A dark rainbow

Fatima, Bluebeard’s Wife

Artist : Edward Clifford (1844-1907)

The Fairy Tales of Charles Perrault

George G. Harrap & Co Ltd

London

1922

Artist : Harry Clarke

The Sleeping Beauty

1926

The Sleeping Beauty

Just a short time after I watched the grotesque comedy with satirical overtones that is Offenbach's "Barbe-bleue" I happened to come across another take on the Bluebeard story. This one could hardly be any more different - a surreal, dark, psychologically astute one-hour, one-act opera from 1911 by Béla Bartók that retains the fairy tale atmosphere of the French folk tale it is based on, but changes the story quite heavily. In short, I consider this "I can fix him: The opera".

You can download it here - beware though, the file is a 3GB DVD rip whose video quality does not justify the large size. VLC player can play it and subtitles in English, French, German, Spanish and Mandarin (I think) are included. If you have the disk space and the patience to switch to a new file every 20 minutes, I'd definitely recommend it, it's visually beautiful and contains what I consider some pretty nuanced acting by the only two singers, the bass Kolos Kováts as Bluebeard and the soprano Sylvia Sass as Judith, his latest lover.

Spoilers and my thoughts under the KR...

(Source: Brut, by Layamon)

Here's that passage where Arthur is born and then supercharged with magic by the elves (fairies), like a fantasy super soldier. It includes longevity, superhuman strength and the most OP ability of all, being rich forever. So if you had any doubts that Arthur had his own supernatural aura, there you go.

This element also bears notable similarity to motif of fairies attending child's birth and bestowing blessings and qualities upon it, that is most common in French literary fairy tales. The most famous example is, of course, Sleeping Beauty, but there are many others: Riquet-with-Tuft; White Doe, Princess Mayblossom....

And this motif, while rare, isn't unknown in Arthuriana, or at least, Arthuriana adjacent legends:

In  Adam de la Halle's 13th century text Jeu de la feuillée, Morgan alongside two other fairies visits a human city to bestow blessings and curses to the people

In 13th century text  Les Prouesses et faitz du noble Huon de Bordeaux, fairy king Oberon is identified as son of Julies Caesar and Morgan le Fay, who is cursed to always be dwarfish due to a grumpy fairy who attended his christening

In 14th century romance about Ogier the Dane, titular hero is bestowed by many gifts and virtues by fairies who attend his birth; last of which is Morgan, who promises he will be her lover

One Thousand and One Nights is such a rich and layered inheritance — stories passed down from oral tradition to the written form, like so many folk and spiritual tales across cultures. But at the same time, their journey through translation tells us a lot about colonial mechanisms in literature.

I'm an Indian Muslim living in Europe, and like a lot of us, I grew up listening to versions of One Thousand and One Nights. My dad used to tell me bits and pieces in Urdu, sometimes mixed with other Indian folk tales or Sufi parables. These stories are part of a huge shared tradition — Arabic, Farsi, Urdu — and they’re still very much alive in South Asian and Middle Eastern imaginations.

But growing up in Belgium, whenever I tried to actually read the original text (in French at first, since that’s the language I was educated in) I kept running into Antoine Galland. And let me tell you: that man didn’t translate the Nights. He basically wrote fanfiction (and honestly, calling it that is disrespectful to fanfiction).

He added stuff that wasn’t there — Aladdin, Ali Baba, Sinbad? Not part of the original corpus. They were separate folktales that he included based on oral retellings. He also censored many parts, rewrote others, and modified everything to fit the European gaze. The result? A whitewashed, romanticized, orientalist version that Europe adored.

And because Galland was the first to translate the Nights into a European language, his version became the reference. Even the first major English translations were based on his retelling — not the Arabic manuscripts. And yeah, it bothers me. Because it shaped how “the West” sees this work — and by extension, how it sees us.

This isn’t just about a translation. It’s about power. About exoticisation. About how a literary tradition can be overwritten and distorted to serve a fantasy — a fantasy that flatters the colonial gaze. It’s a textbook case of what Edward Said called orientalism: taking a cultural object from the Muslim world and reframing it to match Western fantasies — of sensuality, decadence, cruelty, mystery. And because it was dressed up as "authentic," it shaped generations of readers and their perceptions of “the Orient.”

Fun fact: Galland’s version was so off that Persian and Arab scholars never even treated it as a real version of the Nights. Instead, it was translated back into Arabic and Persian in the 19th century — not to reclaim it, but because it had become such a globally recognized product in the West. These translations circulated as a separate corpus, often under titles like Alf Layla wa-Layla wa Qisas Ukhra (A Thousand and One Nights and Other Stories). So yes, the stories had to be "re-traditionalized" in their own languages — while keeping a clear boundary between Galland’s fictionalized version and the authentic canon.

Also, sidenote: Europeans have long called it The Arabian Nights, but its roots are actually Persian. The original title is Hezār Afsān (A Thousand Stories), and the earliest manuscripts were in Middle Persian, before Arabic versions became dominant. Calling it “Arabian” erases the Persian layers completely. It came to South Asia through Farsi language actually.

Thankfully, more recent translators have tried to go back to the source. In French, we have René Khawam, who worked from original Arabic and refused to sugarcoat or censor anything. In English, you can check out Malcolm C. Lyons (Penguin Classics) or Husain Haddawy, who translated from the Muhsin Mahdi critical edition — both of which offer a much more respectful take.

These days, I’ve been reading bits and pieces from Khawam’s version, and also children’s Urdu versions — just to reconnect with what it felt like when my dad used to tell them. I hope to one day read the full thing in Urdu. I also have Haddawy's version on my radar.

Anyway. It just makes me mad. The white gaze is everywhere, especially in literature. And the worst part is — most people have no idea.

∘₊✧──────✧₊∘

Further readings (for the nerds, like me) If you want to dig deeper into how One Thousand and One Nights got reshaped — and how much it influenced Orientalist stereotypes — here are some great starting points:

Robert Irwin, The Arabian Nights: A Companion — deep dive into different translations and their cultural impact.

Edward Said, Orientalism — not just about the Nights, but essential for understanding the “white gaze” in literature.

Marina Warner, Stranger Magic: Charmed States and the Arabian Nights — brilliant on how these tales enchanted and distorted the Western imagination.

Rana Kabbani, Imperial Fictions: Europe’s Myths of Orient — sharp critique of how Europe mythologized “the Orient,” including Galland’s role.

First one of my little fairy tale series in colour ♥

The folk story of Jack the Giant Killer is one of those rare fairy tale stories that's also an Arthurian story - being that its setting during Arthur's reign. Other stories of this type include Tom Thumb and Child Rowland. These stories are generally post-Malory. (unfortunately)

Apparently, according to some scholars the story of "the giant slaying Jack" arose because of the popularity of Arthur himself as the "Slayer of Giants" was so numerous, people were getting bored with it. Jack himself and his story comes off as hodgepodge of various motifs that you find elsewhere in other stories.

What caught my attention with this story, is that the largest episode of Jack's story involves Jack meeting up with a nameless son of King Arthur and adventuring with him.

So, the story of Jack begins with a simple introduction and description of Jack and his first enemy, Cormoran:

For the first three sections of the story, Jack goes around killing giants and making a name for himself (including a famous moment where he tricks a giant into commiting suicide).

For this post, we're skipping over to the part where King Arthur's son is introduced:

Lol. When I was reading this part, I couldn't help but imagine this Prince is actually Sir Loholt, who is sometimes Arthur's Legit son with Guinevere. It actually makes a lot of sense with Lanzelet's description of him:

So yeah, for me he's Prince Loholt. :) Continuing on:

Yup. He's an Arthurian male character, alright. Too nice, not enough braincells.

Also, its kind of heartwarming to know Arthur and Guinevere would have a son who's so kind and generous, he wouldn't think twice to give up his riches if it meant helping someone.

So next up, Jack suggests that they sleep over at a giant's place. This is the other interesting about Jack the Giant Killer: He personally knows this giant and depending on the version, he claims this giant is actually his uncle. Other stories claim the giant is an idiot and Jack's just smooth talking him, but I think its way more interesting if the Giant IS Jack's relative. In Early Arthurian Lore, a number of giant-slayers, including Arthur, Kay and Gawain, all have giantish attributes (Kay's famous superpowers), have giants for relatives (Guinevere, in Welsh myth, is the daughter of Gogfran the giant) or are giants themselves.

Prince: Oh, so that means you're a giant, too? Jack: I guess? Prince: Cool. My Mother, the Queen, is a giantess as well. We're kinsmen! Jack: ... Prince: Also, my uncle can grow really big.

So Jack goes up to the giant's castle and knocks on the door:

So Jack and the Prince spend the night in the giant's castle while the giant himself is locked away. The next day, the Prince continues his journey while Jack promises to catch up after he deals with the giant. What's interesting here is that this giant isn't slain like the others. He survives, unlike Jack's other foes - which kinda puts more points to my theory that this really is Jack's uncle and Jack is a half-breed giant of sorts.

The giant wants to reward Jack:

These magic items are your classic fairy tale archetypal tools that have their inspiration found in earlier myths: You have your bog-standard cuts-through-anything magic sword (like Excalibur), the slippers are the "Seven-League boots" (Based on Hermes' winged sandals) and you have an item that confers invisibility (It comes in many forms: Hade's helm, Siegfried's cloak and even Arthur himself has an Invisibility cloak too)

Jack getting these items is a way to give your hero superpowers without utilizing... unsavory methods. That he's able to use these items despite belonging to - and presumably used by - a giant is never questioned.

Moving on, we get to meet the "Possessed Lady" Loholt the Prince was after this whole time:

Well that was rude. So naturally, the Prince despairs until Jack does something about it:

Methinks that this lady is actually a murderous sorceress and isn't actually possessed.

This is romcom material.

Lady: Um, what is wrong with him? Jack: *Puts on his Cap* ...Camelot, apparently...

So once again, its up to Jack to save the day.

Are you sure this Lady is possessed? Also, she's scolding Satan - definitely wife material Queen material.

And so, Satan was killed (lol), the Lady was restored to her former good looks (even though she was already described as beautiful), she and the Prince get married and Jack gets to be one of the Knights of the Round Table.

And that's the end of this section of Jack the Giant Killer's story and end of this post. Jack's story goes on for a few more episodes of giant-slaying before ending on your typical "...and they lived happily ever. The End."

I wonder what the usual cast's (Arthur, Guinevere, Merlin, Lancelot, Gawain, etc.) reaction to this story would be.

Protagonist, sometimes called John, pays for debts of a dead man whose coffin was to be desecrated by those to whom he owed money

Dead man therefore joins John in his travels, pretending to be a living friend

Through the story, dead man acquires magical sword, pair of wings with which he can fly, and means to turn himself invisible

They arrive to the town where a beautiful princess presents riddles to her suitors, executing them if they fail

The princess is also a dark witch

Dead man pursues her through the night as she sneaks out of the castle

So she could meet with a wicked troll who is her lover and master (Andersen sometimes sues trolls and hobgoblins as euphemisms for Devil, such as here and in the Snow Queen)

He reveals answer to riddles to the John; riddles are all some objects he must retrieve from princess

The last object is troll-king's head

After he is killed, the princess is exorcized of her evil magic and willingly marries John

I will say right away that there is NOTHING wrong with loving Disney Fairytale movies. Heck some of my absolute favourite movies and fairy tale adaptations of all time are Disney movies like Sleeping Beauty and Tangled. But I feel like many other beautiful Fairytale movies often get overshadowed by Disney. Especially fairytale movies from Countries outside of the United States. So don't feel attacked by this list and rather let's view it as a shout out to non-American movies.