Talk:The Three Little Pigs

Untitled

An event mentioned in this article is a May 27 selected anniversary.

(old)

Hey! There's no spoiler warning! I was innocently reading along, and suddenly, the whole plot was revealed! Ortolan88

This article is about a story which is too simplistic to rate a "spoiler" warning. There isn't much of a plot. KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I see someone added a spoiler warning. I couldn't believe there's a spoiler warning on a story like 3 little pigs. Is there anyone on earth over the age of 5 who doesn't already know the story by heart??? Cypherswipe 21:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

"I read somewhere" that this story actually started out as a government-sponsored handbill in England back in the 1600s. The Great Fire of London had just happened and the government was trying to build support for a law requiring all new buildings in town to be of brick or stone (such a law actually was enacted). -- Cranston Lamont 22:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Some quick searching on google and google books didn't net me a reliable source for this. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

That's why it's in the talk section and not in the article. -- Cranston Lamont 03:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep :-) Well, it had be a great fact fr the article if it were verifiable, anyway. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure that it is...

he huffed and he puffed and he blew his house 'in' i am really sure that it is blew his house 'Down'

The passage you're referring to doesn't cite a specific version of the story, so your question can't be answered either way. Since it's a quote, I suppose it should get a "citation needed" tag. GMcGath 21:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Every version I've heard uses 'in'. 'Down' wouldn't rhyme. The house is blown 'in', because the walls are blown 'in', causing it to crumple and collapse. To me, blowing down suggests a tall house that fell over with the force of the wind. Skittle 14:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I remember "down" as well - from somewhere. The text I find uses "let me in" rhyming with "chinny chin chin" and then "down" not ryming with anything. Jimw338 (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Originally "Three Little Pigsies"?

Apparently, a very similar tale about Cornish Pigsies (or pixies) appeared in an edition of the "Athenaeum" magazine dated 1846. I can't copy/paste on the system I'm on but google "Three Little Pigsies" and a reference should be easy to find. Gerard.

Removed 'works influenced' sentence

"In the online Chinese idioms dictionary in Taiwan, there had had one of the idioms called "三隻小豬" (Three Little Pigs). However, after found and reported by some news channel, it has been removed."

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Anyone know what it's talking about? Skittle 14:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It is the news that the the on-line dictionary of Ministry of Education in Taiwan has some inappropriate content. Somebody had written his viewpoint in the blog. --220.135.148.39 11:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Allegorical?

I heard recently that the story is allegorical to some sort of political situation in Germany, but I haven't been able to find any further information on this other than a vague reference. Does anyone know anything about this? If true, I think it would be worth including in the article as it would give the story some depth beyond a mere children's tale. croll 14:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Origins of tale

The article mentions when the tale may have originated, but does not mention in what country it originated. Someone should include this information in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.27.119.90 (talk) 04:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

A second-grade girl in southern Shanxi Province, China, last year (Year of the Pig) told me the story in Chinese and swore it was a traditional Chinese folk tale. When you think about it, the story must take place in a location where folk wisdom needs to justify building brick houses that can stand up to typhoons or earthquakes or fires, where there are wolves and pigs, where coal or wood smoke goes up a chimney, and where brothers live in separate homes instead of in an extended family or polyandry. Look in history for places and times where these co-existed, there are not many. The tale could have developed independently in several, it is just the sort of thing for grandparents to tell grandchildren. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.127.124.69 (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thinking about it more, I wonder if the tale might not have originated in a city instead of a farming area. Farmers would not think of pigs living separately, you always want to raise at least two, piggish pigs compete to eat more than their brothers and the farmers get fat from that. And in many farming areas the land is not divided as population grows, instead there is primogeniture and brothers do not live in equal houses by themselves. So maybe there is an element of urban capitalism here that builds on traditional farm folk custom. And instead of directing social criticism at neighbors who build houses differently (in China they don't), it might be directed at the öther people outside the culture who are too ignorant to follow the customs and morals outlined in this perfect narrative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.127.124.69 (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

{spoiler}

Someone please explain how on earth this helps? Stop it please!--Doc^g 00:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Not by the hair on my chinnie-chin-chin! --Tony Sidaway 00:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like fallout from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning. But seriously folks, I think Three Little Pigs is past the statute of limitations on spoilers.

TWO HOUSES DESTROYED, LOCAL PROWLER KILLED. MAYOR CALLS LATEST HUFFING INCIDENT "FAMILIAR". InedibleHulk (talk) 08:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Used as a propaganda against nazism

This fable (in a modified form) was also used as propaganda against nazism.This site: [[1]] has this cartoon with this fable used as a tool against Adolf Hitler.In fact Hitler is the bad wolf in this fable. Agre22 (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)agre22

Actually the fairy tale itself is an example of hidden fascist propaganda.

dumb — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.78.116.12 (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Morals

How about a section discussing the perceived morals from the story? I would like to propose a few:

- Share what you have with those in need.

- Love thy neighbour as your own

- If you live in an area which is populated by wolves who constantly attempt to blow down houses, make sure you live in a house made of bricks. (62.56.97.86 (talk) 01:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC))

Great, do you have a reliable source you can cite which discusses these lessons, or do you intend to just insert your own original ideas as to what those morals should be? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No, unfortunately I do not have any reliable sources and the above were my own interpretations. I was hoping we could collaborate and agree on, say, 3 key morals of the story. (194.221.40.3 (talk) 15:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC))

Three Litle Pigs in popular culture

Does anyone still remember that rock song based on the Three Litle Pigs? The one with the claymation video shown on MTV? If anyone can find any references to it, please include that in--Alphapeta (talk) 01:39, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry...found it.--Alphapeta (talk) 01:43, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

School Boy Q "Collard Greens." Kdavis52189 (talk) 12:15, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Rap song Kdavis52189 (talk) 12:16, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

I think the article should have mentioned "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?", which of course was parodied in Albee's "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" 2601:C2:201:2B85:DCB:2925:88F1:C5BF (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Looney Tunes?

I am surprised that only Disney was cited as a produced film version, when Looney Tunes also produced a version using the Hungarian dance musical. MPA 21:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPA (talk • contribs)

Original story has been messed with?

"The first little pig builds a house of straw, but a wolf blows it down and the pig runs to his brother's house. The second pig builds a house of sticks and when he sees his brother he lets him in, with the same ultimate result. [...] The third pig builds a house of hard bricks and when he sees his brothers he lets them in. [...] Retellings of the story sometimes omit the attempts to trick the third pig, or state that the first pig ran to the second pig's house, and then both of them ran to the third pig's house of bricks. The latter is often an attempt to write out death or violence in the story"

It seems the retelling where both pigs run to the brick house is the only one that made it into the article in its current form. If this isn't the original story then that should be changed. --Mudd1 (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

History

The second sentence (quote): "Printed versions date back to the 1840s, but the story itself is thought to be much older."

The lead should summarize but the earliest date in the article is 1881 (Uncle Remus version) and the History section begins c1886. If I glance correctly, there is no allusion to any 1840s edition and essentially no discussion of its traditional status ("much older").

Some preceding Talk is pertinent. --P64 (talk) 19:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Or you could just fix it. Unsourced is unsourced. Less huff, more puff! InedibleHulk (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

File:Three little pigs 1904 straw house.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Three little pigs 1904 straw house.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 5, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-09-05. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng {chat} 20:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the day

The wolf blows down the straw house in a 1904 adaptation of Three Little Pigs, a fairy tale featuring anthropomorphic animals. Printed versions date back to the 1840s, but the story itself is thought to be much older. The story in its arguably best-known form appeared in English Fairy Tales by Joseph Jacobs, first published in 1890. The phrases used in the story, and the various morals which can be drawn from it, have become embedded in western culture. The story uses the literary rule of three, expressed in this case as a "contrasting three", as the third pig's brick house turns out to be the only one which is adequate to withstand the wolf.Artist: Leonard Leslie Brooke; Restoration: Jujutacular

Hurricane-proof building

An editor recently asked why this is here. I explained, and now cut & paste here:

That article says "Tornadoes, cyclones, and other storms with strong winds damage or destroy many buildings. However, with proper design and construction, the damage to buildings by these forces can be greatly reduced."

The third pig in this story utilized proper design and construction and so greatly reduced the damage inflicted by the puffing of the wolf (which totally obliterates crappier houses, comparably to hurricane force winds).

Much like the statement that the story features anthropomorphic animals, the hurricane-proof building claim is covered by the story itself, a primary source. "The wolf huffed, and he puffed, but try as he might, he could not blow the house down!" Not "chose not to". Not "could have if he tried harder". He simply could not. In some versions, he huffs and puffs, then huffs and puffs again. This is presumably twice as windy as the wind which easily decimated the wooden house (and thus likely met the criteria for a Category 5 storm). Still, the brick house stood.

Given this information from the primary source, a typical reasonably educated reader should find it apparent that this is indeed a hurricane-proof building. For the same reason we don't need a secondary source to say the animals are anthropomorphic (and that the sky is blue), I reckon we don't need a source for this straightforward description.

Hope this clears things up. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:16, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

OR? TortoiseWrath (talk) 23:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Possibly. It's kind of on the line between OR and SKYISBLUE, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't I feel comfortable counting this as SKYISBLUE, seeing as you just provided a four-paragraph explanation of how you came to the conclusion that the brick house was hurricane-proof; if you can provide a four-paragraph explanation of how you decided that the sky was blue, we can talk. ;)

In addition, I'm not sure that the brick house would survive a C5 hurricane (or even a C3): first, who's to say that the other two houses weren't just very poorly constructed? A well-constructed wooden house has a much better chance of surviving a hurricane than a poorly-constructed brick house. Second, your statement that huffing and puffing twice produces winds with double the speed of huffing and puffing once; however, as the two instances of huffing and puffing did not occur simultaneously, this pair of huffs and puffs would lead to longer-sustained winds, not higher winds.

The explanation was for people who don't automatically come to the conclusion. It doesn't prove these types of people are the majority (or minority) of the article's readers. It's four paragraphs in text form, but a nanosecond as a thought process. I have no idea if most readers think of it as I do, but guessed they did.

You've got the winning point on sustained winds vs strong ones. But as I explained elsewhere: No, the stick house isn't prime lumber, and yes, it was assembled by an animal with hooves for thumbs. But it stays standing for a while, withstanding regular winds, a wolf knocking on the door and (in some illustrations) a "Home, Sweet Home" wall hanging on a nail that was likely hammered there. But then BLAMMO! Debris everywhere in one fell blow. I've never been puffed by a wolf, but I've been panted on by a dog. It barely registers. This wolf is a Category 2 here, at least. (I'll admit this is much more leaning towards OR, but a disputably valid point by non-Wiki standards)

I'll concede that this is indeed disputed and unsourced, so it should go for now. (I'll also complain that your follow-up caused an edit conflict, which really sucks when one is typing with a Playstation controller.) InedibleHulk (talk) 00:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the sentence "This wolf is a Category 2 here, at least." That's going on my epic Internet quote wall. TortoiseWrath (talk) 01:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

TortoiseWrath (talk) 00:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up: also, a hurricane's winds move in a circular motion, which is more damaging than the linear motion that would be created by a wolf huffing and puffing, as it rips an entity's matter pieces apart from one another, as opposed to pushing them all in the same direction.

As an example, winds gusting at 100mph (equivalent to a category 2 hurricane) recently struck where I live in Ferry County, Washington. Though it snapped tens of millions of trees in half, it caused only ~$2M in structural damage and two deaths, despite the fact that very many houses were wooden. Most of this was trees falling on the houses. This was because this wind was moving linearly; were it spiraling, as it would have been had a hurricane struck (though that wouldn't happen, as we're about 300 miles inland), it would have caused massive amounts of damage to the many poorly-constructed and small homes around here.

TortoiseWrath (talk) 00:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

True, but there really is nothing in the story that confirms or denies that the wolf's breath spirals similarly. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

A wolf can be on only one side of a house at any given time. TortoiseWrath (talk) 01:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but...um...damnit! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Refered to in March of the Wooden Soldiers

The three little pigs are also in the movie "March of the Wooden Soldiers" starring Laurel and Hardy. They go by the names of Elmer, Willie, and Jiggs. JohnSHicks (talk) 12:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Wide Awake, August 1879

Yesterday's anonymous revision is almost null but the edit summary mentions publication in the August 1879 Wide Awake (publ. Daniel Lothrop), which is earlier than any particular publication we cite.

"Printed versions date back to the 1840s", we say in the WP:LEAD but do not support. The entire second half of the lead paragraph evidently belongs rather in the body of the article, with support. --P64 (talk) 18:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 6 April 2015

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request. Perfect example of a title where the article would be capitalized in running text.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Three Little Pigs → The Three Little Pigs – As per: The Buried Moon, The Fish and the Ring, The Hedley Kow, The King of the Cats, The Magpie's Nest, The Master and his Pupil, The Old Witch, The Pedlar's Pack, The Rose-Tree, The Small-tooth Dog, The Squirrel Wife, The Necklace of Princess Fiorimonde and The Three Heads of the Well all from Category:English fairy tales. As per earliest reference here presenting "THE STORY OF THE THREE LITTLE PIGS". GregKaye 21:04, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean The Three Little Pigs? If so, I Support it. Otherwise, I'm confused. Also, just "per", not "as per". InedibleHulk (talk) 21:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

TY, and that was an RM built of straw GregKaye 21:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, not exactly hurricance proof. But I think you have overwhelming evidence there, and moving this would be uncontroversial. Most of the article already says it that way, and while Three Little Pigs (film) (probably the most famous version) seems an exception, that article's also mistitled, per the poster. Both clearly should be fixed soon, at least before the next full moon. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixed the film. Checked when the next full moon's coming. No rush. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:16, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Tried moving it myself, but the article already exists as a redirect. Since ancient times (2003), and only because this one was already here. Looks like a job for a technical request. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• Slight oppose per WP:CONCISE and WP:THE; I'm not sure that source is strong enough to justify the "the" Red Slash 14:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Is your opposition slight enough that doing a Google Image search for "three little pigs book" and reading the covers might sway you? Typically just omitted for books about "Walt Disney's Three Little Pigs", which does flow better without "the", but may have been mainly easier to trademark.

Generally seems like The Old Man and the Sea to me, by WP:THE standards. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Three Little Pigs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070226115711/http://www.disneyshorts.org/sounds/bigbadwolf.mp3 to http://www.disneyshorts.org/sounds/bigbadwolf.mp3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

The truth

The truth is that thewolfde had foresight and knowledge and the capability; devided the pigs separately worked toward their own peril, manipulated by External Forces - the same force which twist and warp history and Story in to their own planned devices - all for huberis and greed.

In to one house commanded thewolfde, or the end of you will come. And so I will, even without their cooperation. Thewolfde (talk) 15:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

What do you know, you were right, we all went home together. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

All three pigs have been grossly misquoted

Reference number seven links to Joseph Jacob's "English Fairy Tales" from 1890, a fine book. This is in relation to their response to the wolf, inquiring entry to their homes. Each in turn is said to respond, "No, not by the hair on my chinny chin chin." Reviewing the original text from this source, we find the dialogue actually reads "No, no, by the hair of my chinny chin chin." There is no "not", instead two "no"s. Traditional the dialogue may be, but it is not found in the reference used. A mistake, this may be, or else another reference used. ButterCashier (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

yes 102.69.208.230 (talk) 14:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hmmm. I thought the fable was about working hard and being smart. That was left out of Wikis description.

“Later additions describe the wolf as “nice””? Wiki has gone WOKI! 2600:1014:B031:950F:3C52:4153:ADA0:F61B (talk) 04:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

thank you 102.69.208.230 (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)