Thoughts on Disney's America
Today, in class, I listened to a presentation on "Disney's America," a theme park originally planned by Disney but later dropped by the company. It was probably a good idea that the project was dropped, since the theme park wanted to create entertainment out of American history in a non-sensitive way. For example, the original plans for the park have schematics to create rides based on themes such as slavery and the civil war (one might laugh at the innocence/insensitivity of that time if not for the seriousness of the tragedy that people have actually endured historically).
While it is obvious that the theme park was a bad idea, listening to the presentation got me thinking about another question: is it possible to create a respectful theme park based on American history that is not insensitive? The answer is not immediately obvious: while it is evident that it is almost impossible to create a theme park out of slavery and the Civil War in a respectful way, it also seems that it is possible to create a theme park based around the American Revolutionary War or the Second World War without touching on politically sensitive issues.
However, would it be appropriate for us to create a theme park about America's Founding Fathers without mentioning the institution of slavery? Indeed, would it be appropriate to present any part of American history pre-civil war without considering slavery? This is a non-trivial question: on one hand, one can argue that it is appropriate to hold up American ideals, and describe the historical events that best illustrate these ideals by themselves; on the other hand, a description of history without mention of the failures of the nation is simply a false description.
Perhaps another way to think about this problem is whether it is possible to build a historical theme park with socially desirable effects? The answer seems to be yes; in particular, a theme park that presents history accurately can be an effective institution to educate the public. However, such a theme park may not be necessarily profitable, since most of history is dark and depressing.
The conclusions from this reflection seem to be that a theme park may just not be the best way to present history; at least, I do not see a viable way to do it. However, I think this fact is unfortunate, since people do like going to theme parks and there is a need for Americans to be more aware of their history; in this sense, I do not have anything against the idea of a theme park based on all of American history. Indeed, if a socially conscious entrepreneur actually finds a way to create a fun park that treats historical subjects respectfully, I'd be all for it. In the mean time, though, it would seem that museums remain the best public institutions to display our pasts.
Interesting reflection on historical theme parks, Lihong -- especially because you bring a unique perspective given your upbringing in Dubai.
ReplyDeleteI think the crux of the point is the understanding of what a "theme park" is -- an amusement park with a unifying theme. In the case of Disney, it's "magic" (or edutainment for EPCOT, or movie studios for Hollywood Studios or animal/ecological conservation for Animal Kingdom). The key concept there is "amusement" -- which, at least etymologically, is linked to humor and entertainment. That's not to say that history can't be amusing or funny, but as you've pointed out, to *only* paint history in that light is to gloss over the dark parts (something which a large portion of American schools already do).
I think history can "come alive" and this is something that Colonial Williamsburg strives to do -- to make history more engaging, however many eyerolls and groans a visit there may elicit from children. (I do recommend a visit there, if you've never been, once we can all travel freely again.)
This problem of merging entertainment with education is, I think, something Disney is also struggling with...probably because, in American, education has been framed as "not fun." Education and entertainment are portrayed as antithetical, and attempts to merge them (a la Disney's edutainment) haven't been successful.
Have you encountered any successful attempts, outside of America?
I mean, I've been to theme parks in China that's about Chinese history. However, they are very nationalistic and I don't think they accurately depict anything. It's only in countries such as the US where free speech is held sacrosanct and where the population is relatively diverse that it is possible for society to examine their own past critically. Otherwise, it is in the interest of leaders to glorify their own histories.
DeleteMoreover, it is natural for us to want to see our ancestors in a positive light, so it is only when we are confronted with a great deal of evidence (whether in the form of records, stories, photos, etc...) that we are willing to accept just how horrible that the past was.
Huh! I didn't know about the Chinese History theme parks! I'll have to look into that.
DeleteI also think the goal of the "park" or museum is important -- especially in light of your comment about wanting to see our ancestors in a positive light. If you want to bring in any sort of younger audience (I'm thinking along the lines of school field trips) then the information couldn't be too "brutal" or "graphic."
But I'm thinking of the Holocaust museums in Germany -- they are solemn and horrifying, and there is very little effort to make you feel okay or revere the past. The point is, I think, to make you feel unsettled...
Great depiction of the dilemma surrounding Disney's America. Definitely history is a complex entity with significant highs and lows and as such to find a balance of accurate portrayal vs fun and excitement is difficult. Your argument is sound and I agree with your analysis. It is difficult to portray things that have been known to be serious and significant such as history or education as fun and exciting. Overall, great read Lihong.
ReplyDelete