Monday, October 27, 2008

Disneyland: The Whitest Place on Earth. A Book Review.

Currently one of the biggest, most diverse cities in the world, Los Angeles has the nation’s largest population of Mexicans, Koreans, Vietnamese, Salvadorans and Thais (20). Despite its grand claim as a premier global city, it is important to take into account the past racialized suburban development of Los Angeles. In Popular Culture in the Age of White Flight, author Eric Avila develops a compelling historical analysis of “Race and Space” in post- WWII Los Angeles. The far west had an especially vibrant wartime economy, and new job opportunities encouraged African Americans and other nonwhite social groups to flock to Los Angeles. In response to this changing and diversifying urban culture, suburbanization sanctions formed dramatic, planned divisions between white and black areas of the city. Avila shows how this racial discrimination presented itself not only present in urban/suburban planning, but also in theme parks, ball parks, cinemas, dance halls and shopping malls. These cultural institutions asserted the “whiteness” of middle class America and furthered the “Vanilla suburbs” from the “Chocolate Cities” (5).

In Chapter 4, “A Rage for Order”, Avila looks specifically at the conception of Disneyland and how it compares to earlier theme parks. Disneyland encapsulated all of the utopian aspirations of the suburban society and served as an antithesis to the diver urban population. Amusement parks, such as Coney Island, had always been an important cultural aspect of industrial urbanism, but Walt Disney’s blatant depart from earlier parks shows a shift in focus to pandering to the suburban white class. Walt Disney wanted to defy the heterogeneity in cosmopolitan urban culture, so he created his own world of order, regimentation and homogeneity—in short, a vision of “whiteness”. John Hench, a major developer of Disneyland stated, “We design an area to create a certain atmosphere, and we maintain it so that there isn’t that visual, thematic and even functional contradiction that exists outside in cities where everything is all mixed together” (119). Among asserting the culture of small-town life, patriarchal nuclear family, he also manifested a racial hierarchy; Disney sectioned off areas of the amusement park that would represent non-white lands in an inaccurate and condescending, culture-as-commodity manner. Avila brings up the example of “Frontierland” where meeting “full-blooded Indians” was featured as a main attraction (133). Also, many of Disney’s animal characters exemplified racial caricatures and ethnic stereotypes, for example, the conniving Siamese cats of Lady and the Tramp (133). These references to other races and cultures only furthered their otherness and affirmed the power of whiteness majority.

The Disney Company continues to be a powerful and influential institution in the American entertainment industry, just as it continues to support homogeneity and white middle class values. Disney is now a multi-billion dollar international cooperation that owns amusement parks, cruise lines, consumer products, film and other media networks. Despite its “effort” to make media that is more politically correct, representational diverse, it’s clear that Disney still has very “white” prejudiced underpinnings. Racial caricatures are still uncomfortably apparent in the minor animal characters, while the main characters remain normal (aka “white”). The influence of Disney in Los Angeles has only grown since the construction of Disneyland; Disney movies, games, toys, etc. are staples in most American children’s’ lives. Even as I sit in a coffee shop, writing this book review, I see two little Indian girls in Disney character Halloween costumes; one little girl is Arial, the other, Snow White. It would be interesting to read Avila’s analysis of the Disney Company’s current actions based on the current American demographic.

No comments: