Children's stories and values
I have touched on the questionable values conveyed in some popular fairy tales in kallahmagazine.blogspot.com/2009/02/cinderella-myth-and-sense-of.html. What of the story The Little Red Hen? If you need to refresh your memory about it, you can read a version online at http://www.enchantedlearning.com/stories/fairytale/littleredhen/story/
I recall in one of M. Scott Peck's books, he offers his thoughts on the story. At first blush, he considered it "unChristian" because the hen appears to not care for the other animals. But on further consideration, he considerd it correct (in a Christian sense, as well) because it demonstrates that there is no escaping from personal responsibility.
I agree with the fact that the lack of charity in the story seems harsh and unkind. But the fact of the matter is that the other animals were not needy -- they abstained from work out of sheer laziness, not because they were incapacitated or occupied with other tasks. What right to those who sit back when invited to join in the work and literally earn their bread have to partake of it? The story is the antithesis of the view prevailing today of trying to beat the system -- to get the most money out of the government or other programs -- and take pride in getting free bread.
The modern spin on the story would be that while the hen enjoys the bread she labored over, the other animals go to store and pick up ready-made food with their food stamps. Then they would further boast about their other subsidies for themselves and their children and point out that they actually get far more benefits out of being on the dole than the little red hen can possibly earn on her own.
I have said this before that the whole concept of na'am dekisufa has been forgotten. Now I don't know what reason would be offered for G-d's choosing to create the world in such a way that allows for people to earn their reward. Why earn what you can take for free?
I recall in one of M. Scott Peck's books, he offers his thoughts on the story. At first blush, he considered it "unChristian" because the hen appears to not care for the other animals. But on further consideration, he considerd it correct (in a Christian sense, as well) because it demonstrates that there is no escaping from personal responsibility.
I agree with the fact that the lack of charity in the story seems harsh and unkind. But the fact of the matter is that the other animals were not needy -- they abstained from work out of sheer laziness, not because they were incapacitated or occupied with other tasks. What right to those who sit back when invited to join in the work and literally earn their bread have to partake of it? The story is the antithesis of the view prevailing today of trying to beat the system -- to get the most money out of the government or other programs -- and take pride in getting free bread.
The modern spin on the story would be that while the hen enjoys the bread she labored over, the other animals go to store and pick up ready-made food with their food stamps. Then they would further boast about their other subsidies for themselves and their children and point out that they actually get far more benefits out of being on the dole than the little red hen can possibly earn on her own.
I have said this before that the whole concept of na'am dekisufa has been forgotten. Now I don't know what reason would be offered for G-d's choosing to create the world in such a way that allows for people to earn their reward. Why earn what you can take for free?
Comments
Certainly there is room in literature to teach the values of hard work, seizing the opportunity, and personal responsibility and true chessed.
There is an English translation of the Ben Ish Hai's Arabic work directed at women where he talks a lot about frugality and saving. The Ben Ish Hai seems to endorse a 50% savings rate in one portion.
My mother bought my kids a beautiful edition of Aesop's fables. It makes a nice gift and I hope to use these stories to point out Torah parallels.