For next week, please read and watch the following and be prepared to talk about the readings in class. No writing assignment for this week. However, for those of you who are either behind in blog responses or want extra credit, I will give credit/extra credit for any postings.
Readings/Viewings:
- “Consuming Passions: The Culture of American Consumption,” p. 65-75, SOL
- Watch: “Mickey Mouse Monopoly: Disney, Childhood & Corporate Power”
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 6, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Andy M.
Alright. I definitely support any and all failed or successful attempts to bash Disney with a thirst for blood. However, i feel like there is still room to consider more carefully, the direction of their argument. The company most definitely has a viscous monopoly on childhood eduction worldwide. In the western culture especially there’s a noticeable loss of things like oral tradition to the wide open mouth of the mouse. We simply turn on the T.V., get them the toys and games that correspond to the characters (including clothing, school supplies, and f–ing shampoo), and then we call it good. This in addition to everything else that the monstrosity owns and governs without question. But i could definitely go on forever.
I think though that some of the points are a little out of place. I mean stories such as Tarzan and Beauty and The Beast, were written long before Disney got a hold of them. Not that they weren’t slightly dismantled, but Tarzan has always been a white character. If there is an argument against the portrayal of the heroin in the film then it’s going to have to stretch towards nearly every romantic adventure tale throughout every culture on the planet. There is always the strong, emotionally scarred, cunning and deadly hero. At their side is always the equally strong, equally cunning source of motivation. And they are always the finest representations of beautiful human beings that the given culture can muster. They are themselves a source of inspiration. So you shouldn’t really worry about the product of the damage (the stories or their representation).
Keep the focus on the source, any and all public relations, code of ethics, or things such as the piss one’s pants terrifying threat that Disney is to the overall well being of anything within the category of public domain.
The best way to take down the man in my opinion is to stay with topics that deal only with fact verse fiction, not with a possibly infinite multitude of interpretive opinions on the intentions of the stories or the style of animation. If you don’t want your kid to interact with it, then don’t let them. Or better yet, teach them how to use their ability to choose.
March 12, 2008 at 11:02 am
Lyndsie Klott
This was actually the first time I have heard critism about anything that has to do with Disney. I grew up watching mostly only Disney movies and tv shows and only disney toys. I guess i would say I am still a Disney fan and i never looked at the organization in a perspective that the video does. I disagree that the story lines that are in the movies are a bad influence on children because i loved watching those movies and I never once thought that beauty and the beast was teaching me to look past violent and abusive males and help them because it was my “job” as a women. I looked at the movie as a love story with pretty dresses and fun music. Although childrens mind are easily molded, it is important to remember their innocence at a young age. They are not looking for life lessons on how to act in a relationship as young children, they are looking for the fun, the happiness, and the music, which is accomplished in Disney movies.
The one concept of the video that i found interesting was he fact that there are never black characters in the movies. That does seem strange and unfair and I never noticed it before. I do believe that if Disney incorporated more race into their movies it will help children understand society and be more aware of it as they get older, and it would unify society more than just sticking to white characters.
Disney is a very successful organization that is involved in most peoples lives, even globally, and there are bound to be people who think negatively. There is never going to be a one hundrend percent agreement on anything within society, a country, or even the world. Im glad i heard a different perspective on Disney because i have never even considered a negative outlook before. I still admire the organization, but i have respect for those who disagree.
March 12, 2008 at 11:10 am
Catherine M.
I have to agree with Andy on (most of) his posting. Disney didn’t make up these fairy tales, haven’t you even heard of the Brothers Grimm? Given, I’m sure that Disney does put whatever little twist on the story they want to make it successful for them, I don’t feel that it’s right to blame the company as a whole.
The people in the video had good points. I have never seen a black person in a traditional Disney film, and the only non-caucasian big characters are really in Mulan and Aladdin. And most of the women in the movies are portrayed as sexual women with perfectly shaped bodies and such. However, their analysis of Beauty and the Beast was a little harsh I think. That movie teaches girls that it’s ok to be abused?! WTF? No it doesn’t. I might just be getting too defensive here because I did grow up on these movies, but that really pissed me off.
I did think though that it was interesting on what they said about Disney owning news stations. I had no idea. It really makes me wonder if they do sensor stuff that gets aired.
Overall, I just feel like there a successful company, and that there’s nothing wrong with that. There are a lot of ways this argument could be approached from though, and like I said, I’m kind of biased toward Disney, I grew up on them, and I love them!
March 12, 2008 at 11:48 am
Nick R.
I think the video about Disney was very blown out of proportion. The video basically attacked what I and many other Americans grew up watching. Granted they basically were a monopoly, but it’s not like there were any other major competitors that tried or succeeded in breaking in like Disney did. I dont think that bashing a company because they are successful is right, but there will always be those people out there who do it. In the reading from SOL I think they were right on. From the “throw away” culture part to the status of pagers back in the day and now cell phones. I think that we are in some ways a throw away culture. But with all this new technology coming out faster than we can get it, I think we need to be with some things. But however there are parts of the reading that I disagree with. They say that pagers went from being used by classy businessmen to being used by “gangster” teens. I dont agree with this at all. I think that pagers did change but they changed because of the introduction of cells phones, phones that kids couldn’t afford so they had to keep using pagers. I dont think that categorizing “gangster” teens using just because they dont have cell phones yet is correct. What would you categorize very young teens you now see with cell phones. Are they now “gangster” teens too? No. Back to the Disney idea. Granted they are shaping youth, but if parents dont want their kids to watch it, then that is at their own discretion. Kids are not forced to watch Disney, but they do because they are cartoons and kids like cartoons. I dont think that when kids watch the Road Runner they go out emulate blowing up stuff and dropping anvils on animals heads from the top of mountains. I think that its the parents faults if the kids grow up and want to be “sexy” like the little mermaid or a barbie. Disney, at least in my opinion, is doing what they are good at making cartoons and for children and even now adults are getting into it. I dont believe they are a monopoly trying to persuade kids. If so they are doing a great job of not being found out since they have been around since 1923. But thats just my opinion!
March 12, 2008 at 11:49 am
Cara M
I found the signs of life reading particularly interesting seeing as the contents taught in my major all revolve around how to get people to buy and why they buy. In a book I am reading for a class called Why We Buy, the author specifically breaks down each type of consumer and what to consider when trying to appeal to them. He says to put books and candy on the lower shelves so that kids can easily grab them and throw them into their parents shopping cart. If the items are placed higher on the shelf it will take the child longer to grab the item and by that time the parent has a larger time frame and an easier opportunity to say “no.” At that young of an age children are being allowed to become a consumer. Retailer H&M is a great example of the mass production market with a large turnover of clothing and accessories. The quality of those items offered in h&m are known not to be the best but an easy trendy buy that assists the “dying” economy. This trend is a large part of how we view oursleves today. Just as the example of the cellphones buying them as well as using them is a strong signifier of social class and identity that has a large part in forming how we view people and how people view themselves.