Morton vs Gooding-Williams

Personally, I struggle to decide who made a stronger argument between Morton and Gooding-Williams. In my opinion, both made points that were strong but also had flawed parts to their arguments that make it hard to choose the better argument. According to Morton, Gooding-Williams has two main claims, the first being his depiction of Africa as a history-less continent, and the second being his depiction of the elephant graveyard and its inhabitants as the elephant graveyard. I contend that Morton successfully counters the first point, but fails to fully address the depth of Gooding-Williams' second argument, simply dismissing it as Marxist and arguing that, "every reading of a story is itself a story, complete with mythical dimensions." Of course, Morton extends his argument beyond this, however, it never fully covers its bases, leaving the possibility for Gooding-Williams' to be true.

I find that Gooding-Williams' initial argument that Africa is depicted as historyless is quite problematic, especially given that his argument is that Africa is supposed to be an allegory for Ameria. It doesn't make sense that Williams would argue that Africa is depicted as organic and historyless and then turn to claim that Africa is a depiction for America. Although Morton doesn't use this argument against Gooding-Williams, he still defeats the point in another way by showing how Africa clearly does have a history through the conflict that takes place and by virtue of the circle of life. In particular, he argues, "Indeed, The Lion King's Africa is, I would say, the site of history and ongoing struggle, which is surely why the film ends in exactly the same way it begins ... the recapitulation of the beginning does not simply close the circle: it also suggests that the whole struggle to find a legitimate (and 'good') place in history will be replayed." Although somewhat longwinded, he does manage to get his point across.

Unfortunately, I still find myself swayed with Gooding-Williams' contention that the hyenas, with their voice casting, home, and depiction, represent the inner city and its inhabitants of people of color and of Latinx origin. Morton simply argues that Disney's intention was to create a movie about good vs evil, but his argument leaves many holes through which Williams' could be correct, and thus, it was not an effective counter-argument. Of course, maybe it wasn't Disney's intention to send that message across, however, through careless casting and plot development, it's the message that gets sent across, and as Giroux would argue, when you are an entertainment firm as large as Disney, you have to be more careful with the messages you send. A simple recasting would fix most of the problems.