The New Disney Princess

[ctc]

>I have a feeling you're just playing devil's advocate

Well.... no, actually. I don't see the design changes as that big a dif so it's tough for me to allocate them to a radical rethink of the character.

>Girls seem to measure SO much of their self-worth based on their looks

It's true, but there are some complications to the debate:

-By spending so much time and effort worrying over the changes made to Merida's design, and considering the ramifications aren't you VALIDATING the idea that girls are defined by their looks? Hence my last comment. We haven't seen any idea of the new version's personality; that might be exactly the same but we're assuming a whole lot because the changes seem to match a preconception of a preconception that we have. We're protesting judging by looks alone by judging by looks alone.

-What about boys? Every argument about body image, preconceptions and judging by appearance made for girls' stuff should apply to boys' stuff like He-Man, GI Joe or Superman; but that never comes up. I think it's pertinent in debates like this 'cos it means either there's a whole half of society being hung out to dry (bulimia is rightly seen as an illness; juicing is seen as a ******bag personal choice) in which case you're not actually dealing with the PROBLEM, just who's on the recieving end; or there's something in the makeup/socialization of boys that makes them resistant to problems like this and isolating that could help immunize girls from similar effects.

>I have 5 young nieces, and this stuff really bothers me.

This stuff bothers me too 'cos I've had a number of my works.... very important to me.... come under scrutiny because of this sort of thing. Dealing with that demonstrated how complex the issue is, and it kinda bugs me when everyone moves into their respective camp, and there ceases to be any genuine exchange.

Don C.

[Brazoo]

>The character was this no-nonsense independent individual who could take care of herself

But has THAT part changed, or is it just the look? People seem to be making a leap there.

Don, I have a feeling you're just playing devil's advocate, but yes, THAT'S the point. Girls seem to measure SO much of their self-worth based on their looks.

I have 5 young nieces, and this stuff really bothers me.

[HardyGirl]

Good. Maybe this means that Disney has reconsidered this decision.

Word is Disney pulled the design off their website today.

[ctc]

>The character was this no-nonsense independent individual who could take care of herself

But has THAT part changed, or is it just the look? People seem to be making a leap there.

>These things are all symbols for who we think we are. You can't on the one hand wax eloquent about how some of this stuff is our modern mythology and a connection to higher ideals and then say it doesn't matter, it's just a cartoon.

That's true; but I think there's two ways of arriving at this point. We can ascribe to it a sense of modern mythology, but ultimately the vast majority is designed as disposable entertainment. We may not USE it as such, but that's it's inherent intent. So you can run into a sense of loss and betrayal when the owners take it somewhere we didn't intend; even though, in a lot of ways we should have expected it. Sometimes things make a leap into something more. The author/audience relationship is reciprocal, and the attitudes of the audience can influence the progression of a character/story/setting. (Especially with something corp owned, since placating the audience is a great way to increase sales. It can also turn to pandering, which is a whole other issue.) Those attitudes can change over time as the audience changs too.... further complicating things....

>it really has nothing to do with the length of time the characters have been around

Yes and no. The feelings of the current audience don't, sure; but what that character stands as a representation of, and why does. One of the things that makes an older character, like Superman so persistent is that he's been around a LONG time and our collective image of him is an amalgom of all the past permutations. He seems more iconic, more TANGIBLE because we have seen him through so many different eras, so many different permutations that he's ALWAYS Superman. Even though he's not, and over the years there have been a LOT of different versions. With a newer character it's more difficult to make those ascriptions 'cos we haven't seen them through too many changes, so we aren't completely sure about how they're gonna turn out, and what they're gonna come to represent to the audience as a collective.

If you want to see a really good example of this sort of cultural creep and reappropriation in action, I recommend the film "Wonder Women! The Untold Story of American Superheroines" from PBS.

Don C.

[megoscott]

The whole story is pretty amazing. I see their problem.She doesn't fit in so well with the other princesses in that lineup, even with the makeover. When you render these 3D characters in 2D for merchandise it gets tricky.

The backlash has been big. Live by social media, die by it. Hey, at least they have characters people care about.

http://www.insidethemagic.net/2013/04/merida-to-become-11th-disney-princess-with-new-look-for-royal-coronation-ceremony-at-walt-disney-world-on-may-11/

[huedell]

If Superman is to be taken seriously as a symbol that has meaning to people (and I think he absolutely does and in a way much deeper than a costume change) then what this character stands for ought to be respected too.

It's as clear cut as that to me, too.

[Werewolf]

Because the red undies have been around longer.

Merida is just as much of an icon and role model to a generation of girls as Superman is to ours and it really has nothing to do with the length of time the characters have been around.

Many female comic book characters have also been around a very long time. When changes to them are brought up it's generally met with the same derision.

When fangirls complain they've turned great female characters into sex kittens everyone laughs and tells them they are being PC femi-nazis. Take away Superman's red pants and it's the end of comics as we know it. It's so blatant it's actually embarrassing.

[jwyblejr]

Considering the gnashing of teeth that followed the loss of the sacred red underwear, I can't believe anyone would be mystified by this uproar.

Because the red undies have been around longer. If she had been around longer,then sure I could understand it. In the end,there really ain't much we can do in either case. Just gripe and moan.

[megoscott]

It's true, we are who we are. These things reveal a lot about us, that's why they matter.

Pop culture fans care deeply about the things that are important to them and we all feel like we have a stake in how our interests are handled. These things are all symbols for who we think we are. You can't on the one hand wax eloquent about how some of this stuff is our modern mythology and a connection to higher ideals and then say it doesn't matter, it's just a cartoon. If Superman is to be taken seriously as a symbol that has meaning to people (and I think he absolutely does and in a way much deeper than a costume change) then what this character stands for ought to be respected too.

[YoungOnce]

http://www.marinij.com/millvalley/ci...ncess-makeover

The co-creator of the character weighed in and she was pretty mad. Chapman fumed. "When little girls say they like it because it's more sparkly, that's all fine and good but, subconsciously, they are soaking in the sexy 'come hither' look and the skinny aspect of the new version. It's horrible! Merida was created to break that mold — to give young girls a better, stronger role model, a more attainable role model, something of substance, not just a pretty face that waits around for romance."

This is a big issue because it blatantly disregards the entire impulse behind the character. People who are sensitive to the messages their daughter's embraced the character because it offered some contrast to the sexy princess images their daughters are surrounded by. You feel like you are fighting this uphill battle and you just lost a big ally in the fight...I understand why they are mad and sympathize.

However, they didn't change the film, they changed the look of the character for bedsheets and water bottles and whatever else they want to sell, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of soon-to-be landfilled plastic garbage. I imagine they had good solid market research that told them they needed to tart her up to make her sell. Put the character on a shelf at Wal-Mart next to the other princesses and it probably screams for a little more sparkle and a little more exaggerated proportions.

If you are the kind of person who wants to seriously control what kind of messages your kid consumes, it's just an uphill battle in this climate. We have friends who are stridently no-TV, no mass culture characters, no gender stereotypes in toys, no sexism, no guns....and their daughter is still the most princessey girl you'll ever meet. She doesn't need Disney to tell her to be that. And some boys without guns will still make fingers and shoot at you when they reach a certain age. What can you do?

My son went through Star Wars real heavy last year, we tried to hold it off but his friends at school had seen it and then Dad had toys in the basement...we stuck with the original trilogy as long as we could, so innocent, so fun. But sooner or later they hear about what you are denying them and they want to know who Annakin Skywalker is and what's the deal with General Grievous. So I'm reading books and skipping the part where he mass-murders the Jedi babies and whatever horrible thing happens trying to forestall the inevitable.

It makes you realize how much these huge media corporations have a place in your life whether you want it or not. Thanks to Disney we are going to be force fed Star Wars and Marvel Superheroes until we puke. I'm not even a fan of Pixar anymore. When I heard they sold 8 BILLION dollars worth of Cars merchandise I just wanted to get off that ride. They have a right to do what they want and people clearly love it, but...yuck.

So changing the Brave girl may not seem like a big deal, but to some people it was clearly one small victory for non-conformist thinking that's been sucked up by the machine to be used against you.

Great answer and pertinent information that addresses the topic.

Although I weighed in earlier that it's a little frustrating that Disney would change the spirit of the character to make her fit a more slick, commercial ideal of what beauty is sold to be these days, I definitely won't be losing any sleep or joining a picket line. But just because I am not investing any emotion in it doesn't mean that I can't poo poo their decision. I think that's all any of us are saying.

What I found more entertaining (in a funny way, really) in this thread was reading the posts of those who voiced legitimate thoughts about how this was a little disappointing on behalf of little kids who could be losing a role model that mirrored their own looks and the posts from other grown men (I assume) who posted remarks about how hot the models were; I'd buy that for a dollar; Ariel had her "boobs" covered by clamshells, etc...

And really, I'm not slamming anyone here for that high-school-esque humor... I engage in it myself to excess. But it really revealed why those posters weren't able to identify with the original dissing of Disney's decision to homogenize this particular female character. I sometimes forget that this forum is made up of toy geeks ( you folks know that this is one of the most civil open forums on the net... Great people...); but those posts reminded me of that guy in that Hallmark commercial who's at the wedding and he just keeps saying the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong people. Funny!

Again, not a slam. We are what we are. Just funny.

[megoscott]

The sexist double standard is quite striking. When fangirls complain they've turned great female characters into sex kittens everyone laughs and tells them they are being PC femi-nazis. Take away Superman's red pants and it's the end of comics as we know it. It's so blatant it's actually embarrassing.

[Werewolf]

Considering the gnashing of teeth that followed the loss of the sacred red underwear, I can't believe anyone would be mystified by this uproar.

Well, I guess it's different when it's stuff they care about. So nitpicking and nerd raging over that won't totally cause the world to be less safe.

[megoscott]

Word is Disney pulled the design off their website today.

[megoscott]

Considering the gnashing of teeth that followed the loss of the sacred red underwear, I can't believe anyone would be mystified by this uproar.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I just want to say, after carefully thinking this over, and asking how my wife felt about it, I'm looking at this a bit differently. I still say it could be far worse, and the changes are much more subtle than what Disney COULD have went for....but I understand the underlying messages behind the changes could be offensive to those who admired the character's non-conformist attitude. I still think a good deal of it has to do with Disney "homogeninzing" the characters so they all have a common look for merchandising, but either way, the core of the character is somewhat compromised by having her conform to the others.

Chris