h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

The Brothers Grimm
Mother Goose
The Fairy Tales
and
Nursery Rhymes


You probably have one or all of these collections of ancient European folk tales on your bookshelf. Or you did as a child. They have been told and retold for centuries. Over time they have been modified by political and religious changes that have otherwise almost wiped out our original euro-pagan cultures.

And lately these tales are again being modified for sexism and other politically corect reasons. But several of the basic stories have survived the millenia, some dating back before fuedalism and many before the advent of Christianity. They are classics of our cultural passage, handing down essential truths to our children.

The story of Red Riding Hood and the Wolf for example was known in most European languages. Even though we have lived with domesticated dogs for tens of thousands of years... what is it really saying?

Anyway, now that YOU are all grown up, do you ever think of these foundations, these building blocks of your psyche, your personality?
Or have you put them away as 'childish things'?
Do you pass them on?
Do you 'correct' them for your children?

This is a pretty wide area for discussion, possibly several University courses, but I was hoping to generate some feedback because I was struck lately by some of the most basic messages these stories deliver. Messages so close to our psyche that we barely acknowledge their existence even as we unconciously play out these roles in our real lives.


~jwf~

"Over time they have been modified by political and religious changes that have otherwise almost wiped out our original euro-pagan cultures."

It was the brothers Grimm themselves who did a lot of that modification. They tweaked the original folk stories to make them more Christian and more nationalist.

Aaaactually, that isn't true. I'm currently reading a book about Grimms fairy tales. They weren't *tweaked* at all...the Grimm Bros. collected a wide variety of stories passed down by oral tradition, and simply edited them, and put them down on paper. They never took responsibility for WRITING them...just writing them down, and editing them. Their interest in European oral storytelling was based on the fact that most of the stories correlated, with cultural tweaking. In fact, some stories even had cultural hero's in, in a completely unnatural situation!!!

And if you look at Christian tradition, it is based on the melding of basic human traditional values and dumping sexual restriction on top of it.

I guess the author of the book I read would disagree with the author of the book you're reading. He said the bros. Grimm did indeed modify what they heard and remove the sexual from "Little Red Riding Hood" for example, which was originally about a young girl getting her first period and suddenly being at the mercy of "the wolf", something you'd never get from reading the contemporary version of the tale. The task they set themselves was to commit to writin what was mainly oral tradition, and therefore inconsistend from region to region, village to village, and even teller to teller. So they generally they removed the inconsistencies, made them uniform, removed the sexual overtones, and made them politically correct and "Germanic".

No no no. It's just that you (and I, because I have books with that information in) have only been told selective information. Think about it...that Little Red Riding Hood tale is more than likely to be one of the thousands of stories that the Bros. collected BEFORE melding them altogether. I've got books with the original Sleeping Beauty being a tale of rape and murder. And Goldilocks and the Three Bears was originally an old woman with silver hair.

What happened was; these stories, along with others (that are probably less violent and wouldn't make inclusion in a book) were collected, analysed and shoved together to fins the base root of the story. It was an attempt to find the shared thread throughout all of them. Think about it.

And of course it's going to be sanatised...would YOU tell some of the original stories to kids? Hihgly un-PC...

Surely the stories, unless handed down word for word, had been edited consciously or otherwise since their inception? Cultures with an oral tradition usualy have bards or their equivalent to ensure as little change occurs as possible. This does not, however, preclude the ham-fisted amatuer having a go at the tale when trying to get their children to bed. So either way, whether the Grimm brothers edited or not, the meaning of the story would have changed from person to person anyway. What they recieved was likely a shadow of the original tale. Without professional storytellers to ensure the retention of original meaning of the tale, the central, and more subtle point tends to get mangled, and the meaning lost. Which is, I presume, why so few folk tales make sense to modern ears.

"He said the bros. Grimm did indeed modify what they heard and remove the sexual from "Little Red Riding Hood" for example, which was originally about a young girl getting her first period and suddenly being at the mercy of "the wolf"

In this context the story makes a lot more sense - canines are often attracted to menstruating women - there is also a blatant subtext of the animalistic side of men, whose attitude towards females might change suddenly, and alarmingly, when it becomes apparent that they are sexual mature, if not receptive. They become, in other words, predators.

Without a certain amount of deciphering, all children can definately tell you about it is that it is somewhat confusing, and somewhat disturbing. They can detect undercurrents, even if they cannot decipher them - which makes the repetition of the tale crucial to them, if they want to stand a chance of deciphering it for themselves.

The proof of editing is in the pudding. These tales are obviously parables - but what's the point of a parable unless the point can be readily understood? This popint might lead to the idea that the tales have been repeated and changed by people who may not have understood the tale perfectly in the first place. The printed word, interestingly, did not eradicate creeping errors. to famous examples from the bible "The voice of the turtle was heard across the land" is a mystery, until we learn that it was a typo - it should have been "turtle-dove". Also, there is evidence to show that the Hebrew for "virgin" and "maiden" are very similar. One makes sense (of a kind), the other requires a radical intepretation to make the phrase fit the story, or rather, in this case, to make the story fit the phrase.

I'm sorry, what was the question?

A rambling fool names Frogbit.

Hmm. I haven't given a great deal of thought to any deep meaning behind the stories - as you say, they are 'classics', passed on. Many of them are rather macabre and potentially frightening, but young children often seem to enjoy this vicarious thrill. I have a copy of the 19th century version of Grimm and am sad to see how many modern versions have lost a great deal in the retelling.

The Roald Dahl (semi PC) updates of some of the well-known tales are wonderfully amusing.

"and pulled a gun right from her knickers!"

Was just about to mention Roald Dahl. Which reminds me, that is the next book I need to buy...

Glad to see some people interested.
BTW: Sorry about the typo in the subject line I never intended any pun or deeper meaning, I just mis-typed Mother.

The menstrual message of Red and the wolf is quite clear. I expect it was also in the origins of several of the many Red Rose and Snow White stories. These charcters, or at least those names, occur over and over.

Now, how about Hansel and Gretel. Is the moral of that story simply that children will always disobey instruction and therefore get into trouble? Or is the Truth lost to a later christian notion of restraint, self-discipline and privation, because children are naturally attracted to sweets and if they succumb to their greedy desires they are liable to be 'lost' and come to harm?
Was it told simply to sacre children away from old widows cottages because they might be 'entertaining' men folk?
Or is it that old women should never be trusted at all. And if you do fall victim to some lonely old widow she can be easily fooled and manipulated by clever young people? I honestly believe most modern muggers and purse-snatchers heard it the that way.

Anybody got any other favourites they've 'seen thru' yet?

peace
jwf

Interestingly, the Grimm version of Hansel & Gretel that I have is quite different from the commonly known one. No father, no gingerbread cottage. Mine has a cruel stepmother who is a fairy, to cut it short, turns Hansel into a fawn, the children go off & live in a cottage in the forest, King hunts fawn, discovers Gretel & marries her, punishes fairy who restores Hansel.

In many of these tales there seems to be an essence of trials of hardship, but good triumphs over bad in the end. I wonder if some of them have a religious element.

The version of the Three Bears I remember has a horrible little old woman instead of Goldilocks.

>> In many of these tales there seems to be an essence of trials of hardship, but good triumphs over bad in the end. I wonder if some of them have a religious element. <<

Witches are a relatively modern notion introduced after the advent of Christian teachings in Europe. Old (and even young) widows had always enjoyed a certain sexual freedom in ancient pagan communities. The church in its celibate wisdom frowned upon this sensible pagan practise and widows who kept an open door policy at their cottages were branded and scorned and sadly many would be burned at the stake.

I think even the sweets and candies construction of the witch's house is a much later addition, embellished even further in recent years by the sugar merchants.

The original story was probably not intended just for children since most of these original stories were for the general guidance of everyone in the group. Remember that 'children' were not considered a distinct 'group' in the pagan community. It is only in recent years that children were ever seen as anything other than little people.

But children were, as always, dependent on guidance and they do require care and attention. No one wants them to wander off. I think the story is basically just about how children tend to be curious and can be swallowed up by the natural world around them if they are not looked out for. The story was probably told for the benefit of 'new young parents' in the clan.

The 'witch's house' of today's story was likely just the natural world, the temptations being fruits and berries and nuts. The danger was that children might get separated from the hunter-gathering tribe. But the story goes on to suggest that by being clever, they could survive this ordeal if they remembered that bones (remember the chicken bone for a finger bit?) contain marrow and nutrition. Children may not be capable of hunting successfully but they can survive by scavenging bones from the kills of other predators.

I imagine the original story, told round a campfire at the mouth of some ancient cave, went something like:

"Two kids wandered off while the tribe was picking berries, tempted by something further off in the bushes. The tribe was busy foraging and didn't miss them. Mother Earth (nature) can be cruel (is full of hardships) and gives no favour to human infants or any critters who lose their way. The children grew hungry and thin, but the boy found the bones of a dead bird and they were able to survive."


~jwf~

I was never brought up on all these stories- my ma, da, and grandparents told me totally different ones. They usually involved giants, trolls, giants getting outwitted by little old ladies and oldly, witches that did nasty things, but still won

They aren't that sanitised, though. Often we think of the Victorians being ruthless in that respect (not always the fault of 'political correctness') but the Andrew Lang (Blue Fairy Book etc.) version of Sleeping Beauty is still the extended cannibal/infanticide tale.
I would not sanitise them for my children. In fact I would muck them up a little.
Perrault's Little Red Riding Hood has a sort of epilogue about the most dangerous wolves being men who can charm little girls...
I wouldn't overdo the ancient pagan practices bit, though. We don't know enough to say exactly what was done then, it is highly unlikely there are any concrete survivals from that time, and if we were to find out, it would be disappointing since such prehistoric cultures wouldn't have had a particularly complex belief system as we like to think of them doing. What matters is what we have ended up with.

Mandragora, did you see the new Harry Potter film? There were some wonderful baby Mandragoras in it!

I would like to state strongly and unequivocably that they do not resemble me in any way.

I though a mandragora was a plant?

Me too. Or an evil energy force that invaded 15th century Italy...

Sounds like Mandragora to me.

Caught ya! We have a code red Doctor Who fan here chaps!