Broader symbolic overview of Moana: Hi Jonathan, Great video, I've been looking forward to your analysis of Moana! I was hoping you would go more into the archetypal structure, but I appreciate the relevance of your message. Here's an overview of the major symbolism I see in Moana. Two worlds All of the magic is contained in Moana’s private story. No villager sees any magic. Moana leaves the island and, from the perspective of her people, she learns to sail and fish. She then returns and revitalizes the island culture with the new knowledge. Hubris The island culture and Maui are both hubristic. They believe that they know all they need to know. (Opening song - We have everything we need) It’s obvious that they are stagnating (symbolized by the death and decay that they can’t understand/accommodate), and that they need to venture out into the unknown to get what they need. From this perspective, the tower on the island is a tower of babel image. They are reaching up to god without the appreciation for, or relationship with the transcendent (shown by the neglect of seafaring and as well as the wise woman & her myths) The problems of the culture are mirrored in the symbolic realm by Maui and Tefiti. Maui believes he is responsible for civilization but neglects the positive aspect of the sacred feminine. As a result he loses his fishhook (he is no longer able to pull what he needs out of the ocean/chaos - feminine). Also as a result, the feminine manifests as only negative (the volcano goddess & black death on the island) Overall Narrative The story is about the culture renewing its relationship with the (positive aspect) of the sacred feminine. By diving into chaos (underworld imagery) Maui is able to retrieve his hook (creative powers from communion with feminine) and confront the negative aspect of mother nature (death & destruction). This facilitates the manifestation of the positive feminine in the symbolic realm, and on the island. Symbolic confusion? I don’t think that it subverts the traditional hero myth too much, other than that the hero (Moana) is shown as a woman. She ends up with all of the positive masculine & feminine qualities. She motivates the transformation in both the earthly and spiritual realms (on the island as well as between Maui & Tefiti) It makes sense that Maui lags behind Moana in his transformation because he represents ancestral culture. I guess the main issue is that there is no positive masculine symbolism except that as embodied by Moana (and perhaps Maui after the transformation, although he’s pretty pathetic throughout) The shell on top of the tower to me represents a placing of the transcendent at the top of the hierarchy. The shell is almost like a mandala. The promise is that her people will flourish better by continuing exploration and developing seafaring abilities/ technology (cultural evolution driven by relationship with the transcendent). I do see what you mean though, underlying many of these symbolic decisions is an agenda of replacing the masculine with the feminine. (or turning the feminine into the masculine? This is definitely a question that we are grappling with as a culture right now)
That's actually quite good. There are a few things I hadn't caught in what you say, especially the first song "We have everything we need" which definitely shows the notion of hubris and does indeed make the island into a tower of Babel. Also the shell on top of the pillar does represent a kind of crown. I had thought about that, in fact ancient halos were often represented by shells. A lot to think about, your comment is a good counterpoint to my analysis.
I like the movie but it seems incomplete, like if its not truly mythological but rather a symbolic representation of the ambientalist ideology (as discussed by Peterson). I see as quite revealing the absence of the great father as a force or deity (the closest thing being the decrepit culture of the island) and the supremacy of Tefiti over the individual (Maui and Moana). On the other side i liked that the movie didnt potray moanas father or maui as evil but it shown that the father was right about leaving being dangerous and maui had done great good things despite being abandoned to die as a child.
"As instead of creating powerful cultural images of the feminine, you put female bodies on masculine ideals and the question beggs to be answered: are we actually dismissing the masculine or are we dismissing the feminine by doing this? Or maybe it's both." wow, that is such an interesting thought
I think mr. Pageau's remark on how this movie wants to fit feminine bodies onto masculine ideals, undermining the masculine and ultimately marginalizing the feminine in a very profound way, coincides with the most fundamental flaws in the spirit of the age; the third-wave feminism that vows to "empower" females on masculine terms.
That's a good point, but I still think it's pretty clearly bashing the masculine and it's a coherent (although pathological and uninformed) stance. Feminists tend to see gender roles as something that's simply a product of some form of cultural oppression/dominance, so the ultimate female symbol to these people is a woman that has none of the (so-called) negative elements of masculinity (she's not boastful, violent/destructive, competitive), has all of the positives of masculinity (independence, force of will, courage), AND has all the positive elements of femininity, but none of the negatives. It's the kind of ideal that can't even come close to being met and it's not sustainable.
I wouldn't use the word "dismiss", because for me it looks like they think that somehow both are needed, but are trying to find each in the wrong place. For me this sounds more like trying to achieve a goal without the right tools (and therefore failing). It really is a confusion like Jonathan said.
What story in popular myth-be it book or movie-encapsulates female bodies on (authentic) feminine ideals? I'm not quite ready to concede leadership and civilizational struggle as an inherently masculine ideal.
The symbolism of the brainless rooster is so conspicuous and so over the top that it becomes hard to notice. Hope to see more of these, I really enjoyed this one.
I dunno, seems like a dumb rooster isn't exactly a new concept. After all, chickens and roosters are all pretty stupid. Makes for a perfect comedic pet.
Well it saves me from investing 90+ minutes into movies that are garbage. Visually it looks pretty good but I'm not feeding my brain with more Disney trash propaganda, no thanks!
I think that both masculinity and femininity are needed in order to have a good and balanced world, to dismiss either of them is more dangerous than anyone can possibly imagine.
The classic version and accessible of this story is actually the original Theogony, the greek epic poem that describes the creation of the universe, and where the two first protagonist are Gaia and Uranus
In Polynesian symbolism the Sea is masculine 'Tangaroa' and the notion of the Mother Island surrounded by Tangaroa comes from Tahitian legend. If we look at Samoa creation myth then the beginning is with Mother Earth and Te Fatu - the Stone - which in the movie puts the Heart-stone as a male symbol and source of creation You are right though the Masculine sky is missing
Maui teaches Moana how to sail by the stars (Atlas). He is the one who brought fire from down below (Prometheus). Moana's first mission is to find a man. Who teaches her to navigate chaos. While she helps him over come his impotence from the shame of his past failures. Together they restore feminine furtilty, and lead mankind into the future by restoring ancient traditions.
Furthermore the stone tower reaching towards heaven is symbolic of the tower of Babel. If she added her stone it would collapse, and the civilization would be destroyed. Instead the female hero (a subconscious sign we need a female hero to get past this catastrophe) takes a journey to the underworld to cap the tower, as above so below, to revive the spirit of her ancestors.
This is interesting thanks for the comment. Also when they battle Te Ka, the fire monster, Maui tries to fight her and doesn't succeed, while Moana is successful by taming her. This seems to be consistent with traditional masculine and feminine themes; Masculine destroys the dragon and the feminine tames the dragon. In this case Te Ka needed to be tamed not destroyed. This can be seen even better in How to Train Your Dragon 3, where the masculine and feminine work together pretty well. Some dragons can be tamed and become useful, other dragons need to be fought and destroyed.
Jess Purviance Ta Ka reminds me of a crazy man hating feminist. Like these women professors we have seen leading the charge against the "patriarchy". There is no traditional masculine war, or fight that will be able to defeat these people. Infact them being "defeated" in the classic sense would not constituted a victory of any kind. We require a female/feminine hero, or hero's to challenge, and tame the rage present within their hearts. Simply by facing the violence with a cool head, and exceptance of self sacrifice. We have to keep in mind, people possessed by ideology are still people. They have just lost sight of who they are.
Nice. Another thing to add, the goddess gives Maui back his hook, with the implicit condoning of his hopefully reformed, otherwise inventive and boyish larks. I thought this showed feminine forgiveness and empathy, and support for free-spirited male behaviour.
questor55 the hook ( technology ) was remade but only handed over to man from god on assumption that masculine free-spirited behavior is now tamed to be submissive to the feminine demands as was evidenecd by Maui halting his joy and becoming austere in thanks to tefiti
The film doesn't make it clear if "all prior chiefs were male" or not. We only know the two most recent were. Clearly the villagers in Moana don't have problems with female chiefs from their behavior, so it seems the tribe's system of succession is simply based on bloodline, rather than patrilineage.
I bet if they made a sequel they'd have it so all the chieftains after her were female, so there would be more shells placed upon the first shell. Though i don't think the (feminine)shells would stack up very well compared to the (masculine)stones. Probably something to said about that symbolically.
@@TheSSunter well actually I think the shell is symbolic of the fact they dont live there anymore, they are out at sea hence the SEA shell. No more shells or stones would be added to that stack
I think your analysis is good overall but goes ary in a lot of places. I agree that we're missing the original male God of Hawaiian mythology, but you can't say Maui is a replacement. Maui is the second generation, he is a Hercules type character-- you have to see him as an Architypical hero who steals value out of chaos. Best example when goes into the underworld, grabs its goddess by the neck, and steals fire to be returned to humanity. I was amazed that Disney elegantly summed up that along with his many other feats, and in a song where Maui sets a hapless teenager straight about all that she has to be grateful for. Furthermore, as someone from Hawaii, I thought the opening sequence did a fairly good job of characterizing Maui-- the image of a Hawk, the description of him as a Warrior, calling him a demi-god of the wind and sea; but telling us that he's a trickster, and ultimately showing him in a grey-act, it adds real depth to the character Maui that is also found in the legendary Maui. The fact that his attempt to steal the heart was in fact one more attempt by the architypical hero to bring back the treasure for humanity even by breaking the rules, that's not out of character but in character. Also Disney did not drop the blame of the world's destruction on Maui-- they dropped it at the feet of humanity's greed. A humanity too foolish, too greedy, and too thankless to appreciate everything given to them. When my daughters watch Moana I underscore this-- that the disaster of the story is a product of ingratitude. The other moral story here is that of the architypical hero himself (and herself!)-- to be courageous, to step into the realm of chaos, to set things straight, and to bring back the treasure. It doesn't bother me in the least that the younger hero could be female, and there is no better mentor among architypical heroes for a new generation than Maui (sorry hercules). But aside from missing a creation father God, things were not that bad. Te Fiti/Te Ka is much aligned with the Goddesses of polynesian mythology, and she represents both the destructive and creative faces of Nature's chaos, which is supposed to be feminine-- and the goddess of lava is supposed to be both feared and revered for the destruction and fertile lands lava brings (both demonstrated in the movie!). The order made by civilization, by tradition, finds its manifestation in Moana's father-- who carries real wisdom. It is a reality that wisdom has value, but sometimes wisdom is not true for the change of the situation. No matter how we build order, chaos, change, novelty, disaster does strike-- and it takes courage to step above the conventional wisdom and try to seek the right path. Moana took the right action, but it didn't mean that she didn't appreciate her father's wisdom-- she struggles with it in the movie, hearing his story and even repeating his mistakes and being taught a painful lesson first hand about the reality of her father's wisdom. And that is another point we need to nail down-- that Moana is no Arial. She doesn't just go say Fuck Off and end up fucking up everyone else for it in an incredibly self-centered, selfish mess. Moana always had a calling by the ocean, but in the story she starts off by enduring that, she starts by setting that aside, and by listening to her father and learning the village's traditions. The second song of the movie outlines the order and wisdom of tradition, shows one youth's struggle with it, but her ultimate maturation into an individual that learns to listen, that learns the tradition, and ultimately learns to accept responsibility. The story of the main character of grown up Moana only really starts after we've seen her mature into a productive, competent, and appreciated member of her society. She struggles with her father's wisdom, but takes courage to dive into chaos only when it becomes clear that the threat of doing more of the same becomes too great. And ultimately, her ULTIMATE guiding spirit, the man who calls her back to adventure, to take on the unknown, is her unnamed male ancestors who reveal to her the real, deeper truth and wisdom of her heritage. Frankly, as long as you don't think architypical heroes HAVE to be male, there is a lot to like about Moana.
Women have been portrayed as evil bad for hundreds of years like the story of Adam and Eve, the Gorgons in mythology and even today in “My wife...” jokes. People seem to love making fun of females and what they do today too like Jojo Siwa, Kim Kardashian and other famous women even though they’ve made a name for themselves and are highly successful...but I am still lost on the qualities you’re talking about, you didn’t name any and it would really help clear that up.
I think you missed the point. In Moana I see the Divine Feminine conquering over the TOXIC Masculine. The pre-Christian era Goddess rising again and going through the 12 stages of the Hero with Thousand faces of Joseph Campbell.
I think the spunky female protagonist is deeply archetypal. There's a reason you see it in so many movies, even old ones. Just think about Hayao Miyazaki's Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind - The female lead takes a more masculine role and acts from a place of deeper wisdom and insight. Here, too, masculinity has tampered too much with mother nature, causing her to go on a rampage. This is what happens when the masculine has not lived in harmony with nature, but has tried to subdue and exploit it - it counterattacks in self-defense. The spunky female lead is the "healthy chaos" shaking up the "stagnated order". Or in Jungian terms: she is the anima that beckons the masculine to go on a journey of renewal.
except that's not how the story plays out, which calls into question the motives of the writers who have a responsibility of telling stories in a way that positively affects the audience. In the end the masculine ends up in a subservient relationship to the feminine instead of creative and collaborative one
@@giantenemyrooster8095 if that's the case why don't we have numerous video essays of the feminine being subservient to the masculine because it's been that way for the majority of history even in film, but you know that's bs, because the same people complaining don't care
Insightful as always Jonathan! Didn't even notice the masculine bashing during my first viewing. Seems very apparent now... New editing looks good! - Thomas
Superb video. It's astonishing to me that it's all so blatant. First frozen which encourages distrust of the romantic male and inverts the traditional narrative and now this. What I find so particularly egregious about frozen is that there are no outward signs of evil for the bad guy unlike all other Disney bad guys and gals. This teaches essential distrust rather than saying be alert for signs of corruption - which is why bad characters are always meant to look bad in kids stories. Interestingly Jordan said he liked Moana, so would be interesting to see if his thoughts differed on this.
I completely agree with your assessment of Frozen. It says men are either bumbling idiots or predators in waiting. I don't see Moana in quite the same light though. It is very balanced from an archetypical standpoint, which is why Peterson likes it. His claim is that a story should always be 2-sided if it is being truthful and not propagandistic. I think Moana displays both postive and negative attributes of both masculinity and femininity, while also capturing the balance between patriarchy (culture) and nature. We see positve and negative elements of both culture and nature, which lines up with the postive and negative elements of both masculinity and femininity.
I'd suggest that Frozen does not encourage suspicion of the romantic male, but rather discernment. Ana has to grow up, see through the farce of "falling in love with love," and become romantically involved with a real man - not the flashy, no-account prince, who really does mean her and her people harm, but Kristoff and his brotherly sidekick Sven - who helps her rescue her sister from the edge of the world, restoring both of them to rightful service to their people, honoring their father's intentions for them. I'd say we don't do enough work with kids that lets them become "wise as serpents, innocent as doves." I'm not talking about creating confusion for its own sake. I'm talking about letting them wrestle with characters that are as complex as we ourselves are. There was a study done on the oversimplification of "stranger danger," and how it doesn't keep kids safe from predators. A preferable technique with better results was piloted with kids, who were taught instead not to go with anyone who gave them a "strange feeling." I think Frozen lets kids do that much better than, say, The Little Mermaid, though both have their merits. Take a look at the original Hans Christian Anderson "Snow Queen" which inspired Frozen. All the characters and plot elements are preserved and merged to fit a movie storytelling format, with one major twist: as with many monster stories, there is an alternate ending. Rather than becoming a monster who must leave civilization permanently or be slain, the Snow Queen is tamed (see versions of the St. George and the Dragon myth, where sometimes he kills, other times tames the dragon). Delivered from her own crippling fear that her powers will only bring destruction to her people, "perfect love drives out fear," and Elsa is restored to the proper service of her people. The original story contains a Snow Queen much more like the White Witch in C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. In it, she lures a young boy away to her castle and bewitches him to think that the real world is awful, enslaving him to her obsessive and over-nurturing whims. It is his childhood friend, Gerda, who goes in search of him, and after completing her own road of trials, and becoming more discerning along the way, rescues him and restores him to community. It's a powerful tale of how the masculine and feminine must instruct one another in how to survive the world, maintain innocence, and become mature.
hmcmorgan but nothing in the prince's behaviour should engender a 'strange feeling' - there are no clues, or if there are they are extremely subtle. Consider all other Disney baddies from Aladdin to Little Mermaid to Snow White to lion king to Pinocchio - the evil of the character is manifest in the way they talk, look and present themselves, even when they are acting nice to con the gullible and naive protagonist. Fairy tales and kids stories are not big on subtlety for an important reason (but that is not to say that they aren't deep. In fact fairytales are incredibly deep and have countless levels of meaning and resonance, much like the stories in genesis - they are by many people's reckoning our oldest cultural inheritance and may be more than 10,000 years old. We shouldn't take them casually and rewriting or changing them to fit contemporary fashions is an act of immense hubris.)
Great moments of opera, I think the prince's subtle behavior is more real life. Charming people can be (though they are not always) dangerous, and caution is appropriate. He's doing things with his voice and body language early on that cue you he's not all he appears. He's playing a part, saying everything she wants to hear. Even if we don't sense this in him, we sense she's moving too fast. I've known plenty of women more devastated by subtle cunning because they wanted to fall in love, than women who were too cautious. Maybe it's a question of age group the movie is optimized for. I still prefer to introduce my daughters to how looks can be deceiving, but also the hope that a diamond in the rough might be better to look out for than a flashy prince. This restores not only the fullness of femininity, but masculinity as well. Are you an opera fan, or performer? I have decided in my midlife that opera is my new favorite experience... I grew up on ballet and live theatre, but opera is KING! Do you have a favorite? My first opera ever was technically Handel's Messiah (I think), but soon after I saw The Magic Flute at the Seattle Opera House. The teaching artist seminar beforehand was a lot like this discussion! It made fall in love with the form as a middle schooler. I still wish I participated in it more all year. It's mostly for special occasions now.
Just gonna mention this often ignored fact, nobody would exist without their fathers either. But children are property of the mother as we all know, so that's irrelevant.
But consider the ineptitude and fear that caused them to forget their heritage of voyaging and freedom, as represented by the years of stacked rocks. She set them free again, with the help of her great teacher Maui who taught her to sail.
For me Moana is a wondeful story of the value of tradition, of a nation, of how love redeems and preceeds cooperation ang growth, and perhaps more importantly, how betrayal hurts. I don't find it replaces the masculine with the feminine at all. Moana herself is kind of a little bit of a tomboy sure, but that is incidental to me, I don't care, such women exist. The movie virtually screams that there is a unifying principle behind everything, a one god if you will, that though the individuals aren't arware of as God, is really in control. The fact that the world (the godess) is corrupted by trying to exploit it's heart and profit of it, is very true, and the way that is redeemed was a real twist that actually made my eyes water up a bit.
If you and Jordan had a discussion on this movie I'm sure you would draw a lot of people to the channel, especially considering his favorable opinion of the film.
Great video, sharp. However I must disagree for the most part. (Mostly because I do not concur with your ideological views) The movie has many other complexities that cannot be commented so shortly. In a way, I think Moana is about a reinvigorating soul that is fighting a society found in a dark age of decay, the inhabitants of the Island find themselves in a Dark Age. They used to be wayfarers and now they are a weak society that can't even produce technology to advance through the reef for fishing. Moana is seen as an enthusiastic young lady that is up to bring new perspectives. Through the beginning of the movie we identify the character with the flower symbol, this is because Moana is the one that carries the necessary fertility to sprout the future. One of the interesting aspects is shown in the beginning, when the creation myth is told and Moana seem to be the only character excited about the story, as much as she seems to be the only "true believer" carrying the traditions passed by her grandmother. The figure of the grandmother is interesting because the matriarchs are the ones that usually passes stories and traditions to younger generations, this is the role of a grandmother. So, Moana is the only true believer daring enough to enterprise in a solution for the decaying society. So she carries this heartstone, that as yourself suggested, looks like a seed, and goes through an adventure to find the male counterpart that will help her to bring forward this society. When she meets Maui, we find this figure of a very immature young man nothing alike the stories, Maui is narcissistic, irresponsible and all he wants is as a manchild. So Moana comes and delivers him this responsibility, in a way, the one who is going through a Hero's Journey is not Moana, it is Maui. Moana always had her heroic inclination, but Maui was rather the journey-denying hero. It is true that he does nothing to help her, but Moana is far from being a female warrior. When they explore the lair of the crab, she is threatened by many monsters, and instead of fighting them, she is saved by luck (a bigger plant eat the plant that was going to eat her, a geyser jets a monster out of her way etc). So she works as a distraction for Maui to try to steal his Hook (and later Maui does the same distracting Te Ka). When she places the heart, I think it wasn't supposed to represent conception, but the changes that Moana herself was going through, it is not the island but Moana that is going through a transformation, she is concluding her puberty, she is now a woman and not just a child. My only criticism is that, in the end, instead of accepting the role to become a leader, Maui decides to use his hook for live his own path (which could also be seen as going forth with his irresponsible manchild lifestyle) and legate this task to Moana as she now is a "master wayfarer". The end, when Moana comes back and places the "suggestive" shell on the top doesn't mean that she is impeding growth, just the opposite, by the size of that pile of rocks we can guess that this tradition is not so ancient, it was a landmark for that period where those cheftains were unable/unwilling to sail out of the island. Therefore, her very feminine shell represents a dawn of a new era and not necessarily the substitution of the masculine. Moana was the only true believer, and now, as a village elder, she will be passing traditions just like her grandmother did. These traditions long lost, these beliefs that were only in the imagination of the "village crazy lady" will be restored as cornerstones of that society.
Hmm... My problem with this analysis is that it ommits certain important symbols. There's a balance of water and sky imagery throughout the film ("see the light where the sky meets the sea?"). The story actually focuses on Moana learning how to sail-- an activity which requires both sky (wind, stars), and sea. Maui needs Moana's boat, Moana needs to learn how to navigate--there's co-operation there, even if it's hard-won. I also object to your characterization of Maui as an agent of "civilization," since he's a trickster, a rogue, and shifts into animal forms. His achievements are explicitly described as "natural phenomena." Part of what Moana implores him to do is to think of other people (arguably she is the civilizing element there). I think there's a discussion of gender to be had here, I appreciate the use of textual evidence, however... I'm not sure if you've considered some more obvious textual evidence which may contradict your argument here...
If you change Moana to a boy does anything in the story change or not work? No I dont think so. I think this is panicking about something that does not exist
Question, why is it assumed that all the chiefs before Moana were all male? Sorry, I assumed it was a mix because in my culture-which is a direct descendant, or at the very least, heavily influenced by polynesian culture-reardless of gender, picks the first born as successors to the position of leadership. Don't take this comment as argumentative or anything, I'm just genuinely curious! Thanks :)
@@Peasham i love this? Hahaha. Yeahh im viewing this in a cultural lens because my culture is something near and dear to me. Women were expected to be like Moana- bold, and outspoken, especially leaders. In marriage, the man would take the woman's last name if she was of a higher status. I assumed Te-Ka was also genderless because most of the gods in my culture were genderless. Gender was such a non-issue back then that even until now, we dont have pronouns in our language, and most of our words are genderless (ex. We have one word for wife & husband; girlfriend & boyfriend).
i think you are forcing it way too much. you want to see something. while i can agree that this is a film with a strong feminine part,but seeing the film i saw even the male counterpart,doing it's job,and both make mistakes and do good stuff.. sorry,can't agree with you
You should remember the story was one of the people returning to exploration. The Polynesians had once explored and mapped the Pacific Ocean but had settled on an island. Because the Ocean is symbolically feminine, the imagery of the feminine supplanting the masculine follows the return to the exploration of the Ocean and the abandonment of protective island culture. A larger question than "How is this film Feminist?" would be "Why is the notion of exploration necessary to Feminism as shown through this movie?"
@@seronymus It understood and lucidly explained what's at the heart of this movie: the deep psychological and spiritual relationship between the supplanting of masculine order for the emergence of necessary & revitalising chaos and the usurping or challenging of traditional patriarchal structures, as implied through the return to exploration (particularly after Moana fights with the island's chief, as the OP rightly pointed out). It's shamefully overlooked because it may have flown over the heads of some people, but it drilled right into the core of the movie's central essence.
@@117Industries well good morning and thank you for the quick reply wow I didn't expect it! I must confess that I certainly can see that angle in light of Disney's modern biased especially, although it was directed by two talented, experienced male boomer animators. I think I'm slightly more sympathetic than pure reactionary like I was in the 2010s. At least I believe there is a certain proletarian Christian interpretation you can take of the film (I need to watch it fully) that is not necessarily subversive. On that note, did you notice how Kamala Harris vs Donald Trump seems symbolic of the dynamic apparent struggle between a Devouring Mother figure in a longhouse vs the unbridled Masculine spirit? There's an almost Manichean-Gnostic theme with how Western liberal society operates (Voegelin wrote about this).
Very watchable, maybe the best so far, thanks! What do you think is the level of consciousness in writing a script like that by the writers? Are they doing all those things on purpose or is that rather subconscious, an effect or result of the current cultural atmosphere, not an individual decision?
A bit of both I'd think. A lot if it, such as the shape of the crack in the cave and the shell, are deliberate. Other things might not be. Most ideas are acted out before they are illustrated, and most ideas are illustrated before they are formulated.
Jakub Dudek it’s the OP looking too hard into things. Seriously. A hole in a cave is a vag. This was cheap and felt like an incel complaining about benign nonsense instead of looking at all of the actual amazing symbolism in this film. Instead of the ocean being a manifestation of chaos or whatever. It’s shells and holes look like vaginas. It just seemed like he was blinded by Moana being a girl.
Part of what makes art art is the ability for me to see something and you to see something quite different. I actually didn’t see the body parts from the shell and the way out of the cave but once he pointed it out, it was uncanny. This is being watched intently by our children whose subconscious minds we are shaping. People are after all mostly run by their subconscious minds. Therefore we should be critical of all symbolism that we serve them since symbols are one of the most powerful conveyors of information to the subconscious.
I read an article that the natives dispised the movie exactly because it lacks the harmony they know that exists between men and women. In fact, many of the feats that Maui do are accomplished with the help of Hina, his companion. And Moana means Ocean, so she is chaos, she cannot order herself or order others. Conclusion, I agree with you, they forced "the message" of the boss-female-do-better-and-save-the-world-from-mean-masculine and spoiled what would be a great mythology to watch.
I don't think Moana is overly feminist, if a dude did what she did, no-one would care really, people only care that she's a "Mary sue" because she's a woman. She's doing what lots of men in movies do.
I'm not sure about all this. I'm not a fan of the 'always-seek-to-be-offended' thinking characteristic of some left-wing thinkers, but I think some of your criticism might suffer from the same blind spot. 1) Moana will be the next chief. I don't remember anywhere in the movie it said that all the chiefs before where male, only that the last 3 were. There's strong evidence that Polynesian Island cultures were Matrilineal. The most charitable interpretation of this is that the last few chiefs were men or the writers made a small mistake in the script and didn't consider the correct lineage. 2) The rooster. I'm not sure this is a slam-dunk either. Disney movies have had dumb animal sidekicks for ages. Dory in Finding Nemo. Pumba in the Lion King. I don't think this is necessarily 'male-bashing', but a way to make cheap jokes. Kids love stupid animals. I think some of your points were good though. I think it would have been more redeeming to have Maui return the heart. My above points are just attempts to find more charitable readings of the film, and not fall prey to confirmation bias. I think it's dangerous to presume these were malicious, when they could just be misunderstood.
It seems to me that a charitable interpretation would focus less on the feminine/masculine motif (though that is obviously present) and more on the nature/technology motif. It isn't "the masculine" as such that removes the heart, it is the hook. It is not that he is a demigod, but that he is only a demigod when endowed with technical power. The destruction that besets the islands is a result of the loss of union with nature. That's why the male figure's hook turns him into an unstable being who can transform himself (or disguise himself) into sub-human creatures. It's not so much critiquing "masculinity" as it is critiquing the mode of masculinity that finds its identity in technical dominance and prowess. The feminine sees behind this guise. It's not that the female figure "tames" the male, it's that she is the only one who can remind the male of who he is. That's why she is a Christ figure in the climactic scene. She willingly "submits" (not feminist friendly imagery) to the violent chaos that the male originates and aggravates. He is trapped in a feedback loop. She breaks him out and returns him to stability and harmony by grounding his identity. And she integrates his technical prowess as he integrates her "heart."
Matthieu Pageau I mostly agree. It is overtly a pagan myth, given that the "divine" masculine creative principle is personified as corrupt and secondary to the "mother," something more like the "demiurge" rather than God. The absence of the masculine divine in the opening creation myth does seem to support the thesis in the video. I suppose my "charitable interpretation" is meant more as a critique attempting to redeem the story and point toward what should have been. My main point is that the movie shows both incompatible instincts simultaneously, one toward the pagan subversion of judeo-Christianity and one toward the judeo-Christian subversion of paganism. It's sort of confused. I do think that the ancient impulse to associate technology with the masculine is not completely false. But I think the masculine creative principle, in Christian mythology, renders "technique" in two different lights: one sees it as a means for self-expression and self-revelation, as in art (which is the divine sense) and the other sees it as a means for self-concealment or predatory disguise, as in "cleverness" (which is associated with luciferian shame, or "the fall"-- the first biblical mention of "technology" occurs when Adam and Eve do violence to nature in order to clothe themselves). Anyway, the movie is a great example of how origin myth determines narrative arc. When the feminine is seen as original and self-complete, the masculine will be seen as superfluous and subordinate.
Matthieu Pageau I also wanted to say that it is possible to view the story through a "traditional" femininity lense, with respect to the "occult influence" idea. Someone mentioned that there is a strong case for a "two worlds" interpretation in which all of the "magic" is really subjective experience. So Moana's "masculine" endeavors may actually be private, inward, or spiritual movements that escape the gaze of her broader society. This would comport with a Jungian worldview, since both male and female have inner sexual opposites. So her venture out into the ocean would actually be a dive into the depths of her psyche (or something), to find and integrate her masculine self and return to the "surface" of ordinary experience.
7 лет назад+1
I would say this is a more succinct analysis...prob mostly because I saw the story this way too..lol. I thought Disney was pretty decent at NOT minimizing the masculine here, as well as not overvaluing the feminine gratuitously. Maui screwed up on his own...and needed to atone for it.
shotinthedark90 thanks for this counterpoint. I was beginning to lose heart (and femininity) reading some of the other responses. I especially appreciate your use of the principle of charity. What could be more logical? Thank you.
@@shotinthedark90 Can you point me to books and mythos/ archetypes that have shaped your understanding of how you see things. I'd like to learn to see the world through eyes like yours for myself. Seems very insightful.
Johnathan P! LETS GO!!!!!!! I felt this movie was so beautiful and close to greatness but couldn’t put it into words. Thanks for the deeper perspective
@Z P it is not their place and they are not good at it. It was a women that revealed how women treat other women when they get some power that finally convinced me. How they treat men may be even worse. Seen them drive away male professionals and ruin a department. What I hear is even worse.
This really feels like you're clutching at straws. When has Disney not made films about female leads? It's like you're seeing the world through a lens and it's got a little too muddy. I'd love to know your thoughts on Studio Ghibli films like, Princess Mononoke. I'm not saying there aren't films, scenes that ooze of corporates trying to pander to feminist ideas. I watched the whole thing and just wasn't convinced.
You should you watch his other videos where he actually mentions one of the Ghibli's movies and he puts the female character in praise of what should be represented. Watch that whole thing and then be convinced.
The Ghibli films don't make the women and girls unrealistically powerful. Disney does. Ghibli films also don't make the men bumbling idiots to help the female leads shine.
They aren't? Someone never watched Porco Rosso. Men are shown as morons, and women were shown as strong and oppressed. Well, they were, but that's besides the point.
There is an interesting thing about the hook tho. It represents the phallus, the lost Phallus to be precise. The masculine character is castrated, incomplete. The woman is his completion, she is the Other he needed so desperately in order to get his Phallus back, and she is also the motivation (since women usually motivate met to do anything productive, because they get to choose and not us). And he gets it back not only from the depth of the ocean/chaos, but from the homosexual crab - and it's not about mere sexual preference, that character represents a trend of hyper individualism and consumerism, all with the bi-lighting and not to mention the song. Of course it all falls apart when the masculine character fails to fix his own mistake, instead he ends up being borderline useless. The point with the hook is that it was probably an accidental archetype story that ended up existing within a story that was never meant to be that, it was supposed to be pure propaganda.
I think the intent is to replace the feminine in the future as a leadership role, someone who brings order out of chaos, the traditional masculine role (though be times this role is best exemplified by the feminine as in the Beauty and the Beast). Though not necessarily without respect or appreciation. After all Moana doesn't destroy the tower, the legacy of the previews chiefs, but crowns it as the ending of a project and then starting her own project away form the decadence that was the island. The problem lies in that all males archetypes are shown as the continuation of a system stagnant and decadent (Moana's father is traditionalist aside from gender roles in leadership, while Maui is arrogant in believing that his order will be perpetuated or something better can only come from him) and renewal can only come from the sacred feminine, Moana and Te Fiti. The problem of the movie is that there is no active masculine role, for the renewal of society. Renewal only happens after Maui losses his hook (symbol of authority and source of power) and Moana's dad steps away from his position as chief.
In some universities today, these videos could land faculty who show them in front of inquisition panels. I challenge a brave teaching assistant or professor to show one of these incredible videos in class. You'd probably "trigger" some students by presenting "problematic" messages.
as much as i like your ideals i got to disagree , what defines feminine from masculine? so woman cant fight physically? or do things the same things as men ?
I always thought that plants on island were dying, because villagers had stayed there too long without traveling forward searching new islands to farm out. Resources and minerals on the ground were used up and land didn't have time to recover from it. The Chief did break the flow how things should go, because he was afraid and that's why things got stagnant. You can watch whole movie from that viewpoint. Stagnant things must somehow to get moving again or whole tribe will just start dying out. To do that there had to be crisis to get Moana leave from island and she also needed mentor in seafaring and therefore needed Maui. After she returned to village she teaches skill of seafaring for other villagers and broken cycle can start over again. Maui needed Moana also to get his confidence back and to get moving from that island where he was isolated. He had done all those amazing things, but still nobody thanked him. Maui wanted at least SOME recognition so he ended up stealing Hearth of Earth Mother for the people, but his motivations there weren't pure so he didn't consider was he doing the right thing and it ended up being mistake and he was being punished for it.. Maui gained his confidence back, because Moana needed his help on the way and he felt himself useful once gain. Also his motives was pure since he didn't actually even want to help Moana, but still did so, because it was RIGHT THING TO DO. He didn't expect recognition or "thank you" etc. So at the end all were freed from their chains. Villagers, Moana, Maui, Enraged Earth Mother..
I disagree with your analysis. Moana places the shell on the top of the *that particular pile of rocks*, demonstrating that one particular way of thinking has died. It needed to die, because it was doing the wrong thing (as seen by the brilliant scene at the end when Maui fights the lava-demon). After the heart is returned, though, Maui gets his hook back. It's time to start building again, based on the new paradigm. Likewise, the people become sailors again, which is the appropriate thing to do, given that half the stuff on the island is dead. The female has to be the one to kill the masculine - the male can't do it himself. The last stone has to be female. You have to return to the mother. It's a story about individuation. I'm afraid to say, I think you're seeing anti-masculine propaganda where it isn't.
For me it's really difficult to bear the fact that this is mainstream culture, and mainstream culture for kids! Great, great analysis, Jonathan. Love your channel. Greetings from Argentina!
How do we know "all the chiefs before her were male". It is implied, her father is chief while she has a living grandmother, the stones vs. the shell at the end, but I don't recall it ever being explicitly stated that ALL the chiefs before her were male.
Hi. I truly love your videos. They are an inspiration and leave me looking for more symbols within my daily life. I dont often leave comments, but after viewing Moana with my daughter (for the 15th-ish time, probably), I find that you were very biased in favor of the role and victimization of the feminine in this video. While I agree with the interpretation of the feminine symbolism and the problems that are brought upon the islands as a result of an egotistical patriarchy, I feel that Maui, in all the good he does for Moana and the people of the ocean, is labled nothing more than a one-dimensional symbol of male toxicity within this video. His tragic backstory of divine abandonment is never explained, or mentioned, and if it is, it is not given as near as much depth as it should to provide a balanced argument. Most of Maui's character flaws can be explained by his need to fulfill his own self worth. He steals the heart to become a champion of the people in hopes that doing so may fill the void of being abandoned and left to survive on his own at such an early age. He plays a crucial role in helping Moana learn to sail, something her father (or mother, or grandmother) never taught her (and she lives on an ocean, for Te Fiti's sake!), and while Maui is the cause of the whole plot of the movie, he also is responsible for fulfilling a crucial role of duality and balance when it comes to restoring the heart. Your video seems to lack this perspective and panders more to the ideas of the helpless and victimized feminine. You defend the violent and toxic actions of Te-Ka by stating they are a result of Maui's theft of the heart, but you provide no insight as to Maui's motives and lack of understanding by being cast into to the sea, left to learn and survive the ocean on his own before even being granted his magical hook from the Gods. Maui suffers so that he would learn to sail, and pass on what information and technology he knows (as he always does) to help Moana and the people of the ocean learn to navigate, by way of his hook in the stars, from island to island. I believe Maui's actions deserve more discussion, and that upon undetstanding his story, one can see that the divine feminine is not a faultless form, for it was she, Maui's mother, who left him a child within a wild and dangerous ocean, forced to survive on his own. I love the discussions your videos facilitate! I love the work you do! Keep posting! Much love! C
Could you talk about melkor/morgoth ? the ultimate villain of tolkien's world. He is associated with all aspects of primodial chaos but 100% masculine.
The only apparent "exeption" is that he hates the sea becouse he cant control it. But the idea of "control" for this guy is ignite large scale destructive wrath. So not exactly a cosmic demiurge. I really want to understand what this archetype actually symbolises
The way I saw the movie was that the world was leaning towards masculinity too much, and both girls and boys alike should draw more from their feminine side to solve problems and to grow. Maoi caused all these problems because he had this need for attention and couldn't quite bring himself to be vulnerable. Moana only toppled an 'image' of Maoi, an image of bravado.
I found Moana really enjoyable, and would not place it at the same level as Ghostbusters and the fem versions of superheroes, which are cheap. Just because there are masculine and feminine archetypes, it doesn.t mean all characters have to be archetypes or we would only need one story ever. The characters show combinations or archetypes in them, and clash with obstacles to show their roles. It might be that the reason old mythology has more unidimensional characters is because, as Jordan would put it, the stories were condensed with the passing of time. I don.t consider myself ideologically posessed, but Moana speaks to me, instead of sounding contrived, cheap and political.
You just gained a new Sub! I am presently reading King Warrior Magician Lover and I plan on reading the rest of the books in the series (although some are hard to find). I do find it disturbing how Hollywood is attempting to tear down strong male characters and replace them with strong female characters all for the name of bringing down the supposed "patriarchy". In by doing so, rewriting architects that are millions of years old, that extend beyond not only the human race but in the natural world too. While this is not to say that we cannot have strong female characters in movies and in literature, because we certainly can and there is certainly a use for it. However, doing this at the expense of the masculine is both incorrect and morally wrong. The mature masculine in all its glory, is not oppressive, is not a tyrant. It is the King in all its fullness who does what is needed for the realm. Now Jonathan, correct me if I'm wrong, but how i read the King archetype is that in literature and in movie, the one who possesses the King Energy, the one who possesses the mature masculine, does not necessarily need to be a literal man or woman in these stories? That an earthy woman can possess the characteristics of the mature masculine or the good King. Have I read this wrong or if I did read this correctly, could Hollywood simply sub in female characters for male characters, while keeping the archetypes in tact? This might require a bit more of a "fleshed out" story, which seems to be hard to do these days. As a follow up question, what literature would you recommend for the feminine archetype?
In Maori folklore/mythology we have father sky (masculine) and mother earth (feminine). Its the very first thing you hear our origin (in the beginning) story. And everything was made between them.
This movie was close to being very good. If only they could've maintained the balance between masculine and feminine, and toned down the man-mocking a little... How is it that people can't see the need for a balance, and need one side to supplant the other? The balance, people!
For what it's worth, certain cultures display a sea vs. land dichotomy at least as much as a sky vs. land dichotomy. Izanagi and Izanami in the Kojiki, for instance, can be viewed as a sea-father earth mother marriage, and likewise the realm of transcendence (Tokoyo) in the earliest layer of Japanese mythology is located in the sea. I think a decent amount of "sea transcendence" can also be seen in Celtic myth. Greek myth obviously has a strong sky-father component, but even there the sea is a masculine force. Just to be clear I did find this video as a whole very eye-opening and insightful, I just had a potential quibble with that specific point.
The eagle also represents Horus, the eye at the top of the hierarchy, the one who sees everything. This is such an we'll put together analysis, I love your videos.
I disagree with the symbolism of black/white, good/evil, and masculine/feminine. The world, and specifically humans, are more complicated than that. In fact patriarchy is not just having the "masculine" be more important than the "feminine", but also maintaining that rigid duality, like stopping boys from playing with dolls and stopping girls from playing with Power Rangers toys. In the Moana movie I don't think the masculine imagery is being replaced by the feminine. The guy did get his fish hook back and having the shell be put on top of the stones is not the same thing as removing the stones.
I agree I don't think it's "removing" masculinity but rather showing how it affects the world badly compared to femininity which seems ok or even better *since it's responsible for all the good in the world*. But maybe we are actually missing the point and not seeing beyond sight
This is probably a larger question about symbolism in general, but how can we know whether we're not reading too much into every little detail? This was interesting and helped articulate my unease while watching the film, but I have to ask whether you think all of these "obvious" symbols were intentionally added. I understand that especially with an animated film, there are artistic decisions made on the most granular level, but still I wonder whether these are conscious symbols added. Or does it not matter?
Even if the symbols are not consciously placed, they give us a look into the unconscious mind of those who placed them. The unconscious plays a powerful role in the creation of symbols in a story. As an artist, I look back on work I made years ago, and I see symbols I placed in my work without even realizing it. And they all align with things that I now realize I was unconsciously grappling with at the time. A lot of the symbols in Moana looked pretty intentional though. Some of the symbols were super low-hanging fruit, like the statue she topples. Didn't need a RUclips video to tell me there was a statement being made there.
I love your videos, Jonathan! This is the best one yet. I don't make a lot of money but I'll be contributing what I can to your patreon because of this. Keep up the good work!
watching your video, i just realize Moana is a metaphor of gender struggle, feminine overtaking masculine. previously i think Moana is about how the younger generation (represented by Moana) must strive to make peace with nature in order to reverse the effects of ecological disaster. Maui (represents human creative force and ingenuity) steals the Heart of Te Fiti for the power of creation. Same thing like what mankind has been doing , and doing it irresponsibly. Moana's father represents the older generation who has been used to do things in their way and think that it's too late to change anything (think Trump and his anti-environment policy). The shiny crab represents materialism that clouded human ingenuity (it hoard treasures and the Enchanted Hook).
Moana is perfectly fine...! Dude, she's on a journey, she fails, doesn't believe in herself, then comes to. She's a fidgety female through and through. Usually the father doesn't have the kids back when they have to go on a journey, then the mom does. At the end love conquers. Love is women's strong suit. They don't really go out of their way to make men look dumb like Star Wars or something. Ehh it's ok.
I agree with your take that this movie wallows around in the modern feminist meme about woman's dominance over men, but I don't think the overall theme actually suffers that much since it tells a tale of masculinity becoming corrupt through hubris and self-centeredness and being reoriented toward the truth though communion with the feminine. That's why I don't see the statue scene as an outright rejection of masculinity altogether, in context I see it as a symbol of using what the masculine created to move forward into the future to escape the prison he sealed himself in (the island) and reunite with him, while simultaneously destroying his masturbatory ego to do so. He's fittingly being tamed by a woman. I'm reminded of a quote from JP that went something like "men tame nature, women tame men." This is a very real part of the human story even if it's an incomplete vision and woefully overrepresented in our culture. I just wish that when Maui finally learned his lesson by the end of the film, he and Moana would've replaced the heart together to cement the reunion and complete his story arc. Helping get her there wasn't enough and is where the narrative falls apart for me because it opens the door to future dominance of the feminine over the masculine which will bring with it new dysfunction.
Hey Jonathan. Great analysis. I have a very basic question. Would you say that the presence of these symbols is intentional, incidental, or mix of both?
But you could also read the ending as saying that we need the femenine to get to new islands and start to build new civilizations. You need more chaos to buily better order.
The problem is: Men don't embody anything positive in his movie ^^ A good story has positive and negative in both men and women, not all positives in women & all negatives in men. I feel the analysis or Jonathan is mostly fair, as there is no man that really did anything of import, living flesh or symbolically, in this movie. Men can rejoice that the main (female) character embodied the positive masculine well, but they have no male character "to root for", so to say. You could say that in the past movies also didn't put to the front females with positive feminine traits (or any positive traits for females), so this is a way of "making things even"... But i'd argue that is not the case.
Yeah, I think Pageau overplaying the negative a bit on this film. What I found refreshing in Moana is that both characters learned with one another and grew together. Maui was clearly a mentor who taught but also learned with the pupil. Also, the father is not a villain. He is portrayed as a fair and cautious ruler whose reasonable caution , nevertheless, is wrong about the remedy for the situation. Moana, on the other hand, though "right" about what needs to be done is brash and impulsive and unaware of how much she doesn't know. That is remedied precisely by the male character. Also, it doesn't portray nature as necessarily good nor evil, it can be both depending on the actions of humanity. At the end, both Maui and Moana understand the need to treat nature with respect. Nature being depicted as female is also not without precedent in myth. If one is predisposed to see only the bad in the film, they will see it, but as far as gender in Disney movies go, I think this is one of the sanest and fairest in their catalogue.
Interesting breakdown of the symbols, on a artistic level I enjoyed Moana but really felt off put by the story. My interpretation after a couple viewings was that besides the political message it was a movie about following your "calling." It is seen from a very young age she is drawn to the sea but dissuaded away from her practical/fearful/protective parents (consider how parents would dissuade an artist as a job occupation). They nearly convince her but she keeps feeling a natural inclination towards what has been labeled as forbidden and becomes torn between what she innately "needs" in life and what is expected of her. The Grandma shows up as the Wizard/Mentor archetype, someone with an understanding and wisdom who wants to guide the hero on the "true" path. Moana leaves to save the people reluctantly, having already faltered on facing her true desire and being cast back to shore and nearly killing her little pig. Throughout the movie the ocean is supposed to be on her side but repeatedly is indifferent to her troubles, it leads her to Maui's island(the place she really needs to get to) but only after tossing her through a raging sea storm. Ultimately though she gains many skills she comes against the final obstacle (Tafiti- A gatekeeper) and fails as she lets her actions be led by her fear instead of virtue. She has made progress but she has not truly reconciled what she needs to cross the final barrier. As she sets off home in defeat she pleas with the ocean (knowing, silent force - god?) that someone else would be better suited and casts the heart into the ocean, symbolically abandoning her "spiritual" calling because of her uncertainty. Even though she has sworn it off, she immediately hesitates without knowing why. Through the song it is inferred that she realizes now that the call was never outside her, but a part of herself. Leaping into the ocean she swims to the bottom (a lone light in the darkness, once again without ocean assistance) to reclaim and "reintegrate" that part of her. Led by virtue and acting on the complete and accepted version of herself she faces the final gatekeeper. Emerging victorious and becoming the light that shines onto others, she fullfills her life purpose and elevates the lives of the people around her. Gender propaganda aside, I really had to dig to see the narrative and the movie felt like it was torn in a couple of different directions. I'm fine with female protags but Moana never really developed a personality and felt generally inconsistent altogether, and Maui's story is rushed to make way for cheap gags. I would feel better if Disney started allowing characters to have flaws again to feel believable. Classic Belle was beautiful, virtuous, brave and kind but also too curious, a bit arrogant and completely stubborn. Sorry for the TLDR, I try not to youtube comment but I felt like the calling interpretation might be something others didn't figure for themselves and could use well to reflect in their own lives. All and all the movie would have benefited from a more clear theme, but I like what I found in it. Cheers!
Hey Jonathan. I’ve been enjoying your work! I noticed how you mentioned the fishing hook as the first instance of human technology, that instantly reminded me of something I found when I got saved. I’ve heard you speak to gematria in other videos. Thought you might find this interesting! 666 400- Tau - Mark 200- Resh - Head 60- Samekh - To uphold 6- Vav - Hook Mark the head to uphold the hook.
Awesome analysis! Definitely going to check out more of your videos and consider supporting you on Patreon. I initially discovered you from your conversation with Jordan Peterson about the metaphysics of Pepe. I'm not sure why I didn't check out your channel earlier but I'm glad I finally did.
You showed a clip of Galadhriel from LotR....you can't really be saying that is an example of this....it's straight from the book written almost 100 years ago. It's not a recent movie only thing.
Well said, but it's rather conspicuous that you didn't mention how Maoi teaches Moana to sail a boat which is how she gets past the lava monster instead of dying. Granted, that doesn't mean your other points are bunk, far from it, I just wish you had mentioned it.
It's got to the point now where it's so bad, that these movies even seem ashamed to admit that any (never mind all) of the characters needed a man for them to exist at all. I'm surprised kids raised on films like these don't think women just impregnate themselves.
I would be interested to hear an explanation of masculinity and femininity in general. Why is chaos characterized as feminine and order as masculine? How does this correlate to day-to-day behavior? How have these characterizations shaped societies? What might be the effects of ignoring or subverting these characterizations?
Well, this post was 4 years ago, no idea if you'll see this, but here are some ideas: We think of chaos as bad (and I'm not sure why entirely). Chaos is the unknown. Its also the world. Its the ocean (dark, deep, and unknown). But its also potential. Remember that potential is itself unknown. Its what COULD be. Its what is out there. Think of a woman getting pregnant - its bringing potential into the world. Bringing something that was unknown into the known. There are many symbols like this, but a woman bearing a child is perhaps the most profound. Some starting thoughts for ya.
Depending on perspective/vantage points, the tool can be either a sickle or hook (for land or for the sea) Isnt it ironic, that it is used to retrieve mother earth's heart?
I believe you're right to point out the manners in which the movie expresses a existent anti-patriarchal, misandric ideology. I would also agree that such a ideology is malicious and we are currently in danger of suffering because of these ideas. But I would also argue that the same symbols of toppling the masculine, of subverting a corrupted order (and order is naturally symbolized by the masculine), are a interesting, benevolent and even archetypal theme. The main theme in the movie, as I see it, is the conflict between the need for staying in the land, the known, dominated, civilized, safe, controlled and masculine space against the need for venturing into the sea, the unknown, uncontrollable, dangerous, uncivilized space and feminine space; conflict that gets resolved by transforming the latter into a better version of the former, by taking partial control of the sea, by learning the techniques to deal with it. This final resolution is a sort of feminilization of the masculine, but it also is a masculinization of the feminine. It is true that the movie doesn't, as far as I've thought about it, put emphasis on this second aspect, but that doesn't mean it avoids it. Moana learns most of what she knows from male figures, her father and Maui. The movie often contrasts their skill and power to that of her, and her journey is one of taking a classically masculine role. Finally, I would agree that the feminilization aspect is much more obvious (even though I didn't, before this video, quite identify several signs you pointed out), but I believe this is a justifiable focus. It would be pathological if this same aspect was exclusive of the opposing one in culture in general, if it overshadowed the importance of the opposite by not leaving it any space to be expressed, which may even be a problem. But it is not pathological to have it dominate a PARTICULAR narrative and work of media art. I, myself, quite like the story Moana tells, how it is a story about the importance of venturing into the chaotic universe, and I find that several elements that have been interpreted by you as symptomatic of a cultural pathology are possibly just mnemonical of such a pathology, but also representative of the cure for the opposite pathology. I would use the example of the Shell. The Shell is indeed very reminiscent of the female genital, and the fact that it interrupts the growth of stones is very subversive. But THE WHOLE POINT of the story was that THAT PARTICULAR ESTABLISHED ORDER was a temporary corruption of the deep nature of that people and a denial of their true place and function: they were voyagers of the sea. And that is symbolically beautiful! Voyaging between land and sea, alternating between these two places, is a wonderful image! I actually believe, and this might be our highest point of contention, that the facts that Moana is female, that her grandmother is also(which opposes her father as the crazy, wild female aspect, an "anthropoform" of the sea, just like he is a "anthropoform" of the land) and that Tefiti is also, are very pertinent even by their more obvious meaning of "women can do it too". Even to the extent that it means "women are also (partially) masculine", that is important and we are living a time in which half of the world population is starting, thanks mostly to technology, to have the possibility of doing things that were particularly hard for them, things that were historically done by men. And Moana does that without demonizing the male figures, without portraying them as JUST stupid and wrong, but also so. That is much, MUCH better then Frozen, which is a whole other story and about which I believe I would almost completely agree with a interpretation that it's theme is maleficent.
I love this movie so much. It feels like the celebration of the return to balance after a long hiatus. As a mirror for the inner state of man (and woman), it's like an illustration of how our masculine aspects of the mind return to a humble and truly helpful state of servitude to our feminine aspects of beauty and spirit. Like a retelling of Venus, Eros, and Psyche. There is always a struggle that the soul must go through in order to regain union of the masculine and feminine, and none of that could happen without the villainess.
Pageau is not interested in reconciling the opposites, like Peterson, they are interested in conserving the good old traditions of the male being the logos hero. Even though the logos is just mere speech without Sophia (Wisdom). They are slaves to their archaic ideologies, which they would have to give up if they actually transcended or reconciled the opposites.
Thomas, I'm not talking about men and women here. I'm talking about the internal forces/qualities in you, male and female, which is what these stories are ultimately about. We are in internal conflict as individuals, and this plays out through external conflict between men and women (everyone, society).
It's been awhile since I watched your analysis Jonathan, but thank you for pinning John Matthew Tennant's comment; it wonderfully explicates some of the intuitive meaning and symbolism I felt in experiencing this film. I greatly appreciate your skill in symbolic analysis, but I do think you tend at times to react to new patterns by assuming that traditional symbols are timeless, even though cultural roles, including those of gender, are always evolving. Maybe at times the leading edge of that evolution is more propagandistic and forced than it is an organic blossoming, but I truly don't think Moana falls into that former category in practice. Moana was the most profound film experience I'd had in years and I'd put it easily in the top 5 greatest Disney movies. I think it also signifies the healthy need for a return to the animism / pantheism / panentheism, ecological symbolism & care, and circular time of the pre-axial, pre 2-worlds mythology continuous cosmos that John Vervaeke has described the need for an integration of.
Jonathan...don’t forget about the scene where she holds up the green object and there’s this light that emanate from her, Almost like she’s this savior. It reminded me of the Statue of Liberty. Like she is the bearer of light versus being a instrument of light.
One of the creepy things about movies is that for many decades they have used women actors who look more like boys and they also do plots that would make more sense if the lead couple were two homosexuals, so I have read, but I don't go to movies anymore.
Broader symbolic overview of Moana:
Hi Jonathan,
Great video, I've been looking forward to your analysis of Moana! I was hoping you would go more into the archetypal structure, but I appreciate the relevance of your message. Here's an overview of the major symbolism I see in Moana.
Two worlds
All of the magic is contained in Moana’s private story. No villager sees any magic.
Moana leaves the island and, from the perspective of her people, she learns to sail and fish. She then returns and revitalizes the island culture with the new knowledge.
Hubris
The island culture and Maui are both hubristic. They believe that they know all they need to know. (Opening song - We have everything we need)
It’s obvious that they are stagnating (symbolized by the death and decay that they can’t understand/accommodate), and that they need to venture out into the unknown to get what they need.
From this perspective, the tower on the island is a tower of babel image. They are reaching up to god without the appreciation for, or relationship with the transcendent (shown by the neglect of seafaring and as well as the wise woman & her myths)
The problems of the culture are mirrored in the symbolic realm by Maui and Tefiti. Maui believes he is responsible for civilization but neglects the positive aspect of the sacred feminine. As a result he loses his fishhook (he is no longer able to pull what he needs out of the ocean/chaos - feminine). Also as a result, the feminine manifests as only negative (the volcano goddess & black death on the island)
Overall Narrative
The story is about the culture renewing its relationship with the (positive aspect) of the sacred feminine. By diving into chaos (underworld imagery) Maui is able to retrieve his hook (creative powers from communion with feminine) and confront the negative aspect of mother nature (death & destruction). This facilitates the manifestation of the positive feminine in the symbolic realm, and on the island.
Symbolic confusion?
I don’t think that it subverts the traditional hero myth too much, other than that the hero (Moana) is shown as a woman.
She ends up with all of the positive masculine & feminine qualities. She motivates the transformation in both the earthly and spiritual realms (on the island as well as between Maui & Tefiti)
It makes sense that Maui lags behind Moana in his transformation because he represents ancestral culture.
I guess the main issue is that there is no positive masculine symbolism except that as embodied by Moana (and perhaps Maui after the transformation, although he’s pretty pathetic throughout)
The shell on top of the tower to me represents a placing of the transcendent at the top of the hierarchy. The shell is almost like a mandala. The promise is that her people will flourish better by continuing exploration and developing seafaring abilities/ technology (cultural evolution driven by relationship with the transcendent). I do see what you mean though, underlying many of these symbolic decisions is an agenda of replacing the masculine with the feminine. (or turning the feminine into the masculine? This is definitely a question that we are grappling with as a culture right now)
That's actually quite good. There are a few things I hadn't caught in what you say, especially the first song "We have everything we need" which definitely shows the notion of hubris and does indeed make the island into a tower of Babel. Also the shell on top of the pillar does represent a kind of crown. I had thought about that, in fact ancient halos were often represented by shells. A lot to think about, your comment is a good counterpoint to my analysis.
Thanks Jonathan! I missed the symbolism of the hook, and your analysis helped me pull it all together.
I like the movie but it seems incomplete, like if its not truly mythological but rather a symbolic representation of the ambientalist ideology (as discussed by Peterson). I see as quite revealing the absence of the great father as a force or deity (the closest thing being the decrepit culture of the island) and the supremacy of Tefiti over the individual (Maui and Moana). On the other side i liked that the movie didnt potray moanas father or maui as evil but it shown that the father was right about leaving being dangerous and maui had done great good things despite being abandoned to die as a child.
John Matthew Tennant, I pinned your comment to give people a wider vision.
Agustin Vitti not sure I've heard him mention ambientalist ideology. What is that?
"As instead of creating powerful cultural images of the feminine, you put female bodies on masculine ideals and the question beggs to be answered: are we actually dismissing the masculine or are we dismissing the feminine by doing this? Or maybe it's both."
wow, that is such an interesting thought
I think mr. Pageau's remark on how this movie wants to fit feminine bodies onto masculine ideals, undermining the masculine and ultimately marginalizing the feminine in a very profound way, coincides with the most fundamental flaws in the spirit of the age;
the third-wave feminism that vows to "empower" females on masculine terms.
That's a good point, but I still think it's pretty clearly bashing the masculine and it's a coherent (although pathological and uninformed) stance.
Feminists tend to see gender roles as something that's simply a product of some form of cultural oppression/dominance, so the ultimate female symbol to these people is a woman that has none of the (so-called) negative elements of masculinity (she's not boastful, violent/destructive, competitive), has all of the positives of masculinity (independence, force of will, courage), AND has all the positive elements of femininity, but none of the negatives.
It's the kind of ideal that can't even come close to being met and it's not sustainable.
I wouldn't use the word "dismiss", because for me it looks like they think that somehow both are needed, but are trying to find each in the wrong place. For me this sounds more like trying to achieve a goal without the right tools (and therefore failing). It really is a confusion like Jonathan said.
Boom! That was a powerful hook right there. I had to watch what followed after that.
What story in popular myth-be it book or movie-encapsulates female bodies on (authentic) feminine ideals? I'm not quite ready to concede leadership and civilizational struggle as an inherently masculine ideal.
The symbolism of the brainless rooster is so conspicuous and so over the top that it becomes hard to notice. Hope to see more of these, I really enjoyed this one.
Bite-sized Philosophy hard to notice? You mean hard to miss?
+Great moments of opera No I meant hard to notice, even though it's paradoxical. It becomes invisible in plain sight - at least to me.
Bite-sized Philosophy haha!
Bite-sized Philosophy wow cool to see you here
I dunno, seems like a dumb rooster isn't exactly a new concept. After all, chickens and roosters are all pretty stupid. Makes for a perfect comedic pet.
Jon, "Hey I just ruined the movie for you, now you will never watch it the same."
Derek, "Thank you?"
Jon, "You're welcome."
What can I saaaay except, you're weelcooome
Well it saves me from investing 90+ minutes into movies that are garbage. Visually it looks pretty good but I'm not feeding my brain with more Disney trash propaganda, no thanks!
Disney ruined that shitty movie for you.
You have no business watching it if you're over 13 anyway.
@@0live0wire0 unless you're a parent with small children...
I think that both masculinity and femininity are needed in order to have a good and balanced world, to dismiss either of them is more dangerous than anyone can possibly imagine.
The classic version and accessible of this story is actually the original Theogony, the greek epic poem that describes the creation of the universe, and where the two first protagonist are Gaia and Uranus
@@pocenha yah.
Yin and yang??
In Polynesian symbolism the Sea is masculine 'Tangaroa' and the notion of the Mother Island surrounded by Tangaroa comes from Tahitian legend. If we look at Samoa creation myth then the beginning is with Mother Earth and Te Fatu - the Stone - which in the movie puts the Heart-stone as a male symbol and source of creation
You are right though the Masculine sky is missing
Maui teaches Moana how to sail by the stars (Atlas). He is the one who brought fire from down below (Prometheus).
Moana's first mission is to find a man. Who teaches her to navigate chaos. While she helps him over come his impotence from the shame of his past failures. Together they restore feminine furtilty, and lead mankind into the future by restoring ancient traditions.
Furthermore the stone tower reaching towards heaven is symbolic of the tower of Babel. If she added her stone it would collapse, and the civilization would be destroyed. Instead the female hero (a subconscious sign we need a female hero to get past this catastrophe) takes a journey to the underworld to cap the tower, as above so below, to revive the spirit of her ancestors.
This is interesting thanks for the comment. Also when they battle Te Ka, the fire monster, Maui tries to fight her and doesn't succeed, while Moana is successful by taming her. This seems to be consistent with traditional masculine and feminine themes; Masculine destroys the dragon and the feminine tames the dragon. In this case Te Ka needed to be tamed not destroyed.
This can be seen even better in How to Train Your Dragon 3, where the masculine and feminine work together pretty well. Some dragons can be tamed and become useful, other dragons need to be fought and destroyed.
Jess Purviance Ta Ka reminds me of a crazy man hating feminist. Like these women professors we have seen leading the charge against the "patriarchy".
There is no traditional masculine war, or fight that will be able to defeat these people. Infact them being "defeated" in the classic sense would not constituted a victory of any kind.
We require a female/feminine hero, or hero's to challenge, and tame the rage present within their hearts. Simply by facing the violence with a cool head, and exceptance of self sacrifice.
We have to keep in mind, people possessed by ideology are still people. They have just lost sight of who they are.
Nice. Another thing to add, the goddess gives Maui back his hook, with the implicit condoning of his hopefully reformed, otherwise inventive and boyish larks. I thought this showed feminine forgiveness and empathy, and support for free-spirited male behaviour.
questor55 the hook ( technology ) was remade but only handed over to man from god on assumption that masculine free-spirited behavior is now tamed to be submissive to the feminine demands as was evidenecd by Maui halting his joy and becoming austere in thanks to tefiti
The film doesn't make it clear if "all prior chiefs were male" or not. We only know the two most recent were. Clearly the villagers in Moana don't have problems with female chiefs from their behavior, so it seems the tribe's system of succession is simply based on bloodline, rather than patrilineage.
Nah, the next chieftain lays his stone upon the pillar and the shell is turned to dust.
I bet if they made a sequel they'd have it so all the chieftains after her were female, so there would be more shells placed upon the first shell. Though i don't think the (feminine)shells would stack up very well compared to the (masculine)stones. Probably something to said about that symbolically.
Microscopic Birds The shade xD
@@TheSSunter well actually I think the shell is symbolic of the fact they dont live there anymore, they are out at sea hence the SEA shell. No more shells or stones would be added to that stack
Vicky Fuentes cause they were heading out to look for a new island or home at the end, correct?
What would masculine do, take stone and crush the shell.
when the next king crushes the shell with his stone, and we get a small layer of pink, that symbolise a ham sandwich
Choking the chicken. Top kek
I think your analysis is good overall but goes ary in a lot of places. I agree that we're missing the original male God of Hawaiian mythology, but you can't say Maui is a replacement. Maui is the second generation, he is a Hercules type character-- you have to see him as an Architypical hero who steals value out of chaos. Best example when goes into the underworld, grabs its goddess by the neck, and steals fire to be returned to humanity. I was amazed that Disney elegantly summed up that along with his many other feats, and in a song where Maui sets a hapless teenager straight about all that she has to be grateful for. Furthermore, as someone from Hawaii, I thought the opening sequence did a fairly good job of characterizing Maui-- the image of a Hawk, the description of him as a Warrior, calling him a demi-god of the wind and sea; but telling us that he's a trickster, and ultimately showing him in a grey-act, it adds real depth to the character Maui that is also found in the legendary Maui. The fact that his attempt to steal the heart was in fact one more attempt by the architypical hero to bring back the treasure for humanity even by breaking the rules, that's not out of character but in character. Also Disney did not drop the blame of the world's destruction on Maui-- they dropped it at the feet of humanity's greed. A humanity too foolish, too greedy, and too thankless to appreciate everything given to them. When my daughters watch Moana I underscore this-- that the disaster of the story is a product of ingratitude. The other moral story here is that of the architypical hero himself (and herself!)-- to be courageous, to step into the realm of chaos, to set things straight, and to bring back the treasure. It doesn't bother me in the least that the younger hero could be female, and there is no better mentor among architypical heroes for a new generation than Maui (sorry hercules). But aside from missing a creation father God, things were not that bad. Te Fiti/Te Ka is much aligned with the Goddesses of polynesian mythology, and she represents both the destructive and creative faces of Nature's chaos, which is supposed to be feminine-- and the goddess of lava is supposed to be both feared and revered for the destruction and fertile lands lava brings (both demonstrated in the movie!). The order made by civilization, by tradition, finds its manifestation in Moana's father-- who carries real wisdom. It is a reality that wisdom has value, but sometimes wisdom is not true for the change of the situation. No matter how we build order, chaos, change, novelty, disaster does strike-- and it takes courage to step above the conventional wisdom and try to seek the right path. Moana took the right action, but it didn't mean that she didn't appreciate her father's wisdom-- she struggles with it in the movie, hearing his story and even repeating his mistakes and being taught a painful lesson first hand about the reality of her father's wisdom. And that is another point we need to nail down-- that Moana is no Arial. She doesn't just go say Fuck Off and end up fucking up everyone else for it in an incredibly self-centered, selfish mess. Moana always had a calling by the ocean, but in the story she starts off by enduring that, she starts by setting that aside, and by listening to her father and learning the village's traditions. The second song of the movie outlines the order and wisdom of tradition, shows one youth's struggle with it, but her ultimate maturation into an individual that learns to listen, that learns the tradition, and ultimately learns to accept responsibility. The story of the main character of grown up Moana only really starts after we've seen her mature into a productive, competent, and appreciated member of her society. She struggles with her father's wisdom, but takes courage to dive into chaos only when it becomes clear that the threat of doing more of the same becomes too great. And ultimately, her ULTIMATE guiding spirit, the man who calls her back to adventure, to take on the unknown, is her unnamed male ancestors who reveal to her the real, deeper truth and wisdom of her heritage. Frankly, as long as you don't think architypical heroes HAVE to be male, there is a lot to like about Moana.
*places another stone and crushes the shell underneath it*
LOL
Odd you never mentioned Moana's pig, only her rooster.
As a naturally feminine woman, I feel like my qualities have been vilified for my whole life.
For what reasons? By who? Lol.
Wtf did I just read?
Women have been portrayed as evil bad for hundreds of years like the story of Adam and Eve, the Gorgons in mythology and even today in “My wife...” jokes. People seem to love making fun of females and what they do today too like Jojo Siwa, Kim Kardashian and other famous women even though they’ve made a name for themselves and are highly successful...but I am still lost on the qualities you’re talking about, you didn’t name any and it would really help clear that up.
What does naturally feminine mean?
To be fair, it is later revealed that Maui had no idea what taking what the heart would unleash and that he was acting out of unselfish intentions.
I think you missed the point. In Moana I see the Divine Feminine conquering over the TOXIC Masculine. The pre-Christian era Goddess rising again and going through the 12 stages of the Hero with Thousand faces of Joseph Campbell.
I think the spunky female protagonist is deeply archetypal. There's a reason you see it in so many movies, even old ones. Just think about Hayao Miyazaki's Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind - The female lead takes a more masculine role and acts from a place of deeper wisdom and insight. Here, too, masculinity has tampered too much with mother nature, causing her to go on a rampage. This is what happens when the masculine has not lived in harmony with nature, but has tried to subdue and exploit it - it counterattacks in self-defense. The spunky female lead is the "healthy chaos" shaking up the "stagnated order". Or in Jungian terms: she is the anima that beckons the masculine to go on a journey of renewal.
except that's not how the story plays out, which calls into question the motives of the writers who have a responsibility of telling stories in a way that positively affects the audience. In the end the masculine ends up in a subservient relationship to the feminine instead of creative and collaborative one
@@giantenemyrooster8095 if that's the case why don't we have numerous video essays of the feminine being subservient to the masculine because it's been that way for the majority of history even in film, but you know that's bs, because the same people complaining don't care
Insightful as always Jonathan! Didn't even notice the masculine bashing during my first viewing. Seems very apparent now... New editing looks good! - Thomas
Superb video. It's astonishing to me that it's all so blatant. First frozen which encourages distrust of the romantic male and inverts the traditional narrative and now this. What I find so particularly egregious about frozen is that there are no outward signs of evil for the bad guy unlike all other Disney bad guys and gals. This teaches essential distrust rather than saying be alert for signs of corruption - which is why bad characters are always meant to look bad in kids stories.
Interestingly Jordan said he liked Moana, so would be interesting to see if his thoughts differed on this.
I completely agree with your assessment of Frozen. It says men are either bumbling idiots or predators in waiting.
I don't see Moana in quite the same light though. It is very balanced from an archetypical standpoint, which is why Peterson likes it. His claim is that a story should always be 2-sided if it is being truthful and not propagandistic. I think Moana displays both postive and negative attributes of both masculinity and femininity, while also capturing the balance between patriarchy (culture) and nature. We see positve and negative elements of both culture and nature, which lines up with the postive and negative elements of both masculinity and femininity.
Was trying to put these same thoughts into words. Thanks.
I'd suggest that Frozen does not encourage suspicion of the romantic male, but rather discernment. Ana has to grow up, see through the farce of "falling in love with love," and become romantically involved with a real man - not the flashy, no-account prince, who really does mean her and her people harm, but Kristoff and his brotherly sidekick Sven - who helps her rescue her sister from the edge of the world, restoring both of them to rightful service to their people, honoring their father's intentions for them. I'd say we don't do enough work with kids that lets them become "wise as serpents, innocent as doves." I'm not talking about creating confusion for its own sake. I'm talking about letting them wrestle with characters that are as complex as we ourselves are. There was a study done on the oversimplification of "stranger danger," and how it doesn't keep kids safe from predators. A preferable technique with better results was piloted with kids, who were taught instead not to go with anyone who gave them a "strange feeling." I think Frozen lets kids do that much better than, say, The Little Mermaid, though both have their merits. Take a look at the original Hans Christian Anderson "Snow Queen" which inspired Frozen. All the characters and plot elements are preserved and merged to fit a movie storytelling format, with one major twist: as with many monster stories, there is an alternate ending. Rather than becoming a monster who must leave civilization permanently or be slain, the Snow Queen is tamed (see versions of the St. George and the Dragon myth, where sometimes he kills, other times tames the dragon). Delivered from her own crippling fear that her powers will only bring destruction to her people, "perfect love drives out fear," and Elsa is restored to the proper service of her people. The original story contains a Snow Queen much more like the White Witch in C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. In it, she lures a young boy away to her castle and bewitches him to think that the real world is awful, enslaving him to her obsessive and over-nurturing whims. It is his childhood friend, Gerda, who goes in search of him, and after completing her own road of trials, and becoming more discerning along the way, rescues him and restores him to community. It's a powerful tale of how the masculine and feminine must instruct one another in how to survive the world, maintain innocence, and become mature.
hmcmorgan but nothing in the prince's behaviour should engender a 'strange feeling' - there are no clues, or if there are they are extremely subtle. Consider all other Disney baddies from Aladdin to Little Mermaid to Snow White to lion king to Pinocchio - the evil of the character is manifest in the way they talk, look and present themselves, even when they are acting nice to con the gullible and naive protagonist. Fairy tales and kids stories are not big on subtlety for an important reason (but that is not to say that they aren't deep. In fact fairytales are incredibly deep and have countless levels of meaning and resonance, much like the stories in genesis - they are by many people's reckoning our oldest cultural inheritance and may be more than 10,000 years old. We shouldn't take them casually and rewriting or changing them to fit contemporary fashions is an act of immense hubris.)
Great moments of opera, I think the prince's subtle behavior is more real life. Charming people can be (though they are not always) dangerous, and caution is appropriate. He's doing things with his voice and body language early on that cue you he's not all he appears. He's playing a part, saying everything she wants to hear. Even if we don't sense this in him, we sense she's moving too fast. I've known plenty of women more devastated by subtle cunning because they wanted to fall in love, than women who were too cautious. Maybe it's a question of age group the movie is optimized for. I still prefer to introduce my daughters to how looks can be deceiving, but also the hope that a diamond in the rough might be better to look out for than a flashy prince. This restores not only the fullness of femininity, but masculinity as well. Are you an opera fan, or performer? I have decided in my midlife that opera is my new favorite experience... I grew up on ballet and live theatre, but opera is KING! Do you have a favorite? My first opera ever was technically Handel's Messiah (I think), but soon after I saw The Magic Flute at the Seattle Opera House. The teaching artist seminar beforehand was a lot like this discussion! It made fall in love with the form as a middle schooler. I still wish I participated in it more all year. It's mostly for special occasions now.
The arrogance of Moana to place the shell above the generations of stone laid by her forefathers...
@La Emaje And that's relevant how?
Let's not honour our fallen soldiers of WW1 for example, but their mothers instead, because they gave birth to them.
Just gonna mention this often ignored fact, nobody would exist without their fathers either. But children are property of the mother as we all know, so that's irrelevant.
But consider the ineptitude and fear that caused them to forget their heritage of voyaging and freedom, as represented by the years of stacked rocks. She set them free again, with the help of her great teacher Maui who taught her to sail.
''and hate the mother of Hitler not her boy" - sarcasm
For me Moana is a wondeful story of the value of tradition, of a nation, of how love redeems and preceeds cooperation ang growth, and perhaps more importantly, how betrayal hurts. I don't find it replaces the masculine with the feminine at all. Moana herself is kind of a little bit of a tomboy sure, but that is incidental to me, I don't care, such women exist. The movie virtually screams that there is a unifying principle behind everything, a one god if you will, that though the individuals aren't arware of as God, is really in control. The fact that the world (the godess) is corrupted by trying to exploit it's heart and profit of it, is very true, and the way that is redeemed was a real twist that actually made my eyes water up a bit.
You and Jordan Peterson are opening my eyes to so much new territory! Thank you very much!
@Juicelad What a bunch of nonsense.
If you and Jordan had a discussion on this movie I'm sure you would draw a lot of people to the channel, especially considering his favorable opinion of the film.
Great video, sharp. However I must disagree for the most part. (Mostly because I do not concur with your ideological views)
The movie has many other complexities that cannot be commented so shortly. In a way, I think Moana is about a reinvigorating soul that is fighting a society found in a dark age of decay, the inhabitants of the Island find themselves in a Dark Age. They used to be wayfarers and now they are a weak society that can't even produce technology to advance through the reef for fishing. Moana is seen as an enthusiastic young lady that is up to bring new perspectives. Through the beginning of the movie we identify the character with the flower symbol, this is because Moana is the one that carries the necessary fertility to sprout the future.
One of the interesting aspects is shown in the beginning, when the creation myth is told and Moana seem to be the only character excited about the story, as much as she seems to be the only "true believer" carrying the traditions passed by her grandmother.
The figure of the grandmother is interesting because the matriarchs are the ones that usually passes stories and traditions to younger generations, this is the role of a grandmother.
So, Moana is the only true believer daring enough to enterprise in a solution for the decaying society. So she carries this heartstone, that as yourself suggested, looks like a seed, and goes through an adventure to find the male counterpart that will help her to bring forward this society.
When she meets Maui, we find this figure of a very immature young man nothing alike the stories, Maui is narcissistic, irresponsible and all he wants is as a manchild. So Moana comes and delivers him this responsibility, in a way, the one who is going through a Hero's Journey is not Moana, it is Maui. Moana always had her heroic inclination, but Maui was rather the journey-denying hero.
It is true that he does nothing to help her, but Moana is far from being a female warrior. When they explore the lair of the crab, she is threatened by many monsters, and instead of fighting them, she is saved by luck (a bigger plant eat the plant that was going to eat her, a geyser jets a monster out of her way etc). So she works as a distraction for Maui to try to steal his Hook (and later Maui does the same distracting Te Ka).
When she places the heart, I think it wasn't supposed to represent conception, but the changes that Moana herself was going through, it is not the island but Moana that is going through a transformation, she is concluding her puberty, she is now a woman and not just a child.
My only criticism is that, in the end, instead of accepting the role to become a leader, Maui decides to use his hook for live his own path (which could also be seen as going forth with his irresponsible manchild lifestyle) and legate this task to Moana as she now is a "master wayfarer".
The end, when Moana comes back and places the "suggestive" shell on the top doesn't mean that she is impeding growth, just the opposite, by the size of that pile of rocks we can guess that this tradition is not so ancient, it was a landmark for that period where those cheftains were unable/unwilling to sail out of the island. Therefore, her very feminine shell represents a dawn of a new era and not necessarily the substitution of the masculine.
Moana was the only true believer, and now, as a village elder, she will be passing traditions just like her grandmother did. These traditions long lost, these beliefs that were only in the imagination of the "village crazy lady" will be restored as cornerstones of that society.
Hmm... My problem with this analysis is that it ommits certain important symbols. There's a balance of water and sky imagery throughout the film ("see the light where the sky meets the sea?"). The story actually focuses on Moana learning how to sail-- an activity which requires both sky (wind, stars), and sea. Maui needs Moana's boat, Moana needs to learn how to navigate--there's co-operation there, even if it's hard-won.
I also object to your characterization of Maui as an agent of "civilization," since he's a trickster, a rogue, and shifts into animal forms. His achievements are explicitly described as "natural phenomena." Part of what Moana implores him to do is to think of other people (arguably she is the civilizing element there).
I think there's a discussion of gender to be had here, I appreciate the use of textual evidence, however... I'm not sure if you've considered some more obvious textual evidence which may contradict your argument here...
If you change Moana to a boy does anything in the story change or not work? No I dont think so. I think this is panicking about something that does not exist
Question, why is it assumed that all the chiefs before Moana were all male? Sorry, I assumed it was a mix because in my culture-which is a direct descendant, or at the very least, heavily influenced by polynesian culture-reardless of gender, picks the first born as successors to the position of leadership.
Don't take this comment as argumentative or anything, I'm just genuinely curious! Thanks :)
It's almost like he can't fathom a female protagonist, and has to assume gender to satisfy his bias. Hmmmm.
@@Peasham i love this? Hahaha. Yeahh im viewing this in a cultural lens because my culture is something near and dear to me. Women were expected to be like Moana- bold, and outspoken, especially leaders. In marriage, the man would take the woman's last name if she was of a higher status. I assumed Te-Ka was also genderless because most of the gods in my culture were genderless. Gender was such a non-issue back then that even until now, we dont have pronouns in our language, and most of our words are genderless (ex. We have one word for wife & husband; girlfriend & boyfriend).
The shell. Dominating the Pillar of
Stones ( phallus) at end. Great vid
👍🤔
i think you are forcing it way too much. you want to see something. while i can agree that this is a film with a strong feminine part,but seeing the film i saw even the male counterpart,doing it's job,and both make mistakes and do good stuff.. sorry,can't agree with you
Same
uccidi got to agree. Frozen has more of the elements he’s talking about here. Moana is one of the best Disney movies. A great hero’s journey.
I totally agree with you 🙏🏻
But no dude, it's leftist propaganda cuz I don't like it, and women can't be protagonists-I mean what
Bro really called a pillar of stones "masculine"
I saw Maui and Moana as a very effective male/female team. They have very different roles and power levels, yet neither could have succeeded alone.
And Maui did practically nothing and needed Moana's help for everything. Didn't you watch the video?
You should remember the story was one of the people returning to exploration. The Polynesians had once explored and mapped the Pacific Ocean but had settled on an island. Because the Ocean is symbolically feminine, the imagery of the feminine supplanting the masculine follows the return to the exploration of the Ocean and the abandonment of protective island culture.
A larger question than "How is this film Feminist?" would be "Why is the notion of exploration necessary to Feminism as shown through this movie?"
Shamefully overlooked comment this is.
@@117Industriesplease explain what you mean I know i am few years late
@@seronymus It understood and lucidly explained what's at the heart of this movie: the deep psychological and spiritual relationship between the supplanting of masculine order for the emergence of necessary & revitalising chaos and the usurping or challenging of traditional patriarchal structures, as implied through the return to exploration (particularly after Moana fights with the island's chief, as the OP rightly pointed out).
It's shamefully overlooked because it may have flown over the heads of some people, but it drilled right into the core of the movie's central essence.
@@117Industries well good morning and thank you for the quick reply wow I didn't expect it! I must confess that I certainly can see that angle in light of Disney's modern biased especially, although it was directed by two talented, experienced male boomer animators. I think I'm slightly more sympathetic than pure reactionary like I was in the 2010s. At least I believe there is a certain proletarian Christian interpretation you can take of the film (I need to watch it fully) that is not necessarily subversive. On that note, did you notice how Kamala Harris vs Donald Trump seems symbolic of the dynamic apparent struggle between a Devouring Mother figure in a longhouse vs the unbridled Masculine spirit? There's an almost Manichean-Gnostic theme with how Western liberal society operates (Voegelin wrote about this).
Very watchable, maybe the best so far, thanks!
What do you think is the level of consciousness in writing a script like that by the writers? Are they doing all those things on purpose or is that rather subconscious, an effect or result of the current cultural atmosphere, not an individual decision?
A bit of both I'd think. A lot if it, such as the shape of the crack in the cave and the shell, are deliberate. Other things might not be. Most ideas are acted out before they are illustrated, and most ideas are illustrated before they are formulated.
Yeah, I guess you're right.
Jakub Dudek it’s the OP looking too hard into things. Seriously. A hole in a cave is a vag. This was cheap and felt like an incel complaining about benign nonsense instead of looking at all of the actual amazing symbolism in this film.
Instead of the ocean being a manifestation of chaos or whatever. It’s shells and holes look like vaginas. It just seemed like he was blinded by Moana being a girl.
Part of what makes art art is the ability for me to see something and you to see something quite different. I actually didn’t see the body parts from the shell and the way out of the cave but once he pointed it out, it was uncanny. This is being watched intently by our children whose subconscious minds we are shaping. People are after all mostly run by their subconscious minds. Therefore we should be critical of all symbolism that we serve them since symbols are one of the most powerful conveyors of information to the subconscious.
@@misanthropicservitorofmars2116 what amazing symbolism?
I wonder what this guy thinks of Miyazaki movies.
I read an article that the natives dispised the movie exactly because it lacks the harmony they know that exists between men and women. In fact, many of the feats that Maui do are accomplished with the help of Hina, his companion. And Moana means Ocean, so she is chaos, she cannot order herself or order others.
Conclusion, I agree with you, they forced "the message" of the boss-female-do-better-and-save-the-world-from-mean-masculine and spoiled what would be a great mythology to watch.
I don't think Moana is overly feminist, if a dude did what she did, no-one would care really, people only care that she's a "Mary sue" because she's a woman. She's doing what lots of men in movies do.
I'm not sure about all this. I'm not a fan of the 'always-seek-to-be-offended' thinking characteristic of some left-wing thinkers, but I think some of your criticism might suffer from the same blind spot.
1) Moana will be the next chief. I don't remember anywhere in the movie it said that all the chiefs before where male, only that the last 3 were. There's strong evidence that Polynesian Island cultures were Matrilineal. The most charitable interpretation of this is that the last few chiefs were men or the writers made a small mistake in the script and didn't consider the correct lineage.
2) The rooster. I'm not sure this is a slam-dunk either. Disney movies have had dumb animal sidekicks for ages. Dory in Finding Nemo. Pumba in the Lion King. I don't think this is necessarily 'male-bashing', but a way to make cheap jokes. Kids love stupid animals.
I think some of your points were good though. I think it would have been more redeeming to have Maui return the heart. My above points are just attempts to find more charitable readings of the film, and not fall prey to confirmation bias. I think it's dangerous to presume these were malicious, when they could just be misunderstood.
It seems to me that a charitable interpretation would focus less on the feminine/masculine motif (though that is obviously present) and more on the nature/technology motif. It isn't "the masculine" as such that removes the heart, it is the hook. It is not that he is a demigod, but that he is only a demigod when endowed with technical power. The destruction that besets the islands is a result of the loss of union with nature. That's why the male figure's hook turns him into an unstable being who can transform himself (or disguise himself) into sub-human creatures. It's not so much critiquing "masculinity" as it is critiquing the mode of masculinity that finds its identity in technical dominance and prowess. The feminine sees behind this guise. It's not that the female figure "tames" the male, it's that she is the only one who can remind the male of who he is. That's why she is a Christ figure in the climactic scene. She willingly "submits" (not feminist friendly imagery) to the violent chaos that the male originates and aggravates. He is trapped in a feedback loop. She breaks him out and returns him to stability and harmony by grounding his identity. And she integrates his technical prowess as he integrates her "heart."
Matthieu Pageau I mostly agree. It is overtly a pagan myth, given that the "divine" masculine creative principle is personified as corrupt and secondary to the "mother," something more like the "demiurge" rather than God. The absence of the masculine divine in the opening creation myth does seem to support the thesis in the video. I suppose my "charitable interpretation" is meant more as a critique attempting to redeem the story and point toward what should have been. My main point is that the movie shows both incompatible instincts simultaneously, one toward the pagan subversion of judeo-Christianity and one toward the judeo-Christian subversion of paganism. It's sort of confused.
I do think that the ancient impulse to associate technology with the masculine is not completely false. But I think the masculine creative principle, in Christian mythology, renders "technique" in two different lights: one sees it as a means for self-expression and self-revelation, as in art (which is the divine sense) and the other sees it as a means for self-concealment or predatory disguise, as in "cleverness" (which is associated with luciferian shame, or "the fall"-- the first biblical mention of "technology" occurs when Adam and Eve do violence to nature in order to clothe themselves).
Anyway, the movie is a great example of how origin myth determines narrative arc. When the feminine is seen as original and self-complete, the masculine will be seen as superfluous and subordinate.
Matthieu Pageau I also wanted to say that it is possible to view the story through a "traditional" femininity lense, with respect to the "occult influence" idea. Someone mentioned that there is a strong case for a "two worlds" interpretation in which all of the "magic" is really subjective experience. So Moana's "masculine" endeavors may actually be private, inward, or spiritual movements that escape the gaze of her broader society. This would comport with a Jungian worldview, since both male and female have inner sexual opposites. So her venture out into the ocean would actually be a dive into the depths of her psyche (or something), to find and integrate her masculine self and return to the "surface" of ordinary experience.
I would say this is a more succinct analysis...prob mostly because I saw the story this way too..lol. I thought Disney was pretty decent at NOT minimizing the masculine here, as well as not overvaluing the feminine gratuitously. Maui screwed up on his own...and needed to atone for it.
shotinthedark90 thanks for this counterpoint. I was beginning to lose heart (and femininity) reading some of the other responses. I especially appreciate your use of the principle of charity. What could be more logical? Thank you.
@@shotinthedark90 Can you point me to books and mythos/ archetypes that have shaped your understanding of how you see things. I'd like to learn to see the world through eyes like yours for myself. Seems very insightful.
Johnathan P! LETS GO!!!!!!! I felt this movie was so beautiful and close to greatness but couldn’t put it into words. Thanks for the deeper perspective
I disagree, despite the feminity and stuff, Maui still praised for his deeds, and he grows up to be loved again after fixing what he did wrong.
Still subordinated and accepts it. The pillar of chieftains still has a vagina on top.
@Z P it is not their place and they are not good at it. It was a women that revealed how women treat other women when they get some power that finally convinced me.
How they treat men may be even worse. Seen them drive away male professionals and ruin a department. What I hear is even worse.
@Z P the truth is the truth, reality is reality.
This really feels like you're clutching at straws. When has Disney not made films about female leads? It's like you're seeing the world through a lens and it's got a little too muddy. I'd love to know your thoughts on Studio Ghibli films like, Princess Mononoke. I'm not saying there aren't films, scenes that ooze of corporates trying to pander to feminist ideas. I watched the whole thing and just wasn't convinced.
stop watching anime and grow up
You should you watch his other videos where he actually mentions one of the Ghibli's movies and he puts the female character in praise of what should be represented. Watch that whole thing and then be convinced.
@@StephWorth1808 don't compare studio ghibli to other anime. It teaches valuable life lessons and has very relatable, human characters.
The Ghibli films don't make the women and girls unrealistically powerful. Disney does. Ghibli films also don't make the men bumbling idiots to help the female leads shine.
They aren't? Someone never watched Porco Rosso.
Men are shown as morons, and women were shown as strong and oppressed. Well, they were, but that's besides the point.
There is an interesting thing about the hook tho. It represents the phallus, the lost Phallus to be precise. The masculine character is castrated, incomplete. The woman is his completion, she is the Other he needed so desperately in order to get his Phallus back, and she is also the motivation (since women usually motivate met to do anything productive, because they get to choose and not us). And he gets it back not only from the depth of the ocean/chaos, but from the homosexual crab - and it's not about mere sexual preference, that character represents a trend of hyper individualism and consumerism, all with the bi-lighting and not to mention the song. Of course it all falls apart when the masculine character fails to fix his own mistake, instead he ends up being borderline useless.
The point with the hook is that it was probably an accidental archetype story that ended up existing within a story that was never meant to be that, it was supposed to be pure propaganda.
I think the intent is to replace the feminine in the future as a leadership role, someone who brings order out of chaos, the traditional masculine role (though be times this role is best exemplified by the feminine as in the Beauty and the Beast).
Though not necessarily without respect or appreciation. After all Moana doesn't destroy the tower, the legacy of the previews chiefs, but crowns it as the ending of a project and then starting her own project away form the decadence that was the island.
The problem lies in that all males archetypes are shown as the continuation of a system stagnant and decadent (Moana's father is traditionalist aside from gender roles in leadership, while Maui is arrogant in believing that his order will be perpetuated or something better can only come from him) and renewal can only come from the sacred feminine, Moana and Te Fiti.
The problem of the movie is that there is no active masculine role, for the renewal of society. Renewal only happens after Maui losses his hook (symbol of authority and source of power) and Moana's dad steps away from his position as chief.
In some universities today, these videos could land faculty who show them in front of inquisition panels. I challenge a brave teaching assistant or professor to show one of these incredible videos in class. You'd probably "trigger" some students by presenting "problematic" messages.
as much as i like your ideals i got to disagree , what defines feminine from masculine? so woman cant fight physically? or do things the same things as men ?
It's this little thing we like to call sexism.
I always thought that plants on island were dying, because villagers had stayed there too long without traveling forward searching new islands to farm out. Resources and minerals on the ground were used up and land didn't have time to recover from it.
The Chief did break the flow how things should go, because he was afraid and that's why things got stagnant.
You can watch whole movie from that viewpoint. Stagnant things must somehow to get moving again or whole tribe will just start dying out. To do that there had to be crisis to get Moana leave from island and she also needed mentor in seafaring and therefore needed Maui. After she returned to village she teaches skill of seafaring for other villagers and broken cycle can start over again.
Maui needed Moana also to get his confidence back and to get moving from that island where he was isolated. He had done all those amazing things, but still nobody thanked him. Maui wanted at least SOME recognition so he ended up stealing Hearth of Earth Mother for the people, but his motivations there weren't pure so he didn't consider was he doing the right thing and it ended up being mistake and he was being punished for it..
Maui gained his confidence back, because Moana needed his help on the way and he felt himself useful once gain. Also his motives was pure since he didn't actually even want to help Moana, but still did so, because it was RIGHT THING TO DO. He didn't expect recognition or "thank you" etc.
So at the end all were freed from their chains. Villagers, Moana, Maui, Enraged Earth Mother..
I disagree with your analysis.
Moana places the shell on the top of the *that particular pile of rocks*, demonstrating that one particular way of thinking has died. It needed to die, because it was doing the wrong thing (as seen by the brilliant scene at the end when Maui fights the lava-demon).
After the heart is returned, though, Maui gets his hook back. It's time to start building again, based on the new paradigm. Likewise, the people become sailors again, which is the appropriate thing to do, given that half the stuff on the island is dead. The female has to be the one to kill the masculine - the male can't do it himself. The last stone has to be female. You have to return to the mother.
It's a story about individuation.
I'm afraid to say, I think you're seeing anti-masculine propaganda where it isn't.
For me it's really difficult to bear the fact that this is mainstream culture, and mainstream culture for kids! Great, great analysis, Jonathan. Love your channel. Greetings from Argentina!
How do we know "all the chiefs before her were male". It is implied, her father is chief while she has a living grandmother, the stones vs. the shell at the end, but I don't recall it ever being explicitly stated that ALL the chiefs before her were male.
Hi. I truly love your videos. They are an inspiration and leave me looking for more symbols within my daily life. I dont often leave comments, but after viewing Moana with my daughter (for the 15th-ish time, probably), I find that you were very biased in favor of the role and victimization of the feminine in this video. While I agree with the interpretation of the feminine symbolism and the problems that are brought upon the islands as a result of an egotistical patriarchy, I feel that Maui, in all the good he does for Moana and the people of the ocean, is labled nothing more than a one-dimensional symbol of male toxicity within this video. His tragic backstory of divine abandonment is never explained, or mentioned, and if it is, it is not given as near as much depth as it should to provide a balanced argument. Most of Maui's character flaws can be explained by his need to fulfill his own self worth. He steals the heart to become a champion of the people in hopes that doing so may fill the void of being abandoned and left to survive on his own at such an early age. He plays a crucial role in helping Moana learn to sail, something her father (or mother, or grandmother) never taught her (and she lives on an ocean, for Te Fiti's sake!), and while Maui is the cause of the whole plot of the movie, he also is responsible for fulfilling a crucial role of duality and balance when it comes to restoring the heart. Your video seems to lack this perspective and panders more to the ideas of the helpless and victimized feminine. You defend the violent and toxic actions of Te-Ka by stating they are a result of Maui's theft of the heart, but you provide no insight as to Maui's motives and lack of understanding by being cast into to the sea, left to learn and survive the ocean on his own before even being granted his magical hook from the Gods. Maui suffers so that he would learn to sail, and pass on what information and technology he knows (as he always does) to help Moana and the people of the ocean learn to navigate, by way of his hook in the stars, from island to island. I believe Maui's actions deserve more discussion, and that upon undetstanding his story, one can see that the divine feminine is not a faultless form, for it was she, Maui's mother, who left him a child within a wild and dangerous ocean, forced to survive on his own. I love the discussions your videos facilitate! I love the work you do! Keep posting! Much love! C
Could you talk about melkor/morgoth ? the ultimate villain of tolkien's world. He is associated with all aspects of primodial chaos but 100% masculine.
The only apparent "exeption" is that he hates the sea becouse he cant control it. But the idea of "control" for this guy is ignite large scale destructive wrath. So not exactly a cosmic demiurge. I really want to understand what this archetype actually symbolises
The way I saw the movie was that the world was leaning towards masculinity too much, and both girls and boys alike should draw more from their feminine side to solve problems and to grow. Maoi caused all these problems because he had this need for attention and couldn't quite bring himself to be vulnerable. Moana only toppled an 'image' of Maoi, an image of bravado.
In the Enuma Elish, Tiamat goes from a (relatively) benign being to a threatening monster who causes pure Chaos in response to the death of Apsu.
These are getting great!
love to see you developing informative and pleasing content!
cheers from Argentina!!
I found Moana really enjoyable, and would not place it at the same level as Ghostbusters and the fem versions of superheroes, which are cheap. Just because there are masculine and feminine archetypes, it doesn.t mean all characters have to be archetypes or we would only need one story ever. The characters show combinations or archetypes in them, and clash with obstacles to show their roles. It might be that the reason old mythology has more unidimensional characters is because, as Jordan would put it, the stories were condensed with the passing of time. I don.t consider myself ideologically posessed, but Moana speaks to me, instead of sounding contrived, cheap and political.
You just gained a new Sub! I am presently reading King Warrior Magician Lover and I plan on reading the rest of the books in the series (although some are hard to find). I do find it disturbing how Hollywood is attempting to tear down strong male characters and replace them with strong female characters all for the name of bringing down the supposed "patriarchy". In by doing so, rewriting architects that are millions of years old, that extend beyond not only the human race but in the natural world too. While this is not to say that we cannot have strong female characters in movies and in literature, because we certainly can and there is certainly a use for it. However, doing this at the expense of the masculine is both incorrect and morally wrong. The mature masculine in all its glory, is not oppressive, is not a tyrant. It is the King in all its fullness who does what is needed for the realm. Now Jonathan, correct me if I'm wrong, but how i read the King archetype is that in literature and in movie, the one who possesses the King Energy, the one who possesses the mature masculine, does not necessarily need to be a literal man or woman in these stories? That an earthy woman can possess the characteristics of the mature masculine or the good King. Have I read this wrong or if I did read this correctly, could Hollywood simply sub in female characters for male characters, while keeping the archetypes in tact? This might require a bit more of a "fleshed out" story, which seems to be hard to do these days. As a follow up question, what literature would you recommend for the feminine archetype?
Moana is one of my favorite movies. I cry every time she returns the heart to tafiki and gives life back to gaia
Interesting that your avatar, cover photo and username are all feminine. Maybe that’s why you liked Moana so much.
Halfway through watching the film "Moana" I, a woman, remember thinking how I preferred the Hero's Journey in "Kubo and the Two Strings" or "Coco" .
In Maori folklore/mythology we have father sky (masculine) and mother earth (feminine). Its the very first thing you hear our origin (in the beginning) story. And everything was made between them.
This movie was close to being very good. If only they could've maintained the balance between masculine and feminine, and toned down the man-mocking a little... How is it that people can't see the need for a balance, and need one side to supplant the other? The balance, people!
For what it's worth, certain cultures display a sea vs. land dichotomy at least as much as a sky vs. land dichotomy. Izanagi and Izanami in the Kojiki, for instance, can be viewed as a sea-father earth mother marriage, and likewise the realm of transcendence (Tokoyo) in the earliest layer of Japanese mythology is located in the sea. I think a decent amount of "sea transcendence" can also be seen in Celtic myth. Greek myth obviously has a strong sky-father component, but even there the sea is a masculine force.
Just to be clear I did find this video as a whole very eye-opening and insightful, I just had a potential quibble with that specific point.
It seems like Moana could’ve been so much better had they honored both the masculine and feminine.
The eagle also represents Horus, the eye at the top of the hierarchy, the one who sees everything.
This is such an we'll put together analysis, I love your videos.
I disagree with the symbolism of black/white, good/evil, and masculine/feminine. The world, and specifically humans, are more complicated than that. In fact patriarchy is not just having the "masculine" be more important than the "feminine", but also maintaining that rigid duality, like stopping boys from playing with dolls and stopping girls from playing with Power Rangers toys.
In the Moana movie I don't think the masculine imagery is being replaced by the feminine. The guy did get his fish hook back and having the shell be put on top of the stones is not the same thing as removing the stones.
stop being an atheist
I agree I don't think it's "removing" masculinity but rather showing how it affects the world badly compared to femininity which seems ok or even better *since it's responsible for all the good in the world*. But maybe we are actually missing the point and not seeing beyond sight
I like how this guy wrote 9 paragraphs crying that Stacy didn't go with him to the prom.
This is probably a larger question about symbolism in general, but how can we know whether we're not reading too much into every little detail? This was interesting and helped articulate my unease while watching the film, but I have to ask whether you think all of these "obvious" symbols were intentionally added. I understand that especially with an animated film, there are artistic decisions made on the most granular level, but still I wonder whether these are conscious symbols added. Or does it not matter?
Even if the symbols are not consciously placed, they give us a look into the unconscious mind of those who placed them. The unconscious plays a powerful role in the creation of symbols in a story. As an artist, I look back on work I made years ago, and I see symbols I placed in my work without even realizing it. And they all align with things that I now realize I was unconsciously grappling with at the time. A lot of the symbols in Moana looked pretty intentional though. Some of the symbols were super low-hanging fruit, like the statue she topples. Didn't need a RUclips video to tell me there was a statement being made there.
I love your videos, Jonathan! This is the best one yet. I don't make a lot of money but I'll be contributing what I can to your patreon because of this. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the support.
Moana is about flat Earth
watching your video, i just realize Moana is a metaphor of gender struggle, feminine overtaking masculine.
previously i think Moana is about how the younger generation (represented by Moana) must strive to make peace with nature in order to reverse the effects of ecological disaster. Maui (represents human creative force and ingenuity) steals the Heart of Te Fiti for the power of creation. Same thing like what mankind has been doing , and doing it irresponsibly.
Moana's father represents the older generation who has been used to do things in their way and think that it's too late to change anything (think Trump and his anti-environment policy). The shiny crab represents materialism that clouded human ingenuity (it hoard treasures and the Enchanted Hook).
I’m really curious about your thoughts of the movement from Pisces to Aquarius.
Moana is perfectly fine...! Dude, she's on a journey, she fails, doesn't believe in herself, then comes to. She's a fidgety female through and through. Usually the father doesn't have the kids back when they have to go on a journey, then the mom does. At the end love conquers. Love is women's strong suit. They don't really go out of their way to make men look dumb like Star Wars or something. Ehh it's ok.
Wow this was super cool, it captivated the interest of everyone in the room I was in.
Yeah, What a great job!
I agree with your take that this movie wallows around in the modern feminist meme about woman's dominance over men, but I don't think the overall theme actually suffers that much since it tells a tale of masculinity becoming corrupt through hubris and self-centeredness and being reoriented toward the truth though communion with the feminine. That's why I don't see the statue scene as an outright rejection of masculinity altogether, in context I see it as a symbol of using what the masculine created to move forward into the future to escape the prison he sealed himself in (the island) and reunite with him, while simultaneously destroying his masturbatory ego to do so. He's fittingly being tamed by a woman. I'm reminded of a quote from JP that went something like "men tame nature, women tame men." This is a very real part of the human story even if it's an incomplete vision and woefully overrepresented in our culture.
I just wish that when Maui finally learned his lesson by the end of the film, he and Moana would've replaced the heart together to cement the reunion and complete his story arc. Helping get her there wasn't enough and is where the narrative falls apart for me because it opens the door to future dominance of the feminine over the masculine which will bring with it new dysfunction.
Great stuff I love these analysis' and the editing was good too
Amazing explanation! Thanks Jonathan! It is a really needed content.
Hey Jonathan. Great analysis. I have a very basic question. Would you say that the presence of these symbols is intentional, incidental, or mix of both?
Also disobedience to her father. A big NO NO.
But you could also read the ending as saying that we need the femenine to get to new islands and start to build new civilizations. You need more chaos to buily better order.
I really feel like this is finding an issue where there is none, and reading subversion into something that's otherwise innocent.
The problem is: Men don't embody anything positive in his movie ^^
A good story has positive and negative in both men and women, not all positives in women & all negatives in men.
I feel the analysis or Jonathan is mostly fair, as there is no man that really did anything of import, living flesh or symbolically, in this movie.
Men can rejoice that the main (female) character embodied the positive masculine well, but they have no male character "to root for", so to say.
You could say that in the past movies also didn't put to the front females with positive feminine traits (or any positive traits for females), so this is a way of "making things even"... But i'd argue that is not the case.
Yeah, I think Pageau overplaying the negative a bit on this film. What I found refreshing in Moana is that both characters learned with one another and grew together. Maui was clearly a mentor who taught but also learned with the pupil. Also, the father is not a villain. He is portrayed as a fair and cautious ruler whose reasonable caution , nevertheless, is wrong about the remedy for the situation. Moana, on the other hand, though "right" about what needs to be done is brash and impulsive and unaware of how much she doesn't know. That is remedied precisely by the male character.
Also, it doesn't portray nature as necessarily good nor evil, it can be both depending on the actions of humanity. At the end, both Maui and Moana understand the need to treat nature with respect. Nature being depicted as female is also not without precedent in myth.
If one is predisposed to see only the bad in the film, they will see it, but as far as gender in Disney movies go, I think this is one of the sanest and fairest in their catalogue.
@@gre8 Some good points you've made
Do you and Jordan Peterson disagree on this film? Since I’ve heard him say that he liked Moana?
you blow my mind every time I watch a new video from you!
Interesting breakdown of the symbols, on a artistic level I enjoyed Moana but really felt off put by the story. My interpretation after a couple viewings was that besides the political message it was a movie about following your "calling."
It is seen from a very young age she is drawn to the sea but dissuaded away from her practical/fearful/protective parents (consider how parents would dissuade an artist as a job occupation). They nearly convince her but she keeps feeling a natural inclination towards what has been labeled as forbidden and becomes torn between what she innately "needs" in life and what is expected of her. The Grandma shows up as the Wizard/Mentor archetype, someone with an understanding and wisdom who wants to guide the hero on the "true" path. Moana leaves to save the people reluctantly, having already faltered on facing her true desire and being cast back to shore and nearly killing her little pig. Throughout the movie the ocean is supposed to be on her side but repeatedly is indifferent to her troubles, it leads her to Maui's island(the place she really needs to get to) but only after tossing her through a raging sea storm. Ultimately though she gains many skills she comes against the final obstacle (Tafiti- A gatekeeper) and fails as she lets her actions be led by her fear instead of virtue. She has made progress but she has not truly reconciled what she needs to cross the final barrier. As she sets off home in defeat she pleas with the ocean (knowing, silent force - god?) that someone else would be better suited and casts the heart into the ocean, symbolically abandoning her "spiritual" calling because of her uncertainty. Even though she has sworn it off, she immediately hesitates without knowing why. Through the song it is inferred that she realizes now that the call was never outside her, but a part of herself. Leaping into the ocean she swims to the bottom (a lone light in the darkness, once again without ocean assistance) to reclaim and "reintegrate" that part of her. Led by virtue and acting on the complete and accepted version of herself she faces the final gatekeeper. Emerging victorious and becoming the light that shines onto others, she fullfills her life purpose and elevates the lives of the people around her.
Gender propaganda aside, I really had to dig to see the narrative and the movie felt like it was torn in a couple of different directions. I'm fine with female protags but Moana never really developed a personality and felt generally inconsistent altogether, and Maui's story is rushed to make way for cheap gags. I would feel better if Disney started allowing characters to have flaws again to feel believable. Classic Belle was beautiful, virtuous, brave and kind but also too curious, a bit arrogant and completely stubborn. Sorry for the TLDR, I try not to youtube comment but I felt like the calling interpretation might be something others didn't figure for themselves and could use well to reflect in their own lives. All and all the movie would have benefited from a more clear theme, but I like what I found in it. Cheers!
Hey Jonathan. I’ve been enjoying your work! I noticed how you mentioned the fishing hook as the first instance of human technology, that instantly reminded me of something I found when I got saved. I’ve heard you speak to gematria in other videos. Thought you might find this interesting!
666
400- Tau - Mark
200- Resh - Head
60- Samekh - To uphold
6- Vav - Hook
Mark the head to uphold the hook.
Awesome analysis! Definitely going to check out more of your videos and consider supporting you on Patreon. I initially discovered you from your conversation with Jordan Peterson about the metaphysics of Pepe. I'm not sure why I didn't check out your channel earlier but I'm glad I finally did.
Happy to have you around. I am also fortunate to have the some of the best commentors on youtube engaging in the conversation.
Very interesting take and your other symbolism-in-movies videos are great too. Thank you
Brilliant analysis - thank you for your work.
You showed a clip of Galadhriel from LotR....you can't really be saying that is an example of this....it's straight from the book written almost 100 years ago. It's not a recent movie only thing.
Well said, but it's rather conspicuous that you didn't mention how Maoi teaches Moana to sail a boat which is how she gets past the lava monster instead of dying. Granted, that doesn't mean your other points are bunk, far from it, I just wish you had mentioned it.
It's got to the point now where it's so bad,
that these movies even seem ashamed to admit
that any (never mind all) of the characters needed a man for them to exist at all.
I'm surprised kids raised on films like these don't think women just impregnate themselves.
Great analysis Jonathan, keep it up!
I would be interested to hear an explanation of masculinity and femininity in general. Why is chaos characterized as feminine and order as masculine? How does this correlate to day-to-day behavior? How have these characterizations shaped societies? What might be the effects of ignoring or subverting these characterizations?
Well, this post was 4 years ago, no idea if you'll see this, but here are some ideas:
We think of chaos as bad (and I'm not sure why entirely). Chaos is the unknown. Its also the world. Its the ocean (dark, deep, and unknown). But its also potential. Remember that potential is itself unknown. Its what COULD be. Its what is out there.
Think of a woman getting pregnant - its bringing potential into the world. Bringing something that was unknown into the known. There are many symbols like this, but a woman bearing a child is perhaps the most profound.
Some starting thoughts for ya.
Depending on perspective/vantage points, the tool can be either a sickle or hook (for land or for the sea) Isnt it ironic, that it is used to retrieve mother earth's heart?
Now because of Moana, nobody can place not a stone nor a shell on the column!
I believe you're right to point out the manners in which the movie expresses a existent anti-patriarchal, misandric ideology. I would also agree that such a ideology is malicious and we are currently in danger of suffering because of these ideas. But I would also argue that the same symbols of toppling the masculine, of subverting a corrupted order (and order is naturally symbolized by the masculine), are a interesting, benevolent and even archetypal theme.
The main theme in the movie, as I see it, is the conflict between the need for staying in the land, the known, dominated, civilized, safe, controlled and masculine space against the need for venturing into the sea, the unknown, uncontrollable, dangerous, uncivilized space and feminine space; conflict that gets resolved by transforming the latter into a better version of the former, by taking partial control of the sea, by learning the techniques to deal with it.
This final resolution is a sort of feminilization of the masculine, but it also is a masculinization of the feminine. It is true that the movie doesn't, as far as I've thought about it, put emphasis on this second aspect, but that doesn't mean it avoids it. Moana learns most of what she knows from male figures, her father and Maui. The movie often contrasts their skill and power to that of her, and her journey is one of taking a classically masculine role.
Finally, I would agree that the feminilization aspect is much more obvious (even though I didn't, before this video, quite identify several signs you pointed out), but I believe this is a justifiable focus. It would be pathological if this same aspect was exclusive of the opposing one in culture in general, if it overshadowed the importance of the opposite by not leaving it any space to be expressed, which may even be a problem. But it is not pathological to have it dominate a PARTICULAR narrative and work of media art.
I, myself, quite like the story Moana tells, how it is a story about the importance of venturing into the chaotic universe, and I find that several elements that have been interpreted by you as symptomatic of a cultural pathology are possibly just mnemonical of such a pathology, but also representative of the cure for the opposite pathology.
I would use the example of the Shell. The Shell is indeed very reminiscent of the female genital, and the fact that it interrupts the growth of stones is very subversive. But THE WHOLE POINT of the story was that THAT PARTICULAR ESTABLISHED ORDER was a temporary corruption of the deep nature of that people and a denial of their true place and function: they were voyagers of the sea. And that is symbolically beautiful! Voyaging between land and sea, alternating between these two places, is a wonderful image!
I actually believe, and this might be our highest point of contention, that the facts that Moana is female, that her grandmother is also(which opposes her father as the crazy, wild female aspect, an "anthropoform" of the sea, just like he is a "anthropoform" of the land) and that Tefiti is also, are very pertinent even by their more obvious meaning of "women can do it too". Even to the extent that it means "women are also (partially) masculine", that is important and we are living a time in which half of the world population is starting, thanks mostly to technology, to have the possibility of doing things that were particularly hard for them, things that were historically done by men.
And Moana does that without demonizing the male figures, without portraying them as JUST stupid and wrong, but also so. That is much, MUCH better then Frozen, which is a whole other story and about which I believe I would almost completely agree with a interpretation that it's theme is maleficent.
I love this movie so much. It feels like the celebration of the return to balance after a long hiatus. As a mirror for the inner state of man (and woman), it's like an illustration of how our masculine aspects of the mind return to a humble and truly helpful state of servitude to our feminine aspects of beauty and spirit. Like a retelling of Venus, Eros, and Psyche. There is always a struggle that the soul must go through in order to regain union of the masculine and feminine, and none of that could happen without the villainess.
ruclips.net/video/oORzLjQzWYU/видео.html
Pageau is not interested in reconciling the opposites, like Peterson, they are interested in conserving the good old traditions of the male being the logos hero. Even though the logos is just mere speech without Sophia (Wisdom).
They are slaves to their archaic ideologies, which they would have to give up if they actually transcended or reconciled the opposites.
Thomas, I'm not talking about men and women here. I'm talking about the internal forces/qualities in you, male and female, which is what these stories are ultimately about. We are in internal conflict as individuals, and this plays out through external conflict between men and women (everyone, society).
It's been awhile since I watched your analysis Jonathan, but thank you for pinning John Matthew Tennant's comment; it wonderfully explicates some of the intuitive meaning and symbolism I felt in experiencing this film.
I greatly appreciate your skill in symbolic analysis, but I do think you tend at times to react to new patterns by assuming that traditional symbols are timeless, even though cultural roles, including those of gender, are always evolving. Maybe at times the leading edge of that evolution is more propagandistic and forced than it is an organic blossoming, but I truly don't think Moana falls into that former category in practice. Moana was the most profound film experience I'd had in years and I'd put it easily in the top 5 greatest Disney movies.
I think it also signifies the healthy need for a return to the animism / pantheism / panentheism, ecological symbolism & care, and circular time of the pre-axial, pre 2-worlds mythology continuous cosmos that John Vervaeke has described the need for an integration of.
Jonathan...don’t forget about the scene where she holds up the green object and there’s this light that emanate from her, Almost like she’s this savior. It reminded me of the Statue of Liberty. Like she is the bearer of light versus being a instrument of light.
Some of the most amazing movie breakdowns I’ve ever seen
I just saw the Star Trek Voyager episode about Tuvix. I wish I could listen to you about this powerful symbolism of the chimera.
YOU ARE A GEM AND A ROCKSTAR!!!!
One of the creepy things about movies is that for many decades they have used women actors who look more like boys and they also do plots that would make more sense if the lead couple were two homosexuals, so I have read, but I don't go to movies anymore.