Like I mentioned the other day, Disney is featuring the first black princess in the animated movie adaptation of “The Frog Princess,” set to premier in 2009. According to the Wiki article about the movie, it will be set in New Orleans in the 1920s Jazz Age (does this mean no zydeco?!). All I know about the main character Maddy is that Jennifer Hudson and Alicia Keys are competing for the title voice role and that she will be part of the grossly saccharine Disney Princess franchise, the “fastest-growing brand for the company’s Consumer Products division.”
No doubt there will be some extra attention paid to the race and class issues in this movie, what with the timeliness of choosing New Orleans as a set and the lack of timeliness in choosing an African-American girl as a lead character. More, considering the, uh, unfortunate representations of an amalgam of “barbaric” Middle Eastern culture in Aladdin, and that they’re reprising the same story production crew that did Aladdin, I wonder how they’re going to represent a black princess considering that in most of the original fairy tale she’s a frog.
The king sets his three sons (or an old peasant woman, her sons, in Lang’s version) to marry, and tests their chosen brides. The king may set them to shoot arrows and find their brides where the arrows land, and the youngest prince’s arrow is picked up by a frog; the two older sons may already have girls picked out, but the youngest son — Ivan Tsarevich in the Russian — is at a loss until a friendly frog takes pity on him and offers to marry him. In Calvino’s version, the princes uses slings rather than bows and arrows. In the Greek, the princes set out to find their brides one by one; the older two are already married by the time the third sets out
The king then assigns his three prospective daughters-in-law various tasks, such as spinning cloth and baking bread. In every task the frog far outdoes the lazy brides-to-be of the older brothers; in some versions, she uses magic to accomplish the tasks, the other brides attempt to emulate her and can not do the magic. Still, the young prince is ashamed of his froggy bride, until she magically is transformed into a princess.
Considering the movie title, this might be a riff on “The Frog Prince” with the sexes reversed. When I did research on fairy tales in college, I saw several versions of the same story from various cultures. Sometimes the lead was male, sometimes female.
I do enjoy the princess movies for whatever reason, nostalgia perhaps, if only because I like a good story and I like a story that’s focused on girls and women even if these stories are lacking in the feminism department. That said, there are aspects of the Disney princesses in recent years that diverge from the Cinderella and Snow White model. One, we have princesses of color including Mulan to Jasmine to Pocahontas, and two, there are feminist aspects to many of Disney’s animated movies starting with The Little Mermaid. The women have agency, they seek their princes instead of being sought after, Jasmine for one scoffs at the idea of an arranged marriage, Mulan cross-dresses and wields a sword in battle. Lilo of “Lilo and Stitch” was a pretty cool character whose end goal was friendship, saving her female-headed family, and saving the world, nevermind that she wasn’t a princess. Face it, these characters may not be Veronica Mars or Agent Scully, but they’re far better icons than I had in my youth.
That doesn’t mean the characters aren’t problematic. Securing a prince or other love interest (like strangely benevolent white man John Smith) is the highest priority, and the women only “achieve” status and security when at the end of the movie they are made “beautiful” and marriagable and crowned princesses, thus when I look at the upcoming “Frog Princess” I’m of two minds. Finally Disney will tell a story whose characters are black and who come from a primarily black culture that is historically associated with brilliant black musicians and authorship. Little black girls in America get a black icon that could potentially be associated with some awesomely positive things. However, note the arc of the original story:
The king then assigns his three prospective daughters-in-law various tasks, such as spinning cloth and baking bread. In every task the frog far outdoes the lazy brides-to-be of the older brothers; in some versions, she uses magic to accomplish the tasks, the other brides attempt to emulate her and can not do the magic. Still, the young prince is ashamed of his froggy bride, until she magically is transformed into a princess.
Ashamed until she’s a princess, armed with all the femininity baggage that goes with princesshood. Charming, Prince Charming.
There doesn’t seem to be a lot of room for progressive or feminist representation here. Considering the national conversations about New Orleans and Katrina, poverty and African-Americans in the United States, long-lived stereotypes of blackness, and especially considering that this movie takes place during Jim Crow, Disney had better tread very, very carefully.
The cynical side of me believes that the addition of a black princess to the Disney Princess line, which has “generated $3 billion in global retail sales since 1999,” is an attempt to cure a bad business model that has overlooked a major demographic of sales potential.
UPDATE: Chris has additional thoughts on the movie. And he’s funnier. Amanda also brought up that obnoxious Randy Newman is doing the music, instead of, oh I don’t know, one of the thousands of brilliant and famous musicians that call New Orleans home.
Disney movies very seldom have mothers. “Girl-centered” movies are always about the princess-in-waiting and dear old dad. Adult female characters are, literally, the Evil Stepmommy and Cruella DeVille.
The absence of mothers, combined with the other elements you mentioned in your post, bugs the crap out of me.
Charmin. Prince Charmin.
*flush*
So, I loved Mulan as a kid (as an even younger kid, I also thoguht Jasmine’s “I am NOT a prize to be won!” speech was pretty much the most badass thing any character had ever said, ever) and when I went back to rewatch it out of nostalgia I assumed I’d be disappointed, but actually it holds up to feminist scrutiny pretty well (the whole “let’s put the movie in English but have some of the characters randomly have Chineseish accents” thing grates, but that’s a general movie pet peeve of mine also seen in things like Chocolat and any poorly made movie set in the 1600s (hi, Affair of the Necklace! hi, Hilary Swank’s nonexistent accent coach!))–Mulan fails at femininity and, more importantly, never gets good at it but proves that she has other things to offer, like saving China, she legimitately kicks ass, not just “kicks ass… for a chick,” and best of all, the guy falls in love with her as a person and comes to her house to pursue her–and even that is a coda of the film, the really big moment having been, of course, saving China.
This could be a lot worse. But it could be awesome! I will watch it either way, because secretly, I am twelve. I’m not too worried about the whole princes-ashamed-of-her thing, just because Disney is not stupid when it comes to trends, and you’d have to be stupid to ignore the fact that part of what made Shrek kind of awesome was the fact that at the end, the princess embraces her sexy ogre self. I mean, Mulan’s the only genuine Disney badass, but they’ve been payinig lip service at least to feminist ideas for quite some time (see: Jasmine–she’s not a prize to be won!, Ariel–she’s feisty!, Belle–she reads! a lot!).
They’ll never top Mulan for best soundtrack though. Mysterious aaas the dark side of… the moooooon!
there are feminist aspects to many of Disney’s animated movies starting with The Little Mermaid.
You must be talking about Ursula, because Ariel gives up her voice to meet the prince.
Disney movies very seldom have mothers… Adult female characters are, literally, the Evil Stepmommy and Cruella DeVille.
Yeah, this bugs the shit out of me too. The implication is that when whatever character starts “losing” her beauty, otherwise known as status, she turns into a conniving old hag. It’s like the old hippie adage but with women: Never trust a woman over thirty.
The no-mothers thing is typical of fairy tales, which is why Angela Carter’s “The Bloody Chamber”–her take on Bluebeard–is so awesome. Instead of Manderley burning, Heroine’s mother shows up, rescues Heroine in the nick of time, and kicks Bluebeard’s ass.
The no-mother trope is also true of a lot of “girl fiction”: A Little Princess, The Secret Garden, Julie of the Wolves, Matilda (mother present but putrid), Heidi, and even latter-day chicks-with-sticks fantasies like Sabriel and Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy (in fact, the opening scene of the Sabriel trilogy is the death of the mother, while Lyra’s mother is The Villain for most of the trilogy).
Which may be why women are trained to believe that once they no longer look like a nubile 18-year-old princess, their lives are over. According to the stories they’ve been told, they are.
and best of all, the guy falls in love with her as a person and comes to her house to pursue her–and even that is a coda of the film, the really big moment having been, of course, saving China.
And best of all, that’s what the Emperor points out is what makes her worth pursuing.
You know, the “saving China” thing.
Adult female characters are, literally, the Evil Stepmommy and Cruella DeVille.
And very often, the most interesting characters. But then, I love Cruella DeVil. She even has a theme song! Covered by the Replacements!
All I’m seeing when I look at this plot outline is “Girl, you are not good enough, even though you kick more ass as a FROG, until your outsides are beautiful.” Belle falls in love with the lumpy old Beast, but I guess you can’t fall in love with a frog. Maybe it’s too hard to outfit them with bespoke clothing and teach them to waltz. Maybe the prince is smart, though, because heir-wise, that’s a dead end.
And not to be gross, here, but since Latinos are now the largest non-white group in the US, shouldn’t Disney be frantically aiming all their story development dollars at creating a feisty/bookish/sassy Latina heroine?
I swear I am going to write a novel someday where the girl’s mother is present, capable, and smart. I am trying to think of a children’s/YA story where this is true, and failing at the moment. UGH.
SJ, try Charles de Lint’s The blue Girl. The mother doesn’t have a major role, but she is there, and is quite capable and smart.
SJ,
A Wrinkle In Time has a present mother figure. Meg Murray’s mother is beautiful, a brilliant scientist, a great role model, and a caring mother. She cooks dinner on her Bunsen burner. I wanted her to be my mom when I was a little girl. In the later book of the series, the protagonist is Meg’s daughter, Polly, and it shows that Meg grew up to be an equally powerful woman and good mother, which I appreciated.
As a children’s literature lover and someone who occasionally attempts to write books for kids, I thought I’d add my thoughts about the missing/evil mothers discussion. As Natalia pointed out, the missing mother is a traditional fairy-tale trope. That doesn’t make it any less anti-feminist, but it is an interesting absence. What I’ve heard from YA authors, and what I’ve discovered myself, is that when you are writing books with young protagonists, you have to get the grown-ups out of the way! If Mom, Dad, or Dumbledore were always around to fix every situation, children’s books would be filled with unempowered, boring kids who never got to be the heroes of their own lives. On the negative side of things, obviously, this leaves a lot of young protagonists as orphans, or it gives them alarmingly passive/evil parents (both mothers and fathers). As a plot device, passive, incompetent, or just plain wicked parenting can be useful. As a social statement, these things are obviously less than ideal.
But there are some good mothers out there in children’s literature. My favorites are Mrs. O’Keefe and Mrs. Austen (both from Madeleine L’Engle’s books) and Anastasia Krupnik’s mother Katherine (from Lois Lowry’s series). They work well because they’re not the center of attention, but they are great role models for their daughters. They stay mostly out of the way, yet they often provide essential advice. That’s a good kind of mother to have, both in literature and in the real world.
Oh my goodness, I meant Mrs. Murray, not Mrs. O’Keefe, in my comment about Madeleine L’Engle’s mothers. Mrs. O’Keefe herself is pretty crazy, if I remember correctly. (Although Meg Murray becomes Mrs. O’Keefe eventually, and I imagine she’s a good mother, too.)
I too love good stories, which is why I think Disney should be indicted for murdering them.
I wonder how they’re going to represent a black princess considering that in most of the original fairy tale she’s a frog.
It’s supposed to be an original story. And I can’t wait to hear the music because I love Randy Newman, and this is right up his alley (his mother’s family was from New Orleans and he spent a lot of time there).
GOSh, I am too late jumping in with Madeline L’Engle! Sadly, she is the only one I can think of. (Add CS Lewis to the Motherless Childrin Trope)
Randy Newman was better then than he is now, and there are other, better choices, but he did grow up in New Orleans. And LA, yes, but.
Kip Manley:
Are you kidding? The World Isn’t Fair may be my favorite all-time song from him, and it’s from his latest studio album:
http://www.randynewman.com/tocdiscography/disc_bad_love/tocdiscography/disc_bad_love/lyricsbadlove#theworldisntfair
His latest released song A Few Words in Defense of Our Country, while no Political Science, I also like: http://youtube.com/watch?v=OldToIF5ZGs
Thanks everyone!
Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle, the crazy aunt figure in an upside-down house with a mysteriously absent husband, was a pretty awesome older woman figure. Of course, she solved problems about how to raise kids (occasionally moonlighting with marriage counseling). But she still rocked! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Piggle-Wiggl
I disagree. Let’s not delude ourselves into thinking that just because the princess is wielding a sword instead of a broom the Disney re/presentation of woman in the 2000s is any better than from the 1930s.
While there’s a lot of talk about utilizing a feminist critique for an analysis of Disney movies — how Disney is beginning to showcase women as “strong” characters, etc. — there is a lot missing in this discussion so far. There’s very little mention of Disney’s normative stance on, for example, authority, nationalism, gender, gender relations, sexuality(ies), culture(s), and bodies. We can’t let our nostalgia keep us from going the full distance a feminist critique can provide us.
We are all children of Disney: we all know the movies and have grown up watching them — often repeatedly, either while as children, as adults, scholars, teachers, or with our children. As such, I think this is a valuable discussion that needs to be expanded.
There has yet to be a decidedly feminist/pro-feminist/feminist-influenced Disney movie.
It cannot happen as long as Disney wishes to make a profit/reach a mass audience; there are too many constraints. If we want alternatives, we have to look elsewhere, as many commenters have already pointed us towards, or we have to create the better stories ourselves.
All leading women characters in Disney’s world are of an ideal body type, from Ariel in her seashell bra to Jasmin in her whispy pants to, most likely, Maddy. (We could examine Snow White (1937), who could be construed as being of a slightly more full/rounded figure. But that is one out of too many other small-waisted, large-breasted, demure leading [and supporting] gals.)
As for Disney’s gender re/presentation they sell to children (and adults), the leading characters are all pretty, feminine princesses, whether at the start of the film or by the ending, and the leading men are beefcakes. Regardless of what the women have done, experienced, and accomplished, they return to their role as woman-to-be-married, woman-to-remain-a-doting-woman, and woman-as-innocence.
In interviews with children on their take on Disney movies, what usually sticks out is how well the princesses succeed in getting their man and acting right — and the color pink. I highly suggest watching Mickey Mouse Monopoly: Disney, Childhood, and Corporate Power (2001) and checking out the works of Henry Giroux on the effects of media on children/childhood/education/culture (e.g., The Mouse That Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence [2001]).
As is mentioned in the documentary (a short intro of which is on YouTube), we can also examine the “global storytelling” that Disney conducts and the spectacle of innocence that is featured in the films — a fantasy world which is never questioned. Through the stories of Disney, children learn about the world through the diluted Disney Corp lens, which never represents history/herstory, cultures, and ethnicities accurately — only in stereotypical, misinformed manners. The effect is the creation of a skewed belief system imparted to children about the world and misinformation about its histories and realities (e.g., Pocahontas, Mulan).
Also to be examined is Disney’s effect on childhood imagination and creativity. Through marketing and cross-corporate deals, Disney toys and other merchandise are found everyfuckingwhere. In play, for example, children merely recreate the movie story through the figures/dolls. The princess gets the prince (woman’s “agency”) or the prince gets the princess and they live happily-hetero ever-after.
While no one can find fault in Disney finally showcasing a black princess (at least not yet; we have to see the film), as one commenter pointed out, we do have to realize Disney is a global corporation, the name of the game is capitalism, and the men in charge may simply have finally realized there is an untapped market with lots of money to be made.
Modern Disney characters may show more so-called agency (”they seek their princes instead of being sought after”); the reality is that they are agents only insofar as they select the right preconstructed option which reinforces gender binaries, heterosexism, and obedience to authority.
That wikipedia link is missing an ‘e’ at the end. This link should work.
I have to chime in and agree with Carina that having no parents (and/or horrifying caregivers) is a standard plot element in kids novels featuring boys or girls as main protagonists. For reasons of gender-role, missing mothers have sometimes been more *important* than a missing father: sometimes fathers are the bumbling caregivers who haven’t a clue. That, to me, is more of a feminist concern: if fathers aren’t dead or awful as often, it is because fathers aren’t being written as the default caregiver.
This element is utterly about child empowerment. It’s part of the fantasy justifying why the child would have suddenly so much agency. The Baudelaires and Harry Potter being the most celebrated current examples, but I’d say most of the recent kid’s books I’ve read have missing or neglegant caregivers. Eragon, which is a sort of teenage/subconscious synopsis of every fantasy novel blenderized into one, has that trope as well.
My favorites as a kid were almost always missing a parent - or the action takes place in a short enough time that the parent can be made absent from the rising action. Like Meg’s adventure: Mom wasn’t there. Or in “The Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiller”, where the kids run away and solve a mystery. Or in summer camp books, I suppose. I mainly wanted my parents good and dead so that it was THE WHOLE WORLD and GRAND ADVENTURE that was on the shoulders of my protagonist. Summer camps? Bah. Such a limited, protected, *domestic* scope. Only good for boyfriends and kisses and mini-soap operas: not for kingdoms and Good and Evil and the Universe As We Know It.
If protagonist girls always had their parents nearby and/or good moms, my feminist sensibilities would be HUGELY offended. Stories for kids are about growing up, and that means leaving the comfort and protection of a nurturing parent - or finding nurturance where there is none; being smart and brave and crafty and fearless and defending yourself against the big and scary world out there.
The world is very big and scary to kids, and fiction is practise and confidence and someone on your team. For leaving your parents behind, but not without someone fictional there for support.
Harriet the Spy had two equally out-of-it parents, but Ole Golly is pretty fuckin badass (she quotes Dostoyevsky! to a twelve-year-old!). If we’re talking about feminist kids’ books, I think Harriet might be my number one (and also one of my favorite books of all time, one I still reread on occasion, by which I mean usually at least once a year).
Isabel:
I loved Harriet, too, and thought they did a decent job with the movie. Another set of books I loved was the My Father’s Dragon series, even though it was boy-centric.
Maddy’s mother is present. Maddy’s father is not. Likewise, the spoiled little rich girl’s father — who owns the plantation — is present. Her birth mother is not. As it is, her ‘mother’ figure is represented by Maddy’s mother, the nursemaid. The Prince is listed as european. His valet/attendent has no listing for ethnicity/nationality/continent. I don’t understand why this couldn’t have been a movie about blacks who didn’t have to be dependent upon whites in a master-slave relationship, like Maddy and her mother and her non-existent father. Might as well set this pre-war.
And the main villain is not only a man (the last time that was done was in the above mentioned Aladdin, correct?), but a black man at that.
I’ll pass. This movie is going to make Disney a lot of money. It won’t be from my pocketbook. We’ll see if little *white* girls tell their mommy they want to be Maddy ;)
>The no-mother trope is also true of a lot of “girl fiction”: >
One of the many reasons I love Neil Gaiman is that he does something interesting with the girl-mom dynamic in both “Coraline” and the movie “Mirrormask”: he presents Mom as both the beloved (if imperfect) parent in need of rescue and the “monster”/shadow side, respectively (the Devouring Mother). either way she’s clearly the most important figure in the girl-hero’s life, which is rare.
Good lord, I just saw Mirrormask and it was my first introduction to Neil Gaiman. I could have turned the sound off and watched that movie on mute. Just beautiful.
Dear Disney,
I wanted to tell you that i have a daughter that works for a bank and years ago she stopped buying disney products because she has one daughter and she doesn’t want her to grow up with low self esteem because all she sees is white or latino with pointy features. I like it that Maddy has a rich black complexion but her features need to be more like an African American we are trying to build self love in our children we want table and chair sets with our faces on it and sheets with our faces on it and why does she have to be a frog princess and why witch craft??? I am glad you honored new Orleans after their tragedy but why not give some of the proceeds to them as well. I love the way Cicely Tyson speaks she speaks like a princess and just use Jennifer Hudson or Alicia for the singing Thandi newton speaks like a Princess too. Think about how blacks were kept from reading and enslaved and give as much honor and dignity to the character as you can whites didn’t come from slavery our history is different don’t you want to effect black children in a positive way Thanks Velda 704 890-1372
he presents Mom as both the beloved (if imperfect) parent in need of rescue and the “monster”/shadow side, respectively (the Devouring Mother).
Sort of like what’s often done with the father and Captain Hook, for Wendy, in Peter Pan?
I am currently studyig Disney for my A level media examinaitions in June. The study is based on the representation of ethnic minorities of women in Disney. If anybody has anymore RELAVANT information please post!!
After reading all the comments I was shocked at how narrow minded Disney actually is. The features of Maddy are all wrong. She looks like Cinderella only black!! It has included negative aspects of black history such as the slave trade. Young black girls may look up to her, only until they are old enough to comprehend the connotations behind such a media text.
I first realized that there was no black princesses when a gruop of friends and i were talking about which disney character we looked like. Myself and A friend of mine who is also black realized there was no character for us. I was infuriated and i didn’t want to see a face that wasn’t black for the rest of the day. Life is not fair but come on! Black kids watch disney just as much as everyone else. Right now disney is teaching our children that blacks can’t live the dream that disney creates. I would have loved to grow up with a black princess to look up to. I wanted to admire someone who was just like me. Let’s face it there is still racism in america hiding in the shadows. Racism is not over! Far from it. We still haven’t had a black president. Thats off on another tangent but the point is blacks deserve some kind of recognition from disney that they screwed up. If they don’t i say we petition! It has taken too long to create a frog princess. This isn’t over. Some people think we should be happy that we finally have a princess but finally is the key word. What finally made them want to create a black princess, did they figure “hey we’ll make money off of this!” Im not sure who decided but im sure it wasn’t with the right intentions. It doesn’t make sense that we get mulan a chinese princess before a black princess in our own country! Where is the justice?!?
why the princess have to be a frog? i think that’s kind of creepy for our young
african american girls. why not have her as a butterfly or a dove? we already waited 400 years! come on now, if little miss sunshine is going to shine give her a motovation that will make all our little black girls want to become princesses! why do it have to be an ugly frog? i have 6 beautiful granddaughters, age range from 12 down to 2 years old and i know they don’t like frogs! that’s kind of a boy thang! snakes and snails, puppy dog tails, get my drift? black girl are dainty too!
let not make a mockary of something i think is disgusting! A Dam Frog. lets start with something more likable by girls and build on that. if you want some input for this movie you can contact me at my email address.
Black Girls have Princess Dreams Too!
diamondbgood@aol.com
my name is deborah hill and i can help yall with this movie before it comes out
i have a granddaughter that could be Maddy in New Orleans. check me out!!
This is all misdirection. Disney owns the three most female-friendly, if not exclusively female-only, channels on TV, with the exception of ESPN, which as far as it can promotes Title Nine’s Procrustrean politics by forcing one of the most unpopular sports ever, the WNBA, as well as clearly unqualified quotas of female sportscasters. ABC holds on to shows directed towards sponsors courting 18-45 year old women even after the ratings tank, and Disney pictures defy even the inexorable bottom-line mentality of Hollywood by churning out ” grrl power” movies with noth limited critical and box office appeal. Popular rejection of shows you like is not the same as corporate censorship - even the most perfunctory examination of network TV and basic cable - and for the past three years, HBO and Showtime - indicates the exact opposite.