Female Cannibalism in Folk & Fairy Tales

Folk & Fairy Tales includes a collection of fairy tales recorded by different people at different times. In reading different versions of the same tale, readers can track the variations that exist across all of the selections. These variations offer some insight into the audience reading the tales and their expectations. At the same time, the changes also say something about the values of those responsible for recording the tales. It is interesting to witness which elements are altered and which are kept the same. For instance, the Grimms’ tales tend to be less violent in nature than their predecessors. In the Grimms’ Little Red Cap, the wolf devours LRRH but a hunter, who happens to pass by the cottage, ultimately saves her, allowing for a “happy ending.” However, in Charles Perrault’s Little Red Riding Hood, published over a hundred years earlier, the wolf devours LRRH and the tale ends on this harsh instance of death. Why do these stark differences exist? Folk & Fairy Tales draws some awareness to such variations. The Grimm brothers, as opposed to Perrault, were writing to a child-centered audience: “the Grimms endeavored to select and edit [the tales] with desirable educational principles in mind” (23). Thus, the Grimms’ tales are less harsh in nature and appear to be more lighthearted. Perrault, however, catered to a French elitist society; the elements in his tales reflect on that society. For instance, in Perrault’s Little Red Riding Hood, we are told that the “pretty little girl” wears a “red hood like the ones that fine ladies wear when they go riding” (26). Clearly, he is addressing the “pretty little girls” in 18^th century French elitist society.

One interesting variation that exists across the tales revolves around the issue of cannibalism. I am especially interested in how Perrault chooses to keep this element in some of his tales and then omit it in others. In some of the older tales of LRRH, the wolf, dressed as the grandmother, fools LRRH into eating her grandmother’s flesh and drinking her blood. In Perrault’s version, however, this instance of cannibalism does not exist. In “Tales at the Borders,” Tracy Willard says, “Revisions are instructive as they show, in this case, the evolution of meaning and importance of the maternal cannibal figure” (Willard).

Willard argues that the reason Perrault leaves out the cannibalism perpetuated by the child is not simply because his audience is the French Royal Court and that cannibalistic nature of the old LRRH tale is “crude,” but rather because of “the context in which the cannibalism occurs.” The innocent and good female character who eats her grandmother’s flesh and drinks her blood “endangers the clearly set boundaries of expected and appropriate behavior…The well-loved and pretty (desirable) Little Red should not count cannibalism among her charms; it would make her too dangerous (and empowered).” While I agree that it is important to consider the context in which the cannibalism occurs, I am interested in learning how Willard defines “dangerous” in this context. Is LRRH dangerous because she simply “endangers” traditional roles for women, or is she dangerous because her deviation from standard roles threatens male desire? I think it is less about maintaining “appropriate behavior” and more about catering to the desires of the male audience, especially since other tales by Perrault do in fact include cannibalistic females. Omitting this detail from LRRH also exposes the aesthetic tastes of Perrault’s audience. I think that Perrault’s decision not to include cannibalism in LRRH is not simply because the French Court will find it crude but because LRRH will no longer be a desired body for which the male can “devour.” Instead, cannibalism is a trait attributed to female characters who have lost their desirability, unlike the youthful and innocent LRRH.
          This concept becomes clearer as you read Perrault’s other versions of classic fairy tales. For instance, in The Sleeping Beauty in the Wood it is the prince’s mother who is the cannibal. When the prince leaves for the battlefield, his mother, who is now a widow, decides to eat her grandchildren, Dawn and Day. The context in which this cannibalism exists requires investigation. The queen comes from ogre decent, and although ogres have the reputation of eating children, we are never told that the queen has actually eaten a child. It is only after her husband dies and she is left without a patriarchal counterpart that she is exposed as a cannibal. She is also older in age, unlike Sleeping Beauty. This, paired with her new position as an unmarried woman lacking an authoritative male figure in her life, makes her the perfect candidate for cannibalistic tendencies. Attributing cannibalistic tendencies on an already undesirable, flawed character will not shock the audience; instead, it is a safe maneuver. However, giving LRRH, a desirable body, that same tendency is a challenge to male desire and thus, Perrault omits this from his tale. Interestingly enough, by the end of The Sleeping Beauty in the Wood, when the queen has made her cannibalistic desires obvious, Perrault refers to her as “the ogress” and not the queen (Folk & Fairy Tales 59). We know that the queen’s appeal was in her economic power alone. We are told the king “married her only because she was very, very rich” (57). In the end, before her ultimate death, she is stripped of her title and thus, her power, and any appeal she may have had. It is safe then to rid of her character entirely because she is essentially “useless.” So, in the end, the queen’s desire to eat is thrown back at her as the prince, who has now returned from war, orders that his mother is thrown into the vat, “head-first,” and is “devoured” by “vile beats.”

Hallet, Martin, and Barbara Karasek. Folk & Fairy Tales. 4^th edition. Ontario: Broadview, 2011. Print.

Willard, Tracy. “Tales at the Borders: Fairy Tales and Maternal Cannibalism.” Reconstruction: Studies in Contemporary Culture Online – Only Journal 2.2 (2002): n. pag. Web.