Ralph Bakshi on animation (from Comic Con 2008)

[Sierra Rose]

Well I always enjoy the discussion when someone is really discussing. Your manner of pontificating "at" people rather than discussing "with" people isn't something I want. Acknowledging what someone says doesn't mean you agree, just that you heard them and took in their points and considered them before you returned with your thought. I always get the feeling whatever I would say to you is blasted aside by your 9 bore guns that are firing before you even took a second to consider my thought. Why wouldn't I give up on that kind of discussion. Patience has it's limits.

[lemec]

To get back on track, (or on thread), Let's look at Ralph's statements:

- Students think it's necessary to work for a big company because they think it's the only way to become successful.

True. I used to subscribe to this. Lots of students I meet still subscribe to this. We're all born as little lost sheep and working for a big company means you don't have to think much. I did that for 5 years and everything dissolved into a routine. I didn't even have to think about what I had to do. Someone told me. When you leave a company to become a freelancer, it's a sudden shock when you realize you really don't know what to do with yourself, and that you have to find that out for yourself.

Too many people want to ensure that they have a buyer before they have a product, or before they are even capable of making a product. I'm currently trying to make myself capable of making a product worthy of a buyer.

- Technology has come a long way. The computer makes animation possible for anyone to animate.

Can't dispute that. Then along came TVPaint and made it possible for traditional, non-vector bitmap animation to be done by anyone with the requisite drawing skills.

- Just band together with a few other people and you can crank out an animation that anyone can enjoy, as long as the story and ideas are good.

Why not?

If there was anything that was degrading the thread it was all of the ad-hominem attacks against Bakshi to invalidate his statements.

[lemec]

Well I always enjoy the discussion when someone is really discussing. Your manner of pontificating "at" people rather than discussing "with" people isn't something I want.

I don't discuss with people. I discuss with their statements. If you say something I agree with, I agree and the matter is settled. If you say something I disagree with, I state my disagreement and pose a question or argument towards which your statement falls apart. It's only a defeat when you choose to leave it that way. Who you are does not matter to me in a debate. It is irrelevant who the statement is coming from. The same statement said by my best friend, greatest idol or worst enemy or mass murderer is still the same statement. What do you want from a discussion? (this isn't a rhetorical question!) Why do you discuss things? I discuss things to find which of the opposing points of view is correct. I'm not trying to be "right", I'm trying to find what "right" is so I can be "right" too.

Acknowledging what someone says doesn't mean you agree, just that you heard them and took in their points and considered them before you returned with your thought.

The problem is that when someone offers a stance with no points to take in, there is nothing to consider. Hurrah catchphrases like "Just follow your instincts", and "It has so much emotion" are examples of majestic sand castles that collapse at the slightest touch of analysis. Until vague concepts like these are clearly defined, they're just sounds. Explain yourself clearly so I can understand you. Grawp(me) is not so smart. Grawp is not a mindreader. Grawp does not have your experience. Share with Grawp.

I always get the feeling whatever I would say to you is blasted aside by your 9 bore guns that are firing before you even took a second to consider my thought.

Try me.

I see debates as being a pitched battle between a pair of stag beetles put in a ring by their owners. My stag beetles are fierce and attack any stag beetle in the ring with great vigour. Now, that doesn't mean that I hate the owner and would get into fisticuffs while the stag beetles fight. It's between my stag beetle and your stag beetle. Some owners become very attached to their stag beetle such that whenever their stag beetle takes damage in the ring, they feel they themselves are being attacked. Just because I may not have respect for an argument you offer doesn't mean I don't have respect for you as a person. This is how I avoid feeling offended when someone contradicts my point of view.

Why wouldn't I give up on that kind of discussion. Patience has it's limits.

I may disagree, but I always state a reason for my disagreement. There's your cue to remove the obstacle for my disagreement. As long as a solution is possible, I have patience. I'm willing to spare the intellectual wattage to work things out. I'm not looking for an easy victory. I'm looking for true solution, even if it means conceding to your arguments through utter defeat. Now THAT's an honest discussion!

[Mandalaholic]

Well speaking a a "very busty, animated character". All I have to say is ...."what the fu***k !"
The only persons career and lifestyle even comes close to what I would aspire to have is Paul's. A very successful freelance animator, who does not have to work in a room full of snot nosed punks who think they know everything. He is free to create as he wishes and is admired and revered for it all as well.

[User 767]

Heck, I love sex and violence. It's entertaining!

Of course you do. Undoubtedly raised on that profanity, right? Now if we could only censor it appropriately, you wouldn't have those evil thoughts (because you wouldn't conceive of them, right?)

I don't discuss with people. I discuss with their statements. If you say something I agree with, I agree and the matter is settled.

maybe you should consider the source-ie: discuss with people, not just their statements. Everyone has their own perception of reality, and interpretation of it. Discussing the statements often degenerates into a matter of semantics.

The problem is that when someone offers a stance with no points to take in, there is nothing to consider. Hurrah catchphrases like "Just follow your instincts", and "It has so much emotion" are examples of majestic sand castles that collapse at the slightest touch of analysis. Until vague concepts like these are clearly defined, they're just sounds. Explain yourself clearly so I can understand you. Grawp(me) is not so smart. Grawp is not a mindreader. Grawp does not have your experience. Share with Grawp.

Sort of in line with 'discuss with people', huh?

I see debates as being a pitched battle between a pair of stag beetles put in a ring by their owners. My stag beetles are fierce and attack any stag beetle in the ring with great vigour.

Yikes, there's that violence! Oh, if only there were better censorship (or mind control). You should move to the US. The government is doing their best to make the world a better, more controlled place.

[lemec]

Heck, I love sex and violence. It's entertaining!

Of course you do. Undoubtedly raised on that profanity, right? Now if we could only censor it appropriately, you wouldn't have those evil thoughts (because you wouldn't conceive of them, right?)

Naaahhhh. The human race has partaken in murder, pillage and rape long before we had television. Animals do it too. The drive to procreate and the drive to compete - it's a part of anything that lives. Censoring or prohibiting something often results in its increased demand.

I don't discuss with people. I discuss with their statements. If you say something I agree with, I agree and the matter is settled.

maybe you should consider the source-ie: discuss with people, not just their statements. Everyone has their own perception of reality, and interpretation of it. Discussing the statements often degenerates into a matter of semantics.

Semantics: The study of language meaning

When a participant expresses themselves in a manner that is unclear it leads to misunderstandings. Discussions on semantics are necessary to remove the misunderstanding or the discussion will really go nowhere.

The problem is that when someone offers a stance with no points to take in, there is nothing to consider. Hurrah catchphrases like "Just follow your instincts", and "It has so much emotion" are examples of majestic sand castles that collapse at the slightest touch of analysis. Until vague concepts like these are clearly defined, they're just sounds. Explain yourself clearly so I can understand you. Grawp(me) is not so smart. Grawp is not a mindreader. Grawp does not have your experience. Share with Grawp.

Sort of in line with 'discuss with people', huh?

Just because I may have heard that someone is an award-winning animator doesn't mean I have insight into what experiences they have. Perhaps they should share those experiences during a discussion if they are relevant to the points being made. Who you are affects what arguments you have to offer. If you don't offer statement based on your experience, then it is all for naught. I still don't care who you are, what you say you are or whatever label has been stuck on you. What you say and what you do in my presence is who you are to me. I wouldn't expect others to perceive me based on my reputation either.

I see debates as being a pitched battle between a pair of stag beetles put in a ring by their owners. My stag beetles are fierce and attack any stag beetle in the ring with great vigour.

Yikes, there's that violence! Oh, if only there were better censorship (or mind control). You should move to the US. The government is doing their best to make the world a better, more controlled place.

LOL! No actual stag beetles were harmed in this discussion. Unharmony is double plus ungood.

[Peter Wassink]

Sort of in line with 'discuss with people', huh?

discuss with user 767?

[slowtiger]

Ups. Just returning from an nice walk in the afternoon sun I find this thread exploding ...

It's not a coincidence that the director and his characters speak in accents favored by the criminal elements. Must be great fun to be hated!

Paul, this was your sentence I was mainly referring to. I read it as a critique of Bakshi's choice of subject and felt I had to defend him. I tried to avoid the personal argument - that Bakshi had first-hand knowledge of such a milieu - in favour of the more general "why not tell a story about criminals and how they behave". And I don't think that this subject only works for half of the population - a list of this year's Hollywood output shows a lot of films dealing with something criminal. Since I don't believe that every director of those films tells about a personal trauma there must be more to it. Sex and crime sells, and fascinates the audience.

One could argue now if it makes a difference wether a director depicts crime and violence as truthful as he can (from experience, maybe), or if his criminal characters are just artificial products of Hollywood's exploitation and entertainment machine. Mind you, I still haven't seen "Coon skin", "Heavy Traffic" or "Fritz the cat", but I'm looking forward to it.

[Paul Fierlinger]

I didn't mean to imply that Bakshi has a criminal background, if that is what you are saying -- as far as I know he doesn't. But he does have a nasty reputation of being a bully to his employees and animators in particular. It seems that everyone who has ever worked for him has a bad story to tell. You can hear echoes of this in his YouTube rant, where he complains about employees eating pizza on the job he pays $1,000 a week for -- or whatever it was he said. I won't listen to him twice just to get this quote right. You can hear it in his dismissive tone at the end about having animators come in to do his work. I hear this bully attitude throughout the whole piece and it leaves me queasy at the stomach.

I thought the review Sierra linked us to was very telling of his work and overall attitudes in life. Certainly nobody I can admire. Besides he's the king of rotoscoping, remember? Now how much lower can you get?

[Mandalaholic]

Now how much lower can you get?

3D? Crappy 3D makes me want to hurl!

[lemec]

I don't know Bakshi personally nor do I have personal, first-hand experience with him. I'm not even a fan and nor do I particularly like or dislike his work - well, Holli Would is pretty good-looking; she's based on Kim Basinger after all. The rest of his work is so-so with me. Aside from his work, I felt there were no good reasons to disregard his arguments on surviving as an animator in our present day, and so I was compelled.

While the Internet provides us great venues for free speech, there are a couple ground rules that I try to stick to, especially when talking about others. Feel free to adopt them as your own or outright disregard them

- Don't speak poorly of other people except from your first-hand experiences with them. Speaking poorly of their work (from first-hand experience) is fair game. Otherwise, it's just gossip. If you agree with disparaging remarks that someone else has posted, indicate your assent and show us the link and let us draw our own conclusions.

- If you must speak poorly of others consider why. Is it to warn others from having an unpleasant experience with them or are you trying to ruin their reputation(s)?

- Don't use their reputation or position to validate or invalidate their statements. We shouldn't believe everything we hear from an authority just because it comes from an authority nor should we disregard everything we hear from a criminal just because it comes from a criminal. It's rare to find people who lie all the time just as it's rare to find people who tell the truth all the time. People lie to serve their own purposes but unless you can point out their agendas don't go about saying: "He's lying because he's an asshole!" Instead: "He's lying because he's trying to make himself look good." or "He's lying because he doesn't want others to know of his foul deeds." etc.

[CartoonMonkey]

A bit off topic, Ever take stock at all the negative things you have to say in a given day versus the number of positive things? Has the business of animation made YOU a curmudgeon? I've tried to curtail this particular personal foible of mine...
And I mostly succeed. Surprisingly, I still find joy in seeing all of the amazing variety the world of animation has to offer.
Also: Don't feed the troll.

[Paul Fierlinger]

To all appearances, from where I sit, this has turned into a generational clash; inevitable, all things considered, nevertheless unproductive at this stage and I sign off.

[Sierra Rose]

Well for some people, it seems discussion is a battle, not an exchange.

[ingie01]

I must say, this is one of the most elucidating topics I have read. My mind is much clearer in respect to my own work and creative urges. Overcome by the pressures of society to succeed I left my confidence to wait until now. I have the advantage of age. Age is and will continue to be the great common denominator. I am at peace with myself. I enjoy all the great tools, resources, and people who are accessible more than ever before. Thanks lemec and all..........