This was really interesting to read, but as this is my least favorite Disney movie for many of these reasons, I must disagree. I am aware of her wanting to be part of the human world, but the way it's written later on severely bothers me, and would regardless of her gender.... I definitely wouldn't think of a male character who I see as that foolish as being so great, heroic guy. ... and as someone who is "rebellious" and doesn't get along with my parents, I just find her actions grating and... not well reasoned.
My main issue is how it does focus mainly on Eric in the latter half of the movie. The song at the beginning seems more like a failed effort to make us think there's more to her to me, as it isn't reinforced later... or only reinforces how she fangirls over objects. She does find things on land interesting to a degree, but she seems to lack curiosity about anything which isn't either a. Eric or B. an object... I view her more as a vapid fangirl collector than anything. Why be fascinated by a world she clearly knows nothing about other than "oohh, they have shiny objects?" And the scene on the boat actually drives me crazy, because while he can tell part of her personality, he still knows nothing about her other than a couple of traits. Also reinforcing the focus being on Eric, Ursula doesn't entice Ariel with becoming human to escape her father (this is never mentioned from what I recall) or her own society (which really isn't that bad at all and which she seems to fit in quite well otherwise-- she definitely isn't a social outcast who dislikes her own culture by any means), she entices her with this man she just met and "is in love with" presumably only because he's human... I actually feel like she treats him like another one of her objects to collect.
I definitely wouldn't give Triton father of the year, but he did have good intentions ultimately, as it's clear he does care for her but just goes around it the wrong way, considering how he knows how dangerous humans can be. I actually find his character development much more interesting than Ariel's throughout the movie in this regard, as he realizes his mistakes while she... doesn't express any guilt all from being fooled by what is obviously a deal with the octopus-devil. Besides, her sea creature friends are loving and care for her, but she betrays their wishes as well. She also just seems to be in that annoying "rebellious teenager who will rebel against anything without a cause" phase. Admittedly, a part of it might also be that I just don't like her personality even beyond that.
Hm... that's interesting! To be honest, I don't really think there is any deep reason for Ariel wanting to be human, but at the same time, I don't really think there needs to be? The way I see her character is that she's got severe culture envy, similar to an Anglophile or a weeaboo or what have you. She comes off as basically "a human in a mermaid body", which, I mean, isn't exactly the peak of maturity but at the same time, as someone who knows people who have random obsessions or collecting-type hobbies (and heck, I have them myself) I can definitely understand the behavior. Maybe this is influenced by my life experiences / where I am in my life but I think it's important to have fulfillment in life, wherever that fulfillment comes from, and regardless of how immature Ariel's hobbies are or how short-sighted her dreams are, they DO give her fulfillment.
Ursula doesn't entice Ariel with becoming human to escape her father (this is never mentioned from what I recall) or her own society You have a point, "Poor Unfortunate Souls" is all about getting Eric -- no other motivation is mentioned or even hinted at. But in the grander scheme of the movie, if you look at what Ariel was sacrificing to be human, it's not much aside from her voice. Her relationship with her father was in pieces at that point and she had no worldly possessions she cared about anymore because he destroyed them. When Triton blew up at her and destroyed her grotto, what it effectively did was make it so that there was nothing tying her to the sea anymore, no real reason why she SHOULDN'T be human and start her life over in a new place. So while Ursula IS like "Eric Eric don't you want to be with Eric?" I think more subtly the other issue is that there's nothing holding Ariel back; she doesn't have much to lose (you know, other than her own self), which is why the decision is possible.
(which really isn't that bad at all and which she seems to fit in quite well otherwise-- she definitely isn't a social outcast who dislikes her own culture by any means), she entices her with this man she just met and "is in love with" presumably only because he's human... Hm, I don't think you need to be a social outcast to want to be in a different society, though. It goes along with what I said above about Anglophiles and weeaboos -- people like what they like, you know? As for why Ariel is in love with Eric, I mean, I'm not exactly a romantic person but I can see her falling in love with him due to his looks and personality. She can tell that he's a dog person, pretty genial and down to earth, treats sailors as his equals, and dislikes when people do things like make statues of him, and he went back to a burning ship to save his dog. I can also see that she might feel like they have a special connection because she saved his life -- if she hadn't been there that night, if she hadn't intervened, his life would've ended then and there. So I can see Ariel seeing their connection as fate of some kind. So yeah, I don't really see Ariel as liking Eric purely because he's human, although I can see that being part of it. (I mean, if we're going with the Anglophile/weeaboo analogy, I know people who think English accents are inherently sexy or have a thing for Asian men/women so...)
Besides, her sea creature friends are loving and care for her, but she betrays their wishes as well. Could you expand on this a bit (the betrayal part, I mean)?
And yeah, I agree that she inadvertently endangered her father and the kingdom -- I don't think she realized that that was Ursula's endgame (I think Ariel probably thought of it as "human world or bust," as in, she'd be human or she'd disappear quietly trying -- it seems to me she honestly didn't consider the possibility that her dad would get involved and actually give up all his power and his whole self to save her), but yes, it was still foolish/short-sighted on her part. Honestly, I don't have an issue with people thinking Ariel is immature, obsessive, foolish, annoying, vapid, or illogical. My issue is when people say things like, "She gave up everything she had for a man!" because it's a huge reduction of the story to the point of gross inaccuracy. At the point she made the deal she had ALREADY lost a lot of things that were dear to her (relationship with her father, her belongings) and she didn't do it for a man; she did it for her own happiness (if you look at the days she spent as a human, she was on cloud nine). Selfish, I can understand. However, "gave everything up for a man" implies the exact opposite -- extreme selflessness. This doesn't make ANY sense to me given the story. Similarly, statements like "she left her loving family to be with a dude" or "she gave up her voice to be with a dude who ended up ditching her for another girl" are false (well, I mean the last one is true if we're talking about the original fairy tale, but we're not).
So while I sort of presented my own personal interpretation of Ariel at points (that she's a strong heroine, for example), that's obviously my personal interpretation and is not necessarily right. The only issue I have is when people have an interpretation of Ariel that is clearly wrong (indefensible) given the facts of the movie. (Not saying your interpretation is wrong, just the ones I see repeated all the time from people that seem like they haven't watched the movie in years and have no idea what they're talking about.)
Yes, but there's a bit of a difference between collecting (which is fine) and what she eventually does. XD It's like... hmm, there are European countries I'd likely fit in better than I would here (liberal, metal-loving countries where it's considered normal to be introverted? Hell yes), but I don't think my collection of Scandinavian metal albums is really going to prepare me for life in Norway... especially if I don't buy a better coat first. I'd want to be sure I had a good enough handle on the language first, study the cultural norms more beforehand, etc. In Ariel's case (assuming books on human culture don't just fall into the sea), I would've spied on human society more before actually joining them. She just got really, really lucky she wasn't locked up on insanity charges for doing things like brushing her hair with a fork... which definitely wouldn't have fulfilled her life much, since it was a huge risk for something she knew very little about. I don't think there's anything wrong with being a weaboo or something, so long as it's not to the foolish degree of "I only like anime! Therefore I am going to Japan where they apparently still have ninja and samurai and I can run around the streets in this cosplay outfit!" ... which is all kinds of headdesk ignorant.
And hmm, like many things, I think this comes down to a matter of interpretation. I find the whole she lost everything perspective interesting, as I never really saw it that way. She had other peop... uh friends/family (those sea creatures at least, and we never see anyone going "she's so weird! I never want her as a royal"), and was a princess who would one day inherit quite a lot... and, given her position, she would've been allowed to pursue just about anything other than the one thing she did. I would've gladly switched places with her when I was her age as I'd say it was better than my life then (to be a little more personal), haha, so I just thought she was over-reacting over objects when she still had plenty of other options. So the Eric thing just seems like more of a... "He's the one thing I can't have, therefore I must have him!" XD Like she was with all the trinkets and such as well.
Although yeah, I do agree that she thought it was some kind of fate, especially since this is Disney we're talking about here, heh.
As for the betrayal... As I recall, Sebastian went through great lengths to keep her safe and away from humans? I know he was also employed by her father, but they also seemed like friends. Flounder too, as he just seemed too shy to say something, but she still left him - who was more or less her best friend - behind without so much as a "goodbye, I'll really miss you!"
I have said she gave up her voice for a man she barely knew, which I thought was utterly ridiculous, since by that point... well, that is the focus for that bit of the movie, but I do agree it wasn't everything just for him. I can understand the selfish/selfless bit, as many actions can be perceived as both. You can donate money to a good cause, but it can be both out of the human need of community, which does help others without need of personal gain, and out of a more selfish desire to just not look "bad" by not donating. In this case, I think she can be seen as selfish as she didn't think... at all, about anything, and that indirectly hurt others because she was just thinking of her own need to have what she couldn't. Yet, since she does it for one person (to use their usage; I'm not saying she does), she seems selfless towards that one, while coming across as selfish to her family, as it's nearly impossible to please everyone at once.
"she gave up her voice to be with a dude who ended up ditching her for another girl" are similarly false (well, I mean the last one is true if we're talking about the original fairy tale, but we're not"
Semi-off topic, but I actually find the original interesting when applied to the author himself. The story alone I'm not a fan of, but it somehow becomes a lot more appealing to me when applied to the author's own severe unrequited love issues, which seems to be really reflected in that, heh.
And yeah, I get you there. XD I just felt like providing the opposing perspective since... I really don't like this movie aside from Ursula, lol.
Haha, I see your point. Basically, given the poor understanding Ariel had of the human world (because she relies on Scuttle's random made-up nonsense), it seems like a horribly bad/uninformed decision to go and live there forever. I can understand that. I do think that Ariel has the right personality to be able to thrive in a foreign culture, though. Like, from my experience, I think being adventurous and unafraid of making embarrassing mistakes is more helpful for acclimating to a new culture than being knowledgeable about it.
And yeah, I see what you mean that Ariel has a pretty cushy life in the grand scheme of things. But I'm actually not sure if Ariel would have inherited anything, since she's the youngest of seven sisters (no idea how mermaid monarchies work, though...). Hm yeah, I never thought of it as an over-reaction, although that interpretation does make sense too. I just find that scene really traumatic!
I don't think she really left Sebastian or Flounder behind. They both were like "NO ARIEL, don't sign that scroll!!" and she completely ignored them, but they still stuck around to help her out throughout the rest of the movie. Like, at first, Sebastian suggested they go to Triton and tell him everything and get the spell undone, but then realized that wasn't what Ariel wanted, and he actually took her side over Triton's. And I mean, Ariel presumably does leave them behind at some point, but she does kiss them goodbye at her wedding. I think it's a very bittersweet moment.
Hm yeah, I see what you mean about selfless and selfish being able to coexist.
Semi-off topic, but I actually find the original interesting when applied to the author himself. The story alone I'm not a fan of, but it somehow becomes a lot more appealing to me when applied to the author's own severe unrequited love issues, which seems to be really reflected in that, heh. I feel the same way. It's weird... Somehow, just knowing TLM was an allegory for Hans Christian Andersen's own unrequited love transforms the story and gives it another layer of meaning. It made me appreciate the story more for some reason -- maybe because it sort of provides some more reasoning as to why the mermaid has to suffer so much in the original story?
My main issue is how it does focus mainly on Eric in the latter half of the movie. The song at the beginning seems more like a failed effort to make us think there's more to her to me, as it isn't reinforced later... or only reinforces how she fangirls over objects. She does find things on land interesting to a degree, but she seems to lack curiosity about anything which isn't either a. Eric or B. an object... I view her more as a vapid fangirl collector than anything. Why be fascinated by a world she clearly knows nothing about other than "oohh, they have shiny objects?" And the scene on the boat actually drives me crazy, because while he can tell part of her personality, he still knows nothing about her other than a couple of traits. Also reinforcing the focus being on Eric, Ursula doesn't entice Ariel with becoming human to escape her father (this is never mentioned from what I recall) or her own society (which really isn't that bad at all and which she seems to fit in quite well otherwise-- she definitely isn't a social outcast who dislikes her own culture by any means), she entices her with this man she just met and "is in love with" presumably only because he's human... I actually feel like she treats him like another one of her objects to collect.
I definitely wouldn't give Triton father of the year, but he did have good intentions ultimately, as it's clear he does care for her but just goes around it the wrong way, considering how he knows how dangerous humans can be. I actually find his character development much more interesting than Ariel's throughout the movie in this regard, as he realizes his mistakes while she... doesn't express any guilt all from being fooled by what is obviously a deal with the octopus-devil. Besides, her sea creature friends are loving and care for her, but she betrays their wishes as well. She also just seems to be in that annoying "rebellious teenager who will rebel against anything without a cause" phase. Admittedly, a part of it might also be that I just don't like her personality even beyond that.
Reply
Ursula doesn't entice Ariel with becoming human to escape her father (this is never mentioned from what I recall) or her own society
You have a point, "Poor Unfortunate Souls" is all about getting Eric -- no other motivation is mentioned or even hinted at. But in the grander scheme of the movie, if you look at what Ariel was sacrificing to be human, it's not much aside from her voice. Her relationship with her father was in pieces at that point and she had no worldly possessions she cared about anymore because he destroyed them. When Triton blew up at her and destroyed her grotto, what it effectively did was make it so that there was nothing tying her to the sea anymore, no real reason why she SHOULDN'T be human and start her life over in a new place. So while Ursula IS like "Eric Eric don't you want to be with Eric?" I think more subtly the other issue is that there's nothing holding Ariel back; she doesn't have much to lose (you know, other than her own self), which is why the decision is possible.
(which really isn't that bad at all and which she seems to fit in quite well otherwise-- she definitely isn't a social outcast who dislikes her own culture by any means), she entices her with this man she just met and "is in love with" presumably only because he's human...
Hm, I don't think you need to be a social outcast to want to be in a different society, though. It goes along with what I said above about Anglophiles and weeaboos -- people like what they like, you know? As for why Ariel is in love with Eric, I mean, I'm not exactly a romantic person but I can see her falling in love with him due to his looks and personality. She can tell that he's a dog person, pretty genial and down to earth, treats sailors as his equals, and dislikes when people do things like make statues of him, and he went back to a burning ship to save his dog. I can also see that she might feel like they have a special connection because she saved his life -- if she hadn't been there that night, if she hadn't intervened, his life would've ended then and there. So I can see Ariel seeing their connection as fate of some kind. So yeah, I don't really see Ariel as liking Eric purely because he's human, although I can see that being part of it. (I mean, if we're going with the Anglophile/weeaboo analogy, I know people who think English accents are inherently sexy or have a thing for Asian men/women so...)
Reply
Besides, her sea creature friends are loving and care for her, but she betrays their wishes as well.
Could you expand on this a bit (the betrayal part, I mean)?
And yeah, I agree that she inadvertently endangered her father and the kingdom -- I don't think she realized that that was Ursula's endgame (I think Ariel probably thought of it as "human world or bust," as in, she'd be human or she'd disappear quietly trying -- it seems to me she honestly didn't consider the possibility that her dad would get involved and actually give up all his power and his whole self to save her), but yes, it was still foolish/short-sighted on her part. Honestly, I don't have an issue with people thinking Ariel is immature, obsessive, foolish, annoying, vapid, or illogical. My issue is when people say things like, "She gave up everything she had for a man!" because it's a huge reduction of the story to the point of gross inaccuracy. At the point she made the deal she had ALREADY lost a lot of things that were dear to her (relationship with her father, her belongings) and she didn't do it for a man; she did it for her own happiness (if you look at the days she spent as a human, she was on cloud nine). Selfish, I can understand. However, "gave everything up for a man" implies the exact opposite -- extreme selflessness. This doesn't make ANY sense to me given the story. Similarly, statements like "she left her loving family to be with a dude" or "she gave up her voice to be with a dude who ended up ditching her for another girl" are false (well, I mean the last one is true if we're talking about the original fairy tale, but we're not).
So while I sort of presented my own personal interpretation of Ariel at points (that she's a strong heroine, for example), that's obviously my personal interpretation and is not necessarily right. The only issue I have is when people have an interpretation of Ariel that is clearly wrong (indefensible) given the facts of the movie. (Not saying your interpretation is wrong, just the ones I see repeated all the time from people that seem like they haven't watched the movie in years and have no idea what they're talking about.)
Reply
And hmm, like many things, I think this comes down to a matter of interpretation. I find the whole she lost everything perspective interesting, as I never really saw it that way. She had other peop... uh friends/family (those sea creatures at least, and we never see anyone going "she's so weird! I never want her as a royal"), and was a princess who would one day inherit quite a lot... and, given her position, she would've been allowed to pursue just about anything other than the one thing she did. I would've gladly switched places with her when I was her age as I'd say it was better than my life then (to be a little more personal), haha, so I just thought she was over-reacting over objects when she still had plenty of other options. So the Eric thing just seems like more of a... "He's the one thing I can't have, therefore I must have him!" XD Like she was with all the trinkets and such as well.
Although yeah, I do agree that she thought it was some kind of fate, especially since this is Disney we're talking about here, heh.
As for the betrayal... As I recall, Sebastian went through great lengths to keep her safe and away from humans? I know he was also employed by her father, but they also seemed like friends. Flounder too, as he just seemed too shy to say something, but she still left him - who was more or less her best friend - behind without so much as a "goodbye, I'll really miss you!"
Reply
"she gave up her voice to be with a dude who ended up ditching her for another girl" are similarly false (well, I mean the last one is true if we're talking about the original fairy tale, but we're not"
Semi-off topic, but I actually find the original interesting when applied to the author himself. The story alone I'm not a fan of, but it somehow becomes a lot more appealing to me when applied to the author's own severe unrequited love issues, which seems to be really reflected in that, heh.
And yeah, I get you there. XD I just felt like providing the opposing perspective since... I really don't like this movie aside from Ursula, lol.
Reply
And yeah, I see what you mean that Ariel has a pretty cushy life in the grand scheme of things. But I'm actually not sure if Ariel would have inherited anything, since she's the youngest of seven sisters (no idea how mermaid monarchies work, though...). Hm yeah, I never thought of it as an over-reaction, although that interpretation does make sense too. I just find that scene really traumatic!
I don't think she really left Sebastian or Flounder behind. They both were like "NO ARIEL, don't sign that scroll!!" and she completely ignored them, but they still stuck around to help her out throughout the rest of the movie. Like, at first, Sebastian suggested they go to Triton and tell him everything and get the spell undone, but then realized that wasn't what Ariel wanted, and he actually took her side over Triton's. And I mean, Ariel presumably does leave them behind at some point, but she does kiss them goodbye at her wedding. I think it's a very bittersweet moment.
Hm yeah, I see what you mean about selfless and selfish being able to coexist.
Semi-off topic, but I actually find the original interesting when applied to the author himself. The story alone I'm not a fan of, but it somehow becomes a lot more appealing to me when applied to the author's own severe unrequited love issues, which seems to be really reflected in that, heh.
I feel the same way. It's weird... Somehow, just knowing TLM was an allegory for Hans Christian Andersen's own unrequited love transforms the story and gives it another layer of meaning. It made me appreciate the story more for some reason -- maybe because it sort of provides some more reasoning as to why the mermaid has to suffer so much in the original story?
Reply
Leave a comment