Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Core Post #5: Hard Bodies and how things haven't changed

The plight of the white man is one that we are all too familiar with. In fact, our current president likes to remind us about the troubles facing the white man with every single tweet he publishes. Susan Jeffords writes about Hollywood's reaction to the "white man's problem" post-Reagan in Hard Bodies.  She interestingly connects films like Robocop and Terminator 1&2 to the change from the hard "machine men" of the 1980s to the sensitive father-like figures of the 1990s (175). In Jeffords view, Hollywood reconciles its view on masculinity because the “violence, rationality, single-mindedness, goal-orientation were destructive, not only for individual men but for humanity as a whole” (164). She interestingly uses Disney’s animated Beauty and the Beast as an example of this change.


The Beast, once a prince with every luxury in life, lives selfishly and without kindness. The narrative conveniently explains away these faults by blaming his behavior on others (i.e. his parents and servants) claiming he does not know better (151). While it’s clear Disney is reaching to teach a lesson about not judging a book by its cover, the journey to get to this realization is problematic. Claiming the Beast does not know any better is a weak argument, especially considering his relationship with Mrs. Potts, Lumiere, and Cogsworth eludes to him being capable of having a relationship. Jeffords also points out how Belle becomes merely a vehicle for breaking the curse instead of an individual person, which is unfortunate considering she is probably Disney’s most successful attempt at a feminist character.


The recent live-action film attempts to fix some of these errors. For instance, Emma Watson’s Belle takes on the mantle of inventor instead of her father, and she is given a larger backstory, but the Beast's story remains largely the same. The Beasts (still hot-tempered) largest change is his intelligence. Instead of illiterate, he is Belle’s intellectual equal--making the match much more acceptable. However, the re-boot still relies on the claim that he didn’t know any better and that the entire castle simply let the Beasts father turn him into a cruel man. It’s irresponsible to teach people that they cannot be held accountable for their behavior simply because they didn’t know any better, and it’s interesting how this problematic narrative about masculinity and accountability continues today (i.e. rape culture).

Image result for beauty and the beast animated and live action




2 comments:

  1. I thought about this too while watching the live action version. Not only do they claim that his father turned him into a "beast," which, I can see that being a viable case ("like father like son"), but then Mrs. Potts and gang blame themselves for letting that happen. Though, in reality, I'm not entirely sure how much say a servant could have in re-shaping the prince's traits from his father's. Regardless, I never thought about it in terms of masculinity and accountability, and more importantly in the terms you mention: ie. rape culture. While one is a fairytale, too often in real life are men not held accountable for acts such as rape, often blaming it on other instances or pressures and therefore making it "not their fault." This is huge in regards to the Stanford swimmer case from a few years back. Interesting point, Cassie!

    ReplyDelete