Response to Disney’s: The Little Mermaid

Of the many Disney movies that I recall from my childhood, The Little Mermaid is not one of them. Although the stunningly beautiful Ariel was just as I envisioned in my mind, the rest of the film had dissolved away with time. It took the iconic and irresistibly catchy Under The Sea to re-stimulate my memory of the film and remind myself that I had in fact seen this before. However, regardless of what I have remembered of Disney films, this class has positioned me to view these animated classics in new and unique ways. I expected then, that I would have some negative reaction to the film or at least some reservations on the plot. However, I found myself simply appreciating the simplicity of the story, the loveable characters, the soundtrack and the animated beauty.

It was a breath of fresh air to watch The Little Mermaid and appreciate the film as a source of entertainment and escapism from the real world. While much of this class has centered on analysis and denunciation of Disney films, often revealing very negative and critical views, I was comfortable observing and analyzing the film in respect to its contextual form. Disney films are, and must be understood as, children’s films of fantasy, wonder and entertainment. Situated in such a frame of mind, we can recognize that the intended audience is young, imaginative and largely uncritical absorbers of the text.

In my opinion, The Little Mermaid is a loveable and familiar story of a young teenage girl wanting to explore the world. Ariel’s longing for a world greater than the confines of the ocean and her father’s kingdom is manifest in her elaborate collection of human items. Ariel’s charm is in her relatability to the audience. She too is filled with wonder and imagination. The film takes on a didactic purpose in its portrayal of the father/daughter relationship between Ariel and Triton. Although Triton can come across as domineering, my reading of his character is that of a father who is zealously protective of his daughter to a fault. The viewer is allowed to make the assumption that Triton is an only father due to the lack of a female spouse, causing him to take a conservative and protective attitude towards his daughter. Triton’s overprotective nature collides with Ariel’s free spirit nature and wonder. I take the position that the conflict of the story is this father/daughter relationship from which the sub-plots divulge into the tales of rebellion with Ursula and love with Eric.  This reading of the film is reinforced towards the conclusion of the film, whereby Triton sacrifices his own soul to Ursula so that his daughter may live free. An unfailing love drives Triton, who ultimately realizes his need to let Ariel free when he sees her affections for Eric and life beyond the sea.

It would be naïve of me to not consider the role of gender roles and stereotypes in The Little Mermaid, which after all are a pervasive theme in the film. My greatest criticism of the film is the haste with which Ariel falls in love with Eric and in which they plan to wed. At just 16, Disney’s character Ariel indirectly aligns Disney with the view that females lack autonomy and require dependence on males. Furthermore, the storyline of finding love in three days, loving someone without knowing anything but their name and loving someone based purely on physical attributes presents a superficiality of love that not only undermines the true complexity of love but further reinforces female dependence as well as male shallowness. The only redeeming feature is Disney’s recurring theme of ‘loves first kiss’, often requiring the protagonist to overturn a magical curse in a certain amount of time. The frequency with which Disney employs such a theme, returns the film to its primary role as children’s’ entertainment, whereby Disney is given the liberty to play with relational dynamics and love at first sight.            

In what has been a class typified by harsh commentary on Disney, I am glad to not have vocal opinions after watching The Little Mermaid. Once situated in the context as a children’s film, we are still able to critically read the text while acknowledging the liberties with which Disney is allowed to portray the themes of love and imagination. I ask Giroux if we must ‘make Disney accountable for what it produces’ when we can just appreciate the texts as imperfect and imaginative.  

Elsa Elsa Everywhere

Today my Facebook trending sidebar had an interesting theme. I've always heard that the trending bar reflects your previous searches and that Facebook has access to your search history (in some way or another). This rang true more than ever today, it feels like my trending would mirror that of a ten year old girl.

http://www.abcnews4.com/story/28176283/hanahan-police-arrest-elsa-for-lowcountry-cold-front

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/19/kentucky-police-arrest-warrant-apb-queen-elsa-frozen-disney_n_6714722.html

While I would usually rather this not be in my trending feed, it does serve to illuminate the omnipresence of Disney and corporate influence in our world today. Reporters from large news corporations have made the effort to write fun-loving pieces on Elsa and the bitter-cold that has gripped America these last few days. More than this, it has reached a global audience through social media platforms such as Facebook. 

I'm always a proponent for the news being a little more comical and uplifting than the usual critical political conversation, hollywood gossip and daily recitation of crimes or legal battles. So thank you Elsa for the change of pace you brought today.     

Disney & the Academy Awards

I’ve never been much of an Academy Awards person. Frankly I think that award celebrations are overwhelmingly dull, commercial moneymakers and in the scheme of things, insignificant. As an avid moviegoer however, I am always curious to see the nominees and keen to see the winners but the ceremony itself is always an excess of disappointment and futility that I regret wasting three hours watching. My favorite moment, in contrast with the widely held view held by the public and especially by the academy, was Seth McFarlane mocking the academy and nominees, all of which should grow a sense of humor.

The Oscar’s do however hold a prestige in the movie world that is unparalleled and recognizes distinguished achievement in a very competitive industry. Disney is no stranger to Oscar’s fame. In what was then just the fifth Academy Award ceremony, in 1932 Walt Disney won his first Oscar. This was the first of 32 Oscar’s he would individually win including 4 lifetime achievement awards added posthumously. Walt Disney is the most decorated Oscar winner in history with the most wins and most nominations of any individual. Added to this personal success, Disney’s production studios have had success with 4 nominations in the Best Picture Category and a multitude of wins in actor/actress, costume design, production and beauty and makeup categories. However one of the crowing achievements of the Disney Corporation has been its success in the category of Best Animated Feature. Since it’s introduction in 2001, Disney affiliates have won 8 of 14 awards for Best Animated Feature. This includes 7 victories from 9 nominations by Pixar Animation Studios and last year’s success Frozen from Walt Disney Animation Studios.

Disney has the chance to add to this impressive résumé in 87^th Academy Awards with 9 nominations including Big Hero 6 for Best Animated Feature. 

Oh Hey! I hope I win!

What's the Big Deal?

This past Thursday I had the pleasure to venture off campus and have dinner at a local Durham restaurant located just minutes off east campus. My dorm house council decided that it would be nice to substitute our weekly meeting with a reflection on our achievements so far this year and discussion of what we want to do with the remainder of our freshman year in Brown dorm. No surprise then, as college students, we thought the best place to hold this discussion was around a table of delicious food. Inevitably the intention of the night got a bit lost as we began telling stories about our experience at Duke so far, sharing who our best friends are here at Duke and asking each other questions about our heroes, our families and our favorite cuisine.

However this blog entry is not concerned with my house council dinner. Rather, I am fascinated with cultural inquiry, evolution and how it can be applied to Disney. The restaurant we decided to go to was Vine. From afar, one would infer that Vine is primarily a Japanese restaurant and they need look no further than the menu, half of which, is composed of sushi items. However Vine is actually a fusion of Asian cuisine, with its full title Vine: Sushi & Thai. The menu had traditional Japanese sushi, sashimi, but also Pad Thai, Thai Curry and Asian Green Vegetables. As someone who has lived my life in Australia, I can appreciate the amazing authentic Asian cuisine one can find in Sydney. The proximity to Asia and the large Asian population in Australia means one can find terrific authentic Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Khmer, Vietnamese and Thai food. However, a Chinese restaurant serves Chinese food and a Thai restaurant serves Thai food. So returning to Vine, I was amazed at the clashing and seeming inconsistencies of the restaurant. Apart from the diverse menu I described, the lady who greeted us was of seeming Japanese decent (probably a first generation American) yet the waiter who served us had a thick southern accent. The cooks had an array of ethnic heritage, from Hispanic to American to Asian. The décor was immediately Japanese with chopsticks, Japanese characters and lighting but also Chinese, Thai and American. What was particularly brought to my attention was the juxtaposition of nice Japanese dining and then the bar with TVs, very American-esque. The center TV was playing the Disney classic Mulan, a Chinese legend, in a Japanese restaurant! I was perplexed by these inconsistencies. This restaurant wasn’t Japanese and Thai, it was a melting pot of all things Asian.

The contradiction of the restaurant first puzzled and frustrated me. However, once I looked around at the people on my table, a mixture of students with Indian, Nigerian, Australian and American heritage, as well as the other patrons in the restaurant, I realized that we exist in a melting pot of cultures. No longer is Japanese, Thai or Chinese culture independent of international interpretation. So too, American culture is interpreted and misrepresented by other cultures worldwide.

Disney is no different in its portrayal of other cultures in their feature animations such as Mulan and Aladdin. Stereotypes, misrepresentations and inaccuracies are ripe in our globalized society. In fact, I would argue that a singular historical or cultural accuracy is not defined. Cultures are constantly evolving and merging in unique and unpredictable ways. The fact that Mulan is playing in a Japanese restaurant is now probably an oversight for much of the American population. Our cultural distinction is slowly amalgamating into an interweaved universal culture network. In this cultural network, cultural accuracy is often violated. From Disney’s perspective, in many of their more controversial films and cultural fairytales, they are simply using their artistic liberty to bring stories to life and to entertain an audience. This cultural interpretation is illustrated perfectly in Mulan. Adored by a wide global audience, Mulan was not released in China until a year after its global release and after Chinese New Year. Upon release, it was criticized for its misrepresentation of the ancient Chinese legend and portrayal of Chinese culture. Yet to draw a comparison, DreamWorks 2008 animated release of Kung-Fu Panda, starring Jack Black along with Angelina Jolie as lead voice characters, was well-received and adored by much of the Chinese population despite its comedic and Hollywood production. In Aladdin, Disney has been widely criticized for its portrayal of the Middle East and Arab world, using thick accents for villainous characters and not for others. While I agree with much of the widely held criticism, I would also add that Disney is using their artistic liberty to enhance the characterization of the film.

While noted critics such as Henry Giroux have argued that Disney has misrepresented, insensitively treated and dumbed down cultural fairy-tales, I would ask them to consider the evolution of cultures and these stories. Disney has given these fairytales, which have spanned centuries and different modes of representation and media, new meaning and new life through the medium of animation just as Vine has redefined the paradigm of an Asian restaurant in America. Culture evolves, culture is not singular and any text, Disney or otherwise, is a art-form with unique representation.

   

Reading Response - Kevin Shortsleeve

This week’s homework required for me to read quite an extensive essay by Kevin Shortsleeve on Disney and the 1930s. It was definitely an endurance event, requiring my focus and demanding my attention. I really liked the arguments by Shortsleeve as he introduced a wide and well-supported assortment of arguments that had me constantly highlighting my page and writing notes. However, along with his breadth of arguments and unique perspectives, I lost a consistency to his writing and found his arguments, while very strong, not totally cohesive and at times, straying from his thesis. Nonetheless, I have learned a great deal about the Disney Corporation, particularly its antiquated 1930s ideology, and developed a more acute eye to critically assessing writing pieces.

I will begin with what I really liked about Shortsleeve’s piece. I though the structure of Shortsleeve’s essay was strong. It was easy to tackle his piece because it was broken up into smaller subheadings that helped divide the piece into a collection of arguments. Furthermore, the arguments did not stand alone but were connected through linking phrases and segues. For example, Shortsleeve transitions from a discussion on the enduring appeal of Disney to a discussion of the 1930s Disney by writing

‘the origins of our discontent can be traced historically to the crucial decade in which the company came of age’.

The strength of Shortsleeve’s essay also lies in his contribution to the greater discourse community. The beginning of the essay cites a vast array of previous authors and critics in the field of Disney and culture, thus presenting Shortsleeve’s arguments as part of a greater academic argument,

‘Sayers was incensed at the Disneyfication of fairy tales, objecting to the overly simplistic, sentimental approach – the dumbing down’.

This theme is continued throughout the essay, enhancing its validity, as Shortsleeve uses other critics to supplement his argument and also present his own argument in response to others. For example Shortsleeve writes:

Steven Watts, in the Magic Kingdom: Walt Disney and the American Way of Life (1997), notes that since the late 1960s “the imbroglio over the Disney Version and the fallout from it have continued to cloud a clear view of Disney and the impact of his work”. I believe that there is an “imbroglio” and that it does “cloud a clear view of Disney”, but I do not think The Disney Version is connected with it.

In addition, Shortsleeve uses to great effect a ‘mini-thesis’ to introduce the theme of his essay before divulging into a ‘proper thesis’ to extend his argument and signpost the direction of his essay.

à mini-thesis ‘I seek to identify a basic rift that occurred nearly seventy years ago, which has fueled paranoia in Disney corporate, artistic, critical and public spheres’

à main thesis ‘I believe that the Disney Company has remained unchanged since its initial climb to international fame in the 1930s. Political and social thought of the 1930s… has remained integral to Disney’s corporate structure and artistic sensibilities. Achieving and maintaining great commercial success via an Orwellian-style management, while selling utopian dreams of agrarian, monarchical kingdoms in its films, has impressed, entertained, and subliminally frightened audiences for nearly seventy years... It is this fractured experience that specifically haunts us.’

Lastly, the strength of Shortsleeve’s piece lies in his framing of his essay. The discussion of Disney’s housing village Celebration, described as a microcosm of the paranoia surrounding the Disney Corporation, acts as an example that threads the essay from introduction to conclusion. Furthermore, Shortsleeve uses the analogy of a child overhearing his parents, but being assured that everything is okay, to frame his discussion on the ‘silent tension’ and ‘suspicion’ surrounding Disney. The analogy is introduced towards the beginning of the essay as more abstract and is resolved at the conclusion

‘If we are like the child I described and is Disney is our duplicitous parent, then, as critics of the media giant we are rendered especially fragile. We are burden, paranoid and fearful… When we criticize Disney, we are like a child testifying against his parents. We are intimidated, guilt ridden, or reactionary.’ 

My greatest criticism of Shortsleeve’s essay is that it almost feels as though its two essays amalgamated as one. It feels as if Shortsleeve is (i) discussing why criticism of Disney is disparate to criticism of other companies and why there exists paranoia around the Disney Company and (ii) discussing the influence of the 1930s on the Disney Corporation. The essay title reflects my opinion, it almost exists as two distinct titles ‘The Wonderful World of the Depression: Disney, Despotism and the 1930s. Or, Why Disney Scares Us’. Synthesizing the two is a monumental task and I feel like they would be better served independent of the other. It feels as though the discussion on the 1930s and Depression era spans the body of the essay and then Shortsleeve returns to why Disney scares us. Shortsleeve’s attempt to link them, ‘basic rift that occurred nearly seventy years ago, which has fueled paranoia in Disney’, is not referenced explicitly enough to merge the two contrasting arguments. It is not until the conclusion of the essay, The Appeal, that the argument returns to why Disney scares us. The consistency of the two arguments is thus called into question and I conclude that the two argument should exist separately.

Complementing my analysis of the writing approach and techniques of Shortsleeve, I would also like to share some exciting new insights I have gained from this essay. Shortsleeve focuses on the 1930s to form comprehensive arguments on the influence of the era on the Disney Corporation and how the characteristics of 1930s Disney persist today. I have learned that the success of Disney is closely tied with the Depression era and the need for entertainment and entrepreneurship in a time of immense economic difficulty. Shortsleeve communicates the popularity of Disney’s utopia and American nostalgia for rural society during a time where unemployment was high and distraction was in high demand – ‘Audiences sought deliverance from a system, a place, and a time that had failed them’. The 1930s also enticed political movements such as monarchy and totalitarianism that Disney effectively used to domineer his company and control his enterprise. The comparison to Walt Disney and Henry Ford emphasize Disney’s shrewd and mechanical business approach.  The 1930s also formed the basis of Disney Parks, with Main Street and Hollywood studios being a representation of 1930s America. Disney portrays the 1930s as a Golden Age of American patriotism, innovation and self-sufficiency in stark contrast to the Depression filled reality. This misrepresentation and glorification is what characterizes the Disney brand. Shortsleeve’s descriptions of the 1940s strike, Walt’s anti-unionization, false egalitarian spirit, desire to build a new society and political influence all point a more comprehensive picture of Disney the man. Duplicity is characteristic of Walt Disney and also the Disney Corporation, which Shortsleeve effectively articulates in his essay while maintaining an objective analysis.

In summary, Shortsleeve’s essay has been a profound reading for this class and has had the dual function of educating me more about the Disney Corporation and enabled me to improve my critical analysis skills.