Intelligibility of Splash Mountain's plot

[Castle Cake Apologist]

“We” are caught? Or Br’er Rabbit?

And whoever is caught, if Br’er Fox has them in his kitchen next to the stew pot, why would he throw us/him out over the edge into the briar patch?

We've been following Br'er Rabbit along his journey, so presumably we've now followed him into our own sticky situation. Characters speak directly to us during the entire ride, so this isn't even really out of place. This isn't Spaceship Earth, where we're meant to be invisible observers. We're actively participating in this story.

Br'er Fox hasn't settled on how he's going to kill him before he cooks him. That's why there's rotating dialogue for Br'er Fox at the top of the hill. ("Well, Br’er Rabbit, I expect I’ll just have to skin/roast/hang ya!") They are mortal enemies, so when Br'er Rabbit seems most terrified of dying by being flung into the Briar Patch ("That’s all right, Br’er Fox—hang me if you gotta! But please, please don’t fling me in that there briar patch!"), that's the fate Br'er Fox Settles on. It's already been established through several previous vignettes that Br'er Rabbit is constantly tricking Fox and Bear, who are constantly trying to finish the job.

 

[spacemt354]

99 responses so far. And of those who responded, a slight majority (53) do not regard the plot as easy to follow in all its particulars. I imagine that percentage would be higher outside our community.

That's not how I interpret the poll. 45% so far have responded that they understood the entire plot, with another 14% understanding most of it (but not one specific aspect), and another 17% biased in understanding the plot because they already knew the story.

Only 22% so far have responded that they understood some of, very little or none of the plot, which to me were the only options available that would categorize the plot as not easy to follow.

 

[Castle Cake Apologist]

Now that I’ve gone back and watched a few different ridethrough videos to refresh my memory, I’m certain some of you all might be over-estimating how much of the ride’s actual story you understood on your first (or even your first few) rides.

Firstly, many Splash ride POV videos on YouTube reflect the poor lighting and audio that the ride has often had over the years. Much of the actual plot (not the general overall story) is conveyed in audio. So if the audio isn’t working well (muffled, poor balance), some of the scenes don’t make much sense at all.

I was happy to find this script of all ride audio!

But even with the audio, much of the plot needs to be inferred.

I'm 35 and have been visiting WDW since I was born. My first ride on Splash was in early 1993, when it was basically brand new. The audio and lighting was top notch, and the story wasn't hard to follow at all.

You can't really use YouTube videos from the last ten years as evidence of anything, as the ride was kept in very good shape for its first nearly 20 years. Those dialogue and lighting problems weren't present for the majority of its life.

You also can't really use YouTube as evidence of how something actually sounds and looks in real life to the human eye, especially when it comes to lighting.

 

[LittleBuford]

That's not how I interpret the poll. 45% so far have responded that they understood the entire plot, with another 14% understanding most of it (but not one specific aspect), and another 17% biased in understanding the plot because they already knew the story.

Only 22% so far have responded that they understood some of, very little or none of the plot, which to me were the only options available that would categorize the plot as not easy to follow.

I agree, which is why I wrote “in all its particulars”. Perhaps I needed to phrase it differently, because you’re the second person to misunderstand me.

 

[LittleBuford]

The same goes for me. It was a pointless exchange that I very much regret engaging in. I hope @The Mom deletes it.

 

[Castle Cake Apologist]

But I don't think it's fair to frame any of this in terms of honesty (or, as others have done, intelligence or attentiveness).

Just wanted to say this. You are hands down one of my favorite members here. I love reading your posts, which always come across as very intelligent and well-written. And I especially love the patience you constantly display when having discussions with others here. I'd wager I find myself in complete agreement with 99.999% of your posts.

So, I really really hope my saying that I think some riders weren't paying attention isn't being taken as an insult in any way, because I really don't mean anything like that by it. It's not unusual to get caught up in the visuals and music of an attraction, especially one as gorgeous as Splash Mountain, and let your mind ignore half of the specifics of what is being presented. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, I was just presenting it as a possibility of why people may have missed parts of the story while riding.

I hope there's no hard feelings here!

 

[LittleBuford]

Just wanted to say this. You are hands down one of my favorite members here. I love reading your posts, which always come across as very intelligent and well-written. And I especially love the patience you constantly display when having discussions with others here.

I really really hope my saying that I think some riders weren't paying attention isn't being taken as an insult in any way, because I really don't mean anything like that by it. It's not unusual to get caught up in the visuals and music of an attraction, and let your mind ignore half of what is being presented. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, I was just presenting it as a possibility of why people may have missed parts of the story while riding.

I hope there's no hard feelings here!

That’s very sweet of you—thanks!

And definitely no hard feelings on my part!

 

[spacemt354]

I agree, which is why I wrote “in all its particulars”. Perhaps I needed to phrase it differently, because you’re the second person to misunderstand me.

I understood what you said, I just feel that is a skewed way of interpreting the poll, and one that implies an outcome that isn't representative of the consensus so far.

 

[LittleBuford]

I understood what you said, I just feel that is a skewed way of interpreting the poll, and one that implies an outcome that isn't representative of the consensus so far.

It was discussion of Br’er Rabbit’s use of reverse psychology in the other thread that prompted me to create this thread in the first place. Before reading some of the posts there, I sincerely thought that it was impossible to infer from the ride alone that Br’er Rabbit wanted to be thrown into the briar patch. I stated as much and rightly received criticism for making assumptions. The debate reignited a few days ago, which is when I decided to open this poll. If my framing of it is skewed, that’s because the reverse-psychology part is what I personally view as the line between a good general understanding of the story (bunny escapes fox) and a clear understanding of the plot in all its major particulars (bunny tricks fox into throwing him back home).

At any rate, regardless of my own framing, the numbers are there for people to interpret as they wish.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Now that I’ve gone back and watched a few different ridethrough videos to refresh my memory, I’m certain some of you all might be over-estimating how much of the ride’s actual story you understood on your first (or even your first few) rides.

Firstly, many Splash ride POV videos on YouTube reflect the poor lighting and audio that the ride has often had over the years. Much of the actual plot (not the general overall story) is conveyed in audio. So if the audio isn’t working well (muffled, poor balance), some of the scenes don’t make much sense at all.

I was happy to find this script of all ride audio!

But even with the audio, much of the plot needs to be inferred.

I think @Castle Cake Apologist makes a good point that many of us came to know the ride during the 1990s when everything was in top working order; there's a reason people have been so dismayed for so long time about the condition in which WDW in particular has allowed Splash to run.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, without it having anything to do with intelligence, people's brains just work differently and respond to different kinds of information. For some (I would wager most), it's easy to fill in many of the blanks based on the context clues and, likely, some prior knowledge. To me, it's more interesting than anything to see that some people have looked at the exact same attraction over the years and seen something so different to what I saw, such as Brer Fox and Brer Rabbit being friends.

As for interpreting the poll results, I opted for the second-last option, but I think the ride's narrative is about as clear as it could be. Everything in life is informed by prior knowledge, and in this case I assume some familiarity with the story helped me to fill in blanks. At this stage, though, it's more an acknowledgement that I don't know how many of the blanks I could have filled in without that familiarity than a statement about certain plot points being unclear.

 

[spacemt354]

It was discussion of Br’er Rabbit’s use of reverse psychology in the other thread that prompted me to create this thread in the first place. Before reading some of the posts there, I sincerely thought that it was impossible to infer from the ride alone that Br’er Rabbit wanted to be thrown into the briar patch. I stated as much and rightly received criticism for making assumptions. The debate reignited a few days ago, which is when I decided to open this poll. If my framing of it is skewed, that’s because the reverse-psychology part is what I personally view as the line between a good general understanding of the story (bunny escapes fox) and a clear understanding of the plot in all its major particulars (bunny tricks fox into throwing him back home).

At any rate, regardless of my own framing, the numbers are there for people to interpret as they wish.

It seems evident to me that the majority as of now, understand the plot in all its particulars. Whether that's through a sheer comprehension of the ride or thanks to prior knowledge of the story.

I wouldn't blame anyone for not picking up the reverse-psychology aspect especially on the first ride-through. In fact to me that heightens the anxiety and anticipation of the drop if you think the main character is in trouble, then the relief in the finale that he tricked them into sending him home.

There are hints beforehand that his home is the Briar Patch, but for a first time rider they're very subtle. I'm sure there are more, but two I could think of is Br'er Frog saying that "Br'er Rabbit is leaving his Briar Patch" as you ascend the first lift-hill, and the How Do You Do? song lyric "I've had enough of this ol' briar patch"

 

[_caleb]

Thanks for engaging in a thoughtful discussion about this. As a huge fan of themed attractions and immersive storytelling, I find this topic very interesting.

Note: I do not think I could do better than WDI on this. I am not criticizing Splash Mountain in any way. I am only discussing my own experience and understanding of the ride's story as told through the series of vignettes on the ride.

I have ridden both the DL and MK versions of the ride many, many times over the years. I have watched POV videos to refresh my memory, but I'm not basing my opinions on ride videos alone.

I do agree with those who have pointed to the importance of ride audio to the guest's understanding of the storyline. With muddled/out-of-balance audio, some of this becomes MUCH more difficult to understand. Key plot details depend on a single line (or two) of dialog or song lyrics.

Things people have claimed to have understood from the ride scenes only that I just don't see (and whether they largely depend on the audio to make the details clear):

• Br'er Frog is a narrator: Perhaps he was meant to be a narrator, but he does little more than say, "here's a story..." and to my knowledge, he does not make another appearance (voice or AA).
• Why Br'er Rabbit wants to leave his home (the Briar Patch): there are hints about running away from troubles, but there's no indication that Rabbit has any troubles, only that he's "movin' along" (see the kerchief-on-a-stick).
• "Br'er Rabbit is a "trickster": The only indication of this I saw was that he peeked out and laughed as Br'er Bear stood on Fox's shoulders beside a tree with a beehive. On the tree, we see "To the Laughin' Place" written. (BTW: all throughout the ride, there is similar such writing--presumably not written by Rabbit: the names of who lives in each house, "keep out" signs on doors, etc.)
• Bear and Fox are "bad guys": Some have pointed to Fox's look (I'm assuming his sharp teeth and menacing eyebrows), but Bear usually has a big, goofy smile. Bear carries a club, so maybe that's how we're meant to know? Fox's dialog says stuff like, "Now’s our chance to set a trap for Br’er Rabbit" and "I’m gonna catch that Br’er Rabbit this time, for sure!" [Dialog is key]
• Fox and Rabbit are "mortal enemies": Obviously in real life this would be true. In the ride, the hints I see were 1) Fox on Bear's shoulders, spying on Rabbit's house and 2) Bear caught in a trap Fox presumably set for Rabbit. Is there history there? Is Fox just hungry? How is Bear involved? Note that some appearances of the characters (in front of the ride) do not seem to depict these characters as being enemies.
• What the Laughin' Place is: Is it a real place? A mindset? Just a trick? Why would mothers warn their kids not to go to the Laughin' Place? Why are all the critters singing and playing in the caverns in the Laughin' Place scene?
• Guests/Riders in the log are part of the story: Is this the case consistently throughout the ride? Hints that this is true: "Time to be turnin' around" lyric, the Vultures dialog? But why doesn't Rabbit ask for our help? Why don't characters address us directly? [Dialog is key]
• Rabbit uses "reverse psychology:" This one has been discussed upthread, but the only in-ride indication of this is the dialog between Fox and Rabbit ("Shall I roast you?" "Sure, just don't throw me in the briar patch!"). Obviously I know the story now, but I did not learn it ONLY through this scene. [Dialog is key]
• Zip-a-dee-doo-dah: What does this mean? I think it's about being content in your present circumstances? In the finale scene, why are all the animals celebrating Rabbit's return?
• Fox and Bear got their comeuppance: The last time we see them, Bear is stuck in briars and Fox has an alligator holding his tail. Is this a "drat, foiled again!" situation? Is the gator going to eat them?
• Rabbit learned his lesson: Obviously, Rabbit literally says this line in his final scene. But the lesson is "stay home?" Why is this the lesson? Fox and Bear were shown just beside his home in their first appearance on the ride. Shouldn't the lesson be "reverse psychology can be a fun way to trick people and also to get you out of danger?" But that hardly seems right for a theme park ride...

I know some here think I'm overthinking. I'm not upset by any of this, and I'm not trying to prove any point or argue. I'm just interested in how WDI chose to boil down the story into these few scenes and how it seemed to work so well to convey the plot details to some riders (and maybe what I missed when I first experienced the ride).

 

[LittleBuford]

It seems evident to me that the majority as of now, understand the plot in all its particulars. Whether that's through a sheer comprehension of the ride or thanks to prior knowledge of the story.

True, but one of the reasons I created this poll was to distinguish between the two groups you mention in the bolded. The debate in the main thread centred on whether a person could understand the whole story, including the reverse-psychology aspect, without prior knowledge of the source material. As far as the results here go, a slight majority of respondents (currently 55 out of 106) could not (or believe they may not have been able to) infer the full plot from the ride alone.

A big caveat is that the "I (think I) already knew the story; certain details may not have been clear to me otherwise" group (which is the one I belong to) is answering based on a counterfactual assumption. Perhaps we would have been able to deduce the narrative unaided, even if we feel otherwise. [ETA: I also see from @Sir_Cliff's post that some of the people choosing this answer aren't who I imagined when framing the options; that may be my fault.]

I'm happy to acknowledge that the most popular answer, accounting for 50 out of 106 responses so far, remains the first: "Pretty much all of it, including Br'er Rabbit's use of reverse psychology." But that still means that only about half of the members of this forum (or those who've answered the poll) claim full (or nearly full) comprehension of the story based on the ride alone.

Let me end by reiterating that I believe that the narrative in its basic outlines was clearer than not. All one really needed to comprehend was that Br'er Rabbit was fleeing Br'ers Fox and Bear, and the poll indicates that a majority of respondents understood that much at least.

 

[LittleBuford]

As for interpreting the poll results, I opted for the second-last option, but I think the ride's narrative is about as clear as it could be. Everything in life is informed by prior knowledge, and in this case I assume some familiarity with the story helped me to fill in blanks. At this stage, though, it's more an acknowledgement that I don't know how many of the blanks I could have filled in without that familiarity than a statement about certain plot points being unclear.

I'm surprised you didn't go for the last option in that case ("I [think I] already knew the story, but the plot probably would have been clear to me anyway"). That would seem to me a better approximation of where you stand.

 

[flynnibus]

I know some here think I'm overthinking. I'm not upset by any of this, and I'm not trying to prove any point or argue

I think you are trying to force a strict linear plot expectation and the idea the ride should be free standing in concept. I don't think either of these things are necessities nor were they intended.

I think we are seeing people 20yrs later who have no idea about the brer rabbit stories and question how these show scenes make sense. They aren't setup to tell a free standing narrative inclusive of character development, conflict, and climax.

 

[spacemt354]

True, but one of the reasons I created this poll was to distinguish between the two groups you mention in the bolded. The debate in the main thread centred on whether a person could understand the whole story, including the reverse-psychology aspect, without prior knowledge of the story. As far as the results here go, a slight majority of respondents (currently 55 out of 106) could not (or believe they may not have been able to) infer the full plot from the ride alone.

A big caveat is that the "I (think I) already knew the story; certain details may not have been clear to me otherwise" group (which is the one I belong to) is answering based on a counterfactual assumption. Perhaps we would have been able to deduce the narrative unaided, even if we feel otherwise. [ETA: I also see from @Sir_Cliff's post that some of the people choosing this answer aren't who I imagined when framing the options; that may be my fault.]

I'm happy to acknowledge that the most popular answer, accounting for 50 out of 106 responses so far, remains the first: "Pretty much all of it, including Br'er Rabbit's use of reverse psychology." But that still means that only about half of the members of this forum (or those who've answered the poll) claim full (or nearly full) comprehension of the story based on the ride alone.

Let me end by reiterating that I believe that the narrative in its basic outlines was clearer than not. All one really needed to comprehend was that Br'er Rabbit was fleeing Br'ers Fox and Bear, and the poll indicates that a majority of respondents understood that much at least.

To me I just feel there are 3 categories of response in this poll. Those that understood the plot in full, those that either understood most, some, little or none of the plot, and those that can't say for sure because they may have had prior knowledge.

To combine the latter two categories together and call them the slight majority I don't think is an accurate way to interpret these results. Naturally the results could change over time and it's an interesting thought experiment but as of now it seems the majority understood the plot in full.

 

[LittleBuford]

To me I just feel there are 3 categories of response in this poll. Those that understood the plot in full, those that either understood most, some, little or none of the plot, and those that can't say for sure because they may have had prior knowledge.

To combine the latter two categories together and call them the slight majority I don't think is an accurate way to interpret these results. Naturally the results could change over time and it's an interesting thought experiment but as of now it seems the majority understood the plot in full.

Let me frame it differently, then. As the poll currently stands, just under half of the respondents (51 out of 106) feel confident in saying that they understood (or would have understood) the full plot from the ride alone.

As I said, the 17% in the penultimate category complicate things somewhat, and I'm happy to adjust that option if my current framing of it is inadequate or misleading. I meant that answer for those who were reasonably sure that they wouldn't have understood the whole story without prior knowledge of it.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I'm surprised you didn't go for the last option in that case ("I [think I] already knew the story, but the plot probably would have been clear to me anyway"). That would seem to me a better approximation of where you stand.

At least speaking from my own perspective, I think those open to the possibility that prior knowledge helped them understand the storyline are more likely to select the second-last option as the last option pushes it a little too close to what you note above as a counterfactual that is difficult to evaluate. That said, I didn't think too much about the difference between "may not have" and "probably would have" when selecting my option.

Ah, the challenges of drafting a questionnaire and anticipating the gap between the intent of the question and that of the person reading and answering it! I'm very happy I don't use them in my work!

 

[LittleBuford]

I'm very happy I don't use them in my work!

As am I! Perhaps if I did, I would have done a better job framing those last two options. If you or others have any suggestions for edits, I'd be happy to hear them!

 

[LittleBuford]

Unless I'm missing something, I don't think I can change the wording of the answers anyway; all it's allowing me to do is add more answers. So let me clarify my intent for those last two options:

• "I (think I) already knew the story; certain details may not have been clear to me otherwise." This is meant for those who strongly suspect that they would not have been able to follow or infer the full story from the ride alone without prior knowledge of the narrative. (By "full story", I mean all of the major plot points, including Br'er Rabbit's use of reverse psychology.)
• "I (think I) already knew the story, but the plot probably would have been clear to me anyway." This is meant for those who strongly suspect that they would have been able to follow or infer the full story from the ride alone without prior knowledge of the narrative. (By "full story", I mean all of the major plot points, including Br'er Rabbit's use of reverse psychology.)

Feel free to adjust your answers in light of these clarifications. I can also add the following new options if people would find it helpful: "I (think I) already knew the story and am unsure whether the plot would have been clear to me anyway." This would be for those who really can't say with any confidence how they feel their prior acquaintance with the narrative factored into their experience of the ride.