Monday, November 14, 2016

Response to Davis' "Evil Villains"

Personally, I feel Davis' article lacks very much strong argument and bolsters in plain plot summary. However, she makes a few good points.

Davis' point that Tarzan and Clayton are "polar opposites" is so obviously correct that I began wondering if that was the norm for many Disney hero(ine)-villain combos. She states that Tarzan is intelligent, observant, honest, noble, generous, kind, innocent and naïve whereas Clayton is of basic intelligence, oblivious, dishonest, deceitful, and destructive. (whoa, a lot of 'd's' there.) Majority of those characteristics are parallel-- they're complete antonyms of each other. Let's look at other characters combinations.

Ariel and Ursula: Ariel is kind, innocent, naïve, and honest (I mean if you can excuse the sneaking around playing with human objects behind her father's back.) Ursula on the other hand is manipulative, aggressive, and wiser than Ariel.

Aladdin and Jafar: Aladdin is kind, generous, caring, and crafty whereas Jafar is sneaky, selfish, stuck-up, and kind of rude.

Creating this list is proving to be difficult. Outside of Tarzan, I can't think of a single hero(ine) that was honest. While they all might be noble in the end, they all have slips in character that at times make you consider how good they really are. For example: Ariel lies to her father about her human object collection and going on shore to meet a human. Aladdin lies to Jasmine about being a prince, and he lives his life stealing from people in the market. Rapunzel in Tangled runs away from "home" after she promises her mother she wouldn't (albeit her mother is evil and did kidnap her in the first place.) Mulan lies to her family and an entire army of men as she pretends to be soldier in place of her father. It prompts the question of whether these character flaws are intentional-- they ultimately make the character more relatable to the audience-- or if Disney just likes complicating things.

 You might be thinking that I'm being naïve by claiming that Tarzan lacks character flaws, because he obviously disobeys Kerchak's order to stay away from the humans and to keep them away from the tribe, but really Tarzan is a human and not an ape. Being with the humans isn't a flaw; it's finding his identity. Of course he breaks the gorillas' loyalty by leading the humans to them, but he doesn't owe them loyalty when they've been holding his past from him his entire life.

 Moving on, Davis also makes a good point that Clayton is charismatic in order to conceal his ill intentions. However, I believe that's a universal villain trait. The victims rarely expect to be manipulated by them. For example: The sultan doesn't notice that Jafar is using him to try to gain control of Agrabah. Tarzan doesn't notice that Clayton is using him to get to the gorillas and capture them. Simba doesn't realize that Scar is trying to steal the throne and turn everyone against him. Snow White doesn't think anything of the apple that the evil queen gives her. It's a common them that villains are so charismatic that other characters hardly know they're villains. However, I think Tarzan stands out slightly from the norm. In most cases, the audience understands that the villains are in fact evil-- even when the characters don't-- but, as a viewer, I had no idea that Clayton was going to turn against Tarzan and become a villain. That was an entire plot twist for me. Clayton played it so cool that he fooled even the audience and that's rare.


Another interesting point of Davis' article is that while most Disney movie articles end up criticizing the way Disney portrays some part of the movie, Davis' article doesn't really address that. She points out that Tarzan has an American accent even though he lives in Africa and doesn't encounter any humans until Jane, her father, and Clayton-- all of which have British accents. Realistically, Tarzan should've picked up a British accent. Ironically, even the gorillas speak with American accents when it's almost certain that they don't encounter any Americans. Davis actually tries to back up Disney by finding reasons that might support an American accent in Tarzan, which again is rare to find in a Disney article.

Finally, Davis' idea that Tarzan rejects becoming the type of "man" that Clayton defines himself as is iconic. Tarzan and Clayton end up fighting, and Tarzan holds the gun to Clayton's face while Clayton taunts him to "Be a man" and shoot him. First of all, telling anyone to shoot you is just ridiculous in itself, but claiming that shooting someone is what defines their masculinity is WEAK. Clayton's version of masculinity is the exact version that America is trying to progress and run away from. Not only does Clayton embody that fragile masculinity, but so does Kerchak. Kerchak dislikes Tarzan simply because he challenges his authority even though it's unintentional. He rejects Tarzan over and over again, because he doesn't want anyone to take his dominant male spot. This kind of masculinity is what Tarzan rejects by not shooting Clayton and by showing subordination to Kerchak. Tarzan shows real masculinity by showing respect and a distaste for bullying.

No comments:

Post a Comment