Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1994 :: June ::
Re: Shakespeare and Disney
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0577.  Tuesday, 28 June 1994.
 
(1)     From:   Jon Enriquiz <ENRIQUEZJ@GUVAX.BITNET>
        Date:   Monday, 27 Jun 1994 10:28:00 -0400 (EDT)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0574  Re: Shakespeare and Disney
 
(2)     From:   Pete McCluskey <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 27 Jun 1994 16:53:50 -0500 (CDT)
        Subj:   RE: SHK 5.0574 Shakespeare and Disney
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jon Enriquiz <ENRIQUEZJ@GUVAX.BITNET>
Date:           Monday, 27 Jun 1994 10:28:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: 5.0574  Re: Shakespeare and Disney
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0574  Re: Shakespeare and Disney
 
*The Lion King* is by no means remotely acceptable as a substitute for
*Hamlet*.  But I would feel no hesitation in mentioning *TLK* if I were
teaching a unit about plots, plot points, and copies/ homages/ripoffs of the
same.  As I once said pithily, there is nothing new under the sun.
 
Disney has an important place in culture, and some of that place is positive.
The same is true for Shakespeare.  Sometimes those places intersect.  Sensible
people can enjoy both, intersecting or not. Let's don't turn this into a
discussion of the relative merits of Disney.
 
Jon Enriquez
Georgetown University
ENRIQUEZJ@guvax     (Bitnet)
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Pete McCluskey <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 27 Jun 1994 16:53:50 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: 5.0574 Shakespeare and Disney
Comment:        RE: SHK 5.0574 Shakespeare and Disney
 
William Proctor Williams poses a challenging question about how we should react
when our students justify writing "it were so" by citing _The Lion King_.
Stumped by this puzzler, I can only answer with other questions for Professor
Williams.  First, what does any of this really have to with the Shakespearean
plot elements of _The Lion King_?  Are there movements afoot in the public
schools to dispense with Shakespeare and replace him with the more accessible
Disney?  On a more serious note, I would like to know how Disney (and by
Disney, I mean the corpus of films, not the fiberglass castles and rodent
wristwatches) poses such a threat to everything we stand for?  Is Disney--or
any other studio--capable of killing the imaginations of children and turning
them into homogenized philistines?  (While some would argue yes, I disagree
that Disney is harmful.)  Disney's appropriation of Shakespeare may be odious
to some, but does it really harm Shakespeare studies, the quality of student
writing, education as a whole, or (gasp!) our own credibility?  Finally, to
those who complain that Disney is formulaic, overly optimistic, and that his
animals don't have genitalia, all I can ask is, "Dost think because thou art
virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?"  In other words, lighten up!
There are greater threats to who we are and what we do as educators than
Disney.
 
Now it's time to say goodbye,
 
Pete McClusK-E-Y M-O-U-S-E
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.