(Monday was Queen's Birthday so I didn't make any documentations)
On Tuesday I presented my seminar. It was at the end of the day, so I breezed through most of my theory and context, and mainly showed some of my sketches I did for environment and character designs. When I reflect upon my presentation now, I wished I talked more about my stylistic influences, and why I chose to use them, as well as the specific themes I chose to explore in my story. However those were all left out for the sake of time efficiency, and I ended up just briefly giving and overview of what I am doing, and what I intend to do. A couple of lecturers from another stream questioned my character design, stating that it was way too over-done (the wide-eyed, Disney style). I remember trying to explain my choice, that these types of designs are what children tend to identify with, and substitute themselves in the character's place to experience the world. The other lecturer commented that it something of cheaply-earned empathy (I cannot remember his exact words). I felt put on the spot at that point, and I was beginning to doubt my decisions. I ended up saying that it is what the narrative that portrays the character as unique, not necessarily the design, and I did base the design on my sister. I thought they gave a really condescending "ok", and I hurried to sit back down. The whole thing made me feel really embarrassed. Not that those lecturers were wrong, at this point I do agree with them, my design IS very common-place, and it does not challenge any sort of boundaries; I might go back and reiterate the design, but it's not entirely my focus. I have a feeling that the lecturers were targeting me for some reason, as I did not see them critique anyone else so harshly. It may be because I did not elaborate on much of my project's background, or present much of the narrative context of fear, etc; or it just might be they do not care much about comics. At the end of the seminars, as I was about to leave, one of the lecturers said to me that she didn't mean her comments as critiques, but an opportunity to get better. I wanted to believe that, but when she did talk my design I felt her tone was rather unkind, and I felt that everything I had done so far is all for naught, and I wasn't good enough; my project less significant than everyone else's. It also might be that I am a person who takes critiques really seriously, and I am over-thinking this whole situation; but I do feel like it is necessary for me to improve a bit on my current design.
On the other hand, I had another idea for my story; or rather a theme that supports it. I remember talking to my sister about how her imaginations scare her, but they cannot hurt her. So in my story, the creature that follows Nelly around is a figment of her imagination that escaped into her reality from her imaginary world. The world through the rose bush is her imagination, and the two endings are her decisions about how she deals with this runaway imaginary figure. In one ending, she learns to live with it, knowing that it cannot hurt her. In another ending, Nelly locks the figure back in the imaginary world, so she won't have to see it ever again. The real and the imaginary world can be thought of as two halves of a full circle of Ying and Yang (Chinese philosophy); I will create the contrast of these two worlds with the real world being coloured and bright, while the imaginary one is in black and white. I want it to be this way to reflect the fact that our imaginations are not always bright or colourful or happy; our imaginations can frighten us, and this is what I choose to convey. The balance is lost once the dark creature leaks into the real world, and Nelly is tormented by its presence. How she deals with it will result in whether the or not the creature becomes a repressed figment of her imagination, or something she learns to live with.
No comments:
Post a Comment