Leow 1

Leow Shu Hui

Ms Caroline Gordon

EN6102 Adaptations

September 19, 2014

Briar Rose vs Maleficent – A study of feminine empowerment in

fairy tales

INTRODUCTION

The original versions of fairy tales now tailored to a

children audience would have been rated R by modern standards.

“Spun”, or made up as they were told, these stories frequently

contained themes of rape and violence, meant to keep their

audience’s attentions captive. Collectively, they are an

archive of each era’s societal norms and dynamics. In

particular, this essay seeks to study feminine empowerment

across generations by comparing one such tale, the Brothers

Grimm’s Little Briar-Rose, more commonly referred to as Sleeping

Beauty, and its modern adaptation Maleficent.

Societies of humankind have often been patriarchal (we

are still living in the midst of one today), often resulting

in female oppression. Attitudes and values reflecting such

Leow 2

occurrences manifest in folklore and fairy tales, which

portray hapless damsels in distress awaiting their Prince

Charming’s rescue (though truly, “Prince Charming” typically

refers to the first guy that comes along and pays some kind of

attention to the damsel). Little Briar-Rose fits precisely into

this genre. That is not to say we are still stuck in

centuries-old mud; there have been paradigm shifts from these

cultural notions in the times elapsed, and it is clear in

Maleficent that women are capable of saving themselves or each

other, and their fates do not rest in the hands of men.

Relevant to our case studies are the various feminist

movements. Yet, despite the progression to equality courtesy

of first and second wave feminism, relics of such notions and

behaviours are still prominent today, forming the basis of pop

culture. The requisite appearance of physical beauty is one

such recurring theme – pop idols are first and foremost

physically attractive, bonus points if they are philanthropic

or morally upright, a prime example being Angelina Jolie, the

lead actress of Maleficent. Ideas perpetuated by difference

feminism of the second wave also permeates – that men and

women are inherently different, and one is less than the

Leow 3

other. Although, this seems to have evolved from

phallogocentrism in Little Briar Rose to gynocentrism in Maleficent.

WOMEN OPPRESSED BY MALES

Fairy tales often have clearly defined good and evil

characters, which respectively represent the ideal gender

roles of the character, and the antithesis of that era’s

cultural norms. In Little Briar-Rose, these desired and undesired

characteristics – passivity as opposed to unyielding –

perpetuate patriarchal female oppression as women’s voice is

nullified.

It is clear in Little Briar-Rose that women lie low on the

social hierarchy, thereby reflecting women’s status in the

Brothers Grimm era. The title of ‘wise women’ comes with

connotations of wielding power or respect, at least in a

modern interpretation, but none of them are portrayed as such.

The thirteenth “wise woman” is evil – cursing an innocent

child to death as a consequence for not being invited to the

party is a severe overreaction to a trivial matter – and this

is coming from a woman believed to be sage, a role model for

women to look up to. This perpetuates the stereotype of women

being melodramatic, that their emotional reactions are

Leow 4

insignificant and overblown. This devalues women’s feelings

and trivializes their existence. Congruently, the other “wise

women” gift the child gifts such as beauty, and riches, as if

these were the best gifts a girl could possibly receive. The

wise woman merely serve to support the patriarchy, and

‘wisdom’ is deemed as qualities that are useful to or

preferred by men. Their power or respectability is limited to

what men accord them, not what they earn.

Juxtaposed with a modern adaptation, the contrast is

emphasized. The wise women’s low status is revealed in

Maleficent, wherein they are merely plot devices, reduced to

bumbling, incompetent fairies. It is ironic that the women

people in the past looked up to have been reduced to a role

meant purely for comic relief. This shows the drastic change

in women’s role, as previously prized qualities such as

beauty, singing and riches no longer contribute a paramount

proportion to a woman’s value. That ‘wise women’ would think

so, meant they were probably clueless, or so the Maleficent

producers interpreted. If wise women were not accorded

credibility, average women of the Brothers’ Grimm era would

enjoy even lower status.

Leow 5

As a modern day adaptation, Maleficent is a massive

improvement from Little Briar-Rose, while revealing the underlying

presence of female oppression in modern society. When Stefan

becomes king, he names Maleficent as evil to his people, and

they take his word as law, figuratively and literally, without

going through any kind of personal evaluation. This unfairly

stamps Maleficent’s power as evil, since she only retaliated

in response to invasion and betrayal. Stefan gave her “true

love’s kiss, after which he exploited her power – her wings,

for his selfish goals, then ostracized her from society.

Taking Maleficent’s wings as a metaphor for sexuality, a

parallel is drawn with society unfairly stamping women’s

sexuality, condemning promiscuity while exploiting it heavily

in the fashion and commercial industries, featuring scantily

clad women in advertisements, selling sex to attract attention

and consumers while telling women not to behave “sluttily”.

This double standard has a huge strain on women – they can

never do right; they either need to be sexier, or more

virtuous, never just right. By conferring women with

shortcomings, men can continually find fault to use as

justification for oppressing them, continually trying to shape

Leow 6

women using a mould based on unrealistic, unfair expectations.

Most people just go along with this, and many women conform to

these ideals. Unconformity is customarily denounced by harsh

emotion and social condemnation. The woman’s voice is hence

silenced over the roar of society’s self-regulation.

It is intriguing that in both cases, powerful, outspoken

women are portrayed as villainous, while beautiful, obedient

women is portrayed as good. It suggests that the ideal woman

is complaint, and any dynamism is denounced. Albeit in

Maleficent this view is disseminated by the antagonist, yet it is

widely accepted by mankind. Furthermore, Maleficent is both

beautiful and powerful – the flawed protagonist, the anti-

heroine. By portraying these skewed views as being propagated

by antagonists, and Maleficent as multi-faceted, Maleficent

begins to navigate the grey area between absolute good and

devil, deconstructing the concrete labelling styles society

utilizes. This helps women break out of the deeply ingrained

feminine ideals of passivity that often limit women from

accomplishing their best outside of the domestic scene,

enabling them to defy the patriarchal system, taking the first

step towards achieving equality among all of the human race.

Leow 7

IS THE VICTIMIZED ANTI-HEROINE ANY MORE PROGRESSIVE THAN THE PASSIVE

DAMSEL?

Sleeping Beauty (Briar-Rose), is widely known as the

passive heroine of Sleeping Beauty. Passive, because she takes no

action nor has any active role in the story. Heroine, there is

no validation for calling her a heroine. The dictionary

definition for heroine is “a woman admired for her courage,

outstanding achievements or noble qualities”, none of which

are displayed in Little Briar-Rose. Any effect on the story that is

related to her is not resultant of anything she does, but

involved her by mere coincidence. Hence, I see it more fitting

to refer to her as the passive damsel.

Briar-Rose has no personality nor voice, despite being

the central character of Little Briar-Rose. The story revolves

around her entirely; anything anybody does in the story is

about her. From protecting her, cursing her, kissing her, to

celebrating her birth, these events cement her position as the

key character in the story – without her, there would be no

story. Yet, she does not do anything for the story, for herself,

or for any purpose. The only she says or does of her own

accord leads to the curse’s fulfilment: “What sort of thing is

Leow 8

that, that rattles round so merrily?" said the girl, and she

took the spindle and wanted to spin too”, after which she

pricks her finger and falls into the infamous deep sleep. The

highlight of the story, of Briar-Rose’s life, seems to be

fulfilling her destiny, as if it is the only thing she ought

to be doing. This perpetuates the idea that a woman’s fate is

absolute, that she should not, and does not, have free will.

It devalues a woman’s spirit and strength, suppressing it.

Men, however, are able to exercise free will, or

influence the woman’s fate. In Little Briar-Rose, the prince simply

proclaimed “I am not afraid, I will go and see the extremely

beautiful Briar-rose”, paying no attention to the kindly old

man’s warnings – meant as a figure of authority, since he

undoubtedly possesses more life experience and wisdom than the

young prince. Yet, the young prince, the heroic figure,

defies him. This advocates that where passive, silent young

girls are heroines, for men and boys to be heroic they must be

active, even defiant. Because he was in the right place at the

right time, arriving just as the 100 years passed, he was

successful. He kissed the unconscious girl, and subsequently

Leow 9

married her. He is wholly undeserving of this happy ending,

which he did what, bravely rebel, to earn?

There are a multitude of issues with the two ideas

brought up above. First, the idea, that women cannot change

their own fate, but instead have to rely on men and their

defiant actions to ‘save’ them. As if taking away a woman’s

autonomy is not already tragic enough, but it is handed over

to men! Secondly, that their feminine beauty, their passive

behaviour as damsels in distress would earn their happiness.

It is, after all, Briar-Rose’s reputation of being a sleeping

beauty that sparked the prince’s interest. This is as if a

woman’s most significant contribution is decoration, as if a

woman is only good for display on a four-poster bed. The fact

that women can contribute to society with their intellect,

determination, insights, leadership, and other prized

qualities – embodied by Aurora uniting the Moors and human

kingdom in Maleficent – is disregarded. Third, for men, that

beauty is a prize to be won through some spectacular display

of bravery – in the Disney adaptation Sleeping Beauty, the prince

gets the girl by defeating dragon Maleficent. Women are not

prizes; this is objectification exemplified. Fourth, that it

Leow 10

is perfectly fine for a man to kiss an unconscious girl – the

climax point of Sleeping Beauty and all its variations. This is a

manifestation of rape culture. Assuming silence is consent is

to disregard the woman’s voice. Fifth, the assumption that

marrying “the one” – the first person who appears at the right

time, constitutes a woman’s happily ever after. The

enchantment of this fairy tale constitutes this. It instils in

young girls the hope, the fantasy that someone out there is

“the one” – that some man, when the time and place is right,

is the ultimate means to a woman’s happily ever after, the

definitive fulfilment of her life. This idea is continually

perpetrated in both classic and modern romance novels such as

Jane Eyre, Twilight and The Fault in Our Stars, to name a few.

Together, these ideas tell young girls that their lives

revolve around men, the same way Little Briar-Rose revolves around

Briar-Rose herself. All they do contributes to a man’s world,

and without men, there is no story. It matters not how

intelligent they are, or how hard they work to make the world

a better place. Their greatest contribution and personal

fulfilment comes from them sitting and looking pretty.

Leow 11

Maleficent is not simply a heroine as she does not

display key qualities expected of heroines, such as idealism

and courage. Most notably, she is not absolutely good, falling

into the grey area on the good-evil spectrum. She commits evil

acts, though not for evil intentions, like cursing Aurora as a

means of standing up to male oppression. Furthermore, we

cannot help but sympathise with her plight of physical

mutilation and betrayal, which she wholly does not deserve.

Evil deeds or not, there is no denying that she is a victim;

nothing one does warrants having your freedom (her wings)

stripped. These factors, together with her redemption towards

the end of the movie, classify her as an anti-heroine –

flawed, but the heroine nonetheless. The five points above

critique the passive damsel in Little Briar-Rose as being backwardly

patriarchal. While the victimized anti-heroine of Maleficent is

undoubtedly more feminist, relics of patriarchal female

oppression remain.

First, Maleficent does not take human oppression lying

down. She fiercely protects the Moors with her army of forest

guardians when King Henry tries to invade it. When Stefan cuts

off her wings, again, she does not back down. That is was her

Leow 12

love’s betrayal just rubbed salt in her wound, but she instead

gathered strength from the injustice to seek vengeance, taking

an even stronger stance against human invasion while awaiting

her curse’s fulfilment. She sees that it is unjust for her to

be treated in this manner, thereby taking the actions she sees

fit in response. The message sent is loud and clear – there

can be no justification, for brutal mutilation; an empowering

message to women – to take a stand against their oppressors.

Second – Maleficent fights her oppressors, and is severely

wounded in the process (she loses her wings), leading her to

become bitter and cold. However, at the end of her journey in

the movie, she finds redemption in developing a motherly love

for Aurora, and forgiving he who harmed her. The overall

message is quite healthy, that betrayal and pain is not the

end of the world. It is part of one’s life journey, and

vengefulness and anger does not make one happy, while love and

forgiveness are more fulfilling. This is one message the

future generation should internalize. Third – the fairy tale

“love at first sight” canon was not reinforced in Maleficent. The

prince’s kiss of “true love” is debunked. It impossible for

him to truly love Aurora from a few brief interactions in the

Leow 13

woods; it takes much more time to forge a genuine connection.

Women are people too, and true love is not for physical

beauty, but for an individual. Fourth – the Prince said “I

wouldn’t feel right. I barely know her. We only met once.” in

response to the fairies insisting he kiss Aurora. Here, the

Prince has set a great example that it is wrong for one to

assume silence is consent; that boys should not go around

kissing sleeping girls who are not conscious to say ‘no’. It

is ironic that these fairies, meant to be motherly figures to

Aurora, are cheering him on. Unfortunately, the Prince is not

a central, impactful character in the movie, and his character

is further questioned when he ultimately caves to pressure

from the fairies, going on to kiss Aurora in her sleep. This

is representative of peer pressure, which one has to take a

strong, individual stand and be discerning towards. Fifith,

Maleficent’s happily ever after came from seeing Aurora unite

the Moors and the human world, essentially that she made a

positive impact on her people – the fae. The image of a woman,

be it Aurora or Maleficent, making a huge difference to

society, where their contributions are highly valued, is

extremely positive.

Leow 14

The overall message in Maleficent is way more progressive

than in Little Briar-Rose. Though there are a few ambiguities, it is

mostly empowering. Hence, unlike Little Briar-Rose, the issue in

Maleficent is not with the message sent by the protagonist or

plot, but lies in the other characters and themes, whose

development is severely neglected in the director’s attempt to

develop Maleficent herself, relegating them to mere plot

devices. Aurora, the original main character, is accorded due

respect in being appointed narrator, but she does not face any

adversity that might require strength of character. Where

Maleficent is the anti-heroine, Aurora embodies the perfect

girl with a spotless record. She still has no substance, like

Briar-Rose. She drifts along aimlessly, happy in her own

little bubble with no ambition or thoughts.

Women aside, the outrage of Maleficent is male

oppression. All the men in the movie are pathetic excuses for

humans. The prince is weak – he knows it is not right for him

to kiss a sleeping girl, but he does not stand strong to his

morals. King Stefan lets greed and ambition take over his

life, further degenerating and developing a blind obsession

with Maleficent in the second half of the movie. He is best

Leow 15

described as mentally unstable. Diaval the raven represents an

atypical role reversal, where the man submits to the woman. It

is a powerful, revolutionary image, for sure. But can men and

women never be of equal footing? Maleficent says men must either

submit, or be vilified, for women to be empowered.

Little Briar-Rose shows the more traditional female

oppression. While Maleficent is empowering in comparison, it

instead oppresses males, as if women were superior. Veteran

scriptwriter Linda Woolverton, who wrote many of Disney’s

heroines – starting with Belle in Beauty and the Beast – is a known

feminist. Maleficent is, for her, the latest instalment of an

“incremental process” to bring Disney heroines from “insipid”

to strong and complex. While she certainly developed a strong,

complex female protagonist, masculine identity is subverted.

We have replaced the oppression of one gender with the

oppression of another, turning to reverse gender polarity

rather than gender equality, the latter a major achievement of

the second feminist wave – in the guise of genuine progress.

Does this reflect that human society will inherently have

inequality of some kind; that equality is merely an

unachievable, idealistic fantasy?

Leow 16

PHYSICAL BEAUTY AS A KEY THEME

Be it an evolutionary result, or merely a deeply embedded

cultural norm, physical beauty is inevitably a keystone in

society. It is a dominant stakeholder in commercial

industries, contributes a major presence in social

interactions, and is essentially omnipresent in peoples’

minds. It is, in fact, imperative to the storyline of Little Briar-

Rose (if Briar-Rose was not reputed to be pretty, Prince

Charming probably would not have been so riveted by her story

and would not have bothered investigating, hence taking away

half of the story of Little Briar-Rose) and the commercial success of

Maleficent, which grossed $240 million in the box office, making

it the Angelina Jolie’s highest grossing film to date.

Unfortunately, placing such heavy emphasis on physical beauty

in pop culture casts no redeeming light on the film, or its

characters.

The portrayal of beautiful women in Maleficent and Little Briar-

Rose is ironically dehumanizing. Briar-Rose’s beauty is

supposedly ideal, but was bestowed upon her by magical means.

There is no knowing what she originally have looked like, but

it is implied that she probably would not have been this

Leow 17

beautiful and perfect if nature took its course. This

idealization of her physical beauty is a phenomena I should

like to call “dollification”. Dolls are often artificially

constructed to represent the beauty ideal of the time, a look

that is usually widely regarded to be unachievable by humans,

yet this is exactly what has happened to Briar-Rose – she is

artificially, or magically, conferred the beauty ideal.

Because physical representations of ideal beauty are

artificially constructed, ideal physical beauty is often seen

as inhuman, an idea perpetuated by Little Briar-Rose in its magial

dollification of Briar-Rose.

In Maleficent, Maleficent’s beauty is mythical and ethereal.

Her cheekbones are cutting but synthetic, wings magnificently

man-made, devilish horns, and more. It is impossible to judge

them on a human level, and this alienates beautiful women.

Since they do not look human, it is as if they do not think,

feel or behave the same as everyone else. This leads to

another effect of dollification. If people cannot relate to

them as fellow humans, they will not treat them as

individuals. Hence, women are objectified, making it even

Leow 18

easier for oppressors to oppress them as mere objects to be

owned.

By always according protagonists physical beauty, the

recurring undertone that physical beauty is equivalent to

power or empowerment can cultivate this subtext into a mind-

set in its audience.

Briar-Rose’s physical beauty is a key component in

fortifying her “perfection”. It is seen as an empowering

feature; only good, never bad. Indirectly, her beauty is her

power – it leads to the fated kiss which coincidentally

‘awakens’ the entire court. It is “the story of the beautiful

sleeping “Briar-Rose”” that inspires bravery in the “king’s

son” to attempt crossing the hedge, leading him to be so

captivated by her beauty that he kisses her, waking her and

the rest of the court up. If Briar-Rose were not beautiful,

there would have been no such tale

Maleficent’s beauty, in the form of her wings, is a part

of her power. Yet, it is that which causes her downfall. When

her wings are cut off, a metaphor for rape, her reaction to

the agonizing pain embodied by the piercing, heart-wrenching

scream heard in the movie shows the duality in woman. This

Leow 19

this singular moment of betrayal has a massive impact on her

life, on her spirit, yet she resiliently gets back on her feet

to stand tall, even without her wings. Here, we see both the

strength and the vulnerability of a beautiful woman, and it

only serves to inspire compassion and understanding towards

her from the audience, assisting them in accepting this

ethereal creature as a fellow person. This scene humanizes

her, which is helps to debunk the dehumanization.

This effect is rendered moot once the audience leaves the

theatre. The temporary gush of affection they feel for the on-

screen character subsides, as the marketing techniques of the

film objectifies Maleficent. Casting Angelina Jolie – no one

disagrees there is no better fit, but Jolie is an

international modern film sex symbol. Using her as publicity

is the most logical option, and it is certainly successful,

[countless sites credit Jolie for single-handedly ‘carrying’

the film] but results in the objectification of Maleficent,

distracting the audience from any kind of actual redemption

the Disney heroine receives, thereby cancelling out the

positive characterization given to Maleficent. The character

is tainted by commercialization since marketing techniques

Leow 20

cannot move away from selling sex to gain viewership. This is

understandable – people rarely want to hear, or watch an ugly

heroine; hence Disney uses physical beauty to draw the

audience to the big screen time and again, and this time-

tested practice always works spectacularly. The nuances in the

story may be a step up, but the commercial undertones show

limited progression.

The pervasiveness and persistence of female beauty ideal

in children’s fairy tales is seen as the canon and modern

adaptations of fairy tales place high emphasis on physical

beauty. Feminine beauty is glorified, causing women to expend

superfluous resources and energies on physical appearance,

rather than develop more substantial skills and values such as

compassion, perceptiveness, intelligence and confidence, which

could play a crucial role in empowering women.

CONCLUSION

Given that there is almost two centuries between the two

pieces, it is no surprise that Maleficent comes off as much more

progressive, in line with modern believes and values, compared

to Little Briar-Rose. Maleficent shows male oppression of females is

no longer the norm – women can fight back and save themselves,

Leow 21

unlike Little Briar-Rose, where females are mainly passive and have

to count on the masculine hero to swoop in and save the day.

However, though Maleficent empowers women to take charge of their

lives and destiny, it is extremely gynocentric, neglecting the

men’s opinion. It is questionable as to whether this is any

improvement from the phallagocentricity of Little Briar-Rose, but

society must be wary of tipping the scales too far to either

side as we advance through the third feminist wave. Finally,

it seems that despite all developments, physical beauty

remains deeply entrenched as a measure of feminity, an

unsurmounted obstacle to complete feminine empowerment.

Works Cited

“Involving Men in Promoting Gender Equality.” United Nations Population

Fund. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Baker-Sperry, Lori and Grauerholz, Liz. The Pervasiveness and

Persistance of the Feminine Beauty Ideal in Children’s Fairy Tales. Sage

Publications, Inc. 2003. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Bianca, Viva. Is Disney’s Maleficent A Feminist Movie?. Thought

Catalogue. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

C, Claire. The Problem With Fairy Tales. The Fbomb. 2012. Web. 19

Sep. 14

Leow 22

DelVecchio, Marina. Media and Gender Stereotypes. Empowering Girls

and Women. 2010. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Disney’s Maleficent: Another Side to Sleeping Beauty. A Mommy Story. 2014.

Web. 19 Sep. 14

Epstein, Allison. Disney Deconstructed: A Feminist Watches Mulan. The

Body Pacifist. 2013. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Gloudeman, Nikki. Is Maleficent Disney’s Most Feminist Movie Yet?

Huffington Post. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

McMilan, Graeme. Another Bite of The Poisoned Apple: Why Does Pop Culture

Love Fairy Tales Again?. Time. 2012. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Neikirk, Alice. “… Happily Ever After.” (or What Fairytales Teach Girls About

Being Women). University of Hawaii at Hilo. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Ng, Michelle. Four Anti-Feminist Disney Princesses… And Why They Deserve A

Break. The Hopeless Writer Chick. 2012. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Pantozzi, Jill. Maleficent: Once Upon a Feminist’s Dream?. The Mary

Sue. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Rothman, Lily. The same woman wrote Maleficent and Beauty and the

Beast – here’s how they’re linked. Time. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Senger, Amy. 2014 Newport Beach Film Festival: A Talk With ‘Maleficent’

Scriptwriter Linda Woolverton. Pacific Punch. 2014. Web. 19 Sep.

14

Leow 23

Stover, Cassandra. Damsels and Heroines: The Conundrum of the Post-

Feminist Disney Princess. Claremont Graduate University. 2013.

Web. 19 Sep. 14

The Brothers Grimm. Little Briar-Rose. Nd. Np.

Thomas, Rhiannon. Disney’s Maleficent. Feminist Fiction. 2014. Web.

19 Sep. 14

Vildirim, Emin. ‘Maleficent’ – Sleeping Beauty uncut. Todays Zaman.

2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Vishnevetsky, Ignatiy. Maleficent only half commits to subverting

Disney fairy-tale convention. A.V. Club. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Wilson, Tim. Making Maleficent Fly. Creative Communities of the

World. 2014. Web. 19 Sep. 14

Woolverton, Linda. Maleficent. Disney. 2012. Web. 19 Sep. 14