Yesterday, we met Ursula, the infamous sea witch and nemesis of Disney's The Little Mermaid. As you may have noticed, she's remarkably different from the version Hans Christian Anderson created in his original story, "The Little Mermaid" (216-32 of our Norton Critical Edition: The Classic Fairy Tales).
Today, I want you to consider the encounter on pages 225-27 in which Ariel makes a deal with Ursula.
Discussion questions:
1) How is the deal the sea witch makes with the little mermaid similar/different to the one depicted in the Disney film? (You may wish to consider Ursula's motives and her message. You may also wish to consider the details surrounding how the little mermaid looses her fin.)
2) In the Disney version, what does Ursula mean when she describes "those poor unfortunate souls?"
3) In the Hans Christian Anderson version, does the term "poor unfortunate souls" still apply? Why or why not?
1. In the original version the sea witch makes a very one sided deal by making the little mermaid go through large amounts of pain on top of loosing her voice and then eventually expiring. The deal the ariel makes is much fairer and ursula actually gets something out of the deal rather than a useless severed tongue.
ReplyDelete2. Ursula is being sarcastic when she says "poor unfortunate souls" she is saying this because the things that people ask her for are things that they can either get by themselves or things they don't need. so Ursula is mocking them for being so "unfortunate".
3. it still applies because The little mermaid was still trying to get something that she didn't need and the sea witch took advantage of that greediness just like ursula did.
1. First of all the payment in return for the spell is the mermaid's voice in both versions, but in the story it is substantially more graphic, with the witch cutting off the mermaid's tongue. In the tale the witch also warns the mermaid of the excruciating pain following her drinking the potion, but in the movie Ariel simply has trouble walking. In the film Ursula also has an entirely different goal: to steal King Triton's trident. Yet in the story she seems much more interested in the deal itself and acquiring the mermaid's voice.
ReplyDelete2. She referring to how desperate they must be to turn to a witch like her to solve their problem for him. They're "poor unfortunate souls" because their lives are troubled and they're miserable.
3. Not entirely. She references "immortal souls" but never seems to go in depth on others asking her for spells. But the way Ariel feels about being trapped in the ocean makes it seem as if she has a "poor unfortunate soul".
*Note: I just abbreviated Hans Christian Anderson to HCA
ReplyDelete1. In general, the deal in both the HCA story and the Disney story are very similar. In both cases, the Little Mermaid makes a deal with the sea witch to get human legs so the prince can fall in love with her at the cost of her voice. That's where the similarities end however. In the movie version, the witch takes the mermaid's voice in the form of a glowing orb, so that later on she can use it to try and thwart the mermaid's plan. In the book version, the witch instead cuts off the mermaids tongue so she can never speak again. Also, the actual transformations and consequences are different. In the movie, the mermaid has three days to get the prince to give her a true love kiss before she turns back into a mermaid. In the book, the mermaid has to go through pain in both transforming and being transformed. She technically has as long as she wants to get the prince to marry her, but if the prince marries another woman before her, then she'll turn into seafoam.
2. In the Disney version, Ursula seems to regard "poor unfortunate souls" as any human or mermaid/merman who doesn't have what they want. Essentially, someone longing to change something about their appearance or lives, such as losing weight or gaining a loved one.
3. In the HCA story, the "poor unfortunate soul" definition doesn't seem to apply. With the Disney version, it mostly pertains to longing. In the book, HCA doesn't even refer to them as either poor or unfortunate, just immortal. From the context of the book, an "immortal soul" is something a mermaid gains after getting a human mortal to fall in love with them. There is nothing stated either explicitly or implicitly that these souls are longing for some kind of change.
1. Overall, the deal between the two versions is quite similar. In the Disney film, the sea witch takes her voice and tells Ariel that she has three days to make the prince fall in love with her. If the prince does fall in love with Ariel, she will remain a human for her whole life, but if he doesn't, she will become a mermaid and belong to the sea witch. The main difference between the stories is that in Hans Christian Anderson, the little mermaid has until the prince gets married to make him fall in love with her, and if he marries someone else, she will turn into sea foam and die.
ReplyDelete2. I believe what Ursula means by "poor unfortunate souls" is that they are mermaids/mermen that she makes deals with so that they get what they want in life. Also, I think that she also uses that term to make Ariel think that she is really good, and doesn't just trick people into making deals that they most likely can't keep.
3. Personally, I do not think the term "poor unfortunate souls" still applies in the Hans Christian Anderson version, solely because I felt as though in the Disney version the sea witch used it to make herself sound good and trusting, but in the original story, the sea witch really tells it like it is.
Hey Carolyn,
DeleteI forgot about the three day time span in the movie. This difference is crucial, because in the book, this goal is more obtainable because there is no timeline. In the movie, the timeline give that anxious feeling to the watcher, creating more of a fast paste and exciting tone, rather than a plain jane depressing tone that the end of the book gives.
1)
ReplyDeleteSimilarities:
- gives up her voice in the movie, and tongue in the book
- no pain in the movie when giving up her tail
Diferences:
- tongue isn't cut out in the movie
- pain is not shown in the movie
The moral of the story is that actions have consequences, and that we go through pain for the people we love.
2)
Ursula refers to "those poor unfortunate souls" as those who have made deals with her and failed. When Ariel enters the witches cave, all kinds of small, shriveled up grey worm type things are those poor unfortunate souls who fell into Ursula's trap, and failed to accomplish their primary goal. Ursula is kind of like a con artists, because she makes these deals, but in the movie, anyways, she makes deals that will most likely end in her favor. When there is a chance the plan doesn't go in Ursula's way, she goes out of her way to receive a certain outcome.
3)
The the Hans Christian Anderson version, "poor unfortunate souls" still applies because Ursula wants death. Instead of Ariel being able to do a different task and come back to her family, she had to commit murder. If she didn't then Ariel would turn into sea foam. This part of the book shows poor unfortunate souls because by giving her life up for the Prince, she attains an actual soul. This soul is however, poor and unfortunate due to the fact that she had to make tough decisions, and ended with an unfavorable outcome, dying at a very young age. However, Ariel actually receives a soul by going through this venture, unlike the other mermaids who just turn into foam.
1) When the little mermaid makes a deal in the story by Hans Christian Anderson, as payment, she gives ursula her tongue. In the movie, Ursula takes her voice, something not so physical. However, it is obvious that she is willing to give up her voice in both versions just to get a chance to marry the prince. Also, what we saw from the movie, Ursula does not use her own blood in the making of the potion.
ReplyDelete2) I think that Ursula says "poor unfortunate souls" quite sarcastically, and that what she is saying that the "poor unfortunate souls" are just people who didn't get their way, willing to gamble their life away in order to get another chance to win their "perfect life."
3) I personally do not think that the term still applies in the book. It seems like Hans Christian Anderson was taking about something different, that is, an "immortal soul." I do not think that an immortal soul and an unfortunate soul are the same, but maybe what Ursula is saying is that having an "immortal soul" is unfortunate for a person with one.
The deal the sea witch makes with the little mermaid is similar to the deal she makes in the novel by both times she takes her voice. However, the witch uses the voice for her own in the movie. Unlike, in the novel, the witch cuts her tongue off and that'as that. Also, in the movie, the subject of her tail turing into legs and hurting like "a sharp sword going though [her]" isn't really discussed. Whereas in the novel, the witch goes into detail on how it will be very painful to the little mermaid.
ReplyDeleteWhat Ursula means when she describes "those poor unfortunate souls" is those who wish to be something they are not or want something that isn't attainable quite so easily so they'd have to seek Ursula for help.
The term "poor unfortunate souls" doesn't really quite apply to Hans Christian Anderson's version because the sea witch doesn't make examples to those who wish to be different or have something they can't obtain on their own like in the Disney version when Ursula points out the women who wished to be skinner or the man who wished to have the girl.
1)In Hans Christian's version of "the little mermaid" the deal seems a lot more extreme and serious than in the disney version.The also the consequences in the book are a lot more extreme than in the movie.In the movie she just gets her human legs and her voice taken away, while in the book she gets her legs but every step she takes is like a sword going through her, her voice is taken away and she also turns in to foam if she doesn't marry the prince.Even though Ursula isn't a good person in the book or movie she does seem nicer in the movie.
ReplyDelete2)What I think Ursula means when she says poor unfortunate soul is what a shame they could't pay her for the chance that she gave them and what bad luck they have being the way they are/or bad luck for what they will become after she takes them.
3)Christian's version the saying can but also doesn't need to be applied.Only because Ursula tell Ariel what will happen to her if she doesn't do what is said of her to do.But Ariel still accepts the deal and gives everything up.Depending on the point of view of the reader it can be applied or it doesn't need to be applied.
1) The deal that the little mermaid makes with the sea witch is both similar and different in the Hans Christian Anderson version/ Disney version. An obvious similarity in both versions is the Little Mermaid losing her voice. But, how she loses her voice is very different in each versions of the story. Hans Christian Andersons story of the Little Mermaid does not have a happy ending, she had to go through excruciating pain, watch the love of her life marry someone else, and when trying to end it all god sent her back for 300 more years to watch over children. Comparing this ending to Disney's, where everything works out it sets the two stories apart.
ReplyDelete2) When Ursula describes the "poor unfortunate souls" she is saying that those people are doomed for eternity. Even after death, because their souls are "poor" and unfortunate", literally meaning their souls are not of good quality and unlucky.
3) I don't think the "poor unfortunate souls" applies as much as it does in the Disney version. But both versions of the story do talk about doomed souls, I think Ursula just emphasizes on it more and possibly in a different way.
1) The deal the sea witch made with the little mermaid is similar to the disney film because it is for the same purpose: the little mermaid wants to marry the prince. It is different because the motives and deals are different. In the disney movie, Ursula's motive was to obtain her voice and to take over Ariel's father's kingdom, but in the story Hans Christian Anderson wrote, she just wanted the little mermaid's voice. On Ariel's end of the deal in the movie, she got to be human for three days, and if he didn't fall in love with her by the end of the three days, then she would turn back into a mermaid and belong to Ursula, while in the story Anderson wrote, if the little mermaid didn't marry the prince before someone else, then she would turn into sea foam. The way she loses her tail for the deal is also different in the movie and the story by Anderson. In the movie, she just changes with out much pain and carries on with out any, while in the story, it says, "...it was as if a two-edged sword pierced through her delicate body.../Every step she took, as the witch had foretold, was as though she were treading on sharp knives and pricking gimlets; but she gladly put up with that" (227). These sentences means that when she changed, it felt like a sword was cutting her, and she felt pain in every step.
ReplyDelete2) I think what Ursula meant when she said "those poor unfortunate souls" in the movie, was that they were not happy because a specific thing about themselves or about their lives. By calling them "those poor unfortunate souls," she is trying to make herself sound like a savior, so Ariel will agree to make the deal with her.
3) I think that "poor unfortunate souls" does still somewhat apply to the story in Anderson's version, only instead, the sea witch calls them "immortal souls" which is on the other end of what she does. "poor unfortunate souls" is what she did before she made a deal with them, and "immortal souls" is what happens to them after she made the deal.
1) The deal the sea witch makes with the little mermaid is different to the one depicted in the Disney film. In the Hans Christian Anderson version, the little mermaids removal of her tale causes her severe pain. This scenario is not a part of the Disney film. Also, in the Disney film, as usual, everything is much less extreme and has a happy, magical ending. In the Hans Christian Anderson version, the ending is more depressing, as the little mermaid does not marry the prince.
ReplyDelete2) In the Disney version, Ursula describes "those poor unfortunate souls." I think Ursula is being sarcastic when singing this quote, and what she means by it is that many people long for more and more nonessential qualities, like being thinner or "getting the girl."
3) In the Hans Christian Anderson version, if the term "poor unfortunate souls" is used the way that I defined it, the term still applies. The little mermaid was still longing for something more, for example, becoming a human and marrying the prince instead of staying as a mermaid.
1) The deal between the little mermaid and the sea witch/Ursula are very similar. While the Hans Christian Anderson version is more gruesome, the little still mermaid loses her voice, and gains the ability to walk on land. Losing her legs causes her extreme pain in the story, but in the movie she feels nothing. In the movie she only has three days to make the prince love her, or else she would have to go back to the sea to be Ursula's prisoner. In Anderson's story she becomes sea foam the minute he marries another woman.
ReplyDelete2) The "poor unfortunate souls" that Ursula describes are other mermaids that came to her hoping to make a deal, but failed. I also think she is calling them "poor unfortunate souls" because they are seeking things they normally wouldn't be able to do without her help, and she finally has them in her trap.
3) I think that "poor unfortunate souls" still applies to the story, but with with a little bit deeper meaning. The "poor unfortunate souls" in the story are just people that were unhappy with themselves, and wished to change it.