Romance, the Role of Men, and Disney
Here, Rothschild brings forward an important point, that I had personally never considered, that Disney dramatises romance that was of little importance in the source material he drew from. He invented the notion of 'true love's first kiss'. This is, perhaps, most evident in Snow White, where the original 7-year old character is transformed to a more appropriate age, who's character is fixated with true love throughout the film. She begins wishing for the one she loves at the well, sings about him to the Dwarves and ultimately bites the poisoned 'wishing' apple in the hope of having her true love. Throughout all of this, she wishes for the one she loves to find her, which makes her entirely passive in the process. She can do nothing except wish and wait for her Prince.
This text primarily outlines that in Disney's versions the story centers around males, where as in the 'original' texts, such as Grimm's or Perrault's, the storyline centers around the female characters. It is the male characters' desires and actions that progress Disney's story, from the Prince falling in love with dear Snow and provoking the Queen's rage, to the King in Cinderella desiring grand-children so deeply that he organises a ball, to Sleeping Beauty where the King throws an elaborate Christening, enraging Maleficent by not inviting her, and betrothing his daughter from birth to form his own alliance. Rothschild provides many more examples of how men are central to the action in the films, and the titular Princesses remain passive. Their own stories are being taken from them, and without the men, they would never find their 'happily ever after'. Snow White would remain asleep in her coffin, Cinderella forever a slave in her own home and Aurora never awoken from her sleep. In Rothschilds words, "The prince is both [the princess's] savior and her reward".
Though after reading Grimm's version of Snow White, it could also be argued that Snow White never was the main character of her story, rather the Evil Queen and her envious hatred was the centrality, for most of the story revolves around her desires and feelings and even ends with her punishment.
While, Rothschild brings forward many intriguing points such as this, there are also many places in her writing where I simply disagree with the conclusions she draws about Disney. While I admire her creativity in her thoughts, I often feel they lack any substantial evidence, and so can be considered barely more than her personal opinions. The first example of this is when Rothschild asserts that Walt Disney "inserted himself into Snow White" through Grumpy and Dopey. Disney's rendition gives the Dwarves a role that never existed in Grimm's version, using them for comedic effect and to progress and fill out the story. I agree that this could have been done for two main reasons. Firstly, to pad out a short story to make it into a feature length film. Secondly, as animating comedic Dwarves, which are less realistic than Snow White, the Prince or the Queen, was easier at a time when animation was at it's beginnings. After all, Snow White was Disney's first film. However, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that these two Dwarves are Walt Disney's way of putting himself into his film. And the assumption that the misogynistic personality of Grumpy is a direct reflection of Walt himself is a little simplistic. As Amy M Davis discussed in her article 'The Dark Prince and Dream Women', there is little evidence to prove that Walt Disney was sexist and this topic is far more complex than at fist glance. From other executives to the general attitudes at the time, there is more to consider. Though the basis Rothschild draws on for Walt's transformation from Dopey to Grumpy is true to an extent. It is believed Walt associated women with warmth and security in his younger years, and became fearful of women after learning about venereal disease in France and having his heart broken by his child-hood sweet-heart while away. But is it fair to say that Grumpy represents Walt's "personal antipathy toward women"? Walt worked with women in his studio and was prepared to listen to their advice, he cared about skill, not gender, and valued his employees on what they could contribute to his company (Amy M. Davis, The Dark Prince and Dream Women). Rothschild states that women at Disney's studio were "accorded neither creative credit nor power", and while I fully believe that women would have been treated unequally in the workplace at this time, this directly conflicts Davis' writing, where Disney is attributed with saying "girl artists have the right to expect the same chances for advancement as men". So again, I feel it is unfair to judge Walt so harshly, especially when you take into context the lack of opportunity for women in 1937, which was not Walt's doing, but the general attitude in society at that time.
Defining the Disney Princess
What I find to be the most interesting point in this section, is the paradox between the first-wave princesses being modeled from Ballerinas, and the fact that such passive princesses could never attain such a disciplined physique. And more shockingly so, that had the real-life Ballerinas actually had figures like the animators adjusted the princesses to, they would not have the muscle strength or balance to dance. With this in mind, I respect the disciplined grace and poise the princesses were modeled on, but simply wish they had kept the more muscular, yet still very feminine, undoubtedly thin, and attractive physique of the dancers.
