The Philosopher's Pen Part Three
Jack Zipes, using the historicist approach, clearly places the fairy tale within its socio-historical context. His main argument is that ‘the times shapes the tale’. Hence under Feudalism the common folk tale was “inhabited largely by kings, queens, princes, princesses, soldiers and peasants…but rarely by the bourgeoisie.” It might detail the relentless grind and poverty of the many, but essentially reflected and upheld medieval power structures. By the time the courtly French writers, such as Perrault, appropriated these oral folk tales in the seventeenth century, historical and social currents had altered. The cultural turn had re-forged notions of childhood and suddenly the didactic potential of these narratives was identified and used to educate the children of French aristocrats in socially approved behaviours. Zipes refers to this as the “dark socialising side” of the classical fairy tales; a deliberate attempt to socially indoctrinate children through “anxiety provoking effects.”
If we consider Perrault’s version of Little Red Riding Hood, we can see that not only has it been bowdlerised (in comparison with the original French peasant tale) leaving out all references to cannibalism, sex and bodily functions, but it provides, as Zipes points out, “a model of behaviour for girls.” The two stories have a very different historical context. The first tale “The Story of Grandmother” in which a peasant girl is tricked by a were-wolf into consuming the flesh and blood of her dead grandmother, is influenced by “the material conditions of [the peasants’] existence…Little children were attacked and killed by animals or grown-ups in the woods and fields. Hunger often drove people to commit atrocious acts.”
The protagonist of Perrault’s tale, however, appears to have haute bourgeois aspirations. She wears “a red hood like the ones fine ladies wear” and takes her grandmother “cakes and butter”, hardly basic peasant fare. Moreover, in case the reader is in any doubt about Perrault’s intention, he includes a moral. He makes it perfectly clear that this story is not about a real wolf and a real little girl but about metaphorical wolves – urbane yet predatory men “who pursue young ladies in the street and pay them the most flattering attentions” (Perrault in Hallet). As Zipes states, “the reader learns…that young girls who are pretty, well-bred and courteous, should never talk to strangers or let themselves go. Otherwise they will be violated…”
A century later this civilising process was still going on, but within the context of industrial capitalist society. The Grimm brothers, Zipes claims, were concerned with promoting bourgeois values. He argues that they were part of a literary trend to
“…indoctrinate children to learn fixed roles and functions within bourgeois society…a process that placed great emphasis on passivity, industry and self-sacrifice for girls and on activity, competition and accumulation of wealth for boys.”
Zipes highlights the familiar narrative pattern – “a struggle for power, survival and autonomy” where the oppressed protagonist is compelled to leave home and embark on some quest or task, to learn and acquire. The male hero’s goal is “money, power and a woman” and his happiness depends on “the just use of power.” The female hero’s goal is “wealth, status and a husband” and her happiness depends on “conformity to patriarchal rules.
The Golden Goose illustrates Zipes’ point very well. In this tale a father sends three brothers into the forest to chop wood. The youngest is called Simpleton and “was despised and ill-treated by the whole family”. Each brother meets with “a grey old dwarf”. The elder two treat him with contempt, refusing to share their food, and end up injuring themselves. The youngest is kind and generous, however, and is rewarded by being given a goose with feathers of real gold. At this point the hero doesn’t return home with his treasure, but sets out on a journey: “leaves home to reconstitute home.” The goose seems to symbolise wealth or Simpleton’s potential to acquire wealth. It also symbolises the greed of others, for any who touch the goose are stuck fast. Eventually, after a series of tasks and adventures, in which he is helped by the little grey dwarf, Simpleton marries a princess and inherits a kingdom.
The patriarchal father-son relationship at the beginning of the story may be disrupted by the cruel, un-loving parents and the selfish elder brothers, but it is re-established at the end of the tale when Simpleton manages to fulfil all the impossible tasks set him by the king thus proving his worth. Moreover the hero’s compassion towards the mysterious dwarf encodes the ‘good’ bourgeois message that “the only way to acquire wealth and power is through…perseverance and honesty” Simpleton indeed “recreates society in keeping with the norms of the status quo,” creating his own ideal, moral, patriarchal family structure; the ‘happy-ever-after’ marriage to the king’s daughter. Yet Zipes is not slow to remind us that this status quo is one of patriarchal domination and based on the “accumulation of wealth and power for private benefit.”