Articles | Disneyland | Walt Disney World
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Mouse Tales' David Koenig: Playing the Walt Card

  1. #1
    MousePlanet Staff
    MousePlanet Staff
    MousePlanet AutoPoster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    MousePlanet Global HQ

    Mouse Tales' David Koenig: Playing the Walt Card

    Playing the Walt Card by David Koenig

    The sure-fire way to shut down any Disneyland debate

    Read it here!


  2. # ADS

    Join Date
    Location
    Posts
     

  3. #2

    David,

    Well articulated. I agree to all your points. And I would add that new experiences like Carsland shows that new concepts (with all its merchandising) are welcome when the experience is well done. People will embrace new shows and attractions, when they are created with great attention to detail. I think they also see makeovers as being largely valid when they are done well--such as the Nighmare Before Chrismas with the Haunted Mansion.

    I think where it gets sticky is a new attraction must really be way ahead of an older attraction that has sentimental value to be embraced. I think if the Winnie the Pooh attraction had been at the level of Tokyo Disney's attraction, you would have seen people embrace Pooh over the Country Bears.

    In short, the Walt card people should be playing is not that things should keep being new, but that things should keep getting better. And I think that's Walt's stronger legacy.


  4. #3
    Fun is wherever you find it... olegc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Blog Entries
    4

    Like

    "[Disneyland] has that thing - the imagination, and the feeling of happy excitement - I knew when I was a kid." - Walt Disney

  5. #4

    Nice article. Yes, just because something is thought of as "old" isn't a good enough reason to change it. Make "it" better, and people will more likely approve.


  6. #5

    I can see the merit in both sides of the Walt argument. But where people run off the rails is when they take a general announcement and predict doom and gloom. The recent announcement of Starbucks coming to DL's Market House is a terrific example of this. Right from the beginning some folks online were freaking out over the loss of their beloved Market House, with absolutely no solid information about what was being taken away and what was still to remain. Further announcements indicated that the general theme of the place will not in any way be diminished. I've never understood why people can't just wait and see what something is going to be like, and THEN praise or criticize it.

    The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time.
    - James Taylor

  7. #6

    You know, I've seen the Walt Card being used on both sides of the argument. "Walt wouldn't want that changed/leveled/replaced/etc. because he was all about (A, B and C - fill in your reason here)." And, conversely, the "Walt never wanted Disneyland to be a museum" argument David speaks of here.

    I think the others posting here are absolutely right. I don't think it's so much what's leaving or changing or being replaced. It's what they are changing to. As was said, as long as it's changing to something of interest, relevancy and quality, most people will accept it. But DL fanatics are like bulldogs. We can smell shoddy work a mile away. In addition, if you are getting rid of something, MAKE SURE you are replacing it with something. Don't just let it sit there empty for years on end (staring at you, Peoplemover track).

    Having said all of that, I'd really love to hear what John Hench's opinion would be of DCA now (he famously stated, when asked what he thought of DCA when it opened, "I liked it better as a parking lot). Hopefully, it would be a much better assessment now.

    "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

  8. #7

    Dan, the reason, of course, is that if you hold your tongue until the change is complete, it's too late. If the public would have reserved judgment until after the cement was dry, Lincoln would be in storage, the Muppets would have appeared on Main Street, and there would be nothing left about Tom Sawyer on Tom Sawyer Island.


  9. #8

    While I can understand all of that, what I'm talking about is unwarranted panic as soon as the slightest change is announced, with no clear understanding of what Disney is really going to do. It's one thing to say "I sure hope they don't mess with X, Y and Z". It's quite another to freak out and scream that "they're taking away X, Y and Z" before any real information is released.

    The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time.
    - James Taylor

  10. #9
    Some people are worth melting for oregontraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon

    The Starbucks remodel is a good example of something new coming in. And we have an official comment via the Disney blog that the theming will be retained ie: keeping the stove, checkerboard & party phones. But what about the elimination of Swing Dancing at PFF. A broken promise, (for now, I hope) Since it appears the benches are not nailed down to the floor. I'm glad the Rainbow Ridge facades are coming back at Big Thunder. But not so happy about the new sleds for Matterhorn.

    Thanks for the column David. The last sentence is key though. As much as I try to embrace any new changes at DL, I'm hopeful that some of Walt's touches will never go away.


  11. #10
    Fun is wherever you find it... olegc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by David Koenig View Post
    Dan, the reason, of course, is that if you hold your tongue until the change is complete, it's too late. If the public would have reserved judgment until after the cement was dry, Lincoln would be in storage, the Muppets would have appeared on Main Street, and there would be nothing left about Tom Sawyer on Tom Sawyer Island.
    Quote Originally Posted by danyoung View Post
    While I can understand all of that, what I'm talking about is unwarranted panic as soon as the slightest change is announced, with no clear understanding of what Disney is really going to do. It's one thing to say "I sure hope they don't mess with X, Y and Z". It's quite another to freak out and scream that "they're taking away X, Y and Z" before any real information is released.
    its interesting when you put both above together. David is right - without some sort of voice from the public early, loud, and often then things may be too late to be fixed (can you imagine if we had insight into what Pooh was going to be?). Without that insight - or leaked info - we get stuck with changes that are not good. So much time, effort, and material is used for some items that you can't go back or easily swap things out. They either stagnate or wait for another idea to come along that maybe will garner interest and be both popular and profitable.

    and dan is right - to a point. I think Disney can't have it both ways. It can't have loyal fans who are willing to return time and again (sometimes multiple times in a year - or in a WEEK!) without getting hit with rabid comments concerning changes. As was stated by another poster - most of the watchful fans are smart enough to "smell a rat" when something does not seem worth while. Its the details that we notice, as David said. Yes - changes to Market House created a fervor - but the comments added only a few hours later had more details. Why did we have to wait? was it going to be a surprise? They should have put that detail into the story block, not in the comments. Its not like a teaser to come later. If nothing is said and they know the details then why not release them - especially for something that's been around a long time. I would guess any location, attraction, or item that is even moderately popular and had no changes for a very long time would receive skepticism should a change be announced - without much detail.

    just my opinion - but flying off the rail happens when you generate such a fan base like Disneyland has.
    "[Disneyland] has that thing - the imagination, and the feeling of happy excitement - I knew when I was a kid." - Walt Disney

  12. #11

    Mr. Koenig,
    I do not want you to get the wrong impression about me;

    The most important thing when making changes at Disneyland, is that we must never lose parts of the past. After all, Walt loved looking to the future, but he also loved nostalgia. That is why I love it when imagineers make a tribute to the past, (Like the CPG crest in Fantasy Faire)

    Do not take me as a simpleton. I am well aware that not every change is a good one. But Mr Koenig, you cannot deny that you always act overly-dramatic and sharp-tongued (at least in your writing) whenever Disneyland wants to make the slightest change. You act like all change is evil.

    Sometimes change can be good. It gives attractions a breath of fresh air, and keeps them relevant for current generations.

    Let's look at Fantasy Faire logically;

    Guests (especially children) LOVE meeting Disney characters, young girls love the princesses, they are real to them, and this new Fantasy Faire solved TWO issues;

    --Making a classy, highly detailed place where guests can reliably find the princesses (similar to how Mickey's house is where guests can reliably find Mickey, you have written about this "finding Mickey" concept in your "Mouse Under Glass" book.)

    And

    --Finally freeing up the Fantasyland Theatre for a show again, and removing the original half-hearted, pieced-together Fantasy Faire from the Fantasyland theatre.

    Now, if swing dancing does come back to the venue, I think that would be great. (Because honestly, as nice as the Fantasy Faire is during the day, at night the area is really dead, and could use the energy.)

    Having said that, even if swing dancing doesn't return to the venue, is that really such a horrible thing? After all, swing dancing is currently offered in Downtown Disney. Is that not a compromise?

    The fact of the matter is, the imagineers are not evil. It's not like they wake up every morning thinking "Hmmm...How can I upset the fans today?"

    As I understand it, most imagineers respect Walt Disney's legacy and are quite aware that there are some parts of the past that should never be lost. The imagineers are Disney fans too. The imagineenrs are NOT idiots. Very often, they do know what they are doing.

    As I said, there does need to be a balance when making changes at Disneyland, we must never lose some elements of the past.
    (I happen to like the "enhanced" versions of Pirates, Small World, and Haunted Mansion. In those cases, the imagineers used a "light touch" and anything new in those attractions BLENDS in with what is already there, and the attractions got a breath of fresh air.)

    Sometimes people "play the Walt card" in a bad way, and say; "Walt would not like this!" I hate that. Because in reality, it is usually just that individual who doesn't like the change and is just using Walt as an excuse. That is shameful.

    To give a brief example,
    The Haunted Mansion opened years after Walt passed away, years before the final concept was realized. So for all we know, Walt could have hated the way the final mansion plan turned out. We will never know for sure. But that doesn't matter, because Haunted Mansion it still considered a great attraction. You do not need Walt's "ok" to enjoy something.


    (By the way, as half-hearted as the original DCA was. It's ok now. The park has been improved tremendously and is finally a hit with the public)


  13. #12

    ...One more thing (because I can no longer edit my previous post)

    facts are facts,

    The bottom line is, Walt Disney wanted the park to change and evolve. Walt is NOT around anymore to give his approval, but as long as the imagineers find the right balance, creating new experiences and refreshing attractions while at the same time, honoring the past, that is all we can hope for because they are keeping his vision for the park alive.

    Mr. Koeing, with all due respect, you simply come across as a constant pessimist, a person who does want the park to change at all, and that is simply the wrong attitude if you want to honor Walt's vision.
    I choose to be cautiously optimistic, and you simply do not come across as an optimist.


  14. #13
    Some people are worth melting for oregontraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by Disneylandfanguy View Post

    Now, if swing dancing does come back to the venue, I think that would be great. (Because honestly, as nice as the Fantasy Faire is during the day, at night the area is really dead, and could use the energy.)

    Having said that, even if swing dancing doesn't return to the venue, is that really such a horrible thing? After all, swing dancing is currently offered in Downtown Disney. Is that not a compromise?

    The fact of the matter is, the imagineers are not evil. It's not like they wake up every morning thinking "Hmmm...How can I upset the fans today?"

    As I understand it, most imagineers respect Walt Disney's legacy and are quite aware that there are some parts of the past that should never be lost. The imagineers are Disney fans too. The imagineenrs are NOT idiots. Very often, they do know what they are doing.
    #1. Moving the Swing Dancing to DtD is not the same experience, so I wouldn't call it a compromise. While I have yet to check out the new area, and I hear they are making some improvements with sound & lighting. I have heard from the dance regulars about the new area. Mainly, you have new dancers who don't know about floor ettiquette, folks coming out of bars and being disrespectful, and sadly, I have heard of alleged thefts. While some may enjoy the bandstand and not having to pay to get into the parks. It is also attracting a different, and rowdier crowd.

    #2 The Imagineers have done a terrific job in telling a story. However, when the folks in Marketing/Sales came in and ruined the window displays on Buena Vista Street. Its another example of crass commercialism that many people are griping about.

  15. #14

    Most of my experience is at the World, not the Land, but I too see both sides of the argument. While those of us on this page are fairly loyal to Disney if not always the management thereof, it is necessary to remember that relatively we make up a small, if vocal, percentage of the total visitors to the park. Most families I know plan on going to Disney once "for the experience" and if it's a good experience, may decide to come back in a few years once the kids get older. It's actually that visit, not the first one that is make-or-break to me. If the parks are essentially the same as they were the first visit, the chances of a third visit and a lifelong Disney fan being formed are slim. If there are some changes- some new rides/shows/parades to go with the old standards, it helps attract people to come back again and again.

    I think that while the parks should retain the same basic structure with some of the classic rides and avoid overcommercialization, I think that much of the park can be changed, altered, and swapped in and out to keep the experience from becoming stagnant. I think the bigger thing for the parks to avoid is really bad ideas (Cinderella's castle as a birthday cake? The Stich Escape version of Alien Encounter) more than it is to make sure that nothing ever changes. Do Disney Characters have to be in Small World? No- the ride was certainly popular without them and the characters probably do serve as a distraction for riders. However, the message of the ride- the similarities of all peoples and world peace- is left in tact.

    In a perfect universe, the Disney Parks would never have to get rid of anything but rather continually expand so that we just get more and more and more rides/shows/parades/experiences. However, in the real world, they are somewhat confined and the reality is that things do have to change.


  16. #15

    Ah, the "Walt Card"-- the easiest way to complain about what Disney management has either changed or failed to change. Surely those who play the card possess the inate ability to channel the thoughts, beliefs, and ideals of a man who died over 40 years ago.

    Those who disagree with a decision by Disney management are free to do so, but doing so in the name of Walt Disney is disingenuous. Make a case for why you don't like something- a cogent argument can certainly get the attention of management.

    Personally, I also chuckle at those who cite too much "commercialism" at the Disney Resorts. Yes, the parks were designed to for family entertainment, but these are not national parks. Disney is a for-profit company, with a fiduciary responsibilty to its shareholders. Decisions will always keep that in mind- if such decisions significantly detract from the customer experience, adjustments will be made.


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •