11th SAS Conference
Brisbane, Australia, 3 – 6 August 1999
“Animation: Contexts and Identities”
The 11th Annual SAS Conference organized by Griffith University in collaboration with the Australian Film Commission and Queensland Screen Resource Centre (QPIX) took place in Brisbane, Australia from 3rd to 6th August 1999. Congratulations to Keith Bradbury who coordinated the Conference, his assistants, and the organizers who made it possible for the conference to take place in a smooth and well-planned manner.
The Conference focused on the theme “Animation: Contexts and Identities“.
Scholars and researchers from around the world presented 25 working papers, and participants also had the opportunity to take part in a forum on Animation Teaching, visit galleries and watch global animation films. The 11th Conference ended with the Annual General Meeting of SAS, which discussed the status of the association as well as the planning of future programs.
The theme of the conference, namely “Animation: Contexts and Identities” was quite interesting, since context and identity are the two major issues that are raised in all discussions of any form of art. The issue of the context of an artwork is generally connected with the artist’s background, as well as the environment, time and space in which the artwork is produced, while identity is an artistic issue that forms the core of any artistic exploration. Identity is generally related to style, iconography, and the relationship of the artwork with its surrounding culture and society.
In this context, regardless of whether animation is considered an art form or an industry, such issues as context and identity remain relevant. All the working papers presented during this conference broached the questions of context and identity in animation in interesting ways, whether directly or indirectly.
Overall, the papers read at the conference discussed animation from theoretical and practical viewpoints. Theoretical presentations defined and discussed the term, concept, aesthetic values, and history of animation, both local and global. For example, Mark Langer presented “Cyborgs before Computers: The Rotoscope as Prosthesis“; Rebecca Farley, “Play and Transformation: The Animated Aesthetic“; Alan Cholodenko, “Apocalyptic Anime: In the Wake of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Godzilla“; and Suzanne Williams-Rautiola, “The Aesthetics of 3D Computer Animation in Television Programming“.
Among the historical papers presented were Gunnar Strom‘s “Desider Gross and Gasparcolor – Two Years After” and Jeanpaul Goergen‘s “The History of Hand Drawn Sound in Germany (1932)“. Several other papers written from a historical perspective focused on well-known animation figures, for instance “The Filmmaker as Overseas Aid: Norman McLaren in Asia” by Terence Dobson; “Isao Takahata: The Animation Director Who Worries about the Mental Health of the Young Generation” by Masao Yokota; and “Avery’s World in Asterix Land” by Pierre Floquet.
Other papers approached animation from a practical angle by focusing on the possibilities offered by image manipulation in the field of animation, such as Laura Knight‘s “Mixing It: Image Manipulation Trends in UK Contemporary Short Form Animation” and Patrick Crogan‘s “Perspectives in 3D Animation in Australia“.
Issues of identity that focused on particular aspects of culture or society were discussed in such papers as “A Regional Life – Images of Queensland and the Animation of Max Bannah“, by Jonathan Dawson, or “The National Style: A Case Study of ‘Footrot Flats‘” by Roger Palmer. Several other participants in the specialized session on Animation in the Asia-Pacific Region chaired by John Lent emphasized this approach. This session introduced participants to the history of animation in the Philippines through Rolando Tolentino‘s presentation, and in Malaysia through Muliyadi Mahamood‘s paper. Apart from Terence Dobson, Masao Yokota, Jonathan Dawson, Roger Palmer, Rolando Tolentino, and Muliyadi Mahamood, participants in this session were Joann Bouldin, Colin Burgess, Richard Leskosky, Cathryn Vasseleu, Sorin Oancea, Jane Begg, William Schaeffer, William Routt, Junia Wulf, and Dan McLaughlin.
Overall, the presentations discussed animation from a wide range of perspectives, including its functions as artwork and as an industry. They also related animation to such other fields of knowledge as music, science, technology, anthropology, and sociology. We can say, consequently, that animators are amazing artists for they succeed in making possible in the world of animation what is impossible in reality while creating their own animated reality at the same time. Animation is thus a moving art of illusion.
Animation has many functions and uses. For example, in the field of commercial advertising, it is used to attract and convince viewers. Gunnar Strom, in “Desider Gross and Gasparcolor – Two Years After“, showed how the ads for “Medina” cigarettes used a gentle visual language and appropriate music in their animation in order to convince women of the elegance of smoking. Meanwhile, in “Animation in the Philippines“, Rolando Tolentino discussed the role of animation as one of Marcos’ propaganda tools to build a confident and patriotic nation. In this respect, animation functions as a tool to convince viewers and win them over.
This role is quite different from that of the animator as a social critic who observes, shows, and criticizes the flaws of the society in which he lives. This reinforces the idea that animation must be appreciated in its context, for although the process and technique of creating a work of animation are universal in nature, the role of the work and the approach chosen to appreciate it often depend on the social context. This responds to the theme of the conference that explored context and identity in animation. Jonathan Dawson, for instance, examined questions of identity as well as differences between traditional and modern values in Queensland by focusing on visual elements and symbols related to rural and to urban life in the works of Max Bannah.
The screening of several animation films from China, India, and Japan revealed the existence of strong local traditional cultural characteristics in the techniques and image arrangements used. Chinese animation evoked monumental landscape paintings that had come to life. The screening of various animation films, such as “Swimming Outside the Flags” (Australian Animation Program), “Grendel Grendel, Grendel”, “Asia Pacific Animation Screenings”, and “International Student Film Program”, gave participants the opportunity to appreciate and examine various cultural aspects of global animation as well as technical differences in its making process.
There is no denying that animation has evolved due to the advancement of production techniques brought about by technological progress. This has enabled animators to create movements that used to be impossible to draw by hand. For instance, as explained by Patrick Crogan, 3D animation techniques have resulted in spatial movements with good caricature qualities, exceeding the capabilities of line drawings of human figures and objects used in 2D animation. In this context, music plays an important role to bring the characters, the atmosphere, and the plot to life. The tight relationship between the art of sound and music on the one hand, and animation on the other, cannot be undone, as argued by Jeanpaul Goergen in his presentation entitled “The History of Hand Drawn Sound in Germany (1932)“, which quotes Oskar Fischinger’s words: “What you see you hear”.
The 11th SAS Conference also witnessed a presentation by Jane Begg about her animation gallery, Silicon Pulp Animation Gallery in Brisbane, the first fine art gallery in Australia to focus on the art of animation.
According to her, the gallery exhibits, among other things, multi-media art and animation, and also designs web sites. Its main purpose is to place animation in the context of fine art. However, some participants to the session questioned the approach of framing and exhibiting scenes from animated films in an art gallery, thus alienating them from their original context. This represents one of the issues concerning the concept of animation that can perhaps be developed and discussed further at a future conference.
The forum on animation teaching concluded the Brisbane Conference. The panel consisted of Kevin Roper, a lecturer of animation at Queensland College of Art, Malcolm McGookin, an animation director, and Peter Moyes, a lecturer and film director. The discussion mainly revolved around the attitudes of students towards animation and the importance of supporting knowledge in such fields as aesthetics, philosophy of art, and art history in order to consolidate the direction and activity of the field of animation. The panel members felt that art education institutions ought to have a clear vision about the direction and future of animation. This can be achieved by taking into account the current climate of the animation industry, demand from media companies as well as from local television stations, and competition from abroad, and especially from Asia. Furthermore, the role of universities as centers of knowledge that produce “better people” ought not to be ignored or sacrificed in favor of creating graduates to answer the needs of the work market. In other words, graduates in the field of animation should not only be “doers”, but should also be “thinkers”, i.e. understand what they are doing.
The 11th Annual SAS Conference was a resounding success. Despite the packed schedule, the participants managed to exchange their views between the many interesting presentations, during the rest periods, and during the visit to the “Animation and Industry” exhibition at the Queensland College of Art.
Congratulations once again to Keith Bradbury and his team at Griffith University!
Review by Muliyadi Mahamood
Liberal Studies Department
Faculty of Art and Design
MARA University of Technology
Malaysia.
Vice President
Malaysian Cartoonists’ Association (PEKARTUN).
