Young Writers Society

I just watched this last night and for the first time in my life, I can say without a doubt that I have a favourite film. This movie is the epitome of storytelling in the modern age. I was just blown away by it. It is so unbelievably derivative - I have yet to see in any film or story such a wide combination of allusions and references and just plain stolen elements, woven into such a unique, classic tale. In order to prove this, I will give a brief overview on the history of storytelling, the way its changed and the fashion in which society's perception has affected it, in regards to children.

Now storytelling in and of itself has been with humanity since the very beginning - as we can see in the Lascaux Caves, in which 35,000 year old paintings are drawn. To primitive man, storytelling was magic. There was little separation between what was spoken and what happened. For this reason, storytellers and bards, from the outset, were given a position of power and influence in society - they invented Gods and explained the origins of the strange sounds in the night, thunder and lightning, etc - through imagination, the unknown was driven back and into the void, myths and legends were born.

Throughout all societies and cultures, there were many common themes: mass floods, devastating natural disasters, creation myths or fables that explained away the origins of man and his purpose here on Earth. Joseph Campbell, among others, theorize that this is evidence of common experiences - tying into the idea that we were all one people before a mass diaspora, possibly caused by the aforementioned disasters - and that this also evidence that stories were spread well before being written down. Oral storytelling had obviously been around for much longer and it was by word of mouth that stories spread. In fact, even to this day, the National Council of Teachers of English defines storytelling as: "relating a tale to one or more listeners through voice and gestures."

Nowadays story has a variety of purposes, predominantly being entertainment, initially and throughout all societies, stories were at heart didactic, with strong moral cores that expounded on the values of good loving and the ill that came from bad ones. Of course, with the rise of organised religion (perhaps the greatest testament to the power of fiction and storytelling), this became prolific to an extent hitherto unseen. However, folk and fairy tales were initially devised as an educational apparatus through which children could learn some basic, but important lessons. Clothed in creative story, the children could engage with the inherent lessons on a level that they couldn't by just being told - it also removes the element of rebelliousness in us all, as all children want to emulate their heroes.

You know, such examples include: There is Fortunatus with his magic purse, and the square of carpet that carries him anywhere; and Aladdin with his wonderful lamp; and Sinbad with the diamonds he has picked up in the Valley of Serpents; and the Invisible Prince, who uses the fairy cat to get his dinner for him; and the Sleeping Beauty in the Wood, just awakened by the young Prince, after her long sleep of a hundred years; and Puss in Boots curling his whiskers after having eaten up the ogre who foolishly changed himself into a mouse; and Beauty and the Beast; and the Blue Bird; and Little Red Riding Hood, and Jack the Giant Killer, and Jack and the Bean Stalk; and the Yellow Dwarf; and Cinderella and her fairy godmother. These stories, some centuries old, stay with us to this day, constantly reproduced time after time - because they remain relevant.

Little Red Riding Hood teaches us about the dangers of the woods, going there alone, and strangers. However, the original version of this story is no longer told, deemed too graphic for today's children. Over the years it has been toned down and now Little Red Riding Hood doesn't die at the end, but is rescued by a burly woodsman. This goes against one of the main elements of childrens fiction and fairy tales in general - it completely reverses the lesson. Most such stories begin by removing the influence of adults from the very outset - leaving the child on his or her own, to explore the unknown and during the course of their adventure learn some life lessons. It encourages independence but what the new ending of Little Red Riding Hood does is provide a safety net, the message being: It's okay kids, an adult will always be there to save the day. Which is of course, not helpful at all.

Snow White suffered a similar demotion in that in the original story, the Queen was her mother and first attempted to kill Snow White at age 7. In the version told now, its her step-mother who is doing the evil and Snow White herself is frequently depicted as much older. So, although they were once deemed useful and relevant, now the stories are modified in an attempt to coddle children. This kind of patronizing, talking down to children is widespread throughout the genre now, with censorship dictating what is and what is not suitable for children to read.

Why do you think this is the case? Why are children - exposed to a greater level of violence in every facet of society than ever before, through film, TV, the internet and video games - suddenly perceived as needing such censorship?

Is it death and homicidal attempts causing the censorship? Because one of the first books for children in Australia - still considered a classic is Seven Little Australians and in it, the eldest sister, sorry to spoil it for you, dies. Why is that okay and Little Red Riding Hood, not?

Furthermore, one of the greatest classics in this field, Narnia, deals with death and is filled with battles. Admittedly, it's written in a childish, recount that skims over any details and has the safety net of Azlan roaming around, but my understanding is that Susan is killed at the end. Why is that okay?

It's interesting to me because, in every other mode of storytelling, we have progressed in leaps and bounds but children's fiction, fairy tales and such, have gone backward. In general, we went from simple orally told, tales of a successful hunt, to epic legends, myths and fables like Gilgamesh and the Iliad, From there, with the written word, stories increased in complexity, plot and characterisation as a way, not only to entertain but often to comment on the current political or social climate. Soon enough, we needed more then mere words and live theatre, in the tradition of the ancient greeks, became fashionable once more and gave rise of course, to Shakespeare. As the novel and the short story continued to flourish through the likes of Dickens, the Bronte's, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Poe and such.

Throughout, new technologies have always threatened. With the rise of radio - a return to oral narration - many theorised the end of the written story. Of course, not long after came cinema and it is through this last, most perfect visual reconstruction and re-enactment of story that most tales are told. I remember attending a lecture last year, in which Dr.John Carr explained that the reason we interact with so many different forms of media, both digital and written, is because the human mind is contuining to develop and needs to interact on multiple platforms. It has become such a predominant medium that even in this, a writing class, the texts we've been asked to examine the filmed versions of stories - classic, award winning stories.

In some cases I think this is the wrong to have done - there is nothing of the personal, pain-staking engagement you get from reading a book and carefully constructing it in your mind, with your imagination in movies. Now we have a pretty box or screen showing us everything with no work needed on our behalf. However, because of this it also requires film makers to go beyond what is required in a novel, in order to reach an audience. Unfortunately, most film makers rely on special effects to achieve this and neglect the story. Amazingly, in some cases this actually works.

For instance, I much prefer the film of the Chronicles of Narnia, to the book. The novel is written almost as a recount, as a verbal retelling. It's as if C.S.Lewis was sitting in the room talking to you and while that is good on the one hand, in my mind there's very little action. His voice becomes an intrusion that distracts and annoys and more, makes the fact that you are reading a story of events that have already transpired, all too transparent. It is hard to relive it in my opinion, although you may disagree. I still think its quite charming but was glad that the film was more action packed - that might be a sign of our times