The pigs are always fat, lazy, and happy, whereas the wolves are always intimidating, shrewd, and even reckless. The tyrant in the story of the Three Little Pigs is the wolf, who is unable to be satisfied by his cravings and who must continue in his endless search for meaning. The story seems to portray the wolf as an imposing figure that is unconquerable by the pigs; however, in the end the wit of the third pig does indeed conquer the wolf. The wolf, in a typical role of preying on the weak, is able to blow down the houses of the first two pigs, but the third pig’s business nature and sturdy home hinders the wolf. The cycle is supposed to be a reverse full circle, with the ...view middle of the document...
The third story is by Fazio and Ek and written in the year 2000. The story presented here is one observing the idea of good versus evil and brings into question the roles of fear, confrontation, and evil as major parts of life. The final story is by A. Hokum, B. Goniff, and C. Crook and was written in 1997. They used several instruments to determine the level of cunningness in the wolf. These are the Jones Hot Air Test, the Smith Wool-Over-Eyes Scale, and finally the Cross-Mammal Cunningness Probe, each respected biological instruments used to compare and contrast wild animals (Walden University, 2012).
A Lesson in Paraphrasing
The first story, in today’s modern world with the pigs being at the top of the food chain and in a sense, will retain the revolutionary spirit that had once been contained within the wolf, but was then passed on to the pig. The second story confronts the idea of the tyrant who is unable to reconcile his position with his perceived importance in world events. The wolf ends up being extremely aggressive in his pursuit of the third pig, and begs the pig for his own demise. The triumph of good over evil is seen as a positive thing for the world of the pigs.
Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses
The strengths of the first story seem to be its very plain speech and excellent relation of the story to everyday things. The weaknesses of the first story are its lack of excitement and it does not provide anything new or interesting to the story, just a general commentary on what the pigs may or may not represent. The Oriental aspects seem impractical and are not cogent enough to be influential to the gist of the first story. The strengths of the second story are its excellent use of the idea of the tyrant and the inability of one’s own power to cope in a world of rules and establishment. The weaknesses of the second story are its many uses of questions to the reader that lessen the authoritative vernacular of the author. The strengths of the third story are its dramatic reaches for good and evil. The weaknesses of the third story are its simplifications of the pigs versus wolf’s story as a biblical tale, when actually it is a cautionary tale signifying the importance of industrial attitudes. Finally, the fourth story uses humor to reach the reader, but its weaknesses are that it feigns a scientific study with no real use, since it only serves to facilitate the importance of science (Walden University, 2012).
Compare and Contrast
When comparing these four stories, I would have to look at what the intentions of the authors were. The first author's intent was to display the struggle between the wolf and the pigs as a cycle often repeated in nature, and intended for the reader to gain insight from that knowledge. This insight is beneficial because it makes one think in perspective to the situation that these are just animals and that it is normal for wolves to dominate pigs because they are predators and must do...