Animation Source Forums

You're welcome, Highland! But I also remembered that, in different topics here at various times, people mentioned reading in some books that Balto was a wolf-dog. Yeah...children's books which were poorly-written, and have litte to no research in them. I've said it before, there are only TWO books commonly available which tell the true story accurately: "The Adventures of Balto: The Untold Story" by Patricia Chargot (written with young readers in mind), and "The Cruelest Miles" by Gay Salisbury and Laney Salisbury. Any other books CANNOT, CANNOT, CANNOT be trusted. Some of them even tell the story of Balto based on what the authors learned from the freakin' CARTOON.

I do not understand why this is such a big discussion. Fact is fact - He was a Sibe. We all need to just deal with this fact, and move on.

No. Not an Alaskan Husky. The documentary information there is wrong too (if they even call him that). The Alaskan Husky is not a breed in of itself. It is a characteristic of a mixed breed dog...and there are many Alaskan huskies which have very divergent appearances. However, Balto was not an Alaskan husky. Technically, that "type" didn't even exist at the time.


We're talking about the real Balto now, SilverFangWolf, not the cartoon character. And the real Balto was a purebred husky. Not a wolf-dog. That is a creation of Hollywood...a fantasy.

When is everyone going to get over the belief that the real Balto was a wolf-dog simply because a cartoon movie says so? When have any of you ever known movies to be historically accurate more than very, VERY rarely? (Of all the movies I've seen in my lifetime, I can think of MAYBE five! And the Balto cartoon movie is certainly NOT one of them!)


What I don't get is that, in the beginning of this post (of which I only quoted the latter part), you say Balto is a husky. Then, at the end, you say that the malamute looks more like Balto, and so you infer that you believe that Balto was a malamute. So which is it, for you? Either way, let me set the record straight, for the UMPTEENTH time (for everyone, incidentally):

It is a matter of historical record that Balto was a husky. Of the Chukchi tribe's stock from Siberia. The malamute is an Alaskan breed, from the northern reaches of Alaska and Canada, developed by the Mahlemut tribe...totally different. It is also a matter of historical record that these dogs, produced in Leonhard Seppala's kennels (the dogs used in the Serum Run) were imported from Siberia and raised exclusively in his kennels. And they were ALL huskies. The real Balto was not, not, NOT a malamute. PERIOD. (Just like I said earlier in this topic, under what is now "deleted user" - that's from when I had left the site for a bit...but that is my post.)

Incidentally, Siberian Huskies can have many different looks. The silver and white you showed is just ONE. You want to get more of an idea? Look at this: http://www.huskycolors.com/colors.html. AND this, from that page: http://www.huskycolors.com/mblack.html.

A Post Script:

I also cannot tolerate those fans who, being a bit more "in the know", believe that Universal Studios and Amblimation changed the history of Balto, and the events of 1925, for their cartoon movie because, in doing so, they made the events more dramatic, edgier, and romantic. They believe that the REAL Balto's life must, therefore, have been comparatively boring and uninspired. Baloney. Once a person actually takes the time to read about the events surrouding the real Balto's life (during and after the 1925 Nome Serum Run)...instead of just paying lip service to it, they will find that the real story is pretty dramatic enough itself. And it would have made for a sufficiently-dramatic storyline for a cartoon movie and at least ONE sequel. The only missing element would have been the romantic angle (because the real Balto was neutered, and never sired any puppies). But hey - we don't want to drive away that certain percentage of the female audience that looooooves that romantic stuff, now do we? Heavens, no!

But we know Hollywood and how they love to change things, using the excuse of "dramatic" or "poetic" license to justify their actions. I believe there is no better example of that than the movie "Pearl Harbor"...a sappy, melodramatic love story with about fifteen confusing and poorly-edited minutes (if that) of the event the title purports the movie to be about. PFF. As well as an insultingly-short segment at the end showing elements of Dolittle's famous (or infamous, depending upon your point of view) mission...as if it were an afterthought (which it most certainly was NOT).

Perhaps, Highland. But think...what, if anything, did you know about Balto (or the cartoon itself) before seeing the cartoon? Do you think that the amount of people who like it did so because they had some advanced knowledge of what was going to be in it? No...that's not the way it works. And if there were either a cartoon or live-action movie about the REAL Balto, it's just as likely as not that it would draw as much interest and popularity as the existing Balto cartoon did. (I'm not trying to be "holier-than-thou" here...I'm just countering).

Incidentally, we all have to admit that, as cartoons go, the Balto movies (no matter which) are not as popular, overall, as we'd like to believe. Sure, there is a dedicated fan base. But really...compared to some of the more well-known cartoon properties out there, could you really say that the Balto cartoons are that popular? Of course, quality is not a measure of popularity. I'll grant that. But if it comes down to sheer numbers (in terms of sales and long-term fandom), the Balto cartoon properties are certainly not at the top of the heap.