Theory of Animation

Well's Theory of Animation is a nice crash course into the realm of animation and the unexpectedly complex and valuable role it plays for the artists involved.  What I found to be most interesting is the different levels of abstract animation and their difference in novelty.  So often when people think of animation, thoughts of Saturday morning cartoons and comics come to mind, but there is a much bigger world that animation calls home.  I found value in the distinction between orthodox animation and experimental animation. I never really thought about the fact that Disney cartoons, such as Mickey Mouse or Goofy, had socially normal narratives and were psychologically normal to the viewers because they were familiar animals doing familiar human tasks, and even though the two are not normally together, it never seemed odd to me.  I love the idea that animation is now looked at with more potential and expression in art.  Subconsciously, animation and cartoons never really registered to me as an art form comparable to paintings in galleries, but they very much are similar in many ways.  Even though Wells states that orthodox animation is much more straightforward, I feel that a lot of the story and narrative, as well as cartoon character's attributes such as wardrobe, dialogue and props used in the cartoon can also be subject to detailed analysis for their double meaning and high context value.  I feel that this is also comparable to many of these expressionist styles, though experimental tends to be more complex, I'm sure other cartoons have been made with stylistic choices to metaphorically represent social aspects in a similar way experimental animators do this.  I just think that experimental tends to stand out more and is more frequent in their high context technique, so it is much easier to notice, but I do not think experimental animation stands alone in this quality.  Quite possibly more in depth analysis on cartoons within the orthodox realm may have more to offer than meets the eye.  Maybe "semi-orthodox" could be a good term for some of these animations deemed "orthodox."

Cymatics and Synesthesia

Both cymatics and synesthesia are very interesting concepts. In cymatics there have been many neat tests and art forms created through the use of sound.  I find it interesting now that I think about it, when I was growing up there were many times where I experienced cymatics but did not know of the concept. It was always neat to see something move due to the vibration of sound, but it is even more intriguing that people are intentionally manipulating sound to create motion and shapes.  I will be curious to see where cymatics can be applied in the future with the integration of technology and further cymatic advances.  Who knows what applications cymatics might unlock in the future.  One question that came to my mind while watching the video was are we truly seeing sound? Because if we are then that sound should then have the same pattern every time right?  But if we changed the thickness or area of the material vibrating to the sound, then would that change the pattern?  If so we are not necessarily observing sound solely, but we are observing sound in conjunction with the vehicle in which sound travels. Will the same pitch appear differently when using different surfaces or materials?  That is the question that kept coming to my mind.  As for synesthesia, I am a little uncertain as to what the definition means exactly, especially with regards to grapheme, or color synesthesia.  According to Wiki it stated that synesthetes perceive a letter or number with a color.  What I am unsure about is do the people actually see the color when they look at the letters or do they think of the color when they see or think of the letter or number?  Because in my mind when I think of the letter 'A' I also picture the color red in my head, but I know that this is due to programming and memory growing up.  The whole 'A' is for Apple, and the apple being red comes to mind.  I also think of images with sound, but again it is due to memory and programming over time.  If I hear a screeching sound I think of tires and a car accident, but the screeching could be something else.  Even though it may not be a tire or accident about to happen, my brain immediately associates that sound with what I am most used to.  I feel like this is why Foley sounds can be created so well and trick people's brains, because they are using sounds that are similar to the sound they may be imitating, but may lack fidelity.

Norman Mclaren

This experimental film reminded me of evolution from the cellular perspective.  Many shapes were much like that of bacteria. It seemed as if it was showing the explosion and chaos of life's development and evolution from the primordial soup in the birth of life here on earth. There are combinations of similar looking shapes clashing and becoming new shapes.  Their speed and wild motions fit with this wild idea of nature that I perceived from the film.  The jazz music fit well with the unpredictable nature of the film along with the unpredictable nature of evolution through random cellular mutations that make evolution possible.  It seemed that different shapes and sides were fighting for the "on-screen" survival in a very playful yet intrusive manner.  This reminded me very much of nature's survival of the fittest.  I was very curious as to how Norman Mclaren did the part where the screen was black, but there were little lights dancing on the screen and then visibly presented themselves in the form of the string being played. I cannot figure out how he achieved this, but I liked it very much.  I found the most enjoyable part of Norman's film to be how he managed to match the music to the dancing images on the screen.  Not only did it make it fun, but it brought those images to life and gave them a personality of their own, even though we know as viewers that they were created.  This breath of life Norman created in these images was what I found so entertaining with his experimental film.