home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=94TT0728>
- <title>
- Jun. 06, 1994: Essay:Who's Afraid Virginia's Mouse?
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1994
- Jun. 06, 1994 The Man Who Beat Hitler
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- ESSAY, Page 76
- Who's Afraid of Virginia's Mouse?
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p>By Charles Krauthammer
- </p>
- <p> Opposition to Disney's America, the "historical theme park"
- to be built about five miles from the Manassas National Battlefield
- in northern Virginia, is heating up. There are two categories
- of opponent: those who object to building any large enterprise
- in this bucolic area of the Virginia Piedmont and those who
- object to building this enterprise.
- </p>
- <p> The former are just antidevelopment. They would object to any
- mini-city with all its attendant pollution and traffic implanted
- far beyond the nearest suburb in pristine country. But, as Frank
- Rich points out in the New York Times, that is not the reason
- for the great Disney debate.
- </p>
- <p> Rich, who bitterly opposes the Disney park, admits that "the
- issues of money, urban sprawl and environmental disruption that
- attend the park are between the Virginia voters and their consciences."
- (Their consciences appear clear: the Virginia legislature has
- overwhelmingly approved the idea.) But "the esthetic issues
- dramatized by Disney's America concern everyone." Why? Because
- "the battle over Disney's America is part of a much larger struggle
- between theme-park America and authentic America."
- </p>
- <p> So the issue is not urban sprawl. This is bigger stuff: a battle
- of cultures, a struggle between authentic and inauthentic America.
- Or as historian David McCullough, co-founder of the anti-Disney
- Protect Historic America committee, insists, a case of "synthetic
- history...destroying real history."
- </p>
- <p> The heart of the case against Disney is not the fact of development
- but the content. Were the site slated for a new research campus
- for the Harvard School of Public Health with housing for several
- thousand (as Disney proposes), I doubt that McCullough and the
- other intellectuals on the committee would be in such a tizzy.
- </p>
- <p> What they loathe above all is the meaning of Disney. William
- Styron denounces the still hypothetical park for "its inevitable
- vulgarization of our heritage." Barbara J. Fields waxes poetic
- about the value of the past, then declaims boldly that "such
- things cannot be consumed as entertainment, experienced by carnival
- rides, pictured on mugs or T shirts, or simulated by animated
- wax figures." Shelby Foote expresses "fear that the Disney people
- will do to American history what they have already done to the
- animal kingdom--sentimentalize it out of recognition."
- </p>
- <p> My, my. We're talking about an amusement park here, not Princeton's
- Institute for Advanced Study. Disney builds playgrounds for
- children--loud, clangy, vulgar, kitschy playgrounds. One might
- as well denounce comic books for not being literature. Or Davy
- Crockett movies for vulgarizing Tennessee history--and sentimentalizing
- bears. How many adult couples do you know who dress up, hire
- a sitter and head out for an evening at an amusement park? For
- that matter, how many adults do you know who frequent restaurants
- where teenagers, dressed in giant mouse outfits, snuggle up
- to them and offer a kiss for the camera?
- </p>
- <p> That's Disneyland and Disney World and Disney everything. I
- know. I am an expert on Disney. I've done Catastrophe Canyon
- five times and can recall every diorama of the Great Movie Ride
- in order. I've seen it all in the company of my son, age 9,
- who loved every innocent, campy, vulgar bit of it.
- </p>
- <p> Look. It is one thing for snobbish European intellectuals to
- take American trivia seriously. Disneyana is the favorite mirror
- of America--succeeding Luigi Barzini's insufficiently satiric
- suggestion of baseball--for every European thinker from Umberto
- Eco on down. It was Eco who in his 1975 essay "Travels in Hyperreality"
- gave a deep and dark and ironic account of Pirates of the Caribbean
- as "more real than reality." Heavy implications followed.
- </p>
- <p> I do not know if Michael Crichton reads Eco, but he had the
- perfect riposte in Jurassic Park, when its creator dismisses
- the marauding dinosaurs and general chaos with "When they opened
- Disneyland, nothing worked." To which the wise-guy mathematician
- responds, "But when the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down,
- the pirates don't eat the tourists."
- </p>
- <p> That is because they are not real, let alone "more real than
- reality." And yes, Mickey is an inauthentic mouse. One expects
- Europeans to wax heavy about that. But one expects a bit more
- sense from American historians.
- </p>
- <p> Foote is right. Disney's America will idealize and sentimentalize
- history the way Disney's movies have idealized and sentimentalized
- nature. So what? Bambi and Dumbo are delightful, enduring children's
- treasures. They are not meant to be PBS documentaries.
- </p>
- <p> So with the theme parks. Walt Disney's genius was to drain the
- boardwalk midway of its anarchy and menace. He smoothed and
- creamed and pureed it into a shamelessly sweet, hopelessly inauthentic
- 3-D movie set he called a theme park. His movies are Hans Christian
- Andersen pasteurized. His parks are Coney Island homogenized.
- In both he created the perfect entertainment for children.
- </p>
- <p> Those who fear that a children's entertainment will destroy
- real history have little faith in history. Disney's America
- is an amusement for kids who bring their parents along for the
- ride. The issue of urban sprawl is serious. The suggestion of
- cultural desecration is not. As the kids would say, "Lighten
- up, guys."
- </p>
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-