From: "Kismet" <kismet-AT-bigpond.net.au>
To: <puptcrit-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org>
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] The beginnings and the endings of Puppetry
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:44:02 +1000


Bils definition certainly opens a door to a categorical nightmare if one
were to be looking for it. Fortunatley the kudos of being a puppeteer isn't
driving hoardes of artists to our doors so that we don't have to be too
careful in defining what a puppet is.....I have always claimed my merry go
rounds as puppets, the figures as marrionettes, A show last year featured a
set of laughing clowns I made, Rod puppets. Certainly all animations are
puppetry, taking inanimate objects...sometimes 3D representations and moving
(manipulating) them by human effort in front of an audience..in real time
or........The rules of design, movement and engagement are the same.....
Of course once you mention funding/sponsorship all this flies out the door
and Puppetry is quickly dropped from the dialogue.....kinetic sculpture,
animation, manipulated environments and manipulated objects.

Daniel

----- Original Message -----
From: <WIPuppets-AT-aol.com>
To: <puptcrit-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] The beginnings and the endings of Puppetry


>
> Quoting from Baird's The Art of the Puppet:   "A puppet is  an inanimate
> figure that is made to move by human effort before an  audience."
>
> This does seem to be the most widely accepted and respected definition
I've
> seen, and it is the one that I use as a standard. There are three
essential,
> yet  fluid, ingredients. The inanimate figure- not necessarily  three
> dimensional. Could it be strictly a cyber creation? Human  effort- not
necessarily
> hands-on. If robots can be included, why not CG  figures? The audience-
not
> necessarily present during the  manipulation.
> I wonder how much controversy/inclusion Bil anticipated when  he published
> his book in 1973. I like to think that he was attempting to be  as
inclusive as
> this language can be stretched to allow.
>
> Nancy
>
> In a message dated 6/12/2005 12:30:13 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> bdr1020-AT-hotmail.com writes:
>
> If I  remember correctly, Bil Baird defined a puppet as a three
dimensional
> object animated before an audience. I consider stop motion animation
> puppetry... But, I was surprised to hear that the animators at Pixar
> consider their characters puppets. I suppose they do animate their
> characters in a way that is similar to puppets. I've just never thought of
> them in that way.
>
> Brett
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List address: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
> Admin interface:
http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/puptcrit-driftline.org
> Archives: http://www.driftline.org
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 11/06/2005
>
>

_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
Admin interface: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/puptcrit-driftline.org
Archives: http://www.driftline.org