Empathy and art

Post Reply New Topic

I'm studying animation, which is basically acting through a puppet or drawings (well, at least for character animation). Animators need to, not only have a good idea of how the character will move, but also the character's personality and how they will react in any given situation. It's a lot to take into account for any person. To have to think consciously about how people interact with one another or react to their surroundings takes a lot of studying and planning. Needless to say, empathy plays a huge role in that. You, the animator, has to get into the mind of the character, so you need to have a good idea of their temperament, their attitudes, their views, their circumstances, their flaws, their better qualities, etc. You also need to be able to actually feel how they are feeling.

I don't think this empathy thing is limited to just acting/animating. For example, A writer needs to be able to create three dimensional characters. I would also imagine that musicians have to take into account the content of their work and how it is to be received by their audience (although, I dunno- lyrics can be extremely cryptic). Art is (at least in some schools of thought) is useless if it is not communicating to its audience.

Having ASD, I wonder if that will impede on my ability to fully realize my potential as an animator. Maybe it won't, though. Non-autistics often take their natural empathy skills for granted and while that skill is very important, surely being someone who is constantly studying human interaction has an advantage*? Perhaps my analytical nature is what will allow me to prevail as an animator.

On the other hand, if I only observe people's feelings and don't feel them for myself, then maybe it's not truly acting at all. Though, I don't know about that. Whenever I create a character or study/get obsessed by someone elses' character, I usually act out scenes (internally or externally) because they influence me so much. I've always done that. I never had imaginary friends, but rather imaginary personas. So do I genuinely lack empathy or is it that my condition stops me from naturally reading the signals?

It's all very confusing.

Well, TL;DR, I'm concerned if my aspergers is affecting my creativity (in terms of empathy) and I'm wondering if others have the same concern.

*Don't I at least deserve a shiny sticker for effort? Lawl.

I don't like your use of 4chan memes but the post itself is good.

People tend to take social skills and sue them to have personalities bounce off one another; a basic understanding of eprsonality types would likely be enough to accurately portray the interactions along with use of slang they might use (or might not for humorous effect.)

Autistics don't have empathy problems; it is that others don't recognize the empathy shown because it is outside of social norms. I probably care more than 90% of those my age regarding things familial/political/personal.

Those that say art has to communicate to the audience is elitist as all hell. Good art is good subject, techniques and passionate emotion put into it.

I did a MA course in scriptwriting and found character to be the hardest thing by far, but I did have strengths in other areas other people found difficult. Tutors would praise the detail of the script's 'universe' (mostly science fiction based) and unusual scenarios I created, but always rip it apart for weak characters and corny dialogue. The main character was usually a cardboard cut-out just reacting to what ever was happening in the world, whereas tutors always wanted the character's personality to drive everything in the story. I just find it extremely difficult to write that way, although it did get better with practice and it doesn't mean that the script has no merit, it's just the standard way they teach writing and as SanityTheorist says good art is good art. I also agree that focusing on what other people are going to think of your work all the time is just going to result in mediocrity or pretensiousness, the best way I think is just to follow your inspiration as people respect that rather than something that blindly follows all the conventions they teach in college.

I don't go on 4chan, but (for better or for worse) they influence a lot of the internet culture, which is kind of lulzy.

I agree- when people refer to empathy when talking about autism, it's more to do with the fact that our delays in social development cause us to be ill equipped when it comes to interacting with others. It's not that we don't have compassion for others or lack a desire to be involved in the lives of others. In fact, many autistic folk are overly empathetic. I knew many autistic folk in my life who cried profusely because they thought that they may have insulted someone or because someone else was sad.

Many autistics have a sort of 'golden rule' sense of empathy, which isn't always the best thing. For example, my friend may say to me that they are bored. Now, I know that I have loads of fun looking up diseases on the CDC's website, but it might not be very pleasant for my friend. I think that's the kind of empathy that I am referring to; the well-intentioned-but-ignorant type. I'm much better with empathy than I used to be, but I always face the risk of only applying my own mindset to other people when studying a character (though that may simply be something every actor faces regardless of their neurology).

I agree - art is not restricted to any single purpose. However, when we're talking about a medium such as cinema (which is often entertainment as well as art), it is communication. Not always, of course. Surrealist cinema rarely ever has any coherent plot. Don Hertzfeldt, one of my favourite filmmakers, creates these deranged animations that make little to no sense, but they keep you totally captivated because of the use of timing and mise-en-scene. Hertzfeldt has stated on many occasions that he doesn't like imposing meaning on his films and that people can come to their own conclusions about what they've just watched. Compare that to Pixar, who rely on story. Pixar are fantastic at communicating through their animation. Just watch The Incredibles and just absorb the meticulousness that is put into a single second of animation. I'd like to be able to do that.

[quoteI just find it extremely difficult to write that way, although it did get better with practice and it doesn't mean that the script has no merit, it's just the standard way they teach writing and as SanityTheorist says good art is good art. I also agree that focusing on what other people are going to think of your work all the time is just going to result in mediocrity or pretensiousness, the best way I think is just to follow your inspiration as people respect that rather than something that blindly follows all the conventions they teach in college.[/quote]

I agree- not all stories have to be character-centric. Though I respectfully disagree to a certain degree about the part that I made bold. On one hand, it is true that getting too caught up in other's perception of your work kills creativity and inhibits your ability to reach your actual potential. On the other hand, if you are overly confident about your work, without listening to any criticism, that would also lead to mediocrity and pretentiousness.

Also, character animation is acting and acting is communication. How a character says a line or moves or even blinks makes the difference in the meaning of the scene and if I fail to convey important character traits through the acting, then it will be mediocre.

Thanks for your response. It's all very interesting

Last edited by MindBlind on 01 Aug 2012, 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I know little of animation so sorry if I say something ignorant.

Communicating through art I think is fairly unimportant; the importance is the impact it leaves. I think when plot and art work together you tend to get the best result; look at Okami or Onimusha for proof.

That being said, I think I prefer seeing more art than plot, since art can add more meaning to the plot.

Oh, not to worry! Not all animation is this dogmatic when it comes to conveying characters. It's the standard for places like Disney and Pixar, but often animation experiments with style. UPA are best known for this. I don't personally think that there is a right way of being an animator, but learning the basic principles is a must because even if your animations are surrealist, you might need to sell your soul to a big company from time to time to fund your magnum opus (or to eat, haha). Also, I deeply admire and aspire to create the kind of characters that disney animators create.

Oh, absolutely. There is much more to the experience than "today we learned in school...". Art doesn't cease to become art merely because it is not trying to tell you something (or worse, brainwash you). I've never played either of those games, but I do feel strongly about video games as an artform.

Bare bones plot has no substance. Anyone can use a three act structure. However it only begins to have resonance with others when you add flesh onto that structure. Some people do it with stylistic elements; others do it with characters; others do it with thematic elements.

Ideally you should have both but I think it's better to have interesting scenes than interesting characters. It gave warhammer 40k: Kill Team a very strong impact despite having nothing known about the characters except for their skills.

Contributing with my opinion, folks.

I write a lot of fan fictions and poetry as an hobby. Most of my fan fictions include original characters ; to those I have to find plausible traits, background, personality and such. I don't find it that difficult. For sure, I do spend more time thinking how my romance/friendship stories could be realistic, but globally I don't find it difficult. It may be that I read a lot, and that the 'ingredients' to make a coherent relationship between characters can be common to many books.
Empathy is my weakest point however. I'm not very descriptive about feelings as I can't feel them in my daily life myself.

What's sure is that most people enjoy reading my fictions, as I can think of some very interesting and unusual plots. This, combined with a broad choice of words and idioms, can make stories that are enjoyed, not because you wrote something to get people to have a very specific emotion at a very specific moment, but because you wrote an imaginative scenario, with colourful characters and vivid descriptions that can lift people in awe, even if you didn't intent this result.

Concerning 4chan, it can be interesting and funny. Be prepared though, as 90 % of the memes don't exit 4chan, as most of them are pretty much inside jokes, gore, pornographic humour, pitch black jokes, or all at the same time. It can be fun if you know how to lurk and what to expect. And if you are 18+.

I've definitely received criticisms of my writing's characterization and dialogue more than once, and I wonder if my social incompetence has something to do with that. Honestly, worldbuilding rather than characterization is my favorite part of writing, especially when it comes to fantasy. I also have trouble describing emotions.

Wordbuilding is fun for me as well brandonSP; I particularly love making my own compound words.

ReneDescartes, I think characterization is extremely difficult, which is why I do better with lyrics writing than storytelling. I don't have to do the painstaking conversations.

May I add that I prefer worldbuilding and story building much more than character building, folks. I was just saying it wasn't impossible for me, as I read and practised writing a lot.

I'm the opposite. I love characters, but I find it so hard to create a setting and really, without that environment then what's the point? The character would end up living in a void, banging his head against something solid until his skull burst open.

Despite the fact that I love characters so much, I am always a tad self conscious if they are just author avatars or strawmen. There's a difference between making a character that mirrors many of your own traits or experiences and a character that is supposed to be you. I don't want any of my characters to be me (unless I actually play a role as me in something, haha).

I use life experiences at times to get some situations from my stories, and some traits for some of my protagonists. I hate autobiographical characters. My main chars are always different, and 60% of the time they are girls. A subversion of what people think girls are, since they can be foolhardy in some stories, moe in others, rebellious, submissive, wise... There is no limits.

I don't hate character building, it's just not my favourite part.

Art that has the strongest impact with me is usually on darker subjects...I don't know if that is because I am an artist with a very dark past but it resonates within me. My art is always quite dark with a lot of symbolism of death and evolution...however, another artists might interpret it differently. This is why art should always be more about empathy from within than from external sources.