Inside-out and Outside-in
Copyright (c) Mark Mayerson
From Apatoons #35
"The thing is...to learn how to draw from the outside-in is the most difficult thing that guys do and hardly ever master so that it amounts to anything. Drawing from the inside out is how it should be. That is, to have a point of view and have something to say and then reconcile all the skills you need to support what you have to say. That's the easiest and the only real
way to do it." --Gil Kane
The Comics Journal 113 has the transcript of a panel discussion at the 1986 Dallas Comics Convention with Robert Crumb and Gil Kane. During the discussion, the concept of an inside-out and outside-in approach came up. Kane also characterized it as the difference between dramatizing and illustrating.
Kane stated that he fell in love with movement and grace at an early age and was so smittten with them that he spent years trying to duplicate those qualities in his art. He was much more concerned with communicating those qualities than with communicating any particular content. Crumb responded, saying "Ironically, it seems to me that the majority of comic fans are also caught--guys who don't even know to to draw are caught up in just those lines and movements...That's what they love. The fact that the characters are completely cardboard personalities and heroes is insignificant."
Crumb readily admitted his limitations as a draftsman, and how he struggles with certain drawing problems. Kane commented that "I thing [Crumb's] one of the best [draftsmen], because good draftsmanship has little to do with learning the abstracts. Good draftsmanship has to do with doing a drawing so that it completely expresses the object that is being drawn. Taking it away from him and bringing it into my area...if you do a horse that is less than representational, but on the other hand totally expresses some aspect of the characer, and personality of the horse...you've found characterization is essence. And good drawing is essence. The mechanical aspects of drawing that we're talking about are simply tools to improve our perception."
Put simply, inside-out is someone who starts out with something they wish to express, and then muster all the technique at their disposal to express it. Outside-on is someone with polished technical skills trying to find something to say with those skills.It strikes me that these concepts are interesting ways to look at other media besides comics - like animation.
As an example of someone working from the outside-in, I'd point to Don Bluth. He strikes me as being very similar to Kane in that he fell in love with all the surface characteristics of Disney films. Any interview with Bluth will find him talking about a return to animated shadows, special effects animation, colored ink lines and multiplane camera moves. Rarely, if ever, does he speak about characterization or theme. He has a large arsenal of technique available to him, but to use Kane's terms, he fails to capture the essence of a character or an emotion.
Take Richard Condie (The Big Snit, Getting Started) by contrast. Condie's draftsmanship is poor. He is incapable of drawing a character three dimensionally. He animation is so rudimentary that I question whether he could animate for anyone besides himself. However, he has a well developed sense of humor. He sees people as far from perfect, doing things they know are against their best interests. Having something to say, Condie's films are watchable for all their technical shortcomings.
It's true that Bluth and Condie are working in different marketplaces. Another possible candidate for the inside-out aproach who is working in an area closer to Bluth would be Brad Bird. It is hard to judge him just on the basis of Family Dog, but there is definitely a strong point of view there. The dog is victimized by everyone he comes in contact with. None of the family has any redeeming characteistics. This family is a far cry from the Flintstones or live action sitcoms, where eccentric characters are usually offset by more normal characters. The technical level is far above a Condie film, but one knows that the content was there before the animation. One wonders about that with a Bluth film.
If I can extend the comparisons backwards in time, I'd point to Bob Clampett and Dick Lundy. Clampett's strong point of view was present even in his first black and white Looney Tunes. His craft and the craft of his artists improved tremendously over the years but the sense of humor is the same that created the Porky cartoons. While he was deprived of the opportunity for full animation in the Beany and Cecil's, there is no mistaking them for anyone else's films. Lundy, on the other hand, was able to bring many of the surface characteristics of Disney films to the films he directed at Lantz. However, while they are slick and enjoyable from a technical standpoint, I am at a loss to describe Lundy's point of view. I've seen Lundy-directed cartoons from Disney, Lantz and MGM, and I'm afraid that there's nothing beneath the surface whatsoever.
I don't believe that artists necessarily need fall into one category exclusively over the length of their careers. Bakshi has worked both ways. Heavy Traffic is an inside-out film. Bakshi's eclectic technical aproach just shows him reaching for anything he can get to express himself. Lord of the Rings, on the other hand, is outside-in. I can't think of a better example of a film that's illustrated and not dramatized.
The whole failed renaissance of the '70's and early '80's failed precisely because the focus of attention was misplaced on the outside and not the inside. It was an understandable reaction to the torrent of TV animation, films without an outside or inside. The call for full animation, the rallying cry of a whole generation of animators, ignored the most basic need of communication: having something to say. Dick Williams, Steve Lisberger, Nelvana, Don Bluth and sometimes Bakshi were all concerned with the surface, not substance. As a result, few films in this period made a profit. And as a result, we now have films whose entire meaning can be described in three words: Buy the toy.
|
Home * About Apatoons * How to Join
* Stuff from Apatoons * Covers *
History |