Category Archives: Disneyland

Disney Parks and The Myth of Family Vacations


The season finale of The Middle aired last week. It took the Heck family to Walt Disney World via a contest that Sue wins, though she thinks she is competing for a car. The trip begins as a nightmare. Frankie (mom) ushers in  the trip by failing to read the tickets, which apparently are for Disneyland Resort in Anaheim rather than Walt Disney World. Before long the family is on one long Murphy’s Law of a trip. All along the way, however, the staff at Walt Disney World goes out of their way to make their trip magical. They honor their tickets and upgrade them to a room that makes their original room look like a broom closet. Even so, the Heck family is unhappy. Every plan the family makes fails. Sue carries a binder around convinced that she has the plan for the entire trip. Everyone is grouchy. Everyone is hungry. No one is having a good time. No one gets on any rides.

The first day goes by quickly. They fall asleep in their epic room. The next day they wake up at 3pm, groggy and panicked because they have slept their entire day away. At the park, they bicker and rip themselves apart trying to do too much…trying to consume everything the parks have to offer. The family stands in front of the Partners statue–Walt and Mickey–right in front of the castle arguing. Frankie shouts at them. “What is wrong with us?” she shouts. “Every other family here can figure this out!” “Everyone else can get that ONE good picture for the Christmas card.” Finally Mike (father) tells them “you know why I wanted to go to Epcot? Because never in my life will I be able to afford to tak your mother to Paris. And just once, I wanted to take her to dinner in Paris.” Clearly, he knows it isn’t actually Paris, but he also clearly knows that animating an illusion of life is what Disney does best.

The parents take off to Epcot for dinner and the kids split…and then decide not to split. Before you know it, the kids throw their plans/fears/false annoyances with each other out of the park. Silly faces are made and pictures are willingly taken. In the end, the whole family reconnects for the fireworks. All of the annoyances are gone, and they the fireworks show in awe. Of course, as they drive home, the kids fight just as they always do, but they do so with wry smiles and as the parents give knowing looks from the front seat of the car.

As I watched this episode, I kept thinking about Disney Parks as an American pilgrimage. I questioned, as I always do, what Disney/ABC is on about in this episode. Yes, ABC is NOT Disney, but The Walt Disney Company owns it. This episode was the second episode by an ABC show that took place at one of the Resorts. In 2012, Modern Family did an episode in Disneyland, and one of the central themes of the episode was familial connection and the concept being present in the moment. This episode seemed to convey a similar theme.

The Heck family drives all the way from Indiana to go to WDW. They go to have that moment of connection. Even so, it is difficult for them.  I am with Frankie all the way, because when I visit Disneyland, I always notice families who seem disconnected, frantically trying to consume everything…annoyed that they are spending so much money and not getting everything out of the experience.

Some might suggest that is the shadow of Disney–consumption. And they would not be wrong. I would suggest, however, that consumption is actually the shadow of our culture, not just here in America, but as a global American legacy. Whether we are at Disney or at a ball game, at a park or at a museum, our need to consume often trumps our ability to experience the moment in which we are living. We live in constant fear that we will be unable to consume enough to balance what we believe is being taken from us. We cannot balance the amount of money we spend against the experience of the moment.

Don’t get me wrong. I appreciate the monetary cost of a trip to Disney. I appreciate that some families never get to go and some save for years just for one day at the park. But it isn’t just the trip to Disney. It is the commodification of family life in general. It seems as though we feel that “quality family time” must itself meet some sort of acquisition level in order to maintain its value. But the value of these experiences can only be truly measured by how much they make us feel…how they make us connect. That is the point of this episode. The Hecks win the trip, but they must become conscious of the gift of the trip. They must recognize it as a blessing, let go of plans and expectations, and allow the experience to move them. Once they do, they are able to appreciate its true value. They are able to have, as Joseph Campbell once said, “an experience of life rather than the meaning of life.”  It’s a message that goes to the heart of Disney, because it speaks to a tension in Disney’s myth: consumption vs. connection.




Leave a comment

Filed under Disney/Pixar, Disneyland, Just Life

Disney and Mythology: Recycled Fairy Tale Motifs? Derivative Stories?


Recently, I read a blog review of Frozen that claimed the film was cute, but lacking a bit in originality. This was not the first time that I’ve seen a reviewer talk about Disney fairy tales in this way. I’m not gonna lie. It kind of irritates me each time I see the argument. For some reason, people completely misunderstand creativity. Being creative does not mean being wholly original. As TS Eliot suggests in his essay “Tradition and the Individual Talent,” the creative person enters into a conversation that has been ongoing since the advent of artistic expression. The entire reason to create art is for the soul to speak into that conversation. But Disney has done something besides create art for almost 100 years now. It has created a mythology, and mythology, though a vehicle for art, is not itself art.

Disney is Mythology?: Wait, Say What Now?!

First let’s define mythology. This word that the “parlance of our times” refers to as “fiction” or a “lie” comes from the Greek language. It is constructed of two terms: mythos (muthos) which simply means story and logos which means words, but can be further understood as language…the structural make up through which mythos is conveyed.

Whew…that was heavy and theoretical. Putting it more simply, a mythology is group of stories that belong to a tradition. There! That was simple and to the point. So, has Disney created a mythology? Yes they have. Each one of their stories have the hallmarks of the Disney tradition…they belong to Disney and to all of us who resonate with their message. Dude, I’m not going to bore you with all of the details of Joseph Campbell’s four functions of mythology, but Disney’s stories do in fact: 1). create awe; 2). order the cosmos or explain why things are the way the are; 3). create and promote social/behavioral norms; and 4). provide vehicles for rituals through which we travel from birth to death.

So, what is Disney’s myth? Many of you would argue that Disney’s central myth is capitalism…and you wouldn’t be wrong. Walt himself was very proud of his own capitalist leanings. But, this is hardly the end of their myth. Director, animator, and producer Don Hahn (The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast fame to name a few) told me himself at the 2011 D23 Expo in Anaheim that you can’t really take The Walt Disney Company as anything other than a capitalist entity that is out to make profit. However, and these are his words, “those of us who are artists working for the company intuit something deeper…something archetypal and meaningful.” Exactly, Disney is creating a mythology…a RECOGNIZABLE tradition through which their stories come to us.

And, if that is the case, then the argument that Disney’s fairy tales are full of derivative motifs and images becomes a shallow reading of them. I will give people the argument (if they really need it) that Disney fairy tale characters do have a similar look and that these films have similar and recognizable motifs in imagery and song . Yes they do. But if you focus on that, you miss a broader point. The reason that they share those things is that they are all part of an actual mythic tradition…and I believe that we have been living without consciousness of mythology for so long that we don’t understand what that means. Sadly, we often don’t recognize it when we see it. It means that motifs continue to return, kaleidoscopically, to further convey a tradition’s myths (Disney fairy tales) through a tradition’s ritual (going to the movies/parks).

The better question is not are Disney’s fairy tales derivative, but why do they continue to traverse the same mythic atmosphere? Well, frankly, that is a topic for another blog, so I’ll give it to you in a nice, neat package. They do it because their mythic role in our world is to tell a particular story in a particular way. What’s the story? The story is that magic does in fact exist, but that perhaps we do not call magic by its real name–LOVE. In short, the myth of Disney fairy tales is that love exists and that love transforms.

So focused is this message that Disney has created an entire “logos” for their “mythos.” And, though again this is a topic for another blog, I believe with all my heart that this myth is indispensable to humanity.

1 Comment

Filed under Disney/Pixar, Disneyland, Fairy Tales, Joseph Campbell, Myth, Walt Disney

Sending the Baby Off to College

A week ago tomorrow I dropped the finalized draft of  my dissertation in the mail to my committee chair. I’ve been trying to decide what to do with myself ever since. Although I’ve never had the experience myself, I imagine that this must be a bit what sending a child off to college is like. I have high hopes for this project. I’ve nurtured it the best I knew how and, I’m sure, there are things I could have done to make it better. I’m sure there are ways that I have neglected its needs as well as ways that I have exceeded expectations. All of this is true, but now I have sent it out to fly on its own.  This made me think about the Disney Parks commercial campaign with the “real” family memories. So I watched it again, and a line caught my attention this time that I don’t think I’d noted before. The commercial says:

“Disney memories are magic things that you can hang on to for all time…Disney memories keep our children young in our hearts for all time and color our tomorrows with the best of our yesterdays.”

This really expresses the point I was making in my chapter 2. Now, perhaps more than ever, we all need this kind of magic. Perhaps, now more than ever, I need to reinvent joy and reinvest in happiness. So, yeah, in the midst of my uncertainty, as I wait for news regarding the status of my dissertation “coed,” I’m going to Disneyland.

And, by the way, Happy Halloween!

Leave a comment

Filed under Disneyland, Reflections on the Dissertation Process

Mary Blair: Disney’s Animating Anima

Mary Blair–The lady of flair. Her name is familiar to many of us who are Disney fans. Recently, the Walt Disney Family Museum posted a blog about a new Mary Blair shrine available at the museum. She was one of Walt’s favorite artists, and one of the elite few chosen for the now fabled good neighbor trip to South America in 1941. Blair was the only WOMAN chosen for this trip (not to mention the FIRST woman to receive the distinction of Disney legend). She was an image of tranquility who met each one of Walt Disney’s challenges with the soulful eye of a poet and the joy of a child. Her quiet genius was captured during the 10th anniversary show when Disney and Blair presented early plans for It’s a Small World. But who was this amazing woman who remained content to contribute concepts, while staying in the background as a source inspiration for Disney fans fascinated by the esoteric?

She was born Mary Robinson on October 21, 1911 in Oklahoma. A naturally gifted artist, she was honored with a scholarship to the Chouinard Art Institute (which eventually became CalArts under Disney’s tutelage). After completing her course at Chouinard, Mary began to seek employment in the precarious environment that was the depression era art world  (not unlike our contemporary moment, ironically). She married fellow artist, Lee Blair, and soon began to work in the animation business.

In 1941, she went to South America, becoming part the Walt and El Grupo entourage. It was during this time that her style began to truly take its shape. Blair was fascinated by the bright colors and the physicality of South American folk art. Her work began to more closely resemble the dolls she saw carried by the children of Brazil, Peru and Argentina. This look became a part of what is now considered the iconic Disney look. It offers a different kind of caricature which, instead of providing a cynical outlook on culture, offers Blair’s special brand of innocence.

Walt Disney continued to be impressed by Blair’s work. Although she was not gifted in the technical aspects of animation per se, he considered her one of his most valuable artists. He loved her whimsical style, and continued to find ways to use her extraordinary talents.

Blair was entrusted with the concept art Disney commissioned for the animated features that are the crux of what has often been called the first Disney renaissance: Cinderella, Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland, and her artistic voice was colored by a fascination with the contemporary craftsman style of the mid-century era she helped shape.

 Her surrealist eye was a valuable asset to the Disney Studio and offered something about which few studios could boast; a feminine perspective. One might even suggest that Blair was Disney’s vehicle for positive anima (the feminine aspect of soul). She infused a much needed sweetness into an environment that was often oppressively possessed by the not so positive energy of the animus (the masculine aspect of soul).

Women at the Disney studio have generally been relegated to the ink and paint room, the stenograph, costuming and the duties of wife and mother. Sadly, this condition still continues. Even the brilliance of Pixar lacks the feminine as a physically iconic presence. Lasseter, Keane, Doctor, Bird, Stanton, Baxter, Hahn…they are all men. But women are present. They are everywhere in the background of Disney’s pantheon, doing much of the quiet, drudgery necessary in order to make the magic happen. 

Mary Blair, however, broke through the barrier of whatever version of sexism existed at the Disney studio. She did this through the power of her art, not by the kind of studio maneuvering that got animators like Art Babbitt fired, or by the kind of posturing that later garnered Michael Eisner the position of CEO of the Walt Disney Company. Blair simply did what she did best, presented the world as she saw it, in all its color and life. And Disney noticed.

Not only did he notice, he chose her to be one of the first female imagineers, handing her the project that would become the most iconic of her career. In 1964, Walt Disney was commissioned by Pepsi-Cola to build an exhibit for the upcoming New York World’s Fair sponsored by UNICEF. The exhibit was to be a gift to the children of the world.  Although the attraction’s song, penned by veteran songwriters (Walt’s boys), the Sherman Brothers, is notoriously infectious in the way that it tends to drive patrons crazy, it reflects Blair’s unique ability to combine silliness with social statement.

The boat ride she developed became the voice for Disneyland’s guiding ethos, not to mention a call for peace in the world. It is the outward projection of Disney’s anima; a wish for a utopian understanding of unity in diversity ala Mary (Our Lady of Flair) Blair.


Filed under Disneyland, Reflections on the Dissertation Process, Walt Disney

Pirates 4: A Magical Symbiosis

SPOILER ALERT: The following contains spoilers regarding all FOUR Pirates movies. Do not read, I repeat, DO NOT READ, if you haven’t yet seen the movies!

If nothing else, Disney delivers consistency!! In Pirates 4, they’ve once again found a subtle, but clear way to drive home their message of syncretism. The most basic theme of Disney’s mythology is the Romantic notion that the archetypal exists, and not only does it exist, but that beauty is to be found in the emotional experience of the archetypal. Disney’s myths attempt to deflate tension created by a dialectical approach to relationships by offering a “yes/and” option to the traditional “yes/no” question.

In this aspect, they are most typically post modern. However, the “yes, and, and, and and…” answer that Disney continues to offer brings forward the concepts of Romanticism, because it suggests that unity is found in diversity and that unity speaks the language of love: passion, compassion, kindness and possibly obsession.

The Pirates franchise seems an unlikely candidate for this message, but oddly enough, it has been one of its key themes since the beginning. The series begins with Elizabeth Swan as a small child, aboard a ship that rescues a mini-pirate by the name of Will Turner. At first glance, Elizabeth seems the archetypal image of the era’s aristocracy. She is obedient, intelligent and she knows her voice and her place. BUT, the fact that she loves Will from moment she spies him in the water suggests that all is not what it seems with her.

The characters switch to their young adult selves, almost immediately. As a man, Will is not the cliché of a pirate, but neither is he the upwardly mobile, socially spotless Norrington, whom Elizabeth finds tiresome and ultimately unattractive. The passion between Elizabeth and Will lies in the complication, the complexity they find in each other. The subsequent films (2 and 3) continue to develop this theme. Elizabeth and Will never quite journey to the depths of the danger they find in each other. That danger finds a channel in Piracy, the very structure that eventually separates them from each other physically. In the end, Will does his duty and Elizabeth remains a solitary pirate. They so perfectly embody the unification between feminine and masculine aspects of the soul that not even Will’s sacrificial choice to become the next Davy Jones (to have his heart cut out of his chest and be bound to the Flying Dutchman with a chance to return to land only once every 10 years) separates them. The final scene of At World’s End shows Elizabeth with a child she has apparently conceived with Will during their one night together before he must return to the sea. They two are separated in body, but the child they share reflects the union between them; an image of their complexity. The film ends, and of course, the female contingency of the audience utters a sigh, the lights come up and we exit. Beautiful! Because, clearly, there is only one Will-izabeth, right? Well, not really. All of the lovers in this franchise are actually couples that opposite energies. (The exception that proves the rule is the short lived attraction between Elizabeth and Jack, two characters who are way too similar to ever find true passion between them.)

Pirates 4 goes there, developing the theme of the star-crossed lovers YET again, but with a bit of a twist this time. This time the lovers are not simply from opposite sides of the sociological tracks, they are different species. Furthermore, they are different mythic systems entirely. Phillip, our adorable young missionary, is the archetypal Christian evangelist (almost Bunyan-y in his fervor). He falls desperately in love with Syrena (nice play on words there, Disney! Way to refer to Homer!) our mermaid, who is dark and dangerous with eyes that are deeply expressive.

The audience is introduced to Phillip when Captain Jack Sparrow notices him tied to the mast of Blackbeard’s ship, Queen Anne’s Revenge. When Jack asks what his crimes have been, he is informed that Blackbeard wanted to kill him for the lip he’d been giving him, but Angelica, (Penelope Cruz), Blackbeard’s daughter and Jack’s past lover (who, herself, wears the image of the cross and is on a mission to save her father’s soul), argued against it. She insists that to save his life would bode well for the survival of his immortal soul. Phillip is eventually released during a mutiny organized by Captain Jack. The young missionary immediately speaks up for the fellow sailors who have been involved with the mutiny, seeking to save not only their lives and souls, but the soul of Blackbeard as well. Blackbeard continues to ignore him, making is clear that his life also hangs in precarious balance.

Later, as the crew hunts for mermaids, Phillip is among the first to be used as a decoy to draw the mermaids near. The sailors cower in longboats as they recount legends about mermaids luring men to their deaths at the bottom of the sea and eating them. Suddenly, Phillip notes movement in the water. The crew perks as a stunning creature (who looks surprising like actress Amanda Seyfried) approaches the stern of the boat, cooing to the sailors to hear them sing. The sailor with the notable voice is lured to her, and as he reaches out to kiss the mermaid, she pulls him over and the fight begins.

Phillip seems to be a collateral damage, dragged down to the depths, but he surfaces, unwittingly trapping a mermaid by the tail. Later, he pierces the mermaid’s tail knowingly trapping her, as she cowers in fear. She is captured, and Blackbeard has her placed in a glass coffin (which reminded me a bit too much of Snow White…but that’s a different blog post…). Phillip is clearly moved by the beauty of the creature, as well as her plight. He watches over her (pardon the pun) religiously, and a bond begins to form when he cracks open the coffin so she can breathe. As Brucie nudged me and said, “uh oh…naughty boy. He’s falling in love with a mermaid.” LOL

Well anyway, i could recount the entire plot, but suffice it to say, they fall into a passionate infatuation with each other. The mermaid’s tears Blackbeard needs for the ritual required for efficacy of the aqua de vida are acquired only when Syrena cries out of relief that the man she says is not like the others is alive.  I’ll wrap up this segment by saying that she becomes the savior to Jack Sparrow and Angelica, and a savior to Phillip, kissing him and dragging him down beneath the water in order to heal a presumably mortal wound he receives during the final battle.

So what’s the point? Really now, I find it fascinating that this romantic lead is a missionary. He is such a fervent believer in Christianity that he takes up with the infamous pirate Blackbeard just for the sake of saving souls on his ship. And, our heroine is a mermaid, the very creatures with fangs who capture and drown all those men they inflame. This entire franchise is about mistaken identities and prejudice. It is about the reversal of social expectations. Pirates are expected to be vicious, ruthless killers with no moral code, sense or feeling for others. Clearly, this is untrue. Jack, Gibbs Will and Elizabeth reverse this expectation. But a passionate bond between a mythic creature and a Christian missionary?? Could it be possible for Christianity to come out of the clouds and back into the body? Disney suggests it so, as the fusing of desire between a minister and a pagan is presented here without either complication or any necessity for compromise? In typical Disney fashion, love wins. God is in his heaven and all is well.

Only the mythic voice that brought us Captain Jack could envision THAT kind of union of the opposites…and make it look this hot, by the way…

Leave a comment

Filed under Depth Psychology, Disney/Pixar, Disneyland, Fairy Tales, Just Life, Movie Reviews, Myth

Crafting the Icon: Television Builds the Park

Walt Disney was constantly fascinated by the process of finding new and technologically progressive mediums to use in the promotion of his products. He often used these new technologies as springboards for new projects. Television is one of the mediums that Walt Disney plunged the company into whole-heartedly. It captured his fancy almost as utterly as animation and film. His long cherished dream of creating an interactive park where fans could interact with the myths of his studio seemed out of reach for him just decades before. That is until he moved into the realm of television. Suddenly it seemed possibly to reach into the homes of his fans and encourage them to try his newest products. It was the intimacy of television that struck Disney. Through it, he was able to fuse his love of education and entertainment with his charismatic personality and unaffected charm. At the project’s inception, he was reticent to be the face of this new forum, but once he committed to it, it became clear that he was the perfect choice to host the series.

Disney used the structure of the Disneyland series to creates an icon, while simultaneously placing viewers there. But, the Disneyland television show did much more than that. It created an axis mundi, a holy mountain, a temple.

Disney knew that the success of his park would hinge on memory. People might venture to the park out of curiosity, but they would return because of the memories they created while they were there. He knew that he had to find a way to affect the kind of memories one makes on trip a sacred spot, and, if he wanted to have a profitable first year, he needed to do this before the park opened. Television was the perfect medium for this project.

The Disneyland television series had the unique ability to relate the storytelling canon to their myths and tp create an airtight association between the stories and characters the audience had grown to love, and the place—Disneyland—where they would be found in the physical realm. Without television, the results may have eventually proved the same, but it would probably not have happened in time to turn a profit and save the fledgling, not to mention deeply in debt, Walter Elias Disney (WED) Enterprises…aka…Walt and the Imagineers.

In order to hype the audience up and make them yearn for what he was about to offer, he went to television. To whet America’s appetite for what was about to come, the show built its built its structure around the structure of the park like the “cardinal points of the compass” (Frontierland, Adventureland, Fantasyland, and Tomorrowland). The earliest shows combined tv movies, theatrically released films, animated shorts, full length animation, true-life adventures WITH tours/progress reports of Disneyland the place. The show’s key intention to create a single cohesive narrative for the park.

The Disneyland show suggests, somewhat subtly, that all of these stories belong at Disneyland, In fact, more than any other film studio/purveyer of popular culture, Disney truly embraces the re-visioning of mythology. In true storyteller fashion, the Disney studio never ceases to produce new and innovative versions of archetypal stories. In his seminal essay, “Tradition and the Individual Talent,” poet T.S. Eliot reminds us that we do not create in a vacuum. We are heirs to the mythic tradition of humanity. Myths are grand stories that tell stories about identities and, as folklorist Alan Dundes suggests, myths tell, in narrative form, how things became the way they are. And, Like other mythic systems, Disney is in the buisness of crafting identity.
Disney wisely recognized that memory would be the vital ingredient necessary for the park’s success. Memory, identity and mythology are inextricably linked. We craft our identity through our ability to identify with stories, with each other, with the memories we share. The phrase, “do you remember where you were when…happened” is a consistent phrase in our society. We get, implicitly, how important it is that we remember where we were when Kennedy was shot, when the astronauts landed on the moon, when the Berlin Wall came crashing down, or where we were the fateful morning we witnessed the twin towers burn. The events themselves are archetypal and iconic. It is impossible not to mention inexhaustible, to explain how and why they are powerful. But, we know they are. Experiencing these kinds of powerful moments binds people together. It crafts myth and identity.

And, beginning in the age of television, events are brought directly into our homes. Suddenly, crafting myth is possible through a small box in the middle of the living room. Suddenly, mass culture is possible. Suddenly, it is not necessary to have actually been there for an event to have its all-important, identity making effect. And, its effective because television fuses photographic images and sound. Suddenly, just witnessing it from one’s living room creates the same kind of emotionally sealing experience as the actual act of being there.

THAT is how television built the park. Through the Disneyland television show, Disney continued working the long-standing Hollywood tradition of making illusion seem real. The show created a whole relationship between the audience and a place that didn’t even exist yet. And it did it so seamlessly that by the time the park was actually there, the psychological bonding was complete. The patron didn’t even question the temple’s iconic nature. It felt as though it had always been there…as temples always do. On some level, this is how all containers for ritualistic experience work. Disney’s use of television just cuts out the middleman.

And, truly, it is more than BRILLIANT…it’s magic!

The very first episode: The Disneyland Story

Leave a comment

Filed under Disneyland, Reflections on the Dissertation Process, Walt Disney

Metaphor, Metaphor, Metaphor :P

Hello dear readers,

I’ve been working away on this whole dissertation thingie (oh yeah, that old thing…). Immersed in the midst of the dark wood was a bit daunting for a while, but it seems to me that it is just the nature of this thing.

NEWho, I’m working on my chapter 2, which is shaping up to be a chapter on performance ritual from stage to film to theme park and depth psychological reflections on such. Interesting breakthroughs have been coming my way lately regarding the project as a whole, so I thought I would capture them in my blog before they flitted away like so many others have in the past.

Pilgrimage: I have struggled for quite a while now regarding this project’s relationship to the whole pilgrimage question. It was suggested to me, sometimes gently, sometimes not so much, that pilgrimage should actually be the firm foundation of the project. Well, I have finally figured out the relationship of pilgrimage to this project. It is NOT the focus, in so far as it needs to be laid out as the number one grounding topic in the thesis. However, a chapter 2 on pilgrimage is completely appropriate. I am actually talking about pilgrimage, but using it as a quasi-metaphor. In order to talk about pilgrimage from the point of view of the Myth and Depth Psych disciplines, the word pilgrimage needs to expand from a simple one to one definition. So, talking about pilgrimage as a state of psyche, and the soul’s need to turn to pilgrimage is a wonderful jumping off point for this first content chapter.

Chapter 3, which was originally going to be chapter 2 will now be a focused juxtaposition of theater and film in order to develop consider the origins of the theme park experience as transformation (the journey to the otherworld). I like it…From Stage to Screen to Theme Park. This leads nicely to…

Chapter 4, which will consider the content of the place itself in reference to the traditions of icon and spectacle.

Chapter 5-underworld

Chapter 6 Renewal

nuff said for structure at present. The biggest AHA of the day was not really an aha as much as a reminder. As I’m a myth studies person and not an actual ritual studies/anthro/religious studies person, I tend to deal more in metaphor. I need to own that use of these terms as metaphor.

that’s todays output. I am choosing to see it as productive. LOL

Sidenote: I need to get a Wii. I’m dying to play Epic Mickey…

Leave a comment

Filed under Disneyland, Reflections on the Dissertation Process