Bloody Mary, Bloody Mary, Bloody Mary. Did it really seem like a ghost was going to pop out of the mirror and attack someone? This piece of folklore has been passed down through several generations and has changed every time it is written down or spoken. The article “Folklore vs. Fakelore, the Epic Battle,” from the Horn Book Magazine, is about how folklore has changed and evolved to fit people's new cultures and identities. The Horn Book published this article in their September/October 2014 magazine. The article is used to discuss how most people see new fairy tales as “fakelore” and hold no real deep value or edification for children today. They say this because these stories are not passed down through the generations, and therefore, should
…show more content…
Yolen’s article is written in a persuasive style so as to grab the audience and lead them to the same conclusion she did. Yolen, contrary to Dorson, says “How many of the best authored ‘fakelore’ stories have already moved back into the folk corner, some even becoming canon” (56). She phrases the argument this way because the younger generation uses this type of terminology. It appeals to them and makes it so they can relate to the stories that have been created in their generation. It also shows how proud she is to be apart of this group of writers. People who write stories with morals and consequences in a new light so as to further cultural development. The people she writes about are some of the greats and she is honored to be paired with them. At the very end of the article Yolen states “And now they are in movies and television and in other kinds of phosphor, where they are taking on a new and very wildlife that seems to multiply the readings” (57). This can be taken to show that in the end no matter what the arguers of this topic say the younger generation has taken hold of these new stories and they are using them to define their new cultural identity just like people have done for …show more content…
That way she touches on all three and really connects with the readers. Yolen starts her argument stating “The battle against so-called “fake folklore” had begun in 1950 with Richard Dorson’s barrage “Folklore and Fakelore” in the American Mercury, attacking author James Stevens, who had written a collection of Paul Bunyan stories.” (55). She starts out very factual stating the date that the first incident when Fakelore became known. This gives people some fact and basis for the argument that she is trying to push. Then in her argument, she gets more passionate and defensive with her word choice as she says attacking. Almost like Stevens is a friend of hers and she has to defend him. Another place that Yolen adds logos is when she gives and example. “Take Goldilocks. In 1813 British author Robert Southey was telling friends his story about an old woman who trespasses on a cottage owned by three bachelor bears of varying sizes.” (Yolen 56). This proves her point by giving an actual story that people are writing now have just as much chance at becoming folklore, because of the way Southey’s story evolved over time to the story we know
Yolen’s article is written in a persuasive style so as to grab the audience and lead them to the same conclusion she did. Yolen, contrary to Dorson, says “How many of the best authored ‘fakelore’ stories have already moved back into the folk corner, some even becoming canon” (56). She phrases the argument this way because the younger generation uses this type of terminology. It appeals to them and makes it so they can relate to the stories that have been created in their generation. It also shows how proud she is to be apart of this group of writers. People who write stories with morals and consequences in a new light so as to further cultural development. The people she writes about are some of the greats and she is honored to be paired with them. At the very end of the article Yolen states “And now they are in movies and television and in other kinds of phosphor, where they are taking on a new and very wildlife that seems to multiply the readings” (57). This can be taken to show that in the end no matter what the arguers of this topic say the younger generation has taken hold of these new stories and they are using them to define their new cultural identity just like people have done for …show more content…
That way she touches on all three and really connects with the readers. Yolen starts her argument stating “The battle against so-called “fake folklore” had begun in 1950 with Richard Dorson’s barrage “Folklore and Fakelore” in the American Mercury, attacking author James Stevens, who had written a collection of Paul Bunyan stories.” (55). She starts out very factual stating the date that the first incident when Fakelore became known. This gives people some fact and basis for the argument that she is trying to push. Then in her argument, she gets more passionate and defensive with her word choice as she says attacking. Almost like Stevens is a friend of hers and she has to defend him. Another place that Yolen adds logos is when she gives and example. “Take Goldilocks. In 1813 British author Robert Southey was telling friends his story about an old woman who trespasses on a cottage owned by three bachelor bears of varying sizes.” (Yolen 56). This proves her point by giving an actual story that people are writing now have just as much chance at becoming folklore, because of the way Southey’s story evolved over time to the story we know