Fairy Tale Hypothesis

I want to consider the implications of a very radical philosophy of history -- not of what happened in the past, and not of time, but of the concept of history, the relationship between past, present, and future. In order to focus the discussion, I want to focus on 'defining' three terms: [b]history[/b], [b]intimacy[/b], and [b]non-presence[/b].

1. [b]The Fairy Tail Hypothesis[/b] (or, more coventionally, 'allegory')
The basic premise I call the fairy tale hypothesis. Notice that there are in fact TWO morals to each fairy tale, by the following argument:
1. Fairy tails promise to teach a moral (e.g. the bane of curiosity, the inevitable triumph of good over evil) -- this is the superficial moral.
2. Every individual, however, is unaware of this outcome. The good girl simply [i]does[/i] what comes naturally, the bad girl the same, and they both think they will get away with it.
3. Fairy tails are therefore [i]allegorical[/i] -- they do not provide concrete ways of achieving power, but rather says some fact about fate. IN FACT -- any conscious effort to arrive at a certain ends (such as the bad sister copying the good sister) inevitably meets with failure.
4. [i]Therefore[/i], there is a second, 'negative', moral in fairy tales, an allegory of reading: it states that the first moral can never be used as knowledge, that fate is greater than our ability to control it, or: that this fairy tale itself can never be reduced to concrete knowledge but must remain forever as [i]allo-agoria[/i], "The voice from the other". [i]In addition[/i], all fairy tales are always about the [i]forgetting[/i] of this fact (thus, the daughter will always forget what the mother or the woodsman (the voice of the other) warns her).

Conclusion: The fairy tale (the second moral) therefore provides a very radical model of history, which may be concentrated around these words: [b]allegory, other, forgetting, knowledge, control, fate[/b]. Fairy tales at once teach a (superficial) lesson of the world, but the very same story also 'deconstructs' the first reading,


But I want to 'turn the screw' once more.