I can tell already that studying and challenging fairy tells in this course is going to be endlessly fascinating to me. I have heard several versions of Little Red Riding Head but never have I sat down and compared them, nor have I ever likened any of the stories to rape. I do have to say though, I always thought Little Red Riding Hood was stupid. (I was surprised and disappointed to learn that my revered Charles Dickens refers to LRRH as his "first love." That says a lot about his taste in women, doesn't it?) It's actually better, in my opinion, to know that this particular fairy tale was never initially meant for children, but rather used as entertainment for adults. Thinking about LRRH as victimless in a rape situation shines a new light on the story and makes me appreciate it in a way I never have before. Besides, the moral of this Kindergeschichte is good: never talk to strangers, and (at least in one story) listen to your mother.
On the same note of being having new light shone on an old idea, did anyone else find themselves stopping to consider practically every example in chapter two of Jonathan Culler's "Literary Theory?" I kept stopping and thinking, "My God, what is a weed?" and "What does Hamlet stand for?" This chapter further confuses the conversation we had in class about What is Literature. Is it a fortune cookie? Is it a song? Is it a recipe? My mind was blown... just a little. Before this Fall, I have never before questioned what falls under the umbrella of Literature but now I find myself questioning everything. Next to my computer right now is a picture of me leaning in to kiss the Frog statue in the snow. The picture frame says "KISS LIKE YOU MEAN IT." Literature? If that were a sentence in a novel, sure. What about a lyric in a song? If it can fit into either of those mediums, does the sentence as it stands on the frame count as literature?
Hi Katie-Rose, wonderful post! I think our theorists friends believe that we should question everything. Isn't that Theory Rule Number 1--that "everything is suspect?" But then constant questioning can cause stasis, or worse. Critical reflection is necessary, but on another level we need to accept what our common sense tells us. I like a mix of both. Great comments on LRRH, an interesting tale in all of its forms. The forest is filled with ravenous wolves waiting to devour innocent young girls. I look forward to our discussions. dw
ReplyDeleteHi, Katie Rose! My name is Becca, and I'm responding for our Introduction to Literary Theory class with Dr. Williams.
ReplyDeleteI’m not sure how to intellectually or academically respond to your post on Little Red Riding Hood. Mostly I just kept thinking a resounding “ME, TOO!” I understand the willing suspension of disbelief in fictional stories, but when stupidity or naïveté such as Little Red Riding Hood’s are so glaringly exhibited I find myself frustrated. I’d also certainly never thought of the folk tale as an account of rape. After reading this analysis in the readings and discussing it in class, I find it difficult to approach the tale without this particular allegory lurking in the back of my mind. With this newfound lens through which to see Little Red Riding Hood’s story, I, too, find a sort of comfort in learning of the originally adult-oriented audience. Many (if not all) characterize this folk tale as an allegory. I think the strongest piece of evidence in favor of this argument is the moral-of-the-story, which is universally intended and explicitly stated at the conclusion of each narrative and film.
In response to the rest of your reflection, I found my mind extensively muddled after discussing reality and suspecting everything (and I do mean everything) present in one’s life – both tangibly and intangibly. Reading Jonathan Culler’s discussion reminded me of viewing the film Inception: If I blocked out all other forms of noise and stimuli, and concentrated my mental faculties solely on the proposal at hand, then I was just capable of understanding the ideas presented and allowing those ideas the validity or credibility they deserved.
(But perhaps above all, I agree with your reverence for Charles Dickens. Seriously, what was he thinking?)
Thanks for the comment, Becca! I'm glad somebody else agrees :) I will have to check out your blog soon!
ReplyDelete