I think the story the tigers bride has a very loud voice of sexism in its underlining tone, most of which Im sure has to do a lot with the time period this story was written. It has so many examples of women being nothing but property, completely undermined, and in shorter terms, living in a mans world. From the beginning, as much as the father loves her, just to satisfy his debt, he bets her away to the beast, hence as a piece of property.
I believe the whole existence of the doll in this story that is given to the daughter by the beast alone shows how women are viewed as something "mechanical" that man has sculptured. In one hand she has a powder puff, which is used for make-up, which till this day can be paired with the term superficial. A woman is to not show what she is but what the man wants her to be. I believe the doll is somewhat of a sculpting of what a woman should be in the tigers eyes.
In the other hand, the doll holds a looking glass or mirror, but ironically she does not see herself in this mirror but her father. I think this could easily be viewed as the daughters entire existence is only being an extension of her fathers existence. In this male society I can say that it seems as if the daughter is viewed as a mere representation of her father.
I can see your reading of this story has merit, Dominique. But here's some other things to think of:
ReplyDelete--Doesn't it say something about Beauty's strength that she won't agree to be seen naked by the beast even though he will let her free if she does so, even though he will restore her father's wealth? In fact, look at the top of p. 59. Isn't she saying here that she will let him prostitute her and drop her on the street w/out anything rather than submit to his request? What do you think this statement from Beauty means? Is it strength or just perverseness? At the end of the story when she submits to the Beast, doesn't it seem as if she's doing it on her own terms? She could go free, but she chooses to stay. Why?