The Film – 101 Dalmatians – was released in 1996. The film was created and produced by…

1. Identify the film chosen:

The Film – 101 Dalmatians – was released in 1996. The film was created and produced by film and entertainment conglomerate – Disney.  It is a non-animated recreation of the original animated movie released by Disney in 1961.  By way of  brief summary, the movie is about an affluent evil women in London, England, that loves spotted fur dalmatians.  Thus, she ends up snatching 15 dalmatian that belong to other people of lower social status. Subsequently, she ends up snatching all other dalmatians in town with exception of two – Pongo and Perdida.  These two wonderful dogs recruit the assistance of all the other breed of dogs in town to help rescue the dalmatians in captivity.

2. Identify and provide preliminary evidence for there being a “legal message” in the film about: human-animal relations, animals generally, or a specific kind of animal.

• In the film, dogs, specifically Dalmatians, are presented as a tangible aesthetic property for the pleasure of humans with little regard to the interests of the dogs. Thus, relationship structure is given social approval and no further regard is applied to the dog as whether it is what they want. It is assumed it is what they want.

• The relationship between humans and dogs is like any other relationship. A relationship between interests and power. In my essay, I will be arguing that Disney portrays the relationship between dogs-human as a master-slave relationship. And, it glorifies it, subject to certain restraint by the master such as the prevention of abuse towards the slave. The film also infers that dogs are incapable of surviving without humans and thus the reason why they must be assigned the lower status in the relationship. Throughout this film, this structure of the relationship is glorified and portrayed as if it is the greatest gift humans have done for dogs.

• Although humans like to think and refer to dogs as a men’s best friend, it is only metaphorically as this film confirms humans will never extend dogs legal protections a human being has. As I will demonstrate, it has provided certain benefits for human in maintaining the status quo by being cruel to animals.

• Disney, through the power of its films, and resources acquired, sets the cultural and social standard, which form part of the dominant ideology within society.

• Through their articles and books, scholars also support the view portrayed by Disney to solidified it into the dominant ideology within that society. Another scholar even wrote an article claiming the blame casted on Disney towards the issue with Dalmatians is not the result of the film created by Disney but for other circumstances.

3. Demonstrate Preliminary Research

101 and Counting: Dalmatians in Film and Advertising in: Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology. Volume 9, Issue 2 (2005)

Within academic and animal social rights groups, the film 101 Dalmatians has been condemned as a commercial abuse of the breed. Analyzing it through such perspective, it was widely believed that the Dalmatian has been subject to over-breeding and neglect as a direct result of the film, and that Disney should be held responsible for this abuse. These assumptions are questioned by the author in the article. The author discusses the Hollywood animal image as a type of intellectual property and offers a detailed account of discussions between Dalmatian breed associations in America and UK and Disney. The author proposes that Disney’s animal imagery should be understood “as a more complex cultural and economic negotiation between filmmaker and audience, and conclude that our understanding of the commercial deployment of the Dalmatian image must be situated in a more nuanced account of the relationship between advertising and film.”

Herzog, Harold, “Forty-two Thousand and One Dalmatians: Fads, Social Contagion, and Dog Breed Popularity” (2006) 14:4 Society & Animals p. 383-397.

I will be using this article for my film analysis project as “the existence of extreme fluctuations in preferences for dog breeds has implications for understanding changes in attitudes toward companion animals, veterinary epidemiology, and canine evolution.”

Carey Wolfe, “Before the Law: Animals in a Biopolitical Context” (2010) 6:1 Law, Culture and the Humanities, p. 8-23.

I will be using this article in my film analysis as it explains the biopolitical theory to re-articulate the political and ethical status of human’s treatment of non-human animals.  This article provides examples of how certain nations have enacted laws to extend certain rights to non-humans.  But, questions whether the laws is doing enough to ensure the prevention of animal cruelty or exploitation.

J.M. Coetze, “The Lives of Animals” Tanner Lectures on Human Values, online: < https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/c/Coetzee99

This article illustrates that humans view animals as devoid of reason. Consequently, it justifies humans cruelty to animals as humans view them not equal to animal for their inability to reason and/or understand what is going around them.  Coetze rejects this rationale and instead implies that this argument was useful for colonization and domination of humans.  It justifies mistreatment of other humans by arguing that some humans are not as equal to other humans, usually members of high class, thus not deserving of equal protection as humans of high class are usually afforded.  Same rationale is applied to animals as they tend to be lower in that hierarchical system that capitalism requires.

Deckha, M. (2013). Welfarist and Imperial: The Contributions of Anticruelty Laws to Civilization Discourse. American Quarterly 65 (3), 515-548.

This article explores how laws meant to deliver cruelty to animals have helped maintain a discussion of civilization that cuts across and stimulates hierarchical logics of race, religion, class, and gender. Being cruel to animals justifies division amongst humans and treatment to those not deemed equal in society.  This article sheds light on the fact that the law is mandated to regulate animal exploitation rather than prevent it as it serves a purpose for civilization. This article will be useful in my essay to argue that it has benefit humans historically to be cruel to animals. And, the cruelty to the animals depends on the value each society assigns to that animal.