Tonight on PBS - Walt Disney: Triumph of the American Imagination

[DisneyPrince1982]

I'm not sure if you watched last night, but they highlighted that one bit of feedback that Walt ignored was the advice to avoid the inclusion of African Americans singing while working in the fields (i.e. the so-called "happy slave" stereotype). Instead, he included a couple of "filler" scenes of groups of such farmhands walking home from the fields at sundown, tools in hand, and singing "Negro work songs".

Just because you ask for a group's input doesn't mean you're obliged to follow it. I mean, nowadays, sure, when every company known to man caves to the whims of society. But Walt was from a different time and had the cahones to do it his way.

Slaves often used songs and music to boost the overall happiness of the people they worked with. This is fact! And since music was a big part of "Song of the South," I think it wouldn't have made any sense at all for Walt to not include the slaves singing.

All I have to say is Thank God for this movie because I absolutely love the music that is played during Splash Mountain.

 

[cabanafrau]

Just because you ask for a group's input doesn't mean you're obliged to follow it. I mean, nowadays, sure, when every company known to man caves to the whims of society. But Walt was from a different time and had the cahones to do it his way.

Slaves often used songs and music to boost the overall happiness of the people they worked with. This is fact! And since music was a big part of "Song of the South," I think it wouldn't have made any sense at all for Walt to not include the slaves singing.

All I have to say is Thank God for this movie because I absolutely love the music that is played during Splash Mountain.

It's hard to use the different times excuse when you're directly told it's offensive in response to consultation you sought out. I don't chalk that decision up to cajones, I'd dock Walt for lack of creativity and lacking commitment to the spirit of the idea the movie was trying to put forward. That's hardly an unfair measurement to hold up to the man who accepted all the kudos and drove his staff to their limits to push the creativity and maintain focus on theme, emotion and message in the projects.

 

[DisneyPrince1982]

It's hard to use the different times excuse when you're directly told it's offensive in response to consultation you sought out. I don't chalk that decision up to cajones, I'd dock Walt for lack of creativity and lacking commitment to the spirit of the idea the movie was trying to put forward. That's hardly an unfair measurement to hold up to the man who accepted all the kudos and drove his staff to their limits to push the creativity and maintain focus on theme, emotion and message in the projects.

Again though, Walt's decision was historically accurate. Leaving it out would have been disingenuous.

 

[cabanafrau]

Again though, Walt's decision was historically accurate. Leaving it out would have been disingenuous.

I've not seen the movie in decades, but I thought it took place post war, post slavery? Not so certain it's on quite the "historically accurate" ground you claim.

Secondly, Walt Disney and historically accurate have a bit of a dysfunctional relationship at best. I'd say hanging his hat on that claim for this decision would be disingenuous.

If it was about getting wonderful music into the movie I think the creative genius of Walt Disney could have come up with a way without choosing to both offend people and do a disservice to the sentiments of the story.

 

[NewRVLady]

as I stated on the other thread I started-this Documentary was an eye opener for me. I grew Up with walt on my TV every Sunday night-he was always a kind grandfatherly type
He was ruthless
I really really could not believe how he held a grudge against his top Animator for organizing the Union in the art Dept
and then "threw him under the bus" in the McCarthy Commie Blackballing hearings. watching him trying to come up with more bad things to tell about this man made me kinda sick to my stomach

 

[DisneyPrince1982]

If it was about getting wonderful music into the movie I think the creative genius of Walt Disney could have come up with a way without choosing to both offend people and do a disservice to the sentiments of the story.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The movie won an Oscar for Best Original Song and was nominated for an Oscar in Best Scoring. I'd say Walt hit a grand slam!! The movie, on its film merits alone, received an excellent critical reception.

 

[cabanafrau]

as I stated on the other thread I started-this Documentary was an eye opener for me. I grew Up with walt on my TV every Sunday night-he was always a kind grandfatherly type
He was ruthless
I really really could not believe how he held a grudge against his top Animator for organizing the Union in the art Dept
and then "threw him under the bus" in the McCarthy Commie Blackballing hearings. watching him trying to come up with more bad things to tell about this man made me kinda sick to my stomach

It fits with his personality though. If you look at his story overall, no matter what he turned his attention to he did it with full intent, full throttle and full focus. I wouldn't be surprised to find that he wouldn't view his actions as malicious or vindictive. I suspect that despite being a great visionary, Walt was quite myopic in many ways and failed to comprehend that his vision wasn't in fact the only vision, or even the clearest vision. His early triumphs helped cement his feeling that his viewpoint was the correct viewpoint.

 

[cabanafrau]

We'll have to agree to disagree. The movie won an Oscar for Best Original Song and was nominated for an Oscar in Best Scoring. I'd say Walt hit a grand slam!! The movie, on its film merits alone, received an excellent critical reception.

A bit of a disingenuous response? Nowhere did I say the music itself was the issue. Matter of fact if Walt could have come up with a better creative use of the music to serve the spirit of the relationship in the movie I suspect the movie would still be widely viewed, beloved and a critical darling today.

 

[DisneyPrince1982]

It fits with his personality though. If you look at his story overall, no matter what he turned his attention to he did it with full intent, full throttle and full focus. I wouldn't be surprised to find that he wouldn't view his actions as malicious or vindictive. I suspect that despite being a great visionary, Walt was quite myopic in many ways and failed to comprehend that his vision wasn't in fact the only vision, or even the clearest vision. His early triumphs helped cement his feeling that his viewpoint was the correct viewpoint.

Walt did what he had to do build his empire. Maybe he was a jerk in business but if that worked for him, great. Steve Jobs comes to mind as a more contemporary visionary who was also viewed as the biggest jerk around by almost everyone he worked with.

 

[L&Lfan]

We'll have to agree to disagree. The movie won an Oscar for Best Original Song and was nominated for an Oscar in Best Scoring. I'd say Walt hit a grand slam!! The movie, on its film merits alone, received an excellent critical reception.

"Let The Rain Pour Down" and "ALL I Want" are two of my favorite songs in the film. In fact I enjoy the entire score of Song of the South and wish it were available on CD. I had the soundtrack album when I was a kid. I hope there were no objections to Hattie McDaniel's "Sooner Or Later".

 

[Geoff_M]

I've not seen the movie in decades, but I thought it took place post war, post slavery? Not so certain it's on quite the "historically accurate" ground you claim.

Our family watched it again in August. It is clearly set not too long after the end of the war. It is clear that Remus is free to stay or leave the plantation as he wishes, and Atlanta would hardly be a good destination for a "runaway slave". Additionally, in the opening scenes it is implied that "Johnny's" father is moving him and his mother out of the city of Atlanta to the plantation for their safety because some implied threats made by some in the city against the father, a journalist, because "everybody's mad at father for what he writes in the paper". It is clear the the father was patterned by Disney after Joel Chandler Harris, who in fact was a champion of racial reconciliation after the war, and expressed so while working for the Atlanta Constitution.

 

[cabanafrau]

Our family watched it again in August. It is clearly set not too long after the end of the war. It is clear that Remus is free to stay or leave the plantation as he wishes, and Atlanta would hardly be a good destination for a "runaway slave". Additionally, in the opening scenes is it said that "Johnny's" father is moving him and his mother out of the city of Atlanta to the plantation for their safety because some implied threats made by some in the city against the father, a journalist, because "everybody's mad at father for what he writes in the paper". It is clear the the father was patterned by Disney after Joel Chandler Harris, who in fact was a champion of racial reconciliation after the war, and expressed so while working for the Atlanta Constitution.

I was simply referring to the slaves singing in the fields, which, as you mentioned upthread, Walt was specifically asked to refrain from portraying.

 

[Geoff_M]

I was simply referring to the slaves singing in the fields, which, as you mentioned upthread, Walt was specifically asked to refrain from portraying.

I understand, but you seemed uncertain about the setting. Mine was not a correction, but a buttressing of the answer to the question.

There also another possible reason why Disney included those scenes anyway, which I alluded to earlier... time. Even with them the film barely makes it over the 90 minute mark (including opening and closing titles). While there may have been other footage left on the editing room floor, those scenes are clearly "filler".

 

[PollyannaMom]

If anyone missed it, one of the PBS stations here is replaying both parts tonight.