Philosophy needs to be real in the sense that it has to make sense of the world as it is, not as we imagine or want it to be. But philosophy deals with issues on a general level. It is concerned with a whole series of grand abstract nouns: truth, justice, the good, identity, consciousness, mind, meaning and so on.
Cartoons abstract from real life in much the same way philosophers do. Homer is not realistic in the way a film or novel character is, but he is recognisable as a kind of American Everyman. His reality is the reality of an abstraction from real life that captures its essence, not as a real particular human who we see ourselves reflected in.
The satirical cartoon world is essentially a philosophical one because to work it needs to reflect reality accurately by abstracting it, distilling it and then presenting it back to us, illuminating it more brightly than realist fiction can.
May 19, 2006
Cartoons and philosophy.
Why philosophy fits so well in cartoon form (like "The Simpsons"):
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
"The satirical cartoon world is essentially a philosophical one because to work it needs to reflect reality accurately by abstracting it, distilling it and then presenting it back to us, illuminating it more brightly than realist fiction can."
Oh, please. "Philosophical" has been drained of all meaning here. "Reflect reality," "distill it" and "present it back" -- exactly what form of communication does that formula leave out? Is the supposed contrast here between "philosophical" reflection and, say, wholly fanciful science fiction or just sheer incoherent madness?
These articles about pop culture are typically among the worst, most inane things churned out by journalists.
Homer is not realistic in the way a film or novel character is, but he is recognisable as a kind of American Everyman.
I think this is intrinsic to a certain kind of cartoon stylisation, rather than a particular "satirical" kind of cartoon. Because certain kinds of cartoon designs are divorced from recognisable human individuality (they are not attempting to be "realistic," in the sense that a Marvel Comic character's face might tend to be), they can stand in for everyone in a way that an actual human actor, with all his individual attributes, cannot really do. Homer can be an everyman because the Simpsons style, while flexible enough to allow for a diverse cast of characters, is also not one that strongly calls to mind particular characteristics of real individuals. Indeed, Simpsons caricatures of real people are generally unrecognisable unless you know who they are supposed to be from the start.
To take another example, my favourite example, there is an animated and a live action version of the movie Grave of the Fireflies (Hotaru no Haka). Both have the same basic plot (a young boy and his younger sister gradually starve and die) but the cartoon is much more affecting (i.e. I weep like a baby. Every time.) I think this is because the particular style used has that universalising potential that a real human face hasn't got.
That, and animation is a more forgiving medium, in terms of special effects, child actors, costuming and wardrobe, etc. But even leaving those aside, I do think that the choice of a particular style allows for this possibility:
His reality is the reality of an abstraction from real life that captures its essence, not as a real particular human who we see ourselves reflected in.
Balfegor: "Grave of the Fireflies" is one of my favorite movies. (See my Blogger profile.) I think it is the saddest movie I've ever seen (and also very beautiful). I get chills just starting to think about it. I do think the abstracted reality of the cartoon makes it more affecting and saves it from being phony or maudlin.
CB: As to the time warp, the article is from Britain. I'm guessing they are on a different season.
I haven't watched "The Simpsons" in a long time myself. I do watch "South Park." The insights are the same. You can do things with cartoons that would be insufferable with live actors.
And I mean flat cartoons. I detest those 3-D things.
I think that South Park has gone a ways beyond the Simpsons. What is amazing to me is how well they can get a message out, using such crude graphics and only a limited number of people for all those voices.
After this "bunch of naked apes" has exhausted the thought of Homer Simpson, I predict the next source of deep wisdom for them will be the chattering of chimpanzees.
Chimps and Homer Simpson as "the true heirs of Plato and Aristotle"!!
The contributions of post-modernism to western civilization are breathtaking.
Post a Comment