My garden of musings

Formerly @niraniva. She/her. The assorted thoughts of an aspiring writer living in Carmel, CA. Opera, musical theatre, food, YA fantasy literature, Disney, nature, religion... whatever happens to cross my mind. See also my Les Misérables-themed blog at cometomecosette.tumblr.com.

[costumeloverz71]

Gown, 1894-95

[princesssarisa]

My dad and his best childhood friend Mark used to go on vacation together for a week every summer, usually to some remote, rugged hiking spot.

My mom would look at the pictures they took of themselves together, where Mark almost always had his arm around my dad, and she would say “People probably mistook you for a gay couple.”

Then after Brokeback Mountain came out, a new description of those vacations was born. From then on, my mom always referred to my dad’s annual hiking trips with Mark as their “Brokeback week.”

[princesssarisa]

"Wicked" – a musical with "internalized misogyny" or not?

Some time ago, I remember seeing a post where someone wrote that they saw Wicked onstage just once and couldn't stand it because of its "internalized misogyny."

I suppose they said "internalized" because the musical's writer Winnie Holzman is a woman, even though the original novel's author Gregory Maguire and musical's composer/lyricist Stephen Schwartz are men.

That's an accusation I've never seen aimed at this musical before. Especially because it's such a female-centric musical, with a predominantly female following, and I had always seen it celebrated as a "girl power" musical in the past.

So I thought I thought I would analyze the ways that Wicked can both be seen as problematic and as progressive from a gender perspective.

This is based entirely on the stage musical, since we don't know yet if Wicked: For Good will change some of these details or not.

(Spoilers below for anyone who's only seen the first movie.)

These are the ways that I suppose the musical can be accused of "internalized misogyny":

*A case can be made that Elphaba is a classic "not like other girls" heroine, while Glinda's portrayal shows bias against girly girls. Of the two leading ladies, the "ugly," plainly-dressed, semi-tomboyish, introverted outcast is of course the heroine, whom the audience is meant to identify with and see as superior to the popular crowd that rejects her. Meanwhile, the stylish, pink-wearing, sociable, ultra-feminine beauty is portrayed as a silly, vain airhead (at least when it comes to book smarts), whom the audience is meant to laugh at, as well as a self-centered, manipulative "mean girl" and later a sell-out to a fascist government, in need of a redemption arc. Even though Glinda is sympathetic too, she's framed less positively than Elphaba.

*In the original Oz books and the 1939 film, Glinda is a powerful, wise matriarchal figure, independent of the Wizard or any other man, whose magic and advice never fail, and who is blatantly more powerful than the Witch of the West. The fact that she's unabashedly feminine, and that in the film she has a cute flutey voice and wears a sparkly pink gown, does nothing to diminish her stature. Yet as mentioned above, Wicked reduces her to a silly, vain, self-centered popular girl, who later becomes a figurehead for the Wizard and is under his thumb until the end, and who isn't actually good at magic either, unlike the naturally powerful and talented Elphaba.

*Yet in some ways, despite all of the above, the show still privileges the stylish blonde girly girl at the plain outcast heroine's expense. Glinda is the sparkly, funny, show-stealing role, who has the more transformative character arc too, and the show's fandom is all too prone to fixating on Glinda and using Elphaba as basically just a prop for her. The creative team has described how hard it was to ensure that Elphaba wasn't overshadowed by Glinda in her own show, and it's debatable if they succeeded or not.

*Elphaba and Glinda are pitted against each other in a love triangle. A love triangle that doesn't exist either in Gregory Maguire's novel or, God forbid, in The Wizard of Oz. It would have been easy for their falling out to happen without Fiyero as a factor: after all, Elphaba devotes her life to rebelling against the Wizard, while Glinda devotes hers to serving him and upholding everything Elphaba is against. That would have been enough to change them (temporarily) from best friends into the enemies we see in The Wizard of Oz. But no, it couldn't be "just" that, it had to be a clichéd fight over a man.

*Said love triangle leads to a catfight. The scene could still have been effective with just an emotionally brutal verbal altercation, but no, it has to devolve into slapping and physically attacking each other.

*Fiyero and Glinda both work for the Wizard, but only Glinda is called out for it, including by Fiyero, while no one ever blames Fiyero for making the same choice. Of course Glinda’s motives are self-serving while Fiyero’s motive is to help Elphaba, and Fiyero is ready to defect long before Glinda is, but still, some fans accuse the writers of misogyny for criticizing Glinda’s moral sellout but not Fiyero’s.

*The ultimate reason why Elphaba decides to become truly wicked is because she (seemingly) loses her man. Granted, she has a long list of other traumas too, not the least of which are her sister's death and Glinda's betrayal, both just minutes before Fiyero is captured. But it's Fiyero whom she expresses the most anguish over and who gets the most emphasis in "No Good Deed."

*Likewise, Nessarose's chief reason for becoming the tyrannical Wicked Witch of the East is her unrequited love for a man. (And her bitterness about her disability, which she thinks is why Boq doesn't love her, but that's another issue.)

*Both of the two main supporting females, Nessarose and Madame Morrible, ultimately become villains. Despite being framed at first as allies to Elphaba, respectively her beloved sister and her older female mentor who nurtures her gift of magic, they both turn out to be antagonists instead.

*The most purely evil character is the older woman. The Wizard is granted some audience sympathy, and is semi-redeemed in the end when he willingly goes into exile in grief and guilt over Elphaba. But Madame Morrible is just a ruthless villain to be dragged off to prison in the end.

And yet...

*It's a musical centered around two female characters. Both are three-dimensional characters, both are flawed yet sympathetic, both are strong-willed, ambitious, and active, and both go through immense character development.

*The two heroines' most important relationship is with each other. Whether you view their bond as platonic, romantic, or anywhere in between, the musical revolves around it. Even though they have a mutual male love interest, and he is important, their relationship with each other is much more central than either of their respective relationships with him.

*Neither Elphaba nor Glinda's overarching motives or goals revolve around romance. For both of them, their feelings for Fiyero are just one aspect of their lives and character arcs, amid much bigger desires and ambitions, which are often socio-political in nature.

*Elphaba is a validation of misfit women. The original Wicked Witch of the West is "ugly," aggressive, and unladylike, and in the 1939 film she wears stark black clothes and has an odd skin color and black hair; meanwhile, Glinda is beautiful, gentle, and elegant, with a light-colored gown, light skin, and light hair. All these qualities code the Wicked Witch as a "bad woman" and Glinda as a "good woman." But Wicked subverts those stereotypes. Elphaba is a character whom any woman or girl who's ever been made to feel "wrong" (whether because they're women of color, disabled, neurodivergent, LGBT+, gender non-conforming, or just "too" angry and assertive) can identify with. Say what you will about the "not like other girls" trope, but it is progressive and feminist to validate that type of heroine. And to portray Glinda as a likable yet deeply flawed character, whose popularity and reputation for "goodness" stem mainly from her conventional blonde beauty and ability to charm, is also progressive. It forces people to rethink their concepts of a "good woman."

*Yet the plot arguably isn't "anti girly girl" either. Glinda is sympathetic, her friendship with Elphaba is true, and she goes through enormous growth without sacrificing any of her femininity. And as her fans so eagerly point out, (a) she's much smarter than she seems at first, and (b) in many ways, she's right all along. Elphaba's rebellion fails, while Glinda is the one who saves Oz from the Wizard in the end, precisely because she gains power within the system by using her ladylike charm and social graces, and by using "soft power" rather than Elphaba's aggressive "hard power." (Although unlike some Glinda fans, I don't actually think the show's intended message is, "conform to the system and use charm, grace, and soft power.”) And while Elphaba's actions are more noble on the surface, her motives are arguably just as selfish as Glinda's: in "No Good Deed," she admits to herself that at heart, she might have cared less about doing good than getting attention, and in the end she does what’s best for Oz by giving up her dreams of glory and entrusting her cause to Glinda. Both heroines are flawed, yet in the end they both change for the better, and they rely on each other. Their bond subverts every attempt to pit "good women" and "bad women" against each other.

*In Winnie Holzman’s own words, the whole plot is about young women “standing up to power.” Not patriarchal power, specifically, but it still revolves around Elphaba seeing the injustice and inequality in her society and fighting to change it. And though she’s defeated, she inspires Glinda to take up her cause and successfully oust the oppressors from power. Even though it’s not about gender issues, this central theme is still very applicable to feminism.

*The love triangle isn't just "Elphaba and Glinda fight over a man." Despite her secret love for Fiyero, Elphaba never resents Glinda for being his girlfriend or lets it interfere with their friendship. There's no rivalry over him until he leaves Glinda for Elphaba. And when the "catfight" finally happens, it's really only Glinda whose anger is about the love triangle. For Elphaba (even though she does rub Fiyero's love for her in Glinda's face, which leads to Glinda slapping her), the fight is about the fact that Glinda has spent years upholding the Wizard's corrupt government, and now, when said government has obviously murdered Elphaba's sister, she finds Glinda blithely passing it off as an accident and giving Nessarose's shoes to a stranger.

(And as Gelphie shippers will point out, depending on how the actresses play it, Glinda is arguably more upset about Elphaba choosing Fiyero over herself – either in a platonic "breaking the bestie code" way or in a romantic way – than about losing Fiyero, and even Elphaba's gloating about Fiyero's love for her can be read not just as "He loves me and not you," but also "He loves me more than you ever did – he joined me, you abandoned me." Both of those readings are subtext far below the surface, though.)

*Fiyero's role as Elphaba's love interest mainly consists of helping and supporting her, both in actions and emotionally. Nor does he ever dominate Glinda during their ill-fated time as a couple. He never tries to be in charge of either lady, but serves as their partner, support, sometimes conscience, and confidant, like a typical female love interest to a male protagonist.

*Besides the two leads, the show also has two other prominent and powerful female characters, Nessarose and Madame Morrible. And while Madame Morrible is ultimately a straightforward villain, Nessarose is yet another complex character, with a journey from an innocent young girl to a dark and tragic tyrannical leader. Nor is her dark spiral caused just by unrequited love and her disability, but by her toxic upbringing by her father.

*The musical ends with a woman, Glinda, as the new head of state in place of the former corrupt male ruler, using life lessons she learned from another woman, Elphaba, to guide her in that role.

In short, I can understand both why some people might complain about the musical's "misogyny" and why others celebrate it as an empowering show for women and girls. It's complicated.

[princesssarisa]

Reblogging because more people have been talking about the supposed “misogyny” of Wicked recently, and apparently some people are even theorizing that it was the show’s “misogyny” that made it lose the Tony Award for Best Musical to Avenue Q in 2004. Honestly, I was a teenager then, I remember what early 2000s feminism looked like, and I don’t think that was the reason!

[princesssarisa]

I never noticed it until now, but in the '80s, there seems to have been a trend throughout the world of adapting the Brothers Grimm version of Cinderella instead of the more familiar Perrault version.

Of course there were exceptions: Faerie Tale Theatre adapted Perrault's version, for example. But there were TV movie adaptations of the Grimms' version made in both Germany and Argentina, the French-Canadian TV series Iniminimagimo and the Japanese anime series Grimm's Fairy Tale Classics both adapted the Grimms' version, and of course on Broadway, Into the Woods adapted the Grimms' version too.

[princesssarisa]

I wish that every time a new Toy Story movie comes out, people would stop guessing "The toys are going to be destroyed in the end."

They did it before Toy Story 3 was released.

They did it before Toy Story 4 was released.

They've been doing it now in the lead-up to Toy Story 5 too.

Maybe they know it's a bogus theory and are just joking. But if they seriously think it might happen, I wish they wouldn't.

There's no possible way that Disney and Pixar would end a family movie franchise by killing off such beloved characters! Even if the ending has a bittersweet aspect, it's going to be basically happy. That's the way it will always be.

[princesssarisa]

What do you mean the length of time between when I was in kindergarten and when I was in 10th grade was the same amount of time that's passed between 2016 and now?

I swear it's been five years since 2016, and there were twenty years between kindergarten and 10th grade!

[princesssarisa]

I think in Wicked (the musical at least – not sure about the novel), there's a bit of an uneasiness between the theme of "everyone is morally gray, no one is all bad or all good" and the fact that Elphaba is a freedom fighter against a fascist government that commits atrocities against a minority group.

Yes, the Wizard has some sympathetic qualities, Elphaba has some flaws and briefly turns to villainy toward the end, and Glinda is a mass of moral grayness under her perky pink facade. But for the most part it's clear who the villains are (the Wizard and Madame Morrible), Elphaba's stance against them is clearly heroic, and Glinda's choice to work for them is clearly a moral sell-out, with which she struggles and from which she eventually redeems herself. When the Animals' treatment parallels the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany, you can't take a "both sides" view of the situation. But every now and then, the show seems to do just that – whether in the song "Wonderful" with the Wizard's talk of "moral ambiguities" (though of course in that song, he's trying to justify his actions and manipulate Elphaba into joining him), or Elphaba and Glinda's reconciliation in "For Good," where they paint themselves as having been equally at fault. And again, and again, I've heard people say "There are no real villains in Wicked: the whole point is that there are two sides to every story and neither side is all good or all bad." But if that's the intended message, does it honestly fit with a plot that involves fascism and racial persecution?

Another work of fiction that I think has some uneasiness between its themes is Disney's Beauty and the Beast. Namely between "the Beast as a suffering, misunderstood outcast" and "the Beast as a powerful bully who needs to be humbled and change." I think a lot of the controversy about that movie stems from the uneasiness between those two themes.

On the one hand, the Beast is a spoiled, selfish prince, who was cursed as punishment for shutting out a poor beggar woman, who has a terrifying temper, and who orders others around and throws tantrums when he doesn't get his own way. His beastly appearance and mannerisms can be seen as outward symbols of his bad behavior, which is based in toxic class privilege and masculinity. From this perspective, Gaston is his kindred spirit, which is emphasized by visual cues: e.g. their similar striking blue eyes, or Gaston's pelt-covered, horned chair in the tavern that looks like the Beast's silhouette. The difference between them is that the Beast finally realizes he was wrong and changes his ways, while Gaston only becomes more beastly. But on the other hand, the Beast is also an "other", who hides from the world, who struggles with basic social skills, who is full of insecurity and self-loathing, whom Belle bonds with because they're both misfits, whose bestial mannerisms and overpowering rages are at least partly because the spell is warping his mind (in other words, a magical mental illness), and whom a mob tries to murder just because he looks scary. Analogies have rightly been drawn between the Beast and victims of racism, homophobia, or other prejudice. From this viewpoint, Gaston is his opposite: the type of privileged boor who receives undeserved hero-worship just because he's handsome and charismatic, and who persecutes "others" like the Beast.

When people view it chiefly as a story about the taming of a powerful bully, you hear accusations of "Stockholm Syndrome" and of the dangerous fantasies of changing an abuser. Viewing the Beast as a misunderstood outcast, who finds acceptance in a fellow outcast and who overcomes his mental health struggles and bad coping mechanisms as a result, reduces those accusations. But if you view the Beast chiefly as a misunderstood outcast, then his character arc can feel disempowering: so much of it consists of learning to be more people-pleasing and self-effacing, not to mention re-learning "normal" human manners and behavior (as an autistic person, I know I've sometimes felt "He needs to mask to be loved"), and he becomes fully "normal" by becoming human again in the end.

Maybe there is no uneasiness between these different themes: maybe it's just complexity. Maybe my feelings on the subject shows that I'm autistic and struggle with things that aren't black-and-white. But in both of these works of fiction, I do sometimes feel as if the writers were trying to tell two different stories at once, which sometimes fit together, sometimes not.

Does anyone else feel that way about other works of fiction? Can you name any other stories with multiple themes that seem slightly opposed and uneasy together?

[princesssarisa]

I've been thinking again about works of fiction that seem to want to tell more than one story at once, because I came across a YouTube video that accuses Pixar's Brave of the same thing. It argues that the movie is very blatantly the work of two different writer/directors – Brenda Chapman, who conceived it, and Mark Andrews, who replaced her after she was fired – and that it feels like two different movies in one.

The video's thesis is that Brave is set up as a character-driven fairy tale about a mother-daughter relationship, with underlying themes of freedom vs. tradition, but that after Queen Elinor becomes a bear, it leaves behind the character-driven storytelling and turns into an action-adventure film. (While the video doesn't explicitly say that the film shifts from more a "feminine" type of storytelling to a more "masculine" model, that subtext is easy to read.)

It also argues that there seem to be two different character arcs for both Merida and Elinor playing out at once, especially for Merida. Is she right to seek freedom and self-determination, or wrong to rebel against her mother and her duty? And do mother and daughter both need to change, or to accept each other as they are? According to the video, the movie initially sides with Merida, but then switches to framing her as having been wrong and selfish. It also argues that the conflict set up at the film's beginning is that Merida and Elinor need to learn to accept their differences instead of wanting each other to change, but that after Elinor's transformation, it shifts instead to "Merida needs to learn to be more like Elinor, while Elinor needs to learn to be more like Merida."

Now, I don't know if I personally agree with this video or not. It got some very different responses in the comments, some people agreeing and saying "This is why Brave was Pixar's first failure," others disagreeing and saying they thought the film's different aspects and themes fit perfectly well together.

But the argument stood out for me, because it reflected my exact feelings about Beauty and the Beast and Wicked.

With Brave, the video had an easy explanation for the clashing themes: the movie had two different writer/directors, one of whom replaced the other partway through production. With Beauty and the Beast and Wicked, the cause is less clear, but I suspect it also has to do with different creative team members' different concepts of the story.

I know that there were some behind-the-scenes clashes during the making of of Beauty and the Beast. For example, Linda Woolverton pushing for Belle to be a more "modern," feminist heroine, while other creative team members wanted a more traditional fairy tale heroine; or Howard Ashman clashing with the directors about whether to portray the Beast as having been cursed as a child or an adult.

And with Wicked, I think there are several things we can point to. There are the changes that Gregory Maguire made over the course of writing the original novel (he initially just conceived it as a study of how a lifetime of being labeled "bad" might genuinely drive a person to evil, but then added the political themes in response to then-current events), followed by the musical's efforts to make the plot less dark and more family-friendly (resulting in a morally whitewashed Elphaba, even when we're told that she's morally gray), and of course the enhancement of Glinda's role and the whole plot being restructured to revolve around Elphaba and Glinda's relationship.

It's all very interesting to try to analyze.

[anishenanigans]

rlly fascinating phenomenon to me is when a character is extremely popular, and that popularity seems understandable enough because they've got something interesting going on, and then you look at the fandom and realize 99% of their fans don't actually care about engaging with any of the things that make them interesting and instead seem to be fans of an imaginary milquetoast version that exists solely for ship and/or angst content and is so far removed from the canon character they might as well be an unrelated OC at this point

[bethanydelleman]

Fitzwilliam Darcy

(As a side note, the amount of people who want to rename him because they cannot stand the length and strangeness of his first name. That's his name and according to his character, he would like it)

[princesssarisa]

Glinda Upland

[princesssarisa]

I don't see how Merida is in the wrong, and, frankly, I don't think she would receive anywhere near the amount of criticism she does if she were a male character. She wants to change her mom, but that's because her mom is, well, trying to *force* her to get married! A non-consensual marriage would mean that Merida would be having sex against her will, as well, so this is essentially rape. Of course, Disney-Pixar wouldn't come out and *say* that in their children's film, but that's the logical conclusion here. I think Merida is justified in doing almost anything she can to avoid this and "change her fate."

I agree. Even though she does make a mistake, her motives are totally understandable.

Though I recently found an interesting YouTube video which argued that the movie's narrative viewpoint seems to switch partway through, from "Merida is right" to "Merida is wrong." I was actually just planning to make a post about it. The video blamed this supposed inconsistency on the change of director from Brenda Chapman to Mark Andrews, and the storytelling changes that came with it, although I don't know enough about Chapman's original concept to know how accurate that assessment is.

[princesssarisa]

These Forgotten '90s Kids Movies Deserve Another Watch

LOL, remember ‘Flubber’?

As a '90s kid, I just have to share this list.

Here are my personal memories of each of the movies:

Childhood favorites

Balto

The Prince of Egypt

Babe

Thumbelina

A Goofy Movie

The Secret Garden

Not favorites, per se, but still watched repeatedly

Madeline

Paulie

The Borrowers

Angels in the Outfield

Casper

FernGully: The Last Rainforest

An American Tail: Fievel Goes West

George of the Jungle

Saw twice

The Big Green

We're Back: A Dinosaur Story

Air Bud

Dennis the Menace

Flubber

Harriet the Spy

The Indian in the Cupboard

The Rescuers Down Under

The Flintstones

Saw once

It Takes Two

Jumanji

Mighty Joe Young

Man of the House

The Addams Family

A Little Princess

Beethoven

The Brady Bunch Movie

Fly Away Home

Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey

Honey, I Blew Up the Kid

Black Beauty

White Fang

Richie Rich

The Babysitter's Club

The Iron Giant

What About Bob?

Heard of them, but never saw them

Blank Check

Mouse Hunt

First Kid

House Arrest

Brink!

3 Ninjas

I'll Be Home for Christmas

Good Burger

Kazaam

Romy and Michele's High School Reunion

Free Willy

Johnny Tsunami

A Very Brady Sequel

Little Giants

Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead

Rookie of the Year

Now and Then

The Witches

The Rocketeer

Never heard of them

Smart House

Wish Upon a Star

[princesssarisa]

Are critics of "Brave" right or wrong when they accuse Merida of effectively trying to kill her mother?

Yes, that's exactly what she's guilty of

No, that's going way too far!

Remaining time: 4 days 9 hours

I was just thinking of some of the criticisms I've seen aimed at Brave and at the character of Merida.

Of course it's wrong of her to use magic to try to change her mother, even though she has no idea that it will turn her into a bear. It's portrayed as wrong within the movie. It's perfectly fair to accuse her of trying to brainwash Elinor.

But it seems as if a lot of amateur critics view her actions in an even darker light. They accuse her of "poisoning" Elinor by giving her the magic cake, and they say that by trying to change Elinor's personality, she's effectively trying to get rid of her and replace her with a new mother – ergo, trying to murder her. Some time ago, I saw someone write "Merida basically wished her mother was dead" as a casual statement of fact.

Is that fair, or is it totally out of proportion?

[princesssarisa]

Do you think "Wicked" (the musical) shows misogyny in the way it treats Glinda vs. the way it treats Fiyero?

Yes

No

Remaining time: 4 days 8 hours

I already did a poll some time ago about whether the musical shows a double standard by not holding Fiyero and Glinda equally accountable for working for the Wizard. But having seen more posts on the subject that accuse the musical of "misogyny," I'd like to look at it specifically from a gendered perspective.

Since this aspect of the plot is mainly in the dialogue, not in the songs, I suppose it would be "internalized misogyny" on Winnie Holzman's part.

I think it goes without saying that we're supposed to like Fiyero and to approve of his romance with Elphaba. The hate that Gelphie shippers love to spew both at him as a character and at Fiyeraba as a ship was definitely not the intended audience reaction. Even though he works for the Wizard, no other character ever calls him out for it the way Glinda is called out, so it's probably safe to assume that we're not supposed to fault him as much. And in his argument with Glinda during "Thank Goodness," when he dismisses her excuses and tells her "You can't leave because you can't resist this" (meaning the fame and glory that come with being the Wizard's right-hand lady), he's obviously framed as the voice of reason confronting her with the truth about herself. As much as the fans call him a hypocrite because he's also working for the Wizard at that point, it's clear that we're supposed to agree with him.

Now, I don't personally think he's a hypocrite, and I think it's fair to defend him. He only joins the Gale Force to find and protect Elphaba, whereas Glinda accepts the Wizard's offer partly out of fear (though I do think her fans exaggerate when they call her a "political prisoner"), yet even more because the position is her dream come true. And more importantly, what is the context of "You can't leave because you can't resist this"? Fiyero is fed up and doesn't want to work for the Wizard anymore; he wants to leave and he wants Glinda to come with him, but she refuses.

Still, I get the complaints. Fed up or not, and no matter what his motives are, he has been working for the Wizard too, so maybe he is in no position to serve as the voice of Glinda's conscience in that scene.

So here's the important question: do you agree with the fans who insist that the musical is sexist in its portrayal of Glinda vs. Fiyero? Do you think the creative team subconsciously gave more grace to Fiyero than he deserves because he's male and judged Glinda more harshly than she deserves because she's a girly girl? Would a musical that was actually feminist and fair to women have more sympathy for Glinda's choices and/or be more critical of Fiyero for working for the Wizard too? Or not?

[decompose1]

what if we stopped making Ambiguously Brown Character and started actually thinking about the race and ethnic features of the characters we made? what if instead of drawing a character that looks like you painted a white character brown, we started varying noses, lips, eyes, and hair? just a thought

[ariel-seagull-wings]

@themousefromfantasyland

@the-blue-fairie @professorlehnsherr-almashy

@rayatii @tamisdava2

@alwaysright27

@thealmightyemprex

@therapeuticfairy @princesssarisa @maimoncat @amalthea9

[raichett]

liking a ship but disliking the distinct set of stock fanon that they have been assigned is like one of those punishments dante came up with when he wrote the worldbuilding for hell in inferno

[ariel-seagull-wings]

@ej-brunson

@the-blue-fairie

@themousefromfantasyland @thealmightyemprex @professorlehnsherr-almashy

@princesssarisa

[princesssarisa]

Some other illustrated Cinderella rags:

two by Harry Clarke (in one of which she appears to be inexplicably topless?)

Alexander Zick

and one from the video game Cinders, designed by Gracjana Zielinska

Illustrators never seem to lack creativity!

[alifeoffairytales]

V. Alfeevsky (В.Алфеевский) - The Snow Queen

[alifeoffairytales]

[princesssarisa]

Have you seen Cinderella’s dress in the current West End revival of Into the Woods?

No, I hadn’t seen it until now. Very interesting! It looks as if they went with a similar “leaf” motif to the dress in the 2014 movie, but made it much wilder. It definitely looks like a dress that came from the woods!