Goldilocks: Cute Little Fairy Tale or the Brutal Victimization of Three Talking Bears?

Image courtesy of Dan Osborne - Check out his awesome work at http://danosborne.deviantart.com/

With the constant discoveries of inhabitable planets outside our own solar system I thought it appropriate to write a blog post about Goldilocks. If you’re not familiar with the discoveries then this may sound confusing. The first planet thought to be inhabitable was discovered in 2011 and was located in the ‘Goldilocks’ system. So named because it’s not too hot, not too cold, but ‘just right’. Not only are astrologists smart, they’re also creative…

This got me thinking about Goldilocks and the Three Bears and having not analyzed this fairy tale since I was a wee lad I was shocked at how a slightly skewed perspective can alter the very fabric of this whimsical little tale. 

This brought me to the question: What is Goldilocks and the Three Bears really about? Is it a simple fairy tale warning youngsters of the dangers of venturing off alone? Or is it really a despicable home invasion gone horribly wrong? I’m inclined to believe the latter and will recount the evidence forthwith.

The problems with Goldilocks begin at it’s very conception in 1837. The first known text featured Goldilocks as an old woman which flies directly in the face of the ‘little girl wandering off alone’ scenario. The story was later altered to depict a poor little innocent girl who is almost eaten by three bears. But why? Could it be that the original tale was nothing more than a thief’s tale? An old crone and hornswoggler determined to relieve some hard working bears of their belongings? 

​In later interpretations the old woman transitioned into the little girl we all have come to know as Goldilocks. It’d be nice to say that this is where it all turned into a lovely little yarn of fabledom. Not so. Let’s look at the bears. There are three of them; a momma bear, papa bear, and a baby bear. Not only do they live in a furnished house but they also have the ability to speak. Not only are they not wild animals they’re also domesticated and as they can afford a house and furniture they’re probably also very hard-working.

Goldilocks on the other hand, while walking alone in a forest, falls upon their house and, rather than knocking or ringing the doorbell, she kicks open the door and crosses the threshold. The nefarious human doesn’t stop there but proceeds to seek out food. This may lend to the theory that Goldilocks was homeless and possibly at the end of her proverbial tether. She finds bowls of porridge neatly laid out at the kitchen table and launches into eating their food. Common sense dictates that if food is laid out on a kitchen table in someone else’s house you probably shouldn’t be eating it.

Instead of realizing that she’s just made a terrible mistake, and is possibly breaking the law, she decides to head upstairs to take a nap. When was the last time you walked into a stranger’s house, headed upstairs, and took a nap? It’s not until the family of bears return home and tell her to get the hell out that she realizes the gig is up, and she runs from the house.

She later claims she was afraid the bears would eat her, but who was the real victim here? Is it the teenage girl who invades the home of hard-working bears, steals their food, and sleeps in their bed? Or is it the bears that own a lovely house in the forest and decide to take a leisurely stroll before breakfast? I think the moral positioning of Goldilocks and the 3 Bears is slanted in completely the wrong direction. Had the bears entertained the inclination to eat Goldilocks they would have been well within their rights to do so. 

The true moral of the story should be as follows: Beware of unstable little blonde girls. While they appear sweet and innocent they’re just as likely to break into your home and violate your living space.