The Consequences of Preparation and Impulsivity in The Three Little Pigs

Authors

  • Belinda Angela Suawah MAKARIOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
  • Fristo Timothy Wola MAKARIOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
  • John Prince Miarso MAKARIOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
  • Jessie Queen Miarso MAKARIOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
  • Theofanny Gracia Siregar MAKARIOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL

Keywords:

Children’s literature, Moral Criticism, Fairytale, Impulsivity, Moral Development

Abstract

This study analyzed The Three Little Pigs through the theoretical framework of Maria Tatar’s Moral Development Theory (2009), identifying the consequences of preparation vs. impulsivity, the value of preparation for young audiences, and the role of a narrative device in testing preparedness and impulsivity. The story focuses on the three pigs, who moved out from their parents house to build their own, then the Big Bad Wolf destroyed the first two pig’s houses that were made of sticks and straws, but when it comes to the third pig’s house, the wolf could not destroy it because it was made of stones. The finding reveals: 1) Preparation leads the third pig to safety and success, meanwhile the first two pigs have to experience the consequences of impulsivity which is the wolf’s attack. This outcome demonstrates the moral lesson of the tale: the importance of foresight, diligence, and hard work. The story highlights how careful preparation and effort lead to security and success, while impulsivity and shortcuts result in vulnerability and failure. 2) The narrative’s outcome shows the importance of preparation and how impulsivity can lead to negative consequences. The first two pigs were rushing to construct their homes which resulted in their houses getting destroyed. Meanwhile, the third pig was patient and didn’t rush things which led to the house being safe from the wolf. 3) The big bad wolf serves as a narrative device to test the resilience of the three little pigs’ houses, figuring out who is the best at planning to build.

References

Bell, A. G. (1914). A notable speech. The American Magazine, 77(2), 146–151.

Bettelheim, B. (1976). The uses of enchantment: The meaning and importance of fairy tales. Knopf.

Franklin, B. (1868). Poor Richard's almanac and other papers. J. B. Lippincott & Co.

Frye, N. (1957). Anatomy of criticism: Four essays. Princeton University Press.

Holy Bible. (2011). New International Version. Biblica. (Original work published 1973).

Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Moral stages and the idea of justice. Harper & Row.

Lloyd, C. The Three Little Pigs. (n.d.).

National Literacy Trust. (2021). Reading for Pleasure.

Nussbaum, M. C. (1990). Love’s knowledge: Essays on philosophy and literature. Oxford University Press.

Propp, V. (1968). Morphology of the folktale (2nd ed., L. Scott, Trans.). University of Texas Press. (Original work published 1928)

Tatar, M. (2009). The enchanted hunters: The power of stories in childhood. W. W. Norton & Company.

Zipes, J. (2002). Breaking the magic spell: Radical theories of folk and fairy tales. University Press of Kentucky.

COVER

Downloads

Published

2026-02-28

How to Cite

Suawah, B. A., Wola, F. T., Miarso, J. P., Miarso, J. Q., & Siregar, T. G. (2026). The Consequences of Preparation and Impulsivity in The Three Little Pigs. Boanerges: Makarios Education Journal, 3(2), 181–193. Retrieved from https://streamfly.tech/index.php/boanerges/article/view/50

Issue

Section

Table of Contents

Most read articles by the same author(s)