Chapter 2 Literature Review

Home , Khan Kluay, Sky Trooper, The New Spirit, The Old Army Game

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review provides details about the previous studies relevant to this research and the synopsis of the films Khan Kluay I and II.

2.1 Previous studies

For decades, there have been many studies conducted about nationalism and racism in movies. Many of these studies focused on Walt Disney’s animations, especially his famous cartoon characters. As example, Rami Yashruti analyzed the filmic version of The Jungle Book (1967), and concluded that the racist undertones in the film are often exaggerated and overstated. King Louie’s speech “I Wanna Be Like

You” has often been seen as highly racist. The jive accent of King Louie with the song and dance can be viewed as a mockery of African-American culture. The film seeks to show that they strive to be white, but they always appear like “monkeys”. Louie thinks that if he has the secret of fire, he will be human, but in truth he will always be a monkey.

Another interesting point made in this study is about the voice of Baloo the Bear in The Jungle Book, who seems to represent immigrants. His characterization and New

Jersey working class accent are suggestive of racist views of immigrants. Of note is that all the authority figures in the film have British noble accents, while the slang, jive, and working-class accents are reserved for vultures who speak in a working-class

Liverpool accents, and uneducated kingpins represented by King Louie and his monkey delinquents. At the same time, Bagheera, Col. Hardy, Shere Khan, and the wolf pack, all speak in distinguished British accents. Aside from the difference in power relations as reflected by the difference in accents, there are subtle imperialist overtones as well.

For example, although the wolves are not the most “noble” animals, they hold a council and have their own democracy. The nature of a British colonel can be seen in this animation when Col. Hardy the elephant and his troops constantly patrolling and marching across the Indian jungle (Yashruti, “The Jungle Book: Colonial Propaganda or

Wholesome Family Fun”).

Moreover, Kathi Maio analyzed racism portrayed in cartoons movies which include those with racial stereotyping such as Aladdin (1992) and the Lion King (1994).

In Aladdin, one of the evil characters, Jafar, looks very Arabic and we see “bad” Arabs with thick foreign accents while Jasmine and Aladdin, the hero and heroine, speak in standard Americanized English. Aladdin looks and sounds like a fresh-faced American boy. He introduced himself with American name, “Call me Al”. Some of the lyrics in the movie convey racist overtones: “I come from a land…where they cut off your ears if they don’t like your face. It’s barbaric, but hey, it’s home”. Maio also analyzed, The

Lion King, which shows that the hyenas clearly speak in a kind of street, inner city

African American dialect. They are considered the bad guys. Despite the African locale, the young hero, Zimba, is voiced by American white actors, Jonathan Taylor Thomas and Matthew Broderick while the hyenas are given street jive dialogue and voice by

Whoopi Goldberg, an African American, actress and Cheech Marin, a Mexican

American comedian (Maio, “Disney’s Dolls”).

Another common stereotype noted in cartoon movies is that of the Native

Americans in Pocahontas (1995). A study by Cornel Pewewardy shows that the term

savages just perpetuates the idea that Native Americans are not civilized, normal, and educated people. The fact that the “Indians” in the movie sing the song that is offensive to them appears paradoxical. In addition, the “savages” also refer to the English settlers with offensive words like demon and paleface as if to make such less aggressive towards both parties. The following lyrics, which is from the movie, emphasizes the brutality and savagery of Native Americans:

….What can you expect

From filthy little heathens?

Their whole disgusting race is like a curse

Their skin's a hellish red

They're only good when dead

They're vermin, as I said

And worse.

They're savages! Savages!

Barely even human. Savages! Savages!

Drive them from our shore!

They're not like you and me

Which means they must be evil.

We must sound the drums of war!....

From the lyrics, Pewewardy pointed out that the most obvious element of racism in Pocahontas is language such as "savages," "heathens," "pagans," "devils,"

"primitive," and "civilized." These terms connote something wild, primitive, and inferior. They imply a judgment of white superiority. The term we and they were used in this animation to separate British People and Native American. In contrast, this animation references to the central role that such factors as greed, deceit, racism and

genocide played in the historical contacts between the Indians and Jamestown settlers.

(Pewewardy, “The Pochahontas Paradox: A Cautionary Tale for Educators”).

The studies discussed above largely focus on racist views in a number of Disney animated movies, the following study by Kristján Birnir Ívansson, however, pays attention to the link between nationalism and racist assumptions in American movies and animations produced during the second world war. Ívansson’s study points out that at that time the studios were not only the very heart of the animation business throughout the 20th century, but they were also amongst the biggest ideological supporters of the Unites States government and army during World War II. They produced many animations for war propaganda as well as instructional films for the

Army and the Navy. Such animations featured often well-known cartoon characters such as Bugs Bunny, Superman, Donald Duck and Daffy Duck, all of whom fought against the Axis power. Out of the many animation produced during World War II, twelve were selected and analyzed in this thesis in connection with topic of American nationalism (39-41).

According to Ívansson, the five short Donald Duck movies: The Vanishing

Private (1942), Sky Trooper (1942), Fall out-Fall in (1943), The Old Army Game

(1943) and Commando Duck (1994) were all an example that showed what a soldier is supposed to do and what he is not allowed to do in service. However, in the three movies, Donald´s Decision (1942), The New Spirit (1942) and The Spirit of ´43 (1943), encouraged audience to buy a war bond in order to protect the national symbols, democracy and liberty. The academy award winner movie, Der Fuehrer Face (1943), which was also examined in this study, had also a reference to the national symbols.

The movie was supposed to show, how good it is to live in the United States. Firstly, in

Der Fuehrer Face, it is shown how difficult life is in Germany for example there was

48 hours shift at the assembly line. However, when Donald Duck wakes up in his bed in

America and realized that the whole thing was just a dream, his top priority was to hug a miniature of the statue of liberty which is a reference to the national symbol (39-40).

Another movie analyzed in this study, Reason and Emotions (1943), conveys the message that people have to stick together and keep their composure to be able to defeat the enemy. The film also plays on the strong emotion that freedom is important to every free man. The last film discussed in this study, Education for Death: The

Making of Nazi (1943), is the darkest Disney animated short ever made because of the anti-Nazi subject matter . The use of the animation makes everything come together in a dramatic way. Hans, the protagonist, is brainwashed to become a property of Nazi party.

The film encourages the audience to have sympathy for Hans but at the same time the film expresses the horror of Nazism. The film shows how far Nazism is from freedom and democracy, and how difficult life was in Germany under the Hitler regime (40).

Another study by Megan Rector investigates the attempt to incorporate nationalist ideology in an animation film. The study examines the animated film

Animaniacs and concludes that this film imparts a world view that promotes the interests of the United States over other nations and justifies American ethnocentrism.

The ideological messages in the show are especially important because the show is a cartoon broadcast on TV. People are more susceptible to ideological messages in television programs because their guard is down when they watch television because viewers who perceive cartoons as children’s programming will have their guard down.

The cartoon format of Animaniacs contributes to its position as a powerful ideological medium. Cartoons also function of the powerful outlets for advancing ideology since the messages in cartoons are bound by the imaginations of their creators only. In other words, there is no limit to the ideological messages that television shows could carry.

According to Rector, the portrayal of the United States in the cartoon promotes an idealized view of American society in order encourage a positive view of the nation and send the message to Americans that the United States is still the most powerful country of the world in terms of its technology, economy, foreign relations and culture. This type of ideology promoted in media texts is dangerous because it frames the viewers that the American way is the right way and supports the promotion of American interests even if those interests might be harmful to other countries (110-111).

In Thailand, Chajabhol Choopen also investigates Thai nationalism as reflected through period movies produced after the economic crisis of 1997 by analyzing nationalistic issues through the different components of representative films such as scripts, characters, symbols, and Thai social events used for nationalistic purposes before, during, and after the films took place. Five movies were selected as case studies: The Siam Renaissance (2004), Suriyothai (2001), Bangrajan (2000), The

Overture (2004) and Young Soldiers (2000). The nationalistic issues found in the selected films were compared with the historical background surrounding the creation of Thai nationalism communicated through plays, annals, movies, and the like. This historical creation of Thai nationalism began during the turbulent, crises filled reign of

King Rama V. The crisis which emerged during King Rama V's reign was an important factor that led Thai leaders to encourage Thai people to embrace nationalism, and the media was employed as an important tool to promote nationalist sentiments.

The result of the study revealed that five different nationalistic themes when the five films were closely examined. The first theme is that creation of nationalism in present times continues to follow traditional nationalistic concepts. For example, the fall of Ayutthaya to the Burmese, where the historical wars with Burma were used in present-day as a means to evoke nationalism. At this time, military power is no longer

used by countries to exert their influence. Economic and foreign policies are now the alternative power source for countries today. As a result, there are also new kinds of nationalism which have emerged. The results of this study have succeeded in promoting a better understanding about the contemporary creation of Thai nationalism via film studies (Choopen, “Nationalism in contemporary Thai society: A case study of period films from 1997 to 2005”).

In addition, there is another study of Chakrit Tiebtienrat about nationalist elements in Thai movies during the Thai Constitution of 1997. This study aimed to investigate the interaction between media and nationalism in Thailand by analyzing four

Thai movies; Bangrachan (2000), Suriyothai (2004), Yuwachon (2000) and Moonhunter

(2000). The results indicated that, even if the movie industries aims to make profit, nationalism and political agendas are promoted at the same time. It appears in several case studies that the private media owners and the political leaders share common interests. The filmmakers use the symbols, cultures, and traditions, which are created by the leaders, to justify their power and supremacy over those under them. There is also an attempt of the filmmaker to persuade audiences to follow the practices and values of the leaders. Moreover, individual films target different classes in Thai society, which vary by their beliefs, culture, and practices. The filmmakers produce the films according to the culture of those classes in order to strengthen the nationalistic awareness as well as to persuade the audiences to accept the values approved and promoted by the ruling class. The use of films to promote the ruling class’s version of nationalism clearly functions to maintain hierarchical social structure (222-226).

It can be seen that a number of scholars have conducted research about nationalist ideology in Thai films and their findings reveal that nationalist messages I films are intricately linked with the desire of those in power to mobilize the general

populace to internalize the value that national interests comes before individual interests, and to accept the status quo in Thai society. Besides, previous studies conducted by foreign scholars reveal how nationalism often ends up promoting racism and nationalist messages promoted in films, including the ones with children as targeted audience, could impart racist views of ‘the Other’ to children. As this researcher’s interest lies in animation films produced and released in Thailand, the researcher would like to find out if some of these films promote nationalist feeling and at the same time implicitly express racist attitude. For practical reason, the researcher has narrowed down the scope of the research to the investigation of two films, Kan Kluay I and II , as these two films are highly popular among children and few scholars have paid attention to the in-depth analysis of nationalist and racist messages conveyed through the films, especially the implicit ones.

2.2 The synopsis of Khan Kluay movies

Khan Kluay, the protagonist, is raised by his mother because his father went off to war and never returns. As a young elephant, Khan Kluay is teased by his friends because his father is away. Khan Kluay is always curious about his father but his mother does not tell him much about his father’s life. Because of this, he wants to find his father, and he wanders off to begin his search. Unfortunately, he is soon captured by a Burmese raiding party. When he tries to escape from the Burmese camp, Khan Kluay is befriended by a Siamese boy prince, Naresuan. Naresuan has the ability to tame Khan

Kluay and when Khan Kluay grows up, he becomes Naresuan’s wartime elephant.

Naresuan, as the king of Siam, later goes into battle with the Burmese. He defeats the Burmese and becomes recognized as one of Thailand’s greatest kings. Khan

Kluay is also highly regarded because he played an important role in helping the king during the battle. In the battle, Khan Kluay also confronted Nguangdaeng, a giant

Burmese war elephant with fiery eyes, who was responsible for the death of his father.

Finally, Khan Kluay could avenge his father’s death by killing Nguangdaeng. After that, he is released to spend the rest of his life with his loved ones. Khan Kluay II focuses on another attack of Siam by the Burmese and Kan Kluay’s role in helping to save his country.