I love the way this reading was written. “There was once” is a great example of society and its history, the way many of us were taught to  look at life unknowingly. Many of these folk tales are told in subliminal messages, they paint a non visible picture in  our minds, evil ” stepmothers” wicked “step sisters” .. the golden “prize”; a  Prince charming; the l helpless miserable “good girl”. I have come to realize how these characters and traditional stories have manipulated the way I imagined life to be.

The second person in the reading was against  any common  cliché, I loved it. I believe that this reading opens up the minds of the reader.  We must question all that we read. We must ask our selves why a wicked step-mom; a step-mom can be loving, caring supportive and many other great things, The second voice was basically questioning the first voice, The second voice was showing that he was  tired of all the negative’s that reflected on the woman in these tales. The negative female characters in these stories  seem to have been adapted as a norm for decades.

We must question everything we read, many of these tales tells a story about ourselves and the way society has been built around these readings. Our children and grandchildren’s children will also hear these tales, we want to be able to allow them to question and shape a better world, a great way of doing so is finding the root of reason. Why ?. Could a simple fictional story actually have a secret mission?, Could the tale of Cinderella have a connection with the gap  between woman ? were woman sublimely taught not to value and care for each other?. Why is the price and marriage the happy ending, are a woman’s life  not more meaningful?, Is marriage our biggest agenda?, can it possibly be a woman’s greatest achievement?.  I think not, we must apply the tactics of the second voice in everything find the story behind the “story”.

0

This is barley a story, this is a monologue. There is one person reciting a story that is very familiar (Cinderella). Then there is another person rejecting every word the first person says. For clarification purposes we can call the first person who is reading the story A and the second person who is correcting the story B. B is very conscious of every word A says. B makes sure that every word said in the story A is reciting will not be taken the wrong way. In the beginning of the monologue B seams to be correcting A for sake of relating to times now-a-days. For example A says the poor girl lived in the forest and B corrected forest to suburbs. An urban change. B is changing the story to match reality. As the monologue unfolds B starts to get politically correct. It seams as if B does not want anyone to take what A is saying in the wrong way. B wants there to be no misread words that can cause any problems. B is very conscious of what the reader will think and how the reader will understand A’s message. The monologue ends with “What’s this was, once? Enough of the dead past. Tell me about now.” This sums up the whole debate between A and B. I think this is a very interesting monologue to read because it makes me think about how conscious writers are with their word choices these days. There is a lot of thinking and re thinking that goes into writing to ensure you do not offend your audience. If this was the case when a lot of classic books and movies were made a lot of stories would not be possible or they would not be the same. If it were up to me I would keep everything the way it is.

0