Disney Princess

Disney Princess Ariel support discusssion

Alantlm posted on Jan 04, 2014 at 01:14AM
link

-
--
-

That's also why I figure Ariel doesn't now up for rehearsals. The film shows a track record of Ariel just forgetting and abandoning people as soon as something more interesting (read: human related) comes up, so I think that's the far more likely reason for her absences.
--It would be impossible to negate Ariel’s prioritization and interest in humanity - so that point stands, and always has stood. In fact, every scene of Ariel has her interested in humanity: shipwreck search; asking Scuttle; scolded for going to surface; POYW; ship and meeting Eric; saving Eric and POYW reprise; Ariel in love; destruction of grotto; etc.. So obviously she does prioritize humanity and makes it the majority reason for missing (musical) things, but that doesn’t mean it’s the only reason.
--In Under the Sea, yeah she physically left because of Flounder’s surprise (=humanity) but it wasn’t as if she really there to begin with. Flounder actually has to swim through the party to get to Ariel, who is alone, quite, and isn’t even watching. And this is in contrast to how she was paying attention to Seb at the beginning when it was without all that music and fanfare... for someone who was at least supposed to be practicing to be in a concert and has a lovely voice, I find it odd that she would miss this opportunity to partake in the music... I honestly believe that he would have gotten through to her more if, rather than turning it all into a show, he just kept his song more intimate.
--Anyways, I’ll probably have to concede that point about her not liking public singing/fanfare as subjective opinion based on how you prioritize humanity as the reason for her missing concerts and not joining in Under the Sea.

First, how is that any different from what she's BEEN doing? She blows them off to moon over humans and human stuff every chance she gets, so this should be no different from before.
--There’s a pretty big difference between temporarily not being with them and actually facing the possibility of permanently not being with them.
--And even with that temporary interactions, she still probably saw her family, on average, once a day? From the movie, she seemed to live in the palace with her other sisters and fathers. Even if it was once a week, she’d go from something to nothing.

Secondly ... at what point before or after this moment does she EVER suggests that she actually enjoys spending time with her family or thinks about them when they aren't right in front of her?
--Granted it’s difficult to support because, in the movie, virtually every interaction with Triton ends up badly and there’s like no sibling-relationship... but still, she recognizes that she has sisters and a father. Despite how she doesn’t usually spend time with them or how she doesn’t get along with her dad, she still gave them a thought because they do exist.
--These points are kinda psychological so to support them, I’d probably have to find some book on family relationships and how people react when members die or take extended leave... anyways, my point is that proximity to family means something even if don’t show their appreciation/love for each other all the time.

Thirdly, Ariel says "I'll never be with [them]" as though doing so would cause HER pain (which I believe as strongly as I can touch), but she doesn't seem to consider how her absence might worry or sadden THEM. No "If I become human, my father and sisters will worry sick about me." Her thoughts are for herself and how leaving would (supposedly) hurt HER, not them. (She can decide not to go, but they have no choice in the matter.)
--(which I believe as strongly as I can touch)...What does this mean? Is it an idiom? Sorry, I don’t know how to interpret this.

The questions I want to ask would be amazingly speculative because I don’t know enough about Triton or her Sister’s side... anyways, here they are:
--Part 2 seems to suggest that Ariel doesn’t care for sisters and dad, well, what suggests that her sisters and dad care for Ariel?... There’s virtually no interaction between any of the daughters; if anything, Ariel’s the odd one out... and all the non-trivial interactions with Triton ended with him scolding her to the point of swimming away crying and destruction of grotto. Ariel doesn’t see what the audience sees (that is, Triton’s concern after he has done such things)
--Part 3 seems to suggest that Ariel would assumedly be hurt by leaving her family, well, in relation to part 2, what suggests that her family would be hurt by Ariel leaving. If she has shown to have no relationship with her sisters then it wouldn’t matter if she left or stayed. As for her father, they’ve a history of conflict.

I guess my point is if I reverse this phrase "[whatever] suggests she actually enjoys spending time with her family or thinks about them when they aren't right in front of her" to Ariel's perspective (="[whatever] suggests her family actually enjoys spending time with her or thinks about her ..."), then I feel I'm forced to say the family is superficial... but then if the family, from Ariel's perspective, is shown to be superficial, then why would her she consider if her "father and sisters will worry sick about [her]"

"When she’s having a bath he is safe, until Carlotta picks up the dress." And Ariel doesn't try to stop her or check to see if Sebastian is still with her. Charlotte even tells her she'll get it washed for her, we see no reaction from Ariel. Considering she's happily mooning over Eric next scene and seems to have forgotten Sebastian exists, I doubt she worried any.
--True we see no reaction, mainly because she’s not seen. And although I agree she could have handled it better, I personally don’t blame her too much because been though a lot in a very short amount of time: changing species and living her dream.... as for the worried, that’s answered in the next part.
--As for Ariel-Eric, if anyone’s doing the mooning, it’s probably Eric. It takes two to make eye-contact and I don’t doubt they are mutually interested in each other, but I would reason Eric is more enamoured. Ariel does give him some attention, but she’s really excited by looking around, and fork and pipe... But I think the most telling part is Eric’s positioning when Grimsby is talking about the tour of the kingdom - with his body and face positioning, he literally cannot take his line of sight off her. He doesn’t even listen to Grim.

My point is, Ariel doesn't notice, care, or try. She's so busy enjoying her bubble bath then meeting Eric that she doesn't spare a thought for Sebastian.
--Looking back at things from Ariel’s perspective, would it be unreasonable to think that Ariel first realized Sebastian was in the palace when he appeared on Grimsby’s plate?
--Seb jumps into her sail/dress when she’s being chased by the dog and she doesn’t show any discomfort from having a crab in her sail/dress. And then I don’t know if Seb would have tried to get her attention because she would have been in close proximity to either Eric or Carlotta most likely and if she acted strangely it would look suspicious. Eric was literally helping her walk and for all we know Carlotta undressed her. And then, when the sail was being washed, Seb hid... what are some hints that she really noticed where he was?
--(side note: just looking at the Tour of the Kingdom, even as the audience, I would have to speculate on where Sebastian was too... because of this, I don’t think I can fault Ariel too much - even though I would have liked if she was more considerate of him)
--So, there’s three things: one, did Ariel know where Seb was before appearing on the plate, two, how much would Ariel have known Seb was in trouble, three, how much responsibility would she have over her babysitter.

Every child who has ever been caught doing something wrong says when they want to avoid responsibility. In fact, I do believe Ariel was lying because she DID mean to”+ “WHAT didn't she know?
--Rather than repeating myself, what do you think of the last line spoken to Ariel was: “Poor little princess - it's not you I'm after. I've a much bigger fish to...” and then when Ursula meets Triton she touches his trident.
--To me and I think to Ariel, this would suggest that Ursula was using her in some way to get to Triton. We know that Ursula was known to be evil and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that Ursula’s previous occupancy wasn’t known either (Previous Castle owner or Queen of Atlantica would have been well-known, I think?)... however, I suppose this counter to this idea would be I would be giving Ariel too much credit?
--Also, until most recently, she didn’t know that Eric was going to marry the sea with in disguise. And she’ll never know that Ursula was sabotaging her when she was about to win the bet.
last edited on Jan 04, 2014 at 01:19AM

Disney Princess 6 replies

Click here to write a response...
over a year ago Tygers_Eye said…
“Yeah she physically left because of Flounder’s surprise (=humanity) but it wasn’t as if she really there to begin with. Flounder actually has to swim through the party to get to Ariel, who is alone, quite, and isn’t even watching.” That’s, uh, kind of my point. They’re throwing this huge shindig for her, and she doesn’t grant them the courtesy of paying attention or staying through to the end. I think that’s extremely rude and selfish.

“And this is in contrast to how she was paying attention to Seb at the beginning when it was without all that music and fanfare...” Actually, Ariel never voluntarily pays attention to Sebastian. When he was talking to her (“Will you get your head out of the clouds and into the water where it belongs?” “DOWN HERE is your home!”) she ignored him. When he physically moved right in front of her face, she was forced to acknowledge what he was saying. However, as soon as he started singing (“De seaweed is always greener /In somebody else’s lake”) she goes back to ignoring him. She’s visibly day-dreaming while he’s singing, and pays attention again only when he physically grabs her chin or stands on her fin to make her pay attention. What she’s thinking is more important than what he’s saying = herself over him = selfish.

“There’s a pretty big difference between temporarily not being with them and actually facing the possibility of permanently not being with them.” Which I still think is not any different from what she’s been doing because she’s shown having absolutely no interest in spending time with them or missing them when they’re not around. She blows them off every chance she gets, so what is she going to miss?

“--(which I believe as strongly as I can touch)...What does this mean? Is it an idiom? Sorry, I don’t know how to interpret this.” Sorry, I tend to make up my own idioms. Ariel is a ficitional character and belief is an emotion, none of which I can touch, so I believe Ariel missing her family as strongly as I can touch it = I don’t believe it at all.

Even if she does miss them (that barking laugh you just heard was me), I’ll say that she still only thinks of them in terms of how her absence will hurt her, not them, which means it’s still more about her than them. I’ll also say what I said my Merida/Ariel article: Either Ariel didn't consider how her absence would affect her family, which is selfish, or she did consider and just decided that her desire was more important, which is also selfish. But hey. As long as Ariel gets what Ariel wants, everyone else can twist in the wind for all she cares.

“I personally don’t blame her too much because been though a lot in a very short amount of time: changing species and living her dream....” So it’s okay to consider herself over Sebastian? She’s been through a lot in a short time because she *chose* it, and she asked Sebastian not to tell her father despite knowing how it could get him in trouble, and he agreed to stay and help her. He’s a tiny little crab that can get lost or killed, yet he made the choice to stay and help her despite knowing what dangers he faced on the land and the wrath he risked from her father. The least she can do is have the courtesy to try to help him too.

“Looking back at things from Ariel’s perspective, would it be unreasonable to think that Ariel first realized Sebastian was in the palace when he appeared on Grimsby’s plate?” … No, because Ariel is never shown thinking or caring about Sebastian. She acknowledges he exists when he’s right in front of her, but then she ignores him or blows him off and is never shown acknowledging his existence until the next time he’s right in front of her again. She pleads with him to keep her secret twice (first when he discovers her grotto and then right after she becomes human) but as soon as he agrees and she has no more use for him, she rushes off to do what she feels like doing. Self > him.

“So, there’s three things: one, did Ariel know where Seb was before appearing on the plate, two, how much would Ariel have known Seb was in trouble, three, how much responsibility would she have over her babysitter.” She should know because Sebastian is risking his life to help her, both to humans that might step on him or eat him, and possibly to her father who is his king and so could have him fired, banished, imprisoned, executed, or worse. The least she could do is offer him the courtesy of remembering he’s there, never mind actually feeling concern for his well-being, never mind actually trying to help him stay safe and hidden.

Let me ask you this: If Ariel agreed to help another character pursue their dreams despite knowing that doing so would endanger her life, and they treated her the way she treats Sebastian, would you think they were justified?

“Poor little princess - it's not you I'm after. I've a much bigger fish to...” and then when Ursula meets Triton she touches his trident. …Also, until most recently, she didn’t know that Eric was going to marry the sea with in disguise. And she’ll never know that Ursula was sabotaging her when she was about to win the bet.” She knew Ursula was an evil, treacherous sea witch. Everyone knew it. Ursula explained the terms of the contract and did not hide how EAGER she was over the prospect of enslaving Ariel. (“You’ll belong TO ME!” “Flotsam, Jetsam, now I’ve got ‘er, boys! THE BOSS IS ON A ROLL!”) Ursula also admitted how “once or twice, someone couldn’t pay the price” and her entire garden is full to bursting with former customers. Yeah right that many people just happened to not be able to pay, or they really couldn’t because they had impossible odds like those Ursula gave to Ariel, or she prevented them. Either way, Ariel knew Ursula’s character was evil and untrustworthy, the odds of her success slim even without the evil sea witch revealing that *gasp* she’s evil (who’da thought?), and the price of failure. “Didn’t mean to?” “Didn’t know?” Yeah right, she did mean to, she did know the risks, and she did it anyway. She’s not sorry she did it, only sorry she lost / got caught.
last edited over a year ago
over a year ago Alantlm said…
They’re throwing this huge shindig for her, and she doesn’t grant them the courtesy of paying attention or staying through to the end
However, as Ariel doesn’t pay attention to Sebastian, Sebastian doesn’t pay attention to Ariel. Is it really a ‘huge shindig for *her*” or just for himself? As a trained musician, he doesn’t even check up with his audience - rather, he builds up the song and loses sight (literally and figuratively) of why he started in the first place.

He did check back at Triton during Daughters of Triton song (during the Sebastian line), so he obviously cares what Triton thinks or if it’s about himself... but he doesn’t check if he’s getting through to Ariel.

Actually, Ariel never voluntarily pays attention to Sebastian.
I don’t know about "never" as it depends a lot on interpretation of body language... but I think these are attention’ive:
--She seemed to listen during the “down where it’s wetter line” as she swims back into place
--During fish-in-a-bowl scene she looked concerned (not directly Sebastian, but a point he's making)

However, overall, I do agree that she’s rather uninterested in what she’s saying but, having lived under the sea for 16 years, she knows all this. And some of the stuff (about fish live being all fun and games) is not only obviously false but shown to be false (=shark scene)

--

She blows them off every chance she gets, so what is she going to miss?
Even if she’s not always there for them, they are at least still there. It might not mean much in effect since they don’t do much together, but it’s still a comfort to know they are still alive and available... For this point, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree as we evaluate temporary absence and permanent absence in different ways.

Either Ariel didn't consider how her absence would affect her family, which is selfish, or she did consider and just decided that her desire was more important, which is also selfish.
I don’t think I could logically negative this... but I almost want to jokingly say “you say ‘selfish’ as if it’s a bad thing”.
--Kinda getting into a philosophy argument, but is Ariel’s selfishness anything worse than being individualistic or self-directed? Because, if I’m interpreting this correctly, it would seem that anything anyone does which goes against anyone else could be deemed as selfish because that person has deemed their desire higher than someone else’s?

--

--TREATMENT OF SEBASTIAN--just made this all into one big thing
I’m not saying she couldn’t have done more for Sebastian... but I treat that Sebastian thing as how she interacted with Flounder in the beginning. (“All right. I'm going inside. You can just stay here and - watch for sharks.”... and then Flounder tagged along) Not necessarily saying he “chose” to endanger himself, but he willing went along with her knowing the risks involved or what could happen (=lost or killed) He even sang a song referencing how dangerous/risky it is up there. If he wasn’t willing to risk it, then he shouldn’t have willingly gone along.

Let me ask you this: If Ariel agreed to help another character pursue their dreams despite knowing that doing so would endanger her life, and they treated her the way she treats Sebastian, would you think they were justified?
If Ariel chose to do it and knew the risks and rewards, then I would respect her decision. I would suggest to her: if at any time she feels unfairly treated then she would stop helping out... but if she continues along, then although I might disagree, I’d have to accept her decision.

For the actual movie, I don’t agree with how Ariel treats Sebastian nor how Sebastian treats Ariel. A-to-S is too ungrateful and disinterested while S-to-A is too much of a “soft-shell”. I'm kinda unnerved by the her lack of care for him and his excess of care for her.

but as soon as he agrees and she has no more use for him, she rushes off to do what she feels like doing.
Not trying to be facetious, but what would you want her to do? To keep a secret you just don’t tell it... after that, then what?

--

Either way, Ariel knew Ursula’s character was evil and untrustworthy, the odds of her success slim even without the evil sea witch revealing that *gasp* she’s evil (who’da thought?), and the price of failure. “Didn’t mean to?” “Didn’t know?” Yeah right, she did mean to, she did know the risks, and she did it anyway. She’s not sorry she did it, only sorry she lost / got caught.
I don’t know if I’m being clear enough as your reply was lacking the keywords I would have expected: Triton; trident; palace... What about this question, why do you think Ursula would have said this: “Poor little princess - it's not you I'm after. I've a much bigger fish to...” and then interacted with Triton in that way previously described?... How do you think Ariel would have taken that? Do you think she would have learned something she didn’t know before?

--Either way, yes, Ariel was manipulated by a manipulator who had manipulated many other merpeople before. No one could deny this... I guess it just depends on how much fault lies on Ariel or Ursula.
(side question... do you think Ursula is a good villian/manipulator? Because the way I read your description of Poor Unfortunate Souls, it’s almost as if Ursula did everything in her power to not make the deal)
--As for slim odds of success, seemed to me that until the eels sabotaged the boat, Ariel was doing great.
over a year ago Tygers_Eye said…
You know, as I was reading your responses and all of these tired excuses and arguments I've heard hundreds of times from hundreds of fans, I was thinking of how so many girls want to be Ariel, but I’ve rarely heard anyone say they want to be her friend. At least, not one of her under-the-sea friends. Just by virtue of being human, you would be guaranteed her time since she’s interested in humans and so would probably be interested in you (until something better came along), but if you were one of the mermaids under the sea, do you think she would treat you any better than she treats her sisters, Sebastian, Triton, etc?

If Ariel was a real person and she treated you the way she treats those under the sea – constantly misses out on appointments to get together (whether rehearsals, concerts, etc), leaves while you’re in the middle of addressing her, ignores you when you try to warn her of her dangerous or reckless behavior, doesn’t appreciate you trying to help her anyway, etc, would you think her behavior was acceptable? Would you think it’s completely fine that she lets you down, tunes you out, blows you off, “forgets” about you all the time but doesn’t sincerely apologize or feel bad for wasting your time, etc?

--Kinda getting into a philosophy argument, but is Ariel’s selfishness anything worse than being individualistic or self-directed? Because, if I’m interpreting this correctly, it would seem that anything anyone does which goes against anyone else could be deemed as selfish because that person has deemed their desire higher than someone else’s?

Since consideration for other people doesn’t seem to make an impact, I’ll briefly use this “philosophy argument” to the point of view of the self, and then drop it. Being selfish is “fine” when the person it benefits is the self, but when you’re the person on the receiving end of another person’s selfish behavior, it’s not so fun. The story is told from the perspective of the princess that misses the concert, not the people running the concert that had to deal with the fallout of her absence—the entire kingdom that arrived expecting a wonderful show and went home disappointed, the stage hands and performers that had to usher disappointed audience members home, the royal family and court composer that were embarrassed, etc. If Ariel was a stage hand or one of the sisters who had to deal with the fallout of an absence, and the story was from her perspective, would it seem so sympathetic? No, but since the story is from the perspective of the girl that does whatever she wants, whenever she wants, however she wants, without any regard for anyone else's feelings or well-being, that makes it okay?

“I don’t think I could logically negative this... but I almost want to jokingly say “you say ‘selfish’ as if it’s a bad thing”.

If you don’t think there’s anything wrong with being selfish, then you and I have nothing further to discuss.
last edited over a year ago
over a year ago Alantlm said…
if you were one of the mermaids under the sea, do you think she would treat you any better than she treats her sisters, Sebastian, Triton, etc?
Probably not. If anything, I’d probably be like her sisters: a non-existent relationship.

(Btw, just because I try to defend Ariel doesn’t mean I’m her fan. Just saying so you know my stance.)

If Ariel was a real person and she treated you the way she treats those under the sea – constantly misses out on appointments to get together (whether rehearsals, concerts, etc), leaves while you’re in the middle of addressing her, ignores you when you try to warn her of her dangerous or reckless behavior, doesn’t appreciate you trying to help her anyway, etc, would you think her behavior was acceptable?
There’s quite a lot in this section which addresses lots of what her mermaid life is about... in short, frankly, I wouldn’t put up with Ariel. Once she misses a deadline and/or her “other chance”, then I would just cut her out... it’s not very friendly or family’ish, but then again, I know I wouldn’t want to be friends or family to her.

For “leaves while you’re in the middle of addressing her”
--Are you talking about Sebastian or Triton?
----Because Triton does yell at her and does say “not another word” (bascially equivalent of shutting up). Why would she want to stay?
----If I was Sebastian, I’d probably recognize that she doesn’t respect my authority and tell Triton. If Sebastian was to be control of her but cannot do it, then he should at least tell Triton.

For “when you try to warn her of her dangerous or reckless behavior”
--Do you think Triton has a double-standard regarding fish-eaters? He doesn’t care about the shark, just that she may have been seen by a human. If he cared about her safety at least show concern to how she was chased and nearly killed.

For “doesn’t appreciate you trying to help her anyway”
--Frankly, I’d just stop helping. Even as her ‘babysitter’, personally, I don’t see why Sebastian would be obliged to help her.

Would you think it’s completely fine that she lets you down, tunes you out, blows you off, “forgets” about you all the time but doesn’t sincerely apologize or feel bad for wasting your time, etc?
--To me, the key element in that section is “all the time” as that suggests it’s a problematic relationship and places the responsibility on both parties
----If she had a habit of missing rehearsals, why not definitely make sure everything was ready to go well before the concert was to begin (=she was in the shell) rather than during it.
----If she had a habit of directly disobeying me, rather than yelling and making her isolate me even more, I’d want to relate... it would be clear I wasn’t getting through to her when I see her swim off crying.
----If she wasn’t appreciating all the things I was doing for her, then I’d stop doing it.

As for the apologizing, I suspect that’s debateable since you probably don’t believe she was sincere. We know she apologized but I suppose believing if she meant it or not is up to fan interpretation.

If you don’t think there’s anything wrong with being selfish, then you and I have nothing further to discuss.
Hmm... I probably should have made the ‘jokingly’ part a bit more clear... shouldn’t have said it. Sorry.

Being selfish is “fine” when the person it benefits is the self, but when you’re the person on the receiving end of another person’s selfish behavior, it’s not so fun.
So basically, selfishness is fine as long as it isn’t at the expense of another person.

I think the crux of this selfishness argument is if Ariel honestly forgot and inadvertantly chose to miss the concert. That is, because it was a mistake she didn’t mean to cause negative harm to others. And, had she remembered, she wouldn’t have gone looking for human stuff.

However, I suspect you don’t think it’s forgetfulness, just a choice in her favour - i.e. selfishness.

-

Out of curiosity, do you think Sebastian and Triton were selfish for hosting that concert? Sebastian said himself “This concert was to be the pinnacle of my distinguished career. Now thanks to you I am the laughing stock of the entire kingdom!” ... from what we can see, it’s a concert by them for them.

last edited over a year ago
over a year ago Tygers_Eye said…
There’s quite a lot in this section which addresses lots of what her mermaid life is about... in short, frankly, I wouldn’t put up with Ariel. Once she misses a deadline and/or her “other chance”, then I would just cut her out...

For “doesn’t appreciate you trying to help her anyway”
--Frankly, I’d just stop helping. Even as her ‘babysitter’, personally, I don’t see why Sebastian would be obliged to help her.

Because he's King Triton's royal subject and is bound by his orders. Triton orders that he has to keep an eye on Ariel, so he has to obey.

Anyway, with all that said, how is she not selfish to you? She doesn't care about anyone but herself and what she wants, and doesn't care how her actions would affect you or anyone else not on her priority list (which consists of herself, humans, and human stuff), so how can you argue that she's not selfish?

For “when you try to warn her of her dangerous or reckless behavior”
--Do you think Triton has a double-standard regarding fish-eaters? He doesn’t care about the shark, just that she may have been seen by a human. If he cared about her safety at least show concern to how she was chased and nearly killed.

Sharks and humans are two different predators with two different hunting methods. Sharks are tunnel-visioned torpedoes that launch after their prey with jaws open, but can't weave around or set traps. Humans are trappers that use tools to catch fish. Triton probably knows that Ariel can out-swim and out-dodge sharks, but humans have hooks, nets and harpoons that can snare her. As Triton says: "Do you think I want to see my youngest daughter snared on some fish-eater's hook?" He probably knows she can out-swim a shark, but he's afraid she won't be able to out-swim humans.

Even if it is a double-standard, it's still one born of worry and love. It's not like he's okay with her getting killed just as long as it's not by humans, he still wants her to stay safe. He just thinks humans are the more dangerous of the predators. (Considering humans are killing over a hundred million sharks a year, I think he has a point.) Even if he's mistaken in that belief, it's an honest mistake and he still wants to keep her safe from what he believes is the greater danger.

Besides, I'm not JUST talking about Triton. (Why do people always assume I'm *just* talking about him when I mention Ariel disregarding others? He's not the only character she ignores and screws over.) I'm also talking about Sebastian trying to warn her against Ursula. "Ariel, no! She's a demon! She's a monster!" He even follows her and, after Ursula says she'll belong to her, he cries "No, Ariel!" but gets cut off by the eels. Again, Ariel disregards him and makes the deal anyway.

No matter who is warning Ariel of her recklessness, she ignores them. She doesn't care what they think, what they have to say, or how they worry about her. She wants to do something? She'll just go for it. Who cares what anyone else has to say?

--To me, the key element in that section is “all the time” as that suggests it’s a problematic relationship and places the responsibility on both parties

But Ariel still deserves partial responsibility. Just because she doesn't feel like showing up doesn't mean her family or kingdom should kowtow to her whims, be completely fine with her skipping out, and write her out of future events just because she doesn't want to go or can't be bothered to mark her calendar.

One could argue that Ariel needs to learn to not always put herself and what she wants to do first. She is a princess with some responsibilities and obligations, just like her older sisters, and occasionally she needs to learn to be where she's supposed to be just like her older sisters. They can manage to make rehearsals and concerts, why can't she?

But Ariel thinks she should never have to do anything she doesn't want. When she feels like doing something (like searching sunken ships and visiting Scuttle), she should be able to just go and do it without having to worry about anything or anyone else. If she "just forgets" concerts, she should be able to just not show up and not have to deal with being scolded, monitored, or made to show up to future events. She should be able to say "Daddy, I'm sorry, I just forgot" and her daddy should just accept that as an excuse and never say more on the subject.

I'm sorry, but no. She's part of the royal family, so they expect her to show up to royal family events. If she can live in the same royal palace as her family and do her hair at the same royal vanity as her sisters, then she can show up to royal events they host.

I think the crux of this selfishness argument is if Ariel honestly forgot and inadvertantly chose to miss the concert. That is, because it was a mistake she didn’t mean to cause negative harm to others. And, had she remembered, she wouldn’t have gone looking for human stuff.

However, I suspect you don’t think it’s forgetfulness, just a choice in her favour - i.e. selfishness.

The problem is the film establishes that this is NOT a one-time occurrence. This is an on-going problem. Ariel constantly misses commitments and lets people down. She constantly "forgets" which means she constantly doesn't think it's important enough to try to remember. If she constantly leaves people hanging, then she shows they are not a priority for her. She has inconvenienced and disappointed people many times, but it wasn't enough to make her remember or want to try harder to remember. Other people don't matter to Ariel. What Ariel wants matters to Ariel. She's selfish.

"Out of curiosity, do you think Sebastian and Triton were selfish for hosting that concert? Sebastian said himself “This concert was to be the pinnacle of my distinguished career. Now thanks to you I am the laughing stock of the entire kingdom!” ... from what we can see, it’s a concert by them for them"

Yes and no. They still consider the daughters' own greatness when discussing it. Sebastian tells Triton: "Your daughters, they will be spectacular!" And Triton excitedly murmurs "And especially my little Ariel." "Yes, yes, sire. She has the most beautiful voice..." They still recognize that the girls themselves have talent and look forward to seeing them shine. They are excited for themselves but still recognize and look forward to the girls getting recognition for their own talents.
over a year ago Alantlm said…
Because he's King Triton's royal subject and is bound by his orders. Triton orders that he has to keep an eye on Ariel, so he has to obey.

It’s true that Seb does have to obey Triton, however I don’t think that goes as far as doing what Ariel tells him to do (especially if it’s against Triton’s wishes)... On almost every nervous moment of Seb (which is nearly every scene) he has the chance to tell Triton; which is what I believe he should in the first place since he was obviously incapable of controlling or getting through to her. At least Sebastian should be honest in his inability to do what’s required.

Anyway, with all that said, how is she not selfish to you? She doesn't care about anyone but herself and what she wants, and doesn't care how her actions would affect you or anyone else not on her priority list (which consists of herself, humans, and human stuff), so how can you argue that she's not selfish?

Primarily because I believe “selfish” is a term which could be interpreted to mean virtually anything related to the self. For example self-determination, self-interest, self-preservation, etc.. Not saying any of those apply in particular; just saying they could be interpreted into being “selfish”. In short, there are many other princess actions that could be deemed as selfish - but really aren’t.

If this section is in reference to Seb’s assistance to Ariel, then I ask this question: If someone offers to help and that person accepts, then does the former’s selflessness make the latter selfish? Is it always so binary?It would be virtually impossible to suggest that Ariel is selfless in those land scenes, but I don’t know if that makes her, by default, selfish.


But Ariel still deserves partial responsibility.
+
The problem is the film establishes that this is NOT a one-time occurrence. This is an on-going problem. Ariel constantly misses commitments and lets people down. She constantly "forgets" which means she constantly doesn't think it's important enough to try to remember. If she constantly leaves people hanging, then she shows they are not a priority for her. She has inconvenienced and disappointed people many times, but it wasn't enough to make her remember or want to try harder to remember. Other people don't matter to Ariel. What Ariel wants matters to Ariel. She's selfish.

Of course “Ariel still deserves partial responsibility”; just because I’m defending her doesn’t mean I’m saying she’s 100% innocent.

But this statement, in itself, indicates that a continuous problem between adult/caretaker and child is both parties' responsibility - not only one nor only the other. It’s a problematic family relationship in which those involved continue to contribute to the problem: it’s the responsibility for everyone involved.

I’m not about to say Ariel’s responsible (as missing the concert and previous rehearsals is irresponsible) but I think it’s a leap to say “irresponsible = selfish”. When Ariel realized she had missed the concert, and thus been irresponsible, she knew metaphorically what was going to happen: “My father’s going to kill me”.

So it’s not like she was acting in the sense of “I’m going to miss the concert because I have better things to do” or “I’m choosing to ‘forget’ the concert”, rather, she forgot the concert in the sense of “I’m going to explore because I believe I have the time - I don’t remember anything else”

For that particular act of missing the concert, I’d say she simply forgot. It makes her irresponsible and not to be counted on, but I don’t think she feigned forgetfulness out of spite or she prioritized herself over anything because hadn’t remembered anything to prioritize with.

I'm sorry, but no. She's part of the royal family, so they expect her to show up to royal family events. If she can live in the same royal palace as her family and do her hair at the same royal vanity as her sisters, then she can show up to royal events they host.

I agree, but again, as before about partial responsibility, if she has a history of missing things then those in charge should definitely make sure she’s there.

Obviously speculation, but when Ariel remembered Flounder said “The concert was today?” and not something like “We’re late!”, so it’s almost like no one in charge reminded her/that that day of the concert. For something so big you’d think they would get everyone ready before hand (not just realize someone wasn't there during the actual performance), and for someone who misses things you’d if they cared then they’d make sure she didn’t miss this.

They have those mini-seahorses who send messages. Certainly one of them could have told her to be there the day of.

Even if he's mistaken in that belief, it's an honest mistake and he still wants to keep her safe from what he believes is the greater danger.
Yet, in that instance, Ariel was in greater danger under the sea than on the surface. (And this doesn’t even relate to the dangers of Ursula who is actually imprisoning his own people)

By agreeing it’s a double standard, then I think that means the different situations are similar enough that there is a bias against one (or favour towards the other).

However, it is a good point that mermaids might be naturally able to outswim sharks, but there might be other animals? Or more than one shark?... As for “hooks, nets and harpoons that can snare her” True, yet so could underwater weeds and, regarding outswimming things, she might not be able to escape strong underwater currents or other animals.

In short, I don’t believe the sea is some idyllic place for merpeople. It can have just as many natural dangers as humans do on land.

I'm also talking about Sebastian trying to warn her against Ursula. "Ariel, no! She's a demon! She's a monster!" He even follows her and, after Ursula says she'll belong to her, he cries "No, Ariel!" but gets cut off by the eels. Again, Ariel disregards him and makes the deal anyway.
No matter who is warning Ariel of her recklessness, she ignores them. She doesn't care what they think, what they have to say, or how they worry about her. She wants to do something? She'll just go for it. Who cares what anyone else has to say?

As disregarding Sebastian’s warnings or that such warnings should have changed her mind, Sebastian didn’t tell her anything which she didn’t know already - I don’t see how anything he said could have changed her mind.

For the first one: when the eels came, Ariel herself recognized Ursula as the sea-witch. She said go away but then changed her mind.... When Seb came he said “demon” and “monster” which might just be synonyms for “sea witch”.

For the second one: the only thing she hears is him disagreeing with her. Considering he wasn’t keen on Ariel going to the Ursula in the first place, it’s natural that he would disagree with any deal between them.

Rather than saying important things like “She makes impossible deals with merfolk to capture them” or “She is suspected for the disappearance of many merfolk”, Seb says trivialities.

It doesn’t negate Ariel’s haste, but based off what he said I don’t see how anything is convincing.

-

ps... I probably missed some important stuff so feel free to call me out and I'll address it.
last edited over a year ago
Cookies help us bring you Fanpop. By using Fanpop, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More Got It!