A few days ago, it was announced that R&B singer Halle Bailey has been cast as Ariel in the long-awaited Live-Action Reboot franchise. A Black-American actress, this did not come as a complete shock to me, as rumours that Zendaya might be offered the role had been circulating for a while.
What did come as a shock to me was how much I cared, and the conflicting emotions that resulted sent me into a spiral of anxiety and frustration. Curiously, these emotions did not spawn from the original announcement, but the general public's reaction to the news.
While diversity advocates (read: American-centric representation advocates; diversity outside the USA actually means something much broader that Blacks, Whites, and Hispanic) celebrated the news, conservative traditionalists bemoaned the news, to the point that they created a hash-tag (#NotMyAriel) and started a petition* to remove Halle Bailey from the role.
*Irrespective of my own feelings to this development, I do not condone petitions aimed at badgering creatives to bend to a specific consensus of how their work should be done. Fortunately, such efforts are often futile.
Both sides pulled up their chairs, toggled CAPS, and 'splained to each other why this casting was/not appropriate. The problem is, many of the arguments, on both sides, got their facts wrong, and further added to the problem by asserting that their argument was the end of the discussion. This is nothing new to the Internet.
As a fan of the original Fairy Tale by Hans Christian Andersen, Disney's The Little Mermaid animated film and subsidiaries, and Mermaid Mythology in general, I took extreme umbrage at what some people insisted were well-reasoned arguments. Since leaving comments under every single article, video and Twitter post with which I disagreed would be a spectacularly ineffective waste of time, I'm going to address the points of argument here, and be done with it at once.
Issue 1: Was the original titular character of The Little Mermaid, written by Hans Christian Andersen, described as being of White complexion?
This has cropped up in a number of places, but the one that seems to have gained the most traction, and my attention, was this post on Twitter:
As someone who has read the original multiple times, and can tell at a glance whether a manuscript is a faithful and direct translation of the original Danish version, or just an adaption, I was very confused. So, I pulled up multiple translations of the original, and lo:
Sources:
http://hca.gilead.org.il/li_merma.html
https://andersen.sdu.dk/moocfiles/littlemermaid.pdf
One, two, three, FOUR times does it say that she had white skin. Included is a bonus mention of her sisters' complexion, comparing it to foam on the ocean. One translation implies that the "rose" quality of her skin had to do with the delicate texture of her skin, not the colour. This appeared very early in the text, so it seems the "studious little nerd" didn't read past the second page, stopping once she had found something she felt confirmed her bias. Attempts from others to highlight her mistake have fallen upon blind eyes.
Before I determine whether this is significant, I would like to highlight another folk-tale Disney movie that has received a remake: Aladdin. Although the story is of Middle-Eastern origin (Specifically, Syria; not part of the original 1001 Nights, but compiled into it later during translations), the story, according to the original manuscript, takes place in China, not the Middle East. Indeed, before Disney released their 1992 animated version, depictions of Aladdin as Asian were not uncommon. I myself grew up watching this film (if you want to see a bad example of poor lip-sync dubbed animation, this is for you!) as well as the Disney version:
I didn't hear anyone calling this out when the remake of Aladdin was being filmed/released. In fact, it received praise for its Middle Eastern casting and cultural sensitivity.
Conversely, in the original, the Little Mermaid (who doesn't have a name) dies, she doesn't have companions (Sebastian, Flounder, Scuttle), the Sea Witch is not a villain, etc.
These are stories with elements that have be transposed on top of them to change their context. Rather than having Christian connotations like the original, Disney's animated version focused instead on more contemporary issues, like Father-Daughter relationships, female independence, and (according to Pat Carol, the voice of Ursula) bullying.
In 2010, I attended a lecture at ACMI in Melbourne by Lella Smith, then-Director of Disney's Animation Research Library. She told a story of The Little Mermaid premiering in Denmark: The Directors went up to the Queen of Denmark to apologise for butchering her nation's most beloved Fairy Tale. She reportedly said "Oh, [Hans Christian Andersen] never knew how to finish his stories anyway!"
So, to answer this question:
Was the original Little Mermaid explicitly White? Yes.
Does it matter? No.
Why? Contexts change.
Issue 2: Can Merpeople (any Mer) be Black?
This has drawn more heated debate from both sides, and with good reason: as far as Human complexion is concerned, a Scandinavian Fairy Tales about a woman who is not exposed to sunlight for the first fifteen years of her life, and adapted into a film where she is forbidden from ever going to the water's surface does not evoke images of a person with a dark skin complexion.
Detractors of this argument have postulated that, as a mythical creature, Ariel is not bound to the implications of Human ethnicity and can theoretically have any complexion, independent of UV light exposure. Proponents of this reasoning are particularly obstinate, as it allows them to refute whatever argument their opponent offers by saying "there are no rules".
Ignoring that Ariel transforms into a Human in the story, thereby giving her a very non-mythical ethnicity, the danger with this reasoning is that by denying Ariel a Human ethnicity based on her mythological nature, you're also implying that Sunflower, the Black Centaur from Fantasia, is not a racist African-American steroetype, because she's a mythological creature, and therefore does not have an ethnicity.
Rather than pursuing an inherently problematic reasoning about mythology versus reality, a more sensible approach would be to examine precedence. To that end, may I present Gabriella:
Gabriella was a recurring character in Disney's The Little Mermaid Animated Television Series from the 1990's; I used to watch it on Saturday Disney. Her character was modeled after a fan of the show who passed away after the First Season. She is a Latina Mermaid who is Deaf-Mute, and communicates with ASL (apparently, accurately), interpreted by her octopus friend, Ollie. A Woman-of-Colour with a disability should be well-known to diversity advocates, but I haven't seen a mention of her in this debate, so here she is. She has a notably darker skin tone than Ariel, and should be considered as evidence that Disney's The Little Mermaid can have Merpeople of colour.
To answer this question:
Can Merpeople be Black? Yes.
Does It Matter? Yes.
Why? Because the issue has become relevant.
Issue 3: Does it Matter if Ariel is Black?
I've established that, although the original Little Mermaid was white, story elements do change, and that Merpeople, in general, can indeed be Black. Therefore, we can conceive of a Black Ariel. However, what impact would changing Ariel's ethnicity have?
The act of changing a character's ethnicity is a subject of increasing relevance. In film, if a non-white character is played by a white actor, it is considered "whitewashing", a form of ethnic erasure and cultural appropriation. The opposite does not occur nearly as frequently, has no consistent term attached to it, and is generally considered permissible, as long as the ethnic identity of the character is not fundamentally tied to the nature of their character or story-line.
In this case, Ariel has been represented as a red-haired, blue-eyed, white-skinned female for the past thirty years; translation: my entire life. The perceived identity of a Disney Princess is itself a source of controversy, as little girls often like to dress up as their favourites. This can be met with intense passion, as they may sometimes choose to dress up as a character that does not match their ethnic or cultural identity.
Exhibit A: A First Australian (Aboriginal) girl was racially abused for dressing up as Elsa from Frozen, because she is Brown and the character is White
Exhibit B: Controversy over White girls dressing up as Moana for Halloween
Enter into this debate the concept of Canon, the idea that certain details of a creative property are consistent and irrefutable, versus Non-Canon, where details are fluid and subject to interpretation. Some details may be assumed as canon if they're explicitly stated, though can be retracted or "retconned", while Non-canonical details may have been extrapolated from existing canon, or else felt to have been implied. A famous example of turning an assumed canonical detail on its head was the casting of Black actress Noma Dumezweni as Hermione in Harry Potter and The Cursed Child. While the character had been portrayed by White actress Emma Watson in the film series, author J.K. Rowling pointed out that she'd never specified Hermione's ethnicity, and that Black Hermione was therefore canonically acceptable.
So, is Ariel's identity as a redheaded White woman canonical? Although the animated television series took a few jabs at her having red hair, the film does not, and there is no story-based reason for her to be a White redhead, though it does provide a distinct, iconic image. The problem is that she has been identified as a White redhead for so long, and has meant so much to so many people, myself included, based on her original portrayal, that changing her image translates to changing her identity.
As an obsessive fan of the original film, released in 1989, I am concerned that portraying Ariel as a Black Woman will give rise to demands for retconning: that all present and future representations of Ariel must be of a Black woman, and that the original imagery is obsolete and is to be disregarded. If you think this is a catastrophisation, please do remember that Disney have attempted to erase an entire movie from their canon.
Contrary to those that say Ariel does not have a Human ethnicity, being a made-up character does not preclude her from having one. A large source of controversy when it was released in 1991, the original Aladdin film was criticised for whitewashing Aladdin, while portraying the villainous characters, such as Jafar and the Guards, as Middle Eastern caricatures. This gives way to racial coding, the idea that assigning negative or stereotypical characteristics to the portrayal of a specific ethnicity contributes to that ethnicity's derision and/or vilification.
Aladdin being a make-believe character, and his ethnicity not being fundamental to the telling of the story (he was, after all, originally Chinese), his apparent race should, according to advocates for a Black Ariel, not be an issue. Middle Eastern representatives, however, have consistently disagreed, and felt that Aladdin had been whitewashed in order to make him more appealing to a White American audience.
They aren't wrong: allegedly, Jeffrey Katzenberg (the man on Santa's perpetual naughty list for attempting to remove Part of Your World from The Little Mermaid, and replacing Adriana Caselotti with Mary Kay Bergman as the voice of Snow White at the 1993 Academy Awards) told Animator Glen Keane (who was responsible for the designs of both Ariel and Aladdin) to redesign Aladdin to look "more like Tom Cruise".
The remake of Aladdin, with an Egyptian-Canadian actor in the lead role, along with a supporting cast of appropriate ethnicities, was met with appreciation from diversity advocates, including Rami Ismail, who is himself a Dutch Muslim of Egyptian decent.
Ariel, though purportedly unspecified in ethnicity, does in fact have racial markers that place her within a finite demographic. Changing those markers will change the perception of who she is, and who and what she represents. Tweets are appearing from Black parents who are excited that their girls will grow up with a Black Ariel, and Tweets from redheads (and White people in general) who, identifying strongly with Ariel, feel betrayed by the switch. If people from the Middle East can demand that Aladdin be cast to represent them, why can't Scandinavians expect the same?
To answer this question:
Does it Matter Whether Ariel is Black or White? Yes.
Why? Precedence; Racial and Cultural Identity.
Issue 4: Can Ariel, Nonetheless, be Black?
Although I've established that Ariel was originally White, has a White ethnicity in the film, and that it will impact her reception by the audience, I haven't yet addressed whether this means Ariel has to be White.
Changing her ethnicity will change how she is perceived; the casting announcement alone has drawn praise and ire, which has thus formed this conversation. Although the change is not universally welcomed, having established that a Mermaid can be Black, that Ariel need not be held to the specifications of the original Fairy Tale, and that a character can be cast in a different ethnicity to its original portrayal, it is acceptable that Ariel can be cast as a Black Mermaid.
Whether the actress in question, Halle Bailey, can hold her own in the role remains to be seen. I know she can sing, but the singing/acting/performing talent combo is rare. I'd have been more confident with Zendaya, having adored her performance in The Greatest Showman.
So:
Can Ariel Be Black? Yes.
Does it Matter? Yes.
Why? It's the entire basis of the debate around the casting, which in turn is the basis of this post.
Finally, Issue 5: Does any of this Matter?
Many people in support for the casting have stated that the debate is redundant for varying reasons, such as: Ariel is a fish without ethnicity, her ethnicity is not essential to the story, it's make-believe, the original never specified red hair, etc. To that end, they say that the change doesn't matter, and anyone who says otherwise is racist.
There is one problem with this: it quite evidently does matter, specifically to me. I've been fixated on Ariel my entire life, turned my emotional investment into a financial investment, and detailed much of the adventure in this blog. I go to bookstores and look at picture books of Disney's The Little Mermaid to admire the next iteration of interpretive artwork (or, to see which previous publication's illustrations they've recycled). To tell me that how Ariel is portrayed doesn't matter to anyone other than a racist is dismissive of my individuality and my hobby, which I started nearly a decade before this announcement.
I focus on every frame of the film, agonise over every micro-shift in Ariel's expression, and can place just about any cel in the film. Am I entitled to a White Ariel? No, but you don't get to tell me that it doesn't matter, just because it doesn't matter to you, or has a different meaning to you. I'm a thirty-year-old with ASD (yes, I've been officially diagnosed); this is my "Aspy Thing". This is a big part of my life and, yes, it does in fact matter, to me. Below is a card my brother made for me, for my 30th birthday. He has an... interesting sense of humour. Try not to look too deeply into the meaning of the image; I certainly don't.
Not everything from The Little Mermaid that is officially sanctioned by Disney is well-received by me. If you're wondering what hasn't passed muster with me, take a look at Poor Unfortunate Soul: A Tale of the Sea Witch by Serena Valentino. The only good part of this book is the cover art. Better still, save your time and money and just read the one-star reviews on Amazon; mine is swimming around somewhere in there .
Those
who say it doesn't matter do need to take a respectful step back. I am
not the only collector of Little Mermaid Production Cels, and I am not
the only person with ASD (I can't imagine I'm the only one with ASD and a fixation on The Little Mermaid, I just haven't met them yet). Not all critics are racist; some of us are just
excruciatingly particular. That I've expressed my fascination with the
image of Ariel long before this casting announcement, and invested tens-of-thousands of dollars into it, should demonstrate
that I am more that a "fair-weather" fan. Seriously, cut this out; you
don't know me:
However, does it matter in the broader sense? Many who object to the casting seem to be in the vein of people who complain about any form of character recolourisation. They're the people who complained about the casting of Aquaman, the MCU, and Annie. I quite liked the new Aquaman, didn't know Nick Fury came in anything other than Samuel L. Jackson until a couple of days ago, and have not actually seen Annie, in any incarnation. How they are portrayed doesn't matter to me. How Ariel is portrayed, does. For many of the people complaining, I do wonder how many of them are as deeply committed to the character as I am, and how many are just having a whinge over "blackwashing".
Recap:
Does This Matter? Yes, but it varies from person to person.
Why? I've built an expensive hobby around the depiction of Ariel, and feel it does, but a lot of people weren't vocal about what Ariel's appearance meant to them until, suddenly, she's Black.
Does it Matter [that it matters]? That people say it doesn't matter, when it does, means that it does matter, to matter.
Conclusion: Is this a Problem?
More specifically, do I feel that Halle Bailey being cast as Ariel is a problem?
Is she MY Ariel? Well, no. She doesn't effectively represent my collection* or the transmedia I've consumed over the last thirty years.
*In case you've lost track, here are my Ariel's to-date:
Can she be a NEW Ariel? Absolutely, break a leg! I was never, ever going to be satisfied with whomever they cast. As long as people don't attempt to replace my Ariel with her, this could be great! It's already spawning beautiful fan art:
Sources:
Update: The original source for the Ariel On The Rock is here.
I am honestly more concerned that the project is being helmed by Rob Marshall; I was not enamoured by Mary Poppins Returns, and have extremely high expectations that I'm not confident he can match. I've wondered for years whether Disney might work up the nerve to make The Little Mermaid with the original, tragic ending, but Rob Marshall does not strike me as the type, so that's almost certainly out.
What is a problem are the ones who are mocking and laughing at people like me, who care about what the deviation from how she has been previously depicted means to them, as well as the ones who aren't passionate about Ariel, but are just here to complain that a character isn't White anymore. To both groups:
And to the nostalgists, the people who just don't know if this will live up to the legacy of the original, just go and see it and make up your mind at that time. I loved the original Beauty and the Beast, but wasn't impressed with the remake with Emma Watson. What did I do? Saw it once, then went back to watching the original.
Congratulations to Halle Bailey!
To everyone else, kindly go play in traffic.
UPDATE (23.11.2019): Jonah Hauer-King has been cast as Prince Eric. Again, I don't know much about him, and he wasn't what I was expecting, but we'll just have to wait and see.
