Lacroix and The Exotic Other

Celeste Lacroix is the author of "Images of Animated Others: The Orientalization of Disney's Cartoon Heroines From The Little Mermaid to The Hunchback of Notre Dame". 

This piece explores the orientalization of Disney characters. It outlines that the physique of the "exotic other" is emphasised in Disney films. These exotic characters, such as Pocahontas, are made more athletic, and clos eup shots draw attention to their figures. Also, they are oversexualized. As Pocahontas wears even a more provocative dress than the other tribes-women, with a shorter skirt, off the shoulder strap, and more figure hugging shape. Princess Jasmine certainly embodies the sexualized exotic other, with her revealing outfit (in an Arab country no less), and her sexual appeal playing a large role in the scenes with Jafar. 

I do feel that Lacroix fails to sufficiently acknowledge that the physique of the ethically diverse princesses plays into the story far more than the original white princesses like Snow White, Cinderella, or Aurora. Pocahontas, for example, would have been more athletic, and stronger. And the tribes people did wear clothes very different to the fully covered, floor length dresses custom in Europe around the 18th century, where the first-wave princess films are based. 

Lacroix also compares Esmeralda to Belle, writing that Esmeralda is "frequently shot in active sequences that emphasize the physical rather than the delicate frame that we see particularly in Belle". Well yes, look at it contextually. Belle is a studious character set in provincial France. The dress styles for Belle are very different from Esmerelda's, who is a gypsy. And Belle is not as athletic or active as Esmerelda, though she does still ride her horse, and try to fight off a wolf pack. And while Belle is not overly-sexualized, other white females in The Beauty and The Beast are. Particularly the three blonde, French maiden who swoon after Gaston. They are more provocatively dressed and voluptuously animated. And here, race plays no role in their sexualization, it is more the role of the story line that affects this. 

I found particularly interesting Lacroix's interpretation that Disney seeks to "maintain the invisibility of the construction of whiteness". That what it is to be a white woman is defined through the perpetual representations of asexual, demure, generally passive with a touch of rebellion, romance orientated women. Lacroix agrees with other authors, like Nakayama and Krizek, that the exposure of naturalization of whiteness is as important as the exploration of of the construction of otherness. 

Overall, I think Lacroix raises an interesting and important argument, even if I think it has some weaknesses. This certainly was an interesting read, and I enjoyed looking at the films from this perspective. 

Have Disney Movies Gone Too Dark?

Have Disney Movies Gone Too Dark?

I don't think so.

And neither would Peggy Orenstein, who believes that Disney are actually still too soft, and who, in fact, reads the Grimm Brothers' tales to her young daughter....though undoubtedly the animated versions of the Grimm stories would be far more damaging than just the words!

Tangled

The video narrator first analyses Tangled, which is based on a grim story indeed, as a young girl is kidnapped and locked away in a tower. Though, the Grimm version does have a happy ending, and in fact isn't even too gruesome. Yes, a girl has been locked away, and the prince falls from the tower and is blinded by the thorn bush that breaks his fall....but Rapunzel manages to escape the tower, and finds her love blindly wandering the forest. As she weeps into his eyes, her tears heal his sight, and the two of them run away to live happily every after. Mother Gothel, Rapunzel's captor, is not maimed or killed. She is just left. This story is also one with greatest equality. Both Rapunzel and her prince work to rescue each other. And Rapunzel manages to escape her tower, and save her prince's eye sight, making her an active protagonist, and not just a damsel in distress. 

"Again teaching kids that an upbeat attitude and love can heal even decades long kidnappings may not be the most healthy message. But the moral of the story is a good one, be prepared to take risks and you'll do just fine" - narrator

Although I do agree that Disney films contain dark content - particularly such instances as the Shadow master in The Princess and the Frog - I believe that a lot of the darkness or perhaps seemingly inappropriate content just goes over the child's head. This not only makes the film more interesting for parents / older viewers, but it could be argued also helps children's developments as they view conflicts, or dark scenarios, even subconsciously. 

Like Mufasa dying in The Lion King might make some teenagers cry! But often is just accepted by young children. This is a dark, and upsetting scene, but it teaches children how to handle death and understand the circle of life. 

Frozen

In the analysis of Frozen, the narrator criticizes how Elsa is told to "conceal don't feel", arguing that children should, in fact, be taught the opposite of this. And I agree. But I feel the narrator has failed to acknowledge that this is the whole point of the film! Frozen does teach that we should embrace who we are, and not be shut up in exile because we're different or afraid. We should take control of our lives and embrace our gifts. This is shown as when Elsa does embrace her powers and stops living in fear, the beauty of her ice powers is revealed in the creation of her ice palace. And happiness is restored and the Kingdom saved when Elsa learns to love herself. 

"everything before it seems like a dark story of terrible parents and pain...not exactly a Disney classic" - narrator

I fully agree with this statement. But this is exactly what makes Frozen so realistic, relatable and therefore so popular! Elsa overcomes a childhood of oppression and truly finds herself as an adult. Elsa works through the separation driven between her and her sister and finds love can solve many of her problems. She overcomes exile, charges of treason, and plots to murder her. Yes, this is a dark film. But I would not at all say that is too dark. And this can be supported by the film's popularity with people of all ages. As Disney addresses these darker themes, it helps children to process difficulties they might encounter. Now while I don't mean to say that every little girl has to encounter exile for possessing magical powers, many will have to deal with sibling conflicts, over-controlling parents, hormonal changes (swirling storm inside), and perhaps anxiety issues. Elsa serves as a role model for children growing up. Her realistic struggles make her relatable, allowing the viewers to better understand the message, that they should accept themselves to find happiness, and that the power of love should not be underestimated. 

Zootopia

Yes, this does contain dark references. But this is because it very accurately reflects many issues faced by society today (from drug problems, to racial tensions). The narrator does admit that some of these darkest references will go over the heads of innocent, young children, but suggests that a post-viewing discussion is almost necessary to explain many of the concepts. For a child of an appropriate age, I think some real-world discussions could be beneficial, and this film serves as an opener. For younger children, just the messages of not judging people based on their ancestors or eating habits etc. is a good start! 

I love Zootopia's link to Breaking Bad. Ok so, Jesse and Woolter make a special blue substance in their basement that makes the animals go crazy.....hmmm....sound familiar? Now, when the children have learnt their lessons from Zootopia and grown up, they can enjoy Jesse and Walter White's version....now that's certainly something a little darker! So I guess that helps to put Disney in perspective! They tackle these real-world issues, in the safe setting of an animated animal world. I say well done Disney, and keep at it. You've not got too dark yet!

Disney Princes

Well...we've heard enough about the Disney Princesses already...so how about some Disney Princes?

This video (published April 17th, 2016) counts down the top 10 Disney Princes.

10. Prince Florian - Snow White and The Seven Dwarves
This Prince is introduced singing to Snow White in her garden. He is Disney's original Prince.
This video acknowledges that the Prince plays a MINOR role in the film, but still finds him crucial in the role of "true love's first-kiss" and Disney's notion of romance that follows.

9. Flynn Rider - Tangled
Now I'm a little surprised Flynn Ryder - a.k.a. Eugene Fitzgerald - is only number 9 on their list! This video acknowledges he's a bad boy with a dashing smile, and hints at his sensitive past, but there's a lot more to Flynn that they don't acknowledge. It's such a stark contrast from the Prince in Snow White, who has less than 5 minutes screen time, is followed directly by Flynn, who is such an integral part of Tangled. Flynn is funny and interesting. He undergoes changes throughout the film, as he shows his sensitive side to Rapunzel, reveals to her the truth about his past, and begins to care about more than wealth - evident as he tries to give the crown to the other smugglers, knowing he only needs Rapunzel to find his happiness.

8. Hercules

7. Prince Phillip - Sleeping Beauty
One of the handful of Disney Prince's to be born into royalty.

6.  Kristoff - Frozen
(Not technically a Prince...he doesn't marry Anna). But I do think he's a good 'en. He sure knows how to have an adventure and helps Anna

5. Prince Charming - Cinderella
I believe that, for a long time, when someone thought of a Disney Prince, they'd think of Prince Charming. The typical, eligible, handsome Prince. But now I think we've passed that. I would easily rank our newer options, like Kristoff or Flynn, above the birth-right royal, mild Prince Charming. He's from Disney's era gone by. The olf style of Prince. Boring. Bland. Barely does or says anything....let alone interact with the Princess. And even if you look at his story line...he dances away with his beautiful Cinderella...but then can use only a shoe to find her again!? ....does he even remember her face...? Yes, I understand it's a big Kingdom, and his father takes it to the extreme that the Prince shall marry whomever the shoe fits...so good think it's a magic shoe that only fits our Cinderella! But still....c'mon!?

4.  Simba - The Lion King
Ok, I love The Lion King....I love Simba. I approve! Great music. Great story line. The little Prince is tricked by his uncle, but here sure does have one big come back! And when Simba returns to save his lands and his people, he does so in style.

3. Prince Eric - The Little Mermaid
Hm, I don't agree that Eric should be ranked quite so highly. While he's better than Prince Charming, or Snow White's Prince, he doesn't beat Simba, Flynn, or Kristoff in my books! I agree with the video commentary that he is "kind, considerate, and generally respectful".

2. The Beast - Beauty and The Beast
....eurgh...what!? Ok, the Beast changes in the end once Belle gets through to him. But he begins as a vulgar beast...personality wise, which is why he is then turned into a physical beast to match this. He was selfish, and cruel, and turned away a beggar woman because she was old, and ugly, when he had so many means to help her. He locks away Belle's father, then accepts her as a trade. He is abusive and aggressive. Yes, Belle teaches him to leave. She teaches him to be gentle. And as The Beats falls in love with Belle, his nature changes. But he's hardly 2nd place material!

Honorable Mentions:
Prince Naveen - The Princess and the Frog
Prince Edward - Enchanted
Capt. Li Shang - Mulan
John Smith - Pocahontas

1. Aladdin - Aladdin
The rags to riches Prince. This is his story. So it's not surprising that he wins. This story follows his life, and his journey, so he will be one of the princes with the most developed character, the most notable personality, and the most memorable story. Though arguable, the first wave Princes - Naveen, Flynn, and Kristoff, are just as realized.

Cinderella Ate My Daughter Chapter 10

"Girl Power - No, Really" is Chapter 10 of Peggy Orenstein's book Cinderella Ate My Daughter.
This is the final chapter of the book. This chapter begins by looking at the latest Disney Princess film (as of the writing of this book), The Princess and The Frog. Orenstein discusses how race plays into this film, giving anecdotes from her African-American friend who says black girls need to aspire to be princesses to help remove them from the realm of the "worker bee". Orenstein highlights how Disney consulted experts like Oprah, and the NAACP, among other organizations, to avoid the brunt of the inevitable backlash at this film.

With the character of Lotte, Disney mock the idea of princess - showing how ridiculous it can be to live you life for the sole purpose of marrying a prince. This overly verbose, dramatic, princess-obsessed girl can serve as a warning against pursuing life as a princess. However, as evident in Orenstein's eanecdote, Lotte embodies 'princess' far more than Tiana. Daisy, Orensteins daughter, refers to Lotte when she speaks about the princess in this film, as Lotte embodies all the stereotypes already ingrained in the child's mind. Lotte wears nice dresses, and is at a point of privilege, with her immense wealth allowing her leisure. She throws balls, she wears a tiara, she is pink obsessed, and she dances with a prince. So you can hardly blame the child for thinking her a princess!

In this final chapter, Orenstein tries to bring together her book, explaining that she doesn't have all the answers to raising her child in a perfect way. That, while she strives to protect Daisy from "the marketers' land-grab" (183), she hasn't achieved the peerfect activity balance with walks outside and crafts. Orenstein reiterates alternatives she finds to the commercial princess line, including Papo figurines, and Hayao Miyazaki films (famous films like Laputa: The Castle in the Sky, and Kiki's Delivery Service).

Orenstein discusses the future of Disney, speculating about Brave and Tangled that were yet to be released. Orenstein accurately depicts that Tangled will not too closely resemble the old fairytale Rapunzel, and goes on to explain the story of Rapunzel. However, I disagree with a contrast Orenstein makes between Ariel and Rapunzel. In Rapunzel, a prince hears her singing, and falls immediately in love with her before laying eyes on her. Orenstein conjectures that "that makes Rapunzel the inverse of Ariel - she is loved sight unseen because of her voice" (191).  While you could argue that Eric falls in love with the voiceless Ariel by spending time with her and focusing on her appearance and body-language - though her personality certainly shines through even without a voice (as she brushes her hair with a fork, takes the reins in the carriage, explores the town etc.), and Eric often smiles at her for this. It is undeniable that Eric first fell in love with Ariel's voice, when he heard her sing, but didn't see her face. So I don't think Orenstein added anything to her argument by include this point that Ariel is the "inverse" of Rapunzel in this respect, and, in fact, I think this inclusion only opens her argument up to criticism.

Orenstein uses Grimm's Rapunzel as a final teaching point for parents, that they should not smother or restrain their child too much.

"[O]ur role is not to keep the world at bay but to prepare our daughters so they can thrive within it" (192)

While I diagree with much of what Orenstein has to say, and cringe at her harsh criticisms of Disney, and her over-controlling nature with her daughter, I do like this final chapter of hers. It ties together nicely, speaking of the sort of mother she wishes to be - like the hazel branch - and that she uses as a cautionary tale - Mother Gothel. I agree with Orenstein's conclusions and her vague and poetic final paragraph, that succintly sums up everything you need to do to most successfully raise your daughter, without an inclination of what it means or how to do it...but yes, the sentiment is perfect. I suppose you are supposed to implement many techniques Orenstein describes in her previous chapters, but I disagree with most of these (like trying to fight off the princess culture etc.).

Disney's Global Presence

The Disney corporation is a global phenomenon. With theme parks in America (California and Florida), France, Tokyo, China, and Hong Kong.

Frozen's (2013) "Let It Go" was translated into 41 different languages...that's a far greater reach than The Lion King's (1994) 15 languages...which is still arguably a lot for 1994.

http://www.dorkly.com/post/70383/the-world-map-of-every-animated-disney-movie-ever

This Map shows where every animated Disney film (as of November 2014) is based!

And they sure do span the globe.

Disney's upcoming princess film, Moana, focuses on a Polynesian princess, further extending this global reach, and appealing to a wider audience. 

http://www.bustle.com/articles/10766-disneys-newest-princess-of-color-is-moana-a-polynesian-adventureer-and-she-sounds-awesome

Disney Dolls

Disney Dolls....or more specifically princess dolls...are a guaranteed sale these days, so of course it's only natural for a set of 'limited edition' dolls to be on pre-order sale for $649.75!!!!!

Well, hey, that's less than $650...before tax...so a bargain right!?

Tangled

"I'm a despicable human being"

"This is the best day evveeerrr"

Tangled is, in my opinion, a hilarious, creative, heart-warming film, that's just enjoyable to watch.

I first watched it staying at a friend's house. She'd just got the DVD for her 16th birthday....she requested it from her parents...and was astounded that I'd never seen the film before, so she put it straight on for me. I immediately LOVED it, and we had inside jokes, quotes, and references to this film ever since (one of our favorites being "I'm a despicable human being", which we'd use any time we did something horrendous!). 

Maximus is hilarious. The chameleon, though mute, plays a key role as Rapunzel's companion; entertaining Rapunzel, and interacting with Flynn Rider a.k.a Eugene Fitzgerald.

The songs are beautiful.

This film, like all third wave princess films, is targeted not only at young children, but at teenagers and even adults. This is very effective marketing on Disney's part. They make one film, and everyone goes to the movies to see it, buys it on DVD, downloads the songs, and takes on the merchandise. Well played Eisner....well played.

Rapunzel is intelligent, resourceful, quirky, humorous, brave, conscientious, and wholly lovable.
She pulls off immense feats with her hair, and I find it such a shame she lost her beautiful, magical hair at the end of the film. It happened so suddenly. And I understand that Flynn/Eugene cut Rapunzel's hair for her own good, so that Mother Gothel wouldn't steal her away and take over her life. And in doing so, he sacrificed his own chance of survival. But...still...her hair was such a big part of her, and it was just gone, just like that, without Rapunzel having a say in it. Thankfully, her magical tears still managed to save Eugene, but she doesn't posses the powers she once did.

Which is a shame. She could have helped many people with her magical hair. Just like it was a shame it took the whole flower in the first place to save the Queen, rather than the healing powers being shared...it clearly wasn't running out if Mother Gothel had been using it for hundreds of years already.
I do like the new story Disney created, with the magic flower etc. 

TSIS Chapter 8

While I recognize that this chapter utilized all the techniques it recommends to connect sentences, while explaining how to do so. I nevertheless found the writing very repetitive and tedious, even if it did make valid points.

Applying for the Position of Princess: Race, Labor, and the Privileging of Whiteness in the Disney Princess Line

Megan Condis, the author of this article, proposes that, while Disney have diversified their Princess line-up, the messages  for being a "good-girl" are dependent on racial identity.

In her first argument, Condis sets out her claim, that the first-wave princesses were not to sully their beauty by stooping to perform labor, and immediately addresses the counteractions to this claim. Furthering her point to explain that, though the princesses do perform labor - most notably keeping house - this is an evil inflicted on them by the villain. The princesses are rescued by a prince, and returned to a life of luxury and privilege.

At the beginning of her second section "Ariel and Belle: Adding Feminist Flavor to the Classic Recipe" I think Condis explains well the "fine-line" Disney must walk between keeping to traditions and appeasing a modern audience.
However, I disagree with later points made in this section. For instance, Ariel is describes as "skipping out on her job as a singer in a royal concert" (31) as an act of rebellion against her father. First of all, in the film Ariel had lost track of time while exploring a ship wreck, which shows her fascination with the human world, not her rebellious act against her father. Also, I would hardly phrase it as "her job as a singer". Ariel is a princess with a beautiful voice, who stars in this musical. It is not really a profession for her! It's a more a showcase of the talents of King Triton's daughters. But what perplexes me more is how Condis states so matter of factly that King Triton "learns that he was wrong to expect [Ariel] to work as a representative of the merfolk government". WHAT!? Just.....what!? When was this ever even hinted at in Disney's movie? Oh that's right...IT WASN'T! Ariel is a 16 year old princess. She was free to swim about and explore, though her father disapproved of her obsession with the surface. She never had to work or tend to official business. Also, King Triton had been excited to first find out Ariel was in love, assuming this infatuation was with a merman, and would have been prepared for his daughter to start her own life with this new man.

"Pocahontas, Mulan, and Tiana: Non-White Femininity as Defined by Labor" - this section proposes that women of color will be workers "even if they make it all the way to the throne room".
With respect to Pocahontas, it is never outlined that her labors are far more significant than that of her predecessors. She acts as an Ambassador to her people; this is not just trivial floor scrubbing, she has real responsibilities, a position of authority, and respect. So yes, she labors, but it can hardly be lumped into the same category as before.

Also, I don't think Mulan's work can be held against her, or Disney. First of all, this loosely follows the life of an ancient Chinese warrior....so yes, Mulan is going to train and fight. Secondly, this work is something Mulan chose to do...yes to saver her father...but she made the decision to go herself, to bring honor to her family, to find out who she truly is, and to prove her capabilities. So yes, Mulan is working, but this is a self-fulfilling journey she set upon herself. Now that's far more empowering than being forced to scrub flaws by an evil step-mother and eventually being rescued by a Prince. And, Mulan's work comes to an end (in the first film), as she chooses to return home, after denying the Emperor's offer to join his council. And Mulan achieved what she set out to, she brought the highest honor to her family, and saved her father's life.

I also disagree with the analysis of The Princess and the Frog in this piece. Firstly, it would have been so historically inaccurate for Tiana to have been "upper-class nobility" that this would have caused such backlash. So Disney can hardly be blamed for not putting Tiana in the same starting position as that of Cinderella, for example.
Condis also writes that "Tiana's dreams are small and humble" - which I profoundly disagree with. In my opinion, she's the biggest dreamer of the Princess line. She has a real-goal and plans set out to achieve it. Starting up your own business from scratch is no easy feat, even ignoring an socio-economic disadvantages Tiana faced at the time. And with the song "Almost There", Condis concludes that Tiana can never escape menial tasks even as an owner, as in her dreams she's still chopping vegetables and stirring pots. Well, why not consider that this is Tiana's passion? She always loved to cook with her dad, and in fact, Condis skims over the fact that Tiana is coaching her staff, as she performs the tasks better than each. A good business owner ensures they approve of what's going on - especially with restaurants - and Tiana may not want to "abandon" her "hands-on role" in her dream restaurant that she spent years working towards. It is after all her place! It's not uncommon for such passionate owners to be on the ground. And Tiana is hardly a pot scrubber at her establishment. In her song, which is realized at the end of he film, she is elegantly dresses, and enjoys dancing around with friends and family, really bringing the community together as she's desired.

"Bried Notes on Disney's Rapunzel and Merida"

"the tribal Scottish setting of Brave suggests that to read Merida as "white" is not necessarily historically accurate; the colonial British likened the Scottish tribes to Native American peoples".
Now, I'm no expert, but as far as I'm concerned...and in my opinion as a Brit...Brave kinda got the depiction of Scottish people spot on. Yes, there are variations in every culture, but pale ginger people are very Scottish....then and now....to this day I have many pale, ginger, Scottish friends. And even if the Scotts had brown, black, or blonde hair...as also depicted in Brave...they would all have been white. They are Western European, a historically white peoples.

Condis never addresses the parallels of societal views of women, that affect the depictions of Princesses in the film. The 'diverse' Princesses are the most recent ones, as it is only recently that Disney are conscious of diversity and full representation. This trend also fits with the increase of women's rights, and the expectation that women work. So this adds further insight into the discussion, and provides another explanation for the labor of these princesses.


I like the structure of Condis' piece. In particular, how she clearly labels each section heading, making it easy to follow the conversation, and to refer back to the text at later times. Also of note is Condis' use of two introductions, the first outlining her thesis, and the second serving as background information on "The Disney Princess Line". This is effective as it conveys two different introductory sets of information to the reader, in a neat and ordered style.
Like Condis, as I write I often think of additional notes and ideas, that may not directly link to my thesis. I find it very interesting how Condis adds the section "Brief Notes on Disney's Rapunzel and Merida" (41) at the end of her essay, effectively allowing her to weigh in her additional thoughts, and address some of the latest films made after her first writing, all without disrupting the flow of the essay.

The Beauty in Language

This YouTube video shows Disney Princesses singing in their 'native' language. Ariel sings in Danish, Mulan in Mandarin, Elsa in Norwegian, Jasmine in Arabic, and Rapunzel in German. I love hearing different languages, so personally find this very interesting! And the songs are just as spectacular!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4xrOY5LKM8 

"Endlich sehe ich das Lich" - Tangled

"Endlich sehe ich das Licht

Und die Dunkelheit vergeht"

There's also a part two....so yep, I watched that too! This one features Belle, Snow White, Magora, Aurora, and Anna. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJHpk4nWVOg

"Belle (Reprise)" - Beauty and The Beast

"Je veux tout ce que je n'ai pas :

Un ami qui me comprenne

Et des livres par centaines,

Sans m'occuper des gens qui jacassent"

I only understand the French and German translations, but here are links to translated lyrics for the other songs too: (I can't vouch for their accuracy!) 

The Little Mermaid: "Part Of Your World" --> Danish

http://artists.letssingit.com/disney-lyrics-part-of-your-world-danish-jw35skb#axzz45RtZ604G

Mulan: "Reflection" --> Chinese

https://hopeandloveradio.com/2014/10/16/reflection-chinese-translation-by-coco-lee/

Frozen: "Let It Go" --> Norwegian

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/let-it-go-la-den-g%C3%A5.html

Aladdin: "A Whole New World" --> Arabic
http://lyricstranslate.com/en/di-dunya-fu2-%D8%AF%D9%89-%D8%AF%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D9%81%D9%88%D9%82-whole-new-world-it-high-world.html

Tangled: "At Last I See The Light" --> German

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/endlich-sehe-ich-das-licht-last-i-see-light.html 

Beauty and the Beast: "Belle (reprive)" --> French

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/belle-reprise-belle-reprise.html 

Snow White and the Seven Dwarves: "Whistle While You Work" --> German

http://en.musicplayon.com/Disney-Whistle-While-You-Work-Snow-White-And-The-Seven-Dwarfs-lyrics-8193480.html?translateTo=de&btnTranslate=%C2%BB

Hercules: "I Won't Say I'm In Love" --> Greek

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/forum/i-wont-say-im-love

Sleeping Beauty: "Once Upon A Dream" --> French

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/once-upon-dream-dans-un-r%C3%AAve.html-0

Frozen: "For The First Time In Forever: --> Norwegian

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvyvKwfjKlA

The BFG

Disney's The BFG comes out this July and will be an interesting compilation of Roald Dahl, Disney and Spielberg.

https://youtu.be/GZ0Bey4YUGI

Also, not Disney...but an adorable puppy compilation for anyone who's in need of a smile!
https://www.facebook.com/ILoveMyDog1/videos/517419788396715/

Slamming The Door

http://www.thefeministwire.com/2014/10/slamming-door-analysis-elsa-frozen/

I came across this piece when researching for my second essay. I believe it to be an exceedingly well-written response to Frozen, by an undergraduate student.

A must read for all interested in Frozen and particularly the complex character of Elsa.

Gender Role Portrayal and the Disney Princess

"Gender Role Portrayal and the Disney Princess" is an academic article by Dawn Elizabeth England.

This is an unusual Disney related article in that it takes a scientific stand-point as opposed to the usual humanities focus. This article focuses on data from a coded analysis of the Disney films to analyze the male and female characteristics. There are biases in this piece, as the data was carried out by the same people using it to prove their point. And many conclusions can be drawn from the same data. As also, the researchers assigned their own definitions to the characteristic traits used in their study, and categorized these traits into masculine and feminine in their own arbitrary way. For instance, "wants to explore" or "engaging in intellectual activity" were arbitrarily assigned as masculine traits. And naturally, many Princesses show these traits throughout the films, far more than any male, just as Ariel and Belle spring immediately to mind.

Interestingly, many Disney critiques condone the animation studio for not giving the Princesses any independence; many authors I've already blogged about (included Trites) argue that the Princesses are merely transferred from father to husband and never given autonomy. This study described a character as being independent if they performed "an independent action against many, being alone when it was not the norm, or not participating in the expected culture". Isn't this the plot line for like every Princess story!? And the statistics show that independence is the fourth highest trait observed in the Princesses.

This scholarly article was written before the release of more recent films like Tangled, Brave or Frozen. So, although it's analysis tries to compare trends between the first, second, and third waves (e.g. Hypothesis 3 proposing that the gender role portrayals become more egalitarian over time), this analysis would be more credible had the authors waited until the end - or at least further into - the third wave. Using data from only one source cannot be deemed that reliable, and as the later films have shown, the progressive trends and spunky personalities to extend!

The Princess and The Frog

I first watched this film at the beginning of Spring Break. I hadn't previously seen it, or heard any of the songs or picked up any of the plot-line, so I honestly had no idea what to expect.

Overall I enjoyed "The Princess and The Frog" and found it an interesting notion that we had an obnoxious Prince who could be made an arguably better person by getting to know, and falling in love with, the Princess, Tiana.

I particularly like the song "Almost There" and the notion of hard-work leading to success that this displays. Importantly, the film shows that Tiana works too hard, and is unable to enjoy life because she's too busy working towards the future. This is where Mamma Ottis, and finally the Prince, help Tiana find a better work/life balance...eventually!

Prince Naveen transforms from being a shallow, materialistic bachelor, simply out for a good time, to seeing the value in real relationships, the reward hard work and perseverance can bring and the fulfillment of such a new lifestyle.

Tiana and Naveen are such opposites, who come together and ultimately compliment one another. Before they met, neither of one of them were living a sustainable of fulfilling lifestyle. Naveen was depleting his funds, and Tiana her energy. Naveen worked far too little and Tiana way too much. But together, they work to open Tiana's Place and become successful and happy, fulfilling both of their aspirations.

Again, there's a key Disney message imbedded in this film. Mamma Ottis tried to teach Tiana this in the swamp, but she only truly realizes the lesson as she fights the sorcerer and avoids his illusions by realizing she didn't need her perfect restaurant to fulfill her life, she needed meaningful relationships: "My daddy never did get what he wanted. But he had what he needed. He had love"

A second Disney lesson is that greed is a bad trait, as this lead's to Naveen's man servant succumbing to the Shadow Man, which ultimately leads to his downfall.

A character of particular note to me is Charlotte - or Lottie - who is someone I can only describe as a Southern Belle, complete with large, frilly frocks, the deep Southern accent, and a nice trust-fund to match. Lottie is enthralled with "Princess". She reads fairytales as a young girl, while envisioning her future Prince. She dresses like a Princess. She arguable acts, and is treated by her father, like a Princess. Lottie, however, is not content to WAIT for her Prince. She eagerly drives along this process, having her father host Prince Naveen and throwing an extravagant party for him. She's a girl who knows what she wants and isn't afraid to make it happen.
Her relationship with Tiana is very special. When Lottie is with Tiana, she is not selfish, but kind and considerate. She seeks to help Tiana and make her happy. She helps her get ready to enjoy the party. She shares her desires. Yet, most beautiful of all, is when she gives up her Prince because she values Tiana's happiness over her childhood dream. She would not marry Naveen just because he's a Prince, as this meant breaking apart Tiana and Naveen's love. There are so many sacrifices people are prepared to make for those they love - Naveen marrying Lottie to be able to fund Tiana's dream, Tiana giving up Naveen because she thinks he and Lottie belong together as the fairytale couple, followed by Lottie giving up her Prince. This shows kindness and consideration in their willingness to sacrifice. But ultimately shows that by being open with one-another, they can achieve harmony. Tiana and Naveen would rather remain frogs, if it mean they could remain together. The magical Disney twist, is that when the frog swamp wedding occurs, Tiana becomes a Princess, by marrying a Prince, and thus, as the two frogs kiss, they are transformed back into humans.

The Shadow Man is a character I haven't quite wrapped my head round yet. He moves the plot forward, but the strange voodoo / demonic twist is a new angle for a Disney Princes movie. I mean yes, in Snow White the evil Queen performed magic, and Malefiscent, Ursula, and other such magical villains have existed. But I can't help but feel that this is a new level and interestingly now a male villain using dark magic.

This film certainly wasn't what I would have imagined it to be. The twist on the Princess and The Frog tale is rather interesting and certainly a modern creation.

Brave

It is interesting how Brave begins by depicting the restrictions and limitations of being a Princess. Highlighting the discrepancies between what Merida's brothers can do and how she "can't get away with anything" as she is held to a different standard. "A Princess rises early, is compassionate, cautious, patient, clean" her mother teaches Merida and the viewers. When Merida genuinely enjoys herself, she is berated for "chortling" and behaving in a manor not accustom to a Princess.
One of the most poignant pieces of 'advice' Merida's mother gives her is:
"and above all, a Princess strives for...well, perfection"
This is because it fits so well with Duke's studies of the cycle of effortless perfection and the pressure this puts on women to achieve it all without looking like they're breaking a sweat. This dramatically highlights the double standards held for males and females. The little Prince's are able to run wild and do not receive strict training, like Merida, nor are they expected to strive for or even attain perfection. Yet, Merida is set on a grueling task to chase unattainable perfection. Now this hardly seems fair! And this is what Pixar/Disney highlight through Merida's narrative. They're showing that 'Princess' isn't always what it's glamorized to be; in reality it can be restrictive and unfair. Brave is showing that we should encourage and nurture girls to follow their own passions, not what may be 'expected' of them because of their gender.

Merida explains that she enjoyed most her days where she didn't have to be a Princess because there were "no lessons and no expectations". In reality, Merida doesn't magically stop being a Princess on this day, she still has the same birth-right, she just has freedom to do what she wants. So this shows that Merida equates Princess with limitations, and sees her freedom of choice as not fitting into the role of a Princess - hence, her days off from this role. She sees this as "A day I can change my fate" and by the end of the film she has achieved this - she has changed society's perception of "Princess" and the notion of marriage too. Now, the next generation are able to take control of their own lives, choose their own future partners, and enjoy their own pursuits in life.

Even as a young child as Merida's father gives her a bow for her birthday, which she is evidently delighted at, the mother is upset that this isn't a gift for a lady.

Merida becomes a very skilled archer, shown to the viewers as she gallops through the forest hitting each target with precision. Merida excels in that which she enjoys, archery, and she struggles with that which is forced upon her, Princess lessons. An important message that can be gleamed from this is that we shouldn't force children into things, or stifle their passions. Success, to an extent, follows happiness.

Brave focuses on the relationship between Merida and her mother.
At the very beginning of the film, Merida and her mother are shown to be close. Playing in the field together on her birthday, and laughing and cuddling, they share precious bonding moments. However, this relationship definitively changes as Merida grows up, and is expected more and more to act like a lady. Her mother is preparing her for her future as the lady of a household - as a Queen. The forced instructions put a divide between the two, and lead to feelings of resentment on Merida's part and frustrtation on that of her mother's.
At the dinner table, Merida's mother doesn't listen to her adventures and shows no interest in what Merida's passions. This is followed by Merida being informed of her future betrothals, and consequently rebelling to try to regain control of her own life: "no it's what you've been preparing me for your whole life, I won't go through with this, you can't make me". This feisty, new-age Princess is not afraid to stand her ground against her parents in a matter as important to her as this.
The real relationship breakdown is shown as Merida acts out and slices the family tapestry following this incident, and her mother burns her bow (though does rescue it shortly after, clearly regretting the fight they've had).

Now, throw in some Disney style magic, and next thing you know, the mother is transformed into a bear. This is a very obvious struggle that the two must overcome together, repairing their relationship in the process. I particularly love the speech Merida gives to the room full of men, as her mother-bear signs across the room to her. Through this speech, we see the mother's change in attitude and acceptance of Merida, and this helps bring happiness and harmony to a place of previous discord.

Rozario Review Part 2

"The Team Disney Princess: Just a Little Bit Bad"

I didn't find this pice nearly as interesting as other scholarly articles I've read around the topic. The arguments didn't interest me as much and it seemed quite dry.

Rozario focuses on Princesses by birth-right, not marital status, in her examples. Thus using Ariel, Jasmine, and Pocahontas (daughter of Chieftain) to back up her arguments.

I agree with Rozario's point that, the dancing represented in Walt Disney's films encompasses little girls who want to grow up to be princesses and ballerinas. When you take into account that the original animated Princesses were based on ballerina dancers' figures, this is not a surprising trait. This leads to very good marketing on the Disney corporations part, allowing them to expand their target audience and attract girls with the offer of being a ballerina and a princess.

Rozario goes on to comment on how Disney transitions from ballerina movements in the first wave, to more sportswoman like elegance in the 2nd wave. These are bodies better suited to the new agencies these protagonists possess - for example, Ariel swimming, rescuing Eric, and exploring in human form. Jasmine pole-vaulting buildings in a single bound. Or Pocahontas diving off waterfalls,  and running through the forest. I love Rozario's conclusion that this is evidence that "heroism, egalitarianism and autonomy are slipped into the convention of Disney princesshood" (47). I fully agree that these 2nd wave princesses are progressive princesses - despite other flaws and criticisms - and that they serve as a positive model. They are not perfect, but they are a vast improvement from the first wave, and for the 80's and 90's I feel they give strong messages. Pocahontas, for example, is a physically active adventurer, a strong-willed, level-headed woman, and a brave peacekeeper. She explores her surroundings, leaves the camp when she wants to, prevents a war with her courageous actions, and decides to stay with her people rather than leave with John Smith. Thus showing that women can be heroes in control of their own lives.

Rozario brings Joseph Swain into the argument, by quoting him to explain that musicals don't traditionally center around the action of falling in love; the love between the two main characters is usually apparent and assumed. Rather, the focus is on how the protagonists overcome obstacles to achieve their happily ever after together. This allows for comedic effect, and, Rozario explains, "indicates the dominance of the femme fatale" (47)

On page 47, Rozario briefly introduces the notion that the princess and her lover come from different societies. But I am disappointed that she leaves the point hanging here and doesn't really analyze it. I wish she'd expanded and had more to say, as I think this could be an interesting exploration.
(In the next section, Rozario does bring this point in again, using it to show that in the 2nd wave "Team Disney" princesses break down rigid norms by courting a man outside their expected suitors)

I, personally, found it very strange for Rozario to liken The Little Mermaid to such films as Dirty Dancing. Particularly in such statements as: "Baby and Ariel also rise from the water, signifying Venus, just when they are gaining control of their own bodies and sexuality" (50). I feel this has little relevance to the thesis and body of her paper. I feel the road-map in Rozario's introduction doesn't preclude this tangent which two pages are dedicated to (49-50).
She quotes Chris Richards (1995) "be it in The Little Mermaid or, more substantially, in Dirty Dancing, for girls there is a visible proof of bodily autonomy and self-control implicit in being seen to dance, to present a body enacting tension" (147). Here, I find the wording of Richards "be it..., or...." to show that the two films are not as similar as Rozario tries to make them seem. Richards is using two contrasting films to demonstrate his following point. And I feel Rozario is jumping on connections between them that I feel irrelevant. What does it matter that Baby and Ariel both seek a man their father disapproves of? These are very different films.

"The Disney Princess: Sexuality and Rule"

I admire the structure of Rozario's paper. She uses multiple other scholars to back up her points, quoting a specifically poignant phrase from each, that directly backs up her argument. She doesn't get bogged down in the other author's argument or explanation, Rozario merely uses short and direct quotes to back up her points. This is important so that Rozario successfully gets across what she wants to say, while avoiding simply summarizing another writer. This technique is particularly crucial when Rozario includes multiple opinions in just one paragraph; as she does at the bottom of page 51 in explaining the link of sexuality to Princess by adding well known voices like Trites, Leadbeater and Wilson, Griffin, and Sardar. 

These quotations are, in my opinion, well done; Rozario smoothly includes other voices into the conversation throughout her piece, giving her own arguments greater credibility. 

The portrayal of the princess between sexuality and "daddy's little girl" is an interesting contrast Rozario explores in this section.

As no princess has a brother, rule cannot pass to him, thus leaving the princess responsible for continuation of the dynasty.

No father ever wishes for a son. Even for Mulan, the technically 'not a princess princess', her father says the "greatest gift of all, is having you for a daughter".

I love Rozario's whole argument on page 53 (paragraph 2). It basically sums up to the point that

The Kingdown relies on princess; as her love life issue is resolved, the security of the kingdom is secured. With no brother, and a King who cannot fulfill this role as he is widowed and past prime, the princess holds the power and the future in her hands. The King, the princess's father, wants her to marry a study, reliable suitor whom he approves of; someone Rozario argues is much like the King himself. The second wave Princesses, however, want to break free from this limiting mould and court someone outside this realm, leading them to a more adventurous life. Rozario sums this up beautifully as she writes that the "father represents traditional, somewhat autocratic, law and order, and the princess's function is to represent autonomy and openness." 53

First the conflicts between father and daughter must be resolved, before a happy ever after for the princess and the kingdom can be formed. The father must be able to accept that the daughter has grown up, and accept her new lover. 

The Princess chooses an outsider over the steady man the father experts her to marry. The princesses want more adventure, ever pushing boundaries. In The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, and Pocahontas, a human, street rat, and an Englishman are each very different to the fathers expectations of a merman, prince, and esteemed tribe warrior. 

"the dual focus of the courtship creates the possibility of an equal match between hero and princess" (55). Both hero and princess seek love - Eric needs a bride, Aladdin uses the Genie wishes so he can be suitable for Jasmine, and John Smith asks Pocahontas to return to England with him. 

On the whole, I agree with Rozario's arguments and find her research paper is well written. It flows easily and includes many other voices to give her arguments strength. 

As a Disney lover, I like her optimistic conclusions and the stance she takes, showing that these films are progressive and empowering to women. The princesses marry because they want to, and in doing so they even break down rigid norms, by marrying outside of what is expected. The princess' choice is honoured, and just because she marries, does not mean she loses any of her initial feistiness and just submits to patriarchal oppression. Quite to the contrary, it means she has succeeded; she has achieved what she wanted, and can live a happy life, with a father and Kingdom in good standing. 

Adorable!

https://www.facebook.com/mydisneydorks/videos/1729242623957929/

Man sings "Once Upon a Dream" while dancing with Aurora.

"You the Man, Well, Sorta"

""You the Man, Well, Sorta" Gender Binaries and Liminality in Mulan" is a research paper by Gwendolyn Limbach.

I find particularly interesting Limbach's view that becoming a woman is a passive process, where as the men take part in physical activities enabling them "to become their own agents of achieving manhood" (120). This is a perspective I had not quite considered in this way, but that I completely agree with. Furthering her argument, Limbach explains becoming a woman is like following an instruction manual; as long as you follow obediently, you can do be made into a woman. However, the path to manhood is not so clearly lined out, and no step-by-step instructions are provided. Evidence for these conclusions can be found in the contrast between the songs "Honour to us all" and "Be a Man".

Another construct of note that Limbach briefly explores is that manhood needs womanhood to help define it. By portraying femininity as weaker, men are able to assert their dominance as a powerful male. Just as in the lake Yao asserts his dominance as "king of the rock" and reinforces his elevated power by taunting the others saying, "there's nuttin' you girls can do about it". This notion of equating weakness with womanhood crops up throughout the film, but I believe the fact that Mulan defeats Shan-Yu, the Hun leader, actually works to disprove these notions. The film, thus, highlights such patriarchal stereotypes in order to help deconstruct them.


Cross dressing is when a person of one biological sex wears clothes typical of the opposite sex.
Gender Binary is the set state of either male or female, separating both gender and sex into these two distinct forms.
Gender Liminality is the quality of ambiguity between being male of female.

Mulan is a cross-dresser; she is a biological female who wears men's clothes as she trains for war.
Throughout the film, Mulan displays liminality

Why does Mulan cross-dress?
 - familial piety: to save her father
 - a self-fulfilling journey: to discover who she truly is
Disney portrays cross-dressing as a means to an end; Cross-dressing is a way for Mulan to bring honour to her family by saving China, something she wouldn't have been permitted to do as a woman.

Limbach argues that the combination of Mulan not being shown to enjoy manhood, as well as her specific purposes for cross-dressing in the first place, are Disney's way of maintaining the traditional gender roles that they buy into. Limbach gives such examples as Mulan not wanting to smell like a man, and as her describing them as "disgusting", to show that, despite dressing like a man, Mulan doesn't truly desire to be one. "For the gender binary and patriarchal power structures to remain intact, gender crossing cannot be an attractive option for women". This, Limbach argues, is the reason the men at the training camp are portrayed as cruel, violent, and disgusting creatures.

I believe that, using the fan, while dressed as a woman, to defeat Shan-Yu (the Hun leader), Mulan proves that there is strength in femininity.

I disagree that every oblong shape must be phallic. Lombard describes the post Mulan climbs to retrieve the arrow, and Shan-Yu's sword in this way, and I disagree that such objects are explicit phallic imagery. I in no way agree that by presenting Mulan with Shan-Yu's sword, the Emperor bestows upon her an "officially condoned phallus, marking her instead as male". The sword is gifted to Mulan to thank her for what she has done for all of China and as a mark of achievement so that "the world will know" what she has done. It is gifted to her as she is dressed as a woman, after she heroically fought, as a woman. The Emperor respects her, as a woman. Mulan chooses to return home, as a woman. Mulan has earned her family honour, shown by the Emperor's gifted pendant, and so she no longer needs to cross-dress. She know knows who she is. As a woman, she has earned the respect she didn't previously have. So I don't feel that anything know marks her as male. She has completed her self-journey and concluded that she is returning to be a daughter.

I feel that Mulan is a story of female empowerment. It is, after all, categorised a part of the 2nd wave pseudo-feminist progressive Princess phase of Disney. I believe this is why Mulan defeats Shan-Yu as a woman, and not as the previously described liminal character between the mountains.

I disagree with part of Limbach's conclusion that Mulan just returns to a man's world. While I agree that Shang's arrival helps serve to "re-designate Mulan as fully female" (125). I do think it should also be noted that Shang is shy and awkward as he enters. It is Mulan who takes control of the situation, inviting Shang to stay for dinner. Thus, Mulan has not simply returned to man's world. She is a strong women, better equipped to assert herself after being able to 'act like a man' and now more accepted for doing so (unlike at the beginning of the film when she was shunned for talking out of place or being disobedient, both at the Match-makers and when confronting the conscription agents).

Disney Proposal

https://www.facebook.com/DisneyNerds/videos/1662533027341720/

Yet another adorable Disney proposal moment

Gender Stereotypes in Children's Toys

https://www.facebook.com/attn/videos/1011162078919251/ 

Research has shown that playing with Barbie's leads girls to think they can do less jobs.
This video touches on similar points that Peggy Orenstein discusses in her book, "Cinderella Ate my Daughter". Particularly in the chapter where Orenstein discusses the harm of pink, and investigates the marketing world.

"A Special Place"

This is a beautiful video of Minnie communicating in ASL with a delighted young girl: https://www.facebook.com/omeletocom/videos/10154013301939494/

Disney's "Feminist" Princess Stories

There are my takes on Chapter Four of Sarah Rothschild's The Princess Story. I focus particularly on introductory statements and interpretations of Mulan (1998).

Rothschild begins by arguing that Disney's second-wave, progressive princesses are only superficially feminist. She claims that, despite their spunky personalities, these princesses can't escape the patriarchal oppression they were born from.

Despite my love of Disney, I can concede that Rothschild has a point here. The fairytales the movies are based on have been adapted to fit Disney's signature mould: the magic of romance. Perhaps, as Rothschild suggests, this makes the films "anti-feminist in some disturbing ways", but it also can't be denied that Disney is a company, and their trademark is selling romance. So while, on the one hand they have a responsibility for what they show to children, on the other hand, they are producing romance bundled in a catchy tune to make profit, perhaps much like many rom-coms.

As I find with much of Rothschild's book, she goes on to make wild and contentious statements that she doesn't really back up with evidence. For instance, Rothschild speculates that "Belle, who vaguely says she wants "more", clearly wants the Prince Charming she reads about in books". I believe this statement to be unfounded and it is not at all backed up. Although Belle does enjoy reading romance novels, this does not translate to her "clearly" yearning for a Prince Charming. Quite to the contrary, I believe the "more" that she seeks is that of adventure, to be able to see the world and leave her provincial town with old-fashioned notions. It is Belle seeking opportunity and the chance to live her own life. This is shown as she sings of wanting "adventure in the great wide somewhere" after she outwits Gaston's attempted marriage ceremony. Gaston, though portrayed as a pig of a man, is the supposed Prince Charming of the town; he is the man the women swoon for and the men seek to be like. Evident in the song "Gaston" as "Every guy here'd love to be you, Gaston" and "No one...makes those beuts like Gaston". Yet Belle wants none of this. He represents the old patriarchal, oppression of women, and Belle transcends this "medieval" way of life by not marrying him.

I also fervently disagree with Rothschild's opinion that Belle's inkling for "more romance than she has been offered" is what drives her to offer herself to the Beast in place of her father. Belle felt no romantic notions towards the Beast at first, nor did she perceive her situation as the key to finding love. She simply loved her father and sacrificed herself in order to save him as he was elderly and sick and would surely have died in the Beasts dungeon.

Rothschild argues that "two men are responsible for Mulan's story" as the Huns attack China and the Emperor sends for conscription which initiates Mulan's action. However, I feel a more optimistic way to view this, is that Mulan steps up and takes action in an otherwise man ruled society. It is Mulan who decides to take her father's place, Mulan who comes up with the plans to save China. The fact that she takes this action to protect her father in the first place should in no way undermine what she does, it simply shows her as a loving and brave daughter. The fact she is a woman makes her all the more couragous as she fights stereotypes and risks death to do what she feels is right, where as for any man it would just be duty. In the film, the Emperor says that "one man may be the difference between victory and defeat" and then the shot immediately changes to Mulan. So Disney are already precluding that it is Mulan, a woman, who is this difference.

As Rothschild mention, interestingly, Mulan is the only Princess film with no kiss between the Princess and her love interest. Furthermore, Mulan is not actually a Princess; She is neither born royalty nor does she marry into it (Shang is an esteemed General, not royalty).

I agree with Rothschild that Mulan and her father share a strong and important relationship, and that Mulan goes to war to save her father and is ever conscious of bringing honour to their family.

Rothschild writes that "the girls do not ultimately get to save themselves. It is always the love interest who wins the final battle". Again, I simply do not agree with the conclusions she draws about Mulan, claiming that it is Shang who successfully implements Mulan's plan or that it is Mushu who releases the rocket, and so the males are the heroes. Umm.....has Rothschild forgotten Mulan's incredibly impressive rooftop fight scene with the Hun's leader!? Mulan is elegant, graceful, quick-thinking, agile, strong, brave, and heroic. She successfully defeats the Huns and saves all of China as well as the Emperor's life. Mulan was right all along, even when no one listened to her. Mulan came up with all the plans. Mulan even saves Shang, who would have been killed had she fled to safety with the others. It is Mulan who is presented with the Emperor's medallion, and the villain's sword. It is Mulan who all of China bows down to. I'm not quite sure how Rothschild missed all of that? I certainly feel that her biased dislike of Disney undermines her genuine arguments when she throws out such low jabbs at Disney such as this. Just as I'll admit my biased love of Disney swings me to their defense.

I further disagree with Rothschild's interpretations of the men rescuing Mulan. Rothschild interprets it negatively that Shang and the Emperor come to Mulan's defense against the counselor Chi Fu, arguing that is shows women need rescuing. However, I find this a positive image. Mulan has already proven she can fight for herself by saving all of China twice! So you can't say that she's weak or timid. She's already defied men's rules by taking her father's place in the army, so nor is she afraid to question authority. But, the importance of Shang and the Emperor coming to Mulan's defense against Chi Fu is that it shows she has changed people's attitudes and societal expectations. Now other men are showing they think it is despicable to call a woman a "treacherous snake" or say she's a "creature not worth protecting". In their defense of Mulan, they are defending all of women's rights.
 The Emperor himself bows down to a woman, showing he has no prejudice against doing so.

Rothschild also takes the film out of context as she berates Mulan's father, Fa Zhou, for accepting her unconditionally in a reassuring conversation with her and then in private praying that she impresses the match-maker. However it is at the beginning of the film that he prays for her to do well at the match-makers and at the end, after Mulan has been away at war, that he sets aside the sword and medallion and says "The greatest gift and honour...is having you for a daughter". This shows Fa Zhou's progression, as after missing his daughter, he realises that she is perfect just the way she is and doesn't need to fit to conventions like other daughters.

Pocahontas

I don't really remember this film from my childhood...I think perhaps I'd watched part of it once, when I was older, but never really paid attention. 

I watched it properly recently, and while I enjoy the story, I had expected more to happen. I know this sounds strange, as I'd been perfectly happy with older Disney movies where so much less happened. I guess, watching know, at an older age, and thinking I knew something of the story, I had expected more action. 

Pocahontas is, in my opinion, a good role-model in this film. She is strong, yet gentle. Impulsive, yet thoughtful. Brave, yet cautious. She embodies a good balance of these traits and is undoubtedly the heroin of the story. She prevents a war and saves many people's lives through her courageous and loving spirit. 

She is active from the start, leaping off the great waterfall in an elegant dive. She is fun and playful - tipping up the canoe -and still serious when necessary - such as placing her head on top of John Smith's and explaining why they should not fight.

She can hear the wind and is connected with nature.

The song "Savages" is a frighteningly truthful depiction of the prejudices people have against one another and it shows that this views are held on both sides and ultimately drive people to war. 

Englishmen:

"They're not like you and me
Which means they must be evil"

Indians:

"They're different from us
Which means they can't be trusted"

Throughout this song Pocahontas is a voice of reason. With further connections to nature in reference to eagles, mountains and the wind, she races to do what she can to save John Smith and prevent war. She doesn't see those different from her as evil, she gives them a chance and gets to know them.

This shows that if we try, we can get along, and is an optimistic message.

Pocahontas is based on a true story. In the original, she was an 11 year old girl when the Englishmen arrived. It is thought that she did save John Smith by placing her head upon his, though there are doubts as to whether his life was ever truly in danger or whether it was just part of an elaborate adoption ceremony. She married Kocoum, though would have been considered divorced from him after her later kidnapp and profession of love for an Englishman. Pocahontas improved relations between the English and Indians. She saved many lives. It was reported that John Smith had died of a gun shot wound, though years later in England, Pocahontas met him again. Pocahontas married the Englishman John Rolfe, after being kidnapped, and travelled to England with him and her son. She died very young, at the age of 21, from an unknown illness, preventing her from returning to Virginia. You can read about Pocahontas' interesting history here.

The Little Mermaid

"The Little Mermaid" is an article by Roberta Trites, examining the meaning behind and differences between each of Hans Christian Andersen's and Disney's version.

Andersen is clearly anti-Disney in her interpretations, and while I can agree with some of her points, there are many that I feel leap to such extremes, that I simply don't follow.
But, as a devout Disney supporter, I am naturally biased in the opposite direction. So, while I admit there are many flaws in the Disney movies, I often work to defend them.

For clarity, when I refer to The Little Mermaid, I mean Andersen's mermaid, and with Ariel, I mean Disney's.

I can concede to Trites' thesis argument: that "Anderson's mermaid quests for a sole, but Disney's mermaid, Ariel, quests for a mate".
To The Little Mermaid love is a means to an end, she seeks her Prince so that he may share his soul with her. It is the soul she desperately desires. This is the strong religious theme in Andersen's version. That what's important is to gain a soul and go to heaven, but even more important, is that you earn this soul by doing good deeds. This message is conveyed through the mermaid's failure to obtain a soul through the love of a man, and instead being given the opportunity to continue good deeds for the next 300 years to earn her place in heaven for herself.
In Disney's version, Ariel was always fascinated with the surface, but once she meets Eric she becomes desperate to grow legs to be with him - so desperate that the sea witch is able to trick he into giving up her voice.

I agree with Trites' view that Disney's tale can be seen as a warning to parents not to needlessly repress their children, as this will only cause them to rebel. For instance, as Ariel is forbidden any contact with the human world, and so this is something she craves so deeply, and, ultimately, she does trade her tail and her voice for human legs. This is a whole Disney created message, as in the original, the mermaids were allowed to go to the surface once they reached 15-years of age. They simply had to wait until then. And while it was certainly exciting and new at first, after a while the surface didn't hold much interest over the thoughts of the other sisters. The Little Mermaid was always an exception though, she was always more fascinated than the others. Ariel's motives, however, were very different in Disney's version that in Andersen's, as outlined in Trites' thesis statement.

Though I'm not sure how much I agree with the link to children "developing obsessive behaviors that cause them to reject their identity".

Trites clearly explains that Ariel is "incapable of autonomy" by highlighting that she only moves from a world dependent on her father, to one dependent on Eric. Whichever world she is a part of, a man holds power over her. So, despite all her intelligence and courage, it can be argued that Ariel never has her independence. In "A Part of Your World" Ariel sings of a world where she can be free:
"Bet'cha on land, they understand
That they don't reprimand their daughters
Bright young women, sick of swimming
Ready to stand"

However, when Ariel makes it to land, she becomes instantly dependent on Eric: leaning on him to sturdy her, living in his palace, dependent on his kiss for her to be able to keep her legs. But then again, you can't discount that this is what she wants. And she is still and adventurous, free spirited person, demonstrated as Ariel takes the reigns in the carriage and explores the wonders of the city.

I disagree with Trites' argument that "Ariel is manipulative and dishonest in pursuing" Eric. I believe Ariel is merely trying to communicate with him without words. And I find Trites' evidence false. She states that Ariel "clings dependently to Eric, winking back at her friends in the sea to show she is faking her weakness for the sake of the prince's ego". However, this clip clearly shows that Ariel genuinely falls of the rock and the Prince catches her. We have already seen that Ariel had been unsteady on her legs to start with, as she is only just learning to walk! Yes, Ariel does look back and smile at her animals friends as Eric offers to help her, but this is a smile of joy and excitement as the man she loves has found her and is kindly helping her...not a wink of coy deception. Also, I hardly agree that it is "entrapment" as Trites suggests. Not when you take into consideration that Prince Eric has already fallen in love with Ariel too, he thought he recognised her, but it's the mesmerizing voice that he remembers best. As this voce belongs to Ariel, and she is the girl he can't stop thinking about, any actions Ariel later takes in her human form, I don't believe can be termed "entrapment". 

I believe Trites makes some interesting observations about the differences between the two versions. For instance, in the comparison between Andersen's and Disney's representations of love. The Little Mermaid is able to live as a human in quest of a soul until the Prince marries her, and shares one with her, or until he marries someone else, and she dies. No time frame is put on this process and love is given time to form in either circumstance. For Ariel, however, she is given but 3 days to obtain a kiss from Prince Eric, as a symbol of his love. This is Disney's magical 'true-love's kiss'. Trites uses this to show that Disney rushes love and equates it with sexuality - a physical act rather than an emotional connection - and that this love, therefore, "lacks the basic integrity imbued in Andersen's representation". This is an argument that I certainly agree with.

Towards the end of her article Trites' becomes much more extreme in her views and this is where I really disagree.

First, she interprets the red flowers in The Little Mermaid's garden as a prefigure of the "human genitalia the mermaid will seek" and so this is her "slowly preparing for human sexuality". Wow, and there was me thinking the red flowers represented the sun above the water and The Little Mermaid's fascination with the world above. After all, Andersen's description of the garden states "that of the youngest was round like the sun, and contained flowers as red as his rays at sunset". So I think the link to "human genitalia" is a little far stretched from that, in my mind at least. Trites' extends her analysis of the sexual references in Andersen's and Disney's work, focusing specifically on the imagery in the Disney film.

Further points of Interest:

Female Disney villains use "true-love" to get what they want by holding this notion over the naive princesses. Just as the Evil Queen encouraged Snow White to bite the wishing apple to gain her Prince, Ursula encourages Ariel to make a bargain with her so that she can be with Eric. In each circumstance, the villain had to remind the Princess of her desire and coerce her into their plan. 

Disney's version puts a greater emphasis on the sea witch, Ursula, as Disney "relies on women to create the conflict between good and evil". 

In Andersen's version, the sea witch warns The Little Mermaid of what she's about to do, but as an impartial and minor figure, does what she requests anyway: "it is very stupid of you, but you shall have your way, and it will bring you to sorrow, my pretty princess".

Andersen's original shows a much more positive bond between females. The sisters are all close and supportive of one another. They tell each other of their time at the surface, and they play together. When Ariel is human, the sisters visit her. And when they know she will die, they sacrifice their hair to the sea witch in order to give The Little Mermaid a chance to save herself with a magic dagger. The Little Mermaid is not prepared to murder, and instead kisses the Prince's new bride, showing affection for another woman; The Little Mermaid wants the newlyweds to be happy together, and she always admired the bride's beauty. Here, there is no longer jealousy and hatred. Arguably one of the most important female bonds is that between the grandmother and her granddaughters. The grandmother provides great wisdom and accurately explains the surface world to The Little Mermaid, giving honest and true council. The lack of this prominent female role-model in the Disney film is very telling about their attitudes towards women and their construction of pitting women against each other, rather than having them support one another. In the film, the sisters don't have as close a bond and they don't sacrifice anything to help Ariel. With the marriage scenes, Ariel and Vanessa are pitted against one another in a battle of good vs. evil in the fight for Eric's hand in marriage. 

Andersen manipulates children: they must be good so the daughters of the air may sooner go to heaven and will smile upon them. If they are bad, these daughters will cry and their sentence is prolonged. 

I disagree with Trites' point that the sisters "sacrifice their only treasure" when referencing their hair, as I believe they have many treasures; they had their gardens and were "delighted with the wonderful things which they obtained from the wrecks of vessels". 

AGREE: "The grandmother, the enchantress, the princess, the sisters, and the daughters of the air are all strong, beautiful, supportive, and feminine. But by changing their gender, by making their motivations anti-feminine, or by editing their function from the story, Disney destroys all of these characters".

Check out this link to:

Evolution of the Disney Princess - Evynne Hollens

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDvylXjDt8g

It's a compliation of songs by all the Disney Princesses, and shows the changes Disney have made in their hit songs over the years, right from "Some Day My Prince Will Come" with Snow White and The Seven Dwarves in 1937, to "Let it Go" from Frozen in 2013, the messages do change and the women are given more of a voice than simply waiting and wishing, even if many of the songs do still revolve around love.