Morton vs Gooding-Williams Article

              After reading both articles, I thought that Morton’s argument in “Simba’s Revolution: Revisiting History and Class in The Lion King” was stronger and more effective about The Lion King (1994). I could actually see how the “they say” and “I say” component made Morton’s argument more effective because it was in response to Gooding-Williams’ article “Disney in Africa and the Inner City: on Race and Space in the Lion King”. In contrast, the Gooding-Williams article was not in response to another viewpoint, so I found that overall his article was weaker.

              One component that I thought was stronger in Morton’s argument was regarding history. When I first read Gooding-Williams argument for this, I thought it was a little weak and I was not convinced. Especially, when Gooding-Williams says that Africa is “historyless”, I found that to be a stretch. I think when Morton says that while Africa has timeless values “that does not mean that the place itself is without history” (313). I agree with Morton more on this point because to say that a whole contentment has no history is obviously a very large stretch on Gooding-Williams’ part.

              Additionally, another point that I thought was weak in the Gooding-Williams article was when Gooding-Williams argued that Scar was a political revolutionary that wanted to create a utopia, I want not very convinced. There was no evidence that this was Scar’s intention, so I thought it was a wearer point, and I think that Scar simply wanted power and didn’t really care what happened when he got that.

              Also, when Morton points out that Gooding-Williams leaves out some information when making his argument and states that “his focus is skewed towards an incomplete dialectical reading of the story” (313-314) it makes Gooding-Williams argument much weaker. I agree that after reading Morton’s argument that I can see how Gooding-Williams did leave out the sense of struggle from his argument. In my opinion Gooding-Williams’ argument wasn’t that strong to begin with, but after I read Morton’s article it was even weaker.

              Overall, both articles were interesting to read. I think that they both brought up some thought provoking ideas, but Gooding-Williams made a few too many stretches without much evidence. This, in additional to Morton’s article including both the “they say” and “I say” parts made Morton’s “Simba’s Revolution: Revisiting History and Class in The Lion King” article much more stronger, effective, and convincing.