So I REALLY liked Putnam's chapter on the depiction of Disney villains as transgendered. Not only did she provide a lot of solid and meaningful evidence to support her argument, but also she raised a lot of interesting points that I had never before considered!
To start, I appreciated the anecdote she provides in the beginning of the chapter, relating her interest in transgendered villains to her daughters comment that she "wants to watch one [Disney movie] without a mean lady." I always think it's cool when authors interconnect their argument with personal experiences because it provides more character and in some cases allows for the audience to the relate the author! Similarly, I thought the essay was well organized and structured. She begins with an anecdote, segues into her argument by assigning characteristics to heroines and villains, and then follows this with specific examples from Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, and The Lion King. Everything that she included seemed pertinent to her argument and she did not attempt to put in fluffy, unnecessary details.
In this article, "Mean Ladies: Transgendered Villains," Putnam asserts that Disney story lines "'disrupt and frustrate heterosexuality's dominance' by antagonizing the happily-ever-after of the heroes and heroines" (149). The quote illustrates the purpose of the villain: to destroy all that is good with the characters that we love. Putnam conveys that it is this negativity associated with the villains that causes the anti-heterosexual characteristics presented by villains to be considered bad. Consequently, Disney female villains are masculinized and Disney male villains are feminized.
One thing that I never really paid attention to was the emphasis placed on the outfits of the heroines. Putnam sheds light on the provocative, form-fitting outfits seen on our beloved Disney heroines that accentuate their physical features, in effect enhancing their heterosexual appeal. On the other hand, Disney female villains are often portrayed in a "mannish fashion"--both physically and behavioral--in order to heighten the contrast to the heroine. The ugliness that rests within each Disney female villain is truly insulting, as it does subtly contribute to a hatred towards them that becomes a hatred towards their gender identities and beliefs.
A great example of this is the character Ursula. The article points out the masculinity found in Ursula but illustrates this relation to transgenderism in a really cool way. Putnam addresses the dramatic, flamboyant traits assigned to Ursula that suggest her transgendered nature in offering that "...Ursula's overweight body and tentacles, her deep voice, and the excessive sexualized shimmies are a reminiscent of a drag queen on stage, overly made up and singing, appearing both female and male simultaneously" (155). While I always considered Ursula to be a bit manly, especially because of her deep voice and someone grotesque facial features, I had never thought of Ursula in relation to drag queens. Her over-theatrical and booming persona really does resemble the flamboyant drag queens that we see today; this would be fine had Disney not portrayed her as the villain. I don't doubt that Disney in some way wanted to view homophobia in a negative light, seeing that homophobia was prominent in the early 1930s and Disney is known for maintaining traditional views, but it is really disappointing because this does impact the way kids see things. After taking a closer look at Disney movies, I understand why we should not underestimate the influence that Disney has on the subconscious of youth. Putnam even states that the transgendered characteristics assigned to villains to distinguish between good and evil "becomes a disjointed misinformation telling young children that difference is not okay..." (155). Yes children should know good from bad, however, when you begin to associate that bad with issues of someone's gender identity (i.e being LGBT), you are attempting to shape a child's views towards a completely skewed, ignorant perspective and that is not okay.
Lol enough of my rant, touching on another point, I appreciated the detail Putnam gave to the transgendered descriptions of the characters within movies. Pointing out how Jafar is the only male figure in Aladdin that wears a gown instead of pants and illustrating Scar's failure to secure a female mate despite having absolute means to do so really brought to light things that were not immediately obvious.
Lastly, I enjoyed Putnam's conclusion. In Decoding Disney, we discussed how it's wise to start specific in the conclusion but end broad. She sums her points on transgendered villains in Disney and then transitions into the impact of transgendered appearances on society, specifically that of preschoolers like her daughter (which I particularly like because she's reintroducing the anecdote that she mentioned in the intro), serving to enhance the relation of the audience to her argument.
Overall, I really enjoyed Putnam's analysis and felt that I walked away with a changed perspective of Disney villains!
Peace Love Disney :)))
No comments:
Post a Comment