[DAY 35][OPEN][ALL][TEXT: NETWORK POST]

May 24, 2009 19:36

In Advanced Literature we've been analyzing fairy tales. More specifically we're talking about how the author of a tale frames the text to produce a moral they agree with. This week's subject is Cinderella ( Read more... )

chizuko mikamo, all, day 35, text

Leave a comment

tunedout May 25 2009, 01:36:54 UTC
You actually have to take a class to figure that stuff out?

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 25 2009, 01:49:49 UTC
Not all of us are born with your facility for art.

Reply

tunedout May 25 2009, 02:06:49 UTC
[...agoehgorengoe. Aoiwefnjuvnfwe.]

I don't. It's. No good taking morals from stories.

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 25 2009, 09:14:16 UTC
Why? That's what they're there for. You can disagree with the text but not the method of transmission. This is how we socialize children into obediant adults. Don't you remember them from childhood?

Reply

tunedout May 25 2009, 15:08:16 UTC
No. ...No childhood. Make your own morals.

"I wouldn't be where I am now if I followed that advice."

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 26 2009, 18:00:52 UTC
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to touch something sensitive.

Reply

tunedout May 26 2009, 19:42:33 UTC
["It's not sensitive--" He deletes that. Wants to change the subject.]

It's fine. ...More importantly, it's kind of weird to judge people by their feet anyway. It's a metaphor about 'purity' built on superficiality.

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 26 2009, 20:21:26 UTC
Purity's only part of it. It's one of the feminine virtues implied but not the whole of them. There are related ones (modesty, chastity) but also there are others (obedience, sweetness, mildness, all the characteristics of a calf about to be slaughtered)....All of these are implied. The foot is normally hidden, just like people's true natures. In exposing it, the Prince exposed the wicked stepmother and her daughters as false women: masculine in their cunning (according to the rules of fairy tales at least) and as cunning women, they recieved punishment, becoming blind beggars the rest of their lives.

But I wonder if there's such a thing as a different kind of Prince...

["Look. I think she's trying to imply abuse ( ... )

Reply

tunedout May 26 2009, 22:30:42 UTC
[He's not as good at 'hearing' between lines of text, not enough sensory data to catalog and understand, but her turns of phrase make him pause uncertainly.]

There's no such thing as a 'Prince' at all. Just people. Just you.

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 27 2009, 23:24:24 UTC
Clothes do not wear themselves. That doesn't mean they don't send a message. Same as a role that's played.

Reply

tunedout May 27 2009, 23:50:01 UTC
I'm not in the habit of pretending to be myself.

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 28 2009, 00:24:28 UTC
Why do you think I talk to you?

Reply

tunedout May 28 2009, 00:26:27 UTC
[ndgorjrgkiojworjwe. DGHNgngwoijs.]

Poor judge of character?

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 28 2009, 00:31:07 UTC
Given what you know of me, do you really think i'd make that mistake?

Reply

tunedout May 28 2009, 01:06:56 UTC
I... I don't know.

Reply

grand_theft_moe May 28 2009, 01:39:09 UTC
Well I don't. And I haven't. So quit with the sulky self deprecation.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up