Treasures of the Walt Disney Archives at Museum of Science and Industry

I got to see the Museum of Science and Industry's Treasures of the Walt Disney Archives exhibit!

I was already prepared from reading in the Chicago Tribune that the exhibit focused on movie props and animation, not on storylines or specifically fairy tales. But of course, no display of Walt Disney's life would be complete without reference to fairy tales. In the article, Steve Johnson also pointed out his disappointment that the museum didn't go more into Disney's life, "the good and the bad." I was surprised by this initially, because this is not a display somewhere in Disneyland, but put on by a respected and unbiased museum-until I saw that the whole thing was put on by D23, Disney's official fan club. And really to be fair, only so much can fit into one exhibit, and it's a science museum after all, so it makes sense they would focus on animation.

 

And animation is where Disney shines most when we look back-this form of storytelling would be very different today if it weren't for Walt Disney. It's rather unfortunate that someone so innovative and forward thinking couldn't be more progressive when it came to his portrayals of women in fairy tales. In my opinion, Disney's movies really aren't that bad in and of themselves, especially compared to much of the media coming out at the same time (although you will find many who vehemently disagree with me on that)-what's really telling is looking at each fairy tale's history, and how in that sense, his ideas seemed almost backwards. And while we could have expected a little more from him, at the time critics and fans alike absolutely loved his movies-there were even fan letters from other celebrities and presidents. I don't know enough history to fully understand the attitudes of the time, but it's safe to say people had different expectations from there entertainment in Walt's early career than we do today.

Of course you won't find any of that in this museum. The only thing they mention about storyline is how Walt invented the storyboards. But, aside from that, it was still really interesting. I'd read about the multiplane camera before, another invention of the Disney company (although not actually Walt himself, as the exhibit made it seem), but only had a vague idea of how it worked. But now I understand what it is and appreciate the creativity that went into creating it.

 

I also really enjoyed seeing movie props, like the costumes from Mary Poppins, and the storybooks used for the openings of the first Disney Princess movies.

I also thought it interesting to see how, in the span of Disney's creations, though the creators of this exhibit lauded his genius as storyteller, I'd say at least 50% of his movies were taken from either fairy tales or well-known books. It's a little more challengin to create your own masterpiece then to interpret a story that is already well-loved...but whatever your personal opinions of Disney, you can't deny how influential he was. From his earliest laugh-o-grams to the present, fairy tales were integral to Disney's success, and in turn his interpretations of the tales placed him as one of the most significant people in the history of fairy tales (one fan letter the museum displayed, I think from Cecil B. Demille, said that "Germany had its brothers Grimm, and America its Disney!"). I'd recommend the exhibit to anyone else in the Chicago area who has a soft spot for Disneyana!

Jack Zipes-Breaking the Disney Spell

I have to admit, I have a rather defensive attitude about Disney. I have very happy memories of watching the classic films during my childhood as well as family trips to Disneyland, and Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" is what sparked my interest in researching the history of the fairy tale more fully, which ultimately led to this blog (I would also point to Robin McKinley's "Beauty" as my other major inspiration, but I'm honestly not sure if I would have ever read it had it not been for my love of the movie). Not only that, but I'm not sure that all the arguments I read against Disney are that good-it seems people love to attack him simply for the sake of attacking him.

So, I will attempt to be as unbiased as possible and I welcome your opinions and insights in the comments as well.

Bruno Heroux

I did appreciate very much that Zipes examined Disney's early career in context-first he described the history of fairy tales and the major changes the stories underwent as they went from being primarily orally told, to literary stories. These changes included: becoming more elite, in the sense that now the stories were only accessible to those who could read and afford books; making tales more definitive and enduring, as opposed to oral stories which change slightly with every teller, retelling, and audience; the tales were now geared towards children, whereas before they had been meant mainly for adults; the tales reinforced ideas of patriarchy; the tales were no longer a communal activity but became more private; now authors had power to adapt the tales to their particular preference and publish that version as the "definitive"; and now the stories had illustrations to go along with them and help define and shape the reader's ideas of the stories.

The next major development in the lives of fairy tales was film. Other filmmakers had used fairy tales as inspiration, such as George Melies (featured in the movie Hugo) and Lotte Reiniger (I've featured her The Adventures of Prince Achmed before, such beautiful artwork). But none of them focused on fairy tales as much as Walt Disney, and his movies (and following his death, his company's movies) have become the definitive fairy tales of our culture.

Just as literary, published tales gave the stories a more definitive form, film versions make a story even more definitive. Now nothing is left up to the imagination, but each character and scene is illustrated for us. If you asked people across the world what color Cinderella's ball gown is, I bet the vast majority would tell you it was blue, which is a feature of Disney's film but never (or at least very rarely) in folklore. In the words of Walter Benjamin, the phenomenon of films that can be reproduced to mass audiences leads to a "shattering of tradition." Or perhaps more accurately, it supplants the former with a new, more widely known tradition.

As animation was in its infancy, filmmakers and directors wanted their films to reflect their own creativity and give their unique flavor to each story. Zipes said the images on the screen were meant to "celebrate the ingenuity, inventiveness, and genius of the animator." The credits of Disney's early movies show his name filling the screen, and for a long time he didn't even credit the artists and technicians who worked on the film (I'd be curious to learn what other filmmakers of the time did? Was the industry so new there was no expectation of recognizing each of the many workers, or did Disney alone refuse to give credit where due?).

A complaint about early films is a complaint we often hear (and I've made myself) about current movies-the story suffers as the director goes more for shocking and aweing us with special effects.  Early animators wanted to impress audiences with new levels of illusions. Zipes:  "The animators sought to impress audiences with their abilities to use pictures in such a way that they would forget the earlier fairy tales and remember the images that they, the new artists, were creating for them." What filmmaker wouldn't want to make the definitive version of Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and Snow White? Genious for marketing, but not for enhancing the long, rich tradition of fairy tales. I've had instances where I pointed out a version of a non-Disney fairy tale to a child and they got confused and said, "But that's not Sleeping Beauty/Cinderella/Beauty/etc!"

Zipes analyzes Disney's 1922 "Puss in Boots" (can be viewed in this post). The plot is hardly even related to Perrault's story of a clever cat who uses his wits to trick a king and an ogre. A cat and a man together trick a king into getting the princess/lady cat they desire. Zipes reads the human protagonist as representing Disney himself, the young clever hero who wants to break into the industry.

I personally don't see anything wrong with making a fairy tale current and infusing it with your personal story, although I do generally want the plots to be more related. Fairy tales are always evolving and can be interpreted many ways, and I think the spirit of the story is the same-the underdog defeating the Powers That Be-although I admit I have little interest in Puss in Boots and would be more picky about other tales. But Zipes says Disney "robs the literary tale of its voice and changes its form and meaning...Disney returns the fairy tale to the majority of people."

Zipes himself says that Perrault's Puss represented his own class, so couldn't you say that by Disney using the tale to represent himself and the common people, he actually stayed true to its voice and meaning? Again, not an expert on Puss in Boots, so those more familiar with the tale's history and Perrault's intentions, please pipe in in the comments. But can we really accuse Disney of distorting tradition when Perrault did the same thing with his own literary tales-taking oral tales and elements of oral tales and creating stories that suited himself and his culture?

Zipes gives these as the main characteristics of Disney's contribution to fairy tales as they became his films: 1. Democracy-American attitude towards debunking monarchy and giving power to the people 2. Technology-not only in the making of the films, but Puss uses a machine to defeat a bull and an automoblile to escape the king 3. Modernity-references to specific people and items of the twentieth century

Zipes condemns Disney not for the message of empowering the people, but because Disney's heroes only help themselves, not the community at large. He uses deception to defeat the King, just like films themselves are, in a way, deceptive-multiple images are made to look like movement.

My question is, how is this different from any other fairy tale protagonist? Often characters in folklore use trickery and deceit (though those versions and tales are more suppressed as we've tried to make fairy tales morality stories for children). Though many characters are rewarded for being "good" I can't think of any that actively sought to make the world a better place. Fairy tales are almost always a personal journey-they are not epic battles between good and evil that currently attract audiences.

Walt Disney's Laugh-O-Grams

Walt Disney was inspired by fairy tales before the famous full-length cartoons were created-here are several shorts he did in the early 1920s (I think my favorite is the "Alice's Wonderland"-the cartoons interacting with humans made me smile, especially the cartoon mouse poking the cat). These are a preview for a future post on Jack Zipes' essay "Breaking the Disney spell"

The Adventures of Prince Achmed

Any Disney book will tell you that "Snow White" was the first full length animated film, but Lotte Reiniger's "The Adventures of Prince Achmed" is "considered by many" to be the first full-length animated film. "Snow White" would undoubtably be the first full-length hand-drawn animated film, but I from what I've read, Disney is not meticulous about making this distinction. Reiniger's story is told through enchantingly intricate paper cutouts and premiered in Germany in 1926-beating "Snow White" by 11 years.

This story is very sexually charged, but as everything is told through silhouettes, it's more subtle. Prince Achmed is supposed to be the hero, but I hardly think he's more noble than any of the horny villains. The Arabian Nights is probably the worst for portraying females as nothing more than sex objects...ironic, because they're all supposedly told by Scheherezade, a female.

But the film is spellbinding to watch and the music wonderful, if the historical importance weren't reason enough to watch it. And how interesting that fairy tales are so closely linked with the beginnings of animation?

The story combines the story of Prince Achmed and the Fairy with Aladdin, but the liberties taken still fit the style and characteristics of the Arabian Nights, especially using the story-within-a-story (although, Prince Achmed did NOT fool around with all of the Fairy's servants before he met her. It's funny that we're often under the impression that all older movies were laughably wholesome).

Lotte Reiniger has done versions of several fairy tales, including Cinderella, Hansel and Gretel, Thumbelina, and Jack and the Beanstalk. Portions, if not full versions, of all of these can be found on youtube. "The Adventures of Prince Achmed" is currently on Netflix instant play. Here's the beginning of Prince Achmed:

Happy Mickey Mouse Day!

It's the official Mickey Mouse Day! On this day in 1928, Steamboat Willie premiered, and in 1955, the Mickey Mouse Club aired. You can read about other Disney history that happened on November 18 on the This Day in Disney History page.

Mickey started out looking a bit different that he does today (his name was also originally Mortimer) due to limitations in animation. The animators first went with what was easiest to draw, since they had to create 700 feet of film every two weeks. Mickey gradually changed to his present image to give him more character.

Mickey was also different in personality at first-he was meaner and more controversial-"he was quick and cocky and cruel-at best a fresh and bratty kid, at worst a diminutive and sadistic monster...after a delightfully bratty beginning he matured into a terrible square, simply incapable of the kind of irreverent comic turns that a great comedian must master". Disney changed him to make him nicer, but he lost some of his personality that way, so Donald and Pluto were added- as less sacred, they could get away with losing their tempers while Mickey continued to be the hero.

The distributors of the films believed Mickey was the star and the selling point-Disney realized that the technique was key, and realized sound was a huge way to make movies successful. Steamboat Willie was the first movie to have synchronized sound and visuals. Disney drew a slash of ink on every 12th frame, so the screen would flash white every half second, and the conductor's job was to keep the music in time with the flashes. The soundtrack was originally created with lots of sound effects by musically illiterate animators. Eventually, the costs of recording the music for the soundtrack grew more than expected, and Roy Disney had to sell Walt's favorite car to fund it.

Disney also introduced the idea of using great classical music to accompany cartoons in "The Skeleton Dance". This was considered gruesome at the time (the cartoon, not the classical music)-the subject matter didn't go well with the animal characters, so they were absent. This is supposed to be set to Saint-Saens' "Dance Macabre," of which I hear...maybe 5 seconds' worth, altered. Am I crazy?..

Information from the 1968 American Heritage article "Bringing Forth the Mouse" by Richard Shickel. Shickel also includes some choice words about Walt Disney himself:

"Walt Disney was a grouchy, inarticulate, withdrawn man."

"Everything that came out of his workshops was stamped with his name and, indeed, with his taste and personality, a practice which eventually drove most of his genuinely talented elves from his employ."

"He remained suspicious of outsiders, stragely small-minded on questions of aesthetics and narrow-minded on morals, and deeply wedded to the propagation of the happy myth of small-town, turn-of-the-century virtue."

Animated Snow White

I got this sweet book from the library the other day.
Put aside any qualms you may have with the implied messages of the Disney version and let's just talk animation.

This book is full of pictures of stills from the movie, and of sketches from the animators in different stages of animation. This book is great for anyone who likes the fairy tale or anyone interested in animation or the history of film. No one can deny Walt Disney had a huge impact on the movie industry-he was always pushing the limits of what was possible.

The end of the book also has a "making of" section.
Fun facts about the movie Snow White:
-Walt Disney's Snow White was the first ever full-length animated movie. While in production, it was referred to as "Disney's folly."
-Disney had plans to do a version of Alice in Wonderland first, which got thwarted when Paramount announced their Alice
-Walt told the story to anyone who would listen. He would watch their reactions to certain plot twists and refine the story according to what people responded to
-(Rejected) names considered for the dwarves: Gabby, Jumpy, Sniffy, Lazy, Stubby, Wheezy
-More than 150 girls auditioned for the part of Snow White. Disney listened to their auditions from behind a screen, not wanting their physical appearances to influence his judgement.

-At the time, cartoon animation was primitive and Walt wanted it to look more realistic. Actors, vaudeville performers, and staff acted out scenes for the animators. To make the characters look "rounder," the edges were airbrushed.
-Real blush was used on Snow White's cheeks
-To achieve camera-like motion, the Disney team invented the multiplane camera. Since I wouldn't explain it very well I linked you to the wikipedia
-Project expenses kept expanding. At one point, they needed a loan from the Bank of America in order to finish the project. Representative Joseph Rosenberg watched the completed portion of the film without a reaction, walked out, yawned, and commented on the nice weather. He then turned to a terrified Disney and said, "Walt, that picture will make a pot full of money" and Disney got the loan.
-At the preview, though the audience responded well, towards the end a third of the audience got up and left. The Disney team was worried until they learned they were college students who had to get back for their 10 PM dormitory curfew. 10 PM dormitory curfew! My has college life changed...

-Ingredients in the witch's peddler's disguise: mummy dust, black of night, old hag's cackle, and scream of fright
-The animators say that they improved throughout the year and a half of making the film, and that the animation improves towards the end of the movie
-Audiences LOVED the movie. The animation was so new and so appreciated, even landscape shots got applause
-It took 750 artists to make the film-towards the end, they were all working overtime to meet the Christmas 1937 deadline