Ads


Disney’s Christian Past and Tangled Present

In Tangled, the Walt Disney Company’s new animated, feature-length, 3-D adaptation of “Rapunzel,” critic Armond White finds, sadly, that the story of the girl with the very long locks not only “has been amped up from the morality tale told by the Brothers Grimm into a typically overactive Disney concoction of cute humans, comic animals, and one-dimensional villains,” but also that the film’s “hyped-up story line . . . gives evidence that cultural standards have undergone a drastic change” in the decades since Walt Disney first set out to charm both children and adults with his animated retellings of fairy tales.





“The once-common moral lessons of fairy tales no longer get passed on the same way they used to,” says White, writing in the December issue of First Things. The wildly reworked story of the aptly named Tangled “gets strained through a sieve of political correctness that includes condescending to fashionable notions about girlhood, patriarchy, romance, and what is now the most suspicious of cultural tenets: faith.”

Although White is absolutely right about the tendency of today’s animated films (Tangled included) to pander to the most annoying and depressing aspects of popular culture even as they ignore or deny the richer, deeper culture from which most classic fairy tales emerged, the animated features that Disney brought to the screen when Uncle Walt himself still oversaw the studio made a point of drawing considerable aesthetic, emotional, and narrative power from specifically Christian aspects of the culture that, even today, America shares with Europe.

Walt Disney’s Fantasia is an ambitious—even, for its time, daring—film: not a fairy or folk tale, but a series of animated interpretations of seven pieces of classical music played by the Philadelphia Orchestra under the baton of Leopold Stokowski and introduced on screen by composer and critic Deems Taylor. Everyone remembers Mickey Mouse as Paul Dukas’ (and Goethe’s) Sorcerer’s Apprentice, and, once seen, the vision of toe-shoed ostriches and tutued hippos performing Amilcare Ponchielli’s Dance of the Hours stays forever in the mind’s eye.

Fantasia begins with Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, as arranged for orchestra by Stokowski himself. The audience sees the maestro silhouetted on his podium, summoning forth music from his orchestral forces. Images and colors shift and swirl as the music rises and falls; along the way there are fleeting suggestions of Gothic tracery, images of light shafting down through darkness, and the sun rising through clouds. The often-mesmerizing sequence ends where it begins, with Stokowski, the wielder of musical power, on his podium.

After pieces by Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, and Beethoven (not to mention the hippos and The Mouse), the final number on Fantasia’s program—the concert’s climax and conclusion—offers a deliberate echo of the first. This time, the offering is of two seemingly unrelated pieces of music—Modest Moussorgsky’s Night on Bald Mountain and Franz Schubert’s “Ave Maria”—presented in a single sequence.

But wait: Although musically and thematically dissimilar, both pieces have roots deep in the rich and varied faith life of European Christian culture. The narrator tells the audience they are about to hear and see “a picture of the struggle between the profane and the sacred”: first, a depiction of Walpurgis Night on Bald Mountain, “the gathering place of Satan and his followers,” where “the creatures of evil gather to worship their master,” and then the dispersal at dawn of the demonic horde, sent flying by the ringing of church bells and the singing of the “Ave Maria,” “with its message of the triumph of hope and light over the power of despair and death.”

As the sequence begins, night falls on the mountain and the village that nestles at its base. Moussorgsky’s music swells, and, at the mountain’s peak, Satan—horned, leering, and with gleaming slits for eyes—unfurls his batlike wings and raises his arms (a deliberate echo of Stokowski on the podium) to summon his minions. The devil’s shadow falls across the village, and skeletal figures rise from graves to join their dark lord and his demons in their fiery revels.

The demonic debauchery goes on all night, with increasing frenzy, until, suddenly, the sound of a single church bell stops Satan short. He winces and cowers as the bell continues to ring. His fires subside, his demons slither away, and the skeletal dead drift back to their graves through the predawn mist.

As Satan raises his fists to heaven and folds himself back into his wings, dawn begins to break. A choir is heard, singing “Ave Maria,” as a candlelit procession makes its way over a Gothic-arched bridge and through a landscape of trees whose soaring trunks and branches resemble the delicate tracery of a Gothic cathedral. As shafts of light illuminate the darkness, a soprano voice sings lyrics commissioned by Disney from poet and novelist Rachael Field specifically for Fantasia:


Ave Maria! Heaven’s bride
The bells ring out in solemn praise
For you the anguish and the pride,
The living glory of our nights and days.
The Prince of Peace your arms embrace
While hosts of darkness fade and cower—
Oh, save us, Mother full of Grace,
In life, and in our dying hour.

As the hymn rises, the image on the screen opens to a view outward, through the Gothic tracery of trees, to the sunrise.

As art historian Robin Allan notes, in his book Walt Disney and Europe, when someone asked Disney whether the planned “Ave Maria” sequence was, perhaps, “sectarian,” he replied: “The piece is non-sectarian. There’s still a lot of Christians in the world, in spite of Russia and some of the others, and it would be a hell of an appealing thing from that angle.” The Fantasia program synopsis issued by the studio in 1940 describes the “Ave Maria” as “a universal symbol of Hope and Good.” Amen, Walt.

Sleeping Beauty, released in 1959, was the last fairy tale–based feature made by the Disney studio during Disney’s lifetime (he died in 1966.





It was also the last animated feature from the studio to be filmed entirely from hand-inked cels. Like the 3-D Tangled, however, it also represented a leap forward in movie technology: It was the first Disney animated feature filmed in a super-wide, 70-millimeter format, with a soundtrack in six-channel stereo.

At the same time, the film harks back to Disney’s first-ever fairy-tale feature, 1937’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, with its story of a princess in disguise living hidden in a forest; a villainess with access to supernatural powers; a supporting cast of lovable eccentrics; frolicking animal friends; and a handsome prince who awakens the heroine from a deathlike sleep with love’s first kiss.

Interestingly, as in Tangled, in Sleeping Beauty Disney’s artists strove to present their heroine as a recognizably modern teenager, all spunk and sparkle and with looks straight from the pages of Seventeen. She is not, however, devoid of a moral compass. She accepts her parents’ and fairy godmothers’ plans for her marriage, however those plans may break her heart (she has met a charming stranger in the forest).

The overall style of Sleeping Beauty is also more modern than that of the older Disney fairy tales; both figures and backgrounds are somewhat sharp edged and angular, in the manner of 1950s commercial art, rather than softly rounded as in the earlier films. Significantly, however, the look of the film also evokes the art of the High Gothic.

Walt Disney wanted to fill his panoramic screen with what he referred to as “a continuing illustration.” He found what he wanted in the art of stylist Eyvind Earle, who drew on such models as the Très Riches Heures of the Duc de Berry (a sumptuously illustrated fifteenth-century book of hours). According to Robin Allan, Earle aimed for an overall look that would be that of “stylized, simplified Gothic, a medieval tapestry.”

The climax of Sleeping Beauty comes when the prince must face and conquer the evil fairy Maleficent (her name means “evildoer,” and she is one of Disney’s supreme villains) to rescue the sleeping princess. Allan calls this sequence “a tour-de-force of malignant terror,” and it is shot through with Christian symbolism. Before the prince heads forth to battle Maleficent and free the sleeping princess from her spell, the three good fairies arm him with what the film calls the Sword of Truth and the Shield of Virtue. The sword is a medieval broadsword, with a crosslike hilt; the shield has as its device a silver cross. Surely this is meant as an echo of Ephesians 6:


Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world. . . . Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. . . . above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. . . . And take . . . the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Dressed in flowing black, Maleficent wears a cape and horned headdress that give her something of the look of Fantasia’s Satan. From her mountaintop lair, where she is served by demonlike minions, she conjures a dark cloud that spreads its shadow over the castle where the bespelled princess sleeps, much as Satan’s shadow spreads across the village at the foot of Bald Mountain. Maleficent’s shadow calls forth not an army of the dead, but a forest of thorns to strangle the castle and thwart the prince.

As the prince hacks his way through the thorns with the Sword of Truth, Maleficent swoops down to confront him. “Now shall you deal with me, O prince, and all the powers of hell,” she proclaims, as she rises in a mushroom cloud (the great symbol of unleashed evil in that Cold War era) to transform herself into an enormous horned and bat-winged dragon with Fantasia’s Satan’s gleaming, slitlike eyes.

Cornered on a precipice above the now-burning forest of thorns, the prince has his shield knocked from his hand by the dragon’s fiery breath. With prayerful support from the good fairies (“Now, Sword of Truth, fly swift and sure, that evil die and good endure”), he throws his sword at the dragon’s heart—and hits his target. The dragon falls into the fiery abyss, the demonic flames of which suddenly die. The dragon, with the hilt-cross of the sword protruding from its breast, shrivels, leaving only the cross and a black stain to mark the place of its death.

The hell-born spell is lifted, the rest of the thorn forest disappears, and, as dawn breaks, the prince proceeds to the castle to wake the sleeping princess. Thus, this film’s near-resurrection from a deathlike sleep, unlike the resurrection in Tangled, does, in Armond White’s words, “emanate from some divine provenance.” Moreover, Princess Aurora, who had been willing to marry the prince of her parents’ choice despite having fallen in love with the young man she met in the forest, now discovers, to her joy, that the prince who, armed with truth and virtue, faced the powers of hell to save her is that same chance-met charming stranger.

And so we come to a classic Disney happy ending, in a fairy-tale film that still calls on the “profundity” and “the persuasiveness and the confirmation of epiphany” that Armond White finds so sadly missing in Tangled. “As pop culture gets away from faith,” White notes, “it . . . abandons its most important social function, confusing rather than uniting our humanity. It will take faith to raise corrupted pop culture from the dead.”

Perhaps, as we work and pray for such a faith-guided cultural resurrection, we might show Fantasia and Sleeping Beauty to our children and shield them from the barren and looted moral landscape of Tangled. Even Walt Disney might approve.

Mary Ellen Kelly is associate editor of First Things.

Comments:

11.15.2010 | 1:36pm
David B says:
I haven't seen Tangled, so I can't comment on it. Nor do I have any personal knowledge of the way Disney animation studios operates. With that said, the comparison I make is to Pixar, which Disney now owns. John Lassiter, head of Pixar, is the modern day Walt Disney. Under Lassiter, Pixar makes movies that are every bit as daring as anything Walt Disney made. Pixar's movies are infused with a deep humanity as well -- the Toy Story trilogy, for example, is really a generational tale of love and loss which is why it has such appeal to kids and their parents. Why Disney studios can't make movies like that (or like Ratatouille, or Wall E, or Up or The Incredibles) is beyond me. I can only assume it's because Disney movies get made by committees instead of artists.
11.15.2010 | 2:25pm
Gail F says:
My oldest child is 16, and I've seen nearly every Disney animated movie from "The Little Mermaid" until now -- although I missed last year's "The Frog Prince" and a few in between. IMHO, they're all over the map. We really enjoyed "Atlantis" despite its laughable New Age philosophy, and I was so angry at "Chicken Little" that I almost walked out. That movie was a MESS, despite having two of THE cutest animated characters -- Chicken Little and the alien baby -- ever drawn, and some really amazing animated alien stuff. But it stinks: Woody Allen-style pop psychology (think the dad in "Finding Nemo" but much, much worse); gay fat character who loves Barbara Striesand; too-long, too-explicit kiss between characters; and even a scene with the characters dancing around and singing "If You Want to Be My Lover" by the Spice Girls!

"The Emperor's New Groove," with its Aztec-inspired graphics and a villain who out-Cruellas Cruella deVille, is probably my favorite. But can you forgive Disney for "Brother Bear"? Ever? "Mulan" is a marvel, but straight-to-video "Lion King II" (warning: psychopathic lioness)????? "Lion King 1 1/2" is a hoot -- Disney's "Rashamon" -- and "Dinosaur" would have been so, so much better if they'd done it as originally planned, without any dialogue. "Fantasia II" made me cry with the Donald Duck sequence, but what was with those flying whales??? On the whole, I would say that the output over the last 20 years or so has been more good than bad. But there was some REAL bad. And if kids' movies get any more "girl power," what are the boys supposed to do? Apparently, nothing at all but shut up and sit down.
11.15.2010 | 2:33pm
The Toy Story trilogy is indeed a good story, well made and definitely entertaining for children and adults alike, but, I wouldn't put any stock in it as a particularly good purveyance of Christian culture. The screenwriter Joss Whedon, is an avowedly athiest artist, though I now recall he admits to appropriating Christian or theistic archtypes for their usefulness in story-telling. I believe though he is committed to the ultimate extinction of theism as a throwback to our pre-scientific past.
11.15.2010 | 3:21pm
I agree with David's comment about John Lassiter/Pixar. But as for the general downward trend in animated/children's movies, I would link it with America's drift away from our Judeo-Christian roots. I listened to Harvard's Robert Putnam discuss his book, "American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us" this morning on PBS radio. Sadly, more and more young people are drifting away from the faith of their fathers. The effort on the part of those who market ideas, stories, movies, etc. to avoid offending anyone is market driven: annoying one's potential customers is usually a bad idea. Bucking this trend can be successful, if the narrow road between saying the wrong thing and saying nothing can be followed, but it's risky. So perhaps the problem is not so much with the movie studios as with the sad state of confusion their customers (mostly young) are in these days.

God help America. †
11.15.2010 | 4:08pm
Chad Davis says:
Glad to see the Walt Disney product (as opposed to The Walt Disney Company product) getting the conservative confirmation it deserves. Ever looked at the Marian elements given to the Blue Fairy in Pinocchio that were not in the original short story? There is a little-known cartoon vignette part of the 1948 package film Melody Time called "Trees" that has a profound ending. And, I cannot get enough of the glorification of agrarianism and small-town virtues in the live-action films, my favorite being the 1963 film Summer Magic. Love this stuff!
11.15.2010 | 4:49pm
Russell says:
There's nought wrong with incorporating elements and archetypes from mythology. Even from different mythologies, wove into the same tale. Atheists don't deny mythology. They deny, quite correctly, that your mythology has any better claim to factuality than the rest of 'em.
11.15.2010 | 6:14pm
Don Roberto says:
Oh, Russell, good point: all those other myths—Athena and Baal, Thor and Thasulu—have so much deep wisdom to teach us.
11.15.2010 | 7:21pm
Elliot Dash says:
Ms. Kelly
I find it incredibly interesting that you base a "faith-guided cultural resurrection" on the foundation of Walt Disney and especially a film as FANTASIA. I am extremely curious as to whether you would ever show your children an un-cut version of the film which is ripe with racism. The Pastoral Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPKpFNm3QMM.

I also found it interesting you quote Mr. Armond White who found TANGLED to be "confusing rather than uniting our humanity". Seems to me the movie FANTASIA is simply ripe with confusion. How confusing is it when you watch a peaceful, beautiful setting with a number of diverse and different colored skin characters suddenly being served by the only ones with African traits? If watching (or ignoring) something like that puts you at cultural and/or religious ease then perhaps you are correct to reinforce these ever erroding Judeo Christian values with your children. Excuse me please while I go sing a song of the south :)
11.15.2010 | 8:45pm
Paul Shonk says:
@David B. "Pixar makes movies that are every bit as daring as anything Walt Disney made."

Every bit as daring, yes, but the main point of the article was, not the technical virtuosity or artistic daring of contemporary animators, but the trivialized culture out of which their work arises and by which it is constrained.

Even in the most ethically exalted moments of an animated film like "Up" or "Toy Story 3," I cannot detect any trace of sublimity, such as that awakened by the Ave Maria in Fantasia. This is not due to any artistic fault of the Pixar animators, who are only reflecting the sort of culture they live in, a culture that, for whatever reason, has become increasingly superficial and closed off to transcendence.
11.15.2010 | 9:02pm
JM says:
Sorry, can't trust any Disney movie with my kid. Google "didney subliminal messages" to see how these pervs want to brainwash your kid. Plus that and the entire Disney world compound and no Catholic Church? That's a Godless place.
11.15.2010 | 10:31pm
Russell says:
Don Roberto, are the Illiad and Odyssey no longer read? Because, yes, they contain the wisdom of Athena, in the same way that the Old Testament contains the wisdom of Yahweh. One can extract lessons from all those texts without believing in the gods they reference, and in whom their authors believed.
11.15.2010 | 11:59pm
Mike Linton says:
Hi Mary Ellen: What a great post and such interesting comments. You might like to run down some of the animations by Oskar Fischinger who was the pioneer in the kind of animation exemplified in Fantasia (he worked on the opening sequence but quit after disagreements with Walt). The Fischinger Trust maintains a web site dedicated to his remarkable work. And some of the original Disney animators are still around and have a great blog at imagineeringdisney dot com. You’ll enjoy it. And they will enjoy reading you.
11.16.2010 | 1:33am
I agree that much of the contemporary Disney production is vacuous, with a few exceptions. My favorites among the old classics were “Alice in Wonderland” and “Fantasia”.

But I wonder if you ever heard what Igor Stravinsky had to say about their use of his “Le Sacre du Printemps” (The Rite of Spring)? He visited the Disney studios in 1939 to see the storyboards for The Rite of Spring. When he was offered a musical score for the piece, he responded that he had his own. “But it’s been changed,” they told him. Indeed it had, as he discovered when he saw the final product. Stravinsky was indignant that the instrumentation was changed, the order of the pieces rearranged, and the difficult passages eliminated. “As for the visual complement,” he stated, “I will say nothing as I do not wish to attack an unresisting imbecility.”
11.16.2010 | 9:30am
In this regard, it will be interesting to seeing the new sequel to Tron; the original had a distinct Christian subtext.
11.16.2010 | 10:24am
MFW says:
My family watched Pinocchio last weekend. I found my self wondering if the blue fairy was actually the Blessed Virgin Mary in the original tale, so prominent was the Christian theme.
11.16.2010 | 10:39am
SDG says:
@Paul Shonk: "Even in the most ethically exalted moments of an animated film like "Up" or "Toy Story 3," I cannot detect any trace of sublimity, such as that awakened by the Ave Maria in Fantasia."

It seems to me that citing the Ave Maria in FANTASIA is both highly selective and ultimately misleading. First, that scene, with SLEEPING BEAUTY (which the author above also draws on) are the twin peaks of Christian imagery in the entire Disney oeuvre; you will search through SNOW WHITE, CINDERELLA, THE JUNGLE BOOK, etc. in vain for anything comparable.

But secondly, the best moment of the "Ave Maria" sequence, as described above, is before it actually gets started, as the church bell repels the demon Chernobog. As soon as the "Bald Mountain" sequence is over, the "Ave Maria" sequence becomes disappointingly timid, prosaic and visually unremarkable. Whatever sublimity the sequence has belongs almost entirely to Schubert; the animation doesn't compare to anything else in the preceding acts of FANTASIA.

By contrast, I find more sublimity and openness to transcendence in the awe of WALL-E at the arrival of the white ship bearing EVE, Beatrice to his Dante; or in the existential awe of Woody and his friends silently facing death arm in arm at the end of TOY STORY 3.

One might also find the dark side of transcendence in the frankly demonic element in THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG, but that might be another story, or perhaps not.

Hm, I think there's a blog post here, if not an article ...
11.16.2010 | 10:45am
SDG says:
P.S. @MFW, okay, I have to admit -- since I said as much in my own review of PINOCCHIO! -- that you have a point about the Marian resonances of the Blue Fairy and the general Christian moral milieu of that early masterpiece.
11.16.2010 | 5:14pm
Maria V. says:
Could it be that there has been an element of anticatholic scorn even at the very beginning in Disney characters - there is the hysterically laughing , clad in read , bulgy eyed 'ElMo ' ...a mouse named after a warrior angel ... and a rather evil looking cookie monster ...the enchantments and magic that can distort the idea of what could be real or not in young minds ...

If it is beginning to get less appealing in quality of products , that may be a blessing in disguise !
11.18.2010 | 5:29pm
Steve says:
You realize Armond White intentionally writes smear reviews to get webhits, right? He's a hack that no one respects.
11.20.2010 | 7:08am
MargaretE says:
Tony Christian: "The Toy Story trilogy is indeed a good story, well made and definitely entertaining for children and adults alike, but, I wouldn't put any stock in it as a particularly good purveyance of Christian culture. The screenwriter Joss Whedon, is an avowedly athiest artist..."

I disagree, and believe that the Toy Story trilogy is a very good (albeit stealth) purveyor of Christian values. Joss Whedon is just one of many writers who have worked on that project. Andrew Stanton was much more heavily involved in all three installments – as story creator, screenwriter, and sometimes even director. Stanton also directed Finding Nemo and Wall-E, and has openly discussed his Christianity in several interviews I've read... Mockingbird Ministries has published a book, "The Gospel According to Pixar." You can read some of the Toy Story portion here:

http://mockingbirdnyc.blogspot.com/2010/08/toy-story-as-trilogy-of-heroic.html#more
12.3.2010 | 4:13am
I do not agree entirely with your point on Tangled... altough I do like the point you make. While Disney has changed, I think it's real roots are still settled in good values, in love. It has just taken less poetic forms like the ones found in Fantasia and Sleeping Beauty (by the way, love the sword comparison), yet we can still find them in the story. Flynn's (spoiler) self sacrifice at the end of the film can be an example of that. And even on the poetic side, some scenes, like the beautiful floating lantern sequence, in which both characters finally "see the light" in each other. ( I personally think that song could be sung as an hymn to God).
2.20.2011 | 2:06pm
Charles says:
Ofcourse these movies are having to fit into the politically correct views of these times. However the amount of rich symbolism in the movie Tangled leaves you wondering whether there are some undercover Christians there, or realise that God is speaking louder and louder to mankind. When you see these, you will feel less upset about the passing of your culture and more happy about the coming of your God.
5.15.2011 | 3:38pm
Eliza says:
Are you serious? With all the trashy movies aimed at kids, you decide to attack one that is actually decent? Look, fairy tales in their original form are really dark and most even include rape or incest. So that argument doesn't make sense. Even if you have something legitimate to say about the movie, it is impossible to decipher in this article which barely even has a thesis.
Also, movies like Sleeping Beauty show helpless women. As helpless as the heroine in Tangled was in the beginning, she actually got stronger throughout the movie. She wasn't just rescued by some guy to live "happily ever after."
It's an innocent kids movie, just watch it for entertainment and stop inventing controversy. We have enough to fight against in this world.
7.18.2012 | 7:36pm
dancingcrane says:
Consider also that Glen Keane, the animator behind some of the most awe-some (as in Christian awe) sequences in Disney's repertoire, was inspired by specific Biblical verses in the creation of those scenes. As a lead animator on Tangled, he himself saw the "See the light" sequence, as very much a hymn to God.

http://www.examiner.com/article/tangled-producer-and-animator-glen-keane-shares-his-god-moments
12.27.2012 | 9:03am
Josh says:
The truth is this- Disney movies have never promoted any one religion or idea. The point of Disney movies from the start was never to "be religious" but to provide good family entertainment. That is what they have done for the past ninety years (1923-2013). With regard to "Tangled", I loved it!!! I honestly don't understand how anyone could find something "wrong" with it. It hearkens back to the animated classics of the nineties, which in turn hearken to the classic Walt Disney films. The alleged "subliminal messages" mentioned in above comments are just a bunch of hogwash! There are legitimate arguments against every one of these accusations, and, if you decide to investigate these accusations, please look at BOTH sides of the story. I love Disney because of the beautiful animation, superb stories, and moving music. They are the best movie makers and, in my opinion, will always be.
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact