Grimms' Fairy Tales: A History of Criticism on a Popular Classic (review)

364 Book Revkws "prudent" abridgment of tie Conversations (Fiükr αÎμίÎμίÎμα references to Goetiie 's scientific expertoÂœnts), shÎμ sÎμÎμms to takÎμ her advocacy a Uttlc too far. Several of the articles in the coUection are quite informative—tadudtag Joan von Mehren's biographical sketch, Urbanski's study of FuUer's rhetoric, and Judith Strong Albert's discussion of FuUer's impact on me feminist movement. A weakness of the book, howev8r, is that it lacks an introduction. The book begins widi a personal letter (May 18, 1980) to the editor (Urbanski) from R. Buckmtoster FuUer, who at mat time was Margaret's oldest Uvtog relative. The kner canvasses a number of topics, including his theories of education, Margaret FuUcr scholarship, and the synerçetic operations of the ιιηίνÎμΓβÎμ. Stoce the letter does not address any of the essays to the volume, one may be left confused about die book's purpose. Although the contributors write short, highly personal accounts of how Margaret FuUer tofhenced thek lives or scholarship, the book would have benefited from a discussion of its intended place to FuUer scholarship or from an explanation for the choice of die particular sckctions to this volume. University of Minois at Chicago Astrida Orle Tantillo James M. McGlathery, Grimms' Fairy Tales: A History of Criticism on a Popular Classic. Columbia, South Carolina: Camden House, 1993Given the Ï• ητηÎμηβÎμ amount of important, ^w, and often contradictory scholarship published on the Grimms' Kinder- und Hausmärchen during the last twenty-frve years, James McGlathery's comprehensive study of the most significant critical works about this "popular classic" can sene both scholar and student as a handy gukk to the different approaches to the tales. Moreover, McGlathery deals not only with tie more recent criticism but also discusses die historical origins of folktale scholarship to the nineteenth century and covers relevant research to four different languages. McGlathery himself has written extensrrely on the Grimms' taks and favors a psychoanalytic and Uterary approach to the tales that explores thek immanent nreantogs to thematic dusters. Î¥ÎμΕ , ΙιÎμ is, for ΟίÎμ most part, judicious in his summaries of interpretative methods that differ from his own. As he states, his aim was to "tadude sufficient breadth and depth to give a good accounting and rep- Κ5ÎμηΕ 3ίίνÎμ picture of the various types of scholarship and commentary and an outline of thek development.... The purpose of an account such as this mUitates against fiükr exposition of given critical positions, instead, the aim has ΰÎμÎμη to fit ΟίÎμ work of particular individuals into the context of the whole without misrepresenting them" (3). To accomplish his task, McGlathery divides his book into ΰιτÎμÎμ parts: 1) The Folktales; 2) The Grimms' Collection; 3) individual Stories and Motifs. In the first section, McGlathery begins with a historical survey of the development of folktale scholarship. After briefly discussing the work of the Grimms themselves and Theodor Benfey, he explains how scholars sought to explain the origins of folk taks through notions of monogc^sis and polygenesis. By the bÎμgtontog of the twentieth century, however, the shift to folktak studies was influenced by the Finnish or historical-geographical school led by Antti Aarne and carried on by Stith Thompson in America. As McGlathery explatas, this school of thought in- Goethe Yearbook 365 ίÎμ^Îμα to "show which tale types were native to, or predominated to, a given area, so that a particular story might be claimed as belonging Îμβϕ Îμα3% to a particular national culture.... Or, to a comparative way, differences to versions between geographical areas could be βÎμÎμη as helping to αÎμίΕ ηÎμ cultural differences betwÎμÎμn nations" (9). This approach led to the valuable index, Verzeichnis der Märchentypen (1911) and Thompson's Narrative Motif-Analysis (1955). McGlathery succinctly sums up the Finnish School's accomplishments and alludes to oder important encyclopedic work such as Handwörterbuch des deutschen Märchens (1930-40) and die ongoing Enzyklopädie des Märchens (begun to 1975). Then he turns to otiier important scholars and tiiek distinctive approaches to the Grimms' tales and folktales in general. After a brief discussion of the rise of the Freudian approach, he comments on the work of German Uterary scholars who were interested to questions of genre, including Friedrich Panzer, Albert...