Reading Goethe's version of "The Erl-King", then Carter's, it is striking to see how the elements central are different between the two stories. Major changes made by Carter include the introduction of a female character and the narrative voice becoming the first person rather than the third person used by narrator Goethe. Although obvious, the length of Carter's story has a profound effect on the entire meaning of the story and the overall message; Goethe, by presenting the myth in a short poem, can present the moral of the story in a very simplistic way. The fact that the Father must trust his Son is clear to the reader and the general warning that the Erl-King is dangerous is also clear. In contrast, the moral contained in Carter's 9-page story is almost impossible to deduce; it makes the plot more complex through stronger characterization, which is only possible through a long story. However, Carter by no means forgets the origins of the original myth and often refers to it through slightly archaic and not-so-contemporary syntax such as "King Erl will do you great harm". Carter also makes the reader aware that his story is based on an original myth through classic fairy tale lines such as "What big eyes you have." Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Another truth that runs through both stories is that the character of the Erl-King possesses many desirable virtues; he is not a simple antagonist or villain. For example, the reader can only realize that Goethe's Erl-King is evil through the little child, if the techniques of "!" " and strong imperatives were not included when the child speaks, then the audience's view of the Erl-King would be one of benevolence and generosity. The Erl-King offers “gold” and “care” that seems better than the Father’s constant ignorance of the child’s fears. One could even argue that the Erl-King saves the child and gives him happiness. Humanity does not understand death and does not know what happens after it, but Goethe's Erl-King is the master of death and perhaps knows that the child will be happier after death, whatever that may imply. The narrator of Carter's tale even directly argues to the audience that the Erl-King could be considered good or, at the very least, not responsible for the crimes he commits. She describes his hair as "beautiful" and his eyes as "life", these are descriptions one would give to a stereotypical male fairy tale hero, one who comes to save a damsel in distress. Carter perhaps includes these descriptions to pay homage to the incomprehensible character in Goethe's version, a character who saves or harms the child; an answer that the public will never know. Carter also adds to the parallel between her and Goethe's Erl-King by making the Erl-King possibly evil as well; his description also includes expressions such as "his touch consoles me and devastates me", which is very similar to what the child feels in Goethe's poem. In both versions, the Erl-King is defined solely by how other characters react to him, whether it be fear or sexual desire. Although Carter uses some elements of Goethe's original, the different narrative voice creates an entirely different story. The exploration of feminism is introduced through this technique as the narrator struggles to decide whether the Erl-King is good or.