Disney Info

[Archon]

It has been years since I have seen Mulan, but I was under the impression that you never saw her mother.

[Nessa]

Trust me, I see Mulan regularly (I have kids...) and you see not only both her parents, but also a grandmother.

[stacer]

Yeah, Mulan's mother and grandmother are the ones who set her up for the matchmaker. And I agree with MsFish on the reason there are so many dead parents, especially mothers, in children's fiction. It takes away the gatekeeper, and simplifies storytelling. Much easier than contriving ways to keep the parents out of the way if they're alive, though I think it's much better when the parents are alive. There's so much higher of a percentage of dead parents in children's lit than in the general population. And close behind are the parents who abandoned the children.

[Chimera]

My mother, on the other hand, is adopted, and believes that Disney is giving a complex to adopted kids.  She's written papers on the subject, and thinks that since it's always orphans who are getting into danger in stories, it makes adopted kids assume that their lives are full of danger. 

Finally I know the reason why ninja monkeys attack me at every turn!!! It's because I'm adopted and my life is fraught with danger!

In other news, I agree with MsFish. In fact, in one of my YA writing classes one of the first rules was "Get rid of the parents." That doesn't mean that they have to die, per se, but they often have to take a backseat or be gone for some reason so the main character can have his/her own growth and experiences.

[hamletfan]

I learned in a Women's Studies class in high school (and maybe all you students of literature can dispute this) that back in the day, fairy tales were a way to teach children lessons about life and to prepare them for things to come.  

For example, back in the day, a higher number of women died in child birth than do today.  So there was a good chance that a girl would either marry someone whose wife had died and they would be a stepmother to his children, or they themselves would die before their children were grown.  So Cinderella was told to children to prepare them for this situation.  

Again I don't know how true this is, but it is an interesting way to think about fairy tales.

[stacer]

That's one theory. The other is that it was simply the way life is, so that's what stories were about. It's the age-old "does life reflect art, or art reflect life?" question.

I highly recommend From the Beast to the Blonde on that subject, by the way. Author is Marina Warner.

[fuzzyoctopus]

I think that art reflects life and then life reflects art secondly.  And then often art reflects the life that reflects the art that was originally based on life.

Ok, I didn't mean that to sound as obtuese as it did...

[Fellfrosch]

On Fuzzy's point, I've heard several very well-formed arguments stating that modern criminals, and organized crime especially, subconsciously emulate Al Pacino and Robert De Niro and others of that generation simply because they grew up watching their movies.

As regards the parent thing, I've always thought that Roald Dahl was even more "anti-parent" than Disney because his parents aren't just absent, they die horribly in the first chapter. He only has two books where the parents aren't dead (Matilda and The Twits), and in both of those the parents are the villains. Well, there's also Danny, the Champion of the World, but that's a different genre, and he might still be missing a mom.

And yes, I think Fish hit it right on the head: no parents means no safety net, which increases the drama. My YA book has no parents either (in fact, I killed them horribly in the first chapter).

[Chimera]

Does that make you "anti-parent" like Dahl?  

[Skar]

in one of my YA writing classes one of the first rules was "Get rid of the parents." That doesn't mean that they have to die, per se, but they often have to take a backseat or be gone for some reason so the main character can have his/her own growth and experiences.

I'm not picking on Chimera here, just the rule.  I think this rule is lazy and a reflection of the direction the commies (my universal label for the liberal wackos who do things like try to mainstream homosexual lifestyles through our public school system and imply through tv and movies that if you aren't sexually experienced before you leave high school you're some sort of pervert)  are trying to take our society.

In my opinion and experience, stories about children are more interesting and pack more punch when the parents are dealt with realistically rather than just shuffled out of the way.  I'm not saying you shouldn't get rid of the parents ever, just that you need to do so in a realistic manner and deal with the problems that leaves the kids with.  

Like in Narnia, the kids were separated from their parents for totally realistic reasons. That very thing happened to thousands of children in England.  Or all those books that take place over summer vacation with relatives. No problems there.

But then you have all those books about orphans.  Not that there aren't orphans, the problem is that it's just a convenient way to get rid of the parents and the book has no echoes of the problems and concerns that actual orphans have.  Or you've got books that get rid of the parents not by having them die but just by portraying them as stupid and ineffectual.  I hate that.  I really enjoy YA books that are about and for kids and teens where the parents are present and act like adults.  Not much of that out there though.

And finally, the idea that parents have to be out of the way in order for kids to have "growth and experiences" is another absurd example of the commie mindset.  I don't know about y'all but most of my actual growth (and i'm separating growth and raw experience here) while I was growing up was intricately and inextricably tied to my parents.  

Why don't more people write about that?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Skar's posts always amuse me.

I just want to pick out a couple things here, not because I disagree, on the whole, I think it shows more skill as a writer to keep the parents alive and healthy and find better reasons why they're not right there.

However, the excusing of Narnia seems more than just a little playing favorites. I fail to see why using a historical event to get them out of the picture is any more realistic or "difficult" than making the child an orphan. It doesn't take any more words and isn't any more difficult to write.

in addition, i find it extremely hard to believe that such a phenomenon is any sort of agenda, consciously or unconsciously. I haven't met anyone (and I know some pretty scaribly liberal people) who believe anything similar to "it'd be better if children didn't have to deal with their parents."

[Fellfrosch]

...most of my actual growth (and i'm separating growth and raw experience here) while I was growing up was intricately and inextricably tied to my parents.

Why don't more people write about that?

 


Because my parents would never let me fight crime with a magical sword, but they did help me build character by weeding the garden. When it comes time to choosing a book to read, I think I'd go with the crime-fighting ninja orphan than the well-balanced garden-weeder.

[Tink]

Part of why I think that rule of getting rid of parents exist is because children don't want to be preached to. Although in real life our parents helps us by giving us advice, teaching us right from wrong, and all that, and that's how we grow, children don't want to read a story about how a child got into danger and the parents or other adults came in and rescued them. They want to feel empowered by reading about children, for example, the Baudelaires, who are able to use their own brains and figure out a way to help themselves. I also think that children have fun reading about children who go on these adventures without parents, and sometimes without any adults, because although they themselves would be scared out of their wits without adult supervision, it's fun to escape into a book where children are able to do it and have an adventure. Children still learn lessons this way, but it comes out in a less preachy way than stories where an adult solves the problem.

I think that stories can work with adults and without, but I don't see anything wrong with taking adults out of the picture, especially if it makes the storyline more believable.

[stacer]

I used to daydream that instead of having to live in the apartment with my mom, I got to have the next-door apartment all to myself. It was a safe daydream--she was nearby, but I still had my own space. I think that's what kids like to daydream about, what it would be like to be independent.

But I'm also the kid who daydreamed that her "real" family were the Dukes of Hazzard and that they came to rescue me and we drove off into the sunset in the General Lee.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Who *didn't* have that dream?