muku muku?
--- Andrew Priest <apriest_at_netidea.com> wrote:
>
>
> ➢ I think that was largely designed to be an
> anachronisism -
> a 'foul' creature that believed himself to be God's
> gift to
> girls. For as you may recall in the start of one of
> the
> cartoons, he effectively cleared the perfume shop he
> visited. Hmmm, maybe that is why a friend is
> studying
> French - to try and develop an accent to improve his
> chance
> of picking up..... Good luck, though he does have
> the
> advantage of not smelling like a sprayed skunk...
>
> There is that of course, and I imagine that said
> anachronism is part of the humor of the character.
> Yet, I suspect there is more to it. Have you ever
> seen a skunk walk? They have a particular stride
> that almost resembles a strut; as though they are
> showing off. This odd walk of theirs is so
> distinctive that even without the strip it’s a
> dead giveaway. Given that animation is the art of
> movement, I imagine that the skunk’s walk was a
> large part of the inspiration for the character.
>
> ➢ True, any desired characteristic can be
> exaggerated to the
> point of blatant, a huge plus for advertisers.
>
> Indeed. Yet there is more to it than that. Perhaps
> at its most banal, yet the same phenomenon is what
> allows are to be more pure, and sometimes even more
> intense than reality itself. By simplifying and
> exaggerating it is possible to extract something of
> an fundamental form of reality. Or give the little
> pink dragon really big eyes.
>
> ➢ I think you'd have to admit that 'cute and
> cuddly' are not
> two words generally associated with snakes, so
> having
> improved him in these regards makes him a more
> 'lovable
> villan'. If it sells movie merchandise, they can't
> hate
> that!
>
> Also don’t forget that someone had to animate the
> character. Facial animation on a more snake like
> snake would have been a nightmare to say the least.
> Getting the required character animation into the
> character requires modifying it enough to
> effectively animate. Bambi is a good example of
> this.
>
> ➢ Totally agree with this! I was analysing
> characters at one
> stage and trying to identify commonalities of
> certain
> attributes. Cute characters tend to have rounder
> construction shapes, softer lines and are generally
> more
> effininate.
>
> ➢ Think about the Skunk Sisters for example. HEY!
> ATTENTION
> BACK HERE!!!! You can think about yiffing them
> later...
> Generally it is considered that Onyx is the cutest
> of the
> three. Notice that her facial shapes are a little
> rounder
> than either of her sisters? Notice too that the
> parts you
> consider make her look 'cute' versus 'sexy' are
> DIFFERENT!
> In poses where she appears more 'cute', she'll be
> standing
> where her limbs make gentler curves as opposed to
> where
> she's being more purposeful that tends to use
> longer,
> entended arcs that tend to reduce the cute factor
> and
> increase the 'that looks hot' factor. This brings
> on to
> lines that make things look powerful etc, but we'll
> skip
> over this for now.
>
> ➢ Girls with cute butts tend to be rounder of the
> posterior
> than girls who have a 'hot' butt that as described
> above
> will tend to have longer, less rounded lines in
> their
> 'construction'. The doesn't mean girls with 'cute'
> butts
> are not desireable, or that they can't be some of
> both, but
> it is something to consider when you're checking out
> the
> sisters next.
>
> Now I feel out of my depth, but I’ll note that to
> some cute can be sexy. Or perhaps cute is a fetish
> of sorts. There seems to be something of a dichotomy
> between sexy and cute. Sort of a forbidden fruit
> thing I suppose. It’s interesting that vertically
> compressed is one thing that makes things seem cute.
> Still, I was born without a single artistic bone, so
> don’t trust my instincts.
>
> ➢ 'Cos it's so easy to dress someone up in a bad
> costume and
> churn out another B grade Sci-Fi... :-) Tends to
> follow
> our thought trains (as discussed before) that humans
> are
> the superior race (like we all believe we are 'above
> average' drivers...), hence creatures that are
> 'similar' to
> humans (anthropomorphic even, meaning having
> human-like
> characteristics!) are more likely to be accepted by
> our
> psyche as being possibly able to be smarter, faster,
> more
> able to run the universe or whatever than we are.
> How many
> aliens have you come across recently that don't
> follow the
> 'human' body model, even if they are a different
> size or
> have a few different appendages? Don't see many 1"
> flying
> salmon trying to take over the world? Equally as
> likely as
> some 6" tall fox from another galaxy, but our
> mindset says
> otherwise...
>
> I think you’re being overly harsh. Or I’m being
> too kind. Still, it’s inherently difficult to wrap
> one’s mind around a truly alien perspective. While
> Sci-Fi books have indeed had all kinds of alien
> creatures, they do tend to ultimately center on
> something that humans can relate to; whether that be
> insects or animals or even fish and octopi. Aliens
> that are truly alien are pretty rare. And it’s
> even questionable whether one can really see from
> such a perspective. At best all we really can do is
> see from what we imagine the perspective of the
> other would be. And that’s bound to be tainted by
> out own views.
>
>
>
> ➢ A simple example (maybe too simple?). Many of
> you have a
> dog (or know someone who does). If the dog was able
> to
> walk on its rear legs, use its paws to manipulate
> things as
> we do our hands, talk and generally interact with
> everyone.
> Think about the way the dog behaves? Does it have
> annoying habits, cleanliness, etc, that it would
> probably
> bring with it in anthro form that would really
> grate? Even
> if you did 'correct' it's physiology and make it a
> little
> larger (say up to 4' tall), it would still look like
> an
> upright walking dog with the same fur, potential for
> collecing grime (as an anthro dog, it may be
> perfectly
> acceptable to roll in things that smell...) and
> possibly
> the same habits (anthro dogs view it okay to hose
> down any
> vertical object they encounter, not brush their
> teeth, etc,
> etc). Sort of take the shine off hey? Because we
> are
> assuming because it is anthro it will want to use
> human
> ideals, human logic and human way of dealing with
> issues.
> Big assumptions here, I believe. Throw in the last
> part -
> would you then want to have sexual relations with
> it, even
> if it were compatable, allowing these other
> undesireable
> attributes? Nope, not looking so bright. Though
> I think
>
=== message truncated ===
=====
--------
Fuck you, Fuck you, Fuck you, Your Cool, Fuck you, I'm out
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Received on Thu Aug 07 2003 - 03:11:45 CDT