In 1955, Roger Lancelyn Green published an anthology called
“Modern Fairy Stories.” The stories themselves were published between 1839 and
1907 and are arranged chronologically (by publication date). Famous writers
like Lewis Carroll, Andrew Lang, Oscar Wilde, George MacDonald, Rudyard
Kipling, and Kenneth Grahame are included, as are lesser-known folks (most
notably, Juliana Horatia Ewing and Edith Nesbit). If you come across a copy,
it’s well worth reading.
Mr. Green, the editor, puts these stories forward as a new
genre, the “fairy story,” as opposed to the traditional “fairy tale”—a story
with no known author that was being told long before being written down by Grimm, Perrault, or Dasent. What makes a “fairy story” different for Green, as
far as I can tell, is that it’s invented by a (British) “modern” writer, though
it’s usually modeled on traditional tales. Unlike the traditional fairy tale,
the individual author’s personality (or authorial voice) comes through in
differing degrees.
These writers differed quite a bit in how they tackled the
challenge of writing in the fairy tale / folktale tradition. Or, put another
way, they used “fairy tale” elements for very different purposes. Some take a
light, humorous tone; at times they even poke fun at fairy tale themes, usually
with good reason. Edith Nesbit (among others) seems to enjoy that—especially
the “curse at a royal christening” theme—putting the humor to good use. Andrew
Lang, too—for instance, he pokes fun of the traditional fairy wood. At points
they’re almost flippant with the tradition. Others are more serious, perhaps
moralizing—or anti-moralizing, like F. Anstey in “The Good Little Girl.” And
one or two do something like allegory. Oscar Wilde and George MacDonald excel at that.
In terms of straight-forward fairy-tale quality, the best in
the collection (to me) was John Ruskin’s story, “The King of the Golden River.”
It was pretty close to the longest, but it translates well into an oral
retelling. It relies least, maybe, on style or authorial cleverness, and most
on the deeply embedded movement of traditional themes. Bad, greedy brothers and
a good-hearted youth, each passing through a test—only the last surviving.
As a side note—the sort of thing we don’t usually get for a
fairy tale—we get the hint from Mr. Green that Ruskin’s creation of this tale
might have helped him win his future bride.
Green, writing in the 1950s, seems to think the “modern”
writers struggled to take the old fairy tale tradition seriously—though not all
of them, I think, were put off by its magical qualities. MacDonald and Wilde
and Ruskin don’t struggle with that; they use it. And there’s a difference. But
some writers in this collection do: they act like magic and fairies and spells
are for children, though they’re willing to use these traditional elements to
spin a tale for entertainment. Needless to say—if you’re a fan of
fantasy—that’s inadequate.
No comments:
Post a Comment