Author: Hilary Lowe

February 4, 2016

Mother of Exiles: How the Statue Representing Republicanism Became A Symbol of Opportunity for Immigrants by Keira Campbell Wingert

When the world thinks of America, one of the first images they conjure is the giant, green hued statue of a woman perched atop her pedestal on Ellis Island. She carries a tabula ansata in the crook of her left arm, and her right hand holds a torch high above her head. She has a noble face, and green spikes create a halo around her head. This figure is the Statue of Liberty, and with its placement on Ellis Island, the gateway to America for millions of European immigrants from 1892 to as recently as the 1950s, it became emblematic of opportunity and new beginnings. However, the statue in its beginnings was not necessarily supposed to represent opportunity but rather liberty and the ideals of republicanism.

In 1865, Edouard Laboulaye, a French political figure, proposed that France gift the United States with a statue representing liberty and the ideals of a republic in honor of the U.S.’s upcoming centennial celebration. Ten years later the French sculptor Frederic Auguste Bartholdi, who had a fascination with “colossal” works, was commissioned by France to design a statue for the United States. The U.S. and France agreed that while France would make the statue itself, the U.S. was responsible for building its pedestal.

Bartholdi and Laboulaye both wanted the statue to represent American ideals. They chose to make the statue a colossal figure of Libertas, the Roman goddess of freedom. According to myth surrounding the statue, Bartholdi supposedly had his mother Charlotte sit as the model for the statue’s solemn, simple face. The symbolic torch and tabula ansata were included to represent the ideals of a republic—ideals that France and the U.S. both shared. The statue’s feet were to stand on a broken chain representing freedom from monarchy. Though the statue was supposed to be completed for the U.S.’s centennial celebration in 1876, fundraising and construction for both the pedestal and statue took too long. Thus, the statue and pedestal were ready to be dedicated 10 years after the centennial in 1886.

Three years before the dedication, in 1883, Emma Lazarus, a poet and New York native, penned a sonnet to donate to an auction raising money for the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal fund. In this poem, called “The New Colossus,” she describes the massive copper-plated statue as the “Mother of Exiles” welcoming immigrants to America on her perch on Ellis Island. The poem initially held very little significance to the overall story of the Statue; while Lazarus’ sonnet was read on the day of the statue’s dedication, it then went almost completely ignored—that is, until Lazarus’ friend Georgina Schuyler began an endeavor to memorialize the sonnet. By 1903, Shuyler’s efforts had been successful and a plaque of the sonnet was placed on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty.

Since then, Lazarus’ “The New Colossus” has become synonymous with the Statue of Liberty and immigration to America. Through the poem, Lazarus gives the Statue of Liberty a voice:

“Keep, ancient lands, your stories pomp!” cries she

With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” (1883)

Thanks to the poem greeting all immigrants coming ashore in New York, the Statue became a more than a symbol of liberty and the republic, as was originally intended. Rather, it became many immigrants’ first memory of their new life and the world of opportunity that awaited them. The language in Lazarus’ poem transformed the centennial gift into an emblem of a new life and a chance to pursue one’s dreams.

The Statue of Liberty’s change in meaning parallels the stories of other U.S. icons, such as the Liberty Bell. Like the Bell, the Statue did not take on the meaning it has today until literature was created surrounding it, popularizing one author’s perceived meaning of the monument. And just as the Bell represents both Philadelphia and the U.S., the image of the Statue of Liberty can be synonymous with both New York City and the U.S. at large. But perhaps the popularity of these icons as tourist attractions in their respective cities has simply changed the way we view them altogether. While they may once have been symbols of freedom, liberty, hope, opportunity, and the like, they now mostly represent the places in which they reside. Where once thousands of people gathered below the Statue of Liberty to enter the U.S. as citizens, the tourists who flock to see this monument have become the new “huddled masses.”

Pictures:

“The New Colossus” manuscript – http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/haventohome/images/hh0041s.jpg

Statue of Liberty Tourism – http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-07/05/xin_422070605080848438046.jpg
References

“A Timeline of Statue of Liberty.” (2016). The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.libertyellisfoundation.org/statue-of-liberty-timeline

Conradt, S. (2013). “10 Things You Didn’t Know About the Statue of Liberty.” Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/51521/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-statue-liberty

“Immigration Timeline.” (2016). The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.libertyellisfoundation.org/immigration-timeline

Lazarus, E. (1883). “The New Colossus.” Retrieved from http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/175887

“Libertas.” Encyclopedia Brittanica. 2008. Retrieved 1 February 2016.

“Statue History.” (2016). The Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.libertyellisfoundation.org/statue-history

Young, B.R. (1997). Emma Lazarus in Her World: Life and Letters. The Jewish Publication Society, p. 3.

January 28, 2016

“Old Hickory” and his History by Francesco Truscia

The idea of the self-made man has become a major part in American culture. It is the idea that a person who is, let’s say, a “nobody” can turn him or herself into a “somebody.” It is a recurring idea that inspires many people today. There have been many American icons that are self-made men, and one of them was Andrew Jackson.

Andrew Jackson was the 7^th president of the United States. He was born into poverty into the South, and as a result he had little formal type of schooling. Jackson took it upon himself to start reading law and worked his way into becoming a prosecuting attorney in what is now known as Nashville, Tennessee. Soon after, he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and served as the judge of Tennessee’s supreme court before becoming head of the state militia during the War of 1812. His success in the Battle of New Orleans portrayed him as a national war hero. He was elected President in 1828 and after two terms was succeeded by Martin Van Buren in 1836.

Pretty successful story for a guy whose family had nothing too substantial to provide him, wouldn’t you say? Andrew Jackson definitely fits the image of the self-made man, on the basis of going from having nothing to becoming President of the United States. However, his given history alone isn’t the only contribution to his self-made man status. A very important factor in this is the image that he left behind.

The main contribution to Andrew Jackson’s image of being a self-made man was his stories that he had left behind during his life. Andrew Jackson was an interesting man, in the sense that he was a part of some very unique experiences. One experience was that during the Revolutionary War, he was taken prisoner by British soldiers and was struck in the face with a saber when he refused to shine an officer’s boots. This experience is comparable to Benjamin Franklin and when he was his brother’s apprentice. In David Waldstreicher’s Runaway America: Benjamin Franklin, Slavery, and the American Revolution, he talks about Benjamin Franklin and describes him as, “a seventeen-year-old apprentice printer and the servant of a master in serious trouble” and that “Franklin remembered James’s ‘harsh and tyrannical treatment’ ” (Waldstreicher 3). Both Franklin and Jackson were both at the hands of a much higher authority, but by standing up for themselves Jackson and Franklin, gave the impression that they were not going to give up so easily. Perseverance is a true characteristic of a self-made man. Jackson has other stories of climatic triumph, such as when a man failed an assassination attempt against him he proceeded to beat him with his walking stick.

Andrew Jackson is a prominent figure in American culture. At this point in time, he has definitely reached the status of being an icon. Along with his history of success, it is his image and stories of his life that are a large, contributing factor in him becoming a self-made man.

Bibliography

“Andrew Jackson.” History.com. A&E Television Networks. Web. 26 Jan. 2016.

Waldstreicher, David. “Chapter 1: Runaways and Self-Made Men.” Runaway America:

Benjamin Franklin, Slavery, and the American Revolution. New York: Hill and Wang, 2004. Print.

January 28, 2016

The Self Made Woman by Deidre Rowe

This concept by John Swansbrug of ‘rag to riches’ is ideal for a self made person. I think that idea is brilliant. The survey of the Pew Economic Mobility Project found that “39% of people thought it was common for someone that comes from poverty to become rich” (Swansbrug 5). While “71% said that hard work and drive” were keys to success (Swansbrug 5).

There have been many stories of poor men who become self made. But I think that as the years that have pasted; we have seen the rise of the self made woman. As soon as the world stop viewing women as cleaners and cookers at home; we have seen the explosion of self made women.

There are a few women who are have done brilliant things for example Madame CJ Walker (aka the savior for black girls’ hair). She started off making hair products for local black women because the products that were out there weren’t catered to their hair type. So she made her own hair products and became the first woman millionaire. But the greatest of them all is…. OPRAH!!!!

Oprah Winfrey is a true “rag to riches” story for start to finish. She was born to an unmarried teenage mother in January 1954 in Kosciusko, Mississippi. She spent her early years living in poverty with her grandmother then later moving to Milwaukee. Winfrey was an excellent student and got a full ride to Tennessee State. She later relocated to Chicago and became the one of the richest women alive.

Regardless of your options on her, she is a true self made woman. But she is also an American icon. When I hear the name Oprah, I think of her show, her television network and until recently Weight Watchers (in which she made 20 million dollars off of). This woman is magical and most of the things she touches turns to gold. And within her career of 30-plus years, she has been able to stay relevant.

And if that’s not an icon, then I don’t know what an icon is.

January 28, 2016

Michael Jackson: An American Self-Made Man and Icon by Stephanie Hirsch

When we talk about self-made men/ women we talk about people who have found their own voice through tenacity mixed with hard work and patience. One person that we cannot exclude from this category is none other than the “King of Pop” himself, Mr. Michael Jackson.

Jackson built his iconic empire through his own talent as well as through careful choices in his music that made him explode onto the scene in the 80s. However Jackson had a rough start to success, which begins this story like so many other self-made men before him.

Like Benjamin Franklin, Jackson grew up into a large family in a poor area of Gary, Indiana. As one of 10 children, Jackson struggled to find an outlet of his own. However his brothers under the direction of their father Joe Jackson formed the Jackson 5 which began to showcase Michael’s talents as a singer at a very young age.

Similarly to Franklin, Jackson was in some ways an indentured slave. Franklin’s journey started out as an indentured slave to his brother where he would receive, “harsh and tyrannical treatment” working in his brother’s printing press (1). His brother would beat him at times creating an abusive environment in which Franklin had to escape. Similarly Jackson, under the direction of his father, lived in fear of Joe Jackson’s wrath and worked as hard as he could to avoid abuse. Jackson knew that if he wanted to be successful he had to get away from his family and make use of his talents to reach stardom.

Henry Clay who coined the term “self-made man” describes these people as “enterprising men who give whatever wealth they possess by being patient and diligent” (2). In many ways Jackson understood this definition as he recognized the wealth and success he had within the Jackson 5, yet risked it all anyway to have a solo career.

Jackson went on to have records such as Off the Wall in 1979 that gained some following. However, the turning point for Jackson in his journey happened once he teamed up with Quincy Jones. Together Jackson and Jones produced the highest selling album of all time in Thriller soon changing Michael’s status from celebrity to icon.

In some ways Jackson’s album was the smartest capitalistic move of his career. Every song on that album was meticulously thought out and meant to be a sound for virtually everyone to “get down” with. He even got Paul McCartney, one the largest white music legends, to sing a duet with him on Thriller. Jackson’s album exploded as top hit after top hit was played on the radio showing that a black voice could be iconic.

Benjamin Franklin in similar fashion understood the concept of appealing to a mass audience as well with his newspaper the Pennsylvania Gazette. In David Waldstreicher’s book Runaway America, Waldstreicher describes how Franklin succeeded with his newspaper because, “it spread crucial information between participants in translocal markets” appealing to many people across different boundaries (3). This is the job of the self-made man, and Jackson and Franklin understood this very well and capitalized on it.

Jackson’s celebrity and presence grew beyond anything he could of imagined paving the way for other artists such as Usher and Justin Timberlake to make similarly inspired music and social presences. In similar ways Benjamin Franklin did the same as both came into the spotlight through persistence and hard work. Both deserve the title as self-made men, but most of all both are icons that forged new paths for others to follow.

Waldstreicher, David. pg 3-4. Runaway America. New York: Hill and Wang. Print.
Swansburg, John. pg 6 “The Self-Made Man The Story of America’s Most Pliable, Pernacious, Irrpressible Myth” Print.
Waldstreicher, David. Pg 23-24 Runaway America. New York: Hill and Wang. Print.

April 10, 2015

Walt Disney’s Linguistic Portrayal of Aladdin and America by Kristi Bezhani

Walt Disney lead a life which was not handed down to him after experiencing the life of hard farm labor, beatings from his father and experience in working for the newspaper back in the 50’s. However, the introspectiveness that he gained along with his success from producing Disney movies was not as evident as his financial success. It is clear that Disney is a large corporation which is primarily concerned in entertaining people to make money, however the stereotypes condemned in Disney movies detest the morality of entertainment.

Although movies, are meant to harmlessly entertain children, although Disney only seeks to gain money through entertainment, it does not have to resort to stereotypes to make movies enthralling for child viewers. For instance one particular movie that I used to love watching as a child was Aladdin. In this movie stereotypes are quite evident and clear from a linguistic, socioeconomic, and racial lens. Specifically, in the scene when Aladdin meets Jafar, some very interesting dialogue arises in their first encounter. Jafar is an old, Arabic man who seems to appear crippled from the scarceness of his body weight and poor conditioned teeth, he wears a long white beard, dark skin, a big nose, and tired eyes. In the movie he is made out to be an evil character due to his appearance and Arabic dialect. Also, the fact that he is made out to be evil in the setting of an Arabic kingdom, his home country, is very ironic and insinuates a bad image towards Arabic men.

Contrastingly, Disney tries to make the fact that Aladdin speaks Standard English in the movie, superior to Jafar’s use of language, due to his dialect.

Such a political undercurrent of dialect is present in Aladdin, as Aladdin’s humanity and dialect is viewed with greater trust in respect to Jafar’s Arabic dialect.. Throughout the scene, as Jafar shows his treachery through wicked laughter, conniving movements (which only add skepticism and stereotypical reference to his image as an Arabic man), his choice of words does well to show his treachery above all else. He deviously says to Aladdin, “You’ve heard of the Golden rule haven’t you? The one that has the gold makes the rules.” In this sentence, Jafar syntactically changed the modifiers of the sentence as he pertained modifiers to a person in command as he says “the one.” Yet the original phrasing of the Golden Rule, does not have modifiers that pertain to a person, but rather holds the heart of the message, which signifies the act of giving.

Therefore, language discrimination is another reason to undermine someone when one is already discriminating against race and culture, as language is immersed into one’s culture and can be defined by culture through dialect. Evidently, Disney does not appreciate heterogeneous dialect, as it negatively and stereotypically portrays the content of a foreign dialect. On the contrary, linguistically speaking, Disney appears to encourage homogeneousness with the incentive that Standard English is more sincere and trustworthy as that of Aladdin’s since he is presented in a good light throughout the movie. From one single scene in Aladdin, it is understood that Disney uses dialectic differences to determine superior and acceptable use of language as Aladdin’s Standard English in the movie is superior to Jafar’s.

In that light, Disney is not exactly welcoming linguistic diversity by stereotypically condemning the language of a foreign dialect. It does this through using social dialect to reference what is perceived as good and bad language. This leads many watchers to be subjected to prejudice. It is for that reason that Disney insinuates a lack of sincerity from discriminating the heterogeneous importance in language as discrimination of labeling someone with a stereotype for Arabic descent occurs. Mike Wallace sums this up perfectly in his article Mickey Mouse History and Other Essays on American Memory as he says: “The Disney people do not consider this retrospective tidying up an abuse of the past, they freely and disarmingly admit its falsification, pointing out that this is, after all, just entertainment.” (Pg. 137).

As this is “after all just entertainment” it is entertainment which is done in American and with that comes certain American exceptionalism incentives and political undercurrents within Disney movies. For instance Aladdin possesses heroic features of light skin, and a small nose, using a Standard English accent. This comes to show how much more an Americanized character is perceived as a hero in contrast to a foreign character by Disney’s standards. Therefore, in the grand scheme of things, one could say that Americanized dialect, appearance and culture is superior to all else, and as true as this may be in the world, it is ironic to American liberal values.

April 9, 2015

Disney—Childhood Takeover by Deja Sloan

For almost all people growing up in America, Disney seems to have an inescapable death grip on childhood. Aside from the obvious Disney channel and Disney movies present in many households, there are deeper examples of Disney presence exposed to children at very young ages. Consider, for example, Playhouse Disney or Disney Junior. Theses two channels are owned by Disney, specifically aimed at children 0-5. They feature bright and colorful educational programs, and even feature shows starring Disney’s mascot himself, Mickey Mouse.

As children grow older they are expected to graduate to watching plain “Disney Channel” which features shows aimed at kids about 7-13. Before this, however, consider Disney merchandise that is also aimed at young children. Growing up, almost all of my toys had to do with Disney. Weather they were replicas of those toys featured In Toy Story or stuffed versions of animals side kicks from Disney princess movies, they were just about all I had. What is so interesting about Disney’s hold on youth is how institutionalized it is. I am almost certain no child exposes itself to Disney, but is conditioned by their parents to love it, giving them no choice.

My nephew, for example, recently celebrated his first birthday. My sister was very excited to plan his party and though his favorite TV show is Peppa Pig, (A British TV series having nothing to do with Disney) she went with a Mickey Mouse theme without so much as a second thought. I asked why she chose that over his favorite (and only show capable of really holding his attention) and all she had to say was “He’ll love it, every kid loves Disney”. So of course, I went along. Another factor to take into consideration is the recent popularity of viral video of children’s reactions to finding out they’re going to Disney world. In many cases, it seems the parents express more excitement than kids, and the kids just go along until they’re old enough to form their own opinions, and even then they still express excitement after being conditioned by their parents for their entire lives.

With all the reading we have done in class regarding “Disney History” it seems many children (including some in our class) remember having their first historical experience through Disney. The historical accuracy of the information however, was to be determined later in most cases. The fact of the matter is Disney has something for everyone. Whether it be Playhouse Disney, Evil villains, enchanted princesses, or even live action pirates, the iconicity of Disney stretched over many demographics of people in every stage of life. Parents see this, and take it upon themselves to prepare their children for a life of Disney.

April 9, 2015

How My Child Proves He Isn’t Corrupted By Disney by Annie Persico

This may or may not have been me all week. That may or may not be a representation of my mom comforting me in the upper left hand corner as I expressed my true disappointment in the lack of iconicity discussion around the subject of Disney and instead a discussion of what was up with Disney’s portrayal of history and it’s damaging effects. I’ll leave it up to you to decide.

On to the real issue at hand, How My Child Proves He Wasn’t Corrupted By Disney

As most Disney haters are known for presenting all the reasons that Disney is corrupting our youth, I’ve decided to prove just how much Disney has NOT damaged my child. Listversehttp://listverse.com/2012/11/22/top-10-ways-disney-corrupts-children (along with countless others) presents a list of the Top 10 Ways Disney Corrupts Children. To be honest, I understand how some of these themes in Disney movies can be seen as harmful to children, but as I mentioned in class there’s some parental responsibility when you expose your child to ANYTHING so the blame can’t be placed solely on Disney’s shoulders. I may not touch on every one of the 10 “evil corruptions” of Disney for the sake of length, but I’ll touch on two that have been pointed out and proved to be wrong by my own seven year old.

Poor “corrupted” kid

Historical Inaccuracies

“Perhaps one of the most obvious points critics have grilled Disney over are historical inaccuracies in their few films which are actually based on real events.”

OK…I’m going to combat this one by saying that ART, which Disney movies are, are allowed to take poetic license as much as any other form of art. We don’t all think Picasso’s version of the Spanish Civil War is true to life, do we? To assume that every child is taking the Disney Canon of Animated Films and believing in them as the literal truth is to accept that every child is a moron- something I’m just not down with. Instead of looking at the historical inaccuracies as damaging, I’ve always taken them as an opportunity to educate my son on the history that INSPIRED the film. When Ryan watched Pocahontas and asked if it really happened like that I told him “quite honestly no, Pocahontas was actually 10 when that happened and she married a different English settler” and then I took him to a museum to show him some Native American Culture. Obviously I’m not getting into all the atrocities of the settlement of the New World with a 7 year old, and neither should Disney. But if I choose to sterilize history for a seven year old, what is wrong with Disney choosing to do the same? We have a whole national holiday based on a friendly dinner between Native Americans and Pilgrims and Disney didn’t start that… just sayin’.

These movies are geared towards children, not history majors. Please raise your hand if you are going to show your child accurate historical portrayals of violent events in our past. Oh no one is, you’d rather let them see at least an aspect of history that opens up a questioning of the events you say? Oh maybe you should put a Disney movie on for them, they’re great conversation starters.

Skinny People are THE ONLY Pretty People

I guarantee there will be a blog post about how harmful the body types portrayed in Disney are- and I’m not saying they aren’t, NOONE in the world could ever have a waist as small as Meg’s from Hercules…unless they were two years old. But maybe, once again, kids aren’t as judgmental as we think. Maybe I’ll kids aren’t looking at skinny princesses and thinking that’s the beauty ideal.

True story:

I take my seven year old to Disney over spring break, we meet Merida from Brave and Ryan straight up says to this beautiful girl dressed up as Merida, “ya know, you’re a lot prettier in real life, your too skinny in the movie.” Now aside from Ryan blatently commenting on a human’s weight (which we had a later conversation about) I was proud of him for telling this “Princess” to her face that he didn’t think her super exaggerated skinny self was what he was looking for. Bravo kid, you aren’t a judgemental little jerk who defines your views through television.

“corrupted kid” tells Merida she’s prettier with some meat on her bones

Maybe I have a well adjusted kid, I don’t know. But I refuse to let an Animated Film define my sons point of view of the world. I see the problems in Disney movies, the portrayal of skinny princesses and the fact that all of the parents are dead, I see the historical inaccuracies but I choose to use them to my advantage. I have conversations with my child about the things I expose him to. Maybe, just maybe, the corruption isn’t coming from Disney, but from parents who refuse to have honest conversations with kids thinking that they are all idiots and don’t understand the difference between Art and real life. When my child proves his “corruption” (cause what kid doesn’t eventually show some signs of corruption?) I’m not blaming it on Disney. If he fails world history, I’m not going to blame that on Disney either. And if he decides he wants to date a skinny girl or a curvy girl or a frog princess, I’m not going to blame that on Disney either.

With that being said, I’ll continue to give thousands of dollars to a Mouse to take him on vacation to Disney World after I put the monthly college contributions in the bank AND I’ll continue to let him watch movies where cats dance across pianos and dogs share pasta because I know he’s smart enough to ask me a question if he has one and I’ll take the responsibility of answering it, not leaving it to Disney.

April 9, 2015

Disney owns what? Historical Inaccuracies and Media Consolidation by Brittany Cozzens

As with Barbie, American Icon Walt Disney has created a worldwide network of people wishing to be in a fantasyland forever. Through massive parks such as Disneyland and Disney World, to movies and their beloved characters, and even a Disney themed town, Walt Disney created something more than just a place to love, he created a place where dreams come true.

However, after reading Mike Wallace’s “Mickey Mouse History and Other Essays on American Memory” I began to see that “The Happiest Place on Earth” is just a successful money pit created from false happiness that consumers are ever so willing to invest in.

This false happiness comes from the Disney imagineers invention of creating a Disney realistic society when at the parks- it becomes a place that is “utopian in nature, where we carefully program out all the negative, unwanted elements and program in the positive elements” (Wallace 137). As someone else in class pointed out that though Disney may be full of historical inaccuracies, it wouldn’t be as popular or sell as much if it included the negative moments from our histories past. While this may be true, the problem arises people, especially young kids, growing up thinking those historical inaccuracies to be true.

But just what is the reach of the Disney brand and its inaccuracies? With further exploration I came to find that not only is Disney a family favorite but also is one of the worlds biggest and most loved media conglomerates. The Big 6 as they are know control 90% of everything Americans see, hear and consider important. That’s right; GE, News Corp, Viacom, Time Warner, CBS, and yes Disney pretty much rule the media world and how you get all of your information. But what all does Disney own you might ask- ABC, ESPN, Pixar, Miramax, Marvel Studios just to name a few. In an almost $276 BILLION dollar business, Disney has major say in not only what your children watch for fun but also everything else. Being such a large monopoly, it is scary to think that a company that prides itself on creating a new type of history, void of anything deemed negative that is integral to our nations history, is also the same company that rules the airwaves, TV stations, and so much more.

Disney- the happiest place on Earth, media conglomerate, monopoly, and more apart of your life then you will ever know.

http://www.freepress.net/blog/11/11/22/media-consolidation-illusion-choice

April 9, 2015

Maleficent may not be a communist, but she is the devil by Angie Indik

When choosing a Disney movie to examine for historical context, Pocahontas or Davy Crockett, King of the Wild Frontier, may appear to be the obvious option. I chose to view and analyze Sleeping Beauty instead. I did not do it for the challenge, I did it, truth be told, because it is the only Disney movie I own! It is also one of my favorites. This film was released in 1959, but the story is much older. It is a fairytale that Charles Perrault has been credited with writing back in the seventeenth-century. Historians believe there are even earlier versions dating back to the fourteenth-century. No matter how old the story is, the Disney interpretation of the tale would no doubt reflect the time period of the 1950s. My goal in watching this film was to try and decipher the less obvious historical messages in the movie.

For those unacquainted with the story of Sleeping Beauty, it is about a princess who was put under a curse by the villainess Maleficent. The Princess Aurora was to prick her finger on a spinning wheel and ultimately die before her sixteenth birthday. The curse did not work as intended as Aurora ended up falling into an eternal sleep, but would awaken with true love’s kiss.

Knowing this movie was made during the Cold War, I automatically felt I should see Maleficent as a communist. It must be there somewhere, right? Nope. She was not spreading a message of anti-capitalism. She was not against individuality. Perhaps she was against free speech as Princess Aurora could not speak during her deep sleep, but I think that’s stretching it a bit. I mostly saw a jealous woman hurt because she was not invited to a party celebrating Aurora’s birth.

While the movie did not strike me as having a particular anti-communist message, it did have religious undertones to it. The 1950s brought about a religious revival. This was a result of the anti-communist, anti-atheist feelings on the 1950s. Maleficent is presented as having big devil horns on her head. She breathes fire as she is transformed into a dragon. The villainess is seen as evil as the devil himself. On the opposing side, there are the three fairies, Meriwether, Flora and Fauna. They represent the good. They look like nuns. The trio wear dresses and habits; the only difference is they do not wear black and white, but rather blue, pink and green. They adopt and raise the princess Aurora just as nuns would in an orphanage.

The movie Sleeping Beauty also shows how the 1950s valued motherhood and the female being the homemaker. The three fairies were thrilled at the chance to raise Princess Aurora. Motherhood was something that was denied to them. Now they had a chance to take on the “sole important role” for a woman and be a mother. When it came to doing domestic work such as baking, sewing and cleaning, the film pokes fun at them as they could not tackle these projects without using magic.

While Sleeping Beauty is not inspired by a particular historical figure or event, history can be found in unlikely places such as this Disney cartoon.

April 9, 2015

Dangers of Disney by Sarah Klein

Controversy seems to surround Disney as much as their perfect, pretty princesses. Princesses who always look gorgeous, who have the ideal slim yet curvy body, and who always find their prince charming. For a children’s company that heavily appeals to young girls, Disney sure does manage to lump sum all types of girls into one narrow slot.

If an icon contributes to nuanced negativity, should it really be an icon? And furthermore, is it unfair to expect such perfectionism out of icons as large and all encompassing as Disney, even though they primarily reach America’s impressionable youth?

Let’s look at the facts. A quick Buzzfeed search sends me to an article posted April 7, 2015–yesterday. The title: “16 Terrible Love Lessons We Learned From Disney Princes.” I’m not even surprised. Disney certainly has a sordid past of promoting no sexual consent (Sleeping Beauty AND Snow White), changing yourself for the man you love (The Little Mermaid), and allowing yourself to be abused by your true love (Beauty and the Beast)… Just to name a few.

The model Walt Disney created as far back as 1923 certainly lived in a world very different from today. Only three years prior woman finally won the right to vote.

In 1937 Snow White almost gets killed then has to run away until a man saves her by kissing her while she’s unconscious. In 1942 Planned Parenthood is established.

n the 1950s Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty have to be saved by their prince charmings to live a happy life, while in 1960 the FDA finally approves birth control and in 1963 Congress passes the Equal Pay Act.

In 1989 The Little Mermaid changes herself for a man; in 1991 Belle lets the Beast be abusive. In 1992 the Supreme Court reaffirms the validity of women’s rights to abortion under Roe v. Wade. Hey, that’s when I was born!

As women have been making leaps and bounds in the real world, Disney continues to follow their outdated model of confining women to the life of princesses, in a role that is usually subservient and passive. Isn’t an icon supposed to change with the times and remain relevant? How can Disney continue perpetuating cold hard sexism to generations of impressionable little girls?

Oh yea, for this thing called money.

It certainly appears that when an icon is intertwined with making people money problems arise and morals and progress remain locked in the tower with the princess.

Too bad that intelligent little girls get the shaft.

Sources:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/krystieyandoli/terrible-love-lessons-we-learned-from-disney-princes#.qfly8qKgLg

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/about-disney/disney-history/1960-01-01–1969-12-31

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline2.html