Cultural Appropriation or Harmless Costume?

Another year, another time to consider how Halloween costumes aren't just "Halloween costumes" anymore.

I feel like I write this post -- or a version of it -- every year. And I grapple with the same questions -- where is the line? When is a costume just a costume? -- and I haven't figured out an answer.

But this post popped up on my newsfeed a few days ago and...yeah.

via Distractify

Okay, fine. I'm on board with this. Cultural progress where we're "increasingly exposed to diverse narratives" which means "we look up to and admire cultures that are different from our own" -- yes. This is unequivocally a good thing.

But here's where it gets tricky:

What I take issue with here -- or, rather, what I struggle with -- is the part about how "it might not be your kid's place to honor them with a disguise."

While this article is, most likely, click-bait, it still raises an interesting question -- one I'm still grappling with.

First--let me offer this disclaimer: some most of these costumes are truly offensive and inappropriate, given their adult target audience. Yes, it is inappropriate for an adult woman to don a geisha costume. Yes, it is inappropriate for an adult woman to don a "sexy Pocahontas" costume. Yes, it is inappropriate for a company to even market an Anne Frank historical 1940's costume and then invoke The Chronicles of Narnia.

But the very first costume on the list is Moana -- a Disney character costume marketed towards kids.

Here's what the site offered as far as a caption:

What bothers me here is not the fact that a mother is talking with her child about cultures and cultural appropriation. (Lord knows, I'm already That Mom when it comes to watching Disney movies, emphasizing Elsa's point that you can't marry a man you just met, etc.) What bothers me is her claim that it "feels like we are laughing at her culture by making it a costume."

As a parent (<--that still feels weird to say/type!), I don't know...I staunchly disagree with this. (I mean, I guess it depends on how her old daughter is. If she's north of 10, sure.) But if my 2.5 year old (who doesn't really know what Halloween is, but let's pretend she does for the sake of this hypothetical) came to me and said she wanted to "be Moana" for Halloween, I wouldn't hesitate. Because I know that she's not motivated by malice or spite nor she does have a desire to mock or laugh at her culture. It's because Moana is a person she admires and wants to be like her. I don't even know what a conversation about cultural appropriation would look like with a 2.5 year old.

But is it cultural appropriation?

OED recently added the term to their dictionary defining it as:

the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one people or society by members of another and typically more dominant people or society.

The key component seems to be the power dynamic -- specifically the imbalance of power between the marginalized and dominant group.  And, look: my daughter's a white female. She, through no fault of her own, was born into a place of privilege and power, based simply on the color of her skin. But she doesn't know that. Not yet. And I don't know when she will know that. Probably much earlier than I would want or than I learned it.

Once again, I don't have an answer to this question. And it feels very reductive to say that "under the age of X you get a pass," because that's not what I'm advocating for. I just think that the situation is much more complicated for a 3-year-old wanting to be like her favorite fictional character than it is for an adult who, even as a teenager, would have experienced enough of the world to know about power dynamics.

The window of time where a kid can want to dress up like Moana, or Mulan, or Belle, or Hermione Granger, or Darth Vader, or Cookie Monster, is so short as it is -- why would I want to make it any shorter?

New Wreck It Ralph Trailer

It's a big week for Disney-related things -- new trailers for Mary Poppins Returns, Captain Marvel and now Ralph Breaks the Internet:

Fewer princesses, more details about the plot. I was wondering what the motivation was for Ralph and Vanellope to leave the arcade and go explore the Internet, and now we know: Vanellope's game is broken and they need to find a piece on Ebay. (Where else?) 

We also get a glimpse of Gal Godot's character, who seems to be a racer, albeit in a much different game, like Vanellope and there seems to be some female bonding going on. (Will she be a bad guy though? I'm skeptical of all secondary characters in Disney movies though...no matter how wondrous they are in real life.) 

I'll end with these screenshots from the trailer that just make my heart happy. 

Captain. Freaking. Marvel.

I've never been a big comics fan. I had a small collection of Archie comics (she said as she was binge-watching Riverdale -- I was totally Team Betty and harbored a deep irrational resentment for Veronica -- I'm glad that rivalry isn't a thing on the show) but they were mostly just random issues my mom bought me at the grocery store.

Aside from that...I watched Dean Cain and Terri Hatcher in The Adventures of Superman and I watched Smallville back when The WB was a thing. But Superman and Batman...they exist in pop culture in a way thats transcends comic books. You don't need to have picked up a single comic book to know about the moral compass of the Man of Steel or the tortured background of Gotham's Dark Knight. (Although I did love the cheesiness of the 1960s Batman series; I'd watch it with my parents on Nick at Nite.)

All of that to say -- I was never a big comics fan. And when an ex was Fanboying over the first Iron Man movie, I rolled my eyes and wasn't convinced that Robert Downey Jr could convincingly portray a hero let alone carry a franchise. (Yeah, yeah, yeah. Past Lisa was kinda dumb in that regard. She also refused to watch the first Thor movie with Chris Hemsworth and was in love with a guy who is an ex for obvious reason. Hindsight.)

But then The Avengers came out while my husband and I were dating, and my husband was a fan and was appalled that I had never seen them. (Honestly, between that fact and the fact that I had never seen the Star Wars movies, I'm surprised he put up with me. 😂) Aaaaand I was hooked. Kevin Feige hasn't had a miss yet and the new spate of DC movies are...soul-suckingly bad. Except Wonder Woman. She is kick-ass and amazing and everything I could want in a female superhero. It bothered me that the MCU, a stronger franchise in almost every other way, couldn't compete. (Don't even get me started on Black Widow.)

Until now.

I know there's a lot that I don't fully understand -- things about Kree and Skrulls and Ronan and Captain Marvel's backstory -- and obviously the thing I want the most (to know how in the world she's going to fix everything that happened in Infinity War) isn't going to be in the trailer, but I'm still super excited. Brie Larson looks amazing. 

Mary Poppins Returns -- New Trailer

Cue the "practically perfect in every way" and "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" puns. 

This morning was...rough, for a variety of reasons. But, then this trailer dropped and things got a little brighter:

First--that cast! I knew Emily Blunt was playing Mary Poppins (and that the iconic Dame Julie Andrews gave her her blessing); I knew that Lin-Manuel Miranda was playing Jack -- not Bert!!! -- I even knew that Dick Van Dyke was playing/reprising the role of Mr. Dawes (again, not Bert). 

But Angela Lansbury! Colin Firth! Julie Walters! And Meryl Streep!!!

Second--this is probably uber-nerdy even for an uber-Disney-nerd, but I love the film-specific castles in the front of each film:

But I also left a piece of my heart in London, so there's that. 

Third--the old-school 2D animation!!! 😍😍😍

ScreenRant has a really cool article on the attention to detail in this sequence -- how it's not just an homage to the original film or a remake of it, that's worth a read. (For example, how the characters' clothes look they were drawn/animated, which you can kinda see above!) 

Fourth--the CGI. When it came out in the 1960s, Mary Poppins was a technical innovation for its time (something that can always be said of Disney) -- but with the advances in CGI, the magic is going to seem so much more...fluid. 

I'm sure this film will be filled with Easter eggs and nods to the original film -- the kite, the original house with the infamous bannister, the chimney sweeps dancing, the 2D animation, Jane campaigning for women's rights, just like her mother -- which makes my heart happy on so many levels. There's even a questionable Cockney accent from LMM, continuing Dick Van Dyke's terrible accent tradition. 

Look, I'm sure P. L. Travers -- author of the original Mary Poppins book -- would probably hate this film too. I've blogged about Disney's Mary Poppins and Distory before, with the end result being my decision to both love the books as one of the cornerstones of children's literature and the Disney movie as a cornerstone of my own childhood. (Julie Andrews was one of my grandmother's favorite actresses and we watched this movie together a lot.) I know that the Disney movie(s) are Disneyfied versions of the books and while I wish Disney would reflect that in this film -- especially given it's setting during the Depression, a less cheerful, more no-nonsense Mary Poppins would fit -- I'm not expecting them too. The trailer reflects that -- it looks a magical concoction about the wonder and purity of childhood -- and I can't wait to see it. 

Spotted: Target Run & Done

After being cooped up in our house since Wednesday evening -- thanks, Hurricane Florence -- my family and I ventured out to Target this morning. (Honestly, though, where else would we go?) We didn't really need anything, but Target is such a great place to wander around and somehow end up with a cartful of random things.

Plus there's coffee. Which, after four days in the house, was definitely, actually needed. (Starbucks + Target is my second favorite pairing behind Starbucks + Disney.)

Target's also a great place to do "field research," which is a fun way of saying I get to look at the Disney-related merchandise through an academic lens.

And Target didn't disappoint. First up:

📷: Me (and yes, that's my coffee in the background)

First, I tried searching Target for "mulan doll" and the only one that came up was the Hasbro doll. (At least she's wearing the outfit from the end of the movie and not the matchmaker outfit that she's usually in.) This one is marketed as an "Action Adventure Figure" so that's a solid plus. Also a plus -- this is the closest thing to Warrior Mulan I've seen in the Mulan merchandise. Normally, for whatever reason, she's marketed in a dress and definitely conforms to feminine conventions. So, another solid plus for a Mulan figure who's wielding a sword and is portrayed as a kick-ass woman. 

But...those legs!? 

Not exactly a win in the "realistic body image" column there, Hasbro. So, Con. 

On a less relevant note, I also saw this:

📷: Me

My daughter wanted to watch Tangled this weekend -- anything that wasn't Frozen! -- and I'm just really confused about why Maximus has such a glittery mane. I'm pretty sure he's not glittery in the movie and can't we market a male horse without adding glitter? My daughter loves Maximus just fine without the glittery mane, and I'm pretty sure she doesn't need to have one marketed towards her.

And we may or may not have left the store with this shirt:

Dream big, princess.

Love is the Strongest Magic

A friend shared this post this afternoon, and I've found myself reflecting on it a lot. 

This is one of the best parts of the movie IMO (although the part that never fails to make me cry is when Moana's grandmother's spirit gives her the reminder and the strength to go on), but I'm not sure I completely agree with it...

There are a lot of valid points here:

• I agree that it's important that Moana meets Te Ka with love and acceptance and not violence, and that's what helps restore her.
• Yes, violence begets ruin. A violent approach could not have saved Te Fiti.

But I'm not entirely sure I buy the fact that "only women can help other women heal from male violence" -- and certainly not within the context of this film. While I am the first one to insist that Disney movies are not just simply animated fluff, and that they have complex thematic messages in addition to their morals, this goes a bit too far for me. 

One of the most striking things about Moana, for me, was its lack of emphasis on gender. That is, Disney went out of their way to tell a story where gender differences weren't front and center. After all, in the initial draft, Moana had brothers (6, I think?) and, as the youngest, she was constantly trying to prove that she was just as good as them and deserving of her father's pride and admiration. (SO glad they took that storyline out.) And, after all, this is the first Disney princess movie, where this isn't a romantic subplot. 

So, yeah. I don't think this is a movie about male violence or how women can help each other through it. Yes, women supporting other women is crucial and important, but I don't think the fact that Te Ka/Te Fiti and Moana are women is the point here. Rather, IMO, it's about Moana's humility and good nature -- regardless of gender. It's her act of saving the baby turtle when she was little that made the ocean "choose" her (as Grandma Tala points out) -- her kindness, her selflessness (she gives up the pretty shell), and her strength of character. 

It's more of an exchange of female wisdom and guidance. After all, Moana's journey throughout the movie is one of self-discovery and acceptance -- of finding her True Self, which is different from how others define her, namely her father (but, to some extent, her mother and community). They want her to be one thing, and she knows that she's meant for something different (to explore the world and sail the ocean). This is the advice she passes on to Te Fiti when she understands the effect of the stolen heart: she tells her that even though "they have stolen the heart from inside you / but this does not define you." I read this not as "healing from male violence" but as "honoring your true self." 

Snow White & Castles in the Air

Today we discussed Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in class, so last night, I had to re-watch it. (Sometimes, I really love my job.)

I also watched it with my family -- my husband and both my kids -- which made my heart all kinds of happy. My daughter is just about 2.5 and, amidst all the fun of the terrible 2s, she's starting to become her own little person with a clear personality. It's also a lot...less quiet. 😂 There are so. many. questions!

But it's fascinating to see what she picks up on. Critics, especially the academic ones, like to make a big fuss over Disney movies -- especially the princess ones -- especially the early princess ones. They like to say that kids take this harmful message away or that watching princess movies will make them grow up into weak, passive women. Which...I've always been skeptical of. After all, how can you determine what a child takes away from a film? Won't every viewer take away something different? And even if you could definitively conclude what a child takes away from watching a movie, can you lay the blame entirely at Disney's feet? Isn't this one part of a larger conversation?

So, yeah. My daughter didn't bat an eye at the dark, scary parts -- not when Snow White ran into the woods, not when the Queen went down into her dungeon and used dark magic, not when the Dwarfs chased the Queen at the end.
She was more concerned with where characters were -- so when Snow White was cleaning the house, she didn't seem to focus on what Snow White was doing, she wanted to know where the rabbit was.
And her biggest concern was that she didn't understand where the Queen went when she transformed into the hag -- and after answering that question about a dozen times and trying to explain magic, she wanted to know what happened to her crown. 😳 Write about that, academics.

Anyway. I noticed something at the end of the movie that I hadn't noticed before and, TBH, I found it a little odd. Yes, things wrap up pretty quickly. Yes, the Prince randomly stumbles upon Snow White and kisses her (without knowing that Love's First Kiss is what breaks the spell). Yes, Snow White wakes up and is like, "O hai. Sure I'll ride off with you to who knows where." Yes, Snow White just abandons the Dwarfs after all they did for her.

But it was the castle at the end that I noticed.

Here's a screenshot near the end, with Snow White and the Prince riding off, literally, into the sunset.

Then, here's a screenshot of a few second later:

I remembered the Prince's castle differently...I assumed/remembered it as a castle on a hill off in the distance (maybe like the castle in Cinderella?), but this castle appears to (1) have magically appeared in the middle of the sky and (2) be floating on a cloud. Which...intrigued me and sparked a connection to "castles in the air." 

I remembered the phrase from Louisa May Alcott's Little Women -- there's an entire chapter titled "Castles in the Air." The March sisters are telling Laurie about how they used to play Pilgrim's Progress and try to make it to the Celestial City. Beth tells Laurie:

If people really want to go, and really try all their lives, I think they will get in, for I don't believe there are any locks on the door or any guards at the gate. I always imagine it as it is in the picture where the shining ones stretch out their hands to welcome poor Christian as he comes up from the river.

And Jo replies:

Wouldn't it be fun if all the castles in the air which we make could come true, and we could live in them? 

The castles are, I think, meant to represent the girls' (and Laurie's) daydreams, their aspirations, what they want most in this world. (Jo's dreams and castles were the ones I related to the most, TBH.) The idea, though, is that they have to live their lives first -- to deal with their weaknesses, to face their troubles, to endure the hardships. There's also the Christian undertones, given the reference to Bunyan's Pilgrim Progress (which I'll admit I'm not familiar with, except to know that it's about how to get to Heaven) which are quite prominent in Snow White.

There's also the connection to Thoreau (who I'm pretty sure was close with Alcotts -- or at least moved in the same circle as them), who wrote in Walden,

I learned this, at least, by my experiment: that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours. He will put some things behind, will pass an invisible boundary...In proportion as he simplifies his life, the laws of the universe will appear less complex, and solitude will not be solitude, nor poverty poverty, nor weakness weakness. If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them. "

Later, in the same chapter, Thoreau writes,

However mean your life is, meet it and live it; do not shun it and call it hard names. It is not so bad as you are. It looks poorest when you are richest. The fault-finder will find faults even in paradise. Love your life, poor as it is....

These are still unformed thoughts but I think the connection to Snow White is there: if Thoreau viewed "castles in the air" as a person's dreams, their heart's desires, the life which they have imagined, then the "foundation" is to love your life, as poor as it. 

Doesn't this hold true for Snow White? However "mean" her life was, she "met" it and "lived" it. She met adversity with "a smile and a song" and never stopped wishing "for the one she loved to find her." She built her castle in the air in her heart and dreams, and lived her life as poor as it was. And in the end? Her castle literally appeared in the air in front of her, as her reward for her good life and faith and hope. 

I have no idea if Disney read Walden or Little Women, or was familiar with Thoreau's or Alcott's ideas, but he was a smarter man than people sometimes give him credit for. At the very least, I think it's plausible. 

Let's Go To The Movies: Disney Princesses Back In Theaters!

So, I don't have a lot of spare time to go to the movies -- still waiting to see Crazy Rich Asians. And Mission Impossible. And Mamma Mia 2. -- but this is tempting. If only my daughter was a little older, these would be perfect to take her to! While Disney movies can hold her attention like nothing else can -- except maybe Dora the Explorer -- I don't think we're quite at the point where we can sit in a movie theater.

I'm hoping Frozen 2 will be her first theater-movie, but I don't know how she'll do with a movie she's never seen before. Honestly, she's more likely to sit through Moana because she knows the movie by heart.

Our local AMC theater is at Southpoint mall, y'all! Happy Fall!

To Buy: New Disney Shirts from TeeTurtle

A short post, to ease back into blogging. There is, apparently, some plague remnant stomach bug going around and I caught it. (Which is a big deal, because I never catch those. I always get the colds. Which, fun fact, I got too. Back to back: the virus and a cold.) Basically, this has been me for the past few days:

via GIPHY

YAY ADULTING. 

But, this email from TeeTurtle popped up this morning helped a little bit. Two new Disney couple shirts available! 

I mean, on the one hand, I definitely don't need any more Disney graphic-tees, no matter how cute and nerdy they are.

But on the other hand...it's Rapunzel and Flynn! (I'm definitely "meh" about Aladdin and Jasmine -- love the movie, love that scene, but as characters...meh.) And it's the lantern scene! Which is one of the most gorgeous pieces of animation and also "I See The Light" was the First Dance song at my wedding. 💖 

Check them out and add to your collection here -- along with a bunch of other Disney shirts I definitely covet.