"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???

I'm Back!!!

Dear all,

Having taken an extended leave of blogging absence I'm coming back to finish what I started - by blogging a whole lot in one day...
The next few posts will essentially summarise what I've learnt this semester in looking at Disney and its propensity to manipulate pretty much everything. If you have a look at that kid who lives down the hall's blog, you'll realise he also is a lazy college student and has backloaded everything. We're starting a club...
This first post of the day will look at Disney's Aladdin and the problems within it, a discussion guided by Eric Addison's piece 'Saving Other Women from Other Men'.
What really jumped put at me from this reading was the ethnic coding in Aladdin which, as a child, went right over my head. Never would I have considered Aladdin to be the 'diamond in the rough' in a cultural sense, but it is very obvious he is. Addison comments that he is a "thinly disguised American entrepreneur", spouting American ideals and values in the stereotypically racist 'Middle Eastern' setting of Agrabah. This clash of ideals between Aladdin and his contextual environment is most manifest in the responsibility he has in "freeing" Jasmine from the confinement of her gender role in 'Eastern' society. This conflict is, perhaps haphazardly, linked back to the contemporary cultural context of Aladdin's creation in 1994, only a year after the events of the Gulf War, which ended in '93. Thus Aladdin comes to represent the American protagonist, combatting the enslavement of the Middle Eastern people by the tyrannical traditions of the area.
I've also written a pretty dank essay of my own on the topic, extending Addison's analysis to draw the conclusion that Disney has appropriated a traditional eastern tale (the basis for Disney's version comes form One Thousand and One Nights, but the original 'original' is actually a Chinese folk tale) to instill western values under the guise of cultural sensitivity. Nothing of the like is happening, instead, I use long words like 'perpetuating crusader tradition' and cool analogies such as one dealing with the croissant to suggest that Aladdin is part of the 'tenth crusade', a conflict between east and west that has been waged since the early 20th century and is now fought with the media and Predator Missiles rather than swords and shields. It's a pretty sick essay...

You might have guessed it was coming...

(this is not my picture)

The Kid Down the Hall: "Why would you write about Pocahontas? It's just going to be boring and will make you look like an idiot"

My carefactor about ^ = 0

 Disney's Pocahontas is sick - it's like a messed up cross of Lolita, The Last of the Mohicans and The Aeneid - with Mel Gibson voice acting and tinny music added for effect (and it still mangages to be worse - according to Rotten Tomatoes - than Jackass 3.5). Sounds like a recipe for killing history in one blow to me...

Let's get intimate with the facts: 

• Pocahontas was 10-14 at the 'time of filming' or period the action takes place - here she is in the film:

well she grew up bloody fast...

• Pocahontas' ending is an absolute joke - historically, the character ended up being all that the movie does not show - assimilated into British society, baptised and married at age 14 or so... None of this Dido and Aeneas sunset ending garbage (without Pocahontas burning herself to death, although that would have obviously made the movie SO much cooler:

This shot just oozes stereotype...

Compare it to this: (FYI this is Dido consecutively stabbing herself with Aeneas' sword and burning herself on her own funeral pyre as Aeneas sails into the distance... There are also gods and stuff coming from the sky - Now THAT's intense:

• Grandmother Willow is the most ill-conceived character ever - a talking tree. Way to ruin your movie, Disney people... The only cool talking trees are the ents from Lord of the Rings, particularly Treebeard. Quick Treebeard quote: "I am on nobody's side, because nobody is on my side..." now that's profound. Grandmother Willow in the other hand has this bit of wisdom to offer: "Oh, a dream! Let's hear all about it!"= not profound.

Here's grandmother willow - it's a face on a tree:

Here's an ent throwing a rock and wrecking Isengard - that's cool:

ENTS > GRANDMOTHER WILLOW

• The film left out the guy that should have been the main character or at least one of the major ones... This is John Rolfe:

He's the one that actually ended up marrying Pocahontas, yet he only shows up in Pocahontas II. John Smith's character was actually a redundant intruder.

Fun fact: Pocahontas II only got 1.5 stars on rotten tomatoes - Transformers 3 received 2 stars - wow...

Let's call it a day there.

Why Kevin Shortsleeve is a Legend

Beloved readers, you are about to acquire a new life hero...

Meet Kevin Shortsleeve...

For class today we read a fantastic piece by Kev called "The Wonderful World of the Depression: Disney, Despotism, and the 1930s. Or, Why Disney Scares Us". While reading I realised that it was probably some of the best academic discourse ever written, not in terms of quality but how questionable it was. Here is my shortlist of Kev's awesomeness.

1. Kev's carefactor = 0. He really does not care what people think. He ranges from calling Disney a Nazi to saying that the Disney Company is based on war-causing principles to relating a story of his experience of Disneyland which borders on libel. All this is conducive to humes - (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Humes).

2. Kev's analogies = awesome. One of my favourites was his likening his characterisation of Disney's empire to String Theory. Therefore, one of the sections of his essay is titled "A Disney 'String' Theory". If that's not so full of pretention as to be hardcore I don't know what is.

3. At least 1/3 of Kev's writing = not his. He literally quotes other writers for most of his essay. He seems to have a particular man-crush on a guy called Watts. Hell, if I were an academic, I'd try to do as little work as possible as well...

4. Kev's evidence = at times very questionable. He uses Scaramanga (the James Bond villain) to assert that Disney was a terrible individual. See the logic yet? He goes on to comment that Scaramanga's island home - which was fully sick - resembles Disneyland because it had tunnels. Nice, Kev. This place also has tunnels - by Kev's logic, it therefore resembles Disneyland:

By the way, this town is called Coober Pedy. It is the furthest one could get from Disneyland. It's a mining town where the weather gets so hot people have to live underground (in tunnels). As a result, all its residents bear a strong resemblance to Gollum.

5. Kev's qualifications = legendary. I could only imagine his CV: "Kev Shortsleeve, social commentator extraordinaire". Here is an excerpt of his awesomeness: "[Kev's] commentaries on children’s cultures are heard nationally on the public radio program Recess." BOOM! Take that kids! You just got commented on - nationally as well! Pretty much the most ineffective qualification I have ever heard. Apart from that, he's also studying at Oxford and got his master's at Florida - a jump of astronomic proportions...

Picture of the day - Grumpy Cat's opinions on this post:

Just Skip This Post - It's Actually Serious

Top of the morning lovely readers,

Yesterday I was vacuuming my room when a thought struck me: why the hell do we still care about Disney (apart from it practically owning our souls)??? Even newborns who have no idea who or what Mickey Mouse is are these days adorned with onesies decorated with pictures of him and all his friends (see some of the more humourous pictures I found). But why does he have such an influence - on both the young and the old?

The funny thing about this one is that the kid actually looks like Yoda

This kid's parents obviously think they're funny...

I found this child's sleeping position fantastic - Not much else going for this picture...

In class this week we read a piece by Elizabeth Lawrence discussing this lasting impact Mickey has had. If you want to read it for yourself, it's called "In the Mick of Time: Reflections on Disney's Ageless Mouse". But my summary's going to be better so I wouldn't bother. Also if you're a college student, you live for reading summaries...

What stuck out in the article is that Mickey is more than a friendly character in a film - he is an ideal to which we all aspire. Young children can relate to his youthful character and personality, but his persona represents so more. He is the epitome of ageless enjoyment, a feeling of youth that all people can relate to matter what their age. A particularly interesting comment that Lawrence makes is that Mickey outlived his contemporary counterpart, Felix the Fox (never heard of him either...) because he represented an image people were comfortable with. While Felix was made of sharp, angular features, Mickey was made of comforting circles - a shape which has "never harmed anyone"...

Speaking of circles, such as those of life, here's the picture of the day: 

NONE OF THESE PICTURES ARE MINE

That Kid Who Lives Down The Hall

Hello again dear readers,

While shotgunning my early morning coffee, the realisation struck me that I had made the unjustifiable mistake of failing to provide a link to my hallmate's blog (as he had done the same for me - thanks for the ONE additional page view...) Anyway, suffice it to say the woe elicited by this thought made me choke on my coffee (whether or not this was actually caused by the coffee tasting like it's laced with ipecac is still up for debate). Therefore, here is the link to his blog:

http://drewdecodingdisney.blogspot.com

Some quick comments: he talks about Disney more than I do (that is, he has mentioned it), he seems to be obsessed with that rather rotund kid from Up or whatever it's called, he is actually considerate in what he writes, his background is some random Toy Story poster just repeated in a number of dysfunctional tiles - very unprofessional - and, finally, there are no pictures of Grumpy Cat...

To ameliorate this heinousness, and because I have some time before my next class, here is a picture of Grumpy Cat poorly photoshoped onto my hallmate's body. Enjoy...

UPDATE 10:17, 21/1/14: Was just asked by said hallmate "Why don't you get a wallpaper for your blog???" My response summarised my views on his blog, "Because there is no picture on google images which is awesome enough to justify my even considering its inclusion..."

UPDATE 10:33, 21/1/14: He just updated his background to some weird tessellation of pictures of Disney - were I an epileptic he probably would be on file for a murder charge by now... 

BOOM! Bookbagged that ****!!!

Greetings dear readers,

It was exactly 7:00am one morning when my speedy mouse-clicking skills actually came into use for a purpose other than achieving the coolest headshots ever seen. I gained a place in the esteemed 12-man team of the Writing 101 course 'Decoding Disney'. I was excited as all hell: not just because a couple of my friends missed out on the class and ended up in  'The ecology of migratory species' (this is actually a class...), but because I knew this was going to be a fully sick semester. The big question is 'Why?'

Apart from obviously being more interesting than the other (compulsory) subjects, Decoding Disney (DD because I'm lazy) engaged with matter pertinent to the world we live in. For example, did you know that Disney has $75 billion worth of assets, including media networks, theme parks, publishers, etc.??? I certainly had no idea, yet we come into contact with each of these entities on a daily basis.

Do we come into contact with the history of the Amazon's decolonisation on a daily basis??? I think not. Could the ecology of migratory species brainwash most of the world's population in the event of the discovery of a mind-control machine??? Maybe... NOT! This stuff is real, it's all around us and it has shaped our lives ever since those weird mickey ears were first forced upon our heads by our unaware parents...

More soon!!!

D-Men: Origins

Greetings beloved readers,

You will be happy to know that you now number above 5 - and at least two of those have come to this blog without me telling them to...
This blog will be all about me and my thoughts on Disney. As I realise that this may not be the most interesting subject matter for many, I'll try to make it as readable as possible by inserting anecdotes and potentially irrelevant pictures wherever I deem necessary.

But anyway, I am writing this blog as a compulsory aspect of a Writing 101 course I am taking. Called 'Decoding Disney', it is about the Disney Corporation and the reality behind the seemingly family- and society-friendly facade it has cultivated over the past century or so. Most of these posts will be discussing this topic or using it to express my opinions on things. Usually I am not too much of a fan of blogs, mainly because most of the blogs I have ever read were simply uninteresting people discussing their uninteresting thoughts. Therefore my aim with this blog is to mix things up: the only censor/editor this blog will go through is one of my mates who lives down the hall from me... But most of the time I won't listen to his thoughts - so prepare yourself....

A bit about me: I am an opinionated Australian fairly infamous in my dorm for writing unnecessarily verbose pieces, such as apology letters (more about this later) and complaints about Duke University, particularly the dining system. As I write this I am rocking four stars on GTA:V and wondering what I can eat at 4:00pm on a Monday afternoon. Subsequent blogs will generally follow this outline.

The first irrelevant picture of the series:

By the way, Grumpy Cat is awesome - prepare yourself for more... 

They might actually mention Disney next time - fingers crossed...

See you next time!