A Thesis

Presented to

the Faculty of the Graduate School of Millersville University of Pennsylvania

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

of Master of Art

by Brooke Anderson

1 March 2019

ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS

Self-Actualization in LGBTQ Fairy Tales

By Brooke Anderson Millersville University of Pennsylvania, Spring 2019 Millersville, Pennsylvania

Directed by Dr. Timothy Mayers

Approved by Dr. Timothy Mayers, Dr. Kim McCollum-Clark and Dr. Carla M. Rineer

An important difference between characters of traditional fairy tales and characters of

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (LGBTQ) fairy tales are the hardships the latter

characters endure to achieve self-actualization within their story.

Fairy tales are part of an oral tradition of story-telling passed down through generations.

They are commonly told from the perspective of an adult to a child in terms that the child is able to comprehend, but they are not exclusively for children. Some non-traditional fairy tales, such as LGBTQ fairy tales, do not change the canon because they operate in the same space. By

comparing the characters of LGBTQ fairy tales to their traditional counterparts, it is clear that the

journey of the former is made more arduous. To gain a better understanding of this, it is

necessary to establish the familial relations of the LGBTQ characters and how they interact

within that fairy tale.

i

ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS ...... I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... III

THANKS ...... IV INTRODUCTION ...... 1

SELF-ACTUALIZATION IN LGBTQ FAIRY TALES ...... 4 ASH ...... 7 CINDERELLA ...... 15 THE HAZEL-BRANCH ...... 16 THE GOLDEN KEY ...... 18 THE VIRGIN MARY’S CHILD ...... 23 KING THRUSHBEARD ...... 25 HANSEL AND GRETEL ...... 28 RUMPELSTILTSKIN ...... 37 THE TWO TRAVELERS ...... 43 THE FISHERMAN’S WIFE ...... 49 GODFATHER DEATH/THE GODFATHER ...... 54 CONCLUSION ...... 58

ii Acknowledgments

I grew up loving books. One summer in elementary school I was awarded a trophy for reading over 400 books. My mother took my sister and me to the library every day that summer, sometimes multiple times a day. We would read to her and she would read to us. My dad is a walking encyclopedia. Instead of telling us the answer, he would walk over to one of our many bookcases and bring back a book, usually books, that would have a passage or reference or book about or relating to the topic of our question. Reading has a very special place in my heart.

Traveling to different worlds, understanding someone else’s journey, realizing that we were all one in the same is a very powerful and personal experience.

One summer over college break, I read a story about a girl who was disconnected from her family and could not differentiate between real and the imaginary. She carried with her the stories her mother told her all while struggling to maintain her grip on reality while being a multitude of people at once: a servant, a daughter, a stepdaughter, a stepsister, a friend, a confidant, and a human. The book I read was Ash by Malinda Lo. Never once was the term lesbian mentioned. Love is love. People are people. A mantra that I try to practice every day of my life comes from the Ubuntu philosophy which is “I am because you are.”

Being raised by two loving parents who rose from their own personal hardships and childhoods who, by happenstance, met in college and got married and made heartbreaking and personal sacrifices all while raising two black children in predominately white communities undoubtedly shaped my upbringing. It is unfathomable to think of the person I would be without them and their journeys. If one little detail of their lives were different, who would I be? I cannot say. To the people who brought me into this world and the people who kept me here, my parents,

iii Joseph Anderson and Winnie Lee Tell Anderson and my sister who is my mirror in every way possible, Raquel Dee Anderson, my eternal thanks and gratitude.

Thanks

Thank you to the Millersville University of Pennsylvania for accommodating my break from graduate school as well as my encouraging my return, specifically those who reached out to me and made themselves available to me at every point in this process. A special thank you to

Sherry Rose-Bond, my real-life fairy godmother.

iv

Introduction

Representation matters. In life and in all things, but especially children’s literature. While

reading is an individual activity, it does not need to be a solitary one. By reading, the reader can

travel through time, across different worlds and be in the company of a variety of different

people. The question of representation arises when the reader sees the same characters again and

again or rather when the reader does not see new characters. Dr. Rudine Sims Bishop writes in

her essay, “Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass Doors”, “literature transforms human

experiences and reflects it back to us, and in that reflection, we can see our own lives and

experiences as part of the larger human experience” (Bishop). Oftentimes, children from

disenfranchised groups, whether they be non-white or non-heterosexual, become accustom to reading literature with characters that do not look like them. Bishop states “for many years, nonwhite readers have too frequently found the search futile” (Bishop). The desire for literature with a character they can see as a reflection of themselves, will only continue to grow as they do.

Ash by Malinda Lo and Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men by Peter Cashorali

are examples of why representation matters.

Ash is a retelling of the fairy tale Cinderella in the form of a young adult fantasy book.

Elements of Cinderella do exist in Ash: wicked stepmother, dead biological mother, handsome

prince; but that is where the similarities end. The titular character of Ash is a lesbian; however,

the term lesbian does not appear anywhere in the story. The concept of a “lesbian Cinderella”

makes it seem as though Ash should be categorized in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender

Queer, but as previously mentioned, the absence of the term lesbian and Lo’s focus on more than

Ash’s sexual orientation or identity makes the book fit perfectly in the Youth Adult or YA

category. That is not to say that if a book can only be considered YA if it does not discuss sexual

1 orientation or identity. It also does not to suggest that if a book only talks about those previously mentioned, it strictly falls into the LGBTQ category. The idea of the absence of the label lesbian made the book more accessible to other readers who might not have read it or even considered the possibility of reading it because they do not specifically identity with that term therefore, this book is not meant for them. Ash can be read and enjoyed by all mature enough to read YA.

Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men was written for a specific audience, gay men. Cashorali does not shy away from the use of certain language such as profanity or adult concepts like wanting a male lover to be well-endowed. This book takes the traditional fairy tales the gay men grew up reading and provides them with a version that they as gay men can relate to. This book captures everything that Bishop writes in her essay; the importance of representation in children’s literature and what it means for child development.

Bruno Bettelheim in his book The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of

Fairy Tales writes “the fairy tale simplifies all situations” (Bettelheim 8). The premise of most fairy tales can be described as good versus evil, with characters clearly identified as one or the other. Due to the simplicity of fairy tales, they often appeal to children. They are told as bedtime stories and feature concepts that children find relatable. Fairy tales also appeal to adults. They provide nostalgia, but often their universal themes make them timeless and relatable at different stages in life. Bettelheim reasons “the fairy tale, by contrast, takes these existential anxieties and dilemmas very seriously and addresses itself directly to them [the child's fears]” (Bettelheim 10).

A child who cannot articulate a concern that they have, for example might find the hero in a fairy tale fearing the same thing in the form of an animal that he must destroy.

Many fairy tales retold through the medium of Disney movies feature a princess with a deceased parent, typically a mother. The princess faces hardship throughout the movie, but is

2 able to at the end find happiness. The movies show children that in spite of losing a parent, they are still able to achieve great things and will overcome adversity. Bettelheim explains “the fairy tales offers solutions in ways that the child can grasp on his level of understanding” (Bettelheim

10). Fairy tales should not and cannot be replicated in the real world, but there are still lessons to be taken away from reading them. For example, the basic notion of good versus evil; while no one should strive to live as the characters in fairy tales do, the reader can take away from hearing them that if someone remains unkind and awful to the people around them, especially those who are unfortunate, bad things will come their way. This reinforces the concept of treating others with respect and empathy which can be learned from reading stories with a multitude of characters; the more exposure the reader might have to individuals from other cultures and groups might help them prepare for real-life situations.

Tales are exactly that. They are stories that have been passed down through generations and have evolved over time. Tales reassure, help individuals understand purpose in life, provide information that can influence personality, give instructions for how to overcome situations, and prepare for the future. Stories accomplish this by featuring characters and themes individuals can connect with. Fairy tales are stories with fantastical elements that are used as teaching aide for children which appeal to adults which allows them to process and understand things such as the importance of good behavior in a non-threatening and easy to process medium. These stories typically have a happy ending and are magical and idealized, but fairy tales are not exclusively for children.

Fairy Tales: Traditional and Lesbian, Gay, Transgender, Bisexual, Queer

Fairy tales are a type of literature written by adults, typically for children, that contain certain themes and life lessons to use as an example of how children should behave they are

3 serving as a teaching tool. Fairy tales teach children and adults life lessons as well as examples

of behaviors to exhibit. Traditional fairy tales are stories that have a life lesson, contain

fantastical elements, generally have a happy ending, and exclusively features characters who are

heterosexual.

Non-traditional fairy tales or Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer1 fairy tales are stories that have the same characteristics as traditional fairy tales with the exception of having one or more characters who are considered to be a part of that community. In all other ways,

LGBTQ fairy tales are the same as traditional fairy tales that can be considered non-traditional because they feature characters who are not heterosexual. These fairy tales do not change the canon of traditional fairy tales and how we think of fairy tales because in order to recognize or consider a fairy tale to be LGBTQ, the reader would have to understand the traditional fairy tale in order to understand the retelling or LGBTQ version of that fairy tale. There are some LGBTQ fairy tales that do exist and are not a retelling, but are the LGBTQ version of that fairy tale. The

LGBTQ fairy tales that will be discussed in this thesis are retellings of the traditional fairy tales.

The LGBTQ fairy tales exist in the canon because without an understanding of the traditional fairy tales that make up the canon, the LGBTQ would not have a space to exist. LGBTQ fairy tales add to the canon almost like an extension.

Self-Actualization in LGBTQ Fairy Tales

As previously mentioned, there needs to be an understanding or base knowledge of the fairy tale through the traditional fairy tale in order to understand or recognize the differences in the LGBTQ fairy tales and appreciate them as LGBTQ fairy tales. Self-actualization is defined

1 Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer will be shortened to LGBTQ for the duration of this paper. This specific acronym was not selected over LGBTQIA with the intention of alienating any persons or groups.

4 by the Oxford Living Dictionaries as “the realization or fulfillment of one’s talents and

potentialities, especially considered as a drive or need present in everyone” (Oxford). It is the

state of mind that a person or being achieves when they fully realize his or her potential. This

thesis defines self-actualization as a state of mind achieved by a character when he or she

realizes his or her sense of worth and in some cases their sexual identity. This definition of self-

actualization exists in the world of fairy tales, specifically LGBTQ fairy tales, when the main

character realizes his or her self-worth and they make changes or their newfound understanding

influences their behavior throughout the fairy tale that results in a happy ending for them.

For a character in a fairy tale to achieve self-actualization, they would need to undergo a

transformation that changes their personality. An example of this internal change would be if the

character were to change from arrogant to demure or from childish to mature. These changes are

common and simplistic in fairy tales. Characters in Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer

fairy tales undergo a more rigorous transformation as their change in personality results in a

change to perception; not only how they view the world, but in turn how the world views them.

This change hinges on the acceptance of their sexuality within their story, something their

traditional counterparts do not experience. In the world of LGBTQ postmodern fairy tales, sexuality is at the center of the story. It differentiates the character from other characters so the reader can visualize how the protagonist fits into that world.

Several of the fairy tales that will be analyzed in this thesis are divided into groups that

feature characters with no family and characters with family members including siblings,

parents, and partners such as spouses or companions who engage with the main character

throughout the tale. Both genres of fairy tales are divided and impacted by the familial relations

that exist within them. This can include, but not be limited to, fairy tales that do not feature

5 familial relations or characters who do not interact with any other character who could be considered a familial relation.

The premise for this paper was sparked by the book Ash by Malinda Lo, a retelling of the fairy tale Cinderella in which the titular character, Ash, identifies as a lesbian. The simplicity of the story was refreshing, especially the concept of the protagonist as a lesbian. The term lesbian is never mentioned or implied as “other” at any point in the book. The story takes place in a world where female/female relationships are commonplace. This book inspired a search for other fairy tales featuring characters who would be members of the LGBTQ community were it not for their fictitious lives. The majority of the gay fairy tales discussed in this paper are based on the traditional fairy tales that served as the primary sources for Peter Cashorali’s book Fairy Tales:

Retold for Gay Men. The book of traditional fairy tales is used from The Complete Grimm's

Fairy Tales from Pantheon Books. Ash will be directly followed by the Brothers Grimm

Cinderella while Cashorali’s chapter index will provide the order of the rest of the LGBTQ fairy tales discussed, all though not all fairy tales included in the book are mentioned2.

Cashorali’s chapter index and the order of the Grimm fairy tales discussed in this paper will be as follows: The Golden Key, The Virgin Mary's Child, King Thrushbeard, Hansel and

Gretel, Rumpelstiltskin, The Two Travelers, The Fisherman's Wife, Godfather Death, and The

Godfather.

2 Two fairy tales in Fairy Tales: Traditional Fairy Tales Retold for Gay Men are outside of the Grimm Brothers canon which serves as the baseline for this paper and were not considered for discussion. Those fairy tales are: “The Companion” based on The Traveling Companion and “The Man Who Came Back from the Dead” based on Jorska Who Came Back from the Dead.

6 Ash

Ash by Malinda Lo is a retelling of the traditional fairy tale, Cinderella. Some consider this book to be a “lesbian Cinderella”. Although that terminology is not incorrect, this classification does not do Ash any justice. This young adult, YA, book exceeds the limitation that phrase, “lesbian Cinderella”, places on it. The titular character Ash, also known throughout the book by her full name Aisling, leads a similar life as Cinderella. Both lose a mother during their early childhood. Both inherit a stepmother and stepsisters when their fathers remarry. They both experience love; however, that is when the similarities end. The most notable difference between Cinderella and Ash is Cinderella falls in love and marries the handsome prince. Ash meets a handsome prince in her fairy tale, but she does not fall in love with him. She actually falls in love with the King’s huntress, Kaisa.

As her title suggests, Kaisa oversees all the royal hunts in the Wood. The king and all the people in living in the Royal City, those in the country, and those in the neighboring Seatown have an interesting relationship with the Wood. For many generations, the Wood was sacred and home to supernatural beings known as Fairies. As the communities grew they began to evolve in the sense they no longer held much belief in the mystique surrounding the Wood.

The possibility of Ash falling in love with the handsome prince like Cinderella does exist; however, the female/female relationships exist in the world of the book so the moment Kaisa enters Ash’s life, she becomes the most plausible love interest. Not only because same-sex couples exist, but because Ash and Kaisa share a lot of common interests and spend a significant amount of time together, something Ash does not do with the handsome prince.

7 An idea around representation and seeing oneself or someone similar is important for development. Ash seemingly comes to life when someone outside of her family acknowledges her. Perhaps when her mother died so did her father or at least the man he used to be died with her. Therefore, although he is still alive, Ash no longer has any family left. That might be the reason behind her insistence for being reunited with her dead mother as opposed to being reunited with her dead father or simply being reunited with her dead parents. The fact that Ash specifically seems to have interactions and strong connections with women might be unrelated to the fact that if a reader were to classify her with modern language “labels” or identifiers, they might say that she is a member of the LGBTQ community.

Another interesting thing to note is that Ash seems to be validated as a person when she interacts with someone who not only acknowledges her as a person, but also accepts her beliefs.

The first example is Ash’s mother and Maria Solanya. They both believed strongly in the power of the Wood and the fantastical elements that surround it. Ash’s mother Elinor and Maria

Solanya were beginning to teach Ash the old ways and some of the beliefs most of the people living in the country still followed.

The second example is when the King’s Huntress Taryn and her companion speak with

Ash during the Yule festival. This was right after the death of her mother and her father’s second marriage. Already Ash feels lost in a sense that everything in her life has changed and she no longer has her mother giving her instructions and guiding her on the Wood and the magic surrounding it. When her mother dies, Ash’s father William does not object to her interest in the

Wood and fairy tales. He does not encourage it as his new wife suggests, but he turns a blind eye and continues to support her although he never approved of her earlier fascination. Returning to the King’s Huntress, her companion tells her to recant a fairy tale in the hopes of entertainment.

8 Ash hearing the fairy tale asks her if she had ever seen a fairy in real life. Later Ash admits that the King’s Huntress most likely felt obligated to humor a child and was only saying so to maintain the magic of the night. Even when she reveals this to the Kaisa, her ideas are not entirely dismissed. Kaisa tells Ash that the King’s Huntress would never be able to reveal the secrets of the office as it was a prestigious appointment. Again, Kaisa, much like the other

King’s Huntress, does not dismiss Ash’s belief or make her feel less than because she believed in fairy tales and still does.

The third example is not entirely in support of the claim that Ash feels validated by other people who share her beliefs or at least do not make her uneducated for having them. Ash does interact with the only fairy, Sidhean who is male and other. There are other fairies mentioned in the story, but the only one Ash consistently has regularly contact with is him. Sidhean is part of the fairy tale fantasy that Ash believes in, but when they converse, he always makes her seem and feel like a silly human girl. He often tells her that what she believes in and knows of as stories about his kind are simply stories and hold no truth in his life and what he does or is actually about in the sense of what he is capable of doing and what he does.

She continually asks Sidhean to take her to her mother and she even believes that one day he will kill her, an idea that does not frighten her or deter her from seeing him again. She does not understand what she asks of him, nor does she understand him and his life as a fairy; both what he is able to do and what he could do for her. She does not know who she is around him and does not act like herself. The only time the reader sees Ash unsure and lost is when she is with Sidhean because he challenges her and her beliefs. This is fascinating because fairy tales and the Wood seem to ground Ash despite being fantastical. When Ash is around other humans and they discuss fantastical things, the reader gets a glimpse of who she is as a person.

9 Another person who challenges her beliefs is her stepmother. A reason why Ash does not

have the same reaction when confronting her stepmother compared to when she talks with

Sidhean is because her stepmother does not acknowledge fairies and fairy tales might be real.

She has no regard for them; therefore, she cannot and does not accept them as anything except

childish nonsense. Kaisa, the other King’s Huntress, a few of the other servants, Elinor, and

Maria Solanya concede to some small aspect of fairy tales, whether that be that young children

believe in these stories and ideas to fairy are real and dangerous. Due to this fact, they can

formulate a feeling of credence, whereas people like Ash’s stepmother, who does not belief in

fairy tales at all, has no tolerance for talk of these things.

It is important to note that Malinda Lo divides her book Ash into two sections. The first

being “The Fairy” and the second being “The Huntress.” The division of the book plays a significant role throughout the story. In “The Fairy,” Ash finds herself drawn towards the male fairy Sidhean for several reasons. Firstly, Ash was told fairy tales by her mother which established a connection to the Wood and its inhabitants. Secondly, Ash believes that the only way for her to see her mother again whether she be brought back to life or Ash trades her life to be able to see her again. Thirdly, Ash loves Sidhean or she at least thinks she loves Sidhean.

Near the end of the first section, Ash finally comes to terms with her mother’s death.

At the beginning of “The Huntress” section, Ash begins to spend more time concentrating

on her human life and less time trying to be reunited with her dead mother. Eventually she meets

Kaisa the king’s huntress and begins to focus on daily tasks and her future with Kaisa. Ash does

not remove Sidhean from her life. She continues to interact with him, but what she once hoped to

achieve from a relationship with him turns into something resembling a contract; Sidhean helps

her in exchange for her human life.

10 This is not the only instance of dichotomies. Several of them can be found within the

book: reality/fantasy, upper-class/lower-class, child/adult, stepchild/biological parent,

fairy/human, male/female, and female/female. The last two are more relationship-based in the sense of an intimate relationship, lovers. Although partnerships exist that are not romantically related. Lo highlights several female/female relationships that display a form of stability. In order to understand the other dichotomies, the first one that needs to be discussed is reality/fantasy.

In the reality/fantasy dichotomy, Aisling, also known by her shortened name Ash, grows up in a struggle, both within her household with her parents and in their nameless country.

William, Ash’s father who is a merchant, finds himself at odds with Ash’s mother, Elinor, a greenwitch3. The marriage between William and Elinor was filled with disagreements about

whether to continue to acknowledge the old ways, that is the belief in the fairy tales and myths

around their people.

Ash was partly raised in belief of the fantasy through her mother Elinor and Maire

Solanya, the greenwitch Elinor apprenticed under. They would teach her things, but Ash’s father and the rest of the country began to move away from those teachings. She was raised in an interesting situation where she witnessed the debate between reality and fantasy firsthand.

William tried to prevent Ash’s involvement with fantasy but was quick to indulge her with the presence of Elinor, telling her fairy tales and her absence due to death. “When [Ash’s] mother fell sick so suddenly, her father called Maire Solanya to attend her, and Ash knew it was because he loved Elinor more than his beliefs” (Lo 15). This concept is a resounding theme through the book and plays an integral role in Ash’s self-actualization.

3 Elinor was apprenticing with the Greenwitch Rose when she married her husband William. She stopped her studies to led a married life, but continued to practice the old ways.

11 Ash experiences a two-fold process of self-actualization. The first moment of self-

actualization is when she realizes that she, in fact, does not want to die. After the death of her

mother, Ash spent many evenings venturing into the woods at night not only to visit her mother's

grave, but to see one of the fairies, Sidhean. Ash hopes to be reunited with her mother with the

aid of Sidhean, who will transport her to the fairy world, thus ending her human or mortal life.

The second moment of self-actualization is when Ash realizes that she is in love with the King's

huntress, Kaisa, and, therefore, she cannot be with Sidhean. The second moment of self-

actualization leads her to devise a plan of escape from her life of servitude at the hands of her

stepmother. Ash starts to display feelings of independence and self-reliance after she realizes she

wants to live.

Throughout the book, Lo places men and women in pairs. Not in the sense of

relationships, because that does happen, but in a way that shows their compatibility and their pairing and the complexities. The reality/fantasy dichotomy intersects with the men/women dichotomy. “Philosophers tended to be men and greenwitches tended to be women” (Lo 12). The word tended is important to note because it does not mean that philosophers or those who support reality over fantasy are always men. This is reinforced with Ash’s stepmother, Lady

Isobel and one of her stepsisters, Ana.

Lady Isobel and Ana both look down on Ash for continuing to read and believe in fairy tales, but at the same time Ana participates in a superstitious holiday called the Fast of Lysara4.

During this holiday, an unmarried girl must fast for the entire day and recite a poem to see her

future husband in her dreams. Unlike the stepmother and stepsisters in Ash, Cinderella does not

4 Lysara was a queen who died in childbirth, but her reputation of being steadfast and true inspired her people to consider her to be the embodiment of true love. Lo describes the Fast of Lysara, observed on Lysara’s wedding day, as an old wive’s tale told by greenwitches if a young girl wished to see her future husband, she would need to fast all day and he would appear in her dreams later that night. (Lo 114).

12 experience any moments of understanding or connections that would lead them to interact with

her in a way that would reveal the possibility of becoming more of a family unit.

Another example of the dichotomy between men and women is that the king always has a

huntress lead his hunting party. There is no explanation for how this partnership came about, it is

just accepted as tradition. Men and women also work together in the hunting party. Other

instances of men and women working together are in the household as servants.

Returning to the dichotomy of reality and fantasy, the philosophers changed their treatment of the people and their conflicting beliefs. The people have a strong connection to the

Wood. William told Ash that Elinor could never stay away from the Wood. Ash starts to exhibit this behavior when she continues to visit her mother’s grave outside of the Wood. The huntress who Ash meets and grows to love admits her fondness for the Wood. The Wood seems to have a magic that draws people back. It might be the presence of the Wood and the power of nature or it could be enchanting because of the fairies that reside in the Wood in the fairy world of Taninli.

Having been exposed to fairy tales and their lore during her formative years, Ash was a strong believer in the power and the mystique of the Wood. She would often go into the woods to search for fairies. Not because she wanted to meet one, but because she wanted to be reunited with her deceased mother.

The dichotomy of reality and fantasy continues in the sense that Ash seemingly embodies a fairy tale character. Kaisa tells Ash a fairy tale called Eilis and the Changeling5. Kaisa admits

that she likes the story because “in the end Eilis proves them all wrong” (Lo 153). By the end of

the book, Ash proves her family wrong in the sense that she wanted by someone, Kaisa, and also

5 The fairy tale Eilis and the Changeling follows the journey of a young huntress who ventures in the fairy tale to retrieve the missing princess who was replaced by a changeling. To win the princesses back, Eilis must complete a series of difficult tasks. She succeeds and brings the princess back to the human world.

13 that as a human, she was able to outwit a fairy, Sidhean. A key moment in Ash’s self-

actualization process is that when she was in the Wood with Kaisa, “looking at the huntress, Ash felt a surge of happiness within herself, as if she were unwrapping an unexpected gift, and the realization of it sent a blush of pink across her cheeks” (Lo 154). This gives the reader insight into process of self-actualization. This is the first moment that the reader gets a sense of Ash’s emotions and what she experiences. The reader knows that the emotion Ash feels and cannot articulate to be love.

The scene when Kaisa ventures to Ash’s home is reminiscent of a particular story from

the book Tales of Wonder and Grace, a gift from Ash’s father titled “The Farmer and the Hunt”.

In “The Farmer and the Hunt”, Thom sees his thought-to-be-dead sweetheart Grace only to discover she is not exactly human. Grace tells Thom, “As soon as I mounted one of their horses, they took me to Taninli, their home, where they gave me food and drink. I was so hungry and thirsty that I gave in, but now I must serve them for eternity, for no humans can taste their delicacies” (Lo 28). Ash herself ventures into Taninli. Soon after she arrives, a fairy offers her refreshment. Before Ash can accept, another fairy, who she has seen near her mother's grave, is able to convince the other to leave Ash alone. When Ash invites Kaisa into the house, she finds food to give to the King’s Huntress. Ash begins to slice an apple for them to share when the blade slips and she cuts herself. Kaisa takes the knife from Ash finishes the task. “When Kaisa finished the story, the food lay untouched between them, but the apple had been sliced neatly into six wedges, the skin coiled like a ribbon around them. ‘Please,’ said the huntress, ‘will you eat?’/Ash picked up a piece of the apple and bit into it, and the flesh was crisp and sweet” (Lo

145). In this moment, Ash belongs to Kaisa. She did not eat the food from the fairy, but accepted the food from Kaisa. In doing so, she accepts a place in Kaisa’s world.

14 The parallels between Kaisa and the fairy, Sidhean are many. Both Kaisa and Sidhean

ride horses. Sidhean often transports Ash out of fairy world into the human world via his horse.

Kaisa teaches Ash how to ride a hunting horse. Kaisa extends an invitation for Ash to join her on

a hunt and she rides a fairy horse. Horses to Sidhean are simply beasts of burden. He uses them

solely for transportation. Kaisa views horses as gentle yet fierce creatures that allow her the

opportunity to do her job. As the King's Huntress, Kaisa is responsible for leading the royal hunt.

The human horses play another role for both Ash and Kaisa. The steed that Kaisa rides brings her

to Ash. When Ash goes to the town market, she spots Kaisa's horse who then comes over and

offers to teach Ash how to ride. Sidhean had always been in control of the horse whenever they

rode together. Kaisa gives Ash the tools and the power to ride a horse; Kaisa enables Ash to be

independent6.

Cinderella

The traditional fairy tale “Cinderella” by the Brothers Grimm contains a complex family dynamic. This is the first traditional fairy tale that will be discussed in this paper with complicated familial relationships. The stepmother does not wait to reveal her true feelings towards her new stepdaughter until her husband’s death. In Ash, the stepmother scolds William

by telling him that he encourages Ash’s childish behavior. This is interesting because William

did not always behave this way. When Elinor was still alive, he was the opposite. Now that

Elinor is dead, Ash reminds him of her and the life they had before so he indulges Ash’s interest

in fantasy (fairy tales). Additionally, William might allow Ash to continue to read fairy tales

6 Shortly after William’s death, Ash interacts with Taryn, Kaisa’s predecessor, during a night of Yule celebrations. “No one else had paid the slightest attention to her all night, and Ash felt as though the huntress had suddenly called her into being” (Lo 51). When Ash interacts with anyone, especially a huntress who acknowledges her and fairy tales rather than dismissing her and them, she becomes not only a different person, but a person in general.

15 because although he did not necessarily believe in fairy tales himself, he never kept her from

doing so.

Returning to the traditional “Cinderella”, the stepmother is cruel from the very beginning

and does not pretend to like Cinderella or her new circumstances in front of her husband. She

refers to her as a “stupid goose” and “kitchen maid” (Grimm). These deeming insults are used in

an interesting way. At first, the stepmother refers to her as an animal, dehumanizing her. With

the second insult she gives her back humanity and implies that she still has a place in the

household and by extension, in all their lives. A servant would directly interact with the family

and be a part of the family without being a member which is complicated because Cinderella is

indeed a family member through her father.

The Hazel-Branch

“The Hazel-Branch” concerns a child who falls asleep outside. The child does not sleep

near a mother’s grave, but the idea of sleeping outside and a limb of a hazel tree draws

connections to both Ash and “Cinderella.” The book Ash begins with the death of Ash’s mother

much like the Brothers Grimm’s “Cinderella”. Both Cinderella and Ash went outside to sit by their mothers’ graves. Once there, they remember the advice their mothers gave them. For

Cinderella, it was to "be good and pious" (Grimm 121). For Ash, it was warnings about how to avoid encounters with fairies and to “simply don’t answer the door after sunset” (Lo 18). When

Cinderella goes to her mother’s grave, she sits there and weeps. She asks her father to “break off for [her] the first branch which knocks against [his] head on [his] way home” (Grimm 122).

When she receives the hazel twig from her father, she plants it in the soil at her mother’s grave, and because she weeps so often, the twig is watered and grows into a tree that she sits beneath while visit her mother. Ash similarly visits her mother’s grave for hours. The night of her

16 mother’s burial, her father watches at the grave as “he had told her that he would keep vigil over the grave all night. According to superstition, the Fairy Hunt seeks out souls on the night after

burial, and only those who were guarded by their loved ones would be left to rest in peace” (Lo

5), unlike Cinderella, Ash is not allowed to sit by her mother’s grave on her own.

While Ash hesitates to leave her mother’s grave, the housekeeper Anya reassures her that

all will be well. “‘It will be all right,’ Anya said. ‘Come inside before night falls. Your mother’s

spirit will be safe with your father watching over her’” (Lo 5). Ash most likely experiences

uncertainty because she wants to protect her mother’s spirit. Another reason why Ash is reluctant

is because her father did not believe in fairies as Ash does, because of the love for his wife and

her adamant belief, he wants to do this for her; participate in a burial ritual.

Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men

This idea of lack of representation growing up might lead to changes in one’s adult life.

Malinda Lo also took this issue and instead of following the same path as Cashorali, she created

a sliding door and a window in the form of her book Ash. In a way Ash is also a mirror. The

book reflects concerns that can apply to any reader regardless of race, gender, and sexual

orientation. Many of the book’s themes are universal: love, loss, hope, self-doubt, fear, and

courage. Many readers would be able to identify and form an emotional connection to one of the

listed themes. The book has an overall, universal, appeal regardless that seems almost heedless to

the reader and his or her background. That is the reason why Cashorali wrote Fairy Tales Retold

for Gay Men specifically for the gay men who were not able to read fairy tales and other stories

as children and see themselves. Cashorali did something and wrote something that an adult who

could not see themselves reflected in children’s literature. The lack of availability of children’s

books, specifically children’s books with LGBTQ characters probably did not exist when

17 Cashorali was a child which might be the reason why he wrote a children’s book for adults. The

subtitle of the book reinforces the idea that it was written with a specific audience in mind which

is why he details that the fairy tales are retold for gay men.

As the book indicates, it is comprised of many fairy tales retold for a gay, male audience.

The readers will recognize several of the stories, such as Hansel and Gretel and Rumpelstiltskin.

Some of the stories might be unfamiliar to the readers as several of them fall outside of the canon

of the Brothers Grimm fairy tales and will not be discussed in this thesis. Cashorali’s book

supports Bishop’s essay in the sense that mirrors, sliding doors, and windows are important and

necessary for development. Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men answers the

question of what happens when a child grows up without exposure to representation in children’s

literature? That child might go on to write something as an adult that he or she would have

enjoyed reading as a child.

The Golden Key

This traditional fairy tale features a character without a family. The unnamed character

from “The Golden Key” by the Brothers Grimm is referred to as "poor boy" is the only character

in the fairy tale. By not having a name or a description other than his gender and lack of

economic status, the Brothers Grimm tell the reader that this character is ordinary, perhaps even

lesser than that. Although he does not have a family to speak of or other characters to interact

with, the reader gets a sense that “poor boy” is the hero of this tale. His lack of family is not indicative of his misfortune.

18 On the other hand, the “poor boy” from “The Golden Key” as re-imagined by Peter

Cashorali7 has a family, but their lack of support and a parental figure as a role model shows the

reader that this “poor boy” and the Grimm Brothers “poor boy” are almost the same character.

Their differences appear when they discover the golden key on the frozen ground. The sudden

appearance of the golden key breathes new life into both of the “poor boys”.

In the traditional version, the reader knows “poor boy’s” thoughts. The Brothers Grimm show the reader that despite his unfortunate circumstances, being poor and having to go out into the cold to fend for himself, he is clever. “He believed that where there was a key, there must be also be a lock” (Grimm 812). “Poor boy” knows that if he has the key and finds the lock, he might gain something valuable. The reader does not know if “poor boy” unlocked anything valuable because the Brothers Grimm break the fourth wall and directly address the reader:

“[N]ow we must wait until he has finished unlocking it and has opened the lid. Then we shall find out what kind of wonderful things there were in the little chest” (Grimm 812). The refusal to grant the reader the knowledge of what “poor boy” finds in the chest implies that the reader has not earned the reward of knowledge. “Poor boy” trudged through the snow in the cold and cleared the ground to discover the key. The reader simply reads of his efforts.

In “The Golden Key” retold by Peter Cashorali, the “poor boy” had to go outside to fetch wood for his own fire because he “would grow up to be like himself” (Cashorali 1). His brothers and sisters had their respective parent to see as a role model, therefore, the firewood needed for

7 There is a note that appears in the index of Cashorali’s book which explains “The Golden Key” was previously produced in a different book. The following is the citation: “The Golden Key”. Queer Spirits: A Gay Men’s Myth Book, ed. Will Roscoe (Boston: Beacon Press 1995), by Cashorali, Peter. Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men. HarperOne, 1995, pp 1-2.

19 their fires was already found in the house. The reader knows the driving force behind “poor

boy’s” journey into the cold for firewood: he is different from everyone else in his family and

has to provide for himself. Much like the traditional version, Cashorali also denies the reader the

knowledge of what's in the chest. Cashorali's “poor boy” also works hard to achieve the contents of the mysterious, little chest. His discovery and achievement of the key and eventually the potential valuables in the chest are more significant than the chest in the Brothers Grimm’s tale.

The poor boy in Cashorali’s The Golden Key almost deserves the “wonderful things” (Cashorali

2) that might lie inside because unlike the Brothers Grimm’s “poor boy”, he grows tired in his search for the chest.

Cashorali also writes of the physicality of the search describing the pain “poor boy” experiences while digging through the frozen ground for his prize. His unearthing of the little chest also signifies something that is just for him. Earlier in the tale, the reader learns that he is unlike everyone in his family and there is not firewood for him. When he goes out into the cold and finds the golden key, the chest that goes with the golden key is something that is for him alone. It is interesting to note that Cashorali's poor boy has a family while “poor boy” from

Brothers Grimm tale does not. Cashorali's “poor boy” is equally as alone if not more so. The author takes pains to describe the alienation “poor boy” experiences by being so different from his family. Peter Cashorali’s interpretation of “The Golden Key”, the first retelling in his book

Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men under the same name, also concludes with

undefined 'wonderful things'. Breaking tradition from the Brothers Grimm, he does not explicit

state the living conditions of character in the name; the character is simply known as boy.

Cashorali suggests that the boy might be of little means because during one of the coldest winters

20 the boy can remember or anyone else from the village does not have access to firewood. The boy

lives with his family: a mother, a father, brothers, and sisters.

There was firewood for his brothers, who would grow up to be just like their father, and

firewood for his sisters, who would grow up to be just like their mother. But for the boy, who

would grow up to be like himself and no other, there was none (Cashorali 1). Every member of

his family has firewood available to them except for him. In doing so, Cashorali shows that the

boy differs from his family because he does not have role models. His brothers and sisters can

imitate the corresponding parent. The boy must be his own role model. He sets off into the woods determined to find firewood for himself. Much like the poor boy from the Brothers

Grimm, the boy finds a key on the ground. The way the boy discovers the key seems to have

more fantastical elements.

He was brushing the snow away when suddenly the sun, which had risen while he

searched, gleamed on something at his feet. The boy saw it was a key, a golden key, and he

picked it up eagerly. “It's mine,” he laughed, tossing it into the air and catching it, and the key

sparkled and glittered in the sunlight as if it were laughing with him. The boy searches outside in

the dark, cold, snowy Endless Forest for the wood meant for him. When he finishes his task and

seeks to warm himself up, the sun rises and shines upon the ground in a majestic way. With the

sun’s light, the boy notices a key.

Cashorali places emphasis on the discovery by first stating the boy found a “key”. He expresses the importance of this by adding the type of key: golden. In doing so, Cashorali identifies a tangible thing of monetary value. Nothing expensive has been described or mention in the tale so far in a monetary sense. Until this point, firewood holds the most value as a necessity for comfort and life. The boy eagerly picks up the key. The boy eagerly picks up the

21 golden key unlike all his other motions thus far in the tale. “Dragging his sled behind him” and

“gradually he loaded his sled” describe the boy’s labor. When the sun shines and he finds something unexpected, he acts differently. The boy also has an emotional response that he expresses physically. “‘It’s mine’ he laughed, tossing it into the air and catching it’ (Cashorali 2).

Not only does he speak aloud, the words spoken by any character and unlike the poor boy from the Brothers Grimm. The emotion the boy expresses also manifest in the key. “And the key sparkled and glittered in the sunlight as if it were laughing with him” (Cashorali 2). Cashorali describes the key and the boy in a similar manner. Under the light of the sun the boy transforms and the key which in the dark was not visible and dull, much like the boy when he was at home surrounded by his family that were unlike him.

Like the “poor boy”, the boy reasons that if he found a key, he might also find something to unlock. As the boy searches for something to unlock, the description returns to the previous dark, tone. He goes from sweeping the snow away, the same way that he found the key and the wood for fire. “Oh, the ground was hard, harder than stone, harder than steel, and the boy had no tools to work with but his hands” (Cashorali 2). The boy works tirelessly on a task that made difficult because he has nothing to help make it easier like a shovel or a pick, just like how he does not have firewood in the same way as his siblings.

Bishop writes “when children cannot find themselves reflected…they learn a powerful lesson about how they are devalued in the society of which they are a part” (Bishop). That was written in relation to children not seeing themselves in literature, but it can be applied to the world of “poor boy”. The siblings know which firewood to use because they have an example of a lifestyle to strive for; brothers like father, sisters like mother. The boy does not have that example and he also does not have tools. It has been made clear to him whether that was

22 intentional by his parents, but he cannot identify with an adult member of his family in the same

way that his siblings can. Although he is a member of the family, he does not have a place in it.

He has to go his own way and figure it out on his own. The boy maintains this spirit of self- reliance and perseverance. “It was a long while that he dug; but whenever he got tired or discouraged he pulled the golden key out of his pocket and let his eyes rest on its promise, and then went back to his labor refreshed” (Cashorali 2). The promise of potential riches that would elevate his position of being alone with no role models thus allowing him to live apart from his family. The golden key allows him to be different.

The Virgin Mary’s Child

In the traditional fairy tale, Virgin Mary’s Child by the Brothers Grimm, the young girl who lives in Heaven with Mary breaks the only rule in place: do not open the forbidden thirteenth door. The girl breaks the rule and is cast out of Heaven. She endures a miserable life as a result. Mary offers her a way out of her torment if she would only admit that she opened the forbidden door. She continues to deny the allegation. As punishment, Mary takes all of the girl’s children away. Although it gets to the point where the girl’s husband, the king, believes his subjects when they say that she is a witch and has been eating her own children, she does not admit that she opened the door. Eventually becomes overwhelmed by guilt, she admits that she did in fact open the door, at which point her trial ends and her children are safely returned to her alive.

It seems that the girl, a queen, does not experience self-actualization until her own life is at stake. A big part of part of her transformation has to do with her increasing guilt. As her circumstances grow more dire and the loss of the children sets her on a path of shame, she finally confesses the truth when she realizes that it is her last chance to set things right. The Brothers

23 Grimm do not make it seem like the girl wants to save herself, but that she sees this is her last

opportunity to bring back her children. She confesses, ultimately freeing them and bringing them

back to Earth.

Peter Cashorali’s retelling of “The Virgin Mary’s Child” is called “The Vampire”. Much

like the tradition fairy tale, this one has a character who lies and refuses to confess to another

character who has the power to take away the liar’s loved one. The Virgin Mary in the traditional

tale and the Stranger in Cashorali’s version require the main character Robert to look inward for

the truth and reveal himself. Rather than having Robert lose a child like the girl from “The

Virgin Mary’s Child”, he instead will lose a close family member. Cashorali describes the party

that the young people attend that involves falling in love and making romantic connections

between other young people at the party. While at the party, Robert sees a young man, a stranger,

whom everyone else considers to be not only gorgeous, but exciting. Robert quickly develops

feelings for the stranger, but the stranger seems not to return his feelings. Although enamored with him, Robert does not listen to the stranger when he tells him not to follow him or pursue anymore or otherwise members of Robert’s family will die.

Much like the tradition version of the fairy tale, Robert must reveal what he saw lest something bad happens. He was asked by the stranger to name what he saw, but he does not reveal what it was. Eventually, he admits to the stranger that he saw him, and it turns out that

Robert is the stranger. When Robert looked at him, he saw himself. He realizes that the stranger

is actually him which challenges everything he thought he knew. For a long time, Robert thought

the stranger was a vampire, a horrible creature and a monster. This is reminiscent of Bishop’s

assertion “when children cannot find themselves reflected in the books they read, or when the

images they see are distorted, negative, or laughable, they learn a powerful lesson” (Bishop).

24 Robert had a negative opinion of vampires. He could not understand that he might be the thing

he once despised and that he did not understand who he might be. Robert never considered the

possibility that he villainized this group that he might be a member of and most importantly, that

he feared himself. Robert’s self-actualization occurs near the end of the fairy tale when he admits

to the stranger and seemingly realizes in that moment that he is the stranger. By accepting

himself as the stranger and what the activity the stranger was engaged in is the moment when he

accepts himself for who he is.

King Thrushbeard

In the traditional fairy tale “King Thrushbeard,” the king wants his daughter, the princess,

to find a suitor. She openly mocks each suitor she meets to the point that her father marries her

off to the next man who appears and he happens to be a beggar. The reader does not sympathize

with the harsh treatment because of the princess’s own callous treatment of potential husbands.

In Cashorali’s retelling, “King Crossbill”, the parents’ rejection of their child, Christopher, is not nearly as severe. The parents in “King Crossbill” decide to give their son to the next person who would be able to teach him a trade. In “King Thurshbeard”, the King marries his daughter off as punishment to the next man who enters the palace, not because it would be a good match, but because she continues to reject suitors whose union could strengthen his kingdom. He is not

concerned with finding a beneficial match that could benefit the kingdom, but rather wants to

punish his daughter.

Unlike marrying off a child as punishment, Christopher’s parents tell him, “We won’t be

able to either take you with us or keep supporting you. So, we’ve decided to apprentice you to

the first person who can teach you a trade.” (Cashorali 14). Christopher’s parents in “King

Crossbill” are more concerned with his welfare. They tell him that they will not be able to help

25 him financially, and they decide to find a person who can teach him a trade. Their concern with finding a person who he can be an apprentice speaks of their worry over his financial stability and the hope that he will eventually be able to support himself with the lessons he will be taught.

Christopher’s parents cannot remain connected to him while they are gone away, so it is important for him to be apprenticed to someone who can teach him a trade. While Christopher is with his parents, being supported by them emotionally and financially, he is unable to grow and understand his sexuality.

The relationships in King Thrushbeard are between a king and his daughter the princess, the princess and potential suitors, the princess and the beggar minstrel, and finally King

Thrushbeard and the princess. The beginning of King Thrushbeard opens with the line: “king had a daughter who was beautiful beyond all measure, but at the same time so proud and arrogant that no suitor was good enough for her. She rejected one after the other, ridiculing them as well”

(Grimm). The princess behaves egregiously towards her potential suitors, often making fun of them for her own amusement. “She ridiculed especially one good king who stood at the very top of the row, and whose chin had grown a little crooked. ‘Look!’ she cried out, laughing, ‘He has a chin like a thrush’s beak.’ And from that time, he was called ‘Thrushbeard’” (Grimm). Her reputation for being beautiful might be the reason why she holds the physical appearance of the suitors to such a high degree.

Being beautiful is important to her. Surely people have treated her differently, better, not only because of her royal station as a princess, but also because of her beauty. Beauty often gets conflated with kindness. Being beautiful and being kind are two different things. Kindness can be seen as beauty, but beauty is not always kind. The Grimm Brothers are clear to make the distinction in the opening line. “Beautiful beyond all measure, but at the same time so proud and

26 arrogant” (Grimm). This line shows the polarizing nature of the princess. She is beautiful, proud, and arrogant.

The relationship the king has with his daughter is very firm. Her beauty does not easily dissuade him from parenting her in a manner he sees fit. He acknowledges her unkind nature and that she does not take the matter of finding a husband seriously. “Now the old king, seeing that his daughter did nothing but ridicule the people, making fun of all the suitors who were gathered there, became very angry, and he swore that she should have for her husband the very first beggar to come to his door” (Grimm). It is unclear if he thought her marriage to a beggar would make her a better person and teach her humility, but rather the king sought to punish her.

Much like Robert from “The Vampire”, Christopher also struggles with seeing representations of himself. Cashorali’s writes at the beginning of his story that Christopher did not like to admit that he enjoyed listening to the sighs of young men. He likes them so much that he spends a lot of time trying to be his version of masculine which is to resort to physical violence and intimidation. Once he becomes apprenticed to the beggar, one of his new jobs is to make flower arrangements. This is difficult for him because he thinks “flower arranging is effeminate” (Cashorali 17). He is later called “flower boy” by a stranger which confirms he misguided opinions and fears that he would be less than.

Christopher participates in similar behavior at the beginning of the story when he would pretend to dislike the attention and reactions his presence and appearance would elicit from young men. The beggar informs Christopher that there is nothing effeminate about flower arranging and proceeds to show off his muscular physique and strength that comes from the hard work of flower arranging. Again, Bishop’s claim that “when children cannot find themselves reflected in the books they read, or when the images they see are distorted, negative, or

27 laughable, they learn a powerful lesson” (Bishop). This concept was meant to refer to children’s

literature, but it can also be applied to real life situations or at least situations a character might

face. Christopher thought flower arranging and liking the sighs of young men was not what he

wanted, effeminate and not who he really was which was a distorted view and way of thinking.

Hansel and Gretel

The next traditional fairy tale featuring a familial relationship and its impact on the characters is “Hansel and Gretel.” This fairy tale by the Grimm Brothers offers the most complex view of familial relations and the impact it has on the character because of the presence of

Hansel and Gretel's stepmother. Stepparents and blended families in fairy tales are not a controversial concept, but rather common and almost expected.

In the traditional "Hansel and Gretel", there are several changing pronouns throughout which could be a result of translation inconsistencies in the text, but regardless, the changing words highlight the differences between the familial relations. The opening line of the fairy tale,

"Hard by a great forest dwelt a poor wood-cutter with his wife and his two children" (Grimm 86) informs the reader that Hansel and Gretel live with their father and their father's wife, their stepmother. Most fairy tales begin with an introduction of the characters; however, by establishing the familial relations in this way, the reader understands that this is a blended family. If the inconsistencies were intentional, it is interesting to note the difference in pronouns as the adults try to rid themselves of the children.

The father and stepmother’s plotting to abandon their two children to prevent all four of them from starving to death serves as the catalyst of the self-actualization of the children. Self- actualization in “Hansel and Gretel” occurs two-fold in the fairy tale, at different moments for

28 both siblings as individuals which will be explained later. When Hansel and his sister Gretel hear the plans their father and stepmother are crafting to get rid of them, Hansel immediately formulates a plan. He tells Gretel, “Do not distress yourself, I will soon find a way to help us”

(Grimm 87). Hansel goes outside and finds pebbles that shine in the moonlight which he deposits in the woods and uses the next day to light their path back to the house.

This first plan by Hansel is to rescue himself and his sister from abandonment and death.

His self-actualization is realizing his importance not only to his sister, but also his importance as a person. He does not deserve to die, and he needs to do everything he can to save not only himself but also his sister. It is difficult to say that Hansel and his sister know that their father loves them more than their stepmother, but it seems evident when upon their return: “the father, however, rejoiced, for it had cut him to the heart to leave them behind alone” (Grimm 88). Their stepmother scolded the children, acting as if they were not supposed to be the woods all night.

The warm embrace by the father reinforces that Hansel made the right decision by casting the pebbles to find their way back home.

The second plan that Hansel creates to ensure that he and sister return from the woods to their father's house mimics his first plan of leaving a trail to follow the next. “On the way into the forest Hansel crumbled his [piece of bread] in his pocket, and often stood still and threw a morsel on the ground” (Grimm 89). It differs and ultimately fails because rather than using a mineral that would not degrade overnight in the woods, he uses something that is edible and can dissolve. “When the moon came they set out, but they found no crumbs” (Grimm 89). They continue to walk and seek a way out of the woods, but they are lost. This is a turning point in the fairy tale not only because they meet another adult in the form of the witch who wants them dead, but because Gretel achieves self-actualization.

29 Gretel, like her brother Hansel, achieves self-actualization when her life is at stake. The reason she was unable to reach this state of mind and understand her self-worth is that she had her brother with her. He was a constant source of reassurance. Before the first morning they were to be left in the woods, he tells her, “Do not distress yourself, I will soon find a way to help us”

(Grimm 87). He does not have a plan the second night before they are to be taken out, he assures her that “the good God will help us” (Grimm 89). At the witch's house, she is alone and must fend for herself.

Hansel achieves self-actualization when he overhears his father and stepmother’s plan to abandon them in the woods the following day. Gretel achieves self-actualization when she realizes the evil witch plans to eat Hansel and her. For the first time, the reader sees Gretel as a clever person in her own right. Until this point in the story, only her brother displays cleverness when he creates a plan to help them escape from the woods and return home. Hansel continues to be cunning. The witch keeps him in a cage outside of her house. When she goes to check to see if he has fattened enough to eat, instead of sticking out his finger for her to check, he uses a piece of bone so that she is none the wiser. Gretel stays inside the witch's house and soon realizes that the witch plans to eat her first because it is taking too long for Hansel to be ready. Gretel “sees what [the witch] has in mind” (Grimm 92) and decides to feign ignorance. Instead of getting into the oven as the witch demanded, the witch has to climb into the oven to demonstrate for Gretel.

Gretel sees this as her opportunity to escape so she pushes the witch into the oven and goes to release Hansel.

When Gretel reaches Hansel, she tells him, “Hansel, we are saved! The old witch is dead!” (Grimm 93). The two times that Hansel saved them both, he consoled her and the night before claiming that he had a plan and that God would not forsake them. When Gretel saves

30 them, she does not reveal what her plan was to get away from the witch. The other time Gretel is

more assertive than her brother and takes charge is when they have taken jewels from the witch's

house and try to cross the river.

Hansel reasons they cannot cross because he “[sees] no foot-plank, and no bridge”

(Grimm 93). Gretel agrees, but she spots a white duck and decides to ask for its help. Hansel

much like Gretel at the beginning of the story displays hopelessness. It is Gretel who shows

reason and comes up with an alternative plan. When the duck comes over and Hansel tells Gretel

to sit next to him, she replies, “No...that will be too heavy for the little duck; she shall take us

across, one after the other” (Grimm 93). By Gretel telling her brother that his idea will not work

and proceeding to explain, she shows how much she has grown as a character after she achieves self-actualization.

When the children return home to their father’s house, they wrap themselves in each

other’s arms. Until this point in the story, their home has always been referred to as their father’s house. At this moment, it is truly their father’s house because “the man had not known one happy hour since he had left the children in the forest; the woman, however, was dead” (Grimm

94). The entire time up until this point in the story, the father had felt horrible about the prospect of abandoning his children in the forest. Despite feeling remorse, he continued to honor his wife’s wishes to forsake them so that the adults might survive. When the children return to the house after being left, he is overjoyed but decides to plan to leave them once more. “He who says

A must say B, likewise, and as he had yielded the first time, he had to do so a second time also”

(Grimm 89). As the biological parent to the children, he felt not only more love for the children

but also more guilt when it came to leaving them behind. This might be the reason why he

survived and his wife did not. There are clear familial divisions in this fairy tale as far as parent

31 versus stepparent. It is interesting to note that when Hansel seemed like the rational child to

figure out a way to save his sibling when he achieved self-actualization, Gretel was also able to

reach that state of mind and was able to exhibit some of the same driving forces and strength as

her brother.

Peter Cashorali’s retelling of “Hansel and Gretel” has the same title, but unlike the

Brothers Grimm version, Gretel is introduced and remains a pillar of strength. Another notable

difference is that there are no stepparents in Cashorali's. In addition to the fact that both parents

“treated them badly” (Cashorali 35). This is a major departure from the Brothers Grimm fairy

tale. In that one, the audience had a clearer picture of familial divisions and were able to decide

which parent was bad and which was good. Although it is rarely that simple, especially when the

father agrees to the stepmother's plan, the differences are clear.

Returning to Peter Cashorali’s “Hansel and Gretel”, the children are able to form a family

of their own and not feel the pressure to try and stay in the house with their parents. Gretel states

that it was unusual for them to do anything as a family of four so the idea of her parents doing

something with her and her brother immediately come across as suspicious. Since Gretel is the stronger sibling both emotionally and intellectually. “Gretel, neglected by their parents, was glad to feel needed by her brother, and Hansel was grateful to have someone look out for him”

(Cashorali 35). The neglect from their parents has enabled them to create a parent/child relationship amongst themselves. In the Brothers Grimm version, Hansel was strong from the beginning and Gretel eventually achieves self-actualization and learns to not only be strong but take charge in her own right. “The girl...had both eyes open and knew how to take care of herself” (Cashorali 35). Cashorali sets Hansel up not to be weaker than his sister, but to have a different outlook on life and thus a different life than the shared one they lead as children of

32 unpleasant parents. “The boy...was dreamy and withdrawn, and the only protection he had from

trouble was to lose himself in daydreams and old movie magazines which wasn't always helpful”

(Cashorali 35). In doing so, Cashorali separates Hansel and Gretel from their shared experiences.

The children do not hear their parents planning to get rid of them, but Gretel knows they

are planning something. “Gretel immediately knew something was wrong because they never did

anything as a family” (Cashorali 36). It is effective for Cashorali to only leave the audience as

aware of the situation with which the children are about to be faced with because again it shows

the difference between Gretel and Hansel. She thinks quickly on her feet and knows that things

are not as they appear. She instructs Hansel to “fill [his] pockets with white pebbles” (Cashorali

36). In the Brothers Grimm version, Hansel takes the night before to come up with a plan.

Another departure from the traditional version of the fairy tale is that Hansel and Gretel

do not return home after being left in the woods and using the white pebbles to trace their steps.

They come across a house in the woods made from candy and other sweet things that Hansel

likes to eat as confirmed by him eating the food the parents gave them which was a candy bar.

Gretel remains suspicious of the house and the lady who lives in the house. The audience is

supposed to side with Gretel and trust her point of view because, of the two children, Gretel is

more logical and realistic while Hansel does not display the level of practicality.

The witch that they meet in the woods is not described as such and is referred to as a

lady. The lady is meant to be older like the witch from the Brothers Grimm version. Cashorali

describes her not “young at all, and her face had been long ago marked by heartbreak and tragedy” (Cashorali 39). The lady seems to possess magical powers in the sense that she seemingly entrances Hansel. “The lady didn’t even glance at Gretel but looked deep into

33 Hansel’s eyes and said, ‘You,’ as if he was the one she’d always been waiting for” (Cashorali

39). The lady with her words and her presence seems to pull Hansel away from his desire to eat the house made of food and he follows her inside. The lady is meant to be a drag queen. The pointed language of the text hints that the lady or witch-like character is a drag queen: because she states that Hansel reminds “her of him at that age” and the fact that she decides to teach him.

It is clear why he is drawn to her in this way when both Hansel and Gretel are inside the lady’s house. It seems almost sinister when Gretel takes note of the difference in voice and tone that the lady uses when she, the lady, speaks to her brother. “Her magic voice, the one she only used for him” (Cashorali 39). The voice the lady uses when she speaks to Hansel seems menacing to Gretel, but that is because it is not meant for her. Everything about the lady, Hansel desires for himself. When the lady laughed, Hansel thinks to himself that “it was an enchanting laugh, and Hansel wished more than anything that he could laugh that way” (Cashorali 39).

Hansel feels this way, because he does not realize it, but he desires to be like the lady in every way.

Cashorali’s Hansel and Gretel both achieve self-actualization. Much like their traditional counterparts, they do not reach this state of being at the same time. A difference between the two

Hansels and Gretels is that they do not come to this fulfillment when their lives are in danger, but when they seem to realize that their lives are meant to follow a different path and thus not be the same.

When Gretel is in the house with the lady and her brother, she is not taught the things her brother is. In fact, Gretel is not really acknowledged by the lady, merely tolerated. Gretel tries to make herself useful by cleaning, but the lady stops her each time claiming, “everything’s just the

34 way [she likes] it” (Cashorali 39). The audience later finds out that Gretel “[misses] feeling

needed by her brother, who [spends] all his time with the lady” (Cashorali 39). Without her

brother relying on her, Gretel no longer knows her place. She only knows her place when Hansel

is his normal, dreamy, oblivious self.

Much like the Gretel from the Brothers Grimm, Cashorali’s Gretel pushes the woman

who keeps them prisoner in her home into the oven. The nontraditional Gretel tricks the lady into

the oven by appealing to her vanity whilst the traditional Gretel feigns incompetence and

requires a demonstration. This approach works almost better than the other because Gretel really

uses the lady's background as an actress to trick her. Gretel creates a fake movie in which the

lady was a star. “For the life of her she couldn't remember having been in The Queen in the Oven or even having heard of it before. But she couldn't resist Gretel’s praise” (Cashorali 41). The

lady feeds off praise and attention, something Gretel figures out when she notices that Hansel is

slowly turning into the lady. The lady “lived on the attention and admiration that she got from

Hansel” (Cashorali 40). By using it in this manner, Gretel does not turn into the lady. That could

be for several reasons. The first reason is that the Hansel seems himself in the lady and desires to

be like her. Gretel is unlike her brother and unlike the lady, therefore, she is not susceptible to

her charms. The second reason Gretel does not turn into the lady or start to exhibit some of her

traits is that she only gives the lady praise for a very short time. After Gretel tricks the lady into

the oven, she goes in search of her brother.

Gretel finds her brother and at first, she thinks she is too late in rescuing him because she

does not find the Hansel she has known all her life. She finds someone unlike Hansel and more

like the lady. At first, Hansel searches for the lady only to discover she is no longer in the oven,

but in the mirror looking back at him. Hansel does not become the lady, but he inherits some of

35 her qualities and becomes his own version of the lady. When Gretel first suggested leaving the

house now that they are free, Hansel did not want to go. As his own version of the lady, he

realizes that he is beautiful and it is time for them to leave. He does not say that it is time for

them to leave, but rather that it is time for him to leave. Gretel notices the difference and asks

about her and essentially her place in his world. Hansel decides that although “she [isn’t]

glamorous...but how clever she must have been to trick the lady into the oven” (Cashorali 42)

offers her a new role as his manager.

Cashorali’s characters achieve self-actualization in a different manner than their

traditional counterparts. Gretel's achievement of self-actualization is two-fold. On one hand, she

does not know who she is when Hansel does not need her to protect him. On the other hand,

Gretel realizes that even though she loses sight of herself and her role in Hansel's newfound

world, it is still up to her to protect him and ultimately save his life.

Hansel, realizes his before his sister does. Unlike his sister, he does not think that the

witch is feeding off of him or turning him into her. He tells Gretel that he is learning to be a star.

It is interesting to note that when he looks at himself in the mirror, he sees “the person looking

back at him was stronger and more beautiful than anything [he] had been afraid of” (Cashorali

40). At this moment, Hansel seems to be clever and knows that he should take the lady’s interest in him and use it to his advantage. He decides that he needs to learn everything he can from her such as walking in high-heeled shoes, something he tells his sister he cannot do. The importance of children reading about and seeing “reflections of themselves” (Bishop) in literature extends to

real life or the life of a literary character. As previously mentioned, Hansel is entranced by the

drag queen which is why when they meet, he almost seems mesmerized by her. Literal mirrors

are abundant in this story.

36 The drag queen gets ready in front of three mirrors. She offers to teach Hansel how to

change into a different person, apply makeup and wigs. The drag queen moves over so Hansel

can sit down in front of the mirrors and participate. This is interesting because when Gretel goes

to find her brother later in the story after she tricks the drag queen into the oven, she finds him in

front of the mirrors. Hansel gets up from the mirrors to find the drag queen, but when he returns

to his place in front of the mirrors, he does not seem his reflection but rather the reflection of the

drag queen looking back at him. He becomes her in the end while at the same time his true self.

Rumpelstiltskin

The traditional Rumpelstiltskin features a father/daughter relationship that is strained at

best. The father, a miller, tries to impress the king by telling him that his daughter can weave straw into gold. The king challenges the miller’s daughter to weave straw into gold on several

occasions. Each time the king returns to find the straw newly spun into gold, but not at the hands

of the girl, but because a small, unnamed man did it for her. Eventually the girl marries the king

and the small man returns into her life asking for her firstborn child as payment for helping her

weave the straw into gold. The only way to keep the man from taking her child is to call him by

his true name.

Lies are in abundance in this fairy tale. The miller lies to impress the king and the

miller’s daughter lies to save her life by taking credit for spinning the straw into gold. The

question becomes why did the miller lie in the first place to the king? Did he not think that the

king would challenge his claim? These questions are never answered, but it is interesting to

wonder about the miller’s motivation or reasoning behind his decisions that put the story into

motion.

37 Steven from Peter Cashorali’s “Rumpelstiltskin” was sent by his parents to live with his gay uncle who is a miller. “The miller had never married; Steven’s parents had a feeling their son was never going to marry, either, and they hoped the miller might finish their son’s education and show him how to get on in the world in ways they couldn’t (Cashorali 43). Bishop’s theory that “children from dominant social groups have always found their mirrors in books, but they too, have suffered from the lack of availability of books about others” (Bishop). Steven’s parents knew how important it was for him to have a mirror in his life, especially for his development which is why they insisted that he goes to live with his uncle the miller who was like him.

The gay uncle is a clear departure from the traditional version. In the traditional a male family member deceives the king and the child, in this case the nephew, as to answer for it. The uncle likes to brag and told his friends that his nephew could “turn shit into gold” (Cashorali 44).

Shit in this context does not mean literate feces, but is the slang term to express dissatisfaction or

general state of disarray that something is in. Worried about how to face the king, Steven’s uncle

tells him, “You’ll think of something” (Cashorali 45). This is interesting because it means that

Steven’s uncle either has faith in him and knows Steven’s potential or this is just another example of the uncle speaking out of turn. Steven does face the king and learns that he has to use his ability to turn shit into gold on a room in the castle and become a companion of sorts to the prince.

Much like the miller’s daughter in the traditional Rumpelstiltskin, Steven does not actually possess the ability he is thought to have. He too struggles to come up with a solution until he meets the little man who is the Rumpelstiltskin-like character. When it comes to reimbursement, Steven does not have much to offer. The little man asks for payment in a year’s

38 time in the form of happiness. Steven agrees and does think about the deal until the man appears later in the story.

Another departure from the traditional Rumpelstiltskin is that Steven does not marry the king, but the king’s son known as the “Angry Prince”. When Steven first meets the “Angry

Prince”, the reader is told that “he would have been a very handsome young man, but oh, he was knotted up with tension” (Cashorali 48). The reader and Steven are aware of the “Angry Prince” potential, his looks and possibly his demeanor. The little man or Rumpelstiltskin-like character facilitates Steven’s initial interaction with the “Angry Prince”. He instructs Steven to let the

“Angry Prince” unleash his anger on him (Steven). In doing so, the “Angry Prince” becomes less angry and is eventually known by his true name again which is Eric. When Eric leaves the room with Steven, “he could hardly be recognized, he was so relaxed—he actually smiled” (Cashorali

49). Steven’s contact with the Eric left a physical and noticeable change.

Returning to the original, Steven, like the miller’s daughter, has to complete a task or else he will lose something important. For the miller’s daughter, she would forfeit her first child unless she could tell Rumpelstiltskin his name and for Steven he would lose his happiness unless he could answer what being positive means. The little man presents his terms in a trickster’s manner. He tells Steven, “you’re HIV positive” (Cashorali 50). Steven and the reader do not realize that the little man is lying. The little man relies on the fact that Steve heard him say “HIV positive” (Cashorali 50), that he would become fixated on the abbreviation and not listen to the rest of what the man has to say. Steven quickly loses his sense of self-worth, maybe the potential or the quality that Steven’s uncle saw inside of him. When the little man tells him that he is HIV positive, Steven cries out no, “but something inside of him said ‘Yes,’ and he knew that the little man had just taken away his happiness” (Cashorali 50). This is true, the little man did take away

39 Steven’s happiness, but not in the way that he thinks. By hearing that he is HIV positive, Steven no longer feels content with his life as the thought of illness overshadows the rest of the conversation. Steven believes the little man has taken his payment, but he was actually playing upon his fears in order to devise a trap to trick him.

During the rest of the exchange, Steven does not pay attention to the language used by the little man. The little man tells Steven, “If you can tell me, in these next three nights, three guesses per night, why you’re positive, what that means about you as a person, I’ll give you back enough happiness to live a good life, and we’ll be quits” (Cashorali 50). Steven continues to think that he has HIV and only guesses reasons that have to do with his sexual orientation and life choices such as “too many poppers” (Cashorali 50). On the second night one of Steven’s guesses is “Chronic feelings of worthlessness having an impact on [his] immune system”

(Cashorali 50). This guess gives insight into the depth of Steven’s feelings.

Before his diagnosis or rather his misdiagnosis, it was never revealed how Steven really felt other than quick glimpses of him “getting a little frustrated” (Cashorali 48), “[fretting]”

(Cashorali 45), or “[groaning]” (Cashorali 46). The idea that Steven considers “chronic feelings of worthlessness” (Cashorali 50) implies that he did not always possess confidence. At the beginning of the story, he acknowledges that his life with his uncle the miller “was a pleasant life” (Cashorali 43). Steven has a sense of contentment in his life with his uncle and that feeling continues to grow when begins a newer life with Eric. The idea of “chronic feelings of worthlessness” (Cashorali 50) means that Steven felt this way underneath all the moments of happiness.

40 On the other hand, Steven might be willing to give away his happiness because he secretly might have felt he deserved to lose what little he might have, tying in with his chronic feelings. When Steven made the deal with the little man he “reflected that he didn’t accept [the terms], he’d lose all happiness that very night, and his life, as well. Then too, a year was a long time, and anything could happen before the little man’s payment was due” (Cashorali 47). Steven does not value his happiness so much as he values his life. He considers that a year is a long time so maybe his life during that time might experience happiness only to lose it, something he might feel he deserves or he might never know any form of happiness; therefore, he will not exactly lose anything to the little man. It must also be considered that Steven said “chronic feelings of worthlessness” (Cashorali 50) in jest because he is listing every possibility for why he might be

HIV positive in hopes of guessing something right and retaining his happiness.

It seems fitting in the story that the same miller uncle who got Steven into the predicament of turning shit into gold provides the answer. Steven continues to incorrectly guess why he might be positive. Even enlisting the help of the other people in the kingdom. They all continue to guess it has something to do with Steve’s sexuality orientation, but the uncle reveals that he overheard the little man singing. Two lines are the answer: “Tonight I take him, fair and square:/it’s just something that was there” (Cashorali 51). The first of these lines describe the deal between the little man and Steven which is if Steven guesses incorrectly, the little man will take not only his happiness, but also Steven. The second of these lines say that something was already there meaning that Steven’s happiness is there.

When Steven confronts the little man for his third and final night of guessing, the little man hopes that Steven thinks the HIV positive is the only positive he could possibly be. Steven only has two guess both of which are about being positive as a disposition. He starts by asking

41 “does being positive mean I’m loyal in my friendships, honest, and dedicated to personal growth?” (Cashorali 52). Steven continues wondering if “it [means] I’m creative, exciting, glamorous and courageous?” (Cashorali 52). The little man grows angry and tells Steven his guesses are incorrect. Steven does not supply an answer for his final and third guess, but instead he tells the little man “it must not mean anything about me at all. It’s just a virus I was exposed to. A terrible one, but just a virus” (Cashorali 52). This statement is slightly problematic because

Steven and the only people in the story think the positive the little man refers to has to do with

HIV positive because of how the question of what it means was brought about. By not giving a final guess as part of the agreement he does not breech the terms, but he does answer the question set before him which was to answer why he was positive. Steven considers that the little man might be referring to his positive attitude which is why he guess along those lines for the first two guesses. With the third guess that does not actually happen, but instead is the answer to the question, he tells the little man that he is positive because he was exposed to a virus. In doing so, he answers the question and “[gets] back more than enough happiness to live a good life with his prince” (Cashorali 52) which is more than what he had expected at the beginning of the story.

This is also interesting because Steven could not imagine being happy.

Steven has a sense of self-actualization at the beginning of the story or at least a sense of self-worth. It might be synonymous with happiness because happiness seems to be a topic brought up when the reader is first introduced to Steven. He was sent to live with his uncle a miller who might teach him something his parents could not. Steven even acknowledges that living with his uncle was a “pleasant life” (Cashorali 43) suggesting some form of happiness he was already exposed to or at least had in his life. The time he spends with Eric, the “Angry

Prince”, he experiences a different time of happiness and he knew that how happy his life was.

42 When Steven’s happiness is endangered of being taken away, he panics and thinks that he will never get it back. It was interesting that he agreed to forfeit his happiness when he mentioned at the beginning of the story that he find the live with his uncle to be somewhat agreeable. Maybe when his uncle bragged and essentially lied to the king about Steven’s ability that is when he became to feel unhappy. It is unclear, but as previously mentioned, Steven might have been joking when he said that he had continuing feelings of worthlessness. Whether Steven already had a sense of self-worth before meeting the little man or even Eric, he certainly achieves self- actualization by the end of the story.

The Two Travelers

“The Two Travelers” by the Grimm Brothers follows the journey of two unlikely travel companions, a tailor and a shoemaker. The process of self-actualization in this fairy tale comes through remembering lessons taught to the tailor by the mother. The tailor is the only of the two who is described. “The tailor was a handsome, little fellow” (Grimm 486). The physical description of the tailor identifies him as the good of the two. Although the shoemaker is not described, the beginning of the tale gives an idea of what the shoemaker might look like, “hill and vale do not meet, but children of men do, both good and bad” (Grimm 486). If the tailor is

“handsome and little” (Grimm 486), then the shoemaker must be ugly and big, the opposite.

Although the Brothers Grimm do not offer a physical description of the shoemaker, but they do provide a description of their personalities. The tailor is described as “merry and full of enjoyment” (Grimm 486). Applying the idea that the shoemaker is the opposite of the tailor in every way, it is assumed that he is not as jovial. This is reinforced when the shoemaker who

“could not bear a joke” (Grimm 486) looks as if he is about to do bodily harm to the tailor who sings a “little mocking song” (Grimm 486) to him.

43 It is interesting that the shoemaker is offended by the song the tailor sings. “Sew me the seam,/ Draw me the thread,/ Spread it over with pith,/ Knock the nail on the head” (Grimm 486).

The tailor could just as easily be singing the song about himself. Both professions, tailor and shoemaker, do manual labor. Perhaps the shoemaker did not like to be reminded of his common work. The shoemaker might also be upset to be compared to the tailor, a person so different from himself.

Another telling trait about the shoemaker are accounts about his physical reactions. When the first heard the song sung by the tailor, “he pulled a face as if he had drunk vinegar, and made a gesture as if he were about to seize the tailor by the collar” (Grimm 486). The shoemaker is so displeased by the tailor he changes his face looked so unpleasant He probably felt rage because he wants to grab the tailor. The shoemaker either wants to cause physical harm to the tailor or shake him to as elicit a response from him This does not bother the tailor because he offers him something to drink. This exchange provides the only positive description of the shoemaker. The shoemaker accepts the offer to share a drink with the tailor. “No harm was meant, take a drink and sallow your anger down” (Grimm 486). The tailor and the shoemaker bond over something that impairs one's judgment. Perhaps in this lowering of his inhibitions allows him to be near the tailor without being offended. “The shoemaker gave the bottle back to the tailor, and said: “I took a hearty gulp; they say it comes from much drinking, but not from great thirst” (Grimm

486). The shoemaker acknowledges that drinking can be a problem, but that people who ask about it only see it as such. Those same people do not question if the person who drinks a lot is thirsty, they only see that he drinks to excess.

Going beyond a philosophical statement on whether extreme thirst might be the reason for excessive drinking, he invites the tailor to travel with him. By answering that only if he is

44 also traveling to a big city. The shoemaker confirms that is also his destination, the reason being

that he is guaranteed to find work in such a place. Venturing to a small town would essentially be

worthless. “In a small place, here is nothing to be earned, and in the country, people prefer to go

barefoot” (Grimm 486). The shoemaker identifies the country people living in small towns to be

uncouth. He can only find civilized people in large cities to employ him. This might be where the

shoemaker’s sense of worth comes from; large cities with civilized people who acknowledge him

and his work and by doing so give him purpose. The shoemaker does not achieve self-

actualization in the fairy tale because he already possesses the knowledge; however, misguided it

might seem to the reader.

When the tailor and the shoemaker finally reach a big city to find work, the shoemaker

begins to revert to his former self; the opposite of the tailor, an unpleasant man. The shoemaker

also begins to experience feelings of jealousy. Whenever he met up with the shoemaker, the

tailor always had the most in his bundle. The ill-tempered shoemaker would make a sour face,

thinking, “The greater the rascal, the more the luck” (Grimm 487). The shoemaker cannot believe that someone as ridiculous as the tailor is able to find work. He likens it down to the tailor's physical appearance attracting people and the fact that he is just mischievous and things just happen to work out for him. The tailor is unaware of the bitterness coming from the shoemaker so he continues to be his usual, kind self, “and would begin to laugh and to sing, ad shared all he got with his comrade” (Grimm 487). The tailor remains unaffected by the resentment that plagues his companion. A key factor to the tailor’s optimism, would be his

outlook. The Grimm Brothers include the tailor's motto: “lightly come, lightly go” (Grimm 487).

this perspective on life allows the tailor to look beyond his current situation. Although he finds

work easily, he might not be able to in the future. He is ready for whichever way life takes him

45 His stance on life continues in the future when he and the shoemaker are both faced with

two footpaths in the forest. The paths go in different directions and neither knows which way is

the shortest. All they know for sure is it will take them seven days to go down one path and only

two days to go down the other. They devise a plan to take with them bread for the journey. The

shoemaker argues, “one must plan ahead for the unexpected” (Grimm 487) so he decides to take

seven days’ worth of brad with him in case he goes down the longest path. As the opposite, the

tailor only brings with him enough bread for two days. “Haul bread for seven days on one's back

like a beast of burden and not be able to look about? I shall trust in God, and not trouble myself

about anything” (Grimm 487). The tailor’s faith in God is the true reason for his carefree attitude.

As the tailor and the shoemaker continue their journey through the forest, it becomes clear after the tailor finishes the last of his bread they are on the footpath that will take them seven days to get through. The shoemaker is pleased that he had enough foresight to pack seven days’ worth of bread. Unlike the tailor, the shoemaker is not generous with his good fortune. He

“laughed mockingly, and said, ‘You have always been so merry. Now you can see for once what it is like to be sad. Birds sing too early in the morning are caught by the hawk in evening’”

(Grimm 488). The shoemaker gloats and is gleeful of the tailor's misfortune. It is very telling for the shoemaker to be happy when the tailor is sad, full when the tailor is hungry; they are opposites. The reversal in their fortune does not extend to their dispositions. While the tailor was happy and charitable, the shoemaker is happy because the tailor suffers.

Eventually the shoemaker decides to be benevolent towards the tailor. “The shoemaker said to him, ‘I will give you a bit of bread to-day, but in return for it, I will put out your right eye’” (Grimm 488). The shoemaker knows that the tailor will need bread the next day so instead

46 of sharing his rations, he only gives him a small piece of bread that will satisfy his hunger for

one day so that the tailor will be forced to beg for another piece of bread. The shoemaker also

wants to put out his other eye, which he does. He is finally able to exact the grievous bodily

harm to the tailor he wanted to do from their first encounter, when the tailor sang the song that

offended the shoemaker. Ultimately the shoemaker does end up putting out the tailor's other eye.

The tailor takes him physical price for the bread in stride. “Eat whatever you can, and suffer whatever you must” (Grimm 488). these are the words his mother taught him and so he continues to focus on the positive.

When the tailor loses his second eye, he informs the shoemaker that although he can no longer see, God sees all and remembers the wickedness committed by him. The tailor says “and

hour will come when the evil deed which you have done to me, and which I have not deserved of

you, will be requited” (Grimm 488). The tailor acknowledges that the shoemaker did not need to

be so cruel. He also reminds him of all the times he shared with him. This does nothing to sway

the cruelty of the shoemaker. The Grimm Brothers explain that the shoemaker “had driven God

out of his heart” (Grimm 490). This is yet another example of how the shoemaker and the tailor

are opposites.

The shoemaker abandons the newly blind tailor. Eventually the tailor falls asleep. When

he awakens, the tailor overhears two brothers hanging in the gallows conversing. One brother

says to the other, “The dew that this night has fallen down over us from the gallows gives everyone who washes himself with it his eyes again” (Grimm 490). The tailor wets a

handkerchief with the dew and wipes his eyes. As the brother said, it gave him back his sight.

The tailor sees the world with new eyes. “He threw himself on his knees, thanked God for the

mercy he had shown him, and said his morning prayer, not forgetting to pray for the poor sinners

47 who were hanging there, swinging against each other in the wind like the pendulum of clocks.

Then he took his bundle on his back and soon forgot the sorrow he had endured, and went on his way singing and whistling” (Grimm 491). The tailor remembers to thank the two sinners who are

hanging in the gallows for the information regarding the morning dew.

It is interesting that the tailor clashes with the shoemaker, a sinner who does not believe

in God while he gets on all right with the two sinners. The brothers are hanging because they

have committed sins. The sins are not specified and the punishment is death which leads to them

like the shoemaker not having God in their lives. The tailor having given his thanks to God

returns to his usual, positive self. With his eyesight restored, the tailor makes his way to the

town. The tailor tries to eat various animals and foods along the way, but the creatures plead with

him not to. He obliges them and can let the creatures go without any animosity because they tell

him that his kindness will and patience will be repaid in the future. Something he practices in every part of the fairy tale and his pains are rewarded by the end when he leads a pleasant life in the kingdom while the shoemaker does not.

Peter Cashorali interpretation of “The Two Travelers” focus on the relationship between

a hairdresser and a personal weight trainer. The hairdresser decides to venture elsewhere to find a

new position after many years spent as a hairdresser. While entering the forest, the hairdresser

comes across the weight trainer and suggest that they travel together since they are going in the

same direction. Much like the tailor from the traditional fairy tale, the hairdresser remains

positive. When the hairdresser loses an eye, he tells himself “‘a one-eyed hairdresser is not a

happy thing,’ he observed. ‘But a dead hairdresser is even less happy.’” (Cashorali 68). The

hairdresser makes the best of his situation, something he later explains to the weight trainer. The

hairdresser tells him, “you just have to be able to make the bet of a bad situation” (Cashorali 68).

48 This comes at a moment when the weight trainer was going out of his way to make the

hairdresser feel bad not only physically, but mentally. Despite the weight trainer’s best efforts to

inflict pain, he does not diminish the hairdresser’s positive outlook.

The Fisherman’s Wife

“The Fisherman and His Lover” by Peter Cashorali shows the lengths the fisherman takes for the sake of his lover. The fisherman’s physical appearance changes because his lover is displeased with the way he looks. When the physical appearance of the fish also changes with every request that the fisherman asks of it. The fish grows to be very large and starts to frighten the fisherman. Despite being fearsome, the fish does nothing untoward to him. The self-

actualization for the fisherman comes through his fear. It seems like the Steven from Cashorali’s

“Rumpelskiltskin”, that the fisherman had a sense of self-worth and an understanding of what is

right and what is wrong before his story begins. It is only through his interactions with the fish

and the increasing unhappiness of the fisherman’s wife, that the fisherman loses or at least

forgets his sense of self-worth.

The fisherman develops a type of relationship with the fish. When he catches the fish at

the beginning, he calls the fish “my friend” (Cashorali 101). The fisherman indicates that he

although he fishes to survive, he appreciates the sacrifice that fish makes by simply being a fish.

Unlike Isadora's fisherman, this one does not give in to the demands of the fish. “The fish put its

head out of the waves, spat the seawater from its mouth, and said, ‘Release me this instant!’”

(Cashorali 101). The speaking fish surprises the fisherman, but he does not release it. The fish

even goes so far to say that he is important.

“I,” said the fish, with great diginity, “am not just any fish. I'm the lover of the king of the

sea. If I were you, I'd let me go.”/It wasn't so much the mention of the fish's connections that

49 helped the fisherman decided to release it as the thought that it--he--had a lover at home who would watch the clock, or whatever they had down there to tell the time, with growing apprehension. He knew how terrible it would be if anything happened to his own lover. Gently, if regretfully, he freed the fish from his net. (Cashorali 101).

The fisherman images himself in the position of the king of the sea and how upset he would be if something happened to his own lover. Cashorali indicates that the fisherman is mindful of others.

The fisherman assigns a pronoun to the fish, “he” instead of “it”. Cashorali's fisherman takes the time to understand those around him and acknowledge them to the best of his ability.

The fisherman mentions that he did not let the fish go because he was afraid of the consequences that the fish implies await him. He lets him go because he would want someone to let his own lover go free. The fisherman reluctantly frees the fish because although he depends on the catch for himself and his lover, he knows it is the right thing to do. The fish recognizes the sacrifice the fisherman makes by freeing him and decides that he will repay his goodwill. The fish tells the fisherman that he may call upon him to be granted a wish. “Tell me what you want, and I’ll give it to you (Cashorali 101).” The fisherman insists that he has all that he could ever need and that it's pointless, but the fish tells him the offer still stands regardless.

The fisherman returns home and explains to his lover Kevin that they had a measly dinner because the large fish he caught asked to be released. Kevin humors the fisherman until he learns that releasing the fish just might benefit them rather than be a hindrance. Kevin asks the fisherman what they were granted. Although the fisherman was the only one to receive the boone from the fish, Kevin assumes that they share everything and wants to know what they will get.

The fisherman tells Kevin, much like how he told the fish, that he did not ask for anything because he has all that he could possibly want in life. Kevin says to the fisherman “why didn't

50 you ask it to give you a bigger cock, you moron!” (Cashorali 102). Kevin’s outburst surprises

Kevin because until that moment, he did not realize that maybe they are not as happy as he thought they were. The request that Kevin claims the fisherman should have made would have been a physical change to the fisherman that was really for Kevin.

Cashorali does not go into detail about the sexual relationship between the fisherman and his lover Kevin, but he implies that Kevin is unsatisfied with their relationship. Kevin continues with his list of changes that the fisherman needs to ask the fish to make. The fisherman grows apprehensive asking the fish for all the favors not only because he keeps changing in appearance, the fish physically grows each time he sees him, but because the fisherman continues to come to him with wish after wish. “It’s not for myself I’m asking but for Kevin” (Cashorali 104). As

Kevin’s greed grows, so does the fish. Each time the fisherman meets with him, the fish looks more menacing and the fisherman does not feel comfortable even standing in the water with him.

The fisherman might also be apprehensive to be in such proximity with the fish because the request become increasingly specific and personal. The fisherman starts to find himself inadequate. Perhaps the constant demands from Kevin on how the fish can next fix the fisherman manifest as the fish. The more he continues to meet with the fish to get another fish, the more menacing the fish becomes as if it scares the fisherman to seek out the fish, to ask for another wish, and to transform to something further removed from himself. When Kevin goes to the fish for the last wish, the fisherman becomes so overwhelmed with emotions that he breaks down.

In the Grimm Brothers account of “The Fisherman and His Wife”, the fisherman and his wife have a good-natured relationship. Like the fishermen in Cashorali and Isadora's versions, this one listens to his wife. Unlike the other fishermen, he does not do so out of fear or because

51 he wants to please his lover. Whenever the wife tells the fisherman to go ask the flounder for a

wish she reassures the fisherman that everything will be okay.

Another example of how the wife cares for the fisherman more than the others is because

when she tells her husband to wish for something, she always says to wish for something for

“us”. Clearly, she values the fisherman and his opinions because she does not want for things

that would solely benefit her; she always thinks of a wish that will improve their lives. “Ah,”

said the woman, “it is surely hard to have to live always in this pig-stye which stinks and is so

disgusting; you might have wished for a little hut for us” (Grimm 104). The wife admits that she

finds their current living conditions intolerable. The other wife and lover insist that the fisherman

ask for something that will benefit them and not the two of them. The wife reveals that the life

they have made in the pig-stye has been uncomfortable especially with the smell. The fisherman

finds their lives to be content and said he did not think to ask for anything because he is just so

content. His wife presents us with a different perspective that maybe things are not as content as

they seem.

The wife tells her husband the fisherman that after he released the flounder he caught for

their supper, he should have wished for something because the flounder will remember than the

fisherman spared his life. “Ah,” said the man, “why should I go there again?” “Why,” said the woman, “you did catch him, and you let him go again; he is sure to do it. Go at once.” The wife

reminds the fisherman of his kindness and that the flounder will be thankful and more than

willing to return the good deed. The fisherman obeys his wife and goes to the river to seek out

the flounder. When the fisherman seeks out the flounder he always says:

52 “Flounder, flounder in the sea,/Come, I pray thee, here to me;/For my wife, good

Isabil,/Wills not as I'd have her will” (Grimm 104). In this rhyme, the fisherman informs the flounder that his request is from his wife and that it goes against his wishes.

The Grimm Brothers and Cashorali name the fisherman’s wife/lover. Isadora’s version does not give a name to the wife. Without the name, the wife comes across as an institution and not as a person. It also creates an interesting dynamic when the wife has a name and not the fisherman. The fisherman only being identified by his occupation makes it easier for the reader to connect with him than his wife, Isabil. The reader understands how difficult it is for the fisherman to go against his instincts and ask the flounder to grant him a wish. The fisherman breaks from his namesake which is to fish from the beginning of the tale. His job is to fish so he can provide for his family, but listens to the flounder when it asks to be released. It seems natural that the fisherman finds it difficult to go to the flounder and ask for something on behalf of Isabil because as the fisherman, he should be baiting and catching the flounder, not making deals with it. The fisherman faces the normal concerns like the other fisherman; intimidation. In the version by the Grimm Brothers, the fisherman finds the water to be different colors every time he returns in addition to a pungent odor.

The fisherman also tells Isabil that she could not possibly want for more whenever she reveals a new wish for her husband to ask the flounder. “Alas wife,” said the man, “he cannot make you Emperor; I may not say that to the fish. There is only one Emperor in the land. An

Emperor the Flounder cannot make you! I assure you he cannot (Grimm 108)”. The fisherman finds Isabil’s request to be made Emperor outrageous because that role has already been taken.

The fisherman was slightly more accepting of Isabil’s wish to have a larger and better home because it was not be taken away from someone else. It was also easier to him to handle because

53 as material things, they are reasonable to want something better in life. For Isabil to want to be

Emperor, the fisherman cannot understand comprehend because that position is based on lineage and divinity. The Emperor can only be the Emperor because he was born to do it. Isabil is also a woman so the idea that she would assume a male position of power does not make sense to the fisherman. He also seems very convinced that the flounder will do not do it. The fisherman even threatens not to the tell the flounder although he reluctantly goes to the flounder anyway against his better judgment. The Grimm Brothers account differs from the others because the fisherman in those tales did not stand up to the wife/lover at all, they simply knew in their hearts that nothing good could come from asking the flounder for another wish.

Godfather Death/The Godfather8

The last LGBTQ fairy tale to be discussed in this paper is Cashorali’s “Godfather Death”.

Cashorali draws inspiration from two traditional fairy tales, “The Godfather” and “Godfather

Death”. There is complexity to this because although the main character has a family, they do not interact with him. The reader knows that the father is poor and already has twelve children so it seems reasonable for the man to struggle to find a godparent for his thirteenth child, a son named

Martin.

In Cashorali’s version, the man meets with two potential godparents, the Lord and the

Devil both of whom approached the man. When the Lord and the Devil make their offer to be the child’s godfather, Cashorali writes “the man wasn’t impressed” (Cashorali 124) and “impatient”

(Cashorali 125). This description is surprising because the man greets them both cordially. It

8 “Godfather Death” and “The Godfather” are two separate fairy tales from the Brothers Grimm. They are both used as primary sources for Peter Cashorali’s Godfather Death. Due to their shortness in length, it seems appropriate to discuss them as one entity rather than dividing them into two different sections to discuss.

54 might be due to this opposite nature that the man does not seem eager to meet the man whom

Cashorali describes as being “of indeterminate age…with no beard at all, no hair on top of his head, and no eyebrows” (Cashorali 125). When the man finds out that Death has offered to be the godfather he accepts. His acceptance hedges on the fact that Death “is a hard worker…[doesn’t] carry a grudge…and [pays] everyone a visit” (Cashorali 125). The man felt that the Lord and the Devil were both extremes and all too willing to benefit from others leaving

Death, an equalizer of sorts, to be the perfect candidate for godfather.

Death’s new godson Martin comes to visit him after he comes of age. Martin informs him that he wishes to be a doctor for his chosen profession. Naturally, Death has many friends who are doctors and gives Martin “a small bottle of something colorless” (Cashorali 127). Martin soon finds out that he has been water which saves people. Death has explicit rules for Martin that say he cannot go against him. Depending on where Death stands next to the patient determines whether Martin is allowed to administer the water. Death tells him “don’t ever give the water to anyone I’ve already claimed. Don’t ever oppose me: I’m your godfather” (Cashorali 128).

Martin made the choice to become a doctor, but he ultimately does not have a choice when it comes to saving certain patients. This scene with godfather Death and his rules for Martin is the first time the reader sees a familial relation exert power. Death also tells Martin that the “bottle does have one other quality…as long as [Martin has] it, [Death] won’t be paying a business call”

(Cashorali 158). The father chose Death as Martin’s godfather because he did not discriminate and eventually pays a visit to everyone. Death sharing that the bottle will keep Martin safe from him makes Martin different from everyone else. So far two father/son relationships have been discussed: the first is the man and his son Martin and second is Godfather Death and his godson

Martin. The third father/son Cashorali includes the king and his son.

55 Martin is called upon to attend the king’s son who has fallen ill. When Martin see the king’s son, he finds himself drawn to his beauty and refuses money as payment. Martin tells the king, “I’ll cure your son, but what I ask as a reward is that he and I pledge our hearts to each other” (Cashorali 129). Unlike Martin’s father decided who would be Martin’s godfather, the king tells Martin that it is his “son’s decision to make” (Cashorali 129). The king as a father does not take the decision away from his son. Martin has already had a father and father-figure make decision for him. The decision Martin’s father made was for Martin’s benefit. Death does not think of his godson’s interests, but instead tells Martin that he could never go against because he is his godfather.

Martin does eventually break the rules his godfather sets in place for him. “Quickly, he turned the king’s son around in the bed so that his head was at the foot and his feet were on the pillow” (Cashorali 129). If Death stood by a patient’s head, Martin was never to save that person.

By turning the king’s son around in bed, Martin exploits a loophole which allows him to save his potential lover and not go against his godfather. He immediately feels remorse and tells Death he will not go against him again.

Once again Martin is called the attend the king’s son and as much as he wants to use the water, he cannot defy his godfather. Cashorali reasons that Martin most likely would have saved the king’s son if not for the shadow behind his godfather. Martin looks at the shadow in fear.

“No matter how he stared into it he could see nothing, so he couldn’t tell if the shadow had an end or if it went on forever” (Cashorali 130). The unknown of the shadow scares Martin and prevents him from acting. Through Martin’s ordeal, the prince awakens to comfort Martin. In doing so, he awakens within Martin a determination which allows him to stand up to his godfather and disobey him. This moment is reminiscent of Ash being brought to life when

56 someone acknowledges her. It seems at first that Martin cares about his godfather’s opinion, but that might just be fear of his powerful godfather. When the prince comforts him, it is evident

Martin only cares for the opinion of his lover, the prince who helps him achieve self- actualization.

Martin saves the king’s son and even gets physical with Death. During their struggle, he consumes some of the shadow which gives him the ability to see in the shadow and be unafraid.

Although Death tells Martin “you’re on your own” (Cashorali 132), Martin realizes that he is not and replies “I’m with the king’s son” (Cashorali 132). The king’s son becomes a vehicle for

Martin to achieve self-actualization. When Martin first sees the king’s son, he decides that he could love him. Perhaps when he asks the king to pledge his son to him, Martin, the king tells him it will be his son’s choice. Witnessing a father give the choice to a son might have helped encourage Martin to make his own decisions. In the traditional fairy tale “The Godfather”, a poor man with many children “asked everyone in the world to be godfather, and when still another child was born, no one else was left” (Grimm 206). The idea that the man asked everyone in the world shows that he not only had a lot of children, but he also was not selective when it came to deciding guardianship.

There are several differences in this LGBTQ fairy tale and the traditional fairy tales. The first difference is that the father in Cashorali’s version talks in detail about his concerns: the first concern was to find a godparent for his thirteenth child. The second concern was to make sure he selected a great person to be the godparent. The reader can see the effort he puts into his decision. In the traditional fairy tales, the man realizes he needs to decide on his child’s godparent and it will be the first person he comes across. A second difference is that the man from Cashorali’s “The Godfather” follows through with his decision to ask the first person to be

57 the godparent. The men from both versions of “Godfather Death” do not follow through on their

initial decision to ask the first person they meet to be the godfather, but instead go with the third

person. A third difference between both “Godfather Death” and “The Godfather” is that the

godson only dies in the “Godfather Death”. A fourth difference between the all versions of this fairy tale is that while Martin and the godson from Godfather Death go to find their godfather, they encounter strange sights, only Martin was able to face the strange sight directly and overcome it. In Cashorali’s retelling, Martin sees the shadow of his godfather and is unable to process what it is, succumbing to fear. It is only when he ingests some of it that he is able to see it for what is it and is no long afraid.

Conclusion

In conclusion, fairy tales are meant for all ages. If the child hears the fairy tale from the adult, the adult most likely heard the fairy tale as a child. Not only do fairy tales can appeal to all

ages, they also have a global appeal because there are a multitude of fairy tales from different

cultures and parts of the world that share similarities. Fairy tales can be used as teaching tools.

Bettelheim also writes that “the fairy tale is future-oriented and guides the child” (Bettelheim

11). Fairy tales can be read as children and then reread as adults. Fairy tales teach children to hope. That despite their current circumstances, if they believe and remain good their situation can improve.

Some of these fairy tales are considered non-traditional. Lesbian, Gay, Transgender,

Bisexual, Queer (LGBTQ) fairy tales do not change the canon of fairy tales. They exist alongside

and, in some cases, seemingly outside the canon. LGBTQ fairy tales differ from traditional fairy

tales for the obvious reasons as the characters in the former are usually stated or implied to have

sexualities that are not explicitly heterosexual. Familial relations in this paper are not limited to

58 family through biology or marriage, but are expanded to include any other characters such as animals or friends whose presence directly impacts the main characters of the LGBTQ fairy tales.

Dr. Rudine Sims Bishop concludes her essay “Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass”

Doors with a call to action. She writes that books and literature are not all powerful, but by having more books and stories out there that are a better a truer representation of all people, it would be a huge step in the right direction. Representation in literature, especially children’s literature is vital for development. While her ideas that representation for a child reading a story or a book, the notion of representation could be applied to the world the characters of Ash and

Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men would have also appreciated. Several of the characters grew up without seeing people they could identify with or properly acted as a role model for them therefore when they are faced with people who are like them or themselves later in life, they have a strong reaction to that person. They not only try to emulate that person, but what to be around them as much as possible as was the case with Ash and reuniting with her dead mother as well as Cashorali’s Hansel who could not stand the idea of being unable to connect and learn from the drag queen. He later realizes that she is with him and he is her when he looks in the mirror at the end of the story. Sometimes characters do not have the opportunity to meet someone like them and must forge their own path like Cashorali’s “poor boy” with no firewood of his own. Regardless of which group the characters fit in with, they are examples of the importance of seeing one’s life reflected at them in the hopes of understanding and realizing the “larger human experience” (Bishop).

Dr. Michael C. LaSala reasons “It seems, no matter what our families were like when we were growing up, they always remain a part of us, for better or worse. Whatever our experiences,

59 invisible cords reach through time” (LaSala xiii) in his book Coming Out, Coming Home:

Helping Families Adjust to a Gay or Lesbian Child. Familial relationships play an integral role in

fairy tales especially LGBTQ fairy tales. These relationships help to highlight the difference

between traditional and nontraditional fairy tales. Their absence and presence in a LGBTQ fairy

tale impact the journey of achieve self-actualization by the characters.

Several traditional fairy tales from the Brothers Grimm repertoire, Cinderella among

others, feature familial relationships while some do not. The presence and absence of these

familial relationships have a direct impact on the character of the fairy tale, influencing the way

he or she achieves self-actualization, such as Ash. In LGBTQ fairy tales, the process of self- actualization for the character is made even more arduous as the stakes are raised even higher

whether it be to decide to remain in the human world rather than venture to the fairy world9 or to accept a sibling’s transformation into something almost unrecognizable only to be recognized by them and still given a place in their life10. A recurring theme between the characters of the

LGBTQ fairy tales discussed in this paper is the main character meets someone or encounters

something that enables them to be different. Whichever it is, that person or thing validates them

in most of the fairy tales discussed in this thesis. They are not validated or given permission by

whatever the person or thing is, but when they interact with what it may be, the LGBTQ

character allows himself or herself to be whom they were meant to be. And in that moment of

realization, they achieve self-actualization.

9 In Ash by Malinda Lo, Aisling known by her shortened name struggles with the choice to remain in the human world with her human lover or go to the fairy world Taninli with the male fairy she became communicating with after the death of her mother. 10 In “Hansel and Gretel” by Peter Cashorali, Gretel spends most of the fairy tale trying to protect her brother Hansel from the witch-like lady only to discover that her brother has indeed changed since their time with the lady, but that he still needs her in his life.

60

61

Works Cited

Bettelheim, Bruno. The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales.

Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 1976.

Bishop, Rudine Sims. Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass Doors. Perspectives: Choosing and

Using Books for the Classroom. The Ohio State University. Vol 6, No 3. Summer 1990.

Cashorali, Peter. Fairy Tales: Traditional Stories Retold for Gay Men. HarperOne. New York.

1995.

LaSala, Michael C. Coming Out, Coming Home: Helping Families Adjust to a Gay or Lesbian

Child. New York. Columbia University Press. 2010.

Lo, Malinda. Ash. Little, Brown and Company. New York. 2009.

Pantheon Books Inc. The Complete Grimm’s Fairy Tales. 1944. New York (New York. Random

House Inc, 1972).

“Self-actualization, n.” Oxford Living Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press, 2019.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/self-actualization. Web. 18 April 2019.

62