This week, it’s the latter part of my conversation with animation student Leila (part one can be found here). We talked about the “lone wolf” myth that pervades art school and the importance of taking time off from work. Next week, we’re talking architecture.
This week, I got to discuss the animation industry with Leila, a fellow art student whose portfolio can be found here. We talked about the shift from 2D to CGI, the cost of getting your name out there, and how weird it is for strangers to see your portfolio. There’s more to the conversation that I want you all to hear, so I’m splitting this into two parts. Next week: the realization that nothing is guaranteed and the best of plans can go awry.
There has been a new trend over the past couple of years in the Disney movies that have been released. Live action Disney movies started with the live action Cinderella and are still continuing now. There are three that are being advertised right now: Dumbo, Aladdin, and The Lion King.
The trend started with Cinderella. The movie was almost an exact replica of the animated version. They had tweaked a couple of things and made the movie as beautiful as possible. This movie was beautiful to watch, and gave you the same magic as the animated version. Beauty and the Beast was similar to Cinderella in the fact that it was very similar to the animated version. Both movies included the most popular songs and followed the plot very closely.
For some of the movies Disney has changed the formula a little bit. The live action version of the Jungle Book was very different from the animated version. In the live action they only include the most popular songs and they add more to the movie to make it more cohesive and have more substance. The live action Jungle Book improved upon the original animated version of the movie. The movie Maleficent also didn’t just recreate a past movie. But this is because there was no Maleficent movie before this one. This entire live action movie was based off of Maleficent’s part in Sleeping Beauty.
The new Disney live action movies are coming out throughout the rest of this year. Based on the trailers for the movies, we cannot tell if they movies will follow the plot lines to a T like they had for Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast. I think that The Lion King and Aladdin will follow the original’s plot very closely but Dumbo might stray from it a little more. Dumbo might not follow the movie exactly because the original is not as popular with children now. The animated version of Dumbo was also a little darker than most Disney movies are now, so I think that it might have a more happy and positive tone than the original.
By far one of my favorite things that comes along with being a student here is going to the Penny W. Stamps Speaker Series on Thursday nights at the Michigan Theater. All Stamps students are required to go every week, and others outside of the Art and Design school are welcome to come to the free event as well. The speaker series was founded by alumna, Penny W. Stamps, and it is a collective of professional creators from a wide range of art fields. The Stamps Series always creates some sort of inspiration and that is one of the many reasons why it has a special place in my heart.
This week a Seattle based artist, Clyde Peterson came to speak. His medium is usually animation but he dabbles with multimedia work to spread word of his stories and his music.
Routinely, before I go to the lecture I look up the artist who is speaking. Clyde is a part of the transgender and queer community, has created an animated feature length film, and has won a bunch of awards. I was excited for this lecture, and as soon as he stepped on stage and began his casual conversation like speech I became thrilled. His way of speaking was refreshing because he wasn’t talking down to anyone in the audience but rather with us. Clyde began to tell stories of his college life and how he began as a filmmaker and animator. He has one specific project that stood out to me the most called, Boating With Clyde.
It began 10 years ago and rather than his animation films this is a “nautical adventure series” created by Peterson, that presents musicians and artists from all over the world on the waterways of Puget Sound in Seattle(https://www.clydepetersen.com/bio). The area where the shows take place only allows row boats, so Clyde decided to create a community that bonds over making music on the water in this uncomfortable yet beautiful place. He took videos of these performances and made the project be an installation at a gallery by “tricking” them with creating a set for the film. After the first gallery accepted Boating with Clyde, it was easier to get more opportunities for this project. Clyde explained in his presentation that he loves engaging with the project, hence why it has gone on for ten years. He goes in and out of working on this project but he always seems to come back to it because of his love for what he and others have built off of it. He has a “do what you want and love” personality, which has made him struggle with money at times but overall enjoy what he is doing with his life. Clyde Peterson, is an inspiration because of the way he freely has chosen to live life and create art.
Although I have mainly talked about Boating With Clyde, Clyde Peterson has also created many other unique projects which can be found on his website. In addition, checkout his instagram @fuck_you_im_clyde_petersen !!!
So two days ago I was on the interwebs (as I usually am, no surprise there), and I happened across a thing. I wasn’t sure what this thing was so obviously I googled it, and it came up, no problem.
This thing was called Over the Garden Wall and I realized that this was probably a really, really big thing.
Over the Garden Wall is a miniseries that aired on Cartoon Network around three weeks ago and apparently gained a lot of attention from kids my age. Really though, I wasn’t surprised, because the show is made by someone who worked on Adventure Time, and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told that I should watch Adventure Time (protip: it’s a lot). I haven’t gotten around to it yet, and really, I’m not sure it’s gonna be my thing.
But the other night while I was in desperate need for a break from writing (protip: I do a lot of writing), I decided to go ahead and watch the first episode since Cartoon Network so kindly put it on YouTube for me to enjoy.
The first thing I’ll say about it is that it’s dark. Like I probably wouldn’t show it to my kids dark. And it;s not necessarily anything plot wise, the show just gives off a creepy vibe. And I absolutely love it.
However I’m not sure how I feel about the show. It’s intriguing to be sure, and I’ll definitely finish it (I’m currently on episode 6 out of 10), but I’m really on the fence about it.
On the one hand, the animation is absolutely gorgeous, though I’d expect nothing less. The dark colors, deep plums and greens from the forest don’t mute the show but make it stunning, and the style is somewhat reminiscent of Gravity Falls and Adventure Time, but it’s still completely unique.
And the format is nice, the episodes being bite sized rather than full length. And I’m really enjoying the writing, it’s smart and at times witty and the characters are really unique, even the comic relief.
But still, in terms of liking it, I’m not sure. I’ll have to wait until I’ve seen the whole series until I can judge, but nonetheless it’s very well executed and it deserves a lot of praise. Smart programming for children (though, I’d argue, the target audience isn’t exactly children) is always something I enjoy and look forward to, so hearing about Over the Garden Wall was a nice breath of fresh air for me.
For his master’s thesis, an animation student created a short film about a kiwi who followed its dreams to the end. We’re talking about the bird, not the fruit. Unlike other birds, the kiwi is incapable of flight. It—actually, let’s engender it—he, only has small, stubbed wings that cannot lift him into the air. Longing to achieve flight, the kiwi spends what appears to be years constructing a forest on the vertical face of a cliff. Once built, the kiwi jumps off the cliff and “flies” through a forest, fulfilling a lifelong goal. The film ends as bittersweet tears stream from his eyes. The animation fades to black. We realize we’ve just witnessed a suicide.
The video, you can watch it here on YouTube, has raised a good deal of controversy in the comments.
Much of the discussion revolves around whether the film gives positive or negative messages. Positive, in that the kiwi had finally achieved his dreams. Negative, in that the kiwi had killed himself in the pursuit of something outside his limits. Both arguments are valid, and the arguments continue for 78,000+ comments (at the time of this posting) with no mutually decided “right” answer. Discussions like this are numerous. Especially so on the Internet. Especially so over a good piece of art. And “Kiwi!” is just that.
It’s just art.
An impressive work of art, no doubt, that raises good discussion and stirs the pot, making viewers feel something. But the important thing to realize is that the video is neither “good” nor “bad” in isolation; like most things, it can be reflected in positive and negative light. Regardless of this morally ambiguous identity, the film explores an important concept: potential vs. desire.
There’s a good mathematical way of looking at this. (I apologize in advance; I know this is an art blog). If you take piano playing, for example, and allot musical ability on a scale of one to twenty-five, you can score pianists based on two parameters—potential and desire—each worth one to five points. Potential you cannot control. Potential is one’s natural aptitude for piano playing. Desire you can control. Desire is the amount of time and energy one invests in something. For some people, they are born with an affinity for piano playing, maybe at a score of five. If these people were to invest a good deal of time (a four or five on the desire scale) into piano playing, they could be very accomplished in the art, receiving a cumulative total of twenty to twenty-five. This is great, for they reached their full potential. But then there are other people. These people have little to no affinity for piano playing, so their potential score is a one. This means if they invested their full effort into the art, the highest score they can achieve is five. This is the kiwi. The kiwi has little potential for flight, so despite his hard work, he’ll never be that good. Ergo, he dies trying.
This is sad. But we can find consolation in final success. Although he spent his whole life laboring toward short-lived benefits, he ultimately achieved what he wanted—flight. If you leave it at that, you can step away from the film with a happy feeling. The kiwi had a goal-driven life and that is admirable.
Or you can look at the economics of the situation. The kiwi invested his efforts in a bad return on investment. That was stupid, and we can pity him for it. But the film only becomes depressing when think about the kiwi’s potential. Sure, the kiwi may not have held much potential for flight, but what about some unknown potential that he never tapped into? The kiwi could’ve held a strong affinity for swimming, but he never invested the effort. The kiwi died without reaching his full potential. He pursued his passion and that passion destroyed him.
Do you own your dreams? Or do your dreams own you?
That’s what the animation has presented. Some say that’s good, others say it’s bad.
It’s just art.
