Review of AWS - "Crazy Old Lady" (Part 4)
Jun. 21st, 2017 02:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
aikateriniThe next story is called "Crazy Old Lady" and it’s a retelling of "Hansel and Gretel" from the witch’s POV in second-person perspective. Now, one might wonder if this is supposed to be a sympathetic rendering and, if so, how exactly we’re supposed to sympathize with a person who tried to kill and eat children.
Right out of the gate, the Anonymous Narrator (A.N.) lets the reader know what adults were really wondering about the story: what was the sex life of the witch like?
Well, if you must know (and I don’t know why anyone would), the nameless witch was a promiscuous teenager who lied about her age so that she could have sex with strangers at taverns. She married three times and almost married a fourth time, but thought better of it.
Because adults were really clamoring to know that.
As she grew older, she saw her friends get married and have families and drift away from her. As she approached middle-age, she then fantasized about sleeping with teenage boys. She calls the current generation ‘timid’ and ‘too well-behaved’ because they’re not aggressive like the men from the tavern were, i.e. they’re actually polite and try to be conscious of girls’ feelings. She purchases a piece of property and decides it’ll be made from candy. Why, in this ‘adult’ book, would a grown-up build a house from candy? Why, she did the research and found out that it’s possible to construct bricks out of sugar and cornstarch that can stand up to rain!
And after she’s done, she waits for kids to come to her house. After she’s been fantasizing about banging teenage boys.
Where…do I even begin with this?
So, apparently, it wasn’t enough for the witch in the original fairytale to be a cannibal. Now she has to be a pedophile as well. And yes, I know that the correct term regarding teenagers is ephebophile, but look at this! She built a house with candy. Candy! Who is more likely to be attracted to the candy: teenagers or young kids?
And people might say, "Well, how is being a pedophile any worse than being a cannibal?" And to that, I say, "Remind me again, who was the original audience for this fairytale?"
Children. And now tell me the difference between this:
Parent: If you don’t behave, the monster will eat you.
And this:
Parent: If you don’t behave, the monster will rape you.
There was no need for A.N. to throw this in there. The witch tried to kill Hansel. She tried to cook and eat a little boy. Why in God’s name does she need to be a pedophile on top of that? Oh, right, because sex makes everything 'mature' in this universe. That’s why we need to know that the witch used to be ‘jailbait’. And that’s why we need that lovely little dig at teenage boys who are too ‘timid’ to be aggressive brutes. Yeah, why can’t they be like those men from the tavern who banged an underage girl (but that’s okay, she lied about her age, so it was all her fault!)?
To be fair, A.N. does imply that the witch is lying to herself about being "undeluded" about banging teenage boys. But the reason seems to be more like, "You’re an ugly old crone past your prime, why would they want you?" instead of "they’re underage and young enough to be your grandsons, you nutcase!".
Then Hansel and Gretel arrive and if you think that this retelling was already disgusting, it gets even worse.
The narrative describes Hansel and Gretel as "pierced and tattooed", so they’re clearly not meant to be young children. The witch ogles them and A.N. unleashes this lovely comment: "Gretel sucked seductively – with the cartoon lewdness of girls taught by porn rather than experience – on a scarlet lollipop".
Or she’s doing it with the cartoon lewdness of the fantasy of a creepy middle-aged man who’s condemning her for being sexual while at the same time drooling over her for it like the shameless hypocrite he is.
Could we just stop with the lollipop as a sexual symbol? It’s candy that mostly aimed at kids! But then again, so is the gingerbread house, so I suppose that the phallic imagery of the lollipop is fitting in its own messed-up way.
Not content with destroying Gretel’s character, A.N. then proceeds to describe her looking at Hansel "as if he were clever and intoxicatingly dangerous, as if he were a rebel and a hero."
Umm, sir? You do know that Hansel and Gretel were brother and sister in the original story, right?
Right?
I mean, A.N. doesn’t say that they’re brother and sister, but he doesn’t confirm that they aren’t. I guess that the fact that Gretel looks at him like that could indicate that they’re not related in this version, but considering all of the sexual depravity in this story, I’m not giving A.N. a pass.
And then the witch (or A.N., who’s narrating from her perspective) has the outright gall to call Hansel and Gretel psychopaths because they proceed to eat up the house "without the remotest expression of wonder, or even of simple politeness".
It’s a house made from candy. What the heck did you think was going to happen? If some birds started pecking at your house, would you call them psychopaths too?
Also, it's rich for A.N. to say that, considering that wonder is nowhere to be found in this book, and it wasn't that long ago that the witch was insulting teenage boys for being too polite.
In the original story, the house was a trap and the witch wanted to fatten Hansel up so that she could eat him, so she wouldn’t have cared. Here, not only do Hansel and Gretel not seem aware that the witch is there at first, but they’ve also been starving in the woods. Yet no compassion or understanding is extended to them. In addition to eating the house, they mock the jewelry that they find, complain that there is nothing but candy to eat (because starving and lost children in the woods would really care about that) and that they also need protein (is this a jab at modern nutritional standards, A.N.? Because it’s not funny).
Oh, and Hansel also urinates in a vase that the witch has had since her grandmother died. Because why not assassinate his character too? And then after he and Gretel notice the witch, they have the nerve to call her Grandma.
Yes, those horrible kids, stealing food and wrecking a stranger’s house. What psychopaths they are to treat a poor, lonely child predator – who purposely built her house this way so she could entrap children – like this?
Yes, pity the poor ephebophile for not being able to bang teenagers. Pity her and not the children who’ve had their characters mutilated beyond recognition all so that we could feel sorry for her.
Of course, A.N. skips over the whole bit where she reveals that the house was a trap and attacks them, because that might make readers think that she’s the villain or something. Nah, let’s just skip ahead to when Hansel and Gretel are about to shove her into the oven and she thinks that it’s a relief.
You hear that, elderly women? If you’re too old to bang teenagers (teenagers who, by the way, are simpering pansies because they don’t just bang girls without a hello or goodbye and who are tiresomely polite and considerate), then your life is over. You’re done. You might as well let the robber who’s broken into your house kill you. And when he does, we’ll call it mercy.
Because that’s what the story of Hansel and Gretel needed! Musings on the sex life and midlife crisis of a child predator. The importance of teamwork, of sticking together when times are rough, of cleverness in the face of adversity? Pah! Those lessons are for children.
And it’s only going to get worse from here.
Right out of the gate, the Anonymous Narrator (A.N.) lets the reader know what adults were really wondering about the story: what was the sex life of the witch like?
Well, if you must know (and I don’t know why anyone would), the nameless witch was a promiscuous teenager who lied about her age so that she could have sex with strangers at taverns. She married three times and almost married a fourth time, but thought better of it.
Because adults were really clamoring to know that.
As she grew older, she saw her friends get married and have families and drift away from her. As she approached middle-age, she then fantasized about sleeping with teenage boys. She calls the current generation ‘timid’ and ‘too well-behaved’ because they’re not aggressive like the men from the tavern were, i.e. they’re actually polite and try to be conscious of girls’ feelings. She purchases a piece of property and decides it’ll be made from candy. Why, in this ‘adult’ book, would a grown-up build a house from candy? Why, she did the research and found out that it’s possible to construct bricks out of sugar and cornstarch that can stand up to rain!
And after she’s done, she waits for kids to come to her house. After she’s been fantasizing about banging teenage boys.
Where…do I even begin with this?
So, apparently, it wasn’t enough for the witch in the original fairytale to be a cannibal. Now she has to be a pedophile as well. And yes, I know that the correct term regarding teenagers is ephebophile, but look at this! She built a house with candy. Candy! Who is more likely to be attracted to the candy: teenagers or young kids?
And people might say, "Well, how is being a pedophile any worse than being a cannibal?" And to that, I say, "Remind me again, who was the original audience for this fairytale?"
Children. And now tell me the difference between this:
Parent: If you don’t behave, the monster will eat you.
And this:
Parent: If you don’t behave, the monster will rape you.
There was no need for A.N. to throw this in there. The witch tried to kill Hansel. She tried to cook and eat a little boy. Why in God’s name does she need to be a pedophile on top of that? Oh, right, because sex makes everything 'mature' in this universe. That’s why we need to know that the witch used to be ‘jailbait’. And that’s why we need that lovely little dig at teenage boys who are too ‘timid’ to be aggressive brutes. Yeah, why can’t they be like those men from the tavern who banged an underage girl (but that’s okay, she lied about her age, so it was all her fault!)?
To be fair, A.N. does imply that the witch is lying to herself about being "undeluded" about banging teenage boys. But the reason seems to be more like, "You’re an ugly old crone past your prime, why would they want you?" instead of "they’re underage and young enough to be your grandsons, you nutcase!".
Then Hansel and Gretel arrive and if you think that this retelling was already disgusting, it gets even worse.
The narrative describes Hansel and Gretel as "pierced and tattooed", so they’re clearly not meant to be young children. The witch ogles them and A.N. unleashes this lovely comment: "Gretel sucked seductively – with the cartoon lewdness of girls taught by porn rather than experience – on a scarlet lollipop".
Or she’s doing it with the cartoon lewdness of the fantasy of a creepy middle-aged man who’s condemning her for being sexual while at the same time drooling over her for it like the shameless hypocrite he is.
Could we just stop with the lollipop as a sexual symbol? It’s candy that mostly aimed at kids! But then again, so is the gingerbread house, so I suppose that the phallic imagery of the lollipop is fitting in its own messed-up way.
Not content with destroying Gretel’s character, A.N. then proceeds to describe her looking at Hansel "as if he were clever and intoxicatingly dangerous, as if he were a rebel and a hero."
Umm, sir? You do know that Hansel and Gretel were brother and sister in the original story, right?
Right?
I mean, A.N. doesn’t say that they’re brother and sister, but he doesn’t confirm that they aren’t. I guess that the fact that Gretel looks at him like that could indicate that they’re not related in this version, but considering all of the sexual depravity in this story, I’m not giving A.N. a pass.
And then the witch (or A.N., who’s narrating from her perspective) has the outright gall to call Hansel and Gretel psychopaths because they proceed to eat up the house "without the remotest expression of wonder, or even of simple politeness".
It’s a house made from candy. What the heck did you think was going to happen? If some birds started pecking at your house, would you call them psychopaths too?
Also, it's rich for A.N. to say that, considering that wonder is nowhere to be found in this book, and it wasn't that long ago that the witch was insulting teenage boys for being too polite.
In the original story, the house was a trap and the witch wanted to fatten Hansel up so that she could eat him, so she wouldn’t have cared. Here, not only do Hansel and Gretel not seem aware that the witch is there at first, but they’ve also been starving in the woods. Yet no compassion or understanding is extended to them. In addition to eating the house, they mock the jewelry that they find, complain that there is nothing but candy to eat (because starving and lost children in the woods would really care about that) and that they also need protein (is this a jab at modern nutritional standards, A.N.? Because it’s not funny).
Oh, and Hansel also urinates in a vase that the witch has had since her grandmother died. Because why not assassinate his character too? And then after he and Gretel notice the witch, they have the nerve to call her Grandma.
Yes, those horrible kids, stealing food and wrecking a stranger’s house. What psychopaths they are to treat a poor, lonely child predator – who purposely built her house this way so she could entrap children – like this?
Yes, pity the poor ephebophile for not being able to bang teenagers. Pity her and not the children who’ve had their characters mutilated beyond recognition all so that we could feel sorry for her.
Of course, A.N. skips over the whole bit where she reveals that the house was a trap and attacks them, because that might make readers think that she’s the villain or something. Nah, let’s just skip ahead to when Hansel and Gretel are about to shove her into the oven and she thinks that it’s a relief.
You hear that, elderly women? If you’re too old to bang teenagers (teenagers who, by the way, are simpering pansies because they don’t just bang girls without a hello or goodbye and who are tiresomely polite and considerate), then your life is over. You’re done. You might as well let the robber who’s broken into your house kill you. And when he does, we’ll call it mercy.
Because that’s what the story of Hansel and Gretel needed! Musings on the sex life and midlife crisis of a child predator. The importance of teamwork, of sticking together when times are rough, of cleverness in the face of adversity? Pah! Those lessons are for children.
And it’s only going to get worse from here.
no subject
Date: 2017-11-11 11:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-11-13 03:03 pm (UTC)Because if that's the case, then your idea is already better than what this book delivered.