Wells Reading Response

This essay compares the differences between traditional or orthodox animation with a more experimental animation. In  contrasting the two, wells talks about things like continuity (or lack there of), form, style, artists, etc. In regards to orthodox narration he basically says that most of the reliance of the animation comes from the continuity of plot and the way that everything in the film is tied to the evolution of the plot. This is shown in not only the way it is crafted, through cel animation, but also the way the gags and style all add to the forward motion of whatever actions are being portrayed in the animation. However, with experimental animation, it doesn't rely on the traditional tropes of narrative and continuity. He says also that unlike in orthodox animation where the audience is following an identifiable figure in the animation (duck, human, etc) in experimental the subject is much more abstract. He also talks about the more obvious presence of the artist in the animation. It is much more about personal expression, as opposed to simply telling a narrative story. Of the two, experimental obviously offers a much larger palate of what you can do. I like the idea of being able to do anything you can possibly think up. But also, after having done the small 100-frame animation I also have a deep respect for being able to execute realistically something that is more concrete than abstract.