Robert Gooding-Williams piece “Disney in Africa and The Inner City: On Race and Space in the Lion King” and John Morton’s essay “Simba’s Revolution: Revisiting History and Class in the Lion King” are two texts with completely different arguments. It’s fun to read and analyze exactly how the authors clash…
Let’s start with Gooding-Williams piece. He emphasizes how Disney devalues the complexity of African culture by belittling it to an endless cycle of reproduction. His argument directly criticizes one of the Lion’s King largest themes: the circle of life. Somehow he interprets this wholesome and cyclical idea as devaluing Africa, since it implies that there are no dramatic chances or advances on the African continent. While I understand how the circle of life theme can suggest elements of a culture rising and falling, the circle of life is intended - and I think Disney does a very good job of presenting it properly - to bring viewers back to their roots and force viewers to understand animals and humans interconnectedness. Much of the movie devotes time to the importance of every animal since they all contribute to each other’s survival. The ONLY time the food chain is misrepresented is when it relates to the hyenas, who are wrongfully depicted as darker, trashier animals. In reality, hyenas are just as important to the food chain as other animals, but Disney needed a way to incorporate villains! With this in mind, Gooding Williams fails to recognize that the circle of life theme does not devalue Africa or its cultural advancements, but instead highlights Africa as a symbol of mammal’s inter reliance and connectedness. Another part of his argument focuses on how Disney’s Lion King suggests how blacks and Latinos are unwelcome in the American community. As I mentioned prior, William-Gooding points to the hyenas as a perfect example of animals that are discriminated against and seen as minorities. He argues that because the hyenas were played by black actors, Disney suggests that these minorities are less than human - I think that is a bit of a stretch, it doesn’t necessarily suggest anything about hyenas. He goes on to argue that hyenas and minorities are one and the same, as the hyenas desperately try to become real, respected citizens. I found one blog that presented similar ideas about racial differences in the Lion King, and another that brought up why their representations of black citizens affect child's understanding of race. While William-Gooding’s argument revolves around the whole idea that hyenas are essentially black and Latino citizens, I can’t help but say he is reading too much into it. That may sound ridiculous, but in every movie, there is a villain. Yes, it it relevant to analyze how villains are depicted (and accounting for who plays them, specific physical characteristics, etc.). But it is still hard for me to consider how Disney’s depiction of animals can extend to its views on race.
Morton’s essay encompasses all my views. I respect the piece because it doesn’t make Disney out to be a villain, but it also doesn’t rid Disney of its responsibility to properly portray race. Disney did not try to make a movie that shows segregation based on race, as I’m sure that is not filmmakers’ goal (hopefully). More importantly, Morton not only dares to disagree with Gooding-Williams argument but also notices where his arguments have gaps. He makes the argument that the movie is “less black and white than Gooding-Williams recognizes.” For example, both Mufasa and Scar were demoted as nothing, even coming from different socioeconomic statuses. Overall, Morton’s essay does a great job of showing Good-Williams provincial argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment