Tag Archives: penguinbook

The Little Mermaid: Full Commitment. No Payoff.

Posted on by
5

At first glance, it would be a lie to claim that one began read the story without thinking (at least subconsciously) about the Disney iteration. However what is truly surreal is the fact that the Hans Christian Anderson story of “The Little Mermaid” was truly nothing as expected in terms of tone and over all motives displayed throughout the tale. Apart from the huge disparities between the film adaptation and the tale by Anderson, there seems to be a reoccurring sense of longing for something that we as the readers, already know that it is only highlighting the positive aspects of being human without truly understanding the hardships and flaws humanity has to offer.

The claim that Anderson’s “The Little Mermaid” is a cautionary tale that showcases the attractive qualities of being a human is not only supported by moments where the characters glorify certain superficial and materialistic things, “The little mermaid swam close to the cabin window, and as often as the water lifted up, she peeped in through the transparent panes, and saw a number of well-dressed persons” (Penguins, 113). Now this is just an observation on the mermaids part and can entirely be done just out of sheer admiration for the clean and presentable appearance of the gentlemen, but it is also a telling piece of information which implies that this sort of fondness towards all things “classy” and “fancy” is natural and tailored only to humans (which is why the mermaid is so intrigued by the prince). Not only does this correlate with humans as a whole, but it also demonstrates the sacrifices women make in society as a result of marriage and motherhood which can be interpreted from the witch’s warnings, “if once you obtain a human form, you can never be a mermaid again!” (Penguins, 120). While not blatantly stated, this may very well be an allegory for dedicating ones entire life and leaving everything behind in order to seek for marriage and a relationship that is built on materialism and physical qualities. The ending (which is quite depressing) serves as an example of said sacred bonds that do not have a legitimate foundation comprised of love and understanding, rather one that is constructed by unrealistic expectations and hope which in the very end, leads the little mermaid to end up risking everything for someone that did not share the same passion.

Christianity: An Apparent Constant for all Earthly Creators

Posted on by
2

Hans Christian Andersen’s The Little Mermaid depicts the lives, but more importantly, the inner thoughts and perspectives of Merpeople. Andersen wrote about what he can only imagine it would be like to look into our world from such an unimaginable viewpoint. Somehow, he still managed to integrate Western Christianity into a fairy tale about a young woman who lived separate from all things “worldly”. This proves that, as much as we try to understand the incomprehensible, and walk in the shoes of or (swim in the tails) of others, our own learned perspectives will often prevail.

On page 108, he writes, “It was the little birds that her grandmother called fishes, or else her young listeners would not have understood her, for they had never seen birds”. According to this logic, the young mermaids had no concept of the world on land whatsoever, yet in basically the same breath, he mentions how enticing the church bells are to the girls. On page 109, he mentioned the church three times, and yes, mostly intended as an example of the sounds of humans, heard from afar, but nonetheless, it was mentioned. Andersen takes the time to point out that they don’t know what dogs are, yet skims past the fact that they’d never been inside a church and still had a full understanding of what they were. If these young girls could understand the reason for church bells, and not birds singing, then well, they were clearly written to be religious mermaids.

This may seem to be very insignificant, but I felt I needed to point out such a minute detail because it really does play a larger role in this story. If this young mermaid knew the significance of the church or religion, or in some ways, morality, then she would, in turn, also know shame. Organized religion has been a tool in inducing shame for centuries, and it was especially potent at the time of this telling. Although shame is a less intense theme in this story than it is in other merpeople tales, its presence is more interesting when it relates to a LITTLE mermaid. A 15-year-old child feels shame for wanting love, for wanting beauty, and for wanting human connection.

I do not think this distinction was necessarily purposeful or intended to be significant, but I do think it points to writing about unknown beings in general. That is my point, I suppose. Andersen was submerging himself in this perspective, over-explaining the way things look to someone who had no concept of them, down to little details. Yet he subconsciously or consciously decided that, of course, mermaids would inherently have a concept of religion, the church, or God.

The Day after the Wedding from Undine

Posted on by
4

All that was echoing in my mind while reading “The Day after the Wedding, from Undine” in “The Penguin Book of Mermaids” was like Professor Pressman said in class, “Love with a capital L”. This tale is the holy embodiment of what we typically consider to be love, or rather, what it’s displayed to be for us in the media. So it only makes sense her soul is tied to male validation, right? *crickets* The entire section was full of contradictions! I found it interesting it says, “She continued thus throughout the whole day, quiet, kind, and attentive,- at once a little matron and a tender bashful girl” (103). Even details like this about her personality also hold these major contradictions. Why is it that Undine can only have a soul if she obtains the love of a man? Why does her humanity have to be defined by her marrying a man? Have you guys ever thought about how odd it is that, in our society, for a relationship to be considered real in the eyes of the law you legally have to go through the ritual of getting married? Also, Undine explains she is magical…literally made from the elements, and even says, “Thus my father, who is a powerful water-prince in the Mediterranean Sea…”(105), indicating that she is of some royal lineage…yet none of that matters? She is, for some reason, less than Huldbrand and depicted as incomplete without him. This is important to think about because tales like this reinforce patriarchal standards, but also when looking at them deeper…heavily favor religion. The entire thing has strong religious themes, echoing the Christian sentiment that love is good and redeeming. According to the text, similar to our friend Undine, our souls can also be redeemed.

Humanity’s separation from Nature.

Posted on by
3

For this post I will be talking about “The Day after the Wedding, from Undine” Pages 101 to 106 in the Penguin Book.

In the section in the Penguin book for the story Undine, the beginning text before we start reading the story makes sure to emphasize her role as a “water princess” and within the story itself how she alludes to being a “water spirit”. Rather than simply a mermaid. This to me highlights a deeper connection between Undine and nature, that she represents the element of water itself, embodying the bodies of water on the Earth (the oceans, lakes, rivers, etc). The story’s conclusion where we’re told after Huldbrands death, and after his love drifted to someone else (a more mortal or human person), Undine transforms into a body of water surrounding his grave. I saw this and their marriage as humanity’s bond with nature, as there is a saying how we return to nature after death. This made me think about how, in the context of these stories, humanity was much closer to nature, both literally and spiritually in the past, a point our professor made in class.

During the section where Undine talks about other spirits like herself, she says, “that there are beings in the elements which almost appear like mortals, and which rarely allow themselves to become visible to your race,” tells how nature—like Undine herself—is often only partially visible and understood. Showing how humanity is already, even around this time, separating themselves from nature in a way that didn’t necessarily break their bond. But in a way that lessened their understanding/outlook. As when Undine explained this to Huldbrand, “The knight tried to persuade himself that his beautiful wife was under the spell of one of her strange humours, and that she was taking pleasure in teazing him with one of her extravagant inventions. But repeatedly as he said this to himself, he could not believe it for a moment”, this quote shows he doesn’t believe her. Rather only focusing on her beauty.

Struggled a lot to put this into words, so I hope this makes sense.

Undine: Affected by Your Surroundings.

Posted on by
Reply

While there are many a siren and water spirit tales, the pattern tends to be the fact that there is a sense of betrayal and or seductive nature to them and after reading the section from Undine, it follows a similar structure to the other ones that have been included in “The Penguin Book of Mermaids.” Despite the common motifs, this specific section has more of an actual emotional complexity which makes the reveal that much more impactful compared to the other tales and this very depth is also explained by the overall atmosphere in which Huldbrand resides in.

Now, that is not to say that the relationship Sir Huldbrand and Undine was completely fabricated without any true intimacy, but should be mentioned that their environment and social status definitely made in impact on their lives. In instance in the tale where it is evident that their relationship was also shaped by their social status and atmosphere is when they are speaking about going their separate ways and Huldbrand is hesitant to do so, “‘remember, even if I wished to desert you, the church, and the spiritual powers, and the emperor, and the empire, would interpose and bring the fugitive back again'” (102). Considering that Huldbrand says this while they their is quite a significant flood going on, this as well could be an indication that he only stayed their and only planned it continue to be there because of the storm that was occurring in the meanwhile. As time goes on and Huldbrand begins to question himself and others, he continues to be a subject of his own environment due to how much he prioritizes what the people would say if they found out as well as the natural disasters that are impeding him from doing what he wants to do, which is to be his true self and leave the shore but once he realizes that he is a victim of his own mentality, it is too late.

Redefinition for Rights

Posted on by
Reply

Besides the obvious intrigue of this week’s readings that discuss so many sightings of mermaids in very early years, I was drawn to the way they discuss the shift of their view. While we’ve analyzed at length the difference between their original view in society as creatures of lust, to a symbol of femininity and fertility, to their modern interpretation as child’s play, there doesn’t seem to be much of this recognition from the previous generations during the existence.

The exact statement really holds a lot of value: “The Mermaid has long been considered by many as a fabulous animal, but some naturalists have declared there is too much evidence of the existence of these animals to warrant them in pronouncing the mermaid to be solely a creature of fancy” (Penguin, 241). Their verbiage in particular, referring to them as animals, really begins a new definition in and of itself. While they’re somewhat referred to as a cross between fish and human in the rest of the reading, it’s clear where the author of this particular section draws the line. Their animal existence seems to completely separate them from the human existence, as if totality is the only true definition of being excluded from animal definition.

It’s especially intriguing because of how it leans into the idea that in the wake of their reality, they are animals, but humans are not. Only in fiction can they be considered entirely something of marvel, but when they may actually be something of fact, their existence must become detached from ours. Despite the same evolutionary process that created us being something that would be a part of their existence, and the fact that their cognitive ability matches our own, they must be completely disconnected and unassociated with the “perfection” that humanity supposedly holds. Even the contemplation of their existence needing to have complete evidence, despite there already having been, proves this need to deny them so we do not have to work around any creature that we would consider remotely comparative to us.

It truly in one sentence reflects our disrespect of them, our need to stare and make them “creatures of fancy” when we don’t believe they can defend themselves or find any kind of retaliation, but in the event of their actuality, we’re unsure of how to respond besides disconnection as animalistic beings. Without this shield of their non-existence, we’d have to recognize the inevitability of coexistence with something as cognitive as us, and humanity’s selfishness cannot do this. Instead, we refuse to accept them as a part of us, or a part of the world whatsoever.

Elemental Spirits

Posted on by
Reply

In Undine (penguin), one of the passages that stood out to me was when Undine explains the existence of other elemental beings. The text says “There are beings in the elements which almost appear like mortals, and which rarely allow themselves to become visible to your race. Wonderful salamanders glitter and sport in the flames; lean and malicious gnomes dwell deep under the earth; spirits, belonging to the air, wander through the forests; and a vast family of water spirits live in the lakes and streams and brooks.” I think this description is important because it shows how magical the natural world is and it also makes me think about how humans create the boundary between themselves and nature. 

One thing that stood out to me in this quote is how much imagery it provides. Each spirit is tied to an element, fire, earth, air, water and each one carries a different personality. Salamanders are “wonderful” and full of light, gnomes are “lean and malicious”, air spirits are wanders, and water spirits are shown as a “vast family”. By giving each element a personality it shows that the natural world is alive and has hidden powers that are beyond human control. At the same time, the story makes it clear that these spirits “rarely allow themselves to become visible” which suggests secrecy and distance meaning the separation from the natural world. They exist alongside humans but stay hidden.I like the wording of this quote because it’s super detailed but at the same time it also organizes nature into different categories. Some spirits sound enchanting while others feel dangerous but they all align to “your race” meaning human beings. This separation creates the idea that these creatures are like humans but not quite, which makes them fascinating but also threatening.  

Another thing I found interesting was the way Undine delivers her speech because it connects to her own identity. Undine is a water spirit who gained a soul through marriage, she belongs to the world of elemental beings but she’s also separated from it. Undine is both an insider and an outsider to human life. She knows their world, but she is now speaking to humans and describing them as different. By saying “your race” she shows that she is in between the two categories, human and nonhuman. 

This part of the story shows how the line between nature and humanity is blurred and it connects to Undine’s in between identity. The descriptions of the elements bring out both the beauty and the fear people attach to nature and the way the spirits are kept separate from humans makes me think of the bigger question of how to define what belongs to the human world and what exists outside of it.   

A different kind of story

Posted on by
4

For this post I read The Legend of Melusina” (Penguin, pgs. 85-88)

While I can talk about how the story can be interpreted as power, with Melusine’s incredible power (her wealth and being able to build “the castle of Lusignan”(87)), and or that it is about the trust in relationships (Melusine making her husband promise not to come see her on Saturdays when she’s transformed). I would like to highlight how different this story is from the usual ones of its time and type, where such a secret would have seen Melusine not only shamed and hunted for her curse, but demonized heavily. Which the prelude text highlights that in different tellings, most likely NOT created by the original author, allude to. But rather the husband, Raymondin,“is not horrified but only saddened” (85). This is where I liked the story, because rather than immediately judge Melusine and her condition, showing that he truly only loved her for her looks, he becomes what I interpreted as relief, because he was egged on by someone else, driven by jealously. It wasn’t his words that convinced Melusine to ultimately leave, but Geoffroi, to be honest I would kick him in the shins for calling my wife a “snake and odious serpent” (88).

This also highlights my next interesting point, when Raymondin witnessed Melusine’s hybrid form the text described it as “in a snake, gray and sky-blue, mixed with white”, but this doesn’t actually apply to snakes, but to fish. As the beginning text said, “fish and water hold a redemptive symbolism”, which tells me that possibly Raymondin would’ve accepted Melusine for her curse and redeemed the curse (not her) in her eyes. Considering when their children were born, they were described as deformed, yet for Raymondin, “Raymond’s love for the beauty that ravished both heart and eyes remained unshaken”. Considering how common a trope it is for the husband to blame and scorn the mother if a child ends up with anything undesirable, it proves how much he genuinely loved Melusine. That she found someone accepting of her but another had to go off and ruin it. I can see the story having a message of acceptance as well, but that’s the tragedy.

Week 5: A Curse between Us and Them

Posted on by
Reply

The Legend of Melusina is a heartbreaking story about a fairy whose curse, brought on by her mother, has led to a tragedy between us (humans) and them (non-humans). Although the curse can stem from one side, it will often have undesirable effects when the afflicted come in contact with a being from the other side. As seen in Melusina’s curse and her marriage with Raymond, the legend uses the curse as an outside force, whether natural/unnatural or in/outside the person, that can disturb or even devastate both sides of the equation.

Melusina’s rejection comes from her curse–which she cannot control–that turns her into a half-serpent every Saturday, which is lifted under a condition that a man who would marry her should “never [see] her on a Saturday, and should keep his promise.” (Penguin 86) If you know the context, she brought the curse upon herself by planning with her sisters to punish their father (on the “us” side) as “revenge” and confessing what they had done to their mother (on the “them” side). Because she was the one who carried out the plan in the first place, it is no wonder why she had the most severe punishment compared to her sisters. The curse forces her to live outside of society, “in search of the man who was to deliver her.” Raymond, a man who “accidentially” killed his uncle, meets her and swears to not see her on a Saturday.

Despite her curse, she is quite an able and powerful woman, as demonstrated in her ability to build castles and other majestic places “out of her great wealth” for Raymond, as seen in page 87 of the Penguin Book of Mermaids. However, their marriage would quickly crumble when her curse–and destiny–results in “the deformity of the children born of one that was enchanted” and Raymond’s cousin “exciting him to jealousy” and making him believe that his wife is retiring on Saturday. The curse has done more than just curse her body; it has tainted their marriage, and she’s sharing it with Raymond.

In the last parts of the legend, you may be wondering: why was Raymond hiding in Melusina’s room? It’s simple: the curse deceived him. The force from the other side has “afflicted” him, leading to him breaking his promise of never seeing his wife on a Saturday and the curse rubbing it in by making his son murder his brother. These events have led to Raymond seeing Melusina’s cursed form not with horror, but with heartbreak that he broke his promise. And because this curse has led to the death of his son Freimund, he yells at the accursed fairy to get out of his sight while calling her a “pernicious snake and odious serpent! thou contaminator of my race!” (87)

Raymond believes that Melusina was the one responsible for the misfortunes that happened in their marriage, as he is now fully convinced that she has “contaminated” him with the curse that will follow him until his death as a hermit. Melusina had found a man perfect for her to break her curse, but at what cost?

Lines of Succession Know No Boundaries

Posted on by
2

The only thing that wives and mothers in the story of Melusina ask for is a respect of boundaries. Pressina, Melusina’s mother asked for Saturdays to herself from her husband and when she curses her daughter she sets for her the same boundary. This story embodies the themes in mermaid stories of demonizing the “other” and the female threat to a patriarchal system. Both of those themes play into the subtle political line of succession message in the legend.

The Fay Women found by human men when they were in need of saving are magical creatures. They provide love and success to these mortals in exchange for devotion and promises of letting them keep some part of their power. This power is not over others like it is expected in the patriarchal system of mortals, but in their autonomy to limit the access to their bodies by others. I found it interesting in both of the marriages of mother and daughter, it was a relative that encouraged the husbands of these Fay Women to violate this boundary set forth in the marriage.

In Pressina’s story, it is her male stepchild Nathas and likely heir to the throne of Albania that excited his father to violating the martial pact. It is not explained if Nathas knows of this agreement. Though if he knew about his stepmother giving birth before his father, it is fair to assume Nathas had his finger on the pulse of the activities in the castle. While the birth of three daughters might have not pushed Nathas out of the line of succession, his father’s current wife providing so many additional heirs might have challenged his position. Creating a wedge or a reason to dissolve the marriage might have been in the prince’s best interests.

Later in Melusina’s story it is the cousin of Raymond who had “excited him (Raymond) to jealousy…by malicious suggestions of the purport of the Saturday retirement of the countess” (88). Nathas used joy to break the martial bond, while this cousin used distrust of a wife who would not provide full access of herself to her husband at all times. As a wife Melusina had given Raymond riches and castles he wouldn’t have had otherwise, but she was still an outsider to the world of mortals. Stories and myths often depict how outsiders are always a threat to the accepted system.

The gender and position of the cousin is not depicted in the story, but the relationship of this family member to Raymond reminded me of the only other mention of his family. When we are first introduced to Raymond he has just “accidentally killed” (87) his uncle who is a count. Melusina uses her power (possibly influence) to protect Raymond from the fallout of this killing.

Could this cousin be a child of that uncle?

Could this be a cold dish of revenge by someone whose position was lost from this coupling?

Or was it just Melusina’s ability to maintain some form of power over the societal powerful position of Raymond?

Raymond’s strength is made secure not only through what Melusina built for him but in the children she bore, his heirs. It is only when the sons of Raymond and Melusina are taken out (or at least compromised) of the line of succession that he turns on her. She then becomes a spectre who will haunt the family line when there will be a death in their lineage.

In respecting a boundary, Raymond and the King of Albania were abdicating part of their power given to them by the patriarchal system they were entrusted to maintain. This clearly illustrates the threat the “other” can impose on the sanctity of the established family, teaching how it only brings heartache and ruin for future generations. Underlining how an “outsider” woman who is not is in complete submission to her husband, like the women of the society were conditioned to do, must have flaws and secrets that threaten societal norms.