There have been lots of comments about how dark children’a books were. But, back then, children’s lives were pretty dark. With the high infant and childhood mortality, a good proportion of children had lost a brother or sister. Given maternal mortality, many children had probably lost a mother in childbirth. Given the nature of farmwork and the primitive nature of medicine, many children probably had a father, uncle, etc who was killed or main in an accident. And that is before you consider the frequent wars in which soldiers roamed across the land raping, pillaging, and killing. Death would have been all around children.
Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
41–50 of 107 posts
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#42Here's free collection of Tolstoy's Fables for Children
https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/leo-tolstoys-fable...
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#43> The publicists of the most recent edition issued by Simon & Schuster, who seemingly did not read it, write of this book, “children will be able to take away important lessons, as well as laugh at silly mishaps and characters, from this timeless collection.” This is possible but unfortunately the author of the article decided not to answer his children: > “Daddy,” my stunned four-year-old son asked, “why did the lio…
I happen to be a close personal friend of the author, and happen to know that he answers deep and difficult questions from his children very directly and well; and that he allows them to see all facets of life (an eagle eating a mouse; a deer not surviving the winter) as a matter of course. Perhaps the paragraph is simply lighthearted :)
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#44>Anna Karenina’s suicide scene
spoilers on side note, isn't Tolstoy famous for being a Schopenhaeur influenced writers why did he had 13 children? He is a great writer nontheless
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#45> But frequently those stories are redeemed by a depth which feels archetypal: when Rapunzel’s prince falls from her tower and blinds himself in the rose bushes below, his blindness appears to have a meaning — it’s not just gratuitous bloodshed.
If I doubted my dismissal of this article, I felt vindicated by this line. Is the author really so blind as to believe that popular fairy tale endings are archetypal for any reason beyond the fact that they became popular? They were just as nasty and surprising back then, and it's only repeated listenings and social acceptance that has made them appear to be any more child-appropriate than a screaming, dying tree.
FWIW, I generally believe kids are way more resilient to any of these things than we think they are. Like the poplar tree, in trying to protect them, we lead them to their own downfall.
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#46I much preferred the original title of the post -- why change it?
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#47Those books shouldn't be judged by today's norms. They were not written for the children (nor parents... especially not parents) of today, but for children back then who lived in a completely different world.
For instance, in the version of Cinderella by Charles Perrault - the version that we all know - one of the evil stepsisters was advised by her mother to cut off her toes in order to fit the slipper. She almost fools the prince, but doves warn him about blood dripping from her foot. He then goes back again and tries the slipper on the other sister. She cut off part of her heel in order to get her foot in the slipper, and again the prince is fooled. While riding with her to the king's castle, the doves alert him again about the blood on her foot.
How about that for a good night story?
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#48Important point many are missing: Folktales were not originally for children. They were told among adults after children had gone to sleep. But when folklorists (like the Grimm brothers) started collecting and publishing folk tales, it became a trend to publish sanitized edition for children.
Read something like the Arabian Nights tales in an uncensored version - these were clearly not intended for children anymore than 50 Shades of Grey are for children. The children's editions are heavily sanitized.
I suspect their change into children literature was because of cultural changes - educated 19th century adults couldn't take folktales serious anymore (except as anthropological studies) and found them childish. The same way that 19th century popular literature like Dumas and Verne became children's books in the 20th century.
Walt Disney is often criticized in this context, but both Snow White and Cinderella are actually pretty faithful to the source material. Cinderella is just based on the Charles Perrault version of the story, not the Grimm version which contain a lot more maiming.
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#49"Ring around the rosy" is about the plague.
"12 days of Christmas" and other tales and sings have hidden Christian symbolism due to persecution.
Re: Tolstoy’s Children’s Stories
#50Those books shouldn't be judged by today's norms. They were not written for the children (nor parents... especially not parents) of today, but for children back then who lived in a completely different world. For instance, in the version of Cinderella by Charles Perrault - the version that we all know - one of the evil stepsisters was advised by her mother to cut off her toes in order to fit the slipper. She almost f…
Aren't we and our children exposed to much more violence, blood, and plain evilness in media nowadays?
I don't understand how people in those times would be less sensitive to such themes.