-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks
- Thread starter hpyhnt 1000
- Start date
- Status
wishesjake
Member
Yeah they do, please don't get me wrong I wasn't arguing with you, I don't want this to turn into the typical forum slugfest. I totally agree with you that he did have a political bent to his optimistic futurism. Can you make a case that Walt's version of capitalism would work today? I'm not challenging you, I would just like to hear someone else's opinion. (believe it or not I don't meet many people day to day that want to discuss the politics of Walt Disney.)
HBG2
Member
I won't try to make the case here; I'll simply point out that yes, there are credible authors and politicos who would happily make a case for you in the affirmative. Of course some things have changed. For example, the suspicion that big corporations can't be fully trusted to protect the environment unless someone keeps an eye on them (and government's the only thing big enough to do that) has now become accepted conventional wisdom, it seems to me. Certain now-widely-accepted labor laws and industrial safety regulations would be other examples. Hence, the sort of open love fest with GE that is promoted in the Carousel of Progress, for example, would embarrass even Reagan conservatives today. The question is, does our less glamorous, more jaded view of big corporations amount to a political sea change? I'd say no. There are plenty of conservative Republicans and Libertarians out there who concede the point that a few curbs and cautions need to be in place, but who still firmly believe in the general principal that the free market should be constrained by the least amount of governmental interference possible. In other words, they see the ideal as Walt's early 60's muscle car with a catalytic converter and air bags, but not making everything illegal except bicycles and Chevy Volts. Tweaks, not overhauls. I don't think Walt in 2010 would want to or feel the need to go to a radically different business model, IMHO.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
When I was a boy in the seventies, the conventional wisdom was that things would get better every year and improve somehow due to a thing called progress. Wars were anomalies that happened elsewhere, but we had progress and technology on our side. We have lived long enough where the breakthroughs of the 20th Century in some cases have haunted us and still do. The world has changed and "progress" in many cases is seen as industrialization and something viewed with skepticism.
No one wants the cellular tower in their neighborhood.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
Iaapa
Kevin Yee covers the Amusement Park convention. I used to go every year, but was too busy to fly out this time. Would have enjoyed it for sure. Any of you thinking of becoming designers should check it out sometime to get a feel for the industry. Enjoy some of the innovations. The shaped bubble star thing looks pretty interesting.
http://miceage.micechat.com/kevinyee/ky112310a.htm
Kevin Yee covers the Amusement Park convention. I used to go every year, but was too busy to fly out this time. Would have enjoyed it for sure. Any of you thinking of becoming designers should check it out sometime to get a feel for the industry. Enjoy some of the innovations. The shaped bubble star thing looks pretty interesting.
http://miceage.micechat.com/kevinyee/ky112310a.htm
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
Interesting take on Walt. I agree that the 1967 Tomorrowland, like the World's Fairs that spawned the COP were big marketing vehicles posing as pavilions for the greater good. Disney somehow made Dishwashers and Ford Falcons fun and palatable back then and did it in an immersive environment where people were more accepting of those overt messages. If you can sanitize Monsanto, you can sell anything! The only one that caught on to the whole thing and objected to hearing GE was "Sport" the growling dog! Animals are so much smarter.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
I think what made Tomorrowland '67 so great was the inherent sense of optimism. Same thing for EPCOT Center. Which is why, in my opinion, these places pale compared to their current incarnations. What's better- pessimism? 
flavious27
Well-Known Member
He was american in dreaming large, his brother roy was the one behind the scenes that made the money flow to make those dreams reality.
As great an idea EPCOT was, it unfortunately would not ever be possible to be made.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
Why do you think it wouldn't be possible? I've studied the EPCOT City plan for years but I've never been able to figure out why some people think it was an impossible goal.
ABigBrassBand
Well-Known Member
I think it has to do more with the funding and how to maintain it after it was created to the point where it would be an accepted society--building it would be the easy part.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
The cost to build it would have been enormous, there would not have been the demand to support it in Central Florida.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
That's why doing it as a DVC timeshare kind of project that allows public access from EPCOT to the PC public areas may make the most sense. Mixed use so to speak. "Progress City" is just another location in a proven DVC business model. That way you avoid all of the "rights of homeowners" issues you would get with a real City. When you are a part time "resident", the fun stays fresher, longer.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
VIPs.
We talk about the political messages or political stand of Walt through his work, and there are many ways to see that for sure. It's a great topic.
One thing that has always stood out to me as neutral but powerful, was the fundamental CM policy that "every guest is a VIP". If the goal is to welcome everyone and treat them better than they expect, you cannot help but be successful. A "secret weapon" of Disney IMO. This policy was probably crystallized in the 60's when civil rights was at a boiling point and was a contrast to some who came from other parts of the country or the world. Disneyland was an "escape" to a degree and everyone shared things together .
I always chafe a bit when I see "VIP tours" and "fast passes" because it creates a "haves and have nots" situation in the park. I know that this exists elsewhere as we accept that others pay for it like Season Tickets at ball games, etc. But I always loved that at one time Disneyland had an unspoken democracy about the experiences and equal access to them. Now they are back to selling hard ticket events in the evenings to create a tier beyond the AP. It never ends and is a reflection of the real world we live in. I get that.
At WDI I always waited in line for the shows and liked to hear what the guests liked and disliked. "Shared experiences" is part of the great power of the parks. The challenge today can be the wide diversity itself in that so many cultures mix and then it is up to each guest to be tolerant of each other in viewing parades, etc. Good design can contribute to making those shared experiences socially successful. Designers have to be aware of the audience and how they view the design and use it. Across the world, we learned that some cultures are less likely to respect rules and queues, while others are inherently more orderly in how they behave, etc. You recognize those differences and design for them as best you can. Not that they are better, just different customs. The design itself can encourage a sense of fair play for all. So making queues that are too wide encourages cutting in line and the stress of those easing ahead, while a narrower queue subtly supports the notion of single file and that every guest gets their turn. Design can help every guest to get a VIP treatment. A warm smile does that better than anything you can build BTW.
We talk about the political messages or political stand of Walt through his work, and there are many ways to see that for sure. It's a great topic.
One thing that has always stood out to me as neutral but powerful, was the fundamental CM policy that "every guest is a VIP". If the goal is to welcome everyone and treat them better than they expect, you cannot help but be successful. A "secret weapon" of Disney IMO. This policy was probably crystallized in the 60's when civil rights was at a boiling point and was a contrast to some who came from other parts of the country or the world. Disneyland was an "escape" to a degree and everyone shared things together .
I always chafe a bit when I see "VIP tours" and "fast passes" because it creates a "haves and have nots" situation in the park. I know that this exists elsewhere as we accept that others pay for it like Season Tickets at ball games, etc. But I always loved that at one time Disneyland had an unspoken democracy about the experiences and equal access to them. Now they are back to selling hard ticket events in the evenings to create a tier beyond the AP. It never ends and is a reflection of the real world we live in. I get that.
At WDI I always waited in line for the shows and liked to hear what the guests liked and disliked. "Shared experiences" is part of the great power of the parks. The challenge today can be the wide diversity itself in that so many cultures mix and then it is up to each guest to be tolerant of each other in viewing parades, etc. Good design can contribute to making those shared experiences socially successful. Designers have to be aware of the audience and how they view the design and use it. Across the world, we learned that some cultures are less likely to respect rules and queues, while others are inherently more orderly in how they behave, etc. You recognize those differences and design for them as best you can. Not that they are better, just different customs. The design itself can encourage a sense of fair play for all. So making queues that are too wide encourages cutting in line and the stress of those easing ahead, while a narrower queue subtly supports the notion of single file and that every guest gets their turn. Design can help every guest to get a VIP treatment. A warm smile does that better than anything you can build BTW.
PhilharMagician
Well-Known Member
What about Club 33? Walt himself created it just for his business relations and of course the people the could afford it's very limited membership.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
Club 33 litist?
Good one! Club 33 is there to fill a need (some say that need was to have a full bar). It was primarily created to reward and entertain (and retain) those 33 companies who were the financial "founders" of the park. "21 Royal" (now the dream suite) was going to be a private "sponsor lounge" for the INA Company. Now we design a "sponsor lounge" into new attractions so the participant can entertain their own guests and show off their investment in private. They vary in elegance, although the Living Seas pavilion had one that was pretty elaborate, and the sponsor pays to maintain it.
The thing that stands out to me was that Club 33 and all sponsor lounges are discretely intended to be "invisible" to the guest as not to generate any comparison. They have nothing to do with how each guest is personally treated. It truly filled a need the companies demanded as they wanted to bring their clients and entertain them. The parks encourage the sponsors to make their employees feel that the ride they sponsor is "their show" and when at the park, to visit the company lounge and say hello, or sign a guest book. They do get treated special by their company because they built the project. Disneyland had nothing like that up till that time. Unlike seeing those with fast passes being let in ahead of you, this process is "invisible" to the guest. You can argue that Club 33 was also a secure location to entertain dignitaries that visited the park (an unexpected need) but needed security or who would not shuffle a tray at the Plaza Inn. So it is true that the Club could be considered elitist and it certainly has evolved that way as there are many personal memberships and the fan base knows this. Most guests thankfully have never heard of it.
Good one! Club 33 is there to fill a need (some say that need was to have a full bar). It was primarily created to reward and entertain (and retain) those 33 companies who were the financial "founders" of the park. "21 Royal" (now the dream suite) was going to be a private "sponsor lounge" for the INA Company. Now we design a "sponsor lounge" into new attractions so the participant can entertain their own guests and show off their investment in private. They vary in elegance, although the Living Seas pavilion had one that was pretty elaborate, and the sponsor pays to maintain it.
The thing that stands out to me was that Club 33 and all sponsor lounges are discretely intended to be "invisible" to the guest as not to generate any comparison. They have nothing to do with how each guest is personally treated. It truly filled a need the companies demanded as they wanted to bring their clients and entertain them. The parks encourage the sponsors to make their employees feel that the ride they sponsor is "their show" and when at the park, to visit the company lounge and say hello, or sign a guest book. They do get treated special by their company because they built the project. Disneyland had nothing like that up till that time. Unlike seeing those with fast passes being let in ahead of you, this process is "invisible" to the guest. You can argue that Club 33 was also a secure location to entertain dignitaries that visited the park (an unexpected need) but needed security or who would not shuffle a tray at the Plaza Inn. So it is true that the Club could be considered elitist and it certainly has evolved that way as there are many personal memberships and the fan base knows this. Most guests thankfully have never heard of it.
MarkTwain
Well-Known Member
The idea of a social/political message behind Disneyland is one that has fascinated me recently. It's become more or less accepted that the reason Walt utilized monorails and PeopleMovers in Tomorrowland so extensively is because he was trying to advocate their use in public transportation, but I suspect there are even other such messages in the park. When Walt built Disneyland in 1955, the pedestrian walkways and urban streets of American cities were losing favor to freeways and interstates, and the idea of a dense, downtown urban area was rapidly giving way to suburban sprawl. This was also a time when the old-fashioned architecture of yesteryear was far more unpopular than the changes brought about by modernist design. So I wonder if, by building Main Street, Walt was quietly pushing his agenda that there was still value in pedestrian design, pointing out the spacial and commercial efficiencies by having a bunch of stores and restaurants within walking distance of each other, while also highlighting the charms and beauty of old-fashioned architecture. If this was the case, then that could mean Walt Disney had preceded the ideas of New Urbanism by some 30 years! I noticed this when seeing a proposal for a pedestrian district in Indianapolis, which the presentation described as a "modern urban Disneyland". Apparently some designers/urban planner even today are paying attention to the ideas Walt demonstrated half a century ago.
That's true, one element of Club 33 was that it was "invisible" to the average guest, and created no feeling of inferiority. One can even hear guests today wondering what the "33" sign on the patio means, completely unaware of the restaurant overhead. One thing that can be said for fastpasses is that at least they are free to everyone, so any feeling of haves/have-nots has nothing to with finance, but rather how well you know the park. It also raises questions about current/upcoming offerings like the Wild Animal Trek for Animal Kingdom, where guests on a VIP tour of the savannah will be within plain sight of people riding the Kilimanjaro Safaris (pictures). I wonder if that will create a feeling of classism between the guests.
PhilharMagician
Well-Known Member
I agree with the Fast Pass system in it's current state of operation. Let's see what happens in the future and if Disney starts a similar system to Universal and the paid Pass system. Disney does have some patents filed for just that and more. Who knows what the future will bring with the combo of RFID, FP and level of accomodations, DVC, D-23 and then throw in AP or PAP. The more money you spend the more FP's will be available to you???
The feeling of classism can be felt at the bus stop watching people getting on the bus for the Grand Floridian or Contemporary when you are going to the All Stars. I don't care where you are in society, social classes will always be there in some way and as always with money in the drivers seat! If you think about it, when Disneyland was opened you had tickets for the rides. You could only ride them if you had the money, if no money then no ticket and no ride! That is just like if you want to go on the Wild Animal Trek then you buy a ticket and go. Anybody can go as long as they pay. It's capitalism
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
Eddie, are you familiar with the Epic Mickey video game coming out this week? If so, do you have any thoughts on how the designer, Warren Spector, has 1.) apparently tried to bring a darker tone to Mickey and the parks, and 2.) revive some long-dormant parts of Disney lore like Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, extinct attractions, etc.?
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
I have read the story of it, and like "Kingdom Hearts", it's a darker reboot of sorts. I'm anxious to see the execution of it all (how dark it ends up being), then I can better comment.
Eddie Sotto
Premium Member
Great post, thx.
Main Street as far as I know was addressing the fact that small towns were vanishing in favor of big cities and the slow simple life was vanishing as well. So the slower pace of the street, the "clip clop" of the horses, etc was his reaction to that. The mom and pop stores, local theater are part of the dynamic too. Candy, Silhouettes, and glass trinkets made by hand. So in a sense, you are right in that Walt was recalling the warmth and simplicity of small town suburban life. To add drama, he threw in the conflicting elements of electric lights and motor vehicles. It's more of a social commentary and nostalgia to me. A 1955 passing on opportunity from grandparent to child.
- Status