I think Cinderella get a bad reputation a lot All about just finding a man, falling in love in a matter of three hours, and getting married, the end, happily ever after.
Her story is a lot more than that, she was dancing with prince that everyone thought was her “dream come true” and she didnt even know it. i think mostly she wanted to get away from her step mother and sisters and be happy, and go to the ball.. it just so happened that she found her happiness at the ball
do you probably realize that when dancing with Prince Charming at the ball was probably the firs time shes ever been happy since her father past away, she was a prisoner in her own house , and she was still kind to them and everyone… and people will say that “well why didnt she leave on her own”, well i dont think its about that, i think the story was more about when the cards are stacked against you, if you remind kind and a decent person you will get your happy ending /rant
She gets such a bad rap but she is an awesome character. She was in an abusive situation and its incredibly hard to leave abusive households. It really bothers me/makes me uncomfortable when people say “well she just should have left” or “she should have told her step mother off.” Doing that could have gotten her hurt and made her life more hellish. She did what she had to do to survive and that makes her strong. She was a strong character and people don’t give her enough credit. She was not weak.
Also I’m pretty sure she was just a child when her father passed away and I’m pretty sure the intent was to make her more of a teenager age wise, like… where else could she have even gone? Plus at the end of the day, that is still her home. She was probably born there. The animals like the horse and dog are clearly all hers and I doubt anyone would care for them even if she had found a way to just up and leave. She wasn’t the one who deserved to leave
Cinderella gets so much flack but she’s really amazing fuck all the hate man.
The idea that people can just up and leave a bad situation is such a modern upper middle class western concept, and the scary thing is it doesn’t even really work in that very narrow range. Setting aside the very real psychological factors that bind victims to abusive situations, very few people have the economic security and independence to just uproot everything they’ve ever known and all their built up resources to just start from scratch.
Insulting a young woman in a premodern Western European-esque society to strike out on her own in a society where your only social welfare is either religious based (which we saw no sign of in the film) or familial (who abuse her in the first place) and women have few real legal protections that don’t depend on the morality of the local nobility is victim blaming at its finest.
I love all this discussion! Unfortunately, I can only half-agree with you all. Of course, I agree that no one has the entitlement to claim to any abused victim, fiction or non-fictional, to muster up the confidence to leave his/her own surroundings.
Despite this, an unsettling element remains: Cinderella only gains agency once external forces bestow it upon her. This reinforces an attitude that one can only attain a ‘happily-ever-after’ if they wait long enough for a fairy godmother to wave her wand and allow her to do so. It promotes a Dickensian idealism that issues women to be patient in traumatic situations.
In the past, Cinderella fairy tales did not always follow this paradigm. Consider, for instance, “The Discreet Princess” created by this daring damsel, Marie-Jeanne L’heritier:
In this adaptation, a woman’s two sisters are abused and raped by a travelling Prince. When he knocks the protagonist’s door to issue her with the same fate, she confronts him and tells him if he touches her, she’ll beat him with a hammer. The tale ends with her, placing the rapist in a barrel penetrated with sharp nails, and pushing him down a hill.
Then, there is Finette Cendron, told by this fetching lass, Marie-Catherine d’Aulnoy:
Her Cinderella variant tells the story of young princess Finette, whose kingdom goes bankrupt and whose parents abandon her. She spies a chateau that she can occupy and kills the ogres inside to occupy it for herself. On the day of a ball, she sneaks out on her own accord and looses one of her red shoes in the process. The tale follows as normal after that.
Both these tales were created in the 17th century. What they tell us is that tales don’t have to accept culturally-conceived values. Even though women had little to no power during the nineteenth century, d’Aulnoy and L’Heriter fought against the status quo and presented two intelligent female protagonists who can determine their own fate. They are not patient. They are not obedient. They are not silent. And yet, it is Charles Perrault, the Grimms, and Walt Disney’s version is the one that we know all too well. Coincidence? I think not.
It talks about social ques given to children through kid’s movies and the whole Magical Quest trope: yes
It talks about raising boys to respect women in a way that’s not just chilvarly: yes
It’s written by a man: yes
Watch, listen and learn, because this guy knows what he’s talking about. It’s important to teach the right lessons to both girls and boys.
This is fantastic, funny, and extremely true. Both girls and boys need to learn together that they’re equal, not just “girls can be powerful” and “boys can be powerful”. take a sec to watch this, dashboard!
“…the story where the boy is a hero, who defeats the villain through violence, and collects his reward, which is a woman with no friends and who doesn’t speak.”
WHAT A GOOD LINE THOUGH
This is why shows like Steven Universe and Adventure Time art important, because they show not only women engaged in powerful yet benevolent positions, but they show men and boys as strong not only in a physical sense but in an empathetic sense, and also unafraid to engage in femininity and be proud to associate with women.
An amalgamation of seeds and clay rolled into a ball which can bloom into anything you want: herbs, wildflowers, you name it. With a "throw it and go" approach, it’s probably the only thing I’d be able to grow without it dying five minutes later.
Disney heroes & their voice actors (singing voices & animal protagonists not included)
Walt Disney always made a habit of having his voice actors pose and dance for him so that he could mimic their movements and behaviour onto screen. Looking at this, you can just see that nearly 50 years later, little has changed.
A sneak peak at Disney’s latest feature film, “Frozen” to be released later this year. Wiki claims the following:
"When Anna (Kristen Bell) is cursed by her estranged sister, the cold-hearted Snow Queen Elsa (Idina Menzel), Anna’s only hope of reversing the curse is to survive a perilous but thrilling journey across an icy and unforgiving landscape. Joined by a rugged, thrill-seeking outdoorsman Kristoff (Jonathan Groff), his one-antlered reindeer, and a hapless snowman, Anna must race against time, conquer the elements and battle an army of frozen sinister warriors if she ever hopes to melt her frozen heart"
It’s based of Hans Christian Anderson’s AMAZING tale, “The Snow Queen”, although perhaps the only similarity between the two is an icy location. The original, it can be argued, can be seen as a metaphor for mental illness. Essentially, the devil creates a magic mirror that has the power to change the way people view themselves. Rather than reflecting the goodness in people, it magnifies their worst thoughts and appearances - making the most loveliest of landscapes look like “boiled spinach”. Essentially, this mirror breaks into millions of shards, and ends up in peoples eyes and ears, making them view the worst of people around them, and most importantly, of themselves. Essentially, to put a very long story short, it ends up in one of the eyes of Kai, a small boy. Gerda, his friend, goes on a quest to save him.
I’m disappointed because not only did Disney have the opportunity to make their film a little more broader, having the “princess” save the guy (not to mention, the protagonist just looks like Tangled’s princess in plaits), but it also missed the opportunity to comment on something much bigger. They had the chance to take a peak at representing mental illness and they disregarded it entirely.
Ashamedly, I’m still freaking excited to see it, I just think that Disney’s pursuit for sanitisation has the consequence of missing out really important health issues that ought to be more widely talked about.
The first literary renditions of Puss In Boots stem from two authors. One named Giovan Francesco Straparola called “Constantino Fortunato” and the other by a lovely man named Giambattista Basile who rendered his “Cagliuso”
Both felines in these adaptations are the same. Both are cunning. Both are agile little buggers. Both end up bestowing their owners with enormous riches.
Both were also female. Not to mention, bootless.
Yes, Puss’s sex change was instigated by this dashing lad: Charles Perrault, aka Mr French Dreamboat:
Until he intervened, Puss got around just fine without a sword, using an amalgamation of wit and charm to restore his owner’s name … The same owner who actually considers to throw dear puss out of a window when he thinks she’s dead, but still!
It’s a worry that Perrault uses the sexist stick to bash down a lot of fairy tales we know and love today. The first few literary versions of Red Riding Hood show Little Red outsmarting the wolf. Perrault just found it worked better if she were digested and her memory reprimanded. No biggie.