Why do we still value puppets in the digital age of cinema?

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Why do we still value physical puppets in the digital age of cinema?

This essay will investigate the impact of the digital revolution on traditional puppetry in the film industry. In an age where anything is possible with the use of computer generated animation, why do we still value handmade puppets?

From the analogue puppet shows of medieval travelling theatres to Hollywood blockbuster creatures in cinema, the film industry has translated this traditional storytelling method for the big screen. Developments in technology over the last decade have impacted the way puppetry is performed and experienced in cinema.

The word puppet comes from the Latin ‘pupa’, meaning little girl or doll. In this essay, the term puppet refers to a figurine that is manipulated by puppeteers and used in films. ‘Puppet’ may be an antiquated lexicon for these advanced hybrid forms we see used in ‘Kubo and the Two Strings’ (Knight, 2016) or ‘Anomalisa’ (Kaufman, 2015), both of which combine physical stop-motion animation with 3D printing technology and digital production methods. Tillis, S. (1999) suggests the name ‘media figures’ to replace the outdated ‘puppet’, since it would accommodate to the advancements in construction and context. ‘Media figures’ would not be confused with the archaic idea of puppets being crude, childish toys, but would also include digital puppetry.

Levenson (1992) argued that stop-motion models are not puppets. Levenson might approve of the new term ‘media figures’, since this would separate stop-motion and digital puppetry from live-action performance, which he believed was the only genuine form of puppetry. However, Tillis also said “there are striking similarities in the creation of computer graphics figures and puppets,” explaining his opinion that physical puppets and digital puppets are not as disparate as Levenson believed, since they are both “artificial human constructs designed for manipulation.”

Puppets are used by filmmakers to perform fantastical scenes which would be impractical with only human actors. Fantasy films in the 1980’s were prominent for employing practical puppetry and creature effects to illustrate their magical realms, such as the titles ‘The NeverEnding Story’ (Petersen, 1984), ‘Return to Oz’ (Murch,1985) and ‘Labyrinth’ (Henson, 1986).

To illustrate, in Jim Henson’s second feature film ‘Labyrinth’, Ludo, was brought to life through puppetry, the only way at the time to construct a realistic moving beast in the same scene as a human actor, Sarah. Animatronics were also used to control the creature’s movement; Ludo could blink, speak and breathe just like a real animal.

1

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

[Fig. 1. Ludo and Sarah from ‘Labyrinth’ (Henson, 1986)] Following this golden decade of puppetry, the digital age brought a new technology that changed production methods again in the 1990’s. Advanced computer software like Maya allows artists to design and construct models on-screen that replace the need for physical puppets and practical effects. It is now possible to create highly realistic digital models of beasts like Ludo for film, and at a much cheaper cost than the equivalent physical puppet. Film critic Mark Hughes (2013) is an advocate of new technology “Technical advances improve the overall quality of cinema.” Hughes believes that developments have improved and not killed the art of moving image.

Digital puppetry has become cheaper, faster and much easier to produce to a high quality than puppetry. Buckmaster (2016) explains how this affected the puppet trade: “With the inundation of computer effects came a growing reduction in “real” on-set physical elements, such as puppets.” but although this new technology could make physical puppetry completely redundant, physical puppets are still used and celebrated in cinema.

Several studies have been conducted into the materiality of films and how audiences respond to these purely visual stimuli, such as the work of Barker (2009), who explored how senses can be stimulated through cinema. Barker concluded that sight and touch are connected: “To say that we are touched by cinema indicates that it has significance for us, that it comes close to us, and that it literally occupies our sphere. We share things with it: texture, spatial orientation, comportment, rhythm, and vitality.”

In other words, by representing handmade processes in the textures of puppets onscreen, the audience get a sense of feeling a puppet just by looking at it.

Below is a similarly fantastical mythological beast created for ‘Fantastic Beasts and 2

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Where to Find Them’ (Yates, 2016). Produced 30 years after Labyrinth, Fantastic Beasts constructed their award winning animated creatures using advanced digital computer software as opposed to the foam latex, hand-pelted fur, animatronics and human actor inside of the Ludo puppet made in Jim Henson’s creature shop.

[Fig. 2. Niffler from ‘Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them’ (Yates, 2016)] Although they were produced in different contexts and using different media, both of these beasts evoke an emotional response from audiences. Niffler and Ludo were both fabricated with the intentions of appearing realistic and endearing. Neither of the beasts is real or actually alive, but it is the willing suspension of disbelief – as coined by Coleridge (1817) - that allows audiences to accept both of these puppets as a living creature and be convinced by their animated performance.

While the actor who played Sarah (Jennifer Connelly) working alongside Ludo, could reach out and touch the beast, Eddie Redmayne who played Newt in Fantastic Beasts interacted with a placeholder which would be digitally removed and replaced with the computer generated model of Niffler.

Petersen (2014) compared how actors work with digital puppets to how they worked with physical puppets in The NeverEnding Story: “Actors now often complain they have nothing on stage to work with, they have to imagine everything. This was not like that. The creatures were there and they were talking to them. They felt alive. That made it easier and also adds to the warmness and the humanity.”

Petersen’s comment suggests that the value of physical puppets is their convincing existence on the set and details how this affects the audience and the actors “It is

3

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

not only the audience who feel isolated and distant from the digital puppets, but also the actors who have to imagine their presence during filming.”

Zompolas (2016) argues that the attraction to live action puppets is the physicality which is lacking in digital puppetry “the human element of a puppeteer’s hand can bring a sense of life and character to an object that digital work can sometimes lack.”

Zompolas explains, “The lure of traditional puppetry is in its physicality – something that strikes a chord with the human viewer.” It is the human constituent of a puppeteer that makes the audience connect with puppets, a familiar and homely quality that feels natural and personal.

Walter Benjamin’s essay ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’ (2008) reviews the effect of mass-production on art and individuality. Benjamin’s analysis can be applied to the aesthetic divide between physical puppetry and digital puppetry. “Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art,” Benjamin writes, “is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be”. Digital puppets like the creatures in ‘Fantastic Beasts’ do not exist in a real physical space.

According to Walter Benjamin (2008), handmade art like the physical puppet has a charm. This peculiar power is described by Benjamin as an ‘aura’, an untouchable atmosphere of innocence; this figurine, with its wonky shape, asymmetrical form and rough edges, has beauty in its imperfections. The development of technology and reproduction of art lessens the authenticity and results in the loss of aura. Benjamin would claim Henson’s Ludo puppet to have an aura because it was an original piece of art that has not been reproduced.

Whilst Benjamin described the charm of handmade puppets as an ‘aura’, Gross (2011) describes it as ‘madness’. Gross explains that the madness is a result of the often unsophisticated construction but goes on to say “even the most beautifully crafted of puppets will have something ready-made, homemade about it, something incomplete”; it is this unfinished, handmade quality that makes puppets charming.

A digital puppet is difficult to identify as being a specific artists’ handiwork whereas a physical puppet’s origin can be recognised by discernible crafting techniques such as carving style or a puppeteer’s distinguishable movements. John Sundholm (2005) referred to this phenomena as ‘deixis’, which are “categories which encode the person, place, time or social context of utterance,” such as trademarks of the artist or puppeteer that can be seen in the finished puppet. Supporting Sundholm’s argument

4

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

is Graça (2005), who has investigated the use of handmade puppets and the value of artistry “With their intimate connection to the body, handcrafted processes reintegrate not only the physical senses into filmmaking, for both the maker and the viewer, but cinematic technology all together.”

We may be less responsive to digital puppets because they are less personal as a result of the software that creates them, since there is a barrier between the hand of the artist and the model during the construction of digital puppets. Variety’s Lowry (2015) discussed the flaws of computer generated imagery in films “while the results can be visually astounding, the movies regularly feel as lifeless and mechanized as the technology responsible for bringing those visions to fruition.”, implying that there is less artistry involved in the production of digital puppets.

For some viewers, puppets can also evoke fear. Puppets can have a haunted presence, deadliness in their inanimate bodies at once possessed by their master puppeteer. Freud (1919) described the repulsion to puppets as the ‘uncanny’, a feeling of dislike in response to objects of unnatural or unnerving disposition.

Freud’s theory of the uncanny has been studied and elaborated. Uncanny Valley theory by Mori (1970) shows a relationship between how lifelike a puppet is and the empathic response of the audience. There is a positive correlation between the human likeness of the puppet and the empathic response, until the realism reaches the point of uncanny. This is where the puppet is too real, and becomes disturbing to the viewer, so the empathic response drops dramatically. The graph peaks after this likeness only for a real human being.

5

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

[Fig. 3. Diagram of Uncanny Valley] Digital puppets also have the capacity to be uncanny and unnerving in aesthetics as they can lack the life and weight that is embodied in physical puppets or in the physiques of live actors. There is no scale to a digital puppet. Despite their 3D modelling, these moving vectors only exist in the world of the screen and do not exist in the same 3 Dimensions as the audience. The fear of the unknown causes these fleshless spirits to unnerve and repulse the viewers. The falsity in these almosthuman figures produces eeriness on screen as they are not quite alive, not quite right. The theory of uncanny is supported by Wolchover (2013), who comments on digital puppetry “The characters seem at once human and alien, causing cognitive dissonance that settles into a feeling of fear or repulsion.”

Using puppetry is now a deliberate creative choice by filmmakers. One such filmmaker is Wes Anderson, who used stop-motion puppetry in his 2009 release ‘Fantastic Mr Fox’. Although the production had access to the digital puppetry which is now commonplace in the industry, they deliberately chose to work with physical puppets instead. The creative decision behind this is justified by Wes Anderson’s vision “Wes didn't want it to be smooth – that's what gives the film its character.

There's a kind of naivety about it all with the charm of TV series from the 1970s...”, explains Ghent (2009), who was one of the animators involved in the production “Wes wanted it to feel crafted.”. Physical puppetry is valued by this filmmaker because he feels that it achieves a more handcrafted, authentic quality.

The recent trend for craft and authenticity in products has been criticised as an example of ‘craft fetishism’ by design analyst McGuirk (2011), a term which echoes Marx’s negative views on capitalism and commercial values in his study of ‘commodity fetishism’ (2004). McGuirk claims that “we romanticize the handmade because we yearn for quality, not quantity.” which aligns with Marx’s theory: “This is what I call fetishism; it attaches itself to the products of labour as soon as they are produced as commodities”. Both McGuirk and Marx believe that value is a social construct. The artist McMillan (2014) opposes this notion in his proclamation: “At a time when 3D printing can manufacture guns or replicate machines with moving parts, the reminder of the hand-made object, with its brilliant imperfections and anomalies, is a thing to celebrate”. McMillan contends that it is at this point in time, more than ever, that we crave something real and that it is not just about commercial profit, as Marx disputed.

6

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

If we are to consider the power of the puppet as the result of its craft and handmade production, then is it a work of art? The context of the puppet suggests otherwise, they do not demand their own pedestal, only an audience. Puppets are not commonly found in galleries, only museums specially covering the theme of theatre or puppet history, like the ‘Bagpuss, Clangers & Co’ (2016) exhibition at the Museum of Childhood in which the puppets of Smallfilms animations were exhibited as works of art. These puppets were not originally intended to be exhibited as works of art, they were made of recycled materials in a garden shed for children’s television between 1959-1980s, but in the digital age we can look back at these out-dated puppets and appreciate their handcrafted value.

Puppets aren’t designed to be exhibited. Maintaining and preserving puppets is difficult because of their intricate construction, some have to be handled by curators with gloves to prevent damage, and other puppets need supports to help them stand straight. The puppets of Labyrinth, for example, have had to be professionally restored due to the fact that they were made with foam latex, a material that decomposes after time. Old puppets require care and attention to maintain their intended form.

Digital puppets also prove difficult to be since they don’t have 3 dimensions, so they cannot be stood on plinths or placed in glass cabinets.

Another reason why we value handmade puppets may be because we perceive the artist or puppeteer as god-like. The magic of bringing objects to life in puppet performance perhaps stems from animism, “an idea of pervading life and will in nature” (Tylor, 1871), the belief that all natural objects have a soul. The puppeteer could be perceived as god-like because of their power in controlling and manipulating the puppets. The puppet builders are also powerful in that they create the models, scenes and props, bringing them into existence, as in a creation myth.

These tiny worlds are born from the hands of a greater being. This wonder and awe of the powerful puppeteer harks back to when storytellers and magicians were believed to have special shamanic skills. Stop motion “comes from the idea of redefining the material or object as if it still possessed an intrinsically organic life”, according to Wells (1998). The art form stems from the illusion of something occurring as if by magic.

Technology’s development might provide computer-generated alternatives to the aging puppet medium, but it also offers opportunities to embellish and improve the process in the digital age. Seeking to embrace the technology at hand in an attempt

7

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

to revive stop-motion is Laika. Laika was established in 2005 and has produced a collection of intricate stop-motion films using state-of-the-art technology without abandoning the physical models. 3D printing and computer-rigging are just some of the processes used by the company to make the production of stop-motion faster, easier and slicker.

[Fig. 4. 3D Printing at Laika] Some traditionalists may say that this approach is not true to the medium, but Laika strives to maintain the handmade quality, with the hand of the artist still evident in how they painstakingly paint each detail by hand. Laika is sustaining the handmade aesthetic but utilising the speed and mass production methods available in the digital age.

"When we started Laika 10 years ago, we could see the writing on the wall.

Stop-motion animation was basically taking its last, dying breath. We had to come up with a way, if we wanted to continue to make a living in this medium that we loved, to bring it into a new era, to invigorate it.” (Knight, 2015).

Another company that illustrates the changing world of puppetry and media figures is The Jim Henson Company, which was founded by Jim Henson in 1958. Renowned for his Muppets, Jim Henson also had a hand in pulling the strings of the film industry, taking puppets to Hollywood. During his lifetime, Jim Henson himself only produced two major films with the company: ‘The Dark Crystal’ (1982) and ‘Labyrinth’ (1986). Both films are the result of teams of puppeteers, puppet makers and the Creature Shop, hours of craft, sculpting and effort. The legacy of Jim

8

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Henson lives on through the company and his son, Brian Henson, who inherited ownership of the company, but it’s questionable whether Jim Henson’s values are at the heart of everything the company produces. Many of the company’s recent films have been made using 3D digital animation and Brian Henson (2010) justifies the change in direction “animatronics has been largely replaced, and certainly enhanced by 3D digital animation…” but he also claims that “There will always be a place for puppetry," and that even though they use 3D digital animation for some projects, that the entertainment of the traditional puppet is a specific art that will always have a future “the simplicity of what you’re doing with puppetry... well, you can’t beat the simplicity of a puppet”.

Jim Henson’s daughter, Cheryl Henson (2017) agrees with Brian Henson’s notion that physical puppets still have a purpose in the digital age: “People are attracted to the physical, furry, tactile puppets … you can imagine reaching out and cuddling them and touching them.” Cheryl Henson’s opinion is that physical puppets evoke a sensory response unique to physical media that digital puppets simply can’t.

An emerging artist whose work deals with the value of puppetry in the digital age is Stelling, J. (2017). Stelling compares physical puppets to ritualistic figurines and creation myths, with her most recent collection ‘The Value of Puppets’ encompassing a range of puppet forms displayed in shrines and frames, commenting on the artistic and spiritual worth of the physical puppet. Many of the puppets in this collection are designed in response to critical writing and theoretical discourse, such as ‘Fortunes’, which is a literal interpretation of Walter Benjamin’s definition of aura.

[Fig. 5. Fortunes (Stelling, 2017)]

9

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Stelling practises under the belief that puppets still continue to enchant modern audiences today, although the context has changed. Her work is largely supportive of the physical puppet, but could be considered dismissive of digital practice. This physical approach to her work may be criticised as conforming to McGuirk’s model of Craft Fetishism because she romanticises the process of making, suggesting that the value of the commodity is the result of the artist’s physical labour. She places importance on the materiality of her creations, with texture playing an intrinsic role in her outcomes. Stelling deliberately leaves imperfections in her artwork in an attempt to imbue a trace of the artist’s hand within her sculpture. Stelling’s work could be denounced for being shallow and self-centred; her approach may be likened to the egotistic idea that the puppeteer has god-like qualities. Stelling’s artwork is retrospective and gives a utopian view of puppetry which may be biased towards the physical puppet.

Using recycled materials, Stelling’s puppets are inspired by the salvaged approach to animation of Smallfilms (1959-1980s). She also follows the guidelines of Graça (2005) in using handmade processes to translate the sense of touch for the viewer.

By moving the puppets and making them by hand, the puppets consequently evoke a sense of tangibility, which Wells discussed in his concept of fabrication (1998).

In conclusion, it seems that audiences value physical puppetry in the digital age because there is an empathic response to the tactile object. Barker (2009) noted that physical puppets “beg to be touched”, which is supported by Wells (1998) in his concept of fabrication; both writers agree that physical puppets address our sense of touch through vision because of their materiality. Using physical puppetry captures the tangibility of the sculptures and their fabrication which evokes a physical sensation in the audience. Digital media lacks this materiality and perhaps it is because we see so much digital art that we can look back retrospectively and value the puppets of old.

Physical puppetry never really died or disappeared, but it was impacted by the birth of digital technology. Although the use of digital puppetry has become popular in cinema, filmmakers and animators like Wes Anderson, Laika and The Jim Henson Company are returning or revising the old medium because it brings artistry and playfulness back into film. The success of physical puppetry revolves around the idea that there is a relationship between artist and audience: the artist builds the puppets with the intention of making the audience feel a certain sensation. Physical puppetry is deliberately chosen over digital puppetry to achieve a specific emotional connection.

10

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

The value of physical puppetry is also in its charming and handmade aesthetic. The audience knows that the physical puppet has been constructed by a human being, not a machine. The audience suspends their disbelief because they trust the imperfect, handcrafted puppet.

The revival of traditional puppet animation in the cinema may be charming and nostalgic for those who remember it the from first time around, but it is also refreshing and exciting to see how technology is expanding the world of puppetry, bringing new possibilities to what we can animate and build. Whilst there is still a place for puppets in cinema, this is the beginning of an exciting new movement in puppet animation where many mediums can be appreciated.

11

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Bibliography Books: Barker, J. (2009). The tactile eye: Touch and the cinematic experience. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Bell, J. (2001) Puppets, Masks and Performing Objects. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Benjamin, W. (2008) The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.

London: Penguin.

Block, P. & Erdmann, T. (2016) Labyrinth: The Ultimate Visual History. London: Titan Books.

Garlen, J. & Graham, A. (2012) The Wider Worlds of Jim Henson: Essays on His Work and Legacy Beyond The Muppet Show and Sesame Street. Jefferson: McFarland Books.

Gross, K. (2012) On Dolls. London: Notting Hill Editions.

Gross, K. (2012) Puppet: an essay on uncanny life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Harrod, T. (2015) The Real Thing: Essays on making in the modern world. London: Hyphen Press.

Marks, L. (2002). Touch: Sensuous theory and multisensory media. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Marx, K. (2004) Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Vol. 1, New Ed. London: Penguin Classics.

Moseley, R. (2016) Hand-Made Television: Stop-Frame Animation for Children in Britain, 1961-1974. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Paz, O. (1974) In Praise of Hands: Contemporary Crafts of the World. New York: New York Graphics Society.

Tillis, S. 1992. Toward an aesthetics of the puppet: puppetry as a theatrical art.

12

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

London: Greenwood Press.

Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive Culture. London: John Murray Von Kleist, H. (1989) On a Theatre of Marionettes. Swindon: Acorn Press.

Wells, P. (1998). Understanding Animation. London : Routledge.

Articles: Freud, S. (1919). The ‘Uncanny’. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XVII (1917-1919): An Infantile Neurosis and Other Works, 217-256 Mori, M. (1970). ‘The uncanny valley.’ Energy, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 33–35. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6213238 Sundholm, J. (2005). ‘I am a rhinoceros: Memory and the ethics and aesthetics of materiality in film.’ Studies in European Cinema, vol. 2, no.1, pp. 55-64.

Tillis, S. (1999). ‘The Art of Puppetry in the Age of Media Production.’ TDR, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 182-195. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1146776 Papers: Levenson, M. (1992). ‘Memorandum re: Puppetry in Other Media.’ Unpublished paper presented to the Futurism conference, San Luis Obispo, CA, 15 May. Websites: Buckmaster, L. (2016) Why Labyrinth is so Memorable. [Online] Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/culture/story/20160621-why-labyrinth-is-so-memorable (Accessed: December, 2016) Buxton, A. (2016) Stop Motion Celebrated Like Never Before at the V&A. [Online] Available at https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/pressreleases/stop_motion_ celebrated/ (Accessed: December, 2016) Duca, L. (2014) The Hand-Made Magic of ‘The NeverEnding Story’. [Online] Available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/18/neverending-

13

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

story_n_5589126.html (Accessed: January, 2017) Edwards, G. (2016) The History of Puppetry in Cinema. [Online] Available at http://www.tested.com/art/movies/566693-history-puppetry-cinema/ (Accessed: December, 2016) Eschner, K. (2017) Why Puppets (and Puppeteers) Are Still Important. [Online] Available at http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/puppets-puppeteersimportart-180962529/ (Accessed: December, 2016) Everett, L. (2013) Why We Are Still Enthralled by Puppetry. [Online] Available at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-features/9863148/Why-we-arestill-enthralled-by-puppetry.html (Accessed: December, 2016) Giardina, C. (2015) How ‘Anomalisa’ Director Mastered the Art of Puppetry. [Online] Available at http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/how-anomalisadirectors-mastered-art-848245 (Accessed: December, 2016) Hughes, M. (2013) If Digital Effects Ruin Movies, So Did Color and Sound. [Online] Available at https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/03/07/are-digital-effectscgi-ruining-the-movies/if-digital-effects-ruin-movies-so-did-color-and-sound (Accessed: March, 2017) Keddie, L. (2010) Fantastic Mr. Fox animators interview: Ian McKinnon, Andy Biddle and Andy Ghent. [Online] Available at http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/15459/fantastic-mr-fox-animators-interview-ianmckinnon-andy-biddle-and-andy-ghent (Accessed: December, 2016) Lowry, B. (2015) ‘Avengers’ and the Age of CGI Overkill in Hollywood. [Online] Available at http://variety.com/2015/film/news/avengers-age-of-ultron-cgi-specialeffects-1201487125/ (Accessed: March, 2017) McGuirk, J. (2011) The Art of Craft: The Rise of Designer-Maker. [Online] Available at https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/aug/01/rise-designer-makercraftsman-handmade (Accessed: March, 2017) McGuirk, J. (2014) Craft Fetishism. [Online] Available at https://www.disegnodaily.com/article/craft-fetishism (Accessed: December, 2016)

14

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Mcmillan, J. (2014) Brilliant Imperfections. [Online] Available at http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/brilliant-imperfections (Accessed: January, 2017) Morrow, J. (2014) We Spoke to The Puppet Master Behind the Dark Crystal and Labyrinth. [Online] Available at https://creators.vice.com/en_uk/article/puppetmaster-behind-the-dark-crystal-and-labyrinth (Accessed: December, 2016) Ratelle, A. (2016) Ellen Rocha – Beyond Materiality in Animation. [Online] Available at https://journal.animationstudies.org/ellen-rocha-beyond-materiality-in-animationsensuous-perception-and-touch-in-the-tactile-existence-of-would-a-heart-die/ (Accessed: March, 2017) Sancton, J. (2009) How the Puppets from Fantastic Mr. Fox Were Made. [Online] Available at http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2009/11/how-the-puppets-fromfantastic-mr-fox-were-made-slideshow (Accessed: December, 2016) Sancton, J. (2009) Where the Wild Things Are Built: Jim Henson’s Creature Shop.

[Online] Available at http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2009/10/where-the-wildthings-are-built-jim-hensons-creature-workshop (Accessed: December, 2016) Schultz, W. (2013) C.G.I. Has Inspired a New Era of Filmmaking. [Online] Available at https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/03/07/are-digital-effects-cgi-ruiningthe-movies/cgi-has-inspired-a-new-era-of-filmmaking (Accessed: March, 2017) Semmes, A. (2017) Celebrating Jim Henson, Muppet Maker, With His Daughter Cheryl. [Online] Available at https://www.greenwichsentinel.com/2017/04/27/celebrating-jim-henson-muppetmaker-with-his-daughter-cheryl/ (Accessed: March, 2017) Silver, J. (2010) How Aardman is Embracing the Digital Age. [Online] Available at http://www.wired.co.uk/article/aardman-morphs (Accessed: February, 2017) Sinclair, M. (2014) The Art of Smallfilms. [Online] Available at https://www.creativereview.co.uk/the-art-of-smallfilms/ (Accessed: December, 2016) This is Nottingham. (2009) I Pulled the Strings on Fantastic Mr. Fox. [Online]

15

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Available at http://www.nottinghampost.com/pulled-strings-fantastic-mr-fox/story12230459-detail/story.html (Accessed: December, 2016) Victoria and Albert Museum. (2016) History of Puppetry in Britain. [Online] Available at http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/h/history-of-puppetry-in-britain/ (Accessed: January, 2017) Willmore, A. (2014) The Summer Humanity Became Unnecessary at the Movies.

[Online] Available at https://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonwillmore/the-summerhumanity-became-unnecessary-at-the-movies?utm_term=.smZ59Xv2V#.ct2PMRXx8 (Accessed: November, 2016) Wolchover, N. (2013) Beware of the Uncanny Valley. [Online] Available at https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/03/07/are-digital-effects-cgi-ruiningthe-movies/beware-of-the-uncanny-valley (Accessed: March, 2017) Zompolas, P. (2016) No Strings Attached: Jim Henson’s Creature Shop Delivers Digital Puppetry with Redshift. [Online] Available at https://www.redshift3d.com/blog/no-strings-attached-jim-hensons-creature-shopdelivers-digital-puppetry-with-redshift (Accessed: December, 2016) Exhibitions: ‘Clangers, Bagpuss & Co’. (2016) [Exhibition] The Musuem of Childhood, Victoria & Albert Museum, London. 19 March to 9 October 2016 ‘The Power of Making: the importance of being skilled’. (2012) [Exhibition] Victoria & Albert Museum, London. 6 September 2011 to 2 January 2012.

Films: Anomalisa, (2015). Directed by Charlie Kaufman [Film]. USA: Paramount Pictures.

Coraline, (2009). Directed by Henry Selick [Film]. USA: Focus Features.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, (2016) Directed by David Yates [Film].

USA: Warner Bros.

Fantastic Mr Fox, (2009). Directed by Wes Anderson [Film]. USA: 20th Century Fox.

16

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Kubo and the Two Strings, (2016). Directed by Travis Knight [Film]. USA: Focus Features.

Labyrinth, (1986). Directed by Jim Henson [Film]. USA: The Jim Henson Company.

Return to Oz, (1985). Directed by Walter Murc [Film]. USA: Walt Disney.

The Corpse Bride, (2005). Directed by Mike Johnson & Tim Burton [Film]. USA: Warner Bros.

The Dark Crystal, (1982). Directed by Jim Henson [Film]. USA: The Jim Henson Company.

The Little Prince, (2015). Directed by Mark Osbourne [Film]. France: Paramount Pictures.

The NeverEnding Story, (1984). Directed by Wolfgang Petersen [Film]. USA: Warner Bros.

The Nightmare Before Christmas, (1993). Directed by Henry Selick [Film]. USA: Buena Vista Pictures.

Television Programmes Bagpuss, (1974). Created by Smallfilms [Television]. Britain: BBC. Pogle's Wood (1966-1967). Created by Smallfilms [Television]. Britain: BBC. The Clangers (1969-1972). Created by Smallfilms [Television]. Britain: BBC. Videos Big Think (2010) Is there a future for puppetry? With Brian Henson. Available at http://bigthink.com/videos/is-there-a-future-for-puppets (Accessed: April, 2017) Images Fig. 1.

Ludo and Sarah, Labyrinth. Koltun, A. (2015) Available at https://encryptedtbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRKBpVqIG54HBpkokeCn7TXUjVXZKgKtaF CWKG8mTgmemUUpLii (Accessed: March 2017)

17

Jay Stelling

Illustration

OUIL 501 Context of Practice

Fig. 2.

Niffler, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Shamsian, J. (2016) Available at http://static2.thisisinsider.com/image/582dd58265edfe20008b46f42399/niffler%20fantastic%20beasts.jpg (Accessed: March 2017) Fig. 3.

Diagram of Uncanny Valley. MacDorman, K. (2007) Available at https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f0/Mori_Uncanny_Valley.sv g/1200px-Mori_Uncanny_Valley.svg.png (Accessed: December 2016) Fig. 4.

3D Printing at LAIKA. Brandon, J. (2012) Available at http://www.solidsmack.com/fabrication/3d-printed-stop-motion-animation-in-new-filmparanorman/ (Accessed: January 2017) Fig. 5.

Fortunes. Stelling, J. (2017) Available at http://j-stelling1518cop.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/the-fortune-teller.html (Accessed: January, 2017)

18