The feminist and the beast may send mixed signals
British actor and feminist Emma Watson dons a princess gown for her upcoming role as Belle in Beauty and the Beast, an adaptation of the 1991 animated film set to release in 2017. She also currently holds the position of Women’s Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations (UN) in which she advocates for gender equality through movements like “HeForShe.” Typically playing strong female characters, it is strange that Watson is taking on a role of a woman who enters into an ethically questionable relationship.
The 1991 version of Beauty and the Beast tells the story of Belle, a young woman living in France with her widower father. While travelling out of town, her father is badly injured and seeks help from the owner of a mysterious castle. Its inhabitant, the Beast, is a young prince who has been cursed to keep his form until he can learn to love another and have that love returned. When the Beast traps her father, Belle offers to take his place so her father can be free. At first, Belle avoids the Beast and is terrified by him, but slowly the two begin to bond and eventually fall in love. The Beast’s curse is then broken and Belle is able to marry him and become a princess.
The story has long been considered a poor example of a healthy relationship for young girls, as Belle falls in love with the man who has trapped her in his castle.Critics condemn the story, accusing Belle of developing Stockholm syndrome, which is classified as the development of feelings or trust toward your captor in a hostage situation.
The original French fairy tale from which the film is adapted, La Belle et La Bête, was written by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve and was published in 1740. The original story did not feature the violence that the 1991 Disney film included. In the original, it was because of the father’s foolishness in stealing the Beast’s rose that Belle was taken prisoner. In addition, the Beast never terrified Belle in the original fairy tale, she only ever missed her family whom the Beast allowed her to visit. This begs the question: Should a feminist be playing a role in the more violent version of this story?
In an interview with US Magazine, Watson explained that Disney planned to make adjustments to the character in order to strengthen and modernize her, such as making her an inventor and not dressing her in a corset. These changes add an activeness to Belle’s character that further separates her from other women in the film, but the question remains: Why would she fall in love with the Beast?
A feminist defends women’s rights and promotes gender equality. Many campaigns have fought to end violence against women, which is a prevalent theme in the 1991 version. It is strange to see an active feminist—and role model for young women—participating in a film that depicts such an unhealthy relationship. No comments have been made regarding whether the Beast’s character will be less violent or forceful in the upcoming 2017 movie, or if there are any other edits that might change the nature of Belle’s relationship with the Beast. It will be interesting to see whether the new movie reverts back to the original fairy tale version, making the Beast’s character less cruel.
Photo courtesy of Walt Disney Pictures.