"This Has All Been Very Entertaining. But Party is Over..."

Dear readers,

This post will bring my work on this blog to a close, the end of a semester's (sort of debatable...) work. I was trying to think of something really profound to write in this post, but I couldn't. Therefore, I'll just try and draw the course to a close - for both my benefit and for yours.

To 'decode' Disney is a task beyond all but the most accomplished team of professional researchers. Indeed with the continuous evolution of the Disney corporation itself, there may never be a definitive ideology behind the Disney corporation. Sure, one can identify recurring themes and traditions in Disney's creations, but these do not necessarily represent the entirety of what the corporation stands for, if anything apart from profit. As Mike Wallace comments in his piece 'Mickey Mouse History: Portraying the Past at Disney World', Disney is unquestionably involved in a process of manipulating the past, yet for what end remains uncertain. The content of Wallace's paper resonated strongly with some of the lessons I had learnt from history class in high school: that history is sometimes manipulated and misrepresented to portray an ideal which we should all aspire to in the future. Whether this notion pervades society so deeply as to influence the layout of a theme park is of course up for debate, yet the conspiracy theorists among us would most probably think so. Personally, I'm not entirely sure what to think. With $81 billion of assets, the Disney corporation is a force to be reckoned with. The media outlets it owns and controls have the power to influence an audience of billions. What it uses or will use this immense influence for is for the world to fear or look forward to.

Thanks for reading and happy ANZAC day.

The Kid Down the Hall: "Your blog is still boring..."

As many of you might have realised, I'm not one to go above and beyond. However, I feel like I have poured my soul into this blog and it therefore deserves the splendour of some more posts...

This is currently what is distracting me - they suck, don't even bother with them...

Anyway, in an effort to liven up my blog I will provide some humorous pictures and thoughts on them...

As I've mentioned multiple times, Grumpy Cat is a legend. Just a light break between the profundity of my opinions...

The Kid Down the Hall: "You can't just have your opinions on your blog, you've got to put other stuff there as well..."

Despite this blog being called 'My opinions about Disney', my hallmate thinks that my blog is inferior to his because I haven't got 'other stuff' on it. Of course he didn't realise that he was just giving me an excuse to write about my opinions, so that was a bit short-sighted of him. I will take the offer!

This next post is going to be a bit different. Having finished the course now we must each write our own extended essay on a topic of our choosing. As I already mentioned, mine is about the Orientalism of Aladdin and how it reflects the world we currently live in. This essay has led me down a number of research paths and has made me really consider what the media really means. To jumpstart me in this discussion, I'll look briefly at Dianne Macleod's 'The Politics of Vision: Disney, Aladdin, and The Gulf War'. This reading, despite the seeming shambles it was, was one of the most important in guiding me towards the conclusion that western depictions of the east are not so much indicative of an attitude as they are a cause for such attitude. As Disney's major audience is mostly children, the images of Hun savages in Mulan, tyrannical Arabs in Aladdin and brutish colonials in Pocahontas are integral in the mental development of Disney's young audience. Macleod, having the background of an art historian, comments that this tradition has developed since the early Renaissance where paintings such as those by Jean-Leon Gerome conveyed a sense of eastern inferiority through shear barbarism and rampant sexuality.

Pool in a harem - Gerome

This tradition has developed to the point that it is commonly accepted, perhaps even encouraged. A quick google search of 'Arabian culture' reveals Westen preconceptions: women in burqas, mosques and camels are rife. Although this may indeed reflect key aspects of culture in Arabia, there is a pronounced emphasis on the more foreign, the more exotic. Aspects Edward Said would label 'Other'. By blowing these aspects out of proportion, the west can create a tangible misrepresentation of the east which is reinforced by succeeding cultural products. It is this misrepresentation which arguably brought about the fear and loathing which led to the wars in Iraq, the Gulf and Afghanistan. But where does Aladdin fit into this tradition? Aladdin reinforces the image of the greedy, conniving Arab in the character of Jafar who seeks to subjugate Agrabah under his evil rule by manipulating the Sultan with his magic.

In the contemporary context of Aladdin, Jafar's character was all too similar to that of Saddam Hussein. I would go so far as to argue that Aladdin's creation is indicative of the attitude of fear and foreboding that led to the start of the Iraq war. Without finding any chemical weapons, the preemptive western assault displays an assumption of intended malice from the people of the East. This attitude is propagated in as seemingly benign media such as Aladdin...

I'm not done with the Lion King yet...

About 5 minutes ago I posted that the Lion King is racist.
I forgot to mention some of my favourite parts of my argument.

You know this guy???

Pretty much everything he does is racist...

Why???

Rafiki is meant to portray the traditional African tribal shaman, the wise man and guide to the tribe's future. Instead of presenting the deep spiritual importance of this role, Disney uses the character of Rafiki for comedic relief, just like Genie satirised Islam in Aladdin (shameless essay plug).

Rafiki being Insane

Although there are a number of other characters which are blatantly racist, Rafiki is probably the top of the list. His general antics and particularly his actions in 'guiding' his pride as their shaman are shown to be comedic rather than spiritual. I'm not saying I'm complaining, because Rafiki is funny as all hell, but Disney is definitely approaching a line...

Here's another video:

And another:

The Lion King hits the chopping block

This is going to be short and straight to the point...
JOKES!!!
This post is going to be a bit different...

The Lion King is awesome.

It is also really racist apparently. 
Let's have a look why according to Robert Gooding-Williams and his article 'Disney in Africa and the inner city: On race and space in The Lion King'.

Bam! It's pride rock:

Awesome, isn't it???

That's because the inferior hyenas aren't there polluting the area.

Instead, they're hanging out at...

SWISH! The Elephant Graveyard:

Sounds a bit like segregation, doesn't it??? Pride Rock is a pretty sick place as long as the 'minority' hyenas (voiced by Whoopi Goldberg and Cheech Marin - both members of minorities...) stay away. When they do leave their ghetto of a graveyard and intrude on high society, this happens:

It's almost like Disney's saying that classes should be separated for the good of the superior - oh wait, they are...

Add to this the pathetic fallacy of the weather turning bad when the hyenas take over and Disney is seeming to say that this order of society is divinely ordained! Nice...

Disney as a fairytale

Earlier in the semester we read a piece by Jack Zipes called 'Breaking the Disney Spell'. It was awesome. The question it really asked (or at least made me consider) was whether Disney is continuing the fairytale tradition or just shooting it dead where it stands. Obviously different people will have different opinions, but I'm going to explain mine here.
Zipes tracks the development of the fairytale from the pedagogical tale it started out as in the classical/early medieval period to the period of their transferral to writing and then to the modern era. The question assumed is whether Disney's adaption of the tales to the screen and their messages to suit the audience voids their being labelled fairy tales or not. Obviously, fairy tale 'collectors' such as the Brothers Grimm did a similar thing in the past, assimilating the local German tales into an anthology for publication and distribution. The problem Zipes has with this process is that it strips the tales of their essence - a personal communication between the speaker and their audience. However, in modern times the Brothers Grimm are recognised as potentially the most influential figures in the world of fairy tales. An action movie was even made about them as people, rather than their tales. It was pretty bad though...

My response to Zipes' article is that Disney is most definitely continuing the fairytale tradition into the modern era. It is playing the most vital step in transferring an ancient tradition into the development of today's world, which is not a small role to play. Thus the drastic steps which need to be taken to achieve this, such as using the media of film and television is understandable. Although it cheapens the tales themselves in no small way, it is an inherent problem of modernity that interpersonal communication will never have the same intrinsic value it once did in, say, shamanistic tribes. Instead, this communication needs to be replaced with an impersonal intermediary, ie. the television. In this way, as many people as possible can be reached with just one broadcast or film, conveying the values within to as many people as possible. It is not a cheapening of the values themselves that we are seeing, but a limitation of one's ability to engage completely with them. Disney might be responsible for this, but that is only because it is the scapegoat for modernity itself, biting the bullet to ensure the continuation of a practice which underlines humanity as a whole. If you think about, do you know of any culture that does not teach its young tales and stories? Do the methods of teaching differ in each culture? Disney is the modern western method of teaching the tales.

Picture of the day and accompanying anecdotes

As everyone should know by now, I love my grumpy cat. Thus I love this picture. Even moreso because it gave me something else to write about.
The whole Little Mermaid thingy is a pretty massive salepoint for Disney, in fact it might even be its most popular, the ideal Disney princess tale if you will. Thus reading Trites' 'Disney's Sub/Version of Andersen's "The Little Mermaid"' (in conjunction with reading the actual Andersen original because I'm a diligent student...) was a real eye-opener. It was practically a lesson in commodification. And I love that.
As many or at least a few of you will know, Andersen's tale 'Den Lille Havfrue' was one of pedagogics and moral instruction. It was about the cost of making a rash decision and the importance of religion or at least belief. It's a pretty epic story, so you can read it here. Basically, it was all about teaching its readers to think through their decisions and, if they are to make a mistake, take it graciously and accept full responsibility, because good things will arise from one's humility. The depth and insight of this story is embodied in the gaze of the statue of the same name which rests on the shore of Copenhagen's harbour.

Den Lille Havfrue

In contrast, Trites points out the shear questionability of the lessons of Disney's version. Trites comments that Disney's film changes the focus of the story to materialism in a number of senses. Gone is the notion of 'true love' that Andersen's mermaid pursued. It has been replaced with a definition of true love as being a kiss. Great, really deep Disney... In addition, Ariel is portrayed as what DIsney wants to portray as the pinnacle of beauty - very thin hips and an hourglass figure, while the even Ursula looks like a ball... with octopus legs... Furthermore, Disney seems to convey the message that a woman (Ariel) can only achieve fulfillment through a man and marriage without any other way. Andersen, in contrast, suggests that a woman can find fulfillment and salvation in her own actions and choices. Andersen wrote in 1837, predating feminism by a long time. Disney wrote in the late 20th century, the heyday of feminism. Really empowering Disney...

Quick side note: Ursula's character was based on the drag queen performer Divine:

Similar no???