The trial of Yzma (Emperor's New Groove analysis Pt 2)

  All rise, court is now in session. Today's case is against Yzma as to whether she is guilty of being crazy or whether she has a just cause for wanting to "kill" Kuzco. The prosecution, all the people who watched The Emperor's New Groove, The Defense, me (Oh boy) and the jury is you.
 
  The prosecution would like to make an opening statement. They claim that Yzma is a single-minded villian who has always been scheming of taking the throne and her questionable experiments helped in leading to getting rid of Kuzco. When she heard he was still alive she practically conducted a manhunt and searched the Incan Empire for this one man. And why would she do all of this? To protect her new position and rule the empire for life. In the second movie we all see that she uses her unforrtunate henchman Kronk as a scapegoat to help her in her endeavors to take back the throne and kick out Kuzco again. If this doesn't scream that she is crazy, dangerous, and an anarchist, then the prosectution doesn't know what does. The prosecution rests.

  Unfortunately for the defense, because all the peole who have been around or interacted with Yzma are incredibly biased, I call upon no witnesses, yet hope that the following evidence will influence the jury's descision.
  First, I would like to point out something about Yzma's job and occupation in the beginning of the movie. As the jury may know, she was the Emperor's advisor. Now this may not sound like a big deal to some, but I would like to point out that in an empire the emperor can't make all the descisions and he/she (because there are some empresses in history) may notknow what to do in certain situations. Cue the Emperor's advisor. Their role is to assist the Emperor and give him wisdom in his actions and descisions. And I would ask the Jury to observe who the Emperor is... Kuzco, someone who clearly doesn't know how to run an empire (more on that later). This would lead Yzma to influence Kuzco's decisions a lot and as a result she is technically ruling the empire already indirectly. So I ask the Prosecution, why would she want to rule the empire if she already has a grip on Kuzco and the empire.
 
 OBJECTION!  (I've always wanted to do that) The Prosecution would like to address the fact that it was not enough for her. She is a power hungry maniac who has no concern for others, as long as she has the throne, she will never be satisfied.

  To the Prosecution I would like to ask this. You know who else has no concern for others? Kuzco! Yes he has a change of heart in the end, but in the beginning I should remind everyone of how painfully self-centered this man is. First we see him reject down would be brides, after kicking out and old man by the way. Then he brings in a peasant to tell him that he is basically going to destroy his village, just to build a summer house. He then procedes to fire and exile Yzma after she is caught filling in for the emperor and this helps give her motive for what she does. Members of the jury, I would like to draw your attention to other people in history who assassinatedemperors and improved the condition of the world/empire: Ehud killing Eglon and freeing Israel, the death of Caligula. It doesn't help Kuzco's case that no one really liked or cared about his reign as is seen at his "funeral." Therefore while Yzma's attempt at assassination were horrifying, she was trying to protect the empire from the selfish clutches of Kuzco's hands.
  As for the second movie and Yzma's behavior their: I refuse to acknowledge that movie as a true sequel to the Emperor's New Groove. I'm not saying it's bad, in fact it's actually pretty good, but unfortunately I don't find it as suitable evidence for this case.

  For my closing remark. While some members of the jury may already find this woman guilty, I implore you to consider the evidence presented before you and while this woman is guilty of many things, Kuzco is just as guilty as Yzma for driving her to this point.

  Leave your verdict in the comments below and I will see you next week when we analyze Alladin.

Kuzco, Is he really the center of the Universe?

Emperor's New Groove came out in 2000

  Hello Internet and all of you night owls (I say this this because I am posting at 10:39 PM). Welcome to History of Disney, where we get our groove on and ride our llamas to the sunset. I have a confession to make. I love the Emperors New Groove, and why wouldn't I? It's got a great lesson to learn, its got humor that is targeted for all ages, and it has lovable characters. This week we won't be analyzing for a specific time frame of the Emperor's New Groove, but we will be analyzing the historical accuracy between two specific parts, the restaurant scene and what the peasants eat, and the idea of Kuzco really being seen as the center of the universe.

Yes that thing in the center of the picture is a pill bug.

  So for all of you history buffs out there, here is a quick little aside on where the movie is based from. The movie's setting is the Incan Empire. This makes sense, because there are no iron tools in sight, there are llamas doing the hard work and there is distinct mountainous feel that places it in the Andes Mountain Range. Not to mention the bugs... oh the bugs. This is actually a perfect seg-way into our next topic of the peasants meals. Now clearly there were no restaurants in the Incan Empire like it is shown in the movie. You will also be glad to know that from my diligent research, that those pill bugs that Pacha and Kuzco eat, are not even close to what real peasants at the time ate. At the time of the Incan Empire, most of the peasants ate vegetables and small animals like Guinea Pigs and possibly even llamas at times (now it all makes sense why they chose bugs over this menu). They also consumed maize (corn) and even potatoes at times with their meals. Peasants would also have their meals twice a day and spend more time working in the fields than doing half of what Pacha and Kuzco are doing.

  Speaking of Kuzco, let's analyze his claim of being center of the universe. In most societies we are taught that many times the emperor is seen as a god. Here's a brief list to prove my point : Egypt, Rome, Japan, China,  the Aztecs, just to name a few. As for the Inca, they are no different. According to their mythology there is a sun god named Inti and Incan Emperors were believed to have descended at one point from Inti himself.  In most ancient pantheons we also learn that sun gods are usually considered above more highly than the other gods, and in a society like the Inca it would make sense that the sun god be important to them. So Kuzco does have some meat to his argument when he says the universe revolves around him. However this does not excuse his appalling behavior and it almost makes the villain look justified in their attempts to get rid of Kuzco.

  Well I have figured that this blog was too short this week and I have decided that next week that we will look at  the Emperor's New Groove again, and we may also use its less glamorous sequel to assert the fact if Yzma is justified in her actions for why she does what she does, or if she is just a crazy old lady bent on taking the throne, the answer might surprise you. But until next week thank you for staying up late with me as I prove to you that the Inca did not eat gargantuan pill bugs for lunch and that while Kuzco still is a huge jerk, his argument of a perfect world beginning and ending with him, makes a little sense.

  Thank you for your time, and as always I will see you in the next post.

The Sword in the Stone, and a time traveling Magician

  Hello Internet, welcome to History of Disney, where the Middle Ages are glorified like no tomorrow (thanks Eurocentrism). Now I must confess, as a kid I loved the idea of being a knight, slaying dragons and meeting wizards, and thus as a result I loved movies that were staged in the Medieval Era. So as a kid I grew up loving this movie, The Sword and the Stone. For those of you who haven't heard of this movie I'll give you a run down. Sword of the Stone was made by Walt Disney Pictures in 1963 and tells the story of a boy named Arthur and his adventure with the seemingly time-travelling wizard Merlin. It's a 60's take on a classic story, and we are going to compare this version to the actual tale of King Arthur and the sword in the Stone.

  The tale of Arthur begins in England as the king Unther Pendragon falls ill and dies. In the tale, Merlin takes the boy and gives him Sir Ector, who is a loyal ally to the king. When the king finally dies, the problem of the throne rears it's ugly head. Rival dukes and lords fought over who would rule the country. Soon the nobles asked Merlin for a solution, and Merlin creates the sword in the stone, saying that whoever pulls the stone will be the true king of England. Well like my valiant attempts to use "epigram" correctly in a sentence (AP Lang. joke for those of you who understand it), many nobles came forward to try and remove the Sword but all failed. The sword soon became forgotten and England fell into more disrepair. After a few years Merlin reveals himself to Arthur and they become great friends. The scrawny Arthur is taught that brains are better than brawn, and then we reach the climax of the story. It was decided that in order to find a king, the nobles agreed to hold a jousting tournament on New Years Day. The prize? Why none other than the crown of England of course. Arthur and his step-brother Kay go to the tournament, (Arthur as the squire) and realizes that they forgot Kay's sword at the inn they were staying at. Arthur runs to get Kay's sword but can't find it. He then proceeds to a churchyard and pulls the sword from the stone. Kay tries to take advantage of the situation and declare himself the one who pulled the sword. His father Sir Ector, decides to test kay to make sure he is the true king, by having him pull the sword himself. Kay fails and Arthur pulls the sword from the stone again and is made King of England, and the rest is history. (OK it's not actually history, its more of a legend really)

  So what about the movie? Is Disney accurate towards the Legend and keeps true to it's origins? Surprisingly yes, although there are some parts that Disney had to make up, because the Legend of the Sword in the Stone is actually really short. Arthur does grow up under Sir Ector and his step-brother Kay. Merlin does reveal himself to Arthur and they do become friends. Merlin does teach Arthur that brain over brawn  wins every time, there is a joust to determine who is the King of England, and Kay's sword being left the inn correct. They even got Arthur's description correct: a scrawny boy who was destined to become a squire at first. However, in the legend it is implied that Arthur was able to get in the inn and Kay's sword may have been stolen and in the movie Arthur can't gets locked out of the inn because everyone is at the joust. Also it is worth noting that in the legend Merlin had a huge part in Arthur's life and decided his fate from birth, but movie Merlin, didn't even know who Arthur was until he crashed into his house. The movie has also altered his age but a couple years: in the legend Arthur is 15 years old when he removes the sword from the stone, and in the movie he is around 12 years old when he becomes king. Despite some of these differences the movie remains somewhat accurate to the legend (Even with it's fourth wall breaking moments, like knowing that the Legend of Arthur would be made into a movie).

  There is one thing that bugs me though, would people real joust for such high stakes such as the crown for ALL of a kingdom and is jousting really as violent as they make it sound in the movie, swords and all? Well I did some digging and I found out that at one time jousting was actually a military tactic for heavy cavalry and became a sport around the 15th Century onward. So I guess that would explain the violence, and they are playing for high stakes after all. Jousts were used as ways to get honor from battle (wow honor seems like a big deal these past couple weeks) or, even at times, used to get money, land, and titles from a grateful liege. So is it possible that the title of King of England could be used as a reward for a tournament. It's quite possible, but we will never really know. It would make sense though when you look at the context of the tournament. England has been leaderless for 12-15 years and they need a king desperately. So therefore it would make sense for England to hang it's entire future in the hands of knights competing for glory. 

  This has been a fun ride through a movie that is not quite as  known in this generation. If you have never seen this movie before then I would recommend that you watch it. It is a really good movie after all.

Fa Mulan vs Hua Mulan (and Shan Yu)

Mulan: 2004

  So last week we were able to place Arrendelle in the time frame of the Holy Roman Empire. Now this week I have chosen to tackle the movie Mulan. This is another movie that I'm willing to bet everyone has seen at least once, and who can blame you it is a great movie. Anyways, enough talk, let's get down to business and try to place a date on the movie Mulan.

  The movie Mulan is based off an ancient Chinese ballad written in the 6th century AD, just before the founding of the Tang dynasty, called the Ballad of Hua Mulan. Many adaptations have placed her anywhere from the beginning of the Tang dynasty to the Mongolian Khaganate. However because this is a blog based off Disney movies, we will be only looking at the Disney adaptation of this ancient story.

 
  So anyways when the movie starts we see the Great Wall of China in all of it's animated glory. The wall from what we can see looks completed and a highly developed signaling system has been made so that the Chinese soldiers can warn each other if they are under attack and word will spread quickly. And now for the historical part: the Great Wall of China was started in 206 BC by Shi Huangdi of the Qin dynasty and was slowly constructed over time. The majority of the wall that we see today was created by the Ming dynasty, which came after the Mongols. It is also worth noting the architecture of some of the buildings in China. Clearly this is a time in Chinese History in which elaborate palaces were built and the buildings looked like they were built around the time of the Middle ages in Europe.

The Song Dynasty at it's height

  How can I be so confident about this taking place during the Middle Ages. Well one, if one hasn't noticed already, Disney has kind of a fascination with the Middle ages. Two If you pay attention to the armor and weapons, the Chinese soldiers still rely on swords, spears, bows, and arrows for weapons. They also rely on...cannons? But Jacob, I can hear some of you thinking, I thought you said in your last blog gunpowder wasn't accepted as a weapon until the 1500s. How can China have cannons in the middle ages? Well my friends, from what we learned in history classes as well as from our Eurocentric history books, we can learn that China was the first for a lot of stuff, gunpowder was one of them. China invented gunpowder around 850 AD, during the Tang dynasty but was not used as a weapon until 904 AD in the Song Dynasty. This definitely points to the Song dynasty as a possible contender. It also narrows our timeframe to anywhere from 904 AD- 1279.

  Now we get the fun part of analyzing the villains. First off we notice that Shan Yu and his men are able to scale the Great Wall of China, almost as if they had done it before. Then there is their conduct in fighting that comes into playas well. They ride around on horseback almost all the time, and are quite good at it I might add, and are pretty skilled archers. They also have a habit of completely burning villages and killing all the inhabitants mercilessly. They have huge strength in numbers and are clearly feared throughout all of China. There is just one problem though... Shan Yu and the Huns, are not The Huns. Yes, from what we learn in History, the Huns sacked Han China and lived in Central Asia. But keep in mind, That was around the same time as the fall of Rome, and the Huns were clearly in Europe by the Song Dynasty. Heck, they weren't even called the Huns, they were called the Kingdom of Hungary. No the attributes I have described are the clear attributes of another more feared group to the Chinese. That's right Shan Yu and his men are possibly a small raiding party part of none other than, wait for it..... THE MONGOLS.  (Insert Mongoltage Here).

 
  The Mongols created their empire around 1279 AD and upon further analysis I have found that China didn't start using cannons until 1100AD, 179 years before the Mongol invasion. Also people who survived AP world history, or world history in general will remember that the Song Dynasty was split into two empires around 1127 AD, around the same time cannons were used in combat! I believe that Mulan takes place just a year moths before the Song Dynasty is forced to take up shelter behind the Yangtze River. Therefore I can comfortably place Mulan to take place anywhere form 1100 AD- 1127 AD, 300 years before either Tangled or Frozen take place.

  Thank you for enduring through my ramble on Shan Yu and go forth and Bring Honor to us All.

New Title, Sorry for the confusion

As you can plainly see I have created a new blog title, and I want to apologize firsthand for any confusion this may cause. Last week was my first week blogging, and I wasn't really sure how to set up my blog. I thank you all for your patience with me, and I hope that now we can have a great time analyzing the History behind Disney movies.

Again thank you for your patience with me.