Summary of Andrew Darley's "Bones of Contention: Thoughts on the Study of Animation"

Darley, Andrew. “Bones of Contention: Thoughts on the Study of Animation”. Animation: An Interdisciplinary Journal Vol2 (1) 2007: 63-76. Print.

Although Andrew Darley is not an animation fanatic or a specialist in the field or study of animation, (his strengths lie in more general media disciplines) his predisposition allows him to look objectively at the study of the medium of animation and through this he discovered problems pertaining to the academy of animation. Only recently has animation been considered a form of art and more appreciation developed.  However, with limited information and studies around animation, the theories that develop from the new studies and essays only focus on the broader aspect of animation which Darley describes as the ‘ontological’ concerns around animation. As a result, this diverts the focus away from the ultimate questioning of defining animation and discovering its history, style, context and aesthetic aspects- the basics of any study.

Although it has been an underrated and marginalized medium, the experts of the field tend to overcompensate for this and exaggerate the artist form- Darley refers to this as the ‘inferiority complex’. Theorists dish out rash statements, such as: the imaginative ability within animation is endless, whereas in other forms such as live action (film) and literature, there are limits that constrain the imagination. Darley argues that every art form has limitations governed by the traditional rules that bind it.  Animation has its limits, but has not been discovered as theorists dwell on the essence of animation and the nature of being instead of seeing the constraints of the medium.

Animation has previously been seen as part of film, and for this reason, the boundaries between animation and live action (film) become blurred in regards to animation studies. Although there are many similarities between the two mediums, there are distinguishing factors that allow for alternative thought.

There have been studies around the modernism of animation but this approach disregards other types of expressions. The essentialism approach seems to limit the expressive qualities the text/ artwork is capable of as the rigorous rules seem to restrict artist freedom. These set of barriers essentialism promotes leaves some works less appreciated when those barriers are broken. 

Some animations may mimic the conventions of live- action and these similarities should be explored and discussed further.  Digressing back to the preconception that animation has unlimited possibilities with regards to imaginative representation, Darley believes that this notion should be disregarded, as many mediums (although they have established rules) can break the rules and conventions that have been traditionally established where the idea of the work requires and expansion of the medium.

Darley believes that imaginative constraint should never be an issue with the mediums rules, the constraint lies within the artist’s abilities to convey and idea or text. This can be said for digital imagery, where all texts have constraints in the artist, not in the form of art. Digital imagery is not superior to mediums and yes, there is freedom as there is in other forms of media. Although digital media has opened up a new sphere of representation and an ‘easier mode to portray ideas’, certain constraints/ rules are essential in keeping the artwork in tact enough for people to read it and appreciate it. Another concern regarding animation is the growing technology that creates a difficulty in distinguishing between live action and animation. However, this should not alarm theorists as many other conventions of the two mediums should be enough to distinguish and establish the mediums as art forms.

Darley concludes that animation should not be so theoretical when the actual basis of animation is lacking in content and information. The theories lack in evidence as the evidence must still be discovered by intensive research. Claims of modernism, essentialism, superiority and imagination have to be substantiated with history, styles of animation, aesthetical conventions, and genres.