Old School Disney: Why is Cruella villified for wanting a nice coat?!

A tongue in cheek rewatch of animated classics

I’ve always liked rooting for villains.

Idk, maybe there’s something wrong with me but also I think it’s common to want to root for the underdog. The one who everyone is against.

I think also maybe growing up with the 2000s Disney show House Of Mouse, where Mickey Mouse and his pals run a diner for a host of Disney characters, had a lasting impact on me - if “villains” can sit alongside heroes then is the dividing line between the two really all that clear?

That brings me to fashion icon Cruella Deville. The OG of what the girlies nowadays are calling the “skunk hair” trend. A woman whose bob was a “Robert.” A girl boss. A woman in STEM. A “mother” if you will.

We’re first introduced to her in the 1959 children’s book by Dodie Smith called 101 Dalmatians which was then adapted into a feature-length film in 1961. Here’s the brief plot of the film:

We’re in 1950s England. So Empire times and pre anti-discrimination legislation Britain, although none of the characters are openly racist and the film cuts out the book’s dodgy references to the Romani community. Anita and Rodger Ratcliffe live in London with their two Dalmatians - Pongo and Perdita. Perdita gets knocked up. She gives birth to 15 puppies. Anita’s old school chum, Cruella, wants to buy them. Rodger, who hates Cruella from the off, says no.

So she turns a no into a yes by hiring two goons to dognap them! The police are called, but they do nothing, so it’s up to a network of dogs across the country to save the day. They find the puppies, alongside 84 more who were sold by their owners to Cruella. Cruella wants to kill them all to make a nice fur coat. Eventually the Ratcliffes end up taking in all the dogs - hence 101 Dalmatians.

From the moment we meet Cruella it’s clear that she’s the baddest b in London. Roger has already written a diss track about her!

She’s wearing sensational white fur coat, with a red satin lining, red gloves, red heels and a cute little black dress. She says she “live(s) for furs” and asks whether “there is a woman in all this wretched world who doesn’t.” And Anita agrees with her!!! She says she would “like a nice fur” too, although it’s not her top priority.

Now I get it, time has moved on from the 1950s and it is more trendy now to say that you prefer fake fur to real fur. That you care about the environment and don’t want to harm the animals. I get it. I’ve been a RSPCA supporter since childhood. Not a PETA one though…idk about that one, that’s America’s own.

BUT in the world of this film, we are told it is not necessarily a bad thing to want to wear fur clothing.

The film, and our society today it seems, just want to condemn Cruella because she wants to kill puppies we personally know to make her Dalmatian coat. Cruella isn’t condemned for the white fur coat she has already had made. Anita even compliments her for it!

How do we know a cute little fox family wasn’t killed for that coat? Some little pomeranians? We don’t but we don’t care because we’re more upset at her for a future hypothetical coat made out of Dalmatians! THE HYPOCRISY

And, if you, dear reader, are not a vegan I think you’re an even bigger hypocrite. You’re telling me you eat animals. Little piglets for your bacon. Little baby cows for your burgers. Little fetus birds for your sunny side up eggs. But you draw the line at using animals for fashion?? Is this what Babe the pig fought for???

Animals are being taken to the slaughterhouse so they can be digested in your stomach, but Cruella, who wants to kill them to make a long-lasting fashion product, is where your draw the line??? For shame.

Next week I’ll be explaining what Madagascar 2 teaches us about Pan-Africanism.

The Seun Speaks Substack was written in front of a live studio audience…(it wasn’t but, as someone whose favourite show growing up was Kenan & Kel, it just feels right to end the post this way)