Showing posts with label Wizard of Oz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wizard of Oz. Show all posts

Saturday, July 12, 2014

Red Shoes in Fairy Tales and History

"The Red Shoes" is a tale by Hans Christian Andersen, one that really reveals his tendency to condemn a young girl, in this case for her vanity, and make her suffer incredible punishments that seem to far outweigh the crime.

Karen, the protagonist, struggles with vanity long before she even comes into contact with the fateful shoes. "People said that she was pretty. But the mirror told her, 'you are more than pretty-you are beautiful.' " A throwback to Snow White's evil Queen, perhaps, another vain character known to listen to her mirror?
"Mirror Mirror on the Wall"-P J Lynch
Karen chooses red shoes for her confirmation, causing everyone to stare at her shoes the whole time. She continues to wear them, despite how "improper" they are to wear to church. She is no longer able to focus, but thinks of her shoes the whole time-"she forgot to say the Psalm, forgot to say the Lord's Prayer."


The first time Karen danced a few steps in the shoes, she found she couldn't stop, until the shoes were removed. She still thinks about the shoes even when she isn't wearing them, and finally wears them to a ball. This time she starts dancing and can't stop. After dancing for days, past meadows and fields, she is condemned by an angel: “Dance you shall,” said he, “dance in your red shoes till you are pale and cold, till your skin shrivels up and you are a skeleton! Dance you shall, from door to door, and where proud and wicked children live you shall knock, so that they may hear you and fear you! Dance you shall, dance—!”
Thomas Vilhelm Pedersen

She even passes a funeral for herself, and knows "she was forsaken by everyone and damned by the angel of God." Nothing can help her until she goes to the executioner and asks him to chop off her feet. Even the first time she tried to go to church again, the red shoes were still there, dancing on their own, and she had to repent of her sin.

After that she became the image of piety, "industrious and thoughtful," and when children "asked her about dress and grandeur and beauty she would shake her head." After living in humble piety for a while with her crutches, one day she is taken up to Heaven, "and no one was there who asked after the Red Shoes." (Italics part of the story, not my emphasis).
Anne Anderson

All that for a pair of shoes seems rather extreme, but wikipedia includes this pertinent background information: "Andersen explained the origins of the story in an incident he witnessed as a small child. By his report, his father was sent a piece of red silk by a rich lady customer, to make a pair of dancing slippers for her daughter. Using red leather along with the silk, he worked very carefully on the shoes, only to have the rich lady tell him they were trash. She said he had done nothing but spoil her silk. "In that case," he said, "I may as well spoil my leather too," and he cut up the shoes in front of her."

So Andersen may have had bitterness towards the rich more than towards women and girls especially. She originally wants red shoes because she sees a princess wearing them.
Katherine Cameron

This paper by Anastasia Yuanita sees the story as cautioning children more about obedience than vanity. Karen tricked her adopted mother into buying her red shoes, and wore them over and over again after being told not to. As far as we know, the princess in the beginning was never condemned for wearing her red shoes, so her sin could be idolizing the shoes more so than just wanting and wearing the shoes in and of themselves, good news for any of us who happen to own red shoes. Plus, extremely didactic tales enforcing children's obedience were pretty much the norm at the time.

However, when you look at this story in combination with Andersen's others, you really do start to notice a pattern. Inger of "The Girl Who Trod on a Loaf" is given even more dire punishment. This girl is bad, cruel, and proud-even despite her poverty. In her vanity and foolishness, she uses a loaf of bread given to her to place in the mud to keep her shoes from getting dirty. For this she becomes a statue in the underworld, forced to hear the voices of people up above telling her tale as a warning against wickedness, and she wishes she had never been born, and that people had punished her more for her waywardness.
Arthur Rackham-shoeless Gerda

In contrast, the good heroine of "Snow Queen," Gerda,shows her devotion by throwing her red shoes, her "treasure," into the river. (Interestingly, although you can find illustrations of Gerda with and without shoes, I haven't found any pictures of her wearing those red shoes, has anyone else?)

I couldn't help but wonder how much of Andersen's attitude towards red shoes were universal, and how much was his own, so I did a little digging.

From BBC News: "In the 1670s, Louis XIV issued an edict that only members of his court were allowed to wear red heels. In theory, all anyone in French society had to do to check whether someone was in favour with the king was to glance downwards. In practice, unauthorised, imitation heels were available."

Louis XIV's shoes in a portrait by Hyacinth Rigoud
  • Footwear facts
  • In Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries heels on shoes were always colored red. 
  • Six-inch-high heels were worn by the upper classes in seventeenth-century Europe. Two servants, one on either side, were needed to hold up the person wearing the high heels.
This lecture tells us that "woman in red" was basically a code name for "prostitute" in England and France in the nineteenth century. Prostitutes could also be identified simply from their dress-being overdressed according to cultural wardrobe norms. 

Yet, red shoes couldn't have been a universal symbol for wanton sexuality, especially (one would assume) if there were pairs available for little girls. Plus, in the Grimm's The Juniper Tree, when the brother is resurrected as a bird, he rewards his sister Marlene by bringing her a pair of red shoes from the shoemaker. Marlene is only represented as good and kind, and was thankful for the present.

In fact, I'm finding it difficult to research the importance of red shoes in nineteenth century Europe. It seems shoes of many different colors were fairly common, especially by the mid-1800s.
A pair of red shoes pictured among other colored shoes

People also associate Red Riding Hood's red cap with daring and/or sexual overtones, but she clearly wasn't the only little girl wearing the bold color, as this mid-nineteenth century fashion plate reveals

Dorothy's shoes were only changed from silver to red to show off MGM's brand new color filming
House of Harry Winston's Ruby Slippers-created from diamonds and rubies for the 50th anniversary of "The Wizard of Oz," these are supposedly the most expensive shoes in the world ($3 million)

And to bring it back to the Snow White reference at the beginning- if you missed it the first time, you should definitely check out Gypsy's post on the red-hot iron shoes Snow White's evil stepmother was forced to dance in. Here's the warning:
Warning:
This post is NOT for everyone.
It discusses historical torture methods.
Skip this if you have a sensitive stomach.

There are so many other fairy tales that deal with shoes in general, so I tried to keep this post limited to discussion of red shoes specifically (although you could also throw in the stepsisters from Cinderella-after putting their mutilated feet into Cinderella's slipper the trickling red blood is what tipped the Prince off to their deception). Any thoughts on the symbolism of red shoes in fairy tales, and/or historical facts about red shoes?

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

My Take on Oz, the Great and Powerful


I went to see the new Oz movie and was surprised by how much I liked it. I was expecting another forced epic journey extremely loosely based on literature using special effects to try and wow the audience. I was impressed by the levels of meaning and symbolism throughout the film, and throughout the rest of the day was discussing what certain things in the story meant-how the characters in Oz represented characters from Kansas and how Oz had an opportunity to redeem those relationships; what the film had to say about goodness vs. greatness, naivety and deception, and where true power lies. It was also fun to see another setup of the events we're familiar with in The Wizard of Oz, an alternative to Wicked.

So I was surprised to see the title of this article, linked on Surlalune, Why ‘Oz the Great and Powerful’ Is A Major Step Back For Witches and Women. The major points in the article are: 1. The Wizard of Oz has multiple sequels, so Hollywood should be exploring those rather than making more prequels 2. Baum was a feminist, and all of his heroines were females, so it's unfortunate that Hollywood should go back to making a male the center of attention.

As for the first point, the sequels are so unknown I can definitely see that it would be difficult to drum up excitement for a movie of one of those books. I loved the book Wizard of Oz and have read a couple of the other books in my childhood but that didn't stop me from enjoying both Oz and Wicked. One of the reasons I really love new interpretations of fairy tales is when they take well-known elements from fairy tales and come up with an explanation for why or how that came to be. Oz prequels do the same sort of thing-Wicked was exploring the "why"s of how the Wicked Witch of the West came to be the way she is, what made her so obsessed with her sister's shoes, what it would have been like for her to grow up with green skin. And this movie was exploring a different set of "why"s-how did Oz get to Oz anyway? How did he end up deceiving everyone behind a smokescreen? This movie presents a plausible (mostly plausible, anyway) explanation for that aspect of the story, as well as going into the relationships between the sister witches and why the Munchkins were so happy when Dorothy eventually landed on the Wicked Witch of the East when she arrives years later.

As for the second point, it was very interesting to read the history of Baum and his feminism. I think it's really cool that he intentionally made his main characters females and never had them get involved in romantic relationships.

But can a woman expect men to get excited about stories with female leads if we are offended by the mere fact that a man is the lead in another story? Granted it makes a difference when viewing it in context, but it seems like we judge characters seeing only through the lense of gender. If I as a modern woman have to be told why I should be offended before I get upset about characters in a movie I just saw, is it really that offensive?

Elisabeth Rappe points out that the witches of Oz come across powerless in their reactions to the Wizard-lauding him as the one who will save them. The only one who truly does this is Theodora, and she as a character is naive. Not only that, but though she is a witch from the beginning, we never see her using her power for good. She passively wants peace and only uses her powers to get revenge in a series of impulsive decisions. I thought she was an interesting character with challenging implications.

Evanora is intentionally trying to deceive Oz, so she plays into his vanity and greed in order to control him. Glinda sees through him and wants to use him and the prophecy to give her people hope for defeating the witches. I think she overall is a very strong character-she blends concern for her people with wisdom, and she is powerful-I loved the part where Evanora says, "what's the matter? Run out of bubbles?" and Glinda responds "bubbles are just for show" and they proceed to have an electric flying wand fight that reminds me of the Harry Potter wand fights.

Plus, the Little China Girl is a plucky heroine. She stubbornly convinces Oz to take her on his journey, saying, "I'm not as delicate as I look!" as she kicks him in the shin. She ends up being instrumental in freeing Glinda from Evanora later.

So I'm not saying I totally disagree with the article. It would be great to have more strong female heroines-if only Hollywood could realize that strong heroines aren't necessarily just sword-weilding. But I feel like I connect with characters regardless of gender and I personally enjoyed the movie. I must seem like I'm coming across as anti-feminist, especially with my recent post on Disney's Snow White, which I swear I'm not. Sometimes it seems like the academic world has become a little too hyper-feminist. I just wanted to put out my two cents, that as a female I did not feel offended by this movie until I read up on the history of its source. Even then, each reinterpretation of a fairy tale or classic fantasy literature should be seen as it stands alone, and as it stands in the history of that story. I'm sure the filmmakers never intentionally changed from female to male heroes, but unconsciously our culture/Hollywood has produced a new trend in this story that in turn reveals something about our culture.
By the way, for the record I didn't like that Oz got Glinda in the end-I thought she was too good for him.

Readers, have you seen the movie? What did you think of it? And of the article? I will be out of town for a bit and though I hope to schedule an extra post or two I won't be following up on comments for a while, but please feel free to discuss

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Wicked: Book and musical

Not too long ago, everyone was obsessed with the musical "Wicked." It seemed to be that people were most enthusiastic about the music. When I saw the musical myself, it wasn't necessarily the music I loved-it was fun and catchy, and I do think "Defying Gravity" would feel great to belt out-but not really excellent. What really caught me about the musical was the plot.
I love the idea of twisting traditional plots-making Elphaba the true hero and tying in the characters we know of as Tin Man, Scarecrow, and Cowardly Lion to people in Elphaba's past. But the message really got me-one that I specifically needed to hear at that time in my life, as well as in general-about the importance of not sitting back and letting evil happen, but going out and doing something about it, even if it may cost you.

I had heard negative things about the book but wanted to read it for myself anyway. Those who have gone from the musical to the book, like I did, may be shocked at how different they are. Both of them took creative liberties, but the approaches are entirely different.

The musical turns the world of the Wizard of Oz upside down. What was once black is now white, what was white is now black-but the world is still one of black and white. The book does not attempt to villainize Elphaba, or to make her out to be a heroic victim. Maguire's purpose was to explore the character and history of the Wicked Witch of the West in a way that fits in more closely with the original books and movie. Not to implicate her from all wrongs, but to create a scenario in which a person would be so obsessed with her sister's red shoes (silver, in the original). And, if the witch did have green skin, how would that affect her upbringing and ultimately the person she became?

The book is definitely an adult book, in contrast to the family-friendly musical. It's more dark and gritty and doesn't even feel very much like a fantasy because the fantastic world of Oz is so like our world. If I had read the book first I probably would have appreciated its approach more-it wasn't till I had time to process afterwards that I understood it better.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Designer Princess

One of my favorite fashion bloggers is Alix, The Cherry Blossom Girl. If you go through her archives, she's put together several modern and designer clothes and accessories to create outfits modeled after certain fairy tale characters.


As a peasant:





As a Princess whose dress color is being fought over by fairies:





































A dress the color of weather:



A dress the color of the moon:




A dress the color of the sun:



Follow the links for more information on the individual peices, or in some cases, more accessories and outfits.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

The Marvelous Land of Oz


My Christmas present from my sister this year was this beautiful, first-edition copy of The Marvelous Land of Oz.

This first sequel to The Wizard of Oz was written because so many children wanted to hear about more adventures from their favorite characters. From the author's note: "I promised one little girl...and she is a "Dorothy," by the way-that when a thousand little girls had written me a thousand little letters asking for another story of the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman, I would write the book. Either little Dorothy was a fairy in disguise, and waved her magic wand, or the success of the stage production of "The Wizard of Oz" made new friends for the story. For the thousand letters reached their destination long since--and many more followed them."

Dude. Jack Pumpkinhead is totally Jack Skellington from Tim Burton's Nightmare before Christmas.

Fan art from here.

It's a really fun story. I don't even want to think about possible implied gender messages meant by General Jinjur and the girls' army (although he can't be too anti-female because the ultimate ruler of Oz is Ozma). I will say that the twist at the end, which I won't give away, was REALLY disturbing to me when I read it as a child.


My favorite thing about secondhand books-aside from the smell-is finding notes from the former owners.
Fun facts about Oz:

-L. Frank Baum got the name "Oz" from an O-Z filing cabinet.
-Gregory Maguire got the name "Elphaba" for Wicked's Witch of the West from L. Frank Baum's initials: L. F. B