When I was younger I was completely in love with Disney films. My favourites, Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King, I played over and over on a loop. When The Lion King came out in theatres, I actually went to see it three times (and please don’t mention that I was fifteen when it came out, okay?) A few years later I had more of an eye to critique what I thought was just harmless cartoon fun, and I really didn’t like what I saw. Not only is Disney jam-packed with obvious sexism and gender steretypes, in contains the worst kind of “acceptable” mainstream racism readily available at your local Wal Mart.
While some may argue “that was a different time” (which I’m not buyin’) when referring to the racism in movies like Fantasia, Dumbo, and The Jungle Book, Disney still has to be on the hook for some of their most recent blunders (Mulan anyone?) So when I saw this piece on Jezebel about “Disney’s first black princess” I knew I needed to post:
In March of last year, the company announced that production had begun on the film, a fairy tale to be called The Frog Princess featuring Maddy, a black chambermaid working for a spoiled white Southern debutante. A voodoo priestess fairy godmother helps Maddy win the heart of a white prince, after he rescues her from the clutches of a voodoo magician. Clichéd? Stereotypical? Yeah, that’s what many people thought. So even though the film was slated for a 2009 release, Disney went back to the drawing board.
Really? This is the best they could come up with? Well, given what they’ve “come up with” in the past, we shouldn’t be all that surprised. Watch this recap of some of the worst crimes Disney has committed to date (Although it doesn’t include the film that I believe to be one of their top ten personal worst.)
Warning: this video contains some pretty disturbing stuff, even if it is “just a cartoon.”
I’m actually starting to wonder if Disney cartoons are simply obsolete? Do they really need to do a “black princess story” at all? Do girls still need their princesses rescued by princes? Do boys still need that, for that matter?
The reviews for Wall-E, Disney’s latest Pixar film, have been strong. Admittedly I haven’t seen it because I’ve been too busy getting choked up about the trailer (the robot falls in love!), but in the spirit of Monsters Inc. and Finding Nemo, it seems to toss in the trash a lot of the problems listed above and move into a new kind of storytelling that a wider variety of kids can relate to. Disney seems to be better at creating monsters, toys, fish, ants, and robots we can relate to, rather than people. I was always curious as to why the Pixar division was able to, from day one, create stories that were inclusive, while the cartoon division just kept on being problematic (To give you an idea of what I mean, Toy Story and Pocahontas were released the same year. Toy Story marked the first involvment Pixar had with Disney, admittedly only in distribution.)
Do you think that Disney’s effort at a black princess is even worth it? More importantly, why is it so hard for them to get it right?
Disney is a billion-dollar business which makes a huge impact, globally, and especially with little girls. Therefore they have a huge responsibility: To make a black princess impressionable kids can look up to. … But how is it that Nickelodeon can figure out how to create an engaging minority-oriented TV show (Dora The Explorer) and Disney — a company founded in 1923, with a history of questionable characters … can’t draft a politically-correct film about black people?
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
nine comments
Arguably Disney still doesn't have much involvement with Pixar aside from distribution. Pixar seems rather defensive of its turf and they're such a critical and financial success story that they can easily afford to act that way.
As for why Pixar's so much better at crafting universal stories than Disney, I imagine at least part of it has to do with the two different corporate cultures. But really someone could (and probably has) written reams of lovely cultural analysis on the subject, so instead I'll just link to this video of a woman who cried every time she watched the Wall-E trailer.
Posted by Wesley
July 18, 2008, 11:12 AM
So I actually cried watching the woman cry over the trailer. I'm glad I'm not alone in crying every time I see it.
Posted by Stacey May
July 18, 2008, 12:35 PM
As a graphic designer, and sometimes illustrator I have to say, it is a lot harder to get audiences to feel empathy for illustrations of people.
In his amazing book about the comic arts Understanding comics summarized here: http://en.wikibooks.org/w/wiki.phtml?...
Scott McLeod suggests that the closer artists get to neotenic(baby-like) features, the more we empathize with their characters.
I would suggest that Disney's problem (aside from the blunt instrument approach to racial/gender typing). Is that part of the Disney brand is creating human-children characters, which is already a bit tougher as far as adorable is concerned then making a lonely robot.
That's why Disney films rely heavily on animal sidekicks and animatronic teakettles.
That being said, I think it is also interesting that Disney often uses parody to make points that are much more important in the original texts or myths. For example Gaston in Beauty and the Beast is an arrogant macho who actually loses Belle's heart to a "beast" ie; Fearfully masculine character who is cursed to be perceived as much more aggressive and violent than he would like to be. In fact it is the beasts friendship with Belle that eventually undoes his curse letting the true "gentle" man to re-emerge.
So the original story of B&B; rather then being about stereotypical gender roles, is actually a pretty amazing exploration of the idea of fearsome masculinity and the hero myth. For further nuanced readings or fairy tales, I would recommend reading Bruno Betelheim a writer who did a lot of work on the power of fairy tales in the social imagination, or that old favorite Joseph Campbell.
As far as I am concerned, Disney takes very complex stories that are actually opportunities for young people and adults to examine the mythological and narrative beliefs that help us construct our realities and relationships, and simplifies them to the point where they lose a great deal of their power. This is true in terms of stories that deal with different places, cultures and people as much as about gender.
So my problem with Disney wouldn't necessarily stop at racism and sexism it would extend to a general over-simplification of complex and rich stories into caricature and sentimentalism. Even if Disney does manage to create a culturally relevant and non-offensive movie, it will still dumb down the whole art of story telling itself.
Posted by Mir
July 18, 2008, 3:17 PM
*I’m actually starting to wonder if Disney cartoons are simply obsolete? Do they really need to do a “black princess story” at all?*
It's an interesting question. In a perfect world of gender equity and viable human rights for all, the answer would be no. However in this over-commercialied, racist, heterosexist corporate world of media we live in, that will still keep creating princess and bad-guy characters, is it fair to have other races continually dismissed? Is it also okay to want to be a princess (of colour!), as long as that is your choice?
And since you mentioned Pochantas, I'm STILL pissed off at that. Making up some BS story that willfully lies about the fact that John Smith was an abrasive, abusive man whom Matoaka (her real name) saved from being clubbed to death when she was only 10. She was then raped, kidnapped, and as many stories reveal, killed by the English at the age of 21 for what she could reveal really went on with these colonizers.
Posted by Jessica Yee
July 18, 2008, 3:51 PM
If that black princess storyline ever reaches the light of day, I hope they let her fall in love with a man of colour. In contemporary Hollywood women of colour are always paired with white men, as if it is inconceivable that a woman of colour could ever choose a man of colour.
Considering our cultural histories where men of colour were (are?) painted as barbarians, boogeymen and unregenerate misogynists, and how much women of colour are sexualised and exoticised for the consumption of white audiences, I'd prefer it if they made a children's movie that didn't replicate that trend.
I read an argument that Pixar movies aren't really for kids, just in the sense that kids lose interest in their storylines: http://www.racialicious.com/2008/07/1...
Posted by Thea
July 18, 2008, 4:48 PM
much as i enjoy the pixar films, i don't think that we can hold them up as paragons of inclusivity: when was the last time that you saw a pixar film with a strong female lead, or even a strong female character? (ok fine, maybe annie from toy story 2) i heart dory, but i wouldn't call her a protagonist.
for a more eloquent take on this, check out this blog post.
Posted by fireeyedgirl
July 19, 2008, 12:06 PM
Fireeyedgirl: That link on Pixar is really, really interesting. Thanks for posting it. I like this challenge, and when I see Wall-E I think I'll try it out...
"I tried very hard to identify the cues and actions that marked WALL-E's and EVE's genders and see if I could imagine them as gender neutral. In truth, it wasn't too hard. Up until the scene when they introduce themselves by name, it was pretty easy to imagine each of them as either the opposite gender or gender-neutral..."
Posted by Stacey May
July 19, 2008, 12:35 PM
I think that is would be wonderful to have the frist disney black princess because i am african american but mix but my skin color is carmel, any just the type for color girls to realizes that we are great and wonderful the way we are and that we can be anything we want to be. there are so many type of race with the disney pricess why not make a african american. it will teach a lot of girls new things. i say go for it. really 1000 percent
Posted by julie
August 2, 2008, 5:13 PM
Anybody got good links about this stuff?! Disney is a really great cultural burometer. I'm obsessed! There's no better way to know just how far mainstream north american culture is willing to push the envelope and in what way, if left to make it's own rules. There are both hugely deep problems and some surprisingly pushy concepts in disney animations. I agree with much of the above criticism, but It's important to point out that just because disney shows negative traditional masculinity/aggression ideals or outdated traditional ideas, does not mean that in the context of the storyline of their films those themes are being encouraged. Geston is, I believe, an example of that, as is some of the stuff shown above from Mulan. Meanwhile, the last time Disney had an opportunity to show black people, it decided to go with "Africa- land of cute animals" instead (or did it? Very much worth probing, for instance the fur shade difforence between Scar and Mufassa.) The Song "Be Prepared" also seems to have visual references to Natzi rallies (very interesting to see on u-tude). Lilo & Stitch showed some pretty impressive realism, for Disney. No matter how many times I watch Disney stuff, I can't deside weather I love it or hate it. I want to read books! Books Anyone?! Give me books! I'm hungry for research! I always have been. Actually, I thought Beauty and the Beast was a beautiful triumph for gentle masculinity overall. Nayla is a real voice of truth in The Lion King, however as with Jazmine she plays the role of conscience for a more active male character (Simba, Aladin) The movies are quite formulayic. Those two are particularly similar in their underlying plot-line mechanics. Anybody get to write any essays on this for school? Send them to me! Know any good videos about all this?? Anything is welcome!
Posted by Myra
August 6, 2008, 11:07 PM
Leave a comment
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.