This article from a Toronto Newspaper announces the 1979 recreation of a scene from Fantasia using puppets.  The Toronto-based group, The Famous Players, is comprised of severally mentally handicapped members who have been trained as puppeteers.  The Famous Players' shows often use puppets to impersonate celebrities and politicians, and this upcoming interpretive performance of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" represents the group's tribute to Walt Disney.  In attendance will be Jimmie Edwards, the recently retired Disney representative who worked on the original Fantasia film vocals and later went on to handle Mickey Mouse's vocals in other Disney endeavors.  In addition to the group's interpretation of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," The Famous Players will also be performing other acts including a rendition of a sequence from the Puccini opera Madame Butterfly.

This brief article is important because it provides a glimpse into the treatment of Fantasia in the intermediate years between its original release and contemporary times (significantly, in between the film's original release and the release of Fantasia 2000).  This adaptation using puppets is significant because it demonstrates the treatment of Fantasia as a cultural production that enables artistic interpretation.  While the method of interpretation is certainly unconventional, this creative adaptation reflects onto the artistic possibilities of the film itself for creating the possibility for such interpretation.  It is also significant that the group's Fantasia performance is nestled next to their interpretation of a piece as classically artistic as Madame Butterfly.  This juxtaposition further substantiates an aura of art around the film.  The temporal position of this group's performance reflects my thesis because it represents an intermediate view of the film as art.  While the group's adaptation recognizes the film as art (and functions as a tribute to Disney), it also takes the liberty of creatively interpreting the film.  Thus Fantasia was not merely viewed as an antiquated form of art but something that could still be reworked in the current time.

Johnson, Bryan. "Puppets bring a slice of Fantasia to life." The Globe and Mail 22 June 1979.

This article, written in 1946 by a professor of theater arts at the University of California at Los Angeles, weighs the merits and drawbacks of the animated cartoon as an art form.  The author notes that the beauty of the form is that, at its best, individual cartoons can be watched repeatedly and still hold the viewer's interest.  The article describes Walt Disney as the master of the animated cartoon, a man who brings infinite imagination to his work to produce rich details that warrant repeated viewings of his short films.  However, the author does not respond as favorably to Disney's feature films, arguing that they progress only in terms of technical skill.  The article mentions the shortcomings of many of Disney's early feature films, specifically describing Fantasia as an "ambitious experiment lacking over-all perfection," but still recognizes Walt Disney as a man working within the constraints of a larger industrial system that limits his art through economics.  The author argues that Disney, himself, is a genius but is unable to bring true artistic innovation to his feature films because they represent "an expensive medium for far too large a public."  The article closes by announcing two new Disney shorts to be released in the coming months, predicting that these cartoons will be able to "comment on life and society and still be entertainment" because they do not suffer the same burden of economic popularity as Disney's feature films.

Written just six years after the original release of Fantasia, this article is an example of negative critical reception of the film based on criteria that do not revolve around the film's "destruction" of classical music.  Here the author situates his disappointment in Fantasia's execution within an overall critique of Disney's feature length films.  The author's main criticism of the Disney feature length format is that it tries to cater to too large an audience and is bound by expectations of economic performance, a fact that strengthens my thesis that art is often seen as being in opposition to mass entertainment/commodities.

Macgowan, Kenneth. "Make Mine Disney: A Review." Hollywood Quarterly july 1 (1946): 376-77. JSTOR. University of Pennsylvania Library, Philadelphia. 27 Nov. 2008 .

 

What is art? This question has taken on many different forms and functions over time, changing in regard to social and historical circumstances. Can a piece of work that achieves commercial success still be considered art? Can true art be produced with a massive audience in mind? This project examines how the answers to these questions change over time in relation to a particular cultural production, Walt Disney's Fantasia (1940). Drawing upon sources from different points in history, I aim to demonstrate that as time passes since the original release of Fantasia, the critical discourse surrounding the film becomes increasingly mounted in artistic terms. This would indicate that the definition of art becomes more inclusive as time elapses since the production of a specific work. The socio-historical perspective that is gained through temporal distance allows a richer reading of a cultural production, beyond its classification as either high art or popular commodity, and it is from this vantage point that qualifications as art are more likely to spring.

Clague, Mark. “Playing in ‘Toon: Walt Disney’s ‘Fantasia’ (1940) and the Imagineering of Classical Music.” American Music 22.1 (2004): 91-109. University of Illinois. JSTOR. Van Pelt Library Philadelphia, PA. 26 Nov 2008.

Clague opens with “Fantasia’s” style. A “new kind of art,” “Fantasia” creates meaning out of music and images through audiovisual alignment. Such meaning should expose the public, presumably having no musical knowledge, to a wider understanding of classical music. Disney achieved this goal with “Fantasia” by creating a series of shorts, each of which was associated with a particular piece of classical music (such as Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D Minor of the opening vignette). With the help of Leopold Stokowski and the Philadelphia Orchestra, Disney attempts to teach viewers how to listen to such music. The animation acts as a visual aid to suggest information about listening to the music. More specifically, “Fantasia” is an early example of Disney’s “Imagineering,” exemplifying the combination of science and creativity, engineering and imagination. Certain critics suggest that such a composition may have damaged the music; inevitably, image always dominates sound. However, the Disney Studio used that implication to its advantage in “Fantasia” by introducing a number of associations, ideas, and references to the music. Appealing to middlebrow culture and an uneducated middle-class, “Fantasia” provided easy access to the high-end classical music. Abstractions of sound were connected with imagery of commonplace experiences to allow the public to better relate to the pieces. Themes expressed by the film are faith in scientific research and progress; Darwin’s theory on evolution in The Rite of Spring segment; racism (though more obvious passages were self-censored in the 60’s and do not appear on the modern editions of the film), mainly in depictions of black picaninnies; sexism; homophobia and gluttony (Bacchus, who is over weight, and the donkey kissing); as well as family, parenting, love, youth, etc. Though many of these ideologies are rejected by today’s society, Americans in the 1940’s more readily embraced them. In effect, “Fantasia” reflects the ideological viewpoints of its time, serving today as an important reminder of where America has been and what is aspired to be.

Clague exemplifies, in this article, Disney’s goal to make “Fantasia” an educative production. The film therefore has a clear message in mind and does not leave much room for personalized interpretation. More harmful still are the commonplace associations with the music. Such banalities associate the corresponding music to lack of musical innovation and of individuality. This visual imposition therefore truly taints the musical pieces of great composers whose work has been subject to Disney’s distortions. The Disney Studio effectively changes the nature of the music by limiting the listener’s creativity. As such, “Fantasia” is the opposite of art because it introduces only one correct idea and expresses as true, perhaps resembling propaganda. Though there is the unresolved debate of propaganda’s artistic nature, “Fantasia” is not even propagandistic art because it was not created as such. “Fantasia,” an entertaining animated film and not a political advertisement, confines the viewer to one clear interpretation, rather than implying a message through abstraction. This film is therefore fundamentally not a work of art. It is simply the middleclass entertainment that it depicts.

English, Horace B. “’Fantasia’ and the Psychology of Music.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 2.7 (Winter, 1942-1943): 27-31. Blackwell. JSTOR. Van Pelt Library Philadelphia, PA. 30 Nov 2008.

English reminds the reader that the combining music and dramatic production is an old technique. Therefore, there has always been music that was written to accompany drama. Such music is composed around the story in order to enhance it. Some of the pieces in “Fantasia” were written as such, and therefore Disney’s visual accompaniment does not destroy the music. On the other hand, most of the sequences in “Fantasia” use the music as the base and write the story around the music, ignoring the inherent differences between visual forms and musical forms. He explains this by describing man’s relationship to sound. Sounds have become abstractions and carry an infinite variety of plastic meanings. There is no fixed meaning of a musical sound. On the other hand, the eye is an organ of reality meaning that what is seen—painted, written, pictured, etc.—holds far more acceptability than what is heard. “Seeing, not hearing, is believing,” he asserts. He says that when we are really responding to music, we are creating something unique and individual; and at the moment of such creation, anyone else’s response, be it ever so beautiful, is only a distraction and an annoyance.

This article exemplifies one of the biggest critiques of “Fantasia:” mixing two forms of art inappropriately. According to English’s view on music, Disney ends up annoying the viewer with this combination rather than impressing him. In the context of “Fantasia’s” purpose, English seems to take the repercussions of the sound-image relationship too far. Disney wanted to expose lower-class audiences to the mysteries of classical music while demonstrating his talent in animation. However, with an intellectual mindset, the viewer sees the images as “a distraction and an annoyance.” Disney thus succeeded in entertaining his uneducated viewer, but he could not gain approval of intellectuals. English describes music, which is not written around a story, is an art form of its own. As such, artistic music provokes individual emotions that should not be normalized as they are in “Fantasia.” Unfortunately, Disney’s attempt failed to consider the musical characteristics that were the cause of much critique. As an entertainer, Disney seems to be doing the job with this film. On the other hand, as an artist, Disney overlooks fundamental aspects of art. Disney’s lack of basic artistic comprehension contributes to “Fantasia’s” failure as a work of art.

Disney's "Fantasia" (1940) is an innovative masterpiece combining classical music and images to form an animated concert to educate those not fortunate enough to experience classical music and all its beauty. The film represents a magical form of entertainment reinforced by Disney's technological advancements. However, the producers of the film, especially Walt Disney and Leopold Stokowski, regarded the film as more than entertainment. They saw "Fantasia" as the creation of a new artistic form combining music and sound to convey ideas. Unfortunately for Disney, many musical critics disagreed with the film's use of classical music accusing the company of having forever ruined the pieces. From this disagreement arises the debate of "Fantasia's" functionality: is the film simply entertainment or does it possess a more significant artistic characteristic?