Motion-picture film opened a new
medium for artist to produce pieces that could speak to the masses – testing new
applications to convey opinions and to express themselves fully. Between 1900
and 1930 the world of silent film was introduced to a new form of motion
picture – animation. A stop motion process created to display ideas that the
real world could not replicate with actors alone – this effect was created
through something as simple as a series of drawings on paper or as complex as
a scene of clay figures dancing in a realistic setting. Even in a time where
sound was not combined with the stream of motion pictures, emotions could be conveyed
through speech bubbles and exaggerated expressions. It took large groups of
individuals to painstakingly create animations, yet the finished product often
had a relatable story and quickly developed memorable characters like Felix the
Cat and Gertie the Dinosaur. It is these early animations that have become a
foundation for the animations of today – for it was that motion-picture film
that began the idea to create a story in art through shooting a series of pictures
one frame at a time.
Much like in John Dos Passos’
Camera Eye – the animations were often a stream of thought placed before the
movie in addition to the newsreel. Though animation is not brought up in the
books we have read thus far, the progression of the motion-picture animation
follows the technological advances of the modernist time. Animation, as it is developed, steps away
from the human actors and focuses more on the drawn characters. The animation Felix the Cat: Feline Follies was
created by Pat Sullivan and Otto Messer in 1919 – though it is not the first
animation to be viewed it became one of the first to be drawn without real
filmed backgrounds and quickly became a success. According to Patricia Vettel
Tom’s American Art, Felix was a Modernity
of Form stating “these black-and-white silent films combined abstract and
surrealistic imagery with the comic antics of a caricatured feline.” This was
not meant to replace the real world in the mindset of the viewers but to give a
playful example of what could befall in day-to-day circumstances.
The world Felix was created in was
meant to speak of possible real life situations from a playful point of view –
removing the serious tone that could have come with violence, depression, and
day-to-day struggles. The act of
lessening the seriousness of the scenes portrayed becomes a form of fabrication
for the reality it emulates – allowing the viewers to see what would otherwise
be heinous acts. The animations were created with such speed and accepted with
admiration that the studios developed free reign over topics in which they often
either endorse or mocked. The themes also held a closer connection to that of
mature content– As Canemaker points out when Felix was in his beginnings he was
‘intended for an adult audiences' (Langer). A prime example of this can be
viewed in the Felix the Cat: Feline Follies where Felix is tossed from his home
after mice destroy the house during his rendezvous with his beau. The abuse has
a slapstick effect as he bounces from the front door- running to his cat friend
who in turn has had quite a large litter from him. Instead of acting in a
positive matter he walks away and the act of killing himself through gas inhalation
is implied as the film ends. This humorous
form of violence makes light of the true effect such actions would play in real
life situations.
Felix the Cat : Feline Follies
Through the mockery of violence and
progression of storytelling a voice has been created. If this developed voice worked
for the betterment of the community it catered to or fed the beginnings of
mindless violence that is prevalent today remains unknown.
Question:
If animation can expand from the limitations of real actors and situations, does the portrayed voice become altered or lose credibility?
Work Cited
Langer, Mark. "Felix: The Twisted Tale of the World's Most Famous Cat." Rev. of Felix: The Twisted Tale of the World's Most Famous Cat by John Canemaker. Indiana University Press 1 June 1991: 223-25. Print.
Tom, Patricia Vettel. "Felix the Cat as a Modern Trickster." American Art. 1st ed. Vol. 10. New York, NY: Published by Oxford UP in Association with the National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, 1996. 64-87. Print.
Cook, David A., and Robert Sklar. "History of the Motion Picture." Encyclopeadia Britannica. Encyclopeadia Britannica, 11 Mar. 2016. Web. 3 Oct. 2016.
In regards to your discussion question, I would personally say that the portrayed voice which appears through the medium of animated film does not lose credibility but rather, its credibility comes in a different way. An animated film can explore certain themes in ways that real-life film cannot but when the animation (such as Felix the Cat) presents a depiction of violence geared especially for children, the voice is still significant for its audience. Perhaps the film being geared towards children would then influence an entire generation of children at an early age and thus have a significant impact.
ReplyDeleteI like how you relate animation to the voice which is pertinent to the topic of this course. Animation in a sense is certainly similar to the Camera Eye that was utilized by Dos Passos to reflect the changing world at the time through snapshots of normal people's lives. As an alteration of reality, I believe animation may cause some voices to be changed, but still maintaining the essence of the message.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very interesting topic, especially as we are moving through modernity, when this technology will become more and more essential to the process of modernization. Concerning your question, I think the portrayed voice is altered through animation, yet, I think that this alteration may let it carry its message in a new and possibly greater way.
ReplyDeleteI am very glad that you brought up animation, as it is not something we have explored before in class, but also because it is something that is still prevalent today, whether one is an adult or a child. To refer to your question, I do not think that animations lose their credibility. Being a big fan of Family Guy myself, I have found that animations can speak in ways that real-actor motion pictures cannot. Animations can break the boundaries of what is accepted as a motion picture and convey messages beyond the realm of what real-actor pictures can explore.
ReplyDeleteI am very glad that you brought up animation, as it is not something we have explored before in class, but also because it is something that is still prevalent today, whether one is an adult or a child. To refer to your question, I do not think that animations lose their credibility. Being a big fan of Family Guy myself, I have found that animations can speak in ways that real-actor motion pictures cannot. Animations can break the boundaries of what is accepted as a motion picture and convey messages beyond the realm of what real-actor pictures can explore.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post! To answer the question, I do think that the style of animation causes the portrayed voice (or object, or person, or situation) to lose credibility. Many animations depart significantly from reality, especially in the realm of slapstick comedy. Not many people would laugh at violence if it was happening right in front of them or being depicted realistically on a screen. Perhaps this is not a bad thing though, because it allows for different interpretations than what we would normally take.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading about your topic as we have not yet explored animation in class or discussion yet. And to answer your discussion question, I believe that yes, the style of animation can lead to a loss of credibility. The audience can become disjointed from what the work was meant to portray. But, of course I think that it's a subjective question that can be argued both ways.
ReplyDeleteThe question is certainly interesting, and I think it has its roots in much earlier literature. It seems that what is unreal or unrealistic often seems to be the outlet through which many writers choose to vocalize thoughts and feelings which are ordinarily kept guarded. This idea I think is part of what underpins the fool in Shakespeare's plays, for example. With respect to the medium of animation, I do not think that there is anything particular about the art form that is fundamentally different from what I have described. The "unreal" often brings to the surface what we normally cannot conceive given our expectation of the real, which is the point I think you were trying to get across.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of animation and film, I think that the portrayed voice transcends actors. The rise of film as a medium was closely tied to a fascination with what the medium could achieve. This meant that the medium had its roots in technology, not social commentary or narratives.
ReplyDeleteIs the voice of animators less or more credible? I personally think that it is just as credible as other forms of social commentary. Dr. Seuss definitely transcended reality with his comics, but people still respected his political commentary. I think the voice is animation is stronger because it encourages to just suspend disbelief for a while, so the audience is not really concerned with credibility over the actual meaning of the message.
ReplyDeleteI thought your comment about the relationship between animation and voice was very interesting, especially because many of the early animation films didn't actually have sound in them and yet were able to create their own sense of voice regardless. I also found the idea of pulling away from reality to lessen the impact of violence interesting as well. I hadn't thought about it in that context, but I look forward to hearing more about it in your presentation!
ReplyDeleteI find it really interesting how animations were originally for adults and that it helped explain more riske concepts rather than such as having real actors kiss on screen. Possibly the reason animation eventually was able to be turned to a child audience is because children don't already know reality as adults do through experience so it's easier to explain concepts to them through animals as well.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the question, I think that animation certainly takes on a voice that's different from the way voice is represented in cinema. Animation opens up a whole world of possibility not available in the medium of a plain reel of film, such as giving animals these human characteristics to animals like we see in Felix the Cat, and this does give it a more goofy feel. If animation sought to capture the exact same things as film perhaps the medium would detract from the artistic value, but since animation is its own ballgame I think it merits a different kind of evaluation.
ReplyDelete