“That is not dead that can eternally unite the workers of the world/ And in proletarian aeons even the bourgeoisie can die.”
If it brings her back to life, I probably would be.
You’re just putting your own cultural expectations, privilege and bigotry onto theirs. Like in many parts of the world, they have arranged marriage. They were betrothed to one another many years earlier. Not only that, they met and not only did they not realize who each other was, were legitimately attracted to one another and wanted to explore a relationship. One chaste kiss when he was legitimately infatuated seems more than reasonable to me.
I don’t remember that part at all, I’ll take your word for it. But even if true,
Yes, absolutely. That kiss was all about the prince being enamoured of a beautiful dead body. It’s creepy.
Before he fights and defeats Maifecent, Phillip is informed of the plot and the curse. While he is infatuated, he knew he was breaking the curse (which needed the ingredient of “true love” on both parts) and was clearly rendering medical aid.
Could have been worse; Sleeping Beauty’s savior raped her in her sleep.
Full disclosure: I never saw the original Disney adaptation but I did read the Wikipedia summary half an hour ago.
Guess they cut that scene from the movie.
I haven’t seen the movie in 30 years. But i thought it was creepy at the time. Also, my toddler daughter saw the queen give an apple to snow white and asked me for an apple. So i figured it was going over her head.
In the original Cinderella, when the slipper doesn’t fit the stepsister because her toes are too big, the wicked stepmother cuts them off and shoves her foot into the slipper. The original versions of many fairy tales are violent and dark by modern standards.
I had heard that one.
Not a fan of Disneyfication but those stories really aren’t suitable for children.
I think they are like cartoons where a character gets killed in gruesome ways. And they are for kids. And they are okay for kids, who tend to have a gruesome imagination.
I think there’s a useful distinction between how something is viewed within its own context versus how it is viewed through our current context. You’re right that within the story and its setting, the kiss was fine. And if people were able to view the movie with a full understanding of marriage, courtship, and women’s roles at the time, it might be OK.
But this is a kids’ movie, and it doesn’t explore any of that nuance. So it’s worth considering if this kind of portrayal, no matter how historically accurate, is still a good idea.
Wait, Prince Phillip was cheating on Sleeping Beauty with Snow White? 
I can think of three possible responses, but I don’t know which is historically accurate:
- Children were a lot less sheltered in the Old Days, when those stories were originally told.
- Those stories aren’t really any worse than what children are exposed to today on TV, in video games, etc.
- Those stories weren’t meant for children (at least not young children).
Ok, it’s a fair cop. Same to you @puzzlegal.
At least in the early 19th century, when the brothers Grimm compiled (and often redacted, rewrote and enhanced) them, they were meant to be for children, as the compilation was called “Kinder und Hausmärchen”, “Children’s and house fairy tales”.
Wrong Princess…
One sister got her toe(s) cut off, the other had her heel chopped off. And the shoe filled with blood.
And in the Grimm’s version, the doves cry: “Ruckedigu, ruckedigu, Blut ist im Schuh”, “Ruckedigu, ruckedigu, blood is in the shoe”.