The Actual Reason "Snow White" Failed
It's Probably Not What You Think
Are you familiar with “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde”?
If you have not read the book by RLS (Robert Louis Stevenson, not Restless Leg Syndrome) then I dare say you are not.
You may have seen the various adaptations; nay, scratch that, the various corruptions. That they are corruptions I can convince with one example. If you have seen any representation in cinema of Mr. Hyde being a large hulking brute, then know that this is very nearly the opposite of the true Mr. Hyde.
The monstrous nature of Mr. Hyde is slowly developed. Witness his introduction:
“All at once I saw two figures; one a little man who was stumping along eastward at a good walk, and the other a girl of maybe eight or ten who was running as hard as she was able down a cross street. Well, sir, the two ran into one another naturally enough at the corner; and then came the horrible part of the thing; for the man trampled calmly over the child’s body and left her screaming on the ground. It sounds like nothing to hear, but it was hellish to see. It wasn’t like a man; it was like some damned Juggernaut.” (Easton Press ed., 1980, p. 8)
And this:
“But there was one curious circumstance. I had taken a loathing to my gentleman at first sight. So had the child’s family, which was only natural. But the doctor’s case was what struck me. He was the usual cut-and-dry apothecary, of no particular age and color, with a strong Edinburgh accent, and about as emotional as a bagpipe. Well, sir, he was like the rest of us; every time he looked at my prisoner, I saw that Sawbones turn sick and white with the desire to kill him. I knew what was in his mind, just as he knew what was in mine…” (ibid., p. 9)
The indication here is of some sense of danger unnamed, unable to be described or exactly defined, but nevertheless felt strongly in the bones. As the reader, we immediately sense that something is very wrong with Mr. Hyde. We feel it along with the characters. We connect. We do not yet grasp the truly monstrous nature of his existence. But we experience a level of dread. Contrast this with the movie representations. He is often large, hairy, hunched, fanged, or otherwise animalistic.
The difference? The original story explores a moral failing, a study of what lurks inside an otherwise respectable man. The movies turn the story into a science experiment gone wrong. In other words, very different stories with entirely different themes.
What has all this got to do with Snow White?
In the original folk tale of Snow White, variously known as Snow Drop or Sneewittchen, we have a very different tale from what most of us remember.
I will leave aside the original Disney animation, though it departs in key ways. One example: in the fairy tale, Snow White is not awakened by true love’s kiss; no, the piece of poisoned apple is dislodged from her throat during transport, and she awakens. One more example: In the fairy tale, the evil queen is made to dance in red-hot iron shoes until she dies.
The original Disney effort does act as something of a bridge to the latest corruption though. The story was flattened to a degree in the original Disney movie, and then some pieces were simply done away with in the latest effort. It will help to review the original fairy tale.
The original is about real life. As are all fairy tales. “Oh, do tell,” I can hear some saying. Well, OK.
The tale tells us of a person in power who is both envious and devious. She disguises herself three times in attempts to kill Snow White, speaking to her obsessive envy. The first time she orders a huntsman to kill her. That this envy is disordered is further heightened by the queen’s desire that the huntsman bring back the slain girl’s lungs and liver. Why? So that the queen can eat them. The huntsman lets Snow White go, and kills a stag or boar (depending on the version), bringing back the lungs and the liver which the queen eats. The queen is more than just an envious person; she commits what she believes is actual cannibalism. She is a monster. And envy is shown to corrupt absolutely, and to hide itself in its pursuits. You’ll be forgiven for seeing any modern day political touchpoints…
After Snow White eats the apple and the dwarves find her, they mourn for three days, then place her in a glass coffin where she remains for several months. Yes, months. And she remains as pure and uncorrupted as the day she was placed in the coffin. This is symbolic of her purity and goodness.
The glass coffin is also symbolic of a chrysalis. This is a type of rite of passage. Snow White will transition from naive girlhood to womanhood.
The prince finds her in the woods, and appeals to the dwarves to take the coffin where it can be safeguarded and so that he can admire her beauty. While the coffin is being transported, it is jostled or dropped and the piece of apple dislodges and she wakes up. Salvation does not come via a prince or kiss. The jostling of life, mundane events, the healing effects of time, and a chance encounter: these are what save her. This just is real life.
The evil queen’s fate is not ambiguous. She is made to wear red-hot iron shoes and dance herself to death at Snow White’s wedding. Evil, when found, must be publicly ended that the moral order may be restored.
All fairy tales end happily, usually with a dance or a wedding, or, as in this case, both. If they do not end happily, they are not properly called fairy tales, they are instead cautionary tales.1
Much of the above arc was altered in the 1937 movie, and some might say for obvious reasons. But it is clear that the moral, if you want to call it that, was altered to something much simpler and, let’s face it, easier to sell. Especially in 1937. “Don’t worry girls, your prince will come and you will live happily ever after.”
So, oddly, Rachel Zegler had something of a point when she called out the whole prince saving Snow White thing.
Anyway, the latest Disney effort, were it not named Snow White, would be difficult to tie to the original folk tale. There is no glass coffin, heck, there aren’t even dwarves. But that’s not why it fails. The reason is deeper.
I hope that you will be able to see and feel the reason this movie has failed, why it has not resonated with anyone despite the obvious singing talents of Rachel Zegler. The fault lies not with her, but with the whole movie.
The original Snow White is an alchemical or archetypal transformation story. Snow White is an innocent soul. The Queen is an externalized shadow self.2 Dwarves represent subconscious or chthonic (pronounced thawnic, meaning delvers in the earth) knowledge. The apple, you see it right? Temptation. The Fall. The Glass Coffin represents suspension between life and death, stasis. And don’t forget chrysalis, caterpillar to butterfly.
The original tells truths we can all see and identify even today in our modern age. These are all aspects of life. Real life. All of this is missing or twisted in this latest version of Snow White. Hell, even fairest means most equitable, not most beautiful. There aren’t even any dwarves. There is a resonance in the original tale which old and young alike can sense even if they cannot name. And this is why the latest movie has failed.
It does not acknowledge the permanent things. It does not touch the eternal.
Want more movie reviews? OK
Saving movies from themselves is serendipitous work. This article is an example of alchemy in action. While smoking a cigar and drinking some spirits and listening to the Literary Life Podcast on The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, I suddenly had an epiphany regarding Snow White and found it necessary to put fingers to keyboard and hammer out this article. Sub-creation is an interesting thing. If you found this article interesting and entertaining, you could always contribute to my future alchemical productions by smashing that button below.
As a quick aside, the original version of Little Red Riding Hood was changed from a fairy tale to a cautionary tale. In the oldest versions, the grandmother, having been eaten by a wolf, is saved by a wood cutter who kills the wolf and cuts it open to release grandma. In a later version, it is a cautionary tale, and grandma is not saved. She’s just dead. So, little girls, don’t lay with wolves.
In the latest versions, the wood cutter simply chases away the wolf, earning the “No Animals Were Harmed in This Fairy Tale” seal of approval. Which of course renders the fairy tale false and unrepresentative of reality in any way whatsoever.
The term shadow self comes from Carl Jung, who described the “shadow” as the unconscious part of the psyche that contains the aspects of ourselves we repress, deny, or reject. It includes the darker impulses: envy, wrath, selfishness, lust for control, but also unacknowledged potential and power. The shadow self is of course in play with Dr. Jekyll in a very overt manner, and only slightly less in the Queen. And of course it is worth noting that The Incredible Hulk has literary ties to both Dr. Jekyll and Frankenstein’s monster. So saith Stan Lee himself.