“The Little Mermaid”
3/5 ***
“The Little Mermaid” (1989), directed by Ron Clements and John Musker, was inspired by the fairy tale by Danish writer Hans Christian Anderson. It tells the story of a mermaid named Ariel (Jodi Benson) who falls in love with a human prince named Eric (Christopher Daniel Barns). With the help of the evil witch, Ursula (Pat Carroll), Ariel trades her voice for human legs with the deal that if Eric does not fall in love with her in three days, Ariel will be turned into seaweed and added to Ursula’s garden. The film was extremely successful upon its release, kicking off the Disney Renaissance and bringing the studio back into relevance. However, while the film may be a classic in the eyes of many, there are many problematic elements promoted in the film that should be addressed.
For starters, Ariel is a terrible role model. She is a 16-year-old child who makes a deal with someone she knows is evil to be with a man she just met. By the time Ariel seeks Ursula, she has not had a single conversation with Eric, but insists that she is madly in love with him. In reality, she is infatuated with him. She does not know anything about Eric other than the fact that he is a prince and that he is single. In spite of that, Ariel gives up her voice, an integral part of her identity, to be with Eric. Ariel literally exchanges her voice and family for a man who is a stranger to her. Ursula sings in the song “Poor Unfortunate Souls” that Ariel does not need her voice because she has “[her] looks, [her] pretty face / [and to not] underestimate the importance of body language.” Narratively, that should not have ended up being how the story went, because the villain says this. However, that is exactly what happens.
The character of Ursula has a lot of problems as well, most notably that she is both the villain and the film’s only plus-sized character. Not only that, but her character design was based on the drag queen Divine. The film vilifies both queerness and different body types while promoting heterosexuality and being thin. Ursula is the only character who acts promiscuous and flamboyant, traits often seen in queer-coded villains. From the Queen of Hearts in “Alice in Wonderland” in 1951 to Governor Ratcliffe in “Pocahontas” in 1995, Disney has a habit of queer-coding their villains as well as occasionally giving them a larger body type. At the end of the film, Ursula is brutally defeated and Ariel and Eric get married while sailing under a rainbow.
As for the fatphobic messages, in “Poor Unfortunate Souls,” Ursula tells Ariel what she can do for her by showing a plus-sized mermaid and a thin merman singing “…this one longing to be thinner / this one wants to get the girl / do I help them? Yes indeed.” She then buffs up the merman and makes the mermaid extremely thin. This promotes the idea that the only way for women to get a partner is if they adhere to rigid and unattainable beauty standards. Not only that, but the mermaid’s tail covers the majority of her body until she changes, saying that plus-sized women have to cover up their body and should not dress promiscuously. Then, at the end of the film when Ursula dies and all her spells are reversed, no plus-sized mermaid is seen leaving her cave, implying that that spell did not wear off. Every other spell Ursula cast is reversed, except for the one that made a mermaid thin. Making Ariel the protagonist and unnaturally thin while making Ursula the villain and plus-sized sends a clear message about body standards.
All that is to say, you can still love “The Little Mermaid.” It is a film that has stayed in the public consciousness for over 30 years now for a reason. It is a very fun and colorful film with great music. Today, Disney’s attempt to use queer-coding to paint Ursula as a villain backfires because it is those traits that end up making her a great character. She is given a confidence and personality that is very fun to watch, and you cannot help but partially root for her to succeed. Overall, while “The Little Mermaid” is a classic film still beloved decades after its release, it is important to recognize and discuss the problematic messages the film promotes.