In Conclusion...

I can’t believe this class is almost over. It seems like just yesterday (so cliché—I know), I was jumping for joy that I got into this class amid the craziness of registration. I came into this class thinking that I would be watching a bunch of Disney movies and analyzing them in high-school-literature-class-fashion. I got half of that right. We did watch a lot of Disney movies for sure—a lot of which I kind of knew the stories of but had never actually watched before—but the analysis was so much more in depth and more relevant than I expected.

This class was basically a modern women’s studies class. I learned so much about gender and gender-portrayal in Disney princess films that I feel like I’ve emerged from this class a higher level of feminist and Disney critic than I was when I came in. Before this class, I liked Disney because I thought its songs were fantastic (I still shamelessly sing them at the top of my lungs) and the stories were cute, but now I’m suspicious of the fact that almost every movie weaves romance into its plotline—independent young women don’t need no man! Or princesses for that matter.

Through this class, I’ve learned about Disney’s history and the evolution of its princesses. I became more aware of how Disney is affected by and actively incorporates current events into the production of its films. I distinctly remember the article I used for my second essay. I feel like that article taught me the most about Disney’s history because of its analysis of when Disney produced, or rather did not produce, princess films. The article taught me that the films’ purpose was to perpetuate traditional gender roles or whatever is socially acceptable. In the 1900s, princesses such as Snow White (1937), Cinderella (1950), and Aurora (1959) perpetuated traditional domestic female roles because they were produced in eras when women were encouraged to stay at home. However, the fact that there were no Disney princess films in the 1940s, when women were empowered, points to the fact that Disney’s major role is to perpetuate old standards. Reading this article and other analyses in class made me more skeptical of Disney’s intentions.

I also became more aware of gender and cultural/racial disparities present in Disney films. Through rewatching Disney princess movies with a concentration on gender, I noticed sexist comments and actions that I had never noticed before, such as the scene in Cinderella when the king insists that there must be a good mother out of the many women at the ball. This might explain why I felt inexplicably uneasy during parts of princess movies—because my inner feminist was uncomfortable with the traditional gender roles represented in the old and some newer movies—e.g. when Ariel and Pocahontas say “daddy I love him!” When I was reading articles for my third essay, I came across lots of background racism, like the realization that even though Disney claimed to create a diverse film by changing the physical race of the characters, it still injected American values into the culture, thereby devaluing its diversity.

However, no matter how egregious Disney’s mistakes are, it is still good that we are learning about them because now we can educate others about gender and racial disparities in popular media, or at least see the world with different eyes. Then we can help effect change in society, and maybe Disney will change again. As for me, I know for sure when I get around to seeing Moana, I will be viewing it from a different perspective—albeit a more critical one—and I hope with every new princess film, Disney improves its representation of women and different cultures.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When Stars meet the Snow

I remember seeing this video a while ago, but I just came across it again, and it is sorta kinda VERY hilarious. I guess this is what you get when Disney acquires Star Wars?? Worth the watch (and the cringe). Enjoy!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Princess Privileges

When I first started reading "Applying for the Position of Princess: Race, Labor, and the Privileging of Whiteness in the Disney Princess Line," I questioned Condis’s argument. She argues that white princesses achieve princesshood by freeing themselves from labor, whereas princesses of color continue to live in a life of labor even once they are princesses.

I immediately began listing all the princesses in my head and their statuses as laborers. Cinderella, Aurora, and Snow White all freed themselves from forced labor. That was easy; they support Condis’s argument because they are the first-wave princesses, so no surprises there. Ariel has never worked a day in her life, and neither has Belle, Jasmine, or Pocahontas. The only princesses that do any form of work are Mulan and Tiana. Furthermore, Tiana is the only one that explicitly labors as a goal. Her dream is to open her own restaurant, and she explicitly works hard toward it. Upon my own conclusions, I did not agree with Condis’s argument…not until I started reading her explanations. Even then, she hasn’t fully convinced me.

Condis starts out with her definition of Disney’s definition of princesshood (so many definitions). She defines “princess” in terms of the first-wave princesses: beautiful, young, and white women who live lives of romance and leisure. The problem I have with this definition is that, while it is accurate for the traditional perception of princess, it is only accurate for the traditional princess. It assumes the definition of princess is static. Who is to say that the definition of princess has not changed over the years? Or at least Disney’s definition? I definitely think that Disney’s definition of princess has changed over the years.

Condis then begins to examine each Disney princess and their labor statuses. She quickly concludes that the Cinderella and Snow White work against their will, and only after they are freed from their labor are they princesses. She makes an interesting point about Aurora, however. Aurora is raised without a need to work, but meets her demise when she pricks her finger on a spinning wheel, which Condis claims is a symbol of labor. This confines her to a comatose state, comparable to being enslaved by labor, and must be freed by a prince, which instills her princesshood. I can buy that argument because the spinning wheel always seemed arbitrary to me, and that explanation gives it meaning.

However, I find fault with Condis’s explanations of Ariel and Belle’s statuses. Condis claims that Ariel rebels against her father because she doesn’t want to work as a singer in the royal concert, and in the end, Triton releases her from working “as a representative of the merfolk government” (31). I think this is a stretch. Nowhere in the film does Ariel have a “job.” Her singing is not a job; it is her identity. She is good at it and enjoys it. Furthermore, Triton’s motives for not wanting Ariel to leave were not because he wanted her to work in their “merfolk government.” It is clearly a father-daughter relationship. The closest relation to labor in The Little Mermaid I can think of is in Sebastian’s song, “Under the Sea,” when he sings “up on the shore they work all day, out in the sun they slave away,” referencing human life above the sea. This could point to the expectation that mermaid princesses, and princesses in general, should not be laboring, but Condis doesn’t even bring this point up.

I also have a problem with Condis’s explanation for Belle. She claims that it is Belle’s job to tame the Beast, and she rejects that job until it becomes easy for her, i.e. when she falls in love with him. That statement just seems wrong to me. First, it is never a woman’s job to change someone. Second, doesn’t the curse place the burden of work on the Beast? He is supposed to be the only looking past surface looks and changing himself, not Belle. Plus, I think it’s very fair to dislike someone who is rude to you and your father. Therefore, Ariel and Belle’s characterizations as disliking labor fall.

Lastly, Condis’s analyses of the four princesses of color irk me. Her dismissal of Jasmine as whitewashed has some basis of truth, but she is still clearly of color and doesn’t like to labor, so to me, Condis’s argument is a cop-out to not deal with Jasmine’s clear opposition to her overarching argument. As for Mulan, I somewhat disagree with the statement that Mulan rejects feminine labor for masculine labor. I don’t think it’s as direct of a causation as Condis seems to put it. Mulan doesn’t immediately switch out one for the other; rather, through her love for her father, she realizes she can escape feminine labor through masculine labor as an alternative. I do agree that this point supports Condis’s argument that the princesses of color enjoy labor. However, in the end, Mulan still rejects working in the government and retreats to a life of leisure at home.

The greatest point that Condis convinced me of is Pocahontas’s continuity of labor. I had never viewed Pocahontas as a laborer, but Condis’s evidence of her athletic body, the scene of her picking corn, and her new position in place of her late mother, convinced me that she did do work. Furthermore, she chooses to stay behind and care for her tribe, another form of labor, instead of living a leisurely, white life with John Smith.

I also fully agree with the argument about Tiana, but I wonder how much of this is coincident. Both diversification and emphasis on actively taking charge of your own life are on an upward trend. Maybe, just maybe these two ideas are at a crossroad and show up in the same movie. I am interested to see what Moana brings to this debate about labor.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More from a Galaxy Far, Far Away

Today, StarWars.com revealed that Game of Thrones star Emilia Clarke will be playing a lead in the new Han Solo stand-alone movie! You know, to me, she kind of looks like Princess Leia...

But of course that couldn't be possible because this movie is set before A New Hope, before Han and Leia meet...unless there's something they're not telling us about...

I guess we'll just have to wait and see!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tale As Old As Time...

The news we have all been waiting for! Drum roll please...

The official trailer of the live-action Beauty and the Beast was released yesterday!!! Must I say more? Watch it below!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Beauty and The Beast Update!

The news we have all been waiting for! Drum roll please...

The official trailer of the live-action Beauty and the Beast was released yesterday!!! Must I say more? Watch it below!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Moana Soundtrack is Ready for Release!

According to this website, Moana's soundtrack, co-written by Lin-Manuel Miranda (squeee~~), is to be released November 18! That's so close! Plus, I want to hear what Mr. Hamilton has concocted because he is a genius.

A quote from a USA Today article says, "Miranda himself sings on the call-to-arms We Know the Way, while You’re Welcome is Maui’s look back at helping mankind with hip-hop flavor. And Moana’s girl-power anthem How Far I’ll Go is the new Let It Go." THIS IS SO EXCITING! Take a look at the clip below!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Sneak Peek at Beauty and the Beast

AHHHHHH!!! I got sucked into the world of Buzzfeed today as I was supposed to be doing more important things (isn't that how it always happens?) and I came across this LOVELY article. Entertainment Weekly just released some pictures of almost everyone in the new live-action Beauty and the Beast!

I mean, look at this!

This picture is absolutely fabulous. The dress, the pose, the lights in the background...just stunning. However, as I looked at the other pictures, which each featured a character, it felt a little odd. The live-action frames just felt a little unnatural and set-up, which I suppose is what they actually did to get the shot. But nonetheless, it kind of made me doubt the movie. A live-action movie should look like a film of an event that actually happened in life, not some middle school play, with handmade props (okay, that's exaggerating a little, but I am slightly let down by the pictures). Also, the Beast's appearance is a bit unnerving, a little uglier than we're used to (but I guess that's the point, isn't it?) (also, there's another Buzzfeed article about how the Internet is losing its sh--poop, for lack of better words, over the Beast's appearance). Also, in Belle's solo picture, her dress is a bit underwhelming. I was perusing the comments, and I liked the way somebody else put it: it looks like a cheap prom dress. I kind of expected the more poofy ball-gown look, with all the ribbon and layers.

I'm not sure what to think anymore. Maybe we've over-hyped it...we'll just have to wait and see.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~