Stronger Than Words Communication through Animation without the use of Words Yuri Nortien’s Tales of Tales. by Tara DeLong One of the things I really like about animation is its ability to convey a message without the use of language; by lan- guage I mean spoken word or written text. Animation without language uses different forms of communication such as move- ment, body and facial expression, gesture, music and colour. These are all forms of communication that humans are innately equipped to understand at birth. Perhaps this ability to communicate and comprehend without language partially explains the common notion that ani- mation is for children. Children are more likely to understand the primordial communication of movement, colour and expression that are present in animation than adults whose minds have been reprogrammed to understand spoken language and the abstract symbols we call writing. Now, that is not to discredit the impor- tance of language (both written and spoken), after all language is one of the defining elements of culture; language is a very effec- tive means of communication, but only if the person you are try- ing to communicate with has been programmed to read, write and speak the same language with some degree of fluency. In animation class my classmates and I have seen many films that communicate with little or no language, films such as Loves Me, Loves Me Not, Chain of Cruelty, Balance, Luxo fr. (and many of John Lasseter's/ Pixar’s early productions), Skyscraper Kitty, Fantasia, Street Musique, The Monk and the Fish, Darkness Light Darkness, Dimensions of Discourse, and Revolver. All of these films are successful in telling their story without language, and as I recall, were well-received in class. There are also films that include language but could get by without the use of language Yuri Nortien’s Tales of Tales. such as The Owl Who Married the Goose, The Cow, The Fox and the Hare, The Metamorphosis of Dr. Samsa, and Tale of Tales. Conveniently, the language in these films is gibberish, or in a for- eign language (so it may as well be gibberish) but the story and message are still quite clear - proof that language does not drive the animation. Often, when the film has language in it, the viewer will tune out unless there is another strong element to keep them riv- eted to the screen. They know that language will supplement them with the information they need to know, allowing them to watch passively. Examples of this can be found in most Saturday morn- ing cartoons where the characters literally stop their action (cue to viewer: pay attention now) say what's on their mind, and then resume action (cue to viewer: resume doodling, rolling your eyes at your friend, counting the ceiling tiles, or whatever it was you were doing before I interrupted you). When the film lacks lan- guage the viewer becomes engaged. They are forced to use visual clues to piece the story together for themselves; they are not given easy answers. This is part of the reward of watching a film without language; the feeling of intelligence the viewer experiences when they have made conclusions on their own, and the realization of the beauty of the images. But if the film is too difficult to under- stand immediately, or is visually irritating, the viewer will often tune out in an effort to avoid the sense of displeasure or sense of failure in not understanding. There are of course, successful dialogue driven animat- ed films and television shows such as The Man Who Planted Trees, Creature Comforts, Wallace & Gromit, and The Simpsons. But more Yuri Nortien’s Tales of Tales. often than not, the reason these films are successful is because they are engaging to watch. There is more going on than simple dialogue. Creature Comforts is not funny because the script is witty, it is humorous because there's something going on in the back- ground that grabs our attention while this ceaseless blathering is going on. The Man Who Planted Trees reaps the benefits of an inspiring story, beautifully rendered animation, and a haunting musical score, while Wallace & Gromit and The Simpsons are noto- rious for image and word play, visual and literal puns, strength of design and a dose of popular irony. Most of the films I have mentioned and many more can be found in the Emily Carr Institute Library, or at Videomatica (which is just a short walk from school on 4th Ave. just west of Burrard), and I strongly recommend that you check them out for yourself. The still images that have been supplied can never sub- stitute the actual experience of watching these films because, alas, still images lose the motion and sound (and in this case the colour as well) that are so essential to animation. If you are interested in animation, Spike and Mike’s Animation Festival will be showing at the Ridge March 12 through April 4, and the line-up of films includes several of the wordless animation works I have mentioned. There will also be a screening of Animated Worlds a compilation of award-winning animation here at Emily Carr Institute on Thursday, March 18 at 6 PM in Room 328. Caroline Leaf’s The Owl Who Married the Goose. Ryan Larkin’s Street Musique. Influx: Magazine March 1999 Ryan Larkin’s Street Musique. 25 Stronger Than Words Communication through Animation without the use of Words Yuri Nortien’s Toles of Tales. by Tara DeLong (One of the things I really ike about animation i ts bility to convey a message without the wse af language; by lan= ‘guage T mean spoken word or writen text. Animation without Tanguage uses diferent forms of communication sich a8 move- ment, body and facial expression, gesture, music and colour ‘These are all forms of communication that humans are nately ‘equipped to understand a birth Pethaps this ability to communicate and comprehend ‘without language partly explains the common notion that ani- Thation is for eildren, Children are more likely to understand the Primordial communication of movement, colour and expresion that are present in animation than adults whose minds have been reprogrammed to understand spoken language and the abstract, syenbols we call writing. Now, that snot to discredit the impor- tance of language (both writen and spoken), afterall language is fone ofthe defining element of culture; language is avery efec- tive means of communication, but ony if the person you ae try- tng to communicate with hasbeen programmed to read, waite and speak the same language with some degree of fuenc. Ta animation class my classmates and Ihave seen many ‘ms that communicate with litle or no language, fms such a2 Loves Me, Loves Me Not, Chain of Cru, Balance, Luz Jr. (and ‘many of Join Lasictert) Pixar's early productions), Siorerper Kits, Fanasia, Sect Musique, The Mont and the Fih, Darkness Light Darknes, Dimension of Discoure, and Rewer. All ofthese ‘lms are socccsfl i telling thee story without language, and as 1 recal, were wellzeceived in class. There are albo films that include language but could get by without che use of language Caroline Leafs The Ow! Who Married the Goose Yuri Nortien’s Toles of Tales. such a8 The Oot Who Married the Gots, The Got, The Fi andthe Hare, The Mtamorphoris of Dr. Samia, and Tale of Tales ‘Conveniently, the language in these fins is gibberish, or ina for- ign language (so it may aswell be gibberish) but the story and ‘message are still quite clea - proof that language does not deve the animation. (Orica, when the lm has language in it the viewer wi tune out unless there is another strong element ro keep them v= ‘ted tothe seen, They know that language wil supplement them ‘with the information they need to know, allowing them to watch passively. Examples of this can be found in most Saturday moen- {ng cartoons where the characters iterally stop their ation (cue {to viewer pay atetion now) say what’ on thee mind, and then ‘esume action (cue to viewer: resume doodling, rolling your eyes at your fend, counting the ceiling tes, o whatever i Was You ‘were doing before I interrupted you). When the fm lacks lan- ‘guage the viewer becomes engaged. They are forced 1 use visual ‘lies to pice the story togsther for themecles they are not given ‘easy answers. Tiss par ofthe reward of watching a film without Tanguage; the feling of intligence the viewer experiences when, they have made conclusions on their own, and the realization of the beauty ofthe images. But if the fl is too dificalt ro under- stand immediatly, or is visually iritating, the viewer wil often tune out in an efor to avoid the sense of displeasure or sense of failure in not understanding "There are ofcourse, sucessful dialogue driven animat- flim and television shows such as The Man Who Planted Tes, Greate Confort, Wallace Grom and The Smptons. But more Ryan Larkin’s Street Musique Influx ‘Yuri Nortien’ Toles of Tats. often than not, the reason these films are successfil is because they are engaging to watch. There is more going on than simple Ailogue. Creare Comfora snot funy because the sxptis Wit), ivi humorous becauee theres something going on in the back- ground that grabe our attention wule this ceaseless blathering is f0ing on, The Man Who Planed Tes reape the benefits of an Inspiring story, beautifully rendered animation, and haunting ‘ical sore, while Willace Gromit nd The Simpson are 2000- ‘ous for image and word play, visual and tral puns, strength of