To most people, the tale of Little Red Riding Hood is a familiar one and Charles Perrault’s version is the most familiar. A moral tale against idleness and disobedience, this classic has stood the test of time. Less familiar to readers is Angela Carter’s “The Company of Wolves.” A dark retelling, Carter’s version is more an exploration of coming-of-age sexuality and a young woman discovering her own wildness than a cautionary tale against strangers and “gentle wolves” (Perrault 1576). While in Perrault’s story, Red and her granny are eaten by the beast due to Red’s idlness and in Carter’s story, we see Red’s willing surrender to the wolf, both tales deal with the burgeoning sexuality of a young girl. Charles Perrault begins his tale of Red Riding Hood with a glowing description of the young woman as “the prettiest creature who was ever seen” (1574), and the little red riding cape her grandmother made for her. The imagery evoked by the red cape for most readers is one of familiarity. As children, many watched as that little red cape traipsed across Saturday morning cartoons with carefree bliss. Conversely, that red cape serves as a beacon in the forest, a brilliant splash of primary color in a neutral world, almost guaranteeing the notice of the predator that awaits her. The wolf has no chance to miss his target, as she blazes with color through his domain. Upon their first encounter in the woods, Red has no fear of the wolf. Perrault states she “did not know it was dangerous to. . .talk to a wolf” (1575). This suggests a certain naiveté on the part of Little Red Riding Hood or perhaps a lack of instruction on the part of her doting mother and grandmother. For all of their love, they neglect to warn her of the dangers inherent in the woods of the world. The wolf immediately has thoughts of eating Red, a sexual sublimation of his desire for the forbidden. A tasty young morsel, she must be saved for a more private moment when the men of the forest will not be able to stop his actions. This awareness on the part of the wolf shows he recognizes that he is flouting society’s rules by desiring this young girl but he has no compunctions. He must have his prize. A wager is set upon, the wolf telling Red he can reach her grandmother before she does. Here we see Red Riding Hood’s willfulness rear its head. In Perrault’s tale, we find not the clever young girl from childhood cartoons, but a willful disobedient young woman who dawdles and brings about disastrous consequences. Red takes her time reaching her grandmother’s home, stopping to pick flowers, chase butterflies and gather nuts. This disobedience suggests a young woman on the cusp of self-hood, neglecting instructions from elders to stay on the path and not tarry to fulfill her own fanciful plans. Red’s self-awareness burgeons and we see her take her own path, straying from that set for her by her elders. This evokes thoughts of young girls beginning to form their own opinions and cement their own personalities as the teeter on the precipice of womanhood. After arriving at her grandmother’s home and finding the wolf instead, the conversation Red has with the wolf is quite suggestive. “Grandmother, what big arms you have” (Perrault 1575) shows the wolf’s forbidding and frightening physical presence in Red’s eyes. “Grandmother, what big teeth you have! All the better to eat you up with” (Perrault 1575). Again, we find a sexual sublimation of the wolf’s desire for Red. The eating of a tasty and forbidden morsel subverts society’s rules and shows the evil inherent in the hearts of “gentle” wolves. Perrault ends his tale with a moral about “attractive, well bred young ladies” who succumb to the overtures of “various kinds of wolves” (1576). According to Fahraeus and Jonsson, Charles Perrault’s tale is “clearly. . .[about] sexual precociousness that ends in disaster” with Red being “irresponsible and naïve if not stupid. . .[and] responsible for a wolf’s behavior” (234). By contrast, using “gothic, pyrotechnic prose” (Barker), Carter gives us a tale illustrating a young woman’s discovery of her own sexuality and the inherent connection between man and beast. Traditionally, the beast has been used to represent the animal nature in man with the woman as his prey. However, in Carter’s tale, the beast has met his match in Red Riding Hood. (Maunder 83) Carter opens her tale, not with Red Riding Hood, but with wolves. According to Carter, wolves “represent lots of things, though basically they are still libido” (Dimovitz 13) and this representation is born out with the author’s use of descriptive terms and phrasing. “The wolf is carnivore incarnate” is repeated several times throughout the piece, reminding the reader that the wolf is, at its core, a dangerous beast. The last time this phrase appears in the piece, it is coupled with the phrase “only immaculate flesh appeases him” (Carter 1587). This gives acknowledgement to man’s desire for virgin, and thus forbidden, flesh. The entire tone of Carter’s tale is dark without seeming sinister. Although her blunt and vivid descriptions of the wolf and his appearance do bring to mind unpleasant details, by using such open and honest phrases Carter makes the wolf seem almost familiar. By the time his nature is revealed to Red, the reader has become accustomed to him and can empathize with Red when she makes her decision. This is where Carter gives a twist to the plot, making Red a willing participant in her fate. Rather than fight with the wolf or try to outsmart him, Carter’s Red embraces the wolf and his otherness and in the process, finds her own inner wildness. According to Maunder, by the end of the tale, Red “has acknowledged the beast within herself, a vital component of self-knowledge” (83). While Granny is eaten by the wolf, Red is taken as a wild bride. Here Carter has wolves howl a wedding song outside the cottage as Red surrenders to the wolf. Carter even refers to “a savage marriage ceremony” (1587). This surrender and subsequent discovery of Red’s wildness is feminist in approach and symbolizes the “death” of a child and the “rebirth” of a young woman as she moves into adulthood. Charles Perrault and Angela Carter wrote about two very different Red Riding Hoods. While Perrault tells the tale of a disobedient young girl getting her just punishment, Carter weaves a yarn of a young girl’s willing participation in her rite of passage from childhood to womanhood. The classic childhood tale spun onto its ear, Carter’s treatment of this story is strong in descriptive phrasing and with a definite feminist point-of-view. Perrault, by contrast, gives readers a cautionary tale on the evils of men and the need for obedience in children.
While the differences in these two treatments would make them seem almost incomparable, at heart both discuss the coming-of-age of a young girl and the consequences of that passage.
Works Cited
Barker, Paul. “Angela Carter’s Beasts.” Prospect. Web. June 22, 2006.
Carter, Angela. “The Company of Wolves.” Making Literature Matter: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. Eds. John Schilb and John Clifford. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s, 2009. 1580-1587. Print
Dimovitz, Scott. “I Was the Subject of the Sentence Written on the Mirror: Angela Carter’s Short Fiction and the Unwriting of the Psychoanalytic Subject.” Literature Interpretation Theory 21:1-19. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Web. 2010.
Fahraeus, Anna. Jonsson, AnnKatrin.eds. Textual Ethos Studies or Locating Ethics. Rodopi: Amsterdam, New York, NY Editions. Web. 2005.
Maunder, Andrew. ed. Facts on File Companion to the British Short Story. Infobase Publishing: New York. Web. 2007.
Perrault, Charles. “Little Red Riding Hood.” Making Literature Matter: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. Eds. John Schilb and John Clifford. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s, 2009. 1574-1576. Print