What about the Boys?

What significance is there in reading simple fairytales? Fairytales have, of course, an element of entertainment. They add vibrant complexion to our gray lives; enchanting the imagination with whimsical wonderlands. These parodies of life also give resolutions. Through heroic characters we can fight dragons or out murderous husbands. But there is graver aspect to these tales. They also contain elements of didacticism. Hidden morals and undercurrents filled with lessons. This, didacticism, is an element of these stories that confuses me. The pragmatic aspect is not really the issue. There is no question that we should not stray from the path when strolling through the deep dark forest, or that you should always build your house out of something sturdier than straw, but what do they teach about relationships. The greatest and most important story in human history is that of the two lovers. There is no greater purpose and no scarier situation, than being in love. These fairy tales strive to teach young women how to land a man and not to fear marriage to a beast, but what are they teaching young men? Prince charming, the beast husband and the trickster, are the categories that boys are face with. These stories leave princes with as shallow an answer to the questions of love as they do for the princesses.

Prince charming, or "The Prince," as seen in Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel, Little Mermaid, and Princess and the Pea, or the stories of the damsel in distress is without a doubt the most romantic of the three motifs. And, I mean romantic in the gross sense of gushy over the top mush. "The Prince" who has no other name, is handsome, rich, and incredibly shallow. He falls in love easily, with only one criteria, and that is beauty. "The Prince" does no work, but often aimlessly wanders around the forest. He falls head over heals for a pretty voice or face. (Which is unfortunate, especially for young mermaids who can't talk.) This motif lends it's self to ridicule, because it has almost no basis in reality. What does a young boy learn from this? Be handsome and rich.

The trickster is more interesting, but no less immoral in his flaws. This lad is usually poor, not necessarily unattractive, just poor. But, what he lacks in finances he makes up in cleverness. He is highly inventive, and often gets a name, like Jack or Marquis de Carabas. The trickster also abounds with luck. However, this character has a rather egregious flaw. He is a trickster. He is a thief, and a liar. We seem to over look this flaw do to the fact that he steals from the "bad guys." Unlike Robin, though, he keeps this loot to raise in status to prince charming. We admire this motif, like Peter Pan, he is forgiven because he is a boy. But , does this teach him to be a man, or answer any questions of love? No, he simply gets the girl and lives happily ever after in his stolen castle.

The beast husband as illustrated in, Beauty and the Beast, The Frog King, and East of the Sun and West of the Moon, has the most redeeming characteristics. Hi is intelligent and kind, sensitive and romantic, and he usually has great wealth. Also he's mysterious. The "Beast Husband," I have been told, is meant to assuage young girls' fears of arranged marriage, but how does it address the other side of the coin? What do boys learn? While, these men are intelligent and often kind, this motif requires the man to also be a "bondsman." The beast steals the innocent girl from her father in exchange for cash. The beast husband teaches young men that ou only need persistence, a little luck, and a ton of cash.

There are, however, exceptions to these atrocious motifs. Kate Crackernuts and Molly Whuppie both offer female heroines that have a bit of character. In both stories the heroin is clever and beautiful and finds a way to survive in perilous times. These characters give young men another image of woman that is slightly healthier. However, Molly Whuppie would fall into the category of trickster as easily as any male counterpart. Also you could say that the Prince in Princes and the Pea was looking for something more than just looks. These stories give us characters that stand slightly against the main stream. But they still portray the propagandistic generic love of man and wife, without any of the messy details.

The mainstream classics, Cinderella, Snow-White, and Sleeping Beauty, confirm the need for men and women to fit into the perfect mould of happy, pretty, man and wife. Even Beauty and the Beast ends with rich, handsome, man and, sweet demure, woman. They represent a cultural need for men and women to fit into specific gender roles. They do not however address many of the aspects and fears that people have about love. These roles or motifs, Prince Charming, The Beast Husband , and the Trickster, were created a long time ago when these roles were clearly defined due to physical ability and environment. But, it is time for a new generation of fairytales that display all the mess and confusion of real relationships. Give us a happy ending, but don't pussy foot around the details.