Monday, September 15, 2014
The Lion King- A pseudo-Hamlet
My knowledge of Shakespeare has been, until this class,
incredibly limited. Due to my school’s reading list, I read the staple of all 9th
grade classes, Romeo and Juliet, and
then the next year followed up with The
Taming of The Shrew. And so, as I viewed the blog and saw the increasingly
varied and interesting adaptations of Shakespeare’s works, I decided to instead
take a turn towards the familiar. Prior to a few days before our first meeting,
I had never read Hamlet. And, interestingly enough, I started to see that the
play was far more infectious than I had thought. I gradually began to see
parallels between Hamlet and a story that had been with me since childhood- The Lion King. I saw the popular Disney
film several times between the years of 7 and 12 (with occasional rewatches
whenever it showed up on TV), and things began to click after reading
Shakespeare’s play. There were parallels everywhere, some more apparent than
others- Mufasa to King Hamlet, Simba to Hamlet, and Scar to Claudius. Their base
plots are essentially the same- A king is killed by his brother in order to
usurp the former’s throne, and his son is made aware of the murder and driven
to seek revenge. Two comic relief characters acting to closely advise the son- This
role is filled by Timon and Pumbaa. The dead king appearing to his son, motivating
him to revenge his passing- Simba’s father appearing to him in the clouds, with
a resounding “remember who you are.” A wise beneficiary that assists the son-
This is fulfilled by Rafiki, guiding Simba on his journey back to face Scar. Polonious
and Laretes are present as well, in the form of the Hyenas- devotees to the
usurper. And yet, despite the similarities and obvious influences that Hamlet had on The Lion King, several key differences caused the two tales to
diverge. Perhaps the largest of them is the ending of the two stories. Hamlet is, by all conventional
definitions, a tragedy. Yet The Lion King,
following a similar plotline, is almost inspiring. Also interesting is the
exclusion of the relations between Polonious, Larates, and Ophelia, and the
importance of Claudius marrying Hamlet’s mother. Perhaps the most momentous
exclusion is Hamlet’s insanity, the central issue to Hamlet- are the son’s actions a product of madness, or rational
thought ending badly due to poor planning and unfortunate circumstances? In The Lion King, this decision is made for
the viewer- The son is completely sane, his actions are justified, and he is
able to carry out his destiny and regain his honor. This single decision turns a cautionary tale
of jealousy and greed into an epic of revenge and fulfillment. What makes the
adaptation intriguing is the fact that it aims to be so different from its
Shakespearean roots. Does the story
benefit from the change? It’s hard to say. Both stories end up fairly different
and wildly popular. Perhaps the change came about due to different target
audiences- Disney is a company towards children’s movies, whereas Shakespeare
sought a more intellectual (or at least older) audience. Or perhaps Disney
aimed to create something different out of a timeless classic. In either case,
it is hard to call The Lion King an adaptation- it’s more like a reimagining of
the play. And as the movie and its franchising have proved, it was not
necessarily a bad idea. At least from a marketing standpoint.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment