My impetus for this piece was to couch Disney's technique of self-appropriation (re-use of poses, timing, movement and composition across films - a small genre of youtube videos) between the original narrative's literary source (sometimes preceded by an oral history) and the employment of a systematic moratorium. In putting these techniques of production in play with one another, I do not mean to suggest a direct hypocrisy in Disney's practices but an unbalanced ideology underlying their high production rate, arguably enabled through self-reuse and appropriation of narrative, in combination with the temporal limitation which is placed on their output. This can be dismissed as an (effective) capitalist impulse but it also feels like they're having their cake and eating it too -- controlling access to intellectual property to this extreme is essentially a claim of a high level of originality, but some of it just simply isn't spanking brand new.
I used Robin Hood as a launching point because of its contrasting advocation of socialism seen through the tale of a heroic yeomen constructed through oral stories of a historical figure. In turning to the vocabulary of the commons (of Post-Norman conquest, England), the process of vaulting classic Disney films after a specified amount of time can be seen as a stinting of the IP commons not to protect the longevity of the work but the longevity of its demand by creating consumer urgency at the sake of limiting the agency of owners.
-Snow White (1937), adapted from the work of Brother's Grimm (1812)
-Sword and the Stone (1963), adapted from the work of T.H. White (1938)
-Jungle Book (1967), adapted from the work of Rudyard Kipling (1894)
-Robin Hood (1973), oral legend
-Youtube videos collecting re-used clips in Disney movies