alalalayat - Tumblr blog

alalalayat · 6 years

Text

This is not a good post.

First of all, you’re not exactly being honest in your framing of these movies. Let’s look at two of your examples: Rapunzel and Jasmine. Your argument is that Rapunzel only leaves her tower because Flynn Rider comes along, but Jasmine leaves the palace of her own volition. I could just as easily frame it this way: Rapunzel wants to leave her tower and seizes the opportunity to manipulate Flynn Rider into taking her to see what she wants to see. Jasmine leaves her sheltered life at the palace, doesn’t like what she sees in the outside world, and immediately goes back to where she’s safe and doesn’t have to be confronted with the realities of her kingdom. Result: Neither your example nor mine is a fair representation of the characters because they both ignore the context of these characters stories and are written in with bias to prove a point.

Second, you’re not comparing the right movies. You know that you have to consider when a movie was made when analyzing it; you didn’t use the earliest princesses because you knew that it would be easy to say that such passive women and uncomplicated stories were more standard for the time they were created. That being said, you cannot just group princess movies together because they’re all from your lifetime. Disney had distinct phases with different leadership and different prevailing themes. If you really wanted to make a point, you’d compare Renaissance films to Renaissance films (and probably more accurately, Katzenberg Renaissance films). The comparisons for Aladdin should be made with Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid because they’re coming from the same teams with the same ideals that they’re trying to infuse into their stories. The New Renaissance films would be compared to each other; Tangled and Frozen would only be compared with Moana and maybe The Princess and the Frog (although stylistically, it is a bit of a stretch). Result: Comparisons do not take into consideration the differing prevailing themes and story-telling methods of different time periods.

Third and most importantly, you’re definitely manipulating facts to make a point. Here are some examples:

1. Breaking the social norms almost gets Princess Jasmine’s hand cut off. No, Jasmine has lived a sheltered life and doesn’t understand what stealing is. She almost gets her hand cut off for stealing. While I agree that Aladdin does perpetuate violent stereotypes of Middle Eastern people (look at how they had to change lyrics of “Arabian Nights”), I think that trying to frame Jasmine as some radical hero is too much of a stretch and ruins your argument.

2. Despite taking advantage of the systems [Charlotte’s] whiteness gives her, the movie makes no comment on how her privilege puts her socially above Tiana...She’s constantly focused on and the movie indulges in her personality, not realizing the hypocrisy of showering her with positive attention while reprimanding Naveen for his privileges. From the get go, the movie acknowledges that Charlotte is privileged and naive. She tries to help Tiana, but she has no real concept of Tiana’s life. The difference between Charlotte and Naveen is that Charlotte seems incapable of really understanding the gap between herself and Tiana but at least tries to be there for Tiana. Naveen just flat out doesn’t care about anyone else at the beginning of the movie. It’s not an inability to understand privilege; it’s a willful ignorance. Also, I would hardly say that Charlotte is focused on; she’s not a major part of the story for most of its action.

3. The fact that the king and queen of Corona took an all healing power for themselves despite the narrative looking down on Mother Gothel for doing the same is because they are royalty. The difference between the king and queen and Mother Gothel is that the king and queen use the flower to save two lives whereas Mother Gothel uses it for vanity. I suppose you could ask why the king and queen deserve the flower more than any other random sick person, but that’s not what you’re saying. You’re comparing life-saving medical intervention with magic cosmetic surgery.

4. Despite Elsa being a recluse unfit for ruling a kingdom and Anna being immature, the narrative places their safety above all others in the kingdom because they are rich and have royal blood. They are deemed the most moral,the most pretty, the most deserving of second chances because Elsa practically divinity. The narrative of Frozen places the most emphasis on the main characters because they’re the main characters. It’s not a six hour social commentary; it’s a movie about sisterly love and coming into yourself. They would literally have to cut out the entire point of the movie to fit in the social commentary that you want. The movie also talks about how horrible the snow storm is for Arendelle multiple times, and Elsa expresses remorse that she affected the whole kingdom and isolates herself in an attempt to protect everyone else. Frozen only compares the morality of Anna and Elsa to the morality of Hans, who attempts murder. Of course they’re more moral than a would-be first degree murderer. It never comments on their appearance compared to everyone else. It also only gives Elsa a “second chance” because she doesn’t ever intentionally hurt people and learns to control her powers by accepting them. I don’t know what you think should happen to Elsa, but I don’t see how she deserves any horrific punishment.

5. Rapunzel lives in an ideal fairytale kingdom with apparently no poverty. Corona is seen so little in the movie that it’s impossible to draw conclusion about the wealth, health, and safety of its citizens.

6. Arendelle is full of citizens that just seem to be window dressing. The kingdom apparently has no real issues despite their queen having magic that could potentially kill off their crops, their industries, and their lives. Social inequalities are non existent. And anyone who is against the monarchy is totally evil or out for power themselves. You can literally say any kingdom in any movie is window dressing. They’re background characters. Words cannot express how ridiculous of a complaint this is. Based on how much time goes by before Elsa’s coronation and how she continues to stay isolated until then, I think it’s safe to say that she didn’t have an active hand in ruling the kingdom. I’m not sure why you think a girl who locks herself in her room all day could kill an entire kingdom. She doesn’t have any control issues until she goes out in public. As for social inequalities and people against the monarchy, we literally only really see the people at the coronation and Kristoff. Of course the people at the coronation are not poor anarchists. It’s not enough to draw conclusions about the whole of Arendelle.

Result: You weaken any argument you may have had by including cherry-picked or nonsensical examples. You try to justify your bias, but it doesn’t work because you don’t have the evidence to back it up.

Disney Princesses Problem: Ideal White Kingdoms, Flawed Kingdoms of Color

Warning: Long post, Anti-Ta*ngled, anti-Frozen, and also I’m not very nice <333

What does the title mean?

Wherein a Disney Princess movie is more likely to have an idealized kingdom and monarchy if the princess is white, while a Princess of Color in a Disney movie is more likely to criticize the social norms or monarchy of their kingdom.

Aka the white kingdom is portrayed as perfect, and the non white kingdom is shown to be imperfect.

White Disney princesses tend to be very passive and reactive to their plots. Princesses of Color tend to be more proactive and move the plot along.

I’m going to exclude the early white Disney princesses because they are very easy to pick apart and have been done to death. I’m going for more recent Disney princesses from the 1990s and 2000s.

Kingdoms Ruled by People of Color are shown as Flawed and Rife with Inequality

EXAMPLE: Agraba from Aladdin and Maldonia fro the Princess and the Frog

Agraba is shown to have social inequalities, with the gap between the rich and poor being the central conflict and a motivation for Aladdin. Breaking the social norms almost gets Princess Jasmine’s hand cut off. People in these kingdoms can be portrayed as rude, mean, and in Aladdin’s case, full of racist stereotypes of people of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent.

[sorry for the bad quality clip, it’s difficult finding good images.]

Children are shown starving because of these inqualities, and Jasmine is frustrated by her extravagant lifestyle.

She consistently criticizes the sexism she faces and criticizes Aladdin for indulging in his princely persona.

In the Princess and the Frog, there is similar criticism of monarchy and opulence. Tiana has to work for everything, and calls out Prince Naveen for his behavior and lifestyle. He has to learn to work hard, and overcome his personality flaws.

But with Charlotte, she basically gets the white Disney princess treatment. Despite taking advantage of the systems her whiteness gives her, the movie makes no comment on how her privilege puts her socially above Tiana. She’s constantly focused on and the movie indulges in her personality, not realizing the hypocrisy of showering her with positive attention while reprimanding Naveen for his privileges.

Even other Disney princesses such as Mulan have to overcome social problems and work through them. They are pointed out, they are discussed. But when it comes to white Disney princesses, the direction is completely different in how their kingdoms are portrayed.

Suddenly poverty and social problems are seldom discussed or actively shown.

White Disney Kingdoms are Shown as Ideal with no Problems, Royalty are Portrayed as Moral and Always Good

You see, white Disney Princesses are more likely to live in idealized kingdoms and make no comments on the social inequalities or problems that could potentially exist.

EXAMPLE: Corona from T*angled and Arendelle from Frozen

White Disney Princess films reinforce what is called Absolute Monarchy, T*angled especially.

Absolute Monarchy is the idea that a king or queen is given the throne through divine intervention. They have power over others because god wills it to be so.

The fact that the king and queen of Corona took an all healing power for themselves despite the narrative looking down on Mother Gothel for doing the same is because they are royalty. They deserve it because they are rich and if something from the heavens comes down to earth, they deserve it more than someone whose poor.

Frozen deems Anna and Elsa special because they are royalty as well. Despite Elsa being a recluse unfit for ruling a kingdom and Anna being immature, the narrative places their safety above all others in the kingdom because they are rich and have royal blood. They are deemed the most moral,the most pretty, the most deserving of second chances because Elsa practically divinity.

These kingdoms are both unrealistically happy, cheery, with no social problems. The citizens are all nice, never pose any physical threat to the princesses, and their laws are considered fair and equal. This is a direct contrast to Disney princesses films such as The princess and the frog and Aladdin.

Rapunzel lives in an ideal fairytale kingdom with apparently no poverty. The men from the tavern are seen as outliers because they don’t live in the city. There doesn’t seem to be any social issues at all. And yet there seems to be a dungeon where prisoners get regularly executed. But that’s not really seen as a problem or discussed at all. Everyone seems to be ok with that and just eat cupcakes and dance.

Arendelle is full of citizens that just seem to be window dressing. The kingdom apparently has no real issues despite their queen having magic that could potentially kill off their crops, their industries, and their lives. Social inequalities are non existent. And anyone who is against the monarchy is totally evil or out for power themselves.

White Princesses Tend to be Passive/Reactive, Princesses of Color are Active and Move the Plot Forward

White Disney princesses also tend to be very passive too. Rapunzel wants to see the lanterns, but she only gets the guts to go out of the tower because Flynn Rider came along. She reacts to him being there and this kicks off their journey to Corona. Result: She is reduced to being a plot device most of the time and her goal feels very vague because of the genericness of “follow your dream!!1″ theme.

Anna is constantly at the mercy of the elements because she’s been sheltered all her life and constantly needs Kristoff to hold her hand. Elsa’s hands are wiped clean of her damning her kingdom to an eternal winter by making it a result of her emotions and “not knowing.” Result: Anna and Elsa’s “triumph’s” feel unearned and lackluster.

Tiana kisses Naveen as a frog because she wants to have the money for her restaurant and it’s her dream. This takes a lot of thought and she makes an active choice. She endures grueling work and constant disrespect. It’s her motivation and she’s actively trying to get to this goal. Result: It’s satisfying when she achieves her goal.

Jasmine wants to leave the castle so she does it and goes out in disguise. She wants to be her own person and isn’t afraid to call out people to let them know to treat her with respect. She criticizes Aladdin because she knows that even though she has feelings for him, she knows they won’t work if he’s not honest with her. Result: Their relationship is satisfying to watch and they feel like real people.

#disney #argument

3K notes · View notes