Advertisement

Children's Literature in Education

, Volume 46, Issue 4, pp 424–437 | Cite as

Letting Down Rapunzel: Feminism’s Effects on Fairy Tales

  • Angela SmithEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The importance of stories written for young readers is undisputed, and in particular the central place of the fairy story in popular culture is clearly recognized. Whilst most of these stories are centuries old, they have been adapted by the cultures of the tellers to be more compatible with the ideological views of the audience. This article will explore how feminism has influenced two versions of the same story, published by the same publisher for comparable age groups through an exploration of the Ladybird versions of Rapunzel as published in 1968 and 1993. It will show how there are subtle changes in the text which do not affect the overall narrative structure but can offer an insight into the ways in which society has ideologically positioned men and women. Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA) will be used to show how a close linguistic analysis of the text can reveal the impact of feminism on the adaptation of children’s books.

Keywords

Fairy tales Power Feminism Masculinities Cultural capital 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to the editors and reviewers for their very helpful suggestions and recommendations, and to Michael Higgins for his invaluable advice in reading over drafts of this article.

References

  1. Ariès, Philippe. (1962). Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. Trans. Robert Baldick. New York, NY: Vintage.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, Caroline and Freebody, Peter. (1989). Children’s First School Books: Introduction to the Culture of Literacy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Baxter, Nicola. (1993). Rapunzel: Favourite Tales. London: Ladybird Books.Google Scholar
  4. Bettelheim, Bruno. (1976). The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. London: Penguin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, Pierre. (1983). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Cole, Babette. (1986) Princess Smartypants. London: Picture Lions.Google Scholar
  7. Crew, Hilary S. (2002). Spinning New Tales From Traditional Texts: Donna Jo Napoli and the Rewriting of Fairy Tale. Children’s Literature in Education, 22(2), 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fairclough, Norman. (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Faludi, Susan. (1991). Backlash: The Undeclared War Against Women. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  10. Grena, Nathan and Howard, Byron. (2010). Tangled. Walt Disney Studios.Google Scholar
  11. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  12. Hourihan, Margery. (1997). Deconstructing the Hero: Literary Theory and Children’s Literature. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Hunt, Peter (Ed.). (1992). Literature for Children: Contemporary Criticism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Knowles, Murray and Malmkjær, Kirsten. (1996). Language and Control in Children’s Literature. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Levorato, Alessandra. (2003). Language and Gender in the Fairy Tale Tradition: A Linguistic Analysis of Old and New Story Telling. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lyne, Adrian (Director). (1987). Fatal Attraction. Hollywood, CA: Paramount Pictures.Google Scholar
  17. Macdonald, Myra. (1995). Representing Women: Myths of Femininity in the Popular Media. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  18. MacInnes, John. (1998). The End of Masculinity. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Munsch, Robert and Martchenko, Michael. (1980). The Paper Bag Princess. Toronto: Annick Press.Google Scholar
  20. Perkins, Margaret. (2008). Literature for the Very Young. In Prue Goodwin (Ed.), Understanding Children’s Books: A Guide for Education Professionals (pp. 21–32). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Roberts, David and Roberts, Lynn. (2003). Rapunzel: A Groovy Fairy Tale. London: Pavilion Children’s Books.Google Scholar
  22. Rutherford, Jonathan. (2003). Preface. In Bethan Benwell (Ed.), Masculinity and Men’s Lifestyle Magazines (pp. 1–5). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Southgate, Vera. (1968). Rapunzel: A Ladybird “Easy-Reading” Book. Loughborough: Wills & Hepworth.Google Scholar
  24. Sunderland, Jane. (2011). Language, Gender and Children’s Fiction. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  25. Talbot, Mary. (1995). Fictions at Work. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  26. Talbot, Mary. (2010). Language and Gender, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  27. Wilcox, Leah and Monks, Linda. (2003). Falling for Rapunzel. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Zipes, Jack. (1983). Fairy Tales and the Art of Subversion. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Zipes, Jack. (2006). Why Fairy Tales Stick: The Evolution and Relevance of a Genre. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CultureUniversity of SunderlandSunderlandUK

Personalised recommendations