Wrap it up!

Let me start by saying that this unit has been extremely enjoyable and I have liked nearly every part of it. To tell the truth I have not learned that much from this unit that I didn't already know. I am speaking in general terms of the units aim of course not just towards comics, because I think the concepts raised in McCloud's book apply to every art medium. I think anyone who has studied a visual art medium whether it be films, television, painting, sketching, photography, multimedia design or comics will have the same sort of knowledge, because when you get down to it, they all apply.

There are parts of McCloud's book that I hadn't heard of before and I found interesting. Like his theory on The six steps. This subject was kind of covered when we read the Manifesto for Growth. It is all about concept generation and how to apply that concept, and the process we go through in our minds that gets us there. McCloud sets that process out in an interesting way that I hadn't seen or thought of before, and I do agree with it.

One of the other main things that stood out in the lecture was the week that was about the birth of motion graphics and After Effects. It is really stunning that this technology and 3D in general is only about 10-15 years old and yet it has come so far. Comparing something like motion graphics which is so young to painting or sketching which has been performed for thousands of years. You look at what changes the art of painting has gone through in its life time, but it has still stuck to the same basic rules and principles, and then think about what motion graphics will be like if it moves the same way painting has.

Comics themselves as an art form I came across by myself when I first saw Frank Millers Sin City novels. Before that I did agree with the consensus that comics where a throwaway medium and they were mass produced for the entertainment of children. When one of my friends first presented me with A Dame To Kill For by Frank Miller I immediately changed my mind. I would rate that ‘comic’ in the same status as any ‘real’ novel I have read. But I think reading McCloud’s book reinforced everything that I already believed.

Overall, this unit has been a great way for me to go back and re-evaluate the knowledge that I did have, and to update and change what I believed to be true. I believe and agree with nearly everything that McCloud says in his book and I think it is a great resource to understanding comics and many other art forms as well. The lectures also have been very informative on the details of the birth and life of things like Manga and Anime, Motion graphics and Image, Visual styles and much more, and I don't think I will be able to watch The Lion King in the same way ever again. Thanks for that Andrew.

Bringin this shiz together

When you think about, everything that McCloud says in the final chapter is obvious and is no huge revelation, but this doesn't mean it isn't true or important. Yes, of course we are all restricted to our own body and thoughts and feelings, and all media is just a way for us to try and communicate to each other and help other people to understand our view. I think it is one of the most important tools for a developing human being. It is how we are able to create our own identity. to take in all these different viewpoints, and decide for ourselves which ones we want to agree with and which to disagree and therefore create our own thoughts, themes and values.

I also agree when McCloud goes on to talk about comics being made of endless possibilities. I think this is also obvious when you think about it. Of course the possibilities are endless, because the human imagination is endless. We are only limited by our own imagination, not by some rules created by a certain medium. And I think all art is like this. Art in general has no restrictions past our own ability and imagination. Art is not restricted by rules or genres, colours or black and white, themes or ideals, or even different mediums. Comics along with every other form of media communication has every type of visual iconography at its disposal, and therefore...the possibilities are endless!

I have studied and gone to these depths of media communication before. You do learn a lot from studying things at a deep level, when you are able to understand the concept and actually take time to think about it. It is like taking a piece of art a trying to figure out every little detail of it, and why the artist did this and why they did that. This can be fulfilling in one way, but some times I just like to sit back and enjoy what I can see or hear or smell and in turn how it makes me feel, and not worry about the deep meaning behind it. Because really, in the end, isn't that what art is really about? Making something that people (most) are going to enjoy? I like to think so.

A word about coloUr, with a U

In this chapter McCloud talks about how colour effects comics, and the way it has developed in comics. When using only black and white to create expression and meaning in comics, there is much more shapes and forms used and the pictures ‘transcend form’ and they ‘approach language’. When colour is added the artist is able rely less on shapes and forms and more on the universal language of colour to create meaning and his or her view.

An example of the way black and white relies on the use of shapes and forms for its expressiveness is the Sin City comics. The way Frank Miller uses lines and shapes in his work to create shadow and dark characters directly communicates the ideas and themes of the comic.

Comparing this to something like The Legend of Drizzt comics which are vividly coloured shows how colour can be used to create an intoxicating environment of sensations. The colours used in this comic are wide and are used to represent characters and their environment. This creates a dynamic visual effect and is something that using just black and white images cannot achieve.

The six steps

As I stated in my last blog, I seem to agree with McCloud on his definition of art. My idea of art is very broad, 'anything that is produced that creates an emotion or reaction in someone'. I also agree where McCloud defines art as something that creates an emotion, but has no other use than to be a piece of art. Tools for example cannot be considered art, because they are what McCloud would call, things used for the survival instinct in humans.

I think art should be looked at from the point of view of the person who made the piece of art. Any one can look at something that another person has made and judge whether they think it is art or not. But in the end this persons opinion doesnt matter whether it is art or not. If the creator says it is art, then it is art. Say a child made a finger painting that is not much more than a bunch of colours randomly painted on a canvas or a piece of paper. Most people would look at that and recognise it a something a child made, because it has no structure. But the child would look at it and like it, because they made it. Therefore, to the child, it is art.

In regards to McClouds six steps rule, I think he is pretty much right. When I want to, or am required to create something, I think that I go through a similar, or the same process, and as McCloud recognises, I may not use all the steps, and maybe not in the same order. I get an idea for something that I want to make, I either already have the form, or figure out how I'm going to make the idea, so the form comes. I find my idiom, my own way of making my idea in my chosen form. I work on my idea and try to create a structure in my chosen form, and that works with my intended idiom (this step may not always work, or may work, but unintentionally). I apply my craft, my knowledge of my intended form, sometimes I already have the knowledge of the form I am working in, sometimes I have to work it out on the way. And finally I reach the surface, where I apply everything I have done to finish making my intended idea (this is where I often get bored of the process and stop before I have something really good).

Show and Tell

Show and Tell. Pictures show and words tell. Thats the way it is in modern art, and probably the way it will continue. McCloud makes the distinction between the written word and visual art, and talks about how over time they have become used together less and less in different art forms. He uses what people would call 'high art' as an example for this. Painters use pictures to 'show' their meaning and writers use words to 'tell' their meaning, and it is not very often in art that these two mediums combine to create 'art'. He says that comics are the main form that allows pictures and the written word to come together to create meaning. Some would not agree that comics are a form of art, or definitely not high art, but I think that the term 'art' can be used very loosely, and nearly anything that is produced, that evokes some kind of emotion or reaction in a person can be considered as art. 

That is why I think that I am able to use something as bizarre as Lolcats as an example of a visual and text coming together equally to create a meaning. I don't think anyone would consider a Lolcats picture as high art, but it definitely uses words and images equally and is very effective at creating emotion and humour.

You cannot say that this picture does not evoke some sort of emotion and feeling. Seriously, its hilarious. And because it is so hilarious and creates such emotion, it is art. The picture itself is funny enough, because the way it is captured, but with the use of text, it gives it another whole level of meaning and a much deeper feeling. 

Lolcats, may only be an Internet meme, but I think it perfectly captures what McCloud is trying to say about how images and words, are not often used together in art, but can be combined to create another level of meaning.

Living in Line

'The idea that a picture can evoke an emotional or sensual response in the viewer is vital to the art of comics.' This is the most important statement that McCloud makes in the chapter Living in Line. He uses basic lines and shapes to show that a picture doesnt have to look like something specific or be of something for it to evoke an emotional response. Certain colours and shapes are universally significant to an emotion. And artist of all mediums use these universal techniques to evoke emotions in their work.

When you look at this painting you feel a certain way. This is because the colour and style and the shapes used are universally related to feelings of hate and anger. When you look at it, you think blood splatter, and when you think of that you think of murder, and crimes of passion, which usually involve a lot of feelings of hate and anger.

Yet when you look at this painting, you feel something totally different, again because of the the colour and shapes used in the painting. Joy and happiness is what I feel when looking at the picture, and I'm sure most people would feel the same.

Again this picture evokes a different emotion. The shapes and lines used in this painting represent a sort of tension and anxiety.

Most abstract art relies on these universal themes and symbols to give meaning to their work. As McCloud says '..A single image can represent the senses and emotions..' in ways such as - Angry = Reds, Placid = Blues, Anxious = Textures, Loud = Shapes, Quiet = Lines and Cold = Greens.

The example of the photo of the Earth from space is a perfect example. By looking at it we, in this day and age, know exactly what it is and what it represent, and we get a serene and joyus feeling from looking at at. But on a deeper level, even if we didnt know what it was we would still feel the same emotions because of the colours and shapes that are in the picture. The picture has a lot of blue and greens and swirls of white, giving that placid feeling, and the Earth itself is a circle or sphere with no harsh edges, giving a strong, powerful and happy feeling. This shows how strong these shapes and colours and symbols are towards create emotion in art.

Time Frames

I was watching the Japanese anime film Princess Mononoke the other day and after reading the chapter Time Frames I realised the techniques used in one of the opening scenes are the same talked about in that chapter. In the chapter McCloud talks about how time and motion is represented in still images in comics. The techniques he details are of using sound and motion blur or 'speed lines' to create the illusion of time and motion. And the way that different countries and cultures use this technique to create the same effect. The use of these, and either using several different techniques for motion blur is very effective in the illusion. 

One of the opening scenes in Princess Mononoke where the prince is being chased and trying to fight off a demon that is attacking his village is a great example of the way writer and artists use motion blur and sound to create motion. This is a great example of the 'Japanese' way of creating motion. In the scene the artists use several different types of motion blur to create speed, but the shot that caught my eye is very good in creating a sense of speed and fluidity. In this shot you can see how they used motion blur and 'motion lines' on the ground to create the speed. Although this is a film which does not need to rely on visual cues to help create motion, because it already has that, it does help create an extra feeling when watching this scene. And because of that when watching the scene it does put across a great sense of speed and danger because of the quickness of the characters. On top of this visual cue of the speed, there is also the sound of the prince's mount on the grass and the music to compliment the action. All the facets work together to create such and impressive picture, with a great quickness.