The Makings of a Memory: Why Disneyland Means so much to Me
Friday, July 22, 2011 | by Danielle Gardner 
- Vancouver, British Columbia - Ever since I was a little girl, going to Disneyland was a family tradition. The first time I ever was brought to this magical land, I was 9 months old, and too young to remember, but then it wasn’t about me. Being the youngest of four girls can have its drawbacks. I wore hand-me-downs for most of my life, and whenever I would go on school trips, I would be the only one with a packed lunch instead of being able to buy something from the cafeteria, or the food court. But one thing my family strived to do was to take trips to Disneyland every 3 or 4 years.
DisneylandWe would take days to drive there so that we could save money on flights and be able to afford to go. But when we got up the morning we were going to leave, there was nothing more excited to my sisters and I than the knowledge that in only a few days, we would be in Anaheim, and that much closer to Disneyland. Our parents could barely contain us, and I still look back and wonder how they kept 4 children quiet and happy for those long travel days. When we were finally able to walk through those Main Gates, and see Main Street with their decorations and we could feel the happiness that resided in that place.
Now, 19 years after my first ever trip, Disneyland is still a place of magic and memories. When I recently declared that I was going to go to Disneyland once again, people looked at me quizzically, saying “haven’t you been there a lot before?” and “aren’t you too old for that?” But the whole point of Disneyland is that it is timeless.
Disneyland creates an atmosphere of fun and excitement. The rides are there more for pure enjoyment than for the thrill of the ride. Spending some time in Fantasyland is like walking back through time to the time when you were young and still believed in fairytales. Every inch of that park is filled with the joy of friends and family, and a magical land that makes you believe in people that can fly or Prince Charmings.
A trip to Disneyland is a family experience, or a great place to meet with friends just to have a good time in a safe environment. I can tell you from experience that going to Disneyland alone is not a fun experience. The ride lines become something to dread rather than a bonding experience. You don’t yell as loud, or laugh as often as you do when you’re with a group. The single rider lines are something to be desired. Though fast, you feel segregated from the lineup, for in rides like Indiana Jones, there is an ambiance created. From start to finish, the line is full of relics and you feel like you’ve been transported to India and are actually outside of a temple. Inside the temple there is exquisite paintings, carvings, and statues. Everything feels so real, and it makes the wait so much more interesting than just a lineup.
The lineups become more than just waiting, and turn into a bonding experience. In my family, it’s where we converse and enjoy each other's company. With my friends, we play words games and talk about things. You can also meet some of the most interesting people.
Disneyland is a memory, from walking through the gates, to leaving at night. With it’s ever-changing shows and new rides being added, Disneyland is never the same experience twice.
DG
Reader Comments (18)
This may seem a little jaded, but clearly you have to be at least upper middle-class to even contemplate going to this park. We're talking $80 for the most basic ticket here. These discount bundles are a great deal, but still represent a huge cost upfront. Disney has spent decades refining their image and presenting it to a North American audience: "this is what you want. This is happiness." In reality, Disney's abominable business practices and near-Mafioso enforcement of their own best interests taint these parks, in my eyes.
So for children, it really is magical. But for adults...good God.
Frankly, I only now think of Disneyland as a place where one can break dance battle Mickey Mouse. Of course, one can only lose, but not every dream can come true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A4KzqSoLIo
Steve, yes, you do come across as a little jaded. =P I think I differ as far as your assessment of "near-Mafioso enforcement of their own best interests," as in I actually think it is one of the main reasons that Disney continues to be a major player as far as their entertainment properties and their amusement parks. They protect their brand better than most and, as far as I'm concerned, frame their product(s) in a far more competitive manner than any other animation studio. In many ways, in our capitalistic society, I feel like Disney demonstrates itself as one company that has managed to fend off bottom-feeders, who would attempt to divert some of Disney's profits to themselves with cheap knockoffs. And for this, I can't help but admire them on some level. They really don't want to let anyone taint their product by misusing or tarnishing their brand, and the fact that they've done so very well, it is quite interesting to me as a point of study.
As for their business practices, I'm not personally aware of what abominable (pun intended?) business practices they have engaged in, though I don't think it is out of the real of possibility that they have acted inappropriately before. Care to inform me?
I don't know that you have to be upper middle-class to go to the park. For one, it becomes very difficult for many families from Canada, but for Californians, it isn't such an issue. Especially compared to some of the extravagent vacations that non-upper middle class families go on. =/ Many times, families make a personal sacrifice financially for their kids to experience it. Personally, I think it is a great experience for kids compared to most vacation alternatives. I enjoyed it as a child a lot and still have many vivid memories of it.
1) Let's get the business practices out of the way first....
Disney's overseas production in China violated human rights: http://web.archive.org/web/20070210015136/http://www.somo.nl/monitoring/reports/hkcic01-02.htm
Disney employed college students for a work experience program, but used them as cheap labour:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8464524/
Up until 2001, communal underwear (and all that went with it) was common:
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jun/08/business/fi-7876
Disneyworld Hong Kong announced in 2005 that it would no longer serve shark fin soup when hosting Chinese weddings...unless they really wanted it:
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/Metro/GF25Ak01.html
And finally, a plea from a woman who believe Disney is overworking her husband (not an uncommon complaint):
http://help.com/post/89796-disney-is-working-my-husband-to-dea
I've found a brilliant piece written by someone who went to Disneyworld with their family, and they broke down some interesting issues encountered: issues like retelling history to only emphasize positive and patriotic feelings, an influx of corporate branding, distorted views of foreign nations, gender roles and stereotyping, the mistreatment of employees...etc:
http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/4116/4215220/c6SW1-7.pdf
2) Let's talk a minute about protecting intellectual property. To fully understand the issue, I would recommend a full reading into copyright laws, and the ever-changing dynamic. I won't claim to be an expert, as I also believe no one can be an expert because of how the issue is in constant flux.
Disney has a whole slew of lobbyists in Washington constantly pushing for copyright extension for characters and cartoons. We need to ask ourselves why. Walt Disney has been dead for almost 50 years, and much of copyright law revolves around how long after a person dies their estate have exclusive ownership. It made some logical sense that Roy E. Disney, his nephew, be an "heir apparent", but he died a couple years ago. So should his children continue to fight for the right to own Mickey Mouse? Firstly...they aren't descendants of Walt. Secondly, Disney is an extremely profitable business. So at what point is Disney going to relinquish these old characters? If they have their way, never.
You might be asking "what's the big deal? Let them have it". The big deal is, if you put the image of Michaelangelo's David on a cake and sell it, there's no problem. Try it with Mickey Mouse. Who is it harming? Is Disney losing money? No! The character is over 80 years old, and everyone who had a hand in designing him is dead. Disney is holding on to a cash cow, and that's it. Public domain is a legal term that allows the use of intellectual property after a person has died. Should we allow Disney to hold onto these characters for another 200 years?
Let's frame this differently...let's say that when learning piano, you had to pay a royalty to some estate who claimed to be related to Chopin. Or that if you went to buy a copy of Canterbury Tales, there was a licensing fee that went to the Chaucer's. What did they do? It's been hundreds of years, and all we've done is institute an extreme level of bureaucracy.
3) To take Jessica and Andrew to Disneyland, I would have to budget between $4000 - $5000. Doesn't that seem a little much? I could go on two cruises with Jess for that amount. I could take them across the country. I could take them to the PNE every day of the season. And granted, for those living in California it's not that big a dent in the wallet. But Disney markets this whole experience internationally. Disneyland and Disney World are destinations. Why else would the California Adventure be in California? Why else can you buy Disneyland packages from any Disney store location? You don't see Six Flags spend nearly that much on advertising internationally.
4) My whole point revolves around this: Disneyland / Disney World is a fantastic place for kids. And why shouldn't it be? They've spent decades refining their image and tweaking it to be a kid's mecca. But let's cut to the chase here: all they are interested in is money. And they charge insane amounts. And they are constantly pushing to increase their value and line their pockets. Why else would they buy Pixar and Marvel? This company is in no financial danger, but that doesn't stop them from sucking money out of people just so that their kids can experience that plastic magic.
You said yourself that families sacrifice a lot so their kids can experience it. Well, I hope it's worth it. It isn't for me.
I will respond to your further points tomorrow, but for now, thanks for providing the links. As for the $4000-$5000 figure, you must be sparing no expense there, because I know my family of five kids were able to do so much cheaper. Granted, we drove down and stayed in a non-Disney hotel, but we still stayed in California for five days, spending three of which at Disneyland. My parents have never had that kind of money for vacations with having so many kids. The trip itself was no more than $1,000.....however, I will concede that this trip was made in 1990, so today's real dollars will bring the price higher.
As for the other points, I will comment on them tomorrow morning.
For my 5 day Park hopper, Hotels and Airplane cost as well as food, I spent LESS than $1000 for the whole trip. That's including presents I bought for my nieces and Nephews. You just need to stay at the right hotel, don't pay for parking. I stayed at a Quality Inn and Suites that was a 5 minute walk from the main gate. We didn't rent a car, because we didn't need to. You can get cheap airplane flights, or like my family did, Drive.
There are always going to be complaints about everything. McDonald's uses teenagers for cheap labour ($6.25 starting wage.... honestly, I worked there for 3 years, for 1 of those years that was all I made).
Disneyland was just the certain trip my family would make where as some people go to like Hawaii or other places, Mine would use this as a bonding experience.
Don't get me started on McDonald's....there's no defending those crooks.
Sorry, hold on, you spent less than $1000 on the whole trip? How long was your trip - 5 days? And was it just you?
I had 5 days In Disneyland, and 2 spare days, and it was my friend and I. Both of us spent less than $1000 each. On everything.
So, you and your friend spent just under $1000 each. Is it then not conceivable that a family of 3 who don't know all the tricks and deals, people who have never been to the park or area, could spend around $4000?
Not if they don't do the park hopper. Or if they don't stay for as long. My family would go for 3 days. We are a family of 6. We afforded to do this every 3-4 years until we got old enough that we could chip in, and then our trips went up to 5 days in Disneyland. We would drive to save money on flights. We would bring a meal into the park, and only buy one. Even for people who don't know the tricks, you can make it affordable.
It begs the questions:
1) How much did your family spend?
2) How long ago was this?
Plus...you're telling me one way to make it affordable is to skip meals? Come on.
This was until I was 14, so just about 6 years ago. We didn't skip Meals, we didn't buy in the park (waaaay more expensive). And We'd Make one meal or get something like Subway for cheaper. My mom is a stay at home mom, and my dad is a pastor, we didn't make that much, but as I was a child I don't know the total cost. There are Smart ways to go about a trip so as not to spend a lot of money. Besides, What vacations did YOU go on as a child? I think you're missing the point of my article.
Besides visiting my grandparents on Bowen Island, none.
Also, Airmiles helped pay for tickets, and since my mom uses her card for everything, we had enough airmiles to bring costs down. Just because your family was unable to go on trips doesn't mean everyone was in the same boat. My family is not rich by any means. We made certain sacrifices in order to take family vacations, because that was important to us. I wore hand-me-downs until I had a job. I shared a room for 12 years of my life. This was a memory that my family had. It was the highlight of my childhood. And I plan on sharing that joy with my children when I get married and have kids, even if we don't have a high paying job. There are ways to make it affordable. That's all I'm saying.
I think we're just going to have to agree we don't see eye-to-eye on this, whatever it is. For what it's worth, I'm glad your family had something they could share.
Let's be honest, Steve.....if someone didn't take the time to research and investigate about any trip, they could find themselves spending way too much money anywhere there go. It isn't like Disneyland has a monopoly on this. The important thing is to know how to be frugal, but not the point where it feels like you've chinced so much that it feels like you spend more time worrying about spending as little money as possible that you don't enjoy the vacation.
Disneyland can be a VERY expensive vacation, but if you want to make it affordable, it is not that difficult with a little research and time invested in making it possible for one's family.
And to respond to your other posts, as I promise:
I don't really see why Disney being a profitable business is grounds that they should yield their intellectual property rights to Mickey Mouse. When one thinks about how central Mickey Mouse is to the brand of Disney and Disneyland, despite the fact that no legitimate feature film has starred him in some time, it is understandable why as a company they would want to preserve their rights to him. People are free to create their own characters and use them, just as other companies are allowed to examine patents after they expire and create their own variations of the same technology. With creative intellectual property, I think it is different in that I don't really see why someone else should be pressured to allow others to use their property or creative (or that of their father or grandfather) because it was created more than 80 years ago. I would feel differently if the use under debate was for educational matters, but allowing someone else to use your creativity without reimbursing the creator or the owner of the rights to that property seems short-sighted to me.
Your statement that Disney is not losing money, therefore it wouldn't hurt them if they were forced to relinquish their rights is also shortsighted as in large part, I feel like Disney IS profitable because of how they have looked after their business from being exploited by those who would seek profit by illegitimately using their properties.
I realize the Kartoons with Kurtis thing was hampered by Disney's rigid copyright protections, but.....as frustrating as that is, I think it plays a role in why Disney has been so successful with managing their brand. And for me, the only thing that interests me in business is brand management. The rest is rather boring and dull. =/