To Whom It May Concern,
Disney produces a number of family friendly films and distributes these films across the world. They target young children as the audience of these films, and for the most part, Disney successfully produces films to inspire and lift up these children. However, the majority of these films benefit most young white American children who speak “standard” English. Even films that contain people of color only positively portray and avoid stereotyping those characters if they speak “standard” English, and often portray villains as speaking “non-standard” English. These worrisome trends present particularly heavily in films such as Mulan and The Lion King. Fortunately, however, there are a number of ways to avoid falling into this standard language ideology. To clarify, standard language ideology socially constructs a false hierarchy of language, often valuing varieties of English spoken by the dominant sector of society, in the US typically wealthy white people, more so than language spoken by individuals with lower socio-economic status. (English With an Accent, 67) This ideology presents in every aspect of our life, from workplace conversations to social interactions. It reinforces societal stereotypes and serves to keep dominant groups in power. By reinforcing this ideology, people and companies such as Disney constantly and unconsciously participate in socio-economic oppression. Within the film Mulan, unfortunately, standard language ideology presents heavily. Although the animated film takes place in China, Mulan speaks flawless, “standard” English. (Mulan) Although this may seem normal as it is an American film, it only seems “normal” because of deeply ingrained standard language ideology. This choice to have Mulan speak “standard” English proves more problematic because not all characters in the film do so. Mushu, Mulan’s spirit ancestor dragon friend, speaks non-standard English. He in particular draws heavily from the African American Vernacular English (AAVE) Linguistic Repertoire, and also serves as the film’s comic relief. (Mulan) This choice to have the only comical character use elements of the AAVE Linguistic Repertoire reinforces a standard language ideology in that AAVE is viewed as lesser, reducing a language repertoire with a complex grammatical structure to a joke. This reinforcement of standard language ideology could have easily been avoided. Mushu need not speak AAVE, as he is a dragon and can speak any way the writers choose. Additionally, even if he does draw from elements of AAVE, he does not have to be the story’s main comic relief. Alternatively, if more other characters speak “non-standard” English, then characters who also do stand out less. Mulan could speak “accented” English, and her parents as well as other characters could as well. All of these changes could help the movie avoid the pitfalls of standard language ideology. Mulan is not the only Disney film which relies on the problematic notion of Standard Language Ideology to code characters in certain ways. These themes also present in The Lion King. Again, the main characters, Simba as well as Mufasa, speak “standard” English. By contrast, Scar, who is Mufasa’s brother and by all accounts has no reason to speak differently than him, speaks with a British accent. (The Lion King) The movie relies on this accent to portray Scar as evil. Although this accent portrayal does not use a “non-standard” American accent, it still uses standard language ideology to demonize any way of speaking that differs from “standard” American English. This reinforces the idea that “standard” American English is superior to other English varietals. These themes also play out with other characters in the film. Timon, one of the primary comical relief characters, uses features from the AAVE linguistic repertoire, including copula deletion and the th/d merger. This again plays into standard language ideology for the same reasons Mushu does, making features of AAVE into a joke rather than the legitimate language varietal that it is. As such, Disney could correct both of these issues by including “non-standard” English varieties for purposes other than jokes and to portray an evil character. The more characters speak “non-standard” English, the more heavily rejected standard language ideology will be. Overall, the removal of standard language ideology from Disney films is vitally important, especially as Disney films target young children who form lifelong ideas. By including standard language ideology, Disney reinforces racism and classism subconsciously in the minds of young children. By including non-standard varieties of English while avoiding the racist stereotypes associated with the groups that use those varieties, Disney could promote equality and reject racist ideology, while creating inclusive, diverse, and entertaining content. I hope to see some of these changes in future Disney films. Sincerely, Shaan Eckstein
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
July 2019
Categories |