“Orthodox Animation, Experimental Animation, and What Lies Between”

Post Two

 “Orthodox Animation, Experimental Animation, and What Lies Between”

There are two contrasting forms of animation, Orthodox and Experimental, however there are ways in which they bleed into one another forming what is referred to as Developmental animation.

A)  In Chapter Two, “Notes Towards a Theory in Animation” in Understanding Animation, Wells describes that in beginning to form a working theory of animation it is important to divide animation into two distinct categories, Orthodox and Experimental.  However, there exists some examples of animation which blur the line between the two; this would be classified as Developmental animation.  Orthodox animation is categorized by its reliance on “configuration”, or the use of recognizable character models of people or animals.  Specific continuity and the use of a narrative form, both featuring a “logical” (in the realm of a cartoon world) cause and effect story are found in Orthodox animation.  In terms of the aesthetics of Orthodox animation, the unity of one style, i.e. two-dimensional or three-dimensional, rather than a blend of styles or formats as well as the absence of the artist and the “invisibility of its aesthetic achievement and its industrial context” (37) are prevalent in Orthodox animation.  Finally, the emphasis placed on dialogue, while not existing in every example of Orthodox animation, is a distinguishing factor between Orthodox and Experimental.  Wells described Orthodox animation “cacophonic”, full of noise and chatter.

    

     In contrast, Experimental animation often shows a reliance on music, whether through a composed or integrated musical score or simply through the very movements and beats featured throughout the piece.  As Wells states, “it may be suggested that if music could be visualized it would look like colours and shapes moving through time with differing rhythms, movements and speeds” (46).  Experimental animation does not rely of configuration, instead it focuses on abstraction, and are therefore concerned more with the concept of “rhythm and movement in their own right as opposed to the rhythm and movement of a particular character” (43).  Experimental animation also eschews the logical cause and effect continuity of Orthodox animation as well as the narrative form, in their place exists a specific non-continuity and an interpretive form, which forces the audience to interpret the work on their own.  Experimental animation is heavily reliant on its own aesthetic from the evolving method in which they have created their work to the incorporation of several styles to the inclusion of the artist as an integral role in the presentation of the animation.  Experimental animated are very personal, meaningful works of art which are meant to be viewed and discussed.

               

  In between the poles of Orthodox and experimental animation exists a third form, whose definition is nebulous at best as it can only be defined as sharing traits of the other more dynamically opposed styles: Developmental animation.  As stated by Wells, “Developmental animation, by definition, harks back to tradition aspects of the animated film but also seeks to embellish or reform these traditions with contemporary approaches” (51).  As a blending of styles, Developmental animation also works to transition from the traditional two-dimensional approach to animation and move toward a three-dimensional approach.

B.)     After completing the assigned reading for this week I was interested in viewing some of the animated films that I have seen before, at a younger age and compare them to the information from the readings.   I took advantage of the subject of the class to seek out the Disney animated short “The Art of Self-Defense" (Jack Kenny, 1941) featuring Goofy.  Although I was always a bigger fan of the Looney Tunes, this particular short was one of my favorites as a child.  It part of a thematic series for Goofy cartoons, taking the approach of documentary shorts that may have been screened at a school or before a feature film.  Several topics were covered, skiing, playing golf, fishing, etc. and all were told through the help of an invisible narrator commenting and correcting Goofy as he attempted to complete the task at hand.  In this particular short, the history of self-defense is shown, from the early clubbing of Neanderthals to the pugilism of boxers.  The short goes on to examine some training and exercise methods such as the punching bag and shadowboxing (where Goofy’s shadow becomes an overzealous training partner).  I feel this is an interesting film to discuss with regards to the readings for this week.  While it is clearly not an example of experimental animation, it does blur the lines somewhat in regards to the traditional definition of orthodox animation.  It’s aesthetic, calling to attention that it is a manufactured film, in this case acting as a documentary film even though it makes no honest attempt to convince viewers that what they are seeing is real.  However, the style acts as a vehicle to show Goofy or Goofy-like characters fighting it out to comedic results.  I feel that this aesthetic choice worked well for the material presented and the effect desired.

C)     So far my final project as not completed itself, so it appears I will have to step in and work on it.  I have decided on a subject for my final paper.  I believe I will be examining “Clerks: The Animated Series” and how it attempts to subvert the mediums of television and animation.  Should be a blast.