Captivity in Disney Animated Canon
Title: Captivity in Disney Animated Canon
Fandom: Disney (various)
Prompt: Captivity
Medium: Meta
Rating: PG
Warnings: Brief discussions of themes including familial abuse, cruelty to animals, prejudice and persecution of various sorts.
Summary: A discussion of themes of captivity as seen in Disney Animated Canon, including literal permanent captivity, literal temporary captivity, persecutory captivity, human-on-animal captivity, and social captivity.
Spoilers for many Disney animated canon films up to and including Tangled (2010). Please check warnings before reading, as some triggering material is discussed.
I considered at first doing fic for this fill, ‘captivity’, because there was simply so much choice that I could have used. But it didn’t take too long for me to realise that the range of choice that Disney animated canon gives for the subject of captivity is probably more than suitable for a meta post on the issue.
Now, I’m not the first person to have done this. There is a lovely recap of captivity, or at least restraint and bondage, as seen in Disney by Kenneth Sundberg (http://www.kennetti.fi/sw_scariest4.html), and I’m sure that he’s not the only one to at least have considered the strong, repeated appearance of this concept in Disney.
For me, at least, themes of captivity and the release therefrom are actually the main factor of the Disney films, the thread that links many of them together. Some of them are fairytales, some are adaptations of famous novels, and some are completely original stories, but for me, at least, the exchange of captivity for freedom is a longstanding tradition of these films.
For the purposes of this meta, the themes of captivity will be divided into categories: literal permanent captivity, literal temporary captivity, persecutory captivity, human-on-animal captivity, and social captivity.
First Category: Literal, Permanent
Some of the captivity seen within Disney is literal, and long-term or permanent for the characters affected. Films such as The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Tangled involve main characters whose entire focus is on escaping from their bell-tower or tower captivity. In the case of Tangled, the climax of the film sees Rapunzel out of her tower and in the world at large, eventually also reunited with her parents. In the case of Quasimodo, however, the situation does not culminate this way. Quasimodo does not permanently leave his tower - and during the second film, he apparently seems quite content there. In this case, the tower is no longer a source of captivity for him, but has become a place of, indeed, “sanctuary”.
Although striking, this is a relatively rare form of captivity as seen within Disney films. As we will see, captivity tends to be a more metaphorical concept, and have a stronger plot element.
Second Category: Literal, Temporary
The second literal form of captivity seen within Disney is the temporary form, often used as a plot device or a punishment by the villain upon one or more main characters. In story terms, it makes a good opportunity for exciting escape attempts, but in plot terms it represents an obstacle to be overcome, one which is (sometimes) more child-friendly, and always more physical, than the psychological battles which they represent and hint to.
It is this sort of captivity which is covered in depth in the article to which I linked above, appears very frequently after Snow White and the Seven Dwarves . It is most commonly effected upon the Princes or Heroes: Prince Philip of Sleeping Beauty, Robin of Robin Hood, Basil and Dawson in The Great Mouse Detective, Aladdin, John Smith of Pocahontas, Quasimodo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Prince Naveen in The Princess and the Frog all end up, at some point or another, in some form of captivity, restraints or shackles. Some, like Aladdin, even manage it repeatedly.
In almost all of these cases, the captivity is at the hands of the villain. Only John Smith manages to get himself tied up by people who are comparative protagonists, although Pocahontas has been noted for its murky moral distinctions (among other things, but I’m not here to provide a social commentary on Disney films). John Smith is also the one of the only two of these characters who is saved by external forces (along with Prince Naveen) - almost all of them are left to fight their way out. In terms of the work of Booker (Booker, C. (2005) The Seven Basic Stories. The work has been heavily criticised, but in terms of its seven plots does provide a useful outline.) this is ‘Overcoming the Monster’, and can be considered a microcosm of the wider stories.
These, however, are only the adult (or acting-adult) human or human-coded males. As again discussed by Sundberg (above),the issues of captivity become possibly more disturbing when attributed to female characters (Ariel in The Little Mermaid, Jasmine in Aladdin, Esmeralda in The Hunchback of Notre Dame), children (all of the main characters in Peter Pan, Penny in The Rescuers, and Lilo in Lilo & Stitch) or animals (Dumbo’s mother in Dumbo, the dogs of 101 Dalmatians, Oliver in Oliver and Company and the gorillas of Tarzan, among others).
This is possibly one of the most common forms of captivity seen in Disney films, although the scenes make up a smaller percentage of screen-time. They are a challenge, an obstacle to be overcome, and a change for the hero or heroine to show their worth. In terms of the chid-friendly-ness of this situation, as hinted to above, I at least believe that the mere fact that this captivity can be overcome, by strength or intelligence, generally does make it more suitable for child audiences than other forms. They are a fuel for childhood adventures more than for nightmares. The truth is that the fact that these captivities can be escaped (especially in the more famous films, the princess series and their ilk) actually makes them one of the least-threatening forms of captivity to deal with, and therefore relatively ‘safe’.
Persecutory Captivity
Quasimodo, perhaps, overlaps with the third case of captivity seen within Disney: that which is imposed by other people. I considered for a while what to call this form of captivity, and my preference would probably still be for ‘captivity by authority’, but because this didn’t fit the format of the other titles I went for the word ‘persecutory’. This also allowed me to open up the category to include situations that were not one-on-one - such as a powerful individual hounding a group of people, a group being more generally socially stigmatised, or a group ‘ganging up’ upon an individual.
Most classically, this is famous as the “evil stepmother” stereotype - one which, however, only appears in two movies: Snow White and the Seven Dwarves and Cinderella, in which the eponymous characters are persecuted by Queen Grimhilde and Lady Tremaine (and the Tremaine sisters) respectively. Other characters to suffer this sort of treatment within their stories include Briar Rose/Aurora at the hands of Maleficent in Sleeping Beauty (albeit more indirectly); the eponymous Robin Hood, among other characters, by Prince John and his allies; Rapunzel by Mother Gothel in Tangled; and, indeed, Esmeralda (and ‘her people’, gypsies) at the hands of Judge Frollo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame, among others. Generally speaking, this situation occurs when there is a use of power (the ‘authority’ in question) by a character or characters to negatively affect many aspects of the life of another or others.
Note - A somewhat subverted extension of this idea can be seen in Peter Pan - the Darling children, especially Wendy, feel at the beginning that they are being poorly treated by being first to grow up. The fact that they realise at the end that this is not the case is once again an ideological shift, similar in some ways to Quasimodo’s but without the removal of the major villain. This is very unusual indeed for a Disney films - protagonists do not usually change their minds!
However, it can clearly be seen from the above list that the type of captivity implied here varies greatly from case to case. It can range from semi-abusive situations, especially of the early ‘evil stepmother’ varieties - a trope more commonly found in the earlier stories, though it has made a reappearance with Tangled in more recent times - through to the ‘noble outlaw’ idea which is a favourite of Disney’s, especially seen in Robin Hood and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Again, I would say that this latter is more palatable for child audiences, as in modern-day Western Europe and America it at least seems to be a far-off concept. The temporal distancing of Disney stories probably also helps with this effect.
But why does Disney use persecutory captivity? Personally, I believe the reasoning is three-fold. Firstly, it clearly defines the villain and the hero; either in personal persecution, or the ‘noble outlaw’ phenomenon, only named villains tend to get roles where they actively persecute, whilst the hero boldly holds up under unfair treatment. Secondly, and relatedly, it creates sympathy for the hero, and allows them to be constructed as likeable (the move from ‘protagonist’ to ‘hero’). Thirdly, I feel that it taps into something in the id of just about everyone who watches: who doesn’t feel that they have not, at some point or another, been unfairly treated by someone with power over them? This is a very visceral concept, and very neatly creates the hero-villain dichotomy which, in many cases, even excuses (comparatively mild) violence on the part of the heroes. It is an excellent, if somewhat manipulative, way of setting up the moral stance of the entire film.
Human-on-Animal Captivity
A particularly haunting form of captivity, at least for some, this occurs in some Disney films in which humans and animals directly interact. Thus it is applicable to the treatment of Dumbo’s mother in Dumbo, or the gorillas in Tarzan, but not to entirely animal-based films such as The Lion King or The Great Mouse Detective. This is often disquieting because it is an extreme form of persecutory captivity as described above: humans have an incredible level of power, and thus authority, over animals. This is effectively a form of animal cruelty, and naturally makes the humans into some of the most despised villains in Disney canon.
Disney films in which there are both humans and animals are rather rarer, which is part of what makes this form of captivity all the more shocking when it does appear. In every situation that I know of, the main story is that of the animals, and the animals are the protagonists, heroes and main characters of the story. It is also something that has probably been rather less used in recent years - the situations in Home on the Range (2004) are nothing like comparable to the sight of Dumbo’s mother shackled and locked into a cage (1941), for example. However, there is a general trend in Disney of making animals seem better and kinder than humans - the hunter of Bambi has been voted one of the greatest Disney villains of all time, despite never appearing on screen! This even crops up in Beauty and the Beast, when Belle declares, “He’s not the beast, Gaston! You are!”
Because, after all, who wouldn’t want to be something cool like a fox instead of a plain old human?
Social Captivity
The subtlest form, perhaps, of captivity which is seen in Disney films. For this, I’ll let the characters speak for themselves:
“Betcha on land, they understand / Bet they don’t reprimand their daughters / Bright young women, sick of swimming / Ready to stand.” - Ariel, The Little Mermaid (1989)
“There must be more than this provincial life!” - Belle, Beauty and the Beast (1991)
“If I’m going to marry, I want it to be for love.” - Jasmine, Aladdin (1992)
“Can I ignore that sound of distant drumming / For a handsome sturdy husband who builds handsome sturdy walls?” - Pocahontas, Pocahontas (1995)
“When will my reflection show who I am inside?” - Mulan, Mulan (1998)
“This old town can slow you down / People taking the easy way.” - Tiana, The Princess and the Frog (2009)
It’s a common theme of the Disney movies from the Disney Renaissance to the present day: the heroes or heroines who want to move beyond the confines of the life that seems to be offered to them. These confines can be to do with age (Ariel), social position (Belle as a commoner, Pocahontas as the daughter of a chief), gender (Mulan) or race (implied to be affecting Tiana) or a combination thereof (Ariel is also affected by her gender, and Jasmine falls under constraints both by her gender and of her position as a princess).
This form of captivity is far more subtle in its appearance within films, although it is increasingly pervasive. It forms a faint echo of social stigmas, and something far darker: prejudice. In the terms often used on the internet, -isms. Many discussions have been made of the problems of Disney in terms of its social justice views, and I am not going to reiterate them here, but at the very least it must be acknowledged that Disney recognises them, and uses them as backgrounds to the stories. Not only do the heroes and heroines of Disney movies have to combat villains to reach their happy endings; they also have to overcome wider societal forces.
In the end, the themes of captivity running through Disney are multiple, and surprisingly subtle for a canon of this sort, one which is commonly thought to be aimed at children. Confinement, entrapment, persecution, animal cruelty and prejudice: hardly the sort of themes that one would at first expect in children’s films. But they are parts of the world, a world of which children are a part, and their treatment is generally subtle. More than that, the characters escape these captivities which are placed before them: a lesson to children, perhaps, that no matter how bad things seem, they can be overcome.
Fandom: Disney (various)
Prompt: Captivity
Medium: Meta
Rating: PG
Warnings: Brief discussions of themes including familial abuse, cruelty to animals, prejudice and persecution of various sorts.
Summary: A discussion of themes of captivity as seen in Disney Animated Canon, including literal permanent captivity, literal temporary captivity, persecutory captivity, human-on-animal captivity, and social captivity.
Spoilers for many Disney animated canon films up to and including Tangled (2010). Please check warnings before reading, as some triggering material is discussed.
I considered at first doing fic for this fill, ‘captivity’, because there was simply so much choice that I could have used. But it didn’t take too long for me to realise that the range of choice that Disney animated canon gives for the subject of captivity is probably more than suitable for a meta post on the issue.
Now, I’m not the first person to have done this. There is a lovely recap of captivity, or at least restraint and bondage, as seen in Disney by Kenneth Sundberg (http://www.kennetti.fi/sw_scariest4.html), and I’m sure that he’s not the only one to at least have considered the strong, repeated appearance of this concept in Disney.
For me, at least, themes of captivity and the release therefrom are actually the main factor of the Disney films, the thread that links many of them together. Some of them are fairytales, some are adaptations of famous novels, and some are completely original stories, but for me, at least, the exchange of captivity for freedom is a longstanding tradition of these films.
For the purposes of this meta, the themes of captivity will be divided into categories: literal permanent captivity, literal temporary captivity, persecutory captivity, human-on-animal captivity, and social captivity.
First Category: Literal, Permanent
Some of the captivity seen within Disney is literal, and long-term or permanent for the characters affected. Films such as The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Tangled involve main characters whose entire focus is on escaping from their bell-tower or tower captivity. In the case of Tangled, the climax of the film sees Rapunzel out of her tower and in the world at large, eventually also reunited with her parents. In the case of Quasimodo, however, the situation does not culminate this way. Quasimodo does not permanently leave his tower - and during the second film, he apparently seems quite content there. In this case, the tower is no longer a source of captivity for him, but has become a place of, indeed, “sanctuary”.
Although striking, this is a relatively rare form of captivity as seen within Disney films. As we will see, captivity tends to be a more metaphorical concept, and have a stronger plot element.
Second Category: Literal, Temporary
The second literal form of captivity seen within Disney is the temporary form, often used as a plot device or a punishment by the villain upon one or more main characters. In story terms, it makes a good opportunity for exciting escape attempts, but in plot terms it represents an obstacle to be overcome, one which is (sometimes) more child-friendly, and always more physical, than the psychological battles which they represent and hint to.
It is this sort of captivity which is covered in depth in the article to which I linked above, appears very frequently after Snow White and the Seven Dwarves . It is most commonly effected upon the Princes or Heroes: Prince Philip of Sleeping Beauty, Robin of Robin Hood, Basil and Dawson in The Great Mouse Detective, Aladdin, John Smith of Pocahontas, Quasimodo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Prince Naveen in The Princess and the Frog all end up, at some point or another, in some form of captivity, restraints or shackles. Some, like Aladdin, even manage it repeatedly.
In almost all of these cases, the captivity is at the hands of the villain. Only John Smith manages to get himself tied up by people who are comparative protagonists, although Pocahontas has been noted for its murky moral distinctions (among other things, but I’m not here to provide a social commentary on Disney films). John Smith is also the one of the only two of these characters who is saved by external forces (along with Prince Naveen) - almost all of them are left to fight their way out. In terms of the work of Booker (Booker, C. (2005) The Seven Basic Stories. The work has been heavily criticised, but in terms of its seven plots does provide a useful outline.) this is ‘Overcoming the Monster’, and can be considered a microcosm of the wider stories.
These, however, are only the adult (or acting-adult) human or human-coded males. As again discussed by Sundberg (above),the issues of captivity become possibly more disturbing when attributed to female characters (Ariel in The Little Mermaid, Jasmine in Aladdin, Esmeralda in The Hunchback of Notre Dame), children (all of the main characters in Peter Pan, Penny in The Rescuers, and Lilo in Lilo & Stitch) or animals (Dumbo’s mother in Dumbo, the dogs of 101 Dalmatians, Oliver in Oliver and Company and the gorillas of Tarzan, among others).
This is possibly one of the most common forms of captivity seen in Disney films, although the scenes make up a smaller percentage of screen-time. They are a challenge, an obstacle to be overcome, and a change for the hero or heroine to show their worth. In terms of the chid-friendly-ness of this situation, as hinted to above, I at least believe that the mere fact that this captivity can be overcome, by strength or intelligence, generally does make it more suitable for child audiences than other forms. They are a fuel for childhood adventures more than for nightmares. The truth is that the fact that these captivities can be escaped (especially in the more famous films, the princess series and their ilk) actually makes them one of the least-threatening forms of captivity to deal with, and therefore relatively ‘safe’.
Persecutory Captivity
Quasimodo, perhaps, overlaps with the third case of captivity seen within Disney: that which is imposed by other people. I considered for a while what to call this form of captivity, and my preference would probably still be for ‘captivity by authority’, but because this didn’t fit the format of the other titles I went for the word ‘persecutory’. This also allowed me to open up the category to include situations that were not one-on-one - such as a powerful individual hounding a group of people, a group being more generally socially stigmatised, or a group ‘ganging up’ upon an individual.
Most classically, this is famous as the “evil stepmother” stereotype - one which, however, only appears in two movies: Snow White and the Seven Dwarves and Cinderella, in which the eponymous characters are persecuted by Queen Grimhilde and Lady Tremaine (and the Tremaine sisters) respectively. Other characters to suffer this sort of treatment within their stories include Briar Rose/Aurora at the hands of Maleficent in Sleeping Beauty (albeit more indirectly); the eponymous Robin Hood, among other characters, by Prince John and his allies; Rapunzel by Mother Gothel in Tangled; and, indeed, Esmeralda (and ‘her people’, gypsies) at the hands of Judge Frollo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame, among others. Generally speaking, this situation occurs when there is a use of power (the ‘authority’ in question) by a character or characters to negatively affect many aspects of the life of another or others.
Note - A somewhat subverted extension of this idea can be seen in Peter Pan - the Darling children, especially Wendy, feel at the beginning that they are being poorly treated by being first to grow up. The fact that they realise at the end that this is not the case is once again an ideological shift, similar in some ways to Quasimodo’s but without the removal of the major villain. This is very unusual indeed for a Disney films - protagonists do not usually change their minds!
However, it can clearly be seen from the above list that the type of captivity implied here varies greatly from case to case. It can range from semi-abusive situations, especially of the early ‘evil stepmother’ varieties - a trope more commonly found in the earlier stories, though it has made a reappearance with Tangled in more recent times - through to the ‘noble outlaw’ idea which is a favourite of Disney’s, especially seen in Robin Hood and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Again, I would say that this latter is more palatable for child audiences, as in modern-day Western Europe and America it at least seems to be a far-off concept. The temporal distancing of Disney stories probably also helps with this effect.
But why does Disney use persecutory captivity? Personally, I believe the reasoning is three-fold. Firstly, it clearly defines the villain and the hero; either in personal persecution, or the ‘noble outlaw’ phenomenon, only named villains tend to get roles where they actively persecute, whilst the hero boldly holds up under unfair treatment. Secondly, and relatedly, it creates sympathy for the hero, and allows them to be constructed as likeable (the move from ‘protagonist’ to ‘hero’). Thirdly, I feel that it taps into something in the id of just about everyone who watches: who doesn’t feel that they have not, at some point or another, been unfairly treated by someone with power over them? This is a very visceral concept, and very neatly creates the hero-villain dichotomy which, in many cases, even excuses (comparatively mild) violence on the part of the heroes. It is an excellent, if somewhat manipulative, way of setting up the moral stance of the entire film.
Human-on-Animal Captivity
A particularly haunting form of captivity, at least for some, this occurs in some Disney films in which humans and animals directly interact. Thus it is applicable to the treatment of Dumbo’s mother in Dumbo, or the gorillas in Tarzan, but not to entirely animal-based films such as The Lion King or The Great Mouse Detective. This is often disquieting because it is an extreme form of persecutory captivity as described above: humans have an incredible level of power, and thus authority, over animals. This is effectively a form of animal cruelty, and naturally makes the humans into some of the most despised villains in Disney canon.
Disney films in which there are both humans and animals are rather rarer, which is part of what makes this form of captivity all the more shocking when it does appear. In every situation that I know of, the main story is that of the animals, and the animals are the protagonists, heroes and main characters of the story. It is also something that has probably been rather less used in recent years - the situations in Home on the Range (2004) are nothing like comparable to the sight of Dumbo’s mother shackled and locked into a cage (1941), for example. However, there is a general trend in Disney of making animals seem better and kinder than humans - the hunter of Bambi has been voted one of the greatest Disney villains of all time, despite never appearing on screen! This even crops up in Beauty and the Beast, when Belle declares, “He’s not the beast, Gaston! You are!”
Because, after all, who wouldn’t want to be something cool like a fox instead of a plain old human?
Social Captivity
The subtlest form, perhaps, of captivity which is seen in Disney films. For this, I’ll let the characters speak for themselves:
“Betcha on land, they understand / Bet they don’t reprimand their daughters / Bright young women, sick of swimming / Ready to stand.” - Ariel, The Little Mermaid (1989)
“There must be more than this provincial life!” - Belle, Beauty and the Beast (1991)
“If I’m going to marry, I want it to be for love.” - Jasmine, Aladdin (1992)
“Can I ignore that sound of distant drumming / For a handsome sturdy husband who builds handsome sturdy walls?” - Pocahontas, Pocahontas (1995)
“When will my reflection show who I am inside?” - Mulan, Mulan (1998)
“This old town can slow you down / People taking the easy way.” - Tiana, The Princess and the Frog (2009)
It’s a common theme of the Disney movies from the Disney Renaissance to the present day: the heroes or heroines who want to move beyond the confines of the life that seems to be offered to them. These confines can be to do with age (Ariel), social position (Belle as a commoner, Pocahontas as the daughter of a chief), gender (Mulan) or race (implied to be affecting Tiana) or a combination thereof (Ariel is also affected by her gender, and Jasmine falls under constraints both by her gender and of her position as a princess).
This form of captivity is far more subtle in its appearance within films, although it is increasingly pervasive. It forms a faint echo of social stigmas, and something far darker: prejudice. In the terms often used on the internet, -isms. Many discussions have been made of the problems of Disney in terms of its social justice views, and I am not going to reiterate them here, but at the very least it must be acknowledged that Disney recognises them, and uses them as backgrounds to the stories. Not only do the heroes and heroines of Disney movies have to combat villains to reach their happy endings; they also have to overcome wider societal forces.
In the end, the themes of captivity running through Disney are multiple, and surprisingly subtle for a canon of this sort, one which is commonly thought to be aimed at children. Confinement, entrapment, persecution, animal cruelty and prejudice: hardly the sort of themes that one would at first expect in children’s films. But they are parts of the world, a world of which children are a part, and their treatment is generally subtle. More than that, the characters escape these captivities which are placed before them: a lesson to children, perhaps, that no matter how bad things seem, they can be overcome.