Visual Analysis

Though the Bottle and The Dog Who Was a Cat may seem very different they both have much more subtle messages in them about identity, and the idea of  what a person is.

Bottle shows a person changing over time, their identity becoming something else when they meet someone new. As they share things with each other, they begin to change and they are no longer the person they started out as, but rather an amalgamation of their own identity and this new person that they have met. If they had not have met, then each person may have stayed the same, or been influenced by something else. It shows how the people around us help to make up our identities, rather than us just being one fixed, never changing person. They give and take different parts of who they are until they are a very different person than they started as, and as they slowly come together they begin to break apart. this could be a metaphor for all kinds of things, not least marriage and becoming a single unit, or trying to become or be a part of someone else so much that your own identity is lost. Another interpretation is that, in a way, they could even be telling each other how they should be, with the things they are saying - it may not be just sending a gift/sending a part of themselves. In real life, it could be subtle or not, but they way people act, what they do and even gifts they give to each other could all be a way of showing how they want a person to be, especially when family or partners are involved.

I think that using stop motion was a very effective technique for this because things are changed in a much more organic way, using actual parts of the world to make up these characters, which is in effect what happens in reality and stops them from becoming perfect solid shapes which doesn't really show them as natural living beings as well. Stop motion also shows the passing of time much more effectively than other types of animation and the fact that stop motion is done with photography works as a kind of documentation of their life, as that is what people do with photographs now.

The Dog Who Was a Cat Inside shows a different story of someone struggling with their identity as opposed to finding/creating it with someone else. The dog character is shown to have a cat on the inside, which can be seen as a metaphor for not feeling the same inside a you act/look, which could also be showing gender dysphoria/sexuality. The dog chases away another cat/kindred spirit after a second, as it acts as a dog is supposed to, and not necessarily how it wants to act. Other dogs act more hostile towards the cat inside the dog, symbolising the way that many people often treat people differently depending on their true self and what they do - for example, if we look at this as a dog being male and a cat as female, this shows another male attacking the dog for being female on the inside/not acting as a typical male, which is a big problem in our society today. The dog then gets into a fight with their cat, showing the inner turmoil or someone who's identity does not match up to other peoples' ideas of how they should be, and how they themselves feel they should or should not be. 

After getting into trouble, and being in a different environment than usual with no expectations, the cat and dog are able to work together and make themselves much better off for it. They are happier, and as they emerge, they find someone who is the opposite of them - a dog in a cat's body. This perhaps shows then that letting go of your surroundings and everything that dictates how you should be allows you to see other people and other people to see you how you truly are, and that people would be happier outside of the rules of society and how they expect you to be. Gender is not the only possible meaning of this animation, however; mental illness is another thing that works really well with this animation, especially with the treatment people affected with Autism get, or when people don't ct as other want them to when they have depression or even psychosis. On a less drastic level it can show the difference between when is acceptable/normal to like and what isn't, like the differences between subcultures and how they may act towards different activities and the like. I feel like this animation is left open enough that the viewer can interpret it the way that they want to, and whichever way it means more to them which I things is a great idea and works very well. 

The animation itself is done in a way that has particular shapes for everything which could show a mentality of 'this is how certain things should be/act/look' within the setting that the dog/cat is in. For the most part, other than the actual cat/dog, the animation is not actually that bright, giving it a glum, miserable feeling which does well to reflect the sort of mood and mentality that the sort of people with dysphoria or any of the above illnesses may have.

Both animations show their ideas about identity very well, even if the message when it comes down to it could be considered as quite different; while Bottle shows how you may change and be changed by the people around you, TDWWAC shows how you might be a certain way and other people want to change that, but that there are other people with similar identity issues and that you are not along in that. The former could be more of a warning of what happens when you let go of your individuality, and how it is not always a fixed thing, whereas the former could be seen as more of a reassuring message that you are not alone, and it is fine if your identity does not conform to what is expected of you. I feel that this lighter message makes TDWWAC a lot easier and inspiring to watch, even if the message in Bottle can be just as important, but I think that they were made with this in mind, as the message of both can be conveyed better with their differing moods and atmospheres.

Essay; Prelim Research

A trope is simply a figure of speech. When using this literary device, you intend for the word or words to have a meaning that is different than the literal meaning. In other words, there is a shift from the literal meaning of a word or words to a non-literal meaning. [http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-trope.html]


A literary trope is the use of figurative language – via word, phrase, or even an image – for artistic effect such as using a figure of speech. The word trope has also come to be used for describing commonly recurring literary and rhetorical devices, motifs or clichés in creative works [wiki]

Linked to: Stereotypes

tv tropes: The site includes entries on various series and tropes. An article on a work includes a brief summary of the work in question along with a list of associated tropes. In addition to the tropes, most articles about a work also have a "Your Mileage May Vary"(YMMV) page with items that are deemed to be subjective. These items are not usually storytelling tropes, but audience reactions which have been defined and titled.

Trope description pages are generally created through a standardized launching system, known as "You know that thing where... " (YKTTW), in which site members, who are referred to as "tropers", can draft a trope description and have the option of providing examples or suggesting refinements to other drafts before launch. While going through YKTTW is not necessary to launch a trope, it is very strongly recommended in order to strengthen the trope as much as possible.[tv tropes]

The Tropes vs Women in Video Games[Femfreq] - controversy relevant? Possibly.

Archetypal literary criticism is a type of critical theory that interprets a text by focusing on recurring myths and archetypes (from the Greek archē, "beginning," and typos, "imprint") in the narrative, symbols, images, and character types in literary work. As a form of literary criticism, it dates back to 1934 when Maud Bodkin published Archetypal Patterns in Poetry. [wiki]

It has been argued that Frye’s version of archetypal criticism strictly categorizes works based on their genres, which determines how an archetype is to be interpreted in a text


In a monomyth, the hero begins in the ordinary world, and receives a call to enter an unknown world of strange powers and events. The hero who accepts the call to enter this strange world must face tasks and trials, either alone or with assistance. In the most intense versions of the narrative, the hero must survive a severe challenge, often with help. If the hero survives, he may achieve a great gift or "boon." The hero must then decide whether to return to the ordinary world with this boon. If the hero does decide to return, he or she often faces challenges on the return journey. If the hero returns successfully, the boon or gift may be used to improve the world. The stories of Osiris, Prometheus, Moses, Gautama Buddha, and Jesus, for example, follow this structure closely

The Hero with a Thousand Faces (first published in 1949) is a non-fiction book, and seminal work of comparative mythology by Joseph Campbell. In this publication, Campbell discusses his theory of the journey of thearchetypal hero found in world mythologies.


Since publication of The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Campbell's theory has been consciously applied by a wide variety of modern writers and artists. The best known is perhaps George Lucas, who has acknowledged a debt to Campbell regarding the stories of the Star Wars films






One of the questions that has been raised about the way that Campbell laid out the monomyth of the hero's journey in Hero with a Thousand Faces was that it focused on the masculine journey. Although this was not altogether true—the princess of the Grimms' "The Frog Prince" tale and the saga of the hero-goddess Inanna's descent into the underworld feature prominently in Campbell's schema—it was, nonetheless, a question that has been raised about the book since its publication.

Christopher Vogler, a Hollywood film producer and writer, wrote a memo for Disney Studios on the use of The Hero with a Thousand Faces as a guide for scriptwriters; this memo influenced the creation of such films as Aladdin, The Lion King, and Beauty and the Beast. Vogler later expanded the memo and published it as the book The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure For Writers, which became the inspiration for a number of successful Hollywood films and is believed to have been used in the development of the Matrix series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Basic_Plots

TV tropes:Tropes are just tools. Writers understand tropes and use them to control audience expectations either by using them straight or by subverting them, to convey things to the audience quickly without saying them.Human beings are natural pattern seekers and story tellers. We use stories to convey truths, examine ideas, speculate on the future and discuss consequences. To do this, we must have a basis for our discussion, a new language to show us what we are looking at today. So our storytellers use tropes to let us know what things about reality we should put aside and what parts of fiction we should take up.
"One does not necessarily have to cluck in disapproval to admit that entertainment is all the things its detractors say it is: fun, effortless, sensational, mindless, formulaic, predictable and subversive. In fact, one might argue that those are the very reasons so many people love it."—Neal Gabler, Life the Movie: How Entertainment Conquered Reality

If your favorite shows have long lists of tropes associated with them, well, so does everybody's. A show featuring an Action Girl or showing a character kicking the dog is not a bad thing; the former is merely a reasonable type of character (badass character who is female) and the latter is a character action that happens plenty in Real Life.

Consider the following points before you label simply including a common story element or character type as a sign of creative failure:

"But it's what this author is doing this time that matters, as much as, if not more than, what he or she did last time, and that, certainly, matters far more than its kinships, its family likenesses with its mode, its genres, its formal kind."

—Valentine Cunningham, Oxford


There is nothing new under the sun. Including that very statement. And the book from which it comes. Completely ignoring the possibility that one's favorite show just might not be hewn from the very essence of the universe by Thor himself and placed in the periodic table under Or for "Originalium" doesn't change the fact that it wasn't. And acknowledging that it isn't should not lessen its appeal, either.


Every story is influenced by what came before it — and storytellers (e.g., writers, directors, actors) are bound to show that influence, intentionally or not, in the process of telling. Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having ties to other works. That said, there certainly is such thing as too derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter Cliché Storm (and even those aren't necessarily bad).


It's impossible to write something completely and utterly without tropes, anyway, so stop trying.


All tropes can be written badly. This includes tropes that everyone thinks are good, like Magnificent Bastard. A badly written Magnificent Bastard may be done in such a way that everyone else in the story are idiots and generally gives less of an impression of intelligence and more of an impression of cheating or changing the internal rules of the story. Refuge in Audacity has different breaking points for different people.


All tropes can be overused. Too many Xanatos Gambits tend to make the show confusing, no matter how well written they are. Too many Moments Of Awesome take up room where plot could go, or make the audience pay less attention to the relatively boring plot bits, making the story more shallow. The Moment Of Awesome is supposed to be a singular moment for a character and the Rule of Cool can make up for weak points in a story, but rarely does it work as the story.


Just because a trope is realistic doesn't mean it's good. There is a reason why we have an entire category devoted to Acceptable Breaks from Reality. For example, The Hero gets shot in the shoulder and dies. The Determinatordoesn't come into play, no My Name Is Inigo Montoya, nothing. Realistic, maybe, but that is not what we want a hero to do. That's right, one of the most fundamental character archetypes is usually unrealistic. The important thing when writing a story is that it's believable, not that it's real. Reality Is Unrealistic, after all; often people are so used to tropes that it's reality they find jarring.


A good show doesn't need "good" tropes. People often search for an ideal recipe for a hit show, as if entertainment was some sort of alchemical process, and are surprised when their stitched-together creation lurches three steps before disappearing into critical oblivion. A well written show won't be any worse if it doesn't have a Magnificent Bastard. A good show doesn't get worse if the main five characters don't form a Five-Man Band. Heck, a good show doesn't even need basic tropes like The Hero or Big Bad.


http://www.mediaknowall.com/gcse/keyconceptsgcse/keycon.php?pageID=audience

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audience_theory


- main char archetypes

- main story things

how and why are they used?

Create my own - chars first and the storyboard/do scenes of them going through their her's journey or whatever else?


A cliché or cliche (UK /ˈkliːʃeɪ/ or US /klɪˈʃeɪ/) is an expression, idea, or element of an artistic work which has become overused to the point of losing its original meaning or effect, even to the point of being trite or irritating, especially when at some earlier time it was considered meaningful or novel.

In phraseology, the term has taken on a more technical meaning, referring to an expression imposed by conventionalized linguistic usage. The term is frequently used in modern culture for an action or idea that is expected or predictable, based on a prior event. Typically pejorative, "clichés" may or may not be true.Some are stereotypes, but some are simply truisms and facts.Clichés often are employed for comic effect, typically in fiction.


Most phrases now considered clichéd originally were regarded as striking, but have lost their force through overuse. The French poet Gérard de Nerval once said "The first man who compared woman to a rose was a poet, the second, an imbecile."


A cliché is often a vivid depiction of an abstraction that relies upon analogy or exaggeration for effect, often drawn from everyday experience.Used sparingly, they may succeed, but the use of a cliché in writing, speech, or argument is generally considered a mark of inexperience or a lack of originality.

A stock character is a stereotypical person whom audiences readily recognize from frequent recurrences in a particular literary tradition. Stock characters are archetypal characters distinguished by their flatness; as a result, they tend to be easy targets for parody and to be criticized as clichés. The presence of a particular array of stock characters is a key component of many genres


Stock characters also feature heavily in the comic traditions of Kyōgen in Japan and Commedia dell'arte in Italy; in the latter they are known as tipi fissi (fixed [human] types).

The study of the Character, as it is now known, was conceived by Aristotle’s student Theophrastus. In The Characters (c. 319 BC), Theophrastus introduced the “character sketch,” which became the core of “the Character as a genre.” It included 30 character types. Each type is said to be an illustration of an individual who represents a group, characterized by his most prominent trait.


http://www.soulcraft.co/essays/the_12_common_archetypes.html


https://www.udemy.com/blog/archetypal-characters/


http://www.byrdseed.com/patterns-in-writing-iv-character-archetypes/


http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/narrative-techniques-in-writing-definition-types-examples.html


http://www.bustle.com/articles/39702-criticism-of-anita-sarkeesian-tropes-vs-women-comes-in-4-groundless-forms


http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Episodes



http://narrativefirst.com/articles/not-everything-is-a-heros-journey


http://narrativefirst.com/vault/what-character-arc-really-means


http://narrativefirst.com/articles/dramatica-story-theory-for-the-21st-century


http://nanowrimo.org/forums/character-cafe


http://nanowrimo.org/forums/plot-doctoring


http://www.musik-therapie.at/PederHill/Character.htm


http://www.brainpickings.org/2012/11/20/daily-routines-writers/


http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2013/12/16/writers-wakeup-times-literary-productivity-visualization/