The Big Bad Wolf
The Big Bad Wolf: Exploring the Identity of Germany Through Wolves and Fairy Tales
Lauren Hoppestad
Abstract
This essay considers Germany’s complex relationship with its wolves in the context of the environmental crisis and the fairy tale genre to further develop an understanding of Germany as a country. The essay explores Germany’s social, political, and environmental discourses through the country’s evolving relationship with its returning wolves after an almost hundred-year absence. It turns to fairy tales, specifically the Brothers Grimm’s “Rotkäppchen,” to explore this relationship. The essay examines the identity and history of Germany’s wolves, the importance and services of wolves, the impact of wolves on Germany’s farmers, Germany’s legal protection of wolves, threats to the continued existence of wolves in Germany, the othering of wolves, and the way that the German people dehumanize and vilify certain demographics by comparing them to wolves. The essay questions the roles of the characters, especially the wolf, in “Rotkäppchen,” and at the end, imagines a retelling of “Rotkäppchen” where the wolf takes on a new role.
When I was fourteen years old, I was kissed by a wolf named Tiger at a wolf and wolf-dog sanctuary nestled between the tall, craggy peaks of the Colorado Rockies. Tiger was one of the sanctuary’s ambassador wolves—a six-month-old pup. In a blur of grey and tawny fur, he ran up to me, his eyes puddles of soft amber. I learned this kiss is how wolves greet each other—they lick each other’s muzzles to learn about each other and form bonds. From that moment on, I was smitten with the species. This soft-bodied, waggly wolf could not possibly be “the Big Bad Wolf” I had heard so much about in stories. That kiss inspired me to learn more about wolves—their incredibly complex behavior, their loyalty to their family, and their necessity to our ecosystems. I also learned about the vilification and persecution wolves have faced for centuries into the present-day, particularly in the U.S. It wasn’t until my German studies course that I began to understand this vilification and persecution extended beyond the North American continent. I was surprised to discover wolves face many of the same challenges and threats to their survival in Germany—a place I had thought of as progressive and environmentally conscious. Through my German studies course and research, I discovered that Germany isn’t quite the welcoming and environmentally conscious place that I had imagined it to be. It is a place, like many others, where different values, lifestyles, and beliefs inevitably bring conflict—socially, politically, and environmentally. Not everyone in Germany is united on environmental concerns, including the return of wolves. In this way, I see Germany’s relationship with its wolves as another avenue by which to understand Germany’s social, political, and environmental discourses. Like any place in the world, Germany has a complex relationship with its nonhuman inhabitants, and these relationships help inform Germany as a country.
The “Big Bad Wolf” and the Role of Fairy Tales
When I think of fairy tales, I immediately think of the Brothers Grimm. My grandparents bought my sister and me two books filled with a selection of their stories and accompanying illustrations. Admittedly, I didn’t read many of the stories as quite a few frightened me, and I struggled to relate to them. Perhaps this reaction is unsurprising. After all, these stories are based upon a rich oral tradition that spans millennia into the past, and humans and life change quite drastically over such an expanse of time (even within a century). This oral tradition aimed to teach its listeners by providing morals and lessons embedded into the tales, and as human-created stories, fairy tales reflected the cultural norms and values of their times. With time, as stories were told and retold, the lessons were adjusted to reflect the changing norms and values of their tellers and audiences while still holding onto their essence. Today’s retellings maintain their essence—their core stories—but have adapted to reflect society’s progress, like portraying female characters who have more control than in previous iterations. For example, in Disney’s Tangled, Rapunzel does not just sit in a tower waiting for the prince to bring her silk so she can weave a ladder and escape with him (Grimm and Grimm, “Rapunzel”); instead, she bargains with Eugene (not a prince) to make him take her to see the floating lanterns, and she leaves the tower by her own hair (Tangled 28:03-31:11). Additionally, retellings reflect the politics of their time and place, like how fairy tales in East Germany reflected the socialist values—like collectivization and the equality of every citizen—of the communist East Germany. Fairy tales are resilient: they have not only survived an ever-changing world but spread throughout it.
Before meeting the wolf, Tiger, my understanding of wolves was shaped by fairy tales like “Little Red Riding Hood”—a fairy tale which, itself, has been shaped by Charles Perrault’s “Le Petit Chaperon Rouge,” published in 1697, and the Brothers Grimm’s “Rotkäppchen,” first published in 1812, with their final iteration of the fairy tale published in 1857. I saw wolves as cunning, threatening, and dangerous creatures who preyed on the vulnerable. Tiger initiated the destruction of that image in my mind with his insistent wolf kisses. Wolves develop powerful family bonds and care for one another. In contrast to how they are portrayed in stories like the Brothers Grimm’s “Rotkäppchen” or “Little Red Cap,” wolves don’t eat humans; they avoid them. Their intelligence can be admired instead of feared. Critically, in the face of our climate crisis and rapid loss of biodiversity, wolves play an essential role in maintaining and protecting the environment.
We now know that wolves are keystone species, meaning they are crucial to the health of our ecosystems and the overall environment—this environment we humans are very much a part of and are very much threatening. As our climate warms to unhospitable temperatures, we are rapidly losing precious biodiversity. We now face a global environmental crisis. As previously mentioned, I once admired Germany as a place I had believed to be quite progressive. Even one of their political parties forming the current coalition is a party ostensibly based around the health of the environment: the Greens. Yet the Federal Environment Minister of this supposedly environmentally conscious party recently proposed that if a wolf killed livestock, any wolves within a kilometer of the attack could be killed over the period of three weeks (Schwaller). According to Niko Balkenhol, an ecologist at the University of Göttingen, a significant concern of this proposal is that it could lead to the indiscriminate killing of wolves, including many wolves who have not killed livestock (Schwaller). If this reality were a retelling of “Rotkäppchen,” I’d start to question the roles and intentions of the characters—perhaps the wolf is actually protecting the grandmother and girl from a huntsman who will destroy the Earth under the pretense of protecting it. The negative treatment and integral role of wolves in Germany invites us to create another retelling of “Rotkäppchen,” in the spirit of the fairy tale genre, in order to more accurately reflect Germany’s current political, social, and environmental climate. A retelling where the wolf isn’t the villain.
The identity, history, and impacts of Germany’s wolves reflect Germany’s history, particularly its history in environmental work, and the importance of wolves to Germany’s environment. Germany’s wolves are European wolves (“Species Portrait”) who have returned within the last twenty-five years primarily from Poland after an almost one-hundred-year absence, with the last wolf killed in 1904 in Saxony (“FAQ”). Many wolves tried to return to Germany from Poland throughout the twentieth century, but their attempts failed as East Germany allowed the hunting of wolves (“FAQ”). Beginning in 1984, East Germany established a year-round wolf-hunting season (“What is the legal protection”). Meanwhile, wolves gained strict protection in West Germany in 1980 with the implementation of the 1979 Bern Convention (Niedziałkowski 799). This Convention, also known as the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, became an international legal agreement for nature conservation (“Bern Convention”), which was implemented in 1990 in the newly unified Germany (Niedziałkowski 799). This agreement, along with the European Union’s 1992 Habitats Directive, allowed wolves not only to return to but to thrive in Germany.
The first pups were born to a pair of wolves from Poland in Upper Lusatia, Saxony, establishing the first wolf pack in Germany in 2000 (“FAQ”; “Wolves in Germany”). As of November 2024, 209 wolf packs, 46 wolf pairs, and 19 individual wolves now call Germany home (“Wolves in Germany”). This keystone species returned bearing gifts. Within Europe, wolves’ influence on the behavior of their prey helps protect plant life, including crops (Schwaller). For instance, studies undertaken in multiple national parks within the United States show how wolves, as keystone species, have allowed plants like willow and aspen to recover through their influence on elk, deer, and moose population numbers and behavior, which then provides more habitat for other animals, like beavers and songbirds (Center for Human-Carnivore Coexistence 1-2). Additionally, wolves tend to prey on sick animals, helping to regulate their prey populations so that the remaining population is considered healthier (“FAQ”). In turn, this means human hunters are less likely to hunt prey that is sick. So why was the wolf so villainized in “Rotkäppchen”?
Though today the standing of wolves has changed significantly, historically, wolves were perceived as the enemy, and, in many ways, they were a real threat. The survival of livestock meant the survival of the German people, and a wolf killing even one animal could be life-threatening to a German family or person who relied on that livestock (“FAQ”). Livestock like sheep, cows, and goats were relied on for sustenance (McGavin), and farmers also relied on sheep for wool (Pflanz). So, perhaps it’s unsurprising that wolves were cast in stories like “Rotkäppchen” as the villain—dangerous, othered creatures who must be killed for the sake of the protagonist’s—the human’s—survival. In the context of present-day Germany, though, I would argue that these types of stories are illogical. Only one to two percent of the diet of Germany’s wolves comes from livestock (“FAQ”). If a farmer’s animal falls into that one to two percent, the German government will compensate the farmer the animal’s full market value (“FAQ”). Most federal states will also provide financial support for non-lethal measures to protect livestock against wolves (“FAQ”). Additionally, despite their increasing population size, none of Germany’s wolves have attacked humans (“FAQ”). This information starkly contrasts the vilification and stereotyping of all wolves as cunning, threatening, and greedy animals that harm humans, which “Rotkäppchen” has perpetuated.
By all appearances, Germany today looks like the ideal of coexistence between wolves and humans that I’ve held in my mind. In addition to the widespread support of the German government to farmers and the relatively minuscule impact of wolves on humans, wolves’ legal protection in Germany is unrivaled. The legal protection of wolves currently comes from the European Union’s 1992 Habitats Directive in addition to Germany’s Federal Nature Conservation Act (Niedziałkowski 794). Both provide wolves with the most protection they can receive, including protection from being hunted (“FAQ”). Looking at the legal protection alone makes Germany appear to be a safe place for wolves—a place that values them as a keystone species. Yet, as shown by the proposal put forth by the Federal Environment Minister of the Greens, this story is not the full story.
Today, Germany’s wolves face multiple threats, but, as in the past, the major threat to their existence is humans. Tensions exist between different groups. Farmers, hunters, and land-users tend to perceive wolves as a threat to their ways of life, desire less legal protection for wolves, and want the ability to kill them (Niedziałkowski 799-804; Schwaller). Meanwhile environmental activists and scientists tend to perceive wolves as important parts of their habitats and the environment’s health and desire a continuation of the strong legal protection wolves currently have (Niedziałkowski 799-802, 804; Schwaller). Illegal killing, specifically by livestock owners as a form of retaliation against wolves, has become a significant threat to Germany’s wolves (Bruns et al.). Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), a populist far-right party, has specifically encouraged “‘illegal wolf killing’” as “self-defence” while echoing Nazi rhetoric of the “lying press” and professing conspiracy theories about how wolves arrived in Germany and how scientists, politicians, and non-governmental organizations were falsifying wolf data for their own goals (Zscheischler & Friedrich 1060). Additionally, the AfD uses anti-wolf and anti-migrant rhetoric to draw similarities between the situation with wolves and refugees—they see both as dangerous to and stealing from German citizens (Bennhold).
The comparison between wolves and groups of people that the German people fear and perceive as their “enemies,” like today’s migrants who are criminalized by the nation they enter (Arnds 13), is not a new one. It is not even exclusive to Germany. Peter Arnds states that it is plausible that “wolves were associated with human raiders, with outlaws and crime” as far back as 10,000 to 5,000 BCE when spears were exchanged for plows. As hunters and gatherers, humans admired and aimed to mimic the way wolves hunted. Yet as humans started to farm, “the idea of trespassing onto one’s communal territory became more prevalent” (10). According to Arnds, wolves became feared “as an intruder”—“a threat to the community and its homesteads”—which led to associating wolves with greed [SS1] (Arnds 10-11). This change in perception of the wolf is reflected in the mythologization and demonization of wolves, which birthed the Greek myth of Lycaon—“the king of Arcadia, transformed into a wolf for breaking the taboo of cannibalism,” cast out from community and sanctuary, perpetually searching for community and sanctuary, and made voiceless (Arnds 11-13). Lycaon is the human dehumanized, criminalized, deprived of the ability to speak, and defined by a voiceless creature wandering for sanctuary. Later, in the Germanic Middle Ages, the “vargr i veum” came into being as a “human wolf” representing criminals who had been expelled from the community simultaneously in need of and a threat to the community (Arnds 13, 28; Grönbech 130). Like Lycaon, the vargr i veum is a criminalized, expelled, and perpetual wanderer. Arnds explains that Lycaon’s “expulsion and wandering are the consequences of crime in the myth.” Similarly, today’s migrants who are attempting “to escape from crime… are made criminals by regimes that do not provide sanctuaries for them” (13). Wandering and migration—movement—is criminalized, and the people who move are dehumanized.
Literature reveals how Germany has likened humans who wander or migrate—who the German people have perceived as “enemies” for various reasons—to wolves throughout history. It is evident in the dehumanization of the Roma and Sinti people and Jewish people—who are all associated with movement and “rootlessness” (Arnds 26)—in German stories like Hans Jacob Christoph von Grimmelshausen’s The Adventures of Simplicius Simplicissimus and Wilhelm Raabe’s The Hunger Pastor. In each story, either a character associated with “G***ies” [SS2] or Judaism is dehumanized as the character is compared to the mythologized and demonized wolf. Written in 1668, Grimmelshausen’s novel describes the character Simplicissimus as this mythologized wolf with the comparison between wolves and the Roma and Sinti people made clearest when Simplicissimus becomes part of the Merode’s Brethren—dangerous marauders who have abandoned the army (Arnds 39-40). Grimmelshausen writes that the Merode’s Brethren are “best compared to G***ies” (320; asterisks added). Later, in Wilhelm Raabe’s novel written in 1864, Raabe likens the Jewish character of Moses Freudenstein to the mythologized wolf in his perceived “excessive greed” and threat to young women and children; he is a character who “represents the kind of rootless cosmopolitanism that poses a persistent threat to those who have stayed at home in their rural German community” (Arnds 33-34). It is this rootlessness that seems to define both Simplicissimus and Freudenstein and makes them both into wolf-like threats to the community. Arnds explains that “G***ies and Jews are stigmatized as wolves trespassing upon sedentary communities, appearing as marauding thieves, cannibals, child devourers and seducers of young women” (29-30; asterisks added). This deep history of the stigmatization of wolves and transient groups through inaccurately portraying both as greedy, dangerous wanderers who threaten the community/sanctuary in fairy tale, myth, and literature feeds into the current stigmatization of wolves and migrants, including people who are fleeing the horrors and dangers of war (which are in turn funded and supported by the very countries whose people then stigmatize the resulting refugees). The current stigmatization portrays wolves and migrants—in a grossly inaccurate way—as greedy, dangerous wanderers who threaten community/sanctuary.
It is this erroneous stigmatization of both wolves and migrants that feeds current fear-based rhetoric in Germany and pushes for the expulsion of both wolves and migrants. To the AfD, in particular, wolves and migrants don’t belong in Germany (Niedziałkowski 804). Importantly, the AfD is not a small political party without power—it is a very conservative political party that is gaining a strong foothold in the German government, having gained seats in the Bundestag in 2017 (Jonge and Frankenberger). This foothold comes with power, and it means these beliefs and actions of the AfD hold weight. It means the AfD poses a real threat to Germany’s wolves and refugees. Furthermore, the AfD is not the only German political party that poses a real threat to Germany’s wolves and refugees. Even the Greens—the supposedly environmentally conscious and “the most migration-friendly party” (Kinkartz)—is acting in ways that threaten both wolves and migrants. As mentioned previously, Germany’s very own Federal Environment Minister, who hails from the environmentally conscious Greens party, proposed taking a step backward on wolf protections. Additionally, the Greens have supported more stringent rules for asylum (Niranjan et al.). This is all occurring at a time when the threat to Earth’s biodiversity—our environment—is very real, even—especially—in a place that claims to be environmentally progressive and protective.
In “Rotkäppchen,” who is good and who is dangerous is clear—the wolf threatens the lives of the humans, a situation perhaps somewhat reflective of Germany’s past but certainly not its present. Humans extirpated wolves in Germany over a hundred years ago, and humans kept them from returning to lands that are their homes, too. They kept them from returning to the ecosystems they form a vital piece of—that they protect. Furthermore, human actions are driving the environmental crisis, threatening all lives. It is in this context that I protest the perpetuation of the Brothers Grimm’s iteration of “Little Red Riding Hood,” “Rotkäppchen.” What if the wolf did not swallow the grandmother and granddaughter out of greed but out of necessity? What if the wolf swallowed them to protect them from the huntsman who, rifle gleaming, stalks the woods seeking to kill any and all he perceives as a threat? What if the huntsman’s perception of threat is based on a fiction of fear instead of a tale of truth? What if it does not account for the vulnerable people, vulnerable species, and our vulnerable Earth threatened by persecution, war, famine, pollution, deforestation, poaching, and a rising ocean? I imagine a retelling of “Rotkäppchen” where the wolf greets the grandmother and granddaughter with a waggly body and covers their faces in warm kisses. I imagine the grandmother and granddaughter willingly stepping inside the wolf’s mouth because they know the wolf will protect them. They know they need the wolf just as much as the wolf needs them. And they know if we lose the wolf, we will be lost, too.
Works Cited
Arnds, Peter. Wolves at the Door: Migration, Dehumanization, Rewilding the World. Bloomsbury Academic, 2021.
Bennhold, Katrin. “A Fairy-Tale Baddie, the Wolf, Is Back in Germany, and Anti-Migrant Forces Pounce.” New York Times, 23 Apr. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/world/europe/germany-wolves-afd-immigration.html. Accessed 1 Aug. 2024.
“Bern Convention.” Joint Nature Conservation Committee, 16, Mar. 2023, jncc.gov.uk/our-work/bern-convention/#:~:text=The%20principal%20aims%20of%20the,species%20listed%20in%20Appendix%20III. Accessed 2 Aug. 2024.
Bruns, Antonia et al. “The Effectiveness of Livestock Protection Measures Against Wolves (Canis lupus) and Implications for Their Co-existence with Humans.” Global Ecology and Conservation, vol. 21, Mar. 2020. Science Direct, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00868. Accessed 1 Apr. 2024.
Center for Human-Carnivore Coexistence. “Ecological Effects of Wolves.” Colorado State University Extension, May 2020, extension.colostate.edu/docs/pubs/predator/08005.pdf.
“FAQ – Wolves in Germany.” NABU, www.nabu.de/tiere-und-pflanzen/saeugetiere/wolf/wissen/15812.html. Accessed 19 Feb. 2025.
Grimm, Jacob, and Wilhelm Grimm. “Little Red Cap.” Translated by D. L. Ashliman, sites.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm026.html.
Grimm, Jacob, and Wilhelm Grimm. “Rapunzel.” Translated by D. L. Ashliman, sites.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm012.html.
Grimmelshausen, Hans Jacob Christoph von. The Adventures of Simplicius Simplicissimus. Translated by Mike Mitchell, Dedalus, 1999.
Grönbech, Wilhelm. Kultur und Religion der Germanen. Darmstadt, 1976. 2 vols.
Jonge, Léonie de, and Rolf Frankenberger. “What is the AfD? Germany’s Far-Right Party, Explained.” The Conversation, 21 Feb. 2025, https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-afd-germanys-far-right-party-explained-250218. Accessed 25 Feb. 2025.
Kinkartz, Sabine. “Germany: Growing Dissatisfaction with Migration Policy.” Deutsche Welle, 2023 Sept. 29, www.dw.com/en/germany-growing-dissatisfaction-with-migration-policy/a-66961728. Accessed 18 Feb. 2025.
McGavin, Jennifer. “Introduction to German Food.” The Spruce Eats, 6 Aug. 2020, www.thespruceeats.com/introduction-to-germany-and-german-food-1446969#:~:text=in%20use%20today.-,Oldest%20German%20Foods,status%20as%20a%20trading%20city. Accessed 25 Feb 2025.
Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof. “Between Europeanisation and Politicisation: Wolf Policy and Politics in Germany.” Environmental Politics, vol. 32, no. 5, 2023, pp. 793-814, Taylor & Francis, https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2022.2127646. Accessed 1 Apr. 2024.
Niranjan, Ajit, et al. “‘The far right wants us to play by their rules’: Can German Greens survive ‘witch-hunt’?” The Guardian, 12 Feb. 2025, www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/12/why-germany-greens-switching-election-focus-from-climate. Accessed 18 Feb. 2025.
Pflanz, Wilhelm. “About Sheep Farming in Europe, Its History, How Shepherds Earn Their Living and the Future of European Wool: Professor Dr. Pflanz from the University of Weihenstephan-Triesdorf.” Lavalan® The Wool Insulation, www.lavalan.com/stories/professor-dr-pflanz/#:~:text=As%20already%20mentioned%2C%20the%20king,scouring%20plants%20and%20fulling%20mills. Accessed 25 Feb. 2025.
Schwaller, Fred. “Killing Wolves Could Soon Become Easier in Germany.” Deutsche Welle, 13 Oct. 2023, www.dw.com/en/wolves-rebalance-ecosystems-but-pose-danger-to-livestock/a-66726300. Accessed 1 Apr. 2024.
“Species Portrait: European Wolf.” Dokumentations- und Beratungsstelle des Bundes zum Thema Wolf, www.dbb-wolf.de/about-wolves/species-portrait. Accessed 1 Apr. 2024.
Tangled. Directed by Nathan Greno and Byron Howard, Walt Disney Pictures, 2010.
What is the Legal Protection Status of the Wolf in Germany and Poland?” Dokumentations- und Beratungsstelle des Bundes zum Thema Wolf, www.dbb-wolf.de/more/faq-e/what-is-the-legal-protection-status-of-the-wolf-in-germany-and-poland
“Wolves in Germany.” NABU, www.nabu.de/tiere-und-pflanzen/saeugetiere/wolf/deutschland/index.html. Accessed 19 Feb. 2025.
Zscheischler, Jana and Jonathan Friedrich. “The Wolf (Canis lupus) as a Symbol of an Urban-Rural Divide? Results From a Media Discourse Analysis on the Human-Wolf Conflict in Germany. Environmental Management, vol. 70, 2022, pp. 1051-1065. ProQuest, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-022-01719-3.
Lauren Hoppestad graduated from the University of Colorado Denver in December of 2024 with a degree in English Writing, Rhetoric, and Technology.
Picture: “Wolves in Snow.” 20 January, 2024. From Pexels. Creative Commons license.
