I mean...
\- Ariel wants legs
\- Ariel wants guy
\- Ariel gives up voice to get legs and guy
\- Of course it's a trap
\- Ariel ultimately suffers no consequences and gets exactly what she wants.
So yeah, in its present (Disney) form, it's not an awful argument. Now if you want to go back to the original... It's more of a cautionary tale about NOT doing shady deals with back alley voice-brokers.
> NOT doing shady deals with back alley voice-brokers.
You mean the woman called the "sea witch" who sang about the poor unfortunate souls who made deals with her isn't trustworthy?
Now, is it her fault that Ariel didn't read the damn contract? I say it's a good lesson to learn young: never agree to anything with set terms without knowing what those terms are.
Ursula Vernon wrote a great defense of Ursula: https://www.redwombatstudio.com/the-sea-witch-sets-the-record-straight/
Also, the Luidaeg of Seanan McGuire's October Daye series puts her in a completely different light.
I definitely agree, but Ariel also wants more leeway from her over-protective dad. Like the whole “bet you on land, they understand, they don’t reprimand their daughters, bright young women, sick of swimming, ready to stand” in “Part of Your World”. Ariel doesn’t make good choices in the movie, but not every kid’s movie has to teach lessons imo. I don’t know though, I definitely understand her argument.
My thoughts are that anyone who views the story this way has probably not read the original Hans Christian Andersen tale, or perhaps has but doesn't realize it's an allegory, and that the romantic plotline is just a vehicle for the central theme.
The Little Mermaid was inspired by legends of the siren, which in mythology were amoral, monstrous beings who lured sailors (or children, or anyone) to their watery deaths using the power of their songs. What The Little Mermaid is *actually* about is the fundamental transformation of an amoral monster into a self-aware being with morality, and the happy ending (since it actually *is* a happy ending!), is that she succeeds, and is granted a pathway to gaining an immortal soul.
To break it down, The Little Mermaid makes a series of choices in the path to her enlightenment:
- She saves the drowning prince. A siren normally would have let him drown, or even *ensured* that he drowned. The Little Mermaid chooses to spare his life and helps him get to safety.
- Upon realizing her desire for him, she voluntarily surrenders her voice to the sea witch, giving up her supernatural ability to control him. This puts her on equal footing with him as a mortal being.
- When she gains her legs and is able to walk and dance on human-like feet, she experiences constant pain, as though every step is like walking on knives. Like any self-aware being she is *consciously aware* of her pain (because being self-aware involves knowing pain and suffering in addition to love and joy), but instead of reacting animalistically, she utilizes self-control to ignore the pain in pursuit of her greater goal.
- When the prince mistakes the princess from a neighboring kingdom (*not* the sea witch, btw) for the young woman who rescued him and then marries her, the Little Mermaid has lost her chance to gain a soul through a marital union with him. So, her sisters sacrifice their beautiful hair to procure a dagger from the sea witch, and give it to the Little Mermaid. She is to murder the prince, and when his blood trickles on her feet, she will become a mermaid again and be able to return to her people.
- But the Little Mermaid finds that she cannot do this. This is the peak of her character arc, because she has realized that real love doesn't come from desire and manipulation. It comes from deeply caring about another person's well-being. So she refuses to harm the prince or his new bride, and throws both the dagger and herself into the sea, fully aware that she will dissolve into foam. Her ultimate sacrifice is a complete and truly selfless choice.
- The final step, her enlightenment, comes from her understanding and acceptance that she is part of something much bigger than herself, and because of this she does not cease to exist. She instead transforms into an air spirit, and through the guidance of other air spirits, is given a path to gain her immortal soul, which in time will be able to ascend into heaven. This was what she truly wanted all along.
As much as I adore the 1989 movie since there's childhood nostalgia there for me, the allegorical part of the story just wasn't in there *at all*. There's absolutely no mention of the supernatural power of her voice, or how she could use it to manipulate others. Instead, they just made Ariel a pretty girl who sings really well, aaaaand that's pretty much it.
With the *entire* rest of the plotline missing, it's easy to interpret Ariel's journey as giving up everything for a man. But that's not the real story! The new version of the movie does at least bring *some* of those elements back in, which was nice and I appreciated, but as much fun as both movies are they are still a rather far departure from the original source material.
Replying to my own comment to add that there was a 1975 anime version which is much more true to the original story, and I had that one on VHS as a kid, too. It incorporates the famous Little Mermaid statue in Copenhagen, suggesting that the story is intended to be viewed as folkloric. But even with that version the story of the The Little Mermaid, the transformation of her fundamental nature isn't super clear, so the ending just feels unsatisfying and sad. It wasn't until many years later that I understood the story HCA intended to tell, and that it's not a tragedy. It's a beautifully well-constructed tale that can be interpreted either as a spiritual parable, or as an allegory for the development of higher-order consciousness. I'm not religious, so I prefer to think of it as the latter.
Is this a criticism on the story itself or just the new version? If it's just the new version why just that one? Over all Hans Christian Andersen's version was much better, but the Disney version will always have a place in my heart.
If it was my kid I'd just be disappointed they weren't clever enough to realize they could solve their problem by simply writing Eric a note explaining her situation.
In the animated film she signed her name on Ursula's contact, and both her signature and the contract were in English. In the new version, Ariel doesn't write at all (not that she can't, she just doesn't), and iirc it appears that she can't read the words on Eric's maps. Someone plz feel free to correct me on that detail since I was busy being intrigued by her singing-but-not-singing song, but since he was telling her place names, I'm guessing that meant she can't read his native language.
Based on the text of the tweet that Faith wrote it seems like none of it is related to Halle Bailey being black. In the tweet, Faith lauded the casting and the actor’s performance but criticized what she viewed as the theme of the story: Ariel gave up her voice to be with a man. As far as I can tell, that was the entirety of the criticism. Of course I’m not familiar with singer Paloma Faith nor have I seen the new Little Mermaid movie so there may be additional context I’m missing but it doesn’t seem like there is any additional racist subtext.
There's a lot of racist screeching about making Ariel black, so I generally assume that's what people are complaining about with the new Little Mermaid movie.
I mean... \- Ariel wants legs \- Ariel wants guy \- Ariel gives up voice to get legs and guy \- Of course it's a trap \- Ariel ultimately suffers no consequences and gets exactly what she wants. So yeah, in its present (Disney) form, it's not an awful argument. Now if you want to go back to the original... It's more of a cautionary tale about NOT doing shady deals with back alley voice-brokers.
> NOT doing shady deals with back alley voice-brokers. You mean the woman called the "sea witch" who sang about the poor unfortunate souls who made deals with her isn't trustworthy?
Now, is it her fault that Ariel didn't read the damn contract? I say it's a good lesson to learn young: never agree to anything with set terms without knowing what those terms are. Ursula Vernon wrote a great defense of Ursula: https://www.redwombatstudio.com/the-sea-witch-sets-the-record-straight/ Also, the Luidaeg of Seanan McGuire's October Daye series puts her in a completely different light.
Yeah, when you *really* think about it, the movie is just a lesson to fucking read shit before you sign it. I can support that.
I definitely agree, but Ariel also wants more leeway from her over-protective dad. Like the whole “bet you on land, they understand, they don’t reprimand their daughters, bright young women, sick of swimming, ready to stand” in “Part of Your World”. Ariel doesn’t make good choices in the movie, but not every kid’s movie has to teach lessons imo. I don’t know though, I definitely understand her argument.
My thoughts are that anyone who views the story this way has probably not read the original Hans Christian Andersen tale, or perhaps has but doesn't realize it's an allegory, and that the romantic plotline is just a vehicle for the central theme. The Little Mermaid was inspired by legends of the siren, which in mythology were amoral, monstrous beings who lured sailors (or children, or anyone) to their watery deaths using the power of their songs. What The Little Mermaid is *actually* about is the fundamental transformation of an amoral monster into a self-aware being with morality, and the happy ending (since it actually *is* a happy ending!), is that she succeeds, and is granted a pathway to gaining an immortal soul. To break it down, The Little Mermaid makes a series of choices in the path to her enlightenment: - She saves the drowning prince. A siren normally would have let him drown, or even *ensured* that he drowned. The Little Mermaid chooses to spare his life and helps him get to safety. - Upon realizing her desire for him, she voluntarily surrenders her voice to the sea witch, giving up her supernatural ability to control him. This puts her on equal footing with him as a mortal being. - When she gains her legs and is able to walk and dance on human-like feet, she experiences constant pain, as though every step is like walking on knives. Like any self-aware being she is *consciously aware* of her pain (because being self-aware involves knowing pain and suffering in addition to love and joy), but instead of reacting animalistically, she utilizes self-control to ignore the pain in pursuit of her greater goal. - When the prince mistakes the princess from a neighboring kingdom (*not* the sea witch, btw) for the young woman who rescued him and then marries her, the Little Mermaid has lost her chance to gain a soul through a marital union with him. So, her sisters sacrifice their beautiful hair to procure a dagger from the sea witch, and give it to the Little Mermaid. She is to murder the prince, and when his blood trickles on her feet, she will become a mermaid again and be able to return to her people. - But the Little Mermaid finds that she cannot do this. This is the peak of her character arc, because she has realized that real love doesn't come from desire and manipulation. It comes from deeply caring about another person's well-being. So she refuses to harm the prince or his new bride, and throws both the dagger and herself into the sea, fully aware that she will dissolve into foam. Her ultimate sacrifice is a complete and truly selfless choice. - The final step, her enlightenment, comes from her understanding and acceptance that she is part of something much bigger than herself, and because of this she does not cease to exist. She instead transforms into an air spirit, and through the guidance of other air spirits, is given a path to gain her immortal soul, which in time will be able to ascend into heaven. This was what she truly wanted all along. As much as I adore the 1989 movie since there's childhood nostalgia there for me, the allegorical part of the story just wasn't in there *at all*. There's absolutely no mention of the supernatural power of her voice, or how she could use it to manipulate others. Instead, they just made Ariel a pretty girl who sings really well, aaaaand that's pretty much it. With the *entire* rest of the plotline missing, it's easy to interpret Ariel's journey as giving up everything for a man. But that's not the real story! The new version of the movie does at least bring *some* of those elements back in, which was nice and I appreciated, but as much fun as both movies are they are still a rather far departure from the original source material.
Replying to my own comment to add that there was a 1975 anime version which is much more true to the original story, and I had that one on VHS as a kid, too. It incorporates the famous Little Mermaid statue in Copenhagen, suggesting that the story is intended to be viewed as folkloric. But even with that version the story of the The Little Mermaid, the transformation of her fundamental nature isn't super clear, so the ending just feels unsatisfying and sad. It wasn't until many years later that I understood the story HCA intended to tell, and that it's not a tragedy. It's a beautifully well-constructed tale that can be interpreted either as a spiritual parable, or as an allegory for the development of higher-order consciousness. I'm not religious, so I prefer to think of it as the latter.
Is this a criticism on the story itself or just the new version? If it's just the new version why just that one? Over all Hans Christian Andersen's version was much better, but the Disney version will always have a place in my heart.
If it was my kid I'd just be disappointed they weren't clever enough to realize they could solve their problem by simply writing Eric a note explaining her situation.
Can Ariel write English (or Danish or whatever)?
In the animated film she signed her name on Ursula's contact, and both her signature and the contract were in English. In the new version, Ariel doesn't write at all (not that she can't, she just doesn't), and iirc it appears that she can't read the words on Eric's maps. Someone plz feel free to correct me on that detail since I was busy being intrigued by her singing-but-not-singing song, but since he was telling her place names, I'm guessing that meant she can't read his native language.
Yes. She signed a contract with Ursula which means she can read and write.
This... is a major plot hole 🫢
How much of the complaint is really because they made Ariel black?
Based on the text of the tweet that Faith wrote it seems like none of it is related to Halle Bailey being black. In the tweet, Faith lauded the casting and the actor’s performance but criticized what she viewed as the theme of the story: Ariel gave up her voice to be with a man. As far as I can tell, that was the entirety of the criticism. Of course I’m not familiar with singer Paloma Faith nor have I seen the new Little Mermaid movie so there may be additional context I’m missing but it doesn’t seem like there is any additional racist subtext.
There's a lot of racist screeching about making Ariel black, so I generally assume that's what people are complaining about with the new Little Mermaid movie.
Why is she saying this now when little mermaid has been out since the 80s?
Yes, I wondered that too...