They're All Wearing Red!: A Marxist Reading of High School Musical 2 (2007)

(This article has been seen in several forms over the years since its inception, so I present here a unified and re-conceived version of the Marxism argument.)

In preparation for a segment on my radio show, I had an opportunity to revisit High School Musical 2 and was struck by a few things - the overt sexual tension between the lines, the certain braveness behind wearing an argyle cap, and (of most importance to this article) the less than subtle Marxist influences. That this is a highly Marxist narrative shouldn't come as too much of a surprise; Newsies was nothing less than socialist propaganda, but that's not for here.

Essentially the film depicts the struggle between the bourgeoisie - represented by the Evans family and their country club 'means of production' - and the proletariat - as represented by the working-stiff Wildcats. That the Evanses are the upper class almost goes without saying; Sharpay and Ryan are the elitist of the elite, possessing flashy clothes and flashier cars. The Evans parents are no different as the holders of the means of production; Daddy's first appearance finds him landing on a golf course in a helicopter, bragging about having "built the course *and* hold(ing) the record," while Mom splits her time between yoga lessons and guacamole face wraps. As for controlling the means of production, Sharpay and her parents are in full control of the hiring and firing of the Wildcats working this summer, free to decide the fates of the working class on a whim.

The Wildcats, then, are the incontrovertible proletariat, working for a living. Yet the work experience is not as glorious as they may have anticipated. Before joining the working class, the Wildcats are free: Troy and Chad practice hoops, Gabriella has an array of self-improvement activities on the docket, and Kelsi is free to "grow, write music, grow." Once the proles join the workforce, things are ignominious. "How did we get from the top of the world to the bottom of the heap?" asks Chad in a crushing moment of class oppression. The work experience is hell, riddled with "rags instead of riches / and all these dirty dishes" and near-abductions to trippy musical numbers where the workers are captive to Sharpay's twisted imagination. Fulton attempts to persuade as many of them to quit as possible, at the behest of Sharpay.

Troy is the focal point through which Sharpay's oppression is channeled. Sharpay "has more moves than an octopus in a wrestling match," and she wraps her tentacles around the proletariat in a struggle to oppress. In an attempt to control Troy - her interests are decidedly not romantic - Sharpay is willing to press her stiletto heel firmly on the throat of the proletariat. And step she does; Sharpay tries to keep the staff and working class from participating in the Star Dazzle talent show by forcing them to labor in the kitchens as servants to the snobs who will attend the show.

Enter Ryan Evans, slowly coming around to the plight of the working class. Ryan, over the course of the second film, becomes marginalized by his sister's attempts to seduce Troy (it might be best to ignore Freudian suggestions of jealousy for this article, at least). Abandoned, Ryan sells his tiki warrior costume on the internet and so shirks the garishly sequined pizazz of the bourgeoisie. Now alone, a social outcast - shunned by his sister and eschewed by the proles who see him only as "Sharpay's poodle" - Ryan fortuitously comes across Gabriella and Taylor (the workers) in a golf cart. He dejectedly tells them he wasn't invited to the staff (worker) baseball game, but Gabriella bubbly declares, "Everyone's invited!" "We're all in this together" here begins to take on a socialist meaning. What exactly are we all in together? Answer: Opposition to - and revolution against - the tyranny of the bourgeoisie.

Slowly a class revolution is building. Ryan teaches the Wildcats a new dance number for use in the talent show (this is, of course, before Sharpay sabotages the show) and trains them to beat the upper class at their own game. The upper class is Sharpay here, certainly, but the upper class is also represented by Tina's "tap dancing epic" and her "tippity tappity toes," as well as a dismal sock puppet act. The bourgeoisie come off talentless, excepting of course Sharpay's acts, which always seem to be superlatively entertaining.

The ultimate class upheaval and demolition of the proletariat-betrayal propagated by Troy comes when he refuses to participate in Sharpay's 'duet.' Appearing in average casual wear - and not the bedazzling number worn by Sharpay - Troy highlights the class disparity between them, suggesting that such a match would not work and deciding that his "place is washing dishes" with the workers. Sharpay is devastated, and her act crumbles. The happily ever after ending comes when caddy Troy and lifeguard Gabriella are reunited in the song "Everyday," a celebration of the novel experience and of the workers who band together, arm in arm, to sing the chorus.

The film's final number, "All for One," is the pinnacle of class revolution; the club pool, limited only to the members of this creme-de-la-creme elitist country club, now bears a sign "Staff Pool Party - All In!" The Wildcats finally get to have their day in the sun, languishing not in the kitchen but living it up in lounge chairs. "Everybody jump in!" the song croons, "Everybody, one for all / And all for one!" The upper class club members are nowhere in sight; the proletariat has taken over the country club. Even the bourgeoisie Sharpay has come over to the side of the working class. There are no thoughts of making money or of class distinction; this is a worker's paradise. The means of production are controlled, the bourgeoisie is eradicated or assimiliated, and the workers rule the day.

A reasonable objection to this point has been raised: this is a proletariat pool party, not a proletariat pool. A temporary suspension of power does not a revolution make. This is a valid argument, one that I find difficult to counter. However, I do not feel that ownership of the swimming pool compromises my overall reading of the film as a Marxist critique of society. The pool party, though not a complete overthrow of the social system, still represents a significant overhaul of the status quo (which the first film has already taught us to reject). The staff, previously banned outright from the pool, now has some freedom to use the pool - exclusively so, with nary a bourgeoisie (save the Evans, who have already joined the proletariat revolution). The workers of the world - or at least Albuquerque - have united, but the full revolution is still imminent. Perhaps in a future film? With the support of the Evans twins and the power gained from the demi-coup of the second film, the future seems bright.

After all, "we're all in this together."