Article: The Mecca of the Mouse

[ginzo]

If he was staying on-property why wouldn't he use Disney transportation? Not trying to find a conspiracy or anything... it just didn't make sense to me.

 

I don't like Disney's on-property transportation much either. It sucks if you're doing a lot of park hopping, going to Typhoon Lagoon or Downtown Disney, having late meals at resort restaurants, etc. There are all kinds of situations where it fails big time. The only Disney transport we used consistently was the boat service to the Magic Kingdom. That was great.

[RIP Psyclone]

A lot of strollers get wheeled into corners as moms whisper-shout, "Settle down, Hunter" and "You stop that right now, Madison."

 

[coolhandluke]

^ Yep, kids only get cranky after a day in Disney parks. Otherwise, they're angels.

Except for a couple witty remarks to which I chuckled, and a decent point or two, it didn't seem like he gave it a shot. It'd be like me going to to Ann Arbor, MI, and attending a week of classes at their local university. My mind is already made up on my experience before I go...

 

Luke "Go Disney and Bucks" Dickman

[ginzo]

It'd be like me going to to Ann Arbor, MI, and attending a week of classes at their local university. My mind is already made up on my experience before I go...

 

From a purely academic standpoint, Michigan has OSU whipped. There's really no debate there. Just be happy you can beat them in football.

[Scaparri]

Not everything Disney builds is a quality attraction.

 

dt

 

I definitely agree, but his interpretation is flawed. It seems like the article was intended to rip the public's view of Disney by pointing out that it's not the most amazing thing on earth. However, most of the time, it seems like he's ripping Disney for not meeting the public's view of being the most amazing thing on earth.

 

Ginzo is right though, if he had written half the article in a less-douchey manner, it would have been a lot better. But instead, he wrote the article with this "I'm so much smarter than all of you, I'm not impressed with Disney" outlook and he just comes off as a pathetic, single male trying to find every flaw with Disney and feel superior for doing so.

[Teacups Make Me Sick]

Not to be in defense of this elitist jerk...but...Slate Magazine is a cynics POV on everything from politics to children to Disney parks. His article is supposed to reach a crabby audience that sees no value in going to a place to steal a little bit of innocent fun.

 

Those are the people who shrivel up and die b/c they lost there sense of fun/humor.

 

 

[ebl]

"If he was staying on-property why wouldn't he use Disney transportation?" (Sgt. Fox)

 

During my visit in October 2006, we stayed on-property (Port Orleans Riverside), but rented and split the cost of a minivan. It was well worth it in terms of timeliness. We did a lot of park hopping and it's really easier.

 

Eric

[coolhandluke]

From a purely academic standpoint, Michigan has OSU whipped. There's really no debate there.

 

And cost. UM students face the 4th highest debt of public schools in the nation. Sorry, I had to... As much as it pains me to say anything positive about a bitter rival, I don't want to start a battle on here, so I know they are a nice school with a nice campus (yes, I've been there).

 

They may be better, but that doesn't mean I like them.

 

Disney, though is better, and I do like them.

[Legendary]

Dude.. seriously. Remind me to NEVER go to a park with someone like that. Talk about no fun! Where does Slate find people like that? That dude needs some meds or something!

[ginzo]

And cost. UM students face the 4th highest debt of public schools in the nation. Sorry, I had to... As much as it pains me to say anything positive about a bitter rival, I don't want to start a battle on here, so I know they are a nice school with a nice campus (yes, I've been there).

 

They may be better, but that doesn't mean I like them.

 

Yeah, I just wanted to point out that there's more to college than the football team. Frankly, I prefer small private colleges to big research institutions like Michigan where the prima donna professors are there to do research and lecture grudgingly. Though the Michigan name would certainly open a lot of doors for a person.

[BeemerBoy]

I finally got a chance to look this over. All I can say is that is one exceptional, insightful, and eye-opening piece of investigative journalism.

 

I really hope he turns this into a series of articles. Perhaps he could follow this gem by answering some other tough to answer questions. Questions like:

 

-Why do over 30 million people a year visit Las Vegas?

-Why do families enjoy camping in state parks?

-Why do baseball fans enjoy summertime baseball roadtrips?

-Why do 18-24 year olds travel to summer music festivals?

 

[MisterP]

The thing I hate the most about this is that it is pretty much how most of my 30-something friends feel (they're kind of like hipsters). The wife and I go to amusement parks (and Disney 3 of the last 5 years), and most of my friends go to "cool" places and eat expensive meals, go to "cool" bars, and see none of the sights except maybe a Cardinals road game.

 

For the record my perfect vacation contains

1. at least one major league stadium

2. at least one happening city with good restaurants/bars

3. at least one outdoor activity

4. at least one historical site

5. at least 3 amusement parks

 

Its a shame that I can't seem to convince my friends that it will could very well be fun to come with us and experience great rides like Space Mountain, POTC, Indy, Test Track and Expedition Everest just to name a few. And I try to explain that you can actually drink booze AND enjoy the parks (and we sometimes do and if that's what it would take for them to be convinced that they might actually have a good time). Hell, I can't even get them to Six Flags anymore. If I get old enough or too cool to wanna ride the Screamin Eagle anymore, just shoot me.

[mattnz]

This guy is clearly out to criticise Disney from the get go. I think he needs to realise that Disney is all about entertainment. They're an entertainment empire after all. They're not out to transform the world outside their own theme park fences.

 

And people will make of it what they will. If you're a consumer, you'll go there to consume. If you're a kid at heart (like me) you'll go and actually have a good time.

 

He's a typical middle-class member of the bored intelligentsia. True entertainment is in the reinterpretation of life - it is NOT supposed to be a representation. I imagine he likes neo-realist movies. Urgh!

[chemical_echo]

This guy reminded me of someone with the "Fraser" personality. Thinks himself much better than everyone else, has to get his way, and likes to look down at anyone who doesn't agree with him. Plus, he seems like the kind of guy that is only happy at "civilized" events like theater or opera, not the happiest place on Earth. You can even tell by his pictures (I'll assume he took the pictures) that he was trying to be artistic instead of have fun.

 

It would have been nice if he actually had done some more research into the things he likes to bash. Take the Disney Vacation Club for example. He goes on to bash everyone that uses it because they use it to go to Disney World every year, when members can really actually go to tons of places and resorts (non-Disney) around the world...or so I'm lead to believe by reading their site.

 

I agree with a lot of the points made, especially the one about the fact that it seems like he didn't even try talking to anybody during the whole trip. But really, I hope to god he didn't talk to anyone because he probably would've ruined their trip and made their kids cry when he told them that Mickey is actually a punk teen trying to pay their way through school, and that Cinderella doesn't know how to keep her legs closed and will be getting her way with the guy dressed up as Donald Duck tonight instead of Prince Charming.

[ginzo]

But really, I hope to god he didn't talk to anyone because he probably would've ruined their trip and made their kids cry when he told them that Mickey is actually a punk teen trying to pay their way through school, and that Cinderella doesn't know how to keep her legs closed and will be getting her way with the guy dressed up as Donald Duck tonight instead of Prince Charming.

 

Hahaha. This is great.

[Philrad71]

Interesting article! While the guy obviously is not a theme park enthusiast, most of his thoughts and points were somewhat comical and valid. There were some definite soft jabs here and there, but there were compliments thrown into the mix as well.

 

Really, I did not see this as a horribly written article at all. He gave his opinion of the parks, albeit from a somewhat non-traditionalist viewpoint. I initially expected that the article would be a total put-down slam of all things Disney (I read the responses first), but I was mildly surprised. I had never even heard of 'Slate' before, so I was unsure of what to expect.

 

I had to chuckle at some of the cheesiness that he pointed out about Epcot. While it may indeed have some cheesy, outdated areas, it is still one of my favorite of the Disney parks. I think we could all say that every amusement/theme park has it's cheesy aspects. It's all part of the fun in my book!

 

Everybody has an opinion and even though his article wasn't in the highest praise that most Americans (and a lot of theme park enthusiasts) would expect, it certainly is not worthy of saying it was total garbage and a slap in the face to all Disney fans.

 

BTW...I still plan on going to Disney in 2010 no matter what anyone might write in an article!!!

[EastCoastn07]

Hmm...seems like to me the fanboys (or the so-called "non-fanboys") are not pleased because the author didn't put Disney in high regards as they do. I honestly liked his take on the park and his article was pretty entertaining. I don't hate Disney(don't really like it either), but you won't see me praise that place like damn near everyone else on this site does.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I completely agree with you and Philrad completely. After reading this thread, most of the people made this guy sound like he's committed some kind of crime for not praising every single thing about the Disney parks. I just went to the parks last summer and I would have to say he made some valid points, even though he kinda wore out the whole idea that Disney isn't real (OK, we get it, it's fake) but it surely isn't against the law to express your opinion and the guy did just that. I think this quote pretty much summarizes how he felt about the parks:

 

1) a meaningless, bubble-headed utopianism, 2) a grasping, whining consumerism, and 3) a preference for soulless facsimiles of culture and architecture instead of for the real thing.

 

While I think he was being a little picky about the fact that Disney is fake (who would have thought, its a theme park), I agree for the mot part with points 1 & 2. While I don't think the fact that Disney seems like a utopia in the eyes of its visitors is such a bad thing (after all we go to these parks to get away from the real world), I completely agree with his point on Disney and consumerism. When I was at the park this past summer it really annoyed me that since my last visit in 1997 the parks have thrown in so many non-Disney related franchises, such as ESPN, Power Rangers, etc. simply to try to make money. I understand that all these companies are operated together, but things like this really threw off my visit. I didn't go to Disney to see stores stocked with ESPN merchandise with a picture of Mickey or Minnie on it to make it seem more Disneyesque. But I guess that's what's changed so dramatically since Magic Kingdom opened for the first time and how larger corporations have now taken advantage of Walt's dream to try and make a quick buck.

 

But really, after reading this article I really didn't find anything offensive for people to get so bent out of shape about. While he did make some out of the ordinary comments on several aspects of the park, I certainly don't feel he tried to give readers the wrong idea about the parks or take away any of the parks glitz or glammor. While I don't feel he was able to capture everything that makes the Disney parks so special, I don't feel he was trying to put any bad light onto them either. I just think he was trying to give his honest opinion on his experience at the parks, there's no need to get offended by that.

[cfc]

But I guess that's what's changed so dramatically since Magic Kingdom opened for the first time and how larger corporations have now taken advantage of Walt's dream to try and make a quick buck.

 

Actually, there's new about this at all. Without coporate sponsorship, Disneyland may never have been built. Disney talked ABC into coughing up a third of the park's cost in exchange for his producing a weekly TV show for the network (which, in turn, was used to sell the park to the public).

 

My problem with the guy's article is that it really isn't anything "new" at all. Richard Schickel made similar points about Disneyland in his book The Disney Version back in the 1960s.

 

But the man is entitled to state his opinion--and others are entitled to disagree.

[EastCoastn07]

It's not the sponsorship that put a sour taste in my mouth, it was just the fact that some portions of the resort were flooded with merchandise that had absolutely no relation to any of the Disney franchises (such as ESPN, the Power Rangers, etc.). I mean, it's just not something I go to Disney for. Sure, they're entitled to try to make money, but it just left a sour taste in my mouth when I went there recently (I still had a great time though). It's almost as if Daniel Snyder would flood all the Six Flags parks with Redskins merchandise simply for the fact he owns them, but I won't even get started on Six Flags' corporate sponsorship. Quite frankly I think they've gone overboard with it, but they've gotta get out of debt somehow.

[cfc]

^Disney owns ESPN and the Power Rangers (bought them some time ago), not to mention ABC.

[EastCoastn07]

^Disney owns ESPN and the Power Rangers (bought them some time ago), not to mention ABC.

 

Yes, I'm already aware of this. But just because Disney owns them doesn't make them a Disney franchise and doesn't mean they fit well in a Disney theme park. I don't know about you, but when I hear ESPN and Power Rangers, the first thing that DOESN'T come to mind is Mickey Mouse, Lilo & Stitch, Nemo, Buzz Lightyear, etc. I understand Disney owns them, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily will fit inside a Disney theme park...that's all I'm trying to say lol.

[Teacups Make Me Sick]

^ I understand where you are coming from, but those other avenues were put there to appeal to other audiences.

 

Before pirates of the caribbean, there were no real "boy" merchandise. Now they have the pirates, the place is flooded with merchandise. Just supply and demand.

 

You were eight when you last went there. As a child, what would you've like to have seen?

[BeemerBoy]

^Disney owns ESPN and the Power Rangers (bought them some time ago), not to mention ABC.

 

Yes, I'm already aware of this. But just because Disney owns them doesn't make them a Disney franchise and doesn't mean they fit well in a Disney theme park. I don't know about you, but when I hear ESPN and Power Rangers, the first thing that DOESN'T come to mind is Mickey Mouse, Lilo & Stitch, Nemo, Buzz Lightyear, etc. I understand Disney owns them, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily will fit inside a Disney theme park...that's all I'm trying to say lol.

 

Honestly, considering Disney's Wide World of Sports complex, and the many events held there annually (some of which are broadcast on ESPN), I don't see how the merchandising tie-ins are all that bad.

 

 

My problem with the guy's article is that it really isn't anything "new" at all. Richard Schickel made similar points about Disneyland in his book The Disney Version back in the 1960s.

Thank you, Chuck. This is exactly mine and many others' point. The article itself was just pretty much pointless. Yes, call me a Disney "fanboy" if you so choose, but I'm not defending the parks in the way you'd like to read into it. I'm saying that his "angle" for which he wrote his article was lame. He actually did make several valids points, criticisms, etc. I'm just saying that overall, it lacked any real significance.

To those who think the "fanboys" are just up in arms over Disney critism, think again. People criticize the place everyday. Doesn't bother me one bit. I know that there's over 30+ million people a year that agree with my point of view on the place....and that's okay by me.

 

I'm just calling this guy's bluff. He wanted to go there on vacation.

[mcjaco]

To those who think the "fanboys" are just up in arms over Disney critism, think again. People criticize the place everyday.

 

Take a gander through a Disney Forum. Good lord, fanboys are the worst of the lot for criticisizing Disney parks. And you'll certainly find people here complaining about them too.

 

How many of R&E's PTR's make reference to the terrible bag checking policy?

 

I'm an EPCOT fanboy, and although I'll defend it, I certainly won't shy away from pointing out it's flaws.

[EastCoastn07]

^ I understand where you are coming from, but those other avenues were put there to appeal to other audiences.

 

Yes, while I understand this in a way, I still feel throwing in other franchises like ESPN and the Power Rangers, which don't fit the Disney image at all IMO, kinda ruins the perception most people have of Disney. I sure as hell doubt there are any kids out there who look forward to going to the Disney parks because they'll be able to meet their favorite Power Rangers. Kids are excited to go to the parks to meet Mickey, Pluto, Captain Hook, Buzz, The Incredibles, etc. Why do you think when I was at Disney's Hollywood Studios last summer there would always be a mile long line to get the a STAMP from the incredibles, not even an autograph, but when I saw the Power Rangers there were only a few people meeting and greeting them? Quite frankly I don't feel they put Power Rangers in the parks to widen their audiences, I just feel its another scheme to try and make more money. I guess when you have a couple hundred gift shops throught the resort, there's no choice to add some variety to them instead of having all the main characters merchanise in each one of them.

 

And while I also agree with your point regarding the Pirates of the Caribbean, you are forgetting that it is a Disney movie. Power Rangers and ESPN weren't created by Disney, they were bought out so when I think of those two franchises I don't think Disney. However, Pirates of the Caribbean has always been a Disney franchise so of course they're going to add its merchandise to the parks, and I'm not against that. I just don't think merchandise for ESPN and the Power Rangers (to name a few there are others out there) necessarily fits with the Disney atmosphere at the parks. This goes back to the author's point of the high emphasis Disney puts on consumerism.

 

You were eight when you last went there. As a child, what would you've like to have seen?

 

Just because I was eight doesn't mean I wasn't grown enough to take note of certain details when I went to the parks. The only reason I even mentioned my first trip to the parks was to make a comparison.