Once Upon an Ecological Dream

Anthropomorphism and the Phenomenon of ‘human interference’ with Nature/nature in the Disney films (1942), The Jungle Book (1967), (1981), (1999), (2003) and (2003)

Reena Leek Supervisor: Dr. C. Lord 10195904 Second reader: Dr. F.A.M. Laeven [email protected] Media Studies: Film Studies Word Count: 23549 University of Amsterdam Date: 24 June 2016 ABSTRACT

The Company has a substantial influence on multiple generations, which could be utilized for a good cause. Therefore I will discover that animated Disney features that portray slightly anthropomorphic animals in their natural habitat can be read as ecological films. Most Disney films carry environmental messages as anti- hunting or anti-domestication when the films are analysed through ecological theories combined with a new media theory and concepts considering spectator engagement. Bambi and Finding Nemo are films that contain a sense of immediacy and therefore their respectively anti-hunting and anti-domestication messages are apparent. This immediacy misses in The Jungle Book, however through a sense of place this can still be seen as an ecological film, with a minor message of preservation. Tarzan bears an anti-hunting message through the anthropological machine and the immediacy of the film. This same anti-hunting message is perceived in The Fox and the Hound, although less apparent due to the lack of immediacy. The last film is Brother Bear although there is a self-reflexive element in this film, the anti-hunting message is not perceived due to the lack of Nature as an ideal. Disney seems engaged with environmental awareness, but there could be more impact from the company.

Keywords: Disney, ecology, nature, anthropomorphism, immediacy

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction: Ecology in Disney 4 Anthropomorphism 7 Immediacy 13 Spectator Engagement 15 Nature/nature and ‘sense of place’ 17 Conclusion 20 Human interference with nature in Bambi and Finding Nemo 22 Bambi: an accurate environment in lush Nature 23 Anthropomorphic and immediacy in Finding Nemo 29 Conclusion Bambi and Finding Nemo 32 The animal-raised feral child in The Jungle Book and Tarzan 35 The Jungle Book: the importance of immediacy 36 Tarzan: between animal and human 41 Conclusion The Jungle Book and Tarzan 45 Impact of humans in The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear 48 The problem of domestication in The Fox and the Hound 49 Brother Bear: self-reflexivity due to the anthropological machine 52 Conclusion The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear 56 Conclusion 58 Bibliography 62 Film List 65

3 INTRODUCTION: ECOLOGY IN DISNEY

All our dreams can come true – if we have the courage to pursue them. – Walt Disney (Williams and Denney 63)

The influence of is one of the most significant in popular culture. Walt Disney pioneered the notion of a standard-issue childhood memory according to film critic Ringel (1). Particularly Disney’s animal characters belong to the cultural heritage of the West. A remarkable example of the influence of Disney comes from the musician Paul McCartney. When he watched Bambi (Algar and Armstrong, 1942) the film about a fawn who loses his mother due to hunters “as a child, McCartney felt a strong sense of empathy for the animals and revulsion at the humans’ cruelty, an experience he now identifies as foundational to his development as an activist for animal rights and conservation” (BBC News 2005 and Steindam 100). The major influence is researched in the book The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence in this book Giroux examines the political force that shapes images of public memory. Disney films produce the childhood fantasies that shape our “roles, values, and ideals” (Giroux 84). However, whereas Giroux claims about race, gender and class is a critique for the Disney Corporation, I will research how the corporation tries to do their best at creating environmental awareness. Even if it is not on their agenda the Corporation does convey ecological messages in their way of storytelling. Caleb Steindam argues in his chapter “The Illusion of Life: Nature in the Animated Disney Curriculum” that “nature is a thematic and aesthetic element of nearly all animated Disney films evoking romance, spirituality, adventure fun and absurdist fantasy.” (96) I contradict that nature is only used to evoke these elements, I think it is also used to promote environmental issues and for the service of entertainment for the enhancement of marketing and merchandising as John Parham states in his book Green Media and Popular Culture: An Introduction (237). After all, an Earth-friendly image is crafted by the Disney Corporation through their edutainment such as the True-Life Adventure series, nature documentaries as Bears (Fothergill, Scholey and Chapman, 2014) and the multiple , in specific the Animal Kingdom Theme Park (Steindam 97). I will make a case that the Disney films, whose protagonists are animals and live in their natural

4 habitat, could be seen as ecological films. The films convey anti-hunting, anti- domestication and preservation messages. All the films of my case study are produced by The Walt Disney Company, with the exception of Finding Nemo (Stanton and Unkrich, 2003). For this film there was a coproduction with . However, Disney had an influence on the film since the company distributed the film and there was a partnership between the two companies. The Walt Disney Company represents the film. To narrow my research down I will look at films that feature animals as protagonists, accompanied by a low level of anthropomorphism; this is the humanization of animals and for my corpus I distinguish the animals that do not wear clothes. I will focus on the most pure animals as possible, not animals behaving as humans. Furthermore these animals live in their natural habitats and not in a city or house. Moreover there has to be an aspect of human interference with nature. With human interference I mean that humans intrude nature and that they are altering it on purpose, in particularly the hunting and domestication of animals. Therefore I came up with the next six films in chronological order: Bambi (1942), The Jungle Book (Reitherman, 1967), The Fox and the Hound (Berman, Rich and Stevens, 1981), Tarzan (Buck and Lima, 1999), Brother Bear (Blaise and Walker, 2003) and Finding Nemo (2003). All films focus on relationships within wild nature, with anthropomorphizing elements and constructed with different levels of immediacy. Immediacy is a term coined by new media theorists Bolter and Grusin and explains how a truthful depiction of nature can lead to a more concerned viewer (Remediation 28). I will use this new media theory of remediation, because it offers insights in the field of film about the portrayal of nature. With immediacy the screen as a medium disappears which leads to a more immediate feeling and creates a transfiguration of the environmental message of the film towards the spectator. If there is no immediacy than there is hypermediacy; the animation is not portrayed accurate and old media is visible. For the term nature I will distinguish ‘Nature’ with a capital N, which is the idealization of Nature and ‘nature’ with a small n, which stands for the real nature. Timothy Morton, on who I will further elaborate in this introduction, makes this distinction. Some films are from the perspective of animals and other through the perspective of child protagonists. The anthropomorphic portrayal of animals is often critiqued; Disney sentimentalizes the animals, which will be elaborated on later in this thesis. I will argue that anthropomorphism is not necessarily an unfavourable element. When the films are

5 watched from an ecological viewpoint the anthropomorphism helps viewers to engage with the animals on a deeper level. Therefore the audience can gain a greater degree of sympathy for the animals. Viewers could better comprehend the damage that humans cause to nature. Already since the innovative film Bambi it was clear that the sentimental animated animals could represent more than just an adorable character. The Disney films are environmentally aware and most of them have a clear argument about ecological issues. The adoption of a narrative aligned with animal characters may have the potential to develop more than cuteness and could create active ecological members. How does the Walt Disney Company convey environmental messages through animated Disney films starring animal protagonists in natural settings? Immediacy and sentimentalizing anthropomorphism reinforce ecological messages of Disney films. For this research I will use the analysis of David Whitley in his book from 2012 “The Idea of Nature in Disney Animation” he combines two of his specializations: film and ecocriticism. He merges interdisciplinary perspectives on how film forges imaginative connections between human beings and the natural world. Whitley is one of the first to write about nature in Disney and offer new insights about the relatively unfavourable portrayals of the Disney Corporation. Furthermore, I will utilise the examinations of Caleb Steindam in his aforesaid chapter in the edited book Disney, Culture and Curriculum of 2016. Steindam explores anthropomorphism, purity and wilderness in Disney films to explain why the Disney-generation does still not engage with nature as it could have. As can be extracted, both of these texts are recent publications, which exemplifies that there have been written few accounts on nature in Disney. I want to analyse the depiction of nature in Disney because I have a dream that a great corporation as Disney uses its power to influence generations to be more environmentally aware, but since some of these generations are already grown-up, I am not certain of this given; therefore I call this the ‘ecological dream’. I am not pursuing a Freudian reading about Freud’s break-through work, An Interpretation of Dreams, where the idea is that the structure of dreams and their mysteries can be decoded, but in the manner that dreams have codes (n.p.). Freud does classify a dream as a wish- fulfilment; I will use this classifying of a dream for this thesis because a dream is a wish your heart makes. The Disney films are categorized as a genre that originates from the fairy tale genre. According to theorist of literary Deszcz, genres constructed by a cultural institution are determined by the cultural industry (85). Disney transformed the genre of

6 the fairy-tale into the genre of Disney. In other words “the fairytale has been reduced to a mass-produced commodity […] to bring considerable profit.” (Deszcz 85) The characterization of the Disney genre is as followed; first there are uncomplicated sequences of adventure with light-hearted characters, than there is a rupture in the established happy world, and finally this establishment is recovered in the end. The power of Disney goes so far that the literally predecessors of Disney retellings are secondary; Disney films establish themselves as dominant versions of the given tale and therefore shape viewers’ assumption about nature and meaning (Deszcs 86). This is also the case for Bambi, The Jungle Book, Tarzan and The Fox and the Hound. The films are often loosely based on the books and do not bear many resemblances. Moreover Disney is sometimes established as a pro-animal genre (Franklin 54). Sociologist Adrian Franklin states that the foundation of this subgenre of Disney begins with Bambi, the same film from where I start this thesis. Thus, I could extract that the films of my corpus belong to the subgenre of pro-animal genre in Disney. Characterized with the essential goodness of animals and the unpredictable treachery of humans (Franklin 54). To analyse the Disney films of my corpus I will use different theories; the ‘structure of sympathy’ by cognitivist Murray Smith, the term nature or Nature by ecologist Timothy Morton, Giorgio Agamben’s ‘anthropological machine, ‘sense of place’ by literary theorist Ursula but foremost, I will use anthropomorphism which is the thread throughout all the Disney films. The anthropomorphism is of importance to convey the ecological messages (Bambi, Finding Nemo, Tarzan and The Fox and the Hound), but could also reduce the ideological message (Brother Bear and The Jungle Book). The depicted aestheticized nature in Bambi, Finding Nemo and Tarzan is often credited by its wonderful realism and the Nature is more glorified than in real life. The animators have studied the behaviour and appearances of the animals, but also of the nature itself. Therefore there is remediation in the Disney films. However, for films as The Jungle Book, The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear the nature is less wonderful portrayed and this leads to a decrease of the environmental message.

Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is all-encompassing in the Disney films, even though I do not want to research the extreme anthropomorphic figures such as the cloth-wearing mice in (Geronimi, Jackson and Luske, 1950). The animated animals that are – most

7 of the time - behaving as animals are also physically altered to create more sympathy. To examine anthropomorphism thoroughly I will combine the ‘Anthropological Machine’ of philosopher Giorgio Agamben in his book The Open and I will follow media theorist Dominic Pettman’s use of this anthropological machine together with Erica Fudge’s theory concerning anthropomorphism. Agamben’s concept and Pettman’s use of this are non-ecological theories but I need those theories considering the anthropological machine to make a case that Disney films are ecological films. Fudge’s chapter, whose scholarly concern is animal studies, is considered as an ecological text. Both Fudge and Agamben analyse the relationship between humans and animals; where Agamben’s machine analyses animals and to what extent they have human characteristics, Fudge mainly clarifies how animals in fiction are utilized for the desire from humans to communicate with animals. Both scholars analyse anthropomorphism differently, but the human-animal relationship is in common. For Agamben the crucial component of the anthropological machine is the way in which its optics have been altered to encourage self-reflection and nurture a sense of superiority by virtue of one’s proper humanness. Of importance for this concept is that Agamben refuses taxonomies. He claims that there are no simple categories as humans and animals, there are multiple levels between them. Some animals resemble humans in their physics, others in their behaviour. Agamben argues that to what degree some animals resemble humans should be through the anthropological machine; the ranking should be different.

The anthropological machine of humanism is an ironic apparatus that verifies the absence of a nature proper to Homo, holding him suspended between a celestial and a terrestrial nature, between animal and human—and, thus, his being always less and more than himself. (Agamben 29)

Thus, without taxonomies, the ranking in how much an animal mirrors a human should go through the anthropological machine and from there the various degrees of resemblances could be measured. The anthropological machine provides us with lenses and mirrors from before even our first word, compelling us to look for our own reflection, to recognize it (Pettman 8). The only difference between animals and humans is that humans can recognize themselves. In other words “man is the animal that must recognize itself as human to be human.” (Agamben 26) The anthropological machine is an abstract apparatus that consists of potent symbols, figures and tropes of belonging and exclusion (Pettman 7,8). Pettman explains the anthropological machine as followed;

8 humans are the anthropological machine, humans recognize themselves in other things like the resemblance with an ape or the mourning of an elephant. Agamben clarifies this by stating that Homo sapiens is not a clarified species “it is, rather, a machine or device for producing the recognition of the human.” (Agamben 26). To draw a line between the human and the animal is difficult, there are few distinctions between the two (Agamben 31). The anthropological machine “functions by excluding as not (yet) human an already human being from itself”, by animalizing the human and also by humanizing the animal (Agamben 37). The machine decided upon and recomposes the conflict between man and animal (Agamben 75). All in all, the anthropological machine is a tool to measure to what extent an animal is human. Agamben wants to get rid of taxonomies and therefore despises categories as species. Therefore he invented the anthropological machine; a new measurement between all species. For animation the distance between humans and animals is diminished because of anthropomorphism; animals can talk and are given human features in their appearances. Anthropomorphism stimulates an anthropocentric worldview; humans can only understand nature through a human-centered perspective. As Margaret King describes it, Disney’s depiction of nature is “not an ecosystem, but an ego-system - one viewed through a self-referential human lens” (62). Furthermore, according to Wendell Berry the anthropocentric perspective, can lead to “gross and dangerous” human behaviour (148). He also considers that “some version of self-centeredness” is unavoidable: “An earthworm, I think, is living in an earthworm-centered world; […] for the hawk it is a hawk-centered world” (14). It is clear that only through a human lens it is possible that humans can identify or sympathize with animals, “so our perception of them is necessarily anthropocentric” (Steindam 104). Anthropomorphism could suggest a shortcut to cross-species empathy, “but this empathy remains shallow and incomplete in the absence of authentic experience with animals.” (Steindam 104) Thus, anthropomorphism contributes to a deep level of sympathy towards the animals. The anthropological machine explains why there are barely any insects visible in Disney films; there are few resemblances. On the contrary, mammals are much akin humans, therefore they are personalized and protagonists in Disney films. Therefore mammals, for example apes and dolphins, are considered as charismatic species. Subsequently mostly mammals are portrayed in children media. The use of animals in children’s literature is an old habit, and is one that opens up idea about how humans wish to live with animals according to animal studies specialist Fudge (69). This is an

9 exploration of Fudge’s chapter “Real and Symbolic: Questions of Difference” in her book Animal. Fudge argues that children and animals go well together because children lack the arrogance adults have, they might even feel related to animals.1 Extracted from this can be why so many children stories are told through animal protagonists. Fudge recognizes that childhood is a period in life in which animals are of a particular value; this can be traced in the book written for children where animals are constant present or the protagonists. (70) “Part of growing up, it seems, entails a growing away from animals.” (Fudge 73) This quote explains the fact that animals are much more apparent in media for children than in media for adults, thus in Disney. The films are primarily made for children and when humans appear in these film narratives they are often also children or youth. In order to avoid the possibility of regarding an animal like a human we regard animals like objects because then it is possible to continue to regard them as fellow- creatures with whom we might want to converse (Fudge 110). This communication is possible in the fictional realm where some children can talk to animals; adults are not able to do this. “The communication across the species is only possible in a world where an equilibrium is perceived. Where dominion is in place such conversations cease to be possible. Only children lack, in Freud’s terms, the ‘arrogance’ that upsets the natural peace.” (Fudge 73) Children will treat animals more respectfully than human adults. This is a reason that children are represented in films with animals and can communicate with them within these films. A strange manifestation is made; with the power of communication we could probably not do horrible things to animals as is the case now. The language is the only significant difference between human and animals, “if this element is taken away, the difference between man and animal vanishes, unless we imagine a nonspeaking man […] who would function as a bridge that passes from the animal to the human.” (Agamben 36) However, Agamben states that the presupposition of speaking man will always obtain an animalization of man or a humanization of the animal (Agamben 36). If communication between species of animals and humans were possible and the distinction between humans and animals is gone, just as in the Disney films, the world would change.

1 Freud claims children bear resemblances with the primitive man in their behaviour towards animals, they do not show any arrogance like civilized adults. Children might even feel more akin to animals than to their elders (Freud 3).

10 Thus, because of anthropomorphism a troubling case comes to light. Humans cannot hear the animals speak and therefore we may be living more destructive towards them than we can imagine. As Fudge puts it: “If we could hear animals speak to each other, could we still do what we do to them?” (74) The Disney Corporation is aware of this given. Therefore they put up a sign at the Finding Nemo attraction in Paris where the spectators can read: “If fish could talk, they’d tell you: the ocean is our home, and it’s part of your home too. Protect the ocean, protect the planet” see illustration 1. It is a melancholy sense of the loss of communication (Fudge 75). There is a powerful desire of humans, children and adults, to get into the mind of animals and fully understand them. This desire could be the reason why animals are so central in children’s literature and films. It seems like an infantile desire, but if these narratives of communication did not exist, then the contact with a large part of our world will be lost (Fudge 76). Anthropomorphism makes humans able to comprehend the animal, which concludes in a more sentimental relationship towards them (Fudge 76).

Illustration 1 Anthropomorphism in Disneyland Paris

Humans need animals to feel, even to be, human. This process of identification via negativity would be impossible without the anthropological machine of the media (Pettman 56). Starting with cave paintings of animals and resulting in the many films, including the Disney films, about animals. Increased interest in animals arises as well from outdoor leisure and hobbies, stimulating “the demand for mass media representation of animals.” (Franklin 39) Franklin argues that a moral identity is given to animals in media representations to broaden popular support for sentimental attitudes, anti-hunting, conservation and protection (39). This statement is of importance for my thesis; the popularity of Disney can attain support through their sentimentalized animals for ecological topics as aforementioned. The question is whether humans are sincere

11 and feel genuine compassion for other beings or do humans only use these others “as a screen on which to project reassuringly narcissistic images of our own finer sensibilities and sensitivities?” (Pettman 60) This leads to the question of Disney, does the company try to create environmental awareness amongst their spectators, or is the sympathy created for the animals in the films only used to create popularity? Humans are narcissistic; they feel good when they have sympathy for violated animals, this is problematic because this feeling alone could create enough satisfaction for the humans. Instead they should come to real-life action against troping, angling or domestication. Disney creates this sympathy in their by using anthropomorphism. Personifying of animals with human traits creates more sympathy; cuddly animals contribute to the innocent state of nature (Steindam 99). Regardless of the inherent inaccuracies of anthropomorphism, Disney animation achieves, according to former Disney animators Thomas and Johnston, ‘the illusion of life’ in its animal characters in surprisingly effective ways (9). and Ollie Johnson commit that they did analyse the gestures and behaviour of chimpanzees to inform about the human and animal representation of nonverbal communication alike (17). Writer of Walt Disney’s World of Fantasy Adrian Bailey states that it is striking that Disney reminded his animators to “keep it cute” and pinned it up on their desks (75). Concluded from this statement is that it was of importance to create sympathy for the animals in Disney animation. There is controversy around the anthropomorphism in Disney films. Ecocritic Lynne Bruckner and sociologist Liz Grauerholz both argue that anthropomorphic images impede humans understanding and concern for animals by distorting animals’ natures (Bruckner 192; Grauerholz, 336). For the opposite reason anthropomorphism has also been assaulted, the manipulation of viewers could undue empathy for animals; as when Field and Stream magazine assaulted Bambi’s “outright anthropomorphism as brainwashing” (quoted in Cartmill 6). “This attack implies that anthropomorphism is inherently deceptive, a perspective that emerges to some degree in other critiques of Disney films.” (Steindam 103) I agree with Steindam’s statement “anthropomorphism allows for increased communication and identification with the human audience.” (104) Anthropomorphism creates sympathy from the audience towards the animals. The anthropological machine gives insights about to what degree animals can be seen as human and to what extent the feral children, Tarzan and Mowgli, resemble more to humans or animals. Immediacy

12

Considering the word realism is a complex term, perhaps a more usable word is immediacy; explained by new media theorists Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin. They discuss it as the achieving or an attempt of reality ignoring and denying the act of mediation (Bolter and Grusin, Configurations 312). With immediacy the act of mediation is neglected because of the high degree of reality. I use terms of these new media theorists because issues of ‘reality effects’ or verisimilitude and pleasing to the eye illusions about the raw qualities of nature are there to ensure that spectators are all dazzled into thinking it is not only real, but somehow, free from the torture from us hairless apes, the homo sapiens. Immediacy is a term that is derived from the act of remediation. There is a double logic behind remediation; there is the transparent immediacy and hypermediacy. Bolter and Grusin do not claim that immediacy, hypermediacy and remediation are universal truths; they regard them as interpretive practices in specific times and groups (Remediation 21). Therefore, I will use the terms the same way they do, I will utilize the terms on the Disney animated films in an interpretative sense. The ultimate goal of immediacy is to erase the medium entirely; for example Virtual Reality where the screen already disappears (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 24). Bolter and Grusin explain immediacy as a sense of belief of the reality in the image (Remediation 31). The new media theorists claim that: “If immediacy is promoted by removing the programmer/creator from the image, it can also be promoted by involving the viewer more intimately in the image.” (Remediation 28) Immediacy thus creates a more engaged viewer towards the film, whether the animation is computer generated or not. Immediacy has to compete with the term hypermediacy; which import earlier media into a digital space and therefore not erases the medium but enhances it. For instance for a computer, the desktop is filled with familiar icons such as a brush for the painting programme, the interface is thus reinforced and visible for the user. With hypermediacy the mediation is obviously visible (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 33). To summarize in Bolter and Grusin’s own words: “If the logic of immediacy leads one either to erase or to render automatic the act of representation, the logic of hypermediacy acknowledges multiple acts of representation and makes them visible.” (Remediation 33,34) Hypermediacy can also manifest itself in the physical world, for instance in theme parks (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 34). Thus whereas the multiple Disneylands are hypermediated areas, the animated films of Disney are considered to

13 strive a sense of immediacy. Remediation is thus the combination of immediacy and hypermediacy. The two elements of remediation are not only contradictory to another, but also dependent on each other (Bolter and Grusin, Configurations 314). To use the term immediacy might sound uncanny because I am dealing with animated films, but the animations offer more insights about immediacy. In one way because animation can stand out because of its degree of immediacy and truthful depiction, where new techniques are being developed to strive for a more authentic feeling of the film. In the other way because animation can create a new wonderful world, which could be so enchanting that, the spectator admires the world and forgets the screen as well. “The logic of hypermediacy expresses the tension between regarding a visual space as mediated and as a ‘real space’ that lies beyond mediation.” (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 41) The real space of Disney’s animated features is the natural habitat of the animals, which is mediated in a glorified manner, but in reality the nature is not always that lush. Therefore, immediacy and in a lesser way hypermediacy in Disney films causes a sentimentalized depiction of the Earth, and when the humans do not interfere with Nature it resembles a close to perfect habitat for the animals. Finding Nemo, Bambi and Tarzan create this feeling of immediacy visualizing a detailed and real natural world, and create a more ecological aware spectator. Even though the mediation cannot be completely ignored because of the drawn or computer generated animations that show the production process. Remediation is almost like a human desire for media perfectibility and seeks for the illusion of immediacy and Disney too wants the power of illusion. Immediacy in combination with anthropomorphism causes that Nature itself is being anthropomorphized: Earth is personified in a beautiful character that is important for the narrative. Finding Nemo, Bambi and Tarzan are acknowledged of their beautiful and immediate impression of different tropical ocean environments (Whitley 129). Each film strives to be realistic in their depiction of nature, in the visual images at least, and this enhances the ecological messages as anti-hunting, preservation and anti-domestication of the films.

Spectator Engagement

14

A proper way to convey ecological messages is through spectator engagement towards the film characters. Therefore I will use Murray’s Smith’s ‘structure of ‘sympathy and Edward Branigan’s model ‘level’s of narration’. These canonical models offer a way to analyse in what degree spectators feel engaged with the film and their protagonists. This will clarify in the film analyses how an anti-hunting message is better conceived when there is empathy for a protagonist. An important model to research the emotional attachment from the spectator towards the characters of the film is Smith’s the structure of sympathy. Smith is a cognitivist theorist who is against the idea of identifying with a character; spectators are not able to identify with a certain character, according to Smith than the spectator would completely become a character that is not possible. Nevertheless they are able feel empathy towards them. Therefore he designed a new model where the degree of empathy from the audience towards the screen can be defined. Although, Smith is not an ecological theorist I need the structure of sympathy to examine the level of sympathy and how this connects to anthropomorphism. Murray discusses that this model is structured in three levels: ‘recognition’, ‘alignment’ and ‘allegiance’. The first level is recognition and defines the spectator’s construction of a character (Smith 40). This is a commonplace act of recognizing a person as a person and an animal as a certain type of animal. The character becomes a coherent individual by their physical appearance and their behavioural characteristics. For instance in The Jungle Book the spectator recognizes Mowgli as Mowgli because of his appearance. The second level consists of ‘alignment’ and this level indicates in what way a spectator has access to the actions of a characters and to what extent they feel and know (Smith 41). Alignment consists of two interlocking functions: ‘spatial attachment’ and ‘subjective access’. The amount of screen time is related to the spatial attachment for example the onscreen-time of a character or a point-of-view shot. Both these elements create a spatial connectedness between the spectator and a character. Imagine if the audience sees a conversation from Bambi to his mother, if there is a point-of view shot from Bambi’s perspective, than the audience sees the same perspective as the little deer. Consequently there is a certain degree of sympathy for Bambi since the audience shares the same frame with the character. Subjective access pertains to the degree of access the audience has to the subjectivity – the feelings or thoughts – of the characters (Smith 41).

15 This can happen through a narrator or through the speech of a character. In Brother Bear the human protagonist literally transforms into a bear in a scene, in the further film he is a bear and thus he learns through other bears. At one particular moment the audience sees a flashback in his mind that delivers more information and intersects two parallels stories together. Through this subjective access the audience feels aligned with the protagonist. This makes him a concerned father instead of an annoying overprotective one. The more screen-time a character has and information about a character an audience has; the more aligned will an audience be with that character. At last there is allegiance and this is the deepest level of sympathy, it discusses the moral and ideological evaluation from the spectator towards the character (Smith 41). The factors that contribute to allegiance are: the actions of a character, iconographic and music (Smith 42). The context of a character is important in order for the audience to evaluate the actions of him or her. Take for instance Finding Nemo, the audience knows from a flashback why Marlin is so scared to loose Nemo. For all the Disney films accounts that the empathy towards the characters is of importance for the degree of concern towards the animals or nature. Audiences are more likely to become environmental aware when they are on a higher level of sympathy with the film characters. Another method to measure the degree of sympathy towards a character is through Edward Branigan’s model ‘levels of narration’. To strengthen the research of audience engagement I will combine the structure of sympathy with the levels of narration to accomplish a more coherent spectator engagement. Branigan analyses spectator engagement on the level of the narrative. He discusses multiple levels and on each separate level the spectator has a different engagement with the character. Top- down the first level is the historical author; this is a low level of engagement. Next in line are the extra-fictional narrator, the non-diegetical narrator and the diegetical narrator: these narrators are respectively in the fictional world, the story world and the scene. The next level is the character self, followed by external focalization this is the dialogue of a character. After this Branigan goes deeper into the perception of a character and thus the thoughts, the same level as subjective alignment from Smith. The level that generates the most engagement is deep internal focalization; the spectator is aware of the thoughts and dreams of a certain character (Branigan 88). The three ways to attain information from a character is through a narrator, through actions of characters and through focalization where the character’s thoughts are the source of

16 information (Branigan 89). The different levels of narration are perfectly combined with Smith’s model. The models are complementary to research the level of spectator engagement in the films. Film is a useful medium for spectator engagement with characters, the model of Branigan could also be utilized on literature, but Smith’s structure of sympathy is only applicable on film. Since the subjective access and spatial attachment discusses the amount of screen time and different perspectives that create engagement. Therefore I end up with Walter Benjamin who wrote: “technology is the mastery not of nature but mastery of the relation between nature and humanity.” (quoted in Agamben 83) Thus, the movie camera teaches a lot about the relationship between nature and humanity. The technology of the movie camera through animation is how the Walt Disney Company creates a relationship between the spectators and nature. This is in line with the structure of sympathy since all the levels this model; recognition, alignment; consisting of spatial attachment and subjective access and allegiance are perceived through a camera. The relationship between nature and humanity is created on screen and therefore also needs a structure of sympathy to empathize and understand nature. The structure of sympathy is a perfect way to analyse anthropomorphism and the animal thoughts and behaviour to engage with an environmental message.

Nature/nature and ‘sense of place’

Thus Smith’s theory of a structure of sympathy is important because it allows the spectator to be engaged with Nature on each separate level: recognition, alignment and allegiance. I have been using the word nature with a small n or a capital N. Both words have a different meaning, which is coined by ecologist Timothy Morton. He intersects his main thought on object-oriented thought with ecological studies. In his book Ecology Without Nature, Morton proposes that ecological criticism must be divested of the ramification of civilization and nature, or the idea that nature exists as something that sustains civilization. The Ecological Thought derives on this theory and here he creates the term dark ecology that explains the irony and ugliness of nature. According to Morton Nature is an ideal; an artificial construction that does not appear in the real world. Important for this research is the way he creates a distinction between the words ‘Nature’ with a capital n and ‘nature’ with a small n. ‘Nature’ fails to serve ecology and

17 highlights it unnatural qualities (Morton, Ecological Thought 3). These unnatural qualities are “hierarchy, authority, harmony, purity neutrality and mystery.” (Morton, Ecological Thought 3) The Nature shown in the Disney films copes with the unnatural elements as harmony and purity; Disney shows a perfect world instead of the real world. Morton claims that modern society has damaged ecosystems, species and the global climate. “Disney frequently presents nature as a state of purity. These depictions often contain moral or spiritual implications, distinguishing good from evil within a dichotomized worldview.” (Steindam 99) This glorification of Nature is in line with Nature with the capital N. When I will speak about Nature; I mean the fantasized, harmonious and glorified lush nature of in the animation film. The other ‘nature’ is an arbitrary rhetorical construct; it is a construction that does not live without the text we create about it (Morton, Ecology 22). Ecological writers propose a new worldview, but all their research actually leads them further away from nature. ‘Nature’ is an ideal image of what nature actually is; it is a mere reflection of the self (Morton, Ecological Thought 5). It is a fantasied idea of humans; perfect in line with nature depicted in Disney. Therefore I will use the term ‘Nature’ for the idealized image of nature in Disney films and ‘nature’ for the common use of the word and talk about the real world nature. Since Disney films are animated the depiction of Nature is always a fantastical setting. The lush Nature contributes to a wonderful sense of place, but also an unreal one. The degeneration of nature is rarely shown, the dehydration or extinction of some animals is not spoken of. There are two elements of the choice of this depiction of nature; the first one is positive and it creates glorification where viewers attain a deep level of engagement with the wonderful Nature. The second element is more negative because viewers do not see the real, terrific nature and thus can believe a fictional truth about nature. The only hazard comes from man including their hunting and fire. Of course these are real life problems as well, but the extinction of species because of hunting and other non-human caused dangers such as harsh elements of nature as dehydration, are not shown in the fantastical setting of the Disney films. “A starving or dying animal or a struggling population can invoke much more sympathy than an unhealthy ecosystem…” (Franklin 59) Thus, a lush nature in combination with a dying animal generates much more sympathy and could create more awareness. The horror of degeneration is in contrast with the safe, cuddly animals of Disney. Thus, for Disney the ideal nature is a colourful, blooming nature with happy animals. While Morton claims

18 that there is a dark ecology, which is the opposite of the ideal nature of Disney, namely a de-idealized nature with the irony and ugliness of nature. It is of importance to divide nature and Nature, because the distinction between the real nature and the lush representation of Nature works well with the analysis of the Disney films. Nature is idealized and romanticized whilst nature is what humans do to it, thus the interference of humans with nature. The term ‘nature’ is a troubled one and therefore it is better to create a distinction between at least two definitions of this concept. Since the meaning of nature in a sentence is now easier conveyed. Furthermore I will use another ecological concept, Ursula Heise’s ‘sense of place’. This is defined as a “familiar idea in American environmentalist discourse: in order to reconnect with the natural world, individuals need to develop a ‘sense of place’ by getting to know the details of the ecosystems that immediate surround them.” (Heise 28) Heise claims a local approach to the environment is needed to protect the global environment. The contemporary problem of people is that they do not know the plants that are surrounding them but they do know some elements on a larger scale of the stratosphere (Heise 28). The alienation from local nature, caused by the intensifying of globalization, should disappear. The global sense is contemporary stronger than the local sense of place. The concept a sense of place leads to the assumption that knowing who you are, is in relation to knowing where you are: this creates an inner geography by which we locate the self (Heise 29). Thus, the local environment and the home are important to create an identity. There are four environmental perspectives that emphasize a sense of place as a basic perquisite for environmental awareness: spatial closeness, cognitive understanding, emotional attachment and an ethic responsibility and care (Heise 33). On these four elements I will analyse the Disney films in regard to the sense of place. I will explain these four elements in regard to my own thesis, thus how I will use these elements. The spatial closeness expresses how close and engaged someone is with a landscape; this could be generated through an immediate depicted nature. Finding Nemo sets a great example of this. Even though humans are barely in the sea, still the film creates a spatial closeness through the immediate and lush representation of Nature. Fudge’s element of cognitive understanding leads to a deep understanding of nature through the characters in the film. This leads to next element of the sense of place namely the emotional attachment to nature, this could intertwine with the sympathy towards a character and how this characters’ perspective towards Nature is. Mowgli

19 loves the jungle and since the audience has empathy for the man cub they also feel emotional attached to Nature. And last there is an ethic responsibility and care, the final element and I think the ultimate goal for the Disney films. When the audience feels aligned with the characters in the film this could transfer to the fictionalized nature. The audience could create an ethic responsibility for the animated Nature in Disney films and as a consequence to the ‘original’ nature that is depicted in the Disney features. The sense of place also reflects on a sense of home. Ecology has its roots in oikos, which in Greek translates to the word home; therefore ‘home’ and ecology are intersected. In the Disney films this search and need for a home is what drives the plot. In Finding Nemo and The Jungle Book the search for a home is important for the protagonist. In a less visible way this search is also visible for Tarzan, Brother Bear and The Fox and the Hound. In this search for home the audience spectates the surroundings and nature of the inhabitants and this strong feeling creates a more concerned attitude towards the shown environment in the film. Thus, by the sense of place the audience learns about the natural environment of the protagonists of the Disney films and can create awareness about ecological messages.

Conclusion

To explore the ecological dream I have categorized my thesis in three different main chapters. In each chapter I will analyse two films and I will sometimes reflect on the previous discussed films. The films are connected on the level of human interference, categorized by to the degree in which humans are apparent in the films. My first chapter will consist of the films Bambi and Finding Nemo. In both these films the humans are barely or not visible, nevertheless, humans still have a major influence on the plot. In the second chapter I will analyse the adopted feral children of Disney; Tarzan from Tarzan and Mowgli from The Jungle Book. The human impact is not too apparent because animals raise both protagonists within the jungle. It is only when civilized humans become involved that the troubles begin. In my third chapter there is a high degree of alterations in nature caused by humans. In both Brother Bear and The Fox and the Hound the humans have a big influence. For The Fox and the Hound this is expressed in domestication of animals, and in Brother Bear the transformation of a human into an animal leads to new insights considering hunting.

20 The discussed theories of this chapter will be used in every chapter of my thesis. However, for each chapter my main focus will be on several theories. The structure of sympathy theory combined with Branigan’s level of narration and the general theory considering anthropomorphism will be apparent in each chapter, because these theories contribute to my main argument and the level of engagement created by these three theories are of importance for conveying the ecological message of each film. I am making a case that Disney films can be seen as ecological films. The focus of each chapter is on different theories. However, this does not mean that they are excluded from the other chapters. Each theory is intertwined with the chapters singular from the focus. For my first chapter “Human interference with nature in Bambi and Finding Nemo”, my theoretical focus is on immediacy and on Morton’s Nature/nature because of glorified and authentic depiction of Nature. For my second chapter “The animal- raised feral child in The Jungle Book and Tarzan” I will combine the anthropological machine and immediacy as central theories. The anthropological machine can offer insights about to what degree the protagonist are considered human or animal. For my third and last chapter “Impact of humans in The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear” my focus will be on the anthropological machine and the sense of place. The anthropological machine comes primarily to its right concerning Brother Bear, whereas the sense of place offers insights considering domestication in The Fox and the Hound. To concentrate on different theories in different chapters I will argue that each animated Disney feature of my corpus can be seen as an ecological film since they conveyed ecological messages.

21 HUMAN INTERFERENCE WITH NATURE IN BAMBI AND FINDING NEMO

Bambi and Finding Nemo resemble each other considering the aspect of human interference and on the level of immediacy and anthropomorphism of the animals. Both films portray the world of animals, respectively in the North-American forest and the . Humans are rarely or not shown, these films nevertheless show the impact of human beings as a major influence on the lives of the animals. These two films are important because they both have an accurate depiction of nature and nearly have the same level of anthropomorphism; the animals are not wearing clothes and live in their natural habitat, but are altered for a more appealing appearance. It is striking that the aftermath of the film on an ecological level is completely different, which I will elaborate later in this chapter. I will analyse how the human interfere with nature and how immediacy, Nature and anthropomorphism are illustrated in each film and contribute to environmental messages and awareness amongst the spectator. I will first analyse each film separately and then compare them both in the conclusion. By comparing the films on these anthropomorphism, immediacy and the idealized Nature I will argue that both films are ecological films in the sense of a glorified depiction of Nature and both attempt to convey an anti-hunting or anti-domestication message, with a good outcome for Bambi and a sorrow result for Finding Nemo. The films Bambi and Finding Nemo have a similar narrative. First the entire forest or ocean including every animal, plant and organism coexists with each other in line with a sentimentalized Nature. Secondly the peace is disturbed caused by human interference in Nature and this is where the plot of the films begins. For Bambi this means the death of his mother as a consequence of hunting. Therefore little Bambi must be strong and transform from a fawn into a deer to survive in the forest with the help of his friends and father. This is in contrast to the peaceful world from before his mother was murdered, a peaceful coexistence between animals. Therefore there is an idealized Nature within Bambi, which is exemplified by immediate features of the film. In Finding Nemo the plot is driven because the title character is taken by scuba divers to place the little clownfish in an aquarium. His father is willing to do anything to find his son and bring him back home. Thus, for both films the action is driven by the interference of human.

22 However, there are also differences between both films. This difference is set in the beginning of Finding Nemo when a eats Nemo’s mother along almost all their eggs. A major difference with Bambi where all the animals live peacefully together, the ocean is more severe with predators. This is in contrast to Bambi’s forest, where the only danger comes from humans with their large scale hunting expedition. Thus, there could be said that there is more immediate natural depiction of nature in Finding Nemo than in Bambi in the narrative, in visuals they are considered equal. The remediation in the films is immediacy – the screen almost disappears by the accurate depiction of Nature. Both films have a high degree of immediacy on which I will elaborate in each film analysis. Remediation, Nature and anthropomorphism enhance the Bambi’s anti-hunting message, however, for Finding Nemo the affect is that more people domesticated fish – in contrast to the film’s ecological anti-domestication message. Although both direct results of the film differ, Disney still tries to create environmentally aware films by making use of engaged spectators who are aligned with the anthropomorphized.

Bambi: an accurate environment in lush Nature

Bambi is an adaptation of Felix Salten’s book: Bambi, A Life in the Woods. Disney made a few alterations by sentimentalizing the original story, the major difference is that in Disney’s world there are no predators, while in Salten’s book this phenomenon is visible. Both stories tried to represent an accurate, immediate nature in the images and the behaviour of animals, but to ensure the empathy towards the characters anthropomorphism is utilized. Because of all these elements, there is a lush Nature with idealized features. This immediate idealized nature starts in the opening shot of Bambi, a tracking shot that circles inwards the forest through a misty light that slowly reveals trees, stones and a river as the camera moves into the intimate heart of the forest (Whitley 63). The spectator sees through a point-of-view of the small forest animals the special event of the birth of a fawn in the realm of animals that is normally unobserved see illustration two. This leads to an intimate feeling of sympathy, in Murray’s and Branigan’s sense, towards the forest inhabitants. Due to the anthropomorphizing of the animals, highlighted here is the ability of speaking and the physical appearance, spectators feel

23 more compassionate about forest animals and will be discouraged to grow up to be a hunter. However, according to Lutts the films immediate impact is not limited to children, it also shaped the opinions of many adults (162). Strong reactions came from audience with an environmental agenda. Bambi acquired an iconic status within discourses about hunting and environmental debates. Whitley states that the environmental ideas reached further than one could except from a sentimental animated children’s feature (74).

Illustration 2 Animal's viewpoint of Nature in Bambi

The anti-hunting and preservation themes are the ecological messages of this film. An expansionist worldview is being presented in the film; this perspective is defined as a prediction of the ever-expanding world economy, including an exploitation of the resources from the natural world (Taylor in Whitley 64). This worldview is in Bambi represented as the human hunters and their desire to exploit the environment by killing animals. Portrayed as fearful and destructive in the film. The death of Bambi’s mother is the most important scene for this anti-hunting message, also contributing to this idea are a human-raised dog pack chasing Bambi’s girlfriend Faline and when Bambi gets shot (Lutts 161). All these events are accompanied by a general panic of animals in relation to men. In the entire film not a single word against hunting is said, it al happens on an emotional level because of the alignment from the spectator with Bambi and the glorification of Nature. This sympathy with Bambi transcends to the real world. A proposal by Aldo Leopold to control an overpopulated herd of deer in hunting season was denied by public opposition in 19432. Both Susan Flader and Curt Meine suggest that Bambi played a role in this decision (Flader 199, Meine 442). This

2 Bambi was released in 1942, one year before Leopold’s proposal in 1943

24 conveys an ethic responsibility towards Nature due to the spatial closeness of the film’s setting and the area of the legislation. Another illustrative example of the impact of Bambi is the no-burn policy founded by the US Forest Service; sought to eliminate even naturally occurring forest fires (Steindam 100). These examples are a direct causal effect of the emotional attachment towards Bambi and his late mother. Significant is that humans are absent for the eye; the human figure is never seen in the entire film. Even though human actions drive the plot. It represents the animal viewpoint towards humans; they will probably die when they see mankind. Therefore, the Nature is more visible due to the animals’ viewpoint. It is an accurate depiction of nature, even more because a new camera was invented to create a dimensional effect in the film. Whitley states that Bambi had a too high degree of accuracy that disturbed some viewers, according to them the aesthetic boundaries where pushed too far and were inappropriate for animation (61). The visual pleasure of the background is similar to landscape painting and photography and enhances the atmospheric sense of the forest. Environmental historian Ralph Lutts claims in his article from 1992 “The Trouble with Bambi: Walt Disney's Bambi and the American Vision of Nature” that to ensure the accuracy of nature, a background artist spend six months sketching nature and a pair of fawns was shipped to the Disney studio to become models as well (163). The artists even had a special training in the drawing of wildlife. A new standard for naturalistic realism was set (Lutts 163). Thus, there is a sense of hypermediacy since old media, such as drawings and paintings, are visible in the animated feature. “However, Disney did often aim for immediacy by evoking what the culture regarded as authentic emotional responses to the narrative, in such early, "heartwarming" classics as […] Bambi.” (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 149) This animated aesthetics cause an idealized image of the balance of Nature, whereas the reality of ecology is chaotic and unstable (Ingram 18-20). Hence, the immediacy of the film is apparent and generates alignment for Nature as a character from the spectator. The immediacy also implies a message of conservation of natural resources; not only through the film’s storyline but also through the way the landscape is represented. The previous discussed absence of humans could also enhance the beauty of Nature, untouched by human presence (Whitley 66). Here the immediate depiction of nature and lush Nature intertwine to create an aligned spectator. The preservation of this mystical Nature is even more reinforced by the film’s devastating fire. Fire equals men because this fire is originated form the human

25 campsite. The ecological strength of this sequence is that the entire environment is shown; animals and plants. The whole forest is victim of this scary element of nature. The camera is tracking them in close-up to emphasize the fear of the animals. The screaming of the animals creates a level of external focalization of Branigan’s model. This in combination with the sympathy creates an engaged spectator. Fire could benefit the soil of the ground to make it more fertile, however it still dramatically affects the ecosystem and the landscape (Solnit 297). The scene after the fire shows the site and offers an enormous contrast of the first beautiful, flowery place and the now uniformly charred environment with a few blackened stumps of trees (Whitley 73). The environment is both devastated and regenerating. Troubling is the lack of predation in the forest, even more because the interruption of humans is the only force that causes death in the forest (Lutts 167). This exaggerates the fear of humans in the films and strengthens the environmental anti-hunting message. Since the fire started with a human-made campfire, they are also responsible for that harm to nature. Next to the immediacy of the film, there is another aspect of the film that is emphasized; the glorification of Nature. For example in the song ‘April Showers’ where rain and thunder compose the music. Natural elements are used as instruments; with every raindrop there is a high pitch sound. This claim is also argued by Steindam, he states “music is used to evoke a reference for nature.” (Steindam 99). This enhances the purity of the lush Nature presented by Disney. Nature is an ideal image, like a painting it is self-contained from afar (Morton Ecological Thought 5). Despite this beneficial depiction of Nature, the harsh element of nature is missing; there are no predators in the forest except for the men. Disney presents a distorted image of woodland ecology where all the animals live at peace (Lutts 165). Thus, Disney’s view on nature in Bambi is in line with Morton’s unnatural qualities of the harmonious and pristine Nature (Ecological Thought 3). The romanticizing of Nature is also visible in the friendship of Friend Owl with and Flower, apparently the predator of a rabbit and a skunk, an owl, does not eat fellow inhabitants in Disney’s forest (Lutts 165). The representation of Nature creates spectator engagement, because Disney glorifies the unrealistic wild Nature of Bambi and nature is presented as immediate. Anthropomorphism contributes to the spectator engagement as well; the animals are drawn with human characteristics to generate a higher degree of sympathy. Through anthropomorphism an animal can be represented as being human, then an important distinction between the species has been eroded (Fudge 77). Bambi has few

26 anthropomorphized elements in relation to other Disney movies (that are dismissed from this thesis), but, as with almost every animated animal, of course it is visible. One element that is highlighted is the distortion in the deer’s bodies to make them look cuter and more human (Lutts 164). Visualized in larger heads for the deer with enormous eyes and human characteristics as eyelashes, these alterations account for the other animals as well. As an effect the animals have much more expression in their face that leads to allegiance: Disneyfication in its purest form. The anthropological machine creates a subspecies between deer and human; to feel allegiance with the deer it has to have human characteristics. Otherwise human spectators would feel less sympathy towards the deer. However, in comparison to other Disney films such as Finding Nemo, there is no pseudo-human world recreated. The characters live the life of an animal and therefore the audience feels aligned with how Nature endeavours, and not with how animals live like humans. Anthropomorphism in only used to generate more empathy with the spectator towards the wildlife and a level of allegiance is reached with Bambi. The anthropomorphism in combination with the lack of predators and the invisibility of humans offer false images of the ecology in the forest (Lutts 165). However, the film raises awareness for the consequences of hunting and fire in the forest. The animal-perspective as offered in the film gives the audience a new perspective. The opening shot of the film draws the spectator into nature and from there he/see sees another world with a gorgeous Nature but also life endangering situations. A level of allegiance is reached because of the immediacy and spatial attachment of the film. Therefore people feel more empathy with the animals than before, which could be life changing for the audience and – perhaps even more important – nature changing for the ecology. All in all, the film motivates a deep concern about nature and promotes wildlife through minimalistic anthropomorphism. This sentimental stance towards Nature is even named the “Bambi complex”. How Cartmill credits it: “probably the most effective piece of anti-hunting propaganda ever made.” (7) As a result Bambi probably has had the greatest influence on societies vision of wildlife and most enduring statement against hunting. Thus, by analysing Bambi on different theories, such as remediation, anthropomorphism and Morton’s ideal Nature all in combination with spectator engagement, the anti-hunting legislations can be explained which is an ecological aspect and direct message of the film.

27 Anthropomorphic fish and immediacy in Finding Nemo

Set in the Great Barrier Reef, a clownfish called Marlin starts the search for his son, Nemo. After Nemo was being a rebel against his overprotective father, a scuba diver took him. Nemo is placed in an aquarium in that is displayed in a dentist’s surgery. This plotline already suggests a film with an ecological message packed in family movie. Due to the immediate representation of Nature and anthropomorphism the film generates sympathy, which leads to engagement with the ocean and its inhabitants. I will argue that the film bears environmental messages via an analysis of Morton’s nature or Nature and the immediate depiction of this Nature in combination with the all-encompassing generation of sympathy from the spectator. First of all the depiction of nature with a small n is more apparent because, in contrast to Bambi, predators are visible in Finding Nemo. Lutts argues the following: “Disney’s world is a world without predation” (165)3. Obviously this has changed in roughly 60 years. Finding Nemo is more accurate about wildlife in the opening scene. And therefore nature is less idealized in the first scene of the film when a predator eats Marlin’s wife and almost al their eggs, this happens in nature. Consequently this ensures a level of allegiance from the beginning with Marlin. Later on in the film this danger of predators weakens because Marlin encounters a therapeutic group of vegetarian . They are dedicated to overcome animal’s primal instinct to eat other fish (Whitley 132). However, when the Bruce sniffs blood his natural drive is reasserted. He tries to eat Marlin and Dory; nature retrieves the grip on him. Further on in the film there is one other encounter with a predator called the deep-sea anglerfish. The clear stated framework from Disney pre-Finding Nemo is distorted by this new vision on predators. Predation and death are present, independently of the presence of men (Lutts 165). Including predators in films about animals is a more realistic way to portray wildlife and on that point the films depiction of nature is accurate but not glorified. Secondly, Finding Nemo also dealt with a problem concerning accuracy and immediacy with the creation of the underwater world. During the production process the water looked too realistic so the animators had to alter it to let it fit in the animation- style aesthetic “…to exploit the expressive freedom of the medium fully.” (Whitley

3 Lutt’s article dates from 1992, Finding Nemo was released in 2004. It was an argument from that time applied to the already released films of Disney.

28 130) Thus, to gain an expressive environment the representation of nature should be hypermediated; otherwise spectators could be distracted from the narrative. For a proper sense of immediacy the Nature should be represented as slightly fantastical and not resemble the real completely. Then the spectator could be immersed in the screen of a glorified world. The computer does not disappear completely; a sense of hypermediacy is needed to develop fantastical Nature. processing has taken over the animated cartoon (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 48). Bolter and Grusin claim that with the advent of the digital screen remediation changed, however the equivalent for should not be distinguished from a traditional film to conceive immediacy since both images are moving (Remediation 28). There are no abrupt shifts in graphic style in Finding Nemo; the film has the smoothness of a computer algorithm. (Bolter and Grusin, Remediation 148). Bolter and Grusin state that the claim of remediation works in both directions for computer animated features: “Computer graphics can now not only supplement manual methods but eliminate the traditional human technique entirely.” (Remediation 148). To create the right form of immediacy all members of the production team went scuba diving in the Great Barrier Reef, thus they could feel the atmosphere of the coral reef. Furthermore the animators were taught by a professor of animal physiology to learn the movement of the fish (Whitley 129). The Pixar Studios that created the film invested in the underwater world with accuracy in every frame – but not too accurate. The film is praised for its detailed presentation of the physical environment as can be seen in illustration three. The water surface was created with 3d modelling and new techniques of perfect light movement. The film’s setting in the water provides a different location than other animation films.

Illustration 3 Immedate Nature in Finding Nemo

29 Thirdly, the anthropomorphism of the fish and other animals in Finding Nemo is on the same level of physical appearances as the animals in Bambi. The fish as a leading character in a film is a break with tradition. One reason could be that fish are less obvious as cuddly protagonists as in the oeuvre of Disney. It was the first time children could feel empathy with fish as protagonist and not as sidekick (Whitley 129). Therefore, the fish had to undergo alterations with enormous eyes and round, cuddly forms. The anthropomorphism goes a level higher than in Bambi. In most films with animals there is a pseudo-human society (Fudge 72). This also accounts for Finding Nemo; in the underwater world is a school, traffic – including fish that function as traffic lights – and neighbourhoods in the coral. In most Disney films the animals are acting as if they are humans. They react the same as humans and are able to communicate within the realm of animals. “This is anthropomorphism at its most extreme, and paradoxically, at its most invisible. We forget that the animals are animals.” (Fudge 72) Whereas the fish do not wear any cloths of very much look like human, they are living a human life. Marlin and Nemo also have concerns and motivations that appear almost exclusively as human (Whitley 130). These concerns are on Branigan’s level of deep internal focalization, the spectator knows the thoughts of the fish and therefore there is an engagement towards them (89). The self-imposed vegetarianism of the sharks is also an anthropomorphic trait, eating fish is an instinct of the fish that can barely be changed. This level of anthropomorphism could be of a higher degree than in Bambi because fish resemble human less than forest animals, they are not mammals and differ a lot from human. Through the lens of the anthropological machine they have more human traits in order to spectators can feel more alignment for the fish, because there are more resemblances. Another element of anthropomorphism is the ability to talk of the fish; every fish and even birds can communicate with each other. It is striking that the are not capable of the act of speaking and the seagulls only know the word ‘mine’. This claims a hierarchy in fish; jellyfish are too non-human in their physics - they can’t be anthropomorphized. They lack eyes, a ‘normal’ mouth and ears and therefore they are eliminated of the suggestion of speech, what other fish and birds can have in the animated Disney-created Sea. Thus in contrast to Agamben’s theory: there is taxonomy. The jellyfish are neglected of speech and are in a lesser rank. The anthropomorphic elements are used to create more sympathy for the main characters, just as in Bambi. The ambiguous state of Finding Nemo is that on the one hand the nature is more

30 accurately shown due to predators, but on the other hand there is a higher degree of anthropomorphism represented in the pseudo-human society and city of the fish. The sense of place is apparent as a newly shown habitat in the oeuvre of animated Disney features: the ocean. Therefore, there is a new sense of spatial closeness, besides The Little Mermaid (Clements and Musker, 1989) the ocean was never shown before in a Disney film. In The Little Mermaid the fish and other sea creatures are merely sidekicks or figure as extras in a mythical sea world called . Now a true habitat is represented in the Great Barrier Reef, this leads to a new spatial closeness to this previously unimagined natural area. A new sense of place with this habitat arises because of the emotional attachment of the fish. However, the ethic responsibility is lacking in this film, which is explained in the next paragraph. Nemo’ search to find his home the ocean and the search of Marlin to get Nemo home reinforce the sense of place. They are attached to the gorgeous Great Barrier Reef. However, through Heise’s theory, a care for the environment is missing because the element of responsibility misses to attain a motivated sense of place, the aesthetics alone are not enough to create ecological awareness with the audience. The film can be read as an ecological film, only the wished outcome lacks. The structure of the film is arranged in such a way that the viewer is aligned with the fish, because the film is perceived through the fish’s point-of-view (Whitley 119). The film focuses on environmental issues of domestication. Because there is sympathy for the sea creatures, the audience should be concerned with the message of the film. As earlier stated however, the film has an opposite effect on the audience. People tend to take a clownfish as a pet; instead of letting them live free in the ocean. The contrast with Bambi could not be more apparent; Bambi became a symbol for the anti-hunting movement and because of the sympathy for the little fawn changes were made in the behaviour against nature. A problem of domestication is stated in the aquarium, besides Nemo and one other fish, every fish is from a pet store. Fish bred in captivity are used to a small environment and do not long for the ocean as Nemo and the other former ocean fish do. The desire of freedom is central with all the aquarium animals, but not as much as for Nemo, they do not know better. It seems that the film justifies an aquarium by providing the audience with this information. The environmental message is now specified to the anti-domestication of fish from the ocean, fish bred in aquaria are able to live in aquaria. The aquarium is beautiful visualized that it actually promotes having fish as a pet. It is a rather attractive

31 environment from the perspective of the human spectator (Whitley 135). All in all, the film’s statement on domestication is ambiguous. Finding Nemo does not attempt to establish a pure, natural world, free from all negative signs of humans (Whitley 135). The few humans that are visible in the film are visualized as unfavourable. For Marlin the scuba-diving dentist who takes Nemo from the ocean is the ultimate portrayal of evil. For Nemo this force of evil is situated in Darla, the dentists’ animal tormenting niece. Nemo is a present for her; however, every fish she gets dies instantly. These humans are presented as unintelligent and gawky. For the spectator they have to be some kind of stupid because of the sympathy with the fish. The audience cannot identify with the evil humans in the film; the human characters in the film have to be slightly unintelligent in order to the audience who then can distance themselves from the characters. Nobody wants to be the bad guy, but eventually, almost everyone with an aquarium is. Another aspect of humans are the fishermen at the end of the movie, the ruthless efficiency of the modern fishing industry is shown. The impact of humans on the ecology of the marine environment is enormous, in the film but also in reality. These ecological messages of the film are an argument why and how this film can be read as an ecological film. Disney and Pixar may or may not do it on purpose, but due to the Nature/nature debate of Morton, Bolter and Grusin’s concept considering immediacy and anthropomorphism the film is conveying ecological messages. The same immediacy, featured in the aesthetic aquarium also is the cause of domestication of the clownfish in the non-fiction world.

Conclusion Bambi and Finding Nemo

All in all, Bambi and Finding Nemo do not have much anthropomorphism considering the physical appearances of the animals; Finding Nemo tops the anthropomorphism because a pseudo-human civilization is apparent. Explained through the anthropological machine to create a deep level op sympathy, allegiance, with the fish. The fish differ too much from humans; a pseudo-human civilization is necessary to create the same empathy as in Bambi. The animals in these Disney films do no not appear as human, meaning that they do not wear clothes and are portrayed as animals. However, this does not mean that there is no anthropomorphism at all, in both films animals are Disneyfied,

32 with for example bigger eyes to make them more sympathetic, and they communicate in the human language to each other. As discussed in my introduction communication is an important feature because language could diminish the human destruction of nature and animals. If the hunters knew that the deer they shot was a loving mother of an innocent little fawn and if she could say that to them, would they still be able to kill her? The same goes for the scuba divers in Finding Nemo. If they knew that they were about to tear a family apart, would they still put an ocean fish in an aquarium? Ironically, due to the popularity of Finding Nemo there was a rise in the demanding for clownfish in aquaria. The audience neglects the plot of the film, which implies that domestication of wild animals causes emotional harm for the fish. However, in both films the anthropomorphizing is within the limits of the animated medium. Further on the environment and behaviours are closely and accurately observed. In both films the film is structured around the perspective of the animals, consequently sympathy for the animals is enormous and therefore the environmental messages of the films, anti- hunting and anti-domestication, are reinforced. This diminished anthropomorphism is in connection with the immediacy of the films; the visuals of both films are accurate and there is an almost seamless direct experience of the narrative without interruptions of media. And since the films are animated this offers a great way to create a glorified Nature where the spectator is immersed in the film. The animations are responsible for a glorified Nature, which could favour the ecological message of the film as in Bambi, or the ecological message could be missed out hence the beautiful depicted Nature. The difference between Bambi and Finding Nemo is visible, not only in the film itself but also in the reactions to both films. Both films have an ecological message but the audience responds in an opposite way. Whereas Bambi’s audience reinforced the environmental message, the spectators of Finding Nemo only admired the film of the film and therefore were distracted of the moral of the story resulting in buying clownfish for aquaria. As Whitley states:

The images that Finding Nemo offers, by contrast, are more localized in effect and multivalent in terms of their implied meaning. In this respect the film also differs markedly from Bambi, where the closing episode of the forest fire is precisely apocalyptic in its overtones. Finding Nemo refuses such totalizing gestures however, incorporating different strands of human interaction with wild nature in a more piecemeal fashion. (136)

33 The aftermath had such an impact that a Saving Nemo Conservation Fund was started since over one million clownfish were taken from reefs and sold for home aquariums each year. Therefore, with the coming of the new animation the Care2Petition is founded to create awareness among Disney and Pixar about the consequences of the films. The petition wants that Disney is prepared and warns the audience about the effects of the film, to save the blue tang (Galuppo 1). Finding Nemo does not have the same direct emotional impact as Bambi. It was impossible to think that people would be motivated to go hunting after seeing Bambi, in contrast to the motivation to go scuba diving in Finding Nemo. Human interaction with the underwater world appears to be accepted, just as the natural predators are. The sea is a less perfect world than Bambi’s forest which is without any predators and only needed to be protected from human interference. The ocean has a mystical otherness of Nature; it is different and therefore the urge to protect is a less concern for humans. Unless both films could be seen as ecological films, this does not mean that the message is conveyed and understood, as it should be.

34 THE ANIMAL-RAISED FERAL CHILD IN THE JUNGLE BOOK AND TARZAN

The Jungle Book is the animation production where wild nature achieved prominence. This only happens again two decades after Disney’s death and was realised in The Fox and the Hound (Whitley 117). However, this natural location was set in a America and cannot qualify as a tropical setting as The Jungle Book was. With (Allers and Minkoff, 1994) and Tarzan the tropical and exotic locations as in The Jungle Book were back in Disney feature animation films. A credit for this new approach was and his surrounding team. He was the head of the Disney Corporation since 1987. Globalization was up coming with the end of the Cold War and the abolition of the apartheid. “Globalization seemed to heighten awareness of vulnerability within all areas of life and, at its outer limit, to intensify the feeling that the fate of the Earth itself was precarious.” (Whitley 118) The borders were fading and in this new climate the theme of nature emerged in popular culture. Between 1990 and 2004 Eisner was responsible for fourteen animated features from which seven are set primarily in the wild4. Included to these films is Tarzan while Walt Disney supervised the The Jungle Book. In both films the spectator observes a world where animals can communicate with each other and limited humans can understand them, in this case Tarzan and Mowgli because they grew up amidst the animals. Fudge argues that a child raised between animals from childhood saves the adult from the arrogance (63). In other words, only children can live amongst animals; Disney has realized this claim in jungle children Mowgli and Tarzan. But when Tarzan reaches adulthood, he is still allowed live in the jungle because he sees the apes as his family and visa versa. Eventually Mowgli has to leave the jungle because the Shere Kahn despises men. He reaches adulthood and therefore he has to leave the jungle, otherwise he could disturb the peace of the animals. The feral child is central in both films, both born unto civilized parents but raised by wild animals when they were found as babies. The stories consist of them re- joining human societies that they had never been a part of. The wild child grows up in a non-human environment. Agamben’s anthropological machine is useful to measure in

4 and straight to video productions are not included in the counting

35 what extent the protagonists belong to animals or humans. Agamben is helpful here because of the anthropological machine subtleties, instead of fixed categories. The anthropological machine accounts for the other animals in the animated features as well in combination with the degree of anthropomorphism. Mowgli and his African counterpart Tarzan are a manifestation of archetypes enabling exploration of a distinctively human trait: the child of Nature (Whitley 101). A distinction between culture and nature arises in the behaviour of the feral children. They are immersed into Nature and communicate with the animals. Besides anthropomorphism and the other viewpoint of the anthropological machine considering the ape-man Tarzan and the animalistic Mowgli, I also want to examine the remediation and sense of place of both films. And thereby what kind of affect these elements combined with each other conduct. Other than in the previous chapter, there will be a difference in the level of immediacy amongst the films in this chapter, which has an affect on how The Jungle Book can be read as an ecological film. Thus, I will analyse the films on each element and claim that each element, the depiction of Nature, the anthropological machine and immediacy, is important to create ecological films in respect to the humans in the film as well.

The Jungle Book: the importance of immediacy

Released in 1967 The Jungle Book was the last animated feature where Walt Disney was still alive. It is based on the 1894 classic texts from Rudyard Kipling. However, the scriptwriters were urged neither to read too closely nor to emulate (Whitley 99). The Jungle Book was the first Disney film that was set in an exotic landscape instead of the more near to home America or Europe. Mowgli’s affiliation to wild nature is developed in the film; his main problem is the element of survival. He cannot survive in the jungle because of the predator Shere Khan and because he lacks survival abilities that other animals have. In the beginning of the film this problem is already highlighted when Mowgli is a helpless baby on his own in the therefore established jungle. The panther Bagheera stands for the dilemma that is repeated throughout the film: whether to intercede and follow his protective and nurturing instinct or to allow the natural process in the jungle to happen where the defenceless baby will not survive on its own (Whitley 102). Disney chose the

36 sentimental and unrealistic option for the film, because the target audience consists of children. Bagheera finds a surrogate family in the wolf pack and the real-life quite aggressive carnivores adopt Mowgli. All this is well, until the tiger Shere Khan threatens every animal in the jungle to not allow humans in their habitat. The wolf pack is forced to cast out their young man-cub. The survival problem of the protagonist re- emerges with this occurrence and even acquires renewed dramatic force at successive intervals – the predatory python, Kaa, tries to hypnotise Mowgli and the aggressive monkeys bully the protagonist – with its ultimate climax with Shere Khan himself (Whitley 102). The imaginative jungle is divided into – the unrealistic – nurturing and paternal concerned animals and evil predators. The ever-concerned Bagheera emphasizes the survival problem of Mowgli as he states multiple times that Mowgli will never survive in the jungle on his own. Mowgli does not learn a particular set of skills to survive in the hostile jungle, but he does learn where his destiny lies. His natural sexual drive is the main stimulus to decide his fate as a human in the ‘man-village’. He falls in love with a girl his age and therefore he leaves the jungle and begins a life in society. In other words his ‘natural’ behaviour leads him from his natural environment into the cultural environment. Furthermore, Mowgli imitates his animal mentors; it is a reoccurring mode of interaction for him. Imitating happens with the wolf pack, the military elephants but most of all with Baloo the bear. He copies the roaring, fighting, screaming, dancing and singing of the bear and more gestures. “It might be objected that Mowgli’s ‘imitation’ is not really apprehensible as an expression of wishing to remain at one with the natural world, since the ‘animal’ behaviours he is depicted as mimicking are in fact overwhelmingly human.” (Whitley 105) Through the anthropological machine could be extracted that Mowgli wants to stay in the jungle by mimicking animals, however the animators did not make him look like an animal at all. He obviously is a human, with no animal features at all. However, the imitation practices connect to the anthropological machine where the field of dialectic tensions between humans and animals are examined, man is not a biologically defined species.

Man exists historically only in this tension; he can be human only to the degree that he transcends and transforms the anthropophorous animal which supports him, and only because, through the action of negation, he is capable of mastering and, eventually, destroying his own animality. (Agamben 12)

37

Thus, Mowgli lacks this action of negation, he does not want to destroy his own animality, he wants to become an animal. This could also be seen the other way around. The animals in The Jungle Book are anthropomorphized and act like humans. Baloo walks almost the entire screen-time on two feet, which is not normal for bears. This phenomenon of anthropomorphizing can be explained in humans’ narcissistic desire to be more concerned with nature. Therefore the opposite happens and animals are portrayed with human characteristics. These characteristics are not only visible in their behaviour but in their physical appearance as well. Again just as the case with Bambi and Finding Nemo the eyes of the animals are enormous in proportion to the reality and the rest of their body. A level of allegiance with the animal characters is gained with these alterations for the animals. In combination with the level of internal focalization, the spectator knows the perception of Mowgli but not his thoughts; there is engagement from the spectator towards the jungle. The most sympathetic character, Baloo, resembles a lot like humans – as can be seen in illustration four – and is portrayed as a cuddly bear whom the audience all would love to meet. In Pettman’s words: “The animal that mimics the human is a delightful distorted mirror to those who consider themselves to have permanently transcended their animal origins.” (58) The animals in the film thus loose their own natural features. Furthermore the animals are generalized and are a mere reflection of the true animal that they represent, rather than naturalistic images with certain features emphasized as in Bambi. Man only sees itself in the sight of an animal, humans look at an animal and recognize features of humans and immediately deforms it to its own (Agamben 27). This happens to each animal in the film, only not to the human Mowgli. Baloo is stylized as a generic bear with no species characteristics. The praised accuracy of Bambi and Finding Nemo has vanished; the animators did not strive to be detailed with the representation of the animals but created cuddly animals. The regions and the natural habitats of the animals are loosely set and therefore there is a low degree of accuracy of the film’s illustration of Nature. This also has an influence on the film’s immediacy. The jungle is not depicted as an accurate environment. Nature is glorified with expressive colours and a range of food and water. The real world Nature is an artificial construct according to Morton, thus the Disney creation of lush Nature is even more artificial (Ecological Thought 11). Although, it does help to create awareness for nature, children could gain more

38 protective stance towards the Nature shown in Disney films since it is too admirable to vanish. The jungle is presented as an attractive environment, but it is worth noting that the jungle as a landscape is less rooted and fixed than the more naturalistically depicted North American environments of Bambi and The Fox and the Hound (Whitley 106). For instance, when Mowgli abandons Baloo the green dark jungle transforms in an arid desert region inhabited by vultures. After the confrontation with Shere Kahn in this area, the abrupt transition is reversed to the jungle again. This sudden shift makes the viewer aware of the animation’s hypermediacy. The jungle seems to change with Mowgli’s feelings. With a good feeling the jungle is full of trees, plants and water and when he is feeling down it becomes a desert. Due to the lack of dangerous men in the jungle – and therefore no human interference – there is no real ecological message considering humans. There is only a slight feeling of preservation of the jungle. An element that contributes to the accuracy of the jungle is the presence of predators. Three main predators are proposed in The Jungle Book: Kaa the snake who wants to eat Mowgli, the tiger who despises men Shere Khan and King Louie less obvious but he wants to captivate Mowgli. Besides the glorification of Nature, the perilous side of the jungle with its predators is represented as well. The problem is, however, that this is realized in an unstable way. The panther Bagheera should also be a predator and clearly is not. Moreover the film’s background is flat and undetailed, this contributes to a low immediacy in the film since old media are apparent and a sense of hypermediacy is generated – see illustration four. Therefore the spectator is less engaged with the film, and its environmental messages. Nevertheless, the only ecological message could be that humans have created a monster of Shere Kahn with their fire. And thus, that human

Illustration 4 Glorified Nature, hypermediacy and anthropomorphism in The Jungle Book

39 should not burn the jungle down. The narrative is driven by the sense of home that Mowgli has to find and what the main protagonists connect to each other. In the process of finding a home a range of options are offered such as: the wolf family, existence with Baloo or captivity with the monkeys under King Louie. Mowgli’s desire is to stay in the jungle’s the natural world: he is willing to do anything to achieve this goal. Connected to this narrative is - more apparent than in Bambi and Finding Nemo - the sense of place from Heise. In his search for a home the spectator learns of a new home, just as in Finding Nemo the spatial attachment is to the jungle is a new location for most viewers. Because of the cognitive understanding of Bagheera’s motivations who claims that Mowgli does not belong in the jungle anymore. The audience aligns with this idea and understands the sense of place. The intimacy with the animals, the changing jungle and the difference between species all contribute to the confusing sense of place for Mowgli. Tropical environments suggest different kinds of openness, sensitivities and freedom: animals feel more natural their and appear coterminous in the natural world, rather than struggling against it (Whitley 106). Films considered to have tropical environments in Disney are The Jungle Book, Tarzan, The Lion King and Finding Nemo. The openness that can be created in these tropical environments suggest fear but also a sense of home. For Mowgli, Nemo and accounts that when they are in problem they appear in the wide open and consequently their sense of place is lost. It symbolizes the possibility of freedom but also danger, the worst things happen in the open space. The tight Nature protects the animals from danger and humans. Notable here is that it has to be a natural small space, the fish tank where Nemo is captured is a human product and does not contribute to a sense of safety. In contrast to the economically harsh time when Bambi was produced around World War Two, The Jungle Book was produced in the mid 1960s when consumerism was growing. The Disney Corporation itself was responsible for the changing consumer ethos worldwide (Whitley 112). The production of animated features became a small part of the total business activity. The Disney Company pioneered the mass marketing of products associated with films and became the Disney Empire (Wasko 48). When The Jungle Book was produced in the mid-1960s the ever-greater consumer expansion began to generate ambiguous feelings (Whitley 113). The exotic landscape seemed a safe setting for a new feature film because of the emotional and physical distance with

40 the jungle. The safe play of Disney is illustrated in Bagheera who has a prudential and responsible attitude to life and nature. The degree of anthropomorphism is high, with an unstable definition of predator and the physical appearances of the animals. The anthropological machine clarifies that the animals are distorted to resemble humans and thus to attain allegiance with humans. This in combination with the sense of place of the film could create a deep attachment to the film’s ecological message; however, there is less immediacy and more hypermediacy in the film. The film does not immerse the viewer and this in combination with the lack of a clear ecological message does not create an environmental engaged spectator. Nonetheless, the film is an ecological film because of the sense of place and the deeper subtext of the film as a conservational text.

Tarzan: between animal and human

Tarzan tells a similar story as The Jungle Book but takes a very different approach. Like Mowgli the ‘man-cub’, Tarzan the ‘ape-man’ is a human raised by animals in the jungle. However, unlike Mowgli who walks and talks like a ‘civilized’ human boy, Tarzan’s movements are distinctly gorilla-like, representing what Wells calls the hybrid ‘humanimal’ as he simultaneously embodies both human and animal qualities (118). The anthropological machine is most helpful to analyse the mixture of an ape and a human; realized in Tarzan. The film follows the exotic landscape from The Jungle Book in a more fluid imaginative space. As in the beginning of this chapter stated this film belonged to the exotic landscapes that returned to the Disney Company from Eisner. West Africa is home to the feral child Tarzan; he has the desire to stay in the jungle just as Mowgli. However, the interests of the two protagonists are different. Mowgli absolutely does not want to go to the ‘man’ village, while Tarzan is curious about his roots and mankind. The endings are the opposite, both boys fall in love, which leads for Mowgli to live within the village, and Tarzan chooses to stay with his family. An explanation for this occurrence is that Mowgli did not had a stable family and switched from different homes in his journey, while Tarzan always belonged to the apes. Tarzan was raised by his ape-mother who taught him everything about the life of a gorilla: including their communication, their physical movement and gestures

41 that are shaped by his relationship with the apes. Whereas Tarzan’s instinct marks him off as human. “The animators of Tarzan were generally fascinated by the idea of reproducing animal-like gestures accurately using the human form…” (Whitley 121) Tarzan’s body was created to go beyond what is naturally possible for humans; the effect of this is that his movement becomes animal-like. Consequently Tarzan’s closeness to Nature is reinforced by these animal gestures, through the anthropological machine Tarzan is more as an animal than a human. He has more characteristics of an ape than of a man. Tarzan lacks verbal communication with Jane; he only speaks the language of the animals. Therefore Tarzan is thus an ape-man without speech according to zoologist and philosopher Ernst Haeckel: “…during the Pliocene period, arises the ape-man without speech […], and from him, finally, speaking man.” (84) Fudge explains this lack of verbal speech as a child’s innocence of the child who is able to communicate with animals. Part of growing up means growing away from animals, the children who are raised by animals are growing away from humans, and closer to animals (Fudge 73). This contributes to a sense of immediacy; it is accurate that Tarzan does not know the human language and immerses the viewer in the animation. Of importance is the behavioural difference, the film’s perspective is through Tarzan, although he is more animal than human and cannot understand humans. This creates a significant difference for the spectator; there is less alignment with Tarzan because we can understand the explorers who come to research apes and coincidentally see Tarzan. It is even clearer that the animals could never understand the language of the human explorers, Tarzan is learning the language but the other animals are excluded of this phenomenon. The civilized humans and the wild animals are able to communicate by gestures. In this perspective Tarzan can be seen as the link between animals and humans, but he can also be represented as the personification of the enduring difference of human and animal. He is the proof that humans and animals are never able to communicate in language and will always be different, unless animals raise humans. Of course he is the link between these two types of communication, but this underlines the differences between the civilized humans and wild animals even more. At first the little Tarzan assumes he is a gorilla, but he gradually becomes aware of his different appearance in relation to the rest of the apes. “Tarzan’s most significant moment of self-realization arrives through nonverbal communication with his gorilla mother.” (Steindam 101) This complex notion of being different is exemplified in the

42 famous scene where Tarzan asks his mother Kala: “Why am I so different?” [21’12] Kala tries to undo this difference to show the resemblances of the two species: “I see two eyes, like mine, a nose (…), two ears and let’s see what else?” Tarzan enthusiastically responds: “Two hands?!” Kala confirms it: “That’s right.” [21’34] And they put their hands onto each other, Tarzan is scared by the major difference but still accepts Kala as his mother by what he feels, not what he sees (see illustration 5). The physical differentiation cannot be erased, but on an emotional level Tarzan and the apes are the same. This is a perfect example of the anthropological machine, to what degree are humans and animals the same and to what not. As Agamben states:

It is an optical machine constructed of a series of mirrors in which man, looking at himself, sees his own image always already deformed in the features of an ape. Homo is a constitutively “anthropomorphous” animal […] who must recognize himself in a non-man in order to be human. (26,27)

The citation is applicable to this scene, not only because of the ape characters in the film but also since Tarzan realizes that he is human by comparing himself with an ape. Tarzan sees the differences but also the similarities. Tarzan’s emotional level is transferred towards the audience, how could people hunt animals that also have feelings? A critic notion is given from Disney towards the hunting agenda. Beautifully underscored by Kala saying to her adoptive son when they are talking about having the same hearts including feelings: “See we are exactly the same.” [22’23]

Illustration 5 The anthropological machine in Tarzan

The film’s moral message started with the opening song by ‘One world, one family’ this suggests that the realms of animals and human are intertwined and seen

43 as one. The image of the family as one implies a sense of equality in regard to rights for non-human life that ecocriticism supports. Anthropologist Tim Ingold explains this new attitude toward animals and urges readers to regard other species than human as ‘different’ instead of ‘failed’. “To defeat anthropomorphism we must stop interpreting statements about the disabilities of other species as assertions of their inferiority.” (Ingold 10) It seems like he is heading towards Agamben’s anthropological machine where there are no taxonomies. In short we should not create animals that resemble humans anymore, not even in animation films to give them more sympathy. However, on the other hand anthropomorphism also develops alignment and therefore the audience will have more sympathy with the on-screen animals. The loving mothering behaviour of Kala and her big-eyed face that represent love in its purest form creates a high degree of empathy. The same goes for friends, an ape and an elephant, they could be young boys with their actions and the audience will feel aligned with these characters because of this recognition in behaviour. In this case, the problems overcoming the animals such as hunting or captivity has a greater affect on the young spectators that could lead to more concern with environmental issues in the future. Bram Wicherink researches Tarzan’s ecological lifestyle, he relates Tarzan to the limitless of resources and sustainability of the Earth. These elements are a hot topic on the environmental agenda because of the increasing concern for our planet’s survival (Wicherink 95). Linked to this is an ecological message, the excessive consumption of food could ruin Earth’s ecosystems and related is the global warming. Tarzan was one of the first characters that had a sustainable lifestyle; he is an eco-minded superhero fighting ivory hunters with only his loincloth, a spear and the jungle trees (Wicherink 95). For these characteristic traits, Tarzan was used as a symbol for the World Wildlife Fund campaign to create awareness for the disappearing rainforest (Wicherink 95). The harsh element of nature is represented in the tiger that murders Tarzan’s parents and Kala’s newborn baby. He is a tiger and hunts baby mammals for his diner; the predator is necessary for nature to maintain all the ecosystems. Where the predator in Bambi was missing, in Tarzan he has a place in the circle of life. The presence of a predator does contribute to the immediacy of the film. However, the urge of Sabor to kill Tarzan does not seem to come from a biological instinct, the tiger just hates Tarzan and his family. There is a relative – it remains an animation film where apes, man and elephants are friends – accurate depiction of nature.

44 Important in The Jungle Book and as well in Tarzan is the sense of place: the protagonist is in search for a home where he belongs. He wants to be part of a species and has to decide if the apes or the humans are his home. He has to choose which family he belongs because he accidentally leads the explorers, including the hunter Clayton, to his ape family. Tarzan trusted them and immediately after they arrive Clayton captures the gorillas. Tarzan betrayed his family, but when he makes it us he has to choose between his family and his love interest Jane. The question is if Tarzan feels at home with his ape family or with his human relationship. Again this is connected to Heise’s theory. The spatial closeness of the not often imagined West African jungle is created through the film’s detailed background. The emotional attachment and cognitive understanding are highlighted by the personification of the villainous hunter in Clayton; the audience is aligned with the gorillas and feels antipathy towards the hunters how capture the apes. Therefore the ethic responsibility is triggered towards the preservation of the jungle and the inhabitants. A critique note here is that this merely accounts for the apes and elephants, the baboons or tigers are presented as evil so there is no empathy with them. If they are captured the audience would feel less concerned. This can be explained through Branigan’s levels of narration, with Tarzan the level of deep internal focalization is reached, thus spectators are engaged with him. Consequently if harm is done to him there is a direct despise towards the human or animal that is responsible for this action, this also accounts for the animals or people close to Tarzan, they are instantly liked. All in all the film’s environmental message is reinforced by elements of the sense of place. Tarzan is an ecological film in respect of the clear anti-hunting messages, this is reinforced with the sympathy the audience has for the apes. The anthropological machine, which offers insights about Tarzan’s relationship with his mother, develops this sympathy. However, the narrative and music of the film also contribute for a deep feeling of alignment with the apes. The enhancement of this sympathy is important for deeper ecological messages considering anti-hunting of the rainforest.

Conclusion The Jungle Book and Tarzan

The nature depicted in Tarzan is more aesthetic and apparent than in The Jungle Book in terms of representation of the natural world. This enhanced accuracy is not only

45 portrayed in animal movement and adaptive human gesture however, the jungle environment is considerably detailed animated as well as the accurate movement of the apes (Whitley 122). As with Bambi and Finding Nemo the animators carefully studied nature; thousands of photographs and film footage were shot during a field trip to Uganda, where gorillas were observed in wild habitats (Whitley 123). Whereas in The Jungle Book there is almost no detail in the background and therefore nature is generally visualized. This remediation carries on to a weaker ecological message of the film. Striking is that the ecological message of The Jungle Book was already not as apparent as it was in Tarzan. Although Bambi and Tarzan have the same detailed environment through close observation of the natural world, the main difference between these films is in the speed of the camera movement. Tarzan cinematography is as an action movie with fast movements following the protagonists running or swinging through trees, in contrast to Bambi which is a more poetical movie with mostly still shots and slow camera movement through the forest. These differences are enhanced by a visual technique called deep canvas; this enables animators to model a three- dimensional environment where the screen accurately adjusts to the right perspective, contour and lightning as the camera movement (Whitley 123). As Bolter and Grusin state:

For decades, animated films have been refashioning live-action Hollywood film, and they have continued to do so in the more recent Disney films. […] computer graphics imitate tracking shots or other film conventions that were difficult or impossible to animate with purely manual techniques. The cartoon characters could still not be mistaken for live actors, and yet there are scenes in which the mise-en-scene and camera work have very much the look of live-action film. (Remediation 147,148)

Tarzan uses computer techniques to create a sense of immediacy; it is nearly a live- action film. The imaginative worlds of Mowgli and Tarzan are quite different; although both are set in the jungle the immediacy of the environment is incomparable. This immediacy of Tarzan creates an audience that could be more aware of the dangerous situations in the jungle. It is more likely to be real so spectators are more concerned with the real problems caused by hunters in the innocent jungle. The Jungle Book lacks this effect and portrays an animal from the jungle itself as true villain; the humans from the ‘man-village’ are the saviours of the protagonist and offer a secure home to Mowgli.

46 In both films the differences between the species are highlighted, humans and animals are different. This is only portrayed in physical appearances and abilities, the feelings and the emotional level of humans and animals are equal. Both films are in an uncivilized society where a civilized society intervenes in a certain way. The animal societies are not human-like; the animals hunt for food, sleep, and behave like animals. Not as in Finding Nemo where the fish go to school and parents drop them off. The level of anthropomorphism could therefore be seen as rather low in both films. However, Disney gave the animals rather anthropomorphic elements in their physical appearance. Again just as in Bambi and Finding Nemo the animals look more human like with their large eyes and roundish bodies. This is most apparent in The Jungle Book where every animal is a caricature of the animal they depict. For Tarzan the animals are portrayed more accurate, especially in their movements. The anthropological machine is most helpful for the Tarzan’s subtleties, taxonomy does not acquire on him he is both human and animal, he has features of both species. He cannot be categorized as one another. All in all, the ecological message from the The Jungle Book is not very apparent, only elements from the sense of place and Baloo’s excessive consumption convey an ecological message. The immediacy of the film misses and Nature is not that much glorified in relationship with Bambi and Finding Nemo. The ecological message is also less because the real human interference is missing. The only human interference was with Shere Khan but that was before the timespan of the film and therefore off-screen. Mowgli does not count when it comes to human interference since he is raised within the jungle and does not know the uncivilized things humans do. This is in contrast to Tarzan where the environmental message is clear and obvious; nature is studied by the animators which leads to an immediate sense of nature because of the accuracy. Reinforced by the anti-hunting narrative and sympathy for the ape-family and the protagonist. Thus, a real depiction of nature leads to immediacy and seems to create a more sympathized feeling with Nature, the anthropomorphism of Nature leads to a clear ecological awareness by the audience of Tarzan.

47 IMPACT OF HUMANS IN THE FOX AND THE HOUND AND BROTHER BEAR

The influence of humans in the diegesis of these films is heavily apparent, more than in the previous analysed films. In Finding Nemo and Bambi the visibility of humans is low and in The Jungle Book and Tarzan the film revolves around a mixture of a human with animal traits. The prime films of this chapter contain humans who have a bigger influence and have more onscreen time. This results in more domesticated animals than in the other Disney films, especially for the dog Copper because he is trained to be a hound by his owner. He is brainwashed to hunt on foxes and also his former child best friend the fox Tod. In Brother Bear the humans are central because the story revolves around an old civilization that hunts on animals and have a conflict with the bears in the area. The human protagonist is transformed into a bear to learn about the perspective of the bears towards humans. In both these films the human civilization has a bigger impact on the animals than in the previous discussed film. Because of this human interference the anthropological machine will be used to analyse the animals in combination with anthropomorphism. Another concept that I will analyse is the sense of place – in combination with aspects of domestication. For The Fox and the Hound my main focus will be on domestication and the ambiguous stance from the film towards this phenomenon. Anthropologist Nerissa Russel defines it as: “Domestication is a relationship with a population of animals that often leads to morphological and behavioral changes in that population.” (286) In the Disney feature there is a double standard because domestication is both being promoted and is portrayed as a negative sign. This problematic aspect of human interference enhances the film’s anti-hunting message, while aspects of immediacy and sense of place are neglected. Anthropological machine is the most helpful concept for analysing the animated feature Brother Bear. In one way the film could be a personification of Agamben’s machine:

[…] man is not a biologically defined species, nor is he a substance given once and for all; he is, rather, a field of dialectical tensions always already cut by internal caesurae that every time separate—at least virtually— “anthropophorous” animality and the humanity which takes bodily form in it. Man exists historically only in this tension; he can be human only to the degree that he transcends and transforms the anthropophorous animal […], and only

48 because, through the action of negation, he is capable of mastering and, eventually, destroying his own animality. (12)

This tension between animal and men is the entire plot of Brother Bear. By becoming a bear Kenai sees the animal perspective and therefore he measures his own humanity to the extent of a bear. By facing another perspective he can transform back into a human and destroy the animality. However, in the end of the film he chooses to remain a bear to take care of his newest bear sibling. Thus, instead he destroyed is humanity by becoming an animal. Humans play an important role in both films of this chapter considering insights in nature, on the area of domestication and new perspectives. For this chapter I will analyse how domestication and the anthropological machine are featured in the films and how this contributes to the film’s ecological messages in respect of anti-hunting and anti-domestication.

The problem of domestication in The Fox and the Hound

The animated Disney film is based on the novel written by Daniel P. Mannix. I will analyse how domestication is portrayed as a contradictory element in The Fox and the Hound. Due to anthropomorphism the domestication seems positive but the human interference with animal is on such high level that the domesticated hound does not resemble a bit with the same young instinctive puppy. Through domestication resounds Heise’s concept of a sense of place. The sense of place is connected to a home, domestication is the forcing of an animal to make it feel at home. The film starts off on a haunting note, in a dark, cloudy, foggy forest accompanied by an endless wind, in contrast to the usual cheerful opening music in a Disney film. When a scary tune starts accompanied by the barking of dogs and the vision of a mother fox with her cub the setup for a hunting scene is established. Just like the Bambi scene, this one ends with an off-screen gunshot and the little baby fox Tod is left behind shivering at a fence. Fortunately the owl Big Mama finds him and makes sure to attract the attention of the elderly widow Tweed who immediately adopts the little fox.

49 The interference of humans in nature is portrayed as dreadful in this Disney film, just as in almost all the other films. Here again the anti-hunting message is conveyed through the evil dog owner Amos Slade, he hunts the forest animals and to be more precise foxes. This wile his dog, Copper, and Tod are neighbours and were childhood friends. He interferes with the glorified Nature by this hunting. The Nature is at its most wonderful when Tod is in the wilderness with his lover Vixey. However, the film, just as The Jungle Book, has more hypermediacy since the background is undetailed and therefore old media as paintings are apparent. Another way that Slade meddles with nature is the domestication of the dogs and thereby training them to be something that they do not want to be. They are forced to be foxhunters, while Copper’s true identity was being friends with the fox, see illustration six. “[…], by usurping the position of the dominant animals, widely regarded as an essential part of domestication or even taming, humans become ‘elders’ to their domestic animals and impose a different culture on them.” (Russell 288) Amos Slade imposes different way of thinking on the dog. It is only after a human training that he hunts foxes. The anti-hunting message is obvious in the film, and is even more highlighted when Amos Slade and his hunting dogs break to a fence into a ‘no hunting’ area. The sign says ‘game preserve’, so the area is protected for the repopulation of wild animals. Spatial closeness towards the Western world contributes for a Western sense of place. The cognitive understanding and emotional attachment is derived because there is allegiance with Tod, the adorable fox had allegiance from the spectator since the first seconds of the film. His mother dies immediately and because of his anthropomorphized appearance and behaviour as a cat – he rubs his head to almost everyone – the empathy for the little fox is present. This is even more enhanced because internal focalization is reached in Branigan’s model; spectators know the fox’s perception and therefore engage with him. However, due to hypermediacy the ethic responsibility and care for the environment is partly missing. The spectator engagement cannot be taken to a next level. The disturbing happy end where the villain becomes best friends with the sweetheart Tweed contributes to this as well. The anti-hunting message is clear and does convey to the audience, but a certain active stance towards the hunting keeps out. The interference of humans in nature can also be extracted in the domestication of animals. However, Tweed also owns multiple pets and this is not criticized in the film at all. It is only when the animals are forced to be someone something else that

50 domestication is presented as unfavourable. Alongside the faceless hunters in Bambi, Clayton in Tarzan and the scuba divers in Finding Nemo, Amos Slade in The Fox and the Hound is the embodiment of the ecological fear caused by human. Bruckner observes that this: “oddly (implies) that predation of animals is man-made.” (193) Of the animated features post-The Jungle Book only The Fox and the Hound deals in any sustained way with ideas and attitudes towards wild nature.

Although The Fox and the Hound represents the forest areas surrounding the rural homesteads of its setting in ways that bear some superficial resemblance to Bambi, however, the film shows much more affinity with the narratives of domesticated animals that had become Disney’s mainstay in the intervening years. (Whitley 80)

The dominion over animals is problematic; the animals do not gain any respect. Copper is completely obedient and cannot expect any appreciation from his boss for doing something on his own, the only way to gain respect is to follow orders. Tod behaves as a dog or a cat in fox-fur; this explains why he is so easily domesticated by Tweed. When Tweed has to keep Tod inside because of her hazardous neighbour she feels guilty to keep Tod inside. This is a critique on domestication since a fox should be able to go outside. The domesticated animal is exemplified in Chief, Amos Slade’s older dog. Chief helps his boss to teach Copper to obey him. Thus, the social pressure on Copper comes from humans and from a domesticated animal. The film does not explore any natural habits of the instincts of animals within creatures that can be trained for human use and company with seriousness (Whitley 80).

Illustration 6 The difference between the domesticated pup and the trained hound

The observations of natural history are much more scattered and more peripheral whilst comparing the film to Bambi or Finding Nemo. Ralph Lutts has argued that a conflict

51 between “wishing to turn wild animals into cute pets and the desire to ensure their survival as autonomous beings in the wild pervades American society.” (15) Thus, there is less accuracy of nature, and there is little wild nature shown in the film. There is no detailed background painting - as can be seen in illustration 6 - so this does not contribute to a high degree of immediacy; the spectator is not immersed into the screen due to hypermediacy. During the 1970s and 1980s Disney was opting decisively for the ‘cute pets’ side of this pendulum” (Whitley 80). And this trend is taking extreme forms on the Internet and in particular social media. Cuddling and domesticating animals is apparent on the Internet. Not even to start about the numerous cat videos. The Internet-users anthropomorphize wild animals into adorable pets: something, which they are not. Agreed cuddling a tiger seems nice for a picture, however true fact is that it still is a tiger that will kill you – where it not that he is drugged for the picture. This new trend where people react that they want kangaroos, goats or pigs as a pet could be traced back to The Fox and the Hound where Tweed also domesticates a wild fox. Tod’s domestication is portrayed as favourable, he is adorable and most viewers will fall in love with this creature. However, in the animated feature the reality is that he has to return to wilderness. And this is the place where he transforms into an adult fox and finds love. The Nature is glorified in the forest since Tod is a free fox now. There is a sense of place in the film but this does not lead to any ethic responsibility in the film concerning domestication. The anti-hunting message is clear and apparent through the anthropomorphic pets and Amos Slade’s cruelty towards Copper. To teach him to hunt foxes seems like a terrible thing to do, since he was a best friend with a fox. It is pity that the nature is not depicted in detail that lessens the immediacy and that, on top of that, the adoptive mother of Tod becomes friends with the personification of evil Amos Slade in the end, otherwise the films ecological message could have had a great influence in my opinion.

Brother Bear: self-reflexivity due to the anthropological machine

Brother Bear is the most human-centered film of all the discussed Disney films. Not only are humans and (ancient) civilization apparent, but it also gives the audience the best insight of how animals feel about humans. Not because there are more traumatizing

52 events in this film, but because the male protagonist transforms into a bear. This leads to self-reflexivity with the audience and therefore a high degree sympathy for the bears and their perspective towards humans is attained. For this chapter I will mainly use Agamben’s anthropological machine to analyse different features. Set just after the in North America is a man Kenai, who resents bears after his older brother dies during a fight with a bear, is transformed into a bear so he can see life from a different perspective. He becomes the animal he despises and is visited by his older brother’s spirit with a quest to transform back. On his journey he encounters a bear cub named Koda. The bear cub is a fun, chatterbox but moreover gives new insights about the feelings and thoughts of bears towards human characterized by the sentence: “Those monsters are really scary, especially with those sticks.” [48’34] The choice to pick a bear as a main character for a story is not strange. Bears are used for the entertainment industry for a long time; think of bear dancing. This originates from the similarities between humans and bears, especially when bears walk straight on two feet. According to anthropologist Robert E. Bieder similarities between humans and bears include: “consumption of wide variety of foods, the ability to walk upright, masturbation, similarity of footprints, physical shape, facial expression and tears.” (Bieder 76). The fascination for bears is also portrayed in the real life documentary Bears from Disneynature, the independent film label of The Walt Disney Studios and partner of . This label is founded in 2008 and follows the ecological path of Disney himself with the True-Life Adventure series; The Academy Award-winning and first nature film series produced by Disney from 1948 until 1960. The environmental awareness that Disney tries to create can be found in the animations films and also in documentaries. A connection between the plot and Agamben’s anthropological machine is significantly apparent. Differences between species makes us human, but the resemblances as well. Humans are so used to look in a mirror and recognize themselves, the only thing what distinguishes humans from animals is the recognition of the self, that humans are used to look at our own reflection (Pettman 8). In such a degree that humans recognize themselves in other animals, a bear has a nose, two eyes and a mouth as well – it resembles human. Kenai only recognizes himself as a human through the lens of a bear, he needs another lens to get rid of his anthropocentric worldview and learn and therefore sympathise with the perspective of the bears. The self-reflexivity of

53 Kenai in the film is linked to the anthropological machine and leads to a more emphatic stance towards bears. The recognize himself as human he must recognize the animal first “something like an animal life has been separated within man, only because his distance and proximity to the animal have been measured and recognized first of all in the closest and most intimate place.” (Agamben 15,16) Kenai is in the most intimate place of the animal, he becomes one. Therefore he is able to become human again, the one thing that differs from Agamben’s theory is that the intimate relationship with the animal does not destroys the animality of the human, Kenai wants to stay a bear and accepts his animalistic side. The change of perspective is important to the sympathy towards both species. The spectator learns about the moral evaluations, the thoughts and dreams of the bears. This change of perspective provides the audience with subjective access for both humans and bears; therefore a high level of allegiance is reached. The reciprocity between thoughts of the animated animal and human spectator are on a different level than the previous discussed films. In the previous chapters, it was the spectator who knew the thoughts of the animated animals, and now it happens on the level of the diegesis as well. The knowledge of thoughts happens in the film itself. One example is that on the road Kenai discovers that he likes being a bear and realizes that bears are just as afraid of humans as the other way around. This realization is exemplified when Kenai finds out that he murdered Koda’s mother, he feels guilty and is able to understand that each animal is a living being. At last, he wants to stay a bear to help Koda, his despise for bears changed towards loving bears. This new perspective could create a deeply engaged viewer, however, the environmental messages are taken aback by the high level of anthropomorphism and therefore also the lack of immediacy. The anthropomorphism is taken so far that Kenai as a bear resembles a man in a bear suit. The details of the other animals are extremely anthropomorphized that the creatures are nothing more than empty ciphers for human types or sidekicks (Whitley 94). However, because of the transformation a level of deep internal focalization is apparent in the film, this is the most engaged level in Branigan’s model. Due to the extreme anthropomorphism and the lack of spatial attachment the ecological message still is not conveyed. The anthropological machine can only work on the level of thoughts for this film – not on physical appearances since the bear resembles human so much that he is not even considered a bear. This is total different in relation to the representation of animals

54 in other films, of course there is always anthropomorphism to enhance the sympathy for the animals. But in this film there almost no accuracy at all; Kenai the bear has many facial expressions that resemble a human’s expression – see illustration 7. The audience cannot see him as a bear. The animation team is not responsive enough to the qualities of the natural world to allow the environmental agendas to work properly – not as in previous films as Bambi, Finding Nemo or Tarzan. The film lacks interest in animal behaviour or movements beyond the most superficial elements, for example that bears eat salmon. These salmon are the only animals that are not given any personality, like Finding Nemo where the jellyfish could not speak. The immediacy is thus, just as with The Jungle Book and The Fox and the Hound, not creating any engagement with the spectator. The hypermediated environment leads to a distance from the spectator towards the environmental message.

Illustration 7 Kenai's facial expression with a hypermediated background This distance is even more emphasized by the elements of Heise’s sense of place. The spatial closeness is neglected, since the story takes place just after the Ice Age the spectator is distanced from the spatiality of the animated feature; the depicted Nature does not exist anymore so why should one be responsible or care about it? The cognitive understanding and emotional attachment, however, are more than apparent because of the anthropological machine, which leads to a major allegiance with the bears. It could be considered as a pity that this huge amount of sympathy is not used for an environmental message. It could be an influential film for generations and now the ecological point is missing. Another element that is different from these films in relation to Brother Bear is the depiction of the natural environment, whereas in the previous discussed films this is

55 done with accuracy, in Brother Bear the sense of beauty and admiration for nature is absent (Whitley 94). The hypermediacy of the film is consequently more apparent than in the films where nature and animals are studies and are more accurate depicted. It is obvious that the film is a drawn animation, which leads to a less engaged spectator and thus decreases the importance of the environmental message. All these elements lead to the moral of the film – for Kenai to respect and understand the natural world where he was so arrogantly above – is damaged (Whitley 94). Although in contrast to Whitley I argue that the extreme anthropomorphism does damage to the film, even though the moral of the film is still conveyed to the audience. The extreme sympathy for Koda and Kenai – because of the intersecting story that Kenai murdered Koda’s mother – is transferred and creates a deep understanding for the bears. I do agree with Whitley that the natural environment is weakly depicted, audience will learn almost nothing from the life in the wilderness, they will only learn about the Bear’s emotional feelings. The ecological messages in Brother Bear are apparent, however, they could have been stronger if the film used less anthropomorphism and more immediacy. This thus differs from the previously analysed films. The plot that attempts to develop moral awareness from a “dramatic incorporation of the common animation device of seeing the world from an animal’s perspective has the potential for engaging with contemporary ecological agendas.” (Whitley 94) The entire film is based on different perspectives through the anthropological machine, which stimulates the empathy for the bears. From the human’s perspective the bear is scary, this accounts the other way around for the perspective of bears towards humans. The film can be read as an ecological film, only the main ecological message misses.

Conclusion The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear

Although Brother Bear generates allegiance because of the self-reflexivity of the human transforms into bear narrative, it still does not reinforces any ecological message. My argument for this is that the audience is not engaged with the story since the plot is just after the Ice Age and thus there is a diminished sense of place. There is no responsibility because the relation between humans and animals as presented in Brother Bear already does not exist anymore. The outcome of the anthropological machine is diminished by a lack of responsibility in the film, although it still could offer insights of the viewer

56 about to what extent they resemble with animals, thus that animals have feelings as well. However, there is a diminished sense of responsibility from the spectator towards the film’s anti-hunting message. In The Fox and the Hound the environmental message is about the problem of domestication, this is so apparent in the film that the dog’s natural instinct is erased and replaced by human social oppression and thoughts. Due to anthropomorphism there is allegiance with Tod, which constructs a hatred for owners and trainers of hound dog. However, the domestication is also put in a beneficial light since the other pet owner, Tweed, is nice to her animals. She treats the animals well and therefore normal domesticated animals as cows and chicken are approved by the film. Just as the domestication of dogs since there is a happy ending where the dogs fall happily asleep in their collars. The film’s anti-hunting message is well conveyed through the audience, highlighted by the trespassing of Amos Slade into the forest’s ‘no hunting’ area. The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear both have a low sense of immediacy. Both films are minimum in the representation of nature in the background. This also decreases the importance of the ecological messages since nature now has a distance in relation to the spectator. The sense of place is apparent in both film, however, neither of the films are capable to engage with all four elements. Therefore the environmental messages are not completely conveyed. For The Fox and the Hound only one of the two ecological messages is transferred to the audience: the anti-hunting message. The problem with domestication remains too ambiguous to create awareness. In Brother Bear there is awareness for anti-hunting, but since it is such a distanced time ago and Nature in the film does not resemble any of real life nature anymore there is no responsibility towards nature. The only thing that does derive from Brother Bear is how the anthropological machine helps the reflection of humans towards animals. If this were possible in real life, the world would be a better place.

57 CONCLUSION

I always like to look on the optimistic side of life, but I am realistic enough to know that life is a complex matter. – Walt Disney (Williams and Denney 16)

Disney films are not obviously considered as ecological films, in the sense ecological messages as anti-hunting, domestication and preservation. I have examined this by looking at some crucial theories about what constitutes an ecological reading of media. By analysing the Disney films on the elements of anthropomorphism, remediation, sense of place, nature and Nature, structure of sympathy and the anthropological machine. All these elements combined offer information and an ecological reading of the Disney films. For each chapter I had a main focus on several of these theories. However, the anthropomorphism combined with the structure for sympathy is analysed for each film since it is such an important component. The anthropomorphism is the foundation for creating sympathy from the spectators towards the animals. For the second chapter “Human interference with nature in Bambi and Finding Nemo” my main focus was on Bolter and Grusin’s concept immediacy and Morton’s Nature or nature. There is an intersection of new media theory with an ecological concept. The anthropomorphism in Finding Nemo and Bambi is relative low on the level of the physical appearances, the only alterations that were made belong to the classic Disney recipe: larger eyes, eyelashes and more round forms. For Finding Nemo there is another degree of anthropomorphism, a pseudo-human civilization. Utilizing the anthropological machine there can be extracted that this is because fish do not resemble humans as much as charismatic species such as deer, bears or apes. Finding Nemo has to contribute more anthropomorphism to attain allegiance as in the other films. Immediacy is important in the film because the spectator forgets the screen and is immersed into the fictionalized lives of the animals. Animation as a medium could be problematic for this immersion, but on the contrary it even intensifies the feeing of immersion. Since animation is able to create a glorified Nature with a detailed background and saturated colours. This is what happens in both films, the accurate depiction of nature combined with the glorified Nature leads to spectator engagement with nature. The environmental messages of the films are reinforced by all these elements and thus, the films are ecological films. However, this does not prove anything

58 considering ecological actions of the spectators. For Bambi there was a positive influence and legislations were made considering hunting, on the contrary for Finding Nemo there are over one million clownfish caught from the ocean and sold to households. Thus, films with anti-domestication messages could also have a negative aftermath. The third chapter “The animal-raised feral child in the The Jungle Book and Tarzan” discusses the anthropological machine and immediacy of the films. The immediacy in the films differs; Tarzan has an accurate depiction of Nature where the animators studied gorillas for the film this causes a great immediacy, even more enhanced by new camera techniques for fast movements to create an accurate sense of the jungle. Whereas The Jungle Book has an undetailed background and no accurate depiction of Nature, striking is that this is the only film with no obvious ecological message except the sense of place that Mowgli searches for. Thus, immediacy is also not needed to reach spectator engagement towards the animals and jungle. The missing of an environmental message could a consequence of the fact that there is no direct danger from humans in the film. The man-village within the jungle coexists with the surrounding animals. Both feral children are raised by animals. This leads to an interesting use of the anthropological machine by Agamben, the subtleties of their mixed human and animal traits are better measured than in categories of humans or animals. Mowgli turns out to be a human child in the jungle, since even the animals in the Indian jungle are more human than animals. However, for Tarzan it is helpful because he has physical strength of apes and has the same movements. He seems more animal than human, despite Tarzan’s physical appearance. He cannot be categorized as human or animal; there is no taxonomy for him. Tarzan’s anti-hunting message is apparent, what could be caused by the direct danger of humans and their cruelty. Human interference with nature seems necessary if an ecological message has to be conveyed. In the fourth chapter “Impact of humans in The Fox and the Hound and Brother Bear” I used Heise’s sense of place to analyse The Fox and the Hound since the main problem is domestication. For Brother Bear I utilized the anthropological machine hence the human protagonist transforms into a bear. The film on a particular way uses the anthropological machine to see the thoughts of the bears through a different lens. The human recognizes itself in the bear, with a family and through the bear’s physical appearance. Moreover because the bears in the films have a high degree of

59 anthropomorphism the animals have a human expression. The anthropological machine contributes to the reflection of the humans towards animals; there is a better understanding for different species. However, due to more hypermediacy, the lack of a sense of place and the anti-hunting message, which is to coexist peacefully with animals, is neglected. In the Fox and the Hound it is not much better, there is no accurate and detailed depiction of nature that leads to a sense of hypermediacy. There is an ambiguous stance towards domestication, on the one hand Copper is brainwashed to hunt his former best friend Tod, on the other hand it is heart breaking when Tod has to be released in the wilderness. The film does not create a clear position towards domestication. The anti-hunting message is transferred to the audience, due to the allegiance from the spectator to the fox. As a result of the narrative and a high degree of anthropomorphism the fox attains so much sympathy that the missing of immediacy does not matters in this film. All in all, by using different theories and concepts the Disney films can be read as ecological films in the sense of bearing ecological messages as anti-hunting, domestication and preservation. For the Disney franchise at least the animated features starring animal protagonists in their natural habitat. If Disney utilized the different concepts at its upmost, that means always a detailed and accurate depiction of nature, a glorified Nature, but also create sympathy through a relative low degree of anthropomorphism, than the Disney Company could have a great influence on the young spectators. People could attain a more active stance towards environmentalism. The communication as discussed by Fudge is important for each film: if animals could talk maybe there will be no harm done to the animals (74). The anthropological machine of Disney could offer insights about the animals thought through communication with animals in the animated world. It is apparent that not every animal in the film has the ability to speak, the jellyfish in Finding Nemo and the salmon in Brother Bear are ranked lower than the charismatic species of the films. Disney does not follow Agamben’s no taxonomy policy. Disney is doing its best with trying to be ecologically aware and yet they cannot help themselves as franchise when it comes to hiding too much of the truth through a deceptive and seductive immediacy and a hypermediacy which, in the latter case, gives away the factitiousness of the medium and therefore, the attempt to cover up the environmental degradation which is our planetary reality. In other words the immediacy leads to a concerned viewer, but the deceptive immediacy does not show dying animals, droughts or other environmental

60 problems. Disney might like to remediate as a way of repressing our sense of the human toll of damage on nature. Another important element is that to convey an ecological message, human interference with nature seems necessary. The Jungle Books lacks this and therefore there is no villainous human who the spectator could blame. The in 2016 released The Jungle Book film does attain this with a better understanding of why Shere Kahn hates man, because humans burnt him. The anthropocentric worldview is important for humans. Thus, through attain ecological awareness from human spectators; there must be a human villain in the films who interferes with an idealized Nature where anthropomorphised animals live peacefully in a detailed and accurate environment. The appeal of Disney films is obvious: in Disney’s fictionalized world, only villains are responsible for environmental destruction, and the villains are always defeated in the end. Steindam suggests the following:

But in this crucial moment we cannot afford to distract and console ourselves with fantasy in lieu of dealing with our reality. We need cooperation and consensus to dismantle all systems that allow the ravaging of Earth and life for money, and we need courage and community to overcome the collective complicity of our compulsively consumptive culture. (105)

Disney as a mass medium could enhance this by creating immediate stories where the villains are not always defeated. However, animated films like Bambi have the potential to “produce a limited environmental sensitivity that is only a starting point for the necessary ecological discussions” (Bruckner 202). There is an educational value in these films enhanced by the emotional engagement of the spectator. Therefore I think that my ecological dream partly – not as Freud’s wish-fulfilment dream – comes true: the Disney films are ecological. However, Disney should improve the execution of the ecological message throughout the film. But as Walt Disney’s quote goes, we have to be optimistic with a sense of realism, exactly how his films are categorized: ecological but not always conveying the message.

61 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agamben, Giorgio. The Open: Man and Animal. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004. Bailey, Adrian. Walt Disney’s World of Fantasy. New York: Everest House, 1982. Bart, William M. “A Hierarchy Among Attitudes Toward Animals.” The Journal of Environmental Education 3.4 (1972): 4-6. Baudrillard, Jean. Symbolic Exchange and Death. London: Sage, 1993. BBC News. 2005. British Broadcasting Company. 23 April 2016. Branigan, Edward. "Levels of Narration." Narrative Comprehension and Film. London: Routlegde, 1992. 86-118. Berry, Wendell. Home Economics. New York: North Point Press, 1987. Bieder, Robert E. Bear. London: Reaktion. 2005. Bolter, Jay David and Richard Grusin. “Remediation.” Configurations 4.3 (1996): 311- 358. Bolter, Jay David and Richard Grusin. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1999. Braudy, Leo. “The Genre of Nature: Ceremonies of Innocence.” Refiguring American Film Genres: History and Theory. Ed. Nick Brown. : University of California Press, 1998. 287-310. Bruckner, Lynne Dickson. “Bambi and Finding Nemo: A Sense of Wonder in the Wonderful World of Disney?” Framing the World: Explorations in Ecocrticism and Film. Ed. Paula Willoquet-Maricondi. Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia Press, 2010. 186-206. Cartmill, Matt. “The Bambi Syndrome.” Natural History 102.6 (1993): 6-13. Deszcz, Justyna. “Beyond the Disney Spell, or Escape into Pantoland.” Folklore 113.1 (2002): 83-91. Flader, Susan L. Thinking Like a Mountain: Aldo Leopold and the Evolution of an Ecological Attitude towards Deer, Wolves and Forests. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1978. Franklin, Adrian. “From Modernity to Postmodernity.” Animals and Modern Cultures: A Sociology of Human-Animal Relations in Modernity. Sage Publications: London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi, 1999.

62 Freud, Sigmund. “The Dream as a Wish-Fulfilment.” The Interpretation of Dreams. Trans. by A. A. Brill. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1913. n.p. Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo. London: George Routlegde & Sons, 1919. Fudge, Erica. “Real and Symbolic: Questions of Difference.” Animal. London: Reaktion Books, 2004. 67-111. Galuppo, Mia. “Petition Asks Disney, Pixar to Protect 'Dory' Fish.” . Ed. Matthew Belloni. 2016. The Hollywood Reporter. 25 May 2016. < http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/finding-dory-petition-asks-disney- 897309>. Giroux, Henry A. The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Press, 1999. Grauerholz, Liz. “Cute Enough to Eat: The Transformation of Animals into Meat for Human Consumption in Commercialized Images.” Humanity & Society 31.4 (2007): 334-354. Haeckel, Ernst. The Riddle of the Universe. Trans. Joseph McCabe. New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1900. Heise, Ursula. “From the Blue Planet to Google Earth.” Sense of Place and Sense of Planet. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. 17-49. Ingold, Tim. “Introduction.” What is an Animal? London: Unwin Hyman, 1988. 1-16. Ingram, David. Green Screen: Environmentalism and Hollywood Cinema. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 2000. King, Margaret J. “The Audience in the Wilderness: The Disney Nature Films.” Journal of Popular Film and Television 24.2 (1996): 60-68. Lutts, Ralph. “The Trouble with Bambi: Walt Disney’s Bambi and the American Vision of Nature.” Forest and Conversation History 36.4 (1992): 160-171. Meine, Curt. Aldo Leopold: His Life and Work. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1988. Metcalf, Greg. “It's A Jungle Book Out There, Kid!”: The Sixties in Walt Disney's ‘The Jungle Book’.” Studies in Popular Culture 14.1 (1991): 85-97. Morton, Timothy. “Introduction: Toward a Theory of Ecological Criticism.” Ecology without Nature: Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press, 2007. 1-28. Morton, Timothy. “Introduction: Critical Thinking.” The Ecological Thought. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press, 2010. 1-19.

63 Parham, John. “The ‘Hope’ of Green Animation.” Green Media and Popular Culture: An Introduction. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. 230-258. Pettman, Dominic. Human Error: Species-Being and Media Machines. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2011. Ringel, Eleanor. “Want to Pat Bambi, Marry Cinderella? A Psychological Profile of Disney Fans.” Atlanta Journal and Constitution (1988) n.g. Russell, Nerissa. “The Wild Side of Animal Domestication.” Society & Animals 10.3 (2002): 285-302. Smith, Murray. "Altered States: Character and Emotional Response in the Cinema." Cinema Journal 33.4 (1994): 34-56. Solnit, Rebecca. Savage Dreams: A Journey into the Hidden Wars of the American West. San Fransisco: Sierre Club Book, 1994. Steindam, Caleb. “The Illusion of Life: Nature in the Animated Disney Curriculum.” Disney, Culture and Curriculum. Eds. Jennifer A. Sandlin and Julie C. Garlen. New York and Abingdon: Routlegde, 2016. Thomas, Frank and . Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life. New York: Abbeville Press, 1981. Wasko, Janet. Understanding Disney: The Manufacture of Fantasy. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001. Wells, Paul. “I Don’t Care What You Say, I’m Cold: Anthropomorphism, Practice, Narrative.” The Animated Bestiary: Animals, Cartoons, and Culture. New Brunswick, New Jersey and London: Rutgers University Press, 2009. Whitley, David. The Idea of Nature in Disney Animation: From to Wall-E. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2012. Wicherink, Bram. “Tarzan! The Untamed Image of the Perfect Savage.” Etnofoor 22.2 (2010): 90-97. Williams, Pat and Jim Denney. How to Be Like Walt: Capturing the Disney Magic Every Day of Your Life. Deerfield Beach: Health Communications Inc, 2004.

64 FILM LIST

Bambi. Dir. James Algar and Samuel Armstrong. Walt Disney Productions. 1942. Bears. Dir. Alastair Fothergill, Ketih Scholey and Adam Chapman. Disneynature, 2014. Brother Bear. and . Walt Disney Feature Animation and Walt Disney Pictures, 2003. Cinderella. Dir. , and . Walt Disney Productions, 1950. Finding Nemo. Dir. and . Walt Disney Pictures, Pixar Animation Studios and Disney Enterprises, 2003. Tarzan. Dir. and Kevin Lima. Walt Disney Pictures, Inc. and Walt Disney Feature Animation, 1999. The Fox and the Hound. Dir. , and . Walt Disney Productions, 1981. The Jungle Book. Dir. . Walt Disney Productions, 1967. The Lion King. Dir. and . Walt Disney Pictures and Walt Disney Feature Animation, 1994. The Little Mermaid. Dir. and . Walt Disney Pictures, Silver Screen Partners IV, 1989.

65