Reflection: Susan Jeffords

The Susan Jeffords piece on The Beauty and the Beast was fascinating - especially because it delved deeply into the differences between the original fairytale and the Disney version. I really enjoyed her discussion of Disney’s portrayal of the Beast as a somewhat helpless victim, despite the fact that the corporation changed his character to be at least partially deserving of the curse. This has also always frustrated me (at least as I have become re-familiarized with the film in the last couple years). I imagine being cursed and turned into an animal is not pleasant, but that does not mean that the Beast gets a free pass for his abuse, kidnapping, and aggressive anger. No matter what has happened to you, treating someone like that is unacceptable. However, it feels to me as though Disney tries to somewhat excuse or justify his behavior by providing an immediate backstory. In doing so, Disney romanticizes domestic abuse and encourages the audience to express sympathy for the perpetrator of that abuse. It seems as though the original fairy tales aligning most closely with The Beauty and the Beast did not necessarily have some of the most problematic aspects of the princess film; rather, Disney included them, which makes it even worse.

I do find Jeffords’ description of Belle as “a Disney feminist” interesting (170). Belle likes to learn and is pretty brave and loyal - that does not make her a feminist. There are several strong women that I would not consider feminists, and I think it is important to keep in mind that a successful woman is not automatically a success for women. Personally, I would be quite hesitant to describe Belle in this way. It is really hard for me to justify the fact that she ends up falling in love with the man who, at one point, held her hostage. I also do not think that there is necessarily enough information given about Belle to determine whether or not she fits the most classical definitions of feminism; she has practically zero interactions with other women and never directly addresses women’s rights. I am not saying she is an anti-feminist (though I can see the potential validity of that argument, given her eventual romance with the beast). Rather, I am merely pointing out that the simple fact that she is intelligent and brave does not mean she is an avid advocate for gender equality.