Buzzfeed’s Loryn Brantz’s digitally edited the waistlines of 6 Disney princesses, and the Huffington Post did a small write up, which also included the images.

(NOTE: This is a commentary I posted on my personal Facebook page that I thought I would post to my blog. I didn’t know anything about Loryn Brantz when I originally wrote this. I’ve since learned she is an illustrator (which is awesome) and has a background in animation. Therefore, I want to make it clear that I am not in any way implying that her point of view is wrong and that there isn’t another way to design female characters for cartooning and animation, nor am I saying that she hasn’t thought about the points I make below; with her background and experience, I’m sure she has. This is simply a perspective most others may not think about regarding why certain character designs, such as Disney princesses, might be designed in the manner they are.)

I looked at all of these and, yes, these realistic waistlines look good. But keep in mind that in cartooning and animation, realism isn’t always wanted. Body proportions and movement are often exaggerated in certain styles of cartooning and animation in order to more dramatically convey an idea, whether it be an aesthetic, symbolism, or motion. There’s a reason to draw a man with pecs bigger than his head and a woman with a relatively small waist, so long as the proportions are structurally sound (ie. not TOO big of a chest or TOO small of waist… I’m thinking of Rob Liefeld and Michael Turner here). There’s a place for realism in cartooning and animation, but it isn’t always needed or wanted.

Take Mrs. Incredible (not a Disney princess). Slim but proportionate waist to her upper torso contrast with exaggerated wide hips to convey the fact that she’s gotten older and she’s a mom that has resulted in changes to her body. Mr. Incredible has a HUGE upper body sitting on top of a tiny waist and legs to emphasize his upper body strength and oversized presence. Each character’s design helps to exaggerate their specific movements in the movie: elasticity and brute force, respectively.

If I relate this concept to a Disney princess – keep in mind it’s been a while since I’ve watched The Little Mermaid, so hopefully I recall correctly – but the way Ariel swims would be animated much differently with a more realistic waistline, and thus look completely different on the screen. The slimmer waist makes for a more exaggerated range of motion so the swimming movements can look more dramatic. This isn’t to say it couldn’t be done with a real waistline – it can – but the more dramatic motion is accentuated by an exaggerated body design. Plus, a realistic waistline with exaggerated motion might look pretty awkward. Furthermore, a slimmer waistline in conjunction with other design elements (facial design, posture, etc) can give the impression of a younger age. I’m not saying that’s the way it is in the real world, and I’m not saying slimmer equals younger, but in cartooning and animation that’s how that particular design can come across when combined with other elements. In the case of Pocahontas, the realistic waistline looks great. It really does. The difference is the slimmer waistline doesn’t make her look younger but instead accentuates her statuesque presence. In the example, the original version makes her look larger than life – iconic – while the more realistic one makes her look more subtle and less dramatic.

This isn’t a commentary on sexism or body image, either, just to be clear. I’m looking at this from a technical and artistic point of view in a medium which I’ve been studying all my life. There’s a time for realism and a time for exaggeration. And I can’t speak for Disney, but if their movies were animated more realistically then they should/would probably just use real actors. I’m a proponent of art, and a lot of times art isn’t real. And while I think everyone should express their opinions if they feel they want or need to, I wanted to present a perspective that I don’t think too many people think about because to them, in this case, a movie is a movie. A cartoon is a cartoon. Yeah, Disney may have a design guide for designing princesses, but – and this is just an assumption based on what I know of the medium – that guide stems from more than just a simple company aesthetic. It employs design techniques that work really well in animation.

However, on the issue of body image – and I’m not a woman – I would think that pictures of real women that either have been Photoshopped or are of scantily clad, starving models, both in exaggerated sexy poses, would have more of an impact on a girl’s body image than a cartoon because the viewer is looking at someone alive and real, someone who actually exists. Someone can certainly correct me if I am wrong or in the minority on this.