d personal inadequacy.

孩子弱小無力，常常被輕視對待，他們可能會認同安徒生筆下的這個 “醜陋” 的生物，它可能沒有什麼前途，但最終卻超越了那些看似有前途的。

Small, powerless, and often treated dismissively, children are likely to identify with Andersen’s “hideous” creature, who may be unpromising but who also, in time, surpasses the promising.

正如布魯諾?貝特爾海姆（bruno bettelheim）在《魔法的用途》（the Uses of Enchantment）中指出的那樣，安徒生筆下的主角不必接受通常強加給童話英雄的考驗、任務和磨難。

As bruno bettelheim points out in the Uses of Enchantment, Andersen’s protagonist does not have to submit to the tests, tasks, and trials usually imposed on the heroes of fairy tales.

“《醜小鴨》中沒有表達出需要完成任何事情。事情只是命中註定並相應地發展，不管主角是否採取行動”。

“No need to acplish anything is expressed in ‘the Ugly duckling.’ things are simply fated and unfold accordingly, whether or not the hero takes some action”.

安徒生暗示醜小鴨的先天優勢在於它是不同的品種。

Andersen suggests that the ugly duckling’s innate superiority resides in the fact that he is of a different breed.

與其他鴨子不同，它是從天鵝蛋裡孵出來的。

Unlike the other ducks, he has been hatched from a swan’s egg.

這種自然界中隱含的等級制度 —— 高貴的天鵝與穀倉裡的烏合之眾相對 —— 似乎表明尊嚴和價值，以及審美和道德上的優越性，是由天性而非成就決定的。

this implied hierarchy in nature—majestic swans versus the barnyard rabble—seems to suggest that dignity and worth, along with aesthetic and moral superiority, are determined by nature rather than by acplishment.

不管一個頌揚弱者勝利的故事有多少樂趣，在這個如今被全世界兒童閱讀的故事中，由那種勝利所引發的一系列倫理和美學問題都值得深思。

whatever the pleasures of a story that celebrates the trium