Disneys Dilemma with Song of the South: Why Sell the Rights If They Are Ashamed?

Introduction

The animated feature Song of the South is a notoriously complex and controversial film in the Disney catalog. For years, the studio has chosen to maintain a degree of secrecy surrounding this movie, often citing family-friendly content as the primary reason. However, the issue goes deeper. To explore the nuances of Disney's decision to keep the film shrouded in mystery and their reluctance to sell the rights, we need to delve into the underlying motivations.

Disney's Image and Controversy

Disney's core mission is to present itself as a family-friendly enterprise. The idea of acknowledging past controversies, particularly those related to their classic films, is often seen as a risk to their carefully crafted public image. As a Disney fan, the artist, and the man himself, I appreciate the art and effort put into the company's works. However, juxtaposing this appreciation with the public portrayal of the company as family-friendly is a delicate balancing act.

For Disney, acknowledging and addressing past controversies like the ones surrounding Song of the South could be detrimental to their overall brand. If they admitted to the film’s problematic elements, it might cast a shadow over their reputation, which they strive to maintain. This is why the company prefers to hide the film rather than confront the issues head-on.

Why Not Sell the Rights?

When you consider the ethical implications of owning a film like Song of the South, the decision to keep it off the market for so long becomes more understandable. If Disney were truly ashamed of the film, selling the rights to another company to handle its release seems counterintuitive. The primary goal would be to prevent the film from being shown, not to enable its distribution. It’s akin to Albert Einstein’s statement that "it’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled."

A similar reasoning applies to other artists and their work. Take Jerry Lewis, for instance, who never sold the rights to his film The Day the Clown Cried. The reasons for this decision are both practical and ethical. If Lewis were truly ashamed of the film, it would make little sense to allow it to be shown, especially for financial gain.

Disney's Hypocrisy or Pragmatism?

The question then arises: Is Disney’s decision to not sell the rights to Song of the South driven by a sense of moral responsibility or simply pragmatic business sense? Is it about preserving their public image, or is there a deeper, more humane reason?

In the case of Song of the South, the film’s narrative is deeply rooted in the works of Joel Chandler Harris, including the character of Uncle Remus, which comes with its own set of cultural and historical implications. Retelling this story in a way that does justice to its origins and respects the subject matter is a task fraught with challenges. Even with careful adaptation, any new interpretation would face scrutiny and criticism.

By refusing to sell the rights, Disney can control how the film is perceived and managed. They can work on creating alternative uses for the film without the pressure of immediate financial gain or the potential backlash from its content. This approach allows them to navigate the complex waters of public sentiment and cultural sensitivity.

Conclusion

The decision to keep Song of the South off the market, rather than selling its rights to another company, is a nuanced issue that involves both business and ethical considerations. Disney’s approach reflects a deep-seated desire to preserve their image and navigate the challenges of cultural sensitivity. While this approach may seem hypocritical to some, it is a calculated and pragmatic strategy in the context of a company that prides itself on being family-friendly and culturally responsible.

Keywords: Song of the South, Disney, moral responsibility