Elizabeth Reneau, Gooding-Williams vs. Morton Response

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.

Elizabeth Reneau, Disney's The Lion King Response

The Lion King is magical, it is dramatic, it is scary at times, it is sad, it teaches needed life lessons, it is a DREAM of a movie. Timon and Pubmaa tell us to remember Hakuna Matata, “It means no worries, for the rest of your days.” Scar teaches us about greed and the evil desire power can bring. Simba teaches us about fighting fears, being confident, and letting your heart lead you. What a dynamic story. Now, with dynamic stories there are always bound to be a few missteps along the way. There will never be a “perfect” movie where everyone in the world is pleased or where there are zero errors made because the people making these movies are human. One of the things I have gathered from blogging and writing about these Disney films it is that even with the best teams in the world, errors will still be made and people will not be pleased because we do make mistakes. Now, even with the Lion King’s mistakes, the majority of the movie is filled with so much greatness.

The things I LOVED:  The animation with the bold colors, the songs, the cute depiction of baby Simba, the LOVE of Nala and Simba (come on it is a literal rom in an animation film), the adventurous life of Timon and Pubmaa, and finally, when Simba comes and saves the day.

The reasoning on why I LOVED these moments of the movie: Well, the animation is pretty spectacular and made the film that much more brilliant. The songs are an iconic part of this film as well. You cannot tell me that about 60% of students at Duke students have not heard the “Circle of Life” song in the film. I was singing so loud in my dorm room when I watched this film a few days ago (I think people thought I was crazy). Lastly (my favorite part), to talk about… Nala and Simba. From best-friends as young cubs to lovers later on with age, these two keep the Disney magic alive with the boy gets girl, the prince wins’ hearts act.

The things I DO NOT LOVE:  The generalization that Africa is only the pride lands, desert, and the savanna. The green-eyed evil hyenas were kind of scary (lol). The death of Mufasa was pretty stinking heartbreaking and finally, the portrayal of females being beaten by men when Scar hit Mufasa’s wife (lioness).

The reasoning on why I DID NOT LOVE these moments of the movie:  The two mishaps which were pretty obvious issues were the generalizations about Africa and the assumption women are beaten by men. The portrayal of Africa in this light is an issue because those watching will begin to assume that all of Africa is savanna and animals because they do not know any different. Films sometimes portray incorrect things on different countries and/or people groups in which people then begin to assume those incorrectly displayed things. Second, women were looked at as servants to the King and hurt if they disagreed with or shared their own opinions with Scar. This is an issue in regards to gender subordination.

Elizabeth Reneau, Sundiata: Lion King of Mali Response

Wow, I love picture books! I forgot how magical these books can be. Specifically, Sundiata: The Lion King of Mali, written by David Wisniewski, had bold colors and solid illustrations which made the book easier to read and more enticing to finish. The specific medium in which this book had been made was in drawing form, either computer generated or hand-drawn and scanned. The interesting part of these drawings is that the distinct lines illustrate the setting of Africa well, emphasizing the thatched roofs and pieces of clothing. Another part of the picture side of this book (which I loved) was the map at the start of this interesting story. The map was a pre-cursor to the adventure in which Sundiata was about to go on in order to fulfill his destiny. Now, let’s dive into the adventure of Sundiata.  

Sundiata was a child who was born without the ability to speak or walk. He was poked fun at by the inhabitants of the land and was threatened by an evil being (the kings first wife), Sassouma. Sundiata had every right to give up and live a life in insolation, but he fought. That is something I found so admiral about his character. Every time something in life seemed to come his way he never backed away from the challenge. Instead, he was as strong as a lion and charged on ahead. I also loved something else in regards to his character dynamic. HIS HEART. Sundiata’s heart was put on display for the audience to see when the nine great witches of Mali were sent to kill him. The way the witches had to kill this boy was through anger. Sundiata had to become angry in his heart for the witches to strike and take his final breath. However, he showed a heart full of kindness, limiting the witch’s ability to kill. This scene to me was one of the most powerful in the whole book because it showed that Sundiata’s selflessness was that fit for a King.

Another character whom I found most intriguing was Sundiata’s mother, the woman which possessed the Spirit of the Buffalo. This woman, Sogolon, was not one of particular beauty, but someone who embodied strength, grace, and wisdom. She was treated as basically an object for trade at the beginning of the story which I was not a fan of in regards to the treatment of women; however, she displays feminine strength throughout the book when leaving Mali and supporting her child.

Now, I have saved the best for last… the ending!!! I was reading this story and honestly almost began to cry (I know… I am a bit dramatic) because Sundiata showed people LOVE more than anything else. He had every right to be upset, to never save his home, and to take revenge on everyone who made him feel like less than human. BUT HE DID NOT DO THAT!! That is what makes the story so beautiful. It reminds the audience to first show love and kindness before anger, which in my opinion is something the world needs to hear.