“When We’re Human”: Black Womanhood in Disney

Disney has a controversial history in portraying people of color and women in their films. Though— at least in recent years— many of the women of color they portray are strong, relatively dynamic characters, their cultural backgrounds are either ignored in the narrative or grossly stereotyped. In Disney’s early years, before Disney portrayed any women of color of any sort, Disney often turned to animals in order to portray people of color in their films, leading to many stereotypes and caricatures. Interestingly, in Disney’s two depictions of Black women in an animated feature, these two phenomenon merge creating an interesting portrait of black women. The Princess and The Frog’s Tiana and The Lion King’s Nala demonstrate how Disney uses animals when portraying black characters in their films to alleviate racial tension. When this is applied to women, stereotypes connected to black womanhood are elevated, as the historical implications of black women as animals undermines their status and humanity in the Disney universe.

The Lion King was released in 1994 by Walt Disney Pictures which is owned by The Walt Disney Company (Wikipedia). At the time, Michael Eisner was the CEO of the company (Wikipedia). 1994 was only two years after the infamous Rodney King Riots and racial tensions were high as many court cases involving racial issues were being considered in the Supreme Court such as Shaw v. Reno (Britannica) (Wikipedia). The Princess and the Frog was released fifteen years later in 2009 (Wikipedia). The CEO of Disney at that time was Bob Iger (Wikipedia). That year was also a racially important year as President Obama’s first term as president of the United States.

In both The Princess and The Frog and The Lion King, race and place seem to only be relevant as a means to pacify criticisms of inequality or promote racial harmony (and in turn uniformity). Neither film directly addresses racial issues. In The Princess and the Frog this is particularly concerning. There are two points in the film in which racial difference is directly addressed. The first comes at the start of the film, when Tiana is a young girl. As Tiana and her mother return from her mother’s wealthy white employer’s home, the camera uses a pan shot to transition from the bright white mansions of the white neighborhood to the dark small houses of the black community. This is an extremely intriguing shot. It seems to suggest that the movie will explore these interesting dichotomies of black and white life later in the film, touching on the institutionalized segregation of the nineteen-twenties, when the film takes place. That illusion is quickly dispelled.

A couple of moments later, Tiana and her father perfect a pot of Jumbo with a splash of hot sauce. Tiana screams out into the street for everyone to join her family in eating. The final shot we see of Tiana’s neighborhood is that of a black utopia, which despite location and economic differences, is filled with happiness and warmth. Black people of every age and size sit happily on Tiana’s porch while Tiana, her mother, and her father stand happily in the doorway, warm light radiating love. In her article “Hurricane Katrina, Race and Gender in The Princess and the Frog,” Sophie Engel sums up the place of race in this film. She states, “the film’s utopian position on the racial issue is clear: race is a surface marker of difference that can be overcome through open-mindedness and true love” (59). With this picture of harmony and happiness, the meaning of the trolley shot seems to change into something much less political and much more customary, simply a fun detail in history.

Setting plays an important role in both these films and their relationship to race. In The Princess and the Frog, as examined above, home becomes an important factor both in the setting of neighborhood as well as in the larger context of New Orleans. In the Lion King, however, whether or not the characters can even be characterized as black is an important question. It can be argued that though The Lion King is set in Africa, and therefore Nala should be African, being a lion negates her role as a black woman. This argument is flawed, however, in connection to the countless other films (mentioned above) in which animals are racialized. Is it only necessary to racialize animals when convenient? Why can a dragon in China be undoubtedly characterized as black but a lion in Africa must just a lion? Through the prospective of Disney, Africa is merely a charming backdrop for a Shakespearean tale told through lions. In the book Animating Difference, it is revealed that Africa seems to be the only setting in Disney films without any native humans present (Tarzan portrays humans in Africa but they are British people travelling to see the wildlife of the continent) (58). The book describes this realization as “a violent act, a symbolic clearing” (58). The denial of Nala’s race in conjunction with Disney’s other animals would be an equally “violent act,” taking away the identity and icon that many young black girls crave in Disney.

Though racial systems and implications can be negotiable, in Disney there is one quality that is never negotiable: gender. Both Nala and Tiana are strictly restricted to the confinement of gender roles. In The Princess and the Frog, frog Tiana is significantly smaller and slimmer than her male counterpart. Her legs are slim — as contrasted to Naveen’s legs which are thicker at the thigh — and her waist is thin. In reality, female frogs are typically significantly larger than male frogs (Armstrong). Tiana also has eyelashes and is a lighter green color. All her features are distinctly feminine, as compared to Naveen’s more accurate representation of a frog.

One specific scene in which Tiana’s femininity is emphasized as a frog is during the song, “Dig A Little Deeper.” At a point in the song, Tiana dances on a barrel, her eyes half closed rather seductively and her hips swaying back and forth. Naveen, previously occupied by a pile of money drops a coin, is shocked by Tiana’s beauty.[1] This moment is meant to signal Naveen’s first realization that he loves Tiana. The Princess and the Frog boasts the message that love is not controlled by money or other superficial concerns, but rather by deep connection of emotion. Tiana and Naveen’s love is meant to be characterized outside of the physical realm, and more concerning their shared emotional bond. Why then, is the realizing factor of Naveen’s love physical? It would be much more apt had Naveen’s realization come during one of the two’s conversations or even moments later in the song when Tiana is expressing her dreams and aspirations. A focus on these aspects of Tiana’s personality would be much more important to children and send a more grounded message to Disney’s young viewers. Instead, Disney chose to sexualize a frog.

Nala’s gender is also quite potent in The Lion King. As an adult lioness, she is grossly sexualized, but even as a child, her place as a woman is clear. Her undying loyalty to Simba (both emotional and physical), even in the face of danger when the two cubs venture to the elephant graveyard suggests that, though she already shows signs of ferocity and fervor, her main purpose in the film is to be Simba’s motivation and love interest. At the end of this scene, after Simba’s father, Mufasa, finds the two cubs and drives the hyenas away, denouncing Simba for his foolishness, Nala stands by his side reassuring him at his side and claiming “I thought you were very brave.”

Nala’s sexuality is even more pronounced, as well as racialized as Nala appears again later in the film as an adult. Nala’s body is an indicative of the relationship in the film between her gender and her race. Her body is quite, muscular (as a lioness’s usually is). The film first shows adult Nala prowling through the tall grass, preparing to pounce on her prey. Her hips move side to side and her shoulder blades move up and down slowly. Her movements alone are not particularly surprising, as this is how female lionesses tend to walk. The following scene, however, changes the implication of this walk., making it much more sexual and reminiscent of the common hypersexualization of black women.

After Nala and Simba recognize each other, they go on a walk to reconnect and discuss the trouble of Simba’s former home. The scene quickly shifts, however, when the song “Can You Feel the Love Tonight” begins. As the two frolic and cuddle in the African jungle, their body movements are emphasized and sensual. One particular moment is especially sexual. After Simba and Nala fall down a hill into each other’s arms, Nala licks Simba’s cheek. The shot shifts to a close up of Nala’s face. Her eyes are half closed sensually (as were Tiana’s in “Dig a Little Deeper), her chest seems to be protruding, as if to suggest imaginary breasts.

Nala’s strength and forthrightness as paired with her sensuality seems to elicit the stereotype of “The Black Bitch” often attributed to Pam Grier’s performances which as Patricia Hill Collins describes “combined beauty, sexuality and violence” (124)). In Black Sexual Politics, Patricia Hill Collins describes the black bitch stereotype as “super-tough, super strong women who are often celebrated” (124). This may seem like a good thing; however, as Collins later indicated, the stereotype only works if these black women are not “on [black men’s] side” and “The Black Bitch” can quickly turn into just a “bitch” (125). Nala is only allowed to be strong and sexual in the context of Simba. In the final scenes of the film, when Simba fights his uncle Scar for the crown, one would think that Nala’s strength and cunning would come in handy. But Nala is nowhere to be found because that would undermine Simba’s model of the alpha male.

Tiana’s sexualization, as depicted in “Dig a Little Deeper,” presents a different image of black womanhood than does Nala’s. The stereotype that Tiana seems to fit more aptly into is “The Black Lady.” Patricia Hill Collins describes “The Black Lady” as an “image to counter claims of black women’s promiscuity” (139). “The Black Lady” is often a middle class woman with a good job and a family, who is only sexualized in the context of nice heterosexual love (Collins 139–140). Tiana is not middle class, for that was a hard standard to meet for a black family during that time; however, her focus on hard work and success suggests that she would like to eventually reach that. Her romance with Naveen only completes the image of “The Black Lady,” suggesting that black women can in fact have it all. Tiana’s sexuality is only acceptable as a way to ensure her heterosexuality and enhance her femininity as to not become a desexualized Mammy or a lesbian. The Lion King must also make this distinction of heterosexuality with Simba and Nala’s romance which is not at all relevant to the larger plot of the film.

In Leena Foote’s article, “I Want to be a Princess Too,” she quotes blogger Ashley Demma arguing that “The Princess and the Frog is just an animated movie, ‘not a social cry or political statement … it’s about a princess and her talking animal friends … sounds like every other movie Disney has ever spit out” (20). This argument could certainly also be applied to The Lion King, in which many common tropes of animal centered films in Disney are present such as in The Lady and the Tramp, Bambi, Dumbo, and many others. Animals seem to be almost as ubiquitous as singing. In a sense, I would agree with Demma’s statement. The Princess and the Frog and The Lion King are “like every other movie Disney has ever spit out.” That is exactly the issue. What Demma fails to recognize is that in all of the other movies she cites, animals have been racialized, women have been sexualized, and black women have been ignored. It is exactly the fact that these movies are like all the others that poses a problem.

For example, in films such as Dumbo (1941) and Lady and the Tramp (1951), animals are deliberately racialized. The first Disney animated feature credited with portraying black people is Dumbo. In the film, Dumbo interacts with a group of crows (often referred to as “Jim Crows”). These crows are stereotypical representations of people of color as each crow has a strong languid, colloquially black speech and black dance moves. Almost fifty years later Eddie Murphy was cast as inept dragon guide in Mulan, a film about China during the Han Dynasty. In her essay, “The Strange Case of The Princess and the Frog: Passing and the Elision of Race,” Ajay Gehlawat certainly does not think that turning Princess Tiana into a frog was simply a innocent act of continuity. She states: “When (human) characters become animals it is seen as reflecting some character flaw — think, for instance, of Pinocchio and his friends becoming donkeys … To make the first African American princess a frog, then, seems to literally conflate her with animality” (418).

There are a couple of ways to remedy Disney’s difficulties with representing black women in their feature films. The most obvious solution is write a story about a black woman who is fully and consistently human. That simple act will be one step in the right direction. More deeply, however, Disney’s problem with race cannot simply be solved by simply taking a brush and painting a character brown. As Lena Foote aptly states, “simply replacing the white characters with minority characters does not “lead to a more democratic society,” but the ideology behind the representations have to be replaced as well” (16). In The Lion King, I would suggest making Nala a more central character, possibly reminiscent of a female version of Hamlet’s Horatio, with no romantic connection to Simba. This would allow Nala to be strong as a black woman, without having to be overly sexual. In order to fulfill a remedy such as this; however, something quite important has to happen. Disney must embrace the Black woman. Though they have started to portray black women increasingly in their television shows and live-action films, the change must go deeper than that and present itself in the production of the films and organization of the company.

[1] It should be emphasized that Naveen is in fact, gaping in wonder at a frog. Though his body does take the form of a frog, he still has the cognitive functioning of a human. He should not be attracted to a frog