Why does Disney always kill the mother?

[wasabi girl]

I've really enjoyed reading these responses. I have a co-worker who has a problem with Disney movies because "Disney always kills the mother". I also tried to explain that for the most part Disney doesn't make up the story upon which the movies are based. That fairy tales play to our deepest fears. Which, I guess our earliest one, would be losing our mother. Having to face the world without her protection and guidance.
My co-worker is quite unsatisfied with answers like that. She blames Disney for choosing to make movies where "they have killed the mother". I've never really understood her point of view. Fairy tales have been around for as long as people have been telling stories. And they've been popular for that long too. There are many Disney movies that aren't like fairy tales (dead mom). Bedknobs and Broomsticks, The Rescuers, Aristocats, lady and the Tramp, etc... but they aren't as popular as the fairy tale types (Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid etc). Disney is in the business of making money. They will make the movie that they think people will go see (and buy lots and lots of things based on the movie)....

 

[jodifla]

They are often better stories BECAUSE the mother was killed off. That's what creates the drama, that's what resonates with children.

It's a way to work through their fears, and it teaches kids that they can survive on their own.

What would Bambi be without the death of the mother? That's what makes it the story we all remember.

 

[cardaway]

We subscribe to the Phoebe Buffett School Of Movies:

Skip the bad parts.



"Wait, where's he going with that gun?! Oh, my God, no, Old Yeller!!!"

Sould we put the movie in the freezer?

 

[amy4bruce]

And, of course, there's Tarzan, where his birth parents are dead, and the conflict is with his stepfather, Kerchak.

I think this makes a monkey out of the theory.

 

[figment52]

Sould we put the movie in the freezer?

I thought only the books went in the freezer -

 

[Maleficent13]

Because Walt Disney himself had a horrible relationship with his mother and there is a secret document preventing any movie made by a Disney studio from having a sympathetic mother in it. It is said that Walt's head - kept in a vault underneath the Burbank Studios - is hooked up to computer monitors and that anyone who has ever written a mother into a movie is cursed. Mulan's authors were killed in a freak accident on the studio lot when a studio messenger on a bike ran them over and they fell into an construction pit. The dalmation authors were attacked by crazed squirrels on the lot. And the Pixar animators in charge of the mother were seriously injured when the elevator in the Frank G. Wells building dropped 4 stories.

Now the secret is out.

Best...post...ever.

 

[firkat]

Yep. Thanks. I think I got it now.

 

[PaulaSB12]

Well, for starters because you didn't write the stories. The Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, and several other really old dudes did. All I'm saying is, in regards to the "fairytales" (which would include Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, etc.) they just followed the story already written.

The brothers Grimm didn't write the stories either, they "cleaned up" many very old folk tales that where not told to children but to adults. Two of the clean up I can remember is that in the original Sleeping Beauty the prince had sex with her and THAT is what woke her up, the second is at the end of Cinderella the wicked step sisters had their eyes poked out by birds. Mind you look at some of the endings in the cleaned up version in Snow White the witch was forced to dance in red hot metal shoes til she died and in the Goose Girl the evil servant was placed in a tub linked with nails and rolled down a hill!!!!!!

 

[VSL]

The brothers Grimm didn't write the stories either, they "cleaned up" many very old folk tales that where not told to children but to adults. Two of the clean up I can remember is that in the original Sleeping Beauty the prince had sex with her and THAT is what woke her up, the second is at the end of Cinderella the wicked step sisters had their eyes poked out by birds.

Actually, the end of the Grimms' version of Cinderella is still pretty gruesome - with the ugly step-sisters sawing their heels and toes off and stuff (my BF had to study them for his 'fairytale' art project in college).

I think that Mulan is based on a Chinese legend..?

Either way, I don't think that it causes huge problems for kids I didn't even have a dad until I was about 5yrs old, and my mother is quite unpredictable, so they just all seemed normal to me And I imagine it's the same for many kids today who do not have both parents around, or who have unreliable parents.

If everyone was there in one big happy family, where would the story be?
It is necessary for Cinderella's parents to die for the sake of the story.
It is necessary for Bambi's mother to die, for the story to exist.
Also, sometimes the parents just do not appear in the film as they have no role (Alice in Wonderland, for example), or their presence would cause overcrowding.

 

[amy4bruce]

Also, sometimes the parents just do not appear in the film as they have no role (Alice in Wonderland, for example), or their presence would cause overcrowding.

Not to mention having to pay another actor, except, of course, in a multi-cast cartoon. (Peter Pan comes to mind.)

 

[Maleficent13]

The brothers Grimm didn't write the stories either, they "cleaned up" many very old folk tales that where not told to children but to adults. Two of the clean up I can remember is that in the original Sleeping Beauty the prince had sex with her and THAT is what woke her up, the second is at the end of Cinderella the wicked step sisters had their eyes poked out by birds. Mind you look at some of the endings in the cleaned up version in Snow White the witch was forced to dance in red hot metal shoes til she died and in the Goose Girl the evil servant was placed in a tub linked with nails and rolled down a hill!!!!!!

True, and just proves my point even more...Disney didn't write these stories, they just animated them. You can clean up a lot, but there are certain plot points that if eliminated effectively make the story, well, non-existent.

Those hot metal shoes at the end of Snow White always terrified me...I was going to mention them yesterday but ::shudder:: I just couldn't bring myself to think about them...

 

[frndofpooh]

I watched an old interview with Walt Disney once and he explained that he often likes to create stories where a mom dies or a family gets pulled apart to "reassure kids that they will be able to cope with tragedy if it comes".

 

[zagafi]

One theory (not mine)is that Disney chose this as a way to highlight the loss of the sacred feminine. Here's one link I found that sheds light on this theory in the Little Mermaid.

http://members.tripod.com/~Ramon_K_Jusino/littlemermaid.html

 

[PaulaSB12]

Now that I think about it, I don't think there was a mother figure for Kate and Bianca, or Rosalind and Celia...or Viola...mothers were apparently not big in Shakespeare either.

This is dredging back all the way to college, though, so I could be mistaken about some of them...

Women where scare in Shakespeare plays, they had to use young boys as it was illegal for women to act.

 

[MrsPete]

Wow! Thanks for that analysis . .

So aren't there archetypes that don't include killing off the mom or cruelly separating her child from her? Can't the poor-but-honest lad make good without a dead mother?

Well, that gets us into the realm of the Madonna-***** archetype. Women in traditional literature are typically either wonderful, loving, dedicated-to-their-family, keep-filling-in-the-positive-adjectives-here types . . . OR -- more commonly -- they are deceitful, backstabbing, evil, money-grubbing, lying wenches. Born from the original sinner, Eve, they cannot help themselves and even revel in their evil nature.

Women in older, traditional literature are not typically middle-of-the-road, even-keeled, realistic characters. Occasionally you'll find a character who is good but who is caught up in circumstances beyond her control, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

Again, Disney is true to these traditional archetypes. Like they say, "There's nothing new under the sun."

 

[MrsPete]

Women where scare in Shakespeare plays, they had to use young boys as it was illegal for women to act.

Right, so anytime he wrote a female part, Shakespeare was creating a role that was difficult for him to fill. Young boys had to be "let go" once their voices changed; adult men could stay with the group for years and years -- they were undoubtably better actors and better employees. Why would Shakespeare have purposefully made his job more difficult?

Also, Shakespeare lived in a world that looked down upon and subjugated women. He lived at the same time as King James (same king whose name is on what we consider to be "the standard" Bible, a king who spent much of his time chasing down women who were a bit "odd" in the name of witchcraft). He even wrote a number of his plays specifically FOR King James -- he was commissioned to do so. Remember his theater group's name? The King's Men. It's no wonder he didn't choose to create many positive feminine roles. He lived in a world owned by and ruled by men; he chose to write about the people who -- in his world -- mattered. Men.

Throw in the fact that many clues lead to the idea that Shakespeare and Anne Hathaway had a loveless marriage: he left the family back at home in the country while he, himself, chose to live his life in London; there's ample evidence of affairs on his part. He and his wife had three children very quickly after their marriage, then no more, though they were both certainly young enough to have produced more -- especially after his only son and heir (Hamnet) died at a very young age. When he died, he left his estate to his eldest child (Susannah), and he left his wife only one item: "the second-best bed". Much evidence points to Shakespeare as a man who was trapped: his society didn't allow him to divorce his wife, yet he didn't seem to like her much either. History hints that they stayed together in name only. Could it be that the animosity Shakespeare felt towards his wife was voiced in his female characters?

 

[MrsPete]

And, of course, there's Tarzan, where his birth parents are dead, and the conflict is with his stepfather, Kerchak.

I think this makes a monkey out of the theory.

The absent mother is a frequently-used pattern, not a hard-and-fast rule.

 

[amy4bruce]

The absent mother is a frequently-used pattern, not a hard-and-fast rule.

I know, and I agree. However, the very title of this thread indicates that many people seem to subscribe to the theory of "always."

As far as James goes, one of my professors pointed out that James was gay, and quite effiminate. Shakespeare got into trouble because, when James needed a play to entertain a visiting German ambassador, he turned to his troup, and Will supplied the first production of Macbeth. The blood and supernatural horror thoroughly disturbed James (his book on demons was, and sorry about this, ghostwritten) and the ambassador didn't speak a word of English. Macbeth was put away for years, beginning the legend that it's cursed.

Or so the professor claimed. (Just in case you say no, that's not true.)

 

[MrsPete]

I know, and I agree. However, the very title of this thread indicates that many people seem to subscribe to the theory of "always."

As far as James goes, one of my professors pointed out that James was gay, and quite effiminate. Shakespeare got into trouble because, when James needed a play to entertain a visiting German ambassador, he turned to his troup, and Will supplied the first production of Macbeth. The blood and supernatural horror thoroughly disturbed James (his book on demons was, and sorry about this, ghostwritten) and the ambassador didn't speak a word of English. Macbeth was put away for years, beginning the legend that it's cursed.

Or so the professor claimed. (Just in case you say no, that's not true.)

James' manhood has been somewhat questioned over the years -- no doubt because of his over-the-top need to prove himself ruler of all he surveyed. Kind of like one of my favorite lines from Hamlet: "Methink the lady doth protest too much."

I'm iffy on the blood and gore thing. While Macbeth is certainly the most bloody of Shakespeare's plays, it is not the only one to employ these device: plenty of his plays involve wars, and one even includes a man being eaten by a bear!

Shakespeare's sexuality has been called into question as well, but the evidence is sketchy at best. Most likely he tired of his wife after a few years, but he seems to have turned to other ladies in London. I think many of the rumors about Shakespeare come from the fact that he spent his professional life surrounded by an all-male company (which was the appropriate choice for his day). Also, people like to draw parallels between Shakespeare and his patron the Earl of South Hampton, who was bisexual and liked . . . well, everyone that way; however, there's no evidence that they had a personal relationship.

Of course, literature so old is frequently questioned because they didn't keep records like we do. I've read that Macbeth was written on commission for an event -- I'm not sure what the event was. It is considered to be "cursed" because so many bad things have happened over the years to people performing it. Weird accidents: actors breaking legs, being struck by lightning, falling ill. Shakespeare himself even burned down his theater while performing it (cannons, used for sound effects, set fire to the thatched roof); he retired rather than rebuild.

Macbeth almost certainly was Shakespeare's least favorite play. Most of his other plays (most notably Hamlet) were revamped, rewritten, and improved over the years. Not so with Macbeth. Only one version exists. It is the only play Shakespeare set in Scotland (but he did that as a nod to King J, who had a Scottish background, and he used J's actual ancestors as characters, taking great liberties with their actual personalities). The play also contains several mistakes, which I -- having read the play close to 100 times -- cannot reconcile. I cannot find mistakes in any of his other plays; this leads me to believe he just didn't care about this play as much as his others. Still, the theme is so powerful and so timeless: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutley.