What do you think?
Rate this book
The Disney Version: The Life, Times, Art and Commerce of Walt Disney
This classic history of Walt Disney’s life and works asks penetrating questions about Disney’s achievements and shortcomings, and the enormous popularity of the “Disney version." "One of the best studies ever done on American popular culture...unfailingly, consistently intelligent, and eminently readable." —Stephen J. Whitfield, Brandeis University. "This may be the single most illuminating work on America and the movies."—Robert W. Butler, Kansas City Star.
396 pages, Paperback
First published May 28, 1985
21 people are currently reading
481 people want to read
About the author
Richard Schickel
106 books32 followersRichard Schickel is an important American film historian, journalist, author, filmmaker, screenwriter, documentarian, and film and literary critic.
Mr.Schickel is featured in For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism. In this 2009 documentary film he discusses early film critics in the 1960s, and how he and other young critics, rejected the moralizing opposition of Bosley Crowther of The New York Times who had railed against violent movies such as Bonnie and Clyde.
In addition to film, Schickel has also critiqued and documented cartoons, particularly Peanuts.
Schickel was a recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1964. He has also lectured at Yale University and University of Southern California's School of Film and Television.
Mr.Schickel is featured in For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism. In this 2009 documentary film he discusses early film critics in the 1960s, and how he and other young critics, rejected the moralizing opposition of Bosley Crowther of The New York Times who had railed against violent movies such as Bonnie and Clyde.
In addition to film, Schickel has also critiqued and documented cartoons, particularly Peanuts.
Schickel was a recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1964. He has also lectured at Yale University and University of Southern California's School of Film and Television.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
March 17, 2011
Besides the fact that the book is pretty dated (written before the last 30-something years of the Disney corporation), it would have benefited from more specific examples (i.e., specific movies, or specific parts of those movies) to back up its sweeping claims. I was looking forward to a critical look at Disney and Disney-fication, and while I understand this is hardly an objective piece, I expected it to be a bit more balanced, and less condescending, towards both Disney and the reader. That being said, I did learn quite a bit about the history and business aspects of Disney.
January 31, 2016
This was the first CRITICAL biography of Disney, written engagingly by the late critic for Time Magazine, Richard Schickel.
When I read the book, the connections between Disney's trend-setting cartoons and American psychology, including barnyard humor, became clearer.
Highly recommended, together with Michael Barrier's more recent biography of Disney, The Animated Man (University of California Press, 2007).
When I read the book, the connections between Disney's trend-setting cartoons and American psychology, including barnyard humor, became clearer.
Highly recommended, together with Michael Barrier's more recent biography of Disney, The Animated Man (University of California Press, 2007).
April 9, 2023
This book seems to be famous for being a critical biographical study of Walt Disney. And that it is.
Schickel's main criticism is that Disney was not intellectual nor particularly sophisticated in his understanding of art & culture.
But Schickel also gives credit to Disney for what he was good at. Namely, he claims Disney had a talent for understanding what ordinary Americans wanted, and giving it to them in animation, live-action films, and (of course) theme parks.
I enjoyed this book because I learned a lot about how Disney & his company worked, without a lot of hagiography.
Schickel's main criticism is that Disney was not intellectual nor particularly sophisticated in his understanding of art & culture.
But Schickel also gives credit to Disney for what he was good at. Namely, he claims Disney had a talent for understanding what ordinary Americans wanted, and giving it to them in animation, live-action films, and (of course) theme parks.
I enjoyed this book because I learned a lot about how Disney & his company worked, without a lot of hagiography.
March 13, 2011
Being a Disneyaholic I personally try to read everything Disney. The positive reviews of this book have astonished me. This book is no more than 300 plus pages of personal attacks and insults on everything Disney has ever done. The author seems intent on personally insulting Disney and depicting him as a small-town idiot with no taste or talent. He has dug up critical reviews of every Disney feature and manages to insult everything from Donald Duck to Bambi. The posturing is laughable, and it seems as if every statement he makes ends with '... of course" to say that anyone with any intelligence obviously agrees with his every statement. I expected this book to be critical of Disney and even being the Disney fan I am, I have no problem with that. This book, however, portrays the man as an idiot with no taste and little talent and descends to such a low level of insults that it can only be considered a hack job.
1 Star
1 Star
September 9, 2007
I found a book club hardback of The Disney Version: The Life, Times, Art and Commerce of Walt Disney at a book sale last year; since we're planning a trip to Walt Disney World in December, I thought I'd read this to get in the mood.
Published only two years after Walt Disney's death in 1966, Schickel did not have the opportunity to reflect on the greater legacy of the man behind The Mouse, as other biographers have. It was also not an sanctioned work; Schickel writes in his afterword that late in 1966, after he had begun his research, "I was given to understand that the studio did not approve of this study...".
Not only is this a biography of Walter Elias Disney; it's also a look at the changes that society went through from the turn of the century to the Space Age, and how socio-economics and popular culture helped form the man who in turn would exert his own strong influences. He explores Disney's childhood, showing how the bond between Walt and Roy formed as a reaction to their controlling (and possibly abusive) father. The uprooting of the family, from Chicago to Marceline Missouri, to California may have reinforced Walt's longing for a place of his own; typified in Main Street USA, Disneyland.
Schickel neither canonizes nor demonizes Walt Disney; considering instead that his success primarily stemmed from having similar tastes for entertainment as the majority of the middle-class American public, and that having remained a child at heart gave him some insight into what children should like. Schickel agrees with the common criticism that the Disney Company simplifies and rearranges the stories that it presents, whether public domain fairy tales or other works for which it purchased development rights. The Real-Life-Nature series was also guilty of anthropomorphism and fitting the animals to a pre-arranged story.
Walt was a demanding taskmaster; but also demanded at least as much from himself, always tinkering with whatever the current project was and trying to make it better. Schickel takes a rather dim view of the Audio-Animatronic characters in Disneyland, feeling that they reflect Disney's need for control; instead of having human actors playing roles with spontaneity, he prefers automatons that will give the same performance time and time again.
The book seems well-researched, with a bibliography and index provided at the end; I'm looking forward to comparing it with later biographies. Recommended to fans of Disney who are able to look beyond the icon he became.
Published only two years after Walt Disney's death in 1966, Schickel did not have the opportunity to reflect on the greater legacy of the man behind The Mouse, as other biographers have. It was also not an sanctioned work; Schickel writes in his afterword that late in 1966, after he had begun his research, "I was given to understand that the studio did not approve of this study...".
Not only is this a biography of Walter Elias Disney; it's also a look at the changes that society went through from the turn of the century to the Space Age, and how socio-economics and popular culture helped form the man who in turn would exert his own strong influences. He explores Disney's childhood, showing how the bond between Walt and Roy formed as a reaction to their controlling (and possibly abusive) father. The uprooting of the family, from Chicago to Marceline Missouri, to California may have reinforced Walt's longing for a place of his own; typified in Main Street USA, Disneyland.
Schickel neither canonizes nor demonizes Walt Disney; considering instead that his success primarily stemmed from having similar tastes for entertainment as the majority of the middle-class American public, and that having remained a child at heart gave him some insight into what children should like. Schickel agrees with the common criticism that the Disney Company simplifies and rearranges the stories that it presents, whether public domain fairy tales or other works for which it purchased development rights. The Real-Life-Nature series was also guilty of anthropomorphism and fitting the animals to a pre-arranged story.
Walt was a demanding taskmaster; but also demanded at least as much from himself, always tinkering with whatever the current project was and trying to make it better. Schickel takes a rather dim view of the Audio-Animatronic characters in Disneyland, feeling that they reflect Disney's need for control; instead of having human actors playing roles with spontaneity, he prefers automatons that will give the same performance time and time again.
The book seems well-researched, with a bibliography and index provided at the end; I'm looking forward to comparing it with later biographies. Recommended to fans of Disney who are able to look beyond the icon he became.
January 13, 2014
Richard Shickel is a very confused man. His book "The Disney Version" is his attempt to totally slam Walt Disney and his audience while he tries to praise his artistic work. This book's primary purpose is basically to show that Walt Disney was this really confused, cynical genius who while bravely delivering artistic masterpieces in the late 1930's he eventually sold his soul to the "devil" (the mainstream American middle class - read "religious, conservative, etc.") and became a cheap purveyor of pop culture junk.
This book is more than 300 pages of personal attacks and insults on everything Disney as ever produced or written. The author seems intent on personally insulting Disney and portraying him as a small-town idiot savant with no taste and no talent. He has dug up critical reviews of every Disney feature and manages to insult everything from Donald Duck to Bambi. The pretentiousness is laughable, and it seems as if every statement he makes ends with '... of course" to say that anyone with any intelligence obviously agrees with his every statement.
The author has failed miserably in his attempt. In truth, Walt Disney was an genius who managed that most unique of marriages: cherishing traditions of yesteryear and upholding the good things in the past while simultaneously blazing a trail into the future with new innovations and technologies and demonstrating that they CAN GO TOGETHER. Walt Disney was not perfect, but his life is far more worthy of celebration than condemnation.
This book is more than 300 pages of personal attacks and insults on everything Disney as ever produced or written. The author seems intent on personally insulting Disney and portraying him as a small-town idiot savant with no taste and no talent. He has dug up critical reviews of every Disney feature and manages to insult everything from Donald Duck to Bambi. The pretentiousness is laughable, and it seems as if every statement he makes ends with '... of course" to say that anyone with any intelligence obviously agrees with his every statement.
The author has failed miserably in his attempt. In truth, Walt Disney was an genius who managed that most unique of marriages: cherishing traditions of yesteryear and upholding the good things in the past while simultaneously blazing a trail into the future with new innovations and technologies and demonstrating that they CAN GO TOGETHER. Walt Disney was not perfect, but his life is far more worthy of celebration than condemnation.
June 30, 2025
I have so many things to say, but instead I'll be brief. I have a love-hate relationship with this book. I loved the FACTUAL details. I HATED the criticism that filled this book, which started with the introduction, that almost made me put this book down. The author essentially stated he was out to prove that the prevalent narrative on Disney was false. The fact that he was so open with his bias was extremely off-putting, but my curiosity won out.
I appreciated that the author wasn't planning to stay in the lane of the story Disney PR had put out regarding their fearless leader, but he was so committed to the negative it was galling. Further, his inclusion and constant coverage of cultural criticism was totally baseless, despite that fact that even by his own narrative, the perspective was without merit.
In sum, this was not a good book and it was biased. I can't in good faith recommend this, there HAS to be others that are better.
I appreciated that the author wasn't planning to stay in the lane of the story Disney PR had put out regarding their fearless leader, but he was so committed to the negative it was galling. Further, his inclusion and constant coverage of cultural criticism was totally baseless, despite that fact that even by his own narrative, the perspective was without merit.
In sum, this was not a good book and it was biased. I can't in good faith recommend this, there HAS to be others that are better.
March 14, 2025
The part of the book that was originally published in 1969, not too long after Walt died, was fascinating. I learned these things: Walt was a) a control freak who 2) really liked a butt joke and 3) had an emotionally absent mother and older brothers who ran off young and 4) couldn't draw. He never authorized a biography during his lifetime because he was obsessed with death and figured once one was written he was on his way out. He was a spectacular, visionary salesman who gave his financial backers the old razzle-dazzle to get what he wanted...and it worked out for him, as we know.
The edition I read was updated in the mid-80s, after the studio quit doing cartoons and had suffered a number of stinging defeats, but before The Little Mermaid came along to save it. This part was less interesting. But the Walt bio I enjoyed. 3.5 stars.
The edition I read was updated in the mid-80s, after the studio quit doing cartoons and had suffered a number of stinging defeats, but before The Little Mermaid came along to save it. This part was less interesting. But the Walt bio I enjoyed. 3.5 stars.
July 14, 2018
Classic read, but painful. Gives good info, but way too much commentary. Literally says in the prologue that the book wasn’t fact checked. A must read for any Disney historian as it’s one of the first biographies, but it is the worse I’ve read.
March 28, 2019
Good read, especially if you're into Disney. However, it can get slow and is longer than I originally thought.
Want to read
January 22, 2021to-read
February 25, 2020
Did he invent the phrase “the Disney version” or simply popularize something already out in the culture? Be that as it may, the phrase has stuck. I recall the book being at least slightly scandalous when published in 1968, and with good reason. Disney hadn’t been dead quite two years and was as sacred as scared cows can be sacred.
It’s not a brutal takedown by any means and some of it legitimate. He’s impressed with Disney animation in the early years and asserts Disney paid his animators, if not well, better than any of the other studios. He turns against Disney in the 1960s, but why not? The live action films were terrible and the animation too expensive at this point to do properly. And, one assumes, the man himself was mainly involved with the park, and later, the Florida plans.
Still, Mr. Schickel is old school snobby and when the arty crowd that had embraced Disney in the early years deserted him after “Fantasia,” Schickel scurries off with them. His views are wonderfully expressed by a Ms. Frances Clarke Sayers, “semi-retired one time director of children’s services for the New York public library and lecturer in Library Science at UCLA.” In a furious letter written in response to some over-the-top laudatory comments made about Disney by the Superintendent of Public Instruction in California in 1965, she vehemently complains (as would later academic writers)about Disney’s “debasement of the traditional literature of childhood.” Do she and Mr. Schickel really expect Uncle Walt have the Wicked Queen DANCE HERSELF TO DEATH IN RED HOT IRON SHOES? How about Pinocchio squishing Jiminy Cricket? America’s moms’d love that. She expresses the view that Disney had made Peter Pan into a “young tough,” and “‘Pinocchio’ into a slap-stick, sadistic revel” (but leave in the cricket squishing). My favorite is her take on Tinkerbell: “Look at that wretched sprite with the wand and the over-sized buttocks which announces every program on TV. She is a vulgar little thing, who has been too long at the sugar bowls.” Tinkerbell? Wretched little sprite? Sugar bowls? In the excerpt quoted she uses the word “vulgar” three times, presumably as in “low” and “common.” And that’s the problem isn’t it? Low and common people. With oversized buttocks. And the sugar bowls thing.
Mr. Schickel parts ways with her over “Mary Poppins” a film him he enjoyed and gives a flattering and detailed review of.
His most striking (curious?) assertion is that Disney didn’t have the “soul” of an artist. Well, okay. Disney said the same thing, repeatedly. Souls are tricky things, I guess. Interesting book, a bit of its time, but really worth a look.
———
Of course, if you consider Disneyland a work of art you can walk around in, it screws everything up.
It’s not a brutal takedown by any means and some of it legitimate. He’s impressed with Disney animation in the early years and asserts Disney paid his animators, if not well, better than any of the other studios. He turns against Disney in the 1960s, but why not? The live action films were terrible and the animation too expensive at this point to do properly. And, one assumes, the man himself was mainly involved with the park, and later, the Florida plans.
Still, Mr. Schickel is old school snobby and when the arty crowd that had embraced Disney in the early years deserted him after “Fantasia,” Schickel scurries off with them. His views are wonderfully expressed by a Ms. Frances Clarke Sayers, “semi-retired one time director of children’s services for the New York public library and lecturer in Library Science at UCLA.” In a furious letter written in response to some over-the-top laudatory comments made about Disney by the Superintendent of Public Instruction in California in 1965, she vehemently complains (as would later academic writers)about Disney’s “debasement of the traditional literature of childhood.” Do she and Mr. Schickel really expect Uncle Walt have the Wicked Queen DANCE HERSELF TO DEATH IN RED HOT IRON SHOES? How about Pinocchio squishing Jiminy Cricket? America’s moms’d love that. She expresses the view that Disney had made Peter Pan into a “young tough,” and “‘Pinocchio’ into a slap-stick, sadistic revel” (but leave in the cricket squishing). My favorite is her take on Tinkerbell: “Look at that wretched sprite with the wand and the over-sized buttocks which announces every program on TV. She is a vulgar little thing, who has been too long at the sugar bowls.” Tinkerbell? Wretched little sprite? Sugar bowls? In the excerpt quoted she uses the word “vulgar” three times, presumably as in “low” and “common.” And that’s the problem isn’t it? Low and common people. With oversized buttocks. And the sugar bowls thing.
Mr. Schickel parts ways with her over “Mary Poppins” a film him he enjoyed and gives a flattering and detailed review of.
His most striking (curious?) assertion is that Disney didn’t have the “soul” of an artist. Well, okay. Disney said the same thing, repeatedly. Souls are tricky things, I guess. Interesting book, a bit of its time, but really worth a look.
———
Of course, if you consider Disneyland a work of art you can walk around in, it screws everything up.
December 1, 2015
An interesting though sometimes pedantic read, this book is best viewed in context of the time it was written at the height of 60's film criticism, which was justifiably anti-Hollywood and anti-establishment. Not much, if any, substantial criticism had been written about Disney for years at this point, so the author takes pains to tear down the legend.
Unfortunately, much of the criticism, particularly of Disney's early cartoons and innovations, are trivial and often pretentious, and the narrative Schickel tries to weave of Disney's life can be disjointed at times and merely and endless list of facts and numbers at others. Perhaps because of the lack of works at the time demystifying Disney, he spends a lot of effort psychoanalyzing Disney, and he goes out of his way criticize, when not outright insult, every single cartoon and film ever created by Disney, usually with no evidence other than a purely subjective opinion and an occasional unrelated quote from an art critic. I got the impression (at least at the time this was written) that Schickel had little to no respect for animation as an art form to begin with.
Probably the most interesting parts of the book were the ones that covered the cartoonists strike in 1941 and Disney's creative drought in the post-War years leading up to television and Disneyland. Here the endless criticism seemed to actually fit because there were actually hard facts and documented instances that needed to be examined and criticized.
As a necessary criticism of Disney's image at the time, the book is overall interesting in the historical context which it was written, but as a critical look at Disney's works, it feels dated and gets repetitive, offering only the most superficial insight.
Unfortunately, much of the criticism, particularly of Disney's early cartoons and innovations, are trivial and often pretentious, and the narrative Schickel tries to weave of Disney's life can be disjointed at times and merely and endless list of facts and numbers at others. Perhaps because of the lack of works at the time demystifying Disney, he spends a lot of effort psychoanalyzing Disney, and he goes out of his way criticize, when not outright insult, every single cartoon and film ever created by Disney, usually with no evidence other than a purely subjective opinion and an occasional unrelated quote from an art critic. I got the impression (at least at the time this was written) that Schickel had little to no respect for animation as an art form to begin with.
Probably the most interesting parts of the book were the ones that covered the cartoonists strike in 1941 and Disney's creative drought in the post-War years leading up to television and Disneyland. Here the endless criticism seemed to actually fit because there were actually hard facts and documented instances that needed to be examined and criticized.
As a necessary criticism of Disney's image at the time, the book is overall interesting in the historical context which it was written, but as a critical look at Disney's works, it feels dated and gets repetitive, offering only the most superficial insight.
February 28, 2024
Agree or disagree with the opinions provided, this is a great overview of the life and times of Walt Disney, starting from the day he was born and ending on the day of his death. In fact, this book was published barely two years after he died, so it has a strong focus on the man himself, instead of analyzing what happened with his company after his passing.
In order to put Disney's ventures into context, the author also gives an interesting and concise background for the concurrent happenings and developments in the american movie and animation industry. All in all, the entire book is extremely well-paced and readable.
Even though the author can be extremely harsh on Disney and many of the films his company has created (at least the ones until 1966), he still raises many interesting and reasonable points about creativity, bowdlerization and the ways different people percieve art. He does make sure to give credit where credit is due, but the praise to critique ratio is somewhere around 1:3.
Huge Disney fanatics should probably avoid The Disney Version, but any open-minded individual who has an interest in Walt Disney and the development of the american animation industry will find a lot to chew on in this book.
In order to put Disney's ventures into context, the author also gives an interesting and concise background for the concurrent happenings and developments in the american movie and animation industry. All in all, the entire book is extremely well-paced and readable.
Even though the author can be extremely harsh on Disney and many of the films his company has created (at least the ones until 1966), he still raises many interesting and reasonable points about creativity, bowdlerization and the ways different people percieve art. He does make sure to give credit where credit is due, but the praise to critique ratio is somewhere around 1:3.
Huge Disney fanatics should probably avoid The Disney Version, but any open-minded individual who has an interest in Walt Disney and the development of the american animation industry will find a lot to chew on in this book.
December 19, 2007
Not the friendliest desciption of Mr. Disney. On balance it gives the good and the bad and describes how Walt and Roy Disney built the 'Mouse's' empire. I took my first visit to DisneyWorld in Florida in early November 2007. That is what piqued my interest in the life of Walt Disney. This book was written in 1968 after Walt Disney passed. It does not contain any of the newer changes, but really the business was set up by this time and what has happened was inevitable. The Disney Company is set to go on for as long as there are kids and adults who want to feel young again. Purely my opinion.
March 30, 2011
Taking into account the fact that this book is almost 40 years old, I found it extremely hard to follow. The author makes many pop-culture references pertinent to the time that I cannot relate to (as if he expects the reader to be a Hollywood-insider/contemporary of Disney's). The book skips around to different time periods and is very dry. This is NOT a biography, as I thought, more of a commentary on Disney's impact on American culture and entertainment, as it quickly summarizes Disney's formative experiences as if the reader is expected to be familiar with them.
March 31, 2013
Read this book about ten years ago when I was much more acquainted with the Disney organization. Granted it's only one man's opinion, but that opinion is shared by many. Disney had an amazing and brilliant mind and the guts and drive to accomplish plenty. His accomplishments are an inspiration. But he had his dark side, as perhaps we all do. This is a peek into shadowland.
June 27, 2011
A sometimes alarming but very fair investigation of the history of Disney. Schickel doesn't forget to praise Disney's artistic accomplishments as he points out the controversial side of Walt's legacy.
July 30, 2011
After the first one hundred pages, I was not interested enough to continue. I have enjoyed reading a number of books about Disney and his legacy, both positive and negative, but this one didn't grab me.
September 16, 2022
a really great look at what Disney has done to culture - good and bad. it’s also a fairly balanced look at Walt, who sometimes get exalted to a ridiculous level. mostly, it proves that Walt wouldn’t be that upset about his company today and probably would’ve greenlit the live-action remakes too.
Want to read
August 2, 2008As heard on Bill's Values on Weekend America on WYPR.
September 2, 2008
A good read. A little more snarky than it needs to be, but a really good "other side of the coin" look at Disney. Though facts are not always straight.
July 16, 2012
I am neither a Disney hater nor a Disneyphile. I enjoyed this pungent "minority report" on Walt's legacy.
March 15, 2013
I honestly thought i would enjoy this book more than i did,but it can be at tad bit bland at times. I would reccomend a different Walt Disney biography.
Read
January 20, 2023DNF I just couldn't get past the old language.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews