Post #4

“The great ‘magic’ of the Disney spell is that he [Disney] animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen,” (Zipes, 333).

I disagree with Zipes’ thesis. Although I do believe that Disney created these animated fairy tales to help audiences get away from the struggles and banality of their everyday lives, I also believe that Disney tried to instill some hope to his viewers, not by simply “transfixing” them through his animation of “false promises,” but by helping them realize that everyone can achieve the “American” dream.

Disney himself was the epitome of “the American dream.” Growing up in a poor family with weak parental relations, he was destined to become nothing more than what he was born into. He, however, showed that with hard work and effort, time and patience, anyone who puts their mind to it can achieve what they want out of life. Although Disney’s films were based on fairy tales from lands far away, with the events depicted lacking realness in today’s society, I do not think that it was with “false promises” that Disney tried to show his interpretations of many known fairy tales.

The "magic" of Disney

I agree with Holly in that the lines she presented are very important to understanding Zipes’ argument about Disney. However, I think the main argument to the essay occurs two lines later: “The great “magic” of the Disney spell is that he animated the fairy tale only to transfix audiences and divert their potential utopian dreams and hopes through the false promises of the images he cast upon the screen” (p. 333). While Zipes’ phrase “Disney was a radical filmmaker who changed our way of viewing fairy tales, and that his revolutionary technical means capitalized on American innocence and utopianism to reinforce the status quo” is very revealing, all of those statements are fairly quantifiable; there is much more of an argumentative edge in Zipes statements about the Disney magic.

If Zipes’ argument was not persuasive enough the first time around, I doubt that my summery is going to change your mind. However, I think there are several parts of his essay that support his definition of Disney magic, so that overall his essay is convincing of his point. He starts with a fairly detailed history of the fairy tale genre and how the oral and literary traditions interacted for so long. The point of this history is to show “the literary fairy tale’s ascent corresponded to violent and progressive shifts in society and celebrated individualism, subjectivity, and reflection” (341). But even with the societal shifts, fairy tales continued to play an important role, be it for adult entertainment or to teach morals. However, fairy tale film had a very different aim: “It did not matter what story was projected just as long as the images astounded the audience, captured its imagination for a short period of time, and left the people laughing or staring in wonderment” (342). Animated fairy tales in general have a very different and less laudable focus. Zipes also argues that “Disney sought to replace all versions with his animated version and that his cartoon is astonishingly autobiographical” (343). Pushing for the audience to only remember his version and using his animation to astound the audience is half way towards arguing his main thesis. Zipes has shown that Disney is using his magic to transfix audiences through the images he cast on the screen, the only question remains, what is he transfixing the audience to?

That question is answered in the text as well, supporting his thesis. Two major points stand out arguing this point: the first is Snow White’s historical context. It came out during the Great Depression, and it “was to bring together all the personal strands of Disney’s own story with the destinies of desperate Americans who sought hope and solidarity in their fight for survival during the Depression of the 1930s” (346). So there is a definite utopian component in the masses. Disney’s own story was a tale of success, but projecting that on the screen even though it was the story of a small minority could give the masses false hope. The final point that shows how Disney only aimed to divert the masses with false promises is how Disney acted once he was firmly in power. “The manner in which he copied the musical plays and films of his time, and his close adaptation of fairy tales with patriarchal codes, indicate that all the technical experiments would not be used to foster social change in America but to keep power in the hands of the individuals like himself” (351). Disney was willing to use his entrancing art form to chain the masses. With all these facts in mind, Zipes’ argument about Disney’s magic seems much more convincing.

Song of the blog: “I kissed a girl” by Katy Perry.

Zipes Thesis on Disney

After reading Zipes’s essay, this is what I have pulled as the thesis, “…Disney was a radical filmmaker who changed our way of viewing fairy tales, and that his revolutionary technical means capitalized on American innocence and utopianism to reinforce the social and political status quo.” (333). So basically, Zipes does not seem to be the biggest fan of our “beloved” Walt Disney. According to Zipes, Disney has changed the way fairy tales are meant to be viewed and extracts new meanings from these tales. After reading through Zipes’s essay, and reflecting on the many Disney movies I have viewed in the past, I have to say I agree with him, though under certain terms.
I grew up on Disney movies and would watch classics like Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, Cinderella, and The Little Mermaid over and over again. They are part of most children’s upbringing and to this extent I think Zipes is a little harsh on Disney because I would never want these films to change or disappear. However, I believe Zipes is correct in his criticism of Disney in that he indeed does change our way of viewing fairy tales. In his films we are not seeing accurate portrayals of the Grimm’s tales. Disney installs new themes, like that of the Prince in Snow White that does imply a patriarchal society, and that innocent and beautiful Snow White can only be saved by this male figure. Here, as Zipes claims, Disney tries to enforce a “social status quo” as good woman are seen as objects that are only useful in their domestic nature, while males take on the active roles.
The Disney franchise also takes away some of the grotesque features of the Grimm’s fairy tales in the reproduction of The Little Mermaid. The Disney tale does not mention the pain the little mermaid must suffer upon walking on her feet, which in the Grimm’s she is described as having to endure the feeling of walking on knives while on land. Disney, indeed, tries to preserve an innocence and cheeriness in his films that is acceptable for children.
Although Disney does change the classic fairy tales so they are not as rich and complex as before, he has created something that Americans love and deem part of their cultural identity. Rather than thinking of Disney’s movies as adaptations of fairy tales, I like to think of them as their own entities and forms of entertainment that should continue to be shown to children for years to come.

Assignment: 3 February 2009

First, please identify the thesis of the Zipes article from this week’s reading. Then, respond to his thesis: do you agree or disagree, and why?

Don’t forget to post two comments by Wednesday at midnight.

Goldflower and the Bear: a Communist battle

This version of LRRH, written by Chiang Mi in China in 1979 is more an allegory of Soviet-Chinese relations than a simple fairytale. On the surface it appears as a simple fairytale should: young girl saves herself and brother by bravely facing down and outwitting an evil creature determined to eat them. In fact Goldflower even outwits the creature in the same way as LRRH outwits the wolf in the early French versions of the tale - by feigning an urgent need for a bathroom. However when you look at the cultural context of this tale, a hidden agenda is discovered and a lot of the author's choices begin to make sense.

The most obvious difference between this Chinese version and the original version of LRRH is the use of a bear rather than a wolf as the evil creature . During the 1960s, a decade before this story was written, relations between the Soviet Union and China became strained due to different beliefs about Communist theory. Then in 1979, the year "Goldflower and the Bear" was written, China launched the Sino-Vietnamese war by invading Vietnam. Vietnam was a Soviet ally and during this time Soviet-Chinese relations became even more tense. It is therefore interesting to note that the antagonist of this tale is not a wolf but a bear - an animal which is often used to depict the Soviet Union.

Goldflower is shown as a resourceful young girl, who can perfectly take care of not only herself, but also her little brother in the face of danger. Instead of being described as a 'dear little girl' as she is in the Brothers Grimm's version of the tale, she is described as 'clever and brave.'
Written in the aftermath of the cultural revolution in China during which time most intellectuals in China were put into labor camps, bringing the education system in China to a halt. However by describing a peasant girl as clever, the author is perhaps suggesting that anyone can be clever - not just the intellectuals.

Finally at the end of the tale, after the heroine Goldflower has killed the "wicked old bear" i.e Soviet Union, the mother returns as "the sun was rising red in the east." Numerous propaganda posters during the cultural revolution used the image of the red sun to describe the Communist leader Mao Zedong. He was often referred to as 'the red sun in the center of our hearts.'
A new day has dawned with Mao ruling over all.

There is perhaps a lot more cultural significance to the tale of "Goldfinger and the Bear" than one would have first assumed after reading this tale. As the fairytale draws to a close, Goldfinger and her brother are safe at home, knowing that the evil bear is gone once and for all. China and its brand of communism are safe, having outwitted and bravely faced the brute strength, power and might of the Soviet Union. China will prevail and be strong.

Two and a half reasons why Thurber appears more humerous than the Brothers Grimm

The picture of James Thurber on Wikipedia shows that he had awesome hair. And everyone knows the saying, “Those who have awesome hair tell awesome stories.” His contemporary retelling of Little Red Riding Hood, which he titled, The little Girl and the Wolf, is certainly an example of his story-telling ability.

The moral of Thurber’s fairy tale is that “It is not so easy to fool little girls nowadays as it used to be.” This point is made after Red pulls an automatic out of her basket and shoots the wolf dead. There are a lot of major differences between Thurber’s version and the Grimm’s version. I am not a psychoanalyst (remember, I’m Irish) so I am not willing to make any sweeping claims about Red’s sexual exploration or her urge to kill her father, but I am willing to consider how Thurber’s audience and how the culture surrounding the time-period might be incorporated into his version of the story.

I think there is a pretty good chance that this fairy tale is addressed exclusively for adults. Thurber spent most of his career writing and drawing for the New Yorker, a magazine geared towards adults. Also, while one could argue that his collection of fairy tales was a contemporary update for children, one major flaw stands out from this point of view. The moral does not make any sense if the reader does not know the original ending to the story; or at least know how naïve Red acts. Since Thurber spent much of his life writing humor and satire for a very sophisticated magazine; there would be little surprise if this was also geared for the same audience who read the New Yorker in the mid-20th century.

Two other major cultural themes are also probably at work. The first is Feminism. Thurber lived through the First Wave of Feminism. The First Wave is characterized by a push for political, economic, sexual, and reproductive rights for women. Red is not as naïve as she was previously in Thurber’s version. For once, Red is able to notice that it is a wolf and not her grandmother in the bed, even at some distance. The Second Wave of Feminism is typically estimated to start in the 1960s, and Thurber’s death was in 1961. So, while he probably wrote this piece before the second wave was in full swing there is a chance he was a forerunner for the ‘women’s liberation” movement. Whatever his personal views, Feminism probably had a role in Red’s behavior.

The second major factor is more of a guess than a fact, but I think a rise in violent crime might also be involved. Red: 1) Is carrying a concealed weapon. 2) Pulls it out and shoots a wolf. 3) Is unfazed by such action. Thurber lived in a big city, New York City, through prohibition and the rise of organized crime, World War II, and well into the “modern era.” Guns were a part of these changes, and their new-found prevalence could also surface in having Red shoot the wolf on-sight.

Song of the blog: “All about Us,” by t.A.T.u.

I also chose to look at Roald Dahl’s poem “Little Red Riding Hood and The Wolf.” However, I believe that the audience Dahl intended for this poem is an adult. It is clearly a satire of the original tale of Little Red Riding Hood and much different from the Grimm’s version or other typical nursery tale forms of the story. He intended for this poem to be a joke although they did end up being published in the 1980s in a book called Revolting Rhymes. The fact that it was originally made as a joke further explains its intention to amuse adults rather than children. An adult reading this poem and observing Little Red Riding Hood take a gun out of her pants and then shooting the wolf while proceeding to wear his fur as a coat would most likely laugh. However a child might be horrified at such a story.
I think that Dahl most likely made this poem to amuse his friends who perhaps often read sugar-coated versions of fairy tales to their children. By the 1980’s most fairy tales were pretty tame and aimed at teaching children a lesson without subjecting them to large amounts of violence. It is doubtful that a story made for children at this period of time would include Little Red Riding Hood pulling out a pistol.