The Disney Two-Step
WILLIAM EVANS, aka Tianaās Security Detail
THEREāS A SCENE early on in The Departed when Dignam (Mark Wahlberg) is interrogating Billy (Leonardo DiCaprio) in the hopes of convincing him to be an undercover agent. The scene intensifies when Dignam begins to press Billyās background and the duality of his personality: āYou were kind of a double kid, I bet, right?ā āYou have different accents?ā He was exposing the vulnerability of Billyās accommodating identity. Trapped in two worlds, Billy assimilated, sometimes on a weekly basis, to the crowd he serviced in hopes of fitting in or not facing ridicule.
I think about this a lot when it comes to how diversity works in the media and political space. Because the demands and desires of diversity have grown louder at about every level of human interaction, many institutions feel they are caught between wanting to be more progressive in their representation and opportunity while not pissing off their core base and support too much. And by core base and support, I mean white people. There is forever an attempt to appease one group and not piss off the other, whether weāre talking left-leaning politics or network programming.
There is perhaps no bigger entity that has mastered this half-in, half-out two-step than Disney. Well, rewind, perhaps there is no bigger entity than Disney. Full stop. And maybe resources, practice, and some mystical charm strung around the statue of Mr. Disney himself have contributed to how it is more versed at it than anyone else. Perhaps it was the easiest target first. While Disney now is all things to all people, the most common association that populates someoneās mind when Disney is mentioned is either the mouse or the princesses. And for a while, the princesses werenāt great. Outside of the very real and valid feminist critique of what the princesses used to be, which were bystanders in their own stories, they were mostly white. And if they werenāt, well, I mean, Pocahontas shouldnāt exist as a Disney entity and thereās not much more to argue on that.
Now, Disney has produced more diverse characters than just about anyone. The landscape is full of women of color doing amazing and active things. Ruling kingdoms, solving crimes, opening a restaurant with the best gumbo in New Orleans. It has been an amazing thing to watch, from my youthful years where Snow White looked like Black people might startle her to seeing Moana dodge arrows and swing to her escape from a pirate ship. But I guess my question is, what exactly is Moana?
Well, sheās Polynesian, I think thatās one of our few exacts. Though that itself is not a definite, as Polynesian is such a catchall for the many different cultures, dialects, and traditions of many people. The film is set in Samoa, but is kind of portrayed as Hawaii for American audiences? Maui in the film is a demigod who is huge and bullish and a buffoon in many ways. But heās based on or at least named for the actual Maui from Polynesian culture, a thin teenager on his journey to adulthood. Not to mention the erasure of Hina, the companion goddess of Maui, who never appears in the film. I mean, we already have one heroine here so⦠see you on the other side of the ocean, I guess?
The mixing and ambiguity of marginalized characters and cultures in Disney films is not a bug. Itās a feature. Itās a calculated risk of building bridges into cultures but never venturing too deep to ensure (white) American audiences will walk the length of it. If I can show you a sanitized culture with some hallmarks that seem cool and exotic without committing you, the viewer, to investing in it, I can check the box on diversity and not turn disinterested white folks away. Maybe the starkest example of this is the Aladdin live-action movie, where we revisit a fictional Muslim city where our hero goes from street rat to sultan. The animated Aladdin, a thrill ride, was released in 1992 in a much less connected world where ridicule and concerns rarely interrupted big business in real time. Specifics to Islamic culture were nonexistent in ā92, but their erasure was more stark in 2019, when there was much more pressure to get cross-cultural experiences right. But I canāt imagine the anxiety of trying to replicate one of the most known Disney properties that occurs in the Middle East in an increasingly hostile Islamophobic climate. Well, you just erase any association with Islam or Muslim identities from the film. You get close-enough casting. You call turbans āhats.ā You work in some spitting camels and monkeys hopping through the streets and hope people forget the significance of where the story takes place. And I guess, if youāre willing to do that, then maybe you didnāt have much anxiety about it to begin with. So, never mind.
As Disney is much bigger than just multimillion-dollar movies, this philosophy is existent in much of its outreachāi.e., cross-cultural projects. Princess Elena is definitely Latina but most definitely not any specific culture. The Indian detective Miraās city aesthetics and holidays borrow from many specific Indian cultures that donāt intersect. And yes, Disney spends what Iām sure is some minor kingās ransom for consultation on these projects where they are close enough to appeasement and havenāt ventured far enough away from the status quo. But it raises the question of how long will we continue to have consultants informing white filmmakers and showrunners instead of employing creators who are versed at making movies and TV shows and also have a strong familiarity with the source? Which, ya know, maybe thatās the next generation of Disney, in another twenty years or so. But the intent is rarely a fully realized effort, and itās hard to divorce the model of using marginalized experts with proximity to the story that white creators want to tell from that.
As much as some would scapegoat marginalized people wanting the media they consume to be more representative and forcing Disneyās hand in submitting to that, itās about the choices that Disney has decided to make. I think about how Frozen 2 was the big animated tent-pole movie for Disney in its release year, and I was curious if it would do anything to answer the fact that people of color didnāt exist in the first movie. Well, Frozen 2 rectified that in ways that Iād generously label as nefarious. Outside of the fact that Arendelle apparently relaxed its immigration laws because Brown folks could now be seen walking the streets, the way the othered people are seen is used as a bigger issue. In the movie, the Northuldra tribe is basically its stand-in for a fictional Indigenous tribe. It is revealed that the conflict between Arendelle and the Northuldra had been a false narrative given to Elsa and Annaāan opportunity to be a commentary on how we struggle with past tragedies toward a group of people. When we realize that Anna and Elsaās grandfather was the villain, the agitator who tried to conquer the Northuldra, there is a very clear moment where the princesses couldāve tried to reckon with their family history. One where they were not responsible for the fallout, but also had been givenāand believedāfalse tales of its origins.
At this point, weāve been given a movie and a half to know that Anna and Elsa are good people. We know they are flawed but kindhearted women. They pursue what is right and just with generosity and empathy. This is a classic āsins of the father with a chance at redeeming the family by doing the right thingā scenario. But Frozen 2 doesnāt do that. Instead, it builds in a way to make the princesses blood related to the tribe through their mother. Which has two immediate effects: First, it allows for a quick reconciliation of the aggrieved Northuldra to instantly forgive and now trust the rulers of a kingdom responsible for its oppression. In the movie it happens in seconds, so fast I had whiplash while seated in the theater as my eight-year-old appropriately asked me what just happened. I had few answers. It was the true wish fulfillment of those that say shit like, āI donāt know why youāre still mad about slavery,ā or even those āthe only race I believe in is the human raceā bastards.
The second issue is the investment factor. Frozen 2 doesnāt make (letās just call a non-spade a non-spade) white people reckon with their family lineage and what trauma their ancestors caused upon another people. It makes the investment partial to the personal stakes of the white folks involved. By making the princesses some de facto descendants of the Northuldra tribe, now the tribeās struggle is the princessesā struggle as well. The action to right those wrongs comes from there and not because it wouldāve been the human thing to do in the first place. This tactic is tried and true and problematic as all hell. It is the politician that doesnāt support gay rights until their son comes out. Itās the white executive that speaks with authority of their role in society by positing their adopted, marginalized children. Frozen 2 is the animated version of what fighting the good fight for big business looks like now. We can reckon with systemic and colonizing actions against the oppressed. But only as long as we make it the struggle of the beneficiaries too. And oh yeah, Anna and Elsa are biracial, I guess. I think about this all the time now.
And if Anna and Elsa are biracial now, what is Tiana from The Princess and the Frog? Single race, multispecies? For all my love of Tianaās characterization and my lightweight unhealthy adoration of Anika Noni Rose, itās impossible to not see that The Princess and the Frog started a thing where Black voice actors are cast for Black-human-identified characters in movies where the character is only a Black human for part of the time. The math is simple here. Youāve got the big Disney princesses that preceded Tiana like Cinderella, Snow White, Pocahontas, Princess Aurora, Hua Mulan, Ariel⦠Tiana was the first Black Disney princess and the first one to get turned into some shit that wasnāt a person. Hell, Ariel became MORE human. Where can a sista sign up to become MORE human as her plot point? Now, if you give me a story of a woman in New Orleans wanting to open up her own soul food spot, who also happens to get transformed into a frog, yes, Iād rather her be Black.
The fact that Tiana is turned into a frog isnāt necessarily the problem. This is my [Game of Thrones spoiler warning incomingā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦] Missandei dying theory. Folks were mad when Missandei got merked and tossed off of a castle wall. And yes, it was upsetting because Missandei was a great character. But yo, you missed me with the actual problem. The situation wasnāt that a Black woman got killed on Game of Thrones. The whole brutal point of the show was that no one was particularly precious and that fairy-tale narratives were subverted and often dismantled. The problem was that Missandei was the only Black woman of note on the show. And so when she dies, you now have zero.
With Disney, Tiana being a frog most of the movie is made more significant because there are now zero Black princesses who get to be Black women for the majority of the movie. The solution isnāt necessarily for The Princess and the Frog to not exist but for there to be more Disney movies with Black princesses. Now because of Disneyās influence, this has become a thing. Take a movie like Spies in Disguise, where Will Smith is an ultra-cool Black 007-type with way more charisma, but the catch of the film is that heās a damn bird for most of it. And then, you have a movie like Soul. I donāt really know where to begin with Soul, but for the uninitiated, hereās the pitch: Joe (Jamie Foxx), a Black high school music teacher whose dream it is to play his own gigs as opposed to teaching uninspired kids how to hold a trombone, gets his big break. In the process of celebrating his first big gig, he falls into a manhole, uncovered as they frequently are. And then poof, Joe is dead (or as we learn later, heās in a coma). But his soul is moving toward the āGreat Beyondā nonetheless. Joe freaks out because it isnāt his time yet and finds himself mentoring a very reluctant soul in the āGreat Beforeā named ā22ā (Tina Fey). Eventually hijinks ensue that land both Joe and 22 on Earth. Except 22ās soul is in Joeās body and Joeās soul is in⦠a cat. Through this misadventure they both come to understand living life for the moment, what their true spark is, and how to repair relationships with themselves and others.
Listen, Pixar has a formula. They know how to circle the human heart and often in the last act devour it like sharks. We are almost helpless to their very well-structured emotional manipulation. They arenāt making bad movies. And Soul isnāt a bad movie. But the weight that Soul tries to carry seems too heavy for the folks that created it, specifically when dealing with the pronounced Black elements of the movie. Itās important to know at least one very big preproduction note about the film: Joe, when the film was conceived, wasnāt originally Black. Who knows how much of this story was constructed with a white protagonist in mind before this change, but hereās the exercise you can do to articulate how much that matters. Was White Joe (sorry, thatās the best code name I got) a musician too? Was he even a teacher? What was in place of the barbershop scene? (I donāt think any of us can see White Joe going into a Sport Clips during this movie.) What was White Joeās conflict with his mother? Was his father still alive? Yes, these are loaded-ass questions, but it makes it easy to see the āBlack checklistā in Soul. Depending on how generous you are, they either make the Black aesthetics in Soul feel authentic or well within the realm of stereotypes. There are scenes where the possible copy and pasting feels prevalent in the film. Take Paul, a very brief antagonist of Joe, who makes fun of Joe and tries to crush his dreams at every interval. The comeuppance for Paul happens later in the film. Terry, the record keeper from the Great Beyond, who is obsessed with finding and retrieving Joe (pardon the slave-catcher vibes, but I didnāt write the movie, yo), finds Paul and briefly pulls Paulās soul out of his body because she believes that Paul is Joe. Yes, somehow, the record keeper for millions and millions of souls who have passed on mistook one Black man for another. In a movie where Paul is white and this is just āthe bully getting scared straightā this probably goes off as a typical gag. But when you have so many examples of unprovoked violence placed on Black people, which includes, way too often, mistaken identity, this joke isnāt hitting the same.
Perhaps the most damning thing about Soul though? Probably the gentrification of Joeās life by 22. Weāve seen movies before where people switch roles, or in this case switch bodies, and through experiencing a differing perspective help solve each otherās problems. The problem is, the culture divide between Joe and the aesthetic we attach to 22 (a middled-aged white woman) isnāt simply different perspectives. It implies that a simple tell-it-like-it-is approach would solve Joeās problems. Whether itās his relationship with his mom. His bully. His career choice. It flattens the complexities that occur in these Black relationships and treats them like they operate in a bubble. When 22 stands up to Joeās Bully (Paul) in the barbershop it assumes the anxiety from Joe is just a product of a typical antagonist relationship. It erases the factors of Black masculinity and the tightrope that Black men walk in their efforts to be accepted within their community and not seem threatening outside of it. When 22 helps facilitate Joe repairing his relationship with his mom, it is spawned by 22 being abrupt and speaking out of turn to his mom. It plays like a very typical parents-not-supporting-my-dreams conversation. But there is an erasure here of the weightiness of Joeās mom being a Black widow and a business owner in the city. Of wanting her Black son to have easy-to-see hallmarks of success because his father did not. This shouldnāt be as generic a moment as it is, but the revelation is flat. Both of these examples carry the pathology that Joe has just made these situations too complicated to untangle. And that it really just takes this witty and naive middle-aged white woman to solve his problems. Problems that we assume came from years of friction during Joeās life, she solves in about five minutes of total screen time. And ya know, thatās cute. Iām sure there are plenty of people that responded well to that. āJoe was just in his own way, he just never stood up for himself and thank god 22 showed him the way.ā But thereās a lot of historical context missing in those moments. For example, we donāt get to see why Joeās mother would be apprehensive about Joe pursuing a music career. It assumes sheās just like every other parent who has a pragmatic approach for their children. But thereās a story that feels particularly unique to this Black woman who has owned her own business for decades, now seeing her departed husbandās face when she looks at her son. Her son, she believes, is underachieving. And if we donāt have the screen time to tell that story, we should at least feel the weight of it. Maybe not have the mouthy never-been-a-real-person-before character break down her concerns so easily. That feels reductive, to say the least. And at one point, 22 steals Joeās body. And when the smoke clears, Joe ends up apologizing for his behavior. Which is after he saves 22ās soul. I mean, we got Black abduction. Magical Negro stuff in the last act⦠Itās a lot, fam. Itās a whole, Black, lot.
Movies like Spies in Disguise and Soul can be enjoyable films. But itās a weird way to go with the pressing want and need of diversity to promote these marginalized characters in the name of representation just for them to transform into a thing not representative of the community youāre wanting to appeal to.
Maybe itās generous, but I still think these blunders or oversights are more neglect based than malicious. The Mulan movie debacle feels different though. I think about all the press of Mulan being this big tent-pole achievement. About how they werenāt going to disrespect China and its folklore this time. How the location and the actors involved proved that they were taking this seriously. And yes, the actors were sort of representative of what Mulan should look like. But behind the camera it was the complete opposite. The tone changes from that tone of āweāre doing the right thing this timeā when you see it for what it was: white people telling someone elseās story in a location exotic to them. This was far from the only problem with Mulan from a cultural perspective, including things Disney couldnāt really control like the lead actress being a fierce defender of the Chinese state and its violence against protestors in Hong Kong. But then thereās the Xinjiang thing. And to be more acute, the filming in Georgia thing.
I couldnāt give a damn about what outrages Republican senators have these days⦠or the length of my personal existence⦠but Disney made a big show about the possibility of no longer filming in Georgia over an abortion heartbeat bill. And ya know what, this aināt that essay, but big business taking a stand on āsomethingā that people feel is a worthy social fight? Iām not mad at that, not even a little bit. Butttttt when that same big-ass company decides to film in Xinjiang, which has been a specific region where China has been committing human rights abuses to Uighur Muslims for years, it does make a brotha tilt his head and say, āHow, Sway?ā What is this supposed to mean? Was it merely an oversight? Was the Georgia thing virtue signaling for progressives in the U.S., thinking no one would notice or care about these issues outside of our borders? Is this some Muslim-hating, self-described liberal Bill Maher shit?! Itās pretty confusing, if youāre not cynical. I am cynical. It just feels like some bullshit to me.
When I say that there are people at Disney that care about diversifying its media, thatās not to be flippant and assuming. Iāve had the privilege to meet a great deal of people working with the Mouse who take these things seriously and do all they can to make a more equitable entertainment complex for the widest range of people. But thereās a limit to the power folks have if they arenāt making the biggest decisions as far as movie scripts and casting calls. And at the end of the day, Disney didnāt become Disney because it didnāt want to maximize profit. TV shows and movies with marginalized figures as the focal point may be an untapped resource, but that still isnāt bigger than predominantly white au...