What do you think?
Rate this book
Off with Their Heads! Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood
When fairy tales moved from workrooms, taverns, and the fireside into the nursery, they not only lost much of their irreverent, earthy humor but were also deprived of their contestatory stance to official culture. Children's literature, Maria Tatar maintains, has always been more intent on producing docile minds than playful bodies.
From its inception, it has openly endorsed a productive discipline that condemns idleness and disobedience along with most forms of social resistance. In this book she explores how Perrault, the Grimms, and others reshaped fairy tales to produce conciliatory literary texts that dedicate themselves to the project of socializing the child.
From its inception, it has openly endorsed a productive discipline that condemns idleness and disobedience along with most forms of social resistance. In this book she explores how Perrault, the Grimms, and others reshaped fairy tales to produce conciliatory literary texts that dedicate themselves to the project of socializing the child.
332 pages, Paperback
First published April 6, 1992
15 people are currently reading
1853 people want to read
About the author
Maria Tatar
55 books322 followersMaria Tatar is the John L. Loeb Professor of Germanic Languages and Literatures. She chairs the Program in Folklore and Mythology at Harvard University. She is the author of Enchanted Hunters: The Power of Stories in Childhood, Off with Their Heads! Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood and many other books on folklore and fairy stories. She is also the editor and translator of The Annotated Hans Christian Andersen, The Annotated Brothers Grimm, The Annotated Classic Fairy Tales, The Annotated Peter Pan, The Classic Fairy Tales: A Norton Critical Edition and The Grimm Reader. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
April 29, 2012
A disturbing, enlightening, and engagingly-written book. Tatar is one of the best academic writers I've read. Her analysis is incisive; even when I disagreed with her or could envision a different interpretation, I recognized that I would not have been able to disagree with her without her elucidation in the first place. Which makes her the best kind of scholar: someone who's in it for the discovery, not to make everyone else agree with her. The disturbing aspects of the book were the chapters on anti-child stories and the even more awful misogynistic stories, tales told to make children fear and obey and stories told basically to justify all manner of abuse of women. Seriously, I thought I knew how bad some of these stories were, then I read this book. The easily triggered should avoid this book.
December 19, 2021
Never mind the blurb. This is, especially at the beginning and end, a fascinating book about how children perceive folk tales, adaptations, and original stories, and how that often differs from how adults do. The author takes into account different cultural contexts* and different interpretations both scholarly and popular. It includes extensive notes and bibliography, but is accessible, not just scholarly.
*For example: Those of you interested in this subject remember learning about the moral tales in which the most obedient and kind children would be blessed with a peaceful early death. Well, that's not so horrible, if one realizes that very many young children were going to die anyway... at least they'd learn from these tales how to prepare themselves to do so, and to not get sent to Hell. Now, in our current context, those tales are not so 'necessary.'
But what to do with tales like Jack and the Beanstalk, for example? Shall a 21st century adaptation make it clear why it's ok for Jack to take the harp etc. from the giant? Or does that spoil the tale? Tatar doesn't come right out and say either way. What she does say is that folk tales, fairy tales, and wonder stories are always being adapted, by the adult telling or writing or illustrating, by the child understanding only parts and misunderstanding other parts, by the very fact that a particular story is made available to that child and another story isn't. Therefore, parents and educators have a duty to at least pay attention to what messages are being sent, and preferably to discuss the themes with the children and to read adaptations more suitable to contemporary context.
Readers of this book will likely get a lot more out of classic children's lit. than those who know only the critical views of BB (who I refuse to name outright in favor of condemning him to oblivion) or even Zipes. Even the Aarne-Thompson system is shown to be problematic. After all, Tatar is not only a scholar but a mother who read *and listened* to her children, so it's good to read from her perspective.
Unfortunately she does sometimes succumb to academese, ie to using fancy words when simpler ones would do. And sometimes she gets lost in her ideas and, while managing to find her own way out, leaves the reader behind. And the thesis itself seems lost when much analytic attention is paid to stories that were surely never offered for children. It's not a terribly rigorous analysis.
Still, it is worth reading, if you have plenty of time and interest.
Some book darts:
"Curiosity and disobedience, along with a variety of other vices, are seen as the besetting sins of both children and women."
Re *Caterinella* "But is it really such a bad thing to outwit a creature who makes a habit out of devouring human beings?"
Hans Christian Andersen adamantly refused to have the statue in his honor be of him reading to children. The quote from him, and Tatar's commentary, makes it clear that he and many other writers were, effectively, pedophobic. Their tales were often exemplary and/or cautionary because inquisitive and spirited children were perceived as, well, frightening. Think of parents you know who still think that it's good to control children, who believe in corporal punishment, who want to indoctrinate them in their beliefs. Tatar and I aren't actually saying there's something for sure going on there, but think about it....
"The fact that fairy tales guide feelings and control responses give lie to the notion [held by BB] that children work their way from dependence to autonomy through literature."
"Our current agenda and the wisdom of our time may seem vastly superior to Janeway's sanctimoniously lurid descriptions of dying children, or Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann's unforgettable images of thumbsuckers getting their digits sheared off, but they are ultimately our own adult ideas about what is 'for their own good.'"
"Think, for example, of *Hansel and Gretel,* where the villain of the tale first appears as a cruel stepmother at home, then as a cannibalistic witch residing in enchanted woods."
(Did you ever make the connection between the two women? Tatar is being metaphorical, I hope... but she does mention this duality twice.... Huh.)
And some adaptations to add to the list of such that I've read: Russell Shorto's Cinderella and Cinderella's Stepsister and Tim Paulson's Jack and the Beanstalk and the Beanstalk Incident. Also Rosemarie Kunzler's *Rumpelstiltskin* which is found in Breaking the Magic Spell: Radical Theories of Folk and Fairy Tales. Also The Forest Princess.
*For example: Those of you interested in this subject remember learning about the moral tales in which the most obedient and kind children would be blessed with a peaceful early death. Well, that's not so horrible, if one realizes that very many young children were going to die anyway... at least they'd learn from these tales how to prepare themselves to do so, and to not get sent to Hell. Now, in our current context, those tales are not so 'necessary.'
But what to do with tales like Jack and the Beanstalk, for example? Shall a 21st century adaptation make it clear why it's ok for Jack to take the harp etc. from the giant? Or does that spoil the tale? Tatar doesn't come right out and say either way. What she does say is that folk tales, fairy tales, and wonder stories are always being adapted, by the adult telling or writing or illustrating, by the child understanding only parts and misunderstanding other parts, by the very fact that a particular story is made available to that child and another story isn't. Therefore, parents and educators have a duty to at least pay attention to what messages are being sent, and preferably to discuss the themes with the children and to read adaptations more suitable to contemporary context.
Readers of this book will likely get a lot more out of classic children's lit. than those who know only the critical views of BB (who I refuse to name outright in favor of condemning him to oblivion) or even Zipes. Even the Aarne-Thompson system is shown to be problematic. After all, Tatar is not only a scholar but a mother who read *and listened* to her children, so it's good to read from her perspective.
Unfortunately she does sometimes succumb to academese, ie to using fancy words when simpler ones would do. And sometimes she gets lost in her ideas and, while managing to find her own way out, leaves the reader behind. And the thesis itself seems lost when much analytic attention is paid to stories that were surely never offered for children. It's not a terribly rigorous analysis.
Still, it is worth reading, if you have plenty of time and interest.
Some book darts:
"Curiosity and disobedience, along with a variety of other vices, are seen as the besetting sins of both children and women."
Re *Caterinella* "But is it really such a bad thing to outwit a creature who makes a habit out of devouring human beings?"
Hans Christian Andersen adamantly refused to have the statue in his honor be of him reading to children. The quote from him, and Tatar's commentary, makes it clear that he and many other writers were, effectively, pedophobic. Their tales were often exemplary and/or cautionary because inquisitive and spirited children were perceived as, well, frightening. Think of parents you know who still think that it's good to control children, who believe in corporal punishment, who want to indoctrinate them in their beliefs. Tatar and I aren't actually saying there's something for sure going on there, but think about it....
"The fact that fairy tales guide feelings and control responses give lie to the notion [held by BB] that children work their way from dependence to autonomy through literature."
"Our current agenda and the wisdom of our time may seem vastly superior to Janeway's sanctimoniously lurid descriptions of dying children, or Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann's unforgettable images of thumbsuckers getting their digits sheared off, but they are ultimately our own adult ideas about what is 'for their own good.'"
"Think, for example, of *Hansel and Gretel,* where the villain of the tale first appears as a cruel stepmother at home, then as a cannibalistic witch residing in enchanted woods."
(Did you ever make the connection between the two women? Tatar is being metaphorical, I hope... but she does mention this duality twice.... Huh.)
And some adaptations to add to the list of such that I've read: Russell Shorto's Cinderella and Cinderella's Stepsister and Tim Paulson's Jack and the Beanstalk and the Beanstalk Incident. Also Rosemarie Kunzler's *Rumpelstiltskin* which is found in Breaking the Magic Spell: Radical Theories of Folk and Fairy Tales. Also The Forest Princess.
June 12, 2016
Sometimes I pick up a non-fiction book, just to have something slightly different.
The author's focus is largely on the literary form of fairy tales and how they were chosen/edited to maximize didactic content bent on making children (particularly girls) docile, obedient and incurious.
She spends considerable time on Bettleheim's "Uses of Enchantment and what she considers a victim-blaming theme where children are made responsible for the bad deeds of the adult villains who attack them.
This was written in 1992, when the current trend of rewriting or reclaiming fairy tales with a feminist or egalitarian perspective was just beginning. I'd like to see an update with her thoughts on more recent events.
For more fairy tale book reviews: http://www.skjam.com/tag/fairy-tales/
The author's focus is largely on the literary form of fairy tales and how they were chosen/edited to maximize didactic content bent on making children (particularly girls) docile, obedient and incurious.
She spends considerable time on Bettleheim's "Uses of Enchantment and what she considers a victim-blaming theme where children are made responsible for the bad deeds of the adult villains who attack them.
This was written in 1992, when the current trend of rewriting or reclaiming fairy tales with a feminist or egalitarian perspective was just beginning. I'd like to see an update with her thoughts on more recent events.
For more fairy tale book reviews: http://www.skjam.com/tag/fairy-tales/
January 11, 2021
Pretty interesting and a good read but my god if I ever in my life have to read another Freudian interpretation of a fairytale it’ll be too soon. A lot of the analysis is very interesting, especially when it comes to why the tales have been told the way they have, and how the culture at the time the most well-known versions of several famous fairytales were written impacted them, but there’s a frankly bizarre acceptance of some really outdated ideas. Maybe I’m just not reading the tone right, and the author does pointedly disagree with some terrible takes she mentions, but particularly the chapter on cannibalism in folktales is just uncomfortable.
Really don’t like the implication that, say, Hansel and Gretel going home to their father is inherently incestuous.
Really don’t like the implication that, say, Hansel and Gretel going home to their father is inherently incestuous.
July 2, 2010
I met Tatar last year and heard her speak, and found her to be very pleasant and interesting. This book, however, drove me a little nuts. She tends to make claims that she doesn't bother supporting, which is frustrating as a scholar. She also makes many ethical judgments and presents them as absolute truths. The book seems to be an instruction manual on how to protect your kids from scary fairy tales, disguised as a scholarly text.
October 20, 2015
A really interesting look at the messages we send our kids through stories.
April 7, 2013
Do you remember that movie "Reign of Fire"? There's that scene where they are reenacting Star Wars "Luke I am your father" and the little kids in the audience gasp - so cute. Well that's the thing about the oral tradition verses printed/filmed stories. Once something is written down or filmed that version of the story becomes fixed but the way we get together around the water cooler at work and talk about last night’s episode of "Lost" changes depending on whom we are talking with.
I'm not sure what the point of this book was, I honestly felt the fourth time I had to get the dictionary to look up a word that the author was like those kids in the 5th grade with big vocabularies who mocked other students for not knowing the meaning of words they had never even heard before. What I did find interesting was that Bruno Bettelheim, author of Uses of Enchantment, committed suicide and was estranged from his daughter in real life.
For all the post-Freud emphasis on studying behavior and societal influences we are still using outdated myths because they have been written and edited into a book or film. Considering that in the last 60 years equality has made such huge leaps forward I don't think it’s necessary to continue to instruct girls to be good little housekeepers or to demonize groups of people like the early written fairy tales do repeatedly (which of course is more an influence of the writers than an actual representation of the oral tradition from which they came). Also considering the complete cultural shift towards children in regards to mandatory schooling, laws preventing them from working until their teens years, and stricter rules against abuse and higher mortality rates in general (child mortality rates where in the 66% range in the early 1800s meaning if you had 10 kids only four were likely to live to be adults) childhood itself is completely different than it was even 50 years ago.
I'm not sure what the point of this book was, I honestly felt the fourth time I had to get the dictionary to look up a word that the author was like those kids in the 5th grade with big vocabularies who mocked other students for not knowing the meaning of words they had never even heard before. What I did find interesting was that Bruno Bettelheim, author of Uses of Enchantment, committed suicide and was estranged from his daughter in real life.
For all the post-Freud emphasis on studying behavior and societal influences we are still using outdated myths because they have been written and edited into a book or film. Considering that in the last 60 years equality has made such huge leaps forward I don't think it’s necessary to continue to instruct girls to be good little housekeepers or to demonize groups of people like the early written fairy tales do repeatedly (which of course is more an influence of the writers than an actual representation of the oral tradition from which they came). Also considering the complete cultural shift towards children in regards to mandatory schooling, laws preventing them from working until their teens years, and stricter rules against abuse and higher mortality rates in general (child mortality rates where in the 66% range in the early 1800s meaning if you had 10 kids only four were likely to live to be adults) childhood itself is completely different than it was even 50 years ago.
January 25, 2015
Tatar is, as always, refreshingly pragmatic and grounded in her analysis. This book in some ways functions as an extended critique of Bruno Bettelheim's psychoanalytic mode of fairy tale criticism, arguing for the historicity of many elements of the tales and their deep immersion in their own cultural contexts. In this way it is not unlike Marina Warner's more expansive From the Beast to Blonde, though Tatar is more pointed in her argument and in her opposition to Bettelheim. She is strongest when illuminating the potential agendas of a teller or critic, locating the didactic potential of a narrative. It's a good book, but might be a surprisingly adversarial one for someone who has read little fairy tale criticism before; I'd recommend From the Beast to the Blonde as a better text to begin with.
March 19, 2014
Alas, my library does not own this and its hefty $35 price tag in paperback is an obstacle. The copy I obtained through Inter-library loan had too short a loan period so I was only able to get through the preface which was enough to inform me that this is an analytical work that begs some concentration on the part of the reader.
I will say that I am now persuaded to NEVER read Bettelheim's "The Uses of Enchantment" in which he puts a disturbingly Freudian spin on the fairy tale motifs.
If I ever get back to this and give it an honest and thorough reading my rating will be more reflective of my opinion of the work as a whole.
I will say that I am now persuaded to NEVER read Bettelheim's "The Uses of Enchantment" in which he puts a disturbingly Freudian spin on the fairy tale motifs.
If I ever get back to this and give it an honest and thorough reading my rating will be more reflective of my opinion of the work as a whole.
January 27, 2018
This is one of those books that I have now skimmed several times for school. My eyes have alit on every single page, but I haven't read the book with the intensity of a novel.
However, per popular response, I can claim it as a "book read in 2009." So there ya go. LOL!
Honestly, I love Maria Tatar from an academic perspective. She's interesting, sometimes funny, and highly readable while remaining clearly extremely intelligent. I keep returning to this book because her perspective is complimentary to my study interests and her language is so approachable.
If you have interest in any of her areas of specialization, I really do recommend Maria Tatar.
However, per popular response, I can claim it as a "book read in 2009." So there ya go. LOL!
Honestly, I love Maria Tatar from an academic perspective. She's interesting, sometimes funny, and highly readable while remaining clearly extremely intelligent. I keep returning to this book because her perspective is complimentary to my study interests and her language is so approachable.
If you have interest in any of her areas of specialization, I really do recommend Maria Tatar.
January 14, 2009
Tatar examples how fairy tales were slightly altered to fit into children's literature. She also offers quite a bit on Sednak. The book is written in such a way that you do not need to have a good solid background in fairy tale studies to understand it.
wishlist
August 19, 2009Off with Their Heads! Fairy Tales and the Culture of Childhood by Maria Tatar (1993)
July 23, 2011
An intriguing book on a scholarly examination of fairy tale. Extremely thought provoking and interesting.
April 30, 2012
I generally disagree with Tatar's major thesis concerning the predominant way in which children are represented in popular culture as "evil," so it was hard to read through the book!
April 27, 2014
It has an interesting perspective on current and original fairy tales. I used this for my A Level coursework and found it exceedingly helpful.
Read
November 30, 2011gave up- too dry & scholarly for me right now.
July 17, 2023
I was so looking forward to this book, although I had been told some about Tatar's thesis. Her preface where she not only attacks Bruno Bettelheim (yes his work is flawed but not evil) was difficult to read and I read it about three times this last month and then I read other criticisms of it. Not only is this attack the central core of her thesis, she insinuates a great deal about Bettelheim. There is a layer of anger in this preface that I noted.
I have enormous respect for Maria Tatar and her work and I own all her works now. This book, I put off for many years buying because of her thesis. The book came out in 1992 and a great deal of work has been done in fairy tale studies (look to Marina Warner and Jack Zipes among many) and also there had been a great deal of work done in child psychology and cognitive behavior. I was hoping, as she said in her preface that she was going to work to protect her commentaries from her own bias, but that did not happen.
Her predicament, her feminism, her open criticism of Bettelheim, not only as a scholar (I can accept that) but as a human being and father was a little wild. SMlLING. And it never left her all the way through the disjointed and sometimes confusing claims she made. Some were very thoughtful and we were in total agreement. We all have more information than Bettelheim had and some of us are not as biased as him or as Tatar. There was much to like but also dislike. I am not sure I agree with her thesis 100% and she certainly did not convince me.
Tatar is looking at this from her psychological point of view. She totally dismisses any Freudian claims, which is flawed and she is erring on the side of children in her psychological claims. It's beautiful in one way, if you are convinced she is right in her core thesis and I am not convinced. I studied psychology for 11 years and was interested in childhood trauma and even some therapists have moved toward her views, but now there is a pushback in this movement because of 20+ year studies since the end of the 1990s that are not looking very good for children and their social outcomes. I don't know where this leads. I don't know how I feel about this book. I don't know if she is really right or wrong. But she did not convince me. And though it's incredible writing and research, I cannot give her anymore than three stars at most. I cannot really like this book that much. One more thing and it's an important one. Most of the tales are from a long ago historical past, which possessed it's own predicament and culture. Not our culture. Arranged marriages is an example. While females may have feared these unions, even been unhappy, arranged marriages and social roles were determined by the social constructions of the day and therefore determined much of the psychology of the situations. We cannot compare them to now in any way, except in the surface ways, that women were property. Beauty and the Beast tales come to mind. But some of those stories are very old. With this author, parents are the enemies in these situations and children are to be pitied and described as perhaps early modern females. Psyche for example. I found this chapter particularly conflicting.
The culture of childhood ( we have less death rates, etc,) is not looking very good right now. And if she were right and all those other people who agree with her were right, third graders might be able to read and they can't. Other factors exist, mental health issues are growing by leaps and bounds and I as a teacher to at-risk children for years know this. I am there, living it.
I have enormous respect for Maria Tatar and her work and I own all her works now. This book, I put off for many years buying because of her thesis. The book came out in 1992 and a great deal of work has been done in fairy tale studies (look to Marina Warner and Jack Zipes among many) and also there had been a great deal of work done in child psychology and cognitive behavior. I was hoping, as she said in her preface that she was going to work to protect her commentaries from her own bias, but that did not happen.
Her predicament, her feminism, her open criticism of Bettelheim, not only as a scholar (I can accept that) but as a human being and father was a little wild. SMlLING. And it never left her all the way through the disjointed and sometimes confusing claims she made. Some were very thoughtful and we were in total agreement. We all have more information than Bettelheim had and some of us are not as biased as him or as Tatar. There was much to like but also dislike. I am not sure I agree with her thesis 100% and she certainly did not convince me.
Tatar is looking at this from her psychological point of view. She totally dismisses any Freudian claims, which is flawed and she is erring on the side of children in her psychological claims. It's beautiful in one way, if you are convinced she is right in her core thesis and I am not convinced. I studied psychology for 11 years and was interested in childhood trauma and even some therapists have moved toward her views, but now there is a pushback in this movement because of 20+ year studies since the end of the 1990s that are not looking very good for children and their social outcomes. I don't know where this leads. I don't know how I feel about this book. I don't know if she is really right or wrong. But she did not convince me. And though it's incredible writing and research, I cannot give her anymore than three stars at most. I cannot really like this book that much. One more thing and it's an important one. Most of the tales are from a long ago historical past, which possessed it's own predicament and culture. Not our culture. Arranged marriages is an example. While females may have feared these unions, even been unhappy, arranged marriages and social roles were determined by the social constructions of the day and therefore determined much of the psychology of the situations. We cannot compare them to now in any way, except in the surface ways, that women were property. Beauty and the Beast tales come to mind. But some of those stories are very old. With this author, parents are the enemies in these situations and children are to be pitied and described as perhaps early modern females. Psyche for example. I found this chapter particularly conflicting.
The culture of childhood ( we have less death rates, etc,) is not looking very good right now. And if she were right and all those other people who agree with her were right, third graders might be able to read and they can't. Other factors exist, mental health issues are growing by leaps and bounds and I as a teacher to at-risk children for years know this. I am there, living it.
July 22, 2019
As the title of this book suggests, this is an analysis of fairy tales and what they say about childhood. Despite the title, there are surprisingly few references to Alice in Wonderland. Anyway, this is an interesting look at the evolution of fairy tales from tales to keep adults entertained during long days and nights of boring repetitive work because 18th century life in general, to tales designed to teach a moral lesson to children.
What I found most interesting is how boys and girls (and men and women, and male monsters and female monsters) are treated differently. Girls tend to get the "prize" by being good housekeepers (like Cinderella), while boys are more likely to get the prize when they go off on adventures and have to complete impossible deeds.
One tale-type, the reward-punishment tales, completely pissed me off. This book didn't actually have an example that I was overly familiar with, but this is basically a story with two similar characters, except the "good" one gets the prize, and the "bad" one has something horrible happen to them. For instance, a girl might give the last of her food to a beggar, even though she herself is hungry, and be rewarded with a husband (nope, I'm not kidding), while her "bad" sister, who is just as hungry won't share her food, and then birds peck out her eyes or something. That whole premise is annoying enough, but the MORAL of these stories is that it's important to be kind and nice to strangers, even if it it means putting yourself at a disadvantage. Yeah, the patriarchy is everywhere and it's been ingrained in our society for hundreds of years through the telling of stories.
Don't get me wrong. I love fairy tales, and I LOVE retellings, but I'd like one where at the end, Beauty is all, well, I'm glad you're not a beast any more and congrats on figuring out how to be a decent human, but no thanks on the marriage proposal. I'm off to do something for me for a change, instead of devoting my life to you and my dad.
There was a super interesting chapter about Maurice Sendak and how he sees children's literature in general as a way for children to work through a lot of childhood feelings like anger and resentment. I had always thought Max in Where the Wild Thing Are was a total brat, and not as a way for Max to work through his anger (I totally understand childhood angry--childhood is superfrusterating because you have all of these feelings and thoughts and ideas and a lot of trouble expressing them as accurately as you're feeling them). Anyway, Max works through his anger and returns to real life at peace with himself. That's an interesting view, and I hadn't seen that book in that light before.
What I found most interesting is how boys and girls (and men and women, and male monsters and female monsters) are treated differently. Girls tend to get the "prize" by being good housekeepers (like Cinderella), while boys are more likely to get the prize when they go off on adventures and have to complete impossible deeds.
One tale-type, the reward-punishment tales, completely pissed me off. This book didn't actually have an example that I was overly familiar with, but this is basically a story with two similar characters, except the "good" one gets the prize, and the "bad" one has something horrible happen to them. For instance, a girl might give the last of her food to a beggar, even though she herself is hungry, and be rewarded with a husband (nope, I'm not kidding), while her "bad" sister, who is just as hungry won't share her food, and then birds peck out her eyes or something. That whole premise is annoying enough, but the MORAL of these stories is that it's important to be kind and nice to strangers, even if it it means putting yourself at a disadvantage. Yeah, the patriarchy is everywhere and it's been ingrained in our society for hundreds of years through the telling of stories.
Don't get me wrong. I love fairy tales, and I LOVE retellings, but I'd like one where at the end, Beauty is all, well, I'm glad you're not a beast any more and congrats on figuring out how to be a decent human, but no thanks on the marriage proposal. I'm off to do something for me for a change, instead of devoting my life to you and my dad.
There was a super interesting chapter about Maurice Sendak and how he sees children's literature in general as a way for children to work through a lot of childhood feelings like anger and resentment. I had always thought Max in Where the Wild Thing Are was a total brat, and not as a way for Max to work through his anger (I totally understand childhood angry--childhood is superfrusterating because you have all of these feelings and thoughts and ideas and a lot of trouble expressing them as accurately as you're feeling them). Anyway, Max works through his anger and returns to real life at peace with himself. That's an interesting view, and I hadn't seen that book in that light before.
December 24, 2023
I don't know much about academic studies into folk tales or childhood literature. My academic background was more focused on musicology and film analysis. Despite the context lost when Tartar would reference some other academic in the folk tales field whom I had never heard of, coming from recent academia gave me the tools to understand the expected annoying jargon and thought process she employed.
If there's anything I can definitively say here without writing an entire essay it's this: Children's media can never be just children's media, and oftentimes (most of the time) is in service for some adult's personal beliefs. Adults choose what stories are printed, distributed, and told to children. They are in control of how a story is told and they try to control what messages stories impart.
I wouldn't recommend this book to someone who wasn't looking for a hefty read, but the analysis Tartar provides is such an insightful and interesting look at how fairy tales have evolved over time and been forced to fit the molds other wanted them to despite their much more nuanced time and place specific nature. She makes so many interesting thoughts that will stick with me whenever I consume more media.
My only critique is sometimes Tartar gets a bit too sidetracked with her thoughts and it leaves the point of some paragraphs a bit unclear. She'll provide example after example of something but then doesn't quite get to saying the meatier part of what she wants. However, I believe this is a frequent criticism of any discipline where the answers can't be found in data tables, so I don't hold it against her much. It's also still much better and clearer writing than anything I put out so please don't take that as a huge critique.
If you aren't scared off by dense academic writing and are interested in children's media or like, any Disney movie ever, and want to develop more insight on how the media you consumed as a kid, and/or the media (your) kids consume check it out!
Oh and also this book provided even more reasons to say: F*** Freud, which is always appreciated.
If there's anything I can definitively say here without writing an entire essay it's this: Children's media can never be just children's media, and oftentimes (most of the time) is in service for some adult's personal beliefs. Adults choose what stories are printed, distributed, and told to children. They are in control of how a story is told and they try to control what messages stories impart.
I wouldn't recommend this book to someone who wasn't looking for a hefty read, but the analysis Tartar provides is such an insightful and interesting look at how fairy tales have evolved over time and been forced to fit the molds other wanted them to despite their much more nuanced time and place specific nature. She makes so many interesting thoughts that will stick with me whenever I consume more media.
My only critique is sometimes Tartar gets a bit too sidetracked with her thoughts and it leaves the point of some paragraphs a bit unclear. She'll provide example after example of something but then doesn't quite get to saying the meatier part of what she wants. However, I believe this is a frequent criticism of any discipline where the answers can't be found in data tables, so I don't hold it against her much. It's also still much better and clearer writing than anything I put out so please don't take that as a huge critique.
If you aren't scared off by dense academic writing and are interested in children's media or like, any Disney movie ever, and want to develop more insight on how the media you consumed as a kid, and/or the media (your) kids consume check it out!
Oh and also this book provided even more reasons to say: F*** Freud, which is always appreciated.
January 23, 2024
Buku ini memiliki 10 bab, tidak termasuk pembukaan dan epilog. Masing-masing bab bisa dibaca mandiri, tidak perlu berurutan dan tidka selalu saling terkait (meskipun misal terkait tetapi tidka signifikan).
Untuk awam yang tidak mendalami literatur cerita anak, dalam setiap bab akan dikisahkan secara singkat cerita anak yang dijadikan bahan pembahasan dalam bab tersebut, tetapi sebaiknya pembaca tetap membaca kisah aslinya. Sehingga untuk dapat lebih memahami setiap pembahasan dalam buku ini, companion book yang juga harus dimiliki adalah setiap kisah dari yang dibahas.
Fairy tales, atau cerita rakyat, harus dan akan selalu berjalan beriringan dengan budaya pembaca/pendengarnya. Karenanya cerita rakyat akan langgeng dan selalu berkembang dari jaman ke jaman. Begitulah pembaca akan dibawa pada kenyataan bahwa perubahan kecil selalu dibutuhkan agar semua cerita akan mencapai akhir 'happily ever after' sesuai pada masanya.
Untuk awam yang tidak mendalami literatur cerita anak, dalam setiap bab akan dikisahkan secara singkat cerita anak yang dijadikan bahan pembahasan dalam bab tersebut, tetapi sebaiknya pembaca tetap membaca kisah aslinya. Sehingga untuk dapat lebih memahami setiap pembahasan dalam buku ini, companion book yang juga harus dimiliki adalah setiap kisah dari yang dibahas.
Fairy tales, atau cerita rakyat, harus dan akan selalu berjalan beriringan dengan budaya pembaca/pendengarnya. Karenanya cerita rakyat akan langgeng dan selalu berkembang dari jaman ke jaman. Begitulah pembaca akan dibawa pada kenyataan bahwa perubahan kecil selalu dibutuhkan agar semua cerita akan mencapai akhir 'happily ever after' sesuai pada masanya.
Read
February 6, 2022Tatar encourages readers to consider “the manner as well as the matter” of the stories we read to our children. Do they “empower or coerce, entertain or frighten, disrupt cultural codes or reinscribe them”? She does this by looking at the sociocultural agendas of various fairy tale versions, meant to make children more governable, more submissive to adult authority. She also shows the different ways adults essentially tell on themselves with the stories they choose to tell and how they tell them.
Her weighted admiration for Maurice Sendak was interesting and made me want to read more of his work.
An extra star to Tatar for choosing Bilibin for the cover art.
Her weighted admiration for Maurice Sendak was interesting and made me want to read more of his work.
An extra star to Tatar for choosing Bilibin for the cover art.
February 23, 2025
Interesting read for fans of folktales and fairytales, I’d suggest having it on your shelf.
I found myself agreeing quite a bit in the beginning but as I moved through the books it was more reflection.
I learned and read about older folklore/fairytales I hadn’t heard of. It mentions Sendak, and that’s always a win for me. I took out Dear Mili and read it again.
I bookmarked a few places to revisit, and that’s always a sign of a good read to me.
I found myself agreeing quite a bit in the beginning but as I moved through the books it was more reflection.
I learned and read about older folklore/fairytales I hadn’t heard of. It mentions Sendak, and that’s always a win for me. I took out Dear Mili and read it again.
I bookmarked a few places to revisit, and that’s always a sign of a good read to me.
April 3, 2018
Really, really wanted to like this book. Extremely analytical and academic with references to Bruno Bettelheim throughout. Also references fairy tales from other cultures I'm not familiar with. This would be an excellent book to use in college/graduate school for a Fairy Tale/Children's Literature course. Too bad it wasn't around when I was in those classes.
June 13, 2019
Need to counter Bettelheim on Fairy Tales? Read this book. Tatar, a scholar in German literature, provides a historical view on the genre.
June 1, 2020
An amazing audio rendition by some of SNL alumni
April 30, 2022
Children are scared cause of the gore of the childhood folk tale stories.
It’s hard out there
It’s so cold in the D
It’s hard out there
It’s so cold in the D
May 12, 2025
This essay collection is just wonderful!
July 8, 2019
A beautifully produced book but a little dry and repetitive at times - Tatar for some reason seems very keen on Maurice Sendak and also mentioning Freud.
August 29, 2025
Off With Their Heads! is one of the best books I've read this year. Despite being the type of person who generally prefers fiction, I couldn't put this book down. Tatar's analysis is interesting, and she strikes up a really intelligent dialogue with materials I'd previously read and disagreed with, but had been unable to articulate my thoughts about. Her range is broad and covers gender, symbolism, and class. Her emphasis on the Grimm's brothers themselves as editors is something not often seen and too often missed in my opinion. I highly recommend this book if you are interested in an academic reading of the Tales.
January 3, 2011
...to declare that adults should stay out of children's literature is utterly unrealistic--adults write the books, publish them, review them, buy them, and read them--and to argue that adults should not interfere in the reading process is as misguided as arguing that they should not intrude on children's lives. Letting children be wholly on their own as the readers of a story can, in some situations, count as a not-so-benign form of neglect that leaves children without any sort of compass to guide them as they enter, pass through, and exit a world of fiction.
Whenever a book is written by adults for children, there is a way in which it becomes relentlessly educational, in part because the condition of its existence opens up a chasm between the child reader and the older, wiser adult who has produced the book. Our current agenda and the wisdom of our time may seem vastly superior to [James] Janeway's sanctimoniously lurid descriptions of dying children, or Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann's unforgettable images of thumbsuckers getting their digits sheared off, but they are ultimately our own adult ideas about what is "for their own good."
Whenever a book is written by adults for children, there is a way in which it becomes relentlessly educational, in part because the condition of its existence opens up a chasm between the child reader and the older, wiser adult who has produced the book. Our current agenda and the wisdom of our time may seem vastly superior to [James] Janeway's sanctimoniously lurid descriptions of dying children, or Dr. Heinrich Hoffmann's unforgettable images of thumbsuckers getting their digits sheared off, but they are ultimately our own adult ideas about what is "for their own good."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews