B is for Beauty and the Beast (and Insecure Writer's Support Group)

First published by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve in 1740, and then again in 1757 by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont, the story of Beauty and the Beast is one of the most enduring fairy tales of all time.

Unlike many of the other fairy tales we've come to know and love, Beauty and the Beast was actually conceived of and written by Villeneuve herself, though it can certainly be said that she drew on many folkloric elements.  In fact, it's roots date back even further to the Greeks and the myth of Cupid and Psyche.

All these stories and versions share a common theme - finding love that isn't based on beauty – as well as the transformative nature of love. But it is interesting to note the difference between the original Villeneuve version of Beauty and the Beast, and the later well-known Disney version.  Villeneuve's story was written for adults and thus dealt with more adult themes – such as marital rights and class distinctions – whereas the Disney version, tailored to a young audience, is filled with morals.

Disney on the other hand places emphasis on the Beast's transformation, from his monstrous behavior in the beginning of the tale into the loving and caring suitor he becomes. In Villeneuve's version however, the Beast's transformation takes a back seat to other plot devices (like destiny and fairy sabotage). He doesn't start out selfish like Disney's version – he simply refuses to marry his wicked governess (who was actually a wicked fairy called the Mother of Time), and thus found himself transformed as punishment. The Beast in this version is very much a victim himself.

Furthermore, Disney's Beast is cold and intimidating, insisting that if Belle will not eat with him then she will not eat at all; Villeneuve's Beast on the other hand, is polite and courteous to Belle from the moment she arrives at his castle. He has little need to change as he and Belle grow closer, whereas Disney's version begins to soften as he comes to love Belle, her love reaching out to his inner humanity.

It's in the big finale that the two stories really diverge. Predictably the Disney version focuses on a redeemed Beast who wins the love of Belle through selflessness and finds the curse lifted. Villeneuve's version on the other hand, walks a very different, and much more complicated, path . . .

Upon the Beast's transformation back into his princely self, his fairy queen mother decides that Belle (begin the daughter of a poor merchant) really isn't good enough for him anymore. Only to learn that Belle is actually the daughter of a fairy princess (the Beast's mother's sister in fact) and a king! When the Mother of Time (the same one that cursed the Beast) wanted baby Belle dead, they hid her away with the merchant by replacing her with his own dying infant daughter, and thus he raised her as his own. So in fact, Belle and the Beast are first cousins, both royal, and how fortunate, of the same social class. Yay for happy endings, am I right?

So in the end, while both the Villeneuve and Disney versions of Beauty and the Beast share a general premise, in reality the two are quite different. Disney deals with sugary sweet theme of physical and emotional make-overs, "outer beauty being more important than inner" et cetera, et cetera. Villeneuve prefers the more antiquated concern over social class and marital rights, all wrapped up in a fairy dust coating. But fortunately for both sets of Beauties and Beasts, they all live happily ever after.

My favorite version:

Rumpelstiltskin as the Beast and Belle from Once Upon a Time (TV series)
_________________________________________________________________________________

Today is not only Day 2 of the Blogging from A to Z Challenge, it's also the first Wednesday of the month, which means it's time for Insecure Writer's Support Group! If you're interested in joining, or just want to learn more about the group, please visit us here.

My insecurity for this month may be something many of you bloggers have wondered in the past . . . how many of my friends and family actually read my blog. Or any of my work for that matter. Now I know I'm something of a sporadic blogger, but I work hard to stay active at it. And I have to wonder how many of the people I love really take interest in what I have to say. I know there are some out there who check it regularly (and to those of you, it has meant so much to me over the years). Just as I know there are many who haven't checked it in months. Maybe longer. In the end it doesn't really matter. They all support me in one way or another. Just a nagging thought.

Anybody else having the same issues?

Good luck to all my IWSG friends out there!! (Especially the ones trying to make it through A to Z . . .)

_________________________________________________________________________________

This post is part of the Blogging from A to Z Challenge. My theme (in case you didn't already guess) is Fairy Tales. Stay tuned for the rest of the alphabet, and if you'd like to check out the other participants, simply click here.

A is for Authors

Hey bloggers, happy first day of the Blogging from A to Z Challenge! I'm so excited to read everyone's first posts and get aquatinted with some new blogs. I hope everyone's ready for some alphabetic awesomeness! 

As I previously revealed, my theme this year is fairy tales, inspired in great part by some of my current favorite TV shows, movie adaptations, and books, most of which I'll share with you over the next 26 posts. So, let's get started! 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Fairy tales are, at their core, an oral genre. Passed down from generation to generation via word of mouth. And yet, over time, somehow we've come to associate our favorite tales with a few key writers. They've become inextricably linked with names like Grimm, writers we still celebrate. 

Perhaps because these men and women traveled the world, tracking down and cataloging the stories that still fascinate children to this day, thus preserving them for future generations. And how funny that their names start with the ABCs. So without further ado, here are some of the Authors we know as the forefathers of fairy tales: 

A is for Hans Christian Andersen -

Andersen (1805 to 1875) was a Danish author who wrote down the fairy tales he'd been told as a child, as well as some of his own invention. Fairy tales such as:

- The Princess and the Pea

- The Tin Soldier

- Thumbelina

- The Little Mermaid

- The Emperor's New Suit

- The Ugly Duckling

- The Snow Queen

- The Red Shoes

B is for The Brothers Grimm -

Jacob (1785 to 1863) and Wilhelm (1786 to 1859) were German brothers, researchers and academics that made it their mission to track down and record folklore and fairy tales. Their versions are a little more, ahem, grim than the modern versions we're familiar with, but their work has greatly shaped the world of fairy tales even today. 

- Rapunzel

- Hansel and Gretel

- Cinderella

- Snow White

- Little Briar Rose (Sleeping Beauty)

- Rumpelstiltskin

- The Frog Prince

C is for Charles Perrault -

Perrault (1628 to 1703) was a French writer who drew on pre-existing fairy tales he'd heard. Though perhaps the least known of the forefathers, the stories he catalogued are some of the most popular (thanks to Perrault's doing) today. 

- Little Red Riding Hood

- Cinderella

- Sleeping Beauty

- Puss in Boots

_________________________________________________________________________________

This post is part of the Blogging from A to Z Challenge. My theme (in case you didn't already guess) is Fairy Tales. Stay tuned for the rest of the alphabet, and if you'd like to check out the other participants, simply click here. 

Blogging from A to Z Challenge is Almost Here

It's almost here. The Blogging from A to Z Challenge is knocking on our door. Have you signed up? Have you prepared any of your blog posts? Are you ready for some spectacular alphabetic blogging? 

I certainly am. I've finished all but 2 1/2 posts (which by god I will have done before midnight!), and am ready to meet some spectacular new bloggers. 

For anyone who hasn't signed up, today is your LAST chance! Sign up here while you still can. For those of you who are new to the challenge, here's a list of the people involved with running A to Z. Anyone would be more than happy to help you out if you have any questions. And I'm one of the Minions this year, so PLEASE feel free to ask me anything at all. 

If you've pre-written your blogs, don't forget to take a look at the calendar and make sure you are on the same page (aka. letter) as the rest of the challenge. 

For the everyone who's signed up and ready to get started tomorrow, good luck! And of course, may the blogs be ever in your favor. 

Peter Jackson . . . the New George Lucas?

As I mentioned in my previous post, my fiance's recent surgery has resulted in many, many, many hours of movie viewing. We started with Star Wars episodes I through VI, followed that up with a little Pacific Rim, and then moved on to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. He'd never seen the extended edition, which made for a great time on my part, getting to introduce him to all the extra hours of footage I find so phenomenal. Of course, as with any book to film adaptation there are going to be some liberties taken that hardcore fans are going to take exception too; but the truth is the Lord of the Rings film trilogy is a masterpiece, one which manages to pick and choose which scenes to take from the novels, which scenes to alter for the sake of pacing, all the while still honoring the original source.

Which got me thinking about Peter Jackson's latest project. I still find it somewhat hard to believe that the man who was so respectful of Tolkien's vision for The Lord of the Rings, could then go and create the travesty that is The Hobbit "trilogy". I just don't understand. From the moment they start talking about the growing evil in Middle Earth (something blatantly ripped out of the LOTR series and shoved unnecessarily into The Hobbit), to the introduction of the Tauriel (the redheaded elf Peter Jackson created with absolutely no literary basis), I knew the series was going to be awful. 

And boy was I right. He has become one of the biggest disappointments in cinematic history. 

Which makes me wonder, is Peter Jackson the new George Lucas? It is my personal opition that both Jackson and Lucas sold-out, tarnishing the reputations they earned honestly in the name of money. )Or maybe it was prestige they were after, but I'm inclined to think it was money.) 

One of the few things I can say in favor of George Lucas was at least the series he destroyed was his own. He created Star Wars from start to finish, and if he made the decision to ruin that with a prequel trilogy, that is his right. Disappointing to fans everywhere. But his right none the less. Peter Jackson on the other hand did NOT create The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, or anything associated with Middle Earth. As a filmmaker, he is allowed a certain amount of creative license, which he used to great effect in The Lord of the Rings. 

But when he adds new and unnecessary characters, creates romance between and elf and a dwarf (seriously, are you kidding me?), and in general ignores the very essence of the story in an effort to make it tie in with his previous series and thus draw in the fans he'd accumulated along the way . . . THAT is unacceptable. And heartbreaking. 

So is Peter Jackson the new George Lucas? It's hard to say. He certainly followed Lucas's footsteps, ruining an amazing trilogy with an obscenely horrible prequel trilogy. And I might even argue that all the new advancements in CGI actually hindered the story in both cases (they filming tricks they used in their original trilogies felt infinitely more realistic than the gross overuse of visual graphics in the prequels). 

All I know if these two filmmakers I once had such faith in have disappointed me to the extreme and I no longer trust them or their visions. 

A to Z Challenge Theme Reveal

The end of March is nearly upon us, and the Blogging from A to Z Challenge is drawing nearer. Which means that it's time to reveal this year's A to Z theme! And what better way to do that than join in a terrific blogfest. Check out host Vidya Sury's blog to see all the other participants. 

I've participated in the A to Z Challenge for the past two years, and had a blast both times. The first year my theme was Science Fiction and I discussed everything from Androids to Time Travel. Last year I focused on Character Types and Tropes, which was a lot of work (blogging about five different examples for each category). 

So what was I to focus on this year? I thought up several different ideas, many of which I'm holding onto for years to come. But this year there was one topic that just sounded too interesting to pass up. And the theme is . . . 

Fairy Tales!

I'm really excited about this one, and can't wait for April 1st so we can get started. I've already got half my blogs complete and hope to have the rest (or as many as I can) finished before the challenge begins. 

What about you? Anyone have an awesome topic they're excited to reveal? 

A Second Look at the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy

When my fiance under went surgery last week, we knew that we'd have to come up with a long list of movies to watch to keep him busy during his recovery. Against my protest, he insisted that we watch Star Wars from start to finish. Now, as I already said, I vehemently protested this for one very particular reason . . . that being that I loath the prequel trilogy to my very core. I think George Lucas is a sell-out and a traitor (Han Solo friggin shot first!), I think the prequel trilogy in no way lived up to the beloved originals, and I think the CGI they used to replace pretty much everything is horrendous and distracting.

But I digress.

So while I did protest, when someone you love has surgery and is in pain, you arguments to the contrary kinda fall flat. And so it was that I found myself watching Star Wars episode I, II and III, something which I'd refused to do since seeing them in theaters the first time (to my great regret). And upon watching them for a second time, I have to admit . . .

They suck. Hard. 

Now, that being said, there are a few points in which I am willing to admit that the prequel trilogy has some merit, something which I had previously believed impossible. They are as follows:

1. Watching Palpatine's complete and utter manipulation of the empire is both ominous and fascinating. His strategic power plays earning him emergency powers are reminiscent of Hilter and his subtle wooing of Anakin Skywalker to the dark side feel wholly realistic. He definitely stole the movie for me. 
2. Watching the Republic slowly crumble and the rise of the Galactic Empire is (at least mildly) interesting. We spent so many years with the image of the Republic in shambles, it's strange to see it whole (if somewhat cracked). I appreciate Lucas giving us a picture of the Republic as it once was. 
3. And of course, R2-D2. He'd just as sarcastic and genius as ever. I'd watch an entire movie chronicling R2's adventures if I could (as long as George Lucas stayed away from it). 

The truth is, they plot isn't completely terrible. It's the filming that ruins the saga for me. And Jar Jar Binks. And bouncing, CGI-Yoda. And Natalie Portman's terrible action sequences. And Hayden Christiansen. 

Now, this in no way means that I like or approve of the prequel trilogy. However, I am willing to concede that they are not complete wastes of time and money. I fear for the coming sequels, and pray to the Star Wars gods that they limit George Lucas's input before he ruins this series even more than he already has -- or god forbid, we have an Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on our hands. 

Saint Patrick's Day!

Today is one of my very favorite days of the year . . . the day of the Irish . . . Saint Patrick's Day!!!

Side note (and in a pointed reprimand for all my Facebook friends who posted photos of themselves wearing green, captioned "St. Patty's Day" this past Saturday), today is Saint Patrick's Day. Saturday was the Ides of March, the day best associated with Caesar's betrayal and resulting death (beware). 

Today is the day we celebrate the Patron Saint of Ireland by wearing green, bedazzling ourselves with shamrocks, keeping an eye out for leprechauns, and in generally thanking the Lord that we (those of us lucky enough to hail from the Emerald Isle) are Irish! So whether you already celebrated this past weekend with some green beer or went to a St. Patty's parade, don't forget to wear some green today in celebration of all things Ireland!