopeful that the time spent on this task comes through in my explanation.  Looking at the variations of LRRH, as well as the general introduction to LRRH in Norton’s Critical Edition, and the ‘test case’ by Zohar Shavit, the main focus of this written work, LRRH, must be about education.  All teachers and parents should remain focused on what is in the best interest of the student or the child.  Education does exist in James Thurber’s rendition of LRRH, as the girl has been coached to know a wolf when she sees one, and she knows when to abruptly shoot him with an automatic weapon.  This is for certain a type of education because the girl has been taught not to be easily fooled, and clearly has been instructed on how to properly handle a firearm.  Even in Charles Perrault’s version, children, most especially young women, are taught never to talk with strangers, even if the stranger sends a smile their way, once again pointing out the educational aspect (in the direction of an adult audience) warning of sexual advances, not necessarily of appropriate nature, and (in the direction of a children’s audience) warning of the need to remain virtuous, leaving the innocence of a child intact, and even between the lines receiving a warning about pedophiles.  Perrault altered the original LRRH in order for a more sophisticated audience to experience a different structure, even adding tragic endings.  These ideas then allowed Perrault the opportunity to speak to two different audiences due to the ambiguous nature of his LRRH.  He spoke to an elite literary group that only intelligent people would notice, including his satirical approach, which the Brothers Grimm did not choose to use. The Grimm Brothers version instead put education as an important message to be learned by Red Riding Hood, “As long as I live, I will never leave the path myself to run into the wood, when my mother has forbidden me to do so.”  Later, the grandmother teaches Red Riding Hood another valuable lesson of how to drown a wolf in a boiling pot.    

The Werewolf, by Angela Carter, perhaps not quite as good at making education a primary focus as the previously mentioned examples, still shows the transfer of education to a child when the girl’s mother insists that she take her father’s hunting knife with the strong reminder that she has previously been instructed on its proper use. Mention of the girl knowing the woods well, but also knowing to use care, is further proof that education is a continued focus in the story.  The Werewolf is absent of a light tone, making the story unsuitable for a children’s audience, and although the moral lesson for the child may not be clear, the knowledge (education) the girl has obtained does allow her to live.

In The Werewolf getting her voice to a wider audience seems important to Carter.  She gives the impression that by shocking her audience she might gain readers who may lean toward more Gothic or X-rated tales.  Clearly, NOT ALL fairy tales are meant to be read by children, making the choices of literature read in schools a difficult task for teachers and school districts alike. 

 

Works Cited

Brothers Grimm.  “Little Red Riding Cap.” The Classic Fairy Tales.  Ed. Maria Tatar. New York:  

     W.W. Norton & Company (1999). 117-122.

Carter, Angela.”The Werewolf.” The Bloody Chamber and Other Stories.  New York: Penguin.

     1993.  108-110.  Print.

Guenther, Leanne.  Little Red Riding Hood.  OLTK’s Inc. 2012.

Nuwer, Rachel.  ”There Are 58 Versions of Little Red Riding Hood.”Smithsonian.com.  15 Nov.

     2013.

Perrault, Charles.  “Little Red Riding Hood.” The Classic Fairy Tales.  Ed.  Maria Tatar.  New York:

     Norton.  1999.  11-12.  Print.

Shavit, Zohar.  “The Concept of Childhood and Children’s Folktales: Test Case-‘Little Red Hood.’ 

         The Classic Fairy Tales.  Ed.  Maria Tatan.  New York: W.W. Norton & Company (1999).

        16-17.

Thurber, James.  “The Little Girl and the Wolf.”  The Classic Fairy Tales. Ed.  Maria Tatar.  New

        York: W.W. Norton & Company.  (1999).  16-17.