The fact that these stories have so frequently been adapted, for stage and later for screen, has added to their cultural significance. Long before Disney's 1992 Aladdin, the tale of a boy and his lamp was the subject of stage plays and pantomimes as early as 1788; the first film version was made in 1898, with a hand-colored arriving in 1906. In 1939, Popeye the Sailor took a turn as Aladdin in the Flesicher Brothers color featurette (Popeye was also to appear in Popeye Meets Sinbad the Sailor and Popeye Meets Ali Baba and his Forty Thieves). There was also a well-regarded live-action feature film, 1940's The Thief of Baghdad, which borrows all manner of Arabian-nights material (including an evil vizier named Jaffar).
One might say that each generation has a version of Aladdin of their own -- doubtless there will be many more to come -- but what about the Disney version? What are its key differences from the original story, and what do you think of them? Or, if you had a chance to make an Aladdin of your own, how would you put the story together?
The Arabian Nights story of Aladdin was quite different from Disney’s film version of Aladdin. Despite the differences I really did enjoy this story. The Arabian Nights version of the story takes place in China while Disney sets the story in the Middle East. What surprised me most was the differences in Aladdin in each story. In the Arabian nights version, Aladdin is a Chinese boy who has a mother and father, and likes to play with the other children in the streets. Although his father dies, he still has his mother. Disney’s character of Aladdin is a street-wise orphan who must steal to survive in the streets of Agrabah. It makes me wonder what Disney’s rationale was for making Aladdin an orphan. The plots of the two story are related, but do differ greatly. I enjoyed both stories, however, I am not sure which story I prefer as they both are very different from one another.
ReplyDeleteI was honestly shocked at the twist to this story compared to Disney's version of Aladdin. I found it interesting that the story was taking place in China instead of the middle east. And as previously mentioned in the above blog that Aladdin was intact being raised by his parents before they gave up on him . Disney portrays Aladdin as a orphan. I found it very interesting that though both were considerably different the fact that Aladdin has to enter the cave to retrieve the lamp was so similar. I also found it interesting that in this short story he builds the palace with he genie but then when the lamp is stolen the palace is wished to be vanished from where Aladdin had it built. Disney's version didn't have such a unique twist. I also enjoyed the ending like Disney's version it did have a sweet happy ending. I just find it very fascinating that though both stories have some similarities in the plot they are so very different. I thought it was a fun read, I enjoyed this read the most out of the other short stories we've read over the summer.
ReplyDeleteI think the original story was super interesting but slightly infuriating. I can't believe how manipulating Aladdin is in this version. He uses his mother, he tricks the sultan and the princess, he takes advantage of the power of the genie for personal gain. Disney's Aladdin is much more likable even though he is technically a thief, which is interesting because most people love him even though he is scamming people. But that is balanced out by the fact he is an orphan so we have sympathy for him and understand why he might resort to stealing from people. The original story was a cool twist but i much prefer the Disney version!
ReplyDeleteThis story is more structurally complex than the other short stories in The Arabian Nights. It follows more of a traditional story arc whereas the other Arabian Nights tales are more episodic in nature. The introduction spans the entire beginning up until Aladdin first uses the lamp; the action rises when he returns home from the cave; and it climaxes when the magician steals the lam and the princess before Aladdin ultimately defeats him and lives with the princess happily ever after.
ReplyDeleteAladdin is seen in this version as a rather nefarious character, with more vices than virtues. His greatest vice is his undeniable greed. Like most story villains, he feels a need to flaunt his wealth by building massive palaces. One of his worst traits is his inability to accept that the sultan’s daughter is married. This is typical of the way women are portrayed in many of the Scheherazade tales as prizes to be won or objects to be desired.
I think the fact that Aladdin got everything he wanted in the end veers from the typical western classic story narratives of punishment and reward for bad and good behavior. Aladdin is a pretty unsavory character, and it can’t be called fair that he gets to keep his fortune. When this story was adapted for children’s books and eventually the Disney movie, they had to change a lot of the character details in order to make a happy ending palatable and fitting with a justice narrative. I prefer the original– that sometimes good things happen to terrible people and vice versa.
Anthony Maselli
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteWhile the Disney’s 1992 movie and The Story of Aladdin, The Magic Lamp by Arabian Nights differ in many ways, I could still see some similarities like Aladdin’s mischievous ways and his goal to find and obtain the lamp and then of course, there is the genie. In the Arabian night’s version, he was disobedient and had no goals, in the Disney version he would steal food, but he did have a heart and would share with others. The Arabian night’s version states that it took place in China however, Aladdin’s dads name was Mustapha which is an Arabic name. In the Arabian night’s version, Aladdin was abandoned by his father, I guess this could be one of the reasons why the Disney version portrayed Aladdin as an orphan.
I question as to whether this story is adequate for a child or maybe an age limit would be appropriate. There were a few scenes in the 1992 Disney Movie of Aladdin that I thought were harsh for children. Even some scenes that a child might attempt at home, like when one of the characters was swallowing a knife among other scenes. In the Arabian night’s edition, Aladdin was approached by a stranger, who claimed to be Aladdin’s uncle and Aladdin believed or went along with it. To me this leads children to believe that it is ok to talk to strangers.
I enjoyed reading this book as well as comparing it to the movie. I even found and watched the 1939 edition featuring Popeye as Aladdin on YesterFear. Even that had some similarities but differed in many ways.
Professor I have a few questions. Do you have an idea as to how many versions of Aladdin have been written? Is there any information as to when the very first story of Aladdin was written or who wrote it, how far does it date back?
As I read this version of Aladdin, I remembered parts of the Disney adaptation that were drastically different. The farther I read, the more depressing and sad the original story is. This version shows Aladdin to be a selfish, lazy child as opposed to the beloved Disney hero.
ReplyDeleteI also interpreted the African Magician as the true villain. The Magician assumes the role of the wealthy, grieving uncle. He uses this to manipulate Aladdin and his mother. He arrives bearing gifts and gaining their trust and uses this trust for his own selfish purposes. Aladdin, still self-serving and lazy, mimics this behavior by having the genie turn him into a prince in order to marry the princess. Aladdin arrives at the palace in grand fashion, bearing exorbitant gifts to impress and gain the sultan’s trust and the approval to marry the princess.
Ultimately the text and the film allow Aladdin to be the victor. He wins the hearts and trust of the sultan, his mother, the community and of course the princess – just like the movie.
SSteere
There is quite a bit of differences that exist between this version of Aladdin and the Disney version. In this one, we truly see a malevolent and malicious Aladdin who wants solely to get ahead with minimal effort, and will use anyone around him that he can to do so. Further, in the Disney Aladdin we see an orphan who has no one to help raise him or help him grow up, so we feel empathetic toward this person who wants to succeed in the world in his own way through whatever means he can. However this is starkly different from the one which exists in the original. In fact, we see a child with a mother who wants to trick everyone he can. Further, he wants to benefit himself and build the world around him. Through deceit and magic, Aladdin (in the original) makes himself come out on top of everyone, effectively creating an overall story that cheaters and slackers come out on top.
ReplyDeleteOverall, both versions show a different side to a story which ends roughly the same way. However, one shows a greedier, self serving man, whereas another presents an orphaned Robin Hood.
As mentioned above by my classmates, there are certainly similarities in the two versions of Aladdin. It is no question that Disney notoriously changes stories to suit their story lines; protagonists are always orphaned, and always loveable. In the writing, Aladdin is far from a loveable character. I was actually acutely offended at how his character was described in the writing; not only did it not jive with my Disney memory of Aladdin, but in general it struck a nerve with me. The privileged, lazy, ungrateful son is all too familiar and strikes a strong cord. It was no surprise to me that he spent his time striving for and protecting wealth so staunchly. Fitting in line with old-school story lines (still present today) of young men required to bestow riches upon the hopeful in-laws. I did find it endearing that he was intent on making money for he AND his mother, although he did live with her and thereby his wealth was her wealth. But, it invoked a sense of empathy from me when he would present his mother with gold. Just a touch of likeability. Interesting how Disney chose to take this story and twist the whole character of Aladdin himself, as well as the Genie.
ReplyDeleteEdward Cummins
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to see how this version of the story of Aladdin follows a very similar character story line to the Disney version but the plot and setting are so very confusing. This version almost seems as though that the author of this particular piece of work wanted to portray more exotic settings and didn’t know how to go about it. It seemed like the whole story was kind of in disarray. The Disney’s Aladdin also seemed like it glorified the actions of his deceit because he was portraying more of a true love, rags to riches story. This story didn’t seem as romanticized. Aladdin was very cunning and manipulative and used the genie’s magical power solely for his own materialistic gains. Aladdin’s love in this version seemed more because he can obtain something and not someone he actually loved. I think this story was a very interesting change in the Aladdin story that I am used to. I think that the refreshing take on the villians was very interesting as well including a redemption aspect. This created a lot of tension that I was not used to from the Disney version.
The story of Aladdin was most certainly my favorite tale from this class. I believe I enjoyed this the most because I was so familiar with the childhood story of Aladdin. Like the movie and what my other classmates have said, the story lines in both the Disney version and this one are along the same lines. Disney has a way with altering stories to fit their view. Erasing the distasteful qualities Aladdin possesses and altering them so he becomes a beloved character. Reading the 'real' Aladdin reminded me of how many things in childhood are sugarcoated and changed in order preserve innocence and youth. This version of Aladdin paints Aladdin as manipulative, cunning, materialistic and lazy. His goal was to obtain lavish items and do little work. I enjoyed the evil spin this version of Aladdin has and has peaked my interest in reading other original Disney stories that also have the dark twist.
ReplyDelete--
Erika M
It was so interesting to see how different the original book was from the Disney movie. It was definitely one of my all time favorite movies as a kid so I enjoyed reading the original. I love how much darker and somewhat more realistic the original tales are from their Disney counterparts because it really shows how much our culture has changed over time. Today, we are so much more concerned with preserving childhood innocence whereas that just wasn't an option in those times because lifespans were so much shorter and living was so much more of a hardship.
ReplyDeletethis was one of my favorite reads of the class. The original and the Disney versions of Aladdin have quite a bit of differences like where they take place and how Aladdin is portrayed as an orphan in the Disney version and how he has a family who eventually gave up on him in the original version. the original version seems like it would not be appropriate for some.
ReplyDeleteCaitlynne McSweeney
I found this to be an interesting read, particularly because I remember the Disney version from my childhood. My familiarity with the Disney version made it impossible to avoid comparing and contrasting the original with the Disney version. I found it interesting that the story was set in China rather than in a middle eastern setting, Jafar was a fusion of several characters from the story, and the differences with the genie(s). The most surprising aspect of the story was that Aladdin marries the Sultan's daughter in both versions and does have a happy ending, as I figured that the original story would not have a happy ending like a Disney movie made for children.
ReplyDelete