From the E-Mailbag…

My pal, the esteemed Disney historian Jim Korkis, has this to say…

I am getting a lot of questions about Disney not running Song of the South on Disney+ because I wrote a book called Who's Afraid of the Song of the South? with a foreword by Floyd Norman about the making of the film and the controversy surrounding it. You are right that Disney isn't releasing it because it wouldn't generate enough income to offset the bad publicity even with disclaimers.

SOTS is probably the most misunderstood film in Disney history. First off, it doesn't take place during the era of slavery. It takes place after the Civil War during Reconstruction. That's why Uncle Remus can say he is packing up and leaving. He is a free man. If he were a slave, he would be considered property and wouldn't be able to leave. The people working on the plantation are sharecroppers not slaves and one of the reasons the father goes to Atlanta is to raise money to pay them.

Here is an exclusive just for your column that doesn't appear in my book because the exciting and frustrating thing about Disney history is that there is always something new being discovered. For the 1948 Academy Awards, James Baskett received an honorary Oscar for his portrayal of Uncle Remus. According to columnist Hedda Hopper's autobiography that I recently read, the Board of Governors was opposed to the award because "Baskett played a slave and the feeling was that Negroes should play only doctors, lawyers and scientists." Jean Hersholt, the president, argued in Baskett's favor until four in the morning at which point he gave his ultimatum: "If he doesn't receive an Oscar, I shall stand up tomorrow night and tell the world the whole disgraceful story." The board gave in and actress Ingrid Bergman gave Baskett his Oscar.

To me, the best argument for Disney releasing Song of the South is to just end this silly controversy. If they did, I suspect there'd be people who would try to gin up some sort of outrage because they think that would help empower them for some larger purpose. Most people would ignore it or — if the "ban" intrigued them, they'd buy a copy, watch it and wonder what all the fuss was about. It's a pleasant enough film and the animated sequences are somewhat delightful.

But the whole movie is probably best known for its unavailability and once it loses that, it will be largely forgotten. It commits the greatest sin a Disney movie can have these days. There are no princesses in it.