Writer's Block: Reconsidering Children's Books

[author_by_night]

[Error: unknown template qotd]Disney. The sexism - it burns.

Actually, I think "sexism" is a bit unfair, just because a, they're simplistic because they're for kids, and b, they weren't exactly written in progressive times. Still, one of the reasons I liked Enchanted was because it pretty much parodied all those themes. Not just that, but it was by Disney itself. (Granted, Disney decades later after these books and movies were written/made.) But old school Disney is just filled with anti "ugly" women themes and "ditch it all for lurve" themes.

And then there's The Baby-Sitter's Club books - not because they were sexist or anything, but the idea of a bunch of thirteen year old girls being trusted to take kids through NYC alone and stuff... *shudders*

Also, Harry Potter... though in that case, it was on purpose. But back when I first read them, I didn't think anything of a bunch of preteens fighting three headed dogs and dark lords and dealing with attempted mass murder. I mean, I always thought the books got darker in the third book, but when I think about it... yikes. O_o Obviously it was Jo Rowling's point, but I don't think I really got how chilling it was until later.

Comments

[starpaint.livejournal.com]

Hm. As far as suburban kids go, that would be horribly unlikely... but I remember some of the kids at my school getting paid to bring the kids they babysat there and back when they were about 13. Which isn't quite the same thing, but...

[jncar.livejournal.com]

Also, Harry Potter... though in that case, it was on purpose. But back when I first read them, I didn't think anything of a bunch of preteens fighting three headed dogs and dark lords and dealing with attempted mass murder. I mean, I always thought the books got darker in the third book, but when I think about it... yikes.

I feel the same way about Narnia. I actually haven't re-read the books as an adult, but I took my kids to see the movies and seeing those young kids stabbing ravenous yet sentient creatures with swords, and then getting stabbed themselves was somewhat traumatic for me--more so than for my kids, actually.

[febrile-lune.livejournal.com]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgxVvbai_nI&feature=related

This is called Mickey Mouse Monopoly and I think you would be interested. It addresses sexism and racism in Disney. I don't think it's unfair, it's very blatant in a culture that is far too accepting of this sort of thing.

[sea_thoughts]

I was already 17 when I started reading HP, so I definitely got a lot of the darkness. That was why I was happy when OotP came out, because it felt like JKR finally took the gloves off and said, "Okay, let's do this." *lol*

[sixth-light.livejournal.com]

The thing I find creepiest about Disney's sexism is that they've often taken the original tale and made it *worse* - e.g., in the original Little Mermaid story she's trying to get a soul, not a man; in the original Beauty and the Beast, the Beast is kind and gentlemanly and Belle has to overcome her initial aversion to realise this, and that's why she loves him, rather than the Disney-fied "if you love a jerk, he'll change" version. And Beauty and the Beast is one of the *better* Disney stories, sexism-wise.

I also find the whole Aladdin thing really interesting because I wouldn't have thought twice about it until I started living with a girl from India, who is willing to explain in precise detail how and why it's racist as hell; she was in elementary school in America when it came out, so she had to deal with a lot of "do you wear clothes like that at home?" stuff. The worst thing about that one, I think, is how they made Aladdin look like Tom Cruise because making him look Indian or Arabic wouldn't make him attractive enough to be a Disney lead. Gah.

[vegablack62.livejournal.com]

I agree that the creepiest thing about Disney movies is that they make the story more sexist not less, sometimes they make the story worse in their attempts to make it more enlightened. It's weird. Their addiction to weak plot cliches is what does it.

"Harry Potter... though in that case, it was on purpose. But back when I first read them, I didn't think anything of a bunch of preteens fighting three headed dogs and dark lords and dealing with attempted mass murder. I mean, I always thought the books got darker in the third book, but when I think about it... yikes. O_o Obviously it was Jo Rowling's point, but I don't think I really got how chilling it was until later."

I read Potter for the first time as a grown woman with children the ages of the characters. (My youngest so graduated high school the year DH came out.)

I used words like sinister to discribe Dumbledore because that is the way he is to a parent. I finished the first books wondering what kind of strange headmaster allows a preteen to have invisibity cloaks or wander the school in search of adventure, or punishes kids by having them roam at night in forests filled with dangerous creatures. I felt JKR hinted that Dumbledore knew about Harry's adventures. I was confused by his portrayal and wondered if it was a hole in the characterization. In the end we found out that he did plot it and saw endangering a 11-12 year old
as part of his plan to prepare him to die fighting Voldemort. That's just cold, however charming the man was.

Children's literature is filled with disturbing stories that touch on cruelty, violence, failure, callousness and the inhumanity of humans. IN some ways they are more frank about it than adult lit. That's why kids like them. I'd say more books deal with it than those that don't. My feelings about Dumbledore didn't make the books bad kids Lit. I think the first three Harry Potters were great examples of kid lit. The first book was a perfect example; the ending was perfectly satisfying from the perspective of a child. Harry's winning the class cup for Gryffindor from Slytherin would have pleased a ten year old more than finding the Philosopher's stone. I just don't see Dumbledore as such a wonderful character. One of the things kids learn from books is that things and people aren't always what they seem.

[eimajunknown.livejournal.com]

funny you mentioned disney. i was just watching 'beauty and the beast' a few weeks ago and was disturbed by some of the lyrics the townspeople, lead by gaston, are singing when they're storming the beast's castle. particularly: "We don't like / What we don't understand / In fact it scares us." i was like....way to be narrow-minded, you know?

also, i was a big bsc fan when i was younger. i liked those and sweet valley. i can't bring myself to read them now, though, lol. but it was fun at the time.

[r-a-black.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking the same on the Disney stuff, because it's been brought a few times when I argue against Twilight. Coincidentally I was having a discussion over the sexism in the movies with classmates the other day, which was pretty much made up of us comparing and contrasting the tougher females to the whiny, helpless ones (I've always hated Snow White, and I always will.)

I'm the same as you with Harry Potter, though it didn't hit me until they put the question to Rowling. They mentioned that it was getting darker as he got older, and she said something along the lines of, "I thought the idea of a face growing out of the back of a man's head was pretty dark". I pretty much had a big "oh duh!" moment there and then.

You know, I think it's cool that you do the Writer's Block bits- I almost want to try some myself.

[vytresna.livejournal.com]

You know, it was pretty much the reverse for me with The Giving Tree. I was a literal-minded child.