Film Review: How Frozen II Gets Colonialism Right In a Kid's Movie

When it comes to watching Disney movies, I find it very hard to take off my academic cap and just enjoy the movie. I'm constantly analyzing and looking for little details. While I sometimes wish I could just enjoy them like I do other movies, I actually really enjoy it -- especially when I see some progress and development in the Disney Princess brand.

One of the biggest criticisms lobbed against Disney films is their whitewashing of history -- it started, perhaps, with Song of the South, and didn't really get better with Pocahontas or The Princess and the Frog. Critics point out that relations between two tension-charged groups -- the Native Americans and the English settlers in the former, and whites and blacks in the latter -- were not as simple or positive as they're portrayed in the animated films; defenders retort that that they're children's films and, as such, can't possibly address the complexities of racial dynamics in 90 minutes nor should they. 

Both sides are right: Disney isn't creating a documentary or a historical film; they're producing a fairy-tale film. (Whether Pocahontas -- a real historical figure -- has a fairy-tale story and whether Disney should have set a film in 1920s Louisiana are entirely different questions.) And the defenders are right, too: even if Disney had a moral obligation to accurately represent history, it'd be almost impossible to do in a 90-minute film. 

So the question then becomes -- and I love discussing it with my students -- what should Disney do? How can they not sidestep sensitive issues but still do them justice? 

And this is where Frozen II comes in: the basic gist of the plot (and I think this is mostly apparent from the trailer), there's a conflict between the Arendellians and the native people in the film, the Northundra (who, I think, are modeled after the Sami tribe, the native people of Norway/Scandinavia). The story of the conflict is initially filtered through Elsa and Anna's father, who doesn't know what happened because he was outside the forest and knocked unconscious. But the elemental spirits of the forest basically keep people in and "lock" out the outside world.

But here's the significant part: the arc of the film is basically Elsa uncovering the truth of what happened, of why the spirits were angered. And the reason, as Elsa learns, is that Elsa's grandfather betrayed the Northundra, building the dam under the guise of peace and unity, but really doing it to gauge the strength and size of the Northundra tribe. His reason? He was pissed off that they were independent and wanted them to swear allegiance to him. The moment he kills the Northundra leader is the moment the spirits "revolt" for lack of a better term, and there's a more complicated, but beautiful, resolution to the story, one which ends with a message of true peace and unity.

Why is this so important? Well, aside from the fact that Elsa and Anna's grandfather is basically a symbol of some ye olden days Fragile Toxic Masculinity, he represents that colonial, imperialist mindset of "white is right" and that native people should swear fealty to him simply because of the crown he wears. In the film, the Northundra are portrayed relatively flat, but they're kind people who seem intent on harmony and peace. (I'm thinking of Pocahontas, where each group views the other as "savage," and equally at fault, when, in reality, the English settlers bear the majority of the blame and fault.) While there's a bit of a problem in locating that mindset in just one character -- in Pocahontas, it's Ratcliffe; once he's gone, all the English settlers are totally fine with everything; here, it's the grandfather who seems to be the sole prejudiced one -- what's important is that Elsa and Anna's grandfather is portrayed as wrong, and his beliefs are firmly and clearly denounced by both Elsa and Anna. Both sisters understand why their grandfather's actions were unforgivable and also understand what they need to do make things right and restore balance. And, in this case, that means appeasing the Elemental spirits and making reparations by destroying the dam.

Is it a perfect depiction of complex inter-racial relations? Of course not. It is, after all, an animated film with a target demographic of preschoolers and elementary schoolers. And there are lots of unanswered questions, but...

Does it attempt to handle complex issues better than its predecessors did? Yes, I would say so. And, what's more important, is that I think it lays the groundwork for important future discussions. I think it opens the door to have early conversations about imperialism and colonialism and how some people, even people we thought were good and right, did some truly bad things. From there? There are so many places to go. 

Film Review: Frozen II

This afternoon, my husband I were fortunate enough to have a Double-Feature Date Afternoon. We saw Knives Out first -- which was a fantastic WhoDunIt and just an overall delightful romp -- and then saw Frozen 2.

Disclaimer: I haven't read any reviews and managed to stay largely spoiler-free. I had read some "first reactions" -- those Twitter responses about people's early responses to the film which are largely vague and non-specific and which don't give away any specific details -- and that was all I knew. Most of them were positive -- I feel like there was one lukewarm response which basically said it "was good, but not as good as the first," (important to note that it was written by a man) -- which reassured me. Disney sequels are, after all, usually things that go straight-to-video and aren't very good. (The only sequels I can think of are The Rescuers Down Under -- because The Rescuers were. my. jam. -- and Ralph Breaks the Internet...somebody correct me if I'm wrong.) I knew that the film was darker, had supposedly matured with its audience, and that a good deal of people believed it was unnecessary.

I have thoughts. Lots of thoughts.

But here's the gist of them: Frozen II is not the movie I thought it was going to be, and that's okay, because it turned out to be the Disney Princess Movie I needed. And, more importantly, I think it's the Disney Princess Movie that I needed to see as a young girl, that the brand needs, and that little girls (and boys) need.
Spoilery thoughts below.

Wreck-It Ralph 2: The Disney Princesses Unite!

A few days ago, this post popped up on my feed:

A couple of important things to note:

(1) Alan Tudyk is back! Given that his original character, King Candy/Turbo, was the villain and (spoiler!) got his just desserts, and also given that Alan Tudyk has become Disney Animation Studios' good-luck charm -- I was worried that he wouldn't be in this film. Worries no more. 

(2) Taraji P. Henson's character looks awesome.

(3) Perhaps, most importantly, our first look at the Disney Princesses all together is here!

Here's a bigger look at the picture:

📷: Purewow via Disney

Again, there are a couple of things to note here:

(1) This is awesome. And you will never get me to say otherwise. I imagine this to be some sort of super-cool Princess secret society. Or, resort/spa where they can relax and get away from princessy-duties.

(2) Excluding Vanellope, there are 11 princesses present:

• (2a) Interestingly, Anna, Elsa and Moana are all here -- even though they haven't been officially inducted into the princess court.
• (2b) All the First Wave princesses are present -- Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora -- even though their voice actors are no longer with us. (I always assumed they'd have different actors, so it'll be fun/interesting to see who they cast.)
  Also--Aurora is in her pink dress. Don't get me started.
• (2c) 3/5 of the Second Wave princesses are present: Belle, Jasmine, & Pocahontas are there, but Ariel and Mulan aren't. More on this in a second.
• (2d) 2/3 of the Third Wave princesses are present -- Tiana and Rapunzel, but Merida isn't. (I'm not counting Moana yet.)

Given the panorama-type view of the shot, it's possible that the three of them are just off-screen (and maybe we'll see them in the trailer tomorrow). 

Shockingly, (she said sarcastically), the internet is a little upset about Mulan not being included -- thanks, Buzzfeed!

Which, I know they ask about Ariel in the sub-title, but still. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to count the princesses and figure out that not *every* Disney princess is there -- I counted 3.  But there's a lot of ignorance misinformation in this post. 

WHERE’S MY BITCH FA MULAN https://t.co/B2c6JUAtbx

— josh (@bernaldont) May 31, 2018

Like that whole jibber-jabber about how Mulan isn't *technically* a princess. Yes. We talk about this a lot in my class -- i.e., how do we determine a Disney princess? Do you have to be born one? Can you marry into royalty? And what about different cultures? After all, princesses are primarily (not exculsively!) a Western concept, especially in the way Disney portrays them. Is Jasmine a princess, as the daughter of a sultan? Is Pocahontas a princess, as the daughter of a chief? (Maui would clear this up.)  But I digress. -- The point is: when Andy Mooney created the princess franchise in the early 2000s, they had to come up with some criteria. After all, Tinker Bell was included at one point -- but then they went and did the whole Fairies franchise ($$$), so she was out. Any female character who is included in the Royal Court, is an official princess, regardless of birth, marriage, or any other factors. See below:

📷: WDWThemeParks

All 11 princesses are there -- and yes, this is before Frozen and Moana, but there hasn't been another "induction" since.

So then they point to these cast photos that were taken at the 2017 D23 Expo (which I thought I blogged about, but I can't find it. Which makes sense. I was so. very. pregnant. in July of 2017 and also running around after a 1-year-old.)

What these images tell us is that, from left to right in the second picture, Paige O'Hara (Belle), Irene Bedard (Pocahontas), Mandy Moore (Rapunzel), Auli'i Cravalho (Moana), Sarah Silverman (Vanellope), Kristen Bell (Anna), Kelly MacDonald (Merida), Anika Noni Rose (Tiana), Linda Larkin (Jasmine) and Jodi Benson (Ariel) are all there. When I first read this story, I assumed Ming-Na Wen (Mulan) wasn't there because of Agents of Shield commitments.

I'm just going to ignore this comment from the Buzzfeed post -- But interestingly the voice actors of Snow White, Cinderella, Elsa, and Aurora were not present, even though they are in the shot from the movie. -- because, you know, LOGIC. (Snow White came out in 1937, guys. It's a safe bet that Adriana Caselotti isn't still alive -- she passed in 1997 -- and even if she were, she'd be pretty old.)

So, yeah. Merida and Ariel will be there -- although no one seemed particularly worried about here in the Buzzfeed post  😢 -- and it's a safe bet that Mulan will be too.

So, let's just enjoy the awesomeness of all the princesses together and hope that we see them all in the trailer tomorrow.

Disney Princesses As....Hogwarts Students

This week in "Disney Princesses As...": they're Hogwarts students! Or, at the very least, they've been sorted into Hogwarts Houses.

While this warms my nerdy heart, it isn't exactly something new....Disney Princess Reimaginer Extraordinaire Isaiah Stevens has done it, and so has a Deviant Artist named Annabella (hers might be my favorite).

My point is: it's been done before, so why do it again unless you disagree with the Sorting Results? And there are definitely some different results here.

Some of them make total sense (a.k.a. I totally agree with them). Like, for instance:

PC: Disney via HelloGiggles

This makes total sense: Snow White and Cinderella with their unrelenting optimism and kindness? Total Hufflepuff. And they are clearly unafraid of toil (as all good Hufflepuffs are) because they not only clean for the baddies in their lives, but they do it with a smile and a song.

Also making total sense?

PC: Disney via HelloGiggles

Yah. Mulan and Merida are both clearly Gryffindors. I mean...the name of Merida's movie is Brave, so I totally get that one.

Also one I like, but hadn't really thought of before:

PC: Disney via HelloGiggles

Ariel is totally the Luna Lovegood of Disney Princesses. And, she's my favorite princess, so it makes sense I'd love that she's sorted into my house.

Speaking of my favorites....

PC: Disney via HelloGiggles

I'm sorry. Elsa is NOT a Slytherin. No. Just no. She is 100% a Ravenclaw. I'm not sure how being "grounded in reality" disqualifies you from being a Ravenclaw -- not all Ravenclaws are like Luna. (Cho Chang was a Ravenclaw, after all. Not that that really helps my case.) The thing that bugs me here is that Elsa is NOT ambitious -- a very Slytherin quality, and not necessarily in a negative way. But "an ambitious leader" wouldn't retreat from a position to power to a place of solitude as Elsa does: a Slytherin would not go build and rule an ice power in isolation. A Slytherin would most definitely stay and rule, regardless of how people thought of him/her. 

Hans, for example, is absolutely a Slytherin -- but he's not a princess. Which I think is the flaw here: Disney princesses are all inherently good; not too many of them are going to belong in Slytherin, even if you read the Slytherin qualities positively. There's going to be a lot of Hufflepuff (First Wave) and a lot of Gryffindor. 

But, if you just look at the princesses, somebody's got to be in Slytherin. Which is why this happens:

PC: Disney via HelloGiggles

Again, I say: NO. JUST NO. I get the ambition part -- which is why I see Slytherin, but Tiana ultimately gives up her dream of a restaurant when Facilier offers it to her: she chooses love/Naveen over the restaurant, which again, I'm not sure a Slytherin would do. (Hence why she's a Disney princess.) But more than that -- Tiana's defined by her work ethic -- she is as unafraid of toil as Snow White and Cinderella are, probably even more so. (I've argued that Tiana is basically an updated version of Cinderella; very similar rags-to-riches story, just with more modern complexity.) The Sorting Hat tells us that "Those patient Hufflepuffs are true / And unafraid of toil." Yeah. Tiana saved for her restaurant penny by penny for years: that is textbook Hufflepuff, right there.

I know I take this all way too seriously, but Disney and Harry Potter are two of my favorite things so I love when they collide. 

Why Elsa Shouldn't Have A Girlfriend

Trending Hashtag Right Now: #GiveElsaAGirlfriend 

Also trending: #GiveCaptainAmericaABoyfriend. (Clearly this was before Marvel revealed that the comic book world's Golden Boy was a sleeper agent for the Nazis Hydra. Or maybe that doesn't matter.)

This may be a controversial thing to say but...I don't support either of these campaigns.

Now, let me clarify this: I'm definitely not saying I don't support LGBTQ+ rights. I'm definitely not saying I don't want to see a homosexual relationship in a Disney film. I'm definitely not saying I don't want to see a homosexual character in a Disney film.

I am saying that I just don't think that either Elsa or Captain America is that character. 

A little bit of background:

This all started when Twitter user lexi4prez tweeted this out:

According to her own essay on MTV,  the motivation for her Tweets is 100% valid. She starts her essay, for instance, by noting what she doesn't/hasn't seen:

"Growing up, I never saw a princess fall in love with another princess — and neither have girls growing up right now. The entertainment industry has given us girls who have fallen in love with beasts, ogres who fall for humans, and even grown women who love bees. But we’ve never been able to see the purity in a queer relationship."

The lack of homosexual characters in children's media isn't a new issue -- or an inaccurate one -- in children's media scholarship. Critics have pointed out that children's media in particular focuses on heterosexual relationships, with the traditional "happily ever after" usually being a marriage between a man and a woman. And Disney, as one of the giants in children's media. is often lambasted for its lack of diversity in many ways, not just with regards to homosexual characters.

SIDEBAR: As influential as Disney can be, it can be fairly reluctant to take a step that would anger its middle-class fanbase: it won't take a step in a progressive direction unless it knows it won't financially hurt them. That is, while there hasn't been a homosexual character in an animated film, the company is by no means anti-LGBT. The Disney Channel show Good Luck, Charlie featured a lesbian couple; the ABC show Once Upon A Time has the bisexual Mulan (and Ruby); and the fact that Disney World has specifically designated LGBT friendly days (Gay Days, usually in early June) has angered more than a few conservative groups. But feature-length animated films are the company's bread-and-butter, and they're going to be extra cautious.

And she concludes with an equally valid point:

"Giving young girls the chance to understand that a princess can love another princess the same way Cinderella loved her Prince Charming is vital to their development. No one deserves to feel isolated and confused about who they are. All we need is someone to show us that there are other options, other kinds of princesses, and other ways to have the happy ending that you deserve."

Yes, "no one deserves to feel isolated and confused about who they are." And, yes, it is important to show girls "that there are other options, other kinds of princesses, and other ways to have the happy ending that you deserve." I agree with this 100%.

But this is also where I start to disagree. Because while I agree that Disney needs be more diverse, needs to have a homosexual character and, one day, needs to show a homosexual relationship, I really don't believe that Elsa is that character, nor should she be.

Earlier in the easy, Alexis Isabel makes this statement:

"Yet Elsa, the film’s protagonist, will probably end up with a male prince or king in the upcoming Frozen sequel."

I understand where this concern comes from: every single Disney Animation Studios Princess before Elsa has ended up with a man in some way. I'm excluding Merida since she has the (more progressive) Pixar behind her story.
[SIDEBAR: It's interesting to note that only four Disney princesses actually get married (in the film itself, not in sequels or shorts): Cinderella, Ariel, Rapunzel, and Tiana -- and Flynn Rider only tells us that he and Rapunzel get married in the "epilogue" of the film. Snow White, Aurora, Belle, and Jasmine are merely shown with their princes at the ends of their films, usually dancing off screen with them. Pocahontas, of course, ends up alone; and Mulan merely invites Shang to dinner.]

So I get it. The temptation to pair Elsa with a man is there -- although I sincerely hope that Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee developed a better story than that. And I'd be lying if I didn't think the Internet's obsession with shipping Elsa & Jack Frost (from Rise of the Guardians) isn't absolutely adorable and perfect. I even own a TeeTurtle shirt with them building a snowman together.

But that doesn't mean I want to see them end up together in a Frozen sequel.

And here's why: there was nothing -- and I'm not counting the lyrics of "Let It Go," since the power of that song comes from the myriad of situations it can be applied to -- in the original film that implied or even hinted at Elsa's sexuality.

And that was the brilliance of it.

Because, again, yes. It's important to have a homosexual character in a Disney animated film -- but only if it is true to the character and the story.

Yes, it is important to have "other kinds of princesses, and other ways to have the happy ending that you deserve." But the emphasis here is on "kinds" -- plural. Not just another "kind" of princess -- singular. There are other options besides a straight princess in a heterosexual relationship and a gay princess in a homosexual relationship. There can, for instance, be a princess queen who is "enough" on her own -- who is strong and independent and resourceful.

I'm not saying she needs to be completely isolated -- that is, after all, the point of the first movie.  We need other people in our lives, our friends and family.

But for me, one of the most progressive aspects of the original film was that Elsa didn't need to be married to rule her country. There was no annoying subplot where she had to be married in order to become queen. (Which is, unfortunately, the plot of The Princess Diaries 2, itself a Disney princess film. Mia can't rule Genovia without being married. And while, in the end, she does give a powerful speech extolling the virtues of female rulers, and the law is overturned, it's still the plot of the movie.) Here, in Frozen, it's not even an issue, it's not even mentioned: the King and Queen of Arendelle die, Elsa turns 21, she's crowned as queen. There's no meeting of Parliament to decide whether she should take the crown; when she spazzes out and unleashes an eternal winter, no one mentions her gender (they mention her "evil magical powers," but that's completely unconnected to gender); and no one says anything about how a man would have been a better ruler. After all, the male authority figures in the film are largely ineffectual (excluding Grandpabbie, as he's a troll): the King of Arendelle is in the running for Worst Parental Advice Ever (when he tells Elsa to suppress her true self); the Duke of Weselton is an ineffectual dignitary with a Napoleon complex; and Hans...well, Hans seems like he could have been a good ruler (he did take care of the people when Anna was searching for Elsa), but he's too power-hungry and narcissistic to really rule well. (Plus, he's the villain.)

This is just as important a message, just as important an image, for little girls (and boys!) watching Frozen to see. You don't need to be in a relationship to be successful: you are capable of great things on your own. Yes, you need friends and family to keep you grounded, but a relationship isn't the only way to define happiness.

So while a gay Disney princess would be great, I still don't think it should be Elsa. Let Elsa rule Arendelle as a strong, empowered monarch and leave the romantic subplot out of it. The first truly gay Disney princess should be a character worthy of that storyline.

[SIDEBAR: All of this applies to Captain America, too. I get it. He and Bucky have an awesome bromance fraught with tension that people love to read stuff into. BUT. Cap loved Peggy Carter. That's like a big point of this most recent film: he goes to London for her funeral (because he loved her), and it's Sharon's recollections of her aunt's advice that cause Cap to not join with Tony Stark and whatever UN accords they're agreeing to. (Again, because Cap loved Peggy. And may or may not have had a thing with Black Widow. And may or may not have a thing with Sharon Carter, because that's not weird at all.) So, yes: it wouldn't be true to his character or his storyline. At least not in the Marvel movies; the comics have shown that Cap's identity and character are apparently pretty fluid, so, yeah.]

Confession Time: I adore Blake Lively.

She was the perfect Bridget in Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (Confession #2: I've seen the movie AND its sequel; I've read all the books. And I love them. The perks of studying Children's Literature?). She slayed as Serena van der Woodson on Gossip Girl. And--lucky girl--she's married to Ryan Reynolds.

Now, our girl Blake has been in the news quite a bit lately. Sure, there was that whole "LA face with an Oakland booty" Instagram "scandal" (I use the term "scandal" loosely, because social media gets outraged over anything and everything) and while I love Sir Mix-a-lot's defense of her, that's not the news I mean.

No, Blake Lively is dressing like a real-life Disney princess. First, there was her Cinderella-inspired look in Cannes:

(c) Vanity Fair

And then there was this dress (also at Cannes) that cannot have been inspired by anything other than Elsa's "Let It Go" dress -- I mean, that thigh-high slit!  that cape and train! those sparkles! (She also captioned the photo "Let It Glo" so...there's that.)

(c) elle

And, in case you're not entirely convinced, consider Exhibits A & B: Blake Lively likes to instagram her jewelry and accessories (and honestly, given the bling she's wearing, can you blame her?) and one photo is captioned "Bibbidi Bobbidi bling" and the other "Not a footprint to be seen." 

Girl clearly knows her Disney princesses. 

But--and this might be why I adore her--she's also got a sense of humor:

And you know my undying love for The Little Mermaid so...

Disney Artwork -- Isaiah Stephens

Blogger tells me that my last post was March 8th. Oof.

To be fair, I'd like to think I had a pretty good reason:
Another Disney princess (and future Disney consumer?) has entered the world. :) Our little Cricket Bug was born on April 21, three weeks early, and I've been playing catch-up ever since.

Cricket Bug has -- surprise surprise! -- yet to wear a Disney outfit -- but when she does, I'll be sure to document and share it.

For now, I thought it was fitting that my first post back be this "Disney Princesses As" piece by Isaiah Stevens for Cosmo: Disney Princesses As Mothers. (Follow Isaiah Stephens on Instagram here! He does a lot of Disney work that's super cool and inventive.)

[Sidebar: I just finished reading "Nearly Everybody Gets Twitterpated: The Disney Version of Mothering" by (Hollins professor!) Lisa Rowe Fraustino--which...well, let me just quote a line from the abstract:
"The animated films [reproduce traditional mothering ideology] not by animating the realities of marriage, childbirth, and mothering work for girls to model after but instead by idealizing the dream of romance that leads to the making of the traditional patriarchal family."
Basically, Disney movies end with the fairy-tale happily-ever-after of a wedding, and basically ignore everything that comes after -- including motherhood (although that's not necessarily a requirement).
So it's interesting to see Stephens kind of take up that mantle and portray the princesses (albeit in a romanticized, stylized way) as mothers. I dig it.]

Quite possibly my favorite:

This one just makes me smile -- even more so because I think the photo in the background is women of all different body types spelling out "B-E-A-U-T-I-F-U-L." I don't know if this is a subversive dig at Cosmo or something that was sanctioned by the magazine, but either way, I love it.

Okay, so this one's not as romanticized...but I love that Flynn is wearing a gas mask. (Although...shouldn't Rapunzel's hair be short and brown?) 

#ParentingTruth. I know Cricket Bug is only 4.5 weeks old, but I have nieces and nephews. This is pretty much how it goes. 

Also--it's called "karma," Merida. :) 

Friday LOLZ

This popped up on my newsfeed this morning and, since I literally laughed out loud (probably longer than I should have), I thought I'd share:

(c) Fantasy and SciFi Rock My World

It's funny because it's true. Hans would fit right in in Westeros. 

Disney Princesses w/Hair Matching Their Outfits (via Buzzfeed)

Leave it to Buzzed to have a completely random post about Disney princesses. Ah, the Internet.

This one is brought to you by the concept of "matching outfits with hair" -- which sounds really weird but, as the Buzzfeed headline points out, is oddly magical. (Mostly.) 

Check out some of the images below, and head on over to Buzzfeed for the full list. 

(I think the purple hair actually makes her look really old.)

(Aside from the fact that Elsa is my current favorite, this might be my favorite hair swap. It just works.)

(Belle just looks blonde here...which works with THIS dress, but maybe not any of the others...)

(Okay, is it just me, or does the raven-haired Aurora just look evil?!)

(Odd dress choice for Tiana...I would have done the green dress and matched her hair that way, but either way, she rocks it.)

Disney Art

When we tell people we have a "Disney Art Wall," we tend to get our fair share of skeptical looks and raised eyebrows. I can only imagine what they're picturing -- I would bet it involves lots of cutesy cartoons. 

But we'd like to think that it's a bit classier than that...we hope. Lots of artists have licenses that allow them to create Disney-inspired works without violating Disney's strict copyright policy and they're sold at places like the Art of Disney and the Wonderground Gallery. They're some of our favorite places to visit when we go to the parks and we try and buy one, nice piece each trip we take. The last time we went to Disneyland, we got a series of prints by J. Scott Campbell who does this really cool work where he mashes up a Disney Princess and her villain -- they only had 3, so I'm looking for a fourth one so I can make a set and frame them.

But, one of my favorite artists is Karen Hallion. She's the artistic and creative genius behind some of my favorite Geek Shirts, which are mash-ups of Disney Princesses and Doctor Who. (You can view and buy them here at TeeFury!) You can also view and buy some her art here on her Etsy site. 

A few days ago, when she came back from ComicCon, she listed some original artwork in her Etsy shop, and I was lucky enough to purchase a print of Elsa. And today it arrived in the mail! It's so pretty and I love it and I can't wait to display it!!

Like A Girl

I cannot begin to explain how much I love the fact that these photos are going viral. They're a girls softball team in Oklahoma and the name of the team is Freeze. (According to Buzzfeed, they wanted to be the Sparkling Elsas, but then thought "Freeze" sounded tougher. It's not clear who decided that it sounded tougher...perhaps they had some help...but still.)

One of the things that bugs me most about Disney Princess discussions is the idea that girls who watch Disney Princess movies and buy Disney Princess products will somehow be inundated with outdated values and will grow up thinking that the role of a domesticated 1950s housewife is the only route open to them. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to be a housewife and mother -- I take issue with the logic that watching Disney Princess movies will teach girls that that is the only option available to them. That "princesses" and "being active/assertive/independent" are somehow incompatible -- that a princess only means being dainty and fragile and passive. Even the First Wave Princesses (Snow White, Cinderella and Aurora) aren't entirely fragile and passive. (Although the case for Aurora is admittedly tough to make.) 

So I love that these photos demonstrate that a girl can wear a sparkly princess dress and still be tough. Because the two are not, believe it or not, mutually exclusive. 

Frozen Ever After

Big news out of Disney Parks today -- a first look at the new Frozen ride in the Norway Pavilion at EPCOT.

Photo Credit: Disney Parks Blog

According to Disney Parks Blog, 

Guests will be transported to the Winter in Summer Celebration where Queen Elsa embraces her magical powers and creates a winter-in-summer day for the entire kingdom. They will also visit Elsa’s Ice Palace and the ice-blue world of the North Mountain along with other locations before returning to the Bay of Arendelle. Of course, favorite “Frozen” characters, including the Snowgies from the animated short “Frozen Fever,” will be part of this new attraction, along with the spectacular sights inspired by the film.

Now. As a long-time Disney fan -- and especially as one who remembers a time when the Maelstrom (the ride whose place Frozen Ever After notoriously usurped) was one of the only "fun" things to do at EPCOT -- this is a bit confusing for me.

On the one hand, I loved Maelstrom. While I was never under the impression (and thus never disappointed by the fact) that it was a "Viking Mickey Adventure," it was still a crucial piece of my childhood.

There's also the fact that the very intrusion (and I don't use that word lightly) of the movie and the characters into the Norway Pavilion in such a blatant way is problematic. After all, the Pavilions are supposed to be "culturally authentic," given the existence of the Cultural Representative Program, which allows for (mostly young and attractive) citizens of each country to work at their respective pavilion.

When you allow the Disney-fied, animated cultural representation to overtake the actual culture...it's a bit problematic for me. Yes, the World Showcase countries have always been connected with relevant animated films (e.g. Snow White hangs out in Germany, Belle and Aurora in France, Mulan in China, etc.), but it's never been to the extent that Frozen is currently reaching. There are no other animated movie rides (those are in the Magic Kingdom, appropriately enough) and most of the characters don't have designated internal meeting spots. (Most of the princesses/characters hang out outside, and only come out once every 1-2 hours.) Anna and Elsa, however, will have their own, presumably air-conditioned, meeting spot indoors -- most likely at the expense of one of the cultural shops.

BUT. (Because there's always a But.)

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little bit excited about the ride. (I'm a sucker for a new attraction at Disney Parks.) Right now, we can only speculate about the ride, but the artist rendering (I'm assuming) looks interesting:

• First--it seems as if the old Maelstrom Viking-Inspired Boats will still be in use. (Or, if they're new, they at least pay homage to the old ships.) 
• Second--it's kind of hard to tell from the picture, but it's unclear whether the Frozen ride will keep the log-flume track from Maelstrom or go more the way of the trackless ride that SeaWorld's Antarctica: Empire of the Penguin utilizes. The picture above would almost seem to  imply the latter (or maybe that's just my wishful thinking) as it looks more like a floor than water. 
• The blog does report that, in addition to "fantastic Disney storytelling" and "favorite moments and music from the film" (re: "Let It Go"), the ride will also use "new technology" -- a nice, vague term if ever there was one. Do they mean ride technology (like the trackless ride)? Do they mean animatronic technology? I suppose it could be like the technology they used over at the Wizarding World of Harry Potter in both Escape from Gringotts and the Hogwarts ride where the actors are holograms and "interact" with you, although Disney's characters are animated. 

A bittersweet time, to be sure. While I am definitely excited for the new ride (and will almost surely use it as an excuse to return in 2016), there will be a rather large part of me that misses the Maelstrom. And I sincerely hope that this isn't a new trend for Disney -- and that most of the Pavilions in the World Showcase stay devoted to cultural authenticity (or, at least as much authenticity as the miniature Disney version has ever managed to package in a few gift shops and restaurants). 

"Fashion is not about utility. An accessory is merely a piece of iconography used to express individual identity."

Today's Pocket Princess brought to you by Amy Mebberson:

I love this one--so much. I mean, I'm going to love anything with Elsa, but this is just awesome. 

And, it needs to be said, I love Elsa's ice-queen dress -- and that they're copying the style of it for Frozen Fever. I know that it's received a lot of criticism -- for the very thing that Amy Mebberson pokes fun at here: it's a very form-fitting, slinky dress with a  very high slit. 

(Although, I'm not sure Snow White would be the prudish one...I bet that would be Cinderella. Or Aurora. Those 1950s girls...I can see Snow White rocking it -- especially with her curvier figure. But this digression has gone on a bit too long.)

Back to Elsa's dress: some people don't like it--and I kinda understand why. 

Example #1: In a blog post titled "Does "Frozen" Ballad Send The Wrong Message" by Stacy-Ann Gooden, she ultimately thinks the song doesn't, but quotes an NPR to help argue her case. She quotes a few of the comment-responses, and one commenter in particular sums things up nicely:

“I love the message of the song, but I wish the character visually represented the lyrics. It seems the animators couldn’t help but visually send the message that “letting it go” means putting on high heels, caking your face in make-up, and showing very little passion in your face (aside from constantly smiling) during the emotionally charged parts of the song. Visually, this still sends the wrong message that girls must still be worried about being sexy during their journey of self discovery and empowerment.” (my emphasis)

There's also an article over at Slate by Dana Stevens, titled "I Can't 'Let It Go'." This might be the piece which received the most attention, and in it, Stevens says,

"...That perfect girl is gone,” she declares as she ditches her old look (a modest dark-green dress and purple cloak, hair in a neatly tucked-up braid) for one that’s arguably even more “perfect.” By the time she sashays out onto that balcony to greet the dawn, Elsa is clad in a slinky, slit-to-the-thigh dress with a transparent snowflake-patterned train and a pair of silver-white high heels, her braid shaken loose and switched over one shoulder in what’s subtly, but unmistakably, a gesture of come-hither bad-girl seduction." (my emphasis)

I think the last comments by Stevens trouble me the most -- the idea that Elsa's physical, outward transformation is "unmistakably" -- such a strong word -- "a gesture of come-hither-bad-girl seduction."

Why? Why does Elsa -- in her new dress -- have to be a bad girl? Why do we have to interpret this as seduction? After all, who is she seducing? She's alone in her ice palace on top of an isolated mountain -- there are no men (or women) around. To me, it's not like Jasmine prancing around the palace dressed like a belly-dancer or a harem girl. Or Pocahontas traipsing through the woods in a tiny, one-shoulder dress. Or Esmeralda provocatively dancing through the Parisian square (although that's relevant to the plot of the movie).

We, as an American society, tend to vilify female sexuality. There are so many instances of double-standards: if a guy has a "one-night stand" (a problematic term in and of itself), he's slapped on the back and praised for his behavior; if a girl has one, she's a "slut" or "easy." Only girls do the "walk of shame." It's such a Victorian concept -- the idea that female sexuality is somehow a dangerous thing -- and we still haven't let go of it.

After all, "Let It Go" is a ballad of empowerment and the value of being true to yourself--and the fact that Elsa's outward transformation is vilified despite her inner transformation...well, it hurts my heart. I know it's a children's movie, but I don't think you can easily say that Elsa's physical changes are connected to her sexuality.

Sexuality in Disney is a notoriously tricky subject. Scholars have lambasted Disney for the stark dichotomy traditionally used: "good" characters are the pure and chaste young princesses; "evil" characters are the seductive, sexual middle-aged villainesses. In the fairy tales that pit women against women, beauty and jealousy are usually at the heart of the conflict. Even in a film as recent as Tangled, Mother Gothel keeps Rapunzel locked up so that she use Rapunzel's magic to stay young and beautiful -- it's essentially Snow White, but 70 years later. Regardless, in Disney films, "good" girls are asexual at best -- they're prim, they're proper, and when they're in love, they bat their eyelashes, smile sweetly, and never give their beaux more than a chaste True Love's Kiss.

Which is a horrible message to send to young girls -- the idea that their sexual identity is something that they should be ashamed of. But when we finally get a Disney heroine who shows a smidgeon of sexuality, she's attacked for it.

And the thing is, the amount of detail that went into Elsa's transformation is so important. In Arendelle, Elsa has been raised (by probably the worst parents ever) to fear her own identity: she shoves down her emotions, represses her magic, and keeps everything bottled up. In the film, we see this visually in (1) her gloves -- which hide her powers and which she relies on as a mask when she starts to lose control; (2) her formal royal attire -- see her high-necked gown with the full skirt and especially the cape, which, sitting on her shoulders, literally envelops her and enfolds her in a blanket of repression; and, finally, (3) her hairstyle -- with the tight braids and the tightly-wound bun, we never see a hair on adult-Elsa's head out of place.

So, during "Let It Go," Elsa sheds each of those symbols of her repression and fear. First, she sends the gloves spiraling off into the snow. Then, in a move that would make Edna Mode proud, she lets the cape go and it flutters away into the distance. Finally, after she's loosened up and experimented with her powers, she changes the way she looks. She loses her modest, confining gown and trades it for a looser, freer, ice-inspired gown. And, perhaps most importantly, she literally lets down her hair -- in the process, tossing away her tiara, another trapping of her repressed state -- opting for a messy braid bedazzled with tiny snowflakes. But it's also important, because, as "Do You Wanna Build A Snowman" shows us, the braid is her connection to her younger self -- the self that built snowmen and ran around the halls with Anna. It's only once her parents leave -- once the fear and anxiety have truly set in, heightened by her being in charge during her parents' absence -- that she adopts her more conservative, repressive hairstyle. Elsa's hairstyle mirrors her internal state.

So if new, empowered, freer Elsa wants to wear a dress with a thigh-high slit, I say, "You go, girl!" If she wants to wear sparkly high-heels, more power to her. If she wants to wear purple eyeshadow, why shouldn't she? What's so wrong with that? The quote in the title of this blog post comes from The Devil Wears Prada -- such a great movie about the power of fashion in general. But in Frozen, Disney reflects the idea that "Fashion is not about utility...[but is] used to express individual identity."

Elsa's not changing clothes for a man, she's not doing it for attention, she's doing it because she wants her outside to match what she feels on the inside. And if that involves wearing a sparkly dress and some high-heels, then that's what right for her. Do empowered women have to wear pantsuits and practical suits? If they want to, sure. But if she wants to wear a dress and heels, then she should have that choice and that freedom. To say that doing so makes her a "bad girl" -- well, that seems dangerously close to the claim that a girl who wore a short skirt was "asking" to be raped. That statement is in no way intended to trivialize the trauma of rape. Instead, I mean to connect the idea that women's fashion choices somehow reflect their sexuality and their personality -- that women who wear high heels and short skirts or form-clothes are more promiscuous and are "bad."

Is Elsa sexy in this moment, in this dress? Absolutely. But as much as her dress and shoes contribute to this, I think her sexiness is heightened by her confidence. In this moment, she has built a kick-ass ice palace, created life (Olaf!), and accepted who she is: that's confidence. What other people think doesn't matter--after all, as she tells us, "I'm alone, but I'm alone and free." And this is what makes Elsa a truly unique and empowering Disney heroine: for once, sexiness means confidence, not waiting helplessly for a man to rescue you.

Want All The Things

I'm such a good little Disney consumerist. These appeared on the Disney Store website today:

They're Frozen-themed Tsum Tsums. 

To be honest, I'm not sure I even know what a Tsum Tsum is. I think they're supposed to be cute, squishy, and, for some reason, stackable plush...things. And they are cute. But I didn't quite understand the "craze" that Disney was trying to incite. 

But then they released Anna and Elsa and Sven and...I want them. Even Olaf and Kristoff are adorable! Hans...well, he's Hans. He rounds out the pyramid, I guess. 

Frozen Fever Trailer!

Exciting news today -- and not just the fact that central North Carolina could get up to a foot of snow.  Elsa certainly has been busy because the Frozen Fever trailer is here!

While I'm a little skeptical about the new song (just because I haven't heard it in its entirety yet), I'm already counting down the days to March 13. 

Things we learned from the trailer:

1. Anna still wins at life by accurately depicting what girls look like when we wake up in the morning. And Elsa is absolutely adorable -- and I love that this moment reverses the scene from the film when Anna wakes up Elsa -- "the sky's awake, so I'm awake!"

2. Olaf sneaks a piece of cake and the entire world smiles. 

3. Sven is still the greatest character in the movie. And quite possibly the best Disney animal sidekick EVER.

4. Anna & Elsa *finally* get to ride their bikes around the halls. 

5. Oaken returns! I wonder if his "family dynamic" will be addressed...? 

6. There are little tiny snowmen. Let the merchandizing commence.