Monday, May 14, 2018

Sentimental Paleontology: The Other Space

Let's not lose perspective: the Tomorrowland Problem is old. You could make a case for it being as old as Disneyland itself—we all know that Tomorrowland was the one area that was severely skimped on back in 1955 due to time and budget shortfalls, and what was there was so immediately dated that the land received a major upgrade before the park turned five. What we don't acknowledge as often is that said major upgrade already represented a partial departure from the themes of science, technology, and realistic futurism in favor of a dose of pure fantasy. The Submarine Voyage—a celebration of technological achievements allowing humanity to explore parts of the world that were previously completely inaccessible—was also a veritable showcase of popular myths about the ocean, presented as though they were as real as the coral reefs.
And honestly...I have trouble figuring out why. This early in the game, the Imagineers could hardly have been running short of futuristic inspiration. Did they think a realistic undersea voyage was too boring? If so, why create the Submarine Voyage to begin with? If, on the the other hand, the fantasy material was included due to the attraction's location on the boundary between Tomorrowland and Fantasyland, why don't we see more crossover content in other boundary attractions that debuted in this era?
Moreover, several years down the line, the “World on the Move” Tomorrowland makeover would have been the perfect opportunity to refine the Submarine Voyage into something more on-point. But instead, the Imagineers doubled down on the fantasy by adding live mermaid performers to the Lagoon. That experiment didn't last, for reasons that vary depending upon who's telling the story,* but the overall point is that this ride has been part of Tomorrowland almost since the beginning, and its most fantastic aspect was immediately established as its most iconic.
They've never really known what to do with Tomorrowland.

The mythical aquatic singing sirens...of the future!


On the other hand, you can hardly claim that the Submarine Voyage was incompatible with the spirit of scientific inquiry. Science cannot proceed if people are not interested in the world. There is room to interpret the mermaids and sea serpent and Atlantean ruins as part of a message like: “Oceanography is worthwhile because you never know what we'll discover down there!” Objectively speaking, a sea serpent is no more bizarre a beast than a bioluminescent anglerfish—maybe less bizarre, when you get right down to it**—and the Submarine Voyage gave us both, with our captain amusingly dumbfounded by the former even though he took the latter as a given.
Or perhaps I am overthinking it.

"No one would believe it..." Not even the passenger who snapped this photo?

I actually don't have any first-hand memories of the original iteration of the Submarine Voyage, at least to the extent that it differed from the version I mostly grew up with. It was renovated and retooled in the mid-Eighties, in an unusual case of a theme park ride being made less tense and thrilling. The submarines themselves, originally painted gray and named after U.S. battleships, were re-done in a friendly yellow reminiscent of research vessels. Fewer direct hazards threatened the voyage in the second version: sound effects and narration indicating that the sub was being scraped by ice floes were omitted, and the giant squid that once reached menacingly for the portholes was repositioned in the middle distance, wrestling a whale*** while the captain assured us that the electrified hull would keep it at bay. Overall, the renovation greatly emphasized the wonders of the undersea world over its dangers. That's what I remember: a dreamy pageant of underwater exploration and discovery.

Eerie foreshadowing for the giant squid scene

I miss it greatly. Not as badly as Adventure Thru Inner Space, but it was still gone too soon, especially since the Submarine Lagoon was then vacant for nearly a decade. It was a weird attraction. The pace was unusually sedate for a ride you had to wait 45 minutes for, and it was one of the last vestiges of educational (boogie-boo!) content in Tomorrowland. But, as is so often the case with older Disney attractions, the weirdness made it unique and charming. That sea serpent was about the weirdest possible finale for a ride otherwise populated with lifelike creatures (even if some of them were also fictional). It has also come to be regarded as the single most memorable thing about it. 
 
Art by Jimmy Pickering

Realistic fish and squid and even mermaids, if they look as generic as these did...those could be from any rendition of an undersea setting. But the sea serpent was one of a kind, so instantly iconic that a similar cartoonish affability became the standard for Disney theme park sea serpents, even though the exact design was never re-used:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Magic Kingdom

World of Motion, Epcot

"it's a small world", Disneyland Anaheim

Downtown Disney, Walt Disney World

Port Orleans Resort, Walt Disney World

I was excited enough several years back when the news broke that the Submarine Voyage would be renovated again, this time as a Finding Nemo attraction. Something is always better than nothing, and Finding Nemo is an eminently charming movie that does a lot in its way to encourage interest in marine life. Some cool tech has gone into the ride, from the obvious (LCD screens that effectively insert animated characters into physical sets) to the subtle (the fish figures are painted with chemically stable pigmented glass granules that resist chlorine bleaching).
If only the ride had anything new to say about its setting or characters. But it's literally a summary of the movie, only they're pretending it's not, that Nemo has gotten lost again and for some reason Marlin and Dory encounter all the same hazards, in the same order, as they did in the movie when they go looking for him. I admit to being completely bemused as to why they bothered with the “sequel” conceit—what does that supposedly do for the ride that a straightforward summary would not?
Maybe someday we'll get yet another renovation of the Submarine Voyage that actually does the concept justice again. My pick would be to move the setting to another planet—either Europa or a fictional planet outside our solar system—to explore the ocean there and discover alien aquatic life. It would be another breed of fantasy in its way, but hopefully one that sits much more comfortably in Tomorrowland and helps to alleviate the age-old Tomorrowland Problem.


* Was the bigger problem the chlorine damage to the performers' skin and hair, or was it the poor impulse control on the part of their would-be suitors? Decades on, there's probably no way to tell.
** Cartoon googly eyes aside.
*** Strangely enough, not a sperm whale such as the giant squid battles in real life, but an orca.

4 comments:

  1. I think the sea serpents and mermaids make more sense in the total conceptual framework of Tomorrowland, i.e.: the television episodes. The Man in Space trilogy, Magic Highway USA, and Our Friend the Atom always include fantasy and science fiction along with the scientific speculation, with the connective tissue that our scientific explorations are really extensions of human imagination.

    If Submarine Voyage were an episode of Disneyland circa 1959, it would absolutely have spent the first third talking about historic fantasies about the sea, mermaids, and monsters, including footage of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, and probably ended with a retro-futuristic voyage with a sea serpent joke animated by Ward Kimball. In fact, there kind of was an episode like that - Monsters of the Deep - that promoted 20,000 Leagues. It's all about imagination brought into reality.

    As for Submarine Voyage itself, I'd love to see that de-Nemoed and those fancy LCD screens used to show footage of actual undersea creatures. Rebrand the thing as "Disneynature Submarine Voyage".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dunno...I've begun to wonder if the "traditionalist" fans like us can be too easy on the old stuff even when it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, simply because it *is* the old stuff, it's what we grew up with, it's What Walt Did and therefore must have been a good idea and we will tie ourselves in knots to defend it.

      If we're going to criticize Pirate's Lair on Tom Sawyer Island, then by the same token we should criticize mermaids in the Submarine Lagoon.

      I also kind of feel sorry for Tomorrowland (sympathy for a section of a theme park, how weird is that?), which seems to be the only part of Disneyland that has never really gotten to be its own *thing*. It keeps having to sneak in thematic elements from Fantasyland, film IPs, even strangeness like America Sings. It seems like WDI has never really committed to Tomorrowland as a concept.

      Delete
    2. I'm exempt from the childhood memories problem because I never went there as a child ;) The connection between Submarine Voyage, Tomorrowland in the theme park, and the Tomorrowland episodes is purely my considered adult opinion! Watch the Man in Space trilogy again and reconsider Submarine Voyage in that light. It should be interesting :)

      My criticisms of Pirate's Lair on Tom Sawyer Island are a different beast entirely... It has nothing really to do with the fact that it was based on the PotC movies, isn't Adventure Isle in DLP, and came at the expense of just fixing the island as it was. TSI in Magic Kingdom is a shadow of what it once was and is still better even than Pirate's Lair.

      I would agree that Tomorrowland today is in a sorry state, but considering that Walt was alive for the initial planning of the 1967 New Tomorrowland, I suspect that is more or less what he wanted to see. The problem was staying true to it and seeking new rides and attractions in that same vein instead of taking the "slap an IP on it" route. The same thing happened with Discoveryland in DLP and Future World in EPCOT too. You need the right vision to properly blend science and fantasy, science fact and science fiction, imagination and reality, into something compelling that is more than either a museum or a theme park. That vision is rare, and those of us who think they have it don't work for Disney ;)

      Delete
    3. Sorry, "It has nothing really to do with the fact that it was based on the PotC movies" should have been "It has nothing really to do with the setting and everything to do with the fact that..."

      Delete