Disney is a beloved part of most people’s childhood. It’s the case for movies released during childhood. And it’s just as much the case for movies released long before one was born. Children are still growing up with the 1964 movie Mary Poppins. But not everyone views the movie in equally positive light. The movie stars some of the biggest names in Hollywood at the time it was made. Names like Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke have kept their star appeal into the modern era as well. When one factors in a catchy soundtrack it’s easy to see what people might like about the film. But it may well be that growing up with a movie causes people to see it in an uncritical light. This is part of the argument raised during the release of the Mary Poppins remake. It’s caused people to examine the original movie, the remake and the narrative in general in a modern light. This debate started to catch people’s attention when gender studies professor Daniel Pollack-Pelzner pointed out a scene where Poppins, Bert’s chimney sweep friends and her wards went on an adventure on top of London’s rooftops. During the process of these romps in soot and dirt the children would unsurprisingly become rather dirtied. Poppins proceeded to wipe the dirt off the children’s faces. In doing so she wound up making it worse rather than better. The children’s faces became smeared in a fashion rather reminiscent of blackface. The allusion was almost certainly intentional. People of the time were still quite familiar with the practice.
Professor Pollack-Pelzner raised a controversial question in regards to this scene. He asked what motivation Walt Disney had in scripting the scene. Was he trying to mock people performing in blackface? Or was he essentially embracing it in a tongue and cheek way? A character only aware of surface appearance within the movie comments that London might be under attack and that cannons need to be fired on the “cheeky devils”. This also adds to the confusion about intent. The character, Admiral Boom, is clearly a buffoon. The audience is certainly meant to laugh at him and his antiquated ideals. Likewise this is all in the service of a narrative that pokes fun at the upper class of the time. It was championing the common man of the time. The underclass, rather than the aristocracy, were the movie’s true heroes. But at the same time this can further muddy the issue.
Even the professor admits that it’s a parody of black menace. He concedes that white nationalists condemned the movie for being so open minded on issues of race and class. But at the same time, the fact that a remake exists in the first place highlights the fact that the world moves on over time. Every work of art is a product of the time it was created in. The nuance and assumptions it brings to the table won’t always be grasped by people one, two or three generations into the future. Many disney fans feel that the accusations are akin to badmouthing Walt Disney himself. And they decry the critic’s view of Mary Poppins by pointing out that the film was always simply meant to show the playful side of life. They lay counter claim that there’s nothing racist or political about the scene.
