They are all here on every post!
http://oliviacgreen.wordpress.com/
Time For Hugs Banner
Monday, May 7, 2012
Comments 1-12
Every one of mikes posts now bears my thoughts. TAKE THAT MIKE. I have no idea who you are.
http://mikeweber90.wordpress.com/
http://mikeweber90.wordpress.com/
Blog post 12: the end of the blogs
Oh the last blog, and I still have so much more to do. Cursed is the life of a procrastinator.
Today I'll talk about how the class impacted me and my works.
For those of you who don't know (looks around web page) I have my own comic. It's not animation, but it is sequential images that tell a story, so some of the lessons are pretty applicable.
In truth very few of the lessons were new to me as far as how animation relates to it's stiller brother comics. Scott McCloud lists off a fair amount of what makes a cartoon in "Understanding comics". This means I will skip over quite a few of the overlapping lessons and the lessons about cartoons, which leaves just the lessons of how sequential art evolved as my topic for this post.
In truth I suppose that cuts down a lot of what I was going to talk about. What commonalities do sequential art forms have in common. Not cartoons. Just sequential art.
Well I could easily start with their differences. Comics rely on choice of moment, while animation show step by step movement and have far less choice of moment. You do see transitions however, so they do overlap slightly. Animation can have many more moments. You have all of the stages of a punch, you don't need to worry about whether or not you show a middle to the punch, it's already there. But transitions do exist for many of the same practical reasons. Meanwhiles, laters, and other announcer type sayings pop up in both of the forms.
Sound. Comics have none, animation has the ability to have it. Instead of writing pow, slick, bang you can actually hear it. Animation doesn't require you to voice the characters, it gives you a voice for them. Animation has a whole other sense for viewers to enjoy.
Story. Ah there it is. A story. Everything requires a story in sequential art. That's why it's sequential, to tell something that one picture could not.
So if anything were to truly be learned by comparing the two. It is the need for a story to accompany the art.
Today I'll talk about how the class impacted me and my works.
For those of you who don't know (looks around web page) I have my own comic. It's not animation, but it is sequential images that tell a story, so some of the lessons are pretty applicable.
In truth very few of the lessons were new to me as far as how animation relates to it's stiller brother comics. Scott McCloud lists off a fair amount of what makes a cartoon in "Understanding comics". This means I will skip over quite a few of the overlapping lessons and the lessons about cartoons, which leaves just the lessons of how sequential art evolved as my topic for this post.
In truth I suppose that cuts down a lot of what I was going to talk about. What commonalities do sequential art forms have in common. Not cartoons. Just sequential art.
Well I could easily start with their differences. Comics rely on choice of moment, while animation show step by step movement and have far less choice of moment. You do see transitions however, so they do overlap slightly. Animation can have many more moments. You have all of the stages of a punch, you don't need to worry about whether or not you show a middle to the punch, it's already there. But transitions do exist for many of the same practical reasons. Meanwhiles, laters, and other announcer type sayings pop up in both of the forms.
Sound. Comics have none, animation has the ability to have it. Instead of writing pow, slick, bang you can actually hear it. Animation doesn't require you to voice the characters, it gives you a voice for them. Animation has a whole other sense for viewers to enjoy.
Story. Ah there it is. A story. Everything requires a story in sequential art. That's why it's sequential, to tell something that one picture could not.
So if anything were to truly be learned by comparing the two. It is the need for a story to accompany the art.
Blog posts 11 Animation as art?
Blog post 11: I can has be qualified as art?
Cartoonists always seem to get a bad rap as Vaudvillans (The words of Rube Goldberg, not mine). That is, people who preceed the main act, and art meant simply for entertainment purposes. Of course we live in a different time now than the 60's, where entertainment has become a form of art, but animation still falls into the category of sub-art.
Or do we? In truth I don't know. Everyone in my circles seems to agree that animation is art, but when does the change happen? When does Cartooning go from "vaudvillian" to "artist". As a community we typically relegate realistic looking things to art. The more real it looks, the more art it is. I don't know if this is really where we, as cartoonists, want to be.
Yes, we are being considered art now. Fine. Good. Yay even.
But do we even want to? If we have to be like "professional artists" to be artists aren't we giving up the best part of cartoons? The fact they are a medium both separate and included in art?
I don't mean to disrespect those that have been established as artists within the community, and those that truly are worthy of both art in the since of classic art and in cartoon art. But I think you are all our strongest advocates. They all know how art is both similar and different than animation, and only they can perhaps prove that we can be art, and that even those that don't fall under the classic ideal of art can be a new form of art.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Blog 10: I have no idea what to write about again
Guess what I'm doing? Writing all of my responses to blogs. Yep. I should have them all done soon. I liked waiting till the last minute so I could comment on all of the best ones.
At least that's what I'll keep telling myself as I write 20 paragraphs of responses.
Watching Legend of Korra now. Maybe I'll talk about that.
I've already talked about the blend of eastern and western animation, and the Avatar series seems to fit in precisely with that. (http://www.nick.com/videos/clip/legend-of-korra-101-full-episode.html) for those who are interested.
Avatar definitely has an eastern feel. The main character is dressed and trained like an eastern monk, and much of the mythology is very similar to eastern themes, even the theme of reincarnation. The fire nation bears many ties to imperial Japan during the Meji period. The story promotes a main character who is contemplative, and the art focuses heavily on a sense of place. Even the art is more eastern based, especially with the eyes.
Legend of Kora strikes me different for many reasons. Although it is a continuation of the series the character shares more in common with American Superheroes as far as ego and will is concerned, and the sense of pacing is a little lost. This is not a bad thing, it is simply a more western thing. Even the art style bears a more western tinge. Cities and statues outweigh natural scenes.
I'm not sure what my animation point is here, maybe that some TV shows are really trying to find out where cultural differences can become similarities.
At least that's what I'll keep telling myself as I write 20 paragraphs of responses.
Watching Legend of Korra now. Maybe I'll talk about that.
I've already talked about the blend of eastern and western animation, and the Avatar series seems to fit in precisely with that. (http://www.nick.com/videos/clip/legend-of-korra-101-full-episode.html) for those who are interested.
Avatar definitely has an eastern feel. The main character is dressed and trained like an eastern monk, and much of the mythology is very similar to eastern themes, even the theme of reincarnation. The fire nation bears many ties to imperial Japan during the Meji period. The story promotes a main character who is contemplative, and the art focuses heavily on a sense of place. Even the art is more eastern based, especially with the eyes.
Legend of Kora strikes me different for many reasons. Although it is a continuation of the series the character shares more in common with American Superheroes as far as ego and will is concerned, and the sense of pacing is a little lost. This is not a bad thing, it is simply a more western thing. Even the art style bears a more western tinge. Cities and statues outweigh natural scenes.
I'm not sure what my animation point is here, maybe that some TV shows are really trying to find out where cultural differences can become similarities.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
THE FINAL IS DUE TODAY!?!?!
DID I MAKE IT! HERE IT IS! I totally forgot it was due. Luckily I had the intro done. I wanted so much more.
Blog 9. Ponies
It’s getting harder and harder to come up with topics for these blog posts. It may be because I’ve been watching less and less car…toons…
WAIT A MINUTE! MY LITTLE PONY IS ON NETFLIX!
*A few hours later*
Whew that was good. Now where was I… Oh… I forgot about my blog post. I better hurry up and write something. Something that has to do with animation and…
Ponies.
That’s right this blog post is about Ponies. Don’t like it? Tough cookies. But how do I make this about something other than appreciation? …
I got it.
Why is guys liking My little Pony such a big deal that they garner the nickname “Bronies”. We do live in a society where gender differences are mocked when one takes on the other, a prime example being the ridicule I received from my girlfriends family when I gave her son a toy kitchen for his birthday. (By the way, the kitchen is the manliest place in the house as it houses knives, fire and food.)
So my argument here is, do classic cartoons promote gender bias and do modern cartoons seek to reverse it?
Let’s take a look at classic cartoons. The first Disney princesses are, for lack of a better term, subservient and totally dependent on men and preyed upon by other women. Classic cartoons paint women at their best as helpless and at their worst as petty vultures. Look at old Disney movies. Look at Popeye the sailor man’s Olive Oil. Look at any female character in looney toons. Cartoons are meant to be caricatures, but there is a fine line between pointing out differences and promoting stereotypical themes as fact.
Now let’s look at modern stuff! My little pony, Foster’s home, Phineas and Ferb. All of these shows feature a host of many gendered characters but instead of relying on gender stereotypes they instead rely on themes. My little pony’s characters are based off of laughter, honesty, loyalty, magic, kindness and generosity, and the only way to tell they are girls is because of their voices and some of their quirks. The stereotypes are hidden behind the themes, not in place of them.
I suppose what spurred this article was the disbelief that I could like a show most people assume is a girl show. It was, back in the day, but now it is more than that and people simply revert to the classics to inform their decisions. And the kitchen thing. My son can have a kitchen and be a man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)