Is Animation Really a Genre?
Lately I've been thinking a lot about the many different forms of animation that have taken shape over the past hundred years and beyond. And the more I think about it the more I'm conflicted by one question. Is animation really a genre?
Now one would typically say yes and for good reason. Any time you're searching for a show or movie and you look in the genre categories, animation is often one of the things that pops up. But as I watch more and more things that belong to this so called genre, I keep thinking, are these movies and shows really so alike? Alike enough to be compressed into a single category. In my opinion, no. Animation is something that I've been watching my entire life and I can wholeheartedly say that classifying all forms of animation into the same group is disrespectful to its artists and their work. Those whose slave away for days on end to make each frame look as good as they can make it. By simply calling it a genre what we're basically saying is all animation is the same.
There are many different forms, styles, and methods of animation, each with its own unique look. Some are more commonly seen than others but no two look exactly the same. This is the difference between animation and live-action and my main reason for why animation is not a genre. Live-action has a very limited amount of ways to present itself compared to animation. While everything in real life can only be manipulated so much, there's an endless amount of ways animation can distinguish itself from other animations. In live-action you can't necessarily change how a typical human being looks without some form of makeup or digital effect. With animation, the entire look of the world, characters and objects can be made anyway you want. If you want a dog to have eight legs, give it eight legs. If you want the entire world to be one color, you make it one color. If you want a person to not have any defined shape, you keep changing their structure.
The topics covered by animation also vary significantly. One day you could be watching Mowgli and Baloo sing "The Bear Necessities" in The Jungle Book but the next day you could be watching Bojack struggle with drug addiction and depression in Bojack Horseman. The point is, animation is too broad a term to classified as a single genre. There are many different ways films and shows are animated are there are many different topics and messages they cover.
If all animation is seen as a single genre then I think it only helps to reinforce the viewpoint that animation is for kids. If people saw it as an aesthetic choice rather than a genre I believe that would be a much more accurate description.
Now one would typically say yes and for good reason. Any time you're searching for a show or movie and you look in the genre categories, animation is often one of the things that pops up. But as I watch more and more things that belong to this so called genre, I keep thinking, are these movies and shows really so alike? Alike enough to be compressed into a single category. In my opinion, no. Animation is something that I've been watching my entire life and I can wholeheartedly say that classifying all forms of animation into the same group is disrespectful to its artists and their work. Those whose slave away for days on end to make each frame look as good as they can make it. By simply calling it a genre what we're basically saying is all animation is the same.
There are many different forms, styles, and methods of animation, each with its own unique look. Some are more commonly seen than others but no two look exactly the same. This is the difference between animation and live-action and my main reason for why animation is not a genre. Live-action has a very limited amount of ways to present itself compared to animation. While everything in real life can only be manipulated so much, there's an endless amount of ways animation can distinguish itself from other animations. In live-action you can't necessarily change how a typical human being looks without some form of makeup or digital effect. With animation, the entire look of the world, characters and objects can be made anyway you want. If you want a dog to have eight legs, give it eight legs. If you want the entire world to be one color, you make it one color. If you want a person to not have any defined shape, you keep changing their structure.
The topics covered by animation also vary significantly. One day you could be watching Mowgli and Baloo sing "The Bear Necessities" in The Jungle Book but the next day you could be watching Bojack struggle with drug addiction and depression in Bojack Horseman. The point is, animation is too broad a term to classified as a single genre. There are many different ways films and shows are animated are there are many different topics and messages they cover.
If all animation is seen as a single genre then I think it only helps to reinforce the viewpoint that animation is for kids. If people saw it as an aesthetic choice rather than a genre I believe that would be a much more accurate description.
It really is disrespectful to the artists. It's like no one wants to give animation the credit it deserves. It's not like film is harder to make than animation. They are both equally hard, and for good reasons. This aligns in my head with that post that was made last week about award ceremonies in which there seems to be no criteria for judging animated films and shorts.
ReplyDeleteIt's ridiculous how demeaning our perception of animation is.