At first, reading the article in our textbook, I was a bit confused by the example of the Aarne-Thompson classification system, but after exploring it on Wikipedia, I understood it much better. I was really surprised to see such an exhaustive listing. I do see how the classification system can assist researchers in their studies of folk tales. However, this classification system is certainly not a perfect one, as some tales could qualify to be listed under more than one category. One person may search for a particular story under one class and not find it because it may be listed under something completely different. So, in my opinion, although I definitely see the benefit of having an established classification system, there is always room for improvement, as demonstrated by subsequent revisions over the years by Thompson and Uther.
I do not believe that any critical mischief or harm is done to the narratives by reading multiple versions at once. I actually have a greater appreciation for doing so, as I was, for the most part, only familiar with the Disney or other animated versions of the tales and those found in modern children's books. I can definitely say that I am more enlightened by reading the varied and/or historical versions of the tales. It's interesting to see how different authors put their own spin on the stories, as well as how the stories evolve over time.
At the same time, reading the stories in a collection, as in the Annotated Brothers Grimm, also makes for an interesting reading experience, as I had never read or heard of many of the tales. Reading the tales back-to-back, as opposed to reading them with among the deep critical analyses, makes for a more light-hearted reading experience and a smoother, quicker flow. Although, as someone else posted, reading them all at once, I sometimes got them mixed up, as some of the tales are very similar.
My overall thought of the tales...very entertaining!
No comments:
Post a Comment