Posted on 03/25/2007 7:43:17 AM PDT by Ellesu
ORLANDO, Fla. - Walt Disney Co.'s 1946 film "Song of the South" was historic. It was Disney's first big live-action picture and produced one of the company's most famous songs _ the Oscar-winning "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah." It also carries the story line of the Splash Mountain rides at its theme parks.
But the movie remains hidden in the Disney archives _ never released on video in the United States and criticized as racist for its depiction of Southern plantation blacks. The film's 60th anniversary passed last year without a whisper of official rerelease, which is unusual for Disney, but President and CEO Bob Iger recently said the company was reconsidering.
The film's reissue would surely spark debate, but it could also sell big. Nearly 115,000 people have signed an online petition urging Disney to make the movie available, and out-of-print international copies routinely sell online for $50-$90, some even more than $100.
Iger was answering a shareholder's inquiry about the movie for the second year in a row at Disney's annual meeting in New Orleans. This month the Disney chief made a rerelease sound more possible.
"The question of 'Song of the South' comes up periodically, in fact it was raised at last year's annual meeting ..." Iger said. "And since that time, we've decided to take a look at it again because we've had numerous requests about bringing it out. Our concern was that a film that was made so many decades ago being brought out today perhaps could be either misinterpreted or that it would be somewhat challenging in terms of providing the appropriate context."
"Song of the South" was re-shown in theaters in 1956, 1972 and 1986. Both animated and live-action, it tells the story of a young white boy, Johnny, who goes to live on his grandparents' Georgia plantation when his parents split up. Johnny is charmed by Uncle Remus _ a popular black servant _ and his fables of Brer Rabbit, Brer Bear and Brer Fox, which are actual black folk tales.
Remus' stories include the famous "tar baby," a phrase Republican presidential hopefuls John McCain and Mitt Romney were recently criticized for using to describe difficult situations. In "Song of the South," it was a trick Brer Fox and Brer Bear used to catch the rabbit _ dressing a lump of hot tar as a person to ensnare their prey. To some, it is now a derogatory term for blacks, regardless of context.
The movie doesn't reveal whether it takes place before or after the Civil War, and never refers to blacks on the plantation as slaves. It makes clear they work for the family, living down dirt roads in wood shacks while the white characters stay in a mansion. Remus and other black characters' dialogue is full of "ain't nevers," "ain't nobodys," "you tells," and "dem days's."
"In today's environment, 'Song of the South' probably doesn't have a lot of meaning, especially to the younger audiences," said James Pappas, associate professor of African-American Studies at the University of New York at Buffalo. "Older audiences probably would have more of a connection with the stereotypes, which were considered harmless at the time."
Pappas said it's not clear that the movie is intentionally racist, but it inappropriately projects Remus as a happy, laughing storyteller even though he's a plantation worker.
"Gone with the Wind," produced seven years earlier, endured the same criticism and even shares a common actress (Hattie McDaniel, who won an Oscar for "Gone" for playing the house slave "Mammy").
However, Pappas said he thinks the movie should be rereleased because of its historical significance. He said it should be prefaced, and closed, with present-day statements.
"I think it's important that these images are shown today so that especially young people can understand this historical context for some of the blatant stereotyping that's done today," Pappas said.
From a financial standpoint, Iger acknowledged last year that Disney stood to gain from rereleasing "Song." The company's movies are popular with collectors, and Disney has kept sales strong by tightly controlling when they're available.
Christian Willis, a 26-year-old IT administrator in San Juan Capistrano, Calif., started a "Song" fan site in 1999 to showcase memorabilia. He soon expanded it into a clearinghouse for information on the movie that now averages more than 800 hits a day and manages the online petition.
Willis said he doesn't think the movie is racist, just from a different time.
"Stereotypes did exist on the screen," he said. "But if you look at other films of that time period, I think 'Song of the South' was really quite tame in that regard. I think Disney did make an effort to show African Americans in a more positive light."
Though Willis is hopeful, there's still no telling when _ or if _ the movie could come out (beyond its copyright lapsing decades from now).
For this story, Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Disney's distribution arm, issued a statement: "Song of the South is one of a handful of titles that has not seen a home distribution window. To this point, we have not discounted nor committed to any distribution window concerning this title."
On the Net:
"Song of the South" fan page: http://www.songofthesouth.net
A service of the Associated Press(AP)
"In today's environment, 'Song of the South' probably doesn't have a lot of meaning, especially to the younger audiences," said James Pappas, associate professor of African-American Studies at the University of New York at Buffalo. "Older audiences probably would have more of a connection with the stereotypes, which were considered harmless at the time."
And as a result of this PC BS, kids don't know the story of Brer Rabbit and the briar patch.
I bought a bootleg copy of SOTS on Ebay for $30 a few years ago. It was very entertaining.
Disney should release it with a disclaimer saying "This is a movie that was made in 1945 and according to the customs of that day".
Hopefully that will appease Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
Please don't throw me in the briar patch! Anywhere but the briar patch!
I bet they'll release it, but it will either be (1) edited or (2) prefaced with a 5 minute speech on racism.
The only thing that would mollify brer Jesse and brer Sharpton would be cut of the profits.
Oh for cryin' out loud - what a pompous buffoon.
It is a kid's movie. Let 'em watch it and just be kids without the indoctrination please.
Are they saying it's absolutely impossible for anyone to have been "a happy, laughing storyteller even though he's a plantation worker."?
Even in servitude, I'd guess the children still giggled and played, and adults entertained them.
I saw it in the theater in 1972. This was my favorite movie growing up. I remember being shocked that it was not for sale in the US when I tried to get it for my own kids.
Only one thing can appea$e Je$$e Jack$on.
I saw the re-release of SOTS in 1986 as a six-year-old. There was nothing racist to me in the movie. I have a degree in history and have always had a keen interest in history, even back then. I knew there were people who were slaves but SOTS did not seem to me then to in any way trivialize their lives. They were dressed in clothes that seemed to be more dingy than the white people in the movie. I thought more about how funny the child looked in frills than the glamorization of slavery. People need to see this movie via a child's eyes and realize that if they are properly raised without a lot of racist BS, than the story carries the message Walt Disney intended, that of fables.
And bring back fond memories for Sen. Byrd.
Tell Dr. Pappas he can kiss my ass.
I saw the re-release of SOTS in 1986 as a six-year-old. There was nothing racist to me in the movie. I have a degree in history and have always had a keen interest in history, even back then. I knew there were people who were slaves but SOTS did not seem to me then to in any way trivialize their lives. They were dressed in clothes that seemed to be more dingy than the white people in the movie. I thought more about how funny the child looked in frills than the glamorization of slavery. People need to see this movie via a child's eyes and realize that if they are properly raised without a lot of racist BS, than the story carries the message Walt Disney intended, that of fables.
I saw the re-release of SOTS in 1986 as a six-year-old. There was nothing racist to me in the movie. I have a degree in history and have always had a keen interest in history, even back then. I knew there were people who were slaves but SOTS did not seem to me then to in any way trivialize their lives. They were dressed in clothes that seemed to be more dingy than the white people in the movie. I thought more about how funny the child looked in frills than the glamorization of slavery. People need to see this movie via a child's eyes and realize that if they are properly raised without a lot of racist BS, than the story carries the message Walt Disney intended, that of fables.
whoops, sorry folks, my browser sent postdatas, please don't throw me into the briar patch!
So they speak better English than today's typical rapper, you mean? ;)
One of the "Saturday Morning Funhouse" cartoons Robert
Smigel did for Saturday Night Live was called "Inside
the Disney Vault" in which two kids meet up with Mickey
and see forbidden footage, like the "original uncut version of
Song of the South" which alleged that Disney was racist
(not sure if he was or not). It had Uncle Remus singing
"Zippity doo dah, zippity ay. Negroes are inferior in
every way..."
http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1706
I thought I saw Song of the South back in the 80s at a
theatre (was re-issued)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.