Jump to content

Washington Post-The Lion King is a tale of fascism.

EMAWesome

By EMAWesome
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

TDunk

TDunk 590

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bojack said:

Just subscribed to the Washington Post because I couldn't read your article otherwise.  The private browsing trick doesn't work anymore.

Democracy Dies in Darkness

This ridiculous thread needs to die in darkness.  Op-ed done poorly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 37980

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Is there absolutely anything in the world you asshats will not ruin by trying to tie it to politics?

I wish you were clever enough for me to give you credit for intentional and humorous irony, given that you're a Fox News parrot.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

When the original animated film was released it was obviously a race-superiority allegory and received a ton of legitimate criticism along those lines.

Cultural critique is great when it isn't undertaken by morons.

The word idiotic gets overused but in this case it aptly applies, maybe it was species superiority there's nothing  about race in the lion King unless you're trying to make something up about race as a theme 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
formermav43

formermav43 4606

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

When the original animated film was released it was obviously a race-superiority allegory and received a ton of legitimate criticism along those lines.

Cultural critique is great when it isn't undertaken by morons.

This is as silly as the op.

The Lion King is Hamlet with a happy ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkleton

Turkleton 145

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The word idiotic gets overused but in this case it aptly applies, maybe it was species superiority there's nothing  about race in the lion King unless you're trying to make something up about race as a theme 

They always see racism where there isn't any. I'm not sure they believe their lies or they are just truly that ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phdhorn

phdhorn 6224

Posted
Posted

Meh, they bitched about this shit in 1994 when it first came out, this is nothing new, I mean really, did you think it was?:
 

Quote

'The Lion King' a Roaring Success Despite Lambasting

By Steve Twomey
Washington Post Staff Writer
July 28, 1994

All right, so they looked fine.

But any untrained professional, such as myself, could quickly see that these three small-fry were masking the racism, sexism, homophobia and violent tendencies that had been subliminally spooned into them only minutes earlier by "The Lion King," the Disney fare posing as a G-rated summer diversion.

Well, that's what is supposed to have been dumped into them, based on reports from across America.

What did you think, you tiny, troubled souls?

"It was okay," Luis Blanco said listlessly.

See, he's a numbed head case.

"Nahhhh! To me, it was, like, really cool."

Luis is, apparently, an 8-year-old leg puller.

"It was, like, magic at the end."

What did you think of it, Janine? Janine Guevara, 11, is Luis's cousin. So is Emily Ochoa, 7, the third member of the trio.

"I thought it was fresh," Janine said.

(Fresh=Excellent.)

"There was a lot of action and pretty sights," Janine added. "I wish I could see it again."

Emily said, "I think it was great!"

The dears hadn't a clue.

"The Lion King" is the tale of King Mufasa, who rules the Animal Kingdom until killed by his evil brother, Scar, who assumes the throne and despoils the region, aided by an army of hyenas. But Mufasa's son, Simba, who fled into exile, owns up to his responsibilities and, egged on by his true love, the lioness Nala, returns to overthrow Scar and restore happiness to the land.

The plot, in other words, resembles a Democratic Convention.

But what about the subsurface plots? I didn't know what to tell the children. Do I report what a columnist wrote in the Detroit Free Press?

The female lions depend on the males for salvation, he said, which "reinforces the stereotypes of men as power-driven competitors and women as helpless, hapless victims." And, he said, Scar clearly is meant to represent an evil African American because "while Simba's mane is gloriously red, Scar's is, of course, black."

Should I pass along what a columnist wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer? That by depicting the rank and file of the kingdom as subservient under Scar and unable to save themselves without Simba, the message to children is that they can't help themselves? "Anybody at Disney heard of empowerment?" this writer said, adding, "We must teach our children to see beyond the dependency of early childhood, beyond the sense of entitlement and victimization so many embrace, and into a world where they believe that they can and should and will be responsible for themselves."

Do I shatter their innocence by disclosing what Carolyn Newberger of Harvard University said? According to the Associated Press, she complained in the Boston Globe that "the good-for-nothing hyenas are urban blacks; the arch-villain's gestures are effeminate, and he speaks in supposed gay cliches." And another Harvard professor worried that the characters achieve goals "through violence."

Actually, I didn't catch all of these problems when I saw "The Lion King." I saw only a funny movie with mind-blowing animation and powerful lessons about obeying your parents, protecting the environment, being loyal and doing what's expected of you.

I did wonder about the violence and about the hyenas and race for a moment. Then I realized the voice of the chief hyena belongs to Whoopi Goldberg, so the hyenas couldn't be offensive, could they? Overall, it seemed more like a movie than a seminar.

But then I started reading way too much and learned how dangerous "The Lion King" is for the young, who presumably can be hit between the eyes by messages that went right over my head.

At Springfield Mall yesterday, Irene Walsh had just bought tickets for the 11 a.m. showing of "The Lion King" for herself and her grandsons, Michael Iuliucci, 9, and his brother, James, 8. It was too late to warn them off. The boys already had seen "The Lion King" twice.

"It was very good," Michael said, very seriously. "It had a lot of spiritual moments."

But what about the problems? Irene hadn't seen the movie yet, but she was dubious it had any.

"This is ridiculous," she said. "They're animals."

People seem to be thinking a bit too much these days, she suggested. Critics ought to, one might say, get a grip.

"It's just a cartoon," Michael said.

Out of the mouths of babes, eh?

Marnie Wiltrout, 27, was about to take Alexa, 6, and Samantha, 2.

Again!

"I loved it," Marnie said, adding that Samantha lasted all the way through it the first time, which is not her usual attention span, so "The Lion King" must be pretty good.

Yes, Marnie said, Alexa cried when King Mufasa was killed. But they talked about it at home and Alexa's fine. "She knows it's just a movie," Marnie said. As for the movie's other alleged deficiencies, Marnie said it was rather a shame "somebody has to pick it apart."

Next came Tracy Murray, 31, with Spencer, 3. They were going to see it.

Again!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/review96/flionkingcolumn.htm??noredirect=on

The funniest part of this is that people think the Washington Post is worth a shit.  Well, it is literally, great toilet reading material.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Imagine getting mad about people pointing out that that art reflects the culture in which it is created.

Imagine laughing my ass off that you see racism in everything you look at.  Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11362

Posted
Posted

i mean, it is about fascism.

when scar takes over. 

i thought that was pretty obvious. 

reading much deeper into it as far as ruling classes go - i mean, that's silly. "king of the jungle" (despite never living jungles, whatever) is the animus behind the story, and it's a story as old as people. i mean, lions are apex predators, and they could fuck one of us up without so much as stretching beforehand.

it is a story about a benevolent monarchy. much like that of king arthur. (i mean, nevermind that the king here needs to eat his subjects occasionally)

anyways, want to talk fucking fascism?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21821

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i mean, it is about fascism.

when scar takes over. 

i thought that was pretty obvious. 

reading much deeper into it as far as ruling classes go - i mean, that's silly. "king of the jungle" (despite never living jungles, whatever) is the animus behind the story, and it's a story as old as people. i mean, lions are apex predators, and they could fuck one of us up without so much as stretching beforehand.

it is a story about a benevolent monarchy. much like that of king arthur. (i mean, nevermind that the king here needs to eat his subjects occasionally)

anyways, want to talk fucking fascism?

 

Yeah, I always saw it as a monarchy, which can turn to facism if the guy in charge is evil like Scar. And yeah, in nature, the Lion is considered the king because it is the apex predator. I was more uncomfortable as a child with the "circle of life" speech about how they all eat each other. Yeah, that's nature, but it's weird in the context of anthropomorphism where they talk and socialize like we do. Are the animals allowing the lions to eat them? If they tried to avoid it would it be considered disloyal to the king? They know they are prey, but they still bow down to their predators? And if they socilize like us, you would expect them to mourn like us at the loss of a loved one, which is just bizarre that they are so flippant about taking family members away for food. Again, it all makes sense in our understanding of the animal kingdom, but very different when placed in the context of our currently shared humanity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, 'stache said:

Tell that to your friends crying about a black mermaid.

Who the hell cares what color a mermaid is ? I don't have any friends  that care what color a mermaid is.

And more to the point BT was trying to say that the intent of the story was racist. This isn't just dumb ass yabos crying about a black mermaid out. This was call pre meditated racist writing by Disney. 

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
workswithseed

workswithseed 2112

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

When the original animated film was released it was obviously a race-superiority allegory and received a ton of legitimate criticism along those lines.

Cultural critique is great when it isn't undertaken by morons.

What? What part is about race?

Edited by workswithseed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13218

Posted
Posted

If someone wants to take a critical view of art then it can actually be interesting to see where all these things slot in ideologically and historically. It was/is interesting to see contemporary art reflect the Divine Right of Rule, and there's nothing wrong with pointing out obvious reality.

Nature itself completely collapses when the king of lions dies and then springs back to vibrant life upon the return of his son. Neither of them ever displayed any kind of egalitarian/meritocratic value. They were simply blessed by the gods to be the rulers of everyone else and we, the audience, are intended to be overjoyed by the divine right of the white-coded characters to rule over the black-coded characters.

If pointing these things out makes you angry, that's not the fault of criticism, that's the fault of your own emotional instability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

If someone wants to take a critical view of art then it can actually be interesting to see where all these things slot in ideologically and historically. It was/is interesting to see contemporary art reflect the Divine Right of Rule, and there's nothing wrong with pointing out obvious reality.

Nature itself completely collapses when the king of lions dies and then springs back to vibrant life upon the return of his son. Neither of them ever displayed any kind of egalitarian/meritocratic value. They were simply blessed by the gods to be the rulers of everyone else and we, the audience, are intended to be overjoyed by the divine right of the white-coded characters to rule over the black-coded characters.

If pointing these things out makes you angry, that's not the fault of criticism, that's the fault of your own emotional instability.

                                                                           {Staring in utter disbelief at my screen currently}.

 

                                                          Yer one of those guys who sees Jeebus in a piece of toast aren't you.

Edited by Onboard 2.0
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

One of those guys who has read things and sees patterns in history and stories? Yeah.

lol @ "stairing"

D'oh !!!  busted.....  

Oh I see patterns in history as well, but my history is usually not revisionist history, especially when it's a children's movie about lions, (at the top of the food chain) re asserting their dominance over scavengers (Hyenas).  Nothing racial about nature, but you do you. It amuses me on a lazy, pre chore Saturday morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
formermav43

formermav43 4606

Posted
Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

Dang have you guys seen black panther yet

Yes. It’s an allegory wherein the Wakandans - read “white people” - build their technologically superior society by stripping vibranium from the land, and then literally hide their wealth away while the rest of Africa suffers. It’s a scathing critique of colonialism.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13218

Posted
Posted

As has been mentioned many times, it is based on classic literature. That classic literature reflects the ideas and beliefs of the era it is written in and the eras it covers. So it's interesting to see old modes of storytelling mixed with newer modes. Old stories that venerated the Divine Right of Kings (not necessarily Hamlet itself, though...) had the purpose of upholding/reinforcing/teaching that social order to prevent unrest, so when you adapt those stories to modern, Democratic times, it creates an anachronistic value set trying to fit in with modern value sets.

The white/black coding of the characters in The Lion King is debatable, of course, and is an element of that transition from pre-modern to modern era storytelling. When the older stories were written, it was an in an all-white context so the delineations were primarily class-based. But in modern America (and the modern West in general, so much as "the West" means anything (it doesn't)) race and class are inextricably linked so it is virtually impossible to tell a class-coded story without making it racially coded as well.

And the creators of the Lion King didn't work very hard to try and separate those things, choosing minority actors for the bad guy's voiced underlings (along with one mentally retarded underling) and a feminine/gay-coded male as the main bad guy.

It's interesting if you aren't (1) stupid and/or (2) strangely emotionally invested in believing that art is entirely without context or message.

It's fine to enjoy The Lion King while acknowledging what it is.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fantana

Brian Fantana 6689

Posted
Posted

The Lion King is loosely based on some classic lit and Scar definitely exhibits characteristics of both fascist and communist dictators, there's a lot of symbolism in his actions and elsewhere to this effect. Hell, they even made the fucking hyenas goose-step in the movie while he's singing. 

There are some minor points you could make about all the main characters having American/British accents and things like the "sub-villains" (hyenas) all having some sort of ethnic slant and/or being borderline retarded to dehumanize them, but I don't really care tbh. 

Looking into it deeper than that basically just makes you a pedantic asshole and you're not invited to my BBQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

The Lion King is loosely based on some classic lit and Scar definitely exhibits characteristics of both fascist and communist dictators, there's a lot of symbolism in his actions and elsewhere to this effect. Hell, they even made the fucking hyenas goose-step in the movie while he's singing. 

There are some minor points you could make about all the main characters having American/British accents and things like the "sub-villains" (hyenas) all having some sort of ethnic slant and/or being borderline retarded to dehumanize them, but I don't really care tbh. 

Looking into it deeper than that basically just makes you a pedantic asshole and you're not invited to my BBQ.

What he exhibits are the same things that despots throughout history have exhibited, a wish for absolute power, control and wealth. There ain't a god damned thing about that which is racist.  The goose stepping imagery is just a nice little visual device that people everywhere understand as a symbol of invasion by despotic regimes because of Germany c. WWII.  

Art imitates life in its use of symbolism, and imagery for sure. What those images are meant to actually represent is not literal all the time.

And no invite to your BBQ ??  Why not ?  Those kinds of people are comedy gold to listen to while having a beverage and pork products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustBecause

JustBecause 112

Posted
Posted
On 7/12/2019 at 7:56 AM, bad_teammate said:

When the original animated film was released it was obviously a race-superiority allegory and received a ton of legitimate criticism along those lines.

Cultural critique is great when it isn't undertaken by morons.

From the same company who released the "Song of the South".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...