My interpretation of the Lion King
is that it was a magical film, one filled with characters who save the day and
the inescapable Disney love. However; every child, every parent, every research
analyst, and every academic will have their own interpretations of films. I am
going to piece together two interpretations of The Lion King film. One interpretation
is that of Robert-Gooding Williams who had some pretty radical beliefs in regards
to the secondary discourses of this film. The second interpretation is John
Morton’s argument which goes through what the Lion King film truly portrays.
After reading and analyzing both of these interpretations, I would have to be
bold enough to say that John Morton’s argument not only made the most practical
sense, but it also was not as far-fetched as that of the Gooding-Williams
argument. I am going to go through each argument and point out the foundational
principles of each, but also the points that I like and disliked along the way.
Gooding-Williams built his argument
mostly off of his acquaintance, Hegel. Hegel and Gooding-Williams believed
Disney depicted Africa as a “geographically bounded and culture less place of spatial
infancy that has not once evolved a novel and non-infantile mode of spiritual
existence.” The belief that Africa was lacking history, was culture less, and
embodied a dark land had been believed by Gooding-Williams after watching how
Disney depicted Africa in the making of the Lion King film. Through characters
such as Scar, Africa apparently had spiritual loss and decline. The “Circle of
Life” also led to the decline of Africa, rather than the growth and advancement
according to Gooding-Williams argument. Now, what do I believe about this part
of his argument? I do not agree. I found that he misinterpreted the “Circle of
Life.” In my opinion the “Circle of Life,” demonstrated by Disney, brings a
sense of connectedness… not a spiritual loss or a lack of history. Another
portion of Gooding-Williams argument was the representation of the American
inner-city through the hyenas in the land beyond the sun in the Lion King. Due
to the African American voices for the hyenas, GW analyzed this as inequality
towards different races (African Americans and Latinos). I can follow more of
his argument in regards to the hyenas being unequal to the lions and linking
that back to racial inequality in America due to the actors which played the
parts of the hyenas (African American and Latino actors/actresses). 
Morton’s argument spends some time
explaining the issues with that of Gooding-Williams and also addresses Disney’s
role with racial issues when making this film. Morton explains the misinterpretation
of Gooding-Williams argument in regards to the “Circle of Life.” His tone also
towards Disney is not as accusatory as Gooding-Williams which I personally love.
Morton does not blame Disney, rather he keeps them accountable for their portrayal
of race
relations. I agree more with Morton’s
interpretation of the Lion King because it brings in realistic evidence and a
more intellectually sound argument. Also, Morton is not here to paint Disney as
monsters, rather he points out the things Disney did right and what they did
wrong. I believe looking at the right and the wrong of different essays truly
embodies a well-developed argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment