As a child raised in the era of cable television, I have become familiar with the stories that have come to define American popular culture in my lifetime. When I was young, I was a passive recipient of messages about life, family, relationships, and society that came from the creators of films and television programs. However, as I have gotten older I have become more critical of the stories that I am being told, and have begun to wonder about the effects of stories that often come from a mainstream white viewpoint. Assuming that other people’s experiences are similar to mine, and that adults are more discerning of the messages that they receive from popular culture than children, I thought it would be interesting to examine racial insensitivity or exclusivity in children’s entertainment.
My interest in children’s entertainment brought me to the Disney Company. Growing up, I was introduced to the entire Disney canon of animated films, and I was not alone. As the largest and most powerful producer of children’s entertainment in the world, Disney holds a particularly important position in the transmission of cultural messages to children all over the world. In addition to watching the Disney Channel and see Disney films in theaters, the corporation is omnipresent in American children’s culture through fast-food cross promotion, theme parks, home video and DVD sales, and ancillary toys and products. This level of universal visibility means that the messages that Disney sends to children are incredibly important.
This level of popularity has put Disney under close scrutiny by cultural historians and film critics who have noted many instances of racial exclusivity and insensitivity in seemingly innocuous animated children’s films. In examining this criticism, I have found that patterns of overt racism from films of the past have remained present through covert racism in films of the present. I use the films Dumbo (1941) and The Lion King (1994) to attempt to gain an understanding of the ways that racist attitudes have remained an insidious part of the lexicon of popular culture in a seemingly politically correct era.
The original argument of racial insensitivity in Dumbo was made by Richard Schickel and has been echoed by many others since (Maltin, 1973). Schickel stated in The Disney Version (1970) that Jim Crow and the Crow Choir (a rather insensitive name) are “too obviously negro caricatures. (p.265)” This seemingly minor comment carries a lot of weight because it was one of the only bits of criticism in an overwhelmingly positive book. It also cuts directly to the heart of the problem with the visual representation of these crows in this film. The crows are obviously intended as stand-ins for 1940’s African American musicians, yet their depiction does not take African American people as its inspiration, but African American caricatures, specifically blackface characters from the tradition of minstrelsy.
The use of crows is insulting in and of itself, because it is a direct reference to Jim Crow segregation laws in place at the time, and makes light of the legacy of slavery, discrimination and racism in this country. However, it is particularly troubling because of how closely the crows reflect African American stereotypes that were developed in minstrel shows. Originating in the 19th century, minstrel shows were a popular form of entertainment where both black and white actors performed comedy routines that made a mockery of African American culture. These actors wore blackface, a style of makeup that was characterized by large, exaggerated red or white lips, white eye sockets, and a black mask painted on the face (Padgett, black-face.com). In nature, crows are black birds with black beaks and small black eyes. The crows in Dumbo have large yellow beaks and wide white eyes. These seemingly small changes are significant because they do not have the effect of making the crows look more human or more African American. They specifically remind audiences of the visual conventions of a minstrel show. Yet, even given this evidence, critics have downplayed the significance of this reference. In his book, The Disney Films (1973), Leonard Maltin quotes animator Ward Kimball, the man who was in charge of developing the crows, as stating that he “wanted to make each crow a separate character.” (p.53) He goes on to give an example of the smallest crow, who wears glasses. He notes that “when he rolls his eyes, his eyes went out beyond the head mass, and rolled around inside the big glasses.” (p.53) While this may seem to be a harmless sight gag, it is a direct reference to the Pickaninny stereotype, an African American child who had “bulging eyes… and wide mouths” (Padgett, black-face.com) Furthermore, because many of the sight gags that occur in the film occur at the expense of the crows, it perpetuates the belief that African Americans are people to be ridiculed and laughed at.
Disney also used language to reinforce attitudes of ridicule toward African Americans. Analysts have acknowledged the Crows’ use of “delightful” (Maltin 1973, p.52) and “jocular” (Watts 1997, p.90) puns in the song “When I See an Elephant Fly,” yet failed to connect the significance of malapropisms and improper punning to the minstrel legacy. Lines like “I’ve seen a peanut stand, I’ve seen a rubber band” recall the stereotype of the Zip Coon, a particularly ostentatious character first performed by George Dixon in 1834 who “spoke in a series of malapropisms and puns that undermined his attempts to appear dignified” (Padgett, black-face.com)
Maltin has dismissed these allegations of racism, saying, “if offense is to be taken in hearing blacks call each other “brother,” then the viewer is merely being sensitive to accuracy.” (p.52) Michael Brode took this defense much further in his strident defense of Disney, Multiculturalism and the Mouse (2005) He believes that “Each crow is individualized as a distinct character, resembling the uniquely realized jive-talking denizens of a Brooklyn street corner in Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing (1989).” (p.51) Brode conveniently fails to acknowledge that Lee is an African American actor, writer and director who was working with live African American actors and actresses, and that animator Ward Kimball, voice actor Cliff Edwards (Jim Crow) and screenwriters Dick Huemer and Joe Grant are all Caucasian, which means that these characters are the product of a white conception of the ways that African Americans look, speak, and act. Cliff Edwards’ performance as Jim Crow could easily be construed as the audio equivalent of a white actor in blackface.
Additionally, segregation is presented as a natural condition in the animal kingdom as well as the human world in this film. None of the animal characters who live in the circus sound or appear African-American. The animals who speak most, a group of matronly elephants, sound and behave as a group of wealthy white women. Yet, Jim Crow and the Crow Choir, the only “black” animals, are presented as characters living outside of the microcosm of circus life. This reflects attitudes of the time that African-Americans should be kept separate from Whites.
The racial climate of the 1940’s is further reflected in the brief depiction of actual African-Americans in the film. When human beings appear on the screen, they are always white, save for one occasion. The only instance of African Americans on screen in Dumbo occurs when a group of workers set up the tent for the circus. They sing “The Song of the Roustabouts,” which opens with the lines “We work all day, we work all night/ We never learned to read or write/ We’re happy-hearted roustabouts” and also includes lines such as “We slave until we’re almost dead,” “When we get our pay we throw our money all away” and “grab that rope you hairy ape” (Dumbo, 1941). The men are large, brutish, and without any facial features. This depiction implies that African Americans are best suited for hard physical labor, and are happy to do so. Furthermore, the exclusion of any identifying features implies that all African Americans are the same, and that individuals do not exist within this group. For a child with little or no experience interacting with African Americans, the perpetuation of these stereotypes can be very influential, and may further ignorant viewpoints.
Though they may seem reprehensible, outdated stereotypes can be highlighted by artists and educators to be exposed as cultural constructions, rather than natural fact. Contemporary artist Michael Ray Charles has used images of blackface in his paintings as a reminder of “the presence of the past” (Wright, Art21). He believes that “Man has always tried to cover up what has been most ugly about man” (Wright, Art21) and that through shedding light on painful issues, we may gain a more complete knowledge of American history. Through the re-presentation of offensive images in a contemporary context, Charles questions the initial acceptance of these images, and reminds viewers that attitudes toward respect for marginalized people were much different only a short time ago.
Author Henry Giroux agrees with Charles’ position on using troubling representations as a teaching tool in his book Disney Discourse (1999). Noting that the Disney canon often produces mainstream narratives that perpetuate heteronormative social structures that provide rigid roles for women and people of color, Giroux advocates “develop[ing] new ways of critically understanding and reading” (p.110) these texts. He goes on to say that, “teaching and learning the culture of the book is no longer the staple of what it means to be literate” (p.111). Thus, by observing and understanding that mainstream viewpoints may be exclusionary or offensive, viewers can come to understand the hidden curriculum of a text, rather than simply reading the surface of it. Instead of simply removing a problematic story or artwork, it can be useful to “create new curriculum that helps students to analyze and deconstruct the implications of the symbolism” (Gude 2001, p.30). It is only then that students can cease to be passive receptors for culture, and through understanding, come to be active participants in that culture.
The Lion King (1994) presents an interesting case study for the racial implications of a depiction of a certain group. As in Dumbo (1941), racist attitudes were perpetuated by linking a group of characters to African Americans through the use of visual representation, language, and segregation from the majority group in the film. In The Lion King, these connections are not as direct as they were in Dumbo, yet they are still present. Furthermore, because the film’s producers have linked African Americans to the film’s villains, the messages embedded in The Lion King are even more harmful than those in Dumbo, though they may be less obvious at first glance.
The film premiered on June 24, 1994, (IMDb) and was quickly subjected to claims by film critics, family values advocates and academics that it was violent, racist, sexist and homophobic (Newberger 1994, Lazarus 1994, Walker 1994) despite the fact that it was well received by the public. Certain features of the film’s villains, namely the dark palette used to render the evil lion Scar, and the hyenas, the vocabulary and dialect used by Shenzi (voiced by Whoopi Goldberg) and Banzai (voiced by Cheech Marin), and the fact that the hyenas live in a geographically distinct and inferior region when compared to the lions, have opened up the film to interpretations that the creators are applying coded messages intended to incite fear of lower class African Americans (Newberger 1994, Walker 1994).
Many (Lazarus 1994, Byrne, McQuillan 1999, Martín-Rodríguez 2000, Gude 2001, Ayres 2003) have noted that the hyenas are darker in coloring than the good characters in the film. Gude(2001) recognized the relationship between these color choices and the convention in Western Art and popular culture of associating white and light with good and dark and black with evil. While the hyenas and the evil lion, Scar, do appear darker than the rest of the lion royal family, the film’s creators have stopped short of including the racially recognizable indicators that appeared in Dumbo. Upon analyzing the various color palettes used in the film, it becomes apparent that darkness and light, as well as vivid and bleak color schemes are used as devices to heighten the emotional impact of particular scenes. Throughout the movie, vastly differing color schemes are employed by the animators to cause both fear and delight in the audience. Without fail, these color schemes always associate happy moments with light and bright colors, and moments of terror and apprehension with darkness. During the song “I Just Can’t Wait to Be King” the color scheme shifts rapidly through vivid reds, yellows and purples while the characters dance around in glee. The screen is bright and vibrant, and reflects a utopian ideal, with animals of all types interacting peacefully. The audience cannot help but feel safe in this moment. Conversely, the song “Be Prepared” uses a dark, monochromatic color scheme where greens and reds combine with the gray and black of the Elephant Graveyard to create a gloomy, ominous landscape full of long shadows and smoke.
Even outside of the musical numbers, the good characters in the film are consistently associated with lightness and brightness while the evil characters are associated with darkness. The night scene of Simba and Nala walking through the jungle that precedes the song “Can You Feel the Love Tonight” is much brighter, and uses far more vivid colors, than any scene involving Scar or the hyenas, who are almost always shown in shadow, even in the day time.
Chicago based artist Kerry James Marshall is cognizant of the existence of color symbolism in the art world, and actively works to subvert it in his work. He presents classically structured paintings that present figures in landscapes, yet his figures have “unequivocally black” (Wright, Art21) skin. His work seeks to document the African-American experience, and he acknowledges that he is trying to “reclaim the image of blackness as an emblem of power” (Wright, Art21). By depicting black figures in beautiful scenes with lush, verdant landscapes, Marshall is deliberately contradicting negative associations with the color and challenging the universality of mainstream viewpoints.
Contemporary artist Laylah Ali has also taken interest in the effects of different skin tones in her own paintings, which feature quasi-human characters in different situations. Her figures, originally called Greenheads, have recently been exhibiting pink and red hued faces, and she says that she is fascinated by the ways that facial color directs the viewer. In an interview with Art21, she notes that warm colors stand out much differently than the original deep green, and wonders,
“Those phenomena affect your reading of the figure—nothing related to anything but what a color does, how it affects your eyeball. I sometimes wonder if that is what it is about? Dark-skinned people—their faces absorb more light so you have to look at them more. They’re more mysterious? What is that? Could racism just be attributed to bizarre visual phenomena?” (Wright, Art21).
Though this phenomenon is certainly not the only factor influencing racism in society today, it raises an interesting question in how we interpret color in non-human figures.
In addition to the visual representation of the hyenas, the creators of The Lion King have also been lambasted for the way that Shenzi and Banzai speak, which has been called “Jiving in African-American dialect” (Newberger 1994, 11) and “the jive accents of a decidedly urban black or Hispanic youth” (Giroux 1999, 106). This dialect is particularly apparent given its contrast with the voices of all other characters in the film, who “talk like the teachers” (Gude 2001, p. 34) according to Olivia Gude’s students. It is interesting that although Mufasa, Sarabi (Simba’s mother) and both the young and adult Nala (Simba’s love interest) were played by African Americans (Walker 1994), the only characters that speak in dialect are the hyenas. This adds another dimension to the connection between African Americans and the villainous characters in the film, and reinforces the idea that people who speak like Whoopi Goldberg should be considered bad, while people who speak like Matthew Broderick (the voice of adult Simba) should be considered good. Equally interesting is the fact that of the three most prominent hyenas, only two are intelligible. Shenzi and Banzai’s companion, Ed, appears to have a rather severe cognitive impairment, and “jabbers maniacally” (Ayres 2003, p.123). He spends most of his on-screen time slack-jawed and drooling, with his tongue lolling from his mouth. Yet Shenzi and Banzai seem to regard him as an equal. This association of mental deficiency with the hyenas adds a particularly insulting dimension to an already insensitive portrayal. It is as if the makers of the film seek to imply that African-Americans are not only evil and threatening, but also mentally inferior.
Like the crows in Dumbo, the hyenas in The Lion King occupy a distinctly different space from the main characters. However, in The Lion King, there are directly negative connotations associated with that space, and an active effort to keep them there. They are directly referred to as “poachers on the royal hunting grounds” in the film, which implies that they are not allowed to set foot in the kingdom. Though the other animals seem to move freely throughout the savannah, there seems to be segregation present with respect to the hyenas (Byrne, McQuillan 1999). This situation, particularly the scene where a groundhog “border patrol agent” informs Zazu, the royal aide, that hyenas have been spotted in the pride lands, has incited comparisons to Apartheid South Africa (Byrne, McQuillan 1999) and the current U.S.A.-Mexico border conflict (Martín-Rodríguez 2000). Though there are no explicit or implicit references in the film to suggest an intentional parallel to either of these issues, it still implicitly reinforces a perspective that the desire to keep different groups separate is a part of the natural order of life. After all, when the hyenas invade the pride lands, drought and famine come with them, and the landscape becomes as bleak as their former home. It is not until Simba returns and banishes them that order is restored and the land again becomes bright and fertile (Martín-Rodríguez 2000).
Though these three qualities of character design do not single out African-Americans as explicitly as the traits observed in Dumbo, it is very interesting that the patterns of racist depictions of minorities that were in place in the 1940’s seem to be relatively intact over fifty years later. These portrayals can be very damaging, because “children are taught that characters who do not bear the imprint of white, middle-class ethnicity are culturally deviant, inferior, unintelligent, and a threat” (Giroux 1999, p.106). Though the association of white with good and black with evil in popular culture is pervasive, and sometimes regarded as universal, it is important to acknowledge that this is a simple cultural construction, and not an absolute. It is only through this understanding that consumers of media can realize the ways that popular entertainment continues to rely on old tropes and stereotypes that many considered long dead.
References
Ayres, Brenda. (2003). The Emperor’s Old Groove: Decolonizing Disney’s Magic Kingdom.New York: P. Lang.
Brode, Douglas. (2005). Multiculturalism and the Mouse: Race and Sex in Disney Entertainment. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Byrne, Elanor, & McQuillan, Martin. (1999). Deconstructing Disney. London; Sterling, VA: Pluto Press.
Chethink, Neil. (1994, July 9). Lion King Reinforces Outdated Stereotypes. Evansville Courier. p. 3.
Disney, Walt (Producer) & Armstrong, Samuel (Director). (1941). Dumbo [Motion picture] USA: Walt Disney Pictures.
Giroux, Henry A. (1999). The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the end of Innocence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Gude, Olivia. (2001). Color Lines. Principal Leadership Nov. 2001 2(3) 29-35.
Hahn, Don (Producer) & Allers, Roger, & Minkoff, Rob (Directors). (1994). The Lion King [Motion picture] USA: Walt Disney Pictures.
Lazarus, Margaret. (1994, July 22). Lion King is Breaking Box Office Records, not Stereotypes. Cincinnati Post. P.12A.
Maltin, Leonard. (1973). The Disney Films. New York: Crown.
Martín-Rodríguez, Manuel M. (2000). Hyenas in the Pride Lands: Latinos/as and Immigration in Disney’s The Lion King. Aztlán 25(1) 47-66.
Newberger, Carolyn. (1994, June 27) Intolerance is the Real Message of The Lion King. Boston Globe. P. 11.
Padgett, Ken. Blackface!- The History of Racist Blackface Stereotypes. Retrieved from http://black-face.com
Schickel, Richard. (1970). The Disney Version: The Life, Times, Art and Commerce of Walt Disney. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Walker, Janet M. (1994, July 23). Disney’s Policy? No Black People, Please. New York Amsterdam News. P. 13.
Watts, Steven. (1997). The Magic Kingdom: Walt Disney and the American Way of Life. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Wright, Migs (Producer). (2001- 2010). Art21 (Television series). New York: PBS.
Jakob Ziwich 