The personalities of talking animal sidekicks have already been discussed by others. In this post, I want to examine their silent counterparts. The silent sidekicks are extensions of the main characters. They express all the outrageous emotion their owners, but on a lighter scale.
Rapunzel’s little chameleon (why on earth she has, of all possible creatures, a chameleon, is still a mystery to me) glares and lunges when Rapunzel is in trouble. Abu, through his angry chittering, expresses the selfish impulses that Aladdin has to control in himself. A Bug’s Life is all about sentient insects, but the ant queen has an aphid as a dog-like pet that growls when the queen is angry.
For whatever reason, we keep coming back to Meeko, so I’ll pull him out again. We have the large-scale drama between the English and the Powhatans reduced to squabbles between a raccoon and a pug. The violence between the humans is daunting; the violence between the animals is fun. The audience is led to root for Meeko, the representative of the protagonist.
The silent sidekick is the cartooniest of cartoons, although still the simplest.
I agree with you. Another good example would be Sven from Frozen. He is so much an extension of Kristoff that Kristoff provides a voice for Sven. Not only are the silent sidekicks an extension of the characters, they also act as their conscience in a way. When Anna is in trouble it is Sven that convinces Kristoff to go save her. In Enchanted (that counts as being animated, right?) Pip is the one trying to tell Prince Edward to go find Giselle. So, in a way, these silent sidekicks are an extension of the audience as well as the characters.
I remember one silent sidekick in particular was the Lucky Cricket from Mulan. Although, he’s not exactly the silent sidekick to the main protagonist, he’s more like the silent sidekick to the… loudmouth sidekick of the main protagonist. Aside from when he helps to screw up Mulan’s evaluation at the beginning of the film, he’s largely Mushu’s silent sidekick. The Cricket was more an extension of the character of Mushu more than he was Mulan. I guess the cricket wasn’t just there just so the audience could sit there hoping the cricket survives the battle against the huns in the snowy mountains. He was there to help drive some of Mushu’s comedic moments.
It is interesting how easy it is to identify the human projected traits on animals. Children in particular easily pick up these hints. Why is it easier to watch violence through animals? It is true I think, because that is why we have channels like Animal Planet and National Geographic. People are entertained and even relate to these animals.
Pingback: [BLOCKED BY STBV] Links to my comments on awsome blogs | History of Animation
Pingback: [BLOCKED BY STBV] COMMENTS | Angela's Wonderful World of HIST 389
Pingback: [BLOCKED BY STBV] Comments I’ve made throughout the semester | Kyles animation blog