What I found interesting about the Zipes article and the “Frog Prince” stories is the argument from Bettelheim about the meaning behind the story and how Zipes refutes it. Both seem to take narrow-minded perspectives on the category of stories as a whole in that they presume that a few specific motifs that are not present in all versions of the story.
Bettleheim asserts that the princess is dealing with anxiety, anger, and hatred. Whereas, Zipes argues that she is “cunning and furious” because the frog is “inadequate and repulsive,” but there is another force (presumably the father) that makes her “accept the dark side” for which she is inevitably rewarded.
However, in one version in particular, the father is the one that makes a promise to the frog but has no say in forcing her to be with him. Instead, the frog drags her away, kicking and screaming. By the next morning, he’s a prince and they live happily ever after. Ok, so, maybe she’s upset about being taken away by a gross frog, but she doesn’t do anything about it and neither does her father.
And in a couple of other versions, the step-daughter or youngest daughter of three is compliant with the requests of the frog, even against the wishes of a stepmother.
So, I guess the point is that it is difficult to analyze the state of mind of the princess in a “Frog Prince” story if the motifs differ to such a degree that her attitude varies from version to version.
No comments:
Post a Comment