Let Her Go" The Evolution of The Disney Female Model in Tangled, Brave and Frozen
Let Her Go" The Evolution of The Disney Female Model in Tangled, Brave and Frozen
Let Her Go" The Evolution of The Disney Female Model in Tangled, Brave and Frozen
By
Paraskevi Markopoulou
By
Paraskevi Markopoulou
APPROVED:
__________
__________
__________
Supervisory Committee
ACCEPTED:
_________
Department Chairperson
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………..……i
Preface ……………………………….……………………………………….………………….ii
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….………….....4
Chapter One
Chapter Two
2.1 Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Has the Princess Changed at All?.....................................54
Conclusions…………………………………………….………………..….…………….……117
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………...121
Filmography………………………………………………………………….………………..132
i
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Zoe Detsi, for the
patience, the understanding and the useful comments and remarks that facilitated the
writing process of this thesis. Also, I would like to thank Dr. Tatiani Rapatzikou.
Without her I would never have studied in the Uppsala University, Sweden, and
therefore, I would not have become familiar with its amazing library system, which
the Walt Disney phenomenon. Last but not least, I feel obliged to thank my close
friend and economist Kleopatra Partalidou, who spent personal time and effort, in
order to provide me with hard-to-find financial data on the Disney Company, as well
as my family for supporting me in any possible way during the writing process.
ii
Preface
Having been raised with the Disney princess film line, I have always had a personal
interest in the Disney fairytale tradition, not only as a result of a nostalgic feeling for my
childhood, but mostly because I believed that by understanding Disney, I would be able to
understand myself better. My curiosity turned into passion, when I studied Disney princesses
university. I already knew that my love for Disney that was based on my memories, would be
brutally shuttered, once I started studying feminist theory, but that was a risk I was willing to
take, in order to get a step closer to the young princesses that I adored.
I knew before I even started my research that, Disney in general is not a virgin field for
scholarly investigation. However, the twenty-first century Disney certainly was. The fact that
there had not been a thorough examination of the latest Disney animation films by critics,
probably because of their recent release date, meant that I was free to explore them without any
sort of predisposition. Certainly the curse of subjectivity is always there, as one’s own ideals,
beliefs, aspirations and expectations render any research quite limiting, but I tried to be free from
them, as much as possible, in order to have a more just view of the Disney evolution. On the
other hand though, it is evident for any researcher, that the lack of scientific material while
studying a subject raises the demands and the responsibility of one’s work. But that was another
risk I was willing to take. Not only because of my own interests and ambitions, but also because
I considered it necessary for these films to be critically and thoroughly analyzed, so that the
future researchers of Disney and film studies in general can have an informed idea about the
ii
changes that the company’s perspective underwent. By providing the academia with this research
paper, I wish to make a scientific contribution and bridge the gap between the old and the future
Disney researchers.
This is the story behind the conception of this project. I hope that the readers will find
this research paper enlightening and enrich their knowledge and understanding of the Disney
Introduction
The Disney company has always been a controversial topic. While Disney and its
productions have been the subject of a heated debate in the field of cultural studies as well as
within the feminist academic circles, because of the peculiar moral codes as well as the gender
stereotyping that its films seem to perpetuate, it never quite lost its prestige and popularity within
the industry of animation films. The tremendous support that Disney has always been offered,
both by critics and, mostly, the audience, even when it was thoroughly scrutinized and criticized,
is very confusing to any Disney researcher.In an attempt to explain this phenomenon, I noticed
that there are two basic reasons why this controversy occurs.
The first reason would probably be that critics themselves seem to have undervalued the
importance of the impact that Disney films could have on the formation or perpetuation of
American ideologies. In Deconstructing Disney, Eleanor Byrne refers to this negligence as ―the
apprehension of unworthiness of Disney for serious academic investigation‖ (59). The second
reason would be that the company itself did not welcome any sort of criticism. It is very
characteristic of the company‘s attitude Elizabeth Bell‘s point that ―Disney does not allow third-
party books to use the name ‗Disney‘ in their titles [as] this implies sponsorship by the Disney
organization‖ (1). Furthermore, based on Janet Wasko‘s analysis of the Disney profits, the appeal
that the Disney animation films had and still have to the public is remarkable. Snow White and the
Seven Dwarfs, according to Wasko, ―was an immediate hit, setting attendance records around the
USA, with box office grosses of $8.5 million within its first three months release‖ (14). A closer
look at the Disney company profits, provided by Wasko, reveals that, from the $0.8 million that
Markopoulou 5
the Disney industry earned in 1941, it managed to reach $22 million by 1970! In less than 30 years
the profit was multiplied. While the Disney company remained invulnerable to external pressures,
such as the Great Depression and the World War II, a company that was worth $4.7 billion in
1995 succeeded to raise the profits alone to $7.5 billion in 20141 (Bell 2). The refusal of the
company to be critically assessed, in combination with the fact that it has grown into a tremendous
corporation through the merchandising of films, toys, books and clothing, has made the
At the same time, however, even the audience fails to provide or even accept criticism that
focuses on the Disney films. I would like to refer at this point to Roberta Seelinger Trites‘s
experience with Ann, a college female student. According to Trites, while analyzing ―The Little
Mermaid,‖ the original Andersen‘s tale, the conversation led to the Disney adaptation (138).
Trites‘s personal opinion that ―whether or not the artists are conscious of creating sexist images
and whether or not children are aware of perceiving them, both groups are involved in
perpetuating ancient symbols of female repression‖ raised strong opposition on the part of Ann
(139). Ann argued that ―kids never notice stuff like that anyway‖ and she left the class in tears
(Trites 139). Ann‘s frustration is a striking example of how deeply rooted the Disney films are in
the young audience‘s soul and consciousness. Taking into consideration that Disney animation
films, as every piece of art, is political and promotes specific models, Ann was herself the living
proof that Trites was right, since she herself embraced unconsciously as a young girl the Disney
female model. These images of femininity were so deeply rooted in her that they followed her as
1
The data is taken from bloomberg.com. For further information upon the financial data of the Disney
site:<http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?ticker=DIS>.
Markopoulou 6
she grew up. Every film‘s message is intentional; and most importantly, it is exactly the fact that
kids are unable to notice these ideological representations, that this political message earns ground
Attention should also be given, however, to the fact that in Trites‘s example we notice a
confusion between the Andersen‘s tale ―The Little Mermaid‖ and the Disney film that bears the
same title. The Disney industry, not only entered the field of folk tale, but also managed to
substitute the original tales with the Disney versions of them, which have gained so much fame
that the original tales have been completely forgotten. This process of ―disneyization,‖ as Alan
Bryman calls it, is explained by the strong connection that the Disney model has with the
American culture. As Bryman points out, ―culture becomes more and more economically inflected
when commercial organizations create idioms that find their way into culture. These cultural
elements are representations that frequently sanitize and distort‖ (174). Jack Zipes, in his article
―Breaking the Disney Spell,‖ also tries to identify the reasons why Disney tales became so
popular, as well as the alterations that Disney made on the folk tales that the company used as
primary material in the production of their animation films. Zipes characterizes the Disney film as
an ―attack on the literary tradition of the fairy tale. He robs the literary tale of its voice and
changes form and meaning. […] In fact, the fairy tale is practically infantilized, just as the jokes
are infantile. The plot records the deepest oedipal desire of every young boy: the son humiliates
and undermines the father and runs off with his most valued object of love, the daughter/wife‖
(344).
The plot of the Disney animation films has also been the focus of the feminist community,
as they maintain that the female heroine is undermined, while the heterosexual patriarchy is
glorified. In The Madwoman in the Attic Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar notice, while analyzing
Markopoulou 7
Disney‘s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1939) that ―the film follows the classic ‗sexist‘
narrative about the framing of women‘s lives through a male discourse. Such male framing drives
women to frustration and some women to the point of madness. It also pits women against women
in competition for male approval (the mirror) of their beauty that is short-lived. No matter what
they may do, women cannot chart their own lives without male manipulation and intervention‖
Regarding the representation of femininity, critics have concluded that Disney offers
limited and limiting choices for women, as the company emphasizes the stereotypical duality of
female nature; in that sense, a woman in a Disney animation film can be either naively good or
unjustifiably evil. This is the main focus of Amy Davis‘s book Good Girls and Wicked Witches.
This moral dilemma that the Disney female body incarnates is seen by Davis as a characteristic of
the 1930s Hollywood tradition. Given that the Disney company starts producing animation films
in the same period, it is no surprise that Davis speaks of the ―female double film‖ in parallel with
the Disney structure. Quoting Hollinger, Davis argues that in this sub-genre, there are two female
heroines with similar characteristics, one good and one evil; ―the good woman‘s traits are aligned
with conventional femininity (passivity, sweetness, emotionality, asexuality), and the bad one‘s
Davis 124).
This lack of options for female characters in Disney animation films renders the
identification of the female spectator highly problematic. Since ―80 per cent of [the Disney]
audience are women,‖ based on Walt Disney‘s statement in 1936, it is no wonder why the feminist
community has opposed the Disney princess model (qtd in Davis 123). While Laura Mulvey in her
essay ―Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema‖ argues that the female spectator is deprived of the
Markopoulou 8
power of the ―gaze,‖ as the gaze is traditionally linked to the male spectator in Hollywood, it
seems that Disney is more than willing to invite female identification, no matter how limiting that
is. Cultural studies have focused on this identification and the possible impact it has on the
formation of gendered behaviors among children. Karem Wohlwend presents the findings of a
study she conducted that involved kindergarten children and the Disney toyline. The results of the
research showed that children internalize the Disney plots and imitate gendered behaviors, while
they play with the Disney dolls. Thus, the attention that was drawn on Disney company and the
In combination to these findings, the fact that the Disney princess tradition has been linked
to passivity and unconditional obedience renders the issue of gender stereotyping even more
problematic. The princesses have been accused of being too pretty, too silent and naively good,
while Kay Stone points out that the heroines of Walt Disney ―seem barely alive. In fact, two of
them hardly manage to stay awake‖ (qtd. in Janet Wasko 133). However, the Disney princess
seems to always have been a dynamic model under constant evolution. Taking into consideration
Davis‘s categorization of the princesses based on their behavioral characteristics, the first
princesses, Snow White, Cinderella and Aurora, all fall into the Classic Era, despite the
chronological gap between them. According to Davis, ―[a]ll are very kind, graceful, good-natured,
beautiful, musical, innocent young girls‖ (101). They all accept their misery stoically, reinforcing
in this way the melodramatic aspect of the Disney plot, as the heroines endure multiple tortures in
silence, only to be rewarded for their patience in the end by a deus ex machina, usually in the face
of a handsome prince. The Disney princess model, however has been evolving continuously
throughout the twentieth century, by providing an alternative model of female representation with
the advent of the 1980s. Ariel (1989), Belle (1991) and Mulan (1998), the representatives of the
Markopoulou 9
―Eisner‖ Era according to Davis have little in common with their predecessors, as they appear to
be far more assertive and dynamic (176). ―Unlike Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, […]
Ariel actively seeks adventure and works hard to achieve the goal she has set for herself, rather
than simply responding to the crises with which she is presented‖ (Davis 178). Belle, in her turn,
is also different from the previous princesses, as she is the only one that is presented as an
intellectual, a ―bookworm‖ in Davis‘s own words, that is not in search of true love, but rather
It is only expected that the Disney princess model would continue to evolve with the
advent of the twenty first century. However, while I was conducting my research I was struck by
the lack of critical sources on the more recent Disney princesses, Rapunzel (Tangled 2010),
Merida (Brave 2012) and Anna and Elsa (Frozen 2013)2. After watching these films, I realized
that these princesses certainly do not fall into the Disney princess tradition as we know it, since
they appear more self-motivated, strong-willed and independent than their predecessors. The
contrast is evident after comparing them not only to the first era princesses (Snow White,
Cinderella, Aurora), but also to the allegedly more dynamic princesses, such as Ariel and Belle.
What could this change mean? Are we talking about a new Disney era as far as the
Princesstradition is concerned?
2
At this point I need to inform the reader that this thesis does not include analysis of ethnic princesses,
such as Jasmine (Aladdin 1992), Mulan (Mulan 1998), Pocahontas (Pocahontas 1995) and Tiana (The
Princess and the Frog 2009). I certainly do not neglect the importance of the ethnic element within the
Disney animation film tradition. However,I think that this subject is closer to the field of Ethnic Studies,
So, this thesis focuses on the Disney evolution, as far as the female representation is
concerned. While in the past Disney altered the folk tales, by romanticizing the plot and
undermining the heroine‘s power,in the more recent films Disney has been adherent to the original
meanings and purposes of the tales that are told. Starting from comparing the way that Disney
misread the old tales with the new Disney‘s respect towards them, this paper continues with a
comparison between the older (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty,
The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast) and the more recent Disney animation films (Tangled,
Brave, Frozen) with the focus being always on the female figure. The princesses are analyzed as
physical and ideological bodies. I am not only interested in their appearance and the extent to
which that has evolved, but also in their attitude and actions. These actions, in their turn, reveal
changes in the way contemporary Disney handles issues, such as femininity, sisterhood,
motherhood, matriarchy and evilness. At the same time, I view this Disney evolution as a result of
external factors, meaning the social changes that affected the notion of femininity, and internal
ones, meaning the risk of bankruptcy that the company faced in the 90s and the relatively recent
purchase of Pixar by Disney. With the help of cultural studies, feminist theory and psychoanalysis
I aim to address a series of important social concerns. Is the princess still passive? Is the villainess
As far as the structure of the paper is concerned, it is divided in two chapters. The first chapter
deals with the disneyization of folk tales, meaning the romanticization of the plot of traditional
fairy tales, such as the Grimms‘ or Perrault‘s.In this chapter I explore the Disney evolution,
regarding the alterations made to the original tales that were employed by the company in their
animation films. What I mostly want to emphasize is that, while in the previous films we notice a
romanticization of all fairytales, which undermines the female heroine‘s voice and prestige, in the
Markopoulou 11
more recent films Disney seems to have abided by the original meanings and morals of the tales.
The second chapter is dedicated to the female figure and the changes that it has undergone in the
latest Disney animation films. The first part of the chapter deals with the princess, while the
second one is concerned with the villainess figure. My choice of using this binarism,good versus
evil girl, even as a structural element of my thesis, is intentional and functions as a comment to the
dilemma that Disney has traditionally posed to women: good and passive or dynamic and evil.
However, there have been tremendous alterations within the Disney company. Based on
my analysis presented in the first part of the second chapter, the princess figure has been
completely transformed. Although externally the changes are very poor, which is construed as
Disney‘s purposeful adherence to the media beauty culture, internally the princess changes from a
passive, victimized, obedient girl to a dynamic, independent young woman. This change is
supported not only by the princess‘s actions and attitude but also from various structural elements
that have become a vital part of all Disney animation films (death, the animal friends and the role
of the prince).What were the social and financial reasons for this changes? Are they an indication
that Disney has entered post-feminism? What is meta-Disney and how it functions in the recent
Disney animation films? While the princess ideological body is completely altered, the villainess
figure, explored in the second part of the chapter, seems to become more humane or even extinct.
Contrary to the old, unjustifiably mean witch, the antagonists in Tangled, Brave and Frozenappear
to be more realistically portrayed, as people with needs and personal agendas. Does motherhood in
Disney acquire new connotations? Could this mean that the princess is now safe in a matriarchal
environment? And, finally, what happened to the traditional patriarchal structure that Disney has
always promoted? These are some of the questions that this thesis aspires to answer.
Markopoulou 12
Chapter 1
A thorough comparison of the original written tales with the filmic versions of them
reveals that Disney has altered folk tales by imposing on them a new set of rules and dictations as
romanticization of the original tales‘ plot and atmosphere in the Disney adaptations, while in the
folk tradition marriage and love is presented (if at all) mostly as a necessity of the era. In this way,
while folk tales described mostly the path from adolescence to maturity, a term that for women
connoted marriage, Disney films mostly describe the fervent desire of princesses to find true love.
This fact alone has transformed princesses, as I will explain further in this chapter, into pretty little
dreamers, since they are constricted into their own imaginary world rather than actively pursuing
their dreams. What I aim to prove, however, in this chapter is that this disneyization3 and
romanticization process seems to be coming to an end, after the release of Disney‘s Tangled
(2010), Brave (2012) and Frozen (2013). By examining closely the tales that inspired these films,
I have noticed that Disney has started to maintain the original meanings and symbols, as the
3
The term is borrowed by Alan Bryman, as used in The Disneyization of Society. More information about
company shifts the focus from the princess‘s romantic dreams to more complicated plots that do
not evolve around a heterosexual couple, but rather the heroine‘s journey towards maturity.
Starting from Disney‘s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937), a number of changes
that were made to the original text in its transition into a film were deemed necessary in order to
spare filmic time and cost. However, these small alterations seem to have changed the overall
effect of the tale and most importantly the message that the brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm
were aiming to convey in 1812, when the tale was first published.4 In the original tale, Snow
White is a seven-year-old girl who lives with her father, the king, and her stepmother, a selfish,
narcissistic woman, who makes her life purpose to kill every woman that her magic mirror regards
as prettier than herself. With the unfortunate Snow White being her only rival based on the words
of her magic mirror, the evil stepmother orders the death of the young child. Thanks to the
hunter‘s good will, Snow White escapes from the stepmother‘s fury and gets lost in the forest,
where she accidentally finds the house of seven dwarfs, which she intrudes and finds refugee for
the night. When she finally encounters the dwarfs, they agree to let her stay as long as she takes
care of the household chores. Without having another option of course, she accepts and stays with
the dwarfs who work in the mines all day leaving her alone in the house. After the magic mirror
reveals to the stepmother that she has been deceived and that Snow White is still alive, she decides
to kill Snow White herself by disguising as a peasant woman. She makes three attempts, the first
with laces that cut the heroine‘s breath, the second with a poisoned comb that she places on her
hair and the third with a poisoned apple; of the three attempts the last one succeeds and Snow
White dies, but is never buried. Thanks to her tremendous beauty the dwarfs decide to put her in a
4
The tale was named ―Snow White‖ (original title ―Sneewittchen‖) and was firstly published in the book
titled Grimms’ Fairy Tales (1812). The final revision of the story occurred in 1854.
Markopoulou 14
glass coffin and admire her even after death. A prince, who happens to pass by, falls in love with
her beauty and asks from the dwarfs to give the coffin to him, as he wants to keep it in his palace.
They agree, but while they move her, the poisoned piece of apple that was stuck in her throat gets
loose and she comes back to life. The prince and Snow White get married and invite the evil
stepmother to the wedding forcing her to dance in two burning iron shoes, which leads to her
instant death.
It has been intriguing to explore the transformations that Disney made to this tale. First and
foremost, Snow White in the Disney version is not a child, but a young woman. In this sense, it is
expected that she could easily be involved in a romantic affair. Her filmic age seems convenient
enough, so that any possible interest on the part of the prince for her will not be considered pervert
or pedophilic. The implication that the film foreshadows a probable romance is strengthened by
another interesting detail that has been altered in the Disney film. While in the Grimms‘ tale the
hunter is ordered to bring back her liver and lungs, in the film the stepmother asks for her heart.
Interestingly enough, the whole essence and existence of Snow White is diminished to her heart,
an organ that has always connoted love and affection. Snow White needs her heart, not only to
live, but in a purely symbolic function, to give it to the prince, who appears even from the first
scene of the film, an element that does not exist in the tale version.
So, from the first minutes of the film the purpose of both heroes has been clearly defined.
Snow White is supposed to earn the love of her life and the prince is supposed to conquer her;
romance becomes the ultimate goal. It is no wonder that the two first murder attempts on the part
of the stepmother are completely neglected by the Disney film, since, not only are they not related
to the new dimension of the plot but would also make Snow White seem extremely ignorant and
naïve as a grown woman who is repeatedly cheated showing lack of critical thinking and alertness.
Markopoulou 15
In the meantime, Disney enhances the romance by creating a loophole in the stepmother‘s spell;
the poisoned apple has an antidote: ―a true love‘s kiss.‖ Snow White wakes up and voluntarily
follows the prince after he gives her the kiss of life. While in the tale he asks for ―it,‖ meaning the
coffin, and has the body of Snow White taken to his palace without her consent, at least in the
beginning, in the film she acquiesces to follow him and be his wife, or simply his5. By accepting
him gladly as her partner, Disney makes the prince not only ―non-evil‖ but most importantly a
hero, who saves the heroine, the insinuation being naturally that she would have remained dead for
eternity if he did not happen to pass by or if she was not beautiful enough to draw his attention.
The prince in the tale accidentally passes by the dwarfs‘ house, ―where he sought shelter for the
night.‖ In the film, though, the dead Snow White‘s beauty becomes a legend, which leads to the
prince‘s coming to see the spectacle and, surprisingly enough, he happens to be the one she
already knows and loves. In other words, she uses her beauty to attract him. In fact, she is not even
in a position to use it, since she is lying dead; it is the others who spread the word for her.
However, following her prince and savior is not the first time that she volunteers in the
film. When she first meets the dwarfs, she begs them to stay and volunteers to cook and clean for
them, which naturally persuades them to keep her. In the tale, on the other hand, Snow White has
no option but to be a housewife, if she wants to stay in the dwarfs‘ house. It would be interesting
to compare at this point the two versions of the same story. The dialogue in the tale appears like
this:
5
The lack of page reference at this point and from now on means that the texts are drawn from online
sources that have no page numbers. The links that lead to the texts can be found in the Bibliography under
"If you will keep house for us, and cook, make beds, wash, sew, and knit, and keep everything
clean and orderly, then you can stay with us, and you shall have everything that you want."
The same point of the story is presented very differently in the filmic version, as Snow White
joyfully informs the dwarfs that ―[i]f you let me stay, I‘ll keep the house for you! I‘ll wash, saw,
sweep, cook.‖
These changes transform Snow White into a happy housewife, the personification of the
domestic, chaste woman and the story per se into a melodrama. This insinuation becomes a
certainty, when Snow White finds a dirty house and she gladly cleans it with the help of her
animal friends. In the tale she finds the dwarfs‘ house ―neat and clean,‖ which makes her a simple
intruder. In the film, though, it seems that her indiscreetness is forgiven as she offers something
back wholeheartedly. However, what she offers back is an act that has always been combined with
womanhood as well as female duties. It is exactly what Betty Friedan meant, when she talked
about the feminine mystique reigning in American society in the 1950s. The advertising
companies, films, books and science were molding ―women‘s lives‖ and claimed to mirror ―their
dreams‖ (Friedan 34). Whereas the feminine mystique dictates that each woman should fulfill her
own femininity, Friedan correctly points out that ―the new image this mystique gives to American
woman is the old image: ‗Occupation: housewife.‘ The new mystique makes the housewife-
mothers, who never had a chance to be anything else, the model for all women‖ (43). Therefore,
recycling this ideology, Snow White seems to embody the classic American housewife, whose life
The filmic Snow White model has no development to show compared to the female model
that the Grimms promote. She remains a stock character throughout the film, as there is no
indication of character development, in contrast with the original texts that depicts the heroine‘s
journey towards maturity. Stock characters, however, is one of the most basic melodramatic
aesthetics. Both Snow White and Cinderella fall into the category of melodrama, as they include
all the elements that a melodrama consists of: the innocent young heroine that is victimized by an
evil villain (in the case of Disney the evil persona is mostly female), who engages the girl in a
collective of tests and tortures, which she stoically endures, only to find salvation at the end of the
story by a deus ex machina, meaning a poetic justice that rewards the heroine for remaining kind
This innocence and compassion towards the dwarfs that Snow White shows continues even
at the end of the film, where the stepmother dies in an accident, while being hunted by the dwarfs.
As a sign of cosmic retribution, she slips and falls over the cliff, offering to Snow White the poetic
justice thatwas previously mentioned. In the tale, though, the evil stepmother is punished by being
forced to dance in iron shoes that lead to her death. The innocence of Disney‘s Snow White
renders her a forgiving and kind angel rather than a realistic human being. She wins with her love,
Except for the romanticization of the filmic story, I spot another serious consequence that derives
from Disney‘s intervention on the tale, in that the meaning of the original story is completely
altered. I borrow at this point N. J. Giradot‘s interpretation of the Grimms‘ tale. According to
Giradot, the Snow White tale presents a motif that is common among folk tradition and that is, the
―initiatory scenario‖ (280). More specifically, he claims that the story is nothing more but a
Markopoulou 18
description of the growing-up process, meaning Snow White‘s as well as every girl‘s ―passage
from childhood to adulthood, natural to cultural life, asexual to sexual life. More specifically for
Snow White, she makes the necessary move from the ―egocentric self-love of the child to the
other-directed love that is required for maintaining society through its institutionalized form of
marriage‖ (Giradot 280). Through this perspective, Giradot divides the story into three important
stages: the ―Phase of Separation,‖ the ―Phase of Liminality,‖ and the ―Phase of Reincorporation
and Rebirth‖ (281, 282). In the first stage, the seven year old Snow White leaves the motherly nest
and the rest of the world, which is a necessary stage for the maturation process (Giradot 281, 282).
It may seem quite early to leave the house at the age of seven, as Snow White does, but it is
important to remember that the age is symbolic. It does not mean that the girl literally abandons
the house, but that she enters the phase of liminality, which is the stage where the young girl is
subdued to tests posed by the older generation women, who are responsible for the girl‘s education
(Giradot 282). The young girl is trained, in order to become a competent wife and mother. This
competence is naturally connected to the household, as the woman needs to know how to take care
of the domestic sphere. In that sense, it seems in fact too early for the girl that is still a child, to be
faced with such huge burden. However, in the German society of 1812, when the tale was
originally written, the age of fourteen was considered ideal for a girl to enter marriage and
motherhood, as it is the biological maturity, meaning menstruation, that dictated social maturity as
well. As Giradot notices, the stepmother of the tale attacks the three elements that constitute
womanhood: she uses laces to attack the breath, meaning the spirit of the girl, a comb to attack the
hair, which stands for ―physical power and spiritual power‖ and last but not least a poisoned red
apple, which has various meanings; it could stand for the ―menstrual blood,‖ which signifies the
Markopoulou 19
initiation of womanhood, or even for the discovery of sexuality, in a more biblical reading
Based on this interpretation of the story, Snow White‘s age of seven is important, as it
symbolizes the beginning of the maturation process. According to Giradot, Snow White must have
remained in the coffin for seven years only to wake up at fourteen, an age where physiologically a
girl turns into a woman (282, 283). In the end, Snow White enters the third and last stage of
maturation, meaning death and rebirth, which is symbolic. The death is not physical but
psychological, as the girl has to transform the love for herself into love for the others, a stage that
the stepmother has failed to surpass (Giradot 287). The death ―involves,‖ as Giradot mentions, ―a
reiteration of the overall cycle of transformation‖ (293). At the end of the tale, the stepmother is
forced to die, which once more is a symbol of the old generation‘s retreat and its replacement by
the new ones, so that the circle of life can go on (Giradot 298).
This model of interpretation, however, cannot apply to the Disney version of the tale, as
the changes made have altered the meaning of the story. The filmic heroine is a grown woman
rather than a kid, the stepmother makes only one attempt to murder her instead of three, Snow
White is awakened by the prince‘s kiss, before the ritual of maturation is complete, meaning
before the physical and psychological maturation of the girl, and, finally, the stepmother‘s death is
presented as a result of cosmic justice, rather than an intentional one, in which case it would
enhance the power of the young generation of women. All these changes lead to the tale being
deprived of the original metaphors that contribute to Giradot‘s possible meaning of the Grimms‘
tale. Instead, the Disney film seems to focus more on the victimization of the young and full of
Markopoulou 20
dreams and hopes Snow White, who is presented as an angelically innocent and passive girl that is
pursued and murdered by an evil, narcissistic woman, only to be resurrected by a man‘s kiss.
She is hardly a developed personality or even very heroic. Snow White in fact, is always acted
upon and seems incredibly stupid in her repeated failure to see through the wiles of the evil
stepmother. Indeed, the distinctly stylized and mechanical protagonists in fairy tales, as
differentiated from the more defined and tragic heroes of epic tradition, may represent an essential
functional trait associated with the type of initiatory theme found in fairy tales. (284)
At the same time, the stepmother‘s evilness is presented in the tale as a failure to complete the
maturation process, as ―[s]he is one who has failed to pass the sacrificial tests of life and growth,
one who selfishly attempts to perpetuate her ‗beauty‘ when life demands that she grow old and
die, to be replaced by new life and new beauty‖ (Giradot 287). In the filmic version, however, she
is simply depicted as a narcissistic, ruthless woman that would do anything to protect and maintain
her prestige. It is her unjustified attitude that presents womanhood as a warfield of vanity, where
sisterhood and compassion is not an option, leading in this way to a false, individualistic
All the metaphors that Giradot explains in the Snow White tale could be explained by the period
in which the tale was written. Literature is not apolitical. When the Grimms publish their book
Grimms’ Fairy Tales in 1812, they are motivated by their own nationalistic feelings. Jack Zipes,
the folk tale analyst, argues that the Grimms attempted to ―create a body of tales through which all
Germans, young and old, could relate and develop a sense of community‖ driven by their ―their
Markopoulou 21
utopic and idealistic program in the name of democratic nationalism‖ (82). At the same time,
when the Grimms write their tales, the fairy tale in European literary tradition is not considered to
be appropriate for children. ―These collections flourished throughout Europe and were read by
children and adults, but they were not considered to be […] be ‗healthy‘ for the development of
children‘s minds‖ (Zipes 85). It was in the mid nineteenth century that the tale started being
viewed as children‘s literature, a few years after Grimms‘ publication of 1812. ―[I]t was from
1830 to 1900, during the rise of the middle class, that the fairy tale came into its own for
children,‖ Zipes points out (86). We understand therefore, not only the social context of the
Grimms‘ tales that Girardot talks about, but most importantly, that we cannot ask for moral
responsibility in the formation of children‘s characters, as the tale‘s meanings were not aimed for
children. But even if they were, the role of the fairy tale is not to be the protector of morality, as
Zipes claims (131). ―This moral component of the fairy tales does not mean that the proposed
morals or norms are good. Every moral code in every society is continued by the most powerful
groups in a community or nation-state theirs vested interests‖ (Zipes 131). In the case of ―Snow
White‖ particularly the aim of the tale seems to have been the portrayal of ―universal instinctual
struggles among women. […] The fierce, primeval conflict between women clearly made this tale
relevant for families, tribes, and communities many years before it begun to take shape in literary
form in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century‖ (Zipes 133). This is an idea also
expressed by Gilbert and Gubar, when they focus on the binarism of the innocent and the
monstrous woman, which is a topic elaborately explored in the second part of my paper.
While the fairy tale does not protect morality, Disney claims to protect the innocence of
the post-Depression era, when Snow White is released (1937). In an insecure America, where
everything seems to be ephemeral, there is a social need to believe that morality exists and can be
Markopoulou 22
guaranteed. Disney responds to the social demand and feelings of the era and proposes a moral
stability that is assured by stock, melodramatic characters, whose identity, motifs and intentions
are overt and unchanged. In a sense, one knows that an evil character will remain evil, the good
will remain good and a poetic justice will make up for the struggles and suppression of the good
character at the end of the film. Despite the ups and downs of the heroine‘s story, which is the
most basic element of a melodramatic plot, the problems will magically resolve themselves, just as
long as the heroine remains pure and innocent, free of guilt and evilness. Rebecca-Anne Rosario
explains Disney by viewing the company as a result of the Hollywood era of the 30s. ―Snow
White is a 1920s/‗30s starlet with a flapper‘s haircut, rosebud mouth, and high-pitched warble.
She matures in the Depression and is happy to pitch in with the working class dwarves in times of
high unemployment and poverty until she is found once again by her prince‖ (38). Therefore, the
Disney princess and, in this case, Snow White, was an answer both to the social need for a moral
security and a product of the new Hollywood era that was about to begin, with the 30s melodrama.
The problem is, however, that Disney focused specifically on children as its target
audience, which means that there is social responsibility in what the company produces, since the
didactic character of Disney‘s version of the tales imply that children will listen and embrace the
moral codes portrayed. Therefore, the false representation of the female model creates a false idea
about gender roles that children will imitate and reincarnate in their own life as an adult. By
presenting a firm idea about what constitutes morality, Disney leaves no spaces for a different
reading of its stories, which leads to the solidification of untrue gender standards and roles that
form the new generations. For instance, in the specific tale analyzed, by presenting Snow White as
a passive, obedient girl, and by saving her at the end of the film from her misery, Disney creates a
Markopoulou 23
false cause and effect relationship: if a woman remains silent and compliant, she will be rewarded
In the same way, the Disney version of the Cinderella story (1950) is quite different from
the original one, titled ―Cinderella‖ or ―The Little Glass Slipper‖ by Charles Perrault (1697) as
well as from the latter‘s adaptation that the Grimms made in 1812. The story plot in both tales
refers to a young girl who lives with her father, her evil stepmother and her two mean stepsisters.
In Perrault‘s tale, similarly to the film, Cinderella has a godmother that helps her find justice.
After she has become queen, she does not forget her stepsisters, as she provides them with two
husbands and forgives them. In the Grimms‘ version of the tale, though, which seems more gothic
and dark, Cinderella has to fulfill three tasks that her stepmother gives her (the same motif of the
old generation that tests the new maid, in order to prepare her for womanhood that we found in
Snow White is also applied here) and she is helped by her bird friends to complete them. It is these
birds that blind her evil stepsisters at the end of the tale, which turns Cinderella into an indirect,
unforgiving punisher.
Interestingly enough, the film undermines the princess‘s role once more, as she seems to
be marginalized in her own story. The most important alteration that becomes evident is that in
both tales Cinderella acts, in order to be saved from the predicament she is facing. In Perrault‘s
version, although the godmother is indeed moved by the girl‘s tears, Cinderella is an active
member of the process of magic. She runs to the garden and brings to her godmother a pumpkin, a
rat (the irony is obvious since in the filmic version Cinderella passionately protects her mice
friends, while in the tales she removes a rat from a trap in order to use it as a coachman) and six
lizards. At the same time, she asks for better clothes, without waiting for her godmother to think of
Markopoulou 24
it first. ―[M]ust I go in these nasty rags?‖ says Cinderella in the tale, which proves once more that
she does not passively accept the transformation, but she also asks for it and facilitates it. In the
Grimms‘ tale Cinderella is even more active, since she verbally asks for help from her bird friends
multiple times: ―You tame pigeons, you turtledoves, and all you birds beneath the sky, come and
help me,‖ she says every time she has to complete a task that her stepmother sets for her. The
moment of her own transformation is even more interesting, as Cinderella says to the magic tree
that lays on her mother‘s grave ―[s]hake and quiver, little tree, Throw gold and silver down on
me,‖ which means that it is she who decides to change her situation.
The ball scene is also altered by the Disney company. In the tales, Cinderella goes to the
ball more than one time6 and while she is there she is an active participant. In Perrault‘s tale ―[s]he
went and sat down by her sisters, showing them a thousand civilities, giving them part of the
oranges and citrons which the prince had presented her with.‖ She also asks her sisters about the
mysterious woman of the ball, since she gains pleasure from the fact that they have no idea it is
her. In a sense, she is presented as a person with human weaknesses and needs, as she finds
pleasure in her tormentors‘ confusion. On the other hand, in the filmic version, Cinderella is
neither as verbal nor as realistically portrayed in the folk tales, as, not only are her lines practically
non-existent (except for the times when she talks to her mice friends, where amazingly she is more
than resourceful and talkative), but also she is passively drawn into the dance with the prince,
6
In the Grimms‘ version she escapes from the ball three times, three being a magic number in folk
tradition, a motif that is also employed in Snow White, as the stepmother attempts to kill her three times.
Markopoulou 25
without even being able to identify his royal origins7. In fact, it is the prince who seems to be the
source of action in the film, a fact also observed by Susan Ohmer. ―In Snow White,‖ Ohmer
notices, ―the Prince shows up only briefly before the end, and the animators for Cinderella were
determined to forge a more active role for the male protagonist. Several argued that the Prince
should be a more rough and ready type,‖ rendering Cinderella to a purely decorative, secondary
Even towards the end of the tale, when her stepsisters are trying on the glass slipper, for
which they mutilate themselves under their mom‘s directions in the Grimms‘ version, Cinderella
personally asks to try it on: ―Let me see if it will not fit me,‖ the heroine says in Perrault‘s version,
whereas in the film she is locked in a room waiting for some mice to set her free! As the typical
melodramatic heroine, Cinderella is not allowed to save herself from the difficult situation she is
in, as the melodrama creates a cause and effect relationship between the heroine‘s inactiveness and
her salvation. Similarly to Snow White, Cinderella needs to be rescued as a result of cosmic
retribution. It is expected then that the ending of the tale is also altered, in the sense that in the
filmic version the stepsisters‘ punishment is totally eliminated, while interestingly enough they are
treated in two opposite ways in the tales. In Perrault‘s version, which is much older than the
Grimms‘ tale, they are both forgiven and Cinderella arranges them to be married. Therefore, while
in the more realistic version of the story even evil women find happiness in the end, in the filmic
version prince and marriage seem to be a prize only for the girls who behave, meaning those who
stay passive, suffer stoically and remain hopeful dreamers, an implication that is strengthened by
7
One could argue that her silence is a form of defiance against a society that has muted her; however, it is
her extreme sweetness and kindness that suggest that this obedience is an inherent attribute, as the heroine
the opening song of the film ―A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes,‖ as Alexander Bruce also
notices. ―In depicting the marital success of subservient, passive females, Disney thereby teaches
its audience that women should fulfill that passive role in society, not acting but instead waiting
for a man to give them the perfect life‖ (Bruce 2). In the Grimms‘ version, on the other hand, the
sisters are both blinded in a brutal way by Cinderella‘s bird friends, which renders Cinderella an
indirect punisher; therefore, she is more realistically portrayed, as it is understandable that one
may not be able to forgive one‘s tormentors8. However, in the filmic version, Cinderella is
construed as a better person and a kind and forgiving angel, since, as a melodramatic character,
violence is something foreign to her. Exactly as in the case of Snow White, whereas in the
Grimms‘ story the stepmother is punished in the end, Disney seems to avoid the risk of presenting
Cinderella as even remotely mean, so she is presented, just like Snow White, too nice to be true,
promoting the model of the ever forgiving woman, no matter how badly treated she has been.
Overall, it is obvious that the whole moral of both tales is transformed into the always
unchangeable Disney moral that centers around a passive, inactive heroine that leaves her rescue
to a deus ex machina, instead of claiming it herself. The similarity between Cinderella‘s structural
elements with those of Snow White have been noticed also by Ohmer, according to whom
―[p]roduction on Cinderella was supervised by senior animators who had been with the studio
since the 1930s. […] They provided a link between Disney's present and its past, and shaped the
narrative and design of Cinderella along the lines established by the studio's previous films. […]
The narrative structure and characters of Cinderella are very similar to those of Snow White, the
8
Grimms‘ depiction of violence and brutality has been widely discussed and criticized. As Maria Tartar
points out, many of their stories were banned as ‗nourishers and reflectors of a cruel, perverse national
only previous Disney feature based on a fairy tale‖ (239, 243). While Grimms‘ tale seems to once
more describe the passage from childhood to maturity, Perrault‘s moral is double: firstly, that
graciousness is more important that beauty, but also, and more importantly, that beauty and
intelligence are important assets. However, ―even these may fail to bring you success, without the
In that sense, in ―Cinderella,‖ ―[w]ith marked cynicism, [Perrault] observes that talents in
and of themselves are useless, without the helpful patronage of someone in power,‖ as Jeanne
Morgan Zarucchi observes. ―The moral suggests a personal dimension as well,‖ Zarucchi
continues, ―for without the patronage of Colbert, Louis XIV's powerful minister of finance,
Perrault himself would never have achieved entrance into the French Academy, despite his
considerable literary gifts; and after Colbert's death, Perrault was forced to resign from the
Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, of which he had been a founding member‖ (164). Naturally,
this ―patronage‖ that Zarucchi refers to is related to the figure of the godmother in Perrault‘s tale,
without which Cinderella, despite her kindness and beauty would never have been able to go to the
ball and meet the prince (164). Disney‘s film, on the other hand, has nothing to do with these
sense, Disney‘s moral seems to be that passivity and patience will be rewarded with a wealthy
husband, rather than that one should act and fight, in order to achieve one‘s dreams.
It is true that Perrault‘s tale appeared to be ideal for a Disney filmic adaptation, since ―[h]is
didactic purpose and praise of patience and fortitude are ideologically consonant with previous
Disney works‖ (Ohmer 244). We notice indeed a regression on the part of Disney to a previous
9
Page number is missing, because it is an online source. More details are provided in the Bibliography.
Markopoulou 28
female model, meaning Snow White. It should not be forgotten that there is a chronological gap of
eleven years between these two films, and, in fact, these were years of extreme social turmoil and
changes, with the World War II being the stigma of the era. While one would expect an evolution
in the female representation, it was due to financial reasons, as reported by Ohmer, that Disney
avoided the risk of change. Amidst the post-war economic crisis and the budget cuts of the forties,
it is even surprising that Disney insisted on making this animation film, which turned out to
financially save the company (Ohmer 235, 232). The financial problems of the company led to a
huge labor strike in 1941, with Disney‘s employees asking for job security and better wages. That
did not cause only a delay in the Disney production, but most importantly a lack of trust within the
company10. However, it should still be pointed out that the profit replaced the moral responsibility
of children‘s animation, as the film failed to embrace the feminist advances of the forties. With the
advent of World War II, women played an important role in the economy of the country.
When the United States entered the war, 12 million women (one quarter of the workforce) were
already working and by the end of the war, the number was up to 18 million (one third of the
workforce). […] When women started working at traditionally male jobs the biggest problem was
changing men‘s attitudes. Male employees and male-controlled unions were suspicious of women.
10
Facts taken from ―Historic Missourians-The State Historical Society of Missouri.‖
<shs.umsystem.edu/historicmissourians/>
Markopoulou 29
Companies saw women‘s needs and desires on the job as secondary to men‘s, so they were not
After the end of the war, according to the same source, ―[m]any women remained in the workforce
but employers forced them back into lower-paying female jobs. Most women were laid off and
told to go back to their homes.‖ It is this suspicion and anxiety towards women entering the
traditionally male, public sphere that Disney embraces in Cinderella, as the company seems to
remind the audience that the woman belongs in the domestic sphere, where she is only responsible
of the household chores, while the assertiveness and dynamism is a male characteristic, one that
women lack or should lack and, therefore, they should be banned from the public sphere.
It could be the case that this compatibility of Perrault‘s morals with the Disney philosophy
inspired the company to continue with one more adaptation of the writer‘s tales, Sleeping Beauty
(1959), a film based on the tale ―La Belle au Boit Dormant‖ (―The Beauty Sleeping in the
Wood‖), published in 1697. As most folk tales, so in this case, the original tale reappears in many
adaptations both filmic and literary. However, for the sake of its popularity, I will focus on the
Grimms‘ adaptation of the tale, titled ―Little Brier Rose,‖ which was published in 1812. As in the
previous cases, Disney seems to have followed the same method while adapting the original
tale.12In both Perrault‘s and the Grimms‘ version, the princess is raised by her royal family,
11
More information on women workforce in the US of the 1940s can be found on
<http://1940s.org/history/on-the-homefront/women-at-work/>.
12
I use the term ―original‖ loosely at this point, since I believe that originality is an unjust claim when it
comes to folk tales. For example, Perrault‘s tale seems to have been inspired by ―Perceforest,‖ which is a
romantic prose collection written between 1330 and 1344 and printed in Paris in 1528. However, for the
Markopoulou 30
instead of being hidden in the woods, which is what occurs in the Disney version. By resorting to
a life of secrecy, hidden behind a fake identity, Disney seems to victimize even more the already
weak figure of princessAurora. Not only is she enchanted, but she is also forced to live excluded
from society and her family for her own good. In this way, the weakness of the female persona
and the wickedness of the evil Maleficent are both accentuated, a fact that creates a false binarism
as far as the female personality is concerned; a Disney woman can be either a victim or a
victimizer.
Furthermore, in the textual form of the tale, the spell that the evil fairy casts upon the
princess is meant to last only one hundred years. So, the princess‘s awakening occurs as a natural
result of the passage of time. ―Trembling in his admiration he [the prince] drew near and went on
his knees beside her,‖ we read in Perrault‘s tale. ―At the same moment, the hour of
disenchantment having come, the princess awoke‖ (Perrault). While the element of the kiss does
not even exist in the French version, it is added by the Grimms in ―Little Brier-Rose.‖ However,
the writers have already established earlier in the text that ―[t]he hundred years had passed, and the
day had come when Little Brier-Rose was to awaken.‖ As a result, the prince‘s kiss and the
princess‘s resurrection do not form a cause and effect relation but are presented as a mere
coincidence. On the contrary, in the Disney‘s version, the prince‘s kiss is necessary for the
princess‘s awakening, as it is a factor in the spell that Merryweather, the third fairy, casts on her
crib, in order to weaken Maleficent‘s original curse: ―And from this slumber you shall wake, when
true love‘s kiss this spell shall break,‖ Merryweather says over Aurora‘s crib, setting in this way
the prince as a term to the latter‘s salvation. Adding to this, Perrault‘s princess speaks after she
sake of time and space I will refer to Perrault‘s tale as the original, always compared to the versions of the
wakes up and it is her words that seduce the prince: ―‗Is it you, dear prince?‘ she said. ‗You have
been long in coming!‘ Charmed by these words, and especially by the manner in which they were
said, the prince scarcely knew how to express his delight and gratification‖ (Perrault). On the
contrary, Disney leaves the princess completely silent, similarly to the Grimms‘ version, rendering
As far as the latter is concerned, his role as a savior is highly exaggerated in the filmic
version. In the textual versions of the tale, he approaches the tower of the enchanted princess,
simply because he is curious to discover if the legends that he has heard of her are true. However,
in the film Prince Phillip, who has accidentally met Aurora once when she was alive, is personally
called by the fairies as the only person that can awaken the princess; therefore, not only does his
role become of immense importance, but also the romantic aspect of the plot is stressed. The
prince is not going to meet a random princess but he is going to save the love of his life. At the
same time, this romance is even more emphasized by the dangers that he has to overcome, in order
to meet her. His reaching the tower is presented as a safe path in the original tale, as, according to
Perrault, ―[h]ardly had he taken a step towards the wood when the tall trees, the brambles and the
thorns, separated of themselves and made a path for him.‖ Similarly, in the Grimms‘ version,
―[w]hen the prince approached the thorn hedge, it was nothing but large, beautiful flowers that
separated by themselves, allowing him to pass through without harm, but then behind him closed
back into a hedge.‖ Nevertheless, in the filmic version the prince‘s journey to the tower is
presented as a passage full of dangers and traps that Maleficent sets for him and that he overcomes
thanks to the help of the fairies. The music itself romanticizes Prince Phillip‘s journey even more,
as, the moment he kills the dragon, which is nothing more than a deformed version of Maleficent,
Markopoulou 32
the tower instantly acquires color and light and the music becomes soft and sentimental, indicating
This is in fact another element that has to be pointed out. The fact that the whole kingdom
falls asleep with the princess, means that prince Phillip does not only save her but he also saves
the whole court. The fact that he endangers his life, in order to succeed in this quest and save
Aurora highlights his courage and braveness, whereas weakens the power of the female character,
who is confined to a deathly bed waiting to be rescued. Naturally, it is questionable to what extent
Prince Phillip would have succeeded without the magic help of the female fairies; even so though,
The major difference, however, between Perrault‘s tale and the Disney version is that in
the first case the tale does not end with the couple‘s wedding ceremony. According to Perrault, the
princess lives under the regime of an ogress, who happens to be the king‘s mother. The latter
decides to kill and devour the princess and her two offsprings, while her son and king is away, and
so she orders to have them murdered. Thanks to a steward, the princess and her children are saved
while her mother-in-law finds a horrible death, as after her son‘s return, she ends up falling in the
trap that she prepared for the princess and being devoured by animals. Leaving aside the obvious
realization that once more in the filmic version the princess has no connection to the evil persona‘s
death, maintaining in this way her purity, I would like to focus on the moral of Perrault‘s tale that
seems to be quite confusing. ―Now, our story seems to show/ That a century or so,/ Late or early,
matters not;/ True love comes by fairy-lot./ Some old folks will even say/ It grows better by delay‖
(Perrault). Once more, the force of the good fairy that facilitates one‘s life is mentioned here,
Markopoulou 33
reminding us of ―The Glass Slipper,‖ where Perrault made a comment on the way that one could
What about, however, the next part of the message the writer uses as an epilogue to the
story? According to Zarucchi, who finds this message quite ―irrelevant,‖ ―Perrault's moral invites
the reader to share in a good-humored indictment of the anxious haste with which women pursue
husbands, spoken from a decidedly masculine and perhaps even personal point of view, for
Perrault himself was married at the age of forty-four‖ (163). If we consider patience as Perrault‘s
solely message, then one could assume that Disney did not actually alter the story‘s moral after all.
Indeed, the film celebrates patience and passivity on the part of Sleeping Beauty, who is rewarded
in the end for her in-activity by finding romance on the side of Prince Phillip.
However, Carolyn Fay makes an interesting case out of the second part of Perrault‘s tale,
meaning the action and punishment of the ogress. According to Fay, this second part of the story is
extremely important, if we accept that the ogress and Sleeping Beauty substitute each other. Fay
notices that the original curse of death is not immediately realized in the tale but it passes from
one character to the other, only to be satisfied at the end of the tale: ―The chain of substitution
functions to delay death long enough to reach the ‗right‘ end, which encompasses both death and
happiness, however ambiguous. The narrative has now come full circle—from death announced,
to death averted, to death achieved—via the mechanism of substitution‖ (Fay 267). Fay realizes
that Sleeping Beauty and the ogress could function as doppelgangers of the same female model,
meaning that they are both dysfunctional and therefore must die. By applying Bettelheim‘s theory
of the ‗isolation of narcissism,‘ Fay categorizes Sleeping Beauty as ―antisocial,‖ since she lives in
her own ―private world,‖ and therefore has nothing to offer to society (268). ―Like the sleeper, the
ogress is a figure turned inward upon herself,‖ Fay continues (269). Her cannibalistic tensions are
Markopoulou 34
focused on her own grandchildren, which automatically means that ―though satisfying her appetite
may keep the ogress alive, it would destroy future generations‖ (Fay 270). So, once more, the
social order is in danger. By characterizing the princess and the ogress as equally problematic, Fay
tries to prove that, as the ogress dies in the end, so must Sleeping Beauty, in order for the male
social order to be reestablished. Based on this theory, the moral of Perrault‘s tale seems to be
much more profound: ―The death of the ogress is of paramount importance. It carries a global
meaning that resonates throughout the tale. It is not simply the punishment of evil, but the
obliteration of the woman who withdraws from the social order, and who would trouble the
narrative order as well‖ and, if we accept that Sleeping Beauty is no better than the ogress, then
we understand why Fay concludes that ―[a]t the heart of ‗La belle au bois dormant‘ is a warning
about self-isolating women. It is not enough to banish the hungry ogresses and mean fairies of the
world. Sleeping Beauty must die too‖ (272, 273). In this sense, Perrault in his tale considers
Sleeping Beauty as dangerous as the ogress, meaning that passivity and withdrawal from the
public sphere is equally destructive as the overt attack on the social order. It is therefore a
comment of the writer against the passivity of the heroine, as her extreme unresponsiveness is not
Taking into consideration Fay‘s theory, the fact that Disney neglects the second part of Perrault‘s
story promotes the exact opposite message from the original tale. More specifically, Aurora‘s
resurrection and re-connection with her prince deifies her passivity and submissiveness. The fact
that Maleficent‘s alter ego, Sleeping Beauty, does not die, means that this dysfunctional model of
woman not only survives, but is also presented as healthy, as ideal for society‘s wellbeing.
Ironically enough, it seems that the model of Sleeping Beauty is indeed ideal for the society that
Markopoulou 35
Disney builds in his films, as Aurora‘s compliance is necessary for the preservation of the
While one would expect that the romance motif of the Disney films would evolve through
time, here we are in 1989 when TheLittle Mermaid is released, a film based on Hans Christians
Andersen‘s ―The Little Mermaid‖(1837). The original tale appears to be quite different from the
Disney version, since, although the mermaid‘s father is alive, she is living in her grandmother‘s
matriarchal power. According to the original story, the mermaid learns from her grandmother that
humans have immortal souls and it is her curiosity and desire to acquire one that leads her to the
trap of the evil witch: ―It seemed to her that their world was far larger than hers; […] There was so
much that she wanted to know‖ (Andersen 6). The romance is not absent from Andersen‘s tale.
The heroine falls indeed in love with the human prince, but this is not the main reason she wants
to live on Earth. The reason is her extreme thirst for knowledge. She wants to see and know more
about the world that exists outside the sea. At the same time, she wants to have an immortal soul.
According to her grandmother, ―[o]nly if a man should fall so much in love with [her] that [she]
were dearer to him than his mother and father; and he cared so much for [her] that all his thoughts
were of his love for [her]; and he let a priest take his right hand and put it in [hers], while he
promised to be eternally true to [her], then his soul would flow into [her] body and [she] would be
able to partake of human happiness‖ (Andersen 6-7). Therefore, she needs in fact the prince to
reach her goal, but he appears to be the means rather than the goal per se. In the filmic version, the
element of the immortality has been eliminated, which makes Ariel long for a life on Earth with
the prince, rather than an eternal life of her own. As Roberta Trites states, ‗‗Andersen‘s mermaid
quests for a soul, but Disney‘s mermaid, Ariel, quests for a mate.‘‘ It is for Eric, the Disney
prince that Ariel is more than willing to ―mutilate‖ herself and transform into a human. As Waller
Markopoulou 36
Hastings notices, ―the Disney version accentuates the most sentimental and romantic aspects of
the story at the expense of its moral and psychological complexity‖ (85). This complexity, which
is related to the mermaid‘s sacrifice of her own body seems to be completely undermined and
neglected in the film, compared to the tale. Andersen elaborately states how painful the process of
It will hurt; it will feel as if a sword were going through your body. All who see you will say that
you are the most beautiful human child they have ever seen. You will walk more gracefully than
any dancer; but every time your foot touches the ground it will feel as though you were walking
on knives so sharp that your blood must flow. If you are willing to suffer all this, then I can help
you. (8)
This process is quite downplayed in the film, first of all since it is never mentioned by Ursula, but
also because it is presented as the closure of Ursula‘s musical solo, with Ariel being simply a
shadow that splits in half. In this sense, the sacrifice she makes, in order to live with the human
prince is undermined and diminished into a simple task that any woman could (or maybe should)
do for love. This is also a point that has been made by Trites, who explains that ―[b]ecause
physical pain is described as less devastating than emotional pain, the self-inflicted physical pain
the mermaid endures is not simply a stereotypical image of women as masochistic. […] Her pain
has a purpose: Through her suffering she will earn an eternal identity. Disney's mermaid, however,
makes pain-free sacrifices so that she can become attractive to a man.‖ Therefore, we notice a shift
of motivation as far as the mermaid‘s transformation is concerned; from the self-centered to the
male-centered; from the self-defined beauty to the hetero-defined one, as Ariel‘s image of herself
Ariel‘s transformation, though, has another level that has to do with the female dress code that
has always confined women. Adrienne Rich in her essay ―Compulsory Heterosexuality‖ wisely
points out that one method used to assert male power over women is physical constraint. Although
Rich speaks of a female dress up code and high heels, which constrain women‘s movement, I
connect this strategy of physical restraint with the complete inability to walk (38). Even after Ariel
acquires legs, still she finds it impossible to walk or even stand. She stumbles and falls repeatedly,
as if she were a child that takes her first steps. It is not only the case that she changes her body, in
order to attract her beloved, but that she also loses her ability to move because of it.
Talking about love, Andersen‘s depiction of love is much deeper than the one Disney
presents. As Trites points out, in Andersen‘s tale the mermaid has all the time she needs, so that
her love for the prince can evolve in its own pace, in contrast with the filmic version, where Ariel
is given only three days to steal a kiss. In that sense, Trites is correct to argue not only that Disney
―reduces love to no more than physical sexuality,‖ but also that ―Disney's representation of love
lacks the basic integrity imbued in Andersen's representation of it.‖ Also, in the Disney version,
love is associated with marriage. While Trites argues that ―[t]his establishes the movie's
superficial values regarding marriage‖ and considers this as a way to undermine the institution of
marriage by presenting it as a privilege of only perfect looking people, I believe that this is not the
main problem of the Disney representation of marriage. In my view, Ariel‘s official union with
Eric in the end reinforces the patriarchal structure of society that is based on heterosexual formal
union, as opposed to the tale, where the mermaid is not even concerned with the idea of marriage.
Interestingly enough, Disney brings back the nineteenth century model of marriage as an
institution of social order, while Andersen himself who writes in 1837 appears to be more liberal,
In the meantime, according to the tale, the mermaid does not manage to get married to the
prince at the end. She earns his respect, but he ends up marrying someone else, which means that
the mermaid‘s heart would break. That could be explained by the fact that the solid structure of the
society in which Andersen writes does not allow any social mobility. In other words, it could be
the case that the mermaid‘s difference is an unbreakable obstacle. Not being able to bring together
two separate and different natures, meaning the mermaid and the prince, Andersen sends the
heroine up in the sky. It is the air fairies though that offer her to be one of them, moved by her
sacrifice and effort to gain an immortal soul. Therefore, the mermaid does gain immortality, but
she remains alone, among the air fairies, without a prince. In the Disney version though, Ariel,
having changed into human form does in fact end up with the prince, which implies that it was
Ariel‘s nature that led her away from her love. By changing into human, Ariel goes through a
―normalization‖ process, if we may say. In a sense, in order to become part of the male-dominated
world, the woman is forced to change, to sacrifice her body, her origins, her will, so as to become
accepted in patriarchy. Is Disney‘s version more sexist than the original tale? The truth is that both
stories are unjust to the little mermaid, as she is willing to mutilate herself and transform her
whole being, in order to be able to achieve her goal. In that sense, Andersen‘s solution is not at all
innocent. However, there is a huge time and cultural gap between the original story and Disney‘s
production that demands responsibility on the part of Disney animation films; not only because
they undermine the female role in the twentieth century, but most importantly because of the
target audience of the company, which consisted and does still mostly of young girls.
At the same time Andersen himself explains the end of the tale in a way that makes the
mermaid a symbol of assertiveness and independence. Leaving aside the moral that the story itself
provides, that seems to be a didactic message to children who misbehave, as Andersen himself
Markopoulou 39
states at the end of the tale, I would like to move a step further and discover the deeper meaning of
this tale. It seems that Andersen was interested in presenting a dynamic female model, one that
fights for herself and in the end manages to reach her goal without the help of anyone else, simply
with her own efforts. Trites quotes Andersen himself, when in 1837 he wrote to a friend: ‗I have
not . . . allowed the mermaid's acquiring of an immortal soul to depend upon an alien creature,
upon the love of a human being.... I have permitted my mermaid to follow a more natural, more
divine path.‘
At the same time, even through a more pessimistic reading of Andersen‘s tale, where the
mermaid‘s death is considered as a defeat rather than salvation, I believe that still the tale teaches
the importance of self-love and acceptance, as well as the subjectivity of beauty. In the tale, the
grandmother openly says that the mermaid cannot earn a human without changing, ―[f]or that
which we consider beautiful down here in the ocean, your fishtail, they find ugly up above, on
earth. They have no sense; up there, you have to have two clumsy props, which they call legs, in
order to be called beautiful" (Andersen 7). I find this part of the tale extremely essential as it
proves that appearance is a matter of habit and taste, rather than a matter of objectivity.
The objectivity of beauty is a topic that has been widely discussed in the feminist
community. As Naomi Wolf elaborately explains in her book The Beauty Myth, the idea that there
are objective criteria and beauty standards is a myth that the patriarchal rule has created, in order
The beauty myth tells a story: The quality called ‗beauty‘ objectively and universally exists.
Women must want to embody it and men must want to possess women who embody it. […] None
of this is true. ‗Beauty‘ is a currency system like the gold standard. Like any economy, it is
Markopoulou 40
determined by politics, and in the modern age in the West it is the last, best belief system that
keeps male dominance intact. In assigning value to women in a vertical hierarchy according to a
culturally imposed physical standard, it is an expression of power relations in which women must
unnaturally compete for resources that men have appropriated for themselves. (12)
In this sense, there is no objectivity in beauty. As a matter of fact, Wolf claims that the beauty
myth, although it appears to be about appearance, in fact it has nothing to do with it. ―The beauty
myth is always actually prescribing behavior and not appearance‖ (14). This behavior connects
femininity to domesticity as the industrialization era, when the myth flourished, demanded a clear
separation between the public and private sphere; this would enforce the ―work unity of the
family,‖ leaving space in this way for the male power to expand in the workplace (Wolf 14, 15). It
is this mistake that Andersen‘s mermaid makes that leads to her destruction. She fails to
acknowledge the subjectivity and politics behind beauty standards and accepts someone else‘s
beauty standards, instead of her own; thus, she changes for someone else. This costs her extreme
pain (the transformation process), the loss of her voice (metaphorically her opinions, her state of
mind) and last but not least emotional pain (the rejection on the part of the prince). In the
meantime, I believe the tale strengthens the implication that without your ―voice,‖ meaning
To our discontent, Disney comes once more to completely disrupt the tale‘s undertone by
having Ariel gain her father‘s support and marry her prince in the end. What does this ending
celebrate though? That the lack of voice, good appearance and rejection of who you are can make
your dreams come true, the dream always being marriage. Once more, young girls are taught that
Markopoulou 41
everything is possible, as long as they are willing to become something that they are not, to forget
their personal views and simply transform into what male-dominated society expects them to be.
At this point I would like to briefly comment on a final alteration of the original tale
and that is Ursula‘s brutal death at the end of the film, since the evil must be destroyed. The first
comment is that, once more, exactly as in Snow White and Cinderella, the Disney princess‘s hands
and conscience are clean, since the angelic model of the innocent girl is preserved. The second
comment is that, while in the previous films the enemy‘s death was presented as a cosmic
retribution (Snow White) or neglected completely (Cinderella), we notice that in the 1989 Disney
film the prince saves the day by killing Ursula. Therefore, there is a new element that is added in
Disney films, the punishment of the evil persona but this death occurs thanks to the male
protagonist. In this way, men in Disney films seem to occupy the center, marginalizing in this way
the female heroines. Of course, this ending is in any case highly problematic also because of the
representation of violence. Waller Hastings notices that the film adaptation of ―The Little
Mermaid‖ seems to perpetuate the philosophy of the post war era of the fifties, where good and
evil were considered to be an everlasting battle that can be resolved only through violence and not
The child who reads Andersen's fairy tale has experienced a world in which desires have
consequences that may be painful, where wanting something badly enough to suffer for it need not
make it happen; the child who views the Disney film experiences a world in which bad things only
happen because of bad people, where desire is always fulfilled. Such moral simplification
increases the likelihood that these children will become adults who find the causes of their
unhappiness in personalized, ‗evil‘ antagonists- a sure formula for continued conflict. (90)
Markopoulou 42
However, I personally believe that Hastings‘s view has to be taken one step further, as these
―‗evil‘ antagonists‖ that he talks about always happen to be female characters in Disney films. The
evil stepmother in Snow White, the evil stepmother and stepsisters in Cinderella and Ursula in The
Little Mermaid. It seems that the Disney World is not generally a world of conflict, but
specifically a war within the female sphere, a fact which unavoidably teaches the young audience
to never trust another woman, since she is probably a rival rather than a friend. However, this
Moving on to Beauty and the Beast (1991), Disney employs Jeanne-Marie Le Prince de
Beaumant‘s fairytale which bears the same title (1756). In this case as well, Disney seems to have
diverted quite noticeably from the original tale. In Beaumant‘s version, Belle is a girl who adores
reading and this is why she is considered to be the wisest among her siblings. According to June
Cummins, Beaumont ―intends to provide moral and intellectual guidance for her listeners.
Although she encourages these girls to be virtuous and ‗agreeable,‘ she just as ardently wants
them to be intelligent and well-instructed‖ (23). On the contrary, in the filmic version, Belle‘s
thirst for books and knowledge makes her be perceived by the inhabitants of the village as
―beautiful but odd, different,‖ as the opening song narrates. It is this that makes one wonder
whether Belle is weird because she is an educated individual or because she is a woman that wants
The problematic of Disney‘s interpretation of the story at this point does not only lie in
the fact that Belle‘s cultivation is considered weird but mostly in the depiction of this curiosity. To
put it more openly, while the old tale Belle loves reading in general, the filmic Belle is mostly
attracted by fairy tales, as her words show. ―[I]t‘s my favorite!‖ she tells the owner of the
bookshop that she visits every day; ―Far off places, daring swordfights, magic spells, a prince in
Markopoulou 43
disguise!‖ It seems, in other words, that Belle is depicted as a teenage dreamer rather than an
educated woman, since what fascinates her most is imaginary worlds and fairy tale adventures. To
put it simply, she is metaphorically living in her own dream-world, which transforms her from a
depiction of her father. While in the tale Belle‘s father is a merchant, which, at the time the tale
was written was the new emerging social class that stood for wealth and prestige, 13 in the film her
father, Maurice, appears to be a failed, foolish scientist. This alteration comes to strengthen the
implication that Belle is not really to be taken seriously, at least not by her fellow citizens. By
presenting her only family member, her protector and father, as mentally ill, Disney reduces the
possibility of Belle being perceived as socially secure mentally healthy either. In these aspects,
therefore, the female protagonist of the film is completely destabilized, as the tale acquires a
Moreover, in the original tale, Belle‘s family becomes bankrupt, which leads to her
father having to take a trip to meet the family‘s potential financial savior. It is on this trip that her
father encounters the Beast, as he takes a rose from the latter‘s garden, to bring it as a gift to his
daughter. In the filmic version though, Belle‘s poverty is a given, a factor that she alone needs to
change, as her father seems to be in no position to handle it. The motif of the poor girl that
manages to seduce a prince and solve her financial issues is recurrent in the Disney tradition. As
Snow White and Cinderella, Belle is also going to find happiness on the side of a wealthy, kind
13
According to Cummins, Beaumont wrote this story, in order to ―reinforce the goals of the meritocracy
for the young women who were the intended audience of her story,‖ as meritocracy substituted the
man. This motif though becomes even more destructive for the image of the female character,
once she is presented to win the prince only with her passivity and beauty. In other words, the
silent girl is always rewarded in Disney animation films, which, in its turn, sets a bad model for
young girls, who, unaware of the politics of the image, embrace the beliefs and values presented to
them.
Belle is in fact a necessary gear in the story as she is certainly more active than the former
Disney princesses. She defies the Beast‘s orders and enters the forbidden room, where the
enchanted rose is located. However, as Zipes points out, ―[d]espite providing [Belle] with a touch
of feminist feistiness, the Disney screenplay writers did not alter the plot very much: the boys
struggle for the charming girl. The right guy wins. She moves up in society, and everyone sings
and rejoices‖ (140-41). It seems that her most treasured characteristic for the filmic plot is not her
assertiveness but her female nature. Cummins verifies this implication by noting that ―[i]n the
Disney version, it is Belle's utility as female that most attracts the castle's inhabitants, and her
beauty is a close second‖ (24). While in the original story the Beast is simply deformed as a result
of nature, in the filmic version he is enchanted (interestingly enough by yet another evil female
witch) and, in order for the spell to be broken, he must earn a woman‘s love. This turns out to be
the main focus of the Disney story; how the Beast will find love and be saved. In other words, we
can safely say that, Belle‘s interesting forcefulness is undermined by the fact that she ends up
being a secondary character in her own story, as even the opening scene of the Disney film is
Having already emphasized how Disney romanticized once more a classic tale, I wonder
how far away Disney‘s moral is from Beaumont‘s story. In the previous tales, I noticed a major
shift, a crucial alteration of the filmic message. However, in Beauty and the Beast I believe that
Markopoulou 45
Disney managed to maintain the original didactic intention of the story; you cannot judge one
from one‘s appearance. And that is truly what Belle learns at the end of both versions of the story.
Nevertheless, while Cummins focuses on the sexist aspect of the film, in that ―[i]t is Belle and not
the Beast who must learn to love ugliness and literally embrace the bestial,‖ I believe that the
problem lies in the extreme passivity and patience with which Belle manages to break the Beast‘s
curse (26). Given that Disney‘s Beast is depicted as extremely violent and intimidating, rude and
ruthless, the fact that Belle‘s passive and nurturing attitude towards him leads to his salvation
seems to alter the overall meaning of the film; in other words, be kind, patient and obedient
towards your brutal man and you will turn him into a prince.
Nevertheless, Disney seems to have made a powerful step towards gender equality as far as
the depiction of female characters is concerned in the more recent films. Starting with Tangled
(2010), the film is based on Grimms‘ tale ―Rapunzel‖ (1812), although the plot has been quite
altered. In the original tale, a wife asks from her husband to enter a fairy‘s garden and steal a plant
called ―rapunzel,‖ which according to critics must have been a kind of lettuce or spinach, 14 that
she was craving for. This act angers the ogress who owns the garden and as a punishment she asks
for the first child that the woman will bring into the world. She names the girl Rapunzel and locks
her up in a high tower that had no entrance but only a window. It is from this window that
Rapunzel throws her hair to let the ogress in, after the latter says the following verse: ―Rapunzel,
Rapunzel/ let down your hair‖ (Grimms). One day a prince passes by and overhears the ogress‘s
poem. So, he uses it to get into the tower and meets Rapunzel who falls in love with him instantly.
Together they decide to leave, but Rapunzel naively reveals their secret to the ogress, who decides
14
According to Marina Warner, the plant implied was probably a primrose, which is ―is connected to the
female cycle, and recommended for regulating it and preventing cramps‖ (334).
Markopoulou 46
to cut Rapunzel‘s long hair and use it to trick the prince into getting into the tower and meeting
her. After the ogress reveals to the prince that he is never to see Rapunzel again, he falls from the
tower and loses his sight because of some thorns. He wanders in the forest until he finds Rapunzel
and their two kids to whom she has given birth. In the end, her tears give him back his sight and
The meanings of the original tale have been debated, since it invites multiple readings.
While Robert Stallman views this story as a ‗rite of passage,‘ Warner positions it in the era when it
was written (Stallman 224). According to Warner, the story ―opens up reflections on the new
contemporary rapid changes in motherhood, often caused by decreasing fertility in the West and
the correspondingly rising rates of surrogate motherhood, of adoption of children by older women,
strengthened by the fact that the ogress asks for the child, in contrast with the previous tale
The point that Warner makes about motherhood is also evident in the filmic version. In the
film, Rapunzel is endowed with the gift of magic, since her long hair is a source of health, youth
and beauty. The evil character in the film, who has the exact same name as the textual character,
Mother Gothel, kidnaps Rapunzel from her crib and locks her in a tower, as in the original story.
However, although in the tale the ogress appears to have motherly feelings, Mother Gothel in the
Disney version is only after Rapunzel‘s magic hair. In a sense, the love that the Grimms‘ fairy has
for youth and innocence becomes a sick obsession in the filmic version, which of course
eliminates any possibility for Rapunzel to have a loving mother as she grows up. The selfishness
that the witch represents in the film accentuates her viciousness and emphasizes the similarity of
Nevertheless, the Tangled villainess is presented as more motherly than any other previous
female opponent in Disney films, while the filmic male character is not a prince as in the original
tale, but a common thief who is known as Flynn Rider. It is obvious that Disney intentionally
disrupts the previous model of a couple that was presented in earlier animation films, by ironically
pointing out that love is blind, as it can bring together people from opposite social classes.15 For
once, it is the female character that helps the male one to climb up the social ladder. Not only that
but also the romance between Rapunzel and Flynn is not the main focus of the film as she runs
away with him in order to see the world and, more specifically, the lanterns that appear in the sky
on her birthday every year. While in the Grimms‘ tale ―the emphasis falls on fair maidens in
situations of entrapment (tower) who are endangered by someone or something (curse, witch) and
urgently need rescue (prince),‖ as Shuli Barzilai notices, in the Disney version Rapunzel is not
motivated to follow Flynn by her love for him, nor does she wait for him to rescue her; instead,
she uses him as a guide into the real world (232). Not to mention of course that it is she who
rescues Flynn multiple times in the film with the last scene being the most striking example.
Also, according to Warner, ―[t]he fairy tale in effect warns against keeping young women
in the dark as the old witch has done. The story is clearly on the side of the lovers - with the added
angle that it's giving its support to sex education - but in his quest for innocence, Wilhelm Grimm
unfortunately managed to turn Rapunzel into a ninny‖ (331). Although the first part of her
comment applies also in the film, the rest of Warner‘s points are not supported by Disney‘s
reading of the story. Under no circumstances could one describe Rapunzel in Tangled as a
―ninny.‖ Compared to the textual heroine, Disney‘s Rapunzel is certainly more assertive and
15
The same motif was employed in Disney‘s Aladdin (1992), with the difference that Aladdin was a thief
dynamic. She finds the strength to abandon the tower and go into the real world, which in her
imagination is a place full of dangers, as Mother Gothel taught her. She remains strong throughout
the film and, interestingly enough, she is called to rescue Flynn in the end, as she brings him back
to life with her healing tears, an element taken from the original tale, upsetting in this way the
Disney norm where the princess is saved by the prince‘s kiss. However, there are of course
weaknesses, as the film refuses to present Rapunzel as truly powerful. In order to save Flynn, she
has to sacrifice her life, which she voluntarily does, as she accepts to stay with Mother Gothel as
long as the latter sets him free. In the meantime, one could assume that it is she who is actually
saved in the end by Flynn as he cuts her hair and renders her useless to her tormentor.
Nevertheless, even if they end up saving each other, the progress made should not be
unacknowledged, as Rapunzel is definitely a more dynamic and realistic female model than her
ancestors.
In the case of Frozen, which has received enthusiastic responses on the part of both the
audience and the critics after its release in 2013, it seems that Disney has employed once more a
story by Hans Christian Andersen, ―Snow Queen‖ (1844). The original tale tells the story of two
young children, Kay and Gerda, who are connected by a strong friendship: ―they were not brother
and sister, but they were just as fond of each other as if they had been‖ (Andersen). Their
friendship is challenged, when a piece of a magic mirror made by evil dwarfs slips into his eye.
The enchanted mirror manages to bring out the worst self of Kay, who is actually kidnapped by
Snow Queen herself, in her effort to connect all the pieces of the mirror and recreate it. The story
follows Gerda as she passes literally and metaphorically through the seasons of the year, only to
end up in Snow Queen‘s palace and save her friend with her warm tears of love. Disney‘s Frozen
seems to be quite far from the original plot; there is no mirror, no evil dwarfs and no male
Markopoulou 49
protagonist. Instead, Frozen is about two sisters, Elsa and Anna, who have grown apart throughout
the years, as Elsa‘s magic icy power has put Anna‘s life in danger as a child. When their parents
die unexpectedly in a shipwreck, it is time for Elsa to become a queen, which leads to everyone
discovering her secret power. Elsa resorts to the mountains to live free and alone, but accidentally
she sets an eternal winter everywhere. It is Anna who decides on her own to embark on a trip to
find her sister and end a literal winter and a metaphorical one, meaning their cold relationship. In
the film version the evil character is not a dwarf, but a well presentable opportunist, Hans, who
tricks Anna into believing he loves her in order to become a king. Naturally, his plan will be
revealed and Anna will end up with Kristoff, an ice seller with a warm heart.
Although the story has completely changed during the adaptation process, there are some
similarities that reveal Disney‘s source of inspiration. First and foremost, Elsa seems to incarnate
Andersen‘s perception of the Snow Queen: ―[The snowflake] grew bigger and bigger, till it
became the figure of a woman, dressed in the finest white gauze, which appeared to be made of
millions of starry flakes. She was delicately lovely, but all ice, glittering, dazzling ice.‖ In the
meantime, Anna, exactly like Gerda, is the only one that can save Kay; as in the film Kay does not
exist, it is Elsa who needs saving, and the only person that can do it is her sister: ―'I can't give her
[Gerda] greater power than she already has. Don't you see how great it is? Don't you see how both
man and beast have to serve her? How she has got on as well as she has on her bare feet? We must
not tell her what power she has; it is in her heart, because she is such a sweet innocent child. If she
can't reach the Snow Queen herself, then we can't help her‖ (Andersen). Interestingly enough,
Anna saves Elsa by actually putting her own life in danger and is saved by Elsa in return, in the
same way that Gerda saves Kay: ―Then little Gerda shed hot tears; they fell upon his breast and
penetrated to his heart. Here they thawed the lump of ice, and melted the little bit of the mirror
Markopoulou 50
which was in it‖ (Andersen). All these similarities make one wonder if in the Disney version the
Surprisingly, the meaning of the story seems to have been preserved. Andersen openly
states at the end of his tale the moral of the story, which is that one should try to preserve a
childlike innocence in one‘s heart, even if time passes: ―'Where roses deck the flowery
vale,/There, Infant Jesus, we thee hail!‘ And there they both sat, grown up and yet children,
children at heart; and it was summer—warm, beautiful summer‖ (Andersen). It seems that it is
also Anna‘s innocent and pure love for her sister that saves the latter. To the audience‘s surprise,
we could safely say that it is the first Disney film, where the heroine is not saved by a prince‘s
That leads to the conclusion that Disney has made in fact a noticeable progress, as far as
the depiction of romance is concerned. In the first place, there are two equally important
princesses in the film, since both Anna and Elsa are indispensable in the story. For the first time in
a Disney film, there are, not only one, but two female heroines, a model which seems to replace
the old heterosexual couple depicted in previous films, as I have already pointed out. Furthermore,
these two heroines save each other, Anna warms up Elsa‘s heart by sacrificing herself for the latter
and Elsa brings Anna back to life with her tears of love. The heterosexual kiss is substituted by
sisterly tears. Also, Elsa does in fact remain unwedded at the end of the story, while Anna ends up
with Kristoff. Has the romance eclipsed in this Disney film? Certainly not. It is not surprising that
the heterosexual model is still an option in Disney, as changes take time and occur only gradually.
So Anna falls in love with Hans and then with Kristoff. However, the romance is certainly not the
main focus of the film, as both Kristoff and Hans are not the protagonists of Frozen, but rather
secondary characters that are employed in order for the relationship of the sisters to be challenged
Markopoulou 51
and reestablished. So, we understand why Tom Russo states in his film review that ―‗Frozen‘
could […] leave its mark as the next step in the Disney Princess feminist revisionism championed
by last year's ‗Brave.‘ Where that film staunchly pushed a men-don't-define-me theme throughout,
here it's the requisite fairy tale ending that gets tweaked.‖
Also, not only are the male heroes not essential to the rescue of any female character in the
film, but also the film is humorously critical towards the romance model presented by the previous
films. ―You can't marry a man you just met,‖ Elsa cries to Anna, when the latter introduces her
future husband Hans, whom she has just met. ―Who marries someone you just met?‖ Kristoff
exclaims. Ironically, the answer to his question would be ―all the previous Disney princesses.‖ All
of the first generation princesses,16 like Snow White, Sleeping Beauty and Cinderella, married the
princes without even knowing them, as they fell in love at first sight. This is something that
In order not to be misunderstood, there are some points that I would like to clarify, as far
as Disney‘s alterations of classic tales are concerned. Firstly, I would like to stress that it is very
crucial that we not consider the old tales as completely innocent. What I mean is that the fact that
by proving Disney‘s overall messages problematic, I do not imply that the original messages of
the original tales were correct or even moral. It is essential that we keep in mind that every tale
was written in a specific era and served the philosophy and interests of its writer. I have already
mentioned, for instance, Perrault‘s criticism towards the individualistic spirit of the French society
16
At this point I use Sarah Rothschild‘s categorization of Disney Princesses, which appears in The
Princess Story: Modeling the Feminine in Twentieth-Century American Fiction and Film (2013).
According to Rothschild, the princesses who appeared in the 1980s-90s indicate the same characteristics,
of the seventeenth century of which he was a part and how his criticism is the result of his own
personal disappointing experiences. At the same time, there has been an even bigger discourse as
far as the Grimms‘ tales are concerned, since the Grimms brothers did not simply write down oral
folk tales, but they added their own elements in these stories. According to Donald Haase, the
Grimms‘ tales were used as a tool to reinforce nationalism after the unification of Germany in
1871 (386). ―In 1939,‖ Haase continues, ―Vincent Brun accused the Germans of perverting the
fairy tale by exploiting its rude primitive instincts to educate and not to amuse children,‖ while
after the World War II their stories were so identified with their German origins that were
completely banned from public schools due to their graphic violence (387). Therefore, it is natural
that we cannot avoid subjectivity when it comes to reading and re-telling folk tales. The question
however is to what extent these re-tellings affect and form children‘s characters and beliefs, since
it is the young ages that constitute the audience of such tales. More specifically, Disney‘s
interpretation of femininity and sexuality could lead to misinformation as far as the roles of the
Furthermore, Haase is concerned with the issue of ownership of folk tales. The author
realizes that in the spirit of copyright in the nineteenth century, many nations started claiming or
re-claiming their own tales (with Grimms being simply one of the striking examples) (Haase 393).
With the advent of mass media, though, copyright continued playing an important role as, while in
the past tales were considered to be every nation‘s asset, in contemporary years they turned into a
trademark. As an example Haase mentions the lawsuit that Disney company filed against the
Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in 1989 complaining that the latter broke the
copyright law by using the Snow White figure (394). This fact is of immense importance, since
the Disney versions of tales are so popular that they have practically become the only known
Markopoulou 53
version of them. This leads to a narrowing of meanings and representations as the Disney way
seems to have become the only way. As Annalee Ward states, ―[g]enerations are now raised on
Disney fairy tales, and original story lines are forgotten or dismissed as not the real thing. Disney
rewrites the original tales for its particular version of American values‖ (2). This lack of plurality
of versions of the folk tales leads, in other words, to a false perception of the Disney models as the
real ones, since the young audience is ignorant of the alternative – I purposefully avoid the term
The realization, however, remains that Disney has shifted the way it deals with the folk tradition.
The plots of the more recent Disney animation films is built around a series of events that are a
result of the princess‘s choices; through these events, the princess embarks on a journey towards a
personal maturation rather than of romance and marriage. Regardless, does the change of the
Disney company end there or has the princess‘s attitude been altered as well? Is the princess‘s
passivity a given in the new Disney films, or is she the leader of her own story? And what is the
villainess‘s role in the recent Disney films?These are the issues that the second chapter of this
Chapter 2
Having already established that Disney‘s interpretation of folk tales has been completely
altered compared to the past, it is only natural that the characters‘ portrayal has also evolved. This
chapter is going to explore separately the external and internal changes that the princesses
underwent. While princesses remain stunningly beautiful, beauty loses the prestige it occupied in
the previous Disney animation films. The focus is clearly shifted on the internal beauty and
dynamism of the princesses, who embark on a journey of self-awareness and maturity. This
change of the heroine‘s personality indicates the beginning of a new era of sisterhood, where
villainess is possibly good, death can be defeated with sisterly or self love and matriarchy is a
possibility.
Before the external and internal change of the Disney princesses is explored, it is important
that the social conditions in which Disney writes and creates nowadays be mentioned, as it will
facilitate our understanding of the Disney female model evolution. It seems that Disney has
realized that social changes need new forms of representations, as, in the opposite case, the
company would be left behind financially and culturally speaking. With gender equality being
nowadays more powerful than ever not only in the US, but all around the world and given that
Disney aims to the global market, they could not help taking into account the changes of their
Markopoulou 55
target audience‘s mentality. At the same time, the advances of technology has forced Disney to
catch up by collaborating with Pixar; a change that, as we will see seems to have affected the
It is not surprising that gender equality is nowadays more contemporary than ever. Naomi
Wolf, author of ―The Beauty Myth,‖ in an interview she gave to the editors of Global Agenda on
this issue declares that ―[w]hat ‗gender equality‘ or ‗feminism‘ should mean -- I suppose if gender
equality is the goal, feminism is the process of how we get there -- is the logical extension of the
core idea of democracy‖ (qtd in H.J. Raymond). Just a few months ago the Bangkok Post writes
about the proposals of the seminar that took place in Bangkok under the title ―Hearing Women's
Voices before Drafting the Charter.‖ According to Mongkol Bangprapa, the seminar asked for
30% quota for women in politics as it is in the western countries, ―budget support for local
women's networks and the establishment of an independent body for women to put forward issues
for the national agenda,‖ protection from sexual violence especially against socially sensitive and
underage female groups, protection of the legal right to motherhood in the workplace and
generally that ―unfair treatment of women must be addressed.‖ Women also ask for opportunities
in male dominated professions. Dan Clark informs us that ―[a] recent report from the Smith
Institute, called Building The Future: Women In Construction, said only 1.2 per cent of
tradespeople in the construction industry were women. As a result of the report, the Construction
Industry Training Board (CITB) is now working with its partners and employers in Hull to try to
improve the perception of construction among women and address some of the negative attitudes
Women do not only occupy a wide space in the workplace, politics and economy but also
the army. Matt Sanctis informs us that ―[a]ccording to information from the Department of
Markopoulou 56
Veterans Affairs, women comprise about 14.5 percent of all active-duty military and 18 percent of
all National Guard and Reserves‖ (2). Even being a housemother, which has been construed as a
Ramachandran, the author of And the Winner Is… and a speaker on women and children's issues,
argues that ―[w]omen who chose to being at home today are not traditionalists who are
simplistically hanging on to the apron strings of tradition. They have just chosen motherhood
against other options that are available to them‖ (6). All this evidence proves that women are not
silent anymore; so how could the princess be? Within this world that changes rapidly and taken
over by the female power, a passive, obedient Belle that comforts an abusive Beast, a Sleeping
Beauty that misses all the action, a Snow White that naively chokes on a poisoned apple and a
mermaid that is willing to cut her tail, in order to get married, seem too naïve to even exist.
The changes of the Disney mentality, however, are also related to the fact that the company
was forced to widen its target audience. While in the past the Disney animation films were quite
childish and failed to attract the older members of the audience, it seems that nowadays being an
adult is not an excuse to avoid Disney. As Fraser Martens points out, ―[t]he long list of animated
features by which Disney built its reputation were, without exception, fanciful stories, fairy-stories
in the usual sense of the word, in which wooden toys came to life, elephants flew, and animals
were more often than not capable of talking as well as, or better than, humans. In other words,
animated movies were kids‘ stuff. Adults saw them, usually, because their children dragged them,
and when they did enjoy them, they probably felt a little sheepish about it. After all, they were just
so… cartoony.‖ This widening of the audience was probably a decision that the company had to
make, when it faced a financial disaster after the release of Beauty and the Beast. Based on data
provided by The Independent ―Euro Disney [the part of the Disney company that controls the
Markopoulou 57
hotels and theme parks] has been blighted with bad luck since its gates opened in 1992 as a
recession loomed and it soon teetered close to bankruptcy‖ and according to the newspaper the
financial difficulties continued till 2010, as the company was facing a €1.8 billion debt. Part of the
financial disaster was definitely that the company could not compete against the CGI (Computer
Generated Imagery) animation that other companies, such as Pixar, exclusively used.
So, it was not surprising that seven years ago Disney bought Pixar for $7.4 billion, as Paul
La Monica writes in CNN Money, although the extreme amount of money that Disney was willing
to pay reveal the severity of the company‘s situation. However, the two companies did not merge,
as Pixar got to maintain its independence and keep its offices and name. The deal was that Pixar
would be responsible for the production of the film and Disney for the marketing of the product,
as Ed Catmull, co-founder and president of Pixar Animation, mentions in his interview regarding
his new book Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True
Inspiration, where he explores issues of management of staff and sources during the production of
the film, as well as the Disney and Pixar collaboration. The reason I mention this is that I believe
that Pixar has affected the Disney way and created what I like to call the Dixar way. Pixar never
really focused on a romance as the main element of the plot. Toy Story (1995), A Bug’s Life
(1998), Monsters, Inc (2001), Finding Nemo (2003), The Incredibles (2004) are some of the
examples that prove that Pixar seems to focus mostly on relationships between friends (such as
Woody and Bud in Toy Story) or fathers and sons (Finding Nemo, Up), rather than on romantic
relationships. In the meantime, Pixar characters evolve tremendously within the filmic time. Toy
Story is all about a boy, Andy, who grows old and naturally abandons his toys, as he enters
puberty. In Finding Nemo, we observe an overprotective father who gradually realizes that his son
can protect himself and is no need of him anymore, while Up focuses on an old man who has
Markopoulou 58
become introvert and stubborn due to the loss of his wife, loosening up and letting a young boy
help him deal with his grief. It is this element of deep meaningful relationships that Martens calls
the ―Pixar Effect,‖ which has definitely affected the Disney way. Pixar has not only given a third
dimension to the princesses‘ looks but most importantly to their characters, as they all seem to
evolve throughout their films. Do they get all the glory and credits for the change? Certainly not. It
is, however, important to acknowledge Pixar‘s strong voice within the Disney company, as muting
Under these social and financial circumstances, Disney offers a new generation of
princesses that share the same characteristics externally and internally; those traits that constitute a
common ground among the new princesses, separate them from the previous princess traditions.
Beauty remains a given in Disney animation films but the importance of it is undermined, as it
does not seem to facilitate the princess in her journey of self-awareness and maturity, in contrast
with the previous princesses. On the other hand, their attitude seems to have evolved, as they
Starting from the princesses‘ appearance, the results of the comparison are disappointing.
It is not only the tremendous beauty of the new princesses that renders us unable to spot a failure
on the part of Disney to represent reality, but most importantly it is the fact that all new princesses
have a fair complexion, shiny hair and tiny waists. In other words, one could assume that Disney
has not managed yet to escape the beauty standards of today‘s media culture. This media beauty is
certainly not characterized by any sort of objectivity, which makes the criteria of what is
considered beautiful by the industry all the more problematic. Roger Scruton points out this
―ideological‖ aspect of beauty (63). ―An ‗ideology‘ is adopted for its social or political utility,
rather than its truth. And to show that some concept […] is ideological, is to undermine its claim
Markopoulou 59
to objectivity. It is to suggest that there is no such thing as […] beauty, but only the belief in it–a
belief that arises under certain social and economic relations and plays a part in cementing them,
but which will vanish as conditions change‖ (Scruton 63). These economic relations are explored
by Geoffrey Jones who analyzes the beauty industry, meaning the use of the beauty ideology, in
order to promote specific cosmetic products mostly to a female target audience. The main
problematic behind this utilization of beauty is that it is inextricably linked to fashion that changes
constantly, thus making beauty change along with it. According to Jones, ―[t]he beauty industry
has always been obsessed with the latest fashions. The coolest celebrities feature as spokespeople
to the world for the leading brands. Advertisements proudly highlight the latest technological
breakthroughs designed to firm, uplift, and hydrate skin, reverse the signs of aging, and make hair
shine as never before‖ (2). In the meantime, through advertising the media shapes an idealized
body image that is naturally unrealizable for the most part of the audience, which resorts to
unhealthy ways to alter their body weight. Based on a study conducted by the psychologists Janet
Polivy and Peter Herman, ―the media are often blamed for the (increasing) incidence of E[ating]
D[isorder]s, on the grounds that media images of idealized (slim) physiques motivate or even
force people to attempt to achieve slimness themselves. The media are accused of distorting
reality, in that the models and celebrities portrayed in the media are either naturally thin (i.e., at
the tail of the normal distribution of body weight) and thus unrepresentative of normality, or
unnaturally thin (i.e., the products of exceptional exertions to achieve and maintain a slim
physique)‖ (192).
In this media culture, it is natural to assume that the audience is accustomed to unrealistic
depiction of beauty and, therefore, any visual production has to abide by the trend of the era, since
otherwise the audience, being unused to this blunt realism may reject the product. The assumption
Markopoulou 60
would be that aesthetics are a product of the media culture and therefore anything that deviates
from the popular beauty norm is construed as ugly and, thus, uninteresting or even repulsive.
However, there as examples that contradict this assumption, such as Dreamworks‘ Shrek (2001),
where beauty has been reexamined and redefined. The film promotes the idea that beauty is
internal, since both Shrek and princess Fiona are two green beasts, the first from birth, the latter
under a curse. While the curse is supposed to be reversed with true love‘s kiss, the heroine remains
a green monster. Shrek, however, exclaims that to him she is beautiful, subverting in this way the
beauty standards. Interestingly enough, the audience appeared to be very open to this innovative
depiction of unconventionality, as the film elaborately presents how beauty is a trait that you
cannot see, but you can only feel. The characters of the film, despite their deviation from the
media-dictated beauty standards, have been in fact widely loved and accepted by the viewers,
since it brought in $42,347,760 during the opening weekend in the US, a sum that covers over
50% of the estimated budget of the film17. It is thanks to this unexpectedly huge success of the
film that four sequels were released in the next years: Shrek 2 (2004), Shrek the Third (2007),
Shrek Forever After (2010) and Shrek the Musical (2013). Based on the financial success of the
films, it seems that adolescent viewers are in fact able to embrace characters that are far from
perfect. The commitment that the young, mostly, audience showed to the deformed princess and
the monster of the film proves that children are not discouraged by appearance, but they fall for
sympathetic characters with humor and good intentions instead. Although this is not the
mainstream idea of beauty in the film industry, this example proves that it may have opened a way
to alternative ideas about beauty and love, which means that there are new demands and
expectations from the Disney company, which unfortunately seems to adhere to the traditional
In the case of Rapunzel, the most powerful part of her external beauty is her extremely
long, healthy, shiny and, interestingly enough, not ―tangled‖ at all hair that is the source of health
and youth for Rapunzel herself and everybody else who uses it. Therefore, what makes her unique
and invaluable, like a contemporary Sampson, is actually her hair, which is nothing but a part of
her appearance18. ―The display of hair, especially female hair, has [always] carried emotional and
sexual connotations around the world‖ (Jones 44). As Jones informs us, the hair fashion finds its
origins in the middle of the nineteenth century, when ―the fashion of more elaborate and longer
hair for women returned in Europe,‖ which led to the advent of the hair industry of ―haute
coiffure‖ (44, 46). By entering the market industry, by being, that is, commercialized, hair
becomes automatically a merchandise, a fetish that indicates femininity and beauty. Thus,
though that Disney surprises us at the end of the film, by presenting that Rapunzel‘s gift is not
confined in her hair, but in her soul. In the last scene, when Flynn cuts her hair to make her useless
to Mother Gothel, Rapunzel heals him with her tears. In other words, the power she has is deeper,
it comes from her soul and it is her who decides who can use it, as she chooses who deserves her
healing tears. In that sense, indeed Disney has made a step towards the internalization of beauty,
although it is not yet something overt and easy to be perceived, especially by the young viewers.
18
The Disney animator Kelly Ward describes the innovative simulation techniques that were used
specifically for Rapunzel‘s hair. ―To simulate [her] hair,‖ Ward reveals, ―we use our proprietary hair
simulation software, DynamicWires, which utilizes a mass-spring system for the dynamics of curves. We
have extended this system to handle the unique challenges of Rapunzel‘s hair.‖ Four different techniques
were in fact used simultaneously to add realistic movements and shine to the heroine‘s hair, according to
Ward; ―Hair Piling and Volume Preservation,‖ ―Effortless Dragging,‖ ―Simulation Freezing‖ and ―Hair-
Hair Constraints.‖
Markopoulou 62
At the same time, beauty does not guarantee you a happy ending any more. Flynn accepts
to lead her to the night lights, not because he is in love with her or stunned by her beauty, although
it is implicit that he will by the end of the film, but because of his personal interests and ambitions.
In other words, had Rapunzel not hidden his satchel, which contained the royal crown, there is no
reason to believe that he would have helped her. Her rescue from her imprisoned life is not a result
of her looks, but a result of a diplomatic and strategic offer that she plots herself and traps Flynn
into accepting. Moreover, the fact that he falls in love with her and returns to the tower to save her
at the end of the film cannot really be accredited to her beauty either, since the difficult situations
that they have survived together throughout the film and the way she coped with the difficulties
seem to be a more valid reason for him to be impressed and seduced by her. My point thus is that,
despite the melodramatic idea of love that is certainly apparent, while in the previous Disney films
the prince fell in love with the princess‘s appearance and saved her with a kiss, in the more recent
ones, it seems that the focus is not on her beauty but on her personality, which seems to attract the
male hero, who, in response facilitates the princess in her journey, without being account for her
Disney‘s opposition to the belief that true love is a result of immense beauty19 is also
obvious in the newest Disney film Into the Woods (2015). As a matter of fact, the Witch and
Rapunzel‘s mother blinds the prince, an act that is clearly symbolic. Disney punishes the one who
falls in love with beauty rather than essence. The Witch deprives him of the male gaze, which in
all the previous films is the beginning of the quest, the motivation of the prince to save the
princess, as he always falls in love with her looks. By taking away his ability to see, even if this is
19
Previous films that undergird this idea is Snow White, Sleeping Beauty and Cinderella, where the prince
seems to instantly fall in love with the princess, without even having proper interaction with her.
Markopoulou 63
the result of motherly jealousy or maybe vanity, Disney opposes the objectification of the female
beauty as it places the emphasis on the soul rather than looks. When the Witch blinds the prince,
she takes away his ability, not only to draw pleasure in what he sees, but mostly to objectify what
he sees, which, in this case is her daughter Rapunzel. Likewise, even though the Witch wins back
her beauty, she fails to be truly loved, even by her own daughter, as it is her soul that renders her
ugly and undesired, rather than her appearance20. In the meantime, the symbolic blinding of the
male viewer opens up new possibilities for the female viewer‘s identification, which has been
quite neglected by the traditional cinema structure, as Mulvey claims (Smelik 10).
While Rapunzel does not use her prettiness in any way, Mother Gothel is in fact punished
for seeking eternal beauty. Although this could be viewed as a step against the obsession with
female beauty standards, it has always been the case that vanity should be punished in Disney
animation films. Snow White‘s stepmother slips off a cliff in her attempt to kill her one single
rival and dominate as the world‘s most beautiful woman. However, the difference between the
stepmother and Mother Gothel is that the second one seems to be more interested in youth rather
than beauty. As the filmic evidence suggests, once she uses Rapunzel‘s hair, she goes back to
being young and healthy. The element of the American obsession with youth is indeed apparent,
20
The deprivation of the male gaze has a more profound meaning, should we take into consideration Laura
Mulvey‘s theory about scopophilia in the movies. Mulvey emphasized that the gaze is the main source of
pleasure in the cinema, as the viewer engages in voyeuristic pleasure or narcissistic identification (qtd in
Anneke Smelik 9, 10). Scopophilia, however, was analyzed by Mulvey ―on the axis of activity and
passivity, a binary opposition which is gendered, that is signified, through sexual difference,‖ as Smelik
explains Mulvey (10). In this schema, it is the male who is the agent, while the woman is ―‗his‘ object‖
(Smelik 10).
Markopoulou 64
but it is not necessarily related to the beauty standards. Although the problematics behind this idea
are obvious, one should keep in mind that it is hard to evade the depiction of young heroes in a
children‘s film, since the identification process would be interrupted. After all, I argue that in fact
the obsession with youth might even be criticized by Disney in the film Tangled, as Mother Gothel
In the meantime, beauty is not a factor either in the case of Merida, the heroine of Brave
(2012). In this case, there has been strong opposition as far as Disney‘s distorted version of
femininity and beauty is concerned, the most striking example being the lawsuit against Disney in
2013, which concerned princess Merida. After the release of the toy line for the film Brave,
Disney published a picture of the young princess that was however extremely different from the
original heroine. The new image depicted a woman, rather than a teenager, that was extremely
feminine and sexualized. The outrage was so intense that Disney finally withdrew Merida‘s
picture.
However, it seems that beauty in the film is something that is not only completely
neglected by the princess herself, but also it is a fact that she hates about her. Merida is presented
as a tomboy, rebellious teenager that enjoys hunting and riding her horse in the forests; a girl that
likes breaking the boundaries of the two genders and living free away from laws and rules.
Femininity in Brave is not linked to physical beauty, but to duty. It is the tradition based on which
every woman needs to be married, in order to protect her kingdom and rule that defines
womanhood. It is this tradition that Merida is trying to break, or, at least, alter somehow, as she
refuses to have a prearranged marriage at the age of fifteen. What Merida is afraid of and she feels
she needs to be saved from is tradition. To that end, beauty has certainly nothing to do with the
outcome of her struggle. In fact, Merida manages to stay unwed by persuading her mother, after a
Markopoulou 65
series of unfortunate events and complications, as in all Disney animation films, that traditions
evolve along with people. This is something that will be analyzed as we proceed, but for the time
being we need to highlight that beauty, although a given in Disney, is not a key to happiness in the
The fact that being pretty is not enough anymore in Disney films is also supported by
Frozen (2013). The stunning beauty of Elsa and Anna does not lead to the melting of the ice. In
fact, beauty and the superficial perception of it is presented as dangerous in this specific film, as it
is on appearance that Anna and Hans base their alleged love at first sight. The very fact that their
love is proved to be a façade and Hans turns out to be evil rather than Prince Charming
undermines beauty even more and it undergirds the argument that superficial perception of beauty
may hide enormous dangers. While the old princesses were lucky enough to have gotten away
with remarkably beautiful and ideal husbands21 the younger princesses either refuse to, or simply
fail to achieve a happy ending through looks. Not to mention of course that in Frozen, Anna ends
up with Kristoff, who is supposedly less beautiful than Hans. Although this is not supported by
Kristoff‘s appearance per se, the trolls sing about all his flaws, both the external and the internal
ones, saying that he deserves to be loved despite them. Indeed, Anna chooses the imperfect one,
rather than the typical fairytale prince. In other words, while in the previous Disney films the
prince‘s beauty was a given and, therefore, it was perceived as common sense that the princess
would fall back in love with him, we notice that in the more recent ones both male and female
21
All the princes of the old Disney films that this study focuses on were not only physically beautiful, but
very wealthy as well, which implies that they saved the princesses both physically, as they brought them
back to life, and socially, as their marriage offers to the princess a financial security and social status,
which princesses such as Snow White, Cinderella, Ariel and Belle certainly lacked.
Markopoulou 66
heroes seem to find love despite their imperfections, as beauty is not the factor that determines
love.
Not only are the newest princesses‘ beauty unstressed by the filmic plot, as it is not an
element that eases their journey but also they seem to be portrayed much more realistically as far
as their body movements are concerned. Kinesthetically, I spot one crucial difference between the
new princesses and the old; that is, the old princesses are very airy and light, while the new ones
seem to be more down to earth, literally and metaphorically. To be more specific, in Snow White
and Cinderella Disney used actual ballet dancers and adapted the movements of the princesses on
them (in fact the same ballerina was used for both leading roles, which is why the similarity
between the two heroines‘ movements is uncanny). These princesses walk on their toes, which
highlights their graceful, classy, aristocratic and gentle nature. However, this airiness of
movement makes it hard for them to be viewed as realistically portrayed women. Similar to their
dreamy personality, their body also emphasizes they are part of a dream themselves. Even Ariel
who constitutes an extreme case, as she cannot even walk, is presented as an airy creature, since
This illusion of reality has been noticed by Chris Pallant who identifies it as part of
works of animation theorist Paul Wells, has come to define a mode of animation which, despite
the medium‘s obvious artifice, strives for ‗realism‘. It is this paradox – the attempt to represent
reality in a medium predicated on artificiality – that makes hyperrealism such an appropriate term‖
(Pallant 345). To make the paradox even clearer, Disney craved for realism but resisted it at the
same time; firstly because the technological means did not favor realism, as, in Pallant‘s own
words, ―a completely realistic human figure could not be depicted using traditional 2-D hand
Markopoulou 67
animation, given that the medium constantly, and unavoidably, foregrounds its artifice‖ (346). The
second reason though seems to be that Disney was willing to sacrifice realism, in order to add
cuteness to the princesses22. While this obsession with staying pretty affected how the classic
princesses moved and talked, it seems to me that the new princesses have nothing aristocratic
about them; in fact the majority of them seem to be goofy and clumsy. Naturally, this change
should be attributed to the advent of 3-D technology that makes it easier to portray realistic figures
In order to prove my point, I want to draw attention to a scene that I find representative of
this idea. When Rapunzel first leaves the tower, we see her hanging from her hair terrified staring
at the ground. Slowly and hesitantly, she places her bare foot on the grass, starting from the toes
and finishing with the whole foot down on the ground, so steadily that her toes move from the
force she puts on it, a force that strong that after a while the foot is barely visible, as it is hidden by
the grass. This process of Rapunzel‘s stepping on the ground cautiously represents, in my view,
Disney‘s process of re-exploring the female model tradition that the company has been faithful to
all these years. By placing Rapunzel stepping slowly but steadily and forcefully on the grass,
Disney makes a new statement about the princess tradition; princesses are real, they are here and
they claim their space with their voice and actions. The closer they physically are to the ground,
the more realistic they get. Thus, it is safe to assume that the old princesses represented a more
idealistic beauty, while the new princesses appear to be more human, more realistically portrayed.
Therefore, we have established through all this textual evidence that, although beauty
continues being the norm in Disney, it seems that the importance of it has been seriously
22
As Zack Schwartz, a Disney animator during the ‗Golden Age‘, argues, ‗that word ‗cute‘ used to drive
undermined. Not only is it not the goal of the newest heroines but it seems to not play a single role
in the development of the plot; neither does it put them in danger nor does it save them. Despite
the fact that by no means should Disney idealize the female body, it is crucial that the evolution of
the company‘s strategy be acknowledged, since the emphasis has been shifted from the princess‘s
appearance to the princess‘s attitude. As far as their attitude is concerned, the princesses have let
go of the passivity that has outraged feminists who blamed Disney in the past for perpetuating the
image of the silent, passive woman who waits for a man to rescue her.
This evolution does not surprise us. Disney princesses have always been the subject of
evolution throughout the years, even though those changes were slow. Using Amy Davis‘s
classification of the princesses, Snow White, Cinderella and Aurora constitute one category (100).
What brings them together is that ―[a]ll are very kind, graceful, good-natured, beautiful, musical,
innocent young girls‖ (Davis 101). Ariel, however, seems to be more dynamic than her
predecessors, even if this assertiveness is motivated by a romanticized dream of love that she is
obsessed with. She opposes her father and escapes the ocean, trying to accomplish her dream.
Does she try to do it on her own terms and with her own power? No; but still, she manages to stay
awake, in contrast with Aurora who willingly withdraws from her own film. Belle, however,
seems to be both a progression and a regression for the Disney standards. On the one hand, she is
the most intelligent and productive of all the previous Disney princesses; on the other hand
though, this education of hers does not prove her assertiveness, but renders her ―the other‖ among
the inhabitants of her village. While we would expect Belle to be even more dynamic than Ariel,
she seems to embody the archetype of the ―good daughter,‖ as Davis exclaims (189). ―[T]he good
daughter is (usually) a young woman who, out of loyalty to her good but naïve father, finds herself
in a potentially threatening situation and must use all her personal resources to survive, an exercise
Markopoulou 69
which usually ends in personal triumph for the heroine‖ (Davis 189-90). Nevertheless, these
―resources‖ that Belle employs seem to be passivity, tolerance and submission, as it is her patience
that changes the Beast in the end of the film, rather than her actions.
determination and courage. By no means are they waiting to be saved by a prince; on the contrary
they become the saviors of themselves and of others. The importance of this change is stressed
should we consider the effect the media icons have on young viewers.In an attempt to prove that
gender portrayal in media affects children‘s perception of gender roles, Dawn Elizabeth England,
Lara Descartes and Melissa Collier-Meek conducted a comparative study in 2011 that focused
specifically on the gender roles in Disney animation films and spotted the differences in the
portrayal of male and female characters. The conclusions of this study are very interesting to read:
Whereas the later princesses performed more active roles in the final rescues of the movies, the
princes still performed most of the climatic rescues. A princess has not yet performed the final
rescue without the involvement of the prince. […] The princess always won the love of the prince
by the end of the Disney Princess films, and this portrayal of romance provides a strongly
gendered message. The child viewer is provided with consistent exposure to the social script that
one falls in love either very quickly, at first sight. […] [A] heterosexual romance is inevitable and
often a central conclusion of the movie. No princess remains single except for Pocahontas. […]
Consistent with the romantic resolutions of the films, the princesses are frequently portrayed as
These conclusions would be perfectly accurate for the old Disney princesses. Is that the case
though still? Is Elsa indeed a princess that ends up with a prince? Is it the case that no rescue has
Markopoulou 70
been conducted by a princess herself? Do the princesses still advocate love at first sight? A close
reading of the recent Disney films proves that such conclusions are no longer accurate.
The first of the new princesses, Rapunzel, remains a special case, as the film is not as
innovative as the following ones. However, the young princess has still a lot of boldness to show
to Disney‘s analysts. First and foremost, she manages to protect herself from Flynn the first time
she sees him by attacking him with a pan. Although her weapon is a pan, which is relatively
childish and could connote what is traditionally perceived as female space, meaning the kitchen, it
is expected that she would employ a house object, since she has never been in the outside world.
Even if we accept though that the pan stands indeed for the female sphere, it is an even more
striking comment that women are not willing to remain in their kitchen any more. Rapunzel, being
herself oppressed by Mother Gothel, refuses to accept this confinement any longer and actively
offers a deal to Flynn to make him take her to the lights. While one would expect that Disney
would put Flynn in the position of the protector, interestingly enough, it seems that he needs
Rapunzel more than she needs him. Repeatedly throughout the film, she saves him thanks to her
charisma and inventiveness. If it was not for her, he would probably have gotten himself killed in
the ―Ugly Ducklin‖ restaurant, caught by the horse Maximus and the guards of the palace, or die
in the end after Mother Gothel attacks him. Although one could argue that Flynn saves her too by
cutting her hair, it is she who in the end brings him back to life, not with a kiss any more but with
her tears. For the first time in Disney history, it is the princess that saves the hero and gives the
To this argument I would like to also add that Flynn is both physically and socially saved
by Rapunzel. He is a common thief and he would have remained one, if he did not marry a
member of the royal family. In the previous films, Snow White, Cinderella, Belle, Aurora and
Markopoulou 71
Ariel are all of lower or of the same class with the prince and, even if they are of the same social
class, it is their fate or an evil stepmother that has deprived them of their power. This power they
earn back only thanks to the prince who brings them back to life and social prestige and wealth.
On the other hand, Rapunzel, who has also been deprived of her royal rights and life because of
Mother Gothel, needs no one to reclaim her throne; she ends up finding her true identity and place
on her own and offers to Flynn a share of the throne as well. Traditionally, marriage was
considered to be a necessity for a woman, since, until the 1960s an unwed woman was
discriminated against and lacked social status and prestige. David Clark notices that since the late
1950s marriage starts changing form, as women‘s emancipation led to their claiming ―higher
standard of living‖ (25). As the Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce reported in 1956
‗[w]omen are no longer content to endure the treatment which in past times their inferior position
forced them to endure‘ (qtd in Clark 25). Even since the 1960s ―marriage as institution gave way
to marriage as relationship‖ (Clark 27). This emphasis on marriage as mostly a relationship rather
than an institution that brings wealth and prestige to the wife is apparent on the recent Disney
films. Consequently, the princess‘s social status does not depend on the prince, her husband,
anymore, but it is rather the princess‘s responsibility to reclaim her post and, even help her
Merida is also another dynamic princess. From the beginning of the film it is established
that she needs no one in order to survive, as she can protect herself in the woods. Being really
adept at the arrow, Merida seems to explore the male sphere, as Warcraft has been traditionally
linked to the male sex. She claims a position in the male dominated world, the one where men are
allowed to hunt, ride horses and be free from rules. Merida has nothing in common with the old,
fragile princesses who passively accept their fate and suffer. She refuses to suffer, she speaks up
Markopoulou 72
her mind and confronts her mother. In order to change her mother‘s opinion, Merida asks for the
help from a witch, similarly to Ariel. The difference however is that the witch in Brave is
definitely not evil, but simply unqualified, as she forgets the particularity of the spell that she
offers to Merida. As a result Merida‘s mother turns into a bear. Throughout the rest of the story
Merida is the one and only protagonist, with her mom, a bear that luckily does not speak, being a
secondary character. It is Merida who is called to reverse the spell, as the witch is gone and it is
her who needs to protect her mother from the men who hunt her down, including the king himself.
The princess succeeds to solve the spell basically alone and, when she does, she manages to
change also her mother‘s will, ending up in this way single and free.
What is quite important to mention is that Brave is in fact the first Disney princess film
that involves no romance at all. Merida neither has nor finds true love; she does not even seek for
it. She fights against the idea and the institution of marriage and this is in fact a major transition
for a Disney princess. However, although in the beginning she wants to be unwed and free, it
appears that in the end all she was fighting for is her right to choose her husband in time. In other
words, Disney is not ready to completely let go of the romantic dream that Walt Disney himself
advocated in the old princess films. The innuendos of Brave is that Merida will want to get
married eventually, once she finds her true love. But she has earned her right to be the one to pick
the time and the man, the right to choose, which reveals the postfeminist influences of the film,
which will be further explored later. Even though the ending is not as innovative as one would
hope, Merida sets unquestionably an example to the older princesses who dream of love and suffer
In Frozen, the plot focuses on the relationship of the two heroines that both seem to be
completely emancipated. Elsa is born with a special gift; the gift of ice. It is this gift that leads to
Markopoulou 73
an accident that endangers young Anna‘s life, so Elsa is confined to a life of solidarity and
exclusion, believing that she is a danger to her own sister. However, after the death of their parents
in a shipwreck, it is time for Elsa‘s coronation. Not being able to control her power, she is
discovered and everybody attacks her for being different, a ―freak.‖ Elsa refuses to accept this
characterization and runs away to the mountains. The song ―Let It Go,‖ that has become the
symbol of this film in general, indicates that Elsa is not willing to change under the pressure of
social standards. ―It's time to see what I can do/ To test the limits and break through/ No right, no
wrong, no rules for me/ I'm free!‖ Elsa sings, ignoring the social stereotypes that confined her all
these years and forced her to deny herself and her particularities.
Naturally, the solution that Disney gives to the difference is quite problematic, since Elsa
voluntarily adopts a marginal existence, as she is forced to run away, in order to be able to be
herself. Does that mean that an untamed woman is not allowed to be part of society? Is Elsa
obliged to control her power if she ever wants to come back? Is society still afraid of the deviant
femininity? Examining the connection between the supernatural and monstrous femininity in
horror films, such as Carrie (1976), Shelley Stamp Lindsey notices that there is a systematic
attempt from the filmic industry to castrate the aberrant woman by mutilating her body (35).
―[T]he horror, as often noted, arises not from woman's ‗castration,‘ but from the fact that she is not
castrated. In order to account for this puzzling phenomenon of sexual difference, the male subject
constructs a fantasy of female castration, perversely enacted by the slasher‖ (Lindsey 35). Thus,
the monster and the woman become one, ―because of their shared (and threatening) anatomical
difference‖ (Linda Williams qtd in Lindsey 35-36). ―Monster! Monster,‖ the Duke of Weselton
exclaims, once Elsa‘s powers are revealed. I simply wonder at this point if this voluntary escape of
Markopoulou 74
the heroine is an easy way out for Disney, since in this way both society and Elsa seem satisfied
However, Elsa does not in fact come back, when she has tamed her power, but when she
realizes that what she was told when she was young is not true. She is not a danger to her sister, in
fact the latter needs and loves her in spite of her special nature. In this sense, it is the lies of her
parents and as an extent of society that have created Elsa‘s dark side; once she escapes society‘s
imposed beliefs about her, she finds her true self, that is simply different rather than dangerous.
Therefore, Elsa may be a circumstantial victim, but not in the same way that the old princesses
were. While the old princesses run away from their tormentors and hide in fear, Elsa runs away
but she does it for her own sake and for her sister‘s wellbeing; she leaves on her own terms. She is
not a weak victim, but a powerful woman that chooses where she wants to be. Elsa is not an evil
enemy, nor a victimized girl: she is a woman that reaches maturity by realizing that she can be
whoever she wants and, once she realizes that, she is finally ready to rule her kingdom.
As far as Anna is concerned, she seems to be as powerful as her older sister, although in
the beginning she is presented as a playful, naïve young girl. Ironically, Anna is oppressed by
being deprived of her sister‘s company for her own good, as the accident has led her parents to the
conclusion she is in physical danger. The fact that they have kept her away from her sister has
made Anna suppress her needs for communication and companionship. She is starved for real life
and action and she finds it all, after Elsa sets accidentally an eternal winter upon their kingdom,
Arendelle. Anna‘s romanticized version of reality, which is obvious by her song ―For the First
Time in Forever‖ is not really an indication of a romantic, dreamy girl, but of a human being that
has been completely deprived of company and social life in years. Anna is craving for love,
because in my view, she simply longs for human contact. At the same time though, Anna is not
Markopoulou 75
motivated to act by her love for a prince. She enters the adventure, in order to talk to her sister and
save her town from eternal winter. The romance in Anna‘s case is not the goal of the film, but
rather a way to make things more complicated, as Anna‘s alleged love at first sight, Hans, turns
out to be the antagonist, an opportunist who goes after the throne. Despite Anna‘s tiny figure, the
young of her age and her lack of real life experiences, she is presented as extremely courageous.
Although she is scared, she manages to overcome her fears and save the day. For instance, the first
time she encounters Kristoff, Anna is terrified to negotiate with him, as she has never done it
before. However, she hides her hesitation and comes up with a perfect plan, in order to persuade
him to lead her to Elsa. This particular scene reminds us vividly of Rapunzel‘s diplomatic offer to
Flynn; the princesses do not wait for a man to save them hoping that their beauty will attract the
male any more, but they ask for help by following strategies that easily convince the male heroes.
The assertiveness of the princesses is highlighted even by the way that they die, which has
been seriously altered in the new Disney films. First of all, in two out of three new animation films
that we examine the princesses actually never die, which means that the figure of the savior, as the
one who brings them back to life is completely eliminated. On the other hand they are called to
save someone else. In Rapunzel‘s case, she is the one who saves Flynn with her healing tears,
while in Brave Merida saves her mother by reversing the spell herself. What is most important
though about the death motif in the new films is that the princess ceases to be simply a pretty
corpse waiting for a savior. Snow White is the most striking example of this, as the heroine‘s dead
body becomes an object of the male gaze thanks to her beauty. In Over her Dead Body,Elisabeth
Bronfen notices that the dead body of the heroine is the first requirement to becoming an object of
admiration. Snow White, according to Bronfen, after her death, is transformed from a human
being to an ―auto-icon,‖ as she exemplifies the idealization of beauty (100). ―[A]s auto-icon, [she]
Markopoulou 76
performs the apotheosis of one of the central positions ascribed to Woman in western culture;
namely that the ‗surveyed‘ feminine body is meant to confirm the power of the masculine gaze. In
Lemoine-Luccioni‘s words, Woman doesn‘t look; she gives herself to be looked at; she is beauty
and being beauty she is also an object of love‖ (qtd. in Bronfen 102). While Snow White and
Aurora fall into deep sleep passively waiting for the prince to notice their beauty and give them
the kiss of life, Anna dies while protecting her sister. The very position that Anna‘s frozen body
holds comes in contrast with the passivity of the previous princesses‘ dead bodies. Even after
death, Anna is dynamic and assertive with her hand raised against Hans‘s sword. Her posture is
definitely not inviting to any sort of rescue. Not to mention that Frozen is the first Disney film
This change of the Disney company‘s perception of death is indeed intriguing. Gary
Laderman, in an attempt to justify Disney‘s ―obsession with death,‖ as he calls it and after running
through Walt Disney‘s biographies to find the answer, ends up making some interesting points that
mostly concern the time when the most famous Disney animation films were created (34, 35).
Laderman explains:
During a period that witnessed severe economic turmoil, a second world war, scientific and
technological revolutions, and other tumultuous social developments in the 1930s, 1940s, and
1950s, Disney's early animated films simultaneously entertained the masses and inculcated
Americans with simplistic notions of right and wrong, virtue and vice, and innocence and
corruption. And what is most striking-though not surprising-about these films is that for many
stories, death, or the threat of death, is the motor, the driving force that enlivens each narrative.
(39)
Markopoulou 77
Based on the writer‘s words, one could assume that the fact that Disney no longer uses death as
one of the basic plot elements is a result of social needs. The industrialization of the 1950s created
the illusion, or even the hope within the American society of an ever-lasting movement, of a non-
stop progress and evolution. By killing the characters in his films, Disney aimed to present that
nothing is over, not even after death. The answer, however is not yet answered. If the motif of
death as a stimulus for motion is now gone, what is now its substitute? It seems to me that death
has not actually eclipsed from Disney films, but it has changed form. Snow White‘s physical death
has turned into an emotional death in the case of Rapunzel that finds the strength to break the bond
with the woman that she was raised by, into a death of innocence, in the case of Brave where
Merida is forced to enter maturity and do her duty to her kingdom, and an ideological death in
Frozen, where Elsa has to break free from the social confinements that oppress her. In this sense,
Disney is still obsessed with the notion of death, but at least this death is dealt with by the princess
per se, as she is the one who dies and resurrects herself.
There is one more element, though, that contributes to the empowerment of the female figure in
Disney films that this chapter focuses on. The role that the animals played in the past becomes
more and more confined, which contributes to the empowerment of the heroine. While in the
past animals had a human voice and were crucial to the development of the plot, in the newest
films they lose the ability to speak and their existence is simply a comic relief and not a necessity
for the storyline. Looking back at the old princesses, it is clear that without the animals‘ help they
would have been in crucial danger. Starting from Snow White, it is the animals that save her more
than once. It is them that lead her to the dwarfs‘ hut at the beginning of the film, they help her
clean and tidy it, they scare away the dwarfs when they come home, in order to protect her and
they notify the latter, when she meets the witch in disguise. Not to mention that it is them who
Markopoulou 78
carry the dwarfs back home soon enough to find and hunt down the evil stepmother. At the same
time, even if they don‘t save her in all scenes, they are her companionship and comfort, her only
friend and support from the way till the end, as they even cry next to her glass coffin, as if they
It is this consciousness of the animals that is portrayed vividly in Cinderella as well. While
being completely alone and tortured in the house of her evil stepmother and stepsisters, all she has
is her mice-friends. They help her cope with her everyday reality, wake her up, help her get
dressed, facilitate her chores and, when things get out of control, they finish her ball dress and
unlock the door so she can have a chance to try on the magic shoe. Interestingly enough, the
human feelings that animals showed in Snow White evolve into a human voice in Cinderella,
where muteness is a characteristic of the enemy, of the evil cat Lucifer that the stepmother owns.
Except for the allegory of the cat-mouse hunt that Cinderella plays with her stepmother, Naomi
Wood also notices that ―Jaq and Gus [the mice] express the physicality that Cinderella cannot‖
(39, 40). They ―possess the libidinal energy that the Cinderella plot lacks,‖ as they seem to be able
to discern between the gender roles of the two sexes (in the scene when Cinderella needs to
prepare male clothes for the newcomer, Gus), they enter and exit holes, and they protest verbally
and physically against the stepmother, when Cinderella stoically accepts the humiliation (Wood
37, 40). In this sense, the role of the animals was extended, highlighted and reinforced gradually
as Disney evolved, since they seem to have entered the human sphere as equal members. Not to
neglect of course the importance of the fact that Cinderella and Snow White can only
communicate with animals, which implies that the female is undermined to an animalistic level,
At the same time, the animals in The Little Mermaid are more than simply the heroine‘s
helpers. Sebastian, the crab, is practically the protagonist in the place of the protagonist, as it is
him who dictates what Ariel is supposed to do, how she is supposed to look and how she will be
able to acquire the prince‘s heart. The fact that a crab is in a position to dictate Ariel and give her
instructions about how to be a woman, undermines even more the intelligence of the latter, as she
is presented as incapable of thinking for herself. In other words, it is implied that without the help
of an animal, the princess would be completely weak and helpless. We notice thus that animals in
Disney acquire gradually more and more filmic space and importance. From the silent,
compassionate helpers in Snow White and Sleeping Beauty, we pass to the talking, energetic,
active helping mice in Cinderella, only to end up in The Little Mermaid‘s world, where animals
not only have a voice, but have also opinions and a personal will and agenda that defines the
In the case of Beauty and the Beast, the animal motif is replaced by the house objects,
which is a natural change, as the whole plot unravels in a castle. However, their role, despite their
nature is no different than their predecessors. Lumiere, Cogsworth and Mrs Potts are there to
facilitate the plot, meaning to make Belle fall in love with the Beast, so that the spell that has been
casted upon him can be broken. The little helpers are necessary to the plot, as they create the
conditions so the Beast and Belle will come together. However, what is more important is that
these inhuman characters seem once more to be the only companion of the heroine. It is not
accidental that Beauty has been placed in a completely strange space alone, where her only
solution is to resort for comfort to house objects that speak with a human voice. Although in this
film there are not animal friends, except for the stool that behaves interestingly enough like a dog,
the pattern of the heroine communicating only with non-human creatures is still there.
Markopoulou 80
What is the common characteristic between the animals of all these classic Disney
animation films, however, is not their human traits or even the fact that they help the heroine
overcome obstacles. The main element is that they seem to be a vital part of the conflict between
the main characters. The animals in Snow White fight the transformed stepmother, the mice in
Cinderella attack Lucifer, who stands for the evil ladies of the house, Sebastian fights for Ariel,
while the house objects speak up for Belle. In a sense, they are in fact soldiers and protectors of
the justice and innocence in animation films. Timothy Cooper views also animals as a means of
political and strategic talk on the part of Disney industry. According to him, ―[c]onsidering that
the anthropomorphic animals are already an ‗other‘ and that their situated origin resides in both
drawn animation and their own contemporary and historic reality, they become redoubled into
something akin to a suggestion for the viewer to consider enacting. Walt Disney Productions
implicitly assumes that animals should be a part of the human war, thus naturalizing and, using
At the same time, however, in order to be more effective in this world animals, seem to be
willing to sacrifice themselves, being on the one hand align with the heroines‘ personal sacrifices
but on the other hand opposing the princesses‘ passivity, making it all the more evident to see that
what they lack the animals have. A striking example would be the courage and willingness of
Cinderella‘s pets when the godmother decides to transform them. The exact moment of the
animals‘ transformation in Disney has been explained by Sergei Eisentsein as a metaphor for
social transformation that people craved after the American depression of the 30s. ―The ideal
reality that took on contours in Disney‘s fairy tales showed nothing other than the momentary
arrest of all possibilities for revolutionary social transformation. The idealized world moulded in
Disney‘s fairy tale reels made graphic the suppression of revolutionary hopes for social
Markopoulou 81
transformation in the 1930s and 1940s‖ (qtd in Cooper 337). Leaving aside the ecologic view that
would see this as a complete exploration of nature for the sake of humanity and focusing on
Eisenstein‘s social transformation theory, it is even sadder to see that the animals take part in a
war that is always the princess‘s problem. By voluntarily offering their help, the animals
undermine the power and feistiness of the heroine who seems to be the trophy of the war, rather
than an active participant. And if we accept Eisentsein‘s view on the social transformation
allegory, it is even sadder that woman is not a part of it or a soldier for its sake, but simply a
motive for all the other powers (male heroes, animals, nature, fairies) to cooperate and fight back.
However, things have been altered in the new princess films. In the case of Tangled, once
more we can spot the in-between-ness of the film, as the heroine has indeed an animal friend,
Pascal, the chameleon, but he neither talks nor is of major importance for the plot (in contrast to
Rapunzel in the Barbie film whose female dragon actually carries her over the great wall finally
conquering its own fear of flying high). In other words, the animal friend is not eliminated in
Tangled, but, in contrast with the previous cases, Pascal is not Rapunzel‘s support system
throughout the film. He is her only friend out of necessity while growing up alone in the castle,
but she grows into having human friends, like Flynn, as the film progresses. In fact, Flynn is not
the only person that she can communicate with. Rapunzel seems to be extremely outgoing and
talkative compared to the previous princesses. She seems to have a charisma that attracts people‘s
attention and helps her resolve complicated situations, with the ―Ugly Ducklin‖ scene being the
most striking example. Therefore, we notice that the role of the animal as the heroine‘s only friend
Similarly, Merida has no animal friends either; in fact, she has no friends at all. What is
interesting in this film is that the animal element is inextricably combined with the human.
Markopoulou 82
Starting with her father‘s figure, he seems to be himself a giant human bear. His posture, the fur he
always wears on his back, his manners and the obsession he has with his sworn enemy, the bear,
strengthen his connection with this particular animal. Interestingly enough, the connection is even
more striking, once Merida accidentally transforms her mother into a bear. Although one could
argue that the animal motif is back, since the whole film deals with Merida‘s relationship with a
bear, the truth is that there is more into it than void accusations against Disney. It is my view that
in this film everybody is taken down to the level of the animal, and particularly the bear. Her
father and siblings‘ animalistic manners, the queen‘s transformation into a bear and her gradual
embracement of the animalistic urges, Merida‘s own connection to the nature and freedom, all
point to the direction that it is a family of bears more than a family of humans. Even the scenery of
the film is not accidental, as they live in a castle of rock that is so similar to a cave.
This is an interesting twist to the old animal heroine relationship. First of all, by placing
everyone at the level of the animal the film plays upon the instincts that are hidden in every
individual and that are oppressed because of society‘s rules and indications. Merida‘s mother is a
comme-il-faut queen and she looks down on her daughter‘s free spirit, until she is forced to
become one with the nature, which she learns to love and embrace as part of herself. Therefore, in
Brave the argument that it is only the princess who is undermined at the level of the animal cannot
stand simply because it is the playful point of the story that people are nothing more than animals
that are well trained to behave in specific ways, in order to coexist. Being an animal and
communicating with one, as the relationship of Merida and her mother bear indicates, is not
something to be looked down on, but mostly it is a process of repositioning the self in life and
nature. It is not accidental that Merida‘s mother becomes more flexible after her transformation
experience, since she realizes that happiness matters in life more than rules.
Markopoulou 83
In the case of Frozen, there are barely any animals at all. The only animal in the film is
Kristoff‘s reindeer, Sven; not only does he not talk but he also has nothing to do with Anna, as he
is Kristoff‘s best friend. In a way in Frozen the pattern of the heroine-animal friendship has been
completely disrupted by placing the male hero in the original schema. At the same time, the two
heroines of the story are friends with Olof the snowman. The point is though that, except for the
fact that Olof is very similar to a human being both appearance-like and behavior-like, his
existence in the plot does not undermine at all the mentality of the heroines but rather enhances it.
Olof is not a random creature that Elsa has created, but the incarnation of Elsa‘s childhood
memories that were filled with love for her sister. Elsa is not simply Olof‘s friend but she is his
creator, which places her in a very strong and powerful position as it is. Moreover, Olof‘s role is
more a comedy release rather than an essential part of the plot, as far as the evolution of it is
concerned. The link that connects the two sisters is not Olof per se, but rather the space of
This assertiveness on the part of the heroine is nothing we have ever seen in Disney
princesses, which leads once more to the realization that the company has made powerful steps
towards the acceptance of the female voice. Has romance eclipsed from the life of the Disney
princess? Certainly not. Nevertheless, romance is neither the question nor the answer any more. It
is a side story to the main plot and it does not undermine the power of the heroine, but it simply
supplements it. Therefore, an accurate question at this point would be: has Disney entered
postfeminism? The concept of postfeminism seems to be quite elusive. It seems that the prevailing
idea behind it is that it portrays the end of feminism, meaning that the latter is no longer needed, as
the female voice is now heard in the social sphere. Understanding this difficulty to define
postfeminism, Elaine J. Hall and Marnie Salupo Rodriguez attempt to analyze this new
Markopoulou 84
phenomenon, based on four different theories. Quoting Laurie Ouelette, they state that ―[t]he four
claims of the postfeminist argument are as follows: (1) Support for the women's movement has
decreased over the 1980-90 period. (2) Antifeminism has increased among ‗pockets‘ of young
women, women of color, and full-time homemakers. (3) Feminism has lost support because it has
become irrelevant. For women who were feminists when younger, the movement failed to achieve
gender equality; for young women in the current era, the success of the movement means it is no
longer needed. (4) A ‗no, but...‘ version of feminism has developed, in which women are
‗reluctant to define themselves with the feminist label, but they approve of and indeed demand
equal pay, economic independence, sexual freedom, and reproductive choice (Hall and Rodriguez
879). By examining the accuracy of these four assumptions, Hall and Rodriguez reach the
conclusion that postfeminism is a myth, rather than a real movement. ―Our research shows that
postfeminism currently is a myth; women continue to support feminism and find it relevant in
their lives. However, the emphasis on postfeminism in the popular media may create a future
reality in which collective struggle is deemed unnecessary. This possibility is the ultimate danger
of the postfeminist argument‖ (Halls and Rodriguez 899). This fear that the scholars express is
related to the ‗lifestyle feminism,‘ as they call it, which ―undermine[s], if not eliminate[s], the
collective struggle that is synonymous with feminism‖ (Halls and Rodriguez 899).
However, to make things clearer and set the boundaries of postfeminism for the sake of
this study, I will use Yvonne Tasker‘s idea of postfeminism, as it is presented and employed in the
cinematic sphere and attempt to see if it applies to the recent Disney films 23. According to Tasker,
23
It must be noted that Tasker‘s idea is quite similar to Ouelette‘s ―no but…‖ feminism theory that was
previously mentioned.
Markopoulou 85
postfeminist discourse to be free to choose; free of both old-fashioned, sexist ideas about women‘s
However, Tasker sees a major contradiction within the postfeminist culture; that is, despite the
fact that female ―strength can […] be celebrated when figured in appropriately feminine terms.
And since conventional femininities are traditionally aligned not with strength but with passivity,
malleability, and a broad willingness to sacrifice self for others, the postfeminist commitment to
an imagery of strong […] yet resolutely feminine women is potentially rife with contradiction‖
It seems that Tasker‘s theory is more than accurate in the Disney films that we analyze. To
begin with, all of the films obviously advocate the woman‘s right to free choice. Rapunzel screams
for her right to leave the tower, even if that constitutes a danger, Merida claims her right to not get
married at the age of fifteen for the sake of her kingdom, Elsa chooses to be alone and free in the
mountains away from society, while Anna argues for her right to be married to whomever she
wants. But how do they celebrate their victory in the end? Rapunzel marries Flynn, Merida agrees
to get married, although her original position was completely negative towards this institution, as
long as this happens in her own time and on her own terms. Her right to not get married in the
beginning becomes her right to true love by the end of the film, a kind of romanticization that has
been linked to femininity and Disney princesses as well. Anna sacrifices herself for her sister.
Even though it is her sister that needs protection, the fact that Anna has to die, in order to save
Elsa proves that she is indeed the typically innocent angel that places someone else‘s needs above
hers. As for the ending, Anna ends up with and probably marries Kristoff, as hinted by the filmic
evidence. The contradiction that Tasker notices in Disney‘s Enchanted (2007), that the film is both
Markopoulou 86
ironic and supportive of true love at the same time, is more than accurate in Frozen (68). The
irony that the film treats Anna‘s first true love with, is completely silenced at the end, when she
finds her actual true love, Kristoff. In a nutshell, Anna‘s possible marriage to Kristoff seems to be
justified and completely supported by the film. Therefore, love at first sight may not exist, but true
love definitely does and it always leads to a heterosexual relationship. This realization that Disney
has entered, as it seems, the postfeminist era does not negate the company‘s evolution; it sets
though the limits of this evolution, as it seems that there are yet miles to be run, in order for the
woman to be redefined and repositioned within the social perception as an individual free from
No matter the weaknesses, the importance of the change should not be undermined.
Changing the Disney princess‘s attitude is crucial, since the audience of such films consists of
young children that seem to form gendered behaviors, based on the models that are portrayed in
Disney films, as cultural studies suggest. In particular, Karen Wohlwend supply us with data from
a survey that ascertains that children reenact expected gendered identities, while specifically
playing with the Disney princess toy line. The observance of the children‘s playtime illustrated the
embodiment of gender stereotypes on the part of the subjects, with the most striking one, in my
view, being that boys are not supposed to reenact female characters (Wohlwend 15). ―As children
in this kindergarten replayed Disney Princess films and played favorite storylines and characters,‖
Wohlwend continues, ―they activated anticipated identities – gendered character roles and
Princess film images, texts, and products‖ (19). These conclusions prove, not only the dangers of
false representation of gender portrayal, but also that children unconsciously realize the
performative nature of gender, since they themselves play out behaviors that they have associated
Markopoulou 87
with each gender. Judith Butler, who is most known for her theory on gender performativity
argues that ―gender is in no way a stable identity or locus of agency from which various acts
stylized repetition of acts‖ (519). This ―repetition of acts‖ that Butler mentions is a given, when a
child revisits and reproduces the plot and songs of Disney animation films, while playing with the
Disney dolls. Therefore, the child adopts the perspective and behaviors of the film, as she imitates
The real dimensions of the impact that these representations have on children‘s mental
formation of gender identity could only be understood, should we consider the commercialization
of the cultural product that occurs, since Disney does not only sell image, but also toy lines that
are based on each film individually. The unlimited success of Disney merchandise is an indication
that children, after watching a Disney film, get to replay and reincarnate the roles and identities
depicted at home. As Janet Wasko points out, ―the content of Disney-branded products, which are
assumed to be wholesome, safe, and pure, as well as ethical, virtuous and unprejudiced. Through
various methods of textual analysis, many studies have identified reoccurring themes in Classic
Disney products, especially those having to do with representation and ideology‖ (250). To make
my point even stronger, recent data from Entertainment Newsweekly shows that ―Frozen products
have landed on every major holiday toy list released by national retailers, toy industry
organizations and media outlets with the Disney Frozen Snow Glow Elsa doll by JAKKS Pacific
being identified on six major lists including TTPM's24 Most Wanted List.‖ At the same time,
Disney dolls are not the end of the story. With the advent of smartphones and tablets, Disney
24
TTPM: Reviews of Toys, Baby Gear, Kids Electronics, Pet Toys, Video Games, & Sporting
Goods<www.ttpm.com>
Markopoulou 88
entered the social media by producing e-books, apps and games associated to the films. The same
Since Frozen's release in 2013, Disney Publishing Worldwide and its licensees have published
more than 800 Frozen print titles globally and more than 35 e-books in the U.S. The Disney
Karaoke: Frozen app has reached no. 1 in the iPad Entertainment Downloads category in more
than 100 countries around the world and ‗Let it Go‘ has been played in the app 3.2 million times
since its launch in May 2014. Additionally, ‗Disney Frozen: Free Fall‘ is Disney Interactive's top-
grossing, most-downloaded app of the year. Millions of people continue to play the mobile game
each day, logging an average of 147 million daily play time minutes each day. (55)
The dazzling numbers of Disney merchandise‘s success emphasize the importance of the analysis
of gender representation in Disney films. Under these circumstances, the fact that Disney
princesses, as previously discussed, have entered a new phase of assertiveness and power creates
new possibilities for the new generations that have come a step closer to a more realistic and
understanding depiction of gender and, most importantly, of femininity on the big screen.
Markopoulou 89
So, while the princess herself experiences a literal transformation, it is only expected that
the villainess would also be altered in some way. The villainess figure is a Disney trend of her
own, with merchandise that has been created and embraced by the audiences. I use the term
―villainess‖ instead of ―villain‖ on purpose, as in this paper what interests me most is how the
female antagonists of the heroines were portrayed in the old Disney films, as well as if and how
this representation has changed in the contemporary princess tradition. It is the general idea among
the critics that the villainess model has changed, especially after the film Maleficent (2014), where
Disney has shifted the focus on the antagonist, rather than the princess, creating in this way a third
dimension for an old animated character. The film Maleficent will be discussed in this chapter, as
indeed I believe that the depiction of the villainess has revolutionary changed the perception of
evil. However, my main focus is not the contemporary villainess per se but the gradual extinction
I do not intend to elaborately describe the old villainess tradition. I believe that it is in fact
a domain that has been discussed and criticized extensively in the past. What I would like to do is
to run through the old princess films, aiming to find an evolution in the villainess portrait, as
Disney‘s evolution in terms of the company‘s perspective is what mostly concerns me. It seems to
me that the old princess generation had only one model of villainess to suggest: the evil witch.
While in the contemporary films we see a variation, that I will elaborately describe later on, the
old Disney demonized the idea of the evil antagonist. The fact that this antagonist is almost in
Markopoulou 90
every case a woman is what makes the films even more problematic. The stepmother from Snow
White, Lady Tremaine from Cinderella, Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty and Ursula from The
Little Mermaid have mostly common characteristics to share rather than differences. They are all
of the same sex (even in Beauty and the Beast the actual villain is not the Beast but the evil witch
that casts a spell on him in the first scene of the film), they are unjustifiably mean and angry, they
are obsessed with the destruction of the princess‘s happiness, they have highly edged faces and
prestigious black gowns and they all get punished in the end for being mean. However, as Davis
notices, the one major characteristic that they have in common is a ―much higher proportion of
agency they show compared to that of their victims‖ (107). The fact that assertiveness has always
been linked with evilness in Disney animation films is quite dangerous, since it conveys the
message that only passivity equals goodness. At the same time, this unexpected evilness that has
possessed them is accentuated by the fact that Disney princesses are presented as innocent, naïve,
unprotected angels. By acquitting the princesses of any sort of flaw, Disney makes it all the more
difficult for the audience to ever understand, sympathize or even identify with the evil witches.
The result is that they become the ―other‖ in the viewer‘s imagination. They are a threat to the
princess‘s happiness, the only obstacle between her and the happy ending and, therefore, they
deserve to be annihilated.
Could these witches be described as femme fatales? My answer would be no. There is an
element in femme fatale that we cannot find in most of the Disney villainesses; hyper-sexuality. In
fact it seems to me that Ursula is the only one that actually expresses some sort of sexual urge, by
attempting to lure prince Eric, despite the fact that even then the viewer cannot clearly detect her
motives; it could be just the case that she wants to sabotage Ariel‘s happiness and through her
destroy Triton, who is her main antagonist. In any case though, Ann Kaplan‘s description of the
Markopoulou 91
evil woman in film noir seems to be more than accurate in the portrayal of Ursula. ‗The hero‘s
success [in our case, Eric] or not depends on the degree to which he can extricate himself from the
woman‘s manipulations. Although the man is sometimes simply destroyed because he cannot
resist the woman‘s lures, […] often the work of the film is the attempted restoration of order
through the exposure and then destruction of the sexual, manipulating woman‘ (qtd in Amy Davis
121). This filmic destruction of Ursula points towards her sexuality even more, as Eric uses a
The main problem remains. By placing a female as the only antagonist of the princess,
Disney films seem to have completely tainted the idea of sisterhood. This lack of sisterhood in
children‘s animation films could and has become harmful, as they embrace the belief that all
women are jealous, vain and dangerous. By eliminating however this bond among women, the
young girl stands alone and unprotected in a world where patriarchy rules and companionship
seems more and more necessary for her to survive. Is that the case, however, in the new princess
tradition? Are women still the enemy or has anything been altered?
I believe Maleficent is the most striking example for this change and, despite the fact that it
is not an animation film, I think it would be naive on my part to ignore it, since it is a film that
where Angelina Jolie holds the leading part, Disney rewrites the story of Sleeping Beauty, by
presenting it from the witch‘s point of view. Maleficent‘s motives, whose lack rendered her
irrationally angry in the animation film, become now clear, as she has been betrayed by her best
friend, Stefan, who mutilates her by clipping off her wings, in order to win the throne. As a
revenge to Stefan, Maleficent curses his daughter, baby Aurora. While in the animation film
Maleficent‘s evilness has no boundaries, in the 2014 film Maleficent comes to love the young girl
Markopoulou 92
and does everything to reverse the curse and save her. And even when she fails, even when the girl
dies, she is there to give her ―true love‘s kiss‖ and bring her back to life. It is very interesting to
see how Disney justifies the evil woman and presents a more realistic character with human
dimensions that feels pain, gets hurt, changes her mind and falls in love. In a sense we could say
that Maleficent stands for all the other villainesses who were never justified for their behavior. By
bringing her back to realism, Disney advocates that evil and good coexist and live within the
person; what matters is the one that prevails in the end. There is no pure evil, there is only human
weakness. At the same time, nevertheless, it is obvious that Disney falls again into the trap of
dilemmas, when it comes to female psychology; right or wrong, good or evil, victimizer or victim.
As Adam Nayman reviews the film, he notices that ―Maleficent‘s malevolence, once so
provides a feminist subtext yet also defines this omnipotent earth-goddess entirely by the actions
of a man‖ (80). Under no circumstances though can we undermine the importance of the change
that Disney has made as far as the portrait of the villainess is concerned.
One year after the release of Maleficent, Disney repeats the same motif of the kind,
misunderstood witch in the film Into the Woods, where everybody is literally and metaphorically
―into the woods,‖ meaning into the forest and in danger. Meryl Streep incarnates the ultimate fairy
tale witch. What is the difference between her and her predecessors? That she herself is a victim of
her own mother, whose curse has cost her her youth and beauty. The whole film evolves around
the witch‘s efforts to reverse a curse that her mother had cast upon a household, in order to find
her inner good/ beauty (sadly the associations of goodness and beauty have not yet changed).
However, the heroes of the fairy tale, who are cleverly interconnected by the plot, seem to be
predisposed towards her, as they do not hesitate to blame her for every danger that has befallen
Markopoulou 93
them. It is then and only then that the witch literally explodes, as she feels the injustice. ―I'm the
Witch/ You're the world/ I'm the hitch/ I'm what no one believes/ I'm the Witch,‖ she sings in ―The
Last Midnight,‖ expressing in this way her misery for the fact that she is indeed misunderstood.
While Maleficent and Into the Woods change the figure of the villainess, Rapunzel, to return to
our main focus, is not that revolutionary. Once again it is proved that Tangled stands in-between
the old and the new era, as Mother Gothel is unquestionably the main antagonist of the girl, but
clearly less evil than her predecessors. Her figure is soft and humanized, despite her black, full of
volume hair that point to a threat. She is the first villainess that looks like a realistically portrayed
woman, without yellow eyes, edged face and magic skills that can transform her. What is the most
important element though that differentiates her from the previous villainesses is her motherly
feelings towards Rapunzel. Rapunzel is not accidentally left with her as the result of misfortune,
like Snow White or Cinderella did, after the deaths of their fathers. She was not murdered by her
like Aurora and she was not mistreated while asking for help as in Ariel‘s case. Rapunzel was
raised by Mother Gothel. Although the latter kidnapped the princess, in order to be able to take
advantage of her magic hair, still it should not be unacknowledged that it is her who took care of
the girl. In fact, there are elements in the film that prove that Mother Gothel may have been a quite
At the beginning of the song, when Rapunzel sings ―When Will My Life Begin,‖ she
presents all the different activities that she does in the house. This house, even though it confines
her, it still gives her a lot of opportunities to grow and entertain herself. Moreover, when Rapunzel
asks to go out on her birthday, Mother Gothel forbids her to do so, but she still makes up for it by
going on a long trip to bring to Rapunzel her favorite painting colors and she makes also her
favorite soup. In a way, I sense that the film purposefully leaves unclarified whether or not Mother
Markopoulou 94
Gothel really cares for Rapunzel or not. Despite her actions, and even if we accept that she is a
selfish, vain woman, she is still much more maternal than the previous villainesses. Not to
mention of course that her hatred appears, once she loses Rapunzel, which could be interpreted as
the reaction of a mother obsessed with her daughter. This obsession is more clearly portrayed
actually in Into the Woods. The Witch does not take advantage of Rapunzel in any way, so, when
the latter decides to run away with the prince, the Witch‘s despair can only be explained as
hyperbolic motherly love. In fact, the scene where the Witch prevents Rapunzel from leaving is a
heartbreaking motherly stream of insecurities and complains. ―Someone has to shield you from the
world./ Stay with me./ […] Who out there could love you more than I?/ […] The world is dark and
wild/ Stay a child while you can be a child/ With me.‖ Even in Tangled though, it is the balance
between motherly love and manipulation of the princess that makes the film progressive, as we see
a new side of a mother. It is very interesting also to notice that, while the previous villainesses
were stepmothers, Mother Gothel, as her name also indicates is a true mother, or at least this is
what the heroine thinks. Mother Gothel is all she knows, which makes her feel safe. She is not
endangered technically in any way; she is protected and free to do whatever she wants, if she
agrees though to stay inside. Not to mention of course that Mother Gothel needs Rapunzel alive,
which is ironically the exact opposite of her predecessors. Rapunzel‘s life guarantees her own life
as well, so it is the protection of the girl that is her main goal. Mother Gothel is indeed a villainess,
but she suppresses Rapunzel, interestingly enough, for her own sake.
In the case of Brave, there is no villainess at all. Merida‘s ghosts are the ideals that her
family has been following for years, the traditions that she is forced to comply with. Although a
superficial reading of the film renders her mother as the antagonist, since she is the one who
fervently forces her to marry, based on what tradition dictates, under no circumstances could we
Markopoulou 95
argue that she is evil, or that she intends Merida‘s unhappiness. On the contrary, the film seems to
advocate that her mother is a victim as well, since she was also forced to marry very young, in
order for the kingdom to be safe. As a matter of fact, she is herself victimized by the patriarchal
society that forbids a woman to become queen, unless she is married. The ―bad wolf‖ in Brave is
not a woman or a witch, but the system, the institution of marriage itself that seems to be a curse
for young girls. This interesting twist shows that the simplistic villainess figure of the past tends to
become extinct in contemporary Disney films, as it is substituted by a more intangible model. The
enemy is not out there, but it is inside of the heroes; it is the internalized ideals and values that
In the same way, Frozen lacks a villainess. Hans, who could be considered as the evil
antagonist, is by no means villain material. His role in the film is confined to basically keeping the
two sisters apart. In a sense, he is the obstacle that they have to overcome, in order to find each
other, in the same way that Prince Philip has to kill the Maleficent-dragon, so as to reach the
princess. However, Hans is neither the main problem nor the most difficult one. He is easy to win,
as it seems, once Elsa finds inside of her the suppressed love that she always had for her sister.
Once she manages to open up and find her sisterly love, without fear and shame, she manages to
bring her sister back to life and control her icy powers. Could we assume that Elsa is the evil witch
of the story that substitutes the old villainess? My answer is once more negative. The fact that Elsa
is a witch is unquestionable; she embodies all the characteristics of a filmic witch based on
Barbara Creed‘s description. ―The witch is defined as an abject figure in that she is represented
within patriarchal discourses as an implacable enemy of the symbolic order. She is thought to be
dangerous and wily, capable of drawing on her evil powers to wreak destruction on the
community. […] Her evil powers are seen as part of her ‗feminine‘ nature; she is closer to nature
Markopoulou 96
than man and can control forces in nature such as tempests, hurricanes and storms‖ (Creed 76).
Creed‘s description of the witch figure seems to be exactly what Elsa is: she is indeed ―thought to
be dangerous‖ towards the community by the patriarchs (the Duke of Weselton and Hans),
although she is not. She is extremely feminine, as her transformation during the song ―Let It Go‖
turns her into a curvy, confident, shiny woman, and at the same time she does in fact control the
weather, since her icy storms literally bury the whole town under snow. However, Elsa lacks the
one characteristic that would make her yet another Disney villainess: the evilness. She is more
scared of herself than the others could ever be of her. She is not the enemy. The danger in Frozen
is not external. Her biggest enemy, as the troll says when he enchants Anna‘s young body, is fear.
The enemy lives inside of her and it is a result of other people‘s decision. Her parents made this
choice, so as to protect her and her sister. What seems to be the best choice ends up destroying
Elsa, who is victimized. It is not accidental that the person who makes the decision is her father
and king. He is the head of patriarchy and he decided that she should live away from her sister,
because she is dangerous. She is suppressed, because she is forced to live with herself under
someone else‘s decision; she hates herself, because patriarchy told her that her powers render her
In the case of Frozen, the internalization of the struggle theory that I am trying to establish
could also be explained, once we prove that Elsa and Anna are two sides of the same person. The
dual nature of the woman in Disney films seems to be an irrefutable element. According to Davis,
―Walt also seems to have believed that [women] had a ‗dual nature,‘ as evidenced in the contrast
between his general conviction of women‘s greater emotional depth and his critical comment
[and] this idea that Walt could believe in female duality is hinted at in his film‖ (226). This
duality, though graphically portrayed in two separate bodies in the past, has been incorporated
Markopoulou 97
within the body of the princess. Using the theory of the double I aim to prove that Anna and Elsa
are the psyche of the individual that has been torn in half at a very early stage of life.
Elsa‘s ability to create ice is not accidental. One‘s reflection on an icy surface is similar to
that in a mirror. Considering that Elsa and Anna are separated from each other while they are
playing with ice brings in mind Jacque Lacan‘s theory of ―the mirror stage.‖ Based on that, one
could assume that, once Anna sees herself in the icy surface/ mirror, the construction of her ego
(i.e. Elsa) occurs. Jane Gallop explains that ―in the mirror stage, the infant who has not yet
mastered the upright posture and who is supported by either another person or some device will,
upon seeing herself in the mirror, ‗jubilantly assume‘ the upright position. She thus finds ‗already
there‘ in the mirror image a mastery that she will actually learn only later. The jubilation, the
enthusiasm, is tied to the temporal dialectic by which she appears already to be what she will only
later become‖ (120). From that point on the child ‗anticipates,‘ according to Lacan, ‗the
maturation of his power‘ (qtd in Gallop 122). The drama, however, according to Lacan lies in the
fact that the child‘s natural maturation is impeded by his anticipation and fantasies, which are very
rigid and difficult to deconstruct (qtd in Gallop 124). It is this rigidity of Anna‘s ego, which is as
firm as ice that she tries to fight throughout the film. By melting down the ice that Elsa creates
around her, by reaching her ego, she will be able to see herself in its own dimensions and truly
mature.
This dichotomy is emphasized by the film by creating two physically separate sisters that,
however, share common characteristics and movements, insinuating in this sense that they are two
sides of the same person. The textual evidence that supports this theory is plenty. First of all, Elsa
seems to always be unattainable and rather inexistent throughout the years. Anna‘s begging her to
come out of the room could be seen as her inability to attain her fantasy self, meaning Elsa, whom
Markopoulou 98
she evidently admires. Ironically enough, after the death of her parents Anna sings outside Elsa‘s
room ―It‘s just you and me./ What are we gonna do?‖ a song that is actually a monologue rather
than a dialogue, since it seems that Anna is speaking out loud to herself. Moreover, on the
coronation day, when Anna meets her sister for the first time after years, she is terrified to even
look her in the eyes. Anna‘s fear of her supposed double could be explained with the help of
Robert Rogers, who, while discussing the motif of the ―double‖ in literature, mentions that seeing
the double has always connoted danger; he brings in his argument the example of
―catoptricophobia- fear of mirrors and reflections‖ (8). This superstition is actually proven by the
film, in the sense that meeting her double means that Anna has to undergo a dangerous journey
into her psyche, in order to catch Elsa and achieve her own self-fulfillment.
The idea of reflection is even more emphasized, both during the song ―Do You Wanna
Build a Snowman‖ when the two sisters are leaning against the two sides of the door and at the
point where the two sisters identify the smell of chocolate during the ball after the coronation.
Leaving aside the fact that their facial characteristics are indistinguishable, the movements of their
bodies are so identical that it literally seems as if they are each other‘s reflection in a mirror. ―A
special genre of the manifest double is the mirror image,‖ Rogers notices, ―the projected self being
nor merely a similar self but an exact duplicate‖ (19). Adding to that, Anna mentions to Hans,
while commenting on her white highlight in her hair that she ―dreamt [she] was kissed by a troll.‖
Despite the humoristic tone of the phrase, the idea that Elsa‘s power is only part of Anna‘s dreams
strengthens the implication that Elsa lives within the heroine. As Rogers quotes Freud, we find out
that the latter has mentioned in The Interpretation of Dreams (1900) ―that the ego sometimes
appears in dreams together with other people who prove, on analysis, simply to be further
representatives of the ego (‗ego‘ here meaning ‗self‘). The self […] can achieve multiple
Markopoulou 99
representation either directly or by virtue of its identification with other personages in the dream‖
(qtd in Rogers 11). The ultimate element that verifies this doubling is that after Anna has been
struck by Elsa‘s ice, her hair, which is no longer in the bun but loose, exactly like Elsa‘s, starts
turning white and ends up looking exactly like her double‘s hair. The whole film actually prepares
the two sisters for this identification as they have similar stages of change. In the beginning they
both have their hair in a bun, which changes into the braid pattern for both of them. Even the
colors used are the same in different combinations; Anna‘s purple dress appears as an eye shadow
on Elsa, while they both wear blue dresses. In other words, the deeper Anna travels within herself,
the more similar she becomes with Elsa, the closer she gets, that is, to the self that she anticipates
to become.
The emphasis I place on these allusions to the mirrors and the doubling are crucial, since,
in my view, by proving Anna and Elsa to be one, we can reach two vital conclusions for the new
Disney tradition. Firstly, the theory of the double proves that the antagonist lives within. The
internalization of action and evilness is even more apparent, should we consider that Elsa and
Anna are the embodiment of evilness and goodness that occupy the same vessel, the same body.
Moreover, if these two are one, then we do not only have a new era of sisterhood in Disney films,
but we can safely speak of a new movement where the princess saves not another princess, but her
own self. Given Disney‘s past obsession with hetero-defined image, where the princesses were the
object of the gaze and action, Frozen suggests that the princess is the one and only heroine in her
own movie.
Based on the textual evidence of the new films, it is doubtless that the Disney villainess
figure has changed and actually become extinct. My theory is that, while evilness was an external
factor in the previous Disney animation films, it is now part of the self of the princess. I notice an
Markopoulou 100
internalization of action, as the evil lives within. All of the princesses fight with themselves and it
is the result of this internal fight that will force them to cope with their repressed weaknesses,
frustrations, fears and eventually set them free. Even Rapunzel, where the villainess exists, has to
fight with the beliefs that her mother imposed on her about the outside world. Mother Gothel has
taught her that the world is mean full of monsters that will hunt her down. It is fear that keeps her
in the cage, not Mother Gothel. At the same time, she was taught that being a good daughter
means always obey to her mother, since ―Mother Knows Best.‖ As a result, Rapunzel is at a
constant war with herself, as Flynn points out. The moment she leaves the tower, we see the young
princess engaging in a dance of guilt, as her independent side feels happy she is finally away from
home, but her weak one feels guilty for having disobeyed her mother. The adult versus the child;
Similarly, Merida is not really fighting against her mother. She is simply torn between what she
wants to do and what she is supposed to do. She is afraid to break the tradition, but at the same
time she is afraid to embrace it. The whole battle happens within herself, as, in the end of the film,
it is the inner values that she actually manages to win, rather than her mother. The body of the
princess becomes a literal battlefield of ideals and beliefs that the system has imposed on her, but
she refuses to accept. Even in Frozen, where the plot is clearly more complicated, Elsa is not
fighting against Hans or her sister, but against her own fear and self, a fear that has been forced
down her throat as a child by her overprotective parents. The dilemma is within the self, the battle
is with their own independent, strong side, which Elsa has been taught that is evil; the darkness
lives inside.
To take this theory one step further, there is a meta-Disney effect in the new princess films, in
the sense that there is an overt criticism against the old Disney ideals and beliefs. I am combining
Markopoulou 101
this element with the internalization of the action theory that I have just elaborated on, since it is
my view that the new princesses seem to be a living proof that Disney‘s old ideological system has
been internalized by young girls and it has already failed. To put it more simply, the princesses in
the new films could be interpreted as symbols of the Disney generation, the audience of young
girls that has been raised within the Disney idealistic, patriarchal world and now find it hard to
cope with their reality. In order to make this argument clear, I am providing evidence that proves
that what tortures the recent princesses are all part of the old Disney propaganda.
In the first film, Tangled, Rapunzel incarnates a girl that has been raised with the belief
that passivity and surveillance are the characteristics of a respectful young woman, despite the fact
that this passivity may lead to her imprisonment. Rapunzel finds it impossible to confine herself in
a small house, even though this house has everything she could possibly need. Comparing this
image to the first full-length animation film, Snow White, it is evident that Snow White‘s happy
housewife figure is no longer the case in Disney films. Rapunzel wants to see the world, which
means that she technically trespasses the borders between the genders, as she enters the
traditionally conceived as male sphere. While Snow White, Cinderella, Aurora and Belle accepted
their imprisonment and construed it as a blessing, Rapunzel craves for emancipation. One could
easily assume that Rapunzel stands for every young girl that has been raised with the Snow White
The example of Merida‘s case is not far from the previous one. In the film Brave, what is mostly
criticized by Disney is the institution of arranged marriage at a young age. Merida claims her right
to love, meaning that she claims her right to choose her own companion, when and if she feels
ready to do so. ―You were never there for me! This whole marriage is what you want! Do you ever
bother to ask what I want? No! You walk around telling me what to do, what not to do! Trying to
Markopoulou 102
make me be like you! Well, I'm not going to be like you!‖ Merida screams to her mother in an
attempt to persuade her that it is her right to make her own decisions about her life. In a playful
way, which becomes even more comic in Frozen, Disney satirizes the happy endings of the
previous films, where the princesses are awoken by their princes and instantly fall in love with
them. What is even more interesting is that Merida is of the same age as the previous Disney
princesses are, when they get married. Based on the analysis of the folk tale of Snow White we
have already seen that her estimated age is fifteen years old at the end of the film; in the same
way, Aurora is not more than sixteen years old, when she marries her prince, as it is at the age of
sixteen that she was supposed to fall into deep sleep as Maleficent‘s spell dictated. Merida‘s
criticism of the tradition that forces the woman to enter an arranged marriage, even though she is
still a teenager, seems all the more ironic, once we consider that the old generation princesses
embrace gladly this tradition, as they fall in love with their future mates instantly. In other words,
once more I notice that Merida could stand for a girl raised with the Disney ideals of what
constitutes a happy ending for a woman; by fighting against her mother, she is fighting against the
tradition and ideology that she has been raised with and that lives inside of her. She has
internalized society‘s and the media‘s instructions, but finds it impossible to live with herself
The meta- effect is even more obvious in the film Frozen, where Anna is presented as a romantic
dreamer who falls in love with literally the first man she meets. The song ―Love Is an Open Door‖
clearly ridicules the old Disney idea that love at first sight is a realistic option, as it points out the
superficiality of the overall idea. Elsa‘s reaction to Anna‘s unexpected news about her wedding
seems to reflect new Disney‘s reaction to the company‘s previously promoted ideals. Anna is
evidently the incarnation of the false old Disney philosophy; she is a girl raised with the old
Markopoulou 103
Disney ideals that construe love as a superficial, fast-paced process based on appearance and
complete ignorance. Hans‘s evil side is used by the film, mostly to point out the shallowness of
love at first sight. By rendering Hans as the antagonist of Anna, Disney casts a shadow upon the
happy ending concept, as Anna‘s misfortune transforms into every old Disney princess‘s future,
after marrying the perfect prince. To put it plainly, Disney no longer guarantees that love at first
sight leads to a happy ending. In the case of Elsa, the criticism on the part of the Disney company
is not that overt. However, it seems to be the same case as the previous princesses, as Elsa is
struggling to overcome society‘s indications that a woman with special powers is dangerous. This
internalized fear has rendered her unable to function within society and forces her to resort to the
nature to find her inner peace. Elsa is punished for being different and this punishment is far worse
than a physical one; it is emotional. Elsa in my perception stands for all the girls that cannot fall
into the typical Disney princess, for all the girls that are different; those whose body type is not
skinny, their hair is not shiny and long and their character is not passive but assertive. Elsa
constitutes the ―otherness,‖ that part of the audience that was told by traditional Disney films that
it does not deserve to find happiness, because they stray from the norm. Luckily, Elsa in the end
finds her own voice. It is not accidental that the song ―Let It Go‖ has become one of the symbols
of the film, as well as a financial hit, since for the first time a princess raises her voice against
After the heroines have been emancipated by society‘s suffocating rules, they are able to
handle power, as they are ready to rule their countries in all of the new Disney films. I noticed in
my research that most critics and reviewers, while analyzing mostly Frozen, focused on the
concept of sisterhood and how it is a new promising era for Disney animation films. Without
wanting to negate this fact, which is self-proven, I believe all of them failed to mention the role of
Markopoulou 104
matriarchy in the new films, as well as the changes that the perception and depiction of it has
undergone. At this point I would like to discuss the differences between the representation of
motherhood and matriarchy in the old princess tradition and how these notions change from curse
to blessing in the more recent films. The absence of mother or the presence of an evil stepmother
poses a threat for the unprotected in the past princess, who resorts to patriarchy, in order to
survive, a fact that is supported by the princesses‘ wedding to the princes at the end of the films.
Are the princesses still in danger and, if this is the case, is patriarchy still their shelter?
In the previous generation princesses, the heroines are forced to leave the matriarchal space, as it
poses a threat to them. Drawn by selfish reasons, all the evil women of the old Disney films that
we focus on create a dangerous sphere for the heroine that is forced to exit this matriarchal sphere,
in order to survive. In the case of Snow White and Aurora matriarchy means physical death, while
in Cinderella it is equal to eternal slavery and submission, which implies a type of emotional and
social death. In order to break free, the heroines choose gladly a patriarchy that seems problem-
free. Even before her wedding to the prince, Snow White lives in the patriarchy of the dwarfs‘
house. Despite the fact that she is obliged to undertake the role of the maid in order to be able to
stay in their house, it seems that the household duties are a blessing compared to the dangers that
await for her in the stepmother‘s world. The choices that she has is either dead with a queen or
In Cinderella‘s case, the death implied by matriarchy is a social one, as she is forced to spend the
rest of her life executing orders and cleaning the house. The household chores that Snow White
loves, Cinderella secretly hates but ungrudgingly performs, as, in the first case it is presented as
the heroine‘s own conscious choice, while in the second it is something imposed on Cinderella. In
this case, matriarchy implies a financial and social death and this fact has led to the Cinderella
Markopoulou 105
myth, the young poor girl that marries into prestige and wealth. This power though is only
achieved through a heterosexual marriage, as, despite her noble descent, the heroine is in desperate
need of the prince, in order to come back to the upper class of society. What about the fairy,
however? Could we assume that this is another form of matriarchy presented in the film, similar to
the Sleeping Beauty? The truth is that the godmother in this film manages to give Cinderella a way
out, a disguise to enter the outside world, the king‘s ball, a chance to climb the social ladder.
Nevertheless, this disguise is only temporary and rather ineffective, as it has a time limit that does
not give the heroine the opportunity to truly achieve her goal. That her slipper accidentally falls
off is not the achievement of the godmother‘s matriarchy, but rather a result of the heroine‘s
hastiness.
Also, I cannot neglect the superficiality that is attached to the godmother‘s matriarchy, as
she arms Cinderella with nothing but accessories and clothes, in order to help her break free. We
spot the early signs of fetishization of commercial objects, as it is only a slipper that manages to
save the heroine‘s life. This idea of the fetish is even more striking, should we consider the
function of this object in the overall depiction of womanhood. According to Smelik‘s explanation
of fetishism, ―classical cinema reinstates and displaces the lacking penis in the form of a fetish that
is a hyper-polished object. Fetishizing the woman deflects attention from female ‗lack‘ and
changes her from a dangerous figure into a reassuring object of flawless beauty‖ (11). In other
words, the whole essence of womanhood comes down to one shoe that by luck falls into the right
hands. Cinderella owes her life to a piece of clothing. The film Into the Woods gives, actually, an
interesting twist to the original plot, by placing Cinderella freeze time and contemplate upon what
to do with the prince who is running after her. Interestingly enough, leaving the slipper behind is
Cinderella‘s plan in the film, in order to test the prince‘s love. What is left in luck and fate in the
Markopoulou 106
old animation film is now the woman‘s choice and intention, which shows once more that women
in Disney have become quite wittier than the classic heroines. At the same time, though, and
taking into consideration Smelik‘s theory, could that mean that the female herself promotes
fetishism and engages to it, in order to captivate a man? Is contemporary Cinderella a new Carrie
Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker in Sex and the City), who claims ―a woman‘s right to shoes‖25 and
―choose‖ at the same time? Does free choice overlap with fetishism and consumerism? The
In Sleeping Beauty the plot becomes slightly more complicated, as, in order to be safe from
Maleficent‘s spell, Aurora is taken away from the patriarchy of the king and into the matriarchy of
the three little fairies. One could assume that in this film matriarchy is presented as both dangerous
and safe, since the fairies manage indeed to protect the heroine for sixteen whole years. However,
we must not forget that Aurora is not free in the matriarchy of the three fairies. She is obliged to
live as a peasant and has no idea of her royal descent. At the same time, her small trip to the forest
seems to be extremely confining, since the fairies advise her to avoid any sort of human contact. In
other words, the matriarchy of the fairies seems to simulate a golden cage, rather than a functional
world for the princess. Moreover, under no circumstances can we accept this matriarchy as a safe
environment, as it turns out to be impossible to protect Aurora. Her death renders the matriarchy
of the fairies rather naïve and futile, since three grown women could not manage to protect one
girl. On the other hand, patriarchy in Aurora is a necessity, since it is the spell that dictates that she
needs to be kissed by a prince, in order to come back to life. Therefore, Prince Philip is practically
indispensable, as he is the only one that can reverse the curse. Patriarchy, in this sense, is not only
25
―A Woman‘s Right to Shoes‖ is a title of HBO‘s Sex and the City TV series. (season 6 episode 9,
August 2003).
Markopoulou 107
a blessing but the source of life. The fact that Aurora will continue living in this patriarchy safe
and protected for the rest of her life seems to be a given by the end of the film.
In The Little Mermaid, patriarchy appears as an oppressive world in the beginning but, after
Ursula‘s intervention, it transforms into the lesser of the two evils. Taking into consideration the
major change that Disney has made on the original tale by Andersen, where matriarchy equals
security and happiness, Ariel lives with a father, Triton, that forces her to stay under the water for
her own safety. Even though he is a tyrant, his good intentions that are driven by fatherly love
undermine the negative aspect of his patriarchal kingdom. However, Ariel‘s free spirit leads her to
neglect her father‘s orders and enter Ursula‘s matriarchy. Ursula, although a woman, seems to
have the beliefs of a male tyrant. Her ambitions are evil, since she craves for power and
dominance over Triton. Her song ―Poor Unfortunate Souls‖ that has outraged in the past the
feminist community is evidence that Ursula‘s matriarchy is no friend to the female heroine, but
rather a trap. Her ideas about what an attractive woman is supposed to be proves that she herself
undermines the female, rather than supports her. She uses Ariel, in order to revenge Triton, by
tricking her into an unfair deal. By taking Ariel‘s voice, Ursula‘s matriarchy becomes worse than
Triton‘s patriarchy, since she literally mutilates the heroine both physically and emotionally. The
dilemma is once more apparent: would you rather have a matriarchy that gives you the illusion of
In her journey though, Ariel enters unconsciously a new sort of patriarchy; that of her male
friends. Sebastian the crab, the seagull and Flounder the fish are Ariel‘s main companions and
support. The irony is, however, that Sebastian is not a simple friend, but rather the voice of
patriarchy per se, since, as we already mentioned, he dictates how Ariel should behave, in order to
win the prince. Similar to the mirror in Snow White, his opinions seem to be the common sense
Markopoulou 108
and truth. In Snow White it is the King‘s voice that is heard through the magic mirror of the
wicked stepmother. As Gilbert and Gubar informs us while analyzing the original tale, ―[h]is
surely is the voice of the looking glass, the patriarchal voice of judgment that rules the Queen‘s –
and every woman‘s – self-evaluation. He is who decides, first, that his consort is ‗the fairest of
all,‘ and then, as she becomes maddened, rebellious, witchlike, that she must be replaced by his
angelically innocent and dutiful daughter, a girl who is therefore defined as ‗more beautiful still‘
than the Queen‖ (38). The King however does not make an appearance, because ―his voice resides
now in her [the woman‘s] own mirror, her own mind‖ (Gilbert 38). Therefore, the female subject
has internalized the patriarchal directives and has made them part of her own mentality. In The
Little Mermaid, this patriarchal voice is expressed by Sebastian. He shows Ariel how to squeeze
her lips in order to be attractive, while the seagull teaches her how to use a fork to comb her hair.
All the directions come from male voices, while Ariel‘s voice is long gone and, interestingly
The very fact that in the end she manages to achieve her dream and marry Eric enhances
all the more the insinuation that she owes her success to the patriarchal voice. Not to mention of
course that it is Eric who kills Ursula in the end and brings peace back to the ocean. The woman
equals danger and it is thanks to a man that this danger is avoided. Things become even more
complicated in this film, once we consider the connotations of Eric‘s patriarchy, the ―white male
system,‖ as Laura Sells calls it (178). The film presents it as the real world, undermining in this
way Ariel‘s own sea world. According to Sells, ―the repeated depictions of land and sea as
complementary also create a hierarchical relationship in which Eric‘s human world on land is
privileged as the real world‖ (178). This implication is undergirded not only by the language and
images of ‗up there‘ and ‗down here‘, but also by Ariel‘s song, ―Part of Your World,‖ in the
Markopoulou 109
beginning of the film, where ―the spatial imagery supports the hierarchy of dominant and muted
cultures‖ (Sells 178). At this point, Sells focuses mostly on how Disney presents the developed
countries as superior to the developing ones. However what mostly concerns me is this contrast
between land and sea, which falsely implies that women would do anything to be part of the male
world. In a way, it is presented as natural that a woman would yearn to be part of the male world
and not only yearn but actually risk her life for it. Nevertheless, Disney cleverly hides the risks of
Ariel‘s choice behind the emotionally charged music and with a happy ending that ―makes Ariel‘s
In Beauty and the Beast patriarchy is presented as a dangerous world that can be altered, should
the princess be obedient enough. Belle ends up trapped into the Beast‘s house, a house that is ruled
by him and only. His dominant figure and unquestioned power and prestige, which is based on
fear, makes the Beast‘s castle a terrifying prison for Belle. The physical and most importantly
emotional violence that Belle endures in this film has been widely criticized, since it is presented
as a necessity, as part of the deal she made with the Beast, in order to free her father. The
problematics of their abusive relationship in my view is mainly that the Beast seems to be
acquitted for his tyrannical behavior, which is attributed to the deep depression that he has been in,
since the witch cursed him. In other words he is allowed by the film and his servants to be a
monarch, because he is hurting inside. This seems to be also Susan Jeffords‘s view of the tale, as
she sees the Beast as a 90s hero in an 80s hero‘s body (170). In her own words, ―[t]he Beast‘s
external appearance is here more than a horrific guise that repels women, but instead a burden, one
that he must carry until he is set free, free to be the man he truly can be. […] It is as if, the Beast‘s
story might suggest, masculinity has been betrayed by its own cultural imagery: what men thought
Markopoulou 110
they were supposed to be- strong, protective, powerful, commanding- has somehow backfired and
In my view Jeffords‘s exclusive focus on the Beast‘s victimization and her negligence of
the heroine‘s attitude towards his misery seems to be quite naïve and unfair to the female heroine.
First of all, Jeffords is wrong in that the Beast‘s appearance ―repels women.‖ Based on the filmic
evidence, Belle is annoyed clearly by his attitude, rather than his monstrous looks. Proof to that is
that she falls in love with him, without even seeing his true looks. Also, what Jeffords sees as a
burden that men have put on them the film sees as a curse that is specifically casted on him by a
female witch. Where does the witch stand in Jeffords‘s analogy? Does she symbolize culture that
oppresses the man, does she stand for society or even the collective of manhood who decided that
masculinity should be depicted on the male body? In the meantime, in what sense is the Beast the
―self-sacrificing man of the 90s,‖ as Jeffords claims? (170) It seems to me that it is Belle who has
to make the sacrifice and tolerate his brutal behavior, simply because of his weakness to see that
he has to change his heart, in order to regain his external beauty. As a new filmic Dorian Gray, the
tale hints that it is his ugly soul that is depicted on his external looks. In order to change he has to
be a hard critic of himself, a fact that is completely neglected by the film, which places Belle in
the position of the therapist. Instead of his self-love and self-realization the film suggests that it is
her tolerance towards his cruelty, acceptance and love that can save him, acquitting him of his
responsibility as an individual. This justification of violence, combined with the fact that Belle
manages to change the Beast and turn him into a prince, creates the false idea that if the woman
stays submissive and persistent, even the most monstrous man will change. In other words, even if
patriarchy is extremely cruel and inhuman, Disney dictates that with a woman‘s patience it will
Naturally, I need to emphasize that the matriarchies presented in the old Disney films that I
analyze are not products of the princesses‘ real mothers, but of their stepmothers, which poses new
questions on the concept of motherhood. In other words, the princesses are completely alone,
abandoned because of fate by their biological mothers in a world, where no other female would
ever care for them, but would in fact hunt them down. According to Lynda Haas, ―in Disney films
[…] the typical mother is absent, generously good, powerfully evil, or a silent other, a mirror that
confirms the child‘s identity without interference from hers. In this way, mothers are either
sentimentalized or disdained; in either case, their identity and their work are simultaneously
erased, naturalized, and devalued‖ (196). It is this motherlessness that strengthens the misogyny of
the previous Disney films, as the heroines are in need of a male friend or of simply a male, in
Kaplan has noticed the binarism as well as the superficiality of this portrayal. According to her,
―[t]here are either Good [mothers] (saintly, self-sacrificing, angelic) or Bad (evil, jealous,
neglectful, sexual, transgressing, cruel, sadistic)‖ (Kaplan qtd in Karen Howe 48). It is my view
however that this dilemma that Kaplan spots has been slightly altered as in Disney animation films
the case is Evil mother or no mother at all. By eliminating at all the image of a good mother, even
if that angelic figure is completely unrealistic, the old Disney distorts the idea of motherhood as it
Davis will come to notice that it is a general tradition in folk tales that the parent is
missing, so that the child can embark on the journey of maturity alone (102). However, it is
specifically the mother figure that is muted in Disney films, while the father usually affects the
plot, either by being the bad guy (as Triton), or the naïve and comic character (in the case of
Aurora‘s father). ―[Fathers] […] have an important presence in the films, and are there to offer
Markopoulou 112
advice, love and support to their children,‖ Davis realizes (104). In the case of the biological
mothers, they are either dead or silent, while the step-mothers are always evil. To take this thought
a step further, it seems that Disney used to imply that only the biological mother cares truly and
protects her daughter. Leaving aside the fact that this thought could be dangerous for all the young
viewers who possibly live in a foster family and deal with the fact that their mothers have either
abandoned them or died and that their stepmothers is all they have, I sense that this obsession with
biological motherhood on the part of Disney insinuated in the past that motherhood is an innate
instinct inextricable from the female nature. In other words, how could Disney guarantee that the
princesses would be safe in their biological mother‘s bosom? Why is it so certain that every
This obsession with patriarchy, or even better, the demonization of matriarchy seems to
gradually eclipse, however, from the recent Disney films. To be more specific, it seems that,
although in the beginning of the films matriarchy may appear dysfunctional, by the end it is
always the case that matriarchy manages to save the day. Tangled is not a representative example,
since the matriarchy of Mother Gothel reminds the viewer mostly of the stepmother tyranny of the
previous films. However, despite the special nature of this specific stepmother, which has already
been analyzed. Mother Gothel embodies the dichotomy that Kaplan talks about. She is both Evil
and Good; she is a more realistically portrayed mother. Tangled is a film that does not suggest
patriarchy as the solution to an evil matriarchy either. Rapunzel runs away from the tower, in
order to escape the confining world that Mother Gothel made for her. However, in contrast with
all the previous princesses, Rapunzel does not enter patriarchy, in order to be safe. What she does
instead is explore the world on her own, even if she is accompanied by Flynn. His incapability to
protect even himself makes it all the more obvious that it is Rapunzel who supports them both.
Markopoulou 113
Rapunzel does not escape matriarchy through the institution of marriage, but by using her own
inventiveness and strength. At the same time, and most importantly, she does not end up in a
patriarchy either at the end of the film. There is a big difference between the heterosexuality
projected in Tangled with the one proposed by the previous films. She is the one who marries
Flynn and not the other way around. She saves him and with their marriage she is the one who
brings the prestige to his life. Adding to that, the whole film suggests that Rapunzel is far more
dynamic than Flynn, which gives the impression that even in their marriage she is the one who
dominates, as the latter is a man of words rather than actions. In a nutshell, the film seems to
suggest that matriarchy, when in the right hands, is truly a place of safety.
In the case of Brave, matriarchy is once more presented in the beginning as something wrong.
Although Merida‘s mother, Elinor, does not threaten her in any way, the pressure that the young
girl feels seems to derive from what her mother mostly believes is right and pushes her to do.
Once more we can spot that the mother figure is neither right nor wrong; neither bad nor good; she
is simply a human being with her own agenda. ―What have I done?‖ Elinor asks herself in tears
after she has thrown Merida‘s bow in the fire during their big fight, proving that she is not evil, but
simply a woman that is torn between her motherly love and her social duty. In fact, I would like to
mention at this point two important details that acquit Merida‘s mother from any possible evilness
attributed to her. First and foremost, her ideas are obviously a result of a patriarchal thought that
were probably imposed on her, when she was a child. The obsession with the institution of
marriage and the obligation that the queen sees in a fifteen year old girl to be married to a prince,
in order to save her kingdom, is obviously a belief that only a patriarchal system could produce,
since it undermines the power of the woman and positions her simply on the side of a king. My
point is that the film suggests that the patriarchal voice has entered the woman‘s soul and it has
Markopoulou 114
influenced the female thought so much that the woman has started not only to think but also to
fervently believe what the voice dictates as right and wrong. The blame, in other words, is to be
place on the male perspective that has brainwashed Merida‘s mother into believing a woman‘s
duty is to be married with a prearranged marriage, in order to be able to rule her kingdom.
The second thought about this special matriarchy is that, even if we consider it is a world
that suppressed the princess, it is a flexible system of ideas that has the opportunity to change and
function well. What I mean is that Merida, in contrast with the previous generation princesses does
not resort to patriarchy, not only because she does not need to, but also because patriarchy is not
even an option in this case. She resorts to another matriarchy, that of the old witch, in order to
change her mother‘s opinion. Starting from the fact that the witch in this film has nothing to do
with the old Disney villainesses, we have to point out that she is rather a sympathetic, comic
character that uses funny and naïve magic, instead of using it as a weapon; therefore, this is a
matriarchy that poses a quite naïve threat only accidentally. With the help of this woman, Merida
forces her mother into the body of a bear, meaning the life of freedom and nature that she adores.
This accident, however, seems to be what the two heroines needed to reconnect, which seems to
turn the witch‘s matriarchy into a blessing. The emphasis that is posed on the relationship of the
mother and daughter proves that through discussion and communication, any problem of
This emphasis on the mother-daughter relationship that we notice in the new Disney films
and particularly in the case of Brave is not an accidental phenomenon but rather an indication that
society has evolved. In fact, there is a very interesting study conducted by Karen Howe within the
context of the Women Studies‘ field, in an attempt to show how and to what extent motherhood is
a product of social beliefs and ideas. This is not a new idea; the French feminist philosopher Luce
Markopoulou 115
Irigaray has already spotted the social construction of the term ―mother‖; according to her, ―a
woman whose identity is her motherhood is ‗the other of the same‘- a woman drawn by the
patriarchy who is ultimately a residual, a defective man, an object in exchange in a male market‖
(qtd in Haas 194). However, Howe‘s ―mother biography assignment,‖ as she names it, aims
mostly on whether or not the daughters view their mothers as socially constructed bodies or as real
women with particularities (51). Howe mentions that the aim of the project is to ―stimulate the
daughter to see her mother as a person, separate from her identity as a mother‖ (Howe 51). ―It is
interesting to note,‖ Howe continues, ―that many of the daughters define this new sort of
interaction as ‗friendship,‘ suggesting an equality they feel lacking in the traditional mother-
daughter relationship. By going beyond the roles, both women begin to relate to each other as
The most important conclusion of this experiment that will help us to fully understand the
development of the relationship between Merida and her mother is ―the new attention paid by the
daughter to the social forces that influenced her mother‘s life. […] Now the daughter can see that
her mother had to deal with the same -if not stronger- social pressures on her development and
behavior‖ (Howe 54). ―You are a princess and I expect you to act like one,‖ Elinor screams to
Merida in the beginning of the film. However, Merida is unable to understand that her mother is
nothing more than a vessel of social restrictions and ideas that she, as a queen, is forced to pass on
to the next generation. It is through spending time with her and seeing that her mother, even if in
the form of a bear, is no different than her that she manages to realize that who her mother is and
what her mother does are two separate things. ―Once [Merida] sees connections between her own
situation as a woman and her mother‘s –a generation apart, but facing many similar influences in
their lives- she can appreciate her mother in a new way, and also recognize and try to overcome
Markopoulou 116
limitations or restrictions in her own experience due to her status as a female‖ (Howe 55).
Motherhood is no longer a one-dimensional concept as Kaplan once worried, but is only a part of
the Disney heroines‘ existence, a side that affects the way they think and act: a justification for
their occasional cruelty. It is this repositioning of motherhood in its true dimensions that alters the
portrayal of matriarchy as well. If the mother is not evil, then the matriarchy will not be a threat
any more.
beginning matriarchy is presented as a dangerous place, since ice and winter have fallen upon
Arendelle, the truth is that this side effect of Elsa‘s powers is a result of her fear, which, as I
already showed earlier, is a patriarchal invention. She was told by the elder of the trolls that fear
will be her enemy and her father supported that decision by locking her up away from her sister‘s
love. In a sense, the dysfunctional matriarchy that Elsa seems to be responsible for is truly a result
of bad decisions that men have made for Elsa. Similarly to the previous cases, Anna does not need
or intend to escape this matriarchy but, in fact, goes after Elsa and tries to persuade her with her
love to return to Arendelle. Although Elsa is not easily convinced that there is nothing to fear, the
film suggests that with support from her sister she manages to overcome her fear and become a
fantastic queen. Therefore, matriarchy I perpetuated in the film; it may seem like an impossible
choice in the beginning but in the end it is the only valid option. Actually, the film Frozen takes
this new tradition of powerful queens a step further by presenting patriarchy as the dangerous
antagonist. Hans‘s hypocricy is evidence that patriarchy in contemporary Disney is definitely not
the answer to a dysfunctional society. On the contrary, both Hans and the Duke of Weselton
appear to be the only antagonists of Arendelle, which seems to be better off with a female queen
Conclusions
It seems therefore that Disney has in fact changed. The new way that Disney deals with the
original folk tales it draws inspiration from proves that it is no longer the case that the company‘s
main focus is the love story of the female protagonist. Instead, we could safely now assume that
the adaptation does not alter the original meaning of the story; While Snow White was
transformed by Disney into a willing housewife, while Sleeping Beauty was left undisturbed in her
deathbed waiting for her prince and while Cinderella placed her happiness on a glass slipper,
Disney appears to criticize the company‘s own female model by suggesting a new one. The path
that was opened by Ariel and Belle is now becoming a wide road where Rapunzel, Merida, Elsa
They may not look different from the previous princesses, as their beauty does not stray
from the media-dictated image. Regardless of Disney‘s weakness to break free from the
stereotypical femininity that has been traditionally linked in Hollywood with an unnaturally slim
waist and long, shiny hair is apparent, the new princesses undoubtedly have a new attitude that
diverts from the audience‘s expectations. They are no longer simply dreaming, but they are
actively pursuing their dreams. Rapunzel makes her own plan, in order to escape the tour; Merida
alters the tradition, in order to protect her right of choice; Anna is set upon a journey to save her
own kingdom and her sister as well, while Elsa denounces a society that suffocates her by going
away. The new princesses do not expect salvation from external factors, as the prince ceases to be
a necessity in the filmic plot, but is rather an element that facilitates the princess‘s own passage
Markopoulou 118
from childhood to maturity, from ignorance to sexual awakening, from a scary patriarchy to a
functioning matriarchy.
In the postfeminist spirit of the twenty-first century, where women reclaim their right to
equality both in the public and the private sphere, Disney, in collaboration with Pixar, which has
evidently contributed significantly to these alterations, catches up with the latest needs of society
and presents a meta-Disney product; films that satirize the old Disney stereotypes of the perfect
mother, the perfect daughter, the perfect sister, the perfect woman. The young heroine has
internalized the stereotypical ideas about womanhood, motherhood, sisterhood, goodness and
innocence that society (and Disney, in cinematic context) has produced and perpetuated for years.
Infected with these ideologies the princess needs to break free by looking into herself and re-
establishing her own identity. The choices that the woman has are no longer limited to the Angel
versus Demon dilemma that traditional Disney suggested. A queen like Elsa can remain unwed, a
princess can choose to save her sister with a true love‘s kiss and the villainess becomes a person
with feelings that could and will change their mind under the right conditions, as the new
Maleficent film projects. The princess is no longer in danger of a woman, as the evilness becomes
internalized.
remarkable change that should be acknowledged on the part of the Disney company. Having in
mind always that this alteration is most likely the result of the social demand for more
psychologically complex and realistic female figures, I think that it is an expedient move and a
necessary one, as the traditional princess line is nowadays outdated. We could make a note about
Disney‘s inability to escape from the model-like appearance of the heroines. Without neglecting
the audience‘s expectations, which is in fact alarming, there is always the fear that any depiction
Markopoulou 119
of progress is superficial, as the basic product remains exactly the same. In other words, how can
the princess become more political and realistic if she looks like a fabricated Barbie doll? We have
yet to see a Disney princess that does not comply with the characteristics that are typically linked
to beauty, as defined by the media world. On the other hand, maybe this is what the media beauty
is all about; both external beauty and intelligence. It could be the case that the media image of the
ideal woman has not remained the same but it has in fact become broader and more demanding, as
external beauty is not enough anymore. In that sense, Disney again follows the dictations of the
media culture regarding the female model, since the new princesses appear to have it all. Can
The most important question, though, is whether Disney will fall into the trap of regression
and take a few steps behind, reproducing the old Disney animation films, only in order to keep the
spark and the memory of the audience alive. To put it more clearly, I worry that there is a large
part of the Disney audience that is so adhered to the old films and the ideologies they promote that
will abstain from the new ones, thus, ―forcing‖ the company to return to the old, tested formula of
the Disney princess tradition. To my discontent, the most recent Cinderella film (2015) appears to
be an exact replica of the 1950s Disney animation film. It appears to have no original suggestions,
as far as the plot and the princess‘s role in this story are concerned.
The heroine‘s moto in life is ―have courage, be kind,‖ a saying that is repeated various
times in the film, dictating once again that passivity is a necessary asset. The single element that
differentiates the filmic Cinderella (Lily James) than the original heroine is that she attempts to
speak up towards the end of the film and accuses her stepmother of unjustifiable meanness.
However, even during the attack, Cinderella remains weak, full of tears, fragile and victimized, as
she expresses how much she struggled to remain kind and how her efforts found no response. Her
Markopoulou 120
weakness is presented by the film as strength and courage, especially after forgiving her
stepmother at the end, verifying the good angel figure that all the classic princesses embodied.
Naturally, the cruel stepmother figure (Kate Blanchett) is nothing that surprises the audience, nor
does the villainess give a good explanation for her behavior. Her apology fails to actually justify
the brutal attitude, but rather presents her as extremely jealous of Cinderella‘s youth, beauty and
kindness, stressing once more the value of these traits. The perfect appearance and indifferent
personality of the prince, the mice friends of the heroine that balance between animal and human
intelligence, the magic that makes everything right performed by the fairy godmother (Helena
Bonham Carter), the happy ending that leads to Cinderella‘s wedding and the punishment of the
stepmother that is sent away from the kingdom seem to glorify the classic Disney ideals.
Are we dealing with an inconsistency on the part of Disney? Perhaps yes. It may be the
case that this regression is an attempt on the part of the company to remind the audience that the
Disney way of life and the Disney ideals are always there, despite the alterations that they may
have undergone. On the other hand, a small fall back does not necessarily signify the end of
evolution, but it could be a way to revisit the past, familiarize with it and alter it in the future. In
any case I am more than excited to stick around to find out if this Disney fairytale of evolution
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Andersen, Hans Christian. ―The Little Mermaid.‖ or ―Den Lille Havfrue.‖ Web. 23 Aug 2014.
<http://scandinavian.wisc.edu/mellor/taleballad/pdf_files/LittleMermaid.pdf>
h.htm#link2H_4_0006>
Grimm Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm. ―Little Snow-White.‖ Web. 12 Aug 2014.
<http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm053.html>
LePrince de Beaumont, Jeanne-Marie. ―Beauty and the Beast.‖ Web. 10 Sep 2014.
<http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/beauty.html>
<http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/perrault06.html>
Secondary Sources
Bangprapa, Mongkol. ―Boost female role in politics, seminar told.‖ Bangkok Post (Nov 2014).
Barzilai, Shuli. ―‗Say That I Had a Lovely Face‘: The Grimms' ‗Rapunzel,‘ Tennyson's ‗Lady of
Shalott,‘ and Atwood's ‗Lady Oracle‘.‖ Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature 19. 2 (2000):
231-254. Print.
Bell, Elizabeth and Lynda Haas. Introduction.From Mouse to Mermaid: The Politics of Film,
Gender, and Culture. Eds Elizabeth Bell, Lynda Haas, Laura Sells. Bloomington: Indiana
<http://books.google.gr/books?id=pdCrF4JxKDIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_su
mmary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>
Bronfen, Elisabeth. Over her Dead Body: Death, Femininity and the Aesthetic. Manchester:
Bruce, Alexander M. ―The Role of the ‗Princess‘ in Walt Disney's Animated Films: Reactions of
College Students.‖ Studies in Popular Culture 30. 1 (2007): 1-25. JSTOR. Web. 16 March
2014.
Bryman, Alan. The Disneyization of Society. London: Saga Pub, 2004. Print.
Butler, Judith. ―Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and
Feminist Theory.‖ Theatre Journal 40.4 (1988): 519-531. JSTOR. Web. 31 Dec 2014.
Byrne, Eleanor J., and Martin McQuillan. Deconstructing Disney. London: Pluto Press, 2000.
Cooper, Timothy PA. ―Walt at War – Animation, Transformation and Indoctrination: The
Catmull, Ed. ―Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True
Inspiration.‖ Online video clip. Youtube. Youtube, 6 Aug 2014. Web. 3 Jan 2014.
Clark, Dan. ―Building Women's Construction Role.‖ Hull Daily Mail (2014): 16. Factiva. Web. 8
Jan 2015.
Clark, David. ―Marriage and Social Change.‖ Marriage: Disillusion and Hope: Papers
Celebrating Forty Years of the Tavistock Institute of Marital Studies. Ed. Christopher
1993. Print.
Cummins, June. ―Romancing the Plot: The Real Beast of Disney‘s Beauty and the Beast.‖
Children's Literature Association Quarterly 20. 1 (1995): 22-28. Project Muse. Web. 1
October 2014.
Davis, Amy M. ―The ‗Dark Prince‘ and Dream Women: Walt Disney and Mid-Twentieth Century
American Feminism.‖ Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television 25.2 (2005): 213-
--. Good Girls & Wicked Witches: Women in Disney’s Feature Animation. Leicester: John Libbey
England Dawn Elizabeth, Lara Descartes and Melissa A. Collier Meek. ―Gender Role Portrayal
and the Disney Princesses.‖ Sex Roles 64 (2011): 555-567. Springer US. Web. 30 Nov 2014.
Entertainment Newsweekly ―Big Freeze Continues as Disney Reveals More than 3 Million Frozen
Dresses Sold.‖ NewsRx (Nov 2014): 55. Factiva. Web. 3 Jan 2014.
Fay, Carolyn. ―Sleeping Beauty Must Die: The Plots of Perrault‘s ‗La belle au bois dormant‘.‖
Marvels & Tales 22. 2, (2008): 259-276. Project Muse. Web. 3 October 2014.
Friedan, Betty. ―The Happy Housewife Heroine.‖ The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton,
1963. Print.
Gallop, Jane. ―Lacan's ‗Mirror Stage‘: Where to Begin.‖ SubStance 11. 4 – 12. 1 (1982): 118-12.
Gilbert, Sandra and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the
Nineteenth – Century Literary Imagination. New Haven: Yale UP, 1979. Print.
Girardot, N. J. ―Initiation and Meaning in the Tale of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.‖ The
Journal of American Folklore 90.357 (1977): 274-300. JSTOR. Web. 29 September 2014.
Haas, Lynda. ―‗Eighty-Six the Mother‘; Murder, Matricide, and Good Mothers.‖ From Mouse to
Mermaid: The Politics of Film, Gender and Culture. Ed. Elizabeth Bell. Bloomington:
Haase, Donald. ―Yours, Mine, or Ours? Perrault, The Brothers Grimm, and the Ownership of
Fairy Tales.‖ Merveilles & Contes 7. 2 (1993): 383-402. JSTOR. Web. 2 October 2014.
Hall, Elaine J. and Marnie Salupo Rodriguez. ―The Myth of Postfeminism.‖ Gender and Society
Hastings, Waller A. ―Moral Simplification in Disney‘s The Little Mermaid.‖ The Lion and
Howe, Karen G. ―Telling Our Mother‘s Story: Changing Daughters‘ Perceptions of Their Mothers
Jeffords, Susan. ―‗The Curse of Masculinity‘: Disney‘s Beauty and the Beast.‖ From Mouse to
Mermaid: The Politics of Film, Gender and Culture. Ed. Elizabeth Bell. Bloomington:
Jones, Geoffrey. Beauty Imagined: A History of the Global Beauty Industry. New York: Oxford
Laderman, Gary. ―The Disney Way of Death.‖ Journal of the American Academy of Religion 68. 1
La Monica, Paul R. ―Disney Buys Pixar.‖ CNN Money (2006). Web. 8 Jan 2015.
<http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/24/news/companies/disney_pixar_deal/>
Lindsey, Shelley Stamp. ―Horror, Femininity, and Carrie‘s Monstrous Puberty.‖ Journal of Film
Martens, Fraser. ―The Pixar Effect.‖ Technology 2. 2 (2011) Web. 8 Jan 2015.
<http://fermentations.org/2011/the-pixar-effect/>
Mulvey, Laura. ―Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.‖ Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory
Readings. Eds. Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. 833-44.
Web. <https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~mquillig/20050131mulvey.pdf>
Markopoulou 126
Nayman, Adam. ―Maleficent.‖ Sight and Sound 24.8 (2014): 80. ProQuest. Web. 7 Jan 2015.
Ohmer, Susan. ―'That Rags to Riches Stuff': Disney's Cinderella and the Cultural Space of
Pallant, Chris. ―Disney-Formalism: Rethinking ‗Classic Disney‘.‖ Animation 5. 341 (2010): 341-
Polivy Janet and C. Peter Herman. ―Causes of Eating Disorders.‖ Annual Review of Psychology 53
Ramachandran, Vasanthi. ―Redefining Traditional Women's Roles.‖ New Straits Times (2001): 6
Raymond H.J. & Co. ―Gender Equality.‖ The New York Times (2012). Factiva. Web. 9 Jan 2015.
<http://mz8an8jm8e.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-
2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-
8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal
&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Gender+Equality&rft.jtitle=The+New+York+Times&rft.date=
2012-11-30&rft.pub=The+New+York+Times+Company&rft.issn=0362-
4331&rft.eissn=1542-
667X&rft.externalDBID=ISR&rft.externalDocID=310424471¶mdict=en-US>
Rich, Adrienne. ―Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence (1980).‖ Blood, Bread and
Rogers, Robert. A Psychoanalysis Study of the Double in Literature. Detroit:Wayne State UP,
1970. Print.
Markopoulou 127
Rothschild, Sarah. The Princess Story: Modeling the Feminine in Twentieth-Century American
Fiction and Film. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc, 2013. Print.
Rozario, Rebecca-Anne C. Do. ―The Princess and the Magic Kingdom: Beyond Nostalgia, the
Function of the Disney Princess.‖ Women’s Studies in Communication 27.1 (2004): 35-59.
<http://www.uky.edu/~addesa01/documents/ThePrincessandtheMagicKingdom.pdf>
Russo, Tom. ―‗Frozen,‘ Disney‘s latest animation, is solid.‖ The Boston Globe (2013) ProQuest.
Sanctis, Matt. ―Women's combat roles expanding.‖ Dayton Daily News (2011): 2 Factiva. Web. 9
Jan 2015.
Scruton, Roger. Beauty. New York: Oxford UP,2009. ProQuest. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.
Sells, Laura. ―‗Where do the Mermaids Stand?‘ Voice and Body in The Little Mermaid.‖ From
Mouse to Mermaid: The Politics of Film, Gender and Culture. Ed. Elizabeth Bell.
Smelik, Anneke M. And the Mirror Cracked: Feminist Cinema and Film Theory. New York:
Soliño, María Elena. ―From Perrault Through Disney to Fina Torres: Cinderella learns Spanish
and Talks Back in ‗Celestial Clockwork‘.‖ Letras Femeninas 27. 2 (2001): 68-84. JSTOR.
Tasker, Yvonne. ―Enchanted (2007) by Postfeminism: Gender, Irony, and the New Romantic
Cinema. Eds. Hilary Radner and Rebecca Stringer. New York: Routledge, 2011. 67-79.
Print.
The Independent. ―Losing The Magic: How Euro Disney Became a Nightmare.‖ (Nov 2010) Web.
magic-how-euro-disney-became-a-nightmare-2132892.html>
Trites Seelinger, Roberta. Waking Sleeping Beauty: Feminist Voices in Children’s Novels. Iowa:
---. ―Disney's subversion of Andersen's The Little Mermaid.‖Journal of Popular Film &
<http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.its.uu.se/ehost/detail/detail?sid=631d4ac2-bb2b-467d-
9756-
e4d12a9a8697%40sessionmgr4001&vid=1&hid=4106&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2Z
Q%3d%3d#db=ufh&AN=9108122088>
Ward, Annalee R. Mouse Morality: The Rhetoric of Disney Animated Film. Austin: Texas UP,
Ward, Kelly, Maryann Simmons and Andy Milne. ―Simulating Rapunzel‘s Hair in Disney‘s
Warner, Marina. ―After ‗Rapunzel‘.‖ Marvels & Tales 24. 2 (2010): 329-335. JSTOR. Web. 7
October 2014.
Markopoulou 129
Wasko, Janet. ―Challenging Disney Myths.‖ Journal of Communication Inquiry 25.3 (2001): 237-
---. Understanding Disney: the Manufacture of Fantasy. Malden: Polity and Blackwell, 2001.
Print.
Wohlwend, Karen E. ―‗Are You Guys Girls?‘: Boys, Identity Texts, and Disney Princess Play.‖
Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 12.1 (2011): 3–23. SAGE. Web. 1 Jan 2015.
Wolf, Naomi. The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used Against Women. New York:
Wood, Naomi. ―Domesticating Dreams in Walt Disney's Cinderella.‖ The Lion and the Unicorn
Zarucchi, Jeanne Morgan. ―Audiences and Messages in Perrault's Tales.‖ Children's Literature
Association Quarterly 12. 4 (1987): 162-164. Project Muse. Web. 1 October 2014.
Zipes, Jack. Why Fairy Tales Stick: the Evolution and Relevance of a Genre. New York:
Routledge, 2006.
---. ―Breaking the Disney Spell.‖ The Classic Fairy Tales. Ed Maria Tartar. New York:
Norton,1999. 332-352.Web.
<http://jtbarbarese.camden.rutgers.edu/files/2013/05/Zipes_Breaking-the-Disney-Spell.pdf>
Sources Consulted
Markopoulou 130
Aston, Jacob M. and Estela Vasquez, eds. Masculinity and Femininity: Stereotypes/ Myths,
Psychology and Role of Culture. Social Issues, Justice and Status (2013) eBook. ProQuest.
Coyne, Sarah M., and Emily Whitehead. ―Indirect Aggression in Animated Disney Films.‖
Gillam, Ken, and Shannon Wooden. "Post-Princess Models of Gender: The New Man in
Disney/Pixar." Journal of Popular Film and Television 36.1 (2008): 2-8. Web. 9 March
2014.
Giroux, Henry A., and Grace Pollock. The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence.
Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Pub, 2010.eBook. Web. 10 Jan 2014.
Grant, Barry Keith. The Dread of Difference: Gender and the Horror Film.Austin: Texas UP,
1996. Print.
Lee, Newton, and Krystina Madej. Disney Stories: Getting to Digital. DE: Springer Verlag,
May, Jill P. ―Walt Disney's Interpretation of Children's Literature.‖ Language Arts 58. 4 (1981):
Müller-Hartmann, Andreas. ―Is Disney Safe for Kids?—Subtexts in Walt Disney's Animated.‖
Amerikastudien / American Studies 52. 3 (2007): 399-415. JSTOR. Web. 2 April 2014.
Ross, Deborah. ―Escape from Wonderland: Disney and the Female Imagination.‖ Marvels & Tales
Showalter, Elaine. A literature of their own: British women novelists from Bronte to Lessing.
Stone, Kay. ―Things That Disney Never Told Us.‖ The Journal of American Folklore 88. 347
Sumera, Lara. ―The Mask of Beauty: Masquerade Theory and Disney's Beauty and the Beast.‖
Quarterly Review of Film and Video 26.1 (2008): 40-46. Web. 30 Dec 2014.
Tavin M. and David Anderson. ―Teaching (Popular) Visual Culture: Deconstructing Disney in the
Elementary Art Classroom.‖ Art Education 56. 3 (2003): 21-24 & 33-35. JSTOR. Web. 11
March 2014.
Waters, Melanie. Women on Screen: Feminism and Femininity in Visual Culture. New York:
Watts, Steven. ―Walt Disney: Art and Politics in the American Century.‖ The Journal of American
Filmography
A Bug’s Life. Dir. John Lasseter. Pixar and Walt Disney, 1998.
Beauty and the Beast. Dir. Gary Trousdale. Walt Disney, 1991.
Finding Nemo. Dir. Andrew Stanton. Walt Disney and Pixar, 2003.
Frozen. Dir. Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee. Walt Disney, 2013.
Into the Woods. Dir. Rob Marshall. Lucamar, Marc Platt and Walt Disney, 2014.
Monsters, Inc. Dir. Pete Docter. Walt Disney and Pixar, 2001.
Sex and the City. Dir. Michael Patrick King. New Line, 2008.
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Dir. William Cottrell. Walt Disney, 1937.
The Incredibles. Dir. Brad Bird. Walt Disney and Pixar, 2004.
The Princess and the Frog. Dir. Ron Clements. Walt Disney, 2009.
Toy Story. Dir. John Lasseter. Pixar and Walt Disney, 1995.