The opposite of Disneyfied


Having read Into the Drowning Deep last week, I was primed to accept this image as a canonical and accurate representation of the Little Mermaid.

I wonder if Copenhagen would be interested in patching up their famous statue?

Comments

  1. Kaintukee Bob says

    If something being ‘Disneyfied’ means making more child-friendly, nicer, and happier, would the opposite then be ‘TRUMPeted’?

    I’ll show myself out.

  2. blf says

    The mildly deranged penguin, who frequently encounters merfiends whilst hunting wild sushi, points out the illustration in the OP still makes a common mistake: Whilst a merfiend is basically halt-fish and half-mad, it’s usually the left half (not the bottom half) which is fish, and the right (not top) which is mad.

  3. says

    I must point out that, now that Disney owns Fox, they own The Rocky Horror Picture Show which makes Frank ‘N Furter “Disneyfied.” I am so waiting for the animated series.

  4. Cuttlefish says

    Oh, she looks…. delicious.

    A fish connoisseur made paella with Mermaid;
    He thought the aroma was nice.
    With garnish of seaweed (his sycophants “oui-oui-ed”)
    And saffron infusing the rice.
    He clarified butter, and started to mutter
    “It tastes like it’s really Mazola”
    Then added blue cheeses: “the trick, if you please, is—
    With Gorgon, you need gorgonzola!”
    With minimum bluster, he gutted and trussed her;
    You see, in his studies, he’d learned
    That the delicate features of mermaid-like creatures,
    If left unattended, get burned.
    The succulent breast of (as well as the rest of)
    The meal, would make proud its creator;
    I was told that one bite would bring utter delight,
    And I could not refuse… so I ate her.

    https://freethoughtblogs.com/cuttlefish/2011/10/29/eating-mermaid/

  5. Akira MacKenzie says

    I finally got to see “The Shape of Water.” last week, and Eliza’s (Sally Hawkins) pantomimed description of Gill Man genitalia was worth the price of admission.

  6. says

    I saw a nice mockumentary about mermaids. Which made me think : they make no sense. If a species of primates actually turned to life in the oceans, it would certainly not evolve into this kind of shape. We have no tail that could be turned into a fluke. Instead, an aquatic ape would have to be otter-like, with an elogated body and short legs with webbed feet. Or penguin-like. But certainly not something sexy.

  7. jbhodges7 says

    See “Aquatic Ape Theory” on Wikipedia, and other Google listings. Originally proposed by Alister Hardy, popularized and steadfastly defended by Elaine Morgan, the idea is that for some period of time our pre-human ancestors lived on coastlines, spending much time swimming and diving for food, and this led to some adaptations that make us differ from other Great Apes. A theory not widely held, distinctly a minority view. (Greatly reduced body hair, subcutaneous fat, downward-pointing nostrils, upright walking, and some others.)

  8. says

    jbhodges7 : thanks for the reference. I knew about the “Aquatic Ape”, as well as another crazy aquatic theory (crazyer, actually), “initial bipedy”. What I was referring to here was the idea (even crazyer, but entertaining) that a species of ape had definitively turned to aquatic life, up to the point of becoming a completely marine mammal, with no possible turning back.

    The fake documentary I saw was this one, I think : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mermaids:_The_Body_Found

Leave a Reply