#wicked stepmother | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

wisteria-lodge · 6 months

Text

SORTING DISNEY VILLAINS (1937-1989)

For *spooky season.* I suspect this will be easier than sorting the heroes, who tend to be reactive while villains are very clear about what they want and what exactly they’re going to do to get it. Let’s see if this ends up being the case.

I go into a lot more detail about this character analysis system here, and talk about the move away from the HP terminology here. But here are the basics:

PRIMARY (ie MOTIVE)

BADGER ~ Loyal to the group.

SNAKE ~ Loyal to yourself and your Important People.

LION ~ Subconscious Idealist. Ideals are linked to feelings and instincts.

BIRD ~ Conscious Idealist. Ideals are linked to built systems and external facts.

SECONDARY (ie METHOD)

BADGER ~ Connect with the group. Make allies, work steadily and well. Be whatever the situation calls for. If you find a locked door, knock.

SNAKE ~ Connect with the environment. Notice things. Tell people what they want to hear. If you find a locked door, get in through the window.

BIRD ~ Collect skills, knowledge, tools, personas, useful friends. If you find a locked door, track down the key or learn to pick the lock.

LION ~ Be honest, be direct, speak your truth. Either the obstacle is going down or you are. If you find a locked door, kick it in.

THE EVIL QUEEN (1937) - BURNT BADGER / BIRD

So. I know that in Snow White the Queen's Thing is Vanity, but. The ‘Vain Villainess’ trope is about the fear of becoming less powerful in a world that only values you for your looks.... which doesn’t actually seem to be her issue? The Queen seems pretty darn unchallenged in her universe. That’s almost part of the problem - there’s an addiction/obsession/paranoia flavor to the way she’s constantly checking in with the Mirror.

I don’t think the Queen is actually obsessed with Snow White’s beauty. I think she’s obsessed with her innocence, her “heart” (that’s literally what she asks the Huntsman to bring her, Snow’s heart in a box.) Snow White isn’t just the “fairest” as in the prettiest, but the fairest as in the most fair-minded, the most honorable. The presence of Snow, with her optimism, kindness, and trust is an existential threat, proof that the Queen is going about things all wrong. Her power definitely has a edge of sadism: She forces Snow to wear rags (none of the other princesses wear *rags.*) And I’ll be haunted by this image of the Queen’s dungeons forever.

So even though my first instinct was to go Hedonist Snake primary for the Evil Queen, that’s not right. She’s not focused on enjoying herself. She doesn’t seem conscious enough of her own desires to be a Bird, and Exploded Lion is possible… but I’m going with Burnt Badger. An obsession with being “Fairest of them all” seems to suggest a group-focused, External-facing primary, and I absolutely see how the extremely UnBurnt Badger Snow White would really get under a Burnt Badger’s skin.

Obviously a Bird secondary. The Evil Queen is Mad Scientist coded, even has a literal evil laboratory. The “Old Crone” plan features a transformation, a costume, and is very much an Actor Bird persona.

THE WICKED STEPMOTHER (1950) - SNAKE / BADGER

While she does seem to get some sort of sadistic pleasure out of controlling Cinderella, the Wicked Stepmother’s main motivation is her daughters. Her daughters kind of suck, but that doesn’t actually matter. The Stepmother is going to make sure they get that happy ending, with all the targeted loyalty of a Snake Primary. There’s a Badger secondary in there too, which you can see in the way she’s… subtle. The Stepmother takes away Cinderella‘s privilege bit by bit… but never actually goes after her directly. She manipulates her daughters into doing her dirty work (like the way they tear up Cinderella’s dress) so she can always maintain plausible deniability. She’s prim, she’s proper, she’s Lady Tremaine. Dark Courtier Badger, all the way.

THE QUEEN OF HEARTS (1951) - LION / LION

This Queen’s thing is that she’s childish. She wants what she wants NOW. Doesn’t matter if it makes sense, doesn’t matter if it’s impossible. The Queen of Hearts functions as both a lesson to Alice (authority figures don’t always know what they’re talking about) and as a warning (this could be you if you don’t navigate the transition to adulthood properly.) I see a very young Glory Hound Lion primary in the way she forces everyone else to cheat so she gets the emotional reward of winning the croquet game. I also want to attribute the Queen of Hearts’ extremely short fuse to her Lion primary - she acts on what she’s feeling the *second* she starts feeling it, and never questions this. Also she's a Lion secondary. There’s no plan. She lives in Wonderland. She’s living moment to moment.

CAPTAIN HOOK (1953) - BADGER / SNAKE

Unlike the Queen of Hearts, Captain Hook does not seem to be *of* the magical land he lives in. He is this outside force trying to impose order on Neverland, leading the only rigid organization there and constantly tying up/imprisoning the main characters. Hook is also the only one th threatened by the concept of time (the ticking crocodile.) *Peter* will never grow old. But somehow Captain Hook will? Or feels like he will? Tradition also says that the actor playing Wendy’s controlling father should play Hook as well, so there's definitely something about toxic order or toxic control going on (the Disney film uses the same voice actor in both roles.) So in the world of Peter Pan, Hook/Father becomes representative of adulthood/society/the Man. That makes him an Authoritarian Badger primary, defined by his organizations.

For his secondary - Hook’s not much of a planner. He’s most effective while he is talking an angry Tinker Bell into helping him, and in that scene he’s charming. He flatters her, pivots according to what he thinks she wants to hear, and while Courtier Badger secondary is possible, I think this feels more like Snake. (I also think you have to be some kind of Improvisational secondary in order to hold your own against Peter.) It makes sense - Hook has to be appealing and seductive as well as threatening, because that's kind of what adulthood is.

MALEFICENT (1959) - BIRD / LION

Maleficent’s feels socially slighted in a very *abstract* way. She doesn’t seem to have an emotional response to either the other fairies OR the King and Queen OR Aurora. Her curse doesn’t have anything to do with with her social standing, or her power, or her role in the kingdom. We actually don’t know what Maleficent’s deal is. Maybe by not inviting her to the christening the kingdom has broken some important Rule of hers. Or maybe she’s just torturing people because she’s bored, and this is a fun Project. (That is her plan with Phillip after all, and this image will ALSO always haunt me.)

But either way, she’s a Bird primary. The only question is if she’s more of a System-Building Bird, or a Project Bird.

Unusually for such a cold villain, I think I want to give her a Lion secondary. She’s patient, and her plans take place over long time-frames, but the plans themselves are direct - “When your daughter turns sixteen, I will kill her.” Done. Also, when Maleficent is threatened, she turns into a giant dragon who certainly does not plan, and her goons (while useless) are very loyal. So another point for Inspirational secondary.

CRUELLA DE VIL (1961) - LION / LION

Cruella wants a coat made out of Dalmatian puppies. That’s it. So I'm putting her in the same category as Hannibal Lecter, someone doing this for the *art,* the ~*~aesthetic~*~ of the thing. But unlike Hannibal, nothing about Cruella is cold or considered. I don’t think she’d be able to tell you why she wants that Dalmatian coat apart from “It’s fabulous, darling.” So instead of going Bird primary (the typical Weird Villain sorting) I’m saying she's a Lion. Cruella seems to have an aesthetic-based morality: "fabulous" and "non-fabulous," instead of "good" and "bad." She’s a Fay Lion primary, like Jack Sparrow.

Her secondary is harder. She definitely has goons, but they’re useless, and don’t seem to like her much. She doesn’t plot or face-change. She clearly likes Anita and doesn’t like Roger, and never bothers to mask this. Cruella first tries to buy the puppies - then sort of seems surprised when this doesn’t work? Honestly, the main impression I get from her is that she’s… not trying very hard. She only really starts to care right at the very end, when she’s driving with wild hair and crazy eyes, as her roadster falls apart around her. I’m going with Lion secondary to reflect that tendency she has to operate at either 1% or 100%.

MADAME MIM (1963) - LION / SNAKE

Madame Mim has a sort of a professional rivalry going on with Merlin, and dislikes that Wart calls him “the greatest wizard in the land.” So of course she challenges him to a wizard duel. She wants to be the best, she wants to win… and that’s all there is to it. So we have another Glory Hound Lion primary.

It’s very clear that Madame Mim loves transformation. She switches between her different faces as many times as she possibly can over the course of a single conversation. Notably, she has a sexy version of herself that she uses to charm people into doing what she wants… and there’s no reason she couldn’t wear that all the time. But she doesn’t want to. Mim gets a lot of joy out of her fluid Snake secondary, and when she’s not solving a problem she just wants to chill out in Neutral.

PRINCE JOHN (1973) - EXPLODED SNAKE / BIRD

Prince John’s motivation has a couple of layers. Obviously, he’s a *little* bit too excited about taxing on the citizens of Nottingham… but that’s because he’s overcompensating. His main visual design element is a crown that doesn’t fit. He’s not King John, he's Prince John, only in charge until his other (better) brother Richard comes home from the Crusades. That’s why he’s so easily flattered - he’s incredibly insecure. But his conflict isn't with Richard, exactly. It’s really... mommy issues. Everything John does is to please Mummy (an off screen-character.) Very Exploded Snake primary.

Secondary is hard because John is incompetent. He mostly solves problems by pointing the Sheriff of Nottingham at them. It’s a running joke that he doesn’t actually listen to his advisor Sir Hiss, who generally has the right idea but isn't a suck-up. I guess John does lay kind of sophisticated traps for Robin Hood? They don’t work, but the intent at least is Bird. So I guess I would have to go with that - a pretty incompetent Bird secondary.

PROFESSOR RATIGAN (1986) - BURNT SNAKE / BIRD

Unlike Madame Mim and Merlin, whatever Basil of Baker Street and Ratigan have going on does not feel like a professional rivalry. Technically Ratigan is plotting a coup… but he spends approximately 85% of his on-screen time entirely focused on Basil. They are at least ex-friends who now hate each other (and it’s really easy to read them as straight-up bitter exes.) Even his hatred of being called a “rat” seems to be linked to Basil - that's an insult Basil uses, implying that Ratigan is motivated by hedonism and ego, and not by the purity of the puzzle the way that Bird Primary Basil is. Really, he’s criticizing Ratigan for having a Snake primary motivation.

Ratigan is very obviously a very loud Bird secondary. He loves lists, he loves Rube-Goldberg devices. He’s based off Professor Moriarty, it's Snake Bird all the way down.

URSULA THE SEA WITCH (1989) - SNAKE / BIRD

So Ursula wants to take over, be the new monarch of the sea… which is usually a Glory Hound Lion motivation. But there's the implication the she's doing this to specifically screw over Triton... which would make her more of a Snake. Ursula also has a *very* hedonistic approach to life, something you often see in Snake primaries with small circles. It's just her and her “babies," the eels Flotsam and Jetsam. He eels also seem very emotionally important to her, as far as villain minions go. This could be another example of Snake primary loyalty.

I don't know, I just think a Lion primary Ursula would be angrier, more of a Scar. She’s doing her own thing, an makes use of an opportunity that falls into her lap. This is structurally a story about King Triton (who has the big emotional arc and the most character change) so it makes sense that she is specifically a Triton villain, and Ariel was just unlucky enough to get in the way.

I'm actually going to say Bird secondary for Ursula. I agree that she gives off Snake secondary *vibes,* and absolutely might model or perform it for fun. But the way she wins over Ariel is by spouting facts very fast and very confidently, then getting her to sign a bad contract. It’s a Corrupt Lawyer beat more than anything. Vanessa, Ursula's alternate form, is more an Actor Bird transformation (Wicked Queen style) and less a Snake secondary playing around (Madame Mim style.) Vanessa is Ursula's version of Ariel - she even speaks with Ariel's voice - and that's a Bird secondary approach. When Ursula‘s plans start falling apart, she doesn't pivot. She starts looking very Lion secondary - exactly like Bird secondary Ariel does when she’s overwhelmed.

Tl;dr

Double Lion - Queen of Hearts, Cruella De Vil

Lion Snake - Madame Mim

Snake Bird - Prince John, Professor Ratigan, Ursula

Snake Badger - Wicked Stepmother

Badger Snake - Captain Hook

Badger Bird - Evil Queen

Bird Lion - Maleficent

#disney #sortinghatchats #shc #queen of hearts #cruella de vil #madame mim #disney’s robin hood #prince john #professor ratigan #ursula the sea witch #wicked stepmother #lady tremaine #captain hook #evil queen #snow white evil queen #maleficent #wisteria sorts

83 notes · View notes

besttropeveershowdown · 2 months

Text

The Worst Trope Ever Showdown: Round 1, Side C

Cheating as Plot Point

A character cheats on their partner, often for the drama and because they “couldn’t help it”

Propaganda:

It feeds into the heteronormative idea that men and women cannot be friends without falling in love with each other, also the idea that “you can’t help/stop/control yourself” when it comes to sex. Also it’s just really shitty and annoying, like why are you acting like this?? How hard is it to stay committed to your partner????? Why do they keep making couples cheat on their partners, like I get that it’s for the drama, but it honestly makes me angry and makes me turn off the show or movie.

Wicked Stepmother

A character's stepmother is evil or mean.

Propaganda:

sure cinderella is a great story but when this comes up now it just feels like a "let's hate on an older woman for no real reason" thing. for instance meredith blake in the parent trap is an icon actually

#the worst trope ever showdown #wtes polls #anti tropeaganda #cheating as plot point #wicked stepmother

33 notes · View notes

mossy-rat · 1 year

Text

your new mother

click for better quality | id in alt

#OBSESSED with the scene w the stepmother its so fucked up the last 20 minutes of that ep go so hard I watched it like three times #dimension 20 #d20 #d20 neverafter #dimension 20 neverafter #neverafter #wicked stepmother #d20 stepmother #gore #blood #body horror

210 notes · View notes

faintingheroine · 3 months

Text

Based on this discussion (made into a separate post for the sake of length and I do have the habit of reblogging and reblogging my posts about Aşk-ı Memnu and I don’t want to do that to someone else’s post)

I agree that both Fire and Blood and Aşk-ı Memnu are examples of a Subverted Trope regarding Wicked Stepmother rather than a full-fledged Deconstruction. They subvert the expectations regarding the stepmother and the stepdaughter’s personalities, but don’t fully pick the trope apart.

I haven’t watched House of the Dragon, but I listened to the Rhaenyra chapters of Fire and Blood on audiobook some time ago, so I still have an idea.

If we reduce the Wicked Stepmother trope to its basic essence, yes Fire and Blood may not be considered to subvert it. Alicent is a stepmother who is wicked. “Hansel and Gretel” definitely uses the Wicked Stepmother trope, and that story definitely has nothing to do with sexuality or a Madonna-Whore dichotomy. But @la-pheacienne still very much has a point, because unlike with “Hansel and Gretel” where the children are of both genders and are very young in the story, Alicent and Rhaenyra are both women and the different sexuality of both of them is a very integral part of their dynamic. This makes it recall “Cinderella” or “Snow White” far more than “Hansel and Gretel”. Alicent is a stepmother who is wicked, that’s not subverted, but the “Madonna” and “Whore”’s roles are switched and the Wicked Stepmother (who is still wicked!) is the “sexually pure” one who apparently plays by the patriarchy’s rules. That’s still a subversion.

(Maybe Fire and Blood can also be called deconstructive in the way it uses its narrators to tell this story but I don’t remember enough to say something substantial on that).

Aşk-ı Memnu explicitly refers to the Wicked Stepmother trope and its prevalence. A character (who is characterized by her love for fiction and her propensity to search for what she had read in her life) actually thinks this:

“Finally that thing that had been feared, that had been delayed for a year, but that could never be kept from occurring, was finally beginning. Bihter and Nihal were taking out the claws that longed to tear at each other. The old girl was saying to herself, ‘whose fault is it? No one’s!… In the affair itself… Step-mother and daughter! After all, the lives of these people are, for all of history, either a comedy or a tragedy. How will this play end between Bihter and Nihal? I am afraid lest it be a comedy for one and a tragedy for the other…’”

(Chapter 7) (italics mine)

The fairy tale that is most similar to Aşk-ı Memnu is Snow White and its variations. Nihal has a little brother, but as is clear from above, this is a play between a stepmother and a stepdaughter. And sexuality is a very integral part of Aşk-ı Memnu of course. (“Cinderella” might also come into play here, but of course not as much as “Snow White”).

Aşk-ı Memnu does not reverse the “Madonna” and “Whore” positions of the stepmother and stepdaughter: The stepmother is still the sexually transgressive more active woman who is punished by the narrative, and the stepdaughter is the “innocent”, passive character who comes to a relatively happy ending. But Aşk-ı Memnu still subverts this trope in two ways and it then pulls a switcheroo and kind of plays it straight at the end, but also not really:

1- The personalities of the two parties are switched. Nihal might be the “sexually innocent” one, but she is also the one madly jealous of Bihter rather than the other way around.

2- The wickedness of Bihter is purely in Nihal’s head. Nihal completely believes that Bihter is wicked but it is not true at all.

Then the book seems to play it straight at the very end as Bihter becomes jealous of Nihal due to her now having Behlül’s love and has very vengeful, aggressive thoughts on Nihal:

“This emotion united Behlül and Nihal; she wanted to throttle them both in the same vice of wrath and enmity.”

“She did not pity Nihal. She had stored up many grudges against her; all the things she had tolerated had each become an excuse for enmity towards this girl, each bearing the weight of due vengeance. But beyond all this enmity was that in Nihal, who had been a child only yesterday, having emerged a rival. It was this more than anything that she could not forgive Nihal.”

(Chapter 21)

The latter passage is very “Snow White”. But the focus is still on Behlül and Behlül’s love, that’s what Bihter cares about. Snow White and Cinderella’s stepmothers (and stepsisters) really are mostly jealous about them, their beauty and their “virtue”, the Prince is only a symbol. Not so for Bihter. Her wrongs against Nihal (her sacking her governess, her ruining her engagement, even her last vengefulness) are about the affair Bihter had, not about any resentment about Nihal in particular. Bihter is still very much not a Wicked Stepmother, and Nihal is still very much the more jealous one overall.

Aşk-ı Memnu is also of course more subversive or deconstructive than Fire and Blood because in it both the stepmother and the stepdaughter are complicated and very human people. Aşk-ı Memnu is a psychological novel that reveals the inner thoughts of all of its characters and is about a domestic tragedy. Fire and Blood is a faux-history narrated by unreliable narrators that is a companion piece to a fantasy series. Maybe House of the Dragon might be more deconstructive than Fire and Blood in this particular way since in it Alicent and Rhaenyra are supposed to be more complicated and human than their book counterparts. Maybe @minetteskvareninova is right about the TV show being more deconstructive than the book in this particular way, though the deconstruction is apparently not done very competently.

Anyway, thanks for giving me the opportunity to ramble yet again about Aşk-ı Memnu.

#aşk ı memnu #aşk-ı memnu #fire and blood #alicent hightower #rhaenyra targaryen #wicked stepmother #house of the dragon #snow white #cinderella #nihal #bihter

26 notes · View notes

disney-stuff · 17 days

Text

Evil Queen / Wicked Stepmother

Walt Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

#snow white and the seven dwarfs #disney #wicked stepmother #evil queen #disney villains #concept art #character concept #walt disney

17 notes · View notes

adarkrainbow · 1 year

Text

I was reading “Contes de loups, contes d’ogres, contes de sorcières: La fabrique des méchants” by Eva Barcello-Hermant (Tales of wolves, tales of ogres, tales of witches: The making of villains).

It is not the best book by far - it is not a scientific book, it is not a true literary study, it is more of a sociology-psychology book looking at the state of fairytales among youth literature today and how villains are received today in young literature.

But it still has a few interesting things. For example, Barcello-Hermant’s classifies the fairytale villains as they are received and perceived today in four categories.

1) The Wolf

Barcello-Hermant spends a LOT of time talking about the Wolf, or the Big Bad Wolf, who is according to her one of the most iconic and widespread villains of fairy tales today. Though she does recognize that this is particularly true in France - while fairytales of other countries tend to have different wild beasts. She reminds people that the Vietnamese version of Little Red Riding Hood has a bear instead of a wolf, while in a Louisiana version of “The goat and her seven youngs” it is an alligator that preys on the titular characters. (Personally I also know of other replacements for the wolf - for example how in an Asian version of Little Red Riding Hood it is a tiger that preys on the little girl and her parent figure ; and in the older English version of The Three Little Pigs the predator is a fox, not a wolf).

2) The Ogre

If you have been following my “What makes an ogre?” series you’ll know the ogre is as iconic as it is complex and nuanced, and far away from the image we have today of just “an orc by another name”. But given this book is about modern literature and the reception of fairytales today, it presents the ogre with its numerous misconceptions: Barcello-Hermant notably explains that the giant and the ogre are just two side of the same coins, and she also places in the category “ogre” the trolls of Nordic tales, as well as the Bluebeard-type of characters. I do not agree with that in principle, but it is true that in today’s world, the ogre, the giant and the troll tend to be fused and confused together as the “ugly, stupid, man-eating giant”

3) The Witch

Barcello-Hermant recognizes that the witch is not a traditonal fairytale villain of French fairytales - in the tales of Perrault and others, it is rather the evil fairy/wicked fairy/old fairy that fulfills the role of the malevolent female wielder of supernatural powers. But the witch is still one of the key antagonists of fairytales today, herself divided into two sub-types. On one side, the hag, the old woman who lives alone in the depths of the wood - the Hansel and Gretel type of witch. On the other hand, the young and beautiful witch who seduces people and usually enters the household of the protagonist - the “Snow White” or “The Six Swans” type of character.

[ Fascinatingly, if you recall my posts about Benjamin Lacombe’s Grimoire of witches, it is precisely the two fairytale witches he picked up for his portraits - on one side the Hansel and Gretel witch reimagined as a mad sorceress of the Hundred Years War ; on the other the Snow-White witch reinvented as a narcissistic serial killer of the Renaisance].

4) The wicked woman / or the wicked family

In this category, Barcello-Hermant places the evil female antagonist that are not supernatural in nature, and that usually are part of the protagonist’s family. It is the wicked stepmother, the evil sister, or the perverse mother: the type of antagonists we find in “Cinderella” or “Toads and Diamonds”. Though Barcello admits that this category tends to bleed into the others, as the wicked stepmother can become a witch (like in Snow-White) the same way the evil mother-in-law can be revealed as an ogress (like in Sleeping Beauty).

#fairytale villains #fairytale archetypes #Fairytale witches #wicked stepmother #french fairytales

51 notes · View notes