Mickey drawing leads man on quest

But Disney archivist disagrees with claims about the sketch.
By MIKE BRASSFIELD

© St. Petersburg Times, published January 1, 2001


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1984, Steven Stein was walking by a New York City junk shop when he saw a dusty Mickey Mouse drawing in a broken frame. He thought it looked like something special.

He bought it for $3.

Stein, now a Clearwater area art dealer, hopes to sell it for millions of dollars.

During the past 16 years, Stein has become convinced that he found a lost treasure, one of the earliest drawings of Mickey from the 1920s, possibly from Walt Disney's own hand.

There's just one problem: The chief archivist at Walt Disney Studios, the man entrusted with cataloging and safeguarding Walt's legacy, thinks Stein's drawing is nothing out of the ordinary.

That's definitely a problem. Stein, 48, doesn't care.

"They're trying to pooh-pooh it with these feeble excuses," Stein says. "This piece can speak for itself."

In his view, the Disney corporation isn't willing to admit that it threw away a treasure. Stein insists on calling the drawing "Mickey's blueprint" or "the Holy Grail of animation art."

Through the years, Stein has had various experts, scientists and cartoonists examine it. Their opinions have bolstered his case -- to a point.

Stein has put together a Web site and a 50-page book of do###ents to convince potential buyers. His sales pitch: "Own a piece of American heritage."

The drawing itself is about 2 feet by 3 feet, done with India ink on expensive vellum. It shows Mickey Mouse talking on a phone.

Right away, some obvious questions arise.

The Mickey in the drawing has short arms and gloved hands. The Mickey in Steamboat Willie, the character's 1928 cartoon debut, has long pipestem-like arms and bare hands.

Stein's response: The drawing is an early experimental work, when nothing about the character had been decided. And Mickey's gloves appear briefly in Steamboat Willie's opening credits.

Critics have wondered whether phones with cradle receivers even existed in the 1920s. They did, but the coiled phone cord had not been invented yet.

Stein's response: "They didn't have a talking mouse then, either, and Disney invented that. If he embellished his drawing with a curly phone cord, we can surely give him that poetic license."

The drawing's long snout and pear-like body shape resemble the early Mickey. (Mickey has since slimmed down.) The "pie-cut eyes," which look like pies with a slice missing, were sometimes used through 1939 and then later in nostalgia drawings.

Stein keeps his prize in a climate-controlled art vault in New York, an expense he can barely afford.

In 1987, Stein sent a small copy of it to Walt Disney archivist Dave Smith, who doubts that it's even the work of a Disney Studios artist.

"The item in no way dates from the 1920s or 1930s and is more likely from the late 1970s or 1980s," Smith wrote in a recent e-mail to the St. Petersburg Times.

In 1989, Stein showed the sketch to Charles Hamilton, an autograph dealer and handwriting expert known for exposing forgeries like the "Hitler diaries." Hamilton, who died in 1996, had examined numerous sketches said to be by Walt Disney. Many of them weren't.

Hamilton thought Stein's cartoon was drawn about 1930, possibly by Walt Disney, and was worth more than a small Walt Disney sketch that had recently sold for $100,000.

In 1991, Chicago forensic scientist Skip Palenik found that the drawing's ink and paper were from 1900-1950.

"If I wrote that, then I stand by it," said Palenik, who has since tested evidence in the Oklahoma City bombing and the JonBenet Ramsey case.

In 1993, Sacramento art appraiser Rudolph Curiel put the drawing's value at $450,000 to $500,000.

Animation art dealer Peter Adamakos, founder of a cartoon museum, thought the drawing was old but that its purpose would probably always be a mystery; it could just as easily have been part of a sign pointing to the Disney studio washrooms as anything else.

"The piece has had a rocky reception, due, I think, to Steve's high hopes that this is some major breakthrough item," Adamakos said last week. "Steve was nothing if not enthusiastic about the piece, and the art world does not like enthusiasm."

Adamakos doesn't think the drawing was done by Walt Disney because Disney wasn't a skilled artist. Still, he thinks it should be worth more than old animation cels, some of which sell for up to $250,000. But he doesn't think Stein should bill it as "some kind of cartoon Shroud of Turin."

Smith, the Disney archivist, doesn't want to get drawn into an argument with Stein. But when pressed, he can punch several holes in Stein's case:

The Disney Studios are in Burbank, Calif., and this drawing was essentially found in the trash in New York in the 1980s.

Walt Disney himself didn't do finished art, only rough sketches.

Animation drawings weren't done on vellum, and Disney artists familiar with other early Disney art don't recall anything like this drawing.

Stein has his answers ready:

Walt Disney did finished art early in his career.

This wasn't an animation drawing. It was a prototype, an early character study.

Someone at Disney must have thrown the drawing out in the 1970s. It ended up in a box of junk that made its way to a New York thrift shop.

Even if it wasn't drawn by Walt himself, it's valuable because it's from the earliest Disney era.

Stein, who moved to this area three years ago, works out of his small home. He says he is close to selling the piece to a collector for $2-million.

Couldn't this picture have just been drawn by an art student or random artist somewhere?

"It's on an expensive kind of paper," Stein said. "No one would have done this just for fun."

He says he doesn't trust auction houses such as Sotheby's and Christie's, and that others in the art world tried to swindle him. He put the drawing up for sale eBay, but the high bidder wasn't serious.

"A third of my life is entwined in this," Stein said. "For whatever reason, it was my destiny to see this through."


this crazy man sues disney..

here in this link or you can read the above your choice

http://www.sptimes.com/News/010101/news_pf/State/Mickey_drawing_leads_.shtml

i hope this is in the right place..

wow, thats amazing. And yet, really stupid.

That is really stupid... Disney is going to win though, I bet.

I do not believe this, no art form of Mickey drawn by Walt Disney, would ever be put in a thrift shop in New York.
I most assuredly believe Disney will win.

hmm

disney wins
or stein


votes for stein.. i have no idea
votes for disney.. i still have no idea

but then again..

ive heard disney gets sued every week and nobody wins..

yeah the art dealers got no chance

sounds like a job for the CSI team lol

That is really stupid... Disney is going to win though, I bet.

The sad thing about these cases the small guy usually wins, like the person that sued McDonalds for it's food making her overweight, and won. And it even got McDonalds to "adjust" their menu and food, so its a bit healthier. But to stay on subject their are some people out there desperate for money.
Any way listen to Weird Al's song "Ill Sue Ya" and you'll hear much more silly cases such as this

Anybody anywhere could have drawn a picture of Mickey Mouse. If I had a pencil and paper, I could do one right now. This is just some crazy guy trying to scam someone out of a lot of money.

Its just some crazy guy who wants to make alot of money.
People do weird things for 2 million dollars like that.

Disney will so win, there are just too many holes in that dudes point.
`Hockey

He wasted 1/3 of his life savings on this! wow.. A little to much for me, especially if they find enough evidence so that it's worth not much. But he REALLY believes it's worth quite a bit..which makes me laugh. There are so many things that ppl have pointed out that show it wasn't made that long ago!

- Ace

Anybody anywhere could have drawn a picture of Mickey Mouse. If I had a pencil and paper, I could do one right now. This is just some crazy guy trying to scam someone out of a lot of money.

Well, there are lots of things that can prove he's right. Such as the ink's dating.

Well, there are lots of things that can prove he's right. Such as the ink's dating.
So, someone 60 years ago drew it. It still could have been anybody. Mickey Mouse had a lot of fans, even back then.

Oh ahahahahahahaha :lachen70: ...... This guy seems like a con-artist(or an idiot....).....2 million....
I'm about to go draw Mickey Mouse on a piece of paper and do what this guy did.

Oh ahahahahahahaha :lachen70: ...... This guy seems like a con-artist.....2 million....
I'm about to go draw Mickey Mouse on a piece of paper and do what this guy did.

You won't get that far.. Neither will he. ;)

- Ace

You won't get that far.. Neither will he. ;)

- Ace

It said he has a buyer........:stpat_06:

Disney gets sued a lot, I'm not surprised... That guy will lose so I wouldn't worry.

It said he has a buyer........:stpat_06:

Yea, but it wasn't as high as he expected. But, let me tell you, that's as high as he's going to get! :asd:

- Ace

Oh ahahahahahahaha :lachen70: ...... This guy seems like a con-artist.....2 million....
I'm about to go draw Mickey Mouse on a piece of paper and do what this guy did.

Well, his has ink dated, and some other proof.

Yours was drawn right now, and doesn't have much proof.

It will be hard to get people to believe you, and you really won't get that far. I'm agreeing with AceGoalkeeper.
`Hockey

Sueing Disney is an Art form that not many can master!

Why are people calling Steve an idiot?
He has as many points as Disney do, to back - up his argument. I would really like to see the turn out of this, but I do actually believe that you could find something old and valuble in the trash, and he was obviously just in the right place at the right time. :)

I see no where in the article the man is going to sue disney over the picture. I read the original article twice and nothing is mentioned about Disney being sued.This is just the posters assumption.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA:asd: :uglyhamme :lachen70: :thf471fd564zf: I would probably laugh in the guy's face if given the chance. I have too many facts too prove that this guy's "painting that Wat Disney, himself drew" is not true. I know who is going to win too. Disney of course.

Off Topic: I remember a time when Bill O'Reily sued Kieth Olbermann. He put up a petetion to get him fired. He got many people too.(By the way he was suing because he said he misquoted a lot of things he said-which was not true) The people that signed the petetion were Kieth's own co-workers, BillO, fans of Kieth, and Kieth himself. When Billo gave the petetion to the judge, the judge laughed so hard he almost cried. By would I have loved to be at that trial(and yes Kieth won).

-Stitchco

Well I think I don't know it could of been anyone who drew it it doesn't have the artists signature or anything. Maybe a big fan of mickey mouse drew it. I really don't think the picture is worth millions.

LOL! "They are trying to pooh-pooh it with these feeble excuses."

Sorry, me with my lame humor

LOL! "They are trying to pooh-pooh it with these feeble excuses."

Sorry, me with my lame humor
They had originally intended to tigger it, but that didn't go as well as they had hoped.

Ya know, I've been reading some of these posts, and I'm very dissapointed.

Dang, most of you posters are siding with Disney simply because Disney is Disney. But Disney can be wrong, like every other company, person, and thing!

You gotta remember:
Behind the castle, behind the magic, behind the fairy dust, behind the princesses, are - guess what? - men and women in bussiness suits contemplating on what next to manipulate children with, while their watchdog lawyers bite away any person who tries to argue.

I will repeat again if you read the article, no where does it say the man is going to sue Disney. He is just trying to find the origin of the drawing. It amazing how the rumors get started.

Ya know, I've been reading some of these posts, and I'm very dissapointed.

Dang, most of you posters are siding with Disney simply because Disney is Disney. But Disney can be wrong, like every other company, person, and thing!

You gotta remember:
Behind the castle, behind the magic, behind the fairy dust, behind the princesses, are - guess what? - men and women in bussiness suits contemplating on what next to manipulate children with, while their watchdog lawyers bite away any person who tries to argue.

Too bad... most people arent going to believe some guy that buys a picture of Mickey and then keeps persisting that it is worth millions. I am one of them. Personally, I would do the same thing. Besides, why would he sue Disney? Because they don't believe him? (Even though the article says nothing about a lawsuit)

:thf471fd564zf: I think that dude has stayed in the junk shop a little too long...

And even if he does win ( which i don't think he will ) 2 million for Disney is like $100 for an average man.

Ya know, I've been reading some of these posts, and I'm very dissapointed.

Dang, most of you posters are siding with Disney simply because Disney is Disney. But Disney can be wrong, like every other company, person, and thing!

You gotta remember:
Behind the castle, behind the magic, behind the fairy dust, behind the princesses, are - guess what? - men and women in bussiness suits contemplating on what next to manipulate children with, while their watchdog lawyers bite away any person who tries to argue.
I agree. If they man was reading this forum, he would be disgusted. It is possible to find something like that. Ok.. Disney has more things to back up their argument, but the man has good arguing skills. Why the heck are people calling him an idiot? Are you jealous? He has as much luck as anyone to find out that it might be a genuine drawing. Yeah.. people will skip over this post, have to stay with the crowd don't we VMKf? I don't.

Too bad... most people arent going to believe some guy that buys a picture of Mickey and then keeps persisting that it is worth millions. I am one of them. Personally, I would do the same thing. Besides, why would he sue Disney? Because they don't believe him? (Even though the article says nothing about a lawsuit)
Too bad? Eh.. since when was this board only allowed to have one side of the argument. We're here for discussion, not to be said "too bad" at. Read my writing above. ^

I am looking forward to seeing the end of this.. but I doubt the thread owner will not even read this post. Skim over the people who think different?

I agree. If they man was reading this forum, he would be disgusted. It is possible to find something like that. Ok.. Disney has more things to back up their argument, but the man has good arguing skills. Why the heck are people calling him an idiot? Are you jealous? He has as much luck as anyone to find out that it might be a genuine drawing. Yeah.. people will skip over this post, have to stay with the crowd don't we VMKf? I don't.


Exactly. I'm simply appalled at the alarming rate of people siding with others because of biast statements and myths (such as Walt Disney, both the man and company, being always right) and not because of facts, strong theories, ect.

This man is not an idiot, and I think some of you need to re-read this article.


I do not see anywhere int his article about him suing Disney
He has very good arguments (as does Disney). I respect people who can make good arguments. I think it is unwise to pass off this guy as an idiot
I don't really see this as an attempt to make a whole lot of money.


Let me ask you something, if this guy was going against some no-name company, would you still call him an idiot? Would you still side with the company? Well, sure, some factors would be different. But the principle of the matter is the same. I'm willing to bet at least half of you would think twice before calling this guy an idiot.

There are several factors that I think people are overlooking and passing off as this guy's "idiocy". I think the fact that the thing has been dated correctly, and the fact that it's not just your average doodle is a huge factor. Whoever did draw this obviously was not going to just sit there and doodle, the person put money into the drawing (whoever the artist is).

Am I saying that by not knowing who the artist is that I side with Disney? No. I'm just saying that I don't know who it is, but I think that it's quite possible that it could have come from Walt.

As for the location of where the drawing was found. There are many ways that it could have ended up there.

I think that this person's dedication to this drawing shows that it's more then a simple attempt to make money. There are probably easier and faster ways to do so.

I would like someone to tell me where exactly in this article that it says that he's suing Disney.

This thread in a way has saddened me. So many people have just said "this guy is an idiot. Disney wins" without any real argument. It almost seems like you're saying "Disney wins because it's Disney". It's like the guy doesn't even have a chance.

Also, what happened to the benefit of the doubt?

-Toashtee

Back before I kids, and when I could afford it, I used to collect original Animation cells. The reason that the old ones are so rare and so expensive, is that harldy anyone thought to save them.


There are books written on the subject, of how the founding animators from Disney, Hanna Barbara, Loony Tunes, etc, just threw cells and drawing in the trash! Most of the ( now) expensive cells, and sketches were rescued from the garbage from the Studio lots, by other studios employees, who thought that they would just be fun to have!

I have seen an interview with Walt Disney, that documents that the first drawing of Mickey was on a train in 1928.

It is possible, thought that drawing from a Disney Artist were thrown or given away, it did happen!

Why don't they check the finger prints on it? (Okay that was stupid.) The telephone thing is creepy I mean are they trying to say Walt Disney invented the modern day telephone? I think he probably either
1.Bought some old fancy paper and copied it off the internet (or drew it)
2.Paid someone to get old fancy paper and draw it.
3.Maybe it is Walt's original masterpiece..
That...would be so...creepy. @_@ *starts to play the haunted mansion theme song*

Have any of you decided to read the OTHER articles on this:

"He got it for peanuts, considering. But there's more.

Now Stein is taking Disney to court.

"I'm suing them for $50-million, the copyright on Mickey Mouse, and the right to tell the Walt Disney story," said Stein.

Stein believes somebody must have a copy of an old newsreel showing his drawing over the shoulder of a very young Walt Disney.

Perhaps his lawsuit will flush that film out, and prove he possesses one very valuable mouse.

Somehow I doubt that merely owning this drawing, even if it was the first depiction of Mickey Mouse ever, would mean owning the copyright. There are many, many ways a corporate lawyer can argue against this."


"Stein has now decided to take the Disney Corporation to court because since 1989 they have been refusing to look at the drawing he has and to tell him whether they think he has the original drawing of Mickey and if not why. Stein states that the Disney Corporation refusing to even look at the drawing which he says has handwriting on the back that he thinks are written by Disney himself.

Stein states, "I'm suing them for $50-million, the copyright on Mickey Mouse, and the right to tell the Walt Disney story.""


There are many stories on this. ;) Whether he is right or wrong..I think he believes in his heart he is right..or at least convinced himself he is.

Here is the pic:
http://img90.**************/img90/4665/photoservletwp1.th.jpg (http://img90.**************/my.php?image=photoservletwp1.jpg)

Have any of you decided to read the OTHER articles on this:

"He got it for peanuts, considering. But there's more.

Now Stein is taking Disney to court.

"I'm suing them for $50-million, the copyright on Mickey Mouse, and the right to tell the Walt Disney story," said Stein.

Stein believes somebody must have a copy of an old newsreel showing his drawing over the shoulder of a very young Walt Disney.

Perhaps his lawsuit will flush that film out, and prove he possesses one very valuable mouse.

Somehow I doubt that merely owning this drawing, even if it was the first depiction of Mickey Mouse ever, would mean owning the copyright. There are many, many ways a corporate lawyer can argue against this."


"Stein has now decided to take the Disney Corporation to court because since 1989 they have been refusing to look at the drawing he has and to tell him whether they think he has the original drawing of Mickey and if not why. Stein states that the Disney Corporation refusing to even look at the drawing which he says has handwriting on the back that he thinks are written by Disney himself.

Stein states, "I'm suing them for $50-million, the copyright on Mickey Mouse, and the right to tell the Walt Disney story.""


There are many stories on this. ;) Whether he is right or wrong..I think he believes in his heart he is right..or at least convinced himself he is.

Here is the pic:
http://img90.**************/img90/4665/photoservletwp1.th.jpg (http://img90.**************/my.php?image=photoservletwp1.jpg)

He may be taking them to court with a lawsuit or whatever, but I'm telling you there is absolutely no proof at all that he has an original drawing by Walt himself. 50-Million dollars, he better have the best doggone lawyer in town, or disney "will" end up winning this thing. An art made by Walt would be put into the finest gallery the world has to offer, This is gonna be a big fight, but Disney has more lawsuits against them then the movies they have made, I most assuredly believe Disney is gonna have victory over Stein.

Amazing, and DUMB

Amazing, and DUMB

True, There's no proof Walt drew it, but there's no proof he didn't. But Disney has been sued so many time's it's not funny, and always won. I think 50-Million dollars is a little too much to sue for.

Here is the pic:
http://img90.**************/img90/4665/photoservletwp1.th.jpg (http://img90.**************/my.php?image=photoservletwp1.jpg)

That doesn't look much like the earliest drawings of Mickey I've seen:

http://www.dialbforblog.com/archives/291/plane_crazy.gif

http://encyclopedia.quickseek.com/images/Mickey-title.jpg

http://www.150.si.edu/images/8miki1.jpg

This Stein fella's drawing seems like a much later version of Mickey Mouse.

True, There's no proof Walt drew it, but there's no proof he didn't. But Disney has been sued so many time's it's not funny, and always won. I think 50-Million dollars is a little too much to sue for.

Will you listen to yourself?
Actually read the articles first. You'll find he has many sorts of evidence to offer.

The picture Jen posted looks completely different, more of a current version of the drawing. As Neoteny posted, it looks NOTHING like the old ones, they were more simple. I find this stupid, Disney is going to win.

~Elly

WEll, he is just trying to get money



YOU CAN DO IT DISNEY

Will you listen to yourself?
Actually read the articles first. You'll find he has many sorts of evidence to offer.

I didn't say there wasn't any evidence, I'm merely saying that there is many things that could disprove this fact as there is to prove this fact. But this man is going to sue them for 50-million dollars, copyright of Mickey Mouse, and the right to show the video clip(whatever the video clip is). He might put the entire Disney Empire in jeopardy. You can disagree with me all you want but I believe that he is trying to pull a scam to make a few million dollars worth on a fake painting. You can disagree with me, but that is my belief, and I'm stitcking to it.

From what I heard, I found no source of evidence. I think Disney knows better than some weirdo dude (I forget his name xD).

Besides, I bet this is almost over and the judge is just "Oh let it be over"

~Penguinz

eh, disney will just win :D

That guy is nutso amazo if u ask me! Man, if I ever sued disney it would be for closing VMK, not because of some picture! But then again.... with the money i would get... I could BUY VMK..... Or could I....