A Critique to the Art as a Treatment for issues on Mental Health

"Art as a treatment for issues on Mental health"

ABSTRACT:(YNA)
INTRODUCTION: (YNA)
Mental health issues are one of the most sensitive issues not only in the
Philippines but around the world. Mental health is a state of well-being in which an
individual realizes his or her abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work
productively, and can make a contribution to his or her community.

The ''Art as a treatment for issues on Mental health" tries to relate to how art can
help those people who are experiencing mental health problems such as depression
and anxiety. We all know that Art can be therapy and used as a traditional mental health
treatment that aims to manage behaviors, process feelings, reduce stress and anxiety,
and increase self-esteem through self-discovery and creating art can help us to
acknowledge and recognize feelings that have been lurking in our subconscious.
Over the past decades, mental health professionals have tried to look for a way
on how arts might be used to heal and to cure mental illnesses that helps to increase
understanding of oneself and others, develop a capacity for self-reflection, reduce
symptoms of depression and alter behaviors and thinking patterns especially the
mindset.
We choose the topic "Art as a treatment for mental health" because we believe
that art is helpful to express one's thoughts, emotions, and feelings. We wanted to
investigate the whole person relationship between art and mental health because this
topic also awakens our curiosity and it offers us some interesting thoughts and ways to
deep dive into whether art can be a useful therapy and more or less effective than
others. We wanted to know whether the impact of therapy can be healed or cure
illnesses, especially to our mental being.
The key question that our critical paper was going to answer is "Can art heal the
human body?" We all know that healing takes time, and healing is a long process. We
wanted to emphasize that Art is healing because it forces us to forge a connection
between our mind and our body. Unlike exercise, which works our body, or meditation,
which clears our mind, art-making accesses both mind and body to promote healing. Art
has a lot of benefits especially to our well-being that helps to stimulate the creative mind
while relieving mental strain. A low-stress level leads to a happier, healthier lifestyle and
helps improve overall mental health.
 The objective and the goal of our critical paper was to better understand art and
how art is used as a treatment for issues on Mental health. We wanted to explore how
art provides creative, healthy ways to help youth decrease anxiety and worry, soothe,
and regulate emotions and behavior and how Art therapy can help strengthen a child's
sense of self, self-esteem, and overall awareness and discovery about identity and
worth.

What does artwork tell us about the topic/ subject of the critical paper?
The artwork tells us about our topic " Art as a treatment for mental health" that
engaging in art can help us to improve our well-being. And helps our mind to stimulate
many thoughts that can express our own "creativity" that helps to improve mental health
issues to be healed and cured. We all know that people who experience mental health
problems isolate themselves and they are very silent when they are facing their own
battles. They have no time for talking and chit-chatting with others. And because they
isolate themselves they put their time and effort into their artwork that whatever lingers
in their mind they express it with the artwork they made because for them artworks can
help them to be pure and true with their thoughts and emotions. Artworks also help
them to have creative minds that will express what they truly feel and it is a way of
releasing their stress in life. For those who battle with depression and anxiety, it excites
them to do arts also because through art they can build connections that can cure
loneliness and isolation. Making art enables a person to take responsibility for their own
health and as well as their well-being by maintaining levels of independence and
curiosity and improving the quality of life.

What does the artwork say about the key question of the critical paper?
Our critical paper focuses on " healing through the use of art ". The key question
that our critical paper was going to answer is " Is art heals the human body?”. We all
know that healing takes, maybe it is our physical health or mental health, it both takes a
long process to be healed and it takes time to be fully recovered. In order for us to be
fully okay and healed, making art can help to calm our minds and help us to reflect in
life. Art can make us free whatever is heavy burdens in our hearts. It helps us to breathe
and allow art to express our true self, our true emotions, and our true identity. Art is a
reflection of what is really inside of us. The unseen and unheard part of us. Art helps us
to slowly heal our wounds without being aware of it even if it takes time for us to finally
get well. Therefore, by creating art or anything that is related to arts, we are slowly
building connections and this connection is " you and the art that you are creating". You
create what your heart and mind speak. And this process helps you feel better day by
day. Instead of focusing on your problems, you tend to focus on your art. Therefore, art
can save us from drowning in a pool of destruction.

What is the question that the paper is asking?

What questions are being asked to elaborate /expand on the main question?

How does the reading relate to other existing knowledge? What are the similar
thoughts/propositions/ findings? What are different?

Is the paper relatable? Is there anything in the paper that speaks of your
experience?

What are the preferred solutions to the issues/ presented that can either be found
within the paper or the student's own opinion?

Cite example artworks (painting, sculpture, movie, architecture) to prove your

point)

Do you agree with the answer? Why or why not? -what are your reflections on the
answer/s?

-End of Review-

ART APPRECIATION
SATURDAY (10:30AM – 01-30PM)
SUBMMITED BY:
BORJA, MA. SOFIA MADELINE N.
DELIZO, LOREINE M.
MANJARES, GISSELE G.
 MANTE, NEŇA MARIE
QUIŇONES, PRINCESS YNA AYALA

SUBMMITED TO:
PROF. ABALOS, KAR CHRISTIAN D.

Karl Christian D. Abalos WD 230: Women and Work UPD

MAWD-CSWCD Prof. Judy Taguiwalo
2003-27280 Book Review Version 1

REIMAGINING FAIRYTALES:

The Attempt to Subjugate the Western Brainwashing of Global Consciousness on Women’s Roles

The Book: A Critique to the [White] Male Supremacy and Its

Implication to the [White] Woman’s Liberation

Kolbenschlag, M. (1979). Kiss Sleeping Beauty Good-Bye: Breaking the Spell of Feminine Myths
and Models. New York: Bantam Books Inc.

We are moulded by stories and are consistently subjected to them. In various stages of our lives, we
come across stories that transform us – transform our way of looking at things or acting towards our
self-creation. It is to say then that some stories are powerful enough to create a certain consciousness
that seemingly appear to be legitimate.

Fairytales are especially powerful as they are fed to children who devour them like scientific truths. That
even when they grow up and the magic and myth of the stories are soon proven false, remnants of the
fairytales in the consciousness remain. Worse, the actions that were influenced by this consciousness
are habitually practiced that, consequently, become institutionalized norms. Whether or not authors of
the fairytales (and their various adaptations) intended the same is beyond debate, but there is a need to
address what it had become especially when it turns into a tool for inequality where, a dominant race,
class or gender oppresses another.

M. Kolbenschlag’s Kiss Sleeping Beauty Good-Bye: Breaking the Spell of Feminine Myths and Models
(1979) highlights the contribution of the fairytale consciousness in the oppression of women. The goal of
the book is to relate the princess-heroine role to the state of women in the patriarchal society thus,
deconstructing its traditional messages from gender-conformation into gender-reinvention.

But in my sense, it has achieved more than that. The book is a concise history of the periodic variations
of the fairytales that were cleverly synthesized into a lone and coherent storyline for single reference.
Although there are limits (as any study does), this connectedness, across time, of the issues referenced
to women is a firm indicator and validation of the long-going objectification of the woman in her
heteronormal role as the Other. It has effectively brought into light the way the society is conditioned by
certain fictional stories, fairytale or otherwise, and the unfounded assumptions made in the illegitimate
attempt of the man to institutionalize his supremacy among other beings thus, making it legitimate. The
audience is thus made-aware of the simple tools, such as the fairytales, that are used to further the
disparity and discrimination of the Other not belonging to the profile of the “White Male.”

Even more, the book manages to weave a beautiful case for reaching transcendence – characterising
what it is and how to achieve it. While again, the discussion is focused on the White Female, as an
[intentional?] limit of the book, it does effectively serve its purpose and [unintentionally?] invite
discussion to apply the same to the cases of the plethora of sexual identities.

The Framework for Review

The paper shall follow the following framework in the attempt to give a substantive and balance review
of the book:
 Figure 1 - Book Review Framework (Rivera, 2013 – WD 231 Class)

The review shall start by looking at the contribution (if there are) of the book to the debates of women
and diversities and whether or not they are substantive. It shall then concurrently see the book’s
strengths and weaknesses and its consideration of intersectionalities (again, if there are). The latter
gauges are discussed fluidly as this reviewer shifts from one measure to the other. Finally, it shall make
an attempt to assess its readability and ability to cut-across audiences – all this in order to make a
balanced review of the book. The framework for review was chosen liberally in consideration of the level
of comfort and knowledge of this reviewer.

Definitely, the book contributes to the debate of women’s issues and albeit the lack of the same
contribution for the issues in diversities, it is still a treasure chest of analytical discourses and stylized
arguments on how fairytales shape and mirrors the plight of women on oppression. These discourses
and arguments can only be discerned if they are flaked in pieces. This reviewer then attempted to do
exactly that by summarizing the book according to the issues present and the accompanying solution/s
presented thereafter.

The summary of the points of the book is hereto attempted to be given in the table following. The first
column, except for Snow White as this reviewer have failed to dissect exactly how the author views her,
describes the character profile of the main protagonist and how she embodies the ascribed roles of
women. The second column, meanwhile, overlays a feminist lens on the fairytale stories and thus,
deconstructing the same. This reviewer then moves to point out some women’s issues on the third
column that the fairytales portray. Finally, the fourth column gives some recommendations on the issues
identified so that the heroine could rise above the dictates of patriarchy. But please note that
presumption of the reader on the basic plot and general storyline of the (popular/original) fairytale is
assumed and so, it shall not be discussed in the summaries.
The Protagonist
The Fairytale Woman
and Her
Character Deconstructed
Sleeping Beauty: The woman is in a state of
“She sees herself “sleep” as an ideal period to
as someone that
prepare the woman for her
things will happen relationship with the man –
to, not as one the woman is idle until a man
who will make comes to “wake” her up but
them happen” (p.
this “waking-up” does not free
15).
her from passivity. Only the
“embrace of her own being”
(p. 28), not the kiss of the
Prince, can awaken her.
Snow White The woman is rallied against
the woman
(daughter/stepdaughter
versus mother/stepmother) in
the bout set by narcissism and
insecurity (p.
31).
The Fairytale
The Protagonist and
Woman
Her Character
Deconstructed
Cinderella: She “has Women’s work, either
been brainwashed public or private, is
The Fairytale
Issue/s Woman
Reimagined
1. “Destructive differentiation” (p. 6) or The Transcendent
the bias in treating the rearing of Woman refuses to
boys and girls. Where the latter is
“undergo the
treated as fragile and made to do
process of
“gentle” tasks leaving the menial
adaptation” (p. 19)
work to the former. As a result the
woman is made to think she is instead, she
forever dependent to the man.
demands the
2. Living for another (p. 10) and the
“power to do and to
eternal waiting for that man to fulfil
her goal of servitude. Thus, while choose, the power
idle (sleeping), the woman is made to crate one’s own
to become the desirable Other to existence” (p. 20).
attract the man (p. 12).
3. The “shopping syndrome” (p. 17) as
the power substitute for work and
public role and the woman’s
exploitation thru consumerism.
4. Heteronomy (p. 25).
1. The myth of the perfect, non Transcendence as
selfserving mother that puts the creation of
unbearable guilt to women who
authentic friendships
fails to meet the standards, in this
with other women
case, the stepmother (pp. 36 & 38).
(p. 47) and to be
2. The effect of narcissism in the
creation of the self: vain and androgynous by
selfdepreciating on one hand and an “abandoning the
“individuated self-centeredness” on
stereotypical
the other (p. 41).
The “shut-upness” & the lack of constellation of
3.
“inner *and outer – as in the body] qualities for a
security” (p. 47). dialectical sexuality,
4. Envy and envy avoidance (pp. 48 - a creative selfhood.”
51). (p. 53) .
The Fairytale
Issue/s Woman
Reimagined
1. Gendered division of labor (GDOL) Transcendence will
and the isolation of women “in a happen if “economic
into a ‘supportive’ merely pragmatic and 2.
mind-set, persuaded never a means for
selfcreation as her Self
that the chief end of
3.
work is service rather is already
than work for its own predetermined by the
sake” (p. 85) – she man
– this is her
“believes that she
“‘othercentered’
belongs where she is”
conditioning” (p. 92).
(p. 86) and finds
“pleasure... [in] the
job of being needed”
(p. 88).
Goldilocks “is an The woman’s 1.
impostor” and “she othercentered “feminine
socialization” (p. 108)
ends where she
with the “institution of
begins: There is
marriage and family” (p.
neither recovery nor
109), as is the case of
consolation, there is Goldilocks who tried to
no resolution of 2.
fit into a series of
conflict” (p. 102).
predetermined roles
(that of the bears),
conditions “a woman to
‘feel right’ only when
whatever she does is
done for that significant
Other” (p. 108).
Belle (Beauty) [and the The woman, while she is 1.
Beast] is a “in command of herself...
freely modifies her
“representation of a 2.
autonomy in the
soul in the process of
interests of a higher
exorcising patriarchal good” (p. 150) and must
images... that wield undergo a “theonomous
power over it” (p. conversion: The
149). acceptance of temporary
diminishment – without
the sacrifice of autonomy
– for the
accomplishment of a
purpose” that is beyond
the personal (p.
159).
Unlike the previous characters where the title billing is that of the female or shared with a female (as is
the case with Beauty and the Beast), the Epilogue tackles a fairytale with a male title lead: the Frog
privatized sphere of domestic relations of the
responsibility” where “the prospect of family and
women leaving the home for work... employment are
came to be regarded as a kind of a
restructured in
‘mortal sin’” (p. 69).
concert” (p. 77)
Double burden and the attempt to
balance “the world of work and the towards shared
home” (p. 69). responsibility.
The “denigration of ‘women’s work’”
and the denial of “value of certain
kinds of work” and thus inhibiting
pleasure in it like housework and
child-rearing (p. 81).
“Addictive socialization” where Transcendence is “role
women are “brainwashed by the experimentation and
notion that ‘you can’t make it the search for identity
alone...’ that survival is dependent [and discarding]... the ill-
upon exclusive attachment” (p. 130) – fitting masks and
the need to establish a nuclear scenarios in order to
family. create an original self”
The “female monopoly of early (p. 104) to have a
childcare” (p. 112) and the “sense of being
consequent “acceptance of paternal complete in oneself” (p.
authority as a sanctuary from 118) – a conscious
maternal tyranny” (p. 112). choosing of
“aloneness” (p. 120)
and the “single life” (p.
122).
Biological determination of Transcendence is
identity (p. 156). “authentic liberation” of
Passive consumptive women the woman who is able
to:
denied of becoming “active
1. Make more
actualizers” (p. 67).
decisions
2. Identify with god
3. Move towards
women’s solidarity
4. Inverse “traditional
moral hierarchy”
5. “Process anger...”
as an “organic
motivation
for...change”
6. Converge
“politicization and
contemplation”
and come in
“contact with the
self” (pp. 179-183).
Prince. The princesses writes to the prince and in a climactic finish, they let out all the rage that’s been
brewing. Kolbenschlag uses the frog as a metaphor for “phallic assertive qualities” (p. 191) of men and
the need to undergo a certain “metamorphosis” (perhaps tantamount to the “transcendence” of the
princess-heroine) through the “rupture and shedding of old shells and old skins – of conventional
structures and traditional roles” (p. 193). The same summary points are used for the princess-heroine to
slice-up the Epilogue.

The Fairytale
The Protagonist and The Fairytale Prince
Issue/s Prince
His Character Deconstructed
Reimagined
The frog prince views The Frog Prince focuses 1. Heteronomy – the Metamorphosis as
himself as classless and on this personhood “assumption of the natural acceptance that the
has resorted to being rather than his superiority of the male” (p. prince is “the
ignorant of his masculinity (p. 199) 195). problem and begin
contribution to and shall discover what 2. “Breadwinner fixation” (p. the task of liberating
oppression with the it “means to be a 197). [himself] and
3. “Male model of dismantling the
excuse that it has always nothing” (p. 200).
achievement” – the ordered system” (p.
been “the way things
195).
are” (p. 194) – a deep “compulsive accretive
sense of “self-deception” production, narrow
(p.194). specialization, manipulation
of data, [and] the ability to
walk over others on the way
up” (p. 197).

The chapter ends with an invitation of the princess-heroine to the Frog Prince to be “something
new together” (p. 199) – a “no-thing” (p. 200) by becoming “each other’s liberation and growth” (p. 201)
and “walk-out of the fairy tale into the future together” (p. 201). This about sums-up the point of the
author: it is not only women that need liberating but also men. The argument is that if the liberation
becomes lateral and one-sided and the men are business-as-usual, the structures those men have been
so complacent with shall not be changed. In order to affect structural (even cultural) reforms to
accommodate an equitable society, men need to change.

Observably, the author does not emphasize the common profile of the princess-heroine that were made
subject of the book profile – the White Female. Although this may be a room for expansion by the
author (or other authors) to tackle Asian or South American fairytales, this limits the solution of
transcendence to those who have not experienced colonialism or the goddess-worship in their culture
and history. This is a crucial element if we are to take on the Women’s movement in the global scale.
The significance of cross-cultural analysis cannot be undermined as it gives us the third-world view and
how the fairytales were used to propagate colonial mentality (if ever) or at least influence local culture
towards colonization (as an alternative to religion perhaps – if ever there is a case).
 If we are to consider genuine liberation, intersectionalities must be considered to make a universal
solution for women’s issues. This reviewer remembers that this cross-cultural linkage was attempted to
be portrayed by the Home Box Office’s (HBO) own reimagining of fairytales in their animated mini-series
– Happily Ever After (1995) – that profiled the princess-heroine in different races. This experimentation
of HBO did achieve to look at intersectionality but have failed also in grounding the storyline on the
race/class story and have remained too faithful to the first world/white female profile.

The reader (and also this reviewer), surmises that the princess-heroine has multiple social class
status (Bourgeoisie Cinderella, Royalty Aurora/Sleeping Beauty and Snow White, Middle Class
Belle/Beauty) – this is a good take-off for the discussion of intersectionalities. But this seemed to be less
important to the author who has, instead, worked in the limits of the social class status and did not go
outside of it to relate the situation of the princess-heroine to her class. This, again, may be a room for
updating and further study.

Aside from Snow White’s stepmother, it is notable, that the villainess was never given much
emphasis as the anti-thesis and a viable sample of transcendence: strong, self-made, and a
decisionmaker. Albeit making questionable and doubtful actions, the villainess does make her mark as
the quintessential anti-social constructionist – non-conforming to the dictates of the Kings and cursing
everybody else that complies with him. Is it our (or the just the author’s) moral structures or our
habitual-ized consciousness to reject non-conformists that prevents this non-emphasis? Either way, this
would be a tempting contribution to the deconstruction of fairytales – in the future.

The Call for the Evaluation and Valuation of Work as Part of the
Women’s Transcendence

Work was largely tackled in the story of Cinderella but this reviewer finds it a cross-cutting issue amongst
the entire book. Again, summarized below are the relatedness of the woman’s subjugation via her
imposed role and the concept of work.

Character Issues on Work

Sleeping Beauty Shopping as substitute for work (p. 17) and the dependency to the man for
sustenance (p. 10)
Snow White For Snow White: Work as apprenticeship to the man (the seven dwarfs in this case)
during her exile (p. 31). For the Step/Mother: Motherhood myth and her multiple
burden (p. 36).
Cinderella GDOL and women’s double burden (p. 69)
Goldilocks A “double shift” of “home and child-care duties” and sharing the “provider role with
the husband” is given to the “working wives” (p. 111) – a double burden
 Belle (Beauty) “Procreative necessity” (p. 188)
Frog Prince “Breadwinner fixation” and the “male model of achievement” (p. 197) as the
definitive

The issues find their solutions through the use of work as a means for self-creation more than the usual
conception of it for utility, to comply with the need of sustenance (either for self or family or both). Even
more, it suggests that work, in relation to productive, reproductive, and community roles, is shared. This
sharing of work responsibility is possible only if we do-away with the usual way-of-things and begin a
deconstructing of the embedded consciousness of patriarchy. This deconstructing shall all lead us to be
a “no-thing” focused on mutual co-existence with other no-things. But again, this reviewer is frustrated
on the non-emphasis of Freedom in existentialism as a means for transcendence – a goingback to
essence – which, I think, is really the point of the author.

Existentialism and the [Non] Consideration of the Diversities

A considerable amount of existential reference (the Other, moral freedom, being, dread, existential
aguish, being-to-the-world, and personhood among others) was made by Kolbenschlag which, puts one
on the initial supposition which, ends in the obvious that the endeavour was to expound on postmodern
feminism. Deconstruction is itself a post-modern literary invention/movement anyway. This reviewer
then anticipates the discussion of fluidity in the discourse or at least sexuality, but to no avail.
Existentialism grounds itself on Freedom, and this could have been a strong axiom in arguing for
deconstruction – the author does not take advantage of this despite the references to it – again, the
frustration of this reviewer.

It is obvious that the traditional fairytales have no inclusion of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender
(LGBT) – the diversities. But if the treatment of women, as processed from the fairytales, is any
indication of how a patriarchal society would treat any other individual that counters the malecentric
worldview, then the invisibility of diversities means that consciousness-formation lacks an essential
“pink” perspective. By “pink” we mean a consideration of the various facets and aspects of sexuality
beyond the male-female dichotomies. So while women are recognized as part of the society, albeit a
subordinate role from the man, the diversities is completely shunned from this recognition as is
reflected in the absence of representative roles in fairytales.

Kolbenschlag did attempt to insert cases that link to the diversities. In the chapter on Sleeping Beauty at
Seventeen (pp. 5 - 28), there was mention of the “tomboy phase” (p. 8) where teenage girls signify
wanting to be boys (but never vice-versa) because of the want to take on more active roles. Tolerance of
this experimentation is also greater to girls and less to boys as the latter is the supposed “dominant
and... with superior status” (p. 9).
Another case is seen in the chapter on Snow White and Her Shadow (pp. 34 - 60) referencing to the
interaction of men in groups as an excuse to avoid “personal communication” and as a strategy to
“defuse any possible assumptions about the intensity of feeling between particular men” (p. 44). This is
also the same exact point of the author in the Epilogue stating that men are “unwilling to admit the
presence of ‘love’ in *their+ relationship with other me” (p. 199). The chapter further referenced that
men have more tolerance in male homosexual relationships as opposed to lesbian ones because the
latter is “perceived as an act of social anarchy (p. 45).” Also, while the Snow White chapter mentions
that the hetero-romantic dyad, as the antagonist, puts a cloud of “sexual ambience” in same-sex
friendships (p. 46), it failed to explore (as “defend” is, I feel, the least intention of the author) the
homophillic misconception placed to it. To aggravate matters, homosexuality is reduced to “a survival
mechanism in coping with the dilemma of extreme psychological polarization” (p. 58) and sex
reassignment is seen as a mere “fad” and that “people would find it less necessary to mutilate
themselves in order to liberate their souls” if sexuality was regarded as “the essence of personality”
rather than “a secondary aspect of a shared humanity” (p. 58). Worse, Kolbenschlag insinuates that
“homosexuality will likely recede in social significance: instead of alternative psyches and polarized
identities, life will offer many paths toward a fully developed, unique personhood” (p. 58). If
transcendence via “autonomy” shall achieve this, I am personally not joining this particular wagon.

In these cases, the LGBT issues were mere consequences of the heteronormative discussions of roles – it
is a reference point so as to emphasize that there is something other than the “Other” – that is the
woman. Unless we count Ariel, the Little Mermaid, as a gay metaphor, and which was not made subject
of the book, it is an obvious observation that there is no LGBT character in fairytales. Some implications
of this are:

1. Sexuality becomes only a dichotomy of male-female gender roles and such is embedded in
children’s consciousness.
2. The LGBT child shall only have the same dichotomy for reference.
3. The LGBT issues are refused recognition and subsequently, remedy is wanting.

This reviewer is glad to note however that emerging trends in children’s book are making alternative
families a subject to include same-sex parents and parenting. So let not this observation cloud the more
significant contributions of the book as this reviewer is just really fixated on the diversities.

A Universal Message for [Gradual] Change

Without some background on post-modernism and philosophical existentialism, there is still a large
degree of appreciation for the book. In fact, some background on the subjects would just strengthen
one’s bias – but aren’t we all guilty of superimposing our idealisms to that of others? With that said, the
book is a classic alternative to radicalism in the guise of deconstructionism.

While it did not have a tone of urgency, the book does call for change of the consciousness – a moving
towards self creation as opposed to trying to fit habitual-ized identities. There are other messages of
change, that were apparent in the summary tables above, that any reader may relate to, some, this
reviewer, have surmised as:

1. Change of social structures to accommodate women in key decision-making areas;

2. Change of work designations/impositions to become shared responsibilities rather than
genderspecific tasking; and
3. Change of self identification towards fluid creations of identities.

And just like any other fairytale that spans lifetimes, these changes are yet to see the broad daylight but,
rest assured that the sun is rising and its rays are far reaching. And while the princess may not live
happily ever after with her prince, she will live happily ever after: living only for her – faithful to her
Freedom.

-End of Review-