Nipple hypocrisy in Fantasia

I was reading an article someone linked from a previous post that said that Walt Disney did not want the Nymphs (which looked more like Centaurs to me) to have nipples, in some attempt to de-sexualize the cartoon or somesuch silliness to make it more ‘family’ oriented. Well, if that was such a concern, why not do the same with the Harpies? Why give the Harpies nipples and not the nymphs? Was this something that slipped through the cracks?

Granted, there was more footage of topless nymphs than there were of harpies in the movie, but it still seems rather inconsistent to me.

Cite?

This was (briefly) discussed in some of the extra material on the Fantasia Legacy DVD. IIRC, the main objection was the screen time the nymphs were getting, and it was a last-minute change. The harpies just slipped through the cracks; they weren’t mentioned at all.

And I think “nipple hypocrisy” is my phrase for the day. :slight_smile:

He also made them draw all the guys with short hair, too. He had a bit of a problem with long hair on men. But that’s not important right now.

From the IMDB trivia for Fantasia:

Kids back then would be all excited to see the naked Nymphs, but not the Harpies. Walt unfortunately did not predict the Goth trend, which brought up kids who would start flogging the dolphin to the naked Harpies.

Just my take on it! :wink:

I posted a thread about this exact thing a couple of years ago. It seems you can’t have nipples in a Disney film unless you’re EVIL! A real letdown for those good little centauresses.
Cite? Go see the film.

No, no skaterboarder87 you’ve got it all wrong. It should now be, “:dubious: cite?”

My WAG would be that while nymphs can be considered “sexy”, there is no way in God’s green earth that a harpy ever will be, so it doesn’t matter if the harpy has nipples because no one is gonna notice in “that way”…

According to Richard Shickel’s “The Disney Version,” the centaurs were supposed to be nude, and there were nipples.

It wasn’t Disney that had them removed, however; it was the Hays Office. There was absolutely no way a film in 1941 was going to get away with showing bare breasts. (Though evidently showing buttocks were OK – see the last shot of the sequence :slight_smile: )

The harpies were probably missed. I hadn’t heard of it before.

here is the link for all you who are still in doubt-

http://www.harbeck.ca/James/nipples.html

Just briefly touches on that fact. But it had me wondering.

And Arden Ranger, you do make a good point that the Centa- I mean nymphs are much more provocative than harpies.

Harpies are scary.

Just like female sexuality.

Makes sense to me.

:wink:

The part with the nymphs/centaurs always makes me sleepy.

You can’t trust this. He make an glaring error in the first paragraph. Chip 'n Dale couldn’t have been incinerated in Bambi (1942); they first appeared five years later.

Do any animals die on screen in Bambi? I don’t think they do.

You’re right and you’re wrong. They couldn’t have been in Bambi, but their first appearance was the following year (1943) in the short “Private Pluto.”

Umm… don’t want to spoil it or anything…

Bambi’s mom isn’t exactly in the sequels, ya know…

It always bothered me that the nymphs/centaurs paired off according to color. The thing with the nipples was just the icing on the cake. I’ve never liked the Pastorale section… I bet Beethoven would have hated it.

Yeah, but unless there’s some super-secret version running around she didn’t die on-screen.

I never noticed be-nipple harpies; actually, I never noticed harpies at all. I’ll hafta watch it again.

They were ghost harpies, flying around near the end during that “Night On Bald Mountain” segment with the giant demonic bodybuilder.

I feel I must point out that the correct term is “nipocrisy”.