6 DISNEY MAPS THE FRONTIER The Suburban Frontier as Contact Zone Disneyland’s Main Steet, US.A., offer a staging area for understanding the Disney cosmos, circa 1955. Spatially linking Disneyland’s four zones, it rep: resents an ideal of American life, genteel and placid a pictate of smallxoven living citea 1001 (the year of Walt’s birth), Middletown in the moments before = ‘abecame the epitome ofthe tensions ofa modernizing Ameican society. (See figure 2.) Main See, UIS.A, links the natural world (Adventureland), to the historical (Prontiesland), to the cbild’s imaginative life (Fantasyland), to the cealization ofthat imagination in the technology of the Futuce (Tomorrow lane) rom its inception, this fantastic encapsulation of American social aid cultural life in the Disney cosmos was predicated on two distinct tropes cone stati, one dynamic—operating in tension with each other, Main Street, US.A,, existed asa place out of time: the eternal present of Wal’ childhood. The fout lands that surrounded that sill center represented an active evo \utionary fantesy—zom the animal, to the cultural, to the technologieal— predicated on Wall's complement, the genetic child, Fence, an active atc ex- tending ftom an kal prehistoric past co an ideal furure wheeled around ail bub, modeling the evolution of American social and cultural fe embodied in the imagined child as both changing and changeless, the naturalization and vecapitulation ofa fantasy of an ideal middle America repeated as theme and ‘oration in every iteration ‘he iteration contemporary with Disneyland’ opening wasthe new Ameti= can suburb, home to the newest evolutionary adaptation to modernization the natural child atthe center of the nuclear fanily. This child was both a bell wether for concltions prevailing atthe time and a set of potentials for a fur yet to be realize: it was a conciit from the past into the present and on into the Future, and foom the domestic, through the local, to the national an iner rational, Just as Disneyland compressed a complex set of relations berween nature, enleure, and the rationalizing forces of modernization, so the child’for understanding the nd’s four zones, it rep. picture of small-town in the moments before American society. (See Adventureland), to the ¢ (Fantasyland), to the he future (Tomorrow. f American soctal and two distince tropes— ach other, Main Strees, at of Walt’s childhood. esented an active evo: co the technological ence, an active are ex: » wheeled around a still itusal life embodied in the naturalization and repeated as theme and ingwasthe new Ameri- tion to modernization: is child was both a bell f potentials for a facure fhe present and on into >the national and inter st of relations berween nization, so the child's [WEEKLY TELEVISION EVENT al Report far Walt Disney Productions included this insert comewhat clamoged in reproduction), which made explce the relationship between the physical ‘out of the park and ze ongunization of fs companion television progratn, small body was imagined as the point at which to temper the onward rush of mass culture with humane and natural principles, Like Disneyland, the bur {geoning new suburbs were a symbolic contact zone—a new Ametican fron: tier—within which that process would take place. Disney would use theme: and ‘ng —the creation and regulation of boundaries between nature, culta a rapidly approaching technological future ~to further integrate itself into a landscape that was both symbolic and actual. Like other media producers, i \woult rely on the pressin chis process, But, unlike others, it would alsodevelop ‘a campaign to integrate itself into Local civic organizations and schools, and it ‘would play upon fears of the socially disruptive introduction of television into the home to position tselfas a prophylactic against tv's negative effects—the benign face (Wal a Tink to nature and to America’s historical past. Just as the Disneyland of the 19508 existed both as ‘sof mass mediation that maintai a television progeam and as a physieal place, so “the child” existed both as a complex of hopes, feaes, and desires —an ideal set of social relations realized in its development-and in the millions of bodies that made up the Baby Boom. DISNEY MAPS THEFRONTIER + 301Thisless managed child, resilient through elknowledge and self paced de. velopment, was imagined asa corrective to the regimes of efficiency to which, its parents had been subjected. At the same time, the suburban landscape in which more and more of these children were growing up came to signify a frontier, a liminal zone in which meanings were tested, produced, and con. sumed, Just as the frontier served as both historical referent and as metaphor, s0 the subusbs of the 19508 were aetual spaces— growing at unprecedente rates —and polysemous signifies. While social theorists such as David Ries. man or Wiliam H, Whyte could locate in the new physical and social organ zation ofthe suburbs the etiology of an expanding (and troubling) mass con sciousness, popular novelistesuch as Pilip Wylie, author of Tomorrow (1957) 08 Sloan Wilson, author ofthe bestselling The Man inthe Gay Flannel Suit (1953), depicted the suburbs as environments s0 new that their rawness inspired in their inhabitants an alienation that allowed them to expetience and corrects: I bchaviors previously woven into the fabric of daly life. Members of social policy bodies such as the White House Conference on Children and Youth de- seribed subuibs in almost ftalistic terms, as ifthe newly built environmen "were springing fiona simultaneously physieal and historcallandscape, rather chan desiving from governmental and economic activity: Carefully graded according to economic andl social status ... embodying allthe features ofthe technological revolution, suburbsare more and more setting the standards and establishing the mores of our civilization. ..."The new real estate developments, whether vast housing projects for factory workers or more expensive, cestricted middle-class subdivisions . .. are more uniform .. than the towns and villages that grew up gradually in the past... ‘The suburbs are highly organized, for both adults and chil dren, and present a pattern of living to which almost everyone is under heavy pressure to conform. (Dulles 1960, 19-21) Iisa quick, though not necessarily wise, jump from the historical record to an assumption that the subutbs were an actual physical locus of conform: {st pressures and an excessively panoptic society. Rapid mass consteuction of whole commenities, and architectural and landscape features that seemed t0 invite mutual observation —such as bay windows and set-off building los encouraged the popular discursive construction of the suburbs and their in habitants as trading freedom for security While this certainly describes the concerns of contemporary liberal elites and may welt offera meaningful analy- sis ofthe social and material elations obtaining there, an emphasis on the dys- topian runs the risk of underplaying the utopian potentials projected onto the subut space they relati wars thela the st inwh out vrork sey fora“ledge and self pacedde. 3 of efliciency to which e suburban landscape in 1g up came to signify a ted, produced, and con. ferent and as metaphor, owing at unprecedented rsts such as David Ries pysical and soctal ongani: snd troubling) horof Tomorrow (1957), or ¢ Gry Flannel Suit (1955), cheir rawness inspired in xperience and correctso- ly life. Members of social n Children and Youth de- ely built environments torical landscape, rather wy! cal status... embodying burbs ave moreand more of ourewvilization...."The using projects for factory cass subdivisions . are at grew up gradually in for both adults and chil almost everyone is under ) feom the historical record nysical locus of conform: spid mass construction of features that seemed t0 id set-off building lots— ‘the suburbs and theit in his certainly deseribes the Loffera meaningful analy an emphasis on the dys rentals projected onto the suburban landscape. Even ifmany of those potentials were ist articulated in & {pace created between a developers pitch andasociologis'sfralisiceusiosty, ine that required a different they resonated within a mattx of anxiety and des riship between a people and their society. The 19508 child and the sub selatio vos were locations where the unstoppable march of American rationa suas meant to conffont a hunmanizing nature, Sine the subusbs experienced thelargestdemographicincrasein chien, the owo vectorsmetandjoinedn the suburban child, where an encapsulated human evolution combined with ecapitlated American fronties to orm anaviral envizonmental laboratory qnwhich the business of observation and (slFjegulation could continue with- sue the suggestion of dislocation and confinement that had characterized the srosk of the previous generation, Initsnature films, Disney would model rela tjonshipsin she wild as prefiguringsocal relations in chose subusbs, and in Dis peylndandThe Mickey Mouse, andshrough ts publielations,ewouldia vorn circulate aversion ofchildhood and family ife that provided a foundation for arguments forthe natural child as an evolutionary necessity Disney in Circulation just as popular child-earing discourse shifted from the clinical tothe anthro ological inthe postwar period—changing the home from laboratory ox tension into a domestic fiekiwork site—so Walt Disney Productions shifted itsse;presentation from an eraphasis on the industrial efficiency of ts opers+ tions to a celebration of its shill in translating the natural and scientific into human terms, However, while changes in child-rearing discourse expressed ‘reaction to the threat of dehumanization inherent in the previous regime, Disney's sift in public relations flowed more from economic ciocumstances philosophy. Disney's rapidly diversifying postwar opera iy under the urabrella of one master narrative. Dusing than from achange tions no longer ft ea the war years it had invested heavily i the development ofa tone of sien tfc experts in its industcal ancl propaganda ou, the calm, esured voice of knowledgeable authority that would surface later in ts educational films ‘ind television programs, such as Our Fiend the Aton (1957) or Magic Highivay {S.A 1958). This woe didnot exactly syne with Wale Disney's small-town, aw shucks persona, nor with Seven Dwarf-lce images ofthe studios a a happy Fondis family, and for some time the company and its proponents hnd some trouble deciding how to represent i. In one moment popular depictions of the company emphasized its fee and easy nature: “Most Holly wood studios took like storage warehouses: Disney's... layout is more ofa cross between DISNEY MAPS THEFRONTIER +3031 country cub and a sanitarium, Ithas a baseball dimond, a battery of ping. pong tables, couple of horseshoe:pitching lanes and a penthouse sun-deck ‘where the male employees acquire an all-over tan, The wotkaday buildings ae airconsltioned and reasonably dustproo!® (Nugent 1947, 22). At other, its representations reverted to celebrations ofits Fords techniques: "There ig liede in common between the assembly-fine methods of producing a Mickey Mouse shore and hoitytoity at,” crowed one journalist in an odd evocation of popalisn. “At the sraere Disney Studios... over 500 highly trained em ployees grind out the cartoons” (Wallace 1949, 36) AS late a 1950 Newsweek continued to celebrate Disney's incustial processes, declaring that "putout a feature-length cartoon film like ‘Cinderella’ the Disney studios requie the services of at least 750 artists who may discard moze than a millon drawings before theiefinished jo (nineteen final celluloid drawings per film foots com, plete, At Feast twice that number of employees are required co handle three- dimeosional backgrounds, research, camera work, and administrative deals” (Money from Mice” 1950, 28) [Nor were these contradictory representations limited to the company and the reporters who recycled its public relations releases, Dime also contended witha diverse public that had come to equate its name with sentiment aid jnnocence, and which expected it never to diverge ftom that meaning, After declating Disney's Treasure Island (1950) too violent for young children, the re ‘viewer for The Rotarian reassured readers that Cinderela (1950) was in all ways, but particularly in the animal sequences, adeight. Parents will be glad to know that such ‘horror’ sequences as have marred some of the full-length Disney features are absent from this one" (Lockhart 1950, 42, emphasis original. Indeed, a review of Cinderela by Parents’ Magazine suggested not only that forces outside the studio were actively shaping its public presence, but that Disney was at least feigning an open-door policy n which representatives of its public took part in story conferences ‘When we visited the Disney studio some months ago the working synop- sis ofthe story called for one scene where Cinderella was tobe shown with sormuch workto clo that she wished for seven Cindercllasto help her-~and these seven figures were to appear, and then seven more to make a whole ballet of busy hands and feet, But in the final version this was dropped in favor of more scenes showing the mice and birds helping their adored fricnd with ber heavy tasks. (C. Edwards 1950, 15) "Though itis mote likely that Disney opted for one scene over the other be sh ly y Op cause the former was too reminiscent of the sorcerer's apprentice scene in Fantasia input of clatified symbol of chile are pros coming This its fan che cor a happ iauea just as in yeas that né patent to Am owl eleme say, Mi playes televi Ath expo shat struc ined: simp the ¥ x theo prod Disind, a battery of ping » penthouse sundeck, e workaday buildings 1947, 22). At othets, techniques: “There ig f producing a Mickey rin an odd evocation oo highly trained em: late as 1950 Newsweek saving that to “put out cy studios requite the an a million drawings gs per film foot) iscom, iced to handle three. adrainistrative details” ed to the company and Disney also contended ne with sentiment and mm that meaning. After young children, he re (950) was “inall ways, nts will be glad to know the full-length Disney emphasis original). suggested not only that blic presence, but that /bich representatives of ago the working synop- lawastobe shown with erellas tohelp her —and ) more to makea whole sion this was dropped ls helping their adored cene over the other be: ct's apprentice scene in the gives the impression that the company invited pantasia (1040), the review re" in the review is never saput of atleast one child-eati echaps moe significantly, though, the choice discussel once again asified) spot recapitulate general tend ofthestaio fro" ‘of conceptions .cene in which exact copies of Pfebildhood in general: The Fors sre prwlced todo manual labor was ewricten in favor ofa beneicnt nature ning to Cinderela’ aid? ing publication (the " “this choice marksan earl ith nature from its industrial expertise. Tt veloped before the war—that of benign but fem control 1m that ditectly informed its products —would con- ipl that knit together Disney's different enterprises physical environment of Disneyland gions, s0 iy stage in Disney's efforts to thematically separate ins familiarity wi the master narrative the company had de ‘a happy voluntary ors tinue asthe guiding p «as it would provide coherence to the} rears to come. But jst asthe park would be made up of different re set of secondary narratives. The company’s ap. lay in Adventureland, its access jus iny that narrative would frame & xe found its physical coro ‘in Frontiesland, its ability to translate scienee in Tomar «i control could hold these parentaccessto to American history rowland, and 50 on, While an ides of mastexy an together, the pretense of theming eased the contradictions between, nas and very human technologies such clements say, a natuve untouched by human hi a3 atomic power of interstate highways.” Much more than had been the ease wt nated fairy-tale features and cartoon shorts, i the 150s the mastery offactre layed an increasingly important ce in the Disney cosmos, On he Piste nd felovision program, Walt introduced minidramas in which the protagonists swell as segments from its growing library of nature footage. public-telation stories in which Wale fnen Disney's stock in trace was ani- ‘wore animals, a ‘Ache same time, the company released txpounded on the jatimateslationship between the behavior of animals and that of humans, and how that informed his parenting, As “nature” became a Sructuingmetaphorin American chikt-rearing and in suburban homesinsg snd cltul frontier, Disney provided! a vision not ip to the historical and {ned as part of a new social a simply ofthe natural world, but of is exact relationsbi the technological Yet the company did not propagate its version. through theatical exhibition. Through the press, prescreenings, frame for the reception of its films. fn this, it ating buzz aboutits ofthe natural world solely and promo: tions, the company provided a ‘was simply following standard movie industry practice, crs prodet by making it appear tobe newsworthy and p Disney's version ofthis practice was unique ans significant fo ("current events."* seseveral reasons, DISNEY MAPS THEFRONTIER + 305however. While most ofthe studios generated publicity chrough the glamoyp aid star quality of eheic hottest properties, Disney traded on the mundane, the ondinary, and the down-to-earth Rather than play upon romance ant inteigue, erating a sense of abstract separation betwen Holly wood nd the quotidian, Disney sought to narrow the distance berween is products and tg aclience, to suggest its consumers that the company had insights into theis daly ives and the inner workings oftheir world. And, as the company be came more diversified in the 19508, is efforts to maintain a coherent public Persona (or “Walt Disney” the man and forthe corporation) required a level of sclfexplanation that few other media producers felt compelled to deliver One of the most important elements in this process was the rearticulation of Wale Disney's public persona and his relationship to his staff and products, Before the war Walt had been cast asthe perfect paternal manager oversee. ing a highly tuned industrial operation; in the 19508, che company presented him asa sor of folk scientist, an intermediary between the realm of experts 4nd that of everyiay life, In the story thatthe company wove in its public re- Intions, Walt Disney's expertise with science flawed! out of his experience a5 an industeial manager, from his work on industial shorts for the government and heavy industry, and in the case of his nature films, directly from his work imanimation. “Ive studied real animals as models for Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Phuto the dog, Bambi the deer, Dumbo the elephant, andallthe others,” Disney stated in the Americar Magagine (Disney 1933, 23. Previously, Disney had used this sort of observation to demonstrate its ability to capture animal 8ctions and behaviors in order to reproduce them in its (or his) animated char acters, By the 19308, however, this skill was remobilized as expert knowledge that wasn’t ranslated but instead was delivered dtectly to Disney's viewers Knowledge through which those viewers could gain insight into the natural ‘world and into themselves, “As I have observed the behavior of bitd, beast, andl insect in the field and on film," Wale told his readers, “I've become con. vinced chat they all do a lot mote thinking than we give them ctedit for, And mean, calculated thought Ieading to planned action, rather than instinctive actions... In many ways animals behave just like humans, and the more human they are the funnier they seem to us, and the better we'll understand thems” (Disney 1953, 107). No longer studied merely for its entertainmentvalue, {his animal world became intelligible through Walt Disney's eyes, revealing itself as far more intelligent and organized than it appeared on the surface— and in that organization, ultimately more human, In press releases distributed to syndicated colurnnists and made available to smaller newspapers in need of content, Disney explained the process through which Wa and insti between “wel of eri of fab shore Adves repor neyla Although animals humans a positive ofits cent By 1954 juseas ith scribed change in| ‘A mo havior our Th as we} neal fact th ‘al f "Disne Like the be ay that Di lfierentia ture, inten changes in notion of engaged w a shift in Dychrough the glamour wed on the mundane, sy upon romance and cn Holly wood and the een its products and its had insights into their i, as the company be cain a coherent public cation) requited a level compelled to delves, swas the rearticulation his scaff and products, rnal manager oversee- he company presented a the realm of experts ¥ wove in its publi re ut of his experience as rts forthe government directly from his work Mickey Mouse, Donald ant,andallthe othe,” 2). Previously, Disney ity o capture animal (orhis) animated char d as expent knowledge 20 Disney's wiewers-~ nsight into the natural chavior of bin, Beast, ers, “Ve become con- e them evel fox: And rather than instinctive yumans, and the more ter we'll understand sentertainment value, ianey's eyes, revealing ed on the surface— sand made available 10 ed che process through which Walt gained his expertise in reading the natural worldas one of personal andinstivutional groweh in which he and his taf learned about the differences between real animals and their animated representations: “Well,” said Walt, “in the entertainment world we have two distinct kinds of eritters: genuine living animals and their cartoon relatives. Animals ‘of fable are entirely distiner from the creatures of field, forest and sea: shore. ust haw wide the difference is, we ourselves have just been vividly reminded in making the first few shore features of our new Tic Life Adventure seri, factual piceues thus far confined to dramatic camera reports of wl Iie its nataral colar an sta” ("Creator Explains ‘Dis neyland’ "1954, 18) Although the company had made much of its ability to realistically portray nimals-—anel in fact had been criticized for its inability to do the same with sumans —during the s9s0s Disney discuesively repositioned that linn ‘ positive example of the company’s aesthetic and historical knowledge, andl of its central place in promulgating a traditional American culture * ion as By 1954 Disney had erected a wall beeween the fantastic and the realistic Justus it had cordoned them off into different areas of its new park, andl de: seribed its theming as a change in Walt’s understanding of the world, not @ change in business strategy: “A moment's thought will confirm the difference in appearance and be havior between, say, a genuine porker and our’Three Little Pigs; between. ‘our’Thumper and a living rabbit; between Br’er Fox of the Remus tales, as we pictured him in our“Song ofthe South,’ and Mister Reynard himself in eal life, Iealways amazes me when people are surprised by the obvious fact that our cartoon animals are not in any sense, except a most super -ator Byplains ficial feature or two, like their namesake in nature” (°Ci “Disneyland?” 1054, 18) Like the border between Adventureland and Fantasyland, the porous bound: ary that Disney maintained between its live and ts animated animals served to Alifferentiate product lines and to regulate the frontier between nature and cul ture. Intentionally or not, its changing characterization of animals paralleled changes in the conception of nature in American child-tearing, moving from ‘notion of animalsas a complex of prediccable behaviors to one in which they ‘engaged with their environment as intelligent social actors. This depiction of «shift in Disney's expertise, ftom one in which he charted and cataloged the ‘movementand behaviors of animals to create an inventory of ideal animated)forms to one in which he and his employees merely observed animal actiong for what they were—unaslulterated templates for proper social relations ~ al. lowed the company to lay claim to two distinct realms of cultural production, and in doing so, to create and regulate relations between them, In the True-Life Adventures, Disney the folk naturalist met Disney the Hollywood producer, and animals became the stars in "nature's unending. drama,” In “Walt Disney Pays THibute to the Animal Actor Kingdom,” the company (speaking through Walt) converted the entire natural world into a performance: “The most outstanding performers on the screen today, as far as we are concerned, are wild animals... By “best” I mean the most sincere, the ‘most natural, the most convincing in any given situation, They have to be themselves to keep from getting the hook; to stay in the act Nature cast them for in her grand drama and they have to be always in charac- ter to survive, .. . Bvery actor here learns his part from birth. Motives are never obscure, The scripeis authentic and realistic a life and death, ‘And in its primitive passions and behavior andl parallels with human con: cemns, the play has unfailing interest to all of us, man, woman, and child (Disney 1952) In contrast to the average Hollywood performer, Disney's “actors” were natu rally sincere and believable, not because Disney had coached them, but be- ‘cause Darwin had. Staying in character vasa matter of survival, and rehearsals began at birth. The company’s thetotic (ostensibly Walt’) linked maturation inthe wild to human child-rearing and suggested that, to the properly trained, ‘eye sch as Walt’), what waslacent behind the surface behaviors che company had formerly mastered became sei evident, just asa child's natural behaviors became clear to a parent in tune with his or her own nature. Ang like the childsen of the 1950s, the animals whose dramas Disney “cap. tured!” could not be coerced or managed, could not have their environment controlled in any fashion. Any undue influence, any sense that they were act- ing for anyone but themselves, could ruin their performance. Recapitulating its guide for amateur cinematographers, Disney encouraged its audience to imagine unmediated access to unregulated nature, “They cake no bows, these actors, Cameras catch them by stealth... . They play to no human auidience They don't even know their performances are being observed or recorded,” the company reassuted readers, “The naturalst-cameramen and women who ‘contribute to the recording of life cycles and events in the animal kingdom can never know in advance just what they will ee.” Like r9s0s parents, they “must always be of the en "These sion as th Gometim term that ratory. Th requestec erews jou historic, Caliorn Life Adve some of producti talents of tiontow Producti onic carein Walt Dis spontane columnis of interp tion deliv unadulte required tion. Ind the maki “coopera wilderne inceeplay dimensic confiden ordinate: isa giga «ors, the and plac ing drat‘observed animal actions oper social relations al. ssof cultaral production, veen them, scuralist met Disney the nature’s unending tal Actor Kingdorn,” the tire natural world into a n today, as fr as we ate wn the most sincere, the 1 situation. They have to to stay in the act Nature 2 to be always in charac: ¢ from birth. Motives are ic as life and death, arallels with human con: ‘man, woman, arid child ney’s “actors” were natu { coached them, but be: sfsurvival, and rehear Vals) linked matuvation, ¢, to the properly trained behaviors the company child’s natural behaviors ose dramas Disney “cap: have their environment sense that they were act: ormance, Recapitulating couraged its audience £0 these They take no bow: y to no human audience. s observed or recorded, eramen and women who the animal kingdom can 19508 parents, they “must atways be ready and vigilant. This calls for vast patience as well as knowledge ofthe creatures they are stalking” (Disney 1952). “These lurking “cinematographers” were important to Disney's reinscrip- tion os the director of a vast observational network. Disney's cas (gometimes husband-and-wife teams) were presented as “naturalists,” a vague term that suggested the scientific, but without the antiseptic scent ofthe labo- ratory. They were Walt’ eyes and ears, bringing back the rare footage he had requested, acting as prosthetic extensions of his benign gaze. Although the ~ cxews journeyed out into places so distant as to seem inaccessible and pre: istori, chey remained as much part of Walt as did is workers in Burbank, California, and this point was repeated inthe press kits foreach ofthe True- Life Advemtues, a8 in this release for Secrets af Life (1056):" Walt Disney invades some of Nature's most closely guarded hiding places... ."To being this great production to the screen... Disney co-ordinated the scientific and technical talents of eighteen of the most prominent naturalist-photographers, in add tion toworking with hisown eminent True-Life Adventure staff” (Walt Disney Productions 10566), Ironically, even as tis discourse worked to produce the sense thatthe na ture itn Disney's films was absolutely spontaneous and un ‘Walt Disney was a master nacusalist~the discomse itself was anything but ved —and that spontaneous. The cieuit that ran from Disney's press releases cots readers via columnists and reviewers was abbreviated enough to guarantee a minimum of interpretive noise, ordered enough in its discursive practices that informa. tion delivered into the system would emerge with its intended meaning largely ‘unadulterated. In its press books, Disney distibuted ready-made stories that requived only minor alterations and the addition of a byline before publica tion. In the case of Nature’s Half Acre (1951) it released material that described the making of the film as involving “fifteen expert naturalist cameramen” who “cooperated on the intimate studies of insect, bird, animal and plant life. in wilderness where a patch of weeds is a gigantic forest. Before one's eyes the intorplay of insects and birds and plants struggling for survival takes on the 1gedeama” (Walt Disney Productions 19516), confident that columnists and feature pages would transmit the ideas, if not dimension of ceaseless and thr the very words, faithfully: "Fifteen naturalst-cameramen are said to have co- ordinated intimate studies ofthis ttle known realm in which a patch of weeds fsa gigantic ‘forest’... Under the cameras of Disney's naturalist collabora tts, the interplay of insect and bird and li plants steugeling for survival and place in ing drama” (Ranney 1951, 20). While Disney may have achieved a remarkable ature’s order of things takes on the dimension of great and thelldegree of inteenal consistency regariing the representation ofits founderand of its products, its ability depended upon the continuity of external networks of ctiticism and representation, Omar Ranney, dhe writer quoted above, wag ‘valuable to Disney (as well as to other producess) because he wrote a synd ‘cated column, as did the widely read Jimmy Fidler, who declared of Niaeur' Half Acre, “Educational? Certainly, it’s educational as few pictures ever have been. It’s the fll equivalent of a year’s study in zoology, biology, botany, and philosophy. But... cis is a piewure that’s tich in drama, loaded with com ccdy, saturated with visual beauty; in short, it’s as completely absorbing as any movie you've ever seen” (Fidler 195. “The examples above were cut from the Cleveland Pres and the Davenport {down Democrat and Leader, but since both columns appeared nationally, they might have come from any numberofsmall or mediuensized newspapers (In ome cases the Disney archives clippings files bold identical copies of such cok tums from diferent newspapers) Smaller organs such as these often could’ afford theirown reviewers or counted on nationally syndicated cofuranist co aud a sense of prestige to thelr reporting, For Disney, one benefit ofthis ys tem was that it allowed the company substantial control over the vepresentae tion of Walt Disney and “his” products, 28 well s wide dsttbation of those representations in smaller markets. Another was that tvctully guaranteed that Disney's public persona would cemsin relatively stable in the focal ub teban and rural maskets referred to in the version of the American landscape recapitulate in the vast majority ofthe corporation's products Ih larges, more diverse markets, Disney was more likely o ran into more cstical reviews, such as Tie Magazine's take on The Living Desert (953 Despite all the efforts o Disneyly what the ages have dignified, ‘The Living Desert remains a triumphantly beautiful film. .. flthough more] infor. ‘mation could have been presented in a more gracious flow of frames ifthe cclitors had not obliged to juice it up at every turn with violence. ... [and] the beauty is too often visiated with cuteness fand gags that]... reduce the picture sometimes to the level of recent Donald Duck eastoons Yetall inal, Producer Disney deserves credit forbringing the movie going, millions back ... fora few minutes ata time, to a sense of intimate par ticipation inthe vast natural order of life. ("Review —"The New Pictures, Time 1953) Though ultimately positive, Time’s anonymous review suggested that nature ‘as so pure anl powerful tha efforts to “Disneyfy” it(to reproduce it asa ca toon event, which was exactly what Disney intended) ultimately could not di:resentation of its founder and rtinuity of external networks the writer quoted above, was rs} because he wrote a syndi ler, who declared of Nature's nal as few pictures ever have zoology, biology, botany, and Jin drama, loaded with com: s completely absorbing as any wland Press and the Davenport mans appeased nationally, they redium sized newspapers.” (In a identical copies of such cot ns suchas these often couldn't ally syndicated columnists to vis al control over the representa las wide distribution of those as that ic virtually guaranteed ‘one benefit of this sys asvely stable in the local sub on of the Ametican landscape ation’s products mote likely to un into more 1 The Living Desert (195): ages have dignified, The Living m, ... falthough more] infor c gracious flow of framesifthe y earn with violence... [and] 35 [and gags that]... . reduce nt Donald Duck cartoons, itforbringing the movie going ne, (0 a sense of intimate par “Review — The New Pictures; s review suggested that nature yy” it ((o reproduce itasa car- ended) ultimately could not di minish either tsbeauty norits inherent connection to the daily lives of Disney's ‘jowers. other reviewers uncritially accepted Disney's claim to presenting, anunscripted nature, even this sort of erticism granted the man and the com- pany aceess to that nature and suggested tha there were atleast moments in which he delivered it, Ie was almost as if the reviewer were calling for more careful theming on Disney's part, a clearer division between its realms of fan- snd of reality. Jhe review also points out what Erie Smoodin (1999) has demonstrated: Disney may have done extensive work in producing, maintaining, and limit- ing the discursive boundaties of Walt and the company, but by the roses both ha become public commodities, and at times Walt Disney productions had to negotiate with its consuming public the meaning of “Disney.” Atsome points {as above) that work could police Disney for apparent excesses that violated ‘a shared sense of what the company was and what it ought to be." Other re views, as the Christian Century's coverage of Reaver Valley (1950), seemed to do Disney's work ort, declaring that "instead of cartoon animals, hepresents real ones... at work and play... Without douibt one ofthe mast remarkable nature fins ever made; your reaction is amazement that such candid shots could bave ‘yeen obtained. In many scenes, the personalities ofthe animals are as vivid and rent Peature humorous as those of Disney's fumous cartoon characters" ( Films” 1950, 1007; emphasis origina!).” Far from alienating viewers from the constructed quality of Disney's na ture, reviewssuch as this supported Disney’sclaim to the accurate revelation of al behavior through theit uncritical acceptance —as did the Time review forthe same film, which gushed that’ Skillf editing, scotingand commentary combine to humanize the animals almost as if they sprang from she Disney drawing board, and produce an engaging litee story in which Hero Beaver and his friends outwit Villain Coyote while some frivolous otters and baby ducks supply the comic reliet” (82). While the review acknowledged that the amaz- ingly anthropomorphic qualities of Disney'sanimals derived insome part from, «cinematic technique (particulaely expertise in cartooning), it still managed to further the company’s claim that it offered access to pure nature—as when it seferred to the film as capturing the animals in “unguarded moments," and a8, “both an informative nature study and a delightful example of moviemaking, magic” (82)- While the magazine would scold Disney a few years later for tend ing too far toward the cartoonish, at that moment it willingly participated in a discursive opetation in which che very celebration of Disney's expertise asthe producer of both cartoons anki narure documentaries helped to reconeile the apparent stylistic conflict between the two.But the circulation of discussion, commentary, and praise of Disney ig newspapers and magazines idl more than reconcile contradictions and re: inforce a sense of the man’s mastery over disparate subjects. As the above examples illustrate, it suggested that what Disney offered was not so much ‘overt pedagogy as the salutary influence of a natural philosophy delivered snot by humans bat by animals themselves. And although Disney promoted this notion very aggressively, the networks of distribution and consumption through which it circulated were also highly receptive to it. Quite simply, Disney could not have engineered is (and his) expertise around the natural ‘and the scientific without a civic infrastructure for doing so, and without @ significant public need to teconcil relationships between nature and culture, ‘especially a they related to child-rearing and the family, Disney in the Community Incision to your regula list fof preview contacts include the followings... Carator of wea! museum... Editors of shoo! pages, photographie pages ant science pages of local acuspapers. «Officers of ra, Winnen’s Clubs, «Lions, Rotary, Elks... President ofthe Garden Cl. Ault Adeisors of Girt and Boy Scout ‘These instructions to exhibitors of The Living Desert (1953), included in the movie's advance press book, were standard forthe Teue-Life Adventures, Part of a larger campaign strategy, they illustrate the thoroughness of Disney's, plans for seating a presence in local cormmunities” While Disney's attempts to convince its exhibitors to reach out to the community met with varying de _greesof succes, it iscleay thatthe company sought vo associate itself with those parts ofthe local civic infastewcture associated with children and with parent ing, as well as those organizations that formed a local bridge between culture and nature. The company urged its exhibitors to contact “wildlife conservs- tion sections of local Department of Agriculture chapters, Future Farmers of “America, 4-H clubs, Farm Granges, Homemakers... and private clubs dedi- cated to natural science” to set up group screenings and suggested shey send ‘posters and cotar reproductions for dgplay on bulletin boards of theit Com munity Halls, for use as decoration ducing meetings” (Walt Disney Produe tions 198, 4. ‘Not only did Disney seek to create an aura of expertise ehrough local pris fs chapren six7 and praise of Disney in ile contractions and re rate subjects. As the above offered was not 80 much acura philosophy delivered although Disney promoted tribution and consumption, ceptive to it, Quite simply, xpertise asound the natural or doing so, and without a yeeween nature and cultuge, family. rats] include the uditos of soa pages, iE mewspapers.... Oficers of President of the Gacden sert (1953), inehuded in the “True Life Adventates. Past thoroughness of Disney's * While Disney's attempts munity met with varying de- toassociate itself with hose h childien and with parent real bridge between culture contact “wildlife conserva hapters, Future Farmers of and private clubs dedi- gs and suggested they send letin boards of theit Com ngs” (Walt Disney Produc xpestive through local print media, i also used local leaders anel educators whose needs for materials to furthertheirown agendas made them more chan willing to work with the con pany, Asa letter from the director of the Buffalo Muscum of Science makes ‘lear, the institution was happy to preview Disney products: “tad the plea sureofattendinga preview of your feature-length film, “The Living Desert, ‘ye feel you have notonly given us an interestingand colorful story that should, the most attractive to any audience, but you have reached an extremely high Jevel in teaching the public some ecology. ... We have used your past natural history flms in our muscum education work and we look forward to seeing, ‘many more” (F. Hall 1954), More than simply afan ora satisfied customer, the whose opinions writer was part of network of civic and institutional leader nd whose positions offered access to impor cartied weightin the community, tant institutional resources?” In this case, the museum functioned as a site for authorizing Disney's public persona and as a secondary market for the corm pany’s backlist ‘This situation was not lost on Disney, which the year before had announced toits stockholders the formation of an educational film depatt- ‘ment that would distribute “certain of our motion picturesin the 16 millimeter, ‘non-theattical field,” for use in “chutches, schools, clubs, youth groups, indus: trial establishments and other non-theatrical.. [venues]... throughout the United States” (Walt Disney Proetuetions 1953. “The educational mission of this department was somewhat vague. By the imid-r9505, Disney offered (theough regional distribution companies} every- thing from segments of Fantasia (to4o) to film versions of its Little Golden Books, deiver-education films, and science featurettes, including its True-Life Adventures. The term educational may have referred to a common mid-i9sos perception (or Disney's hope) that everything Disney produced was educa tional, or thatthe company had developed its most lucrative rental market in a sector that loosely could be described as such. {nts campaign for Secrets of Life (1956), the company assured distributors thatthe department could guatantee widespread circulation of publicity forthe film because “the Walt Disney edu: cational film division , ., has the finest contacts, long established in this field because they have been selling picturesto schools, libraries, colleges, churches, and private organizations” (Walt Disney Productions 1956b). This approach dovetailed neatly with Disney's ongoing efforts to use syndicated columnists tod aan image of Walt Disney's vision and Disney products as in herently educationally valuable, as in this review of Nature's Half Acre (1951) from the Baltimore Sux: “Patient and skillful photographers and scientists spent ‘many long hours in snaring for the screen, much magnified, chese insect, bird,floral, and reptilian actors... Mr: Disney has produced herein a memorable picture, not only for its encucing beauty and high sill in a difficult itd, but also for its permanent worth in the schools" (Kitkley £95}. Before the company bad an official arm for dealing with schools and other ‘ostensibly educational institutions, it was encouraging local distributors to de. velop promotional practices that integrated school administeators and facil ties: “Be sure that local school bulletin boards and the student publications carry publicity notices and ads on your showing of "Water Birds’ and suggest the high school principal announce the show to the student boxy. Offer special sates to Natural History classes” (Walt Disney Productions 1952)."The com pany clearly understood schools and similar institutions not merely as ini vidual promotional sites, but as nodes in an extensive institutional network, the common practices of which could be harnessed in the sevice of both the immediate goal of movie attendance and the longer-term goal of generating an enduring public presence. In promising its distributors that posters for Se CHAPTER sixyusness—not merely into the hat hada associate itself with the local spear in every home of practices that placed it ina cal, italso developed practices, emporal matrix linking world ly, Like the layout of Disney. ney the man on the boundary tuce, a scout at the edge of a she company declared, a itself, as lavish as the wealth he gigantic wilderness which c haly pioneer in one of the oductions, 1954, 1. he frontier —imagined as the rn culture—became a central nany of its other products as .ction to itsaudio-animatronie capes to revealing and cre ress as an element both in the ceting. And while that address 4, it was regularly delivered di ough the company’s True Life : Club television programs. K. The name also refesred toa at Disney had designed to sell s, then, was to speak simulta rnia, and of central compo: nly television watching,” Pre ally preceded the park by nine na live special on July 17, 1955. proper parsing of the middle- ntegral pact of an increasingly al component in the new do: nent “Though criticized for plugging the theme park and upcoming Disney the: atrial releases, and for shamelessly recycling old Disney footage, the television. show was extremely popular, Just as The Mickey Mouse Club was a masterful ‘hicle for promoting licensed products (see below), the Disneyland television program was designed to pitch the park, act only through outright prom. tion but eso through a repetition of the park's spatial chematie divisions in the progeam itself. (See figure 3.) The viewing public came back week after week, in record numbers, to watch frontier stories, nature documentaries and dra- ‘mas, and old cartoons. In short, “Disneyland” was a place where the American public could repeatedly watch the formation ofa basic American humanity at the border berween the natural and the cultural. ‘The park may have anchored that experience, but first and foremost it happened in the Ametican home. jon in 1950, Walt Disney Productions posed a problem for any popular critic or researcher concerned with childrens ability rom its first foray into telev to discem between reality and fantasy, or more specifically, berween adver. sising and creative content. Already masterful at presenting self-promotion as entertainment (consider its 1942. tour film The Reluctant Dragon), Disney had {ew compunctions about producing what were some of television's frst info: _mescials.[n.a move that continued its practice of timing releases with signif cant American holidays, Disney arrived on the airwaves on Christmas Day, 1950, with One Hour in Wonderland, a preview special on wc for the company’s ‘most recent release, Alice in Wonderland (1951)—and on which Walt Disney was joined by his daughters, Diane and Sharon. By Disney's own estimate, the show drew 20 million viewers, providing a willingly captive audience for other Disney products, and Roy Disney assured the company’s stockholders that “the celecasting of ‘One Hour in Wondestand’ commanded the attenti oftop motion picture as wel as television executives and one noted film leader summed up his reaction publicly in these words: “That telecast shouldbe worth, 11,000,000 at the bax office to ALICE IN WONDERLAND. I think Disney has found the answer to using television both to entertain and to sell his prod: uct” (Roy Disney, in Wale Disney Productions 19512,1} Inthe same document, ‘walt Disney elaborated on that observation, bluntly characterizing television as “one of our most important channels for the development of anew motion plcwure audience.” The company would follow up this first special with the ‘Wale Disney Christmas Show (a promotion for the 1953 film Peter Pax) in 1951, and with a brief promotion for Peter Pan on the Ford Omnibus program in 1952, luring each of which, the company estimated, millions of viewers tuned in.” Bach of these programs was a prelude to Disneyland, which ran on anc for four years (until it was replaced by Walt Disney Presents) Disney and asc hadThe Legend of ra es ee Robive Hood 30. A page from the Dis 1 Tleislon classroom guide from 1y36-—