Giroux: Our Prometheus

Henry Giroux may not be chained to Mount Olympus as punishment for his deliverance of man from darkness, but his articles criticizing Disney may have a few red-white-and-blue bleeding Americans willing to claw out his liver. My family personally has owned every original Disney princess movie on VHS or CD, and although as a young woman of color I have recognized the discrepancies between the idealistic fantasies sold by Disney and my own life, I did not begin reading "Animating Youth" ready to string the corporation up by its thumbs.

              However, I find it hard to respond to one article and not address my reception and reaction to the other. After reading, and rereading, “Animating Youth” I felt like I had just brushed against the warmth of knowledge, but after reading “How Disney Magic and the Corporate Media Shape Youth Identity in the Digital Age” I saw the flames. My realization is this: none of us know just how bad a corporation with the economic magnitude and the cultural authority of Disney can be, and “un-American”, in-depth analysis like the ones in these articles are here to help us see.
                It is impossible to respond to either article without addressing Giroux’s use of strong, sharp language. powerful statements such as conservative and commercial values that in fact erode civil society” and “undisputed moral authority” from “Animating Youth” evolve into shocking and bold convictions of Disney as a coercive, exploitive force in “How Disney Magic and the Corporate Media Shape Youth Identity in the Digital Age.” This diction may be off-putting to some readers, as exemplified by my classmates who used words such as bitter and angry to describe Giroux’s tone, but I find the word choice necessary and powerful. The only way to make us see the error in our ways is to use a dedicated, slightly forceful tone.  Anybody sounds like a good guy if you use the right words. Ursula just wanted to give a young mermaid a pair of legs. Hitler was one of the best strategist to ever live. The only way we will willingly identify a need to analyze Disney is if we recognize the threat of its influence in our lives. Giroux cannot paint the dark side of Disney in pastel colors, so why should he use pretty words?
              Both of Giroux’s articles read in similar tones, but the content of each caught my attention in different ways. Although I did not agree with all of his points (such as questioning the gender roles of women in a film about lions) I did note that many of the points in “Animating Youth” pertained to company’s portrayal of social roles and structure while the second article highlighted its economic and marketing power. The former is much more difficult for an audience to accept, it is not easy believing that you have been subconsciously swayed and unnoticeably molded. But stating facts such as Eric tries to marry Ariel even though he knew nothing about her primed my mind to be more open to his criticism. Although I was not convinced of the darkness of Disney after I finished the article, I was definitely aware something was amiss.
                Upon finishing the second reading, I accept and understand that I as a Disney consumer have been living in darkness. Without the statistics and history to pair with the gender and racial insensitivities I wouldn’t have recognized the lengths that Disney has gone to as a global figure to sell its values and beliefs to the public. But now I too can advocate for seeing Disney as force to be reckoned with, in all of this newfound light.