File puptcrit/puptcrit.1001, message 97


To: <puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 00:14:55 -0500
From: Mathieu Rene <creaturiste-AT-primus.ca>
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Is Herbie a Puppet?


  BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
 Hiall,
 Darn, I wish I could read it all and participate actively in this
lively discussion, but I'm happily building puppets for the entire
month, and there are only a few hours in a day.
 The quick browsing I just did makes me want to share the following
idea, and I apologize if it has been raised before.
 The question of wether or not Motion Capture is puppetry has been
raised.
 I"d like to illustrate my current position about it by giving two
examples.
 To me, just a few years ago, object puppetry  was not Puppetry, at
least not in a way that interested me in any way. Probably because, as
a builder of puppets myself,  I couldn't imagine how a simple
unmodified everyday object could be as expressive and alive as a
puppet built for the very purpose of looking alive. well, I was proven
wrong, in a few minutes by seeing a very good show, big lesson in
humility, and in keeping an open mind.
 Motion Capture has been for me in a fuzzy zone between what could be
puppetry, and what it is not yet.
 Until I thought of it that way: when a motion capture performance
artist uses his/her body in a way to animate a creature/object that is
different than his/her own body, especially in anatomy and/or body
position/options/capabilities, to me, it's nothing else than puppetry.
The puppet brings something else than the "plain" body of the
performer, and a very specific set of puppeteering skills is required.
Sort of brings it right back to a some comment I might have heard from
Jim Henson (Dark Crystal or Labyrinth making-of): a performer able to
bring their entire performance into their hand (talking about a mime,
perhaps, my memory is fuzzy tonight).
 Would the displacement  of focus of the performance into a different
part of the body/object be a definitive criteria in deciding whether
or not something/anything performed live is actually puppetry?
 I'm currently inclined to think so, considering that many an art form
is required of a puppeteer in order to give full life and meaning to a
performance, yet none of these by themselves can be called puppetry
until they are used with the specific goal in mind.
 Like the same toolbox can be used to build a functional piece of
furniture or an exquisite work of art, I believe Motion Capture to be
such a tool set, and that in itself, it cannot be called puppetry,
until it is applied for that very specific purpose of being puppetry.
 I've seen a hammer slick its hair back and look utterly imbued with
himself, and called it puppetry without any doubt.
 If this is possible, imagine what a three-headed, winged, 6 legged
creature could be, when animated by motion capture, perhaps by several
puppeteers, acting in unison, most likely looking to the outside
observer as a bunch of crazy contemporary dancers with some alien
rhythm...
 No need to to be fully alien to fit in the category I named. How
about puppeteering a severely amputated actor, via motion capture?
 Or a person with extra limbs, or the ability to fly, or to stretch
its skin...
 The arms become wings, a broomstick could be Pinnochio's nose
extending at a puppeeteer's precise motion...
_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-puptcrit.org
Admin interface: http://lists.puptcrit.org/mailman/listinfo/puptcrit
Archives: http://www.driftline.org

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005