Timewaster's Guide Archive
General => Everything Else => Topic started by: stacer on July 30, 2003, 06:34:40 PM
-
Just very very very happy today, as not only is my summer class over (as of last weekend) but I've finally finished my paper that goes along with it--not quite a week late.... :D [For She's a Jolly Good Fellow played double-time here]
If anyone's interested in reading my take on how Beauty and the Beast is a repudiation of Sleeping Beauty and how both protagonists are Eve figures, I can email you the paper--it's 16 pages long, though, I warn you. 42 told me that Orson Scott Card had something to say about Sleeping Beauty being an Eve figure, but I didn't have the time to find the reference. If anyone knows where it is, now just for my information, let me know.
-
You know Orson Scott Card was in Saint Ehlers and my Ward back in Greensboro NC. He goes by Scott.
I'd like to read your paper, maybe I'll write a review on it. :)
-
Yeah, shoot that over to me. I'd be interested in reading it.
-
I'd like a copy as well. Sounds cool.
-
Fell and SE, I emailed you each a Word copy of it. But I don't have your email, Jeffe. If you don't want to post it on this forum, I asked SE for it anyway--he knows it, right?
-
Fascinating. I'd never even thought about the parallels between the two fairy tales, though I smack myself in retrospect because they seem so obvious when you lay them out like that. The Eve and Eden elements bring the entire concept together perfectly, though the Messiah angle didn't work as well for me--you mentioned it without taking it anywhere.
My question now is this: does this concept have to include Mormon theology? Could you make the point you make without it? I suspect that the paper would be stronger if you either cut the mormonism out or focused on it more strongly--maybe "The affect of Mormon theology on Beauty's role as Eve," since it is the Mormon aspect that turns Even into a hero rather than a dupe and a sinner.
Man, this really makes me want to go back to school.
-
I actually started the paper without bringing the Mormonism angle in, but my areligious classmate who is friends with several LDS people thought it was a good idea to bring it in openly, since as a reviewer I have that viewpoint. I was skeptical, but in talking to her about it, thought it would be okay. It could go either way, especially because I have a feeling that I didn't bring it in terribly skillfully. But I have read reviews of things like Harry Potter and Philip Pullman's trilogy from various denominations' viewpoints (Catholic, Anglican, fundamentalist, etc.), so it's not unheard of, at least in the children's reviewing world.
The entire second half of the paper isn't as well pulled off, I know--I didn't spend nearly as much time on it. I think you get the idea, though, of how Beauty is very tenuously a messiah-figure in the story, don't you? I don't think I could make it any stronger of a discussion on that half without lots more time, so I just kind of put it there. My roommate thought I quoted from the books too much in that half, too, and I agreed, but even though I chopped some of it, couldn't bring myself to chop all of it.
But I was glad to bring in the garden theme--that's what the whole class was about, and we rarely even brought it up in class. The speakers at the institute over the weekend that wrapped up the class were really good at bringing it up in various ways, though, so that was a little more satisfying.
Thanks for your comments.
-
[email protected]
-
I thought it was especially interesting how you incorporated the "forbidden fruit = sexual sin" thing, even though the Mormon church is practically the only christian church that actively disagrees with the idea. Obviously there are strong sexual elements involved in the Fall itself, but it's not the same thing. I think that the Mormon take on this could actually help support your "good Eve" arguments, should you ever decide to edit the paper and use it for another class.
-
I would like that paper. It is almost certain to be way over my head, but i'll try my best to slog through :)
[email protected]
Or catch me on IM programs. MSN uses the above address, AIM is EntropyTWG and ICQ some annoying number. Begins with "2" though.
-
On the "forbidden fruit=sexual sin" thing, that was hard--I hope I didn't say anything amiss, because I was trying very hard to say it right, to refer to it as a loss of innocence (i.e., that once their eyes were opened and they knew good from evil, and were out living in the world, they could have children, etc., which was a good thing--knew sorrow, therefore they could know joy, etc.), but still refer to how medieval Christian beliefs of Eve eating the apple (not the "fruit" as it actually is referred to in the scriptures) was equivalent to Eve seducing Adam, juxtaposing the two ideas against each other. So I thought I brought in my LDS ideas, but maybe I didn't say it well enough if it sounds to you as if I've garbled it, Fell.
-
What the hell, send it on over stacer.
-
I don't think it was garbled, just...underdeveloped. You did a good job of explaining the Mormon version (in which the fall was not equivalent to sex but enabled it), but you didn't explain the difference between the two versions. I'm just saying that exploring the difference rather than just mentionng it might be fruitful if you (or anyone else using these ideas) goes back to this in another paper.
-
sorry, I can't download it right now, I'll have to wait till I get my own place up and running again (sigh)
-
Stacer, can I have a copy too?
Just in case I didn't post my email with my profile, it's [email protected].
Thanks!