Why didn't Cinderella's glass shoes turn back to normal?
Asked by
Berserker (
33548
)
September 26th, 2015
In the Cinderella fairytale, after midnight, everything turns back to normal. The horse carriage turns back into a pumpkin, the horses back into mice, and her dress back into tatters. But the shoes remained.
Now I realize it’s a fairytale, plus it couldn’t have continued without the glass shoe. You know, since the prince is such a damn dumbass and can’t recognize the face of someone who he seemingly fell in love with.
But it still makes no sense. I saw that new Cinderella movie, and it showed that her old shoes were turned into the glass ones, so I started thinking about different versions. Maybe the godmother materialized the shoes out of nowhere, so, unlike the rest of the things touched by magic, the shoes weren’t affected by the time limit restriction? In other versions, perhaps. Not that new one.
So for the hell of it, why didn’t the glass shoes turn back into normal crappy slippers, for the versions where the latter were turned into fancy footwear? (and not materialized out of nowhere)
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
20 Answers
High heels, slippers, combat boots, wtv.
GQ. If you read the original story of Cinderella, written by the Brothers Grimm, there is no godmother, no time limit, and no glass slipper. Here is the original story.
(Warning: For those that appreciate the Disney-type versions of fairy tales, this one should be avoided. It involves self-mutilation and blood, which is right up your alley @Symbeline.)
The adaptation that you saw and the others that most of us grew up with are just sugar-coated versions of the original story.
In the original Grimm story, Snow White was 7 years old.
So the Queen felt sexually threatened by a little 7 year old girl, and what is worse, the Prince in the end had the hots for a 7 year old.
Disney’s still stuck on the “true love” myth / theme, and rarely explains its kids’ cartoons or has them make rigorous sense.
When I saw it as a kid, I thought that the shoes were clearly a different sort of spell than the other other stuff.
Other possible retcon theories:
* The fairy godmother didn’t tell Cinderella the full spell content, and the lost shoe was an intentional bewitching lure for the prince.
* There’s a third party. The invisible super-powerful Disney True Love sprites, who have been stalking Cinderella and are arranging the setup.
* Something about the shoes being separated and/or the prince having possession of the shoe got the last part of the spell stuck.
* Magic spells sometimes have wonky side-effects, and when Cinderella klutzed on the steps, it messed up the unraveling part of the spell, leaving the shoe illusion intact, and causing a loose threat in the fairy godmother’s magic karma web, leading to other wacky adventures which were edited out…
* An unseen witch meddled and froze the spell on the shoes, leading to the plot of the sequel…
@Pied_Pfeffer Yeah I had heard that most Disney shit came from darker shit. I’ve never read any of the originals though…so thanks for that. Looking forward to it.
@Zaku
* Something about the shoes being separated and/or the prince having possession of the shoe got the last part of the spell stuck.
Baaahahahaha I love that one, the spell glitched. XD That’s totally it, no other explanation needed lol.
Oh, god. Did the original story have something to do with her cutting her feet to make them smaller to fit into small shoes, because she thought her feet were too big? I read that once, as a kid. It was pretty horrifying.
Most of those fairy tales came out of the horrors of the dark ages. The children’s game, Ring Around The Rosie was referring to the bubonic plague or small pox or something.
Correction: A kind Jelly sent a PM explaining that the Grimm brothers did not write Cinderella. They only gathered tales from all over and published them in volumes. Here is the link she sent.
Wow. Well, it seems that winning the lottery is a universal hope, huh.
Maybe because the slipper was not on her foot, the magic turning it back didn’t work. And because they were a pair, the other couldn’t turn back either.
@Pied_Pfeffer , Thanks for showing the true version, a grim fairytale indeed. Here is my question. Does the story show prejudice against people with big feet? Maybe they should form an advocacy group.
I saw the Cinderella movie a couple of weeks ago and thought exactly the same thing!!!!
@LostInParadise, @Pied_Pfeffer had a link above (this one) that shows that the story originated in China, so that explains the big feet issue. For what ever reason, tiny feet on women were valued in China and Japan and women would literally mutilate themselves to have them. Their mothers would start binding their girls’ feet at a very, very young age. Very sadistic.
I’m pretty sure the practice is no longer in practice.
As far as an “advocacy group”...whatever would one be needed for? To ban the story, or what?
I think the slipper did not turn because although the FG transmogrified other items into what they were (pumkin to coach, mouse to horse, ragged dress to fancy ball gown) the slippers were create ethereally from the void and therefore had nothing to turn back into.
@Dutchess_III , I suggested an advocacy group somewhat tongue in cheek. Now that the Chinese and Japanese are not quite so hung up on small feet, it is not really needed.
@rojo Right, this is what I theorize as well, except in the last Disney movie, her old ass slippers were turned into the glass ones.
Ass slippers? I’m getting quite a strong mental picture of ass slippers…
Ass slippers that turn back into glass after they’re inserted…ouch…
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
