It is a shame that given the opportunity to write about Disney, Karl F. Cohen wastes the chance to really discuss the problems Disney has caused. It would have been far more interesting for him to discuss the way animation has now become dominated by the 'Disney look' and how this look has effected the aesthetic of world animation. For most viewers outside of America the stance taken by the extreme right and church groups is just a reflection of the bigger soical problems america has. The real problem with Disney is that they produce bland rubbish. The edge of the early work has long since gone to be replaced by a corporate animation that offends no one (Apart from the nutters on the extreme right.) and says very little. The viewer is only required to sit passively and is never questioned or challenged by the work that is shown. I am talking about the animation that is produced and has now become a huge glode product. It seems that Disney animation is really only about making money and nothing to do with art, aesthetics or creativity. Animation that actually steps outside of this normal is rare on the ground, never shown in mainstream cinemas and is usually labelled alternative. If we look at what passes for major works of animation the vast majority has a look, storyline and content that really never changes. Sit and compare Dreamworks animation to Disney and one would not know who produced what. All I can say is thank god there is still a strong tradition of european animation that still requires the viewer to think and not be a passive viewer.

The supposed word SEX in the dust of The Lion King and in the clouds in Aladdin (check for yourself, it's there..) is actually SFX...the Special Effects animators stamping there mark in the films they have made. It's a shame that general public can't view these films for what they are...ENTERTAINMENT!...small minds looking for small things. If Disney upsets you so much...don't see the films.

I have know about the "Clock Cleaners" swearing legend for some time, at least since the early 80's when I was first exposed to it. Always sounded like swearing to me, but I wouldn't attribute it to Walt, more the animators & voice over people. It was alledgedly edited out of some releases of Clock Cleaners, though the original video I had has it in there. Would be curious to see if it is intact in the DVD and how it is translated in the subtitles. There is also no mention of the infamous "Uncle Walt" short. Seems that at least a few people who were working for/close to Walt had something to say there. Take everything with a grain of salt. Realize that everyone does not have to have the same hero and that your hero may be flawed.

Don Duga my favorite, Love the new sketch book of Annecy trip.Thanks for taking us all along. Please keep doing it for all us stay at homes. Love you, Cassandra

I found this article to be somewhat biased as well. Karl talks about certain things found in the Disney animated films (for kids, remember that) and dismisses them like it's no big deal. Oh just two frames of a topless woman and saying to face the facts of buildings are considered phallic??? Please excuse me, but I've never seen a building look the one shown on the cover of the little mermaid. When it involves kids, there's just no excuse. No excuse. I also can't believe that the writer has not seen the dust written word "sex" in the Lion King. I only found it when I heard this "rumor", and tried to check it out for myself. It was very easy to find, and I was just in shock when I saw it. Come on, what are we supposed to do when this kind of stuff happens? Dismiss it and say "Oh so and so has it in for Disney and they're just trying to find anything wrong with the company because they don't like them". No there's a reason and thank God for those people that see those things, else kids are being fed with this crap. And I think a very honest question is WHY?

Great article ... nice to see someone else defend Walt besides me. On the Nazi issue, I would point out a fact I learned from "Walt Disney - The Man Behind The Myth," a special I saw on cable: Concerned with the rumors while considering presenting Walt with an award, the B'nai Brith Assoc (not sure of spelling) investigated him thoroughly and found the stories to be utterly baseless. To me, the idea is so ignorant ... oh, yeah, a Nazi would create "Der Fuerer's Face" and shut down production on features to produce military training films and adverts for War Bonds instead. It doesn't surprise me that Wildmon and the AFA have a stick up their behinds, this is the same moron who ruined "The Real Ghostbusters" with his comments about Janine being "too slutty" and Egon's science-speak being too heady (for him and his sheep, maybe) and the ghosts being too scary (hello, they're ghosts, isn't that the point?)... that's why succesive seasons became mindless drivel. He thought that Mighty Mouse sniffing a flower constituted drug references. If he's not smart enough to come live in the 21st century (or even the 20th) with the rest of us, he shouldn't try to influence TV, an invention that obviously frightens and confuses Mr. Unfrozen Caveman Preacher. Speaking of frozen, if all those sheep can believe in a 2000+ year-old book of fairy tales/moral plays, I can believe the coffin is really a cryogenic device ... makes about as much sense and has as much basis in fact, with a much happier outcome ... I'd love to see Walt come back and kick his ungrateful Nephew's butt up between his shoulders for that "Kiddy crap" remark Roy Edward made in the LA Times in '80 or '81, when he wanted to shut down the animation studio permanently. Eisner needs a boot to the head, too, for not giving credit where it is due to Tezuka for borrowing so much from "Kimba The White Lion" to bring us "The Lion King." If you don't believe me on this count, just watch the first episode of Kimba, and the episode where Claw (a dark brown lion with a black mane and one injured eye) is introduced, with his hyena henchmen ... you'll see that 90% of the film comes from this anime classic. Ah, well, Walt was an angel too good for this Earth, the rest of us are just imperfect mortals.

Very interesting Jean - I was a bit stuck, trying to do something which was becoming very dull, due to that feeling that the original idea was changing and was ready to give up, (I sould have been seeing new potential) but will now return revitalised! An important part of the message I parallel this way - its not that we need to jump from all we know into a void and produce something from beyond that which seems known, so much as we need to work with what we have 'now' (today) and broaden it - pushing boundaries out (as we live and learn). Technique becomes almost irrelavent, as we have no idea where we are ultimatley heading! Thanks again Jean, I will look up Maurice Merleau-Ponty Simon

I find it interesting as I read the article and than read the view points of those that have posted their comments. It seems people are quick to get on a bandwagon no matter what the flag above that wagon is flying. This also relates to the writer of the article. I find that Karl F. Cohen seems to have a chip on his shoulder towards the AFA. Most of the article I find bais based upon how Karl wants to view Disney the person and the organization. If this was an article about Walt himself there is no reason to go into AFA and their views about Disney the corp. machine. I agree with someone else about Bob Thomas's WALT DISNEY:AN AMERICAN ORIGINAL. I thought that was a good show and vary balanced with lots of facts from both positive and negative about the man. I read this piece with a grain of salt. Overall it had some interesting points but does not really do what the title says and that is to dispell rumors. I think Karl is to close to the subject and holds it to dear to his heart to be able to objectively look at the facts and report just as that facts not personal opinions.

Very cool article -- glad to get at least a vicarious tour of the exhibition. "Surrealism" seems an almost quaint word by now, but the Svankmajers seem to be able to keep the erotic kick of the original movement intact.

OUTSTANDING CARTOON FOR LEARNING,MY 3YR.AND 5YR.OLD LOVE WATCHING,AND SO DO I,WE TRY NOT TO MISS IT. ANY CHANCE OF MAKING THEM LAST LONGER THAN 5 MIN. OR MAYBE A MOVIE?

Thankyou for your insight. I will be graduating in one month and as you know, this will be a challenging next six months ahead of me. Currently I am planning to relocate to NYC and target the smaller animation studios, although I may have an opening in Boca Raton, FL. I recently attended SIGGRAPH and what I most noticed is that the animators I met have worked at several of the big studios. I didn't expect to have to relocate so much in this field. Wish me luck, and if you like, check out my website. www.in3d.org Thank you. L.

Paul Naas is absolutely correct (as he has been many times in the past when I was proud to be his co-instructor teaching animation at the Disney Institute). First, that this is a very well written and accurate article (which, of course, goes without saying for anything that Karl Cohen has written. Karl's contribution to animation history is much appreciated). Second, that it is a much needed article to be written. We have at least a generation or two who did not grow up watching Walt Disney on television every Sunday night. Working with college students, I can inform you that the majority of them are under the impression that Walt Disney is either like Betty Crocker or Colonel Sanders. Either completely "made up" or a real person who was merely a figurehead and not involved in the day-to-day decision making. For them, Walt Disney was not a real human but a mythological figure like Paul Bunyan. As a result, these "stories" are very hurtful because they feed that mythological image. I know for a fact that it is extremely hurtful to the Disney family if someone comments on whether Walt was frozen or not. (A simple search on the internet can provide you with Walt's death certificate along with a very clear official signature that Walt was cremated. When Walt passed away, he lay in his hospital bed for hours for the family to say its final good-byes. Certainly not something to do with a body to be cryogenically frozen.) Just like Elvis, it is hard for us to accept that Walt is gone because he had so much more to do and share. I tell folks that the only Disney On Ice is the Feld Entertainment show that performs in your hometown. Walt was not always a pleasant person and certainly not a perfect person but his ideas have an even greater impact on the world today than when he was alive. That type of power scares a lot of folks and the natural tendency is to lash out at it and to try to find flaws that we ignore in other products. (Does anyone recall and is still outraged by the subliminal images that were being put into GARFIELD cartoons like one frame of the Statue of Liberty as a joke?) Because of Walt Disney, we all expect more from the Disney Company. We expect a functional satisfaction (that it delivers what it says it will deliver) and an emotional satisfaction (the way it goes about delivering it). By the way, Walt COULD draw Mickey Mouse and often did up until his death although without the polish of a Freddy Moore. However, Walt could not draw Donald Duck or any of the other Disney characters on model to save his soul. I think the closest document we have today about Walt Disney is Bob Thomas's WALT DISNEY:AN AMERICAN ORIGINAL that is a well-balanced presentation of the virtues and vices of Walt Disney without wallowing in either.

I really enjoyed this article. It was well put together. I just have one problem. Why is it that parents have a problem with Disney but they let their kids see and read books such as Harry Potter?

Hey Karl, was going to send an email congratulating you on the article, but then figured I should do it in "public." You're good at sorting the facts, without hyperbole. And I say that as someone not particularly predisposed towards the Disney aesthetic, or Disney as a corporate conglomerate. It's funny how people often have to wrap their cultural complaints in character assassination; it shows a real shallowness of argument. Also, I agree with the poster below: we should all draw the line at Disney promoting gay admirals. That's clearly a violation of the "Don't ask / Don't tell" policy.

Nice work, It really gave a feeling of your trip.

I will agree some of the things said about Disney are blown out of proportion, but some are not. I am especially very unhappy about the latest family friendly Disney film. They condone cloning, voodoo, cross dressing, and praying to a fallen star. Please don't say any of this is my imagination, because I watched the movie very closely. I am a big Disney fan. We are DVC members, belong to our local Disney club, WDCC member, etc. We go to at least 1 or 2 conventions a year. A minimum of 2 trips to the parks a year. But I do think Disney should not allow many of their totally far left animators to push their political agenda on a very trusting audience. The article rants about the religious right doing something that is perfectly legal. Boycotting is one way to make a point, and the animators putting the above mentioned causes into child films is another. And I think you mislead people about the Gay Day's at Disney. Nobody has said Gay's cannot go to Disney, but to promote that lifestyle as something admiral is also promoting an agenda. I have heard many stories about the inappropriate behavior that is displayed in front of young children. And nobody says anything for fear of offending the offenders. This is one of the reasons behind why the groups who oppose Disney call for boycotts, because a place that was meant to be the happiest place in the world for children and families promotes lowers their standards so badly.

Terrific article - I think both of the first posters missed the point. Yes, Disney has become a giant media conglomerate, but that's a fairly recent development, and happened decades after Walt's death. If the second poster sees Karl's article as negative, then he either didn't read it or didn't read it carefully enough. It's purpose is to dispel some of the rumors and false stories surrounding Walt's life. I'd encourage this fellow to go back and read it again. The problem with letting some of these rumors continue unchallenged is that sooner or later they become accepted as fact. For example, we all "know" that Mama Cass died by choking on a ham sandwich. We've all heard the story - problem is, it's not true. The same thing applies to these unsubstantiated rumors about Walt Disney. The longer they're out there unchallenged, the more they gain credibility, until they're perceived as "true". One correction - the web site mentioned in the article is www.snopes.com.

Another very pertinent and precise article from Pam. In these difficult times, it is very important that one makes the best of the opportunities that one gets - as Pam puts it, most of the jobs are never advertised- networking is the best way to get to know of opportunities. After reading this, I have resolved to do lunch once each week with a person I have never had lunch before. Thanks for the thought-provoking article.

Thanks for the informative article. When I tell people I dont care for Disney, I get all sorts of weird reactions. Of course they arent thinking about the man. They are thinking about the cute little mouse and all the fluffy little characters that they buy along with their happy meals. I dont care about Disney the man. What I do care about is Disney the corporation and what it is doing to the media industry and to western culture. I don't care about Disney's attitude on homosexuality or religion. I am concerned about an expanding monopoly and its uncontrolled influence of movies and televion. Imagine an entire generation raised with only the Disney animated versions of classic stories. Imagine one company able to rewrite history with its releases of "Pocahontas" or "Pearl Harbor" Imagine Disney's dominance in the media and marketing industry. Imagine a company so powerful that they can buy New York City's 42nd street. Mickey Mouse is just an icon. No personality, no values with the exception of greed and expansion.

About stewert little . I have never met somboty whom ever acted like he did (Yes I saw it have a little cousin )he is not any part actual indavidual humanbeing . He is what they think people should act like in biped mouse like form . Distilled media, to be glib . Second " I am not a chicken but I know what an egg is " Isnt empathy one of the piller's of the human mind . What is a club but a stick man asosiate's with his agression ? and so on and so on till be built the titanic . Now im not saying that the titanic was the greatist thing we as a spieses could do ( I deliberetly did not say acomplish there )but in the end isnt that empathy a , if not the , key element of human existace? and in clossig god wouldnt have given us ower ceribelom's if it had not intendid us to use them . Keep up the good work . Ps always good to hear a sipmson's quoat .