The Life & Legacy Of Walt Disney - Lear Center

6The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyAnd now to introduce our occasion for getting together today. He has writtenmany books, including a biography of Walter Winchell, and a group biographyof the Hollywood studio system called An Empire of their Own: How the JewsInvented Hollywood. One of his books, Life, the Movie: How EntertainmentConquered Reality, could, in effect, be the motto for what we study at theLear Center. It’s a special pleasure to us that he is a senior fellow of the LearCenter and has a new biography just out, Walt Disney, please welcome NealGabler.Neal Gabler, Author of “ Walt Disney:The Triumph of American Imagination”I’m going to toss it to Neal for some comments and then there will be akind of easy, comfortable conversation, and at a certain point you will find itirresistible not to be part of it and you will be welcome to join it. So, Neal.I feel I know Walt Disneybecause essentially he andI lived parallel lives forthe last seven years that Iwas researching this bookand going through all ofhis papers.GablerNeal Gabler: I feel in a way that I’ve kind of dampened the conversationbecause we were in the Green Room a moment ago and I was just sittingback, I was just listening to them talk and it was absolutely fascinating.Now, I feel I know Walt Disney because essentially he and I lived parallel livesfor the last seven years that I was researching this book and going through allof his papers. I wrote an article for the Washington Post Book World this lastweekend in which I described method biography. Method biography meansthat among the many things biographers are – they’re thieves, they’redetectives, they’re psychologists – they are also method actors, because whenyou embark on a biography you have to find in yourself correspondencesbetween yourself and your subject. When I researched this book, I did sochronologically. I went through all of Walt’s papers in chronological order atthe archives so that I could stay in the moment with Walt and get to knowhim.

7The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyWe all know that Walt Disney is going to be enormously successful in the end,he’s going to make Snow White and he’s going to make these other greatanimations and he’s going to build the theme parks and he’s going to do It’sa Small World and all of that – but Walt Disney didn’t know. He was a man ofenormous self-confidence and we may hear a little bit about that this afternoon, but at any given point in his life he wasn’t sure that he was going to besuccessful. He was hoping, but he didn’t know. And so, when I researchedthe book, I tried to stay in the moment with him, both to make the book moretactile, to give you the sense of suspense, the sense of what Walt is thinkingand feeling at any given moment of time, but also so that the reader will sharethe experience with Walt. And I did that for seven years.But this afternoon, you’re going to have the opportunity, and so am I, tohear from people who didn’t have to go through Walt’s archives, and didn’tHe was a man of enormousself confidence and we mayhear a little bit about thatthis afternoon, but at anygiven point in his life hewasn’t sure that he wasgoing to be successful. Hewas hoping, but he didn’tknow.Gablerhave to rely on method acting, as I did, because they knew Walt Disney, theyworked with Walt Disney, and they can give you their version of Walt Disney.I’m going to kind of open it up and I hope we’ll have a rather free-floatingdiscussion here. I want to begin with Mr. Gibson and ask him this question.You started work at the Studio in 1939, if I’m not mistaken.Blaine Gibson: Yes.Neal Gabler: So you went there very early.Blaine Gibson: I was an apprentice for a while. Animation takes a long time.Neal Gabler: Yes, and at the Disney Studio, it took a long time to work your

8The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt Disneyway up through the ranks, did it not?Blaine Gibson: It did. Probably one of the main reasons was because the NineOld Men never got any worse. They were better as they got older. And it wasawfully hard to get in.Neal Gabler: And they weren’t all that old, either.Blaine Gibson: No, no, no.Walt Disney and Blaine GibsonNeal Gabler: Not at that point.I saw him often and hewas always friendly andsaid “hello.” But I didn’tmake any aggressive movestoward him because I wasin awe of him from the verybeginning actually. I felt hewas a father figure in a way.GibsonBlaine Gibson: Walt was only 38 when I started, and he was 17 years olderthan I was, so actually it was a bunch of young people.Neal Gabler: Do you remember the first time you saw Walt Disney? Met him?Blaine Gibson: I can’t remember exactly, but I saw him often and he wasalways friendly and said “hello.” But I didn’t make any aggressive movestoward him because I was in awe of him from the very beginning actually. Ifelt he was a father figure in a way. Once I started animating on features – Iwas in effects animation for ten years and character animation for ten years– the happy time was when I was a character animator. We had somethingcalled sweat boxes to the very last, projection rooms where people met tolook at dailies. They were hot. People would watch the dailies and sweat. Waltwould look at the dailies and he would be sitting in the back and it was ratherimpersonal for the most part. You would see your scenes running all throughand he would go through it: “I like that group of scenes. That’s working very

9The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt Disneywell. No, I think we need some work on this.” That was the kind of relationship you had with Walt, in animation. But that all changed when we went overto Imagineering. Everybody was on a personal basis with him at that time.Neal Gabler: Do you remember the first time you met Walt?Harriet Burns: Yes. I was actually hired to do the sets and props with BruceBushman for the Mouseketeer television show. TV was newish and he wasalways experimenting with new things, and so that was fun. He was tellingme about what we should do on that, his whole idea of this big Mouseketeer.Harriet BurnsWe could never rememberthat name, Anaheim, becauseno one had ever heard of thatplace. It was just a bunch oforange groves. There wereother rumors that it wouldnever work, nobody wouldgo that far. Who was goingto drive 40 miles to a playpark?I thought it sounded pretty corny, these Mouseketeers and so forth. And thenhe said, “Now, you won’t be shooting all the time, so when you’re not you canwork with these art directors on this park that I’m going to build.” There wasthis rumor of this park and that was all –Neal Gabler: That’s all he said? This park? he didn’t –BurnsHarriet Burns: No, he didn’t define it. I think other people had told me itwas down in Anaheim and we could never remember that name, Anaheim,because no one had ever heard of that place. It was just a bunch of orangegroves. There were other rumors that it would never work, nobody would gothat far. Who was going to drive 40 miles to a play park? Because the originalplan, set across from Disneyland, had this little train thing, and not a real park.So that was my beginning with Walt. And we had a great relationship becausethere were only three of us.Originally, we were in a boxcar because there was no space for us in theanimation building. So he just stuffed all the odd-ball people down in this little

10The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt Disneyboxcar. We were with the machine shop, which was great for us because wehad all the tools, all the power tools and so forth. And then later we were ina big warehouse-type building on the backlot. And still there were only threeof us. So that made for a wonderful relationship with Walt, very informal. Hewould just come down when he got a chance from the animation building.Neal Gabler: How often did you see him in that period?Harriet Burns: Well, sometimes daily, sometimes once a week, depending onthe project and depending on his schedule. He would just come down whenhe could. It was terrific because all of the products were new, all of the paintsEverything was anexperiment. So it was quiteexciting and it was excitingfor Walt. He would almostbe dying to use whatever– if we were soldering, hewanted to do it. He eventook a flit gun out of myhand once and said, “Letme try it.”were new, everything. Fiberglass had just been out a few years. Xerox hadnot been developed yet and we had to use carbon paper. Everything was anexperiment. So it was quite exciting and it was exciting for Walt. He wouldalmost be dying to use whatever – if we were soldering, he wanted to do it.He even took a flit gun out of my hand once and said, “Let me try it.” It was amarvelous relationship during all of that period. And then we went over in ‘62to Glendale, when we had to do the World’s Fair project. That was big stuff.BurnsWe got a crew, larger crews, and that was entirely different.Neal Gabler: Did the relationship change when you moved to Glendale?Harriet Burns: Not really, except he had to get in a car and drive over there.He was as friendly. In the boxcar, he would sit on this old stool with a brokenrung and tell us stories. He had more time then and it was only three of us. AtImagineering, he had to walk around and see everybody’s project. So it wasdifferent. There was less time with him.

11The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyNeal Gabler: Alice, do you remember when you first met Walt Disney?Alice Davis: Yes, I do. My husband and I had only been married about sixmonths. We had just bought a house. I had been tearing off wallpaper fromthe walls, getting them ready to paint. So I called Marc and said, “You’retaking me to dinner tonight because I’m too tired to cook.” So we went to theTam O’Shanter for dinner, which was near the house –Neal Gabler: Which was one of Walt’s favorite restaurants.Alice DavisAlice Davis: Yes, and ours, too. We were sitting having a drink before dinnerWhen [Walt] went to leavehe said, “You are going towork for me someday.” AndI thought to myself, “Oh,sure, sure” and left it alone.About three or four yearslater the telephone rang andit was his secretary, whosaid, “Walt wanted me tocall and ask you if you wantto do the costumes for ‘SmallWorld’.” I said, “I wouldlove to.” And she said,“Okay, be here tomorrow at9:00.”Davisand this hand appeared on Marc’s shoulder and this voice said, “Is this yournew bride, Marc?” I looked up and it was Walt Disney and we didn’t even askhim to join us, he just sat down and joined us. He started asking me what I didprofessionally and I said, well, I was a costume designer. And he asked where Ihad worked and so forth and I said I had a done a number of different things. Iwas controlling the American woman by elastic for four years doing brassieresand girdles. And I’d worked for a fabric company designing things for smallcompanies that wanted beach clothes but couldn’t afford a designer. And Ihad done some work for the Studio, but he didn’t know it, and I didn’tmention it.But when he went to leave he said, “You are going to work for me someday.”And I thought to myself, “Oh, sure, sure” and left it alone. About three orfour years later the telephone rang and it was his secretary, who said, “Waltwanted me to call and ask you if you want to do the costumes for ‘SmallWorld.’ ”I said, “I would love to.” And she said, “Okay, be here tomorrow at9:00.”

12The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyNeal Gabler: And that was that.Alice Davis: That was that.Neal Gabler: The rest is history.Alice Davis: Right. And I got to work with these dear souls. I also got to workwith Mary Blair and my husband, and we didn’t have any fights.Neal Gabler: You and your husband or you and Mary Blair?Alice Davis: My husband. Mary Blair, I absolutely idolized practically all of mylife. My mother was an art teacher and she saw some things that Mary Blairhad done when she was going to Chouinard. I was educated in regards toMary Blair from a very young age.Neal Gabler: I’m curious. You mentioned Mary Blair, who was one of the veryearly female artists at the studios. Some of you who know Disney lore knowthat there weren’t a lot of women.Alice Davis: No.Original sketch by Alice Davis of a Thaigirl for It’s a Small World attractionNeal Gabler: There were almost no women animators at the studio, only ahandful, and almost no women working at the Studio outside of ink and paintin those early days. How did Walt treat women?Alice Davis: I don’t know. He treated each one differently, don’t you think,Harriet?

13The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyHarriet Burns: I certainly was happy with how he treated me.Alice Davis: Me, too.Harriet Burns: I never even thought about it. I was the only female on thebacklot and I never even thought about how he treated women, plural,because I was –Gabler and DavisAlice Davis: There was one woman, Retta Scott, that Marc said had a verystrong hand and was a very good animator.Neal Gabler: She was the first female animator.Alice Davis: She was the first. There was another woman who designedbackgrounds –Gibson and BurnsHarriet Burns: Thelma Witmer?Martin Kaplan: Let me do something mischievous, if I could. The view ofWalt, which we’ve just gotten here, might in some ways be in contrast withthe view of Walt that Richard Schickel has and portrays in his book. And theysay in the movie business without conflict, no drama.Richard Schickel: Well, I’ll open by saying that I’m extremely disappointedwith Neal because I find his treatment of Goofy and Pluto just totallyinadequate. They are scarcely mentioned in the book.

14The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt DisneyNeal Gabler: There is a reason for that. Let me just add Walt hated Goofy.Richard Schickel: Well, tough! I like him and I thought Pluto was really hisgreatest character.Neal Gabler: Yeah, Pluto was.He was so animatable.Pluto and the fly paperis classic. It’s one of thegreatest things I’ve everseen and he was a wonderful dog. He was pure dog.Essence of dog.Richard Schickel: Because he was so animatable. Pluto and the fly paper isclassic. It’s one of the greatest things I’ve ever seen and he was a wonderfuldog. He was pure dog. Essence of dog. That’s my primary criticism of his book.SchickelI’ll mention the first time I met Walt. The book I wrote had been proposed tome actually by an editor at Simon and Schuster. He gave me a list of titles thathe would be interested in me writing on. That was the one and for somereason, he said, well, that would be interesting. So I got in touch with theStudio and they were running a little tour – I was living in New York at thetime – a little tour on the Disney airplane, a week at the Disney Studio. I wentto Disneyland, went out to wherever the Imagineers were. I think it was inGlendale at the time. This was about 1966 or 7, not long before Walt died. Wetoured the Studio; we met all kinds of people, including Walt, who we hadlunch with I think twice. It had been openly said that I was thinking of writinga book and he was interested in that. He wondered -- he said the Reader’sDigest had been after him to have an official biography done and would I be1969 Edition of Schickel’sThe Disney Versioninterested in doing that. I didn’t want to turn the man down so I said, “Well,let me think about it.” But I said I think I’d really rather be more independentthan that.He was very pleasant to me. I come from the Middle West, as he did – from

15The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt Disneya suburban small town, not a country small town, the way he did – and hereminded me of a lot of the men that I had known as a kid growing up. Guyswho had their own little businesses, very successful, probably about the sizethat Disney had been in the mid-30s, kind of a small business growing. Thesemen were affable, McCarthy-ite, Republicans, and like Walt, had a very sternsense of controlling their enterprise and therefore their own destinies. Theywere people that you go to sports night at the high school and they would bethere and my father would introduce me to them and all of that stuff. So I felt Iwas kind of familiar with Walt in a basic human way.3rd Edition of Schickel’s TheDisney Version (1997)It’s funny, the book came out not long after Walt had died, and I thought[Walt] reminded me of alot of the men that I hadknown as a kid growingup. Guys who had theirown little businesses, verysuccessful, probably aboutthe size that Disney hadbeen in the mid-30s, kind ofa small business growing.These men were affable,McCarthy-ite, Republicans,and like Walt, had a verystern sense of controllingtheir enterprise and therefore their own destinies.it was decently critical but not horrendously so. I didn’t have him, as otherpeople have had him, wandering madly through the tunnels of Disneylandand acting like a crazy person. It’s an honorable book, it’s an honest book, as Isaw it at the time. But it was the first book that even dared to raise a littlefinger and say, wow, there are a few things here that aren’t so wonderfulabout Walt. And you’d have thought I’d – I don’t know –Martin Kaplan: Mother Teresa?Richard Schickel: – committed some kind of crime against a nationalSchickelinstitution from some of the reviews. But I didn’t feel that way about him. I feltthat there were severe limits on his imagination, despite what everybody says.I thought he was a technological genius. I thought he had a certain genius inthe economic realm. I thought that at a certain point artistically he becamestunted. I was never, peace on all of you who work there, a big fan of thetheme parks. The substitution of ersatz reality at that level seems to me kind ofdangerous, but that’s a lonely voice in the wilderness now because you can’t

16The Norman Lear CenterNeal Gabler: The Life & Legacy of Walt Disneywalk into a restaurant or anything else without encountering some form ofDisneyfication. Everybody has a theme and a damned Tiki Room or something.This is America as we experience it in very large measures throughout theThe substitution of ersatzreality at that level seems tome kind of dangerous, butthat’s a lonely voice in thewilderness now because youcan’t walk into a restaurantor anything

either worked for Walt Disney or worked with the Walt Disney Studios or spent time thinking and writing about Walt Disney. Let me introduce some of them to you first. To my right is a gentleman who wrote a book in 1968 call-ed The Disney Version, which to show you its popularity has been reissued twice --Richard Schickel: Never been out of print.