On datedness,
racism, and teachable moments.
In the midst of Disney’s Peter Pan (1953) can
be found one of the most cringe-worthy, tone-deaf, racist sequences you’re
likely to find in any mainstream Hollywood film of the post-World War II era. Centered
on the song “What Makes
the Red Man Red,” this sequence—which, if you haven’t seen, I can’t
possibly do justice to here, so please watch the 3.5 minute clip hyperlinked
there if you would—includes so many visual, linguistic, cultural, and historical
stereotypes associated with Native Americans that it feels a bit like the perfect
card in Racism Bingo (which would be about the worst party game ever). Given
that the Native American chief’s daughter, Tiger Lily, is portrayed as
a potential love interest for (and in any case loyal friend to) our hero Peter
Pan, the sequence clearly wasn’t intended to be insulting to that character or
her culture—but, well, the road to hell and all.
It’d be easy to excuse
or at least rationalize the sequence as simply dated, a reflection of a very
different era in American culture and society (which is what many of the
YouTube commenters on that linked video seem to have done). But while that
might be partly true, it’s just as accurate to note that there had been
prominent American critiques of such stereotypes (both from within
the Native American community and from reformers
and allies of that broad community) for more than a century prior to the
film’s release. Moreover, while the 1950s were certainly far different from the
2010s in terms of racial images and issues overall, I can’t imagine a parallel
1953 sequence featuring African American or Asian American characters being
created and included in a mainstream film (What Makes the Yellow Man Yellow?
Doubtful). It seems indisputable that the sequence exists because of another,
complementary set
of racist narratives—the sense that Native Americans were not a meaningful contemporary
American presence, not a potential audience bloc, not a community toward whose
interests and responses Disney would need to be sensitive.
So do we throw
out the baby with the bathwater, dismissing the whole of this important
animated film because of this one egregious and to my mind indefensible sequence?
I don’t think we can or should—but neither do I think we should just minimize
or ignore the sequence, or otherwise try to view the movie without it. Instead,
I think it’s vital to focus overtly on how, in a movie that has nothing to do
with such issues or images (that is, this isn’t Song
of the South), a sequence like this could be created and included,
could become part of mainstream American culture in 1953. Which is to say,
while I think we tend to overuse the concept of “teachable moments” these days,
I absolutely believe that if and when I show my sons Peter Pan, it would be vital to highlight and use this sequence as
precisely such a moment, a reflection of some of the worst (but also most
telling, now
as then) of our culture’s narratives and attitudes.
Next animated
history tomorrow,
Ben
PS.
What do you think? Thoughts on this film, or other animated histories and
stories you’d highlight?
No comments:
Post a Comment