Harsh New Laws Punish Victims of Violence

Image

Children need to be protected from violent perpetrators and so do their mothers. Mothers who are the victims of domestic violence risk losing their children upon reporting the abuse under new zero-tolerance child protection laws, such as those outlined in the 2013 Child Protection Legislation Amendment Bill (Child Protection Amendment Bill (No 33) 2014). With an estimated 80% of all domestic abuse cases going unreported (Vic Health, 2012) such laws will make the direct victims of domestic abuse less inclined to seek help for fear of forced separation from their children. Removing a child from an abused but otherwise loving and capable parent is not in the child’s best interest, nor is it in the best interest of the victim to have them too intimidated and shamed to speak out.

Domestic violence has overtaken paternal mental illness and drug or alcohol addiction as the leading cause of child protection intervention (Butler 2014). The Family Rights Group (2014) states that cuts to domestic abuse and family support services, including strict means-tested welfare reforms, results in further isolation of victims. The inability of a victim to seek sufficient support, in the forms of stable housing and financial aid, increases their dependency on their abuser. Cathy Ashley, the chief executive of the Family Rights Group, states that women who report the crimes committed against them are told by social workers to leave immediately with their children or they (the children) will be taken into care (Butler 2014).

In order to understand the disempowering and dehumanizing demands of such practices, you first must understand the complex issues faced by victims of domestic violence. The zero tolerance laws indicate that even those who experience such cases daily are failing to understand that victims cannot simply pack up and leave. Not only are victims psychologically manipulated by their abusers, and usually dependent upon them through strategic isolation, they are also most at risk of extreme violence once they have left their abuser.

Clementine Ford, journalist for Daily Life, writes:

In June 2013, WA woman Angela Furullo was murdered by her ex-partner, James Bill Payet, at the hairdressing salon where she worked. Her pregnant daughter was injured in the attack. In April 2013, Kara Doyle’s boyfriend shot her in the groin. Doyle had been planning to leave him. She was dumped at a nearby Caltex Station with severe injuries and died in hospital five days later. Her killer, Mehmet Torun, was recently sentenced to eight years in prison with a non-parole period of five years. In February 2014, Victorian woman Kelly Thompson was murdered by her long term partner. Just 19 days before, Thompson had applied for an AVO against Wayne Wood. After murdering Kelly Thompson, Wood killed himself.

These are just a handful of the devastating acts of violence enacted against women and children every week in Australia. Every single one of these women were either in the process of leaving their partners or had already left them. If women are supposed to ‘just leave’ in order to end the cycle of violence, what is it that these women did wrong? The answer is nothing. They did nothing wrong (Ford 2014).

When a social worker tells a victim of family violence to leave immediately with her children, without time to source adequate housing, financial aid or support for safety, they are putting the mother and child/s life in profound danger. Threatening to remove the mother’s children will only add to the psychological trauma of the victim and make her far less likely to report future acts of violence. This advice condemns victims whilst doing nothing to address the real issue.

Domestic violence does impact on children, who, on average, witness 44% of all violence (Vic Health, 2013). Children are often the victims of revenge killings wherein the perpetrator murders his partner’s children to make her suffer further. As discussed above, such incidents usually occur directly after a woman has left her abuser. This illustrates a definite need for intervention but not the intervention that has been proposed.

We ought to be asking ourselves, as domestic violence is as much a crime as assaulting someone in the street (for example, the now famed ‘coward punches’), if child protection services have sufficient evidence and reports to remove children from the home then why can there not be a new legislation introduced where the perpetrator is court ordered to attend men’s behavioural change sessions? Or, why is the perpetrator not formally charged and facing jail time? Why is more not being done to prevent the violence? Why are there cuts to essential support services? Why is more money not being put into women’s refuges? Why have there been such harsh cuts to welfare payments for single parents?

Seventy-eight percent of people in Australia who are homeless due to domestic violence are women (Ford 2014) and it isn’t hard to see why. There seems only three, bleak options available to women experiencing domestic violence; stay with their abuser and not report the crimes against them in order to avoid having their children removed; stay with their abuser and lose their children; or leave, putting their own and their child’s life at risk, and face a life of poverty and, potentially, homelessness.

In a written interview, on the 10th of June 2013, Susan* illustrates what many women must endure when they make the choice to leave.

It got to the point where I had to seriously consider getting an intervention order against him. His behaviour was erratic and irrational. One moment he would be begging for my forgiveness for what he had done, saying he would love me forever, and at the next he would be calling me a ‘dumb slut’ and saying everything was my fault. I was scared of him, for myself and for my daughter. I had been too afraid to go to court for a formal custody agreement, fearing what he might do if I pushed it that far, so we had our own agreement where he would have her 3 nights a week. Every abused woman with children knows the horror stories that are both real and common. We all fear for our children (Susan* 2013, pers.comm., 10 June)

Continue reading

Madame Bovary Book Review

Madame Bovary (Flaubert 1857) had me hooked; line, and sinker. As I began reading I was uncertain as to whether Flaubert had intended it to be humorous, or if I were reading it wrong. However, as I read on, I quickly came to the realisation that was the point of Flaubert’s humour; to be dry, ironic, and subtle.

The key to such humour is that whilst we are being treated to a realistic and objective narration of events, as the narrator is that of third person omniscient, we also see everything through the eyes and thoughts of Flaubert’s clawing, desperate characters. This creates a disparate version of the plot; that of the characters, and that of the omniscient narrator/reader.

Emma Bovary, for example, longs for passion, excitement and wealth. She wants for nothing more than her life to mime that of an opera. Instead, however, the first affair she embarks on, whilst an intoxicating Great Romance, in her mind, is in fact nothing more than a womanizing, selfish man recognizing in Emma weaknesses (her boredom and romantic ideals) that leave her ripe for seduction, and taking advantage of this.

Emma’s second love affair ends when she begs her lover for money, since she has incurred for herself, and her husband, an unpayable debt by living beyond her means. Both Emma’s lovers react with cowardice in the face of her desperation. However, had they attached themselves to her, she would undoubtedly either soon grow bored of them, or else be the ruin of them. Both men grow bored with Emma’s antics and desires; here again Flaubert is ironic, for Emma herself is bored with both her husband and child.

Throughout the novel characters continuously comment on how clever a woman Emma is, yet she isn’t shown to be clever in action or thought in any scene. Rather, she is shown to be self-absorbed, and lacking in any affection for her husband, or her only daughter. She takes lovers, but is unsatisfied, and demanding. She takes out loans to purchase luxurious items, yet takes no satisfaction in them, always wanting more.

Emma’s story ends with her suicide, and even that fails to go as she would have hoped; it’s drawn out, painful, and absent of any tender, tearful farewell from her child. In a final, unflattering scene, at her funeral, her head is hacked at in order for her husband to have a lock of her hair.

He stepped forward himself, scissors in hand. He was shaking so violently that he punctured the skin in several places on the forehead. Finally, bracing himself for the shock, Homais gave two or three big cuts at random, which left white patches in her beautiful black hair. (Flaubert 1857, p. 345)

For the final irony of ironies, Emma, who had dreamt and longed for city life, passionate love, ballroom dances, and wealth, condemns her only child, her legacy, to the life of a penniless orphan, sent to work in a cotton mill.

Flaubert writes Madame Bovary (1857) with such skill and realistic depth that while we laugh at the audacity, and despair at the mistakes, of Emma, we do not dislike her, or any other character. They are too human for the reader’s dislike. After all, most of us share in a hint of Emma, whether it be a desire for more, for wealth, for a passionate love, dazzling talents or a brilliant career. It is in this truth that Madame Bovary (Flaubert 1857) is an exemplary piece of realist literature; both in character, plot and writing style.

Further Thoughts on the Narrator:

Madame Bovary (Flaubert 1857) opens with the narrative being told from the first person plural point of view.

We were at preparation, when the headmaster came in, followed by a new boy dressed in ‘civvies’ and a school servant carrying a big desk. Those who were asleep woke up, and everyone got to his feet with an air of being interrupted at work. Motioning for us to sit down, the Head turned to speak to the form-master. (Flaubert 1857, p. 15)

The narration then soon changes to that of third person omniscient, quite seamlessly. It is noticed by the reader, certainly, but not disruptive.

The Beginning Hook:

I was instantly intrigued by Madame Bovary (Flaubert 1857) for one single, stand out reason. The book is titled “Madame Bovary”. The blurb enticingly states “Emma Bovary is beautiful and bored.” And yet, the narration begins with dull Charles Bovary. And then following that, two equally dull Madame Bovary’s; Charles’ mother, and Charles’ first wife, chosen by his mother. The curiosity to see when and how this mysterious other Madame

Bovary would come into the story is what kept me reading. That, and the humour.

On Constructing Reality:

Flaubert’s (1857) construction of reality is so thorough that when Emma, having had her monstrous debts revealed to the town, goes to beg money from the wealthy Guillmen, enters his house and observes “Now this…is the dining room I ought to have.” (p. 223).

The reader laughs out loud and sinks their head in their hands in disbelief. Emma is still (still!) not content with what she has in life. There she is, begging for money, and still she is hungering for more, more, more.

By this reaction from myself, as a reader, I realised I had become entirely sucked into the world crafted by Flaubert. He creates human characters, and describes a world so thoroughly, that the reader forgets that these are not helplessly foolish, fallible neighbours, friends or relatives of theirs, but characters in a book, doing what Flaubert makes them.

Another such scene that reveals, by personal reaction, how successfully real Flaubert has made Madame Bovary (1857) to his audience, is this one:

‘If you’d like to go in now and again,’ he said, ‘that wouldn’t be too ruinous, after all.’ ‘But it’s no use unless you keep it up regularly,’ she replied. And that was how she managed to obtain her husband’s permission to go into Rouen once a week to see her lover. (p. 272)

Favourite Quotes:

“And Emma started laughing, a ghastly, frantic, desperate laugh, fancying she could see the hideous face of the beggar rising up like a nightmare amid the eternal darkness. (Flaubert 1857, p. 337)

At last she sighed. ‘What can be more distressing than to drag out a futile existence like mine? If only our sorrows could be of use to someone, we might find some consolation in the thought of our sacrifice.’ (Flaubert 1857, p. 245)

Notice here, the great detail Flaubert gives, like a camera focusing on a scene, time and place, to draw the moment out and mark it as important, before panning over the rest of the setting:

In summer there was more of its shelving bank to be seen, and the garden walls were uncovered to their base, with several of the steps leading down to the water. The river ran noiselessly, swift, cool to the eye. Tall slender grasses leaned above it in a mass, bent by the force of the current; weeds streamed out in the limpid water like green wigs tossed away. Now and then some fine legged insect alighted on the tip of a reed or crawled over a water-lily leaf. The sunshine darted its rays through the little blue bubbles on the wavelets that kept forming and breaking; old lopped willow-trees gazed at their own grey bark in the water. Beyond, the fields looked empty for miles around. (Flaubert, 1857, p. 107)

Had they nothing else to say to one another? More serious communications were, to be sure, passing between their eyes. As they tried to make conversation, they felt the same languor stealing over them both, as if their whispering voices were being drowned by the deep continuous murmur of their souls. (Flaubert 1857, p. 108)

 

Reference:

Flaubert, G 1857, Madame Bovary, 3rd edn. Penguin Group, Australia.

Critical Appraisal of Little Snow White (The original Snow White, Grimm version.)

In this essay I will be examining Liberal Humanism, Marxist and Feminist literary theory in relation to The Grimm’s Brothers version of Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812). This analysis will include biblical and religious references, as I find those to be unavoidable when doing a critical analysis on Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812).

“The most obvious… way to think of literature is as verbal representations of the real world” (What is Literary Theory, p.1). This interpretation of what literature is correlates well with the discussions had in our introduction to The Critical Appraisal of texts- which led to the natural conclusion that language exists solely in the metaphorical world as a means of conveying to others what we experience in our physical worlds.

Given this interpretation,   it makes sense to think of literature as capturing the essence of human experience. Literature is an art that explores different times, lives, political climates, and social hierarchies.

This definition of literature brings me to my introduction of Literary Theory. Literary Theory is an important practice as it is the “interpretation of how literature makes sense of the (literal world) and, in turn, how critics make sense of such literary works” (What is Literary Theory, p.1).

So, what role do fairy tales play in literature and what is their relevance? What can fairy tales tell Literary Theorists of the world?

Keeping in mind the definitions I have given for what literature is, and what Literary Theory is, it makes sense to view fairy tales as a means of introducing and explaining the world to children. Fairy tales are tales of caution, tales depicting social hierarchies, tales that explore the role of men and women- and the values of both. And, as written by Jack Zipes, tales that “confront the injustices and contradictions of (the) so-called real world”. Zipes goes on to write that fairy tales “can be equated to the wish fulfilment and utopian projections of the people”.

As Literary Theory is the analysis of what Literature is saying of humanity and the world in general, fairy tales are immensely relevant to Literary Theorists even to this day. Fairy tales, myths and legends are at the beginning of the story telling culture- and the beginning of what Literature has evolved to. Fairy tales are also still a huge part of contemporary literature today.

In applying Literary Theory to fairy tales both ancient and modern, theorists may see how the world has evolved over time, particularly how society’s attitude towards children, women and religion has changed. More significantly, the comparison of ancient and modern fairy tales can show what has not changed, and what is implicit and reoccurring in human nature- something Liberal Humanism explores.

Feminist Literary Theory is primarily concerned with the representation of women in literature and the conditioning that entails. These representations in fairy tales tell boys and girls what are acceptable feminine attributes, and what are not.

The deconstruction of any text using a feminist approach involves focussing on what the text is showing about women. For example, what is their purpose in life? How must they act, and what characteristics of a woman’s are of value?

No work of literature could be more appropriate to revision by Feminist Literary Theory than fairy tales. Cinderella, The Little Goose Girl, Snow White and Rose Red, Rapunzel and Little Snow White- all these tales from The Grimm Brothers collection (1812)- are very telling to what was expected of, and acceptable behaviour for, women, especially given that these tales focus on female characters and were told to children. This was most likely to teach boys and girls of a young age what a woman’s value and place in life was.

Why did such fairy tales focus on females? As the cautionary tales that they are, does it suggest women required more guiding? And more warnings for caution? I feel confident in answering yes to that, as even today people urge women to be more cautious than men. However, in considering that the villains in these stories are also women and, generally speaking, queens and witches, does it suggest that knowledge and power in the hands of women is not only unacceptable, but dangerous?

Such stories could be viewed as advocating that women require to be kept obedient, sweet, domestic and innocent for their own good, and to ensure their own safety. I will now attempt to satisfactorily answer these questions and more in a feminist reading of Little Snow White.

There are two aspects to Little Snow White that are immediately obvious. The first is the double standard toward female beauty. Throughout the text beauty is portrayed as a most precious commodity in a woman, and is the central point to the story.

It is repeatedly stressed within the text how very beautiful both Snow White and the Queen are. For example, the Queen is renowned throughout the land for her beauty and daily addresses a magic mirror to ensure there is none more beautiful than she.

Beauty, ensures the tale of Little Snow White, will get you far. We see this when the hunter ordered to kill Snow White takes pity on her and kills an animal to present its organs to the Queen in place of Snow Whites. Why does the Hunter take pity on her? It is not, as you might think, because she was ordered to be murdered by her mother or because she cried, pleading for her life, and offered to run away instead. No, instead “The huntsman took pity on her because she was so beautiful, and he thought “The wild animals will soon devour her anyway” (Little Snow White, p. 1).

Then, when Snow White is found asleep in one of the Dwarfs beds they take pity on her because, on seeing her, “good heaven!” They cried. “She is so beautiful!” and they liked her very much” (Little Snow White, p.2) And finally there is the prince who becomes besotted with the beauty of Snow White’s corpse and carries it around with him until she is awoken, and then they marry.

The double standard arises when comparing Snow White with the Queen. In the case of Snow White beauty is portrayed as the most feminine attribute, and the most valuable thing a woman has to offer. However, a woman must not be vain. She must not be aware of or glorify in her own beauty, as the Queen does.

The story first establishes beauty is important to men but women must not use this to their advantage or be vain for that is evil and will lead to punishment. Punishment such as a being forced to wear iron shoes and dance to death. One might argue that the tale warns women to be each other’s heroes. Don’t be jealous. Don’t begrudge others; you may think it is saying. However, given beauty is stressed to be of the utmost importance, put yourself in the Queens shoes. Beauty is all that she is known for throughout the land. When that begins to fade, or be replaced, so must the peoples regard. Although we don’t read of The Queens background it is safe to assume her obsession with beauty arises only because it is so obsessed over by men, as proven throughout the text.

Instead of trying to hang onto her status as beautiful the Queen should give over to the other things women are valued for; raising children, being motherly, keeping house, sewing, cooking and cleaning- things that Snow White does readily.

Graf says “Fairy tales promote unhealthy sex stereotypes… They glorify passivity, dependency, and self-sacrifice. They promote a theme that is the inferior position of women and teach girls win the prize if they are the fairest of them all” (‘Reading Female Bodies in Little Snow White: Independence and autonomy versus subjugation and invisibility’, 2008, p.81).

Graf also writes that, in Little Snow White, “It seems the only role available to women, other than the submissive, abused, young protagonist, is one that defines women as devious, manipulative and therefor subversive” (‘Reading Female Bodies in Little Snow White: Independence and autonomy versus subjugation and invisibility’, 2008, p.81).

The messages in Little Snow White are not by chance- as stated previously these are tales told to children specifically to teach them about the world and their role in it. As Maria Lieberman writes “Fairy tales have only one function and that is to shape girls perceptions to conform to a gendered identity through stereotypical characters like the wicked mother and beautiful, helpless daughter” (‘Someday My Prince Will Come’, 1972.)

The tale of Little Snow White’s (Grimm, 1812) purpose is to teach girls, and boys, that women must be attractive to men, but not vain. Women must ensure they are demure and submissive, perform household duties and listen to men. This is backed by the scene in which Snow White is finally killed by the Queen- by ignoring the warning of the seven dwarfs with whom she lived and letting a stranger in. Little Snow White strongly presses the point that beauty and obedience are the only two things of value in a woman. A woman with knowledge and power is dangerous and woman who refuses to step aside for her more youthful counterpart is positively evil.

I now come to the second thing within the text that is immediately apparent; whatever critical theory you are applying within your review.  Firstly, Snow White eats an apple and dies. This has a strong comparison to Eve eating the apple from the tree of knowledge and being the downfall of women for eternity, and causing Adam and herself to be banished from the Garden of Eden. As is the message in Christianity so is the message in Little Snow White; Curiosity, knowledge and power in a woman is wrongful and fearful. This is also reflected by the wicked mothers and female villains in fairy tales such as Little Snow White being portrayed as witches. The Church feared and persecuted wise women and even midwives, accusing them of witchcraft.

To support this analysis of Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812) holding strong biblical references there is repetitive use of a biblically significant number; the number seven. Within the text there are seven dwarfs; Snow White is seven years old when she surpasses her mother in looks and the dwarfs live in the seven mountains. Most telling of all, are the dwarfs seven beds. As described in this passage “(Snow White) wanted to lie down and go to sleep. She tried each of the seven little beds, one after the other, but none felt right until she came to the seventh one, and she lay down in it and fell asleep” (Little Snow White, 1812, p.2).

This passage directly relates to the making of the world and the working week with the seventh day being a day of rest. Prior to resting in the seventh bed Snow White also eats some simple brown bread and drinks some wine- practices also repeatedly referenced in the bible. However, there are other aspects to the tale of Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812) more aptly covered by a Marxist analysis.

Marxist Literary Theory, as written by Peter Barry in ‘The Beginning Theory’, dictates that good art “always has a degree of freedom…from economic circumstances” although, it is acknowledged, such economic and social climates are the work of arts “ultimate determinant”.

Marxist literary criticism naturally drew a line between propaganda and art. However the prevailing thought behind Marxist literary criticism is to look at the context in which the text was written. What political and social implications are within the text? In what way has it been written?

In Little Snow White I will focus on a Leninist critical reading. Leninist criticism, writes Barry, “insists on the need for art to be explicitly committed to the political cause” (‘Beginning Theory: An introduction to literary and cultural theory’, 1995, p.154).

The obvious place to begin with Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812) is defining the class of the characters. The Queen, in this tale, represents a dictatorship. She has power over everyone, even Snow White who, along with The Prince, are capitalists. Their demands are met and they get whatever they wish from the lower classes. The Seven Dwarfs a prime example of the petite bourgeois. They work for themselves and have the ability to buy the labour of others however they are not as upper class as Snow White or The Prince. Following this cast is The Huntsman and The Servants of The Prince who are representative of the proletariat and the lower class struggle.

As it is in Marxist and the Bolsheviks ideology a communist revolution may not be possible without the rising up of the proletariat and we do indeed see this in Little Snow White. When the servants, tired of carting the corpse of Snow White around, pound her dead body and send the poisoned bite of apple flying from her mouth, Snow White is resurrected and thus able to marry a powerful prince and overthrow the dictatorship of The Queen.

The Huntsman represents the struggle of lower class between two warring ideologies. The Queen orders him to kill Snow White and he must obey. Snow White begs for her life and he is compelled to obey also. This importance on social standing is also reflected when The Prince only admires Snow White’s beauty and wishes to have her after he notes her coffin states that she is a princess, therefor upper class like himself.

The Seven Dwarfs are forced to let Snow White live with them, although they do require manual labour in return. This reinforces their position as depicting the petite bourgeois. Their social standing as below that of the Capitalists is reinforced when The Prince desires to have Snow White’s body for his own. The Dwarfs, of course, must accept.

Finally, at the end of the tale The Queen is forced to wear iron shoes and dance to death- iron being representative of the middle and lower classes labour and such, and dancing a leisure activity of the capitalists.  The dictatorship of The Queen is thus overthrown however the tale can be viewed as commenting on the failings of the communist revolutionary attempts for in place of The Queen is a new dictator- Snow White and her Prince.

Liberal Humanism, on the other hand strips back all these prejudices and interpretations. Liberal Humanist Literary Theory ideally looks at what is at the essence of the text, and what it says about humanity.

It can do this as Liberal Humanist literary Theory views literature as timeless; as well it might in the case of fairy tales as they have survived the test of time, numerous retellings and adaptations. In applying the first tenant of liberal humanism to Little Snow White we must look at what within the text displays as being constant in human nature. This is easy to spot in the story; the things that have remained throughout constant changes to the story are natural jealousy and fear of ageing. It displays the human instinct for survival, not wanting to step aside, be over taken and to hang on to life.

The second tenant is that the text contains its own implicit meaning; it does not need to be read from a socio-political context or a literary-historical one in order for its meaning to be grasped. The inherent meaning of Little Snow White, as a fairy tale of caution or pure entertainment, would be that all too obvious warning; don’t talk to strangers, although I think in this case the real message is to listen to your superiors (In this case the seven dwarfs).

It is also important to note that Snow White sends a religious message- or to apply it to any time- a warning to not do bad deeds. One must not be vain, greedy, gluttonous or envious there will be punishment. The queen is guilty of these sins when she wants to be the fairest of them all- displaying greed and vanity. She is envious in her jealousy of Snow White and gluttonous when she devours what she believes are Snow White’s lungs and liver.

I believe to view the tale of Little Snow White in a manner of “seeing the object as in itself it really is” (‘Beginning Theory’, 1995, p.17), is very difficult given in reading the text it is impossible to put aside the strong and constant biblical references.

When it comes down to it; do you believe in transcendent qualities? Does each individual have an unchanging essence that makes them so? Are some things in human nature entirely unchanging?

Some things, certainly. Our basic instincts, for example, are unchanging. However, today they are often over ridden by rationalisations and conscious thought. All our subconscious instincts and thoughts however probably remain shockingly unchanged throughout time.

The idolisation of beauty is one such thing. As Iris Murdoch says, “beauty is the only spiritual thing which we love by instinct”.

People all over the world and throughout time have always admired and valued beauty- and it is this instinctive appreciation that is timeless in Snow White.

Little Snow White (Grimm, 1812) also tells us, along with beauty, society values hard work, kindness and social ranking, fitting well with point six of Liberal Humanism that “the purpose of literature is essentially the enhancement of life and the propagation of humane values” (‘Beginning Theory’, 1995, p.17).

In conclusion, any form of Literary Theory can be applied to any text satisfactorily. It is important to take a step back from theory and to enjoy the experience that text is depicting and to remember language and literature in a Liberal humanist manner- as something abolishing the distance between words and things, as something that expresses our humanity and experiences in a way which will remain timeless and relevant.

Reference:

Barry, P 2002, Beginning Theory: An introduction to Literary and cultural theory, 2nd ed. New York: Manchester University Press.

Graf,  D 2008, Reading Female Bodies in Little Snow White: Independence and autonomy versus subjugation and invisibility, 1st ed. Oshkosh: University of Wisconsin .

Grimm, G, Grimm W 2011, Brothers Grimm: Little Snow White, 2nd ed. United States: Books LLC.

Zipes, J 2012, The Irresistible Fairy Tale: The cultural and social history of a genre, 1st ed. United States: Princeton University Press.

Zipes, J 2002, Breaking the Magic Spell, 2nd ed. Kentucky : University Press of Kentucky.