MovieChat Forums > Sleeping Beauty (1959) Discussion > What's wrong with dreaming...

What's wrong with dreaming...

posted 10 years ago by Weber4278
26 replies | jump to latest

...about true love?

This is just something I have to get off my chest, so sorry if it feels like a rant but I see this same criticism directed at the older Disney Princesses all the time these days (Snow White, Cinderella, Aurora, and Ariel etc) and that is that they are bad examples for young girls because they spend all their time dreaming about finding true love instead of going out and kicking butt etc.

It's an argument that seems to have made it's way to the Studio as well because Disney these days is moving away from the romance to the comedy, and any love depicted in the latest films are the kind between a mother and daughter or between sisters.

Now I'm not saying it's wrong for Disney to explore other sorts of relationships, nor am I against portraying Princesses as strong women.

But here's my problem with this new train of thought, and I decided to post this here since poor Aurora seems to get the brunt of these types of criticisms...and that is "since when does dreaming about finding true love make you a weakling?"

What is wrong with wanting to find a man you can love?

It's like in order to be a strong woman these days you better not ever get married and have children!

Romance...is only for those submissive girls who want to be controlled by a guy!

The truth is this whole argument really goes beyond Disney since I see it all the time in the real world these days and it's really annoying...to be considered a 'strong woman' you have to be a CEO of a major Corporation and a total *****, God forbid a woman dreams of being a mother or a housewife!

I always thought equality meant a woman could choose whatever she wants to be, I didn't know you HAD to be 100% career minded (and completely cynical and dismissive of men) in order to be considered 'strong'. 

Anyway just had to rant, and again this is just my opinion.

While I grew up with the 90's era films...I'm beginning to favor the older Disney movies more as I get older, and while 'Beauty and the Beast' will always be my favorite fairy tale...Cinderella, Snow White, and Sleeping Beauty are quickly becoming my favorite Disney girls. I just love how sweet, kind, and genuinely warmhearted they are compared to the more...spunky 'modern' Princesses.

[–] rbrtck 10 years ago

But here's my problem with this new train of thought, and I decided to post this here since poor Aurora seems to get the brunt of these types of criticisms...and that is "since when does dreaming about finding true love make you a weakling?"

Well, honestly Aurora is the least developed of the princess characters, although a lot of this is due to circumstance and the fundamental nature of the story that requires her to be asleep while most of the pivotal action is going on. In the time that we do get to spend with her, while fully conscious, she is of course a very sweet girl (what's wrong with that?) who makes observations about the world around her, limited as it was, and extrapolates and applies them to her situation (showing that she has some intelligence), which is the basis, aside from biology and instinct, of her longing for a mate of her own (and there's nothing wrong with that, either).

What is wrong with wanting to find a man you can love?

Nothing, which is why even the recent, modern Frozen has Anna dreaming out loud in song about finding romance and "THE One." OK, so her first attempt didn't quite work out as planned, but she did find her man in the end--a guy who isn't so seemingly perfect and is not a prince, but that's not what love is about, and indeed the same idea can be found in Sleeping Beauty with Prince Phillip having no interest in marrying some princess, wanting instead to marry a peasant girl he found in the forest. It's just a huge coincidence that, unbeknownst to him at the time, they happened to be same girl, but the idea is the same. Frozen just takes it farther because this movie is expressly about the true meaning of love, but the ideas are similar.

Romance...is only for those submissive girls who want to be controlled by a guy!

Well, Tangled, which is fairly recent, has romance. Rapunzel didn't long for a man early on because she had been taught since childhood that they (and everything else) were dangerous, but she sure changed her mind a bit later, and was very happy when Eugene opened up to her and seemed to be into her. Anna, an even more recent example, did expressly dream about romance (not surprising, considering the castle's art collection ), and even after she was badly stung she still ended up in a romantic relationship. Some people try to use Elsa as an example of a woman who doesn't need a man, but she was preoccupied with a lot of very bad things in her life and didn't have time to worry about that (if she can't even touch another person for fear of hurting or killing them, then why would she dream of romance?). So the problem is not WDAS but the public's perception, which unfortunately is often not very perceptive (of the truth) at all.

I always thought equality meant a woman could choose whatever she wants to be, I didn't know you HAD to be 100% career minded (and completely cynical and dismissive of men) in order to be considered 'strong'. 

Yeah, a lot of so-called "feminists" hold extreme, often hypocritical views. I definitely agree with you here.

While I grew up with the 90's era films...I'm beginning to favor the older Disney movies more as I get older, and while 'Beauty and the Beast' will always be my favorite fairy tale...Cinderella, Snow White, and Sleeping Beauty are quickly becoming my favorite Disney girls. I just love how sweet, kind, and genuinely warmhearted they are compared to the more...spunky 'modern' Princesses.

Well, I've made the argument in other boards here that the earlier princesses had some spunk, too. Watch how Snow White handles the Dwarfs and how Cinderella sticks up for herself at times--the part at the climax where she says "But you see, I have the other slipper"  is awesome :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHU5axBMrCI

There are differences owing to having been created in different eras and such, but the newer princesses (at least most of them) seem just as sweet, kind, and warmhearted as the older ones. It's just that sometimes they're given more opportunities by the newer movies to do something about their situations. I think that the fundamental differences between the newer and older princesses are mostly in people's minds and perceptions--to me, they're all sweet, kind, warm, and spunky.  Well, there may be some relative exceptions if you want to quibble, but not lately--Rapunzel, Elsa, and Anna are as sweet as can be, if you allow for the fact that they're only human rather than angels. Similarly, Snow White, Cinderella, and even Aurora have their limits--they're only human, too. Snow White actually uses sarcasm and mocks Grumpy (gently and justifiably), for example, and then he probably ended up loving her the most. Cinderella had a need to vent her frustrations, and mocked her lousy stepsisters (in private) a time or two. And the Good Fairies might as well have been taking Aurora to her own funeral when they brought her back to the castle--not that I blame her, but she practically threw a tantrum when she found out that she was a princess who had been betrothed from birth. They're all very, very sweet, but still only human, which makes them more believable and relatable--both the older and the newer ones.

[–] cheedo 9 years ago

but she practically threw a tantrum when she found out that she was a princess who had been betrothed from birth.

She went into her room to cry (albeit a little dramatically). I'd hardly call that anything close to a tantrum. 

A tantrum implies violence of the verbal or physical kind, ie Jasmine physically attacking Aladdin and telling him to kill himself, or the way Merida screams at her mother, slashes the tapestry and hacks her bed posts to pieces.

Anyhow, I can't really blame her for being upset at finding out her life is a lie, she's forbidden to see the one person she's had feelings for, and her parents aren't actually dead/gone after all. Plus, you have to remember, HORMONES.

I drink coffee FOR BREAKFAST.

[–] dwellman21 10 years ago

Nothing's wrong with dreaming about romance...it's just that it's completely boring in this movie.

At least when Snow White or Cinderella had their Dream moments, it also doubled as an escape for them from the crappy living situations they had to deal with. With Aurora, there's nothing really going on with her, she has a pretty normal, happy carefree life (since she remains in the dark about Maleficent). And that's...just not very compelling to watch for me as a viewer. I don't get to know Aurora, she isn't really going through any active conflict internally or externally, so it's hard for me to care about her or her bland romance with Prince Phillip, something that also takes a hit because we already know those two are destined to be with each other thanks to the beginning of the film, so there's hardly even a Will-They-Or-Won't-They tension like they're trying to set-up.

I can defend Snow White, I can defend Ariel, I'll DEFINITELY defend Cinderella all day every day, but Aurora...*shrug*

[–] danielariveraa98 9 years ago

Aurora was shut away in a cottage and was not allowed to have any other human contact than with the fairies, "don't speak to strangers", so she dreams about love as her escape from that. And with Prince Philip, he didn't laugh at her or mock her for dancing with the animals, nor did he try to kill her or do anything bad to her, so he was a nice stranger, and a very nice one since he danced with her like in her dream. I also like how she rebelled from the fairies by meeting a stranger.

I understand why some people might not connect with this one, everyone has their different stories and they might not connect with some and might with others, but we should understand that her dream is more than just a random dream.

[–] rbrtck 9 years ago

Aurora was shut away in a cottage and was not allowed to have any other human contact than with the fairies, "don't speak to strangers", so she dreams about love as her escape from that.

That's right, few people would be content with such a situation forever, unless they're hermits or something. Rapunzel was in a somewhat similar situation, at least from her own point of view at the time, and even though she was apparently provided a lot more stimulation and was doted on by Gothel, Rapunzel still eventually needed to get out of there. Her "hook" was the lanterns ("stars"), but it could have been anything and would have been something or other in any case. In Aurora's case, she observed that the animals all had little animal friends and mates, and wondered why she couldn't have the same (with her kind). No one was trying to torture her, but it doesn't mean that she should have simply been content with her situation, and eventually she wasn't.

I also like how she rebelled from the fairies by meeting a stranger.

Yeah, and although we don't get to know Aurora/Briar Rose quite as well as the other princesses, she still shows a little bit of the spunk or slyness that many of them do--she knew more than she let on, concerning the fairies. It's not much, but it shows that she's the same kind of character, not just a vacuous shell standing in for one.

I understand why some people might not connect with this one, everyone has their different stories and they might not connect with some and might with others, but we should understand that her dream is more than just a random dream.

You're right, but darned if I can see why some people can't relate or at least sympathize. Who in the real world would be fully satisfied with a life that is peaceful but bereft of friends (near one's age), a significant other, and for most people lots of things to learn and do--people don't even know themselves!  And yes, her dream was not random--in fact, she spelled out her thought process quite clearly.

That said, I can understand why Aurora and her situation might be less interesting for many, relatively speaking. I just mean that there is more than most people give her or the movie credit for.

[–] dominicboo 9 years ago

Nothing's really wrong with it. My only personal complaints with the early princesses is less development than the newer ones. But I still love these movies. They have great side characters (the seven dwarfs, the mice, the three good fairies)and great villains especially Maleficent. So I suggest everybody watch the old Disney movies, and try to find something good about them.

[–] rbrtck 9 years ago

My only personal complaints with the early princesses is less development than the newer ones. But I still love these movies. They have great side characters (the seven dwarfs, the mice, the three good fairies)and great villains especially Maleficent.

It's just a different style of storytelling. I think that the WDAS filmmakers and animators back in the day didn't find either the princess/prince characters or their romances inherently very interesting or relatable--they often waxed lyrical over them, but didn't want to spend much effort and running time on developing them. Instead the audience largely saw the story through the eyes and experiences of the secondary characters. In a way this makes sense because like the secondary characters the vast majority of the audience are commoners, and I think the idea was that we'd relate to and sympathize with these characters more readily and strongly, and since they cared so much for the royal protagonists, therefore we would, too (well, Cinderella wasn't royalty at first, but the style had been established). And of course, most of the secondary characters are either animals or humans with some kind of special cartoony appeal, and I think back then WDAS found them much more interesting as well as relevant to animation than straight-up human characters, which were more the domain of live-action movies anyway.

But times change, and not only are ordinary people out here used to the idea of relating to and sympathizing with Disney royalty, many (especially young girls, of course) even view themselves as "royalty" of a sort. That's what Disney would have us believe, anyway--that we're all princesses and princes, if not literally then figuratively. Plus WDAS have gotten more accustomed to animating humans, finding a level of caricature that they're more comfortable with. Eventually, with animated features having been established for longer, I guess they began to feel more comfortable with using more standard story structures. It helped that Ariel was a mermaid and Beast was, well, a beast, which allowed them to focus on the actual protagonists more without wondering why this is being done in animation instead of live-action. And with the success of these movies as a precedent, they've continued to focus on the protagonists instead of the secondary characters thereafter. I think that WDAS' current filmmakers simply have more confidence that the audience would find human princesses and such interesting enough, in actual animated features, to be the main focus than their predecessors did.

By the way, note that lately they've been trying to give their princesses superpowers--not always, but whenever they can. Rapunzel, Elsa, and Vanellope, if we count her, had this, and of course earlier Ariel was a mermaid. In general they'll focus on whichever characters they can make the most interesting for themselves--early on it was often the sidekicks and now it's most frequently the protagonists, some reasons for which have been given above.

The bottom line is that we should enjoy all of these movies for what they are, and they're all different, of course, especially between different eras. Maybe some prefer one style over the other, and early on WDAS used both, depending on the movie, and there were definite reasons for this, for what it's worth.

[–] danielariveraa98 9 years ago

While I love the older disney princesses, I love the newer ones as well. There is nothing wrong with dreaming of love, and myself I've criticized many times for dreaming like this. But I greatly like the diversity that they're adding with the princesses, as it sends the message that no matter who you are, you are still awesome, from Snow White to Mulan. Rather than have all the princesses have love as their main goal, or all of them having kicking butt as their main goal, they have many different ones, and that's what I like.
There's nothing wrong with wanting a prince, this does not make you weak. There's nothing wrong with not wanting a prince, you shouldn't be looked down on because of this

Every girl is different

[–] Confection_Pictures 9 years ago

http://youtu.be/gbOleDqAnwY

Man is the cruelest animal. ― Friedrich Nietzsche

[–] rbrtck 9 years ago

Some of the early romances in these movies were simply shorthand on the screen, but this doesn't mean that some time hadn't passed off-screen before the characters were married. The filmmakers just chose not to show much of the process because they didn't think it would be that interesting--they were animators so naturally things that aren't done routinely in live-action movies were their focus instead. Things are different today in this regard for whatever reasons, but I can see their point of view at the time.

Even the scene in Frozen that you referenced is a form of shorthand. Who's to say that Anna and Hans would not have been engaged for a long, long time (to get to know one another) before actually getting married? Of course, circumstances being what they were, Elsa couldn't even allow that, so she just cut to the chase and brought up marriage as though it were going to happen that day instead of just an engagement (still too quick, but not exactly the same thing). Elsa would have done almost anything to get out of that situation, including cutting the party short, which she did soon thereafter. This statement by Elsa does imply a more general point nevertheless, but it's not necessarily contrary to other Disney romances any more than Anna's--Elsa just wanted to stop what was happening, or failing that, cut Anna loose and let her live her own life.

[–] AceRoccola 9 years ago

How about instead of sitting around dreaming and singing about true love, they go off and find it? Who said you can't have romance? It's the way they go about waiting for and dreaming for that love as if they had no agency of their own that critics typically take issue with.

Seems to me that love isn't the issue, but rather the passivity of the characters in question. They wait for fate to bring them their future, but that isn't how life works. You don't just sit around in your room daydreaming until true love and a massive fortune come to find you. That's the issue, that people think this sort of daydreaming fatalism teaches a poor life lesson. Not that the evil feminists want to kill romance...

Some critics would say these characters, waiting on the love of a man to fulfill them, are modeling unhealthy relationships. But even then, it's not a crusade against "romance" so much as a criticism of creating female characters that are defined only by their need of/love of a male character. Whether you agree or not is immaterial. In any case, it's not "romance" or "love" that are under fire. It's the way that the characters and their relationships are drawn.

[–] cheedo 9 years ago

Actually, yes, it is. We don't always get he things we want, and much of the time, you have to wait for what you want. But even so, I take it you missed the part where this is a fairy tale. Who honestly reads or watches one fully expecting realism? I might point out acting as though you are 100% self-reliant and neither need a man's help nor do you need relationships with other people is far more unrealistic, though that seems to be quite a popular ideal for many modern Disney fans.

But back to the point- what did you expect Aurora to do? Be a selfish brat and run away to get her man against her guardians' rules (you know, what people call Ariel for doing)? Well, then she'd just get slammed for being a man-crazy hussy. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

so much as a criticism of creating female characters that are defined only by their need of/love of a male character.

Well, that's your own opinion. And if that's all you got from Aurora, we must be watching different movies. Anyway, nothing wrong with a woman who wants love from a man, especially one who's been forbidden from meeting literally anyone but her aunts her whole life. This attitude is so sexist towards both genders: one, it shames women for wanting romance, as if this is a negative thing they should never aim for, and two, it shames men as being unworthy objects of desire for women, as if they aren't good enough for us.

I drink coffee FOR BREAKFAST.

[–] andrewpi7 9 years ago

Exactly.

Aurora does not have to go out on her own to find true love and massive fortune if that's not what she wants to do at that second in her life, especially given her situation you mention and the fact she's only 16. She's doing what she enjoys (singing, playing with animals, dancing, etc) when the prince finds her & that's not a bad thing. The fact she later also finds true love from a prince and has/gets fortune is just icing on the cake.