Every person reads each story in his or her own way whether it be slowly, fast, thorough, distant, personal, or analytically. When this is done meanings are formed and themes are developed. Most people identify a certain dynamic of the characters. In The Three Little Pigs, the pigs are good and the wolf is evil; good triumphs as always. This appears to be the obvious theme, the character the story is centered around is the hero and he defeats the villain. However, on closer inspection this "fairy tale" motif is unstable due to inconsistencies within the text and the story itself.
The Three Little Pigs in its original form doesn 't fit completely with the conventional good and bad unity. One of the main parts of a commonplace good vs. evil …show more content…
The text discusses the pigs simply asking for straw, furze, and bricks (enough to build a house with each) and there is no payment mentioned. Then when there is one pig he sneaks into fields to take apples and turnips, again with no payment. However, when the pig travels to the market it explicitly states that he purchases a butter churn. The logic of the text set up suggests that he did not pay for any of the previous items yet there is in fact a currency exchange. This would lead one to think that the pigs are either thieves or possible have some sort of hold over the townspeople. That being said, the wolf would appear to be the driving force of justice in the story 's town. In that case, are the pigs still the protagonists stealing from the rich for the poor, are they the villains demanding what they want until the wolf starts tailing them, or is this a town of lawlessness and the only rules are kill or be killed, which would explain the stealing and killing being centered around food. Not only does this make the reader question the roles of each character but these facts leave the definition of sides to the story ambiguous, open-ended, and above all unstable as a theme of the …show more content…
Although this seems quite simple on the surface in complicates with the details of the text. At one point the wolf "… ran home … went to the pig 's house, and told him how frightened he had been …" from a surprising event (Grimm). The wolf expresses his trusting connection to the pig, confiding his fear and shock only to him. The wolf proposed plan after plan to simply go somewhere with the pig expressing no intent to kill or eat him, and it is only in the end when the pig show a complete disregard for the wolf 's trust does the wolf become angry and threaten to eat his counterpart. If the wolf was all evil he would have threatened the pig much earlier. This can be assumed because the wolf is tricked repeatedly by the pig with the same simple ruse of the pig showing up early, so the wolf is clearly not wily enough to have a strategy which involves not revealing his intentions. That said, this does not mean that the wolf is entirely good either; he is somewhere in between. These observations yield a conclusion which defies the unity of the story 's theme of good vs.
The Three Little Pigs in its original form doesn 't fit completely with the conventional good and bad unity. One of the main parts of a commonplace good vs. evil …show more content…
The text discusses the pigs simply asking for straw, furze, and bricks (enough to build a house with each) and there is no payment mentioned. Then when there is one pig he sneaks into fields to take apples and turnips, again with no payment. However, when the pig travels to the market it explicitly states that he purchases a butter churn. The logic of the text set up suggests that he did not pay for any of the previous items yet there is in fact a currency exchange. This would lead one to think that the pigs are either thieves or possible have some sort of hold over the townspeople. That being said, the wolf would appear to be the driving force of justice in the story 's town. In that case, are the pigs still the protagonists stealing from the rich for the poor, are they the villains demanding what they want until the wolf starts tailing them, or is this a town of lawlessness and the only rules are kill or be killed, which would explain the stealing and killing being centered around food. Not only does this make the reader question the roles of each character but these facts leave the definition of sides to the story ambiguous, open-ended, and above all unstable as a theme of the …show more content…
Although this seems quite simple on the surface in complicates with the details of the text. At one point the wolf "… ran home … went to the pig 's house, and told him how frightened he had been …" from a surprising event (Grimm). The wolf expresses his trusting connection to the pig, confiding his fear and shock only to him. The wolf proposed plan after plan to simply go somewhere with the pig expressing no intent to kill or eat him, and it is only in the end when the pig show a complete disregard for the wolf 's trust does the wolf become angry and threaten to eat his counterpart. If the wolf was all evil he would have threatened the pig much earlier. This can be assumed because the wolf is tricked repeatedly by the pig with the same simple ruse of the pig showing up early, so the wolf is clearly not wily enough to have a strategy which involves not revealing his intentions. That said, this does not mean that the wolf is entirely good either; he is somewhere in between. These observations yield a conclusion which defies the unity of the story 's theme of good vs.