Once I cottoned on to Belle's reading habits it became really funny to me that she was presented as this super powerhouse intellectual woman. She's reading fairy tales and novels. Don't get me wrong, I also really enjoy fairy tales and novels, and think they can have serious literary merit in some cases - but I don't pretend that this makes me "soooooooo different" from other women.
I heartily approve of many fairy tales and some novels, and think that those who think they don't have literary merit should be sentenced to reading Tolkien's essay on fairy tales repeatedly until they concede. But how do you get Jack and the Beanstalk as the entire book, without it being extremely childish and nowhere on the level of the average woman's reading habits?
This kind of contrarianism is always enjoyable, but it is weakened by needing to pivot from "Beast was actually not such a bad guy" to "Gaston is justified in attacking the beast." Probably need to pick one or the other.
The Chip part has been noticed before, but I guess we are meant to think that everyone was frozen at pre-curse age. The fact that this alleged prince was unknown to the townspeople a few miles away is more of a plot hole. The vaguer time scale of the original story and the Cocteau film is better.
Maybe the Beast, as still a fleshy being, can grow and age, but objects cannot? What would it even mean for Chip to grow? He would not be physically bigger. Maybe the trauma froze his mental age.
It has been a long time since I actually saw the movie, but Google seems to say this was considered a plot hole for the original and so hints about amnesia were made in the live-action remake (which I have never seen). The remake even introduces an amnesiac Mr. Potts separated from his family!
I think Beast not being a complete villain and Gaston being apparently justified in attacking the Beast aren't mutually exclusive. It's a great example of broken people acting on the limited information they have and hurting each other through their lack of understanding of the greater situation. Gaston didn't know anything about the Beast beyond the facts that he had a fortress and kidnapped two people. We know there's more to the story that would cause us to act differently but Gaston went with what he had. Similarly, the Beast has a number of redeeming qualities, but they're completely unknown to the outside world because he's defensive and suspicious of everyone
I really laughed at your take; it also reminded me sooo very much of my father's take-down of "The Little Mermaid." He was honestly angry about the movie and it's messages and what it conveyed to the millions of little ones who would see it. For example, the princess falls for the prince - why? He displays no virtue or heroism. She merely thinks he is handsome and a prince. Her father - who loves her and has taken care of her for her entire life - is suddenly the villain because he won't give in to her whims?! She makes a deal with the devil (Ursula the witch) to get what she wants - abandoning her entire family and any responsibilities she may have as mer-royalty. AND (the kicker) she gets away with it!! NO consequences for her choice to bargain with evil, and she gets out of the bargain and gets what she wants in the end. Ooooh boy he was not happy with Disney!
I actually haven’t let my kids see the Little Mermaid because of all these points! And what a terrible vision it creates for what love is, at first sight without even talking to the person. They know (most of) the music though; the animated version’s soundtrack was great.
Same. We’re avoiding the little mermaid as well- especially since the original tale has a good moral lesson and a good reason for her wanting to be human (she desires a SOUL, so she can go to heaven).
We didn't own a TV until I was 10 or 11, and somehow I wound up with the impression that it was because Arielle and Jasmine didn't wear enough clothes and therefore no TV allowed. I think the reason I thought so was because my mom wouldn't buy me the Disney princess undies I so dearly longed for at 4 years old.
Turns out that it was mainly because my mom didn't think we'd learn to read if there was a TV in the house, but her not having to listen to Disney songs on repeat was a bonus. Apparently not related to their skimpy outfits at all :D
Having a childhood favorite Disney princess movie destroyed by a Brit on Substack was not on my Friday Bingo card today. And now I'll try not to let the teapot situation distract my thoughts too much today. (I bet there is a Scrub Daddy to blame....)
For those of us who are new to Vatican affairs (converted in 2022), what responsibility does the reader and lay person have for making sure things like this Principi case aren't neglected? As a Catholic, am I to treat the Vatican like a democracy and go to my parish priest or write to my archbishop? Or do I just wait and pray that the proper authorities will do something about it? Do I have a role in cooperating with the Holy Spirit to ensure the shepherds act "above reproach?"
All of the above as led by the Holy Spirit, except the Vatican is not a democracy. The Church is a kingdom and as such has a governance structure that reflects the reality. I have Protestant friends who struggle with the idea that the Church doesn’t provide some sort of lay-led mechanism for outing people who intentionally do wrong the way some Protestant denominations do. Prayer and fasting are effective. So is supporting the journalists at the Pillar who will actually work to bring the issues to account publicly.
I had the same question. I feel like I should do something about the poor, or rather non-existent, response to the Principi case but not really sure what to do outside pray and keep supporting The Pillar.
Please do! I do pray, and support y'all through a subscription, and I want to know what Catholics did in the past to obediently&ardently hold their leaders accountable and renew the Church.
I think there's a great deal of personal decision making/no strict rules about this but, I have actually written a letter to the pope asking him to reconsider (on a past issue). It probably didn't get read but who knows, maybe some dicastery somewhere tallies them up by theme, and writing it was a good opportunity to pray for both the Holy Father and the church. It's at least an option!
Maybe when your bishop makes his ad limina visit to the Holy Father, ask him to hand deliver it.
I actually had a retired bishop friend hand deliver two books on Franciscan spirituality to +Francis. Amazingly, I got a personal, embossed thank you note signed “Francisco” back through the Nuncio and my retired bishop friend. You never know until you try 🙏
Please keep up the hard, frustrating, but oh so critical work on Principi and related issues. I find it increasingly difficult to "pray for the intentions of the holy father," which often terrify me.
My deacon, also a canon lawyer, told us (adult catechesis) that we needed to be more stoic. The test of a stoic- is the problem in my power to resolve? If the answer is no then don’t let your passion interfere with your serenity blocking the road to ultimate happiness. When I said I was taught that “ultimate happiness” was in the next eternal life with Christ, he never answered. I concluded he was epicurean.
Evil-doers HATE truth telling. What the Pillar does in reporting things like this is a great way to go about effecting change. In clerical circles there is a very strong Brit-ophilism, which is simply a belief in elitism: lay folk are not considered members, and therefore should shut up, pray, and - of course - pay. But getting the facts out works, as the various sex scandal revelations demonstrated. Francis is especially sensitive to ‘public’ comments - remember when he advised bishops to just be silent and not say (reveal) anything when confronted with abuse accusations? And that this approach is imitating Our Lord’s? In my diocese we had several concurrent horrific abuses (that were censored by the bishop and his henchmen and henchwomen). Courageous individuals made the abuses known and the house of cards tumbled. Lighting up the deeds done ‘in darkness’ (aka secrecy) is what works.
So, “Pray as if everything depends onGod
And work as if everything depends on you” is the advice from a Saint (Theresa of Avila).
In my opinion it's best to pray for them but not take responsibility. It's very easy to get wrapped up with the entire world being Catholic on the internet but ultimately not really our responsibility in the end.
Two comments: 1) I upped my subscription amount recently and your work on the Principi case confirms that I made a good decision. Somehow this story isn't gaining traction outside here. I think we Pillar readers need to do our part to make this story go bigger in whatever way we can since no one else seemingly cares. 2) Your take on Beauty and the Beast is correct and also worth the price..
Bishop McKnight...c'mon, man. You're allowed to be a leader. In fact, God gave you a special grace for that role. You were right. "Synodality" is a made up weapon for those who seek the destruction of Christ's Church. Do not be afraid.
A very nuanced analysis, Mr. Condon; it really puts into proper perspective the current state of children's tales.
I look fondly back on the children's tales of my childhood, when all we had to concern ourselves with was the proliferation of falling Acme Anvils and dynamite-embedded cigars!
Thank you for preaching the truth on Beauty and the Beast, though I disagree slightly with your sunny view of Gaston: he's a villain, though, like most Disney villains, he's the most interesting and funniest in the film. The dry wit of Jafar, Shere Khan, Scar...far more compelling characters than the heroes they oppose. One is almost tempted to root for them. The other premise of Beauty and the Beast that is accepted without question is that a man lost in the woods is fair game to take prisoner. Never really understood that bit.
I've come to prefer the much-maligned pre-"Renaissance" era of Disney animated films. The Broadway style of 90s and on Disney animated films has become stale, but the more fun and adventurous films of the 70s and 80s still appeal. The Aristocats, The Great Mouse Detective, The Rescuers, Robin Hood; the latter of these, in my view, is not only the best of the bunch, but also the greatest film adaptation of the classic tale, animated or not (though Mel Brooks's Men in Tights is a close second).
Can the Look Closer section now include a regular (bimonthly?) analysis of Disney/kids movies from Ed., please? Because this first take was high-quality content (as usual).
I see the Beauty and the Beast discourse is (rightly) getting a lion’s share of the commentary here, but since I can’t possibly improve on what my fellow commenters have said on that front, I’ll drop a line in praise of the political commentary at the top of the newsletter. We must love our neighbors (who voted differently than us); we must forgive and love our (political) enemies. This is the Lord’s command! Cheers to Ed for reminding us to go “touch grass” and to live this command seriously. The only sign we have in our yard is a Sacred Heart sign, but if there were a “However you voted I’m glad you’re my neighbor,” sign, I’d make room for that one.
Once I cottoned on to Belle's reading habits it became really funny to me that she was presented as this super powerhouse intellectual woman. She's reading fairy tales and novels. Don't get me wrong, I also really enjoy fairy tales and novels, and think they can have serious literary merit in some cases - but I don't pretend that this makes me "soooooooo different" from other women.
I heartily approve of many fairy tales and some novels, and think that those who think they don't have literary merit should be sentenced to reading Tolkien's essay on fairy tales repeatedly until they concede. But how do you get Jack and the Beanstalk as the entire book, without it being extremely childish and nowhere on the level of the average woman's reading habits?
best Disney princess 'splainer ever!
Seriously: thank you for what you all are doing. Someday when our Catholic education bills have decreased, we will up our subscription.
This kind of contrarianism is always enjoyable, but it is weakened by needing to pivot from "Beast was actually not such a bad guy" to "Gaston is justified in attacking the beast." Probably need to pick one or the other.
The Chip part has been noticed before, but I guess we are meant to think that everyone was frozen at pre-curse age. The fact that this alleged prince was unknown to the townspeople a few miles away is more of a plot hole. The vaguer time scale of the original story and the Cocteau film is better.
If they’re frozen in age how does a ten year old become a grown up?
Maybe the Beast, as still a fleshy being, can grow and age, but objects cannot? What would it even mean for Chip to grow? He would not be physically bigger. Maybe the trauma froze his mental age.
Wasn't part of the curse also that all the townspeople's memories of the castle existing were erased?
It has been a long time since I actually saw the movie, but Google seems to say this was considered a plot hole for the original and so hints about amnesia were made in the live-action remake (which I have never seen). The remake even introduces an amnesiac Mr. Potts separated from his family!
I think Beast not being a complete villain and Gaston being apparently justified in attacking the Beast aren't mutually exclusive. It's a great example of broken people acting on the limited information they have and hurting each other through their lack of understanding of the greater situation. Gaston didn't know anything about the Beast beyond the facts that he had a fortress and kidnapped two people. We know there's more to the story that would cause us to act differently but Gaston went with what he had. Similarly, the Beast has a number of redeeming qualities, but they're completely unknown to the outside world because he's defensive and suspicious of everyone
I really laughed at your take; it also reminded me sooo very much of my father's take-down of "The Little Mermaid." He was honestly angry about the movie and it's messages and what it conveyed to the millions of little ones who would see it. For example, the princess falls for the prince - why? He displays no virtue or heroism. She merely thinks he is handsome and a prince. Her father - who loves her and has taken care of her for her entire life - is suddenly the villain because he won't give in to her whims?! She makes a deal with the devil (Ursula the witch) to get what she wants - abandoning her entire family and any responsibilities she may have as mer-royalty. AND (the kicker) she gets away with it!! NO consequences for her choice to bargain with evil, and she gets out of the bargain and gets what she wants in the end. Ooooh boy he was not happy with Disney!
I actually haven’t let my kids see the Little Mermaid because of all these points! And what a terrible vision it creates for what love is, at first sight without even talking to the person. They know (most of) the music though; the animated version’s soundtrack was great.
Same. We’re avoiding the little mermaid as well- especially since the original tale has a good moral lesson and a good reason for her wanting to be human (she desires a SOUL, so she can go to heaven).
We didn't own a TV until I was 10 or 11, and somehow I wound up with the impression that it was because Arielle and Jasmine didn't wear enough clothes and therefore no TV allowed. I think the reason I thought so was because my mom wouldn't buy me the Disney princess undies I so dearly longed for at 4 years old.
Turns out that it was mainly because my mom didn't think we'd learn to read if there was a TV in the house, but her not having to listen to Disney songs on repeat was a bonus. Apparently not related to their skimpy outfits at all :D
Conceived while his mother was a teapot. I am slain.
I really liked the suggestion that Dad the teapot broke.
Right?! 🤣
Having a childhood favorite Disney princess movie destroyed by a Brit on Substack was not on my Friday Bingo card today. And now I'll try not to let the teapot situation distract my thoughts too much today. (I bet there is a Scrub Daddy to blame....)
Scrub daddy
i m d y i n g
👏👏👏 Amazing comment section today
Disney princess movies can all be destroyed. As they say, “Let it go; let it go!”
For those of us who are new to Vatican affairs (converted in 2022), what responsibility does the reader and lay person have for making sure things like this Principi case aren't neglected? As a Catholic, am I to treat the Vatican like a democracy and go to my parish priest or write to my archbishop? Or do I just wait and pray that the proper authorities will do something about it? Do I have a role in cooperating with the Holy Spirit to ensure the shepherds act "above reproach?"
All of the above as led by the Holy Spirit, except the Vatican is not a democracy. The Church is a kingdom and as such has a governance structure that reflects the reality. I have Protestant friends who struggle with the idea that the Church doesn’t provide some sort of lay-led mechanism for outing people who intentionally do wrong the way some Protestant denominations do. Prayer and fasting are effective. So is supporting the journalists at the Pillar who will actually work to bring the issues to account publicly.
I had the same question. I feel like I should do something about the poor, or rather non-existent, response to the Principi case but not really sure what to do outside pray and keep supporting The Pillar.
Praying adn supporting the pillar are good steps.
Other than that, I myself spend a lot of time thinking about that, and I wish I had good answers. Maybe Ed and I can talk about that on the podcast.
Please do! I do pray, and support y'all through a subscription, and I want to know what Catholics did in the past to obediently&ardently hold their leaders accountable and renew the Church.
I think there's a great deal of personal decision making/no strict rules about this but, I have actually written a letter to the pope asking him to reconsider (on a past issue). It probably didn't get read but who knows, maybe some dicastery somewhere tallies them up by theme, and writing it was a good opportunity to pray for both the Holy Father and the church. It's at least an option!
Maybe when your bishop makes his ad limina visit to the Holy Father, ask him to hand deliver it.
I actually had a retired bishop friend hand deliver two books on Franciscan spirituality to +Francis. Amazingly, I got a personal, embossed thank you note signed “Francisco” back through the Nuncio and my retired bishop friend. You never know until you try 🙏
Please keep up the hard, frustrating, but oh so critical work on Principi and related issues. I find it increasingly difficult to "pray for the intentions of the holy father," which often terrify me.
My deacon, also a canon lawyer, told us (adult catechesis) that we needed to be more stoic. The test of a stoic- is the problem in my power to resolve? If the answer is no then don’t let your passion interfere with your serenity blocking the road to ultimate happiness. When I said I was taught that “ultimate happiness” was in the next eternal life with Christ, he never answered. I concluded he was epicurean.
Evil-doers HATE truth telling. What the Pillar does in reporting things like this is a great way to go about effecting change. In clerical circles there is a very strong Brit-ophilism, which is simply a belief in elitism: lay folk are not considered members, and therefore should shut up, pray, and - of course - pay. But getting the facts out works, as the various sex scandal revelations demonstrated. Francis is especially sensitive to ‘public’ comments - remember when he advised bishops to just be silent and not say (reveal) anything when confronted with abuse accusations? And that this approach is imitating Our Lord’s? In my diocese we had several concurrent horrific abuses (that were censored by the bishop and his henchmen and henchwomen). Courageous individuals made the abuses known and the house of cards tumbled. Lighting up the deeds done ‘in darkness’ (aka secrecy) is what works.
So, “Pray as if everything depends onGod
And work as if everything depends on you” is the advice from a Saint (Theresa of Avila).
In my opinion it's best to pray for them but not take responsibility. It's very easy to get wrapped up with the entire world being Catholic on the internet but ultimately not really our responsibility in the end.
Two comments: 1) I upped my subscription amount recently and your work on the Principi case confirms that I made a good decision. Somehow this story isn't gaining traction outside here. I think we Pillar readers need to do our part to make this story go bigger in whatever way we can since no one else seemingly cares. 2) Your take on Beauty and the Beast is correct and also worth the price..
thank you.
Bishop McKnight...c'mon, man. You're allowed to be a leader. In fact, God gave you a special grace for that role. You were right. "Synodality" is a made up weapon for those who seek the destruction of Christ's Church. Do not be afraid.
A very nuanced analysis, Mr. Condon; it really puts into proper perspective the current state of children's tales.
I look fondly back on the children's tales of my childhood, when all we had to concern ourselves with was the proliferation of falling Acme Anvils and dynamite-embedded cigars!
Adding Belle to my list of worst movie characters of all time.
Current List:
-Uncle Joe
-Jenny from Forest Gump
-Rudy's dad
Thank you for preaching the truth on Beauty and the Beast, though I disagree slightly with your sunny view of Gaston: he's a villain, though, like most Disney villains, he's the most interesting and funniest in the film. The dry wit of Jafar, Shere Khan, Scar...far more compelling characters than the heroes they oppose. One is almost tempted to root for them. The other premise of Beauty and the Beast that is accepted without question is that a man lost in the woods is fair game to take prisoner. Never really understood that bit.
I've come to prefer the much-maligned pre-"Renaissance" era of Disney animated films. The Broadway style of 90s and on Disney animated films has become stale, but the more fun and adventurous films of the 70s and 80s still appeal. The Aristocats, The Great Mouse Detective, The Rescuers, Robin Hood; the latter of these, in my view, is not only the best of the bunch, but also the greatest film adaptation of the classic tale, animated or not (though Mel Brooks's Men in Tights is a close second).
“One of the minor penances of fatherhood is having to watch the same film over and over again until it drives you mad.”
It’s a tale as old as time.
Song as old as rhyme
Can the Look Closer section now include a regular (bimonthly?) analysis of Disney/kids movies from Ed., please? Because this first take was high-quality content (as usual).
Thank you, Lord, for giving our pope another reason to hate, slander and patronize American Catholics.
I see the Beauty and the Beast discourse is (rightly) getting a lion’s share of the commentary here, but since I can’t possibly improve on what my fellow commenters have said on that front, I’ll drop a line in praise of the political commentary at the top of the newsletter. We must love our neighbors (who voted differently than us); we must forgive and love our (political) enemies. This is the Lord’s command! Cheers to Ed for reminding us to go “touch grass” and to live this command seriously. The only sign we have in our yard is a Sacred Heart sign, but if there were a “However you voted I’m glad you’re my neighbor,” sign, I’d make room for that one.
That's a much better response than the Conan the Barbarian (What is best in life?) response I had been planning.