Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[Eddie Sotto]

This essay reminded me of two unmentioned "fake" places that were recreated with Rockefeller money. The Cloisters near Manhattan and Colonial Williamsburg:

While fake, both were very artfully rendered and are valuable cultural & educational assets.

Disney has counterparts to these two places:

When done at the highest level of execution, any representational reproduction has great value, particularly if the real thing upon which it is based no longer exists or has been compromised by the march of time & money.

A couple years ago, I was at the North Rim of the Grand Canyon for the first time and the atmosphere (the families, the Frontierland-like wooden signage & railing) made me think of Disney. The view was a little wider:

If done right, I think theme parks can have serious artistic, cultural & educational value. I think they lose tremendous value if they are turned into marketing malls, intended to primarily sell toys & movies.

Washington DC borrows of so many Greek and Roman references to it's depiction of a sense of "permanence" and power. Even has it's own "Weenie"! A theme park indeed!

 

[ChrisFL]

So Halloween is approaching and I'm reading about the local haunted houses and haunted farms, etc. that people are doing (for people that have space, time and budget to do such things)

I think its something I'd like to do, as IMO, setting up a unique haunted house could be a good outlet for us prospective imagineering types, you get the general public to visit, hopefully scare up some good feedback.

 

[ScoutN]

Very interesting. Do you know of Halsey Minor?

I know of him. Good story of an American Entrepreneur, worked for what he has. As far as I know he never had a degree that was really tech related but still built/created CNET. I know more about his property history/area than him.

I have never had the privilege to visit his property here via land. I have seen it via air and water though. The history of it is fairly intriguing, especially on the note of Colonial Williamsburg feeling it was no longer period accurate (McCrea family's purchase and modernization in the 1920s). So much history right behind Busch Gardens Williamsburg… literally.

A history professor of mine was on the archeological team that excavated the Wolstenholme Towne. He has some intriguing stories of reactions as they were uncovering the site; especially with pertinence to the armor uncovered.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

If I read you correctly, Eddie, the Washington Monument is DC's "weenie".
Trying to refuse the tempation to add puns... :ROFLOL:

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I know of him. Good story of an American Entrepreneur, worked for what he has. As far as I know he never had a degree that was really tech related but still built/created CNET. I know more about his property history/area than him.

I have never had the privilege to visit his property here via land. I have seen it via air and water though. The history of it is fairly intriguing, especially on the note of Colonial Williamsburg feeling it was no longer period accurate (McCrea family's purchase and modernization in the 1920s). So much history right behind Busch Gardens Williamsburg… literally.

A history professor of mine was on the archeological team that excavated the Wolstenholme Towne. He has some intriguing stories of reactions as they were uncovering the site; especially with pertinence to the armor uncovered.

Wow, that is incredible. Was not aware of the 20's renovation. You should start a Williamsburg thread for us to visit!

 

[Eddie Sotto]

So Halloween is approaching and I'm reading about the local haunted houses and haunted farms, etc. that people are doing (for people that have space, time and budget to do such things)

I think its something I'd like to do, as IMO, setting up a unique haunted house could be a good outlet for us prospective imagineering types, you get the general public to visit, hopefully scare up some good feedback.

Creating your own attraction is really fun and a way to get a start.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Here's a link to a critical essay that questions our cultural motives as to theme parks and how we may prefer the "artificial" worlds of Disneyland to the "real world" of nature itself. "The City of Robots" raises interesting questions and something this thread may enjoy discussing. Your thoughts are always welcomed!

http://books.google.com/books?id=bM...page&q=umberto eco the city of robots&f=false

I will have to add this to my already large reading list. Eco definitely has some interesting thoughts.

This one is about the story of TDL and how American themes work (or not) in Japan. Free to read on Google books.

http://books.google.com/books?id=7J...&resnum=6&ved=0CEsQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

I have a copy of Riding the Black Ship that I read a few years ago. It really is fascinating. I have recently pulled it back out for a paper I am writing. Sadly a lot of the "scholarly" work regarding Disney parks is very poorly researched/fact checked. Even the big essay on Tokyo Disneyland, Bwana Mickey: Constructing Cultural Consumption at Tokyo Disneyland by Mary Yoko Brannen, has a significant portion on differences between Disneyland and Tokyo Disneyland that only works if one completely ignores the existence of the Magic Kingdom.

Washington DC borrows of so many Greek and Roman references to it's depiction of a sense of "permanence" and power. Even has it's own "Weenie"! A theme park indeed!

It is not just Washington, DC. [Neo-]Classical architecture has widely been imbued with these notions of power, stability, permanence and legitimacy. Thus several new governments/leaders have sought to utilize this imagery.

 

[lacrosse nut]

Ideas from the public

Beliwev it or not I just joined this thread and had to go back and read for the last two hours...OK, i actually skipped about 50-60 post. But my question is two-fold. How would you advise a HS student who has aspiations about becoming an imagineer? My daughter will be pursuing a degree in art (she currently is a junior) and is a huge fan of Disney (Walt especially) company. Is there a career track or just a passion that develops into an opportunity?
Second, does anyone from Disney read these chat lines? I would think that they could get valuable information or at least a perspective of fans. What a great and free evaluational tool....There are some great ideas out there that would enhance the experience of guests and keep things whimsical and fresh for the company. Thinking outside the box has always intrigued the people who visit Disney parks, I think they should not forget that as things change. Like the jungle cruise..great ride but very dated and with the Animal Kingdom, so not necessary... Why not revamp the ride to be a Pirates of the Caribean section of the land with a ton of space for ideas from the 4 films since it was so popular. the existing Pirates can be another water ride based on another film or concept . If you really want a jungle cruise, then go boat rides around the Tree of Life, it was done for 1 year and it was lame(nothing to look at , just listen to Radio Disney...and still Imiss it!). i guess it is the money but any info on this subject would be great....I am sure all of the people on this site have thought up things to imprvoe many different times.
In any case, I hope I haven't covered something that was previously brought up, I don't post much on the site but I read and appreciate thsite.. I have for a long time...

 

[yankspy]

I find this discussion of these heavily "restored" places very interesting. What is authentic? It comes down to why we visit them and how they make us feel. Is it to learn or literally "touch" the past? Does it matter if it's real or not?

I had a heated scission with another Imagineer about just this topic. My friend felt strongly that it did not matter if you lied about the artifacts we were going to display (Statue of Liberty MSUSA) as it does not really matter. The guest will never know and the result to the guest will be the same as if it were real. I had to label things as replicas because I just could bring myself to do that. There is a truth in that most do not know that these historic places have little left of their original materials and most has been replaced. They resonate with them as if they are all original. To me, so much of the credibility is that something actually did happen in that historic location and it was restored as it has been shown. Most people assume to a greater or lesser degree that these places are not pristine for 200 years without upkeep. Truth is far more appealing than lying about the artifacts.

It absolutely makes a difference. There are two sites in the D.C. area that have always astounded me. The "Peterson House" which was the house across from Ford's Theater. This where Lincoln died and they still have the bed with a blood stained pillow. You hear so much about Lincoln that he has almost taken on mythical status. However, when you are sitting there looking at a tangible piece of the man it is hard not to be overwhelmed.

The other thing is Monticello. The beauty of the place aside, there is a small bookcase there that has some of his actual books. There are several bookcases with books from his time but this one in particular has his own. There is something about standing there and imagining him thumbing a page while contemplating a thought from Hobbes or Plato. Perhaps he was reading one of those while he was writing the Declaration.

The point is that you are actually face to face with a living piece of that mythical person. Proof that they did indeed exist.

Washington DC borrows of so many Greek and Roman references to it's depiction of a sense of "permanence" and power. Even has it's own "Weenie"! A theme park indeed!

I had the opportunity to go to school as a history major in D.C. We went on several walking tours with one professor who was a third generation Washingtonian. It was a shame how so many people walk right past these powerful buildings without even looking up.

It is also sad how the "dime tours" try and cram everything in without really talking about the details. Every building here has meaning. Everything from the turtles at the Supreme Court building (To symbolize the wheels of justice grinding slowly) to the placement of Lincoln at the memorial (facing Lee across the river at Arlington).

People walk away from these places with a "yeah great, we saw it" feeling because they did not hear the story of the place. Disney assaults the senses. Sights, sounds, smells, etc. Places here assault sight but it is not enough. There needs to be an emotional connection. I love taking people on tours here and telling the story of a certain place. They come away with a much greater appreciation for the many sites here.

 

[ScoutN]

the placement of Lincoln at the memorial (facing Lee across the river at Arlington).

Uh, what? The Lincoln Memorial faces The Reflecting Pool to WWII Memorial to Washington Monument. I feel you are getting confused with the myth that Lee's faced is carved in the back of Lincoln's head over-looking Arlington (through the building of course).

View from Arlington across the Potomac.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Sign me up for your DC tour!! Great commentary.

 

[ScoutN]

Wow, that is incredible. Was not aware of the 20's renovation. You should start a Williamsburg thread for us to visit!

How about "America's Historic Triangle" instead? I love the area I am in though. It is rich with history that cannot be found anywhere else.

 

[yankspy]

Uh, what? The Lincoln Memorial faces The Reflecting Pool to WWII Memorial to Washington Monument. I feel you are getting confused with the myth that Lee's faced is carved in the back of Lincoln's head over-looking Arlington (through the building of course).

View from Arlington across the Potomac.

Sorry, I meant the memorial itself. The seated Lincoln faces the pool. The view from the house itself is almost in a straight line

As far as the myth goes, I have heard from several sources that the face thing came from the sculptor himself (Daniel Chester French) Supposedly he wrote about it in his memoirs which are unfortunately locked away at a university. (If memory serves)

I just wanted to add that I do not necessarily think that the face is there. Just passing along what I have heard.

 

[yankspy]

Sign me up for your DC tour!! Great commentary.

Anytime.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

So we end up at the crossroads of what is defined as "authentic". I work with brands that sometimes stress this authenticity. Levi's is an authentic brand that has a history, you feel like you are wearing "the West", the jeans allow you to visualize that West as you please, or even that James Dean wore them, or that they are American.. the legacy is real until you learn that your pair was made in China (http://www.organicconsumers.org/clothes/chineseslevis.cfm).

A magician creates illusions and in that tradition stays true to that. I see Disney the same way, in that their "authenticity" is in the ability to deliver a certain level of "magic" and "illusion" within a tradition of quality family entertainment.

The essays sometimes criticize the "Disney version" of history in it's theme parks, and their distortions from history to appease the American public. (i.e.- Colonialism in the JC) I wonder if the news media and Hollywood do not also present it's own distortions of events to a degree to capture or direct a view one way or another? Ratings seems to show that people believe they do. Rides are 3 to 5 minutes long and so are news stories. Even documentaries have a bias. There is more to tell but the author chooses to present a shorter version of events. Rides and parks do not promise or pretend to be truthful either, they are clearly entertainment, and even have dedication plaques stating their point of view at the entrance as a disclaimer. Naturally, (I'm biased as well!) I tend to side with the voluntary "Disney versions" of a Jungle Cruise or other settings.

So to me, Disney is "authentic" in it's ability to deliver illusion tied to an emotion. You measure success by the results. Does the illusion elicit an emotion as if the experience were real? (The chill of believing you could "fly" in Soarin'). Fantasy is about suspending disbelief, and the master of fantasy does that. Universal's WWHP does that (so I hear), so the crown goes to those who deliver and transport us.

I visited the Kona Brewing Company in Hawaii (Longboard Beer http://konabrewingco.com/) and love their Island brewpub and their exotic Kona Coffee infused beers they serve on tap. I was confused when they cost more by the six pack on the Islands than they do in my local market here in California (like 4 bucks more!). I later found out that the bottled version of the Hawaiian beer was brewed in Portland Oregon and shipped to Hawaii and elsewhere and the only Hawaiian beers on tap were locally made. I had enjoyed the bottled beer thinking it was brewed in favorite vacation spot, and now, even though I still buy it, the whole Portland thing is a buzzkill.

Brand authenticity is such a downer.

 

[trs518]

So we end up at the crossroads of what is defined as "authentic". I work with brands that sometimes stress this authenticity. Levi's is an authentic brand that has a history, you feel like you are wearing "the West", the jeans allow you to visualize that West as you please, or even that James Dean wore them, or that they are American.. the legacy is real until you learn that your pair was made in China (http://www.organicconsumers.org/clothes/chineseslevis.cfm).

A magician creates illusions and in that tradition stays true to that. I see Disney the same way, in that their "authenticity" is in the ability to deliver a certain level of "magic" and "illusion" within a tradition of quality family entertainment.

The essays sometimes criticize the "Disney version" of history in it's theme parks, and their distortions from history to appease the American public. (i.e.- Colonialism in the JC) I wonder if the news media and Hollywood do not also present it's own distortions of events to a degree to capture or direct a view one way or another? Ratings seems to show that people believe they do. Rides are 3 to 5 minutes long and so are news stories. Even documentaries have a bias. There is more to tell but the author chooses to present a shorter version of events. Rides and parks do not promise or pretend to be truthful either, they are clearly entertainment, and even have dedication plaques stating their point of view at the entrance as a disclaimer. Naturally, (I'm biased as well!) I tend to side with the voluntary "Disney versions" of a Jungle Cruise or other settings.

So to me, Disney is "authentic" in it's ability to deliver illusion tied to an emotion. You measure success by the results. Does the illusion elicit an emotion as if the experience were real? (The chill of believing you could "fly" in Soarin'). Fantasy is about suspending disbelief, and the master of fantasy does that. Universal's WWHP does that (so I hear), so the crown goes to those who deliver and transport us.

I visited the Kona Brewing Company in Hawaii (Longboard Beer http://konabrewingco.com/) and love their Island brewpub and their exotic Kona Coffee infused beers they serve on tap. I was confused when they cost more by the six pack on the Islands than they do in my local market here in California (like 4 bucks more!). I later found out that the bottled version of the Hawaiian beer was brewed in Portland Oregon and shipped to Hawaii and elsewhere and the only Hawaiian beers on tap were locally made. I had enjoyed the bottled beer thinking it was brewed in favorite vacation spot, and now, even though I still buy it, the whole Portland thing is a buzzkill.

Brand authenticity is such a downer.

They probably bottle in Oregon, so they don't have to ship it across the Ocean. Would you rather pay $4 more in Hawaii or at your local store?

 

[BigThunderMatt]

Universal's WWHP does that (so I hear), so the crown goes to those who deliver and transport us.

That's because a corporation put the same amount of dedication and respect for the IP that a die-hard fan would have, if they were given the opportunity.

Although to be fair, and this is no disrespect to Universal because I absolutely love WWoHP after literally dozens of visits, it's almost too easy to take an IP that is very well-established and has a large fan base and have it be successful if you don't skimp and really put some effort into it. Which they did, and it paid off.

What Disney excels at (or used to at least) was taking their own ideas and making them into unique IP. And as far as the US parks are concerned, I really feel that Everest was the last true attempt at originality. Everest was successful in that regard, Mission:Space, not so much. And that might be why the company is willing to take less and less risks on original ideas and instead basing ideas on established IP.

I'm all for them adding Avatar to DAK if it means the rest of the park is going to benefit from the additional guest capacity. But I honestly think if Disney had decided to do what they were capable of 15-20 years ago (and honestly more recently than that given my previous mentions above), they wouldn't need to go to an outside IP just to have something to put there.

 

[ChrisFL]

That's because a corporation put the same amount of dedication and respect for the IP that a die-hard fan would have, if they were given the opportunity.

Although to be fair, and this is no disrespect to Universal because I absolutely love WWoHP after literally dozens of visits, it's almost too easy to take an IP that is very well-established and has a large fan base and have it be successful if you don't skimp and really put some effort into it. Which they did, and it paid off.

What Disney excels at (or used to at least) was taking their own ideas and making them into unique IP. And as far as the US parks are concerned, I really feel that Everest was the last true attempt at originality. Everest was successful in that regard, Mission:Space, not so much. And that might be why the company is willing to take less and less risks on original ideas and instead basing ideas on established IP.

I'm all for them adding Avatar to DAK if it means the rest of the park is going to benefit from the additional guest capacity. But I honestly think if Disney had decided to do what they were capable of 15-20 years ago (and honestly more recently than that given my previous mentions above), they wouldn't need to go to an outside IP just to have something to put there.

Agreed with this, and there's also the one thing that most attractions must have.....familiarity. Whether its from literature, history, movies, etc., if the subject is mostly foreign, the more difficult it is to present the story.

Speaking for Universal, if you look at most of their attractions, even if you didn't know the movies they represent, it was still familiar (earthquakes, shark attacks, tornadoes, shooting aliens)....the others are usually based on wildly popular movie franchises.

I think it is becoming more and more difficult to choose a franchise, because there are so many entertainment choices available. A movie that might have had a much larger following 20 years ago, may not make an impact these days.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

So we end up at the crossroads of what is defined as "authentic". I work with brands that sometimes stress this authenticity. Levi's is an authentic brand that has a history, you feel like you are wearing "the West", the jeans allow you to visualize that West as you please, or even that James Dean wore them, or that they are American.. the legacy is real until you learn that your pair was made in China.

Up until just a few years ago, we had a Levi factory that made jeans right here in San Antonio. They shut it down saying it was to expensive to pay the salaries. :shrug:

A magician creates illusions and in that tradition stays true to that. I see Disney the same way, in that their "authenticity" is in the ability to deliver a certain level of "magic" and "illusion" within a tradition of quality family entertainment.

The essays sometimes criticize the "Disney version" of history in it's theme parks, and their distortions from history to appease the American public. (i.e.- Colonialism in the JC) I wonder if the news media and Hollywood do not also present it's own distortions of events to a degree to capture or direct a view one way or another? Ratings seems to show that people believe they do. Rides are 3 to 5 minutes long and so are news stories. Even documentaries have a bias. There is more to tell but the author chooses to present a shorter version of events. Rides and parks do not promise or pretend to be truthful either, they are clearly entertainment, and even have dedication plaques stating their point of view at the entrance as a disclaimer. Naturally, (I'm biased as well!) I tend to side with the voluntary "Disney versions" of a Jungle Cruise or other settings.

If anyone really believes that the news media or Hollywood present a fair picture of anything, then they are smoking some serious stuff. While the news media may report some normal news stories with an unbiased look (such as kidnappings), there is definite bias in almost every aspect of their reporting on politics and people. If they like you, you are golden. If not, look out! Hollywood is no different in the "spin" they put on most of what we see. They take a lot of latitude with history to make the story look better to fit what they want you to see.

So to me, Disney is "authentic" in it's ability to deliver illusion tied to an emotion. You measure success by the results. Does the illusion elicit an emotion as if the experience were real? (The chill of believing you could "fly" in Soarin'). Fantasy is about suspending disbelief, and the master of fantasy does that. Universal's WWHP does that (so I hear), so the crown goes to those who deliver and transport us.

I think Disney does it best. I have ridden Soarin' coutless times, yet I get chills every time I ride it! It is my wife's and my favorite ride in WDW!

I visited the Kona Brewing Company in Hawaii (Longboard Beer) and love their Island brewpub and their exotic Kona Coffee infused beers they serve on tap. I was confused when they cost more by the six pack on the Islands than they do in my local market here in California (like 4 bucks more!). I later found out that the bottled version of the Hawaiian beer was brewed in Portland Oregon and shipped to Hawaii and elsewhere and the only Hawaiian beers on tap were locally made. I had enjoyed the bottled beer thinking it was brewed in favorite vacation spot, and now, even though I still buy it, the whole Portland thing is a buzzkill.

Brand authenticity is such a downer.

Not surprising, and wouldn't it be better to brew it locally as well? I understand having the brewery in Oregon for US mainland customers, but why not a small one in Hawaii?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

They probably bottle in Oregon, so they don't have to ship it across the Ocean. Would you rather pay $4 more in Hawaii or at your local store?

I'd rather have it less often but have it live up to my expectation.