This blog is supposed to be about my scholarship, too, right? Here's my midterm on Mulan.
In the End, They're All the Same:
Gender and Sexuality in Disney's Mulan
Animated films are often discounted for not having any substance, and therefore are sometimes deemed unworthy of in-depth academic study. What this generalization neglects is the profound impact animated films can have on children, especially in terms of how youngsters are socialized into societal norms. Furthermore, animation is not just for children. In 1989, with the release of The Little Mermaid, Disney made a concerted effort to try and draw more adults to their films, going as far as to create separate marketing campaigns aimed at adults<1>.
Nine years later, Disney released Mulan, an animated film in which a Chinese girl takes her father's place in a war against the Huns<2>. Compared to the princesses who came before her, Mulan seems to send a message that Disney finally learned the term feminism and tried to make a film with a more independent female protagonist. Critics immediately saw the differences between this Disney films and those that came before, describing it as “a tale of a young woman's struggle to overcome societal stereotypes.”<3> But is Mulan truly transgressive? Disney does allow for the challenging of the essentialism of gender, but only if the end is the same as all previous Disney movies: a heterosexual, monogamous relationship.
Mulan starts out as a movie that challenges gender essentialism. As Mimi Nguyen posits, “the sly acknowledgment that gender norms are socially constructed is amazing - both masculinity and femininity are exposed as elaborate performances.”<4> Both instances that drive home Nguyen's statement regarding the construction of gender occur during song. The first mockery of gender essentialism is the song entitled, “Honor to Us All”, which follows Mulan through the process of preparing for the matchmaker. What is most striking about the scene is the elaborate work that goes into making Mulan a perfect woman; her face is painted, her waist is cinched, and her hair is elaborately coiffed. That Mulan is so uncomfortable being forced into the role of woman is further proof that femininity is not something that comes naturally. Mulan has notes written on her arm in case she “forgets something.” If gender was something a person knew how to do instinctively, would it be something that one could forget? The song shows the way in which gender is a performance, and, furthermore, a performance that Mulan would rather not take part in.
Masculinity proved to be a learned attribute during the song entitled, “I'll Make a Man Out of You.” This piece is sung by the military captain, Shang, and follows the men (and Mulan) through their training. During the chorus of the song, Shang outlines that men must be “Swift as the coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire, mysterious as the dark side of the moon.” His lyrics are interspersed with the background singers (in a deep, booming voice) reciting “Be a man!” At first, Mulan appears to fail at being a man just as much as she failed at being a girl; she can't shoot an arrow, aim a cannon, or carry a heavy load. But, by the end of the tune, she has succeeded to the point of being better than the men. Similar to the musical number discussed previously, the fact that the men had to be taught how to be manly proves that gender is not innate, and Mulan's ability to learn how to be masculine when she is biologically female is further proof for the point.
Although these two songs are a major departure from the typical Disney production, the end of the film returns to a socially normative presentation of gender. After saving China (twice), Mulan is offered a position in the Emperor's council. However, she declines the position of power so she can return to her family's home. Had the protagonist been male, I doubt he would have refused such an honor to return home to the family. Rather than let Mulan continue her gender transgression, Disney puts her back where she belongs: the home.
Upon her return home, Mulan presents her father with a sword to prove that she saved China. Her grandmother's response is, “She brings home a sword? If you ask me, she should have brought home a man.” Apparently saving China (twice) is not enough to gain the respect of her family's matriarch; even though she has succeeded in winning a war, the accomplishment is empty if she did not succeed at securing a husband. Luckily for her, Shang enters immediately after the grandmother's comment and asks to speak with Mulan. Grandma rejoices and exclaims, “Sign me up for the next war!”
The song that begins as the film fades to the credits is entitled, “True to Your Heart.” It is a song in which a man is telling his (presumably female) subject that she must be “true to her heart.” Unsurprisingly, the man informs the woman that if she listens to her heart, “it's gonna lead you straight to me.” Although most of this song occurs as the credits roll, it is the capstone of the movie, and thus can be seen as the film's overall message. Throughout the movie, Mulan is on a gender journey, during which she experiences being both female and male in an attempt to learn her true identity. She is on a search to be “true to her heart,” and at the end of the movie she finds what it is she supposedly desired the entire time: a stable man and a content life at home.
Although Mulan does allow for the expression of radical views regarding gender, these viewpoints are allowed to be expressed only if the female protagonist ends the film subscribing to traditional feminine ideals. Mulan is praised for portraying an independent female character, but in the end she still finds herself in a relationship with a man. In addition, the man that she becomes attached to is her military captain, a man who by default has more authority than she does. This causes her romantic relationship to have an inherent imbalance of power, even though she has succeeded in becoming a powerful woman. Therefore, although Disney appears to be breaking out of the mold when it comes to Mulan, the film is only one more in a series of heteronormative, sexist productions.
------------------------------------------
<1> Magiera, Marcy. “'Mermaid' Aims to Reel in Adults.” Advertising Age. October 16, 1989.
<2> Mulan. 1998. Directed by Tony Bancroft and Barry Cook. Produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation.
<3> Wong, Stephen. “History? Close Enough.” Entertainment Insiders. Available: http://www.einsiders.com/reviews/archives/mulan.php
<4> Nguyen, Mimi. “My Mulan.” [Personal Website]. Available: http://www.worsethanqueer.com/slander/mulan.html
Monday, October 22, 2007
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Honors Thesis Colloquium
Blogs posts have been a little sparse over the past few days (I even missed Blog Action Day), but that is mostly because school has taken over my life. I had a midterm due this morning (a film analysis of Mulan), I have another due this coming Tuesday (my Led Zep midterm), and then there is that little, teeny project I'm working on this semester: my thesis.Luckily, the interviews for my thesis are moving right along. I have three done already, one scheduled for later in the week, and one more that is in the works. It's amazing what you can accomplish with a few well-placed Facebook posts!
I know all of you are dying to hear my Sociological discussion of video games, so here is the info on my class's colloquium. It's taking place on Friday, November 2, from 10am to 12:30pm. There are eleven students presenting their work, and all of them are really interesting. My favorites are the projects focusing on pro-anorexia message boards, representations of women in bridal magazines, and an exploration of sneaker collector culture.
So come, eat some free food, learn a little more about sociology, and see some great students who are sure to become big names in academia.
Here's the flyer for the event.
Labels: USF
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
The Haight and my Intro Class
Before this rant (or, as I like to think of it, scholarly musing) begins, let me give some background information. Last week the assignment in my intro to media studies class was to collect artifacts that represented the Haight Ashbury district of San Francisco in the 1960s and post it on our class message board. Then, the class took a field trip to the Haight (which is about 6 blocks from USF) and collected artifacts from today's Haight, which included interviews, photos, and video. These artifacts were also posted to the message board, and old Haight and new Haight were compared.A surprising number of students wrote about the commercialization of Haight and about the neighborhood today the neighborhood being a symbol of materialism and capitalism. While the Haight is probably more commercial than it was in the '60s, it is problematic, and even somewhat untrue, to make such a blanket, black-and-white statement.
Let me explain further...
It is true during the '60s there were programs dedicated to free everything, including housing, food, and medical care. But some of the hippies did buy stuff, if only food, drugs, or the latest LP. I agree that they probably didn't buy 15 pairs of shoes (which, unfortunately is soooo easy to do in the Haight), but some of them had at least one pair. Therefore, while not overly materialistic, the hippies did buy things, and thus there have always been stores in the Haight.
Furthermore, to chastise the Haight for becoming overly commercialized is to ignore all of the counter-capitalist businesses that exist there. My favorite example of such a business is Coffee to the People, a cafe that only sells organic, fair trade coffee and tea. Although a coffee shop, it is far from Starbucks, and the fact that it is still in business (I am unsure when it opened) is a testament to the fact that businesses that treat their workers, the environment, their suppliers, and their customers with respect can still be profitable.
Even though there exist many other stores which probably don't dig as deeply into the origins of their products as Coffee to the People does, most of the businesses are small rather than corporate. In fact, San Francisco Law requires that any "formula retail" establishment apply for a special permit before setting up shop in the Haight. The only large corporations that come to mind when I think of the Haight are McDonalds, Ben & Jerry's and Wells Fargo (the Gap recently closed its Haight & Ashbury location), and of those three I know that at least one (Wells Fargo) is so environmentally friendly that it was awarded a "Green Business" status by San Francisco Green Business.
The other aspect of Haight that makes it anti-capitalist is the wide array of second-hand stores. While I can't find any good evidence to support the claim that second-hand stores are anti-capitalist (at least in the 5 minutes of googling I did), it seems intuitive to me that by buying something used the corporation that manufactured the good doesn't get any more money for the item, and instead a local business profits. Furthermore, something new didn't have to be created, packaged, and shipped, so the impact on the environment is less for second-hand goods (if even No Impact Man will buy second-hand goods, then they must have less environmental impact).
In short (if only brevity were my strong point...) there are stores in the Haight that sell things, but a closer look at the structure, type, and products of the stores receals that the neighborhood is far from an all-consuming, materialist, capitalist beast (or at least as far from it as the Haight is from Union Square).
I promise that not all of my future blog posts will be this academic, nor this long (well, I kinda promise that), so please stay tuned for more!
Labels: San Francisco, USF
