What follows is the beginning of a longer document. I originally composed this document to help increase the understanding of executives within The Walt Disney Company who were new to the Muppets in the hopes that with a more in-depth objective look at what gives the Muppets their lives and longevity, Jim’s methods and values could, indeed, be integrated with the concerns of a giant corporation. Based on truly extensive analysis and falsification, it was months in the making, and was provided to each and every executive who oversaw the Muppets during the twelve years I was involved under Disney ownership.
It was read and subsequently ignored by all.
The facts realized here would only have stood to enhance the success of The Muppets under Disney ownership, while ensuring their integrity through Jim Henson’s influence going forward, and would have in no way undermined any Disney initiative.
– Whitmire 2020
©2020 Steve Whitmire All rights reserved. This text or any portion thereof may not be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the copyright owner.
Excerpts from
COMPONENTS of the MUPPETS
Parts 1, 2, & 3
Aristotle
One of my favorite little analogies has to do with taking apart a wrist watch, and the fact that if you spread it into pieces on a table top you can see all that makes up the watch, but you can’t see what time it is. For you to tell time with that watch it is necessary for all the pieces to be assembled in exactly the right way. The pieces are all important but none will get the job done if separated. Evidently it was Aristotle who is credited with first putting forth the idea that ‘the whole is more than merely the sum of its parts’ way, way back in about 350 BC.
But if you think about it, it’s true, and as with much of the truth it can be applied to the Muppets.
Part 1
Muppet Basics
The subject of this dissertation is a guideline pertaining to the Muppets, and why understanding this basic, essential tenet is imperative. Please read it thoughtfully at your leisure. It concerns a well established precept that has consistently been in place ever since the very first Muppet character was conceived. There are no exceptions to this rule. It is as follows:
Each and every Muppet character consists of at least two differentiated and equal components: a puppet, and a performer.
Friends, it just doesn’t get any more basic than that. None of the Muppets can exist without both of its equal halves, both of those fundamental elements. Why not?
• Because the Muppets are real. They occur as fact, are actual rather than imaginary or fictitious. Unlike animated characters and most fantasy characters their particular physicality allows them to exist in the real world in exactly the same form as they appear on screen without the need for alternate versions of any kind They can show up anywhere at anytime in much the same way that any celebrity can – in their original form. They are physical, not illusory – original, rather than imitation.
• The Muppets can look you in the eye and have a first person conversation about anything. They are never at a loss for words because they respond consistently with the same tangible subjective mentality as any living, breathing individual you might encounter. They are coherent.
• The Muppets each have a point of view, an opinion. They discuss current events, politics, news items and each other’s good and bad habits in character, both seriously and with humor, and exist as both the characters they portray and the celebrity who portrays that character. Even when they appear as themselves, there is the perception of a character and an actor at play from each Muppet. They constitute both Johnny Dep and Capt. Jack Sparrow, Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones, Miley Cyrus and Hannah Montana. The audience senses an off screen existence beyond the onscreen role. The Muppets relate to us in subtle ways, and they operate from a firm foundation, a place of solid perspective and truth. They fully and lucidly exist both in and out of their on screen personas.
• The Muppets have consistent recollection and memory of events. Any one of them can talk to you about something you did together yesterday, last year or thirty years ago. They have consciousness.
• The Muppets are real individuals. They exist in OUR real world society and culture, and are not dependent upon an exaggerated or fictitious, onscreen world in order to function fully in character. They relate to each other and the world from complex individual perspectives, and individuals can not be duplicated and doubled. There is no level of our work at which this would become acceptable. There is no project so small or insignificant that the Muppets would not show up fully, originally intact. Their personas are unique and genuine, never counterfeit.
• The Muppets are motivated by real feelings, memories, thoughts and emotions. The fact that physically they are puppets does not figure into who they are, and, as outlined above, Who They Are is what The Muppets have always been about, first and foremost. They were not created out of a desire for success in the marketplace, and have always existed as much more than a brand. That explains their ongoing connection to the audience, and though it has never disappeared, that is the ‘magic’ we seek to resurrect. Their pecuniary success is dependent upon their foundational principles.
• All of the above is essential to their longevity and success.
• Beyond their real world physical existence, none of it generates from the puppet component.
Because it absolutely has to be understood, it bears repeating: Who They Are is what The Muppets have always been about. All of the above facts require the application of the rule that “each and every Muppet character consists of both a puppet, and a performer.” Without recognition of, and operation from, the simple and obvious rule defining the two integrated components (the exterior “what” and the interior “who” of each Muppet character), the Muppets are no longer the Muppets, pure and simple. Any alternate methodology reinvents the half century old wheel.
Part 2
Who They Are
“What” the Muppets are is obvious. So what constitutes the “Who” in Who They Are? That would be the second half of the equation, the “performer” component. And, though there are some similarities, as the “Who” of who the Muppets are, the Muppet Performers are quite different than ordinary actors and talent that Disney hires for projects at any level.
• Unlike an actor who portrays a certain role on a temporary, limited basis such as in a series or motion picture, individual Muppet Performers have always been permanently cast as individual characters virtually for life.
• This permanent singular casting is what allows the Muppets to maintain their complexity, and to consistently grow and adapt, develop and evolve over time just as any individual human being would, a vital factor in a changing world.
• Since, as puppeteers, the performers supply both the voice and the movements for the life of characters who live in real time and in the physical world, they are supplying the personalities unique to each Muppet, the “soul”, so to speak. That means that the ultimate responsibility for who a long term character is and who they will become, or ‘character development’, has always been in the hands of the performer – it must be for the character to grow cohesively and organically.
Compare this to a voice artist whose technique and portrayal for an animated character is limited to a vocal performance for a particular project.
Compare this to an actor who portrays a character in a motion picture (or series of them) whose role it is to bring a character to life only for a limited engagement, rather than as a lifetime commitment.
• Puppeteers, particularly at the Muppet level of puppetry, are traditionally responsible for far more than ordinary actors, often having acted as performer, casting director, puppet builder, writer, producer, director, musician, set designer/builder, publicist, etc., as opposed to an actor whose job it may be to only portray a role.
As was the case with Jim Henson who was a puppeteer long before he was a successful director, producer or businessman, puppeteers often know what is required inside and out.
What is the point of all of this? It means two things in the Disney/Muppet world:
• the partnership between a puppet (owned by Disney) and the specific performer (who supplies life to that puppet) is on-going indefinitely.
• the Muppets are unique and unlike any other Disney brand or franchise, and do not necessarily fit into any business or creative model The Walt Disney Company has previously used.
Part 3
What Does Disney Actually Own?
Though there are similarities, certain guidelines entirely unique to the Muppets need to be in place in order to accommodate the exclusive nature of what constitutes the ‘whole’ of the Muppets, from production and business issues to the conception of projects, in order for them to function at their best.
What exactly does The Muppets Studio (TMS) commit to deliver to a third party in a license agreement with them? What is it that a producer is expecting from TMS?
If what TMS has committed to deliver to them is, say, Kermit the Frog (or any other Muppet), then the problem facing us is this: In order for The Muppets Studio to do business in the marketplace TMS is charged with licensing a product that, by definition, Disney does not fully own. As the representatives of The Muppets in the business world, Disney Business and Legal Affairs cannot fail to consider this anomaly, or else they leave TMS in the altogether precarious position of marketing the brand to a world of third party entities (including internal Disney partners) without any reliable guarantee of truly being able to provide all that defines it. TMS accomplishes this by acquiring something that they do not own.
Let me explain:
(1) Performers are not free agents with respect to seeking work with outside third party producers as the Muppets (owned by Disney) they regularly perform. Also (2), no third party ever contacts any of the Muppet’s puppeteers to book one of the Muppets for any appearance – ever. Nor (3), when booked, can any Muppet character appear without a performer (except in a museum exhibit as a display, which is not a performance). That means that a working partnership must exist between puppet and performer via The Muppets Studio. Then, and only then, can The Muppets Studio provide the ‘whole’ of any Muppet character or group of Muppets – the sum of its two parts – for their own usage or for usage by any third party internal to, or outside of, Disney.
I think we can all agree that what you are licensing here is the Muppets, yes? So, what does that mean? (From a business perspective) what defines this product we call “the Muppets?” A natural progression is to start to break it down in order to define it, as follows: The Muppets are a brand, a group of characters; Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, etc.
For even more granularity, when we begin to define any one of those established characters, our definition cannot exclude the long standing cultural expectation of what constitutes any one of them. TMS would never send a cardboard cutout or a stuffed doll and suggest that “Good Morning America” set it on a sofa and call it any one of the Muppets. In other words, each of the Muppets are recognizable to the public – they are well known, established – and to present anything to the world that is less than what is traditionally and customarily expected is not the Muppets. It ignores who they are.
So, what does Disney actually own? What did they buy from the Hensons? Two things: 1) the rights to the Muppets, and 2) a really nice set of puppets – that’s it. That’s all Disney actually owns. That’s all Disney will ever own, but that’s not a complete definition of the product TMS must go out and sell, or that Business Affairs must represent. To fully offer the Muppets as a viable brand TMS must have performers as stated above, but Disney can never fully own any performer who portrays any of the Muppets, and without performers, the Muppets do not exist as a viable product to sell within the market in which they thrive.