Did any Grimm fairy tales involve rape?
Little Red Riding Hood?
Sleeping Beauty (the original).
Huh? Here’s a link to the original Grimm Brothers version. I don’t see anything that could be construed as rape.
The “original” Sleeping Beauty, which was passed down through oral tradition, does involve rape. I believe the earliest known written version was written down by Giambattista Basile.
Which… would not be the Grim version.
There are certainly versions of some of those stories that involve rape, but in general, all sexual activity (aside from a “kiss”) is by innuendo and symbolism. So, the princes who “kiss” Sleeping Beauty or Snow White are certainly bringing them to physical maturity.
Sexual connotation abounds in those stories, from Jack’s beanstalk to Cinderella’s slipper. Does the prince rape Cinderella by putting her foot in the slipper? Well, symbolically, there’s certainly more going on that simply shoe-fitting.
Huh. I never thought of it that way (and I thought I was all wise to the Bettleheim.) What does that say about her step-sisters, who each cut off bits of her own foot in order to try and win the prince? :eek:
The Italian, written by Giambattista Basile in 1636 deserves a quick retelling here, for sheer entertainment value: As the tale goes, the King (not prince) loses a hunting bird, and discovers the sleeping girl (named Talia in this version) in an abandoned castle. He has his way with her while she lays unconcious, and she wakes to two twin children nursing at her breasts.
The King remembers the girl, searches for her, finds out about the kids, and brings her to his castel. His wife (whom the tale neglects to mention until this point) orders her cook to make the children into a pie for the king to eat for dinner.
The Queen has the girl brought before her while the king is in the dining house munching and screams at her that she’s the one who’s been causing all of the Queen’s grief.
The girl pleads that it’s not her fault, that the King raped her (“conquered her regions”) while she slept. The queen orders the girl to be thrown into the fireplace, but the girl delays by stripping slowly before the guards. (The Queen agrees to let her take off her clothes because of the pearls sewn thereon.)
Sure enough, the delay allows the King to arrive, and he then notices his illigetimate kids are no where to be seen. The Queen tells him he ate the kids for dinner, and the King has her hurled into the fireplace instead.
But, lo and behold! The kids are not dead after all! The cook made lamb instead. The King rewards the cook, marries the girl, and they live happily ever after.
The “moral” to this tale is that “good things happen to lucky people, even when they’re sleeping.”
Sorry, that should be:
The Italian verison of Sleeping Beauty . . . .
Well, obviously :D, since Cinderella is doing the insertion, her foot is the phallic symbol. Therefore it’s clear 
that this symbolizes the prince’s homosexuality and attraction to effeminate males. The step-sisters are too butch and symbolically castrate themselves in order to be more attractive.
Indeed. The usually known version of this tale is widely different from the common original versions. The first writers had a strong tendancy to adapt the tales to their intended audience : more correct wording, changing events, removing “shoking” elements (for instance, a wolf farting in order to blow up a pig’s house).
The versions I read of “Little red Hood” make it a very unusual tale, in particular because they don’t have a “happy end”. I recently read a statement made by some anthologist writing that in his opinion, “Little Red Hood” wasn’t really a fairy tale but rather a warning story. The main missing elements :
-The wolf doesn’t get killed by a hunter. It kills the grandmother and eats “Little Red Hood”
-It convinces “Little Red Hood” to unkowingly eat the flesh and blood of her grandmother, despite her being warned repetively by animals not to do so.
-Here’s the point related to the OP : the wolf eventually asks the little girl to remove her clothes, one by one, and then to come lying besides it in the bed. I personnally perceive this as a symbolized child rape. Of course, one can disagree with this opinion.
There’s quite a bit of literature in feminist (the academic crit theory stuff) and anthropology circles about fairy tales (most of which, before the Grimms collected them (they were ethnographers, after all) and cleaned them up, were something of cautionary tales, however metaphorical). A young lady doesn’t listen to her parents and goes to the wrong part of town and talks to men she doesn’t know and horrible things happen? What do you THINK it was originally about? Here’s a nice bibliography someone has up with a lot of scholarly works on fairy tales.
As for the Grimm stories, as they wrote them down, I’m not sure. Most of the stories are much older though.
I just had to chime in and say that I am absolutely floored by this thread.
Wow! I had now idea.
One case where father-daughter incest is quite explicit - in fact, the “happy ending” consists of the king marrying his own daughter - is Allerleirauh (All-Kinds-of-Fur)
It reads as if it might be a different king, not her father. The wording is not clear, however.
“Now it came to pass that the king who owned these woods was hunting in them.”
I would say it was definitely a different king. Surely he would have recognised his own daughter when dancing with her if it was her father.
In fairy tales people often fail to recognize others that they know very well. However, on re-reading it, probably you are right that there is a second king involved. However, the incest theme in the first part of the story is clear.
“Oh my, grandma. What a big…”.
Since the OP specified the Brothers Grimm tales, here is a link to their version of Little Red Riding Hood - no rape involved. It appears that while the older, oral versions of these tales included more overt sexual activities, the Grimms edited those elements out.
So the full answer to rape in fairy tales seems to be: some versions yes, Grimm versions specifically, not so much.