On 2/28/96 Don Larsson writes: >A similar observation could be made of THE LITTLE MERMAID. Having Ariel give >up her mermaid status to happily marry the Prince can be seen as reactionary, >but how do specific viewers treat it? Notice the film's marketing--I don't >think there are any Ariel toys, towels, lunchboxes, etc. that have her with >*legs*--and she's usually with Sebastian and Flounder Under the Sea (and >away from Daddy), not on dry land with the Prince. There are Ariel dolls that can switch from fish tail to legs, and in various games Ariel is depicted in both states, but with the Ariel-with-legs version almost a secondary separate character. My five-year-old daughter Hannah is a fan of the TV series, which never shows Ariel with legs, but she also insists on hanging onto the Ariel-with-legs cards when playing the Little Mermaid card game, which, of course, then makes the game impossible to play. In any case, I would venture to guess that most kids think of Ariel in her TV version--always a mermaid, occasionally expressing a wish for legs or human interaction, frequently rebelling against her father's authority and prejudice against humans, but always reconciling with him at the end. Anyway, when fantastic creatures become human they also become ordinary and far less interesting, no matter what their relationships with their significant others may be. --Richard J. Leskosky Richard J. Leskosky office phone: (217) 244-2704 Assistant Director FAX: (217) 244-2223 Unit for Cinema Studies University of Illinois ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]