 |
| Louis Althusser |
W.11-12.1 Write arguments to support claims
in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and
relevant and sufficient evidence.
- W.11-12.1a Introduce precise, knowledgeable claim(s), establish the
significance of the claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that logically sequences
claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence.
- W.11-12.1b Develop claim(s) and
counterclaims fairly and thoroughly, supplying the most relevant evidence
for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a
manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level, concerns, values,
and possible biases.
- W.11-12.1c Use words, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to
link the major sections of the text, create cohesion, and clarify the
relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and evidence,
and between claim(s) and counterclaims.
- W.11-12.1d Establish and maintain a formal style and objective tone while
attending to the norms and conventions of the discipline in which they
are writing.
- W.11-12.1e Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from
and supports the argument presented.
158 comments:
Story 2,
Worshiping a predator . . . why would such odd actions occur? I feel that in the movie, The Lion King, the animals represent all types of other human beings on earth, for the good and bad. When they all come to worship “the strong white people” referred to as the lions, Disney may be suggesting that other races or ethics of people are simply dumb enough to bow down to such a strong power. For example, the flying birds in the scene of your video posted in the prezi, they may represent people who migrate for a living, as birds travel far and beyond, so do peddlers. The various animals, to me, represent many different kinds of people supposedly acknowledging and praising the most “powerful” race on earth. With the Marxist’s theories, on slide 21, Scar should be king because of his knowledge. This is a major problem! In human society, yes knowledge surpasses all and leaders are chosen because they have the brains. However, in the lion community, knowledge does not make you the king or the leader of the pack. Lionesses (the only other lions in a pack besides cubs) want a strong genetic lottery winner as the leader. Lion’s perspectives are far different than those of humans. Strength in muscle with lightning speed defeats being witty and wise to the lion’s eyes. On slide 30 in the prezi, with the Freudian theories, I disagree with the assumptions that Simba had id by being with Timon and Pumba. Scar led Simba astray when he was fairly young, and still oblivious to the situation that was really going on. Any kid who is told something by an adult becomes believable. Why? Kids understand that adults are bosses and typically know more (because when kids want answers to their questions, only adults have the best answer). As this happens in our world, it clearly happens in the movie in their world, and Simba would indeed believe an adult, who is also a family member, when advice is given on what to do. Once Simba is gone, he had no idea what really happened and he grew up only knowing what Scar told him to do. Just as feeling sympathy for people born into hell, and creating it as they age. Hell is all they have known so would not someone feel sorry for them? In slide 54 with the Feminist theories about the movie, I disagree on their theories about Nala being the king. To start off, a king has always been known as masculinity, and putting a woman in this position is not correct with the language and assumptions set forth long ago. Also, in the lion culture, a lioness is to never rule other lions/lionesses. Such actions would violate a culture that comes ever so naturally to them. On slide 44, the Marx statement asks why lions are chosen out of all animals known in Africa. There were thousands of options and only one stuck out. Why? Lions to start off, are above the food chain in all levels above other animals. Even other predators towards the top of the food chain do not attempt attacking or eating cubs or lions. The lions live in large packs, as the whites typically live at large in America. Also lions are respected with manes, symbolizing so much power. Not many other animals have this signifigance. The visuals and rest of the genetic and environmental lotteries become appealing to the eye, persuading the choice of the lions. In all, theories can be made as much as wanted, but the truth only lies within the creators of the film. Only they know the true messages needing to be stuck out, and obvious. There is always the possibility of miss-analyzing and seeing anything differently than what was intended.
Hallstrom 2,
As I was reading this prezi, I began to understand the true meaning behind this movie. On slide 19, it begins to discuss the Marxist theory. This slide states that Scar should be king because he is smarter than Mufasa. I disagree because although as humans our society needs a leader who knows what he/she is talking about, but in an animal society they are more focused on muscular strength and power. In the lion’s mindset, brawn gets you further in the genetic lottery. Slide 22 also continues talking about the genetic lottery. In a sense, I agree with this slide because in some cases, White Americans are better than others. As stated on this slide, many people often interpret British people as wimpy, artsy humans. The Marxist theory puts down other races in this movie by casting non-Americans as the “bad” people. The hyenas in the movie are obviously the bad guys and by casting people of other races, the director of the film was indirectly stating that Americans are not the bad guys. On slide 40 we start to learn more about the Freudian theory. It brings up the song Simba sings called “I just can’t wait to be king”. I never took note to the fact that Mufasa would have to die first, and I see where it could be an evil wish. But I don’t think Simba was old enough to understand that his father would have to die in order for him to become king so I see it as it was his subconscious mind telling him to sing that song. Timon and Pumbaa are talked about on slide 47. It examines the value between Timon and Pumbaa versus the hyenas. I think in America, the personality of someone can either draw you near or far. Timon and Pumba have qualities about themselves that would naturally attract a viewer. They’re entertaining, intelligent, and won’t pose a threat to the rest of the land. Slide 54 discusses the Feminist theory. Although I believe what they say about Nala is very true, I don’t believe it’s socially acceptable that a female be heir to throne when there is a male who at some point will be just as capable. I don’t think children understand the hidden message that men are more privileged because they are men but that doesn’t mean it should be portrayed. Literary theories are helpful in a way so that you can fully understand what the directors were trying to interpret, but sometimes overanalyzing the plot can bring about issues that weren’t supposed to be part of focus or weren’t meant to be analyzed as thorough as other issues.
Gallo 2
A whole new layer of understanding is brought to The Lion King when it is analyzed through the three literary lenses. I find the Marxist lens—described on slide 11—particularly fascinating. I find it difficult to wear the feminist lens as a male (how ironic) and I prefer the order of the Marist approach to the animalistic Id disorder of the Freudian lens. Slide 12 and those closely following it provoke the question of which characters from the movie have won which lotteries. While I agree that Scar has been unfairly treated, I do not totally agree that he is the obvious intellectual superior to Mufasa as is insinuated on Slide 19. Mufasa speaks very intelligently, and Scar doesn’t seem to offer any grandiose verbiage or stunning revelations. Indeed, Mufasa has very relevant words for Simba after the latter explored the elephant graveyards. This scene in particular seems to establish Mufasa’s intellect. Therefore, the comment that The Lion King is anti-intellectual as stated on Slide 24 seems false. One could argue that Scar has “book smarts” and Mufasa only has leadership and applicable “street smarts,” but even then, what is knowledge without relevant application. When prompted by the question on Slide 15, I would argue that Mufasa is a lottery winner: intelligent, driven, and athletic. (Scar only possesses the first two traits.) While he may have been unfairly handed the throne, he certainly seems to be the best choice for the position. I believe that the metaphor used on Slide 19 of electing Brock Lesnar as President is also misleading. A better metaphor would be the election of Chase Marso as President. Chase is both athletic and intelligent. To assume that an athlete (or jock) such as Mufasa or Chase cannot be intelligent also is an asinine byproduct of the culture we live in. I only partially disagree with our instructor’s analysis of the message though. Instead of “brawn over brains gets you power, money, and respect” I would gravitate towards “both brawn and brains are necessary ingredients for the baking of power, money, and respect.” I do not believe The Lion King is anti-intellectual; however, it is certainly anti-gay and anti-feminine, as none of the animals are clearly superior intellectually. The clear message is that, like Chase, one must be athletic and intelligent to lead.
Larson pd 5
Digging the true meaning behind Lion King opened up many different viewpoints I did not originally see when I viewed the movie. Looking at this movie in the three different lenses really helped me dig for more valuable information. The first slide that intrigued me displaced a very simple concept that empowered me. Genetic lottery and the attributes are displayed on slide 12. Looks/appearance, capacity to be smart, and body/abilities all play an enormous role in Lion King. Genetic lottery helps set the main problem of the movie—good vs. evil! Mufasa looks handsome, extremely brilliant, and powerful. Scar, on the other hand, looks distasteful, boring, and somewhat wimpy. In this case, Mufasa dominated the genetic lottery while Scar, unfortunately, did not. The very site where the lions rest is symbolic! With the help of Sigmund Freud’s theories, Pride Rock is mentioned as a symbol of masculine power on slide 44. This makes perfect sense since Mufasa is depicted as powerful and therefore the ground he walks on must be powerful. In many scenes of the movie, the sun is shone brightly above Pride Rock. Slide 37 brings up a very interesting topic. The sun becomes a symbol of God in The Lion King, which shines brightly above Pride Rock to help guide Mufasa to the right decisions. The obvious thought becomes God blesses or likes Mufasa and the animals that gather there. The sun, however, does not shine on the hyenas. Does this possibly mean in the movie that God does not like the hyenas? I came to realize with the help of slide 29, that the hyenas are extremely symbolic. The hyenas did virtually nothing wrong. They were not supposed to eat plants and shrubs—they were meant to eat meat! They are merely just following their instinct behavior! The hyenas were born down the social ladder. They can easily symbolize women, gays, and Hispanics! These groups of people did virtually nothing wrong, but they did not dominate the genetic lottery. A black woman, a Hispanic man, and a crazy man all played the hyenas as stated in slide 22. The hyenas are outsiders who cannot gain access into the wealthy and powerful world. Blacks, woman, Hispanics, and mentally ill also have a hard time gaining access into the wealthy popular population. Deciphering Lion King gave me a great deal of pleasure and Mr. C’s prezi helped me understand this movie even more!
Van Ede, 5
Full of holes and criticism in itself, I still find the Freudian approach to be the most prevalent and applicable lens to the movie. The struggle between doing what is rational and right or submitting to intense desire and instinct manifests itself throughout the entire film and through each character. The id and the superego wage varying wars of intensity inside the minds of each individual character. In some characters, such as Scar, the id appears to be overwhelmingly more powerful as this darker lion passionately seeks power amongst his rivals at whatever the cost. However, within the lioness Nala, the superego remains in complete control practically the whole time. As expressed on slide 54, not once does she consider claiming the throne for herself because her culture has deemed it wrong, even though she knows she is superior. Not surprisingly, there are some aspects of Freudian theory I find difficult to grasp the relevance of—such as Pride Rock as a gigantic phallic symbol as on slide 44. To me, Pride Rock symbolizes a civilized domain of power instead of something more savage as a phallic symbol. However, perhaps that is the point: civilization is unintentionally savage. Using the Freudian lens, one can make the judgment that this film remains incredibly pro-superego. Although the main character, Simba, does indulge his id while maintaining a sort of narcissistic bliss as shown on slide 46, he ultimately falls under the power of his superego and decides to attempt to save the Pride Land from the ruthless reign of Scar.
On a slightly separate aspect of the Freudian lens, Slide 49, which states that it would be tough to be Scar, particularly caught my attention. From what I gleaned from the movie, the king is chosen by birth order. Scar, simply by being born second to Mufasa, is denied the right to be king and deemed to have a harder and less privileged life. This sequence of events made me question my own position in birth order; I found that in my situation, being born second to my brother was more advantageous. I have journeyed through almost every situation in my life with a pre-conceived notion of who I am and what I am capable of doing. My brother, Travis, paved the most difficult parts of all new experiences: the first impressions, the testing of limits, the reaching outside the comfort zone. When I started new classes, I found the teachers already liked me before I even said a word. When I participated in athletics, I discovered the coaches already knew my weakness and spent far less time in fixing them. I slid easily into social situations due to observation of my brother's successes and failures. Essentially, I began everything with a head start, and could easily build the reputation my brother had already given me. However, there will be and have been times where this pattern has created a disadvantage, but for the most part, I have received favorable outcomes through my latter birth. Thus, I find it hard to find sympathy for Scar as expressed in slide 48. Due to my privileged and fortunate experience as a younger brother, I simply view his misfortune as a lack of taking advantage of his situation.
The Freudian lens possesses many benefits that greatly enhance the perception of any film or novel being presented, but some interpretation and flexibly must be allowed in terms of personal experiences and perspectives.
Cain The well known and fairly popular Disney movie, The Lion King, is a classic tale I remember growing up with. I have seen the film countless times and yet watching it with a more mature way of thinking and analyzing, I see and interpret the movie drastically different that I did before my eyes were opened and my thoughts provoked. Like Mr. Story, I too questioned why the prey worshiped the predators but I don’t see these actions as odd. The creators of The Lion King exquisitely demonstrated that the lions were of a higher social class than the rest of the animals and it is easy to perceive them as a royal family since they call their leader the king. Like Blake, slide 22 suggests that the lions are supposed to be seen as the white people of our world, those that seem to assert themselves and claim power and wealth with ideals similar to that of the Devine Right of Kings theory. I’m having a difficult time agreeing with this because Pride Rock and the animal kingdom surrounding it is not the only community. I feel as though this is just a peek into one example. I see the lions and the struggle between Mufasa and Scar similar to a presidential election: one candidate trying to out-do and out-last the other. The other animals are examples of the various social classes, ethnic groups, and culture diversity that is present in every civilization around the world. White people do not dominate in every part of the world.
Prezi slide number 24 talks about how The Lion King is a very pro-religion film and in many cases I concur and because of this I have a very difficult time accepting the idea that it is probably that Nala and Simba are siblings. I distinctly remember the scene in the movie (after the song Nala and Simba sing while trying to distract Zazu so Nala and Simba can sneak to the elephant grave yard) when Zazu makes a comment about how Simba and Nala are betrothed, to be married, and how wonderful it is that they naturally like each other. If Zazu references marriage, then wouldn’t that make marriage a norm in the lion pride? And if in fact the lions partake in marriage, AND Nala and Simba are still siblings, that suggests adultery and the pro-religion aura of the story would look down on that.
Cain Part 2 Much a natural feminist, slide 29 offends me. I would argue that women, gays, Hispanics and even they hyenas, were not born destined to be the outcasts and unappreciated, they simply allowed the pressures of society to dictate their role. They have not asserted themselves and demanded respect. Now I understand the difficulties of doing such; often those who demand respect and push to amount to more than those around them are often scorned and ridiculed by the expectations of society. But really, who determines what is good and what its bad? Who determines what class a person belongs in? And while slide 30 shines a bit of light on my thoughts, it again stirs my flame. Pushing the “rejects” out of the Circle of Life would make life difficult. Sure, maybe not at first, but as more and more people and ideas get banished, the smaller the circle, the tighter the reigns and the larger the resistance. The circle of life is a balance that needs the rejects to be part of it because not everyone can win all the time and with the variety of opinions, thoughts, and emotions, it is nearly impossible to make everyone happy all the time.
I also agree with the Freudian theories on slide 40. While yes, Simba was a child and trusted his uncle, he abandoned the rest of the kingdom until a woman had to come be a voice of reason. Simba felt neither guilt nor remorse for abandoning his position as king and that makes me angry with his character. He disregarded his superego because he never once thought that he needed to go back and even when Nala nicely reminded him, Simba denied that his return as needed. I would again have to disagree with Mr. Story because I view Simba as irresponsible and selfish, characteristics that directly relate to the ID complex. Maybe a child it is easy to be blind to the intentions of others and the misdirection behind their words and actions, but Simba had all the time in the world to reflect upon what happened with Scar and his father. He had every chance to ponder the situation and at the very least attempt to obtain knowledge on the current status of his home. Rather, like many arrogant guys I know, Simba cried for attention as he denied his ability to be a king, and selfishly sulked about a mistake he made long ago. Yes, Simba’s ID took over and it is a real shame that Nala’s strength and wisdom has to be wasted away simple because she was born with an extra x-chromosome.
Marso 1
As I watched the movie and viewed the Prezi, I felt that I could analyze and relate the movie best to the Marxist lens outlined on slide 10. When one reflects on the power struggle in the plot, the quick example that jumps to mind is the battle between lion and hyena. I believe that the hyenas’ reign of power was doomed from the start due not just to their loss of the “environmental lottery,” (slide 13) but in how they deal with their situation. The introduction to the movie makes it clear that the viewer should look at the lions as the top of the socioecomic status and the hyenas at the bottom as shown in slides 22 and 29. The hyenas’ attempt to overthrow the lions can be related to a person attempting to join the upper class while their parents are in the lowest class. This rise takes place in many professional athletes who come from inner cities. Recently, an ESPN documentary (the 30 for 30 series, “Broke”) followed the lives of young athletes who became instant multi-millionaires. Not surprisingly, only a few years following their careers many have little to no money left. This tragic fall is completely predictable, just as the hyenas, which have never had an abundance of wealth or power, turn the luscious pride rock into a “fixer-upper”—as referred to by Timon in slide 47—via overconsumption. The hyenas do not take advantage of the remaining lions and seek advice, but quickly demote them as far as they can. Additionally, a gradual rise to the top like a high school and college graduate could take while learning valuable lessons to be applied to life at the top is not taken. Therefore, the hyenas do not know how to lead. When leaders continually disappoint their followers, as the hyenas do when no food or water is available, they will soon run out of followers to lead. Thus, the return to power of Simba (or at least some other lion) is inevitable. When the movie is viewed through the Marxist lens, analyzing the struggle for power, wealth, and prosperity, one can clearly see the cultural rules and norms we experience.
As a side note, slide 24 asserts the movie is pro-religion/faith. However, in the introduction, Rafiki is seen walking on four legs. The screen then pans away, and when it returns, he walks on two—although he only does in the presence of the lions, the most noble and human-like characters in the movie. In my opinion, this is a clear evolution reference with the primate. Generally, these two concepts are at odds with each other, although some common ground has been found recently, so is this unintentional or is Disney integrating the two?
Herrick 5
The Lion King is one of the most known movies produced by Disney. It was such a success because they made an interesting plot and a variety of characters. On slide 22, the Marxist thought of the genetic lottery are given to Simba just by being born. I would agree that Nola also won the genetic lottery. If Mufasa and Scar are brothers, they would have both grown up in the same environment. Therefore, why is Scar not as successful? Hallstrom states that white Americans are better than others. I find this funny because on slide 23 it talks about how if you sound white you sound smart and if you sound black you sound dumb. Mufasa is voiced by a black man, but this lion still sounds smart and in control. On slide 29 it talks about the hyenas and what they have done wrong. These hyenas symbolize the races and gender differences opposed to the lions. The movie is showing that the man is in charge of pride rock because in the animal world, the males are in charge. Although without the presence of females, the males would go hungry. Just like without other races, how would anyone be able to tolerate others for their differences? The hyenas didn’t do anything wrong but be born a hyena. On slide 35, it talks about the Chosen Ones. The lions are pretty much a monarchy. Back in the days of monarchy’s they believed in the divine right. God has chosen them to lead a country. I feel like Rafiki has been told by God that Simba has a divine right to become the next king. Slide 37 says that the sun never shines on the hyenas. I believe that the sun never shines on the hyenas because they are evil. God does not shine his light on them because they are not following his message. I am sure God would shine his light on anyone who was poor, maybe an elephant that has followed the word of God. I wished I could watch this movie again before I had any knowledge of the symbols and little catches.
Rist 2
I remember watching the Lion King numerous times as a child. My sister would always force me to watch the film with her because it was her favorite! I never realized one Disney movie could have so many symbols until I studied the Prezi. On slide 11, money in the Lion King is expressed as food, water, shelter, land, females, respect, power, and status. This Marxist approach explains why Mufasa is king. He has all of those necessities and a wife. Mufasa has also won the genetic lottery, which is expressed on slide 12 as appearance, neurons, and ability. Scar is smarter than Mufasa but Marxists say brawn beats brains (Slide 19). Strong, masculine, and handsome, Mufasa is fit to be king just by his looks. Scar looks weak and not as attractive even though he is intelligent, therefore he is not king. Slide 22 introduces white Americans. White people are considered good while anyone else is considered and outsider. The hyenas have voices of a black woman, Hispanic man, and a crazy person. Our society shuns outsiders just like the lions and lionesses shun the hyenas. Next, the Freudian approach is expressed on slide 40. Simba sings “I just can’t wait to be king!” but I believe he subconsciously wished for Mufasa to die. Simba is too young to understand what he is wishing and he loves his dad. Whether he meant to or not, Simba still wished for his father’s death. Although, I do not agree with slide 46. Simba was not trying to satisfy his id by staying with Timon and Pumba. He stumbled upon them by accident and they had saved him. Brainwashed by Scar, Simba thought it was the right thing to do to leave Pride Rock. He was not aware of the events unfolding back home while he was with Timon and Pumba, so he could not be satisfying his id by wanting to stay. Slide 54 examines the Feminist view. When comparing just Nala and Simba, Nala should be king. She is stronger and smarter but simply because she is a girl she cannot be king. When comparing Nala and Mufasa, Mufasa wins simply by his power and strength. Any way you analyze the Lion King, some kind of approach fits. Marxists say the power and control are the main points. Superego, ego, and id control the Freudians and the Feminists point toward Nala. Any approach can be argued but I agree mostly with the Marxist view by the logic of the money, power, and appearance.
Myrlie 2
When one puts on a new set of lenses everything becomes surprisingly more clear. The hyenas in The Lion King have always caught my attention. As stated on slide 29, they have done nothing wrong, yet they are treated the poorest. Blacks, Hispanics and the mentally challenged have always been rejected by the supreme Caucasian race, which in turn has brainwashed the lower races into thinking that they are worthless. This lowering of expectations by society naturally places the hyenas in the abyss of the social ladder. As questioned on slide 30, I believe that everyone, despite their social profile, deserves the chance to be an American. However I am saddened that so many people only live up to the expectations set by a degrading society. Ironically, Shenzi and Benzai represent the banished population, yet their voices are played by actors that are famous and respected regardless of their skin color. Ed, the “crazy guy”, is by far my favorite character out of the three hyenas. Throughout The Lion King, Ed only laughs, nods, and points. Are people with mental illnesses really this naïve or is this another standard set by society? On slide 22, I find it extremely intriguing that no mention of the voice of Ed, Jim Cummings, is given. I believe that the writer of the Prezi subconsciously decided not to include Jim Cummings because mentally challenged people are ranked even lower than Blacks on the social ladder. Although Cummings is not as well known, he has been in three times as more titles than Marin or Goldberg. Even though patients with mental illnesses may be in a fog, their intellectual capability is still there. Scar, along with Ed, have relatively normal names compared to the rest of the characters. This small, yet important, quality immediately sets them both apart. I disagree with the statement that Scare deserves to be king as stated on slide 19. He may be smarter, but in a more dark and menacing way. I believe that a combination of brawn and brains working together for the right cause are needed to become king. I also enjoy Rafiki, the priest figure. As asked in slide 38, I believe that Disney did an acceptable job with integrating religion into The Lion King. The anointment of Simba is needed to show how highly respected the lions are. In turn, the presentation of the lion’s higher status makes Mufasa’s death a greater tragedy. I feel that Disney did the right thing with only including a few scenes of religious activity. With a different perspective, a wide variety of things come into focus.
Callahan 7
I find it difficult to use only one lens; the Marxist and feminist viewpoints seem to work together like bifocals to me—the Freudian lens overshadowing both at times like self-tinting Transitional lenses. Still, I have found the most obvious to be the Freudian lens—in this case, the struggle between good versus evil. Obviously, Disney movies generally follow the aforementioned plot like most children's tales do. At such a young age, Freudian symbols and the ethnicity of the characters' voices (Marxist lens) is unnoticed. For example, I struggle to hear the British accent in Scar's voice—most likely because as a child, I never took his voice into consideration (slide 22). What is noticed by children is how gloomy and shady Scar is, how handsome and fun Simba is, and how powerful and brave Mufasa is. Yet, the movie is, of course, written by adults. Saying that the movie is just a children's story and is being overanalyzed is not a believable statement in my eyes (in agreement to slide 19). From a Marxist perspective, the animals are set into classes to resemble people. The "common people" or all species but the lions, are happy to have the lions (the government) in control because the society is balanced that way. (This is shown by the juxtaposition of the first scene as the entire community bows down at the birth of Simba, the resources bountiful, and the scene where Pride Rock is under Scar's reign and closer resembles the elephant graveyards.) I think that when we compare the lions to the white people or "successful people" in our society, we forget that Scar is technically in the same privileged category (slide 24). But, despite him being "white", the other lions look down on him so greatly that he is only above the hyenas. Yet as a viewer, I disagree with slide 49 and do not feel bad for him, because he lives his life in absence of God. (God is the light and Scar is always in the shade; Scar lies and kills without remorse.) From a Freudian point of view, Scar would be assumed to be plagued by a "scarring" childhood--perhaps the reason behind his name. From a Marxist point of view, Scar is alienated because of his effeminate, sinful ways. Now on the topic of feminism, I almost feel that the creators of this movie portrayed the females in a better light than the males. Nala's strength and overall good seem to highlight Simba's laziness and unwillingness (slide 45); the working lionesses make Mufassa appear like more of a figure head, all brawn and no brains; and the way Sarabi holds her head high when conversing with Scar shows how much dignity and strength the lioness carries herself with. Nala had the opportunity to stay in paradise with Simba and forget about the chaos living at Pride Rock, but the thought never crossed her mind. Not once was Nala even tempted by the life Simba indulged in. She could have returned to the pride and brought all of the lions to paradise—abandoning Pride Rock completely—but realized that it would be the so-called "easy way out". I found this almost backwards, because normally the females are the "corrupt" ones (Eve, Pandora's box). Yet in the Lion King, there is no attempt to hide how pure the females are. Still, they make no move to break free of their gender roles, making the film very anti-feminist in the end. Though the Lion King may be viewed from only one of the lenses, the true volume of the film can only be seen while looking through all three at once.
K. Peterson 7
The lion King was one of my favorite movies as a child, but I never realized even as I became older all the elements to the kid’s Disney movie. Starting with the Marxist theory, I came to the conclusion that the lions were definitely chosen in this movie. They remind me of the hierarchy of England. Lions do not mate with any other animal and they keep the kings in the same family. Becoming a lion is ultimately a genetic lottery to start out with. Mufasa and Simba are just given extra lotteries. Scar lost the genetic lottery and then lost the environmental lottery because of his looks, but still is a part of the lions and has some control. Some systems of hierarchy can become corrupt just like The Lion King’s did. Scar should be king but his loss of genetic lottery deprives him the throne. I never seem to like hyenas and I wonder if my brain took in the information subconsciously and that is why I don’t care for them now. The Lion King does favorite the upper class and leaves the lower classes in the darkness. Moving on to Feminism I want to talk about Nala. She ultimately saves the day and has all the genetic lotteries, but still does not have control or the position of King. Pinning Simba every time proves that she is physically stronger than him and she actually knows how to hunt instead of being lazy and eating slugs. The dogmatic notion definitely comes to play in this movie. It tells young girls that you may be smart, athletic, and a harder worker but men will always receive the better role in life. Nala means gift and I believe that was planned. In being a woman she is a gift to Simba, someone he can marry. Their parents knew this from their birth. Then there remains the Freudian theory. Timon and Pumbaa live a full of narcissism but are still welcomed into the lion’s realm, unlike the hyenas who work hard and don’t get accepted. Timon and Pumbaa should be rejected because they are the ones who taught Simba awful habits that will not help him to be king. Overall The Lion King has many elements that subconsciously enter a young child’s mind.
Beckman 1
This Prezi has brought me to thinking deeper than I had before, The Lion King is filled with many symbols that I never caught—the first how many hundreds of times I watched this movie—as well as many thought provoking ideas. Slide 10 talks about the function as well as the social standing of a character and how it affects them throughout the exhibit. Scar is greatly affected by his landing in the social ladder; he wishes for nothing other than to be king but he cannot be until Mufasa and Simba are both removed from the equation, they must die—or be killed! The lions clearly have absolute authority over the land. They are, essentially, the first class people. “Everything the light touches,” Mufasa reveals to Simba “is ours.”What more could they possibly ask of life? While the hyenas have nothing, they live in an elephant grave yard where their food resources are very low and their life is dejecting. Hyenas are the much hated lower class.
Although Scar has obviously inherited the brains of his family, he has ultimately lost both the genetic and environmental lotteries (slide 14). Scar is much less attractive than his older brother Mufasa and clearly less “masculine” due to his lack of physical capabilities—he’s much less muscular. But, not only has Scar lost the genetic lottery he has also lost the environmental as well. Having been shunned from the pride, Scar lives out away from them and spends a majority of his time with the hyenas because not only have they accepted him but they also look up to him in the way he deeply wishes to be seen. It can also be said that Scar loses the environmental lottery because as soon as he becomes king everything is destroyed: the water runs out, the food sources move on and Scar refuses to move with them, and the shrubbery even dies. Contrary, Mufasa has won both the environmental and genetic lottery (slide 15). Mufasa has no problems being heard, obeyed, or accepted by the rest of the pride and the other animals of the kingdom.
Slide 38 asks whether Disney should recommend religion, but we have to take into account that while there were religious disputes when the movie came out it was not as prominent as it is in today’s society. Film industries can make movies about anything and add in any elements they see fit; it does not necessarily mean people have to go see it. Pleasing a film to everyone would be virtually impossible.
Timon and Pumbaa are welcomed into the Pride for two main reasons. First, because they are not hyenas who would be competing against the lions for food, Timon and Pumbaa have a very different set diet. Secondly, not only did they really play a huge part in raising Simba after he ran away but they are now friends of the king. It goes back to the Marxist ideas pertaining to the social ladder, in this case it is all about who they know which allows them to be welcomed (slide 46).
Lenz 7
This Prezi has opened my eyes to a whole new view on The Lion King. I have never critically analyzed a movie through the three different lenses viewed in this online Prezi; those being the Marxist, Freudian, and Feminist. On slide 18 of the presentation, there is a picture of the characters in the movie. In this picture, Scar is more of reddish color than the other lions. I view this through a Marxist lens as representing the devil, or maybe even communism, all things viewed as evil and corrupt in the eyes of Americans. Also, I know we had discussed this for a brief moment in class last semester, but on slide 48, the picture of scar portrays him with green eyes as well as the picture on slide 18. I believe that we said it was because of envy. I was quite surprised that I had noticed it right away once that picture appeared on my screen. Also, in that same picture, Simba appears in the background. He is sporting a look of joy and pure innocence. This just shows that he is still a child and cannot help the fact that he won the genetic lottery and will one day be king. On slide 37, a question was posed of why the sun does not shine on the hyenas. I believe that this occurrence happens not because God hates poor people (or animals), but because the hyenas are always trying to hide do not want to be visible to the general public. Maybe they are ashamed of their standing within the social class. Within this Prezi, Nala was brought up with the statement that she should have been king. Curious about this rather unique name, I went to Google and searched “Nala.” The definition came up as being “a character in Hindu mythology, is the king of Nishadha Kingdom.” I find it rather peculiar that the creator picked that name for her, even though she did not win the genetic lottery and will never be king such as Simba was.
Tripp 7
In my opinion, it is easier to use the Marxist lens when analyzing The Lion King but I can also see how other lenses can be used. When focusing on the Marxist point of view though, power and money are the topic of discussion (slide 11). The “money” in The Lion King refers to the land, having a female, getting respect, and much more. The lions may be considered to be the “white people” in the movie but that would mean that all lions were winners of genetic and environmental lotteries. Unfortunately this was not the case. While Simba could be considered as a winner of the genetic lottery – looks, capacity to be smart, and body – he was not a winner in all aspects (slide 12). His capacity to be smart was not necessarily on his side. Nala far outsmarted Simba in many different situations. This is of course why Nala or Scar SHOULD be king or queen (slide 19). Scar, while he was much less fortunate in many aspects as compared to his brother Mufasa, should have been king in that he is much smarter than Mufasa and the rest of the lions and lionesses. Unfortunately, he is looked down upon because of his lack of abilities and strength. The movie is attempting to brainwash us into accepting the more powerful and more popular. The hyenas are looked down upon and represented by a Hispanic man, a black woman, and someone who is just plain crazy (slide 22). Mentioned in slide 29, we are urged to question what exactly the hyenas have done wrong. We are trained as children when watching the film that the hyenas are bad because they are preoccupied more with food than helping to make life better for every animal living in their kingdom. Overall, the Marxist lens sticks out to me more blatantly because of the obvious strive for power and the class/status role that is a continuous issue throughout the entire movie.
Volk 5
I began reviewing the prezi thinking that I would be able to relate to the Freudian lens. As we discussed Lord of the Flies, I felt as if the psychoanalytic approach fit for me. These thoughts changed as I considered everything presented to me. I began to better relate to the feminist view. I found that Nala should be the rightful King/Queen based on all of her credentials (i.e. brains, physical ability, and ideas). So why was Simba the king? He did not put much effort into life; he was lazy, and somewhat easily controlled. The answer comes in the fact that he did not have to try. He was automatically chosen. The animals accepted him at birth and knew that he would become king. I asked myself, if I did not need to try to attain power and it was handed to me, would I try? I do not know the answer since I have never been put in this situation, but I do not know if I would. So why did the animal accept him immediately as king? He was a man. They looked at men as superior and better equipped to reign. They saw the great leadership of Mufasa (a man) and expected his male child to do the same. Also, anyone of any power was male. Scar, Mufasa, Simba, and Rafiki were all male and powerful symbols. They were also expected to act manly. Although scar was effeminate, he still has a manly swagger about him. Another reason that Nala should be leader is that she could have easily handled Scar. Nala repeatedly beat Simba who ultimately beat scar. How much easier would have it been for Nala. The Lion King shows many gender roles and I think that it teaches kids the wrong message. Women are just as capable as men if they are just given the chance.
Breitzman 1
Being an avid Disney fan, I love the film The Lion King. I never realized until recently, though, how thought-provoking and socially insightful of a film it is. (Until I viewed Mr. C’s Prezi) The first intriguing viewpoint occurred on slide 19. One bullet point stated was that Scar should have been king over Mufasa as Scar was more intelligent, but since Mufasa had won the genetic lottery (making him stronger and more handsome) he ruled instead. (This statement was made using the Marxist perspective, which discusses the genetic lottery and socioeconomic status/class.) There was another statement on the same slide that asserted that brawn often beats brains in the struggle for power. I find this notion to be interesting. It frequently seems in society that those who are smarter and more logical do not assume power while those who are more charismatic and appealing do. This statement could be particularly applied to politicians. In certain instances the more rational and qualified candidate loses out to the one who is more attractive and people-oriented, due to society’s inclination toward magnetic characters. This also applies to Lord of the Flies. Piggy should have been leader of the boys, as he was the soundest thinker and devised the best plans, but Ralph ended up winning the “election” because he was more physically and charismatically apt. There was another stimulating Marxist point on slide 22 involving the social status of white, “stable” people. This point indicated that black and Hispanic people, mentally ill people, homosexuals, those of various religions, etc. often do not feel accepted in American society because they do not fit the stereotypical “American” mold. The stereotypical American is white, male, straight, relatively wealthy, and Christian. Many of the previously mentioned groups are discriminated against because they do not possess the characteristics of the people who founded the USA: white, straight, rich, Christian men. America has seemingly since retained the image of that “ideal” American. Though we claim to be a nation of acceptance and diversity, it sometimes seems that we are more a nation of tradition and unanimity. On slide 46 the Prezi talked about Sigmund Freud’s ideas of the id and the superego. I found it interesting when Mr. C mentioned that (from a Freudian lens) Simba was satisfying his id by living with Timon and Pumbaa for so many years. By living with them, Simba had no children, no wife, no job, and therefore no responsibilities. This is an applicable statement because most everyone has times where they would love to just escape reality and live by listening to their id. We all have moments where we wish we could just let our hair down, relax, and act crazily. I also found slide 54 to be particularly accurate. It discussed the Feminist lens and how Nala should be queen of the kingdom rather than Simba. She is stronger, more responsible, and a better hunter. But since she is a female, she cannot rule. This represents many of the social stigmas that still surround women today. Many men feel uncomfortable with the idea of a female leader; it is evident by the fact that America has yet to elect a female president. Women are thought of as passive and unfit to rule, too emotional, etc. On that same note, I thought slide 59 was intriguing as well. It says that in certain bird species females choose their mates. While human women are allowed to choose their spouse, it still seems like men have more of a say in who they marry. For example, men are the ones who (in most cases) propose marriage to their chosen partner. We rarely hear of cases where the woman proposes. This is because in olden times women were seen more as objects and the man was choosing which object he wanted. Now, of course, times are changing, but that social tradition still remains. Overall, I found the analysis we conducted of The Lion King to be very riveting and socially relevant. I hope that I have more opportunities to analyze things in such a way in the future.
Hanzel 7
In analyzing The Lion King, I found the Marxist approach, beginning on slide 10, very applicable. The desire for power and economic status is what drives Scar and the other animals throughout the film. Scar continually attempts to climb the social ladder and is willing to knock down those preventing him from reaching the top. Scar, the only one who did not receive a unique African name, did not have the “money” (slide 11) that the others had. He did not have Pride Rock, respect, power, or status. Scar lost the genetic and environmental lotteries (slide 12 and 13). Socioeconomic classes are very distinct throughout the film. The image on slide 18 demonstrates these class divisions. The winners of the environmental lottery are positioned on the right side of the image. Resting on a hill of fresh green grass, these characters all appear to be blissful. With smiles spread across their faces, they share no connection with the characters on the left side of the image. These characters are positioned behind the others and have a dark aurora spread across their half of the image. Unlike the lottery winners, the losers sit on a pile of dirt and rocks. These characters could not be any more opposite in this image. From the very beginning the viewers are influenced to dislike the outsiders, the hyenas. Similar to the outsiders in today’s society, the hyenas have done nothing wrong. Just because they are hyenas they are neglected and positioned at the bottom of the social ladder (slide 29). Viewing The Lion King through the Marxist lens provides me with an entire new outlook on the film. The characters all take on a new role in the film through this lens. This children’s movie about the circle of life can provide the viewer with much more than an afternoon of entertainment!
Nifong Period 1
Although, I did not necessarily agree with the three lenses we were presented with, I kept an open mind. I became interested in better understand each lens and what components to search for. Today, I was a Marxist critic. The movie has many Marxist elements. Mufasa is clearly a member of the elite class. He has won multiple genetic lotteries. He was born into the right family; he has great hair, and is accompanied by a beautiful lioness. Scar has evidently lost. He is much darker in color and has been shamed by having a scar on the side of his face. I feel the scar is representing everything that society finds ugly. People who are seen to be ugly may be shunned, like Scar is. Slide 18 was very interesting to me. I found it to be very true. The picture we see on slide 18 has multiple symbols within. The obvious lighting difference casts shadows on Scar and the hyenas as light and goodness is shone on Mufasa, Rafiki, Pumbaa, Timon, and Simba. I found the fact that the lighted characters are all touching intriguing. The touching of the characters led me to the assumption that good feeds off of good and good people are even better together. While the darker characters are not touching, showing lack of unity. Agreeing with a point made earlier about slide 29, women especially should be born equal to males, however actions and mindsets of others downgrade women into this category. Slide 31 was amazing! I’ve seen the movie dozens of times, yet never even gave this scene a second glance. The scene portrays a clear dictatorship along with brainwashed and even scared followers. Slide 37 suggests that the sun doesn’t shine on the hyenas because God doesn’t like poor people. I disagree with this. I think the reason the light doesn’t shine on the hyenas is just to show their evilness. I specifically appreciated slide 58, I am a feminist by nature, and I defiantly agree that Nala is much better at self-discipline and she is physically stronger than Simba.
Hensley 5
It never ceases to amaze me how shows and movies that I watched as a kid could have deeper meaning. As I go back and review them as an adult, I now realize the hidden depth that they contained that was used to subconsciously teach me lessons about life. If I apply a Marxists lens to the movie I can extract several lessons from the movie. Indicated in slides 22 and 23, a young watcher could extract that it is better to be white and “intelligent”. The young watcher using the Marxists lens would also learn that all races: black, Hispanic, insane, are inferior to white people for they were born into the power and have the natural right to lead. It would be against God’s will (Rafiki) to dethrone the whites (lions). If one were to switch lens to a Freudian lens, one could extract even more lessons from the movie. As indicated in slides 40 and 44 one could extract that the movie is about how masculinity is better than femininity represented by pride rock resembling a man’s reproductive part, but I believe there is more substance and depth that can be obtained. I believe that a powerful message to be obtained is the issue of id and superego. Unlike the view in slide 46, I believe that the message in lion king is that we must obtain a balance with our id and superego. The id is represented by the lions need to eat and their giving into their desires. Under Mufassa’s rule the circle of life is preserved where the lions eat only what they need, this is symbolic of their ids and superegos in perfect balance. When Scar takes command, the lions and hyenas give into the temptation of their ids and over indulge themselves, depriving the land of life. It is only when Simba takes command that the lions ids and superegos are once again in perfect balance and life returns to the land. It is amazing what one can learn from a simple children’s movie and it shows us how even the simplest things can shape us into the beings we are today.
Wilde 7
After watching and closely analyzing The Lion King yet again, I have come to the consensus that it is most beneficial to critique the film through Marxist lenses. Such a notion becomes evident merely two minutes into the movie as all the animals gather around in the “Circle of Life,” naturally migrating to their unique lines of class, where they belong. Each specific animal stands among species of its own kind, rather than an integration of all the species. While the concept of Marxism strives for equality among social classes, The Lion King clearly expresses how such an idea is not possible in the animal kingdom. Throughout the entire movie we observe a natural hierarchy of animals dispersed about an expected food chain. Clearly the lions fulfill the highest tier of the hierarchy; they control the other animals and what goes on in their boundaries. As expressed in slide 11, the lions are the wealthiest with their natural ability to better obtain food, water, shelter, etc. The hyenas would then maintain their status among the lower class (slide 29).
Within the lion class, there also seems to be a clear separation of “lottery winners” as well as “lottery losers” (slides 12 & 13). Simba and Mufasa represent the former with their superior physical attributes and other abilities, while Scar represents the latter with his mere intelligence. Just as slide 22 indicates, Simba was anointed at birth with his life set up to inevitably become the pride’s future king. The environments in which the animals reside are significant too. While the “upper class” animals predominantly inhabit “The Pride Lands,” the “lower class” animals, or outsiders, like the hyenas, are isolated and live elsewhere, such as the elephant graveyards (slide 18). At one point in the film, Scar explicitly states that “an elephant graveyard is no place for a young prince.” Having the different characters segregated to different territories further indicates the social structure present in the animal kingdom.
These were just a few of the endless examples of Marxism present in The Lion King.
Bender 7
The lion king is a movie abounding in hidden symbols and ideals pushed upon the viewer by the movie creators. Since I was divide into the Marxist section of class I while begin analyzing there. Slide 11 struck me as particularly fascinating. Food, water and land were all listed as types of currency. By these standards I thought which characters were born into wealth. The obvious answers are the lions. As I thought more however I came to the realization that both Timone and Pumba would also be rich. They have all the food water and land they could ever want and more. The need not work for their meals either like the lioness are forced too. This made me wonder if in fact Timone and Pumba were equivalent to the ultra wealthy. The movies casts a favorable light on the two ultra rich and ultra lazy characters. Slide 22 fits in nicely with this point also. This slide highlights how the hyenas, lower class, are evil and can’t be trusted. This is especially show when they even betray scar at the end of the film. So in essence the film could be shown to endorse lazinees if by the wealthy. The wealthy can be trusted to help no matter what their track record where the poor, the hyenas, are evil and will betray even their evil friends. To me however the most interesting story is slide 36. Not only are the “wealthy” characters more likable and physically drawn to be more attractive, this slide shows us that God himself anoints the rich to their status. The evil and poor never get anointed by Rhafiki. The sun never gives precious vitamin D to the hyenas or Scar. Not only are we not supposed to not like the hyenas, we are not allowed to. Scar is a perfect example. For doing anything to help the hyenas he is cursed by God. The hyenas get any power and God with holds rain. The humor is that this is supposed to be representing our beautiful capitalist society. The irony however is the American Dream is then only for those anointed by God. The ideal that hard work can overcome in our economic structure is made void by the impossibility for the poor to succeed.
Dawn 2
The Lion King has always been one of my all time childhood movies, and will probably continue to do so. This class however, has given me a new perspective on how I view things, and it requires me to dig deeper than the surface to understand the points an exhibit is really getting across. Watching The Lion King, I analyzed it carefully trying to discover points through all three lenses. Looking at slide 19 I agree with this Marxist view. I agree that the leader should be based more off of their intelligence rather than their strength. However, I do not necessarily agree that one cannot have both brawn and brains. I feel that Mufasa is the rightful leader because of his charismatic character, intelligence, and strength. While looking through the Marxist lens I was also able to identify the Nazism similarity—first hinted at on slide. The hyenas, under extreme poverty, blindly followed Scar because he seemed like a possible way out of their horrible situation. I also found myself agreeing with slides 36-37. The Lion King can be argued to be a religious movie. The movie does not portray the sun as all knowing, or all powerful, but it does seem to represent everything good. The sun shines down on everything the movie viewers are supposed view as “good” and avoids the “evil” hyenas. Simply because the hyenas were born into a lower socioeconomic class than the lions, the sun—“God”—neglects them. Looking through the Freudian lens I was able to find some of the ideas on slide 40 present in The Lion King. I believe that when Simba embraces the ideas of Hakuna Matata he makes a clear choice of embracing his id over his superego. By putting his past behind him and living with no responsibilities he is clearly disregarding anything his superego is telling him to do. On slide 54 I discovered a feminist viewpoint that I agreed completely with. Since the first time I saw The Lion King, it was clear that Nala was stronger and smarter. However she was born female and therefore was unable to become what she should have been—the leader of the pride. Another thing I saw that was particularly sexist towards females was the way the lions roar. The movie portrayed the adult male lions’ roars particularly ferocious and awe inspiring, and I found the females’ roars to be quite weak and submissive.
Any assignment that gives me a reason to watch movies—especially The Lion King—is a good assignment in my opinion. This, however, was a great assignment. I analyzed the movie and was able to notice many new things while looking through the right lens. Giving one the ability to see the world in new ways is a great gift, and will assist one throughout their life
Olesen 1
This prezi helped me to better analyze the The Lion King, and see the latent content of the film from different lenses. Using the Marxist critical approach on slide 10, the author of the film creates Simba in a way in which we sympathize, and therefore like more than Scar. Making Simba lose his father and getting banished, we feel sorry for him, and dislike the mean, nasty Scar and hyenas. Those on Pride Rock are the wealthiest having food, water, and shelter, while those on the dark side have little land, scarce food. In slide 12 it mentions the genetic lottery in looks, and smarts. It is obvious that Simba has won the genetic lottery for his looks, as well as the environmental lottery being born into a royal line of lions. I agree with slide 21 stating that the hyenas represent the lower classes and outsiders –blacks, Hispanics, the mentally ill– who cannot gain acceptance in society. I also strongly agree with slide 24 that The Lion King is pro-religion. Simba is the “chosen one” in this story, and is shone down upon by the sun in the sky, while the outsiders are kept in the dark. While watching the film, I also noticed how the colors of the sky and clouds remind me of a heavenly ambience. During the film while Scar is singing Be Prepared it shows how Scar is a Hitler figure, and all the hyenas are following him because they were starving, and Scar promised them if they followed him they would never go hungry again. I also thought it was interesting how in the end while Simba is threatening Scar, Scar turns his back on the hyenas saying everything was their fault, which in return got him slaughtered by the hyenas themselves. As a kid this was my favorite movie, and I have never thought of any of this critical thinking before; I find it very intriguing to look at it in such different aspects.
Bauer 2
After watching The Lion King and precise examination of the prezi, the deep allegory and meaning of the film was revealed to me. The Lion King has many symbols throughout the film. Pride Rock is a huge phallic symbol to show the power and masculinity of Mufasa and his pride. Slide eleven was a slide a found intriguing; food, water, shelter, females, respect, power, and status, all different forms of currency to the pride. The Lion King is showing, in my opinion that no matter what the currency is, money is always the most important thing to a better life. Slides 19 and 20 really caught my eye because the prezi talks about Scar deserving to be king and the only reason is not king is because he is not as strong or handsome as Mufas; showing that the film is symbolizing that physical appearance and stature are more important than education and intelligence. Slide 36 was another slide that was very enlightening. This slide reveals that God is in the story. Simba is the chosen one, but who or what is he chosen by? Rafiki is another symbol in the story. He is the connection the God, to the heavens, to ever super-natural. He blesses Simba upon his birth, but why did he not bless the hyenas or any of the other animals outside the pride? God never lets the sun shine on the hyenas or Scar, which cause us to not be able to like them or care about them. When Scar and the hyenas do get power, God gives no rain to the pride. Scar is being punished or even cursed by God for helping and associating with the hyenas. The hyenas are like the poor people or the people not born into a wealthy family. Working hard is how you are supposed to be successful in life, but this film is showing that only the lucky—the ones anointed by God—are the ones able to be successful.
Woodward 5
I was ultimately surprised at how much subliminal messaging was in the Lion King, a children's movie, after looking through Mr. Christiansen's prezi. When I first watched this movie, over a decade ago, I had no idea that I was being brainwashed to be the perfect, capitalist citizen. I completely agree with slide 24, which insinuates that the film is raising children to be pro-religion and pro-capitalism. The two most respected characters in the movie, Mufasa and Raffiki, hold these traits and are meant to be looked up to by younger viewers. I also find slide 28, the one involving the hyenas, extremely contradictory. While the three hyenas are supposedly Nazis, they are also minorities who have been rejected or looked down upon in a primarily caucasian society. A Hispanic, black, or mentally ill person would never have been found among the Nazis' ranks. Looking at the Lion King through a psychoanalytic lens, slide 39, it is certain that Simba has an Oedipal complex. Not only is this shown by the proof in slide 40 involving Simba singing “I just can't wait to be king”, it is also shown by the dream/vision that Simba has about Mufasa. The vision of Mufasa telling him to take back the throne is certainly Simba's id trying to conquer his superego by justifying the power hunger inside of him. Slide 63, concerning the circle of life, also held particular interest for me. In the movie, the circle of life is presented as a happy, celebrated idea exemplifying every animal living together in harmony. In reality, the circle of life, like capitalism, is a dog eat dog world. Many of the animals shown in the beginning of the movie are the lions would-be prey. As a whole, I feel that the Lion King has a positive underlying message of good triumphing over evil and nature living in balance, even if there are several demeaning and negative themes concerning women and minorities.
Lippert Pd. 7
As a young boy, I loved some Disney movies. One I loved in particular was The Lion King, viewing the moving once again after many years, I can see why I loved it so. We have an awesome example of a typical good winning over evil and perfect for examination. I believe I shall start with a Marxist approach. Scar, the villain in our story, is a victim of the society he was born into. Slide 14 poses the question of which lotteries Scar won and lost. Well, he won a part of won and lost when it came to everything else. Just as slide 19 states, Scar should have been king instead of Mufassa. He is much smarter, but being weaker, not as handsome, and second born he was denied the throne. When one is king, one gets what one wants. When one is not king, well, that don’t get everything they want. As slide 11 informs us, food, land, pride rock, women, and respect all went to Mufassa. Scar got zip. A Marxist would view this as class warfare. Scar and the outcast hyenas—all victims of the society they live in—versus Mufassa and his lions who have all won the environmental and genetic lotteries. When scar finally achieves his goal and kills Mufassa, he asserts his dominance and claimed pride rock, reaping the benefits of his new found status. And when things are horrible and everyone is miserable where is Simba? Satisfying his id. As slide 40 mentions, Simba has achieved his narcissistic bliss. Laying about all day and doing nothing but eating grubs. A Freudian examination may say that Simba is afraid to grow up and do what is expected of him. He chooses to stay with Timon and Pumba and satisfy his id than return to his home and fulfill his duties as king. Simba finally does what he should and faces Scar, winning the right to rule from pride rock. A feminist would ask, “why is Simba the only one who faces Scar?” As slide 54 tells us, Nala is perfectly capable of ascending the throne. She is smart, brave, physically capable, and determined. She would make a great ruler. But, the lions must stay true to their traditions which say a male must be king. Nala is forced to convince Simba to act because her society will not allow her too. A great movie and a triumph of good over evil, The Lion King will be watched for years to come. Once the popcorn is popped, the drinks are poured, and the publish button has been hit, I think I will enjoy this great movie too.
Shroll 2
Slide 14 inquires which lottery, environmental, genetic, or both, Scar has won. I believe Scar has won both the environmental and genetic lottery, the latter to a certain extent. Scar was born as a lion, into royalty. Lions rule the kingdom, Scar is second in line for the throne. He has won the genetic lottery because of his intelligence and appearance—as a child watching the film, I always thought Scar looked cooler with his intense green eyes and dark flowing mane. However, Scar has lost the genetic lottery in physic; he is lacking the muscular stature of his brother, Mufasa. Mufasa, as an attractive king, has clearly won both lotteries (slide 15). Slide 19 compares Mufasa’s reign to Brock Lesnar being the incumbent for president of the United States… I would like to voice that strong men are not necessarily attractive, especially not cage fighters. To be a successful cage fighter, one must solely obey their id to use brute force against another human being (slide 39). The Lion King is most certainly pro-religion, as slide 36 discusses. In Rafiki’s tree, there are three major parts to the tree, representing the holy trinity: the father, son, and holy spirit. Rafiki himself could be considered the holy spirit, as he is there to aid Simba in his time of question, self-reflection, and need. Rafiki tells Simba to look at the stars, and then at his reflection. When Simba observes himself in the water, he claims he sees his dad, or God. Mufasa, who displayed forgiveness to Simba as a cub, represents God. Simba is Jesus, the son, the savior. He was willing to sacrifice himself for the sake of the kingdom when battling/overthrowing Scar. The hyenas eventually kill Scar, representing hell. Sheer brilliance and ingenuity was displayed in the creation of this film… too much to discuss in mererly 300 words!
Ullom 7
Lion King has always been one of my favorite Disney movies. After watching the movie again and analyzing the Prezi, I realized how many concepts are present that I never saw before. I was particularly intrigued when I came across slide 12. This slide, from a Marxist lens, focuses on the genetic lottery. Once I read the slide I instantly thought of Simba. Clearly he has won the genetic lottery. He has brawn and has a very strong appearance. I considered this and continued on the Prezi. The very next slide—which was slide 13—mentioned the environmental lottery. I pondered the different aspects that decide whether or not someone wins or loses the environmental lottery. The hyenas popped into my head. Anyone would say they surely lost this one. The movie helps show their loss by the personalities. In society, there are stereotypes of how Blacks and Hispanics are poorer than most. The three voices for the hyenas (slide 22) are a black woman (Whoopi Goldberg), a Hispanic man (Cheech Marin), and a crazy voice (actor not mentioned.) Slides 32 and 33 show pictures of Whoopi Goldberg and Cheech Marin. The three different types of “people” help to make their social standing more believable. The hyenas status proves very interesting. Going back to the lotteries, on slide 14 the question, “Which lottery did Scar win or lose?” appears. Scar won the environmental lottery by being born into the royal family but he lost the genetic lottery. He is very feminine. In one scene—while he is singing—Scar throws his hands around like a woman would and his mane continues to blow in the wind, showing feminine qualities. These inquiries are easier to make just by using one of the three viewpoints we have learned in class…Marxism.
Rogen5
I appreciated the prezi for its ability to make me dig deeper into the abyss of literary analysis. One of the slides that particularly intrigued me was slide 18. I agree with the written content of this page, yet the nature of the artist is what mostly grabbed my attention. The main area of expression on this slide is in the faces of the characters. In the foreground, you see smiles and bliss. While in the background the viewer is left to notice face scarred with frowns and snarls of hatred. (This is all without including the mentally handicapped hyena’s hysterical laughing.) With the obvious out of the way I looked further into the faces of the movie’s main characters. Scar is seen with a mouth that has grimaced so much that it has succeeded below his actual jaw line. In addition, his nose slopes before reaching his eyes. This gives the resemblance of a nose broken from brotherly quarrels. When comparing to Mufasa, Scar is left with a face full of wreckage. Looking onto Mufasa’s mug, the viewer sees his large jaw line. This Neanderthalic mandible leads the observer to think he is lacking in terms of intelligence, but overpowering in his physical strength. I would also like comment on slide24. It states that The Lion King is “Anti-Intellectual.” There are a few approaches to handle this comment as a child. One would be that the movie motivates you to be more manipulative to achieve goals. This is exemplified in how Timon and Pumbaa take advantage Simba’s Id for safety. The other approach would be to have intellects like Zazu to worry about and handle your intellectual problems for you. The dark side of intelligence—manipulation and delegation for one’s personal benefit—is displayed vividly in the film. Hopefully our youth does not catch on as they should. I also felt as if I was on the same page for slide 48. I too felt sympathy for scar until the whole “Long live the King” incident. Scar is a character that allows the children to see that jealousy can consume a person, and drive them to do terrible actions. Being on the same page of scar is his parallel in the Joker on slide 50. I liked the similarity in the characters. They are alike for in the end Scar was a person that Alfred describes when he says,” Some people just want to watch the world burn.” I also found slide 55 interesting. Your daughter claims that she wants to marry a football boy. This is puzzling for I would expect the same thing to happen in The Lion King Two, but Simba’s daughter falls for a foil to Simba who resembles Scar.
Rogen5 PART 2
(For the blog post due the 17th)
A blog post I would like to comment on would be the closing comments from Mr. Marso. I would like to add to his ideas and comments on slide 24. The slide asserts the pro-religious notions of the movie. Chase’s comments were that of Rafiki progressing from walking on four legs to walking on two. Thus he believes that the movie also brings an evolutionary standpoint to the table. I do not refute this hypothesis, but will add to the religious aspect. By putting Scar in the foreground of a crescent moon background, the movie displays an anti-islam tone. With this being said, the film is both anti and pro-religion.
Another topic I would disagree with would be Mr. Story’s introductory statement. His idea that that the lions in The Lion King are being “worshiped” because they represent “strong white people” is not faulty, but I believe the predators represent much more than dominant white leaders. My belief is that the movie does indeed want to you to worship and cheer for the lions—not for their “whiteness”—but for the qualities that make a good predator. The qualities of cunning, decisiveness, strength, and aggression are prominent in successful predators as well as successful business practitioners. Our capitalistic society (sadly) has no patience for the meekness of zebras or antelope that graze and await their demise. It is for this reason I would wish for my children to emulate the lions in this movie, and hopefully they can avoid being the prey of our culture. Although this is an exceptionally Marxist view, my inner cynic tells me that there is no hope in being a gazelle in American society.
Tibke pd. 1
Since starting our discussion of Lord of the Flies using the three types of lenses—Marxist, Freudian, and Feminist—I have looked at the Lion King in many new ways. The Marxist view explained in slide 12 talks about how the different animals have won or lost the genetic lottery. I for one think it is balanced in a unique way. Where Mufasa won the lottery for brawn, size, and strength; Scar won the majority of the brains side of the lottery. Scars brains help him in the early run when he outsmarts Mufasa and become the temporary king. This works with keeping Simba away as well using Mufasa’s death to keep him away from the pride allowing Scar to achieve the throne. The message on slide 19 is spot ion in my view because in the movie Scar may have been in charge for a time but the build and Brawn of a genetically bigger Simba defeats him in the end, showing how brawn can rule over brains. I find this way of obtaining leadership very unsettling. As it says on slide 21 I feel like leadership should be chosen by who is right, not by the strongest. But in the case of Mufasa and Scar I believe that it was coincidental that the stronger brother made a better leader. From the Feminist lenses it can be seen that women are undermined in almost every way throughout the movie. On slide 54 it talks about how Nala should be the heir to the throne if you go by strength. She is stronger than Simba and beats him multiple times. Nalas passion for other shows when she leaves the hunting grounds in hopes of finding help to get rid of Scar. Sarabi is also pushed into a sexist role when the hyenas ask about food and Scar says that it’s the lioness job to hunt. This is kinda saying that all they are good for is hunting or getting the food, when In reality without them the rest of the tribe could not survive. This prezi really made me rethink this movie. I have never looked into a movie like this before and now I feel like I am going to doing this to everything now!
Rollag 5
I would agree with many of the insights you present in your prezi. The facts you present on slide 24 are well supported by the events and symbols seen in the movie the circle of life represent capitalism and Nala should be queen. One idea you propose on slide 31 is that the hyenas are giving a sieg heil and saluting Hitler while also claiming that Scar is a lot like communism. These ideas are polar opposite as Hitler subscribes to an economic policy that was on the opposite end of the economic spectrum from Stalin. They are defiantly more like Communists because like you previously state in the prezi they are not fit for the circle of life but in Scar and Stalin’s world in theory all are equal and no one is discriminated against. The next lens you study the story from is Freudian and Simbas quite obvious Oedipus complex discussed on slide 40. Simba like the children watching the movie is too young to understand the true meaning of the song. The only difference is that unlike Oedipus Simba does not strive to marry his mother. After the death of his father he goes in search of the desires of his id and wants nothing more than Narcissistic bliss or as we come to find out he wanders in search of hakuna matata. Once he finds it he wishes for nothing else but to relax and enjoy the good life. His bliss is interrupted by Nala who viewed under a feminist lens is the obvious choice for the leader of the pride. She is more of a man than Simba who is weaker in every way but due to the fact that he was born a man he received extra privileges denied to Nala (54). Simba becomes king by birth right and finally fulfills the dream he had as a child it just took longer than he had thought.
Westcott, 5
One of the first and most important concepts our instructor wants each individual to grasp is that taking notes is essential to success. Every day, one must take a few notes in order to fully succeed in college. Our instructor also wants us to be able to use context clues to discover the meaning behind every sentence, plot, setting, and all other aspects of an exhibit. As explained on slide 9; an exhibit is a novel, song, play, poem, t-shirt, painting, building, and etcetera. The first lens we are introduced to is the Marxist lens. Marxist critics look for deeper meanings involving money, social status, and power. They are trained to search for systems and what the author is trying to convey to his or her audience. In The Lion King, money is seen as food, water, and shelter. Pride Rock is a large symbol to Marxist critics as only the lions who have won the genetic lottery live on it. Karl Marx is the founder of the Marxist ideas. He does not believe in communism, but looks to the systems in every exhibit. A prominent message found by Marxist critics in The Lion King is that beauty reigns over intelligence. The Lion Kings trains young Americans to be pro-heterosexuality, pro-Caucasian, pro-democracy, anti-feminist, and anti-intellectual. This film also teaches children to be pro-religion. Found on slide 36, Rafiki, the monkey priest, is shown as connecting to the heavens as he offers young Simba to the heavens. The second technique is known as Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory—found on slide 39. It looks into the superego, ego, and id sections of the brain. The id is known as the narcissistic tendencies all people are born with, and are forced to fight against every day. The superego is the nurturing, caring side of which some choose to show. Freudians also look at dreams and sexual symbols. Sigmund Freud founded this idea of critique to look closer at how different characters respond to their id. His ideas look at Pride Rock with sexual symbology, showing masculine power as stated on slide 44. The final lens is the Feminist outlook. As would be expected, feminist critics look at the roles of both men and women. They decide whether or not the men are expected to be in power, or if the roles of leadership belong to the women. In The Lion King, Nala deserves to be in power over Simba, as it is shown on slide 54, she is more powerful, responsible, intelligent, and is a better hunter. The message sent to children is that men are greater just for being males.
Robertson 2
I would like to start by stating that I abhor Prezis. They are twisty and turny and disorganized. However artful the Lion King Prezi was, it is still a Prezi and that is evil. Evil and bad, if only because it is not a Powerpoint. The Powerpoint, of course, is superior to all presentation tools. The program is backed by reliable software and therefore creates better presentations that make the presenter appear more intelligent. The time period in which the programs were released do not matter. Even if the two programs WERE equal (though they absolutely are not), Powerpoint would still be superior. Why? Because it is.
I have just demonstrated a real-life example of the class system in the Lion King. The Prezi in this scenario is representative of the hyenas; Powerpoint represents the lions. There is no reason that the lions are superior, other than the statement “they simply are”. This comparison can also be applied to Scar and Mufasa respectively. Through a Marxist lens, the “genetic lottery” favors the lions just as Powerpoint’s strong software makes it a more reliable system. The hyenas, and Scar by default, are akin to the new and unusual notion of Prezi’s strictly online-operation because they develop a system of operations drastically differing from what was the norm in the Pridelands. Similarly, the NAME Prezi lacks the strength of the name POWERpoint, just as ‘Scar’ lacks the strength of ‘MUFASA’. The genetic lottery metaphor also applies to the brawn vs. brains struggle between Scar and Mufasa, making the blocky and blatant straightforward Powerpoint the brawn (Mufasa) and Prezi the creative, artsy Scar.
And… that’s all for now, folks. Forum took it out of me.
Slides used: 10-21
Disclaimer: I really do hate Prezis, but I relate best to Scar as a character.
Also: I liked this Prezi and I won’t hold it against you.
Forster 2
To summarize the Prezi—it is a compilation of various ways to analyze The Lion King through Freudian, Marxist, and Feminist lenses. The presentation enhanced and clarified points first introduced in the week before Christmas break, and strengthened my understanding of the film. Though I once viewed Walt Disney’s African tale featuring Simba as a simple children’s story, I can now read into the plot and characters to find underlying messages and themes about religion, moral standing, and gender roles. Throughout the first week of Literature 210 (though my attendance has been poor due to an unfortunate bout of Influenza A) the Marxist lens has been my personal favorite and the one I can identify with most closely in my everyday analysis of the world. I am a female, but I often find feminist views, including the feminist lens, to be somewhat bothersome at times. First, I would like to discuss a statement made in the beginning of the Prezi. It is mentioned that the study of The Lion King is important to analyze because it affects the worldviews of children. Though I do not wish to discount the analysis of this film, nor the importance of its messages, I do not necessarily agree with the prior statement. As a child, I viewed this film and do not believe my worldview was changed by that viewing. I did not pick up racist stereotypes, nor did I conclude that women were to be dominated by only athletic male figures. There is no doubt these views are unfortunately common in American culture, but I fail to believe I picked them up as I sat in my living room as a six year old watching a movie about a lion who sings to multi-colored animals that he “just can’t wait to be king”. Delving deeper into the Prezi’s analysis of the film, one can and will find provocative statements such as “God doesn’t love the poor” and “Women=possessions”. In The Lion King, the three hyenas are similar to lepers—outcast, neglected, alone. However, they are swept up in a sort of dysfunctional care provided by Scar, also an outcast of the “normal” society. This care is somewhat ironic in the fact that Scar has been rejected himself and is only using the hyenas as a sort of manpower for his ultimate takeover. I believe in this aspect the film is making a statement that humans are more likely to become corrupt human beings who lend their talents and efforts to crime and corrupt actions when they are downcast, down on luck, and simply feeling down. I have found the analysis of the film to be quite thought-provoking thus far, and hope to continue film analysis in future English studies both this semester and during college.
Steffen 5
As I watched the movie, for what seemed like the thousandth time, and studied the prezi, I noticed so much that I merely overlooked before. In particular, when Simba sings “I can’t wait to be king”, I nearsightedly thought he was just looking for a way to get rid of Zazu. Only recently did I discover that that not only established Simba’s Oedipus complex, but it foreshadowed Mufasa’s death as well. Therefore I related the movie best through Freudian’s lens (slide 40). When Mufasa actually dies, and Simba is left to be raised by Timon and Pumba, they are living out their id. They have no responsibilities and no family and are living in narcissistic bliss (slide 45). After being brought up on grubs, Simba is miraculously ready to fight Scar for the thrown. This shows that he has won the genetic lottery just like his father, while Scar has lost the genetic and environmental lottery. Genetically, Scar is weaker and obviously not as attractive as Mufasa (19). Scar or Nala should be king or queen because they are far more intellectual than Simba or Mufasa. Multiple times Nala overpowers Simba (“pinned ya again”); again, making her an obviously choice (slide 19). At the Beginning of the movies, Scar’s “cave” is behind pride rock—all dark and lonely. But when he takes over as king, even the land rejects him, not to mention the food and lionesses. He hangs out with Hyenas, who are at the bottom of the food chain and compete with the lions for food. So naturally, they are already a threat. I also agree with this Marxist approach. This lens wants us to sympathize with Simba because he is an orphan and he does not know what happened to his father and how he died. We are compelled to believe that Simba is the victim due to Scar lying to him about how he killed Mufasa (slide 10). These three views have opened up a whole new perspective on how I see things now.
Forster 2
Oops, failed to thoroughly read instructions prior to posting my comment...I referenced slides 54, 11, 19, 22, 28, 29, and 37 most specifically when formulating my response.
Pham 7
In the Disney animated film _The Lion King_, the feminist lens is irrefutably the core undertone. Although Marxist and Freudian lenses are also applicable, the feminist lens proves poignant. Throughout the film, there is constant conflict of the role of women. Consistency exists as the males of the novel continually try to subordinate the females. Slide 54 extrapolates on this point. Although Nala is both intellectually and physically stronger than Simba, she is unable to raise her political status merely because she is a female. The movie assumes a common misconception made among lions. In the wild (as is the setting in this film), lionesses hunt most prey. Accurate in this aspect, lionesses have a larger role in the pride while the males live in a sort of narcissistic bliss, as shown in slide 45. Essentially, lionesses do all the work while lions get all the glory. Fair? No. Equal? No. Even in nature, females are subordinated by men—subordinated by anatomy, subordinated by instinct, and subordinated by the circle of life.
In addition, slide 56 helps relay that Nala is capable of usurping the throne from Scar. She is physically and mentally capable, yet gender roles belittle her. However, the premise of this argument is destroyed even within the film. Slide 28 makes obvious that Shenzi is a black woman. Here is a prime example of a woman in power. She is shown in the middle of the photo with the most prominent features. She is clearly the leader of the hyenas and shows leadership throughout the entire movie—right up to killing Scar. Yet before the animosity, Scar was the boss. Slide 31 shows the hyenas “heil!”-ing Scar. This reiterates the motif that women are allowed to have power but not supreme power. A contemporary and relevant example of this is apparent in our own school. Although Melanie Sittig is the theater director for most plays at our school, she still answers and must get things approved by Mr. Brick. Seemingly, women are not allowed at the top of any hierarchy. Another example lies in the band program. Although Ms. Laura Baker is allowed to direct her own band, Mr. Jesse Miller makes all executive decisions. It is as if society interpellates us to subordinate women. We can give women power, but not too much power. _The Lion King_ indubitably substantiates this interpellation.
Logan Johnke Pd. 5
When analyzing the Lion King I personally think that it is best to analyze it through both Marxist and Freudian lenses. In one of the beginning slides many questions are asked about the Marxist lens and nature's society in the Lion King. One question in particular asks if characters are trying to climb the social ladder and is climbing possible?(slide 11) Other than a the hyenas and Scar attempting to assert themselves higher on the social ladder no other animals in the movie feel the desire to reach the top. (slide 14) On the contrary however, most of the animals seem content worshiping the very animals that hunt and kill them on a daily basis. (slide 25) Have the animals become totally willing to accept that the lions will get whatever they want? At the very least why would they show up for the ceremony that celebrates the new generation of their killers? The only animals that attempt to climb hierarchy's ladder are the hyenas. However, the three main hyenas represent minorities within society – Mexicans, black women, and the mentally handicapped. (slide 22) In their desperation to promote themselves they side with Scar. This reliance mirrors Communist Germany and the Germans dependence upon Hitler.(slide 31) As they blindly, follow Scar they eventually realize towards the end that Scar was thinking only of himself and the hyenas turn on him, just as Germany turned on Hitler. Looking at the movie through a Freudian lens also gives many important insights to the story. Many questions can be asked about Simba's statement “I just can't wait to be king!”. (slide 39) Simba has to know that his father must die for this to happen so does he subconsciously want his father did? There is also a superego and id presence in Simba's life. Just a thought, but is it possible that Timon and Pumbaa are his id's in a small way? When Nala comes upon Simba in the jungle she insists that he return to the Pride. Timon and Pumbaa try to convince him to stay for a short time. They possible are voicing his negative side while Nala tries to reason with him. However, Timon and Pumbaa seem happy for Simba after he returns to Pride Rock so it is hard to say whether this is true or not.
Boerhave 7
When one analyzes The Lion King using new lenses and points of view, one sees and understands things they may not have noticed before. This was completely new for me and many others. On slide 12 it refers to the genetic lottery. Mufasa, by far, has the genetic lottery. He has the looks and the strong build as well as a pretty good head on his shoulders. Scar is almost the complete opposite. Scar looks wimpy and weak but he does have the brains. I find it interesting that while watching The Lion King over break, Scar even mentions to Mufasa that Mufasa has the looks and Scar himself has the brains. In slide 13, Scar has won the environmental lottery by being born into the “monarchy” but looses the environmental lottery by not having the power of being king. On slide 19, I was intrigued by the last bullet point, “The Message: Brawn over brain gets you power, money, respect.” I wonder if this is proof on why society obsesses over handsome celebrities and not famous scientists. On slide 24, I would have to agree that The Lion King trains Americans to be anti-feminine. It uses Nala to prove a point that women may never be in charge or that it would be wrong for women to be in charge or rule. Even though Nala should be king because she is smarter than Simba, It is impossible because a man must always rule the Pride lands. While viewing slide 39, I was reminded to use my Freudian lenses when thinking back into the movie when Simba fills his Freudian urge while living with Timon and Pumbaa( I recently found out Pumbaa has two a’s not one). Simba shows clearly that he is giving in to his id. He is in paradise eating, swimming, being lazy, and doing whatever he wants. Simba lacked responsibility for such a long time that when he was actually needed and had to do work, he had no idea how to think or what to do. The prezi was very helpful to me and my thinking process and will keep me thinking with my Marxist, Freudian, and Feminist lenses.
Poppenga 1
When our professor, Mr. Christensen, told us that there were many hidden symbols and references throughout the classic Disney movie The Lion King, I was baffled. All I could think about was “Why the producers would put these uncanny symbols in a CHILDREN’S movie?” It completely bewildered me. But like our professor said: keep an open mind when it comes to literacy; so I did and I found myself at a loss of words watching the film and going through the prezi. On slide 9 talking about the Marxist Theory, I believe social classes are presented in the film. Since there is no currency/property to measure wealth, the movie is based on power. is The food chain raging from those highest in the ladder to the “bottom feeders”. What I noticed from this is that social class is ascribed: you are born into a specific class and membership into that class is lifelong. Another important view from the Marxist Theory is the conflict theory. According to Karl Marx and the conflict theory, the working class will rebel against the dominant group some time or another. In the Lion King, Scar convinced the hyenas to join him in his quest for power by promising them higher social status when he is king. On slide 12 and 13 in reference to the Genetic and Environmental Lottery, I thought it was interesting that the higher social class received worthy genes such as intelligence, good looks, and power; whereas Scar, his followers, and the hyenas all appear rather dirty and completely opposite of those on Pride Rock. I feel like this can also relate to social class. Most of the time, the higher classes have big houses (Pride Rock), influence, power, good looks, and are very fortunate. I feel like Scar has somewhat won in the Environmental Lottery due to his influence on his followers but he also lost the Genetic Lottery due to his scar running down his face and his green, envious eyes. Answering the question on slide 15, Mufasa has won both: built robust, luscious, thick hair, strong jaw, supportive family, and dedicated followers. On slide 39 it is talking about the Freudian Theory. In class we were talking about how Simba possesses an Oedipal Complex presented in the song “I just can’t wait to be King”. Simba, subconsciously, wishes for his father to die. In order for Simba to finally be king of Pride Rock and all other surroundings, his father has to die… I feel like this song is somewhat foreshadows when Simba accidentally kills his father with Scars’ help. In reference to slide 51, talking through a Feminist lens, I feel like should receive throne after Mufasa. She is clearly stronger, and shows more responsibility where Simba does not. Simba is heir to the throne because his father is king; he doesn’t have to work for anything and is indolently privileged. Although some of the symbols can be a little far-fetched, I find everything very intriguing and I cannot wait to learn more!
Backer 2
As a young child, I remember watching the classic Disney film: The Lion King. I only really took interest in the animals and the catchy songs incorporated with it. Disney characters, to me, were part of a whole separate world that was much more enchanting than my own. Now, as the hidden storyline of The Lion King is revealed, I’m realizing that many of these characters were actually depicted after us. In class, we discussed the three critical lenses: Marxist, Feminist, and Freudian. Although all three can apply, I feel as if the Marxist lens is able to describe the Disney film best. Under these lenses, you will notice that charisma overpowers brains in the Pride Rock kingdom. Scar is clearly smarter than Mufasa, but his intelligence proves meaningless next to Mufasa’s strength and good looks (slide 19). The animals ADORE Mufasa. He displays charisma and confidence-traits that Scar could only dream of obtaining. From when he first appears in the film, we are indirectly instructed to not like Scar. He portrays feminine qualities to draw us to the conclusion that he is homosexual and he has a defined British accent. The accent draws an issue because the British are displayed as inferior to America’s superiority. They are seen as weak and sad compared to our strength and power (slide 27). Scar is not the only character automatically degraded in the film, however. The hyenas are also created to be dislikable characters. For example, one has the voice of a black woman, one of a Mexican, and another is depicted as crazy. The hyenas initially have done nothing wrong; they were just born into a lower social class. If the three had perhaps been born as lions, they may have gained more respect from the other animals. The idea can also be seen as a parallel to reality. Degraded populations such as women, gays, and Hispanics often find themselves being judged the same way as the hyenas. These individuals may be very capable leaders but can often be underestimated due to their sex, race, or sexuality (slide 29). Falling under one of these categories, I find myself especially drawn to the character Nala. She proves in the movie that she outweighs Simba in strength, intelligence, and abilities (slide 54). Knowing you are clearly the more capable ruler, I cannot imagine how frustrating it would be to be Nala. She had to carry out responsibilities, such as hunting for the tribe, while Simba was able to do as he pleased. Simba, who was destined to become king from birth, never showed any sign of realization of just how privileged he was. In slide 58, it is also pointed out that the name Nala essentially means “gift”. Looking at the name in this way, Nala is seen as a possession or object instead of a contributing member of the tribe. The idea only makes me sympathize with Nala more. Although I think society has grown since women were seen as inferior to men, I realize sexism still exists. This issue, along with others, is clearly displayed throughout The Lion King. Although I found myself bothered by some of the statements portrayed in the film, I could not help but become intrigued with the process of analyzing it. I will, without doubt, analyze more things in the same way!
Arrowsmith 5
After viewing this prezi one thing is certain, I will never show The Lion King to my children. Though it was one of my childhood favorites, I am now aware of the horrible message it sends to kids including racism and sexism. When analyzing The Lion King I particularly found it interesting looking at it through the Marxist lens as described on slide 10. I found myself asking what did the hyenas do to deserve their step on the social ladder in the kingdom? I then realized the obvious answer—nothing. Just as blacks, hispanics, and the mentally insane did nothing to deserve their step on the social ladder in our society. As described on slide 13, they simply lost the environmental lottery. They lost the environmental lottery as to where they were born (elephant graveyard) and what they were born (hyenas). In the film they are clearly depicted as the lower social classes in our society. Shenzi, the hyena with the voice of Whoopi Goldberg, clearly portrays black people, black voice, big lips etc. While Banzai, the hyena with the voice of Cheech Marin, clearly portrays the Hispanic community as he is constantly asking for meat from the slightly more powerful Scar, while Ed, the “insane” hyena, clearly shows the mentally insane with the foaming mouth and googly eyes. Continuing off of slide 29, when the hyenas do attain power they drive the land and kingdom straight into the ground because they do not know how to run it. They simply eat, eat, and eat some more because their whole life they have starved and now they have food, so what else would they do besides eat all they can? I wonder if this hints that if blacks, hispanics, and other lower class minorities came to power and became the majority over white people, would they have the same effect on the country as the hyenas did on the Kingdom? Many would argue that would not be the case as we have a black president now, though the majority of government is white. On slide 36 it states the film is pro-religion and that Simba has been chosen by someone/something—possibly God—to be king. Thus raises the question that the film is pro-divine right, the theory that states kings are chosen by God at birth to rule. Whatever the case may be, I am still certain that I will not allow my children to be interpellated (slide 25).
Waldera 5
It had been years since I had watched The Lion King. When assigned to, I dug though all my old VHS tapes, which are mostly Disney movies, to find it. I have so many tapes it actually took me quite awhile to find The Lion King. As I shuffled through all these movies I watched countless times growing up it brought back so many memories. When I finally did find The Lion King and put it into the VCR I thought to myself that I would remember the movie perfectly. I mean I had watched it a ridiculous amount of times as a child. As I watched the movie, however, I was actually extremely surprised how much I had forgotten in the film. I did not simply watch the movie; I analyzed it. As slide 48 states, I did feel bad for Scar while I watched the movie. He had simply been unlucky and born the way he was; he had no choice. I also noticed that Nala was much stronger and deserved to be ruler much more than Simba, as noted on slide 54. Slide 58 shocked me greatly! It says that Nala could have whipped Scar and become King a long time ago! This blew my mind! What a hole in the plot! I had never noticed that before but it makes perfectly logical sense. Slide 63 also brings up a good point. It says why should all the animals praise a new predator? I noticed this myself watching the movie again; it baffles me. However, it is just a children’s movie but still an interesting concept nonetheless. Slide 22 also brings up a good point about the ethnicity of the hyenas. I remember Mr. C touching on the subject in class so I went into the movie already aware of this. It made me wonder if the director did this on purpose or if it just worked out that they were the best voices to fit the part. Or perhaps the director subconsciously thought they were the best for the part because of their ethnicity which would make more sense. After all, The Lion King is a children’s movie once again. However, it just it brings up the thought that there might be some racism in all of us whether we would like to think so or not. I would like to believe I am not a racist but I know for a fact I do not think of all races the same, however, I do not show that in the least bit. I strongly believe all men (and women) were created equal. Whether or not that makes me a racist or anyone a racist is simply opinionated. Analyzing movies, plays, books, art, any form of work makes you think in ways you normally never would. By doing so, you are expanding your mind as well as your world view.
Bakke 7
While researching The Lion King, meanings to subtle elements within this childhood favorite surfaced and changed my interpretation of this Disney classic. Through a feminist’s point of view, described on Slide 54, Nala deserves to be the king/queen of Pride Rock. She is an all around better lion than Simba in intelligence, physical ability, and she appears to care more about the pride than Simba does. Contrary to his “I Just Can’t Wait to be King” song, after meeting Timone and Pumbaa, Simba now has other priorities to attend to, but even after this, as an audience, Nala is left out of the picture so as not to overshadow Simba as his manliness. Nala has it all, just not enough testosterone. From a Freudian vantage—Slide 40—the “I Just Can’t Wait to be King” song my appear to conceal an Oedipal Complex within and want his father dead, but Simba has been raised to know that he is going to be king. He has no reason to kill his father because his power is secure. This would actually make his power less secure because an older lion (i.e. Scar) could come in and kill Simba and take over the Pride Rock more easily if Mufasa was dead and Simba was king. On a more agreeing note, Simba does succumb to his id when he meets Timone and Pumbaa, and becomes a self-pleasure seeking narcissist Slide 45. I cannot agree on the fact that Pride Rock is a phallic symbol solely on the fact that there are truly rocks that look like that in nature. Through the eyes of a Marxist, detailed on Slide 11, of course the natural resources of the land are currency. The only way to have power is to be strong and fit. And the only way to do that is to be fed. Scar, though physically weak and seemingly poor, is smart and charismatic. His problem is that he was not born as one of the aristocrats so he must achieve his goals more deviously. Mufasa has apparently won all of the lotteries, plus his father was probably a king before him. This makes me question how he can be equated to Brock Lesnar—Slide 19. He cares for Simba, his heir and is never portrayed as stupid. The Lion King is a movie that undoubtedly shaped the mindsets of our youth with restrained tones of class order, racism, sexism, religion, and inborn rights.
Svartoien Period 7
One thing that irritates me is that The Lion King implies that brawns over brains deserves power. (slide 19) What a terrible thing to instill in children! This reminds me of propaganda commercials and posters that we study in world history. I remember thinking "How do those citizens not know what is happening? They are being brainwashed and they don't even know it, or care." Now, as I analyze this child film, I am dumbfounded. How is this any different than communism propaganda? Like many others, The Lion King was one of my all time favorite childhood movies, next to Aladdin, of course. When I first discovered we would be analyzing the movie, I was agitated; I did not want to disturb this comforting aspect of my early youth. At the same time, I was excited for an excuse to dig out the old VHS and press play. After watching the Prezi, I was pleasantly surprised. The knowledge did not taint the movie for me; instead, it enhanced it. The main lense that fascinates me the most is the Marxist Critical Lens.(slide 10) The Prezi lists many questions regarding money, power and status, and how they relate to the exhibit. (Slide 9) The money aspect of the Lion King Marx Lens, such as food, water, shelter, doesn't interest me all that much. (slide 11) The concept of royalty receiving the wealth is no new idea. No one should have been surprised at the overturn of Scar, the communist leader, after years of starvation and poverty. History shows us this time in and time out—so much so that the topic is hackneyed. The French Revolution (a personal favorite topic) overthrew the King Louis the 14th after he overlooked the starving needs of his country, while aiding America in her revolution. I digress. What fascinates me most about the Marx lens is the analysis of power and behavior. In Lord of the Flies, behavior change through power is blind-staking clear. However, in the Lion King, I had to look beyond the obvious leadership behaviors. In my opinion, the only characters that maintained a static position are Timon and Pumba. While they don't directly receive power, they do move up in class. No matter where they are in the movie, they stay carefree and happy. Hakuna Mattata. (slide 45) While I was unhappy at first to taint my childhood memory of The Lion King, I realize I am now more enlightened than the seven year old Cylie.
Petersen 7
When Analyzing the Lion King I believe there is a strong sense of Marxism. The pride strives for a food, water, and shelter as it mentions on slide 11. If you control the "money" , you control everything else. In the Lion King, if you can provide these essentials you are the leader and in power. You also have to analyze where the lions in this case came from. What is there number in the genetic and environmental lotteries? Scar loses both of these. He is second born therefore not the leader or king. He also is born weaker than Mufasa; he is portrayed in the movie with feministic movements. Simba and Mufasa win both these lotteries. They are the first born and king or in line to be king. They are strong and natural leaders. They also live at pride rock which supplies them the "money" that keeps them leaders. Scar lives in a cave and does not have the supply the others have. I also agree strongly with slide 19. I believe this movie is strongly based on the fact that brawn wins over brains. Simba does win at the end because he fights Scar and wins. Even though Scar is smarter the others prevail because of strength. There is a definite distinction of different classes also. White people are considered better than everyone else. Just as it states on slide 21 a black woman, Hispanic, and crazy voices are used instead of just some white actor's normal voice. These hyenas are stupid and followers and have no strength. They cannot fend for themselves either. Scar does the hunting for them and they eat his scraps. He is still above them in the class system. I also agree with Hanzel. The picture on slide 18 provides a perfect visual image of these class divisions. Mufasa and Simba seem happy and content while Scar and the hyenas look annoyed or smug.
Albertson 5
I have already written a blog response where I attempted to explain why the analytical skills that we learned in Composition make my interactions with media so much more enjoyable. In that blog response I wrote that our observations of WALL-E opened new perspectives to me and made me want to re-watch every film and re-read every book using critical techniques. Learning about a just few lenses has had an identical effect on me. A great storyline at the least, the Lion King becomes a rewarding experience that one can immerse themselves in when they simply look through a lens. On slide 36 it is stated that the Sun is God and the giver of life. Before viewing the prezi I watched the scene where Mufasa and Simba sit on pride rock and I concluded that because the lions believe they rule over “everything the light touches”, they believe in the divine right theory: God has chosen them and their decisions are God’s will. Slide 37 suggests that the sun does not shine on the hyenas because God does not bless the poor. However, I came to think that Scar is an atheist; he is accompanied by the moon and feels no regret for his sins. Because we are supposed to dislike Scar, this continues the latent pro-religion goal of the Lion King. Thinking about the moon as a symbol of atheism, I recall the scene of Timon, Pumbaa, and Simba striding in front of a full moon. The explanation that comes to mind for me is that they are hedonists that live in a blissful ignorance of God. To switch gears and add to slide 18, (insiders=good, outsiders=bad) my Marxist research in preparation of the forum taught me that the system is good for the insiders because the insiders are good for the system, and vice versa for the outsiders. The hyenas are not good for the system because they would compete with the lions for the same food, as stated in slide 47. To answer slides 14 and 15, Scar and Mufasa both won parts of the genetic lottery, but Mufasa won the environmental lottery too. I wish that students could be introduced to literary theory and lenses earlier so that we could spend less time being interpellated and more time enjoying untangling the mysteries that surround us.
N. Peterson 2
When I was a child I watched The Lion King all the time; it was one of my favorite movies! I never realized that a Disney movie could have so many symbols or could be looked at through different lenses. The Prezi opened my eyes to so many things I never would have thought of on my own. I felt the easiest lens to understand and analyze was the Marxist lens on slide 10. The desire for power is the main theme in the movie. At the beginning Mufassa was king, and Simba was in line to receive it, and Scar was willing to do anything to be in control. The genetic lottery and environmental lottery slides (slides 13 & 14) really interested me. I know that Mufassa won both but I don’t know if scar really won either. In my opinion he didn’t; he has the intelligence even though he doesn’t use it in good ways. Another main theme looked at through the Marxist lens is insiders are good and outsiders are bad (Slide 18). The hyenas were looked down on simply because of their status in society. Looking through a Freudian lens I found it interesting that Simba might have subconsciously, or even consciously, wished for his father to die so he could become king (Slide 40). Before thinking about the The Lion King through this lens, I never would have thought of, or agreed with that statement because of the sympathy I felt for Simba when Scar killed Mufassa. I also found it interesting to analyze this film through the Feminist lens (Slide 54). Nala deserves to be named to the thrown. She was stronger, smarter, shows more self-discipline and responsibility. Simba was privileged simply because he was a boy. I have a completely different view of The Lion King after studying the Prezi and it opened my eyes to the three different literary criticism lenses.
Miller 5
Overall, I was extremely intrigued by the prezi. It gave me a new way to look at not only Lion King, but any movie or book I come across. In class, I am currently on the Marxist side, so I tried to really focus on that and how to analyze “exhibits” in that way. The first slide that attracted my attention was slide ten. This slide had questions Marxists’ ask while analyzing. What particularly interests me about the Marxist lens is that it looks solely at lotteries and socioeconomic divisions. The question of who won/lost which lotteries between Mufasa and Scar was posed in slides fourteen and fifteen. I believe that Mufasa won the environmental lottery, and both won and lost the genetic lottery. By this I mean that he won the brawn but lost the brain. The opposite of this is Scar who won the brains, but lost the brawns. Scar also loses the environmental lottery because Mufasa is his brother. Since Mufasa is king he receives everything that Scar deserves. I believe Scar would be a better leader for the lions but he is rejected because of his lack of strength. Also, I never realized how pro religion, and anti-different this movie was (slides 24 and 28). They have an African hyena, a Hispanic hyena, and a mentally ill hyena. These along with a feminine lion are the unequivocal outsiders because of their differences or “faults”.
Viewing Lion King through the Freudian lens presented to me, I found that Freud could link everything to our id, superego, and ego. Taking pride rock as an example on slide forty, the rock is obviously a phallic symbol, which represents our id. Also on that slide we see that Simbas’ Oedipal complex is at work when he says that he cannot wait to be king, but for that to happen, his father has to die. Subconsciously, I think that Simba wants his father to die so that he can rule.
Finally, with the Feminist lens, the most prominent thing is gender roles. I t is undeniable that Nala should rule the pride, because she is smarter and stronger than Simba. Also, if the roles of women were not against her she most likely could have beaten Scar and never needed to come looking for Simba; consequently leaving him in his lazy man paradise. The fact that her name means gift was shocking to me. I despise when men treat women like prizes and objects, and for that to be in a Disney movie is concerning. I look forward to more discussion and analysis to occur in class.
Clemenson 2
While viewing The Lion King as a child, I never noticed all of the symbols in the movie. I did not realize how pro religion, anti-outsiders, and sexist the movie was until we started discussing in class and I studied the prezi. I do believe that movie teaches children to worship because in the beginning of the movie, Rafiki acts like a pastor when he baptizes Simba in the first scene. I think Disney should be allowed to support religion because I believe that humans naturally worship something such as a god, idol, or money. The hyenas are voiced by stereotyped races but viewers dislike the hyenas because they selfishly want Scar to reward them for calling Simba. I do not believe that the different races of the voices affect the feelings of the viewer. The accent in Scar’s voice affects the feelings of the viewer because the voice of the English actor subconsciously causes him to be perceived as an outsider and accepted less. The fact that people say that Obama “sounds white” is ridiculous. Skin color does not affect the sound of a person’s voice. The movie discourages children from acting differently because outsiders get shunned by society. Nala should be the Queen instead of Simba because she did not run away and she happens to be smarter than Simba. Male lions sleep most of the day while female lions hunt, therefore Nala is a better fighter because she pins Simba when they wrestle. Nala is physical superior to Simbra but she is deprived of the power because society and gender roles limit her. I agree with the Marxist theory that the lions won the environmental lottery by living at Pride Rock. I believe that Pride Rock represents power but I do not interpret it as a phallic symbol. This movie teaches children to worship a god, to try to fit in with society, and to believe males are superior to females.
Etrheim 5
Referring to slide 28 with a picture of the hyenas, you are told that the hyenas have the voice of a black woman, a Mexican man, and a “crazy” guy. Slide 34 of the prezi tells us that James Earl Jones, a black man, is the voice of Simba’s dad, Mufasa. Because of this, I do not understand how this movie can be displayed as anti-black or anti-Mexican. Mufasa is the king of all of the lions and is in charge of everything in the Pride Lands. How could one of the most powerful and influential characters in the movie have the voice of a black man when the movie is anti-black? This is the reason why I disagree with the statement that The Lion King is anti-black. Slide 31 with the hyenas marching like Nazis mentions the crescent shape moon. In this scene, the camera zooms in on Scar with the moon in the background making the picture look like a hammer and sickle, a communist symbol. Even children are able to realize that Scar is an evil figure in the movie. Disney brilliantly sneaked in a communist image connecting it to Scar brainwashing children at a very young age that communism is bad. Another slide (slide 58) in which I disagree with is of the feminist lens saying that Nala should be king instead of Simba. I’m not disagreeing with this statement; however, I am disagreeing with the reasoning for it. The statement that Nala is physically stronger than Simba is false. At the beginning of the movie when Simba and Nala go to the elephant graveyard, they are chased up a pile of elephant bones by the hyenas. Simba was able to climb up the pile of bones without trouble. Nala was the one who was struggling and stumbled down the pile towards the hyenas. Simba heroically came to her rescue saving her from the vicious hyenas. Nala was able to pin Simba multiple times, but in a time of true danger, Simba is by far the stronger of the two. Slide 14 asked “what lottery did Scar win?” Genetic or environmental? Scar won the environmental lottery; he was born into the top of the food chain by being a lion. Scar also is family of royalty as his brother was the king. He did not win the genetic lottery like Mufasa and Simba. Scar is not physically attractive nor has the brute strength that Mufasa had. In fact, Scar looks significantly different from the other lions having orange and black fur. Slide 15 asked “which lottery did Mufasa lose?” In my opinion, he did not lose either. Like I said before, he is good-looking and has brute strength which covers the genetic lottery. Mufasa also was born in the same place as Scar but he was born at an even higher position and became king.
Andersen
Period 2
Mufasa won a majority of the genetic lottery and he won the environmental lottery. He is good looking, muscular, strong, has a full main, and is beautiful in color. He inherited a healthy kingdom, he lives on pride rock, he has many good looking lionesses, and has a family. It is clear he won the majority; however, Scar received the brains and intelligence. Scar is clever and is influential on Simba. He tricks Simba into going to the elephant grave yard disobeying his father’s orders and nearly has his father killed. Later, Scar tricks Simba into staying by a tree where a herd would be coming, set off by Scar and his hyenas. It is shown very clearly that the message sent of brawn over brains gets you power, money, and respect. Until pointed out, I had never realized what each hyena represented. After being told, their appearances and character make sense. Banzai, the Hispanic man, has bushy eye brows unlike the other two who have none, and his eyes are slightly slanted. Shanzi, the black women, has an obnoxious laugh, black dreads as her hair, and has slightly larger nostrils then the others. Ed looks distorted, his eyes far apart and confused looks are always on his face, representing a crazy man. I thing Timon and Pumbaa were welcomed into the pride because they helped Simba survive and grow up after he left the kingdom, and therefore they have meaning to Simba and to Simba’s family. The hyenas were not welcomed because they are hyenas and society does not want them to be welcomed. They are outsiders and outsiders and bad. Scar cannot live up to Mufasa, and therefore we feel sympathy towards him, until he crosses the line. After he kills Mufasa and proceeds to blame and convinces Simba that all of this was his fault, the sympathy ends. It is also very evident that Nala should rule the kingdom and become king. She is smarter than all the others, and is physically stronger. She pins Mufasa and could easily outsmart Scar. Due to society and her gender, she is prevented from taking over. The prey is thrilled to have another predator born because they are brainwashed to be happy for their king. A new cub also represents security. Someone who will rule the kingdom after Mufasa passes away and will follow in those same footsteps.
Heisel 2
Upon viewing the presentation, I was pleased to find out that many of my theories I previously made are shared by experts. As an in-class Freudian critic, I was pleased to see that id and superego are important in the film. In the beginning, Zazu establishes himself as the superego. He is rational and follows social protocol. Later samba is introduced to Timone, a mircat, and Pumbaa, a warthog. These characters promote his id, and help him leave behind his superego when he left the lion tribe. Simba also basically says he wants to kill his father, showing an Oedipus complex. Scar’s green eyes are greed and his feminine side makes him seem weaker and possible homo-sexual. Also, pride rock is a phallic symbol and represents male domination (but not feminine males like Scar).
Male domination is also a main point in the Feminist lens. Feminists believe that Nala should be King due to her superior strength, wit, and hunting ability. Simba is weak and emotionally unstable. He is not acclimated to the lion environment, but somehow he is still the only candidate for king. This shows that the lionesses are considered lower-class than the male lions. Similar to lionesses, Scar is treated badly because he isn’t “manly” like his brother Mufasa is.
Classes are also clearly displayed in the social “food chain” of the region. Marxists believe that the hyenas are lower-class citizens due to their voices being played by “non-whites.” One hyena is Mexican, one is Black, and one displays signs of mental illness. (Maybe not small of signs either, he’s full crazy.) Scar is also lower because he is at least a heavy metro, if not homo-sexual. Scar becomes a Hitler figure when he assembles the hyenas to take over the kingdom. The lack of food and terrible conditions after he takes over shows that communism doesn’t work and capitalism does!
Redford 7
As a child, nearly everyone saw The Lion King. This movie was one of my brothers and my own favorite movies. However, being so little, we never truly looked deeply into it. As I watched the movie again and looked through the prezi, I analyzed this movie in a way that I had never done before, which has given me a better understanding of it. In slide 10 of the prezi, it shows some questions to ask while examining things from a Marxist point of view. We see some of these points applied to the movie in slide 19. As I read through those examples, I was able to look at the movie in a new light. At one point during the movie, Scar even says that when it comes to brute strength, he was born at the shallow end of the gene pool. He knows that he is below Mufasa, not because he is less intelligent, but because he isn’t as strong as him. Despite this, he really wishes to climb the social ladder and become the king. He doesn’t care what it takes; he just wants power. Slide 22 also has some interesting points on the Marxist point of view. For instance, while watching the movie, it really is clear that the hyenas are far beneath the lions on the social ladder. However, as I watched the movie as a child, I failed to make the realization that the people that voiced the lions were people that just by being born a certain way or a certain race were considered “beneath” white people in society. Another way to look deeper into this movie can be seen while looking at it from the Freudian point of view. Slide 40 has quite a few very important examples of how the Freudian point of view can be applied. One particular example that caught my attention was the point about Simba’s song. I find it interesting that while he sang that he didn’t allude to how he would become king. He just sang about what he wanted to do when he became king. I also did like the struggle between Simba’s superego and id. When he left and lived with Timon and Pumbaa, he was clearly satisfying his id; however, when Nala came, Simba was forced to pay more attention to what needed to be done. On slide 54, things take a turn towards the feminist side. I think the fact that they made Nala so powerful and strong was an interesting move. Yet, since she was female, she couldn’t really stand up to Scar in the way that Simba could. I also found it interesting that because she was female, Nala was acting as more of the superego when she was trying to convince Simba to come and fight back. This makes it seem like girls are supposedly more concerned about the greater good, rather than just satisfying selfish desires. I also find it interesting that the lionesses were in charge of hunting, which shows that they are considered strong and powerful, yet they wouldn’t over throw Scar. Overall, this prezi made me examine The Lion King in a way that I had never even considered doing as a child watching this movie.
Pederson 5
When I was a young child, I fell in love with the pretty animations Disney displayed, and I horded a collection of their movies. Little did I know that I’d be indoctrinated the first day I watched them with Disney’s use of subliminal messages. Now that I have been given the tools to use Marxist, Feminist, and Freudian lenses in everything I read or watch, my mind surges with the hidden meanings of every situation.
Slide 14 discusses the genetic and environmental lottery that Scar receives. My opinion is that Scar is pretty much allowed to do what he wants. Although he has a less appealing mane, he is allowed to roam about the kingdom with the privilege of being the king’s brother. The only thing he lacks is the throne, which causes hatred to manifest within him. On slide 19, I disagree that Scar deserves to be king. Although he may be intelligent in the way he goes about murdering his own brother and sending Simba off to hopefully die, he is not intelligent in how to run the kingdom. When Mufasa reigned, the land was teeming with life, but Scar’s enthronement makes the land bare and gray. Scar is not smart enough to protect himself and his people, and was only concerned with claiming the title of King. The idea of survival of the fittest is reinforced with Mufasa being on the throne. Mufasa’s traits encompassed being kind, just, and smart while being powerful. These genes would be hopefully passed on to other He understood the interrelation of every species, how every animal is involved in the “circle of life”. Also, Mufasa’s instincts allow him to save Simba multiple times, and keep the hyenas in the elephant graveyard.
On slide 22, I also found it interesting that the exiled hyenas are voiced by minorities or expressed as mentally ill. This relates to our own society, where a higher percentage of minorities populate our prisons than whites. Also the hyena with a mental illness may correlate with President Reagan “reforming” the mental health system. To save money, the government planned to release the mentally ill from institutions but had Community Mental Health Centers for them to get their daily pills. The financial drain of the Vietnam War in the 1960s and the financial crisis of the 1970s left these people homeless and without anyone to treat them.
With reference to slide 36, I agree that the movie has slight spiritual undertones throughout. At the start of the movie, Rafiki, the shaman, baptizes Simba with juice and dust to trace a cross on his forehead. The baptism appears to show that Simba has the approval of the gods; the previously cloudy day turns into rays of sunlight directly on Simba’s presentation. Also, water in religious ceremonies typically symbolizes redemption and revival. When Rafiki meets Simba as an adult, Rafiki takes him to a pond to help solve Simba’s existential dilemma. Also, in the final scenes, the fire during the fight between Simba and Scar takes on the tones of hell. However, after Simba wins the battle, rain revives the land and the community. As stated in slide 58, the lionesses are superior hunters, as in real life. However, while Simba lazes around eating grubs, Nala is forced to adapt to survive, honing her physical skills to hunt anything she can find. Our society, as reflected in this movie, stresses a male dominant role. However, Disney makes the lionesses more balanced with the males in that Nala becomes a strong, capable partner to Simba.
Anderson 2
As a skeptic of literature and its intentions, I was not too anxious to begin Literature class. Through the first couple days though, I have found literary theory and critique more interesting and relatable using new critical lenses. As one of the most anti-communist members of society I presumably have taken much interest in the Marxist lens. I find it the most interesting and the easiest to relate to since I have profound understanding of its roots and its obvious unsuccessfulness in past history. Slide 12 and 19 reference the lotteries and winners within the Lion King. After recently watching the movie once more, I concur with the understanding that Scar is treated badly but I don’t agree with the idea that he is more superior than Mufasa. I believe my friend Brendan Gallo references this point in a very precise manner and I happen to agree with his contradiction to the prezzi. The most interesting slide to me as a Marxist critic is number 22 and 29. I have a hard time understanding the stance of the symbolism involved with the hyenas. I’m not totally bought into this idea that African Americans, Hispanics and crazies are secluded from the prosperous ‘white society’. I think that white people have dominated society well because they worked for it and earned their cozy positions within society. It’s easy to point blame at the white man but perhaps the lack of penetration into society by these so called minority groups is better explained by their inability to conform or properly dedicate themselves to successfulness. It sounds so racist but I believe that the white man has earned his way into their position in society and they are not forcefully barricading the entrance to a prosperous world. I am also going to have to disagree with slide 23 as well. As a huge critic of Obama, I find it very difficult to believe that anybody would relate skin color to intelligence. Barack Obama is undoubtedly a very intelligent man in some facets of his life (he’s probably the worst president ever). I don’t think Obama’s blackness and his dialect make him sound dumb at all; I think it’s just another example of liberals trying to point out racism in American culture by rich conservatives.
Stephens 1
While The Lion King can be viewed from all three lenses, I believe Marxist is the most prevalent. There is obviously a class system and control. Though I can see many aspects of the other two lenses as well, such as Nala and feminism, and Simba’s Oedipus complex and Freudian. I don’t believe I will ever be able to watch a movie without analyzing again. Which is not actually a bad thing. I have come to realize that knowing the actual meaning of books and movies teaches you more which is much more beneficial than entertainment and the story. There is much knowledge to learn from analytical lenses. In reference to your prezi, many things interested me. First, is the word interpellate. I don’t believe anyone really thinks freely, independently, or for themselves. The Bible says that God gave us free will, which is true, but society has most definitely taken it away from us. No one actually has free will. We all just like to believe we are individuals and unique. I also was intrigued by the video when Rafiki “baptizes” Simba. The symbolism of who Rafiki is to the story is so blatantly obvious. I am surprised and a little ashamed that I haven’t noticed that before. Lastly I want to comment on the slide talking about sounding black or sounding white, because I have used those descriptions before and I was slightly taken aback by being labeled a bigot. There is an obvious difference between the way some African American people speak. There is no denying that. In my mind, it is more or less just an accent. I would say someone sounds southern. What is the difference? Also, speaking with that sort of accent has become cool and sought after with my peers. So in reality, high school students in particular look up to and aspire to speak in that manner.
Guthmiller Pd. 2
It scares me to think that at such a young age I was already being interpellated to be capitalist by The Lion King (Slide 26). What other sub-conscious messages have I been subject to during the first eighteen years of my life? Capitalism is not the problem I have; the problem is that I was a slave to a system before I had a chance to know there was a system. I tried to look at The Lion King through a Marxist lens because it examined the role of money and power. Our world displays its money with style and swagger. We buy expensive clothes, cars, and houses with the sole purpose to show off our wealth. In the Lion King, money is measured mainly by food, water, and shelter—needed and noble compared to us (Slide 10). The movie promotes capitalism, but I don’t think it necessarily promotes democracy (contrary to your Pro-Democracy remark in Slide 24) or the idea of the American Dream—a belief/illusion that can encourage people of lower class to participate in our world with a hope of better times. A true American movie would show us a story of an individual that started from the bottom and rose to the top, because of his character and effort. Instead we are given a young heir, Simba, whose only attribute is that he has won the environmental lottery (Slide 12). He is the heir to the throne of Pride Rock, but he is the heir undeservingly. Nala, a young lioness, can be argued to be a better fit for the throne (most character would be better than Simba) based on her athleticism, drive, and intelligence. Simba and Nala have both won the genetic lottery in this world by simply being lions (Slide 11). The Lion King teaches us many lessons our society insists on teaching, but those lesson are not always right.
Minihan 5
The Marxist Critical Theory/Approach/Lens slide (10) enticed me to think deeper about the Lion King character, Scar. On this slide, I realized how power and status are both main focuses of all of the main characters in the lion king. Even as a young cub, Simba says over and over how he cannot wait to be king! Scar, even being related, will do any malevolent act to gain the kingdom, as we find out later in the movie. This shows how Scar is trying to climb the social ladder. (12) The Genetic Lottery slide points helped me to realize how looks and appearances can subconsciously teach readers or viewers to dislike a character. A good example of this would be Scar. Unlike Mufasa, he has a dark brown, almost black, mane. His eyes and his dark voice instantly create a disliking towards him. (15) I believe Mufasa won the genetic lottery and the environmental lottery. He has a smooth, deep baritone of a voice, which is easy to listen to. Mufasa also has a dapper color scheme; the light brown and light chocolate brown mane add to this effect. Mufasa won the environmental lottery by inheriting the throne, the Pride land. Beings only one king can rule a kingdom, Mufasa was chosen over Scar. (18) On the “Deconstruction: notice binary oppositions” slide, the good guys and the bad guys are being portrayed. Although the good side has lush, green grass and the bad has dried up dirt, I noticed how there was still a little green grass on the bad side. I think this small patch of grass is symbolizing how everyone has a little bit of good in them. Although the outsiders don’t like the insiders, they still show love and likeness for one another; I think that stands for something. (37) On slide 37, the question “Does God not like/bless the poor?” is asked. I believe God blesses everyone. He gave humans free will because He loved us, and still does. People end up losing genetic or environment lotteries because either they or someone down the line made a decision, and that has impacted everyone along the way. God only wants his children to be happy and free; therefore He sends blessings and miracles every day, we just need to be open and see them.
Coyle 2 Part 1
The Lion King has been one of my favorite classic Disney cartoons ever since I was a young girl. I would watch the movie so often that I could speak the lines along with the characters. However, I didn't realize at the time how impactful this movie was on my perception of society. The Lion King is a major proponent of the views that white males are superior to all else. I recall play-acting the Lion King with a few of my younger sisters and I chose to be Simba. With any of our other similar endeavors, I would find myself choosing the main male character, favoring him over any of the female characters. I believe this to be an outcome of being unknowingly brainwashed by the media around me at the time. The positive light in which white males were viewed made it seem only right to want to be as much like a white male as I could, even if I didn't consciously know that I was doing this. Slide 25 of the Lion King Prezi labels this sort of behavior as interpellation. At about age 12 I watched the movie again, and I noticed that the hyenas were all different from the lions in the respect that they were a black woman, a Hispanic man, and a mentally ill man. The Lion King prezi just re-emphasizes that they are in fact different, even so far as to be considered outcasts. On slide 30 of the prezi, it is clearly shown that all of the groups associated with the hyena are basically groups that are shunned in the modern white society of America. They are disrupting or cannot fit in the American “Circle of Life”. The hyenas are represented as being lesser or inferior to the strong, masculine, male lions. The only lion to actually attempt to integrate the hyenas into the society where they should be accepted is Scar. Scar, personally, is one of the most interesting characters in the entire exhibit. He is portrayed as feminine, and weak, yet intelligent. He is also the only character in the film not to have an African name. Here’s an interesting side-note in regard to Scar’s name. A few years ago I owned a collection of Lion King short novels, one of which was a story about Mufasa and Scar while they were children. In the beginning of the story, Scar is actually called by an African name, Taka, which is Swahili for dirt, trash, or want. He was given the nickname Scar after aggravating a water buffalo and receiving a nasty blow to the eye, leaving the scar we recognize today.
Rasmussen 5
After watching the Lion King with more insight into the different lenses that it uses, I have come to realize that the Marxist Lense is the one that I can see the most portrayed in this film. Slide ten talks about thelotteries and how Simba has won both the genetic and environmental. One important character that we tend to pass is Nala. Nala has wont both lotteries also. She is stronger and smarter than Simba. She shows her strength in wrestling matches that they have throughout the movie. One might not think that Nala shows much intelligence in the movie because she is just focused on the main goal. On the contrary, when first meeting Simba in paradise, she in my eyes tries to win him over through the form of seducing him. Before they meet, Nala is very hostile towards Simba and his new found friends. Once she realizes that the lion she is fighting is indeed Simba, the movie instantly cuts to a romantic seen. Before this, there hasn’t been any love interest between the two. After the love scene, Nala begins to pressure Simba in order to get him to come back to Pride Rock and save the kingdom. I believe that Nala had a romantic scene to show the intelligence of women and their influence over men. After they separate from the forest, there isn’t another sign of attraction between the two. At the end of the film, she fills the roll of head lioness at pride rock just like Simba’s mother who did not show much affection towards Mufasa either. Power might not be as apparent as everyone thinks. Nala really had the power to do anything she wanted but she was forced to find Simba. Would it be acceptable for a lioness to save the kingdom? Of course not, because women in this fictional tale cannot lead at all and must totally rely on the males.
Coyle 2 part 2
I was also impressed by the note worthy remarks on slide 23. This slide makes the blatant statement that if you sound white, you sound smart, and inversely if you sound black, you sound unintelligent. James Earl Jones, a black man, plays Mufasa, a quintessential strong, white male. The creators of the Lion King were following the rule listed on slide 23 very closely when selecting James Earl Jones to play Mufasa. His voice sounds like that of a white man, and therefore he sounded smart. One slide within the prezi that I did have a problem with would be slide 58 where it states that the name Nala means gift. I decided to research the meaning to see if this was correct and found that it is in fact not true. One site explained the misconception quite well. “It [Nala] is also occasionally reported as being "gift" in Swahili, however this isn't correct. The common Swahili word for gift is "zawadi" and "Nala" is a present tense form of the verb "kula" (eat), meaning "I eat".” (babynamesworld.com) The most common meaning of the name Nala is actually beloved or successful. The assumption that Nala meant gift could simply be an attempt to connect two ideas that don’t particularly go together. The Feminist lens would see the name Nala possibly meaning gift and instantly link it to her being a possession. I have researched about 10 websites, checking to see if any of them contained ‘gift’ as one of the meanings of the name Nala, and none of them did. While I did find some aspects disagreeable,I believe that this prezi was particularly thought provoking, forcing me to look outside the box and notice all of the subtle influences within the movie. I greatly appreciate the opportunity of being able to look at the Lion King through a different point of view.
Sources:
http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Nala.html
Scholten 2
Looking through the three lenses gives Disney’s The Lion King new meaning, new value, new appreciation, and a new understanding of the film. Using the Marxist lens, one can gain knowledge about society based on the status of the various characters in the film. The Marxist approach and critique proved very beneficial to me as I analyzed the Prezi and movie. Wearing the Marxist lens, I noticed that “money” was a very important aspect in this movie. Money is The Lion King is the same as food, water, shelter, land, females, respect, power, and status (Slide 11). Scar has no money while his brother Mufasa basically owns all of the land—everything that the sun touches! Further examination of the Prezi revealed two types of lotteries that the characters could possess. The genetic lottery is won by both Scar and Mufasa but more so by the latter. Slide 14 asks which lottery did Scar win or lose. Well, he won the genetic to a certain point and he lost the environmental lottery. Scar was born a lion and lions rule the kingdom. Not only was he a lion, but he was born into a royal family as he was next in line for the throne. Scar was smart, seeing as he outwitted Mufasa and Simba to become the next king. The downfall of Scar was that he lacked a strong and masculine physique as his brother Mufasa. Scar lost the environmental lottery seeing as he lacked influence over anyone but the hyenas who are located in a social class lower than the lions. His family basically shunned him forcing him to live among the hyenas in poverty. Slide 15 asks then which lottery did Mufasa win or lose. He clearly won both lotteries. His strong stature and great power over the whole animal kingdom reflects the views that brawn over brains gets power, money, and respect (slide 19). Slide 24 states that The Lion King trains Americans to be Pro-Caucasian. This can be seen by the lions that represent the white race. The hyenas then depict other races that are seen as lower on the social ladder (blacks, gays, Hispanics, the mentally ill). The movie allows for the viewers to start hating the hyenas as they destroy the once beautiful pride land that Mufasa ruled. An interesting point that I noticed in the Prezi was that the names of the voices of two out of the three hyenas were given. Whoopi Goldberg was Shenzi; Cheech Marin was Banzai. The crazy hyena, Ed, was left out. (Jim Cummings played Ed.) This move by the creator of the Prezi left me thinking that the mentally ill are ranked even lower than blacks and Hispanics in society. Is this fair to them? What did they do wrong? The hyenas are outsiders like the minorities in society. The image on slide 18 clearly shows the division of the minority (Scar and the hyenas) and the superior class (lions). This could represent black versus white, gays versus straight, or Hispanics versus Caucasians. Looking through any of the lenses can be very beneficial to provoke more insight and better perception into any movie, novel, poem, etc. A new perceptive can give you a whole new outlook on something.
Berndt 1
On slide 40 the Freudian critical statements say that Simba consciously or subconsciously, wished for Mufasa to die when he possesses an oedipal complex by singing ”I just can’t wait to be king!” I believe that Simba subconsciously wished for Mufasa to die, for he looked up to his father and wanted to follow in his footsteps. Slide 47 provides Marxist reasons for why Timon and Pumba are welcomed into the Pride. Marxist statements are revolved around class, genetic/economic lotteries, money, power and social status. Timon and Pumba are insiders to the lions, and great friends to Mufasa, for they are the ones who raised Simba. Timon and Pumba are wealthy, for they have areas for the lions to relax, and be entertained. Marxist statements are also made on slide 19. One states that Scar deserves to be king, because he is smarter than Mufasa, although he is not as strong or handsome as Mufasa was. Scar didn’t win the genetic lottery as opposed to Mufasa, whom everyone loved, because he was handsome and had charisma. Slide 44 says the lions have been chosen. The Sun shines on the lions and in the movie, the sun is portrayed as God. The sun does not shine down on the hyenas for they are not rich, unlike the lions. The hyena’s are considered outcasts, and from a racial perspective the lions are white, and the hyenas are African American in society. Unfortunately, our American society classifies Blacks lower class, and Whites, the majority, upper class. Slide 54, referencing the feminist statements says that
Nala should be named heir to Mufasa’s throne. I’m taking a different view from some of my classmates and saying yes, Nala should take his throne. Society feels the need for leaders to be strong, fit men, yet most strong and fit men are egotistical when the opportunity of power and control comes to them. Some men, not all men, would make an irrational decision without thinking about the consequences. Sometimes we need a motherly leader who is charismatic, to think rationally at a fast decision making opportunity. I believe women are still not given the credit they deserve, Nala was charismatic, but also knew how to discipline.
Collin Livingston Pd. 5
The task of viewing and interpreting one of the ultimate Disney classics over our extensive winter break was one filled with reminiscing and nostalgia. Long gone, though, are the days where I sat on a couch and watched with an uninterrupted gaze at talking lions and wild animals. As I viewed the movie and studied the prezi presented I completely agree with slide 22 discussing how the hyenas are complete outsiders. The neglected hyenas are voiced over by a black woman, a Hispanic man, and an absolute lunatic, perhaps sending a subliminal message to the viewer that these animals are of lesser value. Compared the deep and masculine voice of Mufasa (despite him being black he indeed sounds very white) and the innocent or powerful voices of the lions the hyenas are without a doubt casted as outsiders in context. I mean, many people view minorities as lesser value than the noble, witty, and fair skinned white man. To everyone who can pick up on such an observation must certainly realize there has been some sort of foul play behind the voice overs to symbolically represent some type of message. I also found it particularly interesting the idea stated on slide 37 discussing whether or not God likes or approves of the poor just because the sun is shining on the lions, or the lottery winners, instead of the hyenas, the losers of everything. I disagree greatly with this statement however; certainly God loves all his children. 1 John 4:7 tells us,” Dear friends, let us continue to love one another, for love comes from God. Anyone who loves is a child of God and knows God.” Instead, does this mean that the feeble attempt to love and accept the hyenas and other lesser animals presents a case of the lions not deserving God’s blessing? Or not knowing God, after passing judgment without giving these lesser animals a chance? Maybe God should intend to shine light on the hyenas and such but Disney hides this to preserve their message? Perhaps there is more to the statement on slide 37 than we initially believe! Slide 49 also wins my agreement. It is very hard to live next to a brother who is seemingly the perfect person/animal there could ever be! What’s even more unbearable is listening to the condescending statements of others who seem to profile you in such negative fashions. Eventually being an outcast rips at your mind and wondering why you weren’t able to fulfill the roles your sibling has driven you to your boundaries. Sibling rivalries occur a lot, and certainly this rivalry and the negative feelings Scar has received his entire life ultimately pushed this rivalry to the ultimate boundary: murder. Slide 54 discusses how Nala should be the leader of the pride, and with the presented evidence I agree entirely! She did pin Mufasa in the movie and displayed her supreme strength, but she also shows more responsibility too. Nala takes care of the Simba and hunts quite well, something the Mufasa lacked. You would think that if Simba was to be the next leader in line the qualified leader now would teach him something, wouldn’t you? Nala is certainly qualified compared to Mufasa. Finally, I agree with another statement on slide 54 declaring that an awful message is sent to kids that men are more privileged than women just because they are men. Certainly we as society send this message with the original notions that the father is the head man and he deserves more power and respect than women. This movie only reinforces this message as it presents a male leader, a role fulfilled by generations of male lions before him and automatically giving him more power and fewer boundaries than the women in the story. This childhood story has always intrigued me, and I wish to shine light on the shadows of this movie. I cannot wait to discuss this more, if we can!
Rise pd 2
Slide 25 Interpellate-brainwashed unknowingly. That complements Roland Barthes thoughts quite well. He believed everything was and has been recyled. We may think we have original wonderful ideas that can change our surroundings; in reality that is quite naive to believe. Roland also believed that the power of a story was held in the reader's hands--not the author's. I believe it is both; I do agree if the reader is unintelligent they will not understand or appreciate the novel.
Slide 29 Golding said, “the thing which threatens every child everywhere, the history of blood and intolerance, of ignorance and prejudice, the thing which is dead but won’t lie down.”On the surface it would appear everyone is equal but when you take a second glance it is easy to see that is false. Oppression of any slight difference is everywhere and remains; whether it is interpellated into the children watching a mild Disney movie or beaten into your skull by your Master in the deep south on a cotton farm.
Slide 31 Hitler is everywhere: Germany, the Lion king and in Lord of the Flies. He and his evil is referenced everywhere. Would it be better to end the references? To forget about the holocaust/death camps, and the slavery and brutatity in America, so that all is forgotten over time--that racism ever existed? Or would that be disrespectful of those who died and suffered? Or does referencing the evil keep it alive and festering, maybe we are carrying on Hitler's plans by reminding everyone that someone thought Jews were less then superior?
slide 39 I think the id is a survival mechanism. In one of my previous essays (why... essay) I reasearched the causes of judging, and categorizing everyone; I emailed Professor Struckman-Johnson, head of Social Psychology of USD. Professor Struckman-Johnson informed me that the intial first impression we asses, is a primal survival mechanism. We used to need to judge others and danger immediately to survive. My point being the id of the Freudian theory was something that caused us to act on our "wants" our selfish ambitions. Those selfish ambitions would keep us alive: food for me, no sharing, secrets, and killing competition. Now that we no longer live day to day trying to outwin the other for food; we fight, train, raise and suppress those distasteful human qualities. In the Lord of the Flies those id characteristics come out, because once again they are necessary--natural selection against others.
slide 45 why is narcissistic bliss frowned upon? clearly this states they are happy. Who gets to decide that should not be okay? Perhaps we should all be Narcissists. Life is so hard to begin with, especially when we worry about others. The term clearly states "bliss" ... ignorance and they are happy about it. Being completely absorbed in yourself sounds terrible but maybe if everyone was... there would be nothing wrong with it. No one would be sad or worried. Bliss. You make yourself happy. No disappointments from others. ( I of course do not truly believe this, but interesting thought? Yes)
At this point in my education I feel that the more you know the more interesting something becomes. The more you are aware of, the more you can connect and relate to. Almost any decent novel can be made amazing if you take the time to appreciate the author's background, thought process, and story line. (According to Roland Barthes also.)
Peltier 5
Growing up, The Lion King has always been one of my top favorite Disney movies. As a child however, my thoughts of the movie were that there was simply a “good guy” and a “bad guy.” Now, as I am becoming more and more capable of analyzing a story, I have noticed certain symbols or details in the movie I never would have thought of before. In slide 44, the Freudian Psychoanalytic Theory is broken down. After watching The Lion King, one thing I have come to realize is the strong Id that is revealed in Scar. At first, I feel bad for Scar because he is casted out, away from the other lions. On the Marxist side, Scar did not win either the genetic lottery or the environmental lottery. He is scrawny, he has a matted down mane, and has a scar on his face; of course we will feel bad for him. Later in the film however, his Id comes out and he cannot handle that his brother is king. He wants to be king so badly that he killed his own brother. Taking Simba down by the tree before the herd of antelope came was all planned out just so Simba would feel like it was his responsibility for his father’s death.
On a side note, in slide 35 dealing with the Pro-Religion aspect, I do believe that the sun in the film was God in this story. Later in the film, Simba is in a field trying to find who he really is and looks in a pond. Then he sees his father’s reflection. Then his father reminds Simba who he really is from the heavens. God may or may not be the symbol in this situation. When we get lost or lose our way and forget who we are, sometimes we turn to God for a little direction. I do not believe that Disney is recommending religion, but I definitely think it is recommending that there is a higher power than just life on earth.
Voigt 7
Growing up, I think most of the students in Literature this semester would agree that watching The Lion King was common practice. It was one of the key films of our childhood - both boys and girls alike. However, despite the numerous times we covered our eyes at the hyena parts or sang Hakuna Matada along with Timon and Pumba, we never looked much closer than the surface of the film. Now, after viewing the film again, and looking with newly acquired lenses, I observe new realizations that the five-year-old me never would have caught on to. Yet, just because I neglected to see those elements, does not mean they are not there. For example, at a young, naïve age I ceased to realize Simba’s winning of the genetic and environmental lottery as expressed in Slide 13 of the prezi. In fact, many of the elements and ideas used by the makers of The Lion King would impact me along with Americans everywhere without our even knowing it.
In Slide 22, the voices of the hyenas along with other characters is discussed. The hyenas have the voices of a black woman, a Hispanic man, and a mentally ill individual. When examined, it is undeniably supposed that the hyenas represent outsiders trying to gain acceptance. I cannot help but wonder however, if the choice of voices was purposeful or not? Did the creators of The Lion King express specifically that those particular voices had to be used in order to relay that the hyenas are outsiders, or did they subconsciously choose those voices without really considering what they were doing? I am curious about this because I feel there is certainly symbolism purposefully put into films and books - such as the scene where Scar is displayed as Hitler (discussed on Slide 31) - but, I also feel oftentimes our subconscious as humans inserts symbolism that our conscious mind does not have the power to concoct on its own. Slide 24 discusses that elements and themes of The Lion King are expressed strongly to the viewer such as being pro-religion. However, once again, although quite prominent themes, the creators either consciously or subconsciously translate these elements to us in a genius way. Proven by the way I did not directly pinpoint these themes as a five year old watching the film again and again, Louis Althusser’s theory of interpellate is used. Explained on Slide 25, interpellate is when an audience is brainwashed, trained, or conditioned by specific social rules yet falsely thinks that they are independently thinking for themselves.
Rusten 5
The Lion King. A fun and cute animal story about how Simba is torn from his family and grows up with a relaxed group “with no worries”. Until he is finally destined to overthrow Scar and become king. A classic Disney tail of good versus evil, or so I thought. It turns out there has been more thought into this movie then I have ever imagined. It is intriguing to think that Disney has been using these movies to brainwash children to think and believe what Disney wants them too. Putting on my Marxist theory lens (slide 10) you realize that Simba has won the genetic and environmental lottery so clearly, he should be king. There is a obstacle of course, Scar. Scar kills off his brother, Mufasa, and tries to kill off Simba to climb up the social latter and become king. Although the lions are top of that latter because of Pride Rock, land, the ladies, and power, (slide 11) Scar is not happy with being at the bottom of the top. On slide 14 the question asks what genetic lottery did scar win/lose. I believe Scar lost the genetic lottery. Not only is he unattractive but he has a ridiculously feminine voice. He has also lost the environmental lottery because the pride shunned him and he spends the majority of his time with the hyenas who are at the bottom of the social latter. You can also point out that when Scar becomes king he still deals with the environmental lottery fail because the drought comes and the main food source leaves. So even though Scar is in the position he has always wanted it is not how it is supposed to be. Another Marxist point of view is through the hyenas (slide 28) . The hyenas are depicted as the Mexican, black and insane people of society. The movie is showing how we should all look down on them because they are taking food from the pride and not looking out for the better of the kingdom. Just like in society. We look down on them because they are poor and need to help themselves before they help other people. In reality they haven’t done anything wrong, but society still looks down on them in distaste. On slide 18 the rich genetic lottery winners are placed in the front of the picture looking happy and in the group while Scar and the hyenas are set in the back looking like outsiders. Further showing the Marxist lens where they are on the bottom social latter.
Koehn pd. 7
To begin our semester of Literature, our class has begun learning a few literary criticism lenses. The main critics being Feminist, Freudian, and Marxist. To ensure full understanding of these groups, our instructor has used the The Lion King to dissect subliminal messages, symbols, motifs, and nuances of the sort. The Lion King prezi contained a general over view of some of the points a Feminist, Freudian, or Marxist would procure from watching the film. A Marxist critic would compare Mufasa’s rule over Pride Rock to represent capitalism. Mufasa was in control (president) but all the other animals worked together peacefully, still maintaining a social hierarchy. The reign Scar held in the Pride Lands reflects a communistic downfall. Scar’s reign was forced and the animals did not have any say in how he governed the land—like a dictator. Also the message brawns over brains gets you power and money would be a key note a Marxist would take (slide 19). From a Feminist lens, Scar produces a red flag. The actor played by Scar has a British, feminine-sounding accent—to make him sound gay. In society, gays are looked down upon and are portrayed as weaker (Which may or may not have been intentional on Disney’s part to create dislike for Scar’s character.) (slide 27). Lastly the Freudian lens focuses on the subconscious desires (often sexual) and narcissistic behaviors (slide 39). Several Freudian critics believe Pride Rock is a huge phallic symbol. The time Simba spent with Timon and Pumba also represents the narcissistic bliss—no wife, no kids, no responsibilities (slide 46). The prezi also included insightful information that is possibly taking a stab at society. The three hyenas were rejected the whole movie, even from Scar who was supposed to be their friend! Coincidentally the hyenas voices were a black woman, a Mexican, and a mentally handicapped person. All of these minorities have been rejected and oppressed in American history. The prezi allowed opportunities to ponder how these minorities have been treated in the past, and if they are still treated this way in the present (slide 29)? The Lion King is one of my favorite movies and being able to apply it to our new study of literary criticism lenses was truly fascinating.
Weidenbach 1
Analyzing The Lion King with the Freudian, Marxist, and Feminist lenses was definitely an eye opener for me. In one of the beginning slides the Marxist theory of the Genetic Lottery is brought up, and in my mind that plays a very key role in the movie. (12) Just the fact that one is a lion gives them dominion over all the other animals, even those animals that are twice their size. Still going of the Marxist theory of the Genetic Lottery the hyenas definitely lose that aspect. I find it extremely interesting that the only hyenas portrayed are casted into the roles of our society’s minorities. Like we have pointed out in class the examples of minorities are Banzai being Hispanic, and Shenzi being an African American. Looking through the Freudian lens, care free people like Timon and Pumba should be the ones we all strive not to be; yet they are the only ones to move up in class!(46) Then again some humans go through a phase in their lives just like Timon and Pumba’s care free mentality. As for the Feminist lenses I have sympathy for the lionesses throughout the movie – Nala would be a much more suited leader than Simba. Not just because she is female, but for the qualities she expresses in being stronger and more intelligent. (58) That is a classic example of brawns over brains makes leaders stronger.(19) I wish I could say examining this film improved the experience of watching it for me. I can say though that it has helped me gain more knowledge in interpreting various aspects of films and books.
Dutson 1
Sticking with the feminist lens approach to analyze this movie I found that this entire lens is applicable to the film. In many instances we see the female figures come out in the film as providers or just being stronger and more capable of leading. The slide referring to Nala as being the better choice to the throne is a fairly valid statement. Nala constantly shows Simba up in "wrestling" matches and always comes out on top (58). Does this assert her dominance? Does it show that she is more capable? Simba, being Mufasa's son, is born into wealth and status (touching on the Marxist lens a bit (13)). We see that Nala is more willing to work hard to achieve her goals, also proving that she would be a better leader. Is it possible that the movie is trying to state that women are more capable of putting bread on the table and that they are more capable of leadership? I believe this is true. In one scene of the movie we see, from Nala, that the lionesses were sent to out to acquire food (11). We can also see that she willing to sacrifice just about anything for the betterment of the land. I believe Nala takes on a strong male role in this move (54). I would also like to touch more on Marxism, specifically referring to slide (18). It says that outsiders are bad and insiders are good. Do we not see this form of social hierarchy today? There are always the cliché outer clicks in a high school that are not necessarily accepted as being the social norm. A negative light is typically cast upon these groups by the insiders. I found the information on this prezi to be enlightening and very helpful in looking at this film in different ways. It definitely stimulates a more abstract way of thinking.
VandeBerg 1
I found the prezi to be very informative. It helped with my understanding of the movie. I had heard from previous years about how students had learned a lot about the movie, such as it's sexist and racist views. Dylan Niklason filled me in a bit before I enrolled in Mr. C's class. The prezi just enabled to put an understanding behind what I knew I would learn. The slide involving the lotteries was interesting because I knew immediately who won and who lost. Scar lost both lotteries, while Mufasa and Simba won both lotteries. It was also noticeable that we would not be a very good nation if we chose brawn over brains and picked Brock Lesnar as our president. The slide was interesting how racist the comments can be about a black guy (Barack Obama) can sound white. I also noticed, even before looking at the Prezi, that the hyenas march like Nazis for Scar who is leading them into prosperity. The question on hyenas not being shone on intrigued me. I don't believe that God does not bless the poor, I believe that they work darkness, which is evil. Evil is darkness although light can conquer it. It's their choice to remain in the shadows and do the "devil's" work.
Tew 1
When asked if Mufasa and Scar won a certain genetic lottery, I say that they both won both lotteries. Scar is intelligent, able bodied, and has a sleek black coat. He also lives on Pride rock and is brothers to the king, which means he has power and influence. He is more “cunning” than Mufasa, but I disagree with the statement that he is smarter than him. There is more than one way to be smart, and Mufasa knew how to rule. Mufasa wanted what was best for the land and that meant that no one could upset the balance of the circle of life. When Scar ruled, he only pleasured himself, and gorged on animals all day in pride rock. This meant that nothing could enrich the soil outside the rock. Food would not grow, which meant that no game would come to the land. This is why everyone hated Scar when he was king. He could not rule the land correctly due to his selfishness.
I also disagree with the statement that Nala is an object to own. Her name means gift which could mean a great many things. She might be called that because she was a surprise that came along to Simba and helped him gain back his kingdom. Timone and Pumba were also gifts to Simba, but they were not “owned.” They saved his life. Then they proceeded to raise him. I could also be given a vacation, but I do not own the vacation. This is merely my opinion however.
I watched the video and realized why the animals care to see this new predator. While they go to see him, the song “Circle of Life” is playing. This is basically the religion of the animals. They accept the fact that the predators must hunt them, because death gives life to the land. This allows others to strive. They obey the king because he keeps their way of life intact and together.
Story 2,
In response to Logan Larson’s blog task of the Lion King Prezi, I agree and disagree with the well thought out statements she concurred to. Genetic and environmental lotteries function as a prime role in possible outcomes . . . as pointed out by Logan. The fact how Mufassa won the genetic lottery over Scar becomes obvious to older and non-subconscious minds. Consider this, if Scar also lives in Pride Rock where the environment proves to be perfect for living, why did he not train himself to be a well-rounded fighter with so many sparring partners around? In basketball, Michael Jordan started off as a horrible player, not even making the D-team in high school . . . until his senior year. He had an environment which he trained in to mutate himself into a true “genetic lottery” winner. Scar lost his chances in improving. Logan also pointed out how the sun shines magnificently bright upon Pride Rock (personifying the sun as God), but not where the hyenas live. In her theories, she assumes that the possibility of God discriminating the hyenas stands strong, but the appreciation of the lions even greater. Not at all, I say boldly. In the movie, the sun shines to all—even the hyenas. The question was never if (italicize if) the sun shines upon hyenas, but how bright (italicize bright) the sun’s rays of hope and faith lay upon the earth and the hyenas. If the sun did not shine at all for them, the scene would be merely a pitch black screen! To me, the sun contains powerful streaks withholding God’s hands. The hyenas are supposed to represent the “unfortunate and bad beings” (along with scar), but even the insane, black, and Hispanic people have religious views. There are times in life where all may seem devoured into darkness, but the ending results are up to the people in this situation. God always looks upon all, never alienating a race or personality inside a human. The streaks that barely shine through in scenes with the hyenas show that God still (italicize still) has hope in them to learn from sins or harmful actions committed. This can apply to modern society today too. The ghetto is usually referred to as mostly “other races” besides whites living there, similar to the elephant graveyard where the hyenas live. Hyenas commit violent acts and work up plots to eliminate other leaders, just like the crimes in the ghetto and major drug dealer leaders that are targeted. Some people in the ghetto want out, and are very religious, as some of the hyenas maybe are in the movie. Even fewer people escape the ghettos, and live lives in peace, as this possibility exist even for hyenas in the movie. We never know the ending results, as once the hyenas kill Scar we never see them again. Chances are (when corresponding to reality) that some hyenas escaped the savage life and showed their worth in the world and their appreciation to God, as the Lord kept his light upon them at all times. This is why God does not shun upon races, and that the hyenas are also given partial of the light, as fraction amounts of the hyenas attempt living a far different and peace originated life. These two points stood out to me while I read Logan Larson’s blog task . . . and if she disagrees with all her might against perceptions, I am fine with this, as all is opinionated.
Koehn pd. 7 (JANUARY 17TH)
I would like to respond to Megan Callahan’s post last week. Overall, I thought her analysis was extremely enlightening and caused me to sway on some of the judgments I had made on the film previously. I agree with Megan on the topic of slides 48-49 about how she feels no sympathy towards Scar. As a child and even now I have never felt sorry for Scar. I have always felt his actions irrational and pathetic. Because he is not the “chosen one” he slinks around and desires everyone to feel sorry for him, instead of being proactive in efforts to ameliorate his situation. Megan’s statement about how Scar lives a life in the shadows without God provides perfect reasoning for why he should not be pitied. Maybe this is harsh, but I do not possess much patience or understanding for those who claim to have a terrible life and continue to mope around without effort to create a better life. I also liked the connection of his name “Scar” to possible “scarring” during his childhood which made him the way he was as an adult. (Thanks for the new knowledge Megan!)
In response to slide 30, Dr. Talcott’s Query involves how one justifies their citizenship and rights. Do we deserve to be Americans? Must we live up to expectations and reputations? No one in the world DESERVES to be born anywhere. They just so happen to be born somewhere and are then faced with the social and cultural expectations. I consider myself extremely lucky to be born in America, and view my citizenship as a gift. I believe someone justifies their rights/citizenship by being an active member in society and valuing the laws, expectations, and reputations of the country. If one cannot do those things, I feel they should be able live in another country, one they can respect. Slide 36 talks about how the film is pro-religion and how Mufasa and Simba are the “chosen ones.” Mufasa and Simba were chosen for their strength, intelligence, and charisma. They were chosen by nature and the food chain. The animals in the movie were more than happy to be lead under the lions because they protect them, and keep Circle of Life in order. All of the white, male presidents in American history were chosen for their intelligence and leadership ability—not out of spite for other races. In the culture they lived in, white males were accepted. Just like in the African jungle, lions are respected. With today’s culture changing, blacks and woman are beginning to gain more power and acceptance in society. Leaders in all aspects are chosen by the expectations of their culture and the ability to provide for the needs of others. In slide 54 the prezi is referring to the feministic lens view of the movie. I agree in some cases society makes men out to be superior “just because,” but the Lion King shows men are more dominant because of their physical ability and leadership skills—which is true. Indubitably men are more superior physically. This is displayed throughout the movie over fight scenes, size comparison, and the symbolic standing on Pride Rock. Mufasa is a fantastic leader throughout, even when he is dead. Simba just has to take a little time before he steps into his role (which the entire Circle of Life welcomes him back with open arms).
Shroll 2
For part two of this blog assessment, I would like to respond to Mr. Waldera’s comments regarding Nala. As Dillon referenced in slide 58, Nala easily could have overthrown Scar and become a powerful and peaceful ruler of the lion kingdom. This had me thinking… why didn’t the female lionesses organize and overthrow their wretched ruler? They clearly have the physical strength (as Scar is lacking a great physical stature—plus Nala could still tackle Simba, a large lion), the patience (as they care for their young), and the brains (as Nala concocted the plan to ditch Zazu as a mere cub). The lionesses would have had a much more enjoyable couple of years if they would simply have combined these admirable traits to improve their, as well as their animal comrades, social situation. However, the menacing, hungry, communist hyenas were a large obstacle. Because Scar promises them all the food they can dream of, which basically equates to equal social status with the lions because food equals wealth in the film, the hyenas worship him and are eager to obey his every command. But as time went on, overhunting occurred, leading to a shortage of food; I do believe another message this movie is conveying to viewers is to practice ecological and environmentally friendly living, so as not to deplete the earth’s precious supply of resources. Even the hyenas were ready for change once rumblings in the depths of their bellies began to occur… now the hyenas have come full circle. Blindly obeying evil for personal gain will only bring on personal ruin in a matter of time. Just like in Lord of the Flies, listening to one’s id by ravaging through resources and acting on a whim will quickly lead to despair. I think The Lion King is a testament to the delicate complications of life—nothing is ever simple, one-sided, or easily understood, but rather, just the opposite.
Andrews2
While growing up and watching this movie numerous time, I never stopped to think about what it could be saying if I just paused it for a second and thought it about it. It's strange to think that a movie that I loved so much that I even had the soundtrack on my iPod could be sending out such a negative message! The movie defiantly has an extremely Marxist and anti-feminist approach. Focusing on Scar first, I would have to say he lost the genetic lottery. From the beginning you can tell he doesn't belong. He looks different from the normal or should we say "white" lions. He even has a different accent that helps distance him from the rest. He technically wins and loses the environmental lottery since he was born into wealth and royalty, but at the same time he loses since he wasn't chosen to be king. Mufasa, in this case, can be said to won have won both. To be honest, it is mentioned that Mufasa is less intelligent than Scar. The Kingdom thrived under Mufasa's power and the animals seemed happy. When Scar took power everything suffered. Scar was manipulative and conniving, but Mufasa was by far wiser. The hyenas are the representatives of the oppressed outcasts and minorities of society. People look down on them and make them hide where the sun doesn't shine. They make it seem like they don't deserve God's blessing. The movie is extremely pro-religion when it has examples on how the lions are chosen for power and the representation of the sun. All the animals in the movie besides the lions are interpellated. They have been taught by social rules that they must bow to Mufasa and accept their fate in the "Circle of Life" willingly even though it isn't really their choice. Hakuna Matata is all about listening to your id. It's about narcissistic bliss and abandoning responsibilities instead of growing up and facing them. The movie is extremely ani-feminism. Nala should have been risen up and became king instead of Scar. She could defiantly be a better king than Simba since she is smarter, stronger, has self discipline, and responsibility that Simba lacks since he is very easily persuaded by a "Hakuna Matata" life. In the end, Nala is seen like a prize or a possession that Simba has won form overtaking Scar.
Tew 2 (response)
So now that I have read a few peoples thoughts on the prezi, I would like to disagree with Miss Svartoiens thoughts of the Brawn beats Brains. Yes Scar did devise a plan to gain the throne, but just because Simba came in and beat him off the rock does not mean it is pure muscle that beats him. Scars plan was doomed to failure the moment the hyenas told him Simba was dead. This created a hole in his near perfect plan. Even if Simba had lost his battle to Scar, he would have been killed by the other lions. They now knew of his treachery and would have ended the matter for killing the rightful king. The battle between Scar and Simba is more of a fight to assert dominance. It could be white vs. black, majority vs minority, capitalism vs. naziism, good vs. evil, or God vs. Satan. The movie portrays it as simply a fight for dominance, which is normally associated with males. The fight is on the tip of Pride Rock after all, which is considered a phallic symbol in some cases. It is also the place where Simba is shown basking in the light of God at the beginning and again at the end, showing that God always triumphs Satan. Definatly a pro religious moment. Then at the very end it shows Simbas child being shown to God and all the animals, completing the circle of life. Simba is of course in Mufasa's spot, and Rafiki shows off the baby again. At the end I do see the image of peace among the rest of the animals, but not the idea of equality. All the animals are equal, except the lions who are better than them all because they sort of uphold the idea of the Circle of Life. This shows to be the religion of the animals and this is why they all respect the lions, not because they are predators and they fear them.
Kirkus 2
January 10
One thing I find interesting and relevant in The Lion King is the idea of characters winning or losing lotteries. Slides fourteen and fifteen ask which lotteries Scar and Mufasa win or lose. A character doesn’t necessarily have to be counted as a “win” or “loss.” Scar, for example, has both won and lost the genetic lottery; he is very intelligent, yet he doesn’t have the muscular, athletic physique that Mufasa has. Mufasa, on the other hand, is somewhat intelligent, but not to the degree of genius that Scar has (even if it is evil genius). As far as the environmental lottery goes, there is an obvious winner and loser: Scar lost, and Mufasa won. Mufasa was just born into the right position, able to obtain power, influence, and popularity among the animals. Scar lost, as he resides in an awful, evil, and dark place full of hyenas. He comes from a terrible place, which is a major contributing factor to why he becomes evil. This goes to show how environment and social class greatly affect character development, which ties in with the Marxist view. Slide eighteen asserts that “outsiders are bad and insiders are good,” which is shown in The Lion King by portraying lottery losers as “outsiders” and lottery winners as “insiders.” Scar and the hyenas are outside Mufasa’s select group only because they didn’t win both lotteries, even though they had no control over that. The hyenas lost both lotteries because they were born hyenas in a negative environment. Being a hyena means losing the genetic lottery because hyenas are natural scavengers, as opposed to lions who are the dominant hunters of their ecosystem. They also lost the genetic lottery by being unintelligent followers who can only accomplish what they want by following orders from Scar. Simba, Timon, and Pumbaa have won both the genetic and environmental lotteries. Simba obviously won, as his father is the king, and he will undoubtedly become king after Mufasa steps down (or falls). Timon and Pumbaa have won the genetic lottery because they don’t really have any competition for food, and they won the environmental lottery by being able to become friends with Simba.
Schwint 7
The first question in your Prezi that caught my attention was on slide 14. It says, “which lottery did Scar win or lose?” I believe he lost both. He is portrayed as feminine and weaker than his brother, which society does not favor at all for men. Also, even though he was born a lion in Pride Rock, I believe he lost the environment lottery too. His brother was more of the “perfect” child than he ever was, so people cared about him less. He was seen as inferior to his brother. This helped Scar feel like a lower class minority (hyenas). That is why he looked to the hyenas to take over Pride Rock, because he felt like a hyena. Another slide that caught my attention was slide 17, capitalism with a conscience. I love that statement because I do think capitalism is a great system, if people do not abuse it. Some people can become money hungry and go to extremes for money, like taking advantage of workers by providing bad working conditions/unjust pay. I can only hope that people use their money unselfishly and help the people truly in need. They do deserve their money for their work, but honestly some people have so much money they cannot spend it all. Donating to charity would be a better use for the unused money instead of hoarding it all, after all money does not always mean happiness. America is full of wealth but we do not have lower suicide or depression rates, because there are problems that money cannot always solve. Stuff like family, friends, and true love. Slide 19 brings up a unfortunate message that The Lion King sends, brawn over brains gets you power, money, respect. This is untrue and unfortunate that we shun intelligence for brawn. I feel like our society is abandoning education like it is not a “big deal”. Education is the foundation of our economy and people cannot progress in the capitalist social structure without a good education. Slide 22 also saddens me due to the racial prejudice in our society. The hyenas are portrayed as discriminated groups: women, blacks, Hispanics, mentally ill. Our society looks down upon these people and automatically treats them differently just because they were born that way. These people unfortunately lost the genetic lottery. A final slide that I will comment on is slide 36. The part that says God selected white Americans to be the “Chosen Ones” really bothers me. Religion is for everyone and God made all of us in his image. Do you really think God purposely makes minorities so we can discriminate against them? I highly disagree with that, God loves everyone and if you are religious you believe we are all perfect in his eyes. And I would not say white Americans fully follow what God would truly want. We stuff our faces full of bounties of food while Africa starves. We trample and kill people on Black Friday for material goods. Is this what God wanted? Absolutely not! He would be sad to see how we let the hungry starve when we have plenty. He would weep if he saw how we acted to get material things, especially how we fight each other and abuse people to get this pure greed. I am ashamed that our society is so greedy, and do not think it is what God wants us to do. I also blame myself because I could be doing so much more to help people. But, I still strive to be selfless, friendly, and helping to others.
Myrlie 2
There are multiple interesting points and questions brought up in Adam Bauer’s blog assignment about his thoughts on The Lion King. Mr. Bauer states that Simba is the chosen one. I agree with him in this statement. Simba has clearly won both the genetic and environmental lottery. Mr. Bauer then asked the question of whom or what has chosen Simba. In the opening scene of The Lion King we see the rest of the animals bowing down to Simba and his family. Nature has already decided Simba will be a great lion and he is still a little cub. I believe that society looks at the parents of an individual and not the individual himself, before making an assumption of how successful the child will become. An explanation of society’s inference could be related to how we as humans live up to expectations as referenced on slide 30. Families involved in professional sports are a great example. Bobby and Barry Bonds were both great baseball players. However, did the pressure of Bobby’s success push Barry into taking supplements so he could fulfill the standard set out by society? The most intriguing statement of Mr. Bauer’s paragraph is his last sentence: “Working hard is how you are supposed to be successful in life, but this film is showing that only the lucky—the ones anointed by God—are the ones able to be successful.” I disagree with the majority of this statement. In order to be successful, I believe hard work is necessary, but just because one works hard does not guarantee success. In The Lion King, Scar worked hard to kill Mufasa and Simba, but in the end Simba defeats Scar. I believe that the writers of The Lion King were trying to say that one should aim to do good deeds in the world. People who strive to help others often succeed at life, where those who try to do harm tend to fail. Thank you to Mr. Bauer for bringing up the points and questions discussed and for helping me think harder about the hidden meanings within The Lion King.
Albertson 5
As I read through Mr. Van Ede’s well composed blog response, I was hooked by one statement in particular: “[The Lion King] remains incredibly pro-superego.” Never before had I considered that a film could be anything but pro-superego; that the battle between id and superego can be open to interpretation. Why shouldn’t we indulge in our id and live selfishly in paradise like Simba did? He would have been happy there forever if a wake-up call from society (Nala) hadn’t pressured him to abandon his friends and put his life in danger by fighting Scar. Simba’s culture—and ours as well—endorses the superego. Siding with his superego made Simba good for the system that is the lions’ kingdom, so in return the system was good to Simba by making him king (Marxist idea). Don’t we all make the same decision that Simba did? We suppress our id so the system won’t put us in prison, and we comply with our superego so that society will reward us with its comforts. In a place with no prison and no comforts of society, it is not surprising that the boys from the Lord of the Flies side with their ids. Their ids unite them, give them power, make them closer to nature, ensure more sources of food, and make their lives less complicated. I often think that conforming to the system to get what we think we want is overcomplicated and unnecessary. The book Walden by Henry David Thoreau describes his experiment living in a cabin for two years where he hoped to see society from the outside, and also to observe the benefits of solitude, self-reliance, and simple living. It gives me respect for the Amish, who a long time ago realized that technology and the kind of civilization it comes with are overrated, because they don’t give us anything more in the end. Living solely with our id is not what I am promoting, because that would surely be anarchy. Rather, my point is that we shouldn’t associate id with evil, because it is a part of what makes us human. Ideally we should have a balance between id and superego, which is the job of the ego.
Also, everything that Mr. Van Ede said about being a latter-born is absolutely true.
Marso 1
I would strongly disagree with Mr. Arrowsmith’s comments about how he will integrate the movie into the lives of his children, or lack thereof. I will eagerly present the story to my children. Indeed it was one of my childhood favorites and I hope it will be towards the top of the list for my children. Although the plot (which tells of a story of return to glory, forgiveness, and good ultimately triumphing—a positive message) is filled with Marxist, feminist, and Freudian views and stereotypes, children do not know this. The situations in the movie may be no different then the ones the find themselves in on the playground at school. Additionally, even if they are somewhat interpellated, or become aware of the underlying themes and symbols later in their lives need to know about the negatives aspects of our society. Too often, the Midwest setting allows us to be over-protected and sheltered. This is not something I wish for my children, and I hope to show them some of the struggles of our country, culture, and world. Ultimately, how can we hope for future generations (and I include myself into the current “future” generation) to instigate positive change when they are unaware of the problems at hand. Solutions cannot be formulated when the problems remain unaddressed due to a lack of knowledge.
I would also like to further explore Mr. Bender’s comments regarding Timon and Pumba. While it is perfectly clear that the two are upper class, what I find most interesting is their initial reaction to finding Simba. When they find him, they could easily abandon him, left helpless to die from thirst or at the hands of another predator. Instead, they quickly recognize his potential—they understand he is one of them and his future benefits. Even in this situation, favor is provided to the lions. I believe that it had been a hyena they found, they would have simply run away, and never given it a second thought; after all, they live with no worries. This circumstance is just one more example of how the movie favors the wealthy—even when they are down, they “find” a break to pick them back up. This is similar to a millionaire who has a misfortune with his company or investments, declares bankruptcy, and finds himself a millionaire within a year or two. Essentially, the movie is claiming that the rich can be knocked down, but have accumulated the resources to be picked back up.
Hallstrom 1
In response to Miss Stephens’ blog feedback, I would like to comment on the fact that she, too states that she does not believe she will be able to watch a movie without analyzing it. I find this reassuring because although the analysis of something is not a terrible thing, some people may find it intriguing that we now can use the lenses we learned in our benefit. By using the lenses and analyzing different movies we see, we might be able to catch things that others cannot. I would also like to comment on Clemenson’s post where she begins talking about religion. I never took into consideration the opening scene when Rafiki is portraying a pastor by baptizing Simba. I believe she’s right by saying Disney should be allowed to support religion because in reality, most people in our society worship someone or something. On another note, I will have to disagree with Arrowsmith because he is making the decision to never show this movie to his children. Although it may be difficult to grasp the different messages this movie portrays, as children, we don’t really know better. I’m sure that as a child when watching this movie, we never grasped the idea that this movie had racism and sexism. Another reference would be to Rise’s response when she references Hitler and his evil intensions. There is nothing anyone can do to totally rid the world of evil and I think that if we stopped referencing evil then everyone would forget. And like she stated, we would all forget the slavery and brutality that America had once possessed. Also, I never took that outlook on the id before. In class we talked about the id as sort of not knowing judgments of value: good and evil. But in her blog task she stated that our id is simply our way of “surviving”. Our selfish acts, in certain situations, keep us alive.
Cain 2
While reading through blog comments Hallstrom 2’s nabbed my attention. Hallstrom suggests “…in an animal society they are more focused on muscular strength and power. In the lion’s mindset, brawn gets you further in the genetic lottery.” I don’t like that idea; it bothers me. If one really thinks about the way Mufasa governs the animals and keeps a balance, he shows to be a much better leader than Scar. Scar allows the reject species, like the hyenas, to eat what they want when they want to the point where the land is desolate, lifeless. Sarabi (Simba’s mom) is supposed to be the head of the lioness hunting party and there’s a specific scene when she tells Scar that there isn’t anything left for them to eat; they’re going to have to leave Pride Rock. Disney is showing viewers that even though Scar may be smarter in a devious sort of way, he isn’t cut out to be king. Not only is Mufasa strong physically, he understands the way in which all the life surrounding him rely upon each other. Even during the sort time Mufasa is able to physically parent Simba, Simba learns about the delicate balance of life. Scar is consumed with so much desire for power and status that he doesn’t care what happens to anyone else just as long as he is king. In relation to that, no other races are being necessarily put down. They hyenas aren’t the “bad guys”. Scar is. The hyenas obey and admire Scar because to the hyenas Scar is a symbol of optimism and new beginnings. If anything, “whites” would be the “bad guys”. Scar is the same flesh and blood as Mufasa and Simba. Simply, Mufasa ended up king and Scar didn’t. Scar’s reaction of anger and resentment directly contrasts the happy and content attitude of Mufasa and Simba showing us all that even the “highest” of species have evil streaks.
Callahan 7 (RESPONSE)
While reading through my peers' blogs from last week, Brendan Gallo's and Zach Van Ede's caught my attention.
Though it is true that Mufasa won the genetic lottery, I do not think his leadership is based purely upon his looks. The line of the throne is given to the first born son; had Scar been born first, he would have been king (looking from a Marxist perspective, at least). From a Freudian perspective, Mufasa and Scar's parents would have looked for certain traits in the two to see which is more fit to be king. I believe Scar's problems started in his childhood. Zach Van Ede shared his thoughts on being a younger sibling in his blog task. In Zach's case, he not only lives up to the expectations teachers have for him, but has also succeeded in creating his own person. We look at Scar as being evil, but there had to have been something that made him that way. Perhaps he tried to follow in Mufasa's wake...and failed. Perhaps his parents only saw Mufasa's light, and are the ones who first cast Scar in shadow.
For this reason, I would argue that an additional message of the film is the influence parents have on their children. Simba was on the path to become a perfect king when he had two loving parents. Mufasa encouraged him when he failed, and brought him back to reality when his head became too big. When Mufasa left the picture and Scar was Simba's closest "father figure", Scar tore him down and gave Simba undeserving guilt and caused him to run from his problems. Mufasa was the better parent--obviously Scar did not have kids, but did a poor job as an uncle--probably because he experienced loving parents as a "child" or cub. A lion who is a better parent would most likely raise a more successful child than a lion who lacks the parenting techniques necessary in the same situation. Would it be wrong to make the connection between a good parent and a good king? Proof is shown in Mufasa's and Scar's story: Mufasa was showered with love and was able to reach his full potential to became king; Scar lacked encouraging parents and therefore failed to acquire the traits suitable to become a king. I disagree with Brendan's statement saying "both brawn and brains are necessary ingredients for the baking of power, money, and respect". The king in the story is the better "person". The king is the lion who would be best for the pride... not the strongest lion, the smartest lion, or the richest lion.
Petersen 7
While looking through my peers statements, I found many different viewpoints I would have just skimmed over. I agree with Breitzman in the fact that in the movie Scar is not king over Mufasa because he did not win the genetic lottery. I also like how she pointed out that this also applies to real life. The people who are more charismatic and appealing seem to overpower those who are more intelligent. When you think about it, the more intelligent person should have power because they may be able to make better choices and decisions. But our society is attracted to appearances and like-ability. It is something our society is on, looks and brawns not brains. This also leads into something Nifong talked about in her blog. Scar has a scar on his face and she said this represents what society may find ugly. The better looking you are the easier you are excepted into society. Mufasa and Simba are royalty because of their looks and strength. I also like the point she made on the light and dark concept. If you notice in the movie Scar and the hyenas are darker in color than the rest. Dark has always represented the evil in our society as far as I know. The good people are all lighter as the light represents everything that is good. Also in the movie when Simba wins at the end , the light overtakes the shadow of the pride lands and everything grows back again and it is not dark anymore. The movie definitely shows a lot of societies flaws. We should not care as much about how people look like but focus on the intelligent level . Even though living in America, we have more opportunities for everyone but when we look at this perspective we still have a huge gap that needs to be filled in order to succeed.
Tripp 7 (January 17)
After reading through several different blog tasks from last week, I came across numerous statements that I never thought of originally. I would particularly like to agree with Miss Voigt’s discussion of not only being a child and experiencing the movie but also whether the directors and producers purposely include information that us as students now understand to be potentially controversial. To begin, I would agree that The Lion King was a key element to our childhood. As children we were much to young to notice and realize how certain scenes could be explored in different ways and even how much of an impact those underlying elements could eventually have on our lives. To continue into the discussion of whether certain things were included on purpose or not I would also agree that I cannot fully believe that directors think of such in depth topics and include them in such ways that our minds are able to understand and analyze them so differently. As Miss Voigt mentioned, the hyenas have voices of different ethnicities including a black woman, Hispanic man, and a mentally ill person. The fact that those specific voices were used for the group of characters that are considered outsiders and not welcome could not possibly be on purpose. Or could it? Would a director have the time and ability to sit down and think of controversial items and include them into their movie when they are obviously overwhelmed with the creation of the movie already? I do not believe so as my classmate has also commented. Our subconscious and conscious minds can often times trick us as humans. We may not always realize that our subconscious has created symbolism in our mind that we could not consciously think of ourselves. This is a very interesting topic and I would be intrigued to find out if these strong and incredibly in depth connections were in fact on purpose or not.
Logan J. Pd.5 (Response)
While sifting through the earlier blog tasks of my peers I came across the essays written by Collin L. and also Vanessa R. Both brought up very interesting points about the Lion King. Collin briefly spoke about the use of actors when making the hyena's voices. Collin, like I did, mentioned the minorities role in the play. However, he also chose to go beyond just the voices and looked at the use of sunlight. In the movie, the hyena's are never blessed with sunlight. Instead, they are forced to live in the dark. This observation is completely right, and it also forced me to think about Disney's subliminal message to us. What are they trying to say? To say that minorities are not good enough to receive God's blessing seems too harsh. I also agree with Collin when he says that Nala should be leader of the Pride. Physically, she is stronger than Simba and mentally, she is more aware. She pins Simba multiple times throughout the movie and instead of running away from the problems Scar is causing she chose to do the honorable and courageous act – resist Scar. As children, I'm sure that none of us even thought about how unfair it is for Nala to have to obey Simba simply because he was born into the position. Subconsciously, the image of males being more privileged than females was driven into us.
Vanessa had a fantastic point when she mentioned the id being a survival instinct in animals and humans alike. Although it may not be seen as much in the Lion King as it is in the Lord of the Flies, the id drives us all forward. Basic human instinct is to survive no matter what the cost. In Lord of the Flies the boys are not savages until hunger sets in. I'm sure that the boys weren't feeling very full on a bunch of fruit so they resorted to killing boars, an act that completely defied their superego's.
Van Ede, 5
I endeavor to use my second response to attempt to expand and perhaps question upon Miss Robertson's startling, but brilliantly crafted, masterpiece of a post (in my belief the most captivating and creative response of the bunch). Towards the end of Miss Robertson's comment, she states, "...I relate best to Scar as a character." After reading this, I paused, pondered, and stumbled upon a question: What about the theoretically millions of children who are minorities and thus more relatable to the supposedly "evil" characters? What contrasting message was interpellated upon them due to this movie, if different at all? I formulated an abundance of theories at varying optimistic and pessimistic levels. Rather basic yet cheerful, my initial thought was that the children of the minority classes gained a similar but possibly more hopeful message from the film. Obviously, the character one is supposed to feel the greatest connection to and sympathy for is the main character: Simba. I hoped the children, as I did, bonded immediately to Simba. I desired the children to be optimistically ignorant to the vast racial and class stereotyping throughout the film. Instead of viewing Simba as a destined aristocrat and white power holder, perhaps they saw a youth betrayed and now at the bottom of the social ladder and food chain. The betrayed youth is able, through honor and courage, to climb up to greatness and respect— creating a cheerful and instructing role model for all youth equally. However, I also formulated a pessimistic and possibly more likely scenario. Perhaps the children quickly identified with the less favorable characters. One can imagine the subliminal horror one child may have received at viewing the ill treatment of tragically lower characters and thus him or herself. Were these children psychologically taught to despise privileged, white Christians? Perhaps it was implied that hope did not exist for the less fortunate. Any effort to "move up" would result in tragedy; the minorities apparently not capable of leadership and conservation. In all branches of art—be that film, paintings, sculptures, or music—judgment and stereotypes are bound to exist, but one must still be conscious to their consequences.
Larson pd. 5 (response)
Cruising upon the blog comments, I came across Miss N. Peterson’s comment. Although Miss Peterson did make some spectacular reasons, I did come across one statement I did not entirely agree with. Miss Peterson did not think Scar won the genetic lottery. I strongly disagree with this. I feel as if Scar was defeated with the environment lottery, but did not fall short with genetic lottery. When thinking about genetic lottery, most people will associate appearance, intelligence, and personality. Scar might not have been as handsome and dapper as Mufasa, but he did turn out atrocious! Even though Scar was born with an intriguing scar on his face, he still emulated a powerful sturdy lion! Scar was also very smart. He showed an instance of pedantry behavior. Tricking Simba into terminating his father was no doubt ruthless, but it becomes extremely hard to deny the tedious thought Scar put into this dubious scheme. Scar’s personality may have faltered, but winning two (appearance/intelligence) out of the three categories under genetic lottery—that does not seem like losing to me! Although I disagreed with this statement I did agree with many of Miss Peterson’s thoughts. She noted that the Hyenas were considered “the outsiders” and the other animals were “the insiders.” Why are the Hyenas considered less of a being just because they are acting simply like they should! Hyenas do not eat plants or shrubs, they eat meat! In order to maintain this diet—they must kill! Imitating Miss Peterson’s thoughts, just because the Hyenas are at the bottom of society does not mean they are “the outsiders” or mean and vicious! I also agreed with her statement about Nala. She obviously deserves the thrown. With her strong physique, high intelligence, and her determination—Nala deserves more credit than she received!
Rasmussen pd.5
In the process of selecting just one of many excellent views and beliefs on the Lion King, I came to find Brian Albertson’s blog to be one of the most interesting. The idea that that the film promotes religion only strengthens the argument that Mr. Christensen made just before the January 10th blog task. He believes that this film is promoting us to be good capitalist, therefore good Americans. America is pro Christianity in many aspects. In the film, Mufasa says that wherever the light touches, that is where the lions own. This comment doesn’t necessarily describe only America. It is referring to western civilization in general. Throughout history the European race has come to have an imperialistic nature, taking anything that they think would benefit them even though it might be at the expense of others. One point to pick out is that the lions don’t ever claim the elephant graveyard or the area in which Scar and his hyenas congregate. Why is this? The land doesn’t have anything of value for the lions so they give that to the animals not worthy of the “honor”. America did similar things to the Native Americans in the late 1700’s and the 1800’s. We delegated areas that were not very appealing and we sent them there. In reality, the light touches the whole world so if what Mufasa says is true, even the elephant graveyard is within its bounds. He gives no explanation to Simba of why the graveyard is not theirs. Is this because Mufasa wants Simba to think that everything is fair in this world? Does Simba represent the youth of today and how we are being brainwashed into thinking that America is always right and always justified? I believe that the return of Simba symbolizes how the cycle of brainwashing and pro America ideas will continue.
Breitzman 1
I am choosing to respond to the comments made by Megan Forster in her earlier blog task. I found many of the statements she made to be on-point, and I agree with nearly all of them. One comment she made that I found to be extremely accurate was her statement about children watching the film. While I do believe that the Prezi we viewed has some very valid points about society and its “problems”, I do think that the statements need to be taken with a grain of salt. I know from personal experience that when I was a young elementary-age child watching The Lion King, I did not pick up on the assertions made in the Prezi. I did not realize that the hyenas were allegories for different racial groups, religious groups, etc., nor did I infer that Scar had likely lost the genetic lottery to Mufasa. These ideas, quite frankly, went over my head. I do not want to sound as if I am insinuating that children cannot pick up on such things; children are very intelligent in multiple ways. But such advanced manners of thinking are most generally lost on humans under the age of 10. Therefore, I agree with Megan in the sense that I do not believe The Lion King particularly alters the world perceptions of children. I think, if anything, it may cause them to think that all lions in Africa roam around the savannah and sing and dance all day long. It will not alter their opinions on society dramatically if at all. I found the comment Megan made about Scar to be interesting as well. She stated that “humans are more likely to become corrupt human beings who lend their talents and efforts to crime and corrupt actions when they are downcast, down on luck, and simply feeling down.” I agree with this statement as well. I personally know of many times where I have been feeling dejected about events that happened during the day and resort to lashing out at my family, slamming doors, etc. (though I would not call these events “corrupt” nor do I consider myself to be a corrupt human being) I do think that negative happenings can lead people down a negative path, especially if these negative happenings occur on a frequent basis, as is seems to be the case with Scar’s life. He suffered a lot of junk in his youth and now exerts the burden of it out on innocent people, like his brother. I also personally think, and I may be toeing a dangerous line when I make this statement, that that is the same reason why we see a lot of African-American or Hispanic criminals. History has not exactly been kind to black people in America, nor has it been to Hispanics. White people have always thought of themselves as the superior people/race and have often exercised this belief throughout the course of history. When a group of people (like the blacks and Hispanics) is constantly pushed down and degraded, it can have an effect on them and they may choose to act out. Of course, it should be noted that there are many white criminals also and that certainly not all of the minority population behaves this way. But I do believe that my previous statement has some validity to it. Overall, I have found Megan Forster’s comments to be very enlightening and accurate and that is why I chose to respond to them. I feel that these Lion King assignments have made me grow as a thinker/analyzer and appreciate the points they were trying to accomplish.
Hanzel 7
Not having watched The Lion King for a few years, I viewed the film with a different objective. Originally the film was just a children’s movie to me. After watching it through the feminist, Freudian, and Marxist lenses I found myself perplexed and intrigued with all the internal thoughts, actions, and meanings concealed throughout the film. While reading my peers’ blog posts, I was introduced to a multitude of ideas that I had not considered previously. I found myself agreeing with Hallstrom’s comments pertaining to the Marxist theory. Although our society can relate to the animals’ in The Lion King in many ways, I was reminded that it is extremely necessary to consider the dynamic differences as well. It can be simpler to pick out what the societies have in common, but the differences are equally important if not more important. In our society, those with the brains are more common to be the great leaders. While in the animal society, the brains can only take you so far- there will be a time when the leader needs to be not only smart, but strong as well. This is why I agree that Scar should not be chosen as king. Although Scar has the brains he would not make an exceptional great leader for the animals. Conquering the feminist and Marxist lens with ease, I tend to struggle to observe clearly through the Freudian lens. This lens was clarified for me by others’ blog posts. I was introduced to many ideas including a few about Simba wishing to be king. While Simba sings “I just can’t wait to be king,” he indirectly alleged that his father would first have to die. I do not believe Simba realized this as he shouted his lyrics throughout the land. Simba is young and inexperienced at this point and is not ready to fulfill the requirements of the king nor do I believe that he is fully aware of what he is singing.
Woodward 5
While perusing through the blogs that had been posted last week, I stumbled across a section of Ms. Ashlynn Boerhave’s that struck me as interesting. Commenting on the last bullet point in slide 10, ”Brawn over brain gets you power, money, respect”, she mentioned that this may be the reason the media and society chooses to obsess over celebrities rather than famous scientists. Indeed, scientists working around the clock to improve our lives and well being should be as respected and praised as much as our favorite entertainers, but it never seems to be that way. I do not believe our society is like this solely because celebrities have money and power and scientists have only knowledge and intuition. I would be surprised if there were not any scientists that are just as well, if not better, paid than society’s favorite actors. No. I believe that society obsesses over others not based on where they are on the social ladder, but what they act like in society. Look at any of the “celebrities” from Jersey Shore or Desperate Housewives. Before they were on their respective shows, they were like anyone else with a bad attitude. All it took was someone to shove a camera in his or her face and throw it on television for them to become the center of attention in our society. Americans idolize people that they can love to hate. The viler they are and the more mistakes they make, the more we all want to hear about them. Tiger Woods is another great example. He was already famous because of his fantastic golfing career, but when the news caught wind of his affair, he received more publicity than anyone could ever handle. Humans love conflict and catastrophe. In this day and age, it’s not only how much money or power you have; it’s what you choose to do with your life.
Larson 1
In this second Lion King blog task I am choosing to respond and expound on Megan Callahan’s original text. As I perused her thoughts and ideas I found myself very much in agreement with her main points. I also appreciated the visual of bifocals and tinted lenses representing the three literary lenses. One of her points stuck out to me particularly. The movie The Lion King, though intended for children, was written by adults. This seems very obvious, but when I think of the Lion King the vast majority of my viewing experiences happened when I was just a wee lass. Such experiences make my analyzing of the movie now seem very forced and overdone. When I read this point of Megan’s, I realized I was still analyzing of this movie the same way I had as a child. To me, Lion King was just a story about animals because that was the entirety of its importance to me in my girlhood. This simple story about lions and responsibility takes on a whole new dimension when I consider that fully grown and discerning adults created it. Sure, I did not see the symbolic importance of the hyenas’ accents, or of the strategic shadow placement, but an adult creating this movie could not possibly have missed the importance. These nuances are too intentional to be coincidence, to put it jestingly. Megan’s last sentence also stuck out to me. Here she stated that the whole meaning behind the film cannot be fully absorbed without combining the three lenses. This reflected my own sentiments perfectly. As I went through the prezi and considered each lens in my own mind, I felt that the analysis I was coming up with was lacking in some way. I now realize that when I pool the thoughts and ideas from each angle, I come up with a much more satisfying analysis of a movie that will never be the same for me.
Volk 5
In response to Dillon Waldera’s post, I think that there is a big reason why the animals would praise a predator. They are the strongest and most well-known animals in the jungle. These animals (and people alike) want a strong and confident leader in power and that is exactly what a lion brings. They are strong, graceful, and intelligent animals and I believe that the animals recognized this. Think of what would happen if a giraffe or a bird of some sort was in power. They would be easily overrun by a more powerful and aggressive creature and that would only cause chaos. The lion is known as King of the Jungle for a reason. The only animal that tried to take the thrown away was another lion (with the help of hyenas of course) and it failed. They had seen in the past how great of a leader Mufasa was and how just he was. Although he was a predator, he did not harm any animal in his kingdom. They were not fearful of him as a predator; they were in awe of him for his leadership abilities. They expected the same out of Simba although it took a little more time for him to fill his role. There was peace and harmony throughout the jungle and I do not think that any other animal, besides Scar, wanted to jeopardize that. They also probably felt safe with a strong and noble animal in control. Another thing the animals saw was the wise Rafiki at Mufasa’s side. They respected his morals and heart as a shaman and recognized a softer and wiser side of Mufasa in his trust in Rafiki. Again, they expected the same in Simba. It makes sense to me why Simba was the receiver of all this praise and I think that the animals knew what they were doing.
Herrick 5
I feel with Guthmiller’s fear about being brought up in a world that showed young children messages that were not necessarily obvious. It would have made a difference if parents and children could have caught onto these symbols and messages. I agree with Andersen that the hyenas looked like the race they were portrayed to be. I knew they all looked different, but could never distinguish the difference. How she describes them makes perfect sense. Clemenson points out that skin color does not affect the sound of a person’s voice. I totally agree with this because how you sound comes from where you live. I think society believes that a “black” voice is a southern, uneducated voice. There are some uneducated black people living in South Dakota, and they do not all sound “black”. Just because you live in a certain location does not mean you will sound a certain way, it has to do with how a person was raised. Peterson said that she felt bad for Nala because she was clearly the stronger and smarter lion. I agree with this but I disagree as well because in the animal kingdom, the male lion is always the “king”. In reality, the females do more than the males, most importantly, hunting. A male lion has no problem killing his own kind to remain on top. Therefore, if a woman was the “queen” lion, there would be no males. There is only one male per pride and if a female was in power, there would be no males. Male lions also are to guard and protect the pride. They can become defensive if another male lion is near and will protect his territory and kin. We really cannot say this film knocks women down. This is a movie of lions and not people. In the lion world the females are down the latter because that is just how it is.
Nifong 1
I could relate the most to Hanzel’s blog comment. The Lion King was one of my favorite movies growing up but I never watched it with the knowledge that I now have. Like Hanzel, I re-watched the popular children’s movie and was amazed at all of the innuendos that I noticed. New perspectives were made clear to me. The elements of the movie encouraged deeper thought processes for me and it was indeed very healthy. As well as agreeing with Ms. Hanzel’s comment, I also can relate to Ms. Hallstrom’s comment. Since being introduced to these critical lenses I have found myself critically observing a plethora of exhibits. Even simple advertisements in magazines seem to be loaded with symbols that can be dissected down. The lenses have certainly sparked my attention and I enjoy critically focusing on exhibits in class as well as everywhere. Switching gears completely, I also appreciated Ms. Cain’s response to an entry made by Hallstrom. I like how she pointed out that the hyenas aren’t the bad guys. Cain claims that Scar is the bad guy and that the hyenas cling to him because they desire to feel a part of something. They want a place where they belong. I had never pondered that idea. Cain’s idea made me think of a gang. In class during the first forum I compared Jack and his new tribe to a gang. I think the same idea could be placed in this context. The hyenas could have come from a respectable family and been raised to be a useful part of society, however somewhere along the line something became disconnected. Their disconnection (from whatever it may be-family, friends, etc.) leads to needing to feel connected into something, leading to them joining a gang. So I definitely agree with Cain that the hyenas are not necessarily bad, they just need to a feel a sense of belonging, just like gang members.
Olesen 1
Myrlie posted a comment on how Shenzi and Benzai are the depicted as the degraded lower class, however, their voices are played by famous and respected actors regardless of their skin color. I find this to be a very intriguing point that I have never thought of before. I agree with K. Peterson’s idea that simply becoming a lion itself is winning the genetic lottery. Lions are ate the top of the food chain, and are definitely the king of the jungle. I also really like the way Beckman worded Scar’s character, how he “spends a majority of his time with the hyenas because not only have they accepted him but they also look up to him in the way he deeply wishes to be seen.” I fully agree with this statement. The hyenas look up to Scar as someone who will take care of them. While they had little and were starved, he promised them food, water, and land. Scar likes the feeling of power he has over them, and the hyenas feel as if they have no choice but to follow him. (Much like Hitler promised the Germans.) In response to K. Peterson’s comment I agree that Nala is obviously the stronger, more intelligent leader than any of the other characters in this book would be. She is the one who got Simba off his lazy butt and persuaded him to return to Pride Rock.
Backer 1
Like Zach, I was both startled, yet highly captivated by Miss Robertson’s blog. Her cleverly written viewpoint on the Lion King class system intrigued me to dig deeper into own society- what makes a name more powerful than another? My name shows no significance to the people who do not know me. My name is not going to matter to anyone living across the world (or even across the country). Why then, is my name suddenly more intriguing when placed in front of the words Dickinson or Blunt? One could say that it might have to do with the fact that they are far more established individuals-that they had/have displayed some sort of recognized talent in their lifetime. Both of which being absolutely true, however, what inspires celebrities to change their name before making it big? Eileen Regina Edwards- does the name ring a bell? No? Well perhaps you might recognize her stage name: Shania Twain. How about Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson? She decided to go with a far more upbeat name that matched her personality: Katy Perry. The two are just a couple of the numerous celebrities who have transformed their names into something that better suits them in their career. They change their names into names that are catchy, names that are unique, names that are POWERFUL. They feel as if these names will make them more known than their own “average” names. In The Lion King, Mufasa’s name draws more attention because it is unique. The name contains just the right amount of syllables to make it seem strong and powerful when pronounced. Scar’s name, however, is viewed as just the opposite. The name does not give off nearly the same effect as Mufasa’s (nor is it as fun to say). The characters’ names reveal to us their position in the kingdom, just how our names reveal something about us. Our name does NOT define us, but the way we use our names can say a lot about us. Depending on where we go with our lives, our names will either gain power or continue to blend in.
Bauer 2
I agree with Hanzel’s comment. The Lion King was and still is one of my all time favorite movies while growing but I never watched through the critical lenses that I have now. Just like Hanzel, I watched the outstanding children’s movie again and was astonished by all of the symbols that can be dissected. I agree with Rogen completely about Scar. “Scar is seen with a mouth that has grimaced so much that it has succeeded below his actual jaw line,” Rogen wrote, which I never noticed until reading his blog comment. I also agree with Rogen’s acknowledgement of his nose. It appears his nose slopes before reaching his eyes, resembling of a broken nose from possible brother abuse. Marso’s comment of the hyenas’ reign of power being doomed from the start due to losing the environmental lottery but also how they deal with the situation is another one of my fellow scholar’s comments that I agree with. I agree with Guthmiller’s fear about being brought up in a world that showed young children messages that weren’t obvious, but the fact that they are not obvious makes them less threatening in my opinion.
Dawn 2
For part two of this blog task I was looking through the comments. One comment in particular stood out, Mr. Rasmussen’s. I completely agree with his view through the Marxist lens. This lens seems to be the most present—or at least the most easily seen—throughout most of the movie. It is all about hierarchy and environment. Simba has definitely won both the environmental and genetic lotteries, but he is irresponsible and is definitely emotionally damaged. Nala however, is both intelligent and strong and would be the clear choice for a leader. As a young lioness she overpowers Simba in strength and wits. Nala is able to pin Simba—she implies that it has happened before—and she is even the one to come up with the plan to get rid of Zazu. Even though Nala would be a clear choice for the leader, she is often overlooked.
I understand that although it is a children’s movie, there are some adult themes. However, seduction in The Lion King seemed quite unreasonable and inappropriate in a children’s movie. How could Disney put this in their movie? The more I look at it though, the more I realize there is almost no other way to perceive it. I believe Nala craves power, but she also knows that in order to obtain some sort of power she would either have to be born male—which is definitely not possible—or she must marry into power. These would be the only choices based on the situation she has been given. Throughout the movie only one scene clearly indicates any feelings of adoration felt between Nala and Simba—after her almost killing one of Simba’s friends. Before this scene she had not been seen since she was a child, and she showed no sign of being in love with Simba. Immediately after the love scene Nala tried to get Simba to come home with her. During the rest of the movie, Nala shows no sign of love yet she assumes the role as alpha female as soon as Scar was defeated. This leaves critical thinkers to wonder if she had been brilliant—and devious—enough to come up with that plan from the beginning.
Given her environment from birth and being raised to believe that only a male could rule the pride, Nala knows nothing else. I believe that if given other circumstances—for example a democratic society—Nala would be the clear choice for the leader.
Anderson 5
After thoroughly examining Ashylnn Boerhave’s blog, my eyes have been opened to a new point about the film The Lion King. Ashlynn was talking about the genetic lottery when I found something particularly intriguing. I agree that Mufasa has won the genetic lottery. Ashlynn then went on to say that Scar has won and lost the environmental lottery. I found this point interesting because I did not look at the fact that Scar had one the environmental lottery in a way. Scar lost the environmental lottery because he is not king, but also won because he is at least part of the monarchy. Mufasa won the genetic lottery because of his looks and strong build, and he has clearly won the environmental lottery since his king. Ashlynn’s inquiry of the quote on slide 19 also intrigued me. The quote on the slide was “Brawn over brain gets you power, money, respect.” Ashlynn also made me wonder along with her: Is this why society is hypnotized by handsome celebrities and not by scientists. I agree with Ashlynn when she says that The Lion King is anti-feminine. Nala should obviously be king (or queen). Nala has a great head on her shoulders. She is smarter than Simba, and is quite strong. Even though Nala would be a great fit to rule, a man must always rule the pride lands. Simba is pretty lazy. His id overtakes him when he is with Timon and Pumbaa. Simba is always swimming, lying around, and eating—lacking the qualities of a good king. Thinking with my Marxist, Freudian, and Feminist lenses has brought me to see nearly everything in these lenses. I found myself analyzing some of my favorite movies, Pitch Perfect and The Breakfast Club, with some of my friends, which made the movies even more delightfully entertaining.
Waldera 5
For part two of this blog assessment, I would like to respond to Miss Shroll’s comment. I would like to particularly touch on the subject of environmental and genetic lottery Kara brought up at the beginning of her blog task. Kara is spot on with her assessment that Scar won the environmental lottery as well as the genetic lottery. Reading her comment, I pondered over the idea what if Scar had been named king instead of Mufasa. I believe he could have been just as good of a king as Mufasa was, if not better. Kara also brought up the comparison between Brock Lesnar and Mufasa. Scar is extremely clever and cunning, however, he is not as fortunate as Mufasa when it comes to muscle endowment. But since when do you need muscular body to be a successful leader? Scar would have been a completely different person (or animal) if he was raised as the future king. He could have applied his cunningness towards good instead of evil. Mufasa is by no means a bad leader but weather he rightfully and justly was named king is up for debate. Kara also mentions in the latter part of her comment about how The Lion King is a pro-religion movie. To refute this statement would be nearly impossible. I, however, had never noticed the three major parts of the tree symbolizing the holy trinity as brought up by Kara. Such a strong undertone for a children’s movie! I never noticed any religions undertones or themes as a child but now they are clearly visible. It made me wonder if any of the other movies I watched over my childhood had religions undertones as well. I assume there must be more! I am now tempted to go analyze all my old childhood films!
Rist 2
While scanning through the previous blog posts, Mr. Marso’s stood out to me. He believes that the Marxist lens best analyzes the movie, which I agree with. Noting that the hyenas were doomed from the beginning, Mr. Marso agrees that they lost the environmental lottery. He then compared the hyenas’ attempt to overthrow the lions to a person attempting to join the upper class while their parents are in the lowest class. This statement made me think about our society. If you are poor, how can you become rich? Some athletes come from poverty and achieve fame and money. Even some people who are intelligent get an education and earn more money than their parents. There is a very small chance that either of these opportunities would happen. Also, I find Mr. Van Ede’s blog to be interesting. He agrees the Freudian approach is most relevant and I disagree. “…the id appears to be overwhelmingly more powerful as this darker lion passionately seeks power amongst his rivals at whatever the cost.” Mr. Van Ede is describing Scar as being the id. I believe Scar did not win the genetic lottery but that does not necessarily make him the id. Although I do agree that Pride Rock symbolizes power. Intrigued by the symbolism, Miss Robertson’s blog caught my eye. I was surprised that she could compare a powerpoint and a prezi to the Lion King. She assigns the prezi as the hyenas and the powerpoint as the lions because powerpoint is simply better than prezi. This is merely an opinion, so are the lions being ranked higher than the hyenas an opinion? That is up to you!
Lenz 7
On the first day of class for the semester, I claimed my spot conveniently marked for me on the seating chart provided by the instructor. Being in the group closest to his desk, I was assigned upon further discussion and notes to be in a group of people who tend to have a viewpoint more closely looking through a feminist lens. While reading through comments on the blog about the Lion King prezi, I began to read the comment left by Koehn, pd. 7. She talks about the “red flag” that Scar raises. Upon much thought, I am not so sure that a British accent is feminine. Many women, in movies and real life, search for men with British accents. Many women find that type of accent to be “sexy” or “hot.” In many Americans’ minds, the British are viewed as proper, and well refined. Having a British accent would be a good thing to Americans because in the eyes of many, that person would, in turn, be proper. I believe the red flag with Scar is not raised in the fact that he has a British accent, but with the way that he presents himself. He seems to have what people would classify as “feminine qualities.” He is limp when swinging his paws around, and did not seem to acquire the masculine qualities usually expected in lions from the genetic lottery (or the environmental for that matter). Mufasa, and eventually Simba, flaunt a glowing orange mane that is overflowing with character. The producers of the Lion King placed a slick, black mane on Scar. The female lions do not have manes, so Scar’s lack of a voluptuous mane may be the reason many think of him as feminine or gay, not his British sounding voice.
Voigt 7
I have found starting the second part of the this blog task assignment more difficult than any blog task previous. This is not due to a lack of impressive writing by my classmates, but rather an overabundance. The multitude of fantastic thoughts and ideas makes it difficult to respond to just one. As I have skimmed through, many caught my eye. However, I particularly enjoyed reading Miss Callahan’s response. I discovered many details in her writing that I very much agree upon. First off, the overall premise of her response was the idea that in any successful analyzation, more than one lens should probably be used. In fact, I at times find it most difficult to discover the dividing line between the various lenses because they do overlap quite often. Referring to this idea as wearing “bifocals” is a perfect way to describe it. When studying the film, I would also agree that I struggle to hear the accent in Scar’s voice. Even now, I strain my ears to hear it so I might be able to understand the connection the producers were perhaps trying to make. Yet, I cannot. Because like Miss Callahan stated, in the time this movie was impressionable upon me, that was a detail that went unnoticed. To me, Scar’s voice was just pure evil. Scar’s presence was when the TV had to be shut off or fast forwarded. I feared Scar because of the evil character that he was and this overshadowed any other details that were intended to be comprehended. I would also agree on the opinion that females are shown in a very unusual light in this film. Although the film may conclude in a very anti-feminist way, females are definitely provided with power and strength radiating through their characters throughout the film. Overall, the entire experience of learning to explore literature within books and movies using different lenses has proved quite beneficial to my classmates and myself.
Bakke 7
I agree with Mr. Van Ede that the Freudian lens view of id versus super ego is a prevalent one, but I cannot concede that it is the most important one. Because though it is the theme that is most frequently shown in the movie, this would be the theme that Disney would want to hide their more sinister meanings behind. The Freudian view for the purposes of the movies can only scratch the surface. The Marxist lens I believe is the more useful tool for this movie. Within The Lion King there are so many social problems to even account for. Scar is the epitome of a grumbling underclass citizen with the impossible task of wanting to climb the social ladder, though not in a moral fashion. Simba and Mufasa are both born at the top and stay at the top and no one will challenge them. The voiceless masses of zebras, water buffalo, and gazelles only seem to matter when they show up to bow for Simba. The minority hyenas are to stupid and busy arguing to get them selves organized to feed themselves; Scar has them convince that they are dependent on him. These factors, I believe are why the Marxism lens is better suited for analyzing The Lion King than the Freudian lens.
Lippert 7
As I was reading through the plethora of posts for me to choose from, Ms. Robertson’s post jumped up and slapped me in the face. I thoroughly enjoyed how she opened by hailing PowerPoint as being utterly dominate and Prezi as a weak little sister. And just when you thought it couldn’t get any better, she relates these two programs to The Lion King. I agree with her assessment of the ranking system in the pride lands. Scar and the hyena’s are the lowest of the low, the bottom of the food chain, just because someone has to be there. Scar had lost the genetic lottery to Mufassa epically. He is weaker than Mufassa, not as good looking as Mufassa, and he was born after Mufassa. I do not agree, however, with her assertion that the lions have no reason for being superior. The lions are the strongest animal roaming the pride lands. They can take down any animal they want and they have the knowledge required of a good leader. When Scar kills Mufassa and becomes head honcho the whole place goes down the craper. Scar invites the hyenas into the pride lands and gives them free run of the place. It is not long before the beautiful has been reduced to a wasteland devoid of both plant and animal life. The hyenas are creatures lacking in control, intelligence, and empathy. This can only lead one to wonder if there is a legitimate reason for them to be banished from the pride lands. A Marxist would assert that the hyenas are the poor and the lions are the rich. The hyenas are victims of the society they live in. This may be true, but the hyenas don’t seem willing to change. Anyone can become a function cog in the machine known as society, but they choose not to. They stay secluded from the rest and plot for when they will take over the world! Or maybe, like in Cuckoo’s Nest, the hyenas are unable to fit into society and feel safer secluded from it. In the end, there could be a million reasons why the hyenas are the way they are. We can all be sure in the fact they will always be waiting. Waiting for the light to shine, waiting for an opening to appear, waiting for a new leader to rise, and waiting for their chance to grab power once again.
Berndt 1
As I was watching the film I looked through the Marxist lens, which is why I was interested by Scholten’s post, we had similar views. I agree that Mufasa ovbiously won the genetic lottery, for he has strength, money, and as stated on slide 19 “brawn over brains gets power, money, and respect”. Mufasa was born into the royal family with his brother Scar. I didn’t think of Scar winning the genetic lottery because I was comparing him to Mufasa, who had looks, strength, intelligence and a family. Scar’s dark color, green, envious eyes, and large scar stood out to me as unfortunately ugly traits when looking through my Marxist lens. I didn’t think of Scar as a winner of the genetic lottery until after reading her post. Scar was born a lion, into the royal family as well. Scar was intelligent for manipulating Simba into running away for a period of time so he could be king. Later in her post she agrees that the Lion King trains Americans to be Pro-Caucasian. I agree with her statements as I continue to read One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest. When Simba and Nala venture off to the elephant graveyard where we are first introduced to the hyenas, we instantly grow hatred and fear of them. The hyenas are voices of a black woman, a Hispanic male, and a mentally ill man. The hyenas are obviously portrayed as the lower class in this movie, but didn’t realize that the mentally ill hyena is even lower than the black woman and the Hispanic male. I agree more with this statement as I continue to read One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest because there are black boys working for the institution at where the mentally ill are staying. The group of black boys mistreats the patients to various degrees, for they have more control and power over them.
Schwint Pd.7
Response
Ms. Andrews blog post had a wonderful comparison. She compared Hakuna Matata to your Id. I felt it was a perfect comparison. The Hakuna Matata lifestyle is all about not being responsible and doing whatever you want. Anything that makes you happy is what you strive for, even if it is not what you should be doing. Simba became lazy, gluttonous, and completely irresponsible. The Hakuna Matata lifestyle might be easier, but society was crumbling without Simba’s responsible rule. It just goes to show that if we all choice to listen to Hakuna Matata, we would all become greedy, unproductive people. A little bit of Hakuna Matata, or listening to your Id, is okay per se; BUT we must try our best to control it and not let it take over all our actions. Another comment she brought up was how the minorities (hyenas) lived in the “land where the sun don’t shine”, like God does not want them. I would feel very miserable if this was what the producers were portraying. We should not be sending this message, especially to children! How could we tell them that God does not care about you because you’re a certain race, mental challenge, or a social outcast. That is a horrible message. I really hope that is not what they are getting through to children. We should promote a loving religion instead of spreading our racism and judgement.
N. Peterson 7
While reading through my peers’ blogs from last week, Miss. Minihan’s really stuck out to me. I completely agree with her idea that God blesses/likes everyone. I think it was a really good point she made by saying people end up losing genetic or environmental lotteries because of the choices they make, not because God doesn’t like them. God does truly loves and blesses everyone sometimes we just don’t realize it. I also agree with her idea that looks and appearances can subconsciously teach readers or viewers to dislike a character. As I watched The Lion King as a child I hated Scar and thought he was extremely scary because of his looks. His black mane, unnerving eyes, and low dark voice caused me the feel this way as a child and when I watched the film a couple weeks ago. I didn’t realize until now that just the looks of characters greatly influences how the viewer feels about that them, not just the way the character acts or the things it does. One statement Miss Minihan made was that the “good side” or the Pride land had lush, green grass and the “bad side” was mostly dirt with just a small patch of grass symbolizing that everybody has a little bit of good in them. I see her point but I disagree. Throughout the movie the hyenas did not do one good thing! They taunt and chase Nala and Simba, they assist in Mufassa’s death by triggering the wildebeest stampede, one lies to Scar saying Simba is dead, they constantly complain, and even attack Scar at the end of the film. Scar also proves to have no good in him by selfishly killing his brother, betraying the hyenas, and trying to overthrow Simba.
Gallo 2
Where to start? There are so many statements I would like to re-emphasize my support for and so many others that I wish to respectfully disagree with.
First of all, “Callahan” has expressed her disagreement with my (I must say very cleverly crafted) analogy that "both brawn and brains are necessary ingredients for the baking of power, money, and respect.” She instead suggests that the king selected is the best person for the job. I certainly agree with this statement. However, my point and I believe the point of this Disney movie is that in our current American society, those lottery winners (Slide 13) are the most capable leaders. I think Callahan and I disagree on the causation of the Kingship. I believe Mufasa is king because he is smart and good-lucking, whereas Callahan seems to believe these factors are merely consequential and not qualifying factors for his Kingship. A second statement Callahan made at some point that I believe is worthy of refuting: that Scar is Godless and that is why God/the sun doesn’t shine on him. Instead, I would tend to echo sentiments on slides 48 and 49. It is tough to be Scar because, I believe, he is not as blessed by God as some of the other animals. God’s blessings are not necessary a reflection of one’s obedience. There are plenty of wealthy people who are Godless individuals; the blessings/sun still shine on them. I believe the sun is a symbol then of God’s blessings and not of his favor related to obedience of his subjects.
Secondly Marso has highlighted that, while the hyenas are at the bottom of the social latter due to their sad lottery losses (slides 22 and 29), it is there fault they have failed to move up. This is similar to Cain’s comment that women in society are not unappreciated, the hyenas just allowed society to dictate their failure. I would argue that this is a system problem. There is a pay gap. Not because women do not try to advance themselves, but because of a widespread and disappointing lack of appreciation for what they offer the workplace. The Lion King is, as mentioned in detail in the Prezi, a pro-Capitalism film. I would certainly tend to lean towards a more Liberal view on society. I would interpret this film as a clear example of less privileged members of society (including women) who are unable to advance themselves without assistance from the government/system what have you. While we’re on the subject, this film provides a great highlight for why welfare is necessary. You cannot deny that the Hyenas/lesser members of society have little chance for advancement. Any of the lions had equal chance of being born into society as a hyena, just as each of us—wealthy, privileged kids from suburbia—could’ve been born into inner-city Chicago! In locales less bucolic than South Dakota, there is indeed a need for welfare. And PLEASE, bother to execute a bit of research before you call Capitalists with consciences (Liberals) stupid. Perhaps you would like to EDUCATE YOURSELF and discover that on average, LIBERALS ARE MORE EDUCATED THAN CONSERVATIVES. Enough. I’m sorry. The politics are done for a while.
This blog task has been all over the place. I would like to close by bringing a new angle to Van Ede’s comments on the advantages of being a younger sibling. While yes, a younger sibling may have an easier road, this is not always the case. In fact, the films interpretation of events may be accurate in more cases than he (Van Ede) realizes. In Van Ede’s case, he has lived up to if not exceeded all his brother accomplished before him. The Lion King highlights when the opposite occurs. You have to assume that about half the time, the reverse occurs. The younger cannot live up to or excel beyond the eldest’s accomplishments. This often results in depression, and, as in Scar’s case, the younger sibling pursuing completely different avenues from the older because they feel they can never live up. That is all I have.
Wilde 7
I found Chase Marso’s comments regarding evolution to be extraordinarily fascinating. While it is obvious to assume the Christianity undertones throughout The Lion King were intentional, analyzing the reference to evolution as Chase suggested is a bit more debatable. Although I was initially oblivious to Chase’s observation, I now concur that Rafiki walking on two legs COULD be a blatant reference to evolution. However, I find it difficult to believe that this scene was intentional. First, there is virtually nothing to be found validating this discovery. I find it perplexing how researching “The Lion King AND evolution” yields nothing valuable. Second, as Chase mentioned, religion and evolution are rarely integrated, particularly in films and novels. As stated above, the movie is flooded with religion. The Lion King as a whole seems to be somewhat of a Christian allegory, being a heroic tale of good versus evil. I do question why one must search so long and hard to find any movie—especially a Children’s movie—with allusions and references to evolution. Our society works so hard to shelter children from evolution, while more and more evidence presents itself in favor. In AP Biology we recently discussed the fact that our country is so antievolution. I feel that a major contributor to that statistic is the way we prevent our kids from learning about evolution by natural selection. While I truly find The Lion King to be a valuable film, I do not believe that there was any intention for scholars, like Chase, to pick up on what seems to be an overt reference to evolution. Maybe one day in our lives there will be animated movies portraying evolution at work. We should all give props to scholar Chase Marso for piecing together a far from obvious connection.
Poppenga 1 Response
Reading through the plethora of comments that my fellow peers have posted, it was much harder for me to write this blog task than the others. Mr. Story’s stuck out to me however, being that I completely agree with all of his points. Like Blake said, Mufasa obviously won the genetic lottery: strength, power, and good lucks…what else could a lion ask for? “Brawn over brains gets power, money, and respect”, stated on slide 29. In relation to Taylor Hanzels blog, I share her same feelings: The Lion King was definitely one of my favorite Disney movies while growing up. As I re-watched the popular children’s movie like Taylor Hanzel, I was flabbergasted at all of the hidden innuendos. Although I do not agree with all of the “symbols”, deeper thought processes were being perceived in my brain. I believe thinking deeper about this movie not only helps with Literature but life as a whole. Agreeing with Mr. Arrowsmith and disagreeing with Mr. Marso about disagreeing with Mr. Arrowsmith, I would definitely not show my children The Lion King with the “bifocals” as Miss Callahan assertively stated. I do not see this movie the same way as I used to. Like Arrowsmith said, “I am now aware of the horrible message it sends to kids including racism and sexism.” And this statement is so true; after reviewing this film more thoroughly, I am almost sickened at all of the concealed symbols throughout a children’s movie. Like Megan Callahan said though, it was made by adults. It just appalls me that adults put these gruesome symbols like sex, racism, and sexist meanings throughout the movie and they know children will be watching.
Forster 2
While perusing through the plethora of well-written blog tasks completed for the January tenth assignment, I found Abby Voigt’s to be well-written and full of true and relevant statements about our analysis of The Lion King. First, I agree that watching The Lion King became a common activity of choice for kids that grew up in the mid-90s. It was a fun, popular, and feel-good comedy that brought animals to life in a culture that many of us had not yet been exposed to. I believe the exotic nature of the film, along with its colorful and bright animation made it exceedingly enticing to young children and adults alike. I also agree with Abby’s statement that, as young children, we would have never caught on to the symbolic elements and ideas that are incorporated as revealed by Mr. Christensen’s teaching and further analytical analysis of the Disney Film. As an extension to the ideas presented in my original blog post, I would like to mention that it is very fortunate that these ideas were not fully understood by our five and six year old minds during our first viewings of the production. If it were so, we would have had corrupt, racist, and conformist ideas taking root in our minds as mere children, and that would be quite a travesty. Children should be allowed to think freely, and—though they will no doubt be affected by society in time—form their own opinions about religion, other cultures, and what exactly they believe the genetic and environmental lotteries are. Children should not be forced into a world where they do not hold their own views and simply use their parents’ as a crutch to lean on. Practices such as these will only hinder the progress of society toward new, exciting, and original ideas that come with different ways of thinking and new ways of viewing the world.
K. Peterson 7
While reading through the many posts, I came upon Kara’s post. In the end of her post she relates The Lion King to Christianity. Who knew a children’s movie could be so deep! Mufasa is the God symbol. He is the head of the Kingdom and the light shines on him. His son Simba would link to Jesus. There are a couple faults in this conclusion thought. From the start, Jesus was teaching and preaching all over the kingdom. He was healing and helping others. Simba leaves and lives with Timon and Pumbaa in a narcissist life. He does not take responsibility to his actions until Nala comes and reminds him. I would relate Simba to Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus lived a life all about himself and his personal gain until he was awoken by Jesus who came into his life. After he was saved, Zacchaeus gave back to the people just like Simba defeated Scar and took over the kingdom. Scar represents the devil. The devil can be very tempting and sly to people but results in evil in the end. Scar tricks Simba plenty of times by making Simba think that he will help his dad but ends up making the situation worse or even killing his father. The devil tempts us as humans and makes us think wrong actions are right. Going back to Mufsaa, there are instances where Mufasaa is there in spirit. For example, when Simba sees his father in the water and when Ratiki tells Simba that his father is still with him. God is said to always be with us through the Holy Spirit. From all these comparisons I truly believe The Lion King is a pro-religion movie. Disney has the right to include spirituality because it is there movie. The company in not a governmental business, it is private. Spirituality in a movie is a positive influence in children’s life.
Beckman 1
The first blog entry that I read was Mr. Story’s, and I must say I thought he had some great ideas that I, myself, had not even considered. How he said the lions were meant to portray “’the strong white people’” really made me think. For some reason, over the course of history, white people all over the world have found themselves supremely dominant to those of any other race. Just because they are white does not mean that they are ultimately better than anyone who is not, yet white people have never had a problem enslaving or avoiding those other people—pushing them to the outskirts of society. Similarly, the lions had no problem pushing the hyenas to the outskirts of the land and avoiding them—never mingling or associating. No one can help who they are born as; they do not get to choose who they will be before birth. The Marxist view posses a very intriguing question for these people (or animals): Is there any possible way for them to overcome what they have been born as and move up in society? Some, like Scar, are more than capable of moving up and holding prominent positions because they have the knowledge to do so even if they did not necessarily win the genetic or environmental lottery. It is assumed that Scar’s parents heavily favored Mufasa, leaving Scar to have lost the environmental lottery as well as the genetic because he was treated as so much less than Mufasa—not given the attention he so strongly yearned for. Maybe if Scar had been given just a little more positive attention either from his parents or his brother things would have gone completely different! The same can be said for society today, children need attention, guidance, and encouragement. Without things like this children grow up thinking they are worthless, less important than another, and become resentful which can lead to extreme behaviors not unlike Scar’s. We can learn a lot from even a Disney movie if we just think a little harder and consider the thoughts of others.
Redford 7
For part two of this blog task, I would like to respond to Miss Robertson. As I was glancing at the already completed blog tasks, I noticed quite a few responses to her blog task. The more responses I saw, as well as my previous knowledge at her incredible artistic and literary talents, the more I wanted to read what she had written. I found hers and found the first paragraph fairly amusing. It didn’t really seem to have anything to do with the topic, yet I found myself completely agreeing with her. I’d take a Powerpoint over a Prezi any day. As I read on, I realized the point she was getting at. I liked this approach because at first, it doesn’t seem like there is much of a point in just talking about what your personal preference about that is, just like there doesn’t seem like there’s all that much of a point in naming one lion Scar and the other Mufasa. However, once you look deeper, you see how Mufasa is more of an intense name, whereas Scar seems much more vulnerable. Scar implies getting hurt. If a person has a scar, it can be assumed that at one point that person got cut or hurt in some fashion. Another part of her blog task besides the name portion also caught my attention. She mentioned that she related best to Scar. After I read that, I began to wonder why one would relate more to the villain rather than the hero. However, when you actually take a look at Scar, he is almost to be pitied, at least up to a point. He is at the bottom of the social ladder when it comes to the lions. He lives in the shadow of his brother. He has no mate and no one to really talk to. He has to live knowing that he is smarter than his brother, yet he is of no importance to the rest of the lions. I don’t know what Miss Robertson’s reason as to why she related to Scar more, but the more I thought about it, the more reasonable it seemed that one would relate more to Scar than to Mufasa.
Westcott, 5
For my second blog task, I would like to respond to Megan Callahan’s post. I enjoyed her analogy of the three lenses—Feminist, Freudian, and Marxist—to bifocals. According to Megan, each lens is always cast over by the Freudian aspect of good versus evil. I agree with this statement because as children we automatically see Mufasa, Simba, and Nala as the good guys. Mufasa’s brother, Scar, and his pack of hyenas are seen as evil, therefore making children want them to lose the overall battle for Pride Rock. I relate to Megan’s comment about not noticing the British accent in Scar’s voice as a child. When Mr. Christensen first mentioned Scar was casted as an English man, I was a bit baffled. Going back and watching the movie with my aforementioned “bifocals” on, I witnessed many symbols in The Lion King I had previously missed. For example, I agree with Miss Callahan’s remark on how similar the lions are to white people in today’s society, or the successful people. However, Scar is left out of that category due to his appearance. Unlike the other lions, Scar has a long black mane and had darker fur; causing him to stand out from the others. He isn’t seen as “white” or as good as the other lions because of this difference, and therefore is seen as only above the hyenas. When getting his chance on Pride Rock in the film, it is depicted as more of an elephant graveyard than loyal worshipers as was given to Mufasa and Simba. I also strongly agree with Megan in saying that she does not feel bad for Scar because he lives his life without God. He had multiple opportunities to decide to do the right thing, but chose not to. For example, as Mufasa was hanging over the cliff, Scar could have helped him up, but instead chose to push his brother to his death. Using the “bifocals” made with the Marxist and Feminist lens and a Freudian transitional lens, I noticed many new things in the common Disney film, The Lion King.
Miller 5 Part 2
Ms. Herrick on the 9th pointed out how Mufasa is voice by a black man. This struck her as odd because according to slide 23 white equals smart and black equals dumb. What Ms. Herrick overlooked was a point made that the man who voiced Mufasa, like President Obama, sounds white and therefore smart. She also poses the question of ‘if Scar and Mufasa grew up together then why is Scar not as successful’. The answer to this would be that Scar won the genetic lottery in brains where Mufasa won the brawns, and apparently brawn is all that matters when it comes to lions. Ms. Herrick also asks about tolerance of the hyenas (other races). What I believe she is missing is that The Lion King is showing how the white males (lions) do not accept the other races (hyenas) at all; they are banished. To her point about the lionesses, yes, it is true that the males would have nothing to eat without the females, but that does not mean they will be treated equally. I personally disagree with Ms. Herrick’s statement about how the hyenas are evil, and that is why the light is not shining on them. I realize that the sun is God, but he shines on everyone who he created. I believe the light does not shine on them because it is driving home the fact that they are the lesser species, or race if you will. One of the points in this movie is that white (lion) is better than everything else (hyena). Therefore, if you are against the white (lions) who were chosen by God, then you are against God. Finally, I feel like Ms. Hallstrom’s comment about white Americans was misunderstood by Ms. Herrick. I believe that Ms. Hallstrom meant that the movie was saying white Americans were better not herself; though I could be wrong.
Pham 7
Regarding Nick-Knack’s blog task, I would like to analyze his Marxist criticism of _The Lion King_. However, I first must clarify or, in fact, redefine his wording. When he says that animals “gather around in the ‘Circle of Life,’” he means that they are gathering in the song “The Circle of Life.” They are in no way gathering in a circle of life—that would be ridiculous. In his view of Marxist literary theory, he states that lions achieve the highest tier of success—blatantly shown through their success in hunting, mating, and ruling. Yet there are always outcasts within every sect. This can be shown through Scar whom is still a lion despite his lack of hearth at Pride Rock. This shows that genetics is not the only lottery to be won. Though Scar has been born a lion, he does not enjoy the full privileges of being a lion of Pride Rock. Instead, he is cast aside because he behaves differently from the rest of the lions. However, Scar maintains his position on the social ladder by being able to obtain, food, shelter, water and followers.
I also concur that the hyenas are of lower class. They live in the slums of society and are controlled by those of higher class (ie. Scar). The same can be said about Timon and Pumba. We may deem these two lower class because they live in a separate environment from the rest of kingdom and do not work. The Marxist lens has a concept of enforces those capable to work. Timon and Pumba can be seen as those that are unemployed and are not looking for a job. Howbeit, they still reap the benefits of working such as living in paradise and having “grub.” Though they are anarchists (trying to keep away from society), they continue to leech societies benefits. Throughout the movie, Marxist literary criticisms of class shine almost as clearly as feminist criticisms.
Andrews1
I found Mr.Schwint’s insight to be very intriguing. I loved his points on the way the movie views religion and how in depth he got with it. It makes it seem like God has his “Chosen Ones” and the rest are discriminated and oppressed. It makes it seem like it is our Divine right as white Americans to have what we want. The Black Friday example is perfect. The day before Black Friday, Thanksgiving, is a day to come together and say thanks. The whole day of Thanksgiving is full of irony from the history behind it involving the Indians to the very next day on Black Friday. God does not want us to show what we are grateful for by being greedy. Instead we should be doing much more for the world. He wants us to share and give to the minorities like the hyenas instead of being ashamed of them and hiding them away. I agree with Mr. Schwint’s points on Scar. He did lose both lotteries and is less loved, because of it. No wonder he turns to the lower class hyenas. He feels just like them since he was always told he was inferior.They were the only ones to ever listen to him and that is what made him feel powerful. I agree 100% on Schwint’s claims about the statement on how we shun intelligence for brawn. Intelligence will always be better than how much you can lift for throw a football, because intelligence is what gives us ideas and keeps us moving forward. Power, money, and respect should be gained with the good you do with your intelligence instead of your shallowness. Also, I agree with the statement made about racial prejudice.The hyenas are portrayed as discriminated groups: women, blacks, Hispanics, mentally ill. As far as we have come, we cannot deny that we still discriminate and continue to oppress these groups since they seem to have lost the genetic lottery. They are looked down on just for simply being born that way.
Clemenson 2
I would like to respond to Ms. Shroll’s comment. I am intrigued by her religious observations that I unfortunately have missed every time I have viewed the Lion King. After reading her comment, I googled a picture of Rafiki’s tree to understand her observation about the holy trinity. After seeing the picture I realize that I never noticed that Rafiki’s tree is drawn with three main sections of branches. The three major parts even create a triangle and I was originally taught to visualize a triangle as a representation of the holy trinity. Rafiki is able to guide Simba as if God is talking through him to Simba. I never thought about Mufasa forgiving Simba like Jesus came to forgive out sins. These observations continue to demonstrate how pro-religion the Lion King is. I disagree with Ms. Hallstrom’s comment which states “I don’t believe it’s socially acceptable that a female be heir to throne when there is a male who at some point will be just as capable.” Nala is more capable of being queen than Simba because she is physically stronger (she can pin Simba as a full grown lion), smarter (she thought of how to get rid of Zazu), and more dedicated to the pride (she did not run away like Simba did). I agree with Ms. Hallstrom’s later comment about Nala and young children not understanding that men have more privileges in our society simply because they are male. Our society teaches people to favor male dominance over female. Numerous books and movies portray men as the strong and dominate character so children are taught from a young age to believe males are superior. Slowly, women are becoming more equal in society but men still naturally assume dominance. The female lions possessed the ability to overthrow Scar with their brains and physical superiority but Scar remained king because society does want to accept females as leaders.
Weidenbach 1
I have to be compelled to the fact that The Lion King has the potential to instill bad ethics and behaviors into the younger generation. Prime example of this is the theory of brawns over brains. My fellow classmate Svartoien shows a good example of this on her past blog, by comparing this ideology to propaganda posters. If leaders would be more intelligent we would have a better society and world to live in. Instead many of our leaders are not necessarily physically strong, but possess other qualities that give them the brawn physic like money, good looks, or having fancy toys. It is a travesty that our society hails these people as our leaders, because of their economic status and their uncanny ability to get their way. I also agree that Timon and Pumba always stay carefree throughout the movie. When I implement the characters Timon and Pumba into the real world, the idea that flashes into my head in an instant is the show Jersey Shore. People that stay carefree and blissful by contributing to society by partying and dating move up in class. It boggles my mind that people like this can move up in our society! The cast of Jersey Shore now has loads of money, are very famous, and possess various other television shows. I am positive that more people in America know who Snoki is rather than a leader like Joseph II who was a Holy Roman Emperor during 1764 - 1790. He made the rights of peasants and education one of his main concerns during his rule. In summary we both agree that it is sad that people still choose brawns over brains sometimes. Many others and I all hope one day everyone will realize that brains are better than brawns.
Rollag 5
I find Mr. Van Ede’s view of the symbols in the movie and those stated in the prezi to best reflect the ideas and view of myself. His ideas on the constant id and superego battle seamlessly fit to the structure and subconscious intentions of the writers’ script. The idea that Nala symbolizes the superego helps overcome the problem of why she did not take power herself as you suggested in the prezi. Which view is right the correct answer to that question is both. Under the Freudian lens the id and superego concept is correct, but when one view the same question under the feminist lens then it is the long standing idea of gender roles. Mr. Van Ede’s next idea is his disagreement with the birth order argument made by the movie. He asserts that being born latter in the birth order is better than being the first born. In his situation this may be true but his view would be vastly different had he been in
Scars position of almost being supreme ruler of the pride. Unfortunately every situation is different and no universal rule can be applied to determine the best slot in the birth order. While Mr. Van Ede tackled the Freudian lens Mr. Marso took on the Marxist lens and applied it in a surprising and extraordinarily accurate way to the real world and society as a whole. His premise is that the hyenas are like the poor in modern society looking for a way into rich society. He equated them to football players that make the pros and end up broke after their careers are over. This was not only insightful but back up by one of my favorite things cold hard facts. You could even compare this idea to lottery winners who also come upon great wealth and quickly squander it. However, the lottery idea is often used for the other characters separating those who won the genetic lottery and those who lost as the majority of my peers did.
Rusten 5
(Response)
Scrolling through all of the original posts and the responses, I noticed Ms. Robertson receiving a lot of attention. Of course I go and search (for about 5 minutes I might add) until I find her post. What I found was extremely amusing and made me chuckle. While the first half was completely off subject I found I enjoyed that little act of rebellion if you may call it that. I do disagree with her about the prezis. I enjoy them more then PowerPoint because you get more creative freedom and enjoy yourself while making a slide show to present. Mostly I find making Power Points tedious and frankly obnoxious-- a prezi shakes things up a bit. Her reasoning for why PowerPoint is superior to Prezi could use a little work though. J What I love in her post is the smooth transition from her tirade about Power Points and Prezis to the Lion King. Where I do not agree with her about the above, I do agree that her analogies fit perfectly. She discuses how the lions represents the Powerpoint just because they are superior, why? Just because. Also comparing the names, she talks about how Powerpoint and Mufasa sound so much stronger then Prezi and scar. Is that genetic lottery? Scar loses the genetic lottery in this perspective. Ms. Robertson also brings up the point that Mufasa, the brawn Powerpoint and Prezi as scar being different and not as accepted is also a part of the genetic lottery. Bravo, Ms. Robertson, I thoroughly enjoyed your blog post.
Bender 7
Reading through the previous posts Adam Guthmiller’s post presented some very thought provoking ideas to me. The first thing that struck me was the sentence “Capitalism is not the problem I have; the problem is that I was a slave to a system before I had a chance to know there was a system.” I too have no problem with capitalism and certainly don’t endorse communism. I find Marxist to be by far the most interesting of the three lenses. The idea of being brainwashed by a system into believing we have not been brainwashed at all is intriguing to say the least. The really interesting point to me however was when do we become aware of the system. Is awareness of the system acceptance that regardless of whether or not we rebel to the system we are still interpelated to it? I always find it funny that people believe they are rebelling against culture and sticking it to the man by dressing different and listening to less popular music. This in and of itself is simply a different system they have become brainwashed to. My question though is what do we do. I believe a completely independent uninfluenced thought does not exist. How then should we live our daily lives? I believe acceptance is key and inevitable. I believe choice is the next step. Knowing that this choice has probably already been hardwired into our lives is a fact of life. We then need to choose how and by what do we want to be controlled. We can choose friends, school, television, church or a number of other things. This choice depends on the brainwashing already affecting our lives. What have you been made to value as important. The choice is the most important and personal choice we will ever make. Adam’s post made me second guess whether or not the choice has already been made for us.
Steffen 5 (17th)
For part two of this blog task I would like to respond to Abby Voigt’s post last week. She really opened my mind to new perspectives. One enlightenment in particular shed light on my views of the hyenas. Abby suggested that maybe the creators of The Lion King subconsciously chose the voices of the hyenas without really thinking about it. “When examined, it is undeniably supposed that the hyenas represent outsiders trying to gain acceptance. I cannot help but wonder however, if the choice of voices was purposeful or not?” Meaning we, as people, ostracize diversity based our specific ethnicity. I always imagined that the symbolism in this movie was purposefully placed and meticulously put together. I never thought that some elements could have been the subconscious result of society’s norms and/ or stereotypes.
In Dillon Waldera’s blog task he posted, “It brings up the thought that there might be some racism in all of us whether we would like to think so or not. I would like to believe I am not a racist but I know for a fact I do not think of all races the same….” Just like in The Lord of the Flies, the beast exists in everyone, low-laying and undetectable. Eventually growing to an abominable force just waiting to undulate to the surface, the beast/racism emulates from the fear of the unknown. From a young age we were exposed to diversity and aware of the differences, subconsciously stereotyping them. So, by the time we are adults, we are experts in deeming those unfit for “our” society to the “badlands”.
Understanding these two viewpoints has increased my knowledge of the world. I will continue to reproduce these analyzing skills to broaden my every day life. Although The Lion King will never be as innocent as it was when I was five, I still enjoy a good movie.
Collin Livingston Pd.5
In response...
There were many intriguing and well wrote responses to the prezi we all studied, but I found Mr. Johnke’s particularly agreeable with my knowledge. Many animals do seem satisfied with where they are on the social ladder or, from our viewpoint, the food chain. Besides Scar and his mangy pack of hyena’s (pointed out by Logan) no one else tries to change the way things are ran around the Pride Lands. His observation made me think. It almost says subliminally to me that, from the viewpoint of the lions being “white” and the other animals of a different skin color, Disney means to convey to us that other races aren’t as good as the white race. This only re-affirms my belief in my post last Thursday where I discussed Disney’s choices of voices behind certain characters. Another intellectual statement I found particularly fascinating was Logan’s comparison of the hyena’s devotion to Scar to German citizen’s during Hitler’s regime. Certainly the hyenas took sides with Scar in desperation to become something other than the spittle of creation. Scar seemed to withhold qualities the hyena’s desired in order to make a change, to give them hope, desire, and strength. The citizens of Germany did the exact same, following Hitler because he seemed to be the voice behind change within their country at a time of massive and incredulous disparity. On their hands and knees and crippled from repeated blows and strikes delivered by countries across the world for their destruction, the Germans more now than ever needed a leader and thus instilled almost fanatic-like devotion into Hitler. As the movie progressed the hyenas turned on Scar, just as Germany had turned on Hitler. The hyenas saw how Scar was in it for personal gain, not to help anyone but himself in the long run. Although this wasn’t the exact story for the Germans they similarly lost hope and withdrew from Hitler’s clammy grasp at the end of his regime. Mr. Johnke’s insight in his article was very informative and thought provoking. I hope he continues to produce quality work that I may have the chance to respond to and review in the future!
Etrheim 5
Like Mr. Guthmiller, it also scares me to think that I was manipulated so easily at such a young age. This makes me wonder how else I have been brainwashed throughout my life. In The Lion King, Disney brainwashes children to be capitalists before even knowing what capitalism is. Adam also mentioned that the “American Dream” is not present in the film. I find this very ironic because capitalism is what America is run on. How can one be present and not the other? The “American Dream” is the belief that those in the lower class can work their way up in society to the upper class. This movie is not like that at all. For example, the hyenas are born at the bottom of society and cannot do anything to change that. Therefore, they remain at the bottom of society because of what they were born as. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the lions were born at the top of the food chain and the top of society. They are superior to every other species in the wild including the hyenas because of what they were brought into this world as. Saying all of this, there is no change of status. No one is able to work their way up the social ladder. Whatever class you are born into is the class you will remain in for the rest of your life. In this sense, The Lion King gives children a bad lesson saying that you cannot improve socially and economically. For the film to demonstrate the “American Dream”, a hyena or another animal of the lower class should gain status and work his/her way up society to the highest position in the Pride Lands, the king. A pro-capitalist yet anti-American Dream movie makes me question its psychoanalytic intentions.
Stephens 1
Personally I disagree with Guthmiller’s first few statements. I may just be ignorant or naive, but I do not believe that I was at all interpellated by the Lion King as a child. At no point in my young mind did I wonder why Nala could not save the pride. When asked, I most likely would have childishly responded, “Because that is not how the story goes!” To young children, the Lion King is a cartoon with no deeper meaning and I do not believe the film affects how they perceive the world or how they fit into the system. I do not disagree that there is a system, and it is horrible in some aspects, but we live in an imperfect world. I don’t believe anyone could devise a system in which everyone was happy. So as much as we hate the system, we need it. Without it there would be chaos. In my defense, I understand that I cannot know any of this for sure, because it has never been tried. Chaos is only my prediction, and there is always a chance that life would be better, but not all aspects of the system are bad.
I agree with Miss Clemenson though, when she states that every person seems to worship something. All people are naturally inclined to have a purpose in life. For some, it is God. To the homeless guy under the bridge, it may be to earn money to buy more alcohol. But everyone has a purpose and aim for their life. Everyone does everything they do for a reason. The majority of those reasons are selfish. Humankind is naturally selfish though, so it is not really our fault…but it is at the same time. You don’t have to teach your children to horde all of their toys and take toys from others. You have to teach them to be loving and share. And example I heard once was whenever my friend would do something cruel to another child, his mother would say, “How would it make you feel if someone did that to you?” I believe many high schoolers need to be reminded of this infantile lesson.
VandeBerg 5
I decided to examine Adam Bauer's analyzation of The Lion King. I agree with his interpretation of the phallic symble being Pride Rock. It is also interesting that it is called Pride Rock; it is the pride of the male and masculine thought to be well endowed. I also agree with what he had to say about the currency. Currency can be any number of things that can contribute to our pride. These include food, water, shelter, females, respect, power, and status. I agree with his assessment of Scar, being that he should be king instead of Mufasa. The Lion King chose brawn over brain, which should never be the case. Brain should be over brawn in any king/presidential situation. Mufasa is also the more dominating male, again that is why he is chosen. Scar is a wimpy, feminine, british, brother (I have absolutely no idea how the two can be brothers other than adoption) who did not win any lotteries; therefore his meager chance at being king is drowned out with how great Mufasa is. I found it very interesting how he brought the light the fact that while Scar was King, there was a massive drought. Bauer claims that this is because God is punishing Scar for his wrong doings and his wrongful way of getting into power. I completely concur. This is a horrible way to become King. Killing your own brother and making the son feel like it is his fault is a far cry from fair. However, we repeatedly learn that the evil or wicked never play fair. They have their own rules that they abide by, such as Scar when he crosses over many moral lines that most people have; he does not possess these moral lines because he was shunned for being such a failure compared to the amazing Mufasa. I cannot blame him for wanting to get revenge, I would not want to be shunned and told I was nothing compared to my brother who got everything he wanted because he won the genetic and social lotteries. However, I do not justify what Scar does, that crosses many moral codes of my own. Overall, I agree with Bauer on his points.
Ullom 7
While looking through all the stellar blogs written last week, I decided I wanted to respond to Ms. Lenz. What caught my attention was her comment about Scar’s color representing the devil. I had never thought about it that way. I have noticed the green envy in his eyes, just like Traci had in her blog, but never his overall color. She stated that he is more red than the other lions. I agree that this may be representing the devil and possibly communism. After reading her comment I am starting to think harder about this concept. It makes sense. The devil gets people to give into their temptations and go against God. This is precisely what Scar is doing. He is committing extreme sin by wanting to kill his brother and actually going through with it. Scar is willing to kill both his nephew and brother in order to be king. This is a direct sin. He is showing the premise of going against God. With the communism aspect, I looked at the song “Be Prepared.” During most of the song, the atmosphere is the color green. At the end, it turns to red, showing the shift to communism. The last step is when Scar is shown on the top of the mountain/hill with red all around him and the moon in the background. The moon makes the same shape on the communist flag, which is the hammer and sickle. The similarities are uncanny. In response to Ms. Lenz’s comment about Nala… fascinating. The name had to have been picked deliberately because it seems very obvious that Nala should in fact be king. She was responsible at home helping to take care of others while Simba was relaxing in narcissistic bliss with Timon and Pumbaa. She even had to convince him to come back to Pride Rock in order to save the kingdom. Ms. Lenz’s blog really opened my eyes even more. When you think you have analyzed something completely, there is always more to learn.
Minihan 7
Reading and listening to others’ perspectives and viewpoints is very critical. It is good to have an opinion on a topic, but if you never hear the other side of a story, or another person’s standpoint, your mind will stay limited and restricted. By only allowing one thought into your head, you become arrogant in a way. When reading the blog tasks of my intelligent peers, I was given more insight; I saw things differently about the Lion King than I had perceived them through my own eyes. After reading Svartoien’s task, my eyes have been opened further. Being a little naïve, I believed that Mufasa was mainly chosen as king due to his friendliness. I had not thought about brawns or brains when comparing Scar and Mufasa. Often in society, people are chosen, well-liked, or admired due to their appearance; a good example is “Jersey Shore”. Though I have not suffered through a full episode of this show, I know that the main character (Snooki?) has a very low intelligence level… While our society watches and supports television shows such as “The Big Bang Theory”, those brainy characters are solely placed on the screen for laughs. I feel like way more people look up to Snooki and want that type of lifestyle: careless, fun-filled, and no regret (may I add: no morals). The Lion King portrays the same message, but not to teens with nothing better to do, but to children, whose parents set them down in front of this brainwashing screen which is playing a surreptitious movie. Society needs to regain its morals and start prioritizing. If this is how fast we have disregarded some of our values, we need to continue with caution, or our world will only consist of skinny, party animals without values and beliefs and skinny, party animals without values and belief-wannabes.
Heisel 2
Upon browsing the comments section, I came across Rollag 5’s essay. I was particularly interested due to the short length and concise nature of his comment. I really enjoyed his incite on the political ideology of Hitler and the Nazi party versus Stalin and Communism. Although his incite is accurate to some extent, Scar can still be portrayed as Hitler. Obvious symbols are there with the rankings of the hyenas. I believe that the movie was more demoting general dictatorship, not the Communist or Nazi belief system. I also concur with the flaw in the Oedipus complex in Simba. Simba surely does not want to marry his mother. Instead, he would rather his father just die and he and a different queen would rein. (Naturally, Simba is not aware of this.) Rollag then went on to describe the general plotline of the Prezi, including details about Nala and the sexist lens. Nothing is this section struck me as particularly profound, so I will comment further upon the Nala/feminism issue. I feel as if Nala, although stronger as children, is no longer stronger as an adult, but she still may be more fit to be “king”. Animal Planet led me to believe that the male lions are in fact stronger, but by nature lazy (sleeping up to 20 hours a day), where the females sleep less and do the majority of the hunting. The lazy nature of male lions is displayed in Simba (hukuna matata), and the lionesses hunting displays the female lion’s role. Female lions are typically the “working class” of the lion higher-achy, which parallels our society. Men are often more lazy, where women do the majority of the housework and cooking (even if they both have careers).
I also came to the conclusion that I did not put the specific slide numbers in my own essay. This is rather upsetting, so hopefully I can make up for it in later, more effective blogs.
Pederson 7 (RESPONSE)
Although Miss Backer highlights many important undertones of this classic Disney film in her essay, I disagree with the statement that Marxism is the core lens to analyze this film with. My opinion is that the Feminist lens should be the primary lens for this movie. Gender conflict is always apparent throughout the movie. While Scar’s only struggle is coming up with plans to kill his relatives to get the throne, the lionesses are on a complete lower tier in society. He gets to be brother to a King, while every female is seen as subservient to the male authority. One of the strongest animals in the kingdom, Nala possesses the prowess to kill Scar, but she knows no one will accept a female as the main ruler of the kingdom. Instead, her only opportunity for power is discovering Simba in his paradise of “Hakuna Matata” and convincing him to usurp Scar from his throne. In reality, lionesses are usually the main hunters in their prides. However, the movie never demonstrates that the lionesses posses this quality. Instead, Sarabi is only shown to explain why they can no longer hunt. Is this to imply that the lionesses aren’t trying hard enough? Earlier in the film all the movie showed was the mothers giving their cubs tongue-baths. Another gender conflict is having the female hyena, Shenzi, leading the hyenas. Since hyenas seem to have little self control, is Disney implying that women can’t control large groups of people? However, Scar assumed responsibility of the hyenas, and Pride Rock became lifeless once he took control. Shenzi shows she can lead the pack to kill Scar once they find out Scar is trying to betray them. The message is unclear. Is Disney modeling our own, semi-patriarchal society, or are they showing that women are capable of nearly anything despite the difficult odds. Being informed of these analyzing lenses has piqued my interest, and I will enjoy using these lenses to get a better understanding of what I’m viewing in every situation of my life.
Hensley 5
Analyzing my fellow classmates’ posts about their analysis of Mr. Christensen’s prezi of the Lion King, I found one that spiked my interest. Mr. Van Ede perspective of the younger sibling is an interesting one. It was interesting for me to read Mr. Van Ede’s view point for I am the oldest sibling within my own family. I agree on the point that as an advantage, the younger sibling can step into the path that the older sibling has blazed. While this can make life easier for the younger sibling, a statistic taken a few years ago placed the more successful sibling as being the oldest. Now this would rise to question, why would the oldest sibling be the most successful? My answer is why not? It is a proven fact that parents are typically stricter with their first child as they try to learn the methods of becoming a good parent, as a second and third child come around, parents typically have slacken their rules, subsequently hurting their children. As the first child, you must blaze the path; this prepares you for the real world where you must figure out problems for yourself where no one is there to hold your hand. The younger siblings however have the opportunity to slack off through their childhood as everything is handed and already figured out for them making life easier. I can’t also help but feel that deep down every younger sibling does not want to be known because of their older sibling. This causes them to struggle as they trudge through their childhood in their older sibling’s shadow and told what they are to be instead of what they want to be. So it is in my personal opinion that the older sibling, while it may be a hard path in their adolescence, tend to be more successful in the long run. It is not to say that younger siblings can’t be more successful than their older siblings, because they can; it is whether or not they want to.
Peltier 5
As I read through some of the other student’s blogs, I agree with Mr. Guthmiller and Ms. Minihan. Like Mr. Guthmiller said, I never realized how interpellated we all were to be more like capitalists. Do we ever just think on our own? Or do we just think we make our own decisions? Maybe we have just been brainwashed from the get-go that we do not know right from wrong! I agree that The Lion King promotes capitalism. All throughout the movie, Simba lived the perfect, relaxing, and care-free life. Why did Simba win the genetic and environmental lottery? Simba believes he is responsible for his father’s death, yet still lives in paradise where there are “no worries (Hakkunah Matata)”. Scar however has never been given any sort of reward.
From a different lens, I also completely agree with Ms. Minihan that God blesses everyone. Just because someone is poor or did not win the genetic or environmental lottery does not mean they are not blessed. They are just blessed in a different way. In fact, some people believe poorer people are more grateful and realize how truly blessed they really are. Maybe we have just been so brainwashed by everything around us that we do not know what a true blessing is or are blinded when a true blessing comes along. Instead, we complain about our problems when in actuality, if we are patient, maybe there will be a blessing in disguise. I believe God blesses each of us with certain gifts and a purpose. If everyone was given the exact same gift, there would be no fun in noticing when a true blessing comes along. By having different gifts, whether sports, singing, acting, drawing, etc. we have all been given a gift to touch someone else’s life or bless them. So no, God does not just bless the rich, we have just been brainwashed into thinking that you are only truly blessed if you look perfect and have the nicest looking clothes, house, and spouse.
Coyle 2
As I studied the responses and summaries of my fellow classmates, I found that many of them were quite insightful, going above and beyond merely summarizing the prezi, adding personal opinions and other interesting statements that enhanced my ability to analyze this exhibit. Ms. Minihan noted one particular instance that, although I have watched the movie upwards of fifty times, I still had not noticed. She pointed out that, although the lush green Pride Lands are clearly favored, the outlands are still blessed with some grass, despite the dry, desert-like appearance. My colleague made the connection that although the outlands seem all bad, there is still a little good in them, and it is the same with people. A person may do many things wrong and appear to stand behind these actions, but somewhere deep within, there is still a little bit of good. Another intriguing post I read was created by Mr. Pederson. He asserts that intelligence is not necessarily the means to run a kingdom. Mr. Pederson states that although Scar shows superior intelligence in the way he cleverly kills his brother and banishes Simba, this intelligence is not the same kind that is needed to efficiently run a kingdom. This is seen when Simba returns to the Pride Lands, which have since crumbled and assumed the same appearance of the neglected outlands. Scar’s intelligence was unable to save the kingdom from collapsing, leaving the lions with little food and virtually no means of restoring the herds. One other particularly enlightening ideas was presented by Mr. Albertson. He realized the clever connection between the sun being God, and the lions being rulers. In the movie, Mufasa states that the lions rule everything the light touches. Mr. Albertson cleverly connects this to the Theory of the Divine Right of Kings, in which God selects an individual to rule and gives that person complete authority over their land.
Wehrkamp 2
What is the number one Disney movie of all time? Ironically, The Lion King. When I was younger, The Lion King was one of my favorite movies, little did I know I was being brainwashed by Disney. The revealing Marxist message on slide 19, Brawn over brain gets you power, money and respect. Initially Mufasa has won the genetic and environmental lottery, but his brother, Scar, has lost both. Scar and the hyenas are all darker color than the rest of the animals, believed to represent the minority. Simba is chosen at birth to take over the “kingdom” from his father Mufasa. Then is deceived by Scar in the event of Mufasa’s death, along with the order to kill Simba that Scar gives the hyenas. Is Disney telling children not to trust the minority, and essentially be racist? Slide 22 demonstrates another Marxist message translated out of The Lion King is stable white Americans people are good, and others are bad; intellectuals deserve less power and control. I found the Marxist criticism of the movie so astonishing true and believable. Slide 39 the Freudian critics symbolize Simba achieving narcissistic bliss satisfying his ID when he lives with absolutely no responsibilities. Completely ignoring his superego seemed to be so enticing, until Nala explains the consequences of his actions and reminds him of his role. Freudian criticism on slide 40 also relates Oedipal complex to Simba when he sings, “I Just can’t wait to be king,” he consciously or subconsciously wants Mufasa to die because that is the only way Simba can become King. I think that all of us consciously or subconsciously want something selfishly benefiting, but in true reality we find ourselves obsequiously regretting. Slide 51 introduces the Feminist critical theory. In Slide 54 Feminist believe Nala should be the rightful heir to Mufasa’s throne. Reviewing The Lion King, Nala is stronger than Simba, pinning him repeatedly. She also shows more responsibility than Simba when she has to argue with him about what Simba should do about his responsibilities as heir. I personally find the Marxist criticism best for this movie because there are many different meanings translated into Marxist theory, and they are all astonishing symbolic. I also see the Freudian and Feminist critique point of views easily rational, but no matter how you critique The Lion King, it shows to be extremely symbolic in many aspects throughout the world.
Dutson 2
While scrolling through the responses written by my peers, I came across Mr. Rasmussen's post. His claim to see the Marxist lense more often in this movie I feel is entirely accurate. Throughout the movie we see displays of genetic and environmental lotteries. In Nala, Simba, and even Mufasa we see excellent examples of genetic and environmental lottery winners. They have all been born healthier and into a more rich environment in which they were able to grow and mature comfortably and with little as little worries as possible. Which comes to mind a question: how have the hyenas and Scar won either lottery? Do both groups represent the extremes – positive and negative ends of the lottery?
Haydn's blog was another post that I found rather intriguing. His analysis of the Freudian lense represented in the king is interesting. Zazu, the right hand man of Mufasa, represents the super ego. He is rational and follows the rules almost to the T. Zazu protests every rebellious act the samba decides to take part in and is constantly condemning those actions. He also comments on the id of the movie. The characters that represent this theory are Timon and Pumba. They shun all responsibilities and listen to only what they want. I feel Simba's exposure to the super ego early in life and later the id, can symbolize today's society (in a theoretical sense). When being raised in a normal house hold we are exposed to the super ego early in life. We learn manners and what is acceptable in society and what is not acceptable. We are even conditioned through our schooling to try to live more in the super ego. Where as, in some cases, a well disciplined student will head off to college or the world where they are immediately exposed to more id situations. They sometimes give into the id and let lose and do what they please. So than is not Zazu, and Timon and Pumba a representation of how society is raised?
Scholten 2 (response)
As I was reading through the comments made by others, I realized my peers are all very smart and think of many different ideas and symbols that I would never have thought of by myself. This has caused this assignment to be very difficult. There are numerous people to respond to but I chose two people who stuck out the most to me. The first person I came across was Megan Callahan and her ideas. Her analysis of The Lion King has made me rethink some of my previous judgments and beliefs. Her analogy for the three lenses as bifocals and tinting glasses has created a new perspective for me. Also, it has created a new understanding and appreciation for each lens working together. Now on to her views about The Lion King. For example, she has never felt sorry for Scar in her life. Upon reading her comments and reasons for this, I have always had a sort of "soft spot" for Scar. However, seeing that she sees Scar has always lived his life in the absence of God, feeling no remorse for killing or stealing. With that understanding, I have changed my views on Scar. No more does he have sympathy from me. Another student's comments I found amusing were the ones thought by Zach Van Ede. I agree with his statement about Pride Rock. I think Pride Rock symbolizes a domain of power and wealth, rather than a phallic symbol. Mr. Van Ede's point that civilization may be unintentionally savage has caused deep thought within me. Like Zach, I am the younger sibling. When I first read his blog task, I had never thought of the misfortunate events surround Scar's birth. If he had been born first, he would have been king. Zach goes on in his assignment about the advantages and disadvantages of having an older sibling to pave the way for you. I agree with all of his comments. Without my older brother, I would not be who I am today. He has introduced me to new opportunites and journeys. I find, like Zach states, that Scar should not be pitied by his latter birth and missing the opportunity to become king. He clearly doesn't take advantage of the situation of having an older sibling which causes his misfortune.
Guthmiller 2
Unfortunately with The Lion King, it seems the same “scholarly” observations about the themes and symbols are recycled in each blog task. It’s not a knock on the students, rather on the limits the film imposes. The film has been analyzed meticulously already, leaving little room for discovery by us students. It’s time – 89 minutes—allows for scholars to leach out meanings and views faster than the more traditional form of storytelling – novels. Novels take many hours to read, and perhaps a lifetime to fully understand. A facet of the book may be hidden to you on first readings but unlocked once you go back. This is true in all forms of media, but l it is truest in written words. Books are also more abstract than films; individuals have to form the story in their mind, rather than being shown it. This medium that must be crossed for the picture to show in your mind offers more room for interpretation (because everyone is seeing a different picture) and more room self-discovery. With that in mind, I found Ms. Shroll’s blog task to be fresh and different. She explains Scar has won both the genetic and environmental lottery, because he has been born a lion and his intelligence – although the film views the latter as a negative. Quickly after she compliments Scar on his looks, saying she always found him to look cooler. When I watched The Lion King I also thought Scar looked cooler than Mufasa. I envied how sleek he was and the way he would hug the ground when he moved. His black, thin body reminded me of a luxury sports car. It didn’t waste space trying to appear powerful, it already was powerful. I most likely gravitated to Scar more also because of shared eye color (although my eyes change from blue to green) and hair color. I was greatly impressed by Ms. Shroll’s blog task, with its brilliant insight on the Holy Trinity and how it related to Rafiki’s tree.
Arrowsmith 5 part 2
Like Adam Guthmiller, I too wonder how much I have been interpellated in my youth. What a crazy thought that maybe the reason we act, think, and dress today is how we were brainwashed to as children. I also agree with Guthy that The Lion King is anti-American dream in that it shows the hyenas are the lower class and will always be the lower class because that is just the way it is. I recant my previous statement in the first blog task that I will not show The Lion King to my children. On the contrary, I will show the film to them, but explain that Nala should be king because she is smarter, stronger, and harder working than Simba and that Simba should not receive the crown simply because of who his parents are. I disagree with Bauer in that Scar is being punished by God for helping and associating with the hyenas. I believe Scar is solely to blame for his actions and if he wanted to he could be a beneficial part of the pride and contribute greatly. Instead he chooses to sulk around for his misfortune of his brother being chosen as king. His attempts at killing Simba and the death of Mufasa are unforgivable and he condemns himself. I found Marso’s comments on Rafiki to be quite intriguing. Did the creators intentionally make the reference to primates and evolution to integrate evolution and religion? If so, is it possible for us to accept the two or must their be only one answer to the greatest question of all? Lastly, I would like to disagree with Gallo’s statement in his second blog that capitalists with a conscience are strictly liberals. I myself am a conservative, but like to think and know that I am a capitalist with a conscience.
Rise pd 2 (RESPONSE)
I agree with Courtney Herrick. The light does not shine on those who are evil, selfish, and wasteful—the hyenas. The animal equivalent to being a good Jew, Lutheran, Hindu or what have you, is an animal who eats when they need to and does not waste the carcass of the animal. The hyenas are like revenging, hungry, eating-machines. Everything they touch turns into a skeleton of its former self. They prove my point for me when they take over Pride Rock under Hitler’s—I mean Scar’s control. I also agree with Courtney's and Clemenson's thoughts about voice having nothing to do with race. It really does have a lot to do with who your friends are, and your location. But... Many times you can hear a voice and decide what race the voice is. I have not researched it, but I do think there is something anatomically that distinguishes our voices with our heritage and ancestors (vocal cords size/length).
I also agree with Gallo, Mufasa appears just as intellectually adequate as Scar is. Mufasa gives his son lectures on life and maintains a healthy relationship with simba. Who knows what else Mufasa would have been capable of if he had not been viciously murdered. Scar shows his evilness, his selfishness by wanting power and the death of his brother. I think being a narcissist like scar obviously is, shows a major flaw in intellect. Constantly thinking of yourself ... that is easy! You are effortlessly aware of your: wants, feelings, and thoughts. It takes someone with intelligence to think of and understand others in order to help them—like Mufasa does when he rules Pride Rock. I feel that UNSELFISH people have a better grasp on surroundings and themselves as a person.
Like Cain, I have been raised or allowed to be a feminist since I was little. I remember as a little kid drawing eyelashes on every cartoon picture I owned: coloring books, painting books, and posters. My thought process was that eyelashes made the object or animal a girl. I wanted everything to be a girl; girls will rule the world! As silly and juvenile as it sounds I think that is a good way to define my personality. I have always wanted and needed to do things my own way—always wanted to change things. I am stubborn. I think you need to be stubborn in a world like this; because it is a capitalist place. The richer and more successful you are the better off you are. This movie exhibits that, money and success being the land, food and water. Why else would we want to be successful? We want to be important and respected—power. How egotistical? Maybe it is selfish to go to college, to want to be the smartest and most revered? A Doctor? A surgeon? How selfish to think we are worth the professors time of bettering ourselves and capable of such feats. Another characteristic of id I think—wanting to be successful.
Ps. I am still going to college with the plan of medical school regardless of what I just said in my blog. haha
Anderson 2
Naturally, as friends of both Mr. Etrheim and Mr. Guthmiller, I tend to agree with their stances on the brainwashing of children and people in society as a whole by our elders and American society. It is astonishing how we can be so naïve and driven to naturally pick up a pro-capitalistic approach on life while watching a children’s movie with subtle innuendo and purely ironic suggestions. The Lion King undoubtedly was made with multiple purposes and was set out to convey different messages within the film. The plot was intricately created so unsuspecting, ignorant younglings would be convinced of hidden themes or messages in the movie without even knowing they (us) were being brainwashed. As Guthmiller stated previously, my initial concern is not the system Disney is promoting and pushing on children; however, I am shocked and worried about what other egregious brainwashing took place during my development as a sophisticated human being. Much debate can be partaken in with the concept of the “American Dream.” I personally believe that this notion at one point was existent and people could achieve their life long goal towards prosperity in America. People could come from relatively nothing and achieve wealth with hard work and dedication thanks to capitalism and the “American way.” Nowadays, I believe this goal is much less accessible due to the restrictions in place on citizens in society and the bureaucrats, as well as the irresolute leadership in Washington D.C. (namely that of Mr. Oblahblah). The irony involved with the so-called American Dream and a capitalistic nature is the ranking of the animals in the movie and the stagnation or lack of social ladder movement (Marxist lens). Hyenas are predisposed to be the lowest of the low and SUPPOSEDLY can’t do anything to change it. The lions are on the top of the social hierarchy naturally because they were born into it and none of the social or economic well-beings of the lions change to a point where they fall down to lower rungs in society. I tend to agree with this for the most part but I have a hard time believing all of the hyena misfortune non-sense. The hyenas are babied by Scar who selflessly provides and sticks up for them continuously throughout the movie. It is also supposed that the hyenas represent the unprivileged and inadequately treated or helpless persecuted members of society: the African Americans and other minorities. The hyenas are too worthless and lackadaisical to muster enough concentration and ability to help themselves. They are the classic example of the “live of the government/other people example”. I think we can interpret a separate side of the story with the hyenas. More people than ever in America are living off of welfare, government assistance, food stamps, you name it. The hyenas are the lowest class of society because they choose to be there. If they really didn’t want to be poor or suddenly become able to provide for themselves, they could manage and work hard to do so just like everyone else has done before them. Instead, political cronies keep shuffling the welfare recipients with more benefits because they are to lazy and useless to work for themselves. I think this is a prime example of what happens with the hyenas in the movie. This philosophy goes to show that just being handed everything in life will not get you to some high away mountain top where everything is fanciful and jolly. Life is hard and you have to earn what you obtain and work hard each and every day to maintain successfulness. I don’t think hyenas or minorities are unfairly treated or disadvantaged or incapable of providing for themselves. I believe that this just show the corrupting nature of handouts how precious hard work and deliverance really is. You have to earn it and take control in life to make it your own. If you stand around waiting for others to help, you will be sadly mistaken the rough realities of life.
Wehrkamp 5 (part 2)
In response to a post I decided to look at Guthmiller’s, who like myself, viewed The Lion King as a Marxist movie. So what sub-conscious messages are we exposed to? We are exposed to sub-conscious messages everyday through television, music and movies – Hollywood. Telling us what to buy and believe; how to act, dress, and be successful. The Lyon King does some of these things in a Marxist’s point of view. I agree we do buy expensive cloths, cars, and houses with the purpose to show off wealth. With this fact I thought of another message you can take from this symbolic movie: show off your wealth, and it might be taken from you. The entire Kingdom has seen Mufasa’s power and wealth as king, and jealousy consumed scar to the point where he took what was not rightfully his. A true American movie I agree would show a story of an individual that started from the bottom and rose to the top, because of his character and effort. Then again Simba may have been born the heir, but was put in the bottom when Scar took the thrown. A Lion living off of bugs? He definitely was not living on top, even if Disney depicts it as a happy time. He was uneducated and unaware of what was going on in the Kingdom. Nala educates or enlightens him of real life, and he was hesitant at first, but it was because of his character and effort that he was able to raise to the top. Another thought is if intelligence should be in charge of brawn, technically Scar should have always been King. When Mufasa was in charge the Kingdom was beautiful and peaceful. Then Scar (the smart one) takes the thrown, and how did that work out? How exactly did Scar’s intelligence help him rule the Kingdom? The Kingdom was dried up, and almost completely destroyed; even the hyenas said they wished they still had Mufasa.
Tibke 1
With so many different blog posts it was tough to single one out. In the end I ended up going back to Chase Marsos blog post. Reading through his post I found myself agreeing with close to all of his major points. The biggest point I think Chase made, at least the one that made me stop and think, was his comment over slide 24, the one pertaining to religion/faith. He explains a great deal on how Rafiki is used to represent primate’s evolution. In the movie Rafiki is seen on 4 legs in the beginning but as it progresses he starts walking on two. This can be an example of how people evolved from apes, but this also can cause problems dealing with religion. It could conflict the people who believe god created us and everything around it. Intentional or not I believe it is a big twist that Disney put into a kids movie.
Larson 1
When analyzing The Lion King through the Marxist, feminist, and Freudian lenses, I find a much different story than the one I watched as a child. As I clicked through the prezi, slide 25 first stuck out to me. Here the idea of “interpellation” is first introduced under the Marxist lense. I found this idea particularly concerning (especially when applied to real life). I saw this technique used by Scar on Simba. Simba—as young and naïve as he is—is led to believe Mufasa’s death is his fault. Who leads him to this conclusion but Scar, who does it in such a way that Simba undoubtedly concluded that this idea was a product of his own thought process. Simba has no recollection of the idea being planted in his head by Scar, and his guilt over the event drives him to leave Pride Rock of his own free will. (His own free will having been molded and shaped by Scar, of course.) Next comes the Freudian lens. Simba attempts to lose himself in the bliss he experienced before Mufasa’s death. He chooses to forget that he is next in line to be king, and decides the lions are no longer his concern. This is illustrated on slide 46. I do not believe this was as much to satisfy his id as it was to forget his guilt, however. Simba left Pride Rock in order to avoid the ostracism and punishment he was sure he would receive after Scar got through with him. In this way I don’t think he can be entirely blamed for his actions, as he was very young when all of these traumatic events took place. The last lens with which to view this film is the feminist lens. The most obvious observation to make is that Nala is clearly superior to Simba in intelligence, responsibility, and fighting skills. As it says on slide 58, she clearly should fill the position of king over Simba. If this had happened however, there would be no movie The Lion King.
Kirkus 2 (response)
First, I would like to agree with Brendan Gallo’s comparison of Scar and Mufasa’s intellects; the prezi states that the film is anti-intellectual, but as Brendan pointed out, Mufasa displays intelligence to some degree. I believe he is also correct in his statement that while both are intelligent and driven, Mufasa was endowed with a quality that Scar lacks: athleticism. I disagree, however, with Mr. Gallo’s statement that because of this extra characteristic, Mufasa “certainly seems to be the best choice for the position.” Although Mufasa does display intelligence, he does not appear to have, in my opinion, the genius that Scar shows. Scar, if not for being completely evil, could possibly have been a much more qualified leader than Mufasa, given his superior intellect. Mufasa’s athleticism really has no significance as a quality for leadership. We may be led to believe that, under Scar’s rule, many things would be different (maybe better or maybe worse) than under Mufasa’s leadership. One possible difference that could take place under Scar would be the inclusion of the hyenas. Under Mufasa, the hyenas are completely shut out from the “elite group,” but Scar unites them and gives them a sense of unity and belonging (being associated with a lion). Assuming that Scar wouldn’t become evil if he was leader instead of Mufasa, I think his superior smarts give him a greater capacity to make beneficial changes to their community/ecosystem. I do agree, however, with Brendan’s contradiction of the prezi’s statement that The Lion King’s themes would translate into real life as Brock Lesnar being elected president. He states that both physical and intellectual superiority are needed to lead, as Mufasa has both. I think it would be more accurate for the prezi to compare Tom Brady to Mufasa rather than Brock Lesnar. Tom Brady is obviously a very intelligent person, and that mental ability supplements his athleticism, making him, in my opinion, the best quarterback of all time in the NFL.
Robertson 2
To respond to a completely random comment, with fashionable lateness, I scrolled through and chose one.
Lucky you, Minihan.
The comment is as follows:
"The Marxist Critical Theory/Approach/Lens slide (10) enticed me to think deeper about the Lion King character, Scar. On this slide, I realized how power and status are both main focuses of all of the main characters in the lion king. Even as a young cub, Simba says over and over how he cannot wait to be king! Scar, even being related, will do any malevolent act to gain the kingdom, as we find out later in the movie. This shows how Scar is trying to climb the social ladder. (12) The Genetic Lottery slide points helped me to realize how looks and appearances can subconsciously teach readers or viewers to dislike a character. A good example of this would be Scar. Unlike Mufasa, he has a dark brown, almost black, mane. His eyes and his dark voice instantly create a disliking towards him. (15) I believe Mufasa won the genetic lottery and the environmental lottery. He has a smooth, deep baritone of a voice, which is easy to listen to. Mufasa also has a dapper color scheme; the light brown and light chocolate brown mane add to this effect. Mufasa won the environmental lottery by inheriting the throne, the Pride land. Beings only one king can rule a kingdom, Mufasa was chosen over Scar. (18) On the “Deconstruction: notice binary oppositions” slide, the good guys and the bad guys are being portrayed. Although the good side has lush, green grass and the bad has dried up dirt, I noticed how there was still a little green grass on the bad side. I think this small patch of grass is symbolizing how everyone has a little bit of good in them. Although the outsiders don’t like the insiders, they still show love and likeness for one another; I think that stands for something. (37) On slide 37, the question “Does God not like/bless the poor?” is asked. I believe God blesses everyone. He gave humans free will because He loved us, and still does. People end up losing genetic or environment lotteries because either they or someone down the line made a decision, and that has impacted everyone along the way. God only wants his children to be happy and free; therefore He sends blessings and miracles every day, we just need to be open and see them."
I would like to begin by stating that I in no way oppose any person's or persons' beliefs. I am responding simply as a literary critic and not a skeptic or naysayer.
As far as the Marxist theory is concerned, there is no middle ground. There are winners and losers. To the victorious winners go the spoils; to the losers, the destitution and decay of being useless (and therefore disposable) in society. Winners are not in any way superior to losers, but they posses specific traits that the SOCIETY deems worthy. Features such as voice and appearance carry significant power only because the society grants these features a weighty meaning. It is not the fault of Scar that he is incompatible with society; it is the fault of society that it is incompatible with Scar.
Characters like Scar mean more than characters like Mufasa. Scar creates an image of what is to be shunned and discounted, whereas Mufasa does not mean as much because one does not have to consider his character because he is simply ACCEPTED. A Marxist lens does not focus on what society wants, but what society REJECTS.
Would the story matter if Scar were just a regular lion? Would it matter if Mufasa or Simba were not so great? So golden? So long in mane?
Nothing matters but what does not matter at all.
Grapevine 7
When I was little, The Lion King was my absolute favorite movie. I had toys, pillowcases, all that. As I now watch the movie, I still have the childhood nostalgia, but now I see this movie in an entirely new view. Though that bothers me somewhat, I'm always open to new things. I found the Marxist view on this very interesting, as it shows the relationships in terms of status and power, the hyenas being the lower class, and the lions being on top. The racist stereotypes shown in this movie now stand out clearly as well. I'd really have to agree with Larson, however. She points out so many things about why Simba felt the need to run away from Pride Rock and his responsibilities. It is true that Simba attempts to forget everything that happened and move on. The past is the past, but some things need to be revisited before you can ever be at peace. Simba attempted to achieve happiness for himself, but it clearly showed in scenes that he felt guilt, and still remembered what had happened. Though I usually enjoy using the Feminist viewpoint, for the Lion King, the Marxist makes more sense to me.
Post a Comment