Snowglobes

[mitros]

OK, so I have only been around for a short time, and I'll use that as an excuse for my ignorance. What is this joke about snowglobes that people keep bringing up? Is it something like the car pools? Please enlighten me.

 

[Planogirl]

The way I read it, it's a commentary on Eisner's selfishness to sell as much as he can with as little effort as possible and also on the Disney fans' desire to buy all that is "Disney" both good and bad. In other words, a "true" fan would buy a lot of snowglobes (or similar items) for his or her collection (or at least spend as much money as possible for "Disney") no matter how badly the company is operating.

If I'm wrong, I'm sure that someone will enlighten me.

 

[Sarangel]

The "snowglobes" comments have to do with a parade that they began in MK with floats in the shape of giant snowglobes - which coincidentally were available for purchase in the MK shops. Yes, it is a commentary on Eisner's brand of merchandising... In fact some of the more cynical posters around here commented that they thought the parade was designed specifically to sell the snowglobes.

Sarangel

 

[d-r]

I think this is simply a way for certain posters who hold such strong personal grudges or hatred for Eisner that they can only think that ANYTHING that Disney does is a mistake or failure to categorize people who disagree with them as simple, mindless sheep. It is a way of belittling those that hold a different view in order to strengthen one's own impression that their view point is the only correct one. This helps them to maintain their world view despite evidence that contradicts it. Another mechanism to do this is to write off any success as "not really" Disney (e.g., it was Pixar, Oriental land company, Bruchheimer, ESPN, that company that made MIssion:Space, oh wait, mission space is a failure so there isn't a need to justify that). Anyway, that is my opinion - it is a way to insult and name call that the moderators accept, a way to belittle people who have different opinions, a way to reaffirm that one's point of view must be the only correct one - anyone who disagrees must be a simple-minded snow glober. It is a way to roll your eyes and discount contrary opinions without having to consider that they might have some value. It is petty, it is junior-high schoolish, and it is lame. And it isn't even a very good metaphor in the first place. Oh, and there are some people who can't come up with much original stuff on their own so they copy cat their heros and use the same vocabulary so they can chuckle at how clever they are. High fives all around.

That's just my opinion of course. I followed the advice and put these folks on my ignore list.

DR

 

[crystalb]

Snowglobes, plushes, pins, happy bouncy icons --- all the same. It equals Pixie Dust.
It is a reflection (on all of us, myself incl) on how the PD can deflect from the *insider information* on what disarray the Disney corporation as a whole appears to be in. -- More sparkles please. The *guests* won't see what is happening!
Disney has become a world wide icon that in some people's eyes can do no wrong. Just as in other's eyes Disney can do no right.
Lets' face it -- when next to a rubberhead character even the most militant are 10 years old again!

I equate it with how Christmas and presents have been jammed down public's throat. But who am I?

 

[crystalb]

I should throw in too, that symbolically the snowglobes represent the snow job that many feel Disney gives their customers.
Also symbolically speaking when Disney ended CoP, progress at Disney ended.

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

As far as I remember, as far as the DIS R&N board is concerned, Sara is right: it was a discussion of whether a couple parades, a Big Ol' Hat, and thousands of tractor trailers full of cheap knick-knacks with 100YOM printed on them would stand as a suitable tribute to or celebration for Walt Disney, when snowglobes first found themselves being used to symbolize the modern Disney as a mass-produced soo-vee-neer of innovative creations past.

More recently, it seems to me the whole thing has degenerated into the jingoistic analogy "Snowglobes" is to "Less Filling" as "Eisner Basher" is to "Tastes Great."

 

[Another Voice]

Snow globes are memories.

Go to just about any tourist spot on this planet and you'll see them lined up by the shelf load. They are not purchased because a ½ inch Leaning Tower of Pisa made of plastic in a quarter cup of water is a great artistic expression – it's because it's a tangible reminder of what one has seen and experienced. The memories they trigger, the emotions they can remind us of are more important than the object itself. They, like any souvenir, aren't important in their own right but only in what they represent.

That is their real value.


It's when people - and companies - begin to focus more on the snow globe (the representation) instead of the true experience that things go wrong.

It's when the merchandising plan is more important than the movie's script. It's when the movie tie-in and plush shop are more important than the quality of the attraction. It's when the maker of the snow globe is more important than craftsmanship that went into making it. It's when being at a place becomes more important than what you can do there. It's when people feel that owning a snow globe is a substitute (or even better than) the original experience. It's when the number of snow globes in one's attic becomes more important than why they are there in the first.

That's when an object that's supposed to contain sentiment becomes a hollow, cheap, plastic water-filled novelty.


Disney became a great company through creating great experinces and great memories. To many today they seem far more interested in selling the reminders and trinkets instead of creating new memories and new experiences. They place the works of the past inside a glass dome and try to peddle the emotion, instead of creating the emotion in the first place.

 

[crusader]

That's right - Disney has a retail division.

They take sentimental memorabilia and repackage it. What a shameless marketing ploy.

So in other words: Spielberg's rerelease of E.T. the collector's edition and Lucas' rerelease of Star Wars and Universal's rerelease of Scarface complete with a new DVD for the collectors all amount to one thing: "Yes, Virginia there is a SantaClaus" and it's going to be a White Christmas in Hollywood. Let it snow - let it snow - let it snow.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Mr. Crusader,

Does it strike you as odd that all the examples you gave are actually creations? Yes, they are marketing gimmicks from that creation, but they are creations nonetheless. The very point that AV was trying to make and you, it seems, were intent on missing.

I don't think he means to exclude the marketing and even to a certain extent, the exploitation, of certain concepts. It's only when that exploitation becomes the singular driving force, rather than the creation itself, that a real problem occurs. A line that many agree that Disney crossed quite a while ago.

Surely you can see that.

 

[crusader]

Baron -

You're right. I did predominantly focus on one aspect of the snow globe analogy. (good to hear from you, btw)

What I see are two distinct philosophies embedded in this metaphor.

On the one hand, we have:

It's when the merchandising plan is more important than the movie's script.

and:

To many today they seem far more interested in selling the reminders and trinkets instead of creating new memories and new experiences. They place the works of the past inside a glass dome and try to peddle the emotion, instead of creating the emotion in the first place.

Which led me to the comments I made in the first place. The three examples I used are great creative works and excluding Scarface, the other two have been merchandised and peddled to the public's psyche to the point of oblivion. Let's also throw in Juraissic Park here. One can argue, particularly with Lucas that he built his empire on one hit trilogy and has been milking it for decades - constantly repackaging it until the resale value has virtually diminished on the open market.

It's very similar to the sports memorabilia from a retired ball player. The longer he lives, the more autographs he sells - and some players will even refuse to sign anything they do not have a financial stake in.

I happen to disagree that Disney's snowglobe campaign operates this way. Every parade, show and attraction at the parks is a representation of their vast creative empire. Many of the characters they have created are immortalized because of the demonstrative nature of the marketing campaigns combined with the excellency embodied within the art itself.

The public wants to experience their memories - and they want to see their favorites properly represented. They buy figurines, dolls, dvd's, shirts, hats, prints, and more recently Pins and Snowglobes because of the feeling they derive from such purchases. Whether they are giving a gift - or harboring a keepsake - the company has a duty to provide what the public wants and if that means they have to constantly reoutfit Mickey, Minnie and Cinderella than so be it.

I don't think the criticism is fair that they haven't created anything new and therefore keep peddling old stuff. If it is - then you have to insist they retire Mickey, Donald, Pluto and Goofy (not to mention Snow White) because they're senior citizens now and should have been creatively replaced with CGI characters.

Which leads me to the second point embodied within the snowglobe mystique -

It's only when that exploitation becomes the singular driving force, rather than the creation itself, that a real problem occurs. A line that many agree that Disney crossed quite a while ago.

or in other words:

It's when people - and companies - begin to focus more on the snow globe (the representation) instead of the true experience that things go wrong.

Ah yes - The "lack of creativity" issue. All due no doubt to the existing CEO. Cleverly referred to as a snowglobe or sticker or whatever the latest buzz is here on the DIS. I will not pretend to believe the animation division isn't in need of an overhaul. I will not agree however, that the company is exploiting the art of the past without creating anything new. I tend to interpret many of the unsatisfied customers here as having a strong distaste for the cold fact that Disney is principally in the business to sell to the consumer.

Do they need to revamp animation? Yes.
Do they need to invest more into the parks? Yes.

These are the two main areas of concern for me. They are not end all life threatening situations to the degree some have placed them. The company can focus its' efforts here and make substantial improvements and I happen to agree with those who remark to that.

 

[KNWVIKING]

Whatever metaphor or analogy "snowglobes" was originally intended to represent has long since been erroded into an oft repeated sarcastic bash intended for anyone not firmly planted in Car 3.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
Whatever metaphor or analogy "snowglobes" was originally intended to represent has long since been erroded into an oft repeated sarcastic bash intended for anyone not firmly planted in Car 3.

I agree. Whether it started with a parade or ever had some meaningful value is irrelevant.................the snowglobe reference has become nothing more than a slur. A tried and overused slur. It is all nice to try and now repackage "snowglober" and say that it innocently represents those who are more interested in buying memories than new experiences, but take away that smoke and it simply is intended to mean that anyone who finds anything of value or Magic in almost anything Disney has done in the past 5 years is someone who can be easily distracted by cheap, shiny, glittery pieces of crap with the Disney logo imprinted on them and wouldn't know quality or worthwhile entertainment if it bit them on the @ss. It is intended to imply that those who see anything positive coming out of Disney aren't seeing things for what they truely are and are blinded by the fact that the letters D-I-S-N-E-Y are attached. It is intended to discount the opinions of those who hold a contrary opinion, no matter how valid, by implying that they can't think for themselves. To some it is entertaining...............to others it is yet another barrier to communication (assuming there is a real intent to communicate....otherwise it is just another jab in an endless bout that will go on ad nauseum until the end of DIS time...............)

 

[Planogirl]

I don't understand what the big deal is. I'm a Car No. 3'er and I own a snowglobe. I also see items of value coming out of the Disney company and items of lesser value.

I guess that I don't see the difference between saying "those who see anything positive coming out of Disney aren't seeing things for what they truely are and are blinded by the fact that the letters D-I-S-N-E-Y are attached" (good phrase Mr Kidds!) or saying "snowglobe". It's just someone's opinion after all, however it's phrased.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"...............to others it is yet another barrier to communication (assuming there is a real intent to communicate...."***

My biggest frustration with this board is that many posters are just so close minded that there is never a discussion on any topic- just the same old "I'm right, you're WRONG" rhetoric.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I'm a Car No. 3'er and I own a snowglobe.

And here I am outside of Car #3 and can't claim snowglobe ownership . But we all know it really has nothing to do with what one does or does not own.................

I guess that I don't see the difference between saying "those who see anything positive coming out of Disney aren't seeing things for what they truely are and are blinded by the fact that the letters D-I-S-N-E-Y are attached" (good phrase Mr Kidds!) or saying "snowglobe". It's just someone's opinion after all, however it's phrased.

You are correct PG..................it all comes down to the shorthand people choose to use. Either way, whether one chooses to use the shorthand version or write it out, this still stinks of a dismissal by those with a (sometimes founded, often times unfounded) knowledge superiority complex . As mitros asked in the op...........yes, snowglobes has sort of replaced or supplemented the carpools..................well, partially replaced as I don't know that the non-car-3ers have a new shorthand for our worthy adversaries. Personally I have no use for such things any longer for the very reason the good Viking touched on.

Is the whole snowglobe thing a big deal? I guess that depends. While it hasn't happened (directly) to me, when someone is trying to have an intelligent discussion and they are basically told to go shake their snowglobe it could be a little..........shall we say............counterproductive .

Just like the distractive nature of the carpools built to a crescendo and subsided, so too shall the nature of the snowglobe.........................I hope.

 

[Planogirl]

Mr Kidds, I agree that often the comments seem excessively harsh but I would rather hear all of the negative comments in the world grounded in truth than some of the Disney cheerleading that goes on at times. I see excessive viewpoints on both sides even from those in other "cars".

For example, some of the criticism of Pixar now that they MAY decide to go it alone or with someone besides Disney seems a bit much to me. Pixar has done a good job and it amuses me when someone says that they aren't making a quality product simply because they might leave Disney.

So you see, it works both ways. Somewhere in the middle is the truth in my opinion.

 

[Peter Pirate]

PG...I don't honestly recall ANYONE saying that Pixar hasn't made and can't continue to make great movies without Disney...The argument generally centers around what is best for them and what would happen to them should they throw out a stinker or two. And if a comment like this ("Pixar can't make good movies without Disney") was made it certainly doesn't reflect the majority of even us 'Snowglobers,' 'apologists,' or 'rose colored glasses' folks, IMO...But as you can see, I just named three derogatory nicknames oft thrown at our side and what names do we use in return? Basher? Threeper? Names, to be sure, but not nearly as condescending in sound or, more importantly, orgin, IMO...

We apologists are continually getting skewered by insiders, oldtimers (veterans) and people who know big words in an attempt to ridicule and belittle our sense of the situation. Nearly everyone on this board sees problems with Disney but some of us don't see the need to crucify Eisner for every decision (even good ones) or compare a 21st Century publicly held multinational conglomerate to a long gone, small back lot company, ruled with an iron fist by a couple of brilliant brothers...Sometimes its nice to discuss the current direction of, say, Epcot under the situation we are now in and are likely to remain in for the near future, without name calling or dispersions being cast. It doesn't always have to be so "big picture"... But in that big picture I am actually more with you than agin you as I too, believe that most truths lie somewhere in Centerville...Now if we could just find that stinkin' town!

 

[DisneyKidds]

Somewhere in the middle is the truth in my opinion.

Absolutely...............as has always been the case around here .

I would rather hear all of the negative comments in the world grounded in truth than some of the Disney cheerleading that goes on at times.

Once again, I agree. I just think there is plenty of room on both sides to have adult conversations without the need for anyone to be so closed-minded and dismissive as to say "I'm right and if you weren't so blinded by all that pixie dust flying around in your prescious snowglobe you would realize it". Sometimes it seems there are those that think that anyone who doesn't agree with them or see things their way is a cheerleader. Well that just isn't the case. Things are never as cut and dry as we like to think they are.

 

[Another Voice]

So would anyone like to explain how "basher" is any less of a slur?

Can anyone claim that dismissing an opinion becasue "you have a personal vendetta against Eisner" is less dismisive?

Is "insiders, old timers and people who can use fancy words" encouraging of conversation?

And how is the oft repeated "if you don't like it don't go" attitude open minded?

It cuts both ways.