Extra thoughts – Page 3 – John's Learning Journal

Learning about learning

It has been a poor season for me. I am only just beginning to make animation now. I fear I am going to fail this term. Well Lets see what I can learn from this.

The year started badly. Last year I cut myself off from most personal projects so they wouldn’t occupy my time. It meant I could put all my focus into my work. And it paid off. I think I did pretty well in my first term last year. But I found once summer came I felt left out and returned to my old hobbies with a vengeance. I got too involved. By the time I was back in college I had a handful of private projects all going at once and was unwilling to abandon any of them. It ate up all my time. I had trouble sleeping. All my creative energy was drained. But worst of all, I just couldn’t concentrate when in uni. I could only think of what I was working on in my spare time. Sometimes I would even work on those projects in class because it was all I could think of.

It’s clear my strategy from last year was necessary for me to proceed. I’ve been weaning myself off them, and unsurprisingly I’m now working again.

I don’t want to pretend that this isn’t my fault. But I feel the fact we were told that we had plenty of time and could get the animation part done towards the end. I bought into this. But I should have trusted my instincts and gotten hard to work immediately.

Another thing that just isn’t helping is the fact this term has been a lot more computer heavy. I need to turn the PC on to listen to the music I’m animating to. And worse the registration is now totally online. So I have to turn the thing on every day to sign in. The irony being as soon as the internet is on I forget why it’s turned on and most days I forget to sign in at all. I’ve asked Owen, Tom, and Spencer if an alternative could be found. So far nothing has happened.

I needed to cut myself off from the internet when in uni last year to get anything done. And the problem is just as bad now. Maybe I need to find away around my addiction on my own long term. But for now it really would help me if I could get my old grove back.

Constellation is just as useless this year as it was last year. In fact given that both it and Subject are at maximum intensity this term is actually harder than any of the others. I’d hoped this would be an “Easing you back in” term. I was wrong.

As I started to get my head back together I found I was now doing my constellation work in class. It was still wasting time. I normally do Constellation work at home. But it was at least something. I feel bad about it because as far as I can tell Constellation doesn’t matter this year. It’s just a time waster. I can write about whatever I want whether it’s related to what we’ve studied or not, and I don’t know if the mark I get for it even matters So why am I doing it?

I’m also really seeing why the sleep routine I imposed on myself last year was so important. Obviously I can’t work if I’m sleeping in class. But even when, like now. I figure out a way to achieve a three hour sleep pattern, it has other effects. I feel very cold in class. Or maybe I find I need to rest for periods at a time, even if I’m awake. Clearly getting a strong, six hour routine last year was another thing I did right last year I need to relearn.

It’s shocking how much I’ve forgotten. I feel like I’m back to zero when I start animating. All that knowledge I thought I had seems to have dried up. Even small things seem to hurt my brain. It’s like when I forgot how to work well I also forgot what I learned when I was working well. Simple things are costing me a great deal of effort.

Ironically I just don’t feel alive until I’m animating. That’s another thing that might have slowed me down. It seems pretty clear to me that while I can do all the other bits, concept art, storyboarding, sound work, and editing well enough, I don’t feel any passion rise in me until I’m at the animator’s easel and ready to work. It’s scary. But I feel my head filling full of ideas. I know where my strength lies. How I’m going to work with this handicap I don’t know.

There’s a dead zone in my head. A place where thoughts are, but I can’t see what I’m thinking. It’s really uncomfortable because sometimes I don’t know what those thoughts are.

When I’m trying to get ideas for my work, but they’re in the dead zone, my life becomes hellish, and I’ve no idea what to do to combat this. In fact I feel like the real reason I wanted to right about this dead zone is currently in the dead zone.

I normally just wait for thoughts to come out of this dead zone, and sometimes they do. But now I don’y have time.

There where other things I felt I’d learned about how I learn. But ironically I’ve forgotten what they where. and now I’m running low on time.

Expect A journal on what I’ve done, how I did it, and what (If anything) I’ve learned from it soon. Hopefully I can salvage something out of this mess.

Constellation year 2: Why even bother?

I was meant to have this journal up two weeks ago. But they never make these things easy

“Art is Dead. Art remains dead. And we have killed it” (paraphrase of some German guy. The Gay Science. 1882. Page 125)

Yes, I used that joke last year. But I’m using it again. It feels even more relevant now.

Also. Where is the point?

Remember back in English class when, if you had a good teacher, they would not only give you a text, would ask you to think about a certain theme or element in the text, but ask you to say if how those ideas were done or if they were well done or not? Oh I miss those days.

I have not one, but five texts and a slideshow to react to and no guidance at all on what I am supposed to say about them. Given all of these are deeply rooted in art theory and a lot of them cross over into philosophy i can’t react to every point in these texts. It would take me a year.

Let’s go back to why I was given these texts to begin with.

The question we we’re given two weeks ago was “what is contemporary art and as a whole, what does it mean to be contemporary?”

Two me the answer seems painfully simple. Was it made in the past 10 years? The unit of measurement by which we measure our lives and divide up our centuries evenly? If not then it is far enough away from the present to not be contemporary. But it wouldn’t be the modern art world if we could do anything simply would it? No sooner had I put out my theory than two other students spoke up. One posseting that even art 100 years old can be contempory if it hasn’t aged and is still in the dominant style. Using duchamp’s infuriating urinal as an example because that thing will never leave me alone. The other stating contemporary art is defined by dealing with contemporary issues. Apparently I will never be a contemporary artist as I will never dabble in readdymade or conceptual nonsense or talk about modern issues. The fact that I am alive now cannot help me.

Well, as the texts I’ve been given give credence to everything but the idea that contemporary art can be measured by when it was made (Simple explanations can’t be spun into money-making lectures and books) I guess I’m going to have to at least look at these other ideas.

Never have I read so much but gained or understood so little. Not just in terms of understanding the text. But in the questions of “What point is being made here? Why does this matter? How am I supposed to react to this?

I’ve hated theories of art before but here there’s nothing solid enough to latch onto for me to hate. I know I don’t agree with this stuff. But I can’t even say why I don’t agree beyond my above stated belief that contemporary art is measured by time. All I can do is shrug my shoulders at these intellectuals and say “Yes. That certainly is a thing you believe”. I feel like I’m being asked to critique a fanfiction of an anime I’ve never watched for if it’s faithful to the source text.

The first one I had to read was a german philosopher called Boris Groys. Reading him was hard. I think he means well. But I was reminded of a bad-faith debating tactic I’ve heard of, throw lots of questions of statements at an opponent all at once so they can’t counter every one of your points and hopefully get lost or scared.

I found Groys idea of wasted time, that it can have more value than a lasting end product, not only terrifying and depressing. But antithetical to what I am being taught here in Cardiff. If I waste all my time here and don’t come up with a good journal and artwork to submit the time just spent struggling wont have existential value,

And his theories about repetitive time were pretty lackluster as well. We live in linear time. We are born. We die. Trying to find meaning in art that shows time like a seesaw is hiding from the truth of our lives.

Granted I could easily have misunderstood both points. Reading this numbed my brain.

Also You CAN view video art as a whole. I like to just sit down in museum and go through the whole thing. I know you don’t HAVE to but i do find it rewarding. Most video pieces do make good atmospheric non-narrative short films.

Next on the list was Mark Godfrey. He was the hardest to get through. His work needed more line breaks and paragraphs.

A lot of the points he made felt tired and overdone for me.

Like complaining we are too western in our understanding of art history. It is fine for western people to critique art history through a westen lense! People in eastern cultures do the same. Many cultures don’t even have the concept of fine art as we understand it. You don’t know what you don’t know. Trying to expand our concept of the history of western art onto the whole world isn’t being progress. It’s vanity. It’s saying these other cultures fit nicely in our box. Be honest about what you understand and don’t criticize others for not following creed you could never keep yourself.

It’s fine when talking about art to talk about western art. Because that’s what you fell in love with to begin with. It’s fine to value your own culture.

Another tired point was the supposed irrelevance of museums and what a victory this is for artists. The fact that some more modern works of art require a specific setting or are too large to be put in a museum does not invalidate museums as a whole.

Not unless you consider all modern painting a sculpture worthless. Which i do not. In fact, modern, non-meseumable art can often be quite worthless in it’s own right. Don’t praise an artist for breaking a paradigm if by breaking it he makes something worse.

On a more original point, Godfrey also wonders why modern fine artists are less keen to embrace new technologies than their early to mid 20th century counterparts.To which I answer could it be simply newer technology is less conducive to fine art than it was in the 1920s? Anyone can make digital art and show it on the internet. It makes one very unspecial to do so.

And sadly these days most modern fine art is 99% showmanship. You need to make a big flashy statement like covering an island in canvas or fucking a dead pig live on stage. Making a detailed, nuanced and heartfelt digital painting doesn’t catch eyeballs the way painting yourself green and singing the USSR national anthem will. Digital technologies make us anonymous. Great for trolls. Not so great if you want the Turner prize.

I myself have often tried to compensate for lack of talent with size and spectacle. But I do at least try to make my things pleasing to the eye.

After that cam Kelly Baum. Hers was the longest. But not as hard to read.

Though she also broachuched some points I’ve grown tired of.

She did talk a fair bit about viewing art through socio-political lenses. I hate the need to see art as political activism. Yes art and politics often go hand in hand. But putting so much focus on it turns art from an expression into a civic duty. Cold and without the freedom to focus on things other than politics

She also really liked name-dropping people I haven’t heard of and sounded like she expected me to be impressed.

She talked a lot about the heterogeneity (a word I had to look up) of modern art and wondered why it is so. Why gut response is if it is so diverse (I’m dubious on that point) I’d say it’s because we have way more people now and proportionately more of them are doing art.

Suzanne Hudson didn’t say much I wanted to react to

Isabelle Graw did have some interesting points put I’m folding them into my final reaction.

She did however repete a falsehood that 20th and 21st century artist keep telling themselves that I have not only grown sick of, but I’ve started to hate. The idea that in the future all people will be artists or that all people WANT to be artists.

Why do so many artists think everyone wants to be a creative? No. They. Don’t! Talk to a taxi driver or a football fan or an animal lover just once. There are people out there who never even think about art! Talk about narcissism

But I agree with the bit where she says art has had a lot of expectations that it can’t live up to placed on it. In fact I think she doesn’t know how true that is. Art can’t save the world or BE the world. The world is too big and too diverse. Not ethnically diverse. But too diverse in terms of people’s needs, loves, and lifestyles.

Now with that done I’ve put together the broadest points I could respond to. A collective ethos from all five that I think I can respond to

Final response.

I think modern art is stuck in an existential crisis it doesn’t need to be in. And these people are not helping. As I said above. Having a huge debate as to what makes contemporary art can be very profitable. But it’s unfair to just dismiss these statements as money making schemes. But why does all this hand wringing about what is contemporary feel so hollow?

Well lets go back to that fucking urinal. You know that joke everyone has seen about modern art all being pretentious rubbish? Well ever notice how the joke doesn’t change? That’s because art hasn’t changed in decades.

Let’s not kid ourselves. Without historical context Dada, Surrealism, Fluxus, and Conceptualism do kinda blur together. I know making art that is truly contemporary to the moment is hard. Being scientific any moment is infinitely indivisible. So scientifically it’s impossible. But you can be in the experiencial movement. That moment lasts as long as you perceive it to.William Blake saw eternity in a grain of sand. And time does fly when your having fun. But there’s probably science that says how much we can perceive at a time. And thus how much time it takes to have a moment of perception. That moment is too small to make a work of art in. So Is contemporary art doomed to non-existence? No. It’s cool. If it’s recent enough it’s contemporary. But right now we’re not even trying to make contemporary art. We’re making old art over and over again. The quest for “truly contemporary” art is keeping us locked in the past.

All the people mentioned talked about the promising future in which art is all things and everyone is an artist that postmodernism will bring. People have been promising this for decades. Enough! Make something worthwhile now!

Mark Godfrey talks about how Modernism was all full of promises of a utopian future we have developed nostalgia for. I see no nostalgia for modernism. Just hate and spite. And hypocrisy given postmodernism has been making the same empty promise for ages.

And some of those promises aren’t even worth fulfilling. Some people talk about tearing down the binary between art and viewer. Please stop trying to tear down my identity as a person separate from your crappy art.

I feel like the quest we’ve been given here to define truly contemporary art is just a distraction. An intellectual cul de sac. Every instinct is just telling me this is just a dressed up version of the quest for “pure” art I was made to look at last year. It could be that I’m just not getting it and too tied up in my worldview to see the difference in the questions and why it matters. But I can only respond through this lens. I’m sorry if I’m being lazy and not really answering the question. But bare with me.

Isabelle Graw is very keen on separating art from the art business. There seems to be this great desire, and nor just from her, to cleans Capital A Art of capitalism. Or at least the auction house. Whether you sympathise with this goal or not, the fact is it can’t be done. If you make a site specific piece people will charge for the right to see it. If you “make” a found object piece people will put all their stock into the object rather than the thing it stands for, Duchamp’s Urinal might be supposedly all concept. But if a vandal smashed that urinal people would be upset. And even hard core conceptionalists would demand it be replaced because the idea is not strong enough to stand on its own.

And if you make a purely conceptual piece people will still make mercendizable books on the subject.

If you really want to be truly free of money in art, become a hobbyist. Earn you money somewhere else and make art out of passion. You can’t say you should just get money for being an artist and your work be in no way monetizable.

Instead of trying to make the purest art possible you should just focus on making good art.

This dislike of the auction house seems to tie into the aforementioned dislike of museums. Graw says “Lost from view is the fact that the art world is a highly elitist milieu that operates by means not only of inclusion but also exclusion”.

I’ve covered at length how conceptionalism works entirely off nepotism and has nothing to do with quality. The art world is more elitist than ever. All that’s happened is maybe the gatekeepers have changed.

Baum say art no longer serves as an enclave or ghetto. I couldn’t agree less. It feels like the postmodern artists are demanding to be seen as gods. There own ghetto of beings who deserve money and fame for simply being. The issue with the auctioneers and the currioates isn’t that they make art worse. But that they take money and respect that belongs to the artists alone.

I feel like the tenets of modernism were never really disproven. Everyone just decided that postmodernism was true because they wanted it to be. It gave the artists more divine power.

Maybe this vision of divinity is part of why the quest for pure art burns so fiercely within the postmodern artist. But it’s not healthy, or even possible. Anymore than scientifically contemporary art is.

I’m made to think about The scenes from Richard Linkladder films Slacker and Waking Life involving The Man who records everything and The Holy Moment.

We’ll cover the Holy Moment later. The man who records everything has video cameras pointed everywhere at all times so he can review anything that happens to him. If he goes outside his home and loses an event he feels he lost and out of control. A perfect metaphor for the modern artist here.

On that note. Could we please drop this obsession with if art does/doesn’t should/shouldn’t point to art. It’s pointless! And it only damages art as a whole.

It reminds me of my own struggles with OCD.

I’ve made it clear I feel all modern art is the same. The medium has stagnated. The people in these journals don’t feel the same

They point to the heterogeneity of art as proof of the difficulty in deciding what contemporary art is. Maybe proof that is doing well or stuggling. Regardless if it is doing well or not. If art trulley is heterogeneous then it will be harder to document and categorize. The fact that modern art is difficult to categorize doesn’t mean it doesn’t fall into categories. As stated before. Sometimes trends only reveal themselves when they are over. And I do believe postmodern art will die. All things do

Let’s talk about the Holy Moment now.

The Richard Linkladder film Waking Life is about a man in a dream full of people trying to find existential meaning in their lives. At one point he walks into a cinema that is playing film called the Holy Moment. In a theorist states that if God is omnipresent then that must mean any photograph is a depiction of God. And thus film can act as a record of God. Through God we are connected to the past Linkladder has shown, and so in all film. If not all art.

As Boris Groys points out, for a good post modernist, God is dead. They can’t take comfort in connecting to the past or be part of any holy moment like the ones Linkladder claims to have recorded. Human beings cling to eternity. We need it. I don’t think postmodernism has transcended this need. Just transformed it into something toxic and egocentric. They try to turn themselves into gods. Something eternal in spirit if not it truth. But like I said. This is hiding from the truth of our existence.

On the other hand Mark Godfrey suggests we are now more entangled in the past. I’m not sure how I feel about that.

The Rhizome model of time is never going to take off. It’s decent for describing memory, But it has nothing to do with how we actually perceive time.

Anyone who Feels ambivalent about being “in one’s time” or being at home in one’s time doesn’t know Jack. Most people rarely look beyond their own little bubble of their own little life. And those that do feel very cut off from the past they’re looking at. We are stuck in time. This is our blessing and our curse. But if Linkladder is right. We do have a connection to our past. And all this posturing is for nothing.

We don’t make contemporary art by transcending time. We make art and being human makes us transcendent.

My drawing teacher once told me that if you’re not making art you’re not an artist. And I think that is all you need. Make good art. And the universe will do the contemporary bit for you. Trying to be pure, or contemporary will just drag you into the past because it’s an old dogma. One that needs to die.

A Final Journal

My term is done. I am free. But I’d like to write about my final week here before the summer holidays. Because if I don’t do it now I never will.

When last I wrote about my progress I had done four Key drawings in one day! Keys take a while because they are the drawing that tell the story, but not only did I do them, but I did them well! I could be going insane but I think I’m getting better and quicker at drawing. The next day I made two more Keys. And again they came out good! I talked to Owen about line testing and he said that I should just do the “Passing positions” and draw them in a very loose style. I tried doing this. But after a while I found it was easier to draw detailed in-betweens with Key-like quality. I kept at and after a while I started thinking “Lets add in an expression change here” or “What if I did an extra halfway point?” and I found myself doing something I hadn’t done in a long time. Taking the indicative and getting creative. I was giving myself more work than I had to because e I wanted to. I was determined to Show the full range of emotions Ezekiel goes through as he considers accepting the Loving embrace Hestia offers him before changing his mind and violently rejecting it.

I came in everyday feeling drained, convinced I couldn’t start again. But Not letting myself use the computer means over time I can work up the confidence to do a little. And a Little can turn into a lot. And soon I’m working away. Not that I didn’t have relapses. I wasted a lot of time on Wednesday on the computer and on Thursday I sent a lot of time staring at the celling. But was able to break the through the fear that’s been holding me back and on Thursday pulled a Midnight shift for the first time in Months. And at the end of it I had 24 extra drawings. Considering I have struggled in the past to get two drawings of this quality done in a day 24 in three days is a massive step up! The last ones where I had to use all the techniques I’ve discovered in the last month to show him breaking free where epically hard. I thought I would be able to do it at all. But somehow I did.

There were enough of drawings that when I put them all together for a line test on Friday (Today) on 3s (8 frames per second) in was good enough to pass as animation!

Her it is

It’s still just a linetest. On seeing it Morgan said the bit where he breaks free of her embrace should be quicker and I agree. Fast actions should really be on Ones. And the bit in the middle where he’s thinking needs to be longer. But that was always the plan. But I still think it’s good. Could use more movement though. And I wish I’d made Hestia’s movements more visible. Turns out really small movements just don’t register if they’re this small, or fast, or something else is the centre of attention, or all three.

But the thoughts and emotions are clear as day and the expressions are perfect. For a guy who hates drawing faces and expressions I think that is a real accomplishment.

I still hope to animate it for real some day. And maybe even draw the final scene of him walking away and Hestia looking sad. But for now, I think I did okay. Morgan sure seems to think I’ve come on by leaps and bounds.

Owen helped me render the thing. Looped the bits that needed looping. As well as colour correct the backlit parts that just look kind of blue. I am very grateful to him I would not have been able to do it on my own.

There’s enough here that when you put it together it tells a coherent story. So While it is not finished here is the animation as it is. I hope you like it.

And Now I’m done.

Fuck my life. I need a rest. I’m going to play the easiest Video game I own to unwind.

Weird Drawings

This is not a quintessential journal for me to write. But given this is meant to show my learning process I thought It might be relevant to talk about how I’ve been using extra drawings to improve my animation.

I’ve been doing preparatory drawings to figure out landscapes

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Poses

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Positioning

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Testing out with partial-stick figures.

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Or just testing small movements using stick figures.

Untitled by Hawkbittern

I also write out animation nots on some of them. Specailly if they were just being used for small changes,

Untitled by Hawkbittern

And for testing and developing faces, facial expressions, and what angle the face should be at

Untitled by Hawkbittern

I use many of of these things to make simple drawings. But they are beyond valuable when making Keys. The big drawings that act as the bedrock for each new piece of animation. The Keys are what make the animation what it is. Morgan tells me in the old days it would take an animator years before they made their own keys. You’d start out doing someone-else’s inbetweens and then move up tp breakdowns and passing positions. A Key Animator was as important as both these people even if he made fewer drawings.

I might not have the skills make real Keys, but I have no choice but to make both Keys and inbetweens and everything between those two. Let it not be said I don’t do hard work.

I have found rather than trying to make perfect Keys it is best to make lots of messy drawings (including but not limited to the types shown above) that in time can be sculpted into what I call a “Messy key”. Brutal drawings not unlike those of Leonardo or Henry Moore. These Messy Keys feel less like drawings than acts of sculpture. I feel myself carving and chiseling into three-dimensional space with my pencil and paper. It is laborious work. But when it is done I have something that looks right in all the important places, and that I can easily trace over to make a final Key. Occasionally the Messy keys are good enough to be used in the animation itself. Here are my Messy Keys.

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Sometimes messy keys ar needed even mid animation. Like here when I was animating the downwards swing in two arms getting ready to embrace someone.

Untitled by Hawkbittern

If I may brag, I think some of these are or have lead to some of the finest drawing I’ve ever done. Or maybe i’m just going crazy from all the work.

And Just to give some context. Here’s how over time all these things come together to make something worth looking at

Starting

Untitled by Hawkbittern

A bit of detail

Untitled by Hawkbittern

And now its a real Key

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Even really simple drawing can be invaluable.

When I was doing my woman walking a a three-quarters angle In was able to plan her movements with these two arcing lines representing how her feet would move (Which strangely, do look a bit like shoes)

Untitled by Hawkbittern

Simple, but beyond useful. I asked Morgan and drawing out arcs like this is a really useful thing to do when animating and planning. There’s a line at the bottom of each arc with a Capital C and a number next to it. These represent her feet making contact with the ground at the end of the step. Again. really useful. But so damn simple!

And after what feels like a lifetime of drawing, my 2B grade pencil has been used so much it’s too small for me to hold anymore. Look at it!

Untitled by Hawkbittern

It’s been quite the year.

I always jump into the deep end first

It’s been a while since I published anything. Work’s been slow. But I have something new to talk about.

The final term is upon us and we have our final project. We must make a short scene of two characters interacting. We have to use the two characters we made last term. As I covered in https://johnhawk.art.blog/2019/03/05/a-bad-case-of-the-mondays/ and https://johnhawk.art.blog/2019/03/11/archetypes-shapes-and-cutouts/ I went for a warrior woman with a shield and a half man, half fox mage with a magical mask that let’s him look like anyone.

As stated earlier, I designed them to be characters who I would enjoy playing off each other. I wanted a male and female who would have a positive dynamic, maybe even be friends. My Shield Maiden is a nurturing type more interested in peace than violence. Someone looking for something positive in the world. My Mask Maker is a self-hating loner. Trying to find peace by hiding in other-people’s identities. Both are high fantasy characters with valuable skills. I could see them working as spies or mercenaries. I like what I have come up with.

For the current Brief I have to make a short film, at least 30 seconds long. Showing the two characters interacting. But also showing them thinking and going through emotional change.

“-a series of drawings going through the thinking process…. [That] is the real aphrodisiac” – Richard Williams.

I’ve done my best to comply to this brief. Thanks to trying to make characters who fit together from the start coming up with dynamic was easy. She’s a nurturer and comforter who is confident in her power, and he’s a misanthrope who distrusts others. She would be way to close and touchy feely for his liking even if he would respect her kindness. It would be like trying to hug fire. It can only burn or be smothered. Even there is no malice on either one’s part.

I first had to name my characters. I named the Shield Maiden Hestia. After the most under represented greek goddess. And the Mask Maker Ezekiel. After the Biblical prophet. One name from Greek mythology and one from the Bible. Keep things balanced.

Then I decided to write a script. Have all my ideas fleshed out before even putting pencil to paper (Also I was going through a phase where I was terrified to draw anything). The scripting processes was easy (it does only need to be 30 or so seconds long). I actually had more trouble coming up with the character names.

Here is the final script

Exterior: Night: A cliff face overlooking the sea.

Ezekiel, the Mask Maker looks out over the cliff. Sadness in his eyes.

Hestia looks at him from a distance.

She feels concern.

She wonders what to do

A smile crosses her face

She walks over to him

Ezekiel finds himself hugged from behind.

He is surprised

He mellows

He looks thoughtful

He the closes his eyes and grits his teeth.

He shakes Hestia’s arms off him and pulls away from her.

Ezekiel gives Hestia an annoyed look.

He then walks away. Hestia looks on

Ezekiel walks out of view.

Hestia continues looking after him.

She then looks down at the ground.

Her expression looks sadder

In total, 18 lines of text to be turned into 18 panels for the storyboard. Nice and simple.

We’ve had the importance of storyboarding drilled into us hard for the past few months. We’ve had side-classes, extra reading material, and even a film-class storyboarder as a lecturer. They want us to take it seriously. If what I have been told is true then storyboarding is every bit as important to animation as daily exercise is to a boxer preparing for the big match.

So had to take these seriously . It was advised that we should make series of thumbnails (Rough drawings the size of a box of matches) before doing the storyboard proper. But this is where the title of this journal comes in. For some reason I thought the others where using postit notes for theirs. So I decided to make my thumb nails the same size, tracing around a pad of postit notes to get them the same size and shape.

The result is I had a lot of extra space. Enought space to make some very detailed drawings. With shading and gradient lightwork and all. So when I finally showed them to Own he thought it was my storyboard. Morgan seems to agree. They are storyboard quality (At least for my skill level). Once again I have jumped into doing the hardest part first. Like how I often seem to approach art. Running before I can walk. And it’s just as well. According to the brief the storyboards were due to be finished yesterday.

So I guess there’s no point doing the thumbnails now?…..

Here are the storyboards as they are now.

Untitled by Hawkbittern

I considered photographing each panel. But right now my ability to upload photographs is a little compromised and really this is more about evidencing my work for the future than showing off my lackluster drawing skills.

With that done I am now ready to start turning this into a film. Tomorrow I will begin making an animatic of these storyboards. Which can be used to judge of long each scene in the film should be. That should get me ready to create an animation.

I had lengthy talk with Morgan about the process of turning storyboards into animatics. He thinks it will be fine. But he was also keen that I alter some drawings to change the composition and add in some closeups. He says both will me it read better to a new audience. I can’t say I want to. I have a rhythm and vision planned out in my head. I don’t really want to redraw things. And I hate doing closeups. Drawing faces is the hardest thing for me. But it is good to actually get some hard constructive criticism for once. If I decide to add those bits in I’ll write about it here.

We also talked about my habit of jumping straight into the deep end. My odd little blunder made me thing about when I was younger and planning to make the greatest animated film ever. I had long ago given up such dreams as overconfident nonsense. I’ve been trying to aim small and manageable. But my work has lacked passion and I’ve suffered from bouts of paranoia where I am scared to draw anything. I wonder if my habit of doing crazy things I had no chance of pulling off was what gave me my drive to begin with? It certainly kept on helping me make my best work. Maybe I need to start dreaming big again.

Certainly as I remember a lot of the dreams I used to have a weight of tension seemed to melt away. I felt… free….

What to write next? Or Being human?

The Following is a series of thoughts I wrote down about my upcoming essay for Constellation. It was written stream of consciousness style over six hours. With only minor changes for spelling and grammar. I hope it is useful.

I can’t think of anything to do.for my final essay on Anthropology. One that will get me marks that I need. So I have taken to think about my predicament instead. Why isn’t Anthropology inspiring me?

Well. Let’s start with what Anthropology is. What defines it from other schools of thought?

Philosophy – What is? – External: Physical and Metaphysical

Science – How do things work? External: Physical

Theology – Why do things exist? External: Metaphysical

Psychology – Who are we? Why do we hurt? Internal: Metaphysical

Anatomy – How do our bodies work? Internal: Physical

Religion – How should we live? Internal: Metaphysical and Spiritual

Anthropology – How are we living? Internal: Physical and Metaphysical

Forgive the large amount Cartesian dualism here. Treating Physical and Metaphysical as totally separate. I know it is unfashionable and has definante drawbacks. It is a system I like and it is very useful for getting to grips with something hard, even if it is limiting.

I classify Anthropology as internal, physical and metaphysical because it deals with what make us us. Not in terms of our bodies or our minds (See Anatomy and Psychology) but how the physical world shapes us. Internally. Not just the physical environment we live in. Climate, resources, landscape and so on But how the people arounds us, their Psychology, their religion, their wants and their culture, turn us into the people we become. You cannot have Anthropology without the physical or the metaphysical. It does not work with just one.

A small disclaimer. I am no expert on anthropology as a whole. When I speak about it as a single field I Am doing so based on the experiences I have had here in in the past three months. If at anypoint I misrepresent the field as a whole, I am sorry.

Anthropology challenges me. And not in a fun way. My interests lie in Philosophy, Theology, Psychology, and Religion. I guess I am very much a Kierkegaardian. I see myself as very much alone on a journey to be a better and more informed person. Science feels unwieldy and unreliable. What is true today is false tomorrow. Anatomy doesn’t grab me either My body feel like a deadweight, a millstone around my neck I’d be happier without (No the irony of that simerly does not escape me). And other people and their culture, without whom anthropology does not work, have always felt like an obstacle.

Even when I was small, the huge mass of people felt like a chore at best and an enemy at worst. A diciticaloral crush demanding conformity or death. I feel happiest on my own. I prefer to go outside at night when there less people around. When I don’t hate being around other people or find it to be my greatest source of suffering, I merely find it boring. The irony is my religion’s highest commandment is to love these people as I love myself. When I find a resolution to this problem I’ll let you know.

Studying Anthropology has been hard, and trying to find something to write about is even harder. Not because I hate it. But because I can’t care. My own culture feels as distant from me as the moon is from the earth. Other cultures may as well be on another planet.

It seems the implicit bias of the current course is to marshal a critique of the current culture. Whether by making us consider if park benches are anti-homeless, or if religions from far distant lands are as true as (if not truer than) western science.

I don’t feel up to critiquing my own culture because it is treating me okay. It lets a misanthrope alone. The idealised “Diverse” culture of the current left is one where I would be even more of an outcast than I already am, and where apathy towards social justice is treachery towards the human race. No country for me. I will not celebrate diversity because I do not celebrate human beings of any skin colour, gender, or sexualty. I want to make art. Not social change. I want to to talk about being human. Not about how awful western humans are.

I will confess to sometimes idealising the old world with its Christian values, classical art, and well spoken english as opposed to modern apathy, anti-art, and gutter talk. But even if it seems brighter, I would not have been able to live in it. The older I get the more it becomes apparent to me. That I cannot conform. Not will not. Can not. And conformity was even more of a priority in the old world than it will be in the new one. I am living in the only world I know of that will tolerate me. It’s is not in my interests, in either sense of the term, to campaign for a new world or a return to the old.

But I am still human. And humans need other humans. Not just practically but psychologically. Humans locked away in solitary confinement go insane. Humans who are stranded will make up other humans to talk to. People, even in civilisation, can die of loneliness. We need other people for empathy, entertainment, and to express ourselves. And while I have not tested myself I believe these human truths apply to me as much as any other person, even if it doesn’t feel like it.

How do I manage this?

I have only felt lonely three times in my life. It was a very unpleasant feeling. I don’t envy those who feel it everyday. I can go for long stretches without human contact. But I’m sure I have limits. I am at least lucky that most of the people in my life are good to me.

The other thing about Anthropology that I have hinted at is that it critiques the culture as it is. Or if discussing a far distant one it may focus on one specific part of its past. I want to think about themes that are timeless. What is? Why is it? Who are we? How should we live? These things will never not be relievent. And they are relevant to everyone. Anthropology as I’ve experienced it here deals with the transient and unimportant. Factors of life that might change tomorrow. Is the UN trying to make us all live longer so we can pay more tax? I dunno? I doubt it. But even if they are the people in the UN might all be different in ten years time and have a totally different set of goals. St Augustine’s writings about memory, suffering, goodness, and the capacity to commit evil will be just as true in 1500 years as they are now.

This is my paradox. I’m being asked to critique the culture, or at least talk about the culture of others. When I am apathetic to both. Apathy is a way bigger demovitiator than hatred. “Apathy is death. Worse than death!” Goes the quote from Star Wars Mystic, Kreia. I am fighting death here!

I cannot muster the hatred or love to think of something. All I can consider is trying to tie anthropology into something I do care about, like a man trying to tether a boat to a moving bull. What can I draw on that I have written here?

I may not have much interest in the current or future culture. But the culture is made up of people, who like me, are still dealing with the same eternal problems I am. Even if I don’t see it.

Why doesn’t that spark more empathy in me? Am I a sociopath? I get upset when I see people being hurt. I feel good when other tell me I have helped them. I feel grief. Even for people I don’t know. I must have some empathy somewhere. Maybe I am a narcissist

instead?

The culture, be it mine or others, is made in response to eternal problems as well as practical ones. No culture has beaten them yet. Some would even claim trusting the culture to do so is anti-human as it turns us into drones instead of people. But Kudos to the cultures for at least trying.

Do I write about how the culture suggests dealing with the human problems I have? Maybe how different cultures tackle them?

These feel like important topics. But the drive to research and write about them still isn’t there.

Please don’t take this as an attack on the subject. It’s not. I’m just lost here and trying to figure out what to do.

There’s more going here than just apathy. When I look at the world outside it seems like and endless scream of rage and hatred. Why would I want to be a part of that? But the truth of it is I am a part of it. I feel intense rage, hatred, despair, and and distress. I think everyone does. And that’s why the world right now seems so rotten and people are demanding change, or for things to go back to how they used to be. If I am right they always have been and people have always claimed one of these things would fix everything. And I think history would back me up there.

If I am just another angry shrill voice saying the culture need to go back/forward and treating all who disagree with me as my enemies what good would I even be doing?

I want to really learn how to be a better person so when the time comes I can be voice of compassion rather than one of anger. And to do that I must complete, or at least start my spiritual journey. If learning lists of facts as to how to run a culture made a good culture we’d have solved all the world’s problems centuries ago. I cannot ever be sure of doing the right thing. But I believe I can at least become less angry, and in doing so spread less anger.

I believe silence is the key to humanity’s ills. The great spiritual masters would go-

I have it!

“Music and Silence. How I hate them both!”. This utterance was made by Screwtape. A senior devil who serived as CS Lewis’s shadow-self. Saying what the greatest way to induce sin is in a man. The great Spiritual masters would go out into the desert to be alone with God. With Silence. Silence. Something our culture has forgotten. Even I, try as I will. Cannot stay in silence for long. I crave noise! NOISE! That only state Screwtape found agreeable. In the age of the internet noise is king!

Let me write about Silence, music and noise. About how we have cut ourselves off from silence, and thus from God. This is an issue that is both eternal, but also very immediate in our current culture. I know I have something to say here. And are not our demons manifestation of that screaming anger that lives within all of us That mentioned earlier? It ties

I feel like a rocket has gone off in my head. I might have trouble finding all the sources for my ideas. But I know I will at least have something to say.

A Bad Case of the Mondays

It’s been a while since I updated this journal. Hopefully the fact I’m back reflects a change for the better.

On the monday two weeks ago I just did not come in at all. I was feeling awful and I don’t even remember why. But despite The best efforts of my support worker I just would not go outside. I was able to make it in for the rest of the week. I don’t truly remember what I was doing. Walk cycle stuff I think. I’ll cover it more when I do my next journal on walk cycles, whenever that may be. But it wasn’t a great week. I remember feeling lousy and not getting much done.

At the start of last week I was feeling utterly lousy. Like I was living at the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean. No light and a lot of pressure. Late February is a bad time for me for personal reasons. I did not want to come in on Monday in the slightest. But I was talked into coming in at least for the opening talk. And I will confess it was a very good talk. We got to talk about Archetypes in literature and watch a Bugs Bunny short. But when it was done I had to go home. I felt exhausted. Again I was able to come in for the rest of the week. But I remember my working being slow. I felt I spent the whole week just catching up.

We had to make characters now. Using two archetypes and the shapes we associated with them. I’ll cover this process in full soon. But in the end I did come up with two new and in-my-opinion very unique characters of my own. I feel very pleased with the final designs I settled on. But I was so slow in getting it done those designs weren’t complete until yesterday. Which brings me to….

One the Monday of this week again felt just kind of awful. I hadn’t showered or shaved in a while and as soon as this week’s lecture started I felt my face and neck (I have long hair) itching like crazy. I wanted to get out. To run away. When I found out we were doing collage work I felt my heart sinking. I did not know this until yesterday. But there’s something about the thought of cutting and pasting from magazines that I can’t stand. Maybe some leftover truma from Junior primary school? Maybe just how complicated it sounds. Whatever the reason, when approaching the table with all the glue and magazines I literally ran away I regrouped, and decided to finish of my design work. Which went well. In fact very soon the insane itching totally vanished.

I don’t know where my fear fear of cutting and pasting comes from. I don’t mind looking at collages.One of my favorite artists of all time, Joseph Cornell, worked in collage. Albeit unique ones. I’ve also liked the collages of Ben Nicholson and Henri Matisse. And that’s when inspiration struck! I would do as Matisse did. I would cut out large pieces of coloured paper and make versions of my characters using them. This did not inspire terror in me In fact it sounded kind of fun. I pitched the idea to Owen and he was onboard with it. I prepped my supplies and started drawing. But I just felt tired and slightly ill so i decided to go home. It was only two a’clock (And thanks to bad traffic I didn’t get home till 3:30.

To recap. Two weeks ago i didn’t come in at all on Monday. Last week I only stayed in for one and a half hours. And this week I made it till 2:00 on Monday, I hope this means my bad case of the Mondays is getting better and next week it won’t affect me at all. Here’s to hoping.

As for my Matisse’alikes, they’re coming along well. I know I’ve said this twice already, but I’m hoping to have a journal about them soon. Today felt okay. I’m still slacking a little. But I feel little of my grove coming back.

Kudos.

An extra thought

I have section on this blog called Extra Thoughts. I sometimes use it for extra work for the course that I don’t need to do but want to. Sometimes I just use it to talk about Uni in general. And sometimes just to talk about my life, my thoughts, or the world in general. Here’s a micro extra thought that fits into the second and third categories.

I’ve made it clear that I work best alone. But I don’t just mean that Metaphorically.

When night roles around in the studio and everyone-else has gone home, that’s when I start to feel happiest. The most comfortable. It’s when I can work for hours at a time without feeling uncomfortable. And I think my work even gets a little better when I’m doing this.

I often feel nostalgic about my time in Treforest. Working late into the night on my paintings. And this takes me back to that spot. To a time when I could work freely and happily.

Let’s hope I can do more.

On the demerits of teamwork

I’m going talk a bit about the problems I feel are endemic to teamwork. This is not an attack on teamwork, or an attempt to say that solo work is always better. That’s nonsense. Most of the great things the human race has done were done through teamwork and could never have been done alone. Imagine if one person had tried to build the Empire State Building by themself! This is more of a rant than anything else. An attempt to vent some steam and point out that for all the good that can be done with teamwork, it does have problems of its own. Especially in an unstructured environment.

When put into a team the first thing that happens is that everyone just sits or stands around nervously. Mumblingly trying to make some kind of common ground while including all people. It’s awkward. But it’s still better than the alternatives.

Normally what happens is some extrovert with more balls than brains (regardless of gender) starts doing all the talking for everyone and doesn’t let anyone-else offer a point of view. If an individual has an idea of their own or just sees a problem with the extrovert’s plan and tries to voice it he or she will be beaten down. The extrovert will not consider the other idea because it did not come from them, and just discards it. So they beat down the opposing idea. Not through logic, but through refusing to use it. This strategy of never looking at any other POV or ever admitting to doing anything wrong is how modern politicians keep their minions in line. Logic and empathy are human traits. So by disregarding them the extrovert makes himself/herself superhuman in the eyes of others. Or maybe it’s just too much effort to fight back for the rest of the group. And when the final product has real flaws, or just falls apart altogether the extrovert takes none of the blame for it. As i’ve said before. This scenario turns the other group members into effective slaves. And the slaves end up suffering for the extroverts mistakes, and even get the blame if things go really wrong.

The other scenario is the Instant Clique.

In this one Two or maybe Three group members start talking and find themselves so interested in each other that no-one-else matters. The other members become invisible. Sometimes these people know each-other, sometimes it’s a first meeting. It happens more often with girls, but does happen with boys. But I’ve never seen it happen with a set of people of both genders. But the effect is always the same. The new clique becomes the group. The other members are divided and conquered, and then reduced to hangers on. Often struggling to keep up with the clique’s ongoing progress. While the Clique is less averse to new ideas than the Extrovert, any idea that goes against the clique’s preset idea or that they just don’t like will be shut down immediately on the grounds that “We’ve all agreed on this!” Even if the clique makes up less than half of the group.

But the end effect is much the same. The other members just trudge alone. Being little more than unpaid interns for the clique. But The Clique-centric group is less likely to be met with disastrous failure, and if failure there is the blame is more fairly shared.

But let’s talk about some problems that can be found in any group.

For starters. No one ever puts the objective or need of the group above their own enjoyment.

When grouped people only have a surface interest in the group as a unit. Their main goal is to survive to the end of the mission, the other people there are a means to an end. Tools to be used. With this in mind people tend to talk to the ones they like the most. Interact based on pleasure rather than logic. If someone isn’t doing well or feeling left out that is no-one’s problem to fix. If the team as whole isn’t doing well then that just how it is. No-one has to try to make things run better. Just as long as things run well enough.

During the planning phase you need to be on your toes all the time. Trying to keep up with what is going on requires the same kind of twitch reflexes needed for a classic 80s arcade machine. You might think you know what’s going on and what’s been agreed on. But if you stop paying attention, even for a second, and you’ll find not only has the conversation shifted completely, but the goal you’ve settled on and how you are going to do it will also have totally changed. And if you object to all the changes that have happened in the past 30 seconds you will be met with the aforementioned cry of “But We’ve all agreed on this”. So if you want any say in what goes on then treat the planning stage like hunting a tiger. If you lose your concentration, it will get you.

Speaking of agreements. Agreements are never formal but they are always binding. Things are rarely put to a vote. And as mentioned before no-one ever asks everyone-else if they agree. Two or three people will just agree on a thing very casually without considering the implications, and then it’s law. Totally irreversible. How anyone keeps track of what has and hasn’t been agreed on in this system is beyond me.

I’ve alluded to the fact that most groups have a defacto leader whether they choose to of not. These people tend to have too much confidence. But it certainly is funny when they don’t know what to do. The leader will um and err and look worried. But as often as not they won’t take any suggestions you might give them. They have a plan, they just need to figure out what it is.

The bigger problem tends to be that if the leader goes missing there is suddenly no plan at all. Everyone has to just sit on their heels until daddy/mommy comes back. I think this is why in the military there is a chain of command and usually a second in command. A opposed to general group work where there is a leader and everybody-else. regardless, I hate being so dependent on someone-else. It’s irritating and even a little humiliating.

And that’s all I have for now. I may think of more, given time.

Completion/ and Nepotism

Here are two Journals in one. I’ve put them together because they interconnect very strongly.

Completing the installation

In a previous post https://johnhawk.art.blog/2019/02/02/my-feelings-about-my-first-weeks-back/ I talked about the installation group task I was given and then unable to do due to none of our group members being avalible to work at the same time and a snow day with no snow.

I prayed that the other members were able to get something done behind my back. Even if I’d had time to work on my own I wouldn’t have had a clue what to do (Or what to use).

Well Monday rolled around and when I got to our set things were not good. Our leader was not in so we were a woman short, a hanging mobile with orange and black discs wasn’t up or even finished. A video and projector to project a looping video onto the wall were both missing. And there were bits and piece all over the floor.

I bought as a little time by asking we be seen last. But we only had about 20 minutes (That’s not long).

I tried cleaning up the mess for fear of getting in the way if I did anything more complicated. Then I was asked to make the string for the hanging on the mobile. But I was told the lengths I made were too short. In my defence. No one told me how long they were meant to be. Then again, I never asked.

When the time came to hang the mobile it was unbalanced. One of the four strings had nothing on it at all! And then it fell down anyway.

In the absence of a video projection we pulled out an old light projector and covered the top of it with all the cuttings of black and orange acetate (a sort of coloured film. It looks like this ) that I had gathered up earlier. On the one hand I’m glad it was being put to good use. But it felt irritating having to pull it out after putting it away. Still. It made a nice light show.

And we just threw the mobile and the rest of our materials on the floor.

So, in total. Our “installation” was made up of, four paintings on the wall that ranged from mediocre to awful. A light projection on the next wall where the colours and patterns where made from discarded acetate clippings (Basically, rubbish). And a pile of discarded art materials and a broken mobile thrown onto the floor. Also one marble that ended up in the piece by chance.

In short. A mess, with all the bits that were meant to give it theme and context either missing or broken. What else would you expect for a piece that had to be made in twenty minutes?

So of course the teacher and the other fine art students loved it.

That’s the nice thing about 21st century fine art. You can’t really fail at it. If anything can be art then what does it matter if it’s basically a mess made in the time it takes to watch an episode of The Simpsons?

There is an odd effect where viewers will assume a final piece is exactly the way the artist wanted it and imagined it in their heads. While the actual artist can see hundreds of mistakes, deviations and imperfections in their own work and can barely stand the sight of it. They think us wizards who can just poof something right out of our heads. Even the best artists can’t stand most of their own work. But the public just assumes the product and the vision are one and the same. I suspect this goes to the Nth degree for modern fine art where there are no standards of quality or technical methods. So of course whatever you make is perfect by virtue of its mere existence.

In all fairness, our group representative was completely honest about what it was meant to be, what happened, and what we ended up making. But none of the people there seemed to mind.

And that’s how the three of us got a pat on the back for failing miserably!

Did I learn anything about teamwork from this?

Nothing that I haven’t covered before…. It’s hard to be a great team when your never in the same room. I’ve learned again that I would hate the army. I can’t stand having to depend on someone-else for orders and ideas. And I’ve learned even the most dedicated team can’t make a masterpiece (Or even something presentable) in 20 minutes.

Now I can guess what a teacher would say to me next, or at least imply. “Okay then. Do you feel you are better teamwork then!? Do you like it more?”

The answer to both questions is no. This was a disaster. And I makes me more certain I am better on my own. At least the people I was working with were nice. But being nice isn’t what makes having a team work. It should be something more than than. Something that makes us more than the sum of our parts. But that happening seems to be a rare event. One you can’t force by shoving four random people together for a week, And one that can’t happen if I’m involved.

Have I gained any artistic knowledge or experience from this?…..

No.

I was basically someone-else’s errand boy during the little time I had to work on this. Doing menial jobs like tidying rubbish or carrying ladders. This was a fine art project and I was just the hired help. The most creative thing I did was make a terrible painting in an hour that wouldn’t be worth throwing on a fire.

Thanks for the experience Cardiff Met. I’m sure that will come in handy when I’m trying to survive in the art world (sarcasm).

There’s one more thing I want to talk about. This would normally go in an extra thoughts journal. But this project has got me thinking about this a lot.

Modern Art is Nepotism

Now I’m using this in the general rather than criminal sense of the word. So don’t be alarmed.

It seems to me that the art world is nepotism these days. Now there has always been an element of this. No artist ever makes it through pure talent. Even western Primitive artists like Alfred Wallis with no education in art or ties to the art world will get noticed by some critic, dealer, or professional artist who then spread word of them to the masses. Anyone who got famous was given a job or a spotlight by someone with means or influence. This even applies to people like Shakespeare or Beethoven. Someone looked at their work and said “I want this” Alfred Hitchcock would never have gotten anywhere if every film studio had turned him down. Maybe the internet and technology will change this but that remains to be seen. For now no-one ever gets big just through being really good.

But at least with old media you had to genuinely be good to last. All the influencers in the world cannot save a bad product. At best you can be James Cameron’s Avatar or the Matrix sequels. Makes a lot of money but basically forgotten or mocked within 5 to 10 years. But most of the time even if the studios/galleries and critics were all behind you but you made bad work it would not help at all. So nepotism was what would get you your break. But you had to be good to have any real success.

When it comes to modern fine art/post-modern art/conceptual art there is no way to make bad art. If it is made by an artist it is good. It doesn’t need to fit any criteria or meet any standards. It doesn’t need to fit any standards of beauty or even mean anything. Sitting in chair can be great work of art if you claim it to be. Just be sure to film yourself doing it so you have proof you did your art. And remember. The sitting in the chair is the art. Not the recording of it.

So if anything can be a great work of art then why can’t I make a huge chunk of money by just taking a walk and filming it? The answer: Status. In modern art your status is what gets you work respect rather than your work giving you status.

When Marcel Duchamp put a urinal in an art gallery he had was only able to do so because he had the connections to do so, albeit under the pseudonym ‘R Mutt’. And when it came under attack he was considered notable enough that his defence of R Mutt was considered worth listening to in its own right. And he had friends, defenders and contacts to back him up who were also considered of note. If R Mutt had been a real person, some nobody from the New York slums, his urinal would have been thrown out before and that would have been the end of it. Duchamp was clear that there was no deeper meaning or aesthetic value to the work. And to to to do so was vile heresy. All that mattered was that he declared it art. The work itself has no value. The only value it has is that Duchamp “made” it. This idea has been applied to other works of non-art like a tin of an artist’s excrement. A sealed box full of an artist’s breath. And a walk taken by an artist. I have also breathed, excreted, and walked. I do all three almost everyday. Why don’t I have tons of money and a page on the Tate website? The answer is connections. They had connections in the art world. I don’t. Nepotism.

This ties back into the garbage I made on Monday. It had no skill put into it. No value. And anything that could have given it meaning was missing. So why did it get praise from the teacher and the fine art students? Because they new the people who worked on it. And being part of the clique gave it value. Where as anyone who didn’t know us would have not even know it was a single work of art. As opposed to a four “paintings” and a mess on the floor. We did not got praised on any merit in our work. We got by on Nepotism.

One last point I want to make. This last two weeks have been focused entirely on the fine art students. As a group we have been tasked to make fine art things. Video pieces and installations. Even the language is aimed towards fine art. The subtext for us animators has been “Just go along and work in some ideas you picked up in Animation if you want to”. Why wasn’t one of the tasks to make an animation and the fine art students could follow our lead?

I feel like the message being sent across the Field module is that we are second-class students. That we need to be more like them. But this is not true. Unlike modern art, in animation you do have to try your hardest. It’s a skill. You can do it badly. If I can’t get a motion right everyone will see and judge me lacking. If I don’t learn to do it well I will be passed over for more skilled animators.

Why is it I am still being pressured to choose something other than animation? I tried my hand at metal work, screen printing, painting, sculpture, illustration, photography and fabric in the years it took to get to uni. Most of them I did not because I wanted to. But because I was asked to so I could comply with the courses. And comply I have. And every time I turned back to animation. And now I feel like I being pressured to reconsider the mess that is modern “Fine art”. Please stop doing this! How long do I have to try other fields before I am allowed to become an animator!

This hurts.