In looking at the two arguments presented by Bettelheim and Darnton, clear differences begin to arise. First, Bettelheim: The argument presented here perfectly fits the frame in which he is seeking to explain fairy tales. For the group of children he worked with, during the time he worked with them, fairy tales seemed to provide universal lessons. However, Bettelheim makes the mistake of assuming that the likely very isolated environment under which one would treat a "severely disturbed" child directly translates into society in general. it is highly unlikely that an adult who grew up with a happy and traditional family would react the same way to a fairy tale that an abused child would. Bettelheim's argument loses credibility solely on its all too specific research pool.
Darnton's argument takes a more holistic, and in my opinion, more valid approach. Through his criticism of many psychoanalysts, I feel he does justice to the fairy tale tradition. Rather than trying to assign meaning to the nuances of a particular tale, he acknowledges that the oral tradition lends itself to an ever-evolving story. He points out that the versions Bettelheim is claiming to be representative of fairy tales as a whole are just blips in the massive history of storytelling. Acknowledging the differences between stories and looking for explanations within those is a much more effective form of analysis than an in depth application of a single passage.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Although I agree with your view of Bettelheim to a certain extent, I do not think that his conclusions are necessarily useless. Although Bettelheim dos claim that it is his “experience” that “children – normal and abnormal alike… – find folk fairy tales more satisfying than all other children’s stories” (p. 271), he does not support this “experience” with any sort of empirical data. Nonetheless, the universality of his conclusion is not necessarily important. If it a certain fairy tale – regardless of version or origin – truly does teach even a specific demographic of children specific lessons that serve them later in life his research and studies have been successful. Although his overall conclusions may be too broad in scope, on a smaller scale I think his arguments have merit.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your view of Bettelheim because the group of children that he speaks of does not translate into the whole. I think what he compiled would be useful in further study but isn't sufficient standing alone.
ReplyDelete