As time as gone on, Disney has gotten away from attractions that try to educate.
I think that education and entertainment can coexist on an attraction. Golden Dreams is a good example of how NOT to do it. Let me share some observations:
1) People MUST have fun learning new things. Education is not the goal, it is the subplot. The goal MUST be to have fun. That is why people go to amusement parks in the first place.
2) People cannot be just TOLD FACTS but must experience the facts. I don't want to hear a lecture on Egypt, I want to sail down the Nile as a Pharaoh.
3) The attraction cannot be presented as a learning experience. Mr. Lincoln was not originally presented as a lesson about Lincoln but as an opportunity to see a human, state-of-the-art audio-animatronic. When the AA was no longer state of the art or a novelty, attendance dropped.
4) We must go where no one has gone before. We also have to want to go there. An attraction must touch the imagination in the guest's mind and heart. It must be innovatively presented. A film is not innovative.
5) Building an attraction that has an historical or educational element is no different than making a movie with an historical base. The story is the key. A good story will attract people. If people learn about Cleopatra or Mark Twain in the process, they have been educated.
6) Walt felt it was is obligation to bring education to his rides. He felt to have his guest learn something while being entertained was heightening the value of Disneyland. He felt he owed it to future generations.
Am I right or wrong?