Disney's bumpy road

Walt and Roy's climb to success was most dramatic after the release of the world's first animated feature, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs: "The studio had prospered beyond his [Roy's] dreams...Money poured into the studio" (119). But just when you think that Disney was making great forward advances in their studio company, they veer off course. In 1938, the Disney brothers had presented their parents with a wonderful new home in California, near the studio. However, the new place didn't turn out so amazing, for it ended up causing the death of their mother, Flora (by furnace gas). Walt recalled, "they [Mom and Dad] were very happy before she died...she was very proud of Roy and me and what we'd done" (126). This tragedy clearly had a large effect on Walt and Roy, as it would with anyone, but the two sons were especially heartbroken. Their father, Elias, died three years later, and was buried alongside his late wife.

Along with the family, the company was at a remarkable low. At least the Disneys had something to blame for their crisis: World War II. No one could escape the economic devastation that arose during that time period. "The forties brought the war and our frozen markets," Roy remembered. "It was a bad decade for us...we were a young organization, and our fellows were subject to the draft. We lost many, many of them" (150). On top of losing many employees, Walt's new animated features did not bring in nearly enough profit to pay for production costs. First, Pinocchio created many problems in its early stages, essentially a "nightmare" (130). Then came Fantasia, Dumbo, and Bambi, and all were box office failures. With these frustrations, "the company was so broke that not even one feature was in production" (158). Everyone in business inevitably has some rough patches to get over, but they eventually disappear. The Disney brothers will definitely come out of their hole, and will have plenty of opportunities to rise to the top once more.

~ Outside Reading #4

Thomas, Bob. Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire. New York: Hyperion, 1998.
.

Fame: enter Disney

It's hard to believe the huge breakthroughs that the small Disney studio productions company was making. Then again, how else would Walt and Roy have made it to the top? No climb comes without risks and striving towards new ideas. First, Walt decided to make color cartoons, which seemed very difficult financially. But of course, the products came through and did much for the benefit of the company: "the reaction was almost as sensational as that for Steamboat Willie...the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences gave Flowers and Trees the first Oscar for a cartoon" (81). These color pictures definitely held promise for the Disneys. Later, Walt came up with undertaking an animated feature. His wife, Lilly, one of many who questioned Walt's resolve, asked, "Who wants to see a feature cartoon? Cartoons last eight minutes. People would be bored if they were ten times as long" (97). However, Walt desired a challenge, and this only motivated him more. As apparent in today's society, making a feature-length animation took the Disney company above and beyond to give them huge success.

Though Walt and Roy's personality differences have always existed, they are most evident during the time the small company was making these huge steps in their production. Readers can clearly see the division: Walt's imagination versus Roy's sense of reality. For example, Walt wanted to produce cartoons in color, which Roy was overwhelmingly shocked. The opposition of their viewpoints can be clearly seen: "Roy argued that color would add greatly to the cost of the cartoons, and United Artists wouldn't advance any more financing. Walt countered that color would enhance the popularity of the cartoons" (80). Unfortunately for Roy, it seems Walt's ideas have always turned out for the better, no matter how much money was needed. Nevertheless, Roy mostly remained a skeptic; he comments on the company's welfare, "Very frankly, our business has been growing so fast and expanding in two or three directions, that we are still about as close run for money as ever" (89). Despite these statements, Roy does acknowledge his brother's ingenuity and his positive mindset that ultimately lengthened the Disneys' survival in the business.

~ Outside Reading #3

Thomas, Bob. Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire. New York: Hyperion, 1998.
.

On the Waterfront: traitor vs. whistleblower

The film On the Waterfront explores the idea that even though one wants to stand up against improper conduct, they are hindered by the ethicality of this action, torn between whether they might be committing betrayal or following their individual beliefs of right versus wrong. Though Johnny Friendly and the mob are responsible for many murders, Terry is hesitant to testify against them, afraid of how they would respond. Terry does not want to be looked down upon as the traitor against the mob, especially since no one else has been before. The whole society has always feared telling honestly about the mob's crimes, even though many are witnesses. Meanwhile, the priest tries to convince everyone that unless someone stands up against the mob, the world will ever change and only acquire more evil. He remains firm in his stance, acknowledging the need for a change. Edie also believes in standing up for what's right, for she obviously desires an explanation for her brother's death. She now realizes that mob's crimes and no one's willingness to testify cannot continue. Though Terry wants to tell the truth in the interest of society, he also has an inclination to stay back for the sake of his own well-being.

I believe Terry definitely took the right action by telling the truth because society became stronger as a whole. One is never a traitor if they are helping a bigger cause and betraying someone who always does terrible things, for they don't deserve to be supported. Ultimately, the difference between a traitor and a whistle blower is who is being affected by the action. If only oneself or a few people come out better, they might be a traitor to whoever they left behind. But if one helps out the larger picture of society by telling the truth, then they can be considered a whistle blower who knows good ethics. Terry is justified in his decision to testify because all the other dockworkers stood up to Johnny Friendly, who was seen for who he really was: a powerful man with no true power. One must be considerate of who they would be affecting with their decision: just themself or society.

~ Question #2
.

All My Sons: family or society?

In Arthur Miller's drama All My Sons, many characters have to make tough decisions about whether to follow the path for a better family or society. This is best displayed by the disagreement between Joe Keller and his son Chris. Joe decided to let the faulty plane parts be shipped out to the war pilots, even though he knew they would not work in the planes. He desperately tries to justify himself to Chris, pleading to him, "I did it for you...when would I have another chance to make something for you...A business for you!" (70). Joe is reasoning that what he did was for the family and for Chris to have a promising future in the business. Despite Joe's insistence, Chris forcefully couters him, exclaiming, "For me! I was dying every day and you were killing my boys and you did it for me? What the hell do you think I was thinking of, the Goddam business?" (70). Chris can relate to the pilots who died because he was also fighting in the war. Based on his experiences, he obviously does not support his father and cares much more about the society and the people who paid for Joe's actions.

It is hard to draw a fine line that states when it's appropriate to help family or society. There are so many different situations to consider. On one hand, you're always supporting your family, but when society calls for help, you should answer, for one person could make the difference in victory or defeat. Then again, one person might not be able to make any difference at all and, instead, should help their family at almost any cost. In the case of Joe Keller, he was definitely unjustified in his decision, for murder is irreversible. There would certainly be other opportunities for the family to obtain money; besides, it would be more beneficial for Chris to go out on his own and start something with his money, not what his father gives him. We must always look out for our loved ones, yet at times we must go out of our way to help the greater people. One must always look at both sides of their situation: whether the family or society is in need the most.

~ Question #1

Miller, Arthur. All My Sons. New York: Penguin, 1947.
.

Disney's real beginning

The lives of successful people like Walt and Roy Disney are extremely fascinating to learn about because we discover that they still had to struggle like everyone else in order to achieve what they wanted. The Disney brothers had several ups and downs during the beginning stages of their company. Roy served in WWI and was unable to support anyone at home. Walt was deciding on his career choice: "I had two ambitions: to be an actor or an artist. It seemed easier to get a job as an artist than as an actor, so I decided on the former" (39). Starting any sort of career is never easy, especially one in art and cartooning. Walt went through many good and bad employments; he even incorporated a company for a time, but he went bankrupt. He eventually didn't know what to do and turned to Roy to help him start anew. They went to Hollywood, which "bore some resemblance to a gold rush town" (44). Hollywood is filled with all the famous studio names, which was what the Disney brothers came for. Their journey would later prove that any goal can be fulfilled with determination and intelligence.

The Disneys inevitably needed more money if they wanted to get an enterprise going. They were graciously supported by their family. Roy commented, "In our family we all helped each other" (47). It took a mortgage of their house, but it was definitely worth it. Walt and Roy rented a lot and called it the Disney Bros. Studio. Then the brothers moved, changing the name to the Walt Disney Studio. When asked about why the name included Walt, Roy said, "Walt was the creative member of the team. His name deserved to be on the pictures" (54). It's exciting for me as a reader to see how something as small as the company name would help give them success. The Disneys worked with several different distributors, and the brothers usually ended up losing their deals with them quickly. Walt produced many cartoons and pictures, including Alice Comedies, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, and of course, Mickey Mouse, which became a national sensation. These words probably made Walt and Roy quite proud of their work, and they will soon have the huge company that will result from their accomplishments.

~ Outside Reading #2

Thomas, Bob. Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire. New York: Hyperion, 1998.
.

Roy: the money behind Walt

You think there's only one person who made it all happen, but you always miss their partners. Yes, it is called the "Walt Disney" company, but it was actually co-founded by Walt and his older brother, Roy Disney. Though they were closely related and a business team, they had quite opposite personalities: "Walt was the inventive dreamer, Roy the financial wizard" (1). Inevitably, you wonder which is better: having optimistic creativity and big visions or a down-to-earth sense of what is physically possible? Though the Disney brothers had their arguments, they still greatly acknowledged each other. When Walt spoke publicly about his older brother, he admitted, "I still love him. I argue with him. Sometimes I think he's the stubbornest so-and-so I ever met in my life. But I don't know what the hell I'd do without him...he kept me on the straight and narrow" (5). The attitude contrast they had clearly did not affect how the two entrepreneurs climbed up to success.

I was very surprised at how far the Disney family was able to be traced back. Hughes d'Isigny fought with William the Conqueror to invade England in 1066. While living in England, the name was shortened to Disney, and 600 years later, they settled in Ireland. Then in 1834, a branch of the family set sail for New York. This action reminded me of how foreign people looked up to the United States as an assurance for a better life. Elias Disney, Walt and Roy's great-grandfather, definitely followed this statement, spending his lifetime "in a futile search for the bounty that America promised" (7). A big family was raised, and eventually, Roy and Walt were born in the turn of the 20th century. All the kids remembered their father's harsh demeanor, and they all "yearned to become independent of their father's commanding ways and occasional switchings" (24). This was probably an incentive for Walt and Roy to start their own lives and create their company. The Disney brothers are a fine example that no matter what your history is, anyone can be successful.

~ Outside Reading #1

Thomas, Bob. Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire. New York: Hyperion, 1998.

Photo: wonders of construction

To clarify, the camera is looking up.

A new view of history

In the Albert O. Kuhn Library in Maryland, the Creative Photograph in Archaeology exhibit features new photographs of ancient sites and monuments that provide a different visual perspective on history. Photographers artistically show classic Greek structures such as the Temple of the Olympian Zeus, the Acropolis of Athens, and the well-known Parthenon. Pictures are taken from unusual angles and with modern settings and close-up detail, and viewers can also see how some of these monuments are still used today, perhaps for other reasons. Photographers hope these images will uncover the answers questions about history that have lingered over our heads for many years.

Photography has definitely changed much over time. Older pictures of history are "straight on, mundane shots to merely show one the antiquity in its entirety, a snapshot, if you will." Now, thanks to a few creative artists, we can see the past in a new light. Clearly, the different aspects of photography have a great effect on our perspective of the subject, and in this case, history has achieved a new beauty that has recaptured many viewers' attentions once more.

~ Outside Reading #4

Davila, Patricia. "The Creative Photo provides fresh take on historic art." The Retriever Weekly. 22 Oct. 2008.
.

3-yr-old living goddess

Hindu and Buddhist priests in Nepal appointed 3-year-old Matani Shakya a living goddess, or "kumari", worshipped as the incarnation of Taleju, the strong Hindu god. Many young girls, who are part of the Shakya goldsmith caste, went through ancient ceremonies to be selected as the goddess by a panel of judges. The girls were also assessed for having perfect physicality and no fear. After being chosen, the goddess must pass the final test of being alone with slaughtered goats and buffaloes' heads, and if they pass this, the goddess will be carried from her family and live in isolation in an ancient temple in Katmandu, the Nepali capital. But once she reaches puberty, she will lose her divineness and be allowed to return to her home.

Matani must feel very proud and so must her family; having status as a god is presumably a great achievement. But there's just one word in my mind: why? Is living by herself for several years really worth becoming a goddess? And she doesn't have or get anything from doing this except being alone. I would not give up my life for ten years if I just get recognized as an incarnation; there are too many things I would miss. And the judges are so particular about the girl's character; it just seems like a lot of trouble to go through, especially for such a young person. Also, I thought Buddhists didn't have any gods except Buddha, who is really only an enlightened person. I didn't really think that appointing Matani as a goddess followed any Buddhist beliefs, like attaining peace and wisdom. I think that this whole event doesn't help anyone or society and, especially for the young girl, creates much unnecessary commotion.

~ Outside Reading #3

Acharya, Yuvraj. "Hindu and Buddhist rituals herald appointment of 3-year-old living goddess in Nepal." Star Tribune. 7 Oct. 2008.
.

Kleos: modern value?

Homer clearly defines winning glory and renown as arguably the greatest accomplishment for any man in war to achieve. Today, people have become wiser and more insightful about what values are important to us. In contemporary society, I don't think that kleos is pursued, for we have discovered greater things to have, like love and virtue. Odysseus' want for kleos gets him and his crew into unnecessary trouble, like when they are trapped inside the cave of Polyphemus, the Cyclops. If Odysseus had kept his mind on the journey home and not thought about fighting the monster, he could have saved his time and effort. Staying out of trouble is definitely a good thing to do; causing trouble just makes situations worse, especially for selfish reasons. Menelaus also went straight for kleos, and in the end, he is only seen as a wealthy man and the owner of a kingdom. Just being rich is frowned upon today, for it doesn't completely help you live your life. You must also have virtue and intelligence, which can be much more valuable than money.

Kleos can also lead to causing other people problems, anything that one does not want to deal with. Odysseus' desire of glory puts his family at home in tough positions. Telemachus lives in Ithaca without confidence for himself. Without his father, who is believed to be dead, Telemachus does not have any fatherly figure to inspire him and build self-esteem. An important modern-day value is to always trust yourself and believe you can achieve your goals. Without self-confidence, it is difficult to remain optimistic about your life. Penelope also must deal with the fabricated loss of Odysseus, for now she must deal with her grief and the suitors who want to court her. As a devoted family member, one should not cause the rest of their family to deal with problems for their own selfishness. Ultimately, one's pursuit of kleos puts themself and others into situations that can be avoided. Glory is definitely not desired today as much as before, for people have become more selfless and have tried more to achieve glory for the whole world.

~ Question #1

.

College cafeterias without trays

At the University of Minnesota and many other schools nationwide, lunch trays have become a thing of the past and have been taken out of their cafeterias. Colleges discover that not using trays saves money and helps the environment by reducing waste and cleaning. There is less food uneaten and less water and detergent used in washing. But many students, if not all, oppose this change. Juggling all that food without a base is definitely not easy, as one freshman puts it: "it's kind of a pain in the butt."

I never actually considered that something as petty as a cafeteria tray would affect the environment or really save a decent amount of money. If this is completely true, then I would definitely agree with removing trays. Saving money is always a good option, and students would not be sacrificing much; they could also just go up for seconds if need be. If we didn't have trays at our school, I don't think that it would affect anything much because no one seems to get a lot of food anyway.

~ Outside Reading #2

Shelman, Jeff. "Students take a crash course in Trayless Dining 101." Star Tribune. 30 Sept. 2008.
.

How important is a cell phone?

American teenagers have made the cell phone an essential item to have, according to survey of teens across the country. Many feel that having a cell phone is part of their identity and the measure of their social lives. Also, owning the latest, newest phone to come out is absolutely necessary; some kids are even embarrassed to show others their phone if it's not "cool". Many teens said they don't even use their cell phone for practical things like emergencies, but for social networking or playing games.

It is so hard to believe how sad and true the survey's results were. It's crazy that some kids are embarrassed if they don't have a phone that's hip or cool. People are so judgmental about others based on one piece of technology; that's almost like judging someone by how much money they have. Don't get me wrong, having a stylish phone is cool and nice to have, but it should not be the basis for one's social life. This article really reveals how society can be so influential on its people.

~ Outside Reading #1

Reardon, Marguerite. "Teens view cell phones as essential." Yahoo! News. 15 Sept. 2008.