Released in 1989, Disney\u2019s\u00a0The Little Mermaid<\/strong> heralded the start of the \u2018Disney Renaissance\u2019 \u2013 a period of critical and commercial success that followed a rocky patch where the studio\u2019s prime focus had been on Disneyland attractions rather than feature films.<\/p>\n
It was soundtracked by\u00a0Broadway golden boy Howard Ashman<\/a>, who changed the planned English butler crab into a Jamaican crustacean named Sebastian, and reworked the film\u2019s structure to more closely align with that of a Broadway musical. He also decided to base Ursula the Sea Witch on drag artist and disco star Divine<\/a> (who died whilst the film was still in production).<\/p>\n
Ashman died of AIDS two years later, in March 1991, but his musical influence, first on\u00a0Mermaid<\/b>, and subsequently on\u00a0Beauty and the Beast<\/strong> and\u00a0Aladdin<\/strong>, was a major factor in the regeneration of the studio in the early nineties.\u00a0Mermaid<\/strong>\u00a0won Oscar gongs for Best Song and Best Score, the first Oscar nod for Disney since the Seventies.<\/p>\n
Mermaids of the Eighties<\/h2>\n![\"Splash!](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/Splash_ver2.jpg?resize=243%2C378\")
<\/a>Splash!, 1984<\/p><\/div>\n
The Disney studio had been considering Hans
Christian Andersen\u2019s\u00a0The Little Mermaid\u00a0<\/b>for adaptation as
early as the
Snow White<\/strong> years, but it was not
until the late Eighties that the time finally
seemed right. Even then, there was concern it
might too closely duplicate\u00a0Splash<\/b>, which Disney had produced in
1984.<\/p>\n
Splash<\/strong> itself had been rushed
through production because there were
rumours of another mermaid film in the
pipeline elsewhere \u2013 a Warren Beatty
vehicle that eventually fell through. Why
exactly mermaids were suddenly in the
ascendant during this particular period of
the late twentieth century is open to
speculation; at any rate, the nudity and
adult content in\u00a0Splash<\/strong>\u00a0led directly to
the creation of Touchstone Pictures,
Disney\u2019s \u2018older
audiences\u2019 label. Mermaids
(particularly Darryl Hannah’s
mermaid) were too sexual for the family
studio in 1984.<\/p>\n
Ironically, of course,\u00a0mermaid<\/em> – \u201cmaiden
of the sea\u201d \u2013 suggests
that these aquatic women are rather
more virginal than \u2018Touchstone
Pictures\u2019 thought. Traditional
(cisnormative) misogynistic popular
wisdom holds women in general to be
\u2018leaky vessels\u2019, because
of the amount of
\u2018moisture\u2019 they produce,
but though mermaids live in the
water, they have no apparent human
genitalia, making them, by contrast,
vessels that are rather neatly
sealed.<\/p>\n
In this, they link with the Virgin
Mary, who appears in Catholic
symbolism as a \u2018fountain
forever sealed\u2019 in the middle
of an enclosed garden,
representing the Immaculate
Conception. Mary\u2019s homonymic
(and virginal) association with
mermaids, and the link between the
sea (mer<\/em>) and the mother (mere<\/em>) introduces an
additional layer to
this.<\/p>\n
Alongside this, there is
also a parallel
virgin\/whore tradition of
the mermaid as prostitute
and even embodied vagina
(since, famously, vaginas
are often described as
smelling like
fish).<\/p>\n
![\"Starbucks](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/Sbux_logo_pre_1987.gif?resize=200%2C200\")
<\/a>The
Starbucks logo, not
abandoned until
1987.<\/p><\/div>\n
This opposing strand
presumably comes from
sailors\u2019 fear of the
Siren-figure and the
unknowns out in the sea, but
it\u2019s also connected
with a different type of
mermaid altogether \u2013
the\u00a0melusine<\/a>.
A\u00a0double-tailed
half-woman, half-fish, her
intrinsic, though hidden,
fishiness only emerges when
she takes a bath. Even then,
the double tail leaves her
human genitalia open to the
world in what\u00a0some
have claimed<\/a>\u00a0is an
appropriation of older
symbols of female fertility,
such as the\u00a0Sheela
na gig<\/a>\u00a0or even the
goddess Venus (an
alternative
\u2018mother\u2019
connection).<\/p>\n
Incidentally the melusine,
not the mermaid, is the
figure in the (now closely
cropped) logo for Starbucks
coffee, the first branch of
which opened – logo
blazing proud, bare-breasted
and double-tailed – in
1971, a decade
before\u00a0Splash<\/strong> went
into production.<\/p>\n
The coffee-shop melusine
was maintained in her
full glory until 1987
(although she was
‘sealed’ at
the point where the
tails meet,\u00a0as her
original had not
been<\/a>); the first of
several censoring crops
came into effect around
the time Disney bosses
turned their attention
to Andersen.<\/p>\n
For a modern contrast to
the ‘sealed
off’ melusine,
have a look at one of
the\u00a0mermaids
commissioned by
men’s deodorant
brand Lynx for an early
Noughties advertising
campaign<\/a>, whose
posterior is beginning
to resurface through her
scales, soft
porn-like.<\/p>\n
Planning The Little
Mermaid<\/h2>\n
Hans Christian
Andersen\u2019s
original\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
tale was
serviceable, but
\u2013 much like
Starbucks\u2019 logo
\u2013 it had to be
sanitised before
Disney could take it
to a Disney
audience. Tellingly,
the changes proposed
during this period
of pre-production
were substantially
same as the ones
suggested during the
preliminary work in
the
Thirties.<\/p>\n
![\"Hans](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/hans-anderson.jpg?resize=248%2C377\")
<\/a>Hans
Christian Andersen,
photographed by
Thora
Hallager<\/p><\/div>\n
The first thing to
do was give it a
happy ending,
since in
Andersen\u2019s
version the
Prince\u2019s
indifference to
the mermaid results
in her
annihilation<\/a>
and transformation
to \u2018a
daughter of the
air\u2019.<\/p>\n
This was typical
Andersen: he wrote
that \u2018most of
what I have
written is a
reflection of
myself\u2019, and
he was not a
terribly happy
man.
Unreciprocated
love was an
ongoing feature of
his life, and
throughout it he
nursed passions
for various
inappropriate
people.<\/p>\n
These included
celebrity soprano
Jenny Lind (who is
said to have
inspired\u00a0his
story
The
Nightingale<\/strong>
after she put
him firmly in
the friendzone
in 1844) and
various straight
men, but he also
wrote of
avoiding actual
sexual
encounters
\u2013 his diary
records him
visiting
prostitutes,
talking to them,
and then
returning home
to masturbate
alone.<\/p>\n
Many of his
\u2018fairy
tales\u2019
are
characterised
by violence,
speechlessness
and
unreciprocated
love, often
across two
different
\u2018species\u2019,
as with the
tin
soldier\u2019s
love for a
paper
ballerina
in\u00a0The
Steadfast
Tin
Soldier<\/strong>,
or indeed
the Little
Mermaid\u2019s
love for the
human Prince
\u2013 a
feature that
tends to
make them,
like their
author,
rather
sexless in
approach.<\/p>\n
Although
the sad
stuff was
scrapped,
the
symbolically
significant
speechlessness
of the
Mermaid
was
maintained
in the
Disney
screenplay.
A
mermaid\u2019s
voice is
her
primary
power,
since her
singing
can lure
sailors to
their
deaths, so
its loss
is a
significant
one \u2013
aphonia in
a milder
form had
also been
a feature
of\u00a0Splash<\/strong>,
where
Darryl
Hannah\u2019s
character
cannot
initially
speak
English.<\/p>\n
Disney\u2019s
Ariel
was
voiced
by
Broadway
star
(and
Ashman
associate)
Jodi
Benson,
and
her
voice
remains
her
defining
beauty
in the
film.
But
the
manner
of its
loss
changes:
while
both
Little
Mermaids
give
their
voices
up to
the
Sea
Witch,
in
Andersen’s
story
the
unnamed
mermaid
has
her
tongue
cut
out to
bring
this
about.\u00a0Disney
cleaned
this
up,
and,
in the
process,
rendered
it
reversible:
Ariel\u2019s
voice
is
depicted
as a
glowing,
ghostly
ball
that
can
pass
through
bodily
barriers
without
drawing
blood
\u2013
as in
traditional
artistic
representations
of the
soul.<\/p>\n
Ironically,
this
is
exactly
what
Andersen\u2019s
mermaid
is
seeking:
her
love
for
the
prince
is the
means
through
which
she
hopes
to win
\u2018immortality\u2019
and
the
chance
to
share
in the
joys
of
paradise.
(This
rather
Romantic
notion,
albeit
gender-inverted,
links
Andersen\u2019s
tale
thematically
with
Friedrich
de la
Motte\u2019s
mermaid\u00a0Undine<\/strong><\/a>
–
and
also
Tchaikovsky\u2019s
watery\u00a0Swan
Lake<\/strong><\/a>,
composed
in
1875,
the
year
Andersen
died).
Disney
refocused
the
mermaid’s
longing
for
a
soul
to
a
more
secular
\u2013
and
sexualised
\u2013
teenage
quest
for
the
love
of
a
handsome
prince.<\/p>\n
She
sells
sea
shells<\/h2>\n
But
Disney
hit
a
problem
when
it
came
to
the
artwork.
Mermaids,
of
course,
are
typically
bare-breasted,
but
so
too
were
traditional
depictions
of
Andersen\u2019s
\u2018little\u2019
mermaid,
including
the
statue
in
Copenhagen\u2019s
harbour.<\/p>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/little-mermaid1.jpg?resize=414%2C311\")
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
loud
and
proud
in
Copenhagen’s
harbour<\/p><\/div>\n
There
is
not
a
single
illustration
to
the
fairy
tale
pre-Disney
that
shows
her
wearing
anything
at
all
over
her
chest
\u2013
in
the
case
of
Heath
Robinson,\u00a0this
emphasises
the
\u2018Little\u2019
part<\/a>,
as
the
mermaid
is
clearly
a
child
in
his
illustrations.<\/p>\n
![\"Disney's](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/ariel.jpeg?resize=269%2C151\")
<\/a>The
mermaid
is
fifteen
in
Andersen\u2019s
tale,
so
her
littleness
could
be
argued
either
way,
but
in
1989
Disney
producers
obviously
decided
they
wanted
her
to
be
legal
(in
most
states
anyway).
To
make
it
completely
clear,
in
the
course
of
the
film
Ariel
declares
to
her
father
(a
familiar
refrain)
‘I’m
sixteen
years
old.
I’m
not
a
child.’<\/p>\n
But
however
innocently
naked
(and
animated)
the
Little
Mermaid
might
be,
Disney
certainly
could
not
show
a
sixteen
year
old\u2019s
breasts
on
screen.
Their
solution
to
this
problem
was
the
creation
of
a
purple
bra
made
out
of
shells
–
a
new
mermaid
first.<\/p>\n
When
coupled
with
the
waistband-like
arrangement
at
the
top
of
her
tail
(another
innovation,
since
traditionally
the
mermaid\u2019s
scales
segue
gradually
from
the
skin
at
her
waist),
this
decision
had
the
effect
of
creating
a
kind
of
mermaid
bikini
that
implies
she
might
just
be
wearing
an
elaborate
two-piece
\u2013
one
very
similar,
in
fact,
to
the\u00a0ensemble
worn
by
Princess
Jasmine<\/a>\u00a0in
Disney\u2019s
next
film,\u00a0Aladdin<\/strong>.
And,
of
course,
it
also
has
the
effect
of
emphasising
breasts
and
hips
either
side
of
a
tiny
waist.<\/p>\n
The
Barbie-style
Ariel
doll
I
had
as
a
child
had
(as
modern-day
packaging
still
asserts)
‘removable
clothes
for
costume
change<\/a>‘,
so
it
was
clear
she
was
a
two-legged
being
with
an
optional
tail.<\/p>\n
This
has
the
effect
of
making
the
transition
from
mermaid
to
human
much
easier:
in
Andersen\u2019s
story,
creating
two
legs
out
of
one
fish
tail
is
exactly
as
vicious
as
you
would
expect
it
to
be,
and
the
draught
the
mermaid
drinks
to
effect
this
causes
the
sensation
of
\u2018a
two-edged
sword
[passing]
through
her
delicate
body\u2019
\u2013
so
severe
she
passes
out.
Throughout
her
subsequent
time
on
land,
each
foot
she
puts
to
the
ground
feels
like
\u2018treading
upon
the
points
of
needles
or
sharp
knives\u2019.<\/p>\n
Bodily
mutilation
\u2013
indeed,
mortification
\u2013
is
everywhere
in
Andersen’s
story.
After
everyone
is
asleep,
the
mermaid
goes
to
\u2018sit
on
the
broad
marble
steps
[of
the
palace]
for
it
eased
her
burning
feet
to
bathe
them
in
the
cold
sea-water\u2019.
Significantly
–
and
somewhat
bizarrely
–
such
mutilation
has
been
an
ongoing
problem
for
the
Copenhagen
representation
of
Andersen’s
mermaid:
the
statue
in
the
harbour
has
been
blown
up,
decapitated
(twice)
and
had
its
arm
sawn
off,
in
addition
to
many\u00a0petty
acts
of
vandalism<\/a>\u00a0since
its
erection
in
1913.<\/p>\n
Some
liberation?<\/h2>\n
By
contrast
with
Andersen’s
difficult
transition,
Ariel\u2019s
easy-on,
easy-off
fish
tail
and
bikini
bra
combo
not
only
\u2018re-opens\u2019
the
traditional
closed
mermaid
vessel,
it
also
sexualises
the
teenage
mermaid
in
a
manner
markedly
different
from
anything
in
Andersen\u2019s
original
(where
the
mermaid\u2019s
love
is
increased
by
knowledge
of
the
prince\u2019s
good
deeds,
and
her
longing
for
a
soul).<\/p>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/little-mermaid.jpg?resize=241%2C370\")
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
–
Disney’s
artwork<\/p><\/div>\n
By
censoring
Ariel,
Disney
draws
attention
to
her
body
and
breasts,
so
she
resembles
a
California
surfer
girl.
The
nakedness,
which
in
earlier
illustrations
was
straightforward
and
childlike,
takes
on
an
explicitly
sexual
edge
(for
more
on
this,
have
a
look
at
this
piece\u00a0by
Virginia
Borges<\/a>).<\/p>\n
The
result
is
that
Disney\u2019s\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
becomes
the
straightforward
tale
of
a
sixteen-year-old
struggling
with
her
father
for
the
right
to
explore
her
burgeoning
sexuality
and
go
out
with
a
boy.
And
because
she
ultimately
uses
this
right
to
make
a
good
marriage
(wearing\u00a0something
strikingly
similar<\/a>\u00a0to\u00a0the
dress
worn
by
the
equally
speechless
Princess
Diana<\/a>\u00a0at
her
1981
marriage),
Ariel
makes
good
in
the
end
and
everyone
is
happy.<\/p>\n
Other
mermaids<\/h2>\n
But
it\u2019s
interesting
that
at
the
same
time
the
producers
were
working
on
a
heteronormative
middle-class
fantasy
idea,
their
musical
wunderkind
Howard
Ashman
(despite
dying
of
what,
at
the
time,
was
popularly
cast
as
a
very
non-family-friendly
disease)
was
injecting
some
Broadway
pizzazz
into
the
soundtrack.
This
included
the
introduction
of
a
deviantly-styled
figure
like
Divine
via
the
character
of
Ursula,
the
Sea
Witch
(though
of
course
she
is
defeated,
as
does
not
happen
in
Andersen).<\/p>\n
In
fact,
as
the
Disney
Renaissance
got
going,
the
calibre
of
stars
from
distinctly
non-Disney
backgrounds
increased:\u00a0The
Lion
King<\/strong>,
the
Renaissance
nadir,
had
major
Broadway
stars
alongside
A-list
Hollywood
stars,
and
the
cast
included
black
and
Latino
actors
\u2013
something
that
had
not
even
been
considered
back
in
the
Forties
(when
Uncle
Walt
wanted
some
racial-caricature
\u2018Jim
Crow\u2019
figures
in
Dumbo<\/strong>,
the
crows
were
voiced
by
white
men
doing
their
best
\u2018black
man\u2019
impression
instead).
The
staff
list
at
the
Disney
studios
was
full
of
Jewish
and
homosexual
figures
like
Ashman.
Yet\u00a0The
Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
ushered
in
some
of
the
most
socially
conservative
films
Disney
produced.
A
strange
duality.<\/p>\n
\n
-
Like
it
says
above,
Hodge<\/strong>
is
currently
doing
a
dedicated
project
on
mermaids
over
at\u00a0Poems
Underwater<\/strong><\/a>,
which
is
inviting
submissions<\/a>…<\/em><\/li>\n
-
@PoemsUnderwater<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/li>\n
-
Poems
Underwater<\/strong>
on
Facebook<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
![\"Splash!](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/Splash_ver2.jpg\")
<\/a>Splash!, 1984<\/p><\/div>\n
The Disney studio had been considering Hans Christian Andersen\u2019s\u00a0The Little Mermaid\u00a0<\/b>for adaptation as early as the Snow White<\/strong> years, but it was not until the late Eighties that the time finally seemed right. Even then, there was concern it might too closely duplicate\u00a0Splash<\/b>, which Disney had produced in 1984.<\/p>\n
Splash<\/strong> itself had been rushed through production because there were rumours of another mermaid film in the pipeline elsewhere \u2013 a Warren Beatty vehicle that eventually fell through. Why exactly mermaids were suddenly in the ascendant during this particular period of the late twentieth century is open to speculation; at any rate, the nudity and adult content in\u00a0Splash<\/strong>\u00a0led directly to the creation of Touchstone Pictures, Disney\u2019s \u2018older audiences\u2019 label. Mermaids (particularly Darryl Hannah’s mermaid) were too sexual for the family studio in 1984.<\/p>\n
Ironically, of course,\u00a0mermaid<\/em> – \u201cmaiden of the sea\u201d \u2013 suggests that these aquatic women are rather more virginal than \u2018Touchstone Pictures\u2019 thought. Traditional (cisnormative) misogynistic popular wisdom holds women in general to be \u2018leaky vessels\u2019, because of the amount of \u2018moisture\u2019 they produce, but though mermaids live in the water, they have no apparent human genitalia, making them, by contrast, vessels that are rather neatly sealed.<\/p>\n
In this, they link with the Virgin Mary, who appears in Catholic symbolism as a \u2018fountain forever sealed\u2019 in the middle of an enclosed garden, representing the Immaculate Conception. Mary\u2019s homonymic (and virginal) association with mermaids, and the link between the sea (mer<\/em>) and the mother (mere<\/em>) introduces an additional layer to this.<\/p>\n
Alongside this, there is also a parallel virgin\/whore tradition of the mermaid as prostitute and even embodied vagina (since, famously, vaginas are often described as smelling like fish).<\/p>\n
![\"Starbucks](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/Sbux_logo_pre_1987.gif\"){kind=logo}
<\/a>The Starbucks logo, not abandoned until 1987.<\/p><\/div>\n
This opposing strand presumably comes from sailors\u2019 fear of the Siren-figure and the unknowns out in the sea, but it\u2019s also connected with a different type of mermaid altogether \u2013 the\u00a0melusine<\/a>. A\u00a0double-tailed half-woman, half-fish, her intrinsic, though hidden, fishiness only emerges when she takes a bath. Even then, the double tail leaves her human genitalia open to the world in what\u00a0some have claimed<\/a>\u00a0is an appropriation of older symbols of female fertility, such as the\u00a0Sheela na gig<\/a>\u00a0or even the goddess Venus (an alternative \u2018mother\u2019 connection).<\/p>\n
Incidentally the melusine, not the mermaid, is the figure in the (now closely cropped) logo for Starbucks coffee, the first branch of which opened – logo blazing proud, bare-breasted and double-tailed – in 1971, a decade before\u00a0Splash<\/strong> went into production.<\/p>\n
The coffee-shop melusine was maintained in her full glory until 1987 (although she was ‘sealed’ at the point where the tails meet,\u00a0as her original had not been<\/a>); the first of several censoring crops came into effect around the time Disney bosses turned their attention to Andersen.<\/p>\n
For a modern contrast to the ‘sealed off’ melusine, have a look at one of the\u00a0mermaids commissioned by men’s deodorant brand Lynx for an early Noughties advertising campaign<\/a>, whose posterior is beginning to resurface through her scales, soft porn-like.<\/p>\n
Planning The Little
Mermaid<\/h2>\n
Hans Christian
Andersen\u2019s
original\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
tale was
serviceable, but
\u2013 much like
Starbucks\u2019 logo
\u2013 it had to be
sanitised before
Disney could take it
to a Disney
audience. Tellingly,
the changes proposed
during this period
of pre-production
were substantially
same as the ones
suggested during the
preliminary work in
the
Thirties.<\/p>\n
<\/a>Hans
Christian Andersen,
photographed by
Thora
Hallager<\/p><\/div>\n
The first thing to
do was give it a
happy ending,
since in
Andersen\u2019s
version the
Prince\u2019s
indifference to
the mermaid results
in her
annihilation<\/a>
and transformation
to \u2018a
daughter of the
air\u2019.<\/p>\n
This was typical
Andersen: he wrote
that \u2018most of
what I have
written is a
reflection of
myself\u2019, and
he was not a
terribly happy
man.
Unreciprocated
love was an
ongoing feature of
his life, and
throughout it he
nursed passions
for various
inappropriate
people.<\/p>\n
These included
celebrity soprano
Jenny Lind (who is
said to have
inspired\u00a0his
story
The
Nightingale<\/strong>
after she put
him firmly in
the friendzone
in 1844) and
various straight
men, but he also
wrote of
avoiding actual
sexual
encounters
\u2013 his diary
records him
visiting
prostitutes,
talking to them,
and then
returning home
to masturbate
alone.<\/p>\n
Many of his
\u2018fairy
tales\u2019
are
characterised
by violence,
speechlessness
and
unreciprocated
love, often
across two
different
\u2018species\u2019,
as with the
tin
soldier\u2019s
love for a
paper
ballerina
in\u00a0The
Steadfast
Tin
Soldier<\/strong>,
or indeed
the Little
Mermaid\u2019s
love for the
human Prince
\u2013 a
feature that
tends to
make them,
like their
author,
rather
sexless in
approach.<\/p>\n
Although
the sad
stuff was
scrapped,
the
symbolically
significant
speechlessness
of the
Mermaid
was
maintained
in the
Disney
screenplay.
A
mermaid\u2019s
voice is
her
primary
power,
since her
singing
can lure
sailors to
their
deaths, so
its loss
is a
significant
one \u2013
aphonia in
a milder
form had
also been
a feature
of\u00a0Splash<\/strong>,
where
Darryl
Hannah\u2019s
character
cannot
initially
speak
English.<\/p>\n
Disney\u2019s
Ariel
was
voiced
by
Broadway
star
(and
Ashman
associate)
Jodi
Benson,
and
her
voice
remains
her
defining
beauty
in the
film.
But
the
manner
of its
loss
changes:
while
both
Little
Mermaids
give
their
voices
up to
the
Sea
Witch,
in
Andersen’s
story
the
unnamed
mermaid
has
her
tongue
cut
out to
bring
this
about.\u00a0Disney
cleaned
this
up,
and,
in the
process,
rendered
it
reversible:
Ariel\u2019s
voice
is
depicted
as a
glowing,
ghostly
ball
that
can
pass
through
bodily
barriers
without
drawing
blood
\u2013
as in
traditional
artistic
representations
of the
soul.<\/p>\n
Ironically,
this
is
exactly
what
Andersen\u2019s
mermaid
is
seeking:
her
love
for
the
prince
is the
means
through
which
she
hopes
to win
\u2018immortality\u2019
and
the
chance
to
share
in the
joys
of
paradise.
(This
rather
Romantic
notion,
albeit
gender-inverted,
links
Andersen\u2019s
tale
thematically
with
Friedrich
de la
Motte\u2019s
mermaid\u00a0Undine<\/strong><\/a>
–
and
also
Tchaikovsky\u2019s
watery\u00a0Swan
Lake<\/strong><\/a>,
composed
in
1875,
the
year
Andersen
died).
Disney
refocused
the
mermaid’s
longing
for
a
soul
to
a
more
secular
\u2013
and
sexualised
\u2013
teenage
quest
for
the
love
of
a
handsome
prince.<\/p>\n
She
sells
sea
shells<\/h2>\n
But
Disney
hit
a
problem
when
it
came
to
the
artwork.
Mermaids,
of
course,
are
typically
bare-breasted,
but
so
too
were
traditional
depictions
of
Andersen\u2019s
\u2018little\u2019
mermaid,
including
the
statue
in
Copenhagen\u2019s
harbour.<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
loud
and
proud
in
Copenhagen’s
harbour<\/p><\/div>\n
There
is
not
a
single
illustration
to
the
fairy
tale
pre-Disney
that
shows
her
wearing
anything
at
all
over
her
chest
\u2013
in
the
case
of
Heath
Robinson,\u00a0this
emphasises
the
\u2018Little\u2019
part<\/a>,
as
the
mermaid
is
clearly
a
child
in
his
illustrations.<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
mermaid
is
fifteen
in
Andersen\u2019s
tale,
so
her
littleness
could
be
argued
either
way,
but
in
1989
Disney
producers
obviously
decided
they
wanted
her
to
be
legal
(in
most
states
anyway).
To
make
it
completely
clear,
in
the
course
of
the
film
Ariel
declares
to
her
father
(a
familiar
refrain)
‘I’m
sixteen
years
old.
I’m
not
a
child.’<\/p>\n
But
however
innocently
naked
(and
animated)
the
Little
Mermaid
might
be,
Disney
certainly
could
not
show
a
sixteen
year
old\u2019s
breasts
on
screen.
Their
solution
to
this
problem
was
the
creation
of
a
purple
bra
made
out
of
shells
–
a
new
mermaid
first.<\/p>\n
When
coupled
with
the
waistband-like
arrangement
at
the
top
of
her
tail
(another
innovation,
since
traditionally
the
mermaid\u2019s
scales
segue
gradually
from
the
skin
at
her
waist),
this
decision
had
the
effect
of
creating
a
kind
of
mermaid
bikini
that
implies
she
might
just
be
wearing
an
elaborate
two-piece
\u2013
one
very
similar,
in
fact,
to
the\u00a0ensemble
worn
by
Princess
Jasmine<\/a>\u00a0in
Disney\u2019s
next
film,\u00a0Aladdin<\/strong>.
And,
of
course,
it
also
has
the
effect
of
emphasising
breasts
and
hips
either
side
of
a
tiny
waist.<\/p>\n
The
Barbie-style
Ariel
doll
I
had
as
a
child
had
(as
modern-day
packaging
still
asserts)
‘removable
clothes
for
costume
change<\/a>‘,
so
it
was
clear
she
was
a
two-legged
being
with
an
optional
tail.<\/p>\n
This
has
the
effect
of
making
the
transition
from
mermaid
to
human
much
easier:
in
Andersen\u2019s
story,
creating
two
legs
out
of
one
fish
tail
is
exactly
as
vicious
as
you
would
expect
it
to
be,
and
the
draught
the
mermaid
drinks
to
effect
this
causes
the
sensation
of
\u2018a
two-edged
sword
[passing]
through
her
delicate
body\u2019
\u2013
so
severe
she
passes
out.
Throughout
her
subsequent
time
on
land,
each
foot
she
puts
to
the
ground
feels
like
\u2018treading
upon
the
points
of
needles
or
sharp
knives\u2019.<\/p>\n
Bodily
mutilation
\u2013
indeed,
mortification
\u2013
is
everywhere
in
Andersen’s
story.
After
everyone
is
asleep,
the
mermaid
goes
to
\u2018sit
on
the
broad
marble
steps
[of
the
palace]
for
it
eased
her
burning
feet
to
bathe
them
in
the
cold
sea-water\u2019.
Significantly
–
and
somewhat
bizarrely
–
such
mutilation
has
been
an
ongoing
problem
for
the
Copenhagen
representation
of
Andersen’s
mermaid:
the
statue
in
the
harbour
has
been
blown
up,
decapitated
(twice)
and
had
its
arm
sawn
off,
in
addition
to
many\u00a0petty
acts
of
vandalism<\/a>\u00a0since
its
erection
in
1913.<\/p>\n
Some
liberation?<\/h2>\n
By
contrast
with
Andersen’s
difficult
transition,
Ariel\u2019s
easy-on,
easy-off
fish
tail
and
bikini
bra
combo
not
only
\u2018re-opens\u2019
the
traditional
closed
mermaid
vessel,
it
also
sexualises
the
teenage
mermaid
in
a
manner
markedly
different
from
anything
in
Andersen\u2019s
original
(where
the
mermaid\u2019s
love
is
increased
by
knowledge
of
the
prince\u2019s
good
deeds,
and
her
longing
for
a
soul).<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
–
Disney’s
artwork<\/p><\/div>\n
By
censoring
Ariel,
Disney
draws
attention
to
her
body
and
breasts,
so
she
resembles
a
California
surfer
girl.
The
nakedness,
which
in
earlier
illustrations
was
straightforward
and
childlike,
takes
on
an
explicitly
sexual
edge
(for
more
on
this,
have
a
look
at
this
piece\u00a0by
Virginia
Borges<\/a>).<\/p>\n
The
result
is
that
Disney\u2019s\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
becomes
the
straightforward
tale
of
a
sixteen-year-old
struggling
with
her
father
for
the
right
to
explore
her
burgeoning
sexuality
and
go
out
with
a
boy.
And
because
she
ultimately
uses
this
right
to
make
a
good
marriage
(wearing\u00a0something
strikingly
similar<\/a>\u00a0to\u00a0the
dress
worn
by
the
equally
speechless
Princess
Diana<\/a>\u00a0at
her
1981
marriage),
Ariel
makes
good
in
the
end
and
everyone
is
happy.<\/p>\n
Other
mermaids<\/h2>\n
But
it\u2019s
interesting
that
at
the
same
time
the
producers
were
working
on
a
heteronormative
middle-class
fantasy
idea,
their
musical
wunderkind
Howard
Ashman
(despite
dying
of
what,
at
the
time,
was
popularly
cast
as
a
very
non-family-friendly
disease)
was
injecting
some
Broadway
pizzazz
into
the
soundtrack.
This
included
the
introduction
of
a
deviantly-styled
figure
like
Divine
via
the
character
of
Ursula,
the
Sea
Witch
(though
of
course
she
is
defeated,
as
does
not
happen
in
Andersen).<\/p>\n
In
fact,
as
the
Disney
Renaissance
got
going,
the
calibre
of
stars
from
distinctly
non-Disney
backgrounds
increased:\u00a0The
Lion
King<\/strong>,
the
Renaissance
nadir,
had
major
Broadway
stars
alongside
A-list
Hollywood
stars,
and
the
cast
included
black
and
Latino
actors
\u2013
something
that
had
not
even
been
considered
back
in
the
Forties
(when
Uncle
Walt
wanted
some
racial-caricature
\u2018Jim
Crow\u2019
figures
in
Dumbo<\/strong>,
the
crows
were
voiced
by
white
men
doing
their
best
\u2018black
man\u2019
impression
instead).
The
staff
list
at
the
Disney
studios
was
full
of
Jewish
and
homosexual
figures
like
Ashman.
Yet\u00a0The
Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
ushered
in
some
of
the
most
socially
conservative
films
Disney
produced.
A
strange
duality.<\/p>\n
\n
-
Like
it
says
above,
Hodge<\/strong>
is
currently
doing
a
dedicated
project
on
mermaids
over
at\u00a0Poems
Underwater<\/strong><\/a>,
which
is
inviting
submissions<\/a>…<\/em><\/li>\n
-
@PoemsUnderwater<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/li>\n
-
Poems
Underwater<\/strong>
on
Facebook<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
![\"Hans](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/hans-anderson.jpg\")
<\/a>Hans Christian Andersen, photographed by Thora Hallager<\/p><\/div>\n
The first thing to do was give it a happy ending, since in Andersen\u2019s version the Prince\u2019s indifference to the mermaid results in her annihilation<\/a> and transformation to \u2018a daughter of the air\u2019.<\/p>\n
This was typical Andersen: he wrote that \u2018most of what I have written is a reflection of myself\u2019, and he was not a terribly happy man. Unreciprocated love was an ongoing feature of his life, and throughout it he nursed passions for various inappropriate people.<\/p>\n
These included celebrity soprano Jenny Lind (who is said to have inspired\u00a0his story The Nightingale<\/strong> after she put him firmly in the friendzone in 1844) and various straight men, but he also wrote of avoiding actual sexual encounters \u2013 his diary records him visiting prostitutes, talking to them, and then returning home to masturbate alone.<\/p>\n
Many of his \u2018fairy tales\u2019 are characterised by violence, speechlessness and unreciprocated love, often across two different \u2018species\u2019, as with the tin soldier\u2019s love for a paper ballerina in\u00a0The Steadfast Tin Soldier<\/strong>, or indeed the Little Mermaid\u2019s love for the human Prince \u2013 a feature that tends to make them, like their author, rather sexless in approach.<\/p>\n
Although the sad stuff was scrapped, the symbolically significant speechlessness of the Mermaid was maintained in the Disney screenplay. A mermaid\u2019s voice is her primary power, since her singing can lure sailors to their deaths, so its loss is a significant one \u2013 aphonia in a milder form had also been a feature of\u00a0Splash<\/strong>, where Darryl Hannah\u2019s character cannot initially speak English.<\/p>\n
Disney\u2019s Ariel was voiced by Broadway star (and Ashman associate) Jodi Benson, and her voice remains her defining beauty in the film. But the manner of its loss changes: while both Little Mermaids give their voices up to the Sea Witch, in Andersen’s story the unnamed mermaid has her tongue cut out to bring this about.\u00a0Disney cleaned this up, and, in the process, rendered it reversible: Ariel\u2019s voice is depicted as a glowing, ghostly ball that can pass through bodily barriers without drawing blood \u2013 as in traditional artistic representations of the soul.<\/p>\n
Ironically, this is exactly what Andersen\u2019s mermaid is seeking: her love for the prince is the means through which she hopes to win \u2018immortality\u2019 and the chance to share in the joys of paradise. (This rather Romantic notion, albeit gender-inverted, links Andersen\u2019s tale thematically with Friedrich de la Motte\u2019s mermaid\u00a0Undine<\/strong><\/a> – and also Tchaikovsky\u2019s watery\u00a0Swan Lake<\/strong><\/a>, composed in 1875, the year Andersen died). Disney refocused the mermaid’s longing for a soul to a more secular \u2013 and sexualised \u2013 teenage quest for the love of a handsome prince.<\/p>\n
She
sells
sea
shells<\/h2>\n
But
Disney
hit
a
problem
when
it
came
to
the
artwork.
Mermaids,
of
course,
are
typically
bare-breasted,
but
so
too
were
traditional
depictions
of
Andersen\u2019s
\u2018little\u2019
mermaid,
including
the
statue
in
Copenhagen\u2019s
harbour.<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
loud
and
proud
in
Copenhagen’s
harbour<\/p><\/div>\n
There
is
not
a
single
illustration
to
the
fairy
tale
pre-Disney
that
shows
her
wearing
anything
at
all
over
her
chest
\u2013
in
the
case
of
Heath
Robinson,\u00a0this
emphasises
the
\u2018Little\u2019
part<\/a>,
as
the
mermaid
is
clearly
a
child
in
his
illustrations.<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
mermaid
is
fifteen
in
Andersen\u2019s
tale,
so
her
littleness
could
be
argued
either
way,
but
in
1989
Disney
producers
obviously
decided
they
wanted
her
to
be
legal
(in
most
states
anyway).
To
make
it
completely
clear,
in
the
course
of
the
film
Ariel
declares
to
her
father
(a
familiar
refrain)
‘I’m
sixteen
years
old.
I’m
not
a
child.’<\/p>\n
But
however
innocently
naked
(and
animated)
the
Little
Mermaid
might
be,
Disney
certainly
could
not
show
a
sixteen
year
old\u2019s
breasts
on
screen.
Their
solution
to
this
problem
was
the
creation
of
a
purple
bra
made
out
of
shells
–
a
new
mermaid
first.<\/p>\n
When
coupled
with
the
waistband-like
arrangement
at
the
top
of
her
tail
(another
innovation,
since
traditionally
the
mermaid\u2019s
scales
segue
gradually
from
the
skin
at
her
waist),
this
decision
had
the
effect
of
creating
a
kind
of
mermaid
bikini
that
implies
she
might
just
be
wearing
an
elaborate
two-piece
\u2013
one
very
similar,
in
fact,
to
the\u00a0ensemble
worn
by
Princess
Jasmine<\/a>\u00a0in
Disney\u2019s
next
film,\u00a0Aladdin<\/strong>.
And,
of
course,
it
also
has
the
effect
of
emphasising
breasts
and
hips
either
side
of
a
tiny
waist.<\/p>\n
The
Barbie-style
Ariel
doll
I
had
as
a
child
had
(as
modern-day
packaging
still
asserts)
‘removable
clothes
for
costume
change<\/a>‘,
so
it
was
clear
she
was
a
two-legged
being
with
an
optional
tail.<\/p>\n
This
has
the
effect
of
making
the
transition
from
mermaid
to
human
much
easier:
in
Andersen\u2019s
story,
creating
two
legs
out
of
one
fish
tail
is
exactly
as
vicious
as
you
would
expect
it
to
be,
and
the
draught
the
mermaid
drinks
to
effect
this
causes
the
sensation
of
\u2018a
two-edged
sword
[passing]
through
her
delicate
body\u2019
\u2013
so
severe
she
passes
out.
Throughout
her
subsequent
time
on
land,
each
foot
she
puts
to
the
ground
feels
like
\u2018treading
upon
the
points
of
needles
or
sharp
knives\u2019.<\/p>\n
Bodily
mutilation
\u2013
indeed,
mortification
\u2013
is
everywhere
in
Andersen’s
story.
After
everyone
is
asleep,
the
mermaid
goes
to
\u2018sit
on
the
broad
marble
steps
[of
the
palace]
for
it
eased
her
burning
feet
to
bathe
them
in
the
cold
sea-water\u2019.
Significantly
–
and
somewhat
bizarrely
–
such
mutilation
has
been
an
ongoing
problem
for
the
Copenhagen
representation
of
Andersen’s
mermaid:
the
statue
in
the
harbour
has
been
blown
up,
decapitated
(twice)
and
had
its
arm
sawn
off,
in
addition
to
many\u00a0petty
acts
of
vandalism<\/a>\u00a0since
its
erection
in
1913.<\/p>\n
Some
liberation?<\/h2>\n
By
contrast
with
Andersen’s
difficult
transition,
Ariel\u2019s
easy-on,
easy-off
fish
tail
and
bikini
bra
combo
not
only
\u2018re-opens\u2019
the
traditional
closed
mermaid
vessel,
it
also
sexualises
the
teenage
mermaid
in
a
manner
markedly
different
from
anything
in
Andersen\u2019s
original
(where
the
mermaid\u2019s
love
is
increased
by
knowledge
of
the
prince\u2019s
good
deeds,
and
her
longing
for
a
soul).<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
–
Disney’s
artwork<\/p><\/div>\n
By
censoring
Ariel,
Disney
draws
attention
to
her
body
and
breasts,
so
she
resembles
a
California
surfer
girl.
The
nakedness,
which
in
earlier
illustrations
was
straightforward
and
childlike,
takes
on
an
explicitly
sexual
edge
(for
more
on
this,
have
a
look
at
this
piece\u00a0by
Virginia
Borges<\/a>).<\/p>\n
The
result
is
that
Disney\u2019s\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
becomes
the
straightforward
tale
of
a
sixteen-year-old
struggling
with
her
father
for
the
right
to
explore
her
burgeoning
sexuality
and
go
out
with
a
boy.
And
because
she
ultimately
uses
this
right
to
make
a
good
marriage
(wearing\u00a0something
strikingly
similar<\/a>\u00a0to\u00a0the
dress
worn
by
the
equally
speechless
Princess
Diana<\/a>\u00a0at
her
1981
marriage),
Ariel
makes
good
in
the
end
and
everyone
is
happy.<\/p>\n
Other
mermaids<\/h2>\n
But
it\u2019s
interesting
that
at
the
same
time
the
producers
were
working
on
a
heteronormative
middle-class
fantasy
idea,
their
musical
wunderkind
Howard
Ashman
(despite
dying
of
what,
at
the
time,
was
popularly
cast
as
a
very
non-family-friendly
disease)
was
injecting
some
Broadway
pizzazz
into
the
soundtrack.
This
included
the
introduction
of
a
deviantly-styled
figure
like
Divine
via
the
character
of
Ursula,
the
Sea
Witch
(though
of
course
she
is
defeated,
as
does
not
happen
in
Andersen).<\/p>\n
In
fact,
as
the
Disney
Renaissance
got
going,
the
calibre
of
stars
from
distinctly
non-Disney
backgrounds
increased:\u00a0The
Lion
King<\/strong>,
the
Renaissance
nadir,
had
major
Broadway
stars
alongside
A-list
Hollywood
stars,
and
the
cast
included
black
and
Latino
actors
\u2013
something
that
had
not
even
been
considered
back
in
the
Forties
(when
Uncle
Walt
wanted
some
racial-caricature
\u2018Jim
Crow\u2019
figures
in
Dumbo<\/strong>,
the
crows
were
voiced
by
white
men
doing
their
best
\u2018black
man\u2019
impression
instead).
The
staff
list
at
the
Disney
studios
was
full
of
Jewish
and
homosexual
figures
like
Ashman.
Yet\u00a0The
Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
ushered
in
some
of
the
most
socially
conservative
films
Disney
produced.
A
strange
duality.<\/p>\n
\n
-
Like
it
says
above,
Hodge<\/strong>
is
currently
doing
a
dedicated
project
on
mermaids
over
at\u00a0Poems
Underwater<\/strong><\/a>,
which
is
inviting
submissions<\/a>…<\/em><\/li>\n
-
@PoemsUnderwater<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/li>\n
-
Poems
Underwater<\/strong>
on
Facebook<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/little-mermaid1.jpg\")
<\/a>The Little Mermaid loud and proud in Copenhagen’s harbour<\/p><\/div>\n
There is not a single illustration to the fairy tale pre-Disney that shows her wearing anything at all over her chest \u2013 in the case of Heath Robinson,\u00a0this emphasises the \u2018Little\u2019 part<\/a>, as the mermaid is clearly a child in his illustrations.<\/p>\n
![\"Disney's](\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/ariel.jpeg\")
<\/a>The
mermaid
is
fifteen
in
Andersen\u2019s
tale,
so
her
littleness
could
be
argued
either
way,
but
in
1989
Disney
producers
obviously
decided
they
wanted
her
to
be
legal
(in
most
states
anyway).
To
make
it
completely
clear,
in
the
course
of
the
film
Ariel
declares
to
her
father
(a
familiar
refrain)
‘I’m
sixteen
years
old.
I’m
not
a
child.’<\/p>\n
But however innocently naked (and animated) the Little Mermaid might be, Disney certainly could not show a sixteen year old\u2019s breasts on screen. Their solution to this problem was the creation of a purple bra made out of shells – a new mermaid first.<\/p>\n
When coupled with the waistband-like arrangement at the top of her tail (another innovation, since traditionally the mermaid\u2019s scales segue gradually from the skin at her waist), this decision had the effect of creating a kind of mermaid bikini that implies she might just be wearing an elaborate two-piece \u2013 one very similar, in fact, to the\u00a0ensemble worn by Princess Jasmine<\/a>\u00a0in Disney\u2019s next film,\u00a0Aladdin<\/strong>. And, of course, it also has the effect of emphasising breasts and hips either side of a tiny waist.<\/p>\n
The Barbie-style Ariel doll I had as a child had (as modern-day packaging still asserts) ‘removable clothes for costume change<\/a>‘, so it was clear she was a two-legged being with an optional tail.<\/p>\n
This has the effect of making the transition from mermaid to human much easier: in Andersen\u2019s story, creating two legs out of one fish tail is exactly as vicious as you would expect it to be, and the draught the mermaid drinks to effect this causes the sensation of \u2018a two-edged sword [passing] through her delicate body\u2019 \u2013 so severe she passes out. Throughout her subsequent time on land, each foot she puts to the ground feels like \u2018treading upon the points of needles or sharp knives\u2019.<\/p>\n
Bodily mutilation \u2013 indeed, mortification \u2013 is everywhere in Andersen’s story. After everyone is asleep, the mermaid goes to \u2018sit on the broad marble steps [of the palace] for it eased her burning feet to bathe them in the cold sea-water\u2019. Significantly – and somewhat bizarrely – such mutilation has been an ongoing problem for the Copenhagen representation of Andersen’s mermaid: the statue in the harbour has been blown up, decapitated (twice) and had its arm sawn off, in addition to many\u00a0petty acts of vandalism<\/a>\u00a0since its erection in 1913.<\/p>\n
Some
liberation?<\/h2>\n
By
contrast
with
Andersen’s
difficult
transition,
Ariel\u2019s
easy-on,
easy-off
fish
tail
and
bikini
bra
combo
not
only
\u2018re-opens\u2019
the
traditional
closed
mermaid
vessel,
it
also
sexualises
the
teenage
mermaid
in
a
manner
markedly
different
from
anything
in
Andersen\u2019s
original
(where
the
mermaid\u2019s
love
is
increased
by
knowledge
of
the
prince\u2019s
good
deeds,
and
her
longing
for
a
soul).<\/p>\n
<\/a>The
Little
Mermaid
–
Disney’s
artwork<\/p><\/div>\n
By
censoring
Ariel,
Disney
draws
attention
to
her
body
and
breasts,
so
she
resembles
a
California
surfer
girl.
The
nakedness,
which
in
earlier
illustrations
was
straightforward
and
childlike,
takes
on
an
explicitly
sexual
edge
(for
more
on
this,
have
a
look
at
this
piece\u00a0by
Virginia
Borges<\/a>).<\/p>\n
The
result
is
that
Disney\u2019s\u00a0Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
becomes
the
straightforward
tale
of
a
sixteen-year-old
struggling
with
her
father
for
the
right
to
explore
her
burgeoning
sexuality
and
go
out
with
a
boy.
And
because
she
ultimately
uses
this
right
to
make
a
good
marriage
(wearing\u00a0something
strikingly
similar<\/a>\u00a0to\u00a0the
dress
worn
by
the
equally
speechless
Princess
Diana<\/a>\u00a0at
her
1981
marriage),
Ariel
makes
good
in
the
end
and
everyone
is
happy.<\/p>\n
Other
mermaids<\/h2>\n
But
it\u2019s
interesting
that
at
the
same
time
the
producers
were
working
on
a
heteronormative
middle-class
fantasy
idea,
their
musical
wunderkind
Howard
Ashman
(despite
dying
of
what,
at
the
time,
was
popularly
cast
as
a
very
non-family-friendly
disease)
was
injecting
some
Broadway
pizzazz
into
the
soundtrack.
This
included
the
introduction
of
a
deviantly-styled
figure
like
Divine
via
the
character
of
Ursula,
the
Sea
Witch
(though
of
course
she
is
defeated,
as
does
not
happen
in
Andersen).<\/p>\n
In
fact,
as
the
Disney
Renaissance
got
going,
the
calibre
of
stars
from
distinctly
non-Disney
backgrounds
increased:\u00a0The
Lion
King<\/strong>,
the
Renaissance
nadir,
had
major
Broadway
stars
alongside
A-list
Hollywood
stars,
and
the
cast
included
black
and
Latino
actors
\u2013
something
that
had
not
even
been
considered
back
in
the
Forties
(when
Uncle
Walt
wanted
some
racial-caricature
\u2018Jim
Crow\u2019
figures
in
Dumbo<\/strong>,
the
crows
were
voiced
by
white
men
doing
their
best
\u2018black
man\u2019
impression
instead).
The
staff
list
at
the
Disney
studios
was
full
of
Jewish
and
homosexual
figures
like
Ashman.
Yet\u00a0The
Little
Mermaid<\/strong>
ushered
in
some
of
the
most
socially
conservative
films
Disney
produced.
A
strange
duality.<\/p>\n
\n
-
Like
it
says
above,
Hodge<\/strong>
is
currently
doing
a
dedicated
project
on
mermaids
over
at\u00a0Poems
Underwater<\/strong><\/a>,
which
is
inviting
submissions<\/a>…<\/em><\/li>\n
-
@PoemsUnderwater<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/li>\n
-
Poems
Underwater<\/strong>
on
Facebook<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
![\"The](\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/little-mermaid.jpg\")
<\/a>The Little Mermaid – Disney’s artwork<\/p><\/div>\n
By censoring Ariel, Disney draws attention to her body and breasts, so she resembles a California surfer girl. The nakedness, which in earlier illustrations was straightforward and childlike, takes on an explicitly sexual edge (for more on this, have a look at this piece\u00a0by Virginia Borges<\/a>).<\/p>\n
The result is that Disney\u2019s\u00a0Little Mermaid<\/strong> becomes the straightforward tale of a sixteen-year-old struggling with her father for the right to explore her burgeoning sexuality and go out with a boy. And because she ultimately uses this right to make a good marriage (wearing\u00a0something strikingly similar<\/a>\u00a0to\u00a0the dress worn by the equally speechless Princess Diana<\/a>\u00a0at her 1981 marriage), Ariel makes good in the end and everyone is happy.<\/p>\n