Instead of repeating what the others have said, I thought I'd hit one element I found particularly striking. Was there any purpose to the stepmother, mother, brother, stepsister, father, or starvation at all? Couldn't the girl have just gone to the river from the beginning and won the love of the king without all the drama with the goat? There is no indication that she had to go to the river because of her hunger, her sadness over the loss of her mother, or chores her stepmother is forcing her to do. Also, the luck with the fish was in no way associated with the mother's promise that they'd be fed; it seems that going to the river was an act completely independent of the rest of the story.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sometimes I find it interesting how in some retellings of fairy tales, things can start to feel so forced. They try to get all the elements of the old tale into the new one, and kind of drive the new story all over the place.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Her going to the river has nothing to do with the rest of the story. It's as if two stories are being forced into one. The story of how the stepmother was evil to the children and then the story of Cinderella as one of the children.
ReplyDelete