Of Grimm Realities and the Irony of Fairy Tales

Today, 20th December 2012 marks the 200th anniversary of  the publication of the first volume of fairy tales by the Grimm brothers- Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm. Undoubtedly, their fairy tales, along with those of Andersen's, Perrault's, and many others more contemporary to my childhood (Enid Blyton?) have shaped the way I relate to literature, and to the world as a whole.

Fairy tales are usually the first stories of gore and violence that a child hears/ reads. For some strange, unfathomable reason, they are considered appropriate to be consumed by even 3-4 year olds. Just like any movie made in animation is deemed fit for juvenile viewing. As an example here, I could mention Madagascar. The plot is suitable enough, give or take a few stereotypes that pepper the narrative. It is in the specifics that I get my hackles up. How could a movie deemed suitable for children - and believe me, 3-4 year olds are taken to these movies by their misguided doting parents - have steamy scenes like the one with Moto Moto the Hippo and Gloria? It's beyond ridiculous.

Anyway, I digress. I was speaking of fairy tales, and Grimms' tales in particular. Their tales are a 'collection of tales' - collected from folklore and cautionary tales that reflected the unsavoury medieval European life. They are therefore, more replete with sexual undertones, gender/ class stereotypes and violence than the Andersen ones. This also underscores the fact that the Grimm brothers were more of curators of local folklore - a lot of what we know of medieval Europe is certainly thanks to people like them - than creators of stories for children. The tales were the then equivalents of the 'bogeyman' stories (again misguided) people tell children to keep them in line. Certainly not what I would classify as 'fairy-tales' as the very name conjures up a benevolent image.

This Wikipedia article says it all: 

The first volumes were much criticized because, although they were called "Children's Tales", they were not regarded as suitable for children, both for the scholarly information included and the subject matter. Many changes through the editions – such as turning the wicked mother of the first edition in Snow White and Hansel and Gretel (shown in original Grimm stories as Hansel and Grethel) to a stepmother, were probably made with an eye to such suitability. They removed sexual references—such as Rapunzel's innocently asking why her dress was getting tight around her belly, and thus naïvely revealing her pregnancy and the prince's visits to her stepmother—but, in many respects, violence, particularly when punishing villains, was increased.

Disney adaptations of these tales are another story altogether. They have not only sanitized these stories, they have 'Barbified' them beyond tolerance - the exact opposite of what the above quote states. Violence has been toned down to almost saccharine- sweetness levels, with characters losing their grey shades, becoming more polarised, and a big dollop of sexualisation added. Unfortunately, they, too, have been gobbled up by children and parents alike. 

So, speaking of Grimm realities, today's Google Doodle is a tribute to the 200th anniversary. Do check it out. The artwork and wordless storytelling is phenomenal.

Their most famous tale- that of Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Wolf.

Coming at a time when crimes against women are escalating - it seems like a fairy tale no more. It is a very real horror story. Being enacted day by day in different parts of the country. The world even. It is the ordinariness of the settings in which these horrors take place that is so menacing. A simple walk down the street to the neighbourhood grocer's could become fraught with frightening nuances.

How do we explain these things to children? Maybe the Grimms' Fairy Tales do not seem a bad option anymore.