I've had plans to write this for almost two weeks but haven't set pen to paper, so to speak. Not because it's so hard-hitting or because it's a difficult topic, but because this is the first chance I've really had. But it's been good, because I've also wanted to mull things over, too.
Ten days ago, as I signed out of my e-mail, a Yahoo! news story title caught my eye: "New 'Cinderella' Film Sparks Backlash". Having a desire to see the movie, I was curious, so I clicked on the link and began to read. Apparently, there is real danger in exposing your children, particularly your female children, to fairy tales. There's even a parody of the movie trailer online that's already had--roughly-- a billion views.
From the trailer: “Revisit the animated classic that will cancel out all of the empowering things your daughter learned from Frozen, where girls are taught to be pushovers, do all the housework and that their problems will disappear if they’re hot enough to land a rich husband.”
"Depicting a female who appears utterly helpless until a male swoops in and rescues her from all of her troubles sends a troubling message,” psychotherapist Amy Morin told Yahoo Parenting. “Girls may learn, ‘I can’t solve my problems, but a boy could.’ It’s much healthier for girls to recognize their own problem-solving skills, rather than look to boys as the solution."
.jpg)
Naturally, all of this new information quashed any and all desires I had to see this trash.
Psych.
I just saw it on Wednesday; it was pretty great. The writing was really good-- it drew from the source material faithfully with just the right amount of "new". I mean, you know that she's going to eventually try on the slipper, but there are enough twists that you're not quite sure how they're going to pull it out. Likewise where the performances were concerned. The costuming was incredible; I spent most of the movie ogling Kate Blanchet's gorgeous gowns.
This goes beyond a cinematic critique for me, though.
According to the aforementioned article, Cinderella depicts "sexism and abuse."
Okay, definitely abuse; but sexism? When is Cinderella treated differently because of her gender in this movie? Because she's forced to cook and clean for her step family? I bet that was because she was a girl and NOT because her step-mother and -sisters were a-holes. If she had been a boy, that never would've happened.
Or maybe it's sexist because the heroine--gasp!-- gets married?! The Prince gets married, too, and nobody is raising a cry of alarm over that. Maybe because there's no Mr. Foundation for Men. Someone should really do something about that. (Side-note: Why is there no male equivalent to feminism? Shouldn't the human rights activists be all over this?)
My major beef --okay, honestly, I have multiple major beefs with this outcry; but the beefiest of all is this: the claim that Cinderella teaches little girls to "be pushovers, and do all the housework, and that all their problems will disappear if they're hot enough to land a rich husband."
First of all, Cinderella is not a pushover. Just because she didn't lash out at her step-family for making her their servant doesn't mean that she's weak. On the contrary. She has a strength and a level of self-control that is praiseworthy; that most of us will (given the recent backlash) clearly never attain. What would a suitable reaction to mistreatment look like? One the femi-Nazis would approve of? Anger? Unmitigated rage? Retaliation? Vindictiveness? Because, to me, those are all really horrible attributes that I never want to be perpetuated. Those are also all easy responses.
But we, as human beings, don't need the easy reactions; we need the right ones. And oftentimes those are the hardest. They're hardest because, as a human being, your knee-jerk reaction when someone is mean to you is to be mean right back.
Anybody can be kind when they're being treated well. The real test of how kind you are comes when you meet someone who isn't kind back. If you're not nice to people who aren't nice to you, you're not very kind, are you? If your being your best possible self is predicated entirely upon it being a reciprocal set-up, you will never reach your full potential because, guess what? A lot of the people you run across are not so great. There are a lot of selfish, vindictive, hateful people out there. Does that mean that I should spend the majority of my time being selfish, cruel, and vindictive? I hope not. That sounds like a miserable way to live.
Our ability to choose who we will be is what separates us from dumb beasts. With patience and self-control, we can overcome our knee-jerk reactions--all of them-- and become (naturally and without even having to think about it) kind, compassionate, loving beings rather than allowing ourselves to be ruled by base instinct.
Maybe that's not what the haters had in mind. Maybe they think Cinderella should have run away. I submit that that would have been the easy way out. Let me be clear: I am not advocating staying in abusive relationships. But I think the detractors are being allegorical in their interpretation of the story, and so am I. If the offending interpretation of the story is that Cinderella solved all her problems by marrying the prince, would leaving her family's home be any less of an evasive maneuver?
The harsh reality is that you can't run away from your problems. I'm no statistician, but I would say that in my experience, 99% of the time, your problems in life are such that you can't just pick up and leave them behind. They come at you full force and, most times, there's nothing you can do but face them head-on. Are you going to let your struggles crush you to a fine powder or are you going to let them smooth out the rough spots of your character?
I submit again that Cinderella is strong and admirable when she chooses to be kind in the face of abuse and discouragement at the hands of her family members, those who should have treated her with love and respect.
If the problem with Cinderella is that she ends up married to the prince at the end... I really don't know why that would be a problem. She happened to fall in love with someone who turned out to be a prince. If you're objecting to him on the grounds of his wealth, I feel inclined to tell you that he is only the prince of a very small kingdom and so cannot possibly be too terribly rich. Kate Middleton married a prince and no one accuses her of being a victim. So the girl in our story falls in love quickly; some people do. Others don't. Some people fall in love when they're young, others when they're a bit older. Some never do in this life. Such is the nature of human relations. Maybe it's just marriage in general that everybody is not so keen on. Why? Criticism of marriage always smacks heavily of bitterness to me. I don't think we need to make a whole big talking point out of it like we do in our society.
None of the points from this article resonate with me.
What was so great and empowering about Frozen? I mean, don't get me wrong; it was a good movie and I enjoy watching it. The music is fantastic. But it's no Tangled (in case you're interested, the writing and characterization were so much better).
It must be that whole "Let it Go" part that everyone has reference to. The part where Elsa decides that what she does doesn't need to have an impact on anyone but her; except that that's completely ridiculous because everything that any of us do has an effect on someone in some way; none of us has any control over that. In essence the song tells our little girls, in desperate need of role models, "Screw y'all; Imma do whatever I want." Empowering.
When it comes on the radio, I crank that biz like anybody; but if you're going to over-analyze a children's movie to oust any troubling messages it might send to the little pitchers, you should at least be thorough in your disapproval. I happen to be an equal-opportunity critic.
I also happen to be a fairly intelligent, strong, capable, independent woman. Who happened to love watching and reading fairy tales as a child. You know why I never internalized all the "harmful","degrading" messages in any of them? Because my parents didn't rely on childrens movies and stories to teach me what was important. They were responsible for that.
From the time that I was a small girl, I knew what my values were; I knew what my parents expected of me, I knew what I expected of me; and everything that I came into contact with was sifted through those all-important internal sieves that I believe are starting to sorely lack in our culture-- and interpreted and applied according to those standards.
I'm not saying that you should let children watch or read or listen to everything; some things are not age appropriate and others are completely inappropriate. What I am saying is that, coupled with the active supervision of adult guardians, we should rely on our childrens' internal filters to make sure they aren't getting any hurtful messages from the things that they encounter. And their internal filters should rely on our teaching and examples for their substance, not what they see in movies or on television. Because, despite our best efforts, they will come into contact with hurtful things in their lives. Our job, as adults, is to make sure that the children in our spheres of influence are equipped to deal with those things on their own, because we can't protect them from everything and we can't always be there to mitigate damage. We have to feed them a steady diet of truth, moral values, and encouragement.
Of course, what do I know? I unabashedly listen to Frozen songs and watch G-rated retools of popular fairy tales. By choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment